Clinton: The rich aren't paying their fair share

[Hemidakota]

Why don't we impose a higher alcohol tax? :)

[bytor2112]

That statement is a typical Republican/Conservative statement. I've heard it a thousand times and always from Republicans.

So lower taxes will help create a stronger economy along with the trickle-down effect?

Hmmm....sounds like a Republican, but, I am fairly sure he was a Democra

t!

Kennedy explained his upcoming tax cuts in a 1962 address to the Economic Club of New York: "The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrents to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system, and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes."

And the impact on the deficit if taxes are cut? "It is a paradoxical truth," said Kennedy, "that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now."

The purpose of the tax cuts was "not to incur a budget deficit," he said, "but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus."

[FunkyTown]

Yep! Kennedy was far more conservative than later Democratic leaders. His 'New Camelot' ideals were intriguing and certainly radical for their time.

And he stood up to the military-industrial complex.

Eisenhower was more liberal, but I hesitate to put that label on him as it means different things to different people. Suffice to say that he believed in the little guy and was strongly pro-farmer and worker.

Taft, the man who stood up to banks before hand and operated as a trust breaker, was a Republican.

It's interesting to note that the men who did the greatest good for the nation broke from traditional party lines. They also were some of the most hated at the time: JFK was assassinated, Eisenhower was called the 'Do Nothing' President for what people perceived was lackadaisical civil rights movement(Interestingly, not by Martin Luther King, jr) and Taft was overwhelmingly defeated in his bid for a second term.

I suspect people like neat packages.

Hmmm....sounds like a Republican, but, I am fairly sure he was a Democrat!

Kennedy explained his upcoming tax cuts in a 1962 address to the Economic Club of New York: "The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrents to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system, and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes."

And the impact on the deficit if taxes are cut? "It is a paradoxical truth," said Kennedy, "that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now."

The purpose of the tax cuts was "not to incur a budget deficit," he said, "but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus."

[Hemidakota]

Talk about Publicans, the latest polls from Gallup today is in;

Republicans Move Ahead in Generic Ballot for Congress

"PRINCETON, NJ -- Gallup tracking of 2010 congressional voting preferences shows Republicans moving back ahead of Democrats, 49% to 43%, by two points their largest lead of the campaign to date. Registered voters' preferences had been closely divided for the last several weeks."

[Traveler]

The problem is that most people have enough experience with “the rich” to realize that many of the very “rich” do not carry their share in anything. Rather they find means to “use” other people to obtain wealth. The “secret” of the Gadianton Robbers is to use the human energy of others to obtain wealth and power.

The scriptures are clear that man is to labor by the sweat of their brow all their life. But one of the big problems of this world is that there are two kinds of willing people.

The first are those willing to work hard to contribute something worthwhile.

The second are those willing to let them.

Contributing to benefit our country and fellow man is not about money but about a willingness to do a more than your share – and it does not matter if you are rich or poor. Everyone should contribute. If someone is not willing to contribute then they should not participate in the bounty of other’s efforts.

The Traveler

[FunkyTown]

Actually, the Republicans have a problem right now:

They have no one to truly unify them. They need someone with fire, passion and an iron rod for a spine.

The coming few years will be difficult ones. The US should not and cannot allow foreign powers to own the majority of their debt, which means that there must be lean years for a while to pay off the absurd bailouts that have happened. This will require short term tax raises coupled with cut benefits.

Frankly, I want to see a cigar chewing Republican who says "All right, everyone. We were idiots the past few years. We're creeping up on almost 100% of our GDP in debt. That means that we're going to scrimp and pay off the national debt. Quickly. It will be hard, the next few years. But we're doing it so that when those years are over, we will be a land of plenty. We will be a land where taxes will be stripped again. We will abolish our ridiculously complex tax laws in favor of a flat tax. We will learn to operate more leanly. We will learn from the mistakes of the past and we will be a nation that looks to the future once more. Until now, we've just printed off more and more money. That has created inflation. It has stopped people from being able to save for their retirement. We have become addicted to debt and now we will go through the withdrawal symptoms."

