Question: most of us are Dems on here. If taxes have to be raised

[babylonsister]

to get our country back in sync (if it was only that easy), would or could you agree or deal with that?
dimson keeps talking about how Dems will raise taxes, and maybe they will if it's necessary, but wouldn't most people agree it would be okay if we got our country back?
How about getting a prez in there who might even consider us to begin with, us being the middle-class?

[pnwmom]

1. Agree. Otherwise the debt just goes on to our children.

[survivor999]

30. But I don't have children...

So, why should I care? Seriously.

[seaglass]

39. I don't know, don't Dems usually care about the community as

a whole and not just themselves?

Serious question.

[Demobrat]

2. What taxes?

On whom?

[FormerDittoHead]

42. Exactly. I'm not going to sit quiet for any "across the board" increase.

Let me see. Reduce the rates on the rich and then increase them overall, effectively increasing taxes on the lower and middle class. No f**king way.

[evlbstrd]

3. Yes.

1. Roll back the tax cuts on the wealthiest.

2. Severely restrict corporate tax breaks, credits and loopholes as well as executive pay.

3. End the legal fiction that corporations have the same rights as citizens.

4. End the income tax for everyone earning less than $100,000 a year.

Think that'd get people out to vote?

[babylonsister]

8. I cannot imagine any person in the middle-class who wouldn't

agree. It's the rich that might be fighting it.
Something has got to give, and we will get screwed
if we don't consider it.

[evlbstrd]

10. I think you'd see voter registration increase.

The rich fuckers are outnumbered.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

23. What fraction of the government's income is income tax on people earning

less than $100,000 a year? My suspicion is that a very great deal of it is, in which case I don't think your proposals are feasible, but I don't know for certain.

[Jed Dilligan]

33. But wouldn't points 1-3 do a great deal

toward making 4 feasible?

I bet a lot of people making 100-120K would accept pay cuts back to 99999.

[rinsd]

34. Taxes do not work that way

They would only be taxed on income above $100K.

Its not like you pay zero taxes up to $99,999 then when you hit $100K you get nailed with a 40% tax bill of $40K.

1 won't be enough.

3 well that is one that may drag out in the courts for years and still may lose.

4 Taxing only income above $100K is risky at best, possibly catastrophic. What would happen if the stock market crashed? Or another Dot Com bust? The whole point of taxes is paying what we can for communal benefit. I have no problem paying taxes though I'd like to know what ad wizard in CA decided 40K+ earns you the highest state rate.

[Jed Dilligan]

43. Yeah, the 100K cutoff seems extreme...

But it could be implemented in the form of a much more severely progressive curve.

[Lasher]

35. I have an amendment to offer

5. Restore the estate tax but leave an exemption of say, $6 million that a couple can leave without their heirs having to pay taxes.

[Epiphany4z]

4. I expect it

the thing that sucks is if we can get our country back...fixing it is not going to be painless monkey boy has things so screwed up...winning the first round is the easy part...keeping control is gonna be the bitch....I hope people understand there is no magic wand its gonna hurt fixing things.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

5. I already pay LOTS of taxes

and I would gladly pay more to fix things and help out my fellow Americans.

[babylonsister]

11. That's what I was wondering. I don't know

anyone's 'value' but I sure would try to help to fix the deficit. But I've been clued in that the deficit is a result of the tax cuts for the very rich, not the war or Katrina or anyone else. Makes me pause.

[Lasher]

36. Me too on both counts Viva. (EOM)

[wtmusic]

6. Maybe the question should be: who wants to keep borrowing money,

running up debt their kids will have to pay off, and buying more yachts for "needy" execs? :shrug:

[MattP]

7. Non-profits

Take the non out of non-profit and make those people pay tax or at least the ones Tom Delay runs and mega churches should pay, any church with over a million in donations should pay taxes or maybe all churches should pay.

[NMMNG]

9. I agree on the churches

But why non-profits? I work for two of them and I imagine it would only hurt the employees (who make small salaries as it is).

[MattP]

13. Not all

Not all non-profits, just the slimy ones like the ones Abramoff used to launder money. Alot are good but alot of congressman have corrupted them.

[brook]

19. It might be

worthwhile to do something to balance the salaries of non-profit execs and those of the workers. I know in mine, the CEO makes in 7 weeks what I make in a year. Every time he says "Thanks for all you do" I want to smack him. Basically, we need to bring things into a semblance of balance. I'll always be willing to pay whatever it takes to have a just and functioning society - as long as everyone does equitably.

[NMMNG]

22. It would be worthwhile to balance salaries of CEOs and workers

in all corporations/agencies, whether they are for-profit or non-profit. The difference in pay between the groups is scandalous.

