There are some interesting comments out there, I guess it depends upon one's perspective:
Quote:
Tax the Rich? Depends On How You Define Rich
Posted by Emily Ekins
As the myriad of media polls have made clear, Americans are typically averse to tax increases except if offered the option to tax the ?wealthy.? However, few polls ask respondents how they would define wealthy. The latest Reason-Rupe poll takes on this task by asking respondents to define what level of income they would define as wealthy and thus would be subject to higher taxes. Similar to a step function, as individuals? incomes increase their definition of ?wealthy? increases also, especially for households with annual incomes over $200,000. For instance, the median household making $25,000-$49,999 a year believes that ?wealthy? is defined as $200,000 year. However, the median household actually making over $200,000 a year believes that ?wealthy? is defined as $500,000. More discussion can be found here: Tax the Rich? - Reason-Rupe Surveys : Reason Magazine
For instance, the median household making $25,000-$49,999 a year believes that ?wealthy? is defined as $200,000 year. However, the median household actually making over $200,000 a year believes that ?wealthy? is defined as $500,000
During a forum on faith Saturday night at Saddleback Church, McCain was asked, "Where do you move from middle class to rich?"
"If you're just talking about income, how about five million?" McCain quipped.
The Democratic National Committee this morning released a web video that features that remark, plus one by former McCain campaign leader Phil Gramm, who said that Americans worried about the economy have become "a nation of whiners."
"[McCain] was in a panel the other day with me, Rick Warren, some of you may have seen it -- and Rick Warren asked him -- how do you define rich? He said, maybe he was joking, he said, "$5 million." Obama added, "Which I guess if you're making $3 million a year, you're middle class. But that's reflected in his policies -- where, you know, for people making more than $2.5 million, he's giving folks a $500,000 tax break. And so this is a fundamental difference in this election. What I've said is we're gonna give 95% of working families a tax break, but it's gonna be ordinary folks."
I don't think that raising taxes on the rich will help either the economy or debt right now.
I think Obama is on the wrong track.
I also think that the republicans are on the wrong track as well. Just a thought, someone who is often referred to here agrees with this. What does Bill Clinton think about this mess we're in?
“So what I’d like to see them do is come up with a bipartisan approach, starting with the payroll tax cuts because they have the biggest return.
“Then what I’d like to see is an effort made at a bipartisan resolution of the banking home mortgage crisis.
“One of the things that President Reagan did with the Democratic Congress in the early 1980s that never gets any discussion is the way they set up this system to purge the debt overhang from the savings and loan collapse. It was unpopular but it had to be done. And as soon as we flushed it out there was a big increase in investment.
“So that’s what we need to do here with this home deal. I don’t think you can tax or cut taxes, I don’t think you can spend or not spend enough to get America back to a full employment economy until we flush that debt
Read more on Newsmax.com: Ex-President Clinton to Newsmax: Raising Taxes Won't Work
You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence.
You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.
Linear Mode
