Posted on 12/10/2012 8:24:05 AM PST by SeekAndFind
An American appetite for tax hikes gives President Barack Obama leverage in fiscal cliff negotiations.
A new POLITICO/George Washington University Battleground Poll finds that 60 percent of respondents support raising taxes on households that earn more than $250,000 a year and 64 percent want to raise taxes on large corporations.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
ALSO NOTABLE:
* 39 percent of Republicans support raising taxes on households making more than $250,000.
* Independents favor such a move by 21 percentage points, 59 to 38 percent.
* Only 38 percent buy the GOP argument that raising taxes on households earning over $250,000 per year will have a negative impact on the economy. Fifty-eight percent do not.
In other words, THIS COUNTRY IS NOT CONSERVATIVE BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION.
Which leads me to conclude that either the word “conservative” is now misunderstood, or this Gallup Poll taken early this year is out of date:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/152021/conservatives-remain-largest-ideological-group.aspx
TITLE:
Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.
As long as your talking about taxing the other guy in your place why in the world would you expect any different response?
Even I’m in favor of raising taxes on JF’nK, Bronco, Pelosi, etc.
I bet if the same people were asked, “How long would the money that the wealthiest 2% were required to pay last the government” not one of them would know.
Funny I NEVER see a poll asking...
Should we have a flat tax or national sales tax?
To be “FAIR” of course.
It would be very interesting to see Gallup conduct two surveys one where they ask for Conservative/Moderate/Liberal and one where they ask Conservative/Moderate/Progressive.
Arguably the greater idiocy is a larger majority wanting to increase taxes on corporations—when we already have one of the least competitive, highest corporate tax rates in the world.
This is just disgusting. I’m ashamed that people are so ignorant.
RE: “How long would the money that the wealthiest 2% were required to pay last the government” not one of them would know.
I don’t think the country’s debt or deficit or unfunded obligations are of concern to Obama, liberals or these people. What they want is FAIRNESS (however they define it ). It’s all about ENVY.
To most people, the word “rich” has become synonymous with NOT EARNING THE MONEY THROUGH HARD WORK AND SMARTNESS.
Here is the formula they have in mind:
Rich=Paris Hilton
or
Rich=Wall Street types who caused the financial crisis
This formula does NOT apply:
Rich=entrepreneurs=risk takers=employers
(In other words — YOU DIDN’T BUILD THAT! )
The broccoli boy has done a good job of stirring up class envy (and dare I say, hatred).
No shocker here. None of these numbnuts understand economics and never will. So many slackers in this country that just want to get by with as little effort as possible.
They are just going to tax them into a lower bracket. Why would they continue to work hard?
So when we are facing 47% or 61% in favor of governing norms which run contrary to our best interests as a people, those are still pretty good odds based on history.
RE: Conservative/Moderate/Progressive.
Can anyone define the word “Progressive” for me?
What are they “progressing” towards when they use the prefix — PROGRESS?
The parasites have voted to kill the host.
The parasites have voted to kill the host.
So, those people don’t make over $250K/yr and think higher taxes won’t affect them? Just wait until unending stimulus spending kicks inflation into overdrive. Those idiots will make millions, then billions, then trillions, etc. per year and yet will become destitute.
When the democrats say it enough and the media sells it constantly and the republicans have no idea how to respond, then taxes get raised. Then when unemployment goes up it’ll be repeated over and over again that it’s the republicans’ fault. And truthfully, it will be.
That same ratio applies to the way they think, act, spend, save, breed, marry, and go about their lives. We live in a nation of 20% carrying the 80%.
The upside of the poll, of course, is that super-majority backing spending cuts.
From that could be deduced that the GOP should have gone in, very publicly, with wanting $XB cuts, with X% from entitlements, X% from regular discretionary, and X%, yes, from the military.
Further, they should have had their cuts lined out in excruciating specificity, and said they were open to negotiations with Obama and the Dems on the specific cuts within each of those categories.
The hammer should have been that if Obama doesn’t go along, they will only vote for those expenditures that fit within their own specific plan.
And, like the claims (however not followed through on) that immigration could be discussed once the border was secure, they should have made it plain that they would discuss tax cuts once the spending cuts were voted through and signed.
People don’t think things out. Putting aside the phenomenon of telling pollsters what one thinks is the “approved” answer, it is so easy to just think that someone else will solve a problem. The “wealthy” are the “other.”
But, yes...when people say they are conservative, in many, if not most, cases, they have no idea what the word means.
Then they taxed those that chose not to buy health insurance.
and I didn't speak out because I had health insurance.
Then they taxed the wealthy,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't wealthy.
Then they came for my 401K and my mortgage interest deduction,
and there was no one left to speak for me ( probably because they were all too busy working to pay the tax man).
Raising taxes on corporations just results in paying higher prices for goods. The consumer (and these nitwit voters) ultimatly pay the higher tax.
RE: Raising taxes on corporations just results in paying higher prices for goods. The consumer (and these nitwit voters) ultimatly pay the higher tax.
___________________________
This rule by Frederic Bastiat is not being taught in our schools nowadays ( of course, the contributions of famous gays and lesbians are now given more prominence ).
One of Bastiat’s most important contributions to the field of economics was his admonition to the effect that good economic decisions can be made only by taking into account the “full picture.”
That is, economic truths should be arrived at by observing not only the immediate consequences – that is, benefits or liabilities – of an economic decision, but also by examining the long-term second and third consequences.
