General Discussion

hfojvt

(37,573 posts)

38. and the $800 billion

Mon Jan 12, 2015, 07:17 PM

Jan 2015

doesn't even equal the $1.3 trillion in permanent tax cuts that Obama already gave to the top 5%.

I get distrustful because clearly I am NOT part of what a politician means when they say "middle class". That would require me to make more than $100,000 a year.

And to me, it becomes LESS progressive when you give $600 billion in tax cuts to the top 30% and $20 billion in tax cuts to the bottom 40%.

I think those with income over $100,000 should pay MORE taxes, like they did when Clinton was President, to say nothing of when Carter was President.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

41 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Democrats, in a stark shift in messaging, to make big tax-break pitch for middle class: [View all] Kingofalldems Jan 2015 OP

And it's on ... 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2015 #1

Will they run with this? senseandsensibility Jan 2015 #3

Sure they will, just like they did before the 2014 elections. Orrex Jan 2015 #5

I LOVE Van Hollen's proposals. SunSeeker Jan 2015 #2

Interesting ideas... kentuck Jan 2015 #9

I hate the ideas hfojvt Jan 2015 #30

That's my congressman. Kingofalldems Jan 2015 #25

I like the proposal but on the marriage penalty JustAnotherGen Jan 2015 #27

I really thought hfojvt Jan 2015 #31

I think they did JustAnotherGen Jan 2015 #33

When you are the opposition party tkmorris Jan 2015 #4

Exactly Orrex Jan 2015 #6

But it does give you something to campaign on and ... 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2015 #7

Also, why in the hell is the only thing the Democrats can come up with the Republican platform? BrotherIvan Jan 2015 #8

Read the article. The headline misleadingly only mentions tax breaks for the middle class. SunSeeker Jan 2015 #12

I agree with the tax on stock trades BrotherIvan Jan 2015 #13

That is not the only thing that will be on the 2016 platform. SunSeeker Jan 2015 #15

I live in California BrotherIvan Jan 2015 #17

CA raised taxes on the rich, not the middle class. SunSeeker Jan 2015 #18

it IS the Republican platform though hfojvt Jan 2015 #32

Nope, Van Hollen proposes a more progressive tax structure, not less overall taxes. SunSeeker Jan 2015 #34

that may be slightly more progressive hfojvt Jan 2015 #36

No, a LOT more progressive. The stock trade tax raises $800B in 10 years. SunSeeker Jan 2015 #37

and the $800 billion hfojvt Jan 2015 #38

The stock trade tax is not the only tax on the rich Van Hollen is proposing. SunSeeker Jan 2015 #39

no I do not just want to rant hfojvt Jan 2015 #40

Silly insults will not get you anywhere. SunSeeker Jan 2015 #41

+10000 JustAnotherGen Jan 2015 #35

Precisely. It will never become law, so they can safely pander to the upper 5% instead of the .001% hedda_foil Jan 2015 #22

yeah, this looks like kabuki theatre to me Doctor_J Jan 2015 #24

I don't like this PSPS Jan 2015 #10

"The plan also would use the tax code to prod employers to boost wages, which have been stagnant midnight Jan 2015 #11

Well, at first glance I see it's the WaPo and not The Onion. SMC22307 Jan 2015 #14

Yes� I would of assumed that right after the banks were bailed out this would of been the next midnight Jan 2015 #23

It sounds like a good start, especially the inclusion of an incentive for people to save. JDPriestly Jan 2015 #16

Depends Recursion Jan 2015 #19

The big problem is housing. The cost of housing rises because the rich can buy properties JDPriestly Jan 2015 #21

Why didn't they do this before Unknown Beatle Jan 2015 #20

Because they might have won. dawg Jan 2015 #26

It is puzzling for sure. Kingofalldems Jan 2015 #28

Well, in one of those 10 - 20 piece jigsaw puzzles for very small children fashions TheKentuckian Jan 2015 #29