He would be booed. He would be called crazy. He would be called every name in the book.

And he would be right. Short term pain would save a whole lot of long term pain for millions of middle class Americans.

Talk about Publicans, the latest polls from Gallup today is in;

Republicans Move Ahead in Generic Ballot for Congress

"PRINCETON, NJ -- Gallup tracking of 2010 congressional voting preferences shows Republicans moving back ahead of Democrats, 49% to 43%, by two points their largest lead of the campaign to date. Registered voters' preferences had been closely divided for the last several weeks."

[Guest]

Actually, the Republicans have a problem right now:

They have no one to truly unify them. They need someone with fire, passion and an iron rod for a spine.

The coming few years will be difficult ones. The US should not and cannot allow foreign powers to own the majority of their debt, which means that there must be lean years for a while to pay off the absurd bailouts that have happened. This will require short term tax raises coupled with cut benefits.

Frankly, I want to see a cigar chewing Republican who says "All right, everyone. We were idiots the past few years. We're creeping up on almost 100% of our GDP in debt. That means that we're going to scrimp and pay off the national debt. Quickly. It will be hard, the next few years. But we're doing it so that when those years are over, we will be a land of plenty. We will be a land where taxes will be stripped again. We will abolish our ridiculously complex tax laws in favor of a flat tax. We will learn to operate more leanly. We will learn from the mistakes of the past and we will be a nation that looks to the future once more. Until now, we've just printed off more and more money. That has created inflation. It has stopped people from being able to save for their retirement. We have become addicted to debt and now we will go through the withdrawal symptoms."

He would be booed. He would be called crazy. He would be called every name in the book.

And he would be right. Short term pain would save a whole lot of long term pain for millions of middle class Americans.

I agree with you, Funky, except for one thing. Once you raise taxes it will be very hard to bring it back down. Congress will always find a way to spend it on something else.

That's the only issue I have with the Fair Tax. It requires abolishing the 16th amendment for it to work, and even if you succeed in abolishing the 16th ammendment, it doesn't stop anybody from levying fees and tarrifs on something else.

Edited June 3, 2010 by anatess

[FunkyTown]

I would kick the IRS to the curb in a second if I could.

I don't know that the 16th amendment would have to be repealed for a flat tax to work, since some States are frankly money holes. It might still be a requirement.

However, I fear you have a point: It's difficult to repeal a tax. Maybe the language of the tax? Make it so the tax will only be around for 4-5 years and then it expires?

Difficult. If a war broke out, they'd need to rely on war bonds.

I agree with you, Funky, except for one thing. Once you raise taxes it will be very hard to bring it back down. Congress will always find a way to spend it on something else.

That's the only issue I have with the Fair Tax. It requires abolishing the 16th amendment for it to work, and even if you succeed in abolishing the 16th ammendment, it doesn't stop anybody from levying fees and tarrifs on something else.

[Hemidakota]

Hmm...good point Funky. I believe ‘flat taxes’, controlled by the voters vice the government can work. Even, placing a cap of ten-percent [using tithing principle], will prevent the government from asking for more money.

In addition, we need to remove retirement for all congressional and senate incumbents and staff. Changing the payroll to a cost of living allowance only and controlled by the voters. Terms are set at two terms only. Cut the congressional and senate size. Supreme Justices are voted in and allowed two terms only. Removal of all perks, including any special plans set aside for both houses. Any usage of governmental fleet can only be used for government business. This does not constitute, usage of governmental fleet in flying back in aiding a fellow incumbent/non-incumbent to office.

The president and vice president will be the only person allowed to retire modestly but limited with two terms. Removal of secret service protection after four years retirement. Removal all clearances when finished terms.

Then we can add the IRS downsizing, removal of federal judges, removing Social Security to the private sector, and removal all federal social programs back into the state hands. Removal of all territories unless applied for statehood. Extend and expand by granting other countries who wish to become one nation with the US, in both North and South America, including the Pacific rim nations.

