EvilPoliticians says:

I think Barack and Joe should set the example and turn over their income and savings that are excessive. That would be very patriotic.

And all of you that are supporting a tax hike because it is noble, there is nothing stopping you from sending in a check today. You may not make $250k/yr right now, but I am sure there is some tax out there you’d like so you can help out.

bobbo says:

#63–evil==whats fair, noble, and honest is for people who are receiving a benefit (Medicare Medication) or creating a cost (Iraq War) PAY FOR IT and the only way to do that is to raise taxes.

Otherwise, the payment gets shifted downstream to our kiddies by way of interest on debt payments, excessive overhead, all of which gets corrected finally by a deflated dollar.

You are either for higher taxes or lower dollar. Whats fair and right is pretty obvious.

EvilPoliticians says:

#65 – what’s your fair share then? How much are you sending in to the Fed today?

Mister Mustard says:

#61 – O’Pinocchio

>>So he wants me to pay more but not? This is
>>what his ACTIONS say. What a hypocrite.

He said he’s willing to pay more taxes. Not that he’s willing to write a big check, no strings attached, to the government.

Are you really as dumb as you appear, O’Pinocchio?

Mister Mustard says:

#68 – O’Furniture

>>A common theme of despots (from any political
>>party) is to demand sacrifices from the >>“masses” while not themselves sacrificing.

Finally, I agree with you, O’Furniture. I’ve been saying that about Dumbya for 8 years. Talk about a guy who’s unwilling to sacrifice ANYTHING. Not his safety (Viet Nam), not his excessive vacation (brush clearing at the “ranch”), nothing.

9yo says:

McCain tried to steal Obama’s nude erection…er a… “New Direction” then Obama said “Tit” tehe…

MikeN says:

Obama was lying in the debate when asked about his vote not to protect babies that survive abortion.

bobbo says:

Dipshit anti-regulation repuglicans want the “so called” freedom to drive on the wrong side of the road.

Doesn’t matter how many traffic accidents are caused by this repeated stupidity.

Heard last night that since 19whenever there have been 6 market crashes caused by “securitization of land based mortgages.” Don’t know how exactly true that is but something the numbnut free regulators/fraudsters constantly fail to appreciate is that a well regulated market is attractive to investors while a free one without sufficient regulation is not.

If you personally are making money from this recent market crash, then good on you. If you have lost money, don’t you even now understand what just hit you in the face? Fools.

Buzz says:

Say it aint so, Joe:

http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/joe-plumber-more-joe-keating-family-

Gary, the dangerous infidel says:

#78 wrote “…a well regulated market is attractive to investors while a free one without sufficient regulation is not.”

Excellent point, bobbo. We’re still seeing the list of companies holding worthless notes from Lehman Brothers dribble out, and questionable valuations of esoteric, often unmarketable financial instruments relating to many companies continues to be a problem. This only adds to the many concerns investors already have, as well as the resulting fear of what we don’t know.

Misanthropic Scott says:

#79 – EvilPoliticians (multiple personality disorder?),

bobbo – “It takes a special kind of short sighted hypocrisy/stupidity to complain about being taxed on making more than $250K.”

So where have you drawn the line? What is your definition of rich? Obviously $250k/yr is too much in your view. What about $100k? And does it matter where you live? People in Oklahoma can live very well with $100K/yr. Try that in NYC.

I live in NYC. True that many in Manhattan will pay higher taxes under Obama. However, it is also true that those making over $250K can afford to pay a bit more, even when living in NYC.

Or, even more accurately, because of the borrow and bomb repugnicans, more taxes will have to be collected in order to prevent this country from declaring bankruptcy and defaulting on the $10T of debt that we now have.

So, someone has to pay more. That is a given. Anyone who does not think so has their head up their ass so far that they should just stick it in a bit farther and hope to see the light of day.

Who would you make pay? Would you tax the health benefits of someone making $50K (as McBush would) or would you raise taxes on someone making over $250K? Remember, McBush is going to raise the taxes on those making barely enough to get by. He will do so by taxing their health care benefit from their employers. Obama will cut taxes on these people, quite significantly in fact, unlike the insignificant cut McCain will give (and then take away by taxing benefits).

Who will get McCain’s tax cuts? ExxonMobil. He said so at the debate. He is going to reduce taxes on corporations. That’s what we need. Let’s give some tax breaks to Halliburton and ExxonMobil. That should help pay down our debt … somehow … unless it doesn’t.

Remember, not only was the tax rate higher under Clinton, but people could afford to pay it. With the economy in shambles from 8 years of borrow and bomb economics, we must recognize that we cannot continue such policies.

Even if you never travel outside this country to see that the dollar is worthless (ahem … I mean worth less, of course), you must be seeing higher prices at home. Do you wonder that Swiss cheese has gone up in price by 50 percent? Do you note that the Euro has gone up relative to the dollar by that same 50%? Do you think this might have anything to do with the nation’s (ahem … federation’s) crippling debt?

If you think the repugs have any plans to pay it back, then you must not be aware that the debt doubled under both Bushes and was decreased under Clinton. Perhaps you have failed to recognize that, believe it or not, Democrats are actually more fiscally conservative than Republicans of late. At least Dems recognize that the bills must be paid.

With McBush’s plan to stay in Iraq for 100 years, where do you expect the money to come from? Will no one talk about the huge cost of the war? Will no one mention that it has been paid for by China? Will you not expect them to eventually collect at least the interest on their loans?

Wake up!!

Misanthropic Scott says:

#83 – Dallas,

Ooo. Did someone mention Palin?

http://palinaspresident.com/

Click around on stuff. Have fun.

I think he should be killed.

Please, let’s not be like McCain and his supporters. We don’t need to kill our opponents. And, we should reign each other in when we go a tad overboard, in much the same way McCain does not with his supporters.

Cow Paddy doesn’t add much that is useful to any debate. But, that is not reason for a lynching.

Montanaguy says:

Obama is either blindly dense or lying. With an economic downturn like this, all of the people making good money will have large capital losses to write off against income and gains. They will actually be sending less money to the treasury, even with Obama’s tax increase. Thus, the tax increases will trickle down to those who simply have to pay up. The idea that Obama is actually going to ONLY increase taxes on those making more than $250K is a joke and he either knows it and is lying or he is really stupid. Or at least he knows that most of those buying into this are stupid.

bobbo says:

#88–montannadude==wtf are you howling about? Tax rates don’t “trickle down.”

Obama himself said McCain tax break for capital gains wouldn’t mean much at this time. I have to think he does know a tax increase would have the same effect in times of loss and loss carry forwards for the next decade?

So YES==tax revenues most likely will be down from past estimates, and YES both candidates are lying about the effect this downturn will have on the Fed’s ability to deficit spend, but how do you get to trickle down tax rates?

Please detail this for us.

Misanthropic Scott says:

#88 – Montanaguy,

So, I guess you’re expecting the losses to continue indefinitely and are assuming that no one is making money in all of this?

Keep in mind that one may only deduct a $3,000 passive loss per year from investments against any ordinary income. I don’t know what percentage of wealthy losers are considered professional traders for whom the loss would be an active one and realizable in the current year. I also don’t know what percentage will truly not make any money again for the next four years.

For the shareholders, the real question will be whether it is their primary business. For executives, those golden parachutes will be taxed, as will the income from their new jobs.