It looks like some of you are having a rough time knowing how big a fool you looked like for buying in to that Hope and Change garbage. Jimmy Carter just called to say that Obama's a puss.
I get so sick of hearing people say this. Boo hoo, you "only" make 250k and it's really not that much money. Cry me a freakin river. It's more than 98% of households in this country make in a year.
It's taken a couple of years for you to figure out you've been a shill for a phony political campaign. You should be the most embarrassed for all the sack riding you've been doing. Not to mention all the Republican party is dead crap your spouted after the presidential election and only a little over 2 years your hero is a now a puppet on a string to the GOP.
To be fair, he wasn't the first to make the comparison... Pete Sessions has compared Republican tactics to insurgencies and the Taliban several times.
But it's still their money and it doesn't entitle you to fulfill your blatant self-justified emotional desire to steal it from them. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700089040/Utah-small-business-owners-want-tax-cuts-extended.html Small-business owner Brian Nichols doesn't consider himself rich, but he's among the Utahns who stand to lose big if tax cuts for Americans earning more than $250,000 aren't extended. That's because like many small-business owners, the profits Nichols earns from three Cascade Collision Repair shops in Utah County are taxed as personal income. But unlike those Utahns who take home paychecks totaling more than $250,000, he said most of that money goes right back into the family business that employs some 50 workers who repair 600 cars a month. Nichols was recently told by his tax attorney, state Sen. John Valentine, R-Orem, he faces an additional tax bill of more than $50,000 if the tax cuts being debated by Congress end. While President Barack Obama announced a bipartisan agreement late Monday to extend the tax cuts as well as unemployment benefits, there's still some uncertainty. "It's a huge stress for us," Nichols said. "When we really don't really know what is going to happen with our money, with our taxes, we get to the point where we're afraid to spend." He said he felt caught in the middle in the battle between Republicans and Democrats in Washington over whether someone declaring an income of $250,000 or more deserves a tax break. "I don't feel rich at all," Nichols said. "Do I categorize myself as higher income? Absolutely not. Do I believe the government should get their act together and spend our money more wisely? Absolutely. That's what we've had to do as small businesses, and that's what we expect." Just under 4,500 of the more than 181,000 small-business owners in Utah reported income of more than $250,000 in 2009, according to the Utah State Tax Commission. Those 4,500 taxpayers represent less than one-third of the Utahns earning more than $250,000. Valentine said his Provo law firm represents about 250 small-business clients in the same situation as Nichols, earning what he called "phantom income" because it's money that largely goes right back into the business. "We think of profit as income and profits are taxed as income," Valentine said. "But you can't take home the profit or the business will fail." The only Democrat in Utah's congressional delegation, Rep. Jim Matheson, agreed with Republicans that all of the tax cuts should be extended because of the impact on the state's small businesses. "A lot of people are unaware how small businesses are treated," Matheson said. "I think we ought to stand up for small businesses." The agreement announced by Obama includes protecting tax cuts for the working poor and extending unemployment benefits for another 13 months for 2 million Americans. Glenn Bailey, executive director of Crossroads Urban Center, supports continuing benefits for the poor and the unemployed because he believes it will help the economy. That's the same reason many back the tax cuts for wealthier Americans. "At the low end, that money goes right back into the economy because people are living hand to mouth," the advocate for low-income Utahns said. "It's being spent. It's not being saved." Bailey said small businesses are important to the economy and suggested an exception be carved out for their owners so other Americans with high incomes pay more taxes. "The same people concerned about hobbling small business ought to be very concerned about increasing the tax burden on the people who have the least," he said.
This is not a relevant argument. If you're against all taxes, then maybe it applies to that question. But this discussion is really about whether a progressive tax system should be more progressive or not. Calling taxes theft doesn't really add to the discussion.
Actually it has definitely been Change. The Hope part has been disappointing, but it's a far cry from the politics we have had. If anything there's been too much of a change. But this guy has accomplished as President, that it was very noticeable change if people were paying attention.
