Page 2 of 4 1234
Results 11 to 20 of 33
  1. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    07-14-2011, 01:46 AM #11
    Obama thought solving a big problem would outweigh any political difficulties his deal with Boehner might cause him. But Cantor saved Obama a lot of trouble. He protected him from a bitter intra-party fight and made crystal clear that preserving low taxes for the wealthy and for corporations is the GOP's driving objective. Even the most resolutely centrist and cautious have been forced to concede this essential truth of American politics.

  2. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    07-14-2011, 02:14 AM #12
    Warrren Buffett: The Rich Need to Pay More Taxes


    Nov. 15, 2007
    It's been said there are only two certainties in life: death and taxes.

    Now one of those certainties is under attack from an unlikely source: Warren Buffett. Wednesday, the billionaire founder of the investment firm Berkshire Hathaway Inc. went to Washington to ask Congress not to cut his taxes. Buffett says the super-rich should be taxed more, not less.

    In particular Buffett urged the Senate Finance Committee not to repeal the estate tax. It is scheduled to come up for a vote, perhaps as soon as this week.

    He told the committee that he recently compared how much he pays in taxes in terms of a percentage of his salary to what his employees pay.

    The results? Buffett says he pays 18 percent of his salary to the IRS while the rest of his staff pays nearly twice that — 33 percent, a lopsided equation that put Buffett in a Robin Hood frame of mind.

    "Frankly, an economy where my receptionist pays a lot higher tax rate than, than I do does not strike me as a just economy," he told lawmakers.

    Buffet has challenged the elite members of the Forbes 400 list to do their own calculations and compare their tax rate with their receptionists, and then consider his challenge that the rich should pay more.

    "I see nothing wrong with those who have been blessed by this society to give a larger portion of their income to the society than somebody that's working very, very hard to make ends meet," Buffett said.

  3. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    07-14-2011, 10:30 AM #13
    DO NOT FORGET that Peter Schiff (Repblican) is Siriusly Long's favorite economist. He even sent me a book of his about economic theories.
    He has been wrong about almost every single prediction he has made for this year. He said the stock market would TANK in January of 2011. He said we would have HYPERINFLATION in the U.S. in 2011. He said the rates on the 10 year would go over 5% and possibly even 6%. I need not go on and on.
    Remember this when Sirisly Wrong talks politics and the economyl
    Last edited by Havakasha; 07-14-2011 at 10:33 AM.

  4. SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    07-14-2011, 04:56 PM #14
    What is most humorous is that you actually think you're making a point!!

    You really are an idiot to "blame" one party of two for this "pending disaster". It takes two to tango pal. Just because you cannot appreciate the GOP's position doesn't make it wrong. It is wrong to you because you are an idealogue, and you only see things one way.

    I am glad for the republicans. They have proven to be a much needed check and balance on the statist regime that was.

    My complaint is well stated above. I'm not talking about higher ideas or looking in someone else's back yard. Mine is clean.
    Last edited by SiriuslyLong; 07-14-2011 at 05:03 PM.

  5. SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    07-14-2011, 05:02 PM #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    DO NOT FORGET that Peter Schiff (Repblican) is Siriusly Long's favorite economist. He even sent me a book of his about economic theories.
    He has been wrong about almost every single prediction he has made for this year. He said the stock market would TANK in January of 2011. He said we would have HYPERINFLATION in the U.S. in 2011. He said the rates on the 10 year would go over 5% and possibly even 6%. I need not go on and on.
    Remember this when Sirisly Wrong talks politics and the economyl
    Economic Theories? How about economics - period. Did you read it yet?

    Funny how the hypocrite Hava-gafa-kasha uses Schiff to argue with his old pal John, and now is making fun of the guy. I sent you the book because you were using him to your benefit, and thought you might interested in it. I should have known. You identified him as a republican, and then your binding idealism wouldn't allow you to read it. Pathetic.

  6. SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    07-14-2011, 05:07 PM #16
    When in doubt, resort to name calling LMFAO. Typical liberal.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_898224.html

  7. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    07-15-2011, 12:38 AM #17
    You continue to demonstrate that you have no idea what the word hypocrite means.