[NMMNG]

12. I'd pay more in taxes

But I want the "faith-based" favoritism program dismantled, the tax cuts for the uber-rich gone, corporate welfare axed and a freeze on pay-raises for Congress until they raise the minimum wage.

[ClassWarrior]

14. There are plenty of taxes that can and should be raised...

...without even touching the middle class. We're talking Tax Fairness here. Bring 'em on!

NGU.

[az chela]

15. Absolutely

His tax cuts have never helped anyone but the filthy rich and we pay their taxes for them.He has screwed up the new drug insurance ,it is a night mare.The democrats can get up health care and we can pay more taxes big f-----ing deal.
I would rather pay the taxes!!!!!
Peace Now
Piss on bush

[pitohui]

16. can't afford it, most true middle class people have nothing left

taxes don't need to be raised, it's a straw man

if we don't have the money, let korea and the middle east solve their own problems and we pull the troops out, financial issues solved

[MiniMe]

27. They are not talking about raising taxes on the middle class

They are talking about rolling back tax cuts on the wealthiest 1 to 2% and some of the obscene corporate tax breaks. In other words, tax the people that want this war most, and who are profiting from it most.

[ninkasi]

17. Speaking for myself

I'm not even considered quite middle-class, and the only reason I'm not living in poverty is that our house is paid for, and so are our car and truck. We lead very simple lives, don't go to movies, or to restaurants. Our social life revolves pretty much completely around our family. Visiting each other, talking to each other, all of those things are our greatest joy, both my husband and I agree.

I would definitely prefer to have our taxes raised, if that were the only way to get our country out of this crushing debt, that will be passed not only to our children, but to our grand-children, and possibly even the next generation. Rolling back the huge tax breaks for the rich would be the first thing, but if we all have to pay more, I would be ok with it myself.

We've already robbed them of so much. Where my grandmother, my cousin and I used to take drives along roads that were pretty much stretches of pine trees, there are now subdivisions and malls, strip centers and fast food places, from Houston to Huntsville, Tx. Friends and family of mine who have gone back to visit places they used to live, are saddened at the destruction of so much scenery, and so much of America's beauty. Live is more rushed, as people struggle to keep 2 or even 3 jobs to make ends meet, and that takes away an enormous amount of time from their families.

Our children already face the probability that jobs they get will pay less, and offer fewer benefits, than the ones we older people have had. Education costs have soared, as has health care. The next generation faces enormous challenges already, due to destruction of natural resources, pollution, unsafe water, global warming, outsourcing of jobs, and loss of civil liberties. If I were to choose between paying less in taxes, or paying more, if it would help solve some problems our children face, and ease their burden, I would gladly pay more taxes.

I know that isn't a popular position, but it's reality, due to the corruption of the Bush administration. The increased taxes should start at the top, by far. Even if the middle class pays just a bit more, to secure our children's future would be worth it. I have not had a child in public school for over twenty years. Still, I don't resent paying property taxes, since it's partly to finance schools, and I maintain that having an educated younger generation is good for us all. I'm curious to see how the rest of you feel.

[babylonsister]

20. I must be older than you, because the development happened

a long time ago for me on Long Island, NY. I grew up on a farm that is now a development.
It's happening here in Houston as well. We must be neighbors, sort of, but I live south of Hobby.

The worst about dimson and his admin are these TAAS tests. They HAVE to study for them to the detriment of any other education they might get. It's wrong.

[ninkasi]

21. Well, I'm 63

so I don't know which of us is older, but remember that NY was much more populated longer ago that Houston. I've always lived just north of Houston. In 1971, my former husband and I moved to Spring, Tx. When we moved there, you could drive down FM 1960 W., from I-45 to Champions, and there was nothing but land. The building started a few years later.

My husband and some of his friends remember when FM 1960 was Jack Rabbit Rd., and there was pretty much nothing there. The area south of Houston has always been more heavily populated. I'm old enough to remember when the North Freeway, or US 75, or I45, was not completed. When my parents took us from the North side of Houston to Galveston, we went through parts of downtown Houston which still had some brick streets.

I agree with you about the TAAS tests, because I have two granddaughters still in school. The two oldest ones are in their twenties. It's always nice to know I have a DUer as a neighbor, although it's quit a distance between our homes.
:hi: :hi: :hi:

[pacalo]

18. I believe it was Nancy Pelosi who said that a Democratic congress

will be working to protect the middle class. If they have plans to raise taxes, it will be in the vein of rolling back the tax cuts for the wealthy (Dimson's self-proclaimed "base"), imo.

