If democrats aren't tax and spend, why would Obama's income tax rate initiatives approach 60 percent?

Question

60 Percent! While this is the effect rate that would be applied to the most successful among us, is there any doubt that the rate applied to the rest of the American public would be any less? Everyone expects the democrats to raise taxes to pay for their increases in spending, but holy c**p!

http://www.nysun.com/new-york/tax-rates-for-new-yorkers-would-top-50-under-obama/82191/

And please, don't respond unless you've read at least part of the article. We don't need mindless party rhetoric.

Thanks.

Answer 1

When the Bush tax cuts end EVERYONE will see taxes double, it won't matter what your income is.  Sorry, people I don't believe in redistribution of wealth, if you earn it, you keep it.  Plain & simple.  Our government needs to suck it up and stop the unnecessary spending.  Haven't each of you had to tighten the purse strings?

Answer 2

Why would a million Americans making less than 50 grand per year care about rich people getting taxed?

You'll probably say, "Well, they cut jobs...."

Then who'll do the work?  Not the fat cats at the company obviously...so who?

They'll just have to cut their profits.  Too dam* bad.

Answer 3

Because they are the tax and spend party and if they claim otherwise it is to garner the votes of the uninformed centrists.

Answer 4

HAHAA you don't want mindless party rhetoric and YET your question has the saying "Tax and Spend" in it!? Hypocrite.

Answer 5

It's an evolutionary thing as libs like to believe. Instead of tax and spend it's rob and steal now.

Answer 6

They will do anything to win including very expensive promises.

Answer 7

Um... what's really amazing is that you have no idea what you're talking about and you're falling for idiotic rhetoric.  The current rate is 35% for people earning over $350,000 where it was nearly 80% in 1918.  Only because of insane republican support of the ultra-wealthy have they managed to get their taxes cut so low.  

In 1945, at the end of WW2, the tax rate for people earning over 200,000 was over 90%.

It was also over 90% during the 1950's which you all seem to recall as the golden age of America, when we saw record growth.

In 1975, it dropped to a record low of 70%.  I guess that's when the Republicans started working their 'magic'.  What I like to call 'the war on the middle class.'

You see, you seem to regard a tax rate of 60% as catastrophic, just as the article wants you to think.  Instead, we're moving back toward normalcy and away from the extreme.  If you don't like extremism, I suggest you support Barack Obama and his tax plan.  Or you can go on falling for Republican extremism and support their debt-inducing tax cuts.

Answer 8

Tax and spend or borrow and spend? That seems to be the choice. I received several reductions in taxes under the Republican way of running the government and the economy. The problem is, though I'm paying less in taxes the costs of everything has risen so much that I have far less money to save and invest than ever before. Its a scam, they first deregulate corporations and capital gains, they then reduce taxes, the cost of everything increases (except wages, which stagnate or decline) so what was being taken from us in taxes is now being used to provide the golden parachute for some CEO.

Answer 9

Exactly.  Sadly, most of these people don't seem to realize that they're voting themselves right out of their jobs.  How foolish and blinded they are!

Answer 10

actually that's the definition of progressive taxation - obama's plan explicitly raises taxes for the very wealthy and doesn't for those in the middle (below $250K income). what's so hard to understand about that?

and at any rate, i'd take tax and spend over spend and increase the deficit any day...

Answer 11

When I start to make $350,000 a year, I'll start to worry about it.  As per the article you cited.

Tax and spend is better than just spend, I think.  What happens when China cashes in their ducats?

Answer 12

Dems tax and spend.  Republicans don't tax as much, but spend anyway (devaluing the dollar and making your money worth less, but we should be happy to have a tiny bit more of it).  

Didn't read the article.  Don't think it's necessary to refute useless partisan rhetoric (which you ironically spew, yet decline to hear).

Answer 13

The 60% rate that you cite (actually 58%) is not on earned income but earned income over $250,000.  I have no way of verifying anything in the article but I do know that no country can be economically successful over time if the great bulk of the population is not able to educate their young, buy food, and pay for transportation for financial reasons.  The rich in the US have been getting MUCH richer and the middle class MUCH poorer over the last six or eight years.  Tax rates, and bail-outs of for-profit-companies such as Behr-Stearns, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac are all part of that pattern.  

Answer 14

They are the party of tax and spend.  Taxes will be higher with the Democrats - there's no doubt.

But the Republicans spent too much also, which has hurt them a great deal with the electorate.  At least they don't tax us to death, though.

PS  Reading the other answers is very dispiriting.  So many people have no problem taking other people's money from them!  That's not the American way.

Answer 15

Yeah, raise taxes during a shaky economy. That's a real good idea.

Answer 16

You don't have to read very far into the article to see that it is discussing the COMBINED state and federal rates ONLY in the state of New York, and ONLY the rate as it would apply to the top income earners in that state.

Obama's tax plan for the federal tax system does not involve an increase in the highest marginal individual tax rate; it only involves closing loopholes that allow rich people to escape paying that rate.

Currently, people earning $10 million/year or more pay an effective federal tax rate of only 21%.  That's actually LESS than many people with lower incomes.  The reason they pay a lower rate is that more of their income comes from capital gains, and Bush reduced the capital gains rate.  

The article is deceptive, because it suggests that somehow, Obama has control over state tax rates.  He doesn't and he wouldn't as President.

Answer 17

IF Republicans are anything but terrible for America and the economy then WHY have we had eight years of this misery under GWB?