Why would I be embarrassed by the most progressive president in history? As always, you make no sense. And I hate to break the news, but the tea party has destroyed any semblance of a republican party so...
I live in San Diego where a condo can cost 500k. I worked my ass off to get to where I am at. I am already paying more taxes since I make more. Why am I required to pay even more just because I decided to work hard and even create jobs for others so they can support their famalies? I worked hard so I can travel and enjoy what life has to offer. Why should I help pay for programs that encourage people to sit on their butt and do nothing?
I take it you never went to public schools, don't use electricity shipped down from the Bonneville Power Administration, don't drink water from the Colorado River, don't drive on interstates, don't eat subsidized food, can douse your own fires, and can protect yourself from all enemies, foreign and domestic. As it is, because of the stimulus, your taxes are the lowest they've been in 60 years.
The problem though with this 250k cap is that like the article above it does in fact tie in too many people who are small business owners who supply jobs and who were the ones that took the risk to start something up. There needs to be another category for the taxes because 250k after all the inflation that has taken place in the last fifteen years just isn't a good measuring stick to decide who is 'wealthy.' But what else would anyone expect from our corporate overlords and their puppet politicians? They want to hammer these small business owners because small business competes against corporations. If they didn't, we'd have a different tax class for people making over $1mil. I bet that would eliminate 90% of all small business owners from the predicament in that Utah scenario.
Hmmmm, let's have this fun with this. If he faces 50k in more taxes, that means his personal income is about 1.7 million dollars ($50,000/3.6% + 250k). Then he says he is not higher income Now the funny part. He says he won't reinvest in his business because of the taxes. Well guess what, he can deduct all those business investments as expenses on next year tax returns. So in other words, if he spends 1.5 million on investments and sucks up the additional 3.6% on taxes this year, then next year, which should be an even better year business wise, he can deduct 1.5 million as expenses and therefore gets all him tax money right back into his pocket! In other words, he's b.s.ing you and me. And it's it funny his accountant is a republican senator????
Actually, you don't pay taxes on the $10k in revenue. You only pay on your net income which is another way of saying profits. The average business claims anywhere from 3%-30% of revenue as profit. So really you only pay taxes on $300-$3,000 dollars. The tax rate has nothing to do with whether or not you turn a profit - only how much of that profit you get to keep. It's not rocket science.
Lets not forget that the initial compromise position that Obama had offered was to extend the Bush tax rates for everyone but those who earned a million dollars a year.
I hope that this compromise does open the floodgates on getting other legislation passed but I am skeptical. I am not sure why Congressional Republicans would be willing to deal on those other issues when they aren't tied to this agreement. I understand that they weren't going to move on any of those until a tax cut deal was reached but given how this deal is framed I don't see how Obama's hand is stronger. As I said in another thread I still think this was a bad move on Obama's part. Tax cuts are much more important to the Republicans than they are to the Democrats and while Obama might feel that the Republicans were holding middle class taxpayers hostage I think a return to Clinton era rates for everyone would've forced their hand more than it would Democrats.
" I didn’t come [to the Lakers] for the money. Obviously I could have gone somewhere else, even a lesser market. Pay less taxes. The taxes here are freaking killing me, you know what I’m saying?” -Ron Artest I like Ron Artest even more and more Of course his gesture of donating his whole salary to good cause is just awesome.
Yet during the Clinton era a lot of people still started a lot of small businesses. As a small business owner myself I can tell you that tax rates have never been much of a consideration for how we conduct our business. Things like revenue, health care are far more factors. For that matter I can't recall ever meeting a small business owner that had decided to not start a small business or not hire someone because of tax rates. Honestly if such a small change in tax rates is going to effect someone's business decision making I would question how well they are running their business. Ending the tax cuts for only those making $1 mil and more was one of the proposals that was defeated.