Start with this…

[HoosierGuy]

Then we can add the IRS downsizing, removal of federal judges, removing Social Security to the private sector, and removal all federal social programs back into the state hands. Removal of all territories unless applied for statehood. Extend and expand by granting other countries who wish to become one nation with the US, in both North and South America, including the Pacific rim nations.

Removal of Federal judges? Social Security to the private sector? Wow, that's Republican to the max. Republicans seem to always vote against their own best interests and the interests of their fellow Americans. You want less evil Federal government? You get more disasters like the oil spill. Thank God for the Federal government. It's another strong layer that protects the rights of people like me and all of you (and also protects me from all of you and protects all of you from me.) And unions are good.

[Just_A_Guy]

Removal of Federal judges?

I agree; that seems a bit much.

Social Security to the private sector?

It'd get a better return over the long haul.

Republicans seem to always vote against their own best interests and the interests of their fellow Americans.

How is financial profligacy in anyone's best interest? Giving some Americans a free ride is not in the country's best interest, anymore than giving my three-year-old ice cream for dinner tonight (as per her request) would have been in her best interest.

You want less evil Federal government? You get more disasters like the oil spill.

AG Holder has already hinted he has a laundry list of regulatory violations he's planning to deploy against BP. Which indicates that federal regulation did not keep BP from doing illegal stuff.

The knowledge that one will be held financially liable for the consequences of one's negligence by a functional civil court system, is a far better deterrent to bad behavior than is a battery of regulators who (apparently) spend a decent portion of their days watching naughty videos on the taxpayers' dime.

Thank God for the Federal government. It's another strong layer that protects the rights of people like me and all of you (and also protects me from all of you and protects all of you from me.)

I'm sorry you think so. The framers didn't. In essence, they constructed a government whose branches would be so busy fighting among themselves that it (theoretically) wouldn't be able to collude sufficiently to turn its power against the masses in any meaningful way.

And unions are good.

They are good as long as they don't become the dominant force in an economy--just like capitalists.

With both labor and government, balance and division of power is the key.

Edited June 6, 2010 by Just_A_Guy

[Moksha]

Actually, the Republicans have a problem right now: They have no one to truly unify them. They need someone with fire, passion and an iron rod for a spine.

What about that Tony Stark fellow? He is rolling in dough and has plenty of iron.

[FunkyTown]

What about that Tony Stark fellow? He is rolling in dough and has plenty of iron.

Tony Stark would win the Republican nomination in a second and he would have kicked any other Presidential hopeful to the curb.

He's intelligent, insightful and has a passionate insight in to the geopolitical situation. And he runs his own corporation like a well-honed machine.

If he were a real person, I would send money to American friends to donate to him.

Tony Stark=Republican

Peter Parker=Democrat

Captain America=Libertarian with a hands-off approach once someone's elected.

[Hemidakota]

Removal of Federal judges? Social Security to the private sector? Wow, that's Republican to the max. Republicans seem to always vote against their own best interests and the interests of their fellow Americans. You want less evil Federal government? You get more disasters like the oil spill. Thank God for the Federal government. It's another strong layer that protects the rights of people like me and all of you (and also protects me from all of you and protects all of you from me.) And unions are good.

It has nothing to do with partism but follow the same Joseph Smith statement, less government involvement.

Talking about the oil rig, you might to investigate the failure of the government inspection program for off shore rigs. The owner of the oil rig is responsible for the rig maintenance. However, this reminds me of the cheaply built government levees in New Orleans. No different. But we blame everyone else but who really was the cause of it.

[Still_Small_Voice]

Clinton went on to cite Brazil as a model.

"Brazil has the highest tax-to-GDP rate in the Western Hemisphere and guess what — they're growing like crazy," Clinton said. "And the rich are getting richer, but they're pulling people out of poverty."

If it's so great in Brazil maybe she should move there.