Guest
10-22-2011, 02:35 PM
As the Supercommittee meets, the line is already in the sand.
As he continues to push for any parts of the Jobs Bill he can get, the President has publicly pledged he will veto any plan which does not raise some new tax revenue from "those who can most afford it".
The Republicans continue to insist they will solidly oppose any deficit reduction legislation which includes any additional tax revenue.
I can understand why the President has taken his stand. It has to do with the facts stated below, as well as the severe criticism from his own supporters that he has been too compromising in the unsuccessful effort to get support for legislative efforts from moderates of both parties.
What I can't understand is why the Republicans still steadfastly hold their position. About 70% of Americans support some form of tax increase on "those who can most afford it" as a necessary ingredient of deficit reduction.
According to the Social Security Administration, in just two years there has been an 18% increase in the number of people making more than $1 million, while 50% of all Americans earned less than $26,364 last year.
Back in 1986, one of the great Republican heroes, Ronald Reagan, strongly supported raising the capital gains tax to 29%, to align it more closely to tax rates on ordinary income. "A bus driver shouldn't be paying at a higher rate than a wealthy investor", was his reasoning. But as we all know, the capital gains rate has been whittled down to 15% since those days. More and more concerned, responsible people, (not just communists, nazis, nut-jobs and ne'r do wells, as a few people here would characterize them), have either joined "Occupy Wall Street" or are financially sustaining those demonstrations. Every one of these people and silent millions more have a single concern in mind; the alarming NEW imbalance in the country's wealth and it's implication on the future of America.
I have asked this before and not yet heard a single reason why the Republicans should continue to take their inflexible position. Even Romney, the most moderate Republican presidential candidate, has not yet articulated a rationale for the Republican position. Only Cain, oddly the most conservative, supports new taxes, but that isn't really true for one huge reason - because he says it isn't. Because they have not been able to produce any factual evidence to support it, the Republicans are finally soft-pedaling or ignoring their old mantra that any additional tax on the wealthy would immediately translate into a reduction of their job creating abilities or inclinations.
So I invite any of you, who are convinced there should be no tax revenue producing elements in any deficit reduction legislation, to share your facts and reasons
As he continues to push for any parts of the Jobs Bill he can get, the President has publicly pledged he will veto any plan which does not raise some new tax revenue from "those who can most afford it".
The Republicans continue to insist they will solidly oppose any deficit reduction legislation which includes any additional tax revenue.
I can understand why the President has taken his stand. It has to do with the facts stated below, as well as the severe criticism from his own supporters that he has been too compromising in the unsuccessful effort to get support for legislative efforts from moderates of both parties.
What I can't understand is why the Republicans still steadfastly hold their position. About 70% of Americans support some form of tax increase on "those who can most afford it" as a necessary ingredient of deficit reduction.
According to the Social Security Administration, in just two years there has been an 18% increase in the number of people making more than $1 million, while 50% of all Americans earned less than $26,364 last year.
Back in 1986, one of the great Republican heroes, Ronald Reagan, strongly supported raising the capital gains tax to 29%, to align it more closely to tax rates on ordinary income. "A bus driver shouldn't be paying at a higher rate than a wealthy investor", was his reasoning. But as we all know, the capital gains rate has been whittled down to 15% since those days. More and more concerned, responsible people, (not just communists, nazis, nut-jobs and ne'r do wells, as a few people here would characterize them), have either joined "Occupy Wall Street" or are financially sustaining those demonstrations. Every one of these people and silent millions more have a single concern in mind; the alarming NEW imbalance in the country's wealth and it's implication on the future of America.
I have asked this before and not yet heard a single reason why the Republicans should continue to take their inflexible position. Even Romney, the most moderate Republican presidential candidate, has not yet articulated a rationale for the Republican position. Only Cain, oddly the most conservative, supports new taxes, but that isn't really true for one huge reason - because he says it isn't. Because they have not been able to produce any factual evidence to support it, the Republicans are finally soft-pedaling or ignoring their old mantra that any additional tax on the wealthy would immediately translate into a reduction of their job creating abilities or inclinations.
So I invite any of you, who are convinced there should be no tax revenue producing elements in any deficit reduction legislation, to share your facts and reasons