Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Republicans Oppose Middle Class Tax Cuts



September 15, 2011 – Comments (15)

So, the Republicans are opposed to middle class tax cuts if it means that tax loopholes on those collecting their wages at captial gains tax rates or cutting corporate loopholes is the price.  I don't think there is much more to say about this, it's pretty clear.  Recommend this if you make under a quarter half million dollars a year and would like a tax cut.

15 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On September 15, 2011 at 9:24 PM, FleaBagger (27.48) wrote:

You're still going to be a slave of the corporatist power structure as long as you focus, to the exclusion of everything else, on taxes that are called taxes.

Report this comment
#2) On September 15, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Dow3000 (< 20) wrote:

Yeah, I totally agree...none of those taxes should exist at are looking at far too small a picture.  Just imagine how much better off you would be without personal income that is something to work towards

Report this comment
#3) On September 16, 2011 at 1:33 AM, awallejr (38.58) wrote:

Well isn't that the mantra for the Republicans?  No tax hikes for the very wealthy but lets cut back on SS instead.  Keep sticking it to the little guy.  They still try to argue how those millionaires create jobs, despite the fact that Buffett proved otherwise.  Psst, Boehner, its the 2 guys in the garage that ultimately create the jobs.

Report this comment
#4) On September 16, 2011 at 8:45 AM, djemonk (< 20) wrote:

Why do you have to make under $250K a year to support this?  It's very possible to be a high-income earner and not be a jerk.  It's also possible to be a Republican and not be a jerk.

Report this comment
#5) On September 16, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Frankydontfailme (29.46) wrote:

Republicans are opposed to tax reductions for anyone if they are inacted via  tax hikes for someone else. They are in favor of tax reductions for the middle class.

Thank you for your asinine post. 

Report this comment
#6) On September 16, 2011 at 11:48 AM, motleyanimal (38.23) wrote:

It makes no sense at all to take money from Social Security and give it to people who already have jobs. How does that help the jobless people? Is it some sort of Socialist Trickle-Down Theory?

Report this comment
#7) On September 16, 2011 at 12:28 PM, kirkydu (89.83) wrote:

ahhhhhhh, all the love...

In my opinion, because I didn't give it here, though I have before, the income tax code as it stands, should be made permanent.  

What needs to be changed are the two things I actually did mention:

1. There are too many special interest tax breaks for specific businesses and industries.  Those mostly need to be eliminated with a phase out as they are expensive and cause market inefficiencies that can become dangerous and generally unfair.

2.  Compensation for work should always be taxed as income.  Only when you have your own invested money at risk should you get the cap gains rate (which I think is darn near at a perfect level for actual cap gains).  Execs who claim cap gains on stock awards or options grants, Buffett included, for what is really income should not be allowed to do that.  It's income.  Hedge fund managers who claim the cap gains rate via the carried interest excemption for what is really income should not be allowed to do that.  Those are the two big examples, there might be more, but in short, income is income if it is for work, cap gains tax treatement is for actually invested MONEY.

@ djemonk

"It's very possible to be a high-income earner and not be a jerk.  It's also possible to be a Republican and not be a jerk."

I agree, but the jerks have been loudest for awhile now and seem to be shouting their way into power- which can't be good for America.

Report this comment
#8) On September 16, 2011 at 12:59 PM, SammyP1 (< 20) wrote:

motleyanimal - 1. The way the bill is written, any money lost from the Social Security trust fund will be replaced by the General Fund so Social Security will not lose any money.  2. Employee payroll tax cuts put money in working people's pockets which they will spend.  Working people tend to spend what they get in their paychecks unlike wealthier folks who tend to be savers.  When people spend money it creates demand for goods and grows the economy and when the economy grows, people get jobs.  Employer payroll tax cuts reduces the cost of hiring each additional worker.  There are some inefficiencies to these tax credits, but old Republicans used to at least understand the potential benefits for hiring, and that's why they used to support payroll tax cuts.  But apparently now it's socialism, or something.

Report this comment
#9) On September 16, 2011 at 6:02 PM, motleyanimal (38.23) wrote:

Thanks for the lesson. But it is still a bad idea to give people money that the government cannot afford to give away. Especially to people who don't need it. What I've learned from Keynesians is that they will throw money at almost anything and call it stimulus.

Report this comment
#10) On September 16, 2011 at 6:56 PM, outoffocus (23.07) wrote:

Of course they don't like middle class tax cuts.  The middle class have been paying the lions share of taxes for years and they want to keep it that way.

Report this comment
#11) On September 16, 2011 at 7:27 PM, awallejr (38.58) wrote:

As an independent I have voted for Democrats and Republicans, and have bashed people from both parties.  What bothers me about the current tea party crusade is it really is a ruse to continue protecting the very wealthy. They argue no taxes for anyone on the one hand, to appear fair, and then say we need to reduce entitlements (which the average person relies on and the rich don't need).  So who continues to benefit and who is made to sacrifice under that scenario?   

Report this comment
#12) On September 16, 2011 at 7:33 PM, truthisntstupid (77.39) wrote:

+1 for awallejr


Report this comment
#13) On September 16, 2011 at 9:43 PM, kirkydu (89.83) wrote:


you are correct sir!!!

Report this comment
#14) On September 21, 2011 at 11:14 PM, SkinneeJ (29.19) wrote:

I've got an idea...  Why not let Americans just CHOOSE what they want to participate in the name of FREEDOM?

For instance...  If you need Social Security, then YOU PAY FOR IT...  Don't ask me to chip in.  I don't need Social Security, so why MAKE me pay for it?  Let me opt out of it and stuff that money into my own 401K and be in charge of my own future.

That's the problem with people.  What you don't get is that you have no right to MAKE me pay for what YOU want just because I may make more money than you.  It's my money and I earned it.  Just because you can vote for a government to force me to give up my income or go to prison doesn't make it morally right.  It's still stealing...

 This is America.  Do whatever you like.  Pay as much tax as you want, just don't ask me to pay for your entitlements.  There is no God given mandate that suggest I do so...  Sell your flat screen TV, your iPhone, iPad, and put all that money in a 401K or Health Savings Account.

Report this comment
#15) On September 21, 2011 at 11:19 PM, SkinneeJ (29.19) wrote:

Give us all of our tax money back...  No INCOME tax at all...  You really don't have to worry about that money going out of circulation.  American's don't save.  If the goverment gave all of that tax money back to the tax payers tomorrow, it would be spent on iPods, Cars, TV's, vacation, fancy dinners, shiny rims, clothes, etc by the end of the month.  Each time someone makes a transaction, the state collects sales tax.  The states would be overflowing with new tax revenue...  Then they wouldn't be as dependant on handouts from the federal government...  Money would stay local, etc...  That money is going to be spent in the economy whether the federal government does it or not.  However, at least let the consumer make the decision!!!  If you think that federal stimulus is the answer, then you didn't really understand the question...

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners