Here's the funny thing about this Forbes idiot. Even if he were taxed the way Buffet would like, he'd still be rich. I don't know what all of this sniveling from the wealthy is about. A bigger group of whining infants who have to have their way all of the time never existed. These are the same people who have no problem with using the U.S. tax payer funded military to protect their overseas investments and shipping lanes. These are the same people who abuse the court system and stack the deck so that they win every case by using their lobbyists through graft to change laws in their favor. So, they use the federal, state and local public systems to every advantage they can, and then ***** about having to pay for it. Like I said, a larger group of spoiled whining brats never existed.
OH, PUH-LEEZE, already! A higher tax on the rich...which is really just a little giveback from the reductions they got under the Bush administration...is PUNISHMENT?!! Guys like Forbes have NO CLUE about what it's like to be truly poor! Otherwise, they wouldn't wage stupid arguments like this! Let them experience going hungry, or long periods of joblessness, or, loosing their home and property...then they'd think twice before they whined about the rich being punished! How ridiculous! And, selfish of him!
"Most of [Buffett's] income apparently comes from dividends and from capital gains. And if you raise the tax on capital gains and dividends, you're going to get less capital creation. We tried this in the 1970s. It led to a disastrous decade - one of the contributors to that," Forbes said.
Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. President Obama not only ignored what caused the huge economic recession during President Carter's administration (and I voted for President Carter), he ignored what President Reagan did to bring us out of that recession.
To those who continue to state that Reaganomics did not work, here are some figures:
Forbes 07/27/11: Louis Woodhill "Whether in Greece or in the U.S., the impact of government policies shows up first and fastest in total employment. Judged by jobs, Reaganomics worked. During the first two years of the Reagan recovery, total employment increased by 7.2 million. Given that Obamunism is the exact opposite of Reaganomics, one might expect that it would produce a terrible jobs situation — and it has.
In terms of total employment, the U.S. lost 0.7 million jobs during the first 24 months of Obama's recovery. The nation has never before had an economic expansion where total employment after two years of recovery was lower than it was at the end of the recession. In June 2011, America had 2.9 million fewer people working than when Obama was inaugurated. (By the same point in Reagan's presidency, our total number of jobs had increased by 0.7 million, equivalent to 1.0 million jobs after adjustment for today's higher population.)"
You are using selective observations and figures. Go back and look at the 8 years of Reagan - and also see when the job growth was compared to when the tax cut happened. (although almost no-one actually paid the high rates prior to the cuts). If cutting taxes created jobs, then the 2000 years should have been boom years for jobs. They are lower than during President Reagan.
Look at the job losses from January 2008 through December 2009 - you will see that almost all of them happen in the first four months of 2009. Let's see, President Obama took office around January 21, 2009. Obviously, all the jobs that were lost in Jan-April 2009 were caused by his policies (that were not even in place yet). Different time, different place, different technologies that lessen the need for more workers. OH... you might be interested to know that President Reagan doesn't rank at the top in job creation... not even second. But, he does rank first in the largest % increase in the federal deficit.
The rich wont invest in jobs when their taxes are down either Steve. So time to tax it away from the hoarders, and put it in to work for America.
The rich have ruthlessly slanted the laws to enrich themselves. Time for the rest of us to stop buying the "we earned it" "we work harder" "we create jobs" "job creator" "you can too" and "not fair" lies.
No one has their hands in the public's pocket deeper than the rich.
Does steve forbes really believe what he is saying:
The Millionaire's tax would aim to reverse a longer term trend, which has seen tax rates for the rich decline over the past decade, primarily due to the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. About 2/3 of the dollar value of those tax cuts went to the top 20 percent of income earners.
Does steve not understand that if a middle-class person pays less taxes they too can invest for capital gains just as easy as steve? Why does he want to have the privilege of paying less of a percentage than the middle-class just because the income is not from a paycheck but from investments? Capital gains taxes have been at there lowest for 20 yrs and there are no jobs. Plus, even if there were zero taxes the jobs would still be going overseas with no one concerned with trying to keep maybe 1 or 2 of them here.
What steve is trying to get thru to we the people of the middle-class is that, IN EFFECT, he is going to have to be the dealer at the black-jack table and have the advantage.
Hey, I've got an idea that makes exactly as much sense as steve forbes idea. What if me and steve forbes trade the % of tax we pay? That would mean that I would pay less taxes and have more money to risk for capital gains. I don't mind that risk at all. If he has a problem with buying investments and paying taxes on the gains I can take that worry off of his mind. Trust me steve, I will help you just like you've helped the middle-class, no problem.
"Well, if Warren Buffett wants to pay the same tax as the people who work for him, then he should pay himself the same net salary that people who work for him [get]," Forbes said.
Typical Steve Forbes. The guy has never been anything but a pig (with apologies to pigs) and this is just another example of how this guy thinks, or doesn't. He's a dimwitted non-caring troll. Unfortunately, he has a lot of company in corporations and the Republican party.
What stevie is trying to drum into our stupid middle-class minds because we have a hard time understanding anything as hard as why he needs to pay a lesser % of taxes even though the middle-class has many many more college grads than the upper class(not percentage but total number) is that if he has to pay as much taxes as we the people of the middle-class then he will have a tiny little bit less money. Now, does anybody really believe that there is anything good about stevie paying a teeny tiny bit more money in taxes? Of course not, we in the middle-class are not so stupid as to believe steve and other elite rich should pay as high a % as the middle class. I just hope the middle-class will drop it forget about it and just let it go because steve may do like I heard boehner is going to do and hold his breath and agree to nothing until the next election. They are true geniuses. Many, many times the intelligence of a mere middle-class person like us. Don't even disagree with them or they may start saying it's "class warfare".
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
So, they use the federal, state and local public systems to every advantage they can, and then ***** about having to pay for it. Like I said, a larger group of spoiled whining brats never existed.
Guys like Forbes have NO CLUE about what it's like to be truly poor!
Otherwise, they wouldn't wage stupid arguments like this!
Let them experience going hungry, or long periods of joblessness, or, loosing their home and property...then they'd think twice before they whined about the rich being punished!
How ridiculous! And, selfish of him!
Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. President Obama not only ignored what caused the huge economic recession during President Carter's administration (and I voted for President Carter), he ignored what President Reagan did to bring us out of that recession.
To those who continue to state that Reaganomics did not work, here are some figures:
Forbes 07/27/11: Louis Woodhill
"Whether in Greece or in the U.S., the impact of government policies shows up first and fastest in total employment. Judged by jobs, Reaganomics worked. During the first two years of the Reagan recovery, total employment increased by 7.2 million. Given that Obamunism is the exact opposite of Reaganomics, one might expect that it would produce a terrible jobs situation — and it has.
In terms of total employment, the U.S. lost 0.7 million jobs during the first 24 months of Obama's recovery. The nation has never before had an economic expansion where total employment after two years of recovery was lower than it was at the end of the recession. In June 2011, America had 2.9 million fewer people working than when Obama was inaugurated. (By the same point in Reagan's presidency, our total number of jobs had increased by 0.7 million, equivalent to 1.0 million jobs after adjustment for today's higher population.)"
Look at the job losses from January 2008 through December 2009 - you will see that almost all of them happen in the first four months of 2009. Let's see, President Obama took office around January 21, 2009. Obviously, all the jobs that were lost in Jan-April 2009 were caused by his policies (that were not even in place yet). Different time, different place, different technologies that lessen the need for more workers. OH... you might be interested to know that President Reagan doesn't rank at the top in job creation... not even second. But, he does rank first in the largest % increase in the federal deficit.
The rich have ruthlessly slanted the laws to enrich themselves. Time for the rest of us to stop buying the "we earned it" "we work harder" "we create jobs" "job creator" "you can too" and "not fair" lies.
No one has their hands in the public's pocket deeper than the rich.
The Millionaire's tax would aim to reverse a longer term trend, which has seen tax rates for the rich decline over the past decade, primarily due to the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. About 2/3 of the dollar value of those tax cuts went to the top 20 percent of income earners.
What if me and steve forbes trade the % of tax we pay? That would mean that I would pay less taxes and have more money to risk for capital gains. I don't mind that risk at all. If he has a problem with buying investments and paying taxes on the gains I can take that worry off of his mind. Trust me steve, I will help you just like you've helped the middle-class, no problem.
Typical Steve Forbes. The guy has never been anything but a pig (with apologies to pigs) and this is just another example of how this guy thinks, or doesn't. He's a dimwitted non-caring troll. Unfortunately, he has a lot of company in corporations and the Republican party.