    I skimmed Mr. Schiff's and found it to be quite basic and very badly written. It was in the form of
    a childrens book and it was clear that he had a right wing ideology. No need to read the whole thing.
    If you go to his website it just reinforces the sense that this guy is just another doomsday guy
    who is selling his name and financial subscription based on sensationalist headlines that have turned out
    to be false.

    You really dont get it. Schiff is someone you praised. You gave me his book and told me that it was a great read and that you liked what he had to say. He IS a political ideologue who expresses his ideology thru his economic theories. He IS running for Senate as a Republican. i identified him as a Republican because it makes total sense given some of his economic ideas. He has been WILDLY off in his predictions. I love how you try to distance yourself from the guy you praised.

    Republicans are on the losing end of much of the debt debate. The polls show it. You tried to claim Obama wasnt interested in spending cuts. You were completely wrong with that statement. Republcans ran away from a deal that most neutral observers say was a good one for them. It was 3 to 1 in favor of spending cuts over revenue raises


    Two statements by Siriuly Long. "you really are an idiot to blame Republicans."
    "When in doubt, resort to name calling LMFAO. Typical Liberal"

    Name calling huh? LMFAO.
    Last edited by Havakasha; 07-15-2011 at 09:18 AM.

  8. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    07-15-2011, 01:57 AM #18
    New data released by the IRS reveals that, over a period of 12 years, tax rates for the richest 400 Americans were effectively cut in half. In 1995, the richest 400 Americans paid, on average, 29.93% of their income in federal taxes. In 2007, the last year for which the IRS has released data, the richest 400 Americans paid just 16.63%.
    In 1995, just 12 of the 400 richest Americans paid an effective tax rat of between zero and 15%. By 2007, that number skyrocketed to over 150. The massive reduction is due to both Bush-era tax reductions for the wealthy and the aggressive exploitation of tax dodges and shelters.

    Siriusly Wrong is cheering. lol

  9. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    07-15-2011, 08:19 AM #19
    http://nationaljournal.com/columns/p...ments-20110714


    Maybe President Obama never would, or could, have delivered enough congressional Democrats to pass a “grand bargain” to tame the long-term deficit. But as the prospects for a big deal dwindle, a combination of ideological rigidity and political hubris is preventing Republicans from putting him to that test.
    The ideological excess concerns taxes. House Speaker John Boehner this week insisted, “The American people understand that tax hikes destroy jobs.” In fact, there is simply no evidence that every tax cut creates jobs or that every tax increase destroys them.
    That’s a big lesson of the past three decades. In 1981, President Reagan massively cut taxes with his supply-side reductions in income-tax rates. Still sluggish at first, the economy eventually soared for the remainder of his presidency. By the fourth year after Reagan signed the tax cut, the economy had created 6.3 million new jobs (an increase of 6.8 percent); eight years on, the economy had created 16.5 million new jobs, up 18 percent.

    Sounds like a pretty good case for tax cuts. But the economy produced even more jobs after President Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy in 1993. Four years after Clinton’s tax increase—which Republican opponents at the time denounced as a certain job-killer—the economy had produced 11.8 million new jobs, an increase of nearly 11 percent. Eight years after the tax increase, the economy had added 20.6 million jobs, up 18.6 percent. Measured in both absolute and percentage terms, the economy produced more jobs after Clinton raised taxes than after Reagan cut them.
    Then, after President George W. Bush’s massive 2001 tax cut, the economy recorded its most dismal decade for job creation since the Great Depression. Eight years after Bush signed his cut (and added another round of reductions in 2003), nearly 1.6 million fewer Americans were at work. And although the median income for average families rose by about 12 percent in the eight years after both the Reagan tax cuts and the Clinton tax increase, income for average families declined almost $1,400 (or 2.7 percent) in the equivalent period after Bush signed his reductions.
    If that experience doesn’t demolish the idea that tax cuts always produce prosperity, consider more recent history. The big deal that Obama and congressional Republicans reached in late 2010 was to extend the Bush tax cuts through 2012—and to turbocharge them with a new payroll-tax reduction. Despite those incentives, job growth has collapsed this year.
    Last edited by Havakasha; 07-15-2011 at 09:16 AM.

  10. SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    07-15-2011, 03:46 PM #20

Page 2 of 4 1234