[WCGreen]

24. Yep, plain and simple.....

But I would restructure the Payroll Tax in order to assist the poor and help out the small business that hire the poor...

[pampango]

25. No. Revenues are up, but spending on the military and pork

are up exponentially. Cut em.

[Iris]

26. As long as they go up all the way to the top echelons of society.

If we're talking about just taxing what's left of the middle class, well, no.

[Stinky The Clown]

28. I don't think we can do it with tax **cuts**

Not the traditional Republic Party tax cuts for the top 2% and for the large corporations, but for the lower and middle classes.

Please see this thread, which looks at the same issue from the other end of the telescope: Let's talk tax cuts for a moment ....

[Lasher]

37. That was a good thread (EOM)

[HughBeaumont]

29. Taxes HAVE to be raised on the super wealthy.

They are FAR from paying their fair share. The Middle Class and the Poor are being soaked to the brink. Costs on everything have gone up. Pardon me for not shedding any tears because someone making 3 million a year only gets to keep 1.5 million of it instead of 2. They aren't starving.

[McCamy Taylor]

31. Raise corporate & wealthy taxes. Raise minimum wage, Bring jobs

home by encouraging businesses to do business here and not abroad. If salaries go up, there is a bigger tax base and that means the government also collects more taxes. Granting more working Mexican immigrants who are already here citizenship also means that they would get higher wages, pay taxes and Social Security which would also help. (We can tighten border security to keep new people from crossing w/out penalizing the people who are already here and contributing members of society).

Consider a big windfall profits tax on the oil industry to help rebuild NOLA and the Gulf.

This sounds consistent with Democratic values.

[Bucky]

32. If it's necessary to raise taxes, it's cowardly not to. You pay your debts

We benefit from the expenditures government makes. If government money helps train a lot of new workers then my whole community benefits from new jobs we attract. If the government builds more roads, my local business costs go down. If the government inspects meat I can shop and eat and live more healthily. What kind of selfish dumbass would I have to be to then object to paying for the services I recieve, or to think that I have the right to borrow money from China and dump those costs onto my children and grandchildren?

Answer: I would be a Republican kind of selfish dumbass.

[DuaneBidoux]

38. I'd be happy to get back to 1/4 of where we were at end of WWII on rich

Essentially Repukes have been reducing taxes on the very wealthy for about 40 straight years now. They pay a fraction of what they did during the 50's. This has been one of the biggest contributors to the skewing of wealth toward the very wealthy that we see more and more of every year.

[foo_bar]

40. the problem is, the Dems are the party of responsibility and survival

The dilemma is exemplified by the succession of New Jersey governors: Kean and Whitman drain the treasury and go on to Bushie cabinet posts, while Florio (and now Corzine) raise taxes to pay for the spending binges of their predecessors, more or less ending their political careers for doing the right thing. The voters are ultimately to blame for choosing christmas bonuses over their own long term interest, but maybe Dems need to put every tax increase to a populist referendum, something like A) Raise taxes, B) Wallow in a 4th world state without schools, police, or garbage collection. At the federal level, Dems might be well advised to declare a moratorium on tax increases or cuts, leaving the painful calculus to states and their respective voters, until Texas and New Jersey are uninhabitable banana republics without Medicare, and NY and California modern technocracies with universal health care and swelling Congressional delegations. I know it goes against the Federalist tradition of Alexander Hamilton et al., but maybe it's time for people to take a more active role in screwing themselves.

[frogcycle]

41. if major corporations

didn't have thousands of ways to avoid paying any tax at all, this conversation would be over.


example: tax incentives to develop "alternative energy sources"
summary: well-intentioned tax breaks to stimulate industry to develop alternatives to coal and oil
implementation: almost all the tax breaks go to major coal companies who sell coal to a subsidiary company located on hte premises of the utilities' power plants. The coal is sprayed with a light film of vegetable oil. That makes it an "alternative energy source" according to the fine print in the law, which was authored by coal lobbyists who pulled the wool over the congress' eyes.so what once was a polluting energy source we wanted to phase out is now a tax-free polluting energy source we want to phase out.


of course I could go on and on and on


couple that with tax breaks on the income of the geniuses who thought up this scam and reap big bonuses, and you end up with insufficient federal income.

so it doesn't matter what percent of the fed income is middle-class wage earners. whatever it is, it is too high.

all the talk about the middle class taxes or how much to cut entitlements when you refuse to do a damned thing about the REAL inequities is just diversionary tactics. refocus people's attention on a couple of symptoms, get them arguing about those, and they won't pick up on what you are really doing.

[Imagevision]

44. Well, we saw what Bush's tax cuts did for this country, tax the rich first

they got the bigger breaks.