Additionally, one must examine the decision’s effect not only on a single group of people (say candlemakers) or a single industry (say candlemaking), but on all people and all industries in the society as a whole.
As Bastiat famously put it, an economist must take into account both “What is Seen and What is Not Seen.” Bastiat’s “rule” was later expounded and developed by Henry Hazlitt in his work Economics in One Lesson, in which Hazlitt borrowed Bastiat’s trenchant “Broken Window Fallacy” and went on to demonstrate how it applies to a wide variety of economic falsehoods.
Sadly, very few people nowadays take the UNSEEN EFFECTS into account.
Labels are difficult to take seriously. Had I been asked that question I would have answered “conservative”. Yet a majority here on FR would consider me at best a lily livered RINO. Had a reasonable description of liberal and conservative views been included in the question we’d have a better understanding of where the country stands. Failing that, we have the election results which gave a socialist a 3.5% win over a moderate. This at a time of very high unemployment, stagnant growth, and overseas crises. That should tell us all we need to know,
Bingo.
Tax everyone at same rate no deductions, no loop holes.
The rich are an easy target. There aren’t very many of them and they are easily outvoted. The notion of fairness has been completely changed in our lifetimes. Why can this not be challenged in court under the equal protection clause. Why won’t anybody take this up?
re: “raising taxes on large corporations”
Nothing demonstrates the stupidity of the respondents as much as that result. When that question is posed the ignorant respondents invariably visualize a cartoon with a bunch of old, fat, banker types in black suits sitting around in a club lounge with cocktails and big cigars.
“Yeah! Raise THEIR taxes,” the ignorant chattering class agrees, never understanding that those additional “corporate” taxes would come right out of their own pensions, IRAs, 401ks, and other investments. By favoring higher taxes on those big evil corporations they are actually favoring more taxes on themselves. There’s no cure for that kind of stupid.
The government already sucks too much from the economy and wastes the greatest portion of it.
I oppose any increase in ‘revenue’ to any government entity.
1. abolish the EPA
2. get rid of the FCC, FEC, FDA, HUD, government schools, dept of energy, OFCCP(affirmative action), IRS, etc., medicaid, foodtamps, welfare, government housing(Projects) etc. etc.
Why is that tyrannical, socialist, crap needed ?
The stupid liberal media never mentions my plan:
1. abolish the EPA, Obamacare
2. get rid of the FCC, FEC, FDA, HUD, government schools, dept of energy, OFCCP(affirmative action), IRS, etc., medicaid, foodtamps, welfare, government housing(Projects) etc. etc.
Why is that tyrannical, socialist, crap needed ?
Will the last American Patriot leaving the building please turn out the lights. Thank you.
Interesting that 75% of voters favor cutting spending across the board, but only about 5% of political officeholders - including Republicans - believe in that very simple remedy.
RE: Interesting that 75% of voters favor cutting spending across the board
FOUR POSSIBILITIES:
Increase Spending, Increase Taxes ( Obama and the Dems want this)
Increase Spending, Decrease Taxes (Republicans IN EFFECT do this, SEE: George w. Bush and his GOP congress )
Decrease Spending, Increase Taxes (That’s what Most Americans seem to want based on the above poll ).
Decrease Spending, Decrease Taxes (That’s what I WANT. Anybody with me on this?)
Wrong question!
“Do you think taxes should be raised on those making over $250,000 a year if it means that they will shut down their businesses and lay off employees so that the actual amount of tax money to pay welfare decreases while the number of people requiring welfare increases thus lowering benefits for everyone?”
However it's better to reduce government . Like for example get rid of the EPA, then FDA, then IRS , Then FEC, and so on. That's the real problem , the growth of government not just the “spending”.
American patriots - producers - are the only reason the lights are still on.
That tax just isn't high enough yet, perhaps. Paycheck send it in.
This poll says “households” making $250,000. Is that the same as a business that hires people? It may be misleading.
We can fix that problem. American patriots are no longer producing more children. All that will be left is the TAKERS, lol. Oh well!.
Parasites will become cannibals then. Cockroaches I hear do eat their own dead when there is no other food around.
It isn't that they're unaware of the effects, it's just that they don't care. 0bama WANTS the downside to the rest of the country. The worse he disrupts the economy the better he likes it. Marxists like him can do their work of converting the USA to a communist country. It isn't ignorance that drives the redistributionists, but malice.
Just do it. Yes, it will kill jobs. Ann Coulter is right. Give America what it thinks it wants.
I made the decision to be middle class a long time ago. I saw what I had to do to become rich, and I wasn’t willing to make that kind of sacrifice. The Return On Investment just wasn’t good enough for me. So, I don’t begrudge wealthy people. The only way a wealthy person hurts me is if he just sits on his money. And even that doesn’t really hurt me. He’s just not helping create jobs. Why should I care if a rich guy has twelve houses and four yachts? Somebody had to build those houses. Somebody has to crew those yachts.
You are correct. Another way to say that is the 20% do 80% of the work at any given time.
Of course MORE people wanted to cut all government spending, so why wasn’t THAT the headline?
And the questions are stupid. Of course people would rather rich people get hit with a tax. If it said “Raise taxes on someone other than me”, everybody would choose that.
If you instead asked people about which CONSEQUENCE of the fix they would rather live with, and the “tax the rich” was replaced by “cause a recession”, nobody would choose it.
Doesn’t 40% conservative match up well with 38% who think you shouldn’t raise taxes?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.