Comments on: More for the rich http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/2011/09/20/more-for-the-rich/ Sat, 23 Mar 2013 13:49:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: zstar7 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/2011/09/20/more-for-the-rich/#comment-256 Wed, 21 Sep 2011 11:23:11 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/?p=99#comment-256 reality.
i grew up on a dead end street in a low wage earner family. both parents worked full time.i paid my way thru college started my own business at the age of 23. took 20 college extensions courses to help figure out my business. 30 years later i am in the top 1%. i still work a minimum of 12 hours a day, usually 15. i have been paying tax at the maximum rate, 35%. when you add in state and local taxes my tax burden is approaching 50%. that means i work for the us govt the first 6 months of the year. for what?
plain and simple. raise my taxes i’m retiring. and terminating 15 employees, all of whom are paying taxes at the 20% or higher rate.

there are thousands like me, sitting on the fence. will i hire any new employees? hell no. obama care, tax increases, new regulations at every corner.

are you listening? raise my taxes and i’m going to the house. these policies are decimating the job creators of this country.

]]>
By: doggydaddy http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/2011/09/20/more-for-the-rich/#comment-255 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 18:46:03 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/?p=99#comment-255 zotdoc: “Go back to the constitution, equal protection under the law” Funny that you’d invoke the 14th Amendment applying it to protect millionaires and billionaires from having to pay a little more in taxes, while failing to consider its application to the poor and Middle Class whose incomes have largely remained stagnant over the last few decades, and have actually begun to decline, while the cost of living has continuously risen.

Take healthcare, in particular. There are a lot of people who can’t afford our extremely expensive healthcare. Millions of working people. Why do you think a billionaire needs to be protected from having to pay a little more in taxes but a working stiff doesn’t need protection from rising healthcare costs that could ultimately cost him his life? Who really needs protecting here?

And let’s get something straight about Medicaid. That working stiff I mentioned in the last paragraph can’t qualify for Medicaid if he’s shown the responsible audacity to save money, to put away a nest egg for his retirement or his children’s college tuition. That money has to be spent on his medical bills before he can qualify for Medicaid. In other words, he has to be broke. Many Americans would rather skip the doctor visits and the prescribed medications than to spend all the money they’ve been saving all of their lives for them and their families. Where’s their protection? Are their lives really less important than the little extra the rich would be required to pay if Obama’s tax increase were to go through?

]]>
By: CanadianGeezer http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/2011/09/20/more-for-the-rich/#comment-254 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 18:39:59 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/?p=99#comment-254 A good read here …. Mr. Johnston is amongst the few articulate people we have found who truly understand the ‘meat’ of the matter …. and this old Geezer really does like his candid and frank appraisal of political figures and policies …. in an era when so many ‘hedge their language & their bets’ he has secured the ethical & moral high ground … Much thanks for your words/work Mr. Johnston!

]]>
By: Randy549 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/2011/09/20/more-for-the-rich/#comment-253 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 18:06:34 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/?p=99#comment-253 It is Obama who is proposing the actual “pernicious attack” on Social Security with his proposal to partially cut off its blood supply. Social Security withholdings are not a “tax” in the normal sense, as they are used solely to pay for Social Security distributions, which are ultimately paid back to the people who paid into Social Security in the first place.

]]>
By: NobleKin http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/2011/09/20/more-for-the-rich/#comment-252 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:30:07 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/?p=99#comment-252 @Ponder

What an arrogant statement. “David Cay Johnston is dead wrong” – Really?

The man has written more books on the subject than you have probably read in your lifetime, and he is wrong?

And he is discussing Social Security, not the entire government (on which he would likely agree with the point you are attempting to make).

Mr. Johnston’s point is a question of raising taxes back to reasonable levels on those who can most afford them, or (as Perry and other Republicans have proposed) doing away with the social safety nets for the least among us.

You probably know damn well the “Starve the Beast” plan the Republicans have held dear for decades. And now they are trying cross the goal line.

If you are of the Darwinistic camp of every man for himself as Perry and the Tea Party audience of several days ago seem to be, then America has truly lost its moral compass. If you favor letting a millionaire or billionare keep an extra $40,000 or $50,000 out of their Million dollar a year salary, so grandmas and grandpas have to do their shopping at Petco, then you are as sick as the rest of them and America is doomed.

Perhaps you also believe the private healthcare insurance model is fine too?

]]>
By: NobleKin http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/2011/09/20/more-for-the-rich/#comment-251 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:10:36 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/?p=99#comment-251 When society has devolved into one that relies on sound bites and skewed information as the primary resource for decision making, all bets for reasonable outcomes become long shots.

One cannot submit too much information to the average American. They are simply incapable of processing the data and would rather rely on gut driven impulse derived from clinging to religion or defense inspired party affiliation…so Fox News and Right Wing talk radio will always be able to sell soap.

Speak the word Socialism, and large segments of the Republican base begin to salivate. (whether there is any basis that the term can be truthfully applied)
The same is true of “Gay Rights” and “Abortion” so regardless of what has worked for the greater good of our society, we are held hostage by the lunatic fringe bent on serving the rich and religious because their party says so.

That a foundational proven program to insure the least among us have sufficient income in old age or when debilatated is being attacked by a pro big business shill with ulterior financial motives comes as no surprise. What is surprising is the lack of wholesale outrage by the American people.

Keep up the good work.

]]>
By: ponder http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/2011/09/20/more-for-the-rich/#comment-249 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:54:41 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/?p=99#comment-249 David Cay Johnston is dead wrong. No one is asserting that
America’s rich is wanting more, rather everyone is concerned
that spending by government is out of control. Every promise that Washington made was made without the revenues to pay for those programs and promises. They created those programs and enlarged it anyway, by borrowing money from the world to pay for them.
The programs should have stopped as soon as they resorted to borrowing money to pay for entitlements. They did not look to raising taxes at that time because serious questions would have been raised about the need for these programs. So now the piper has to be paid and they are trying to re-frame the issue as class warfare. It time to get rid of the liberals.

]]>
By: PCScipio http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/2011/09/20/more-for-the-rich/#comment-248 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:45:51 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/?p=99#comment-248 Missingtoninaction, I fully understand. I live in the West, most of my neighbors still think like 19th century cowboys. zotdoc, is the coffee ready yet?

]]>
By: zotdoc http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/2011/09/20/more-for-the-rich/#comment-246 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:17:05 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/?p=99#comment-246 Go back to the constitution, equal protection under the law. Why should anybody pay a larger percent of their income than anyone else? If you are going to have an income tax at all, then help the economy – go to a flat tax, no exceptions, no exemptions, no deductions. Everybody would then have the same interest in keeping the govt down to size and eliminating wasteful duplicative programs.

]]>
By: Missinginaction http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/2011/09/20/more-for-the-rich/#comment-245 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:04:37 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/?p=99#comment-245 The issue that many Americans face is that they do not understand the math.

Try explaining to your neighbor that a billion is a thousand million or that a trillion is a million million.

Watch the faces glaze over……

]]>