No personal insults please,let's fight reason with reason and evidence.
CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR THE REST OF THE ARTICLE
How about a 90% tax on “assets held less than 1 second.” But that would nail Goldman and the other high frequency traders ... can’t have that.
“Raising taxes in a weak economy will further weaken the economy “
but that’s not a big deal because taxing everyone so that the govt can spend it on Solyndra will create TONS of jobs.
Liberals hear that Warren Buffett pays less in taxes than his secretary and say, “That ridiculous, he needs to pay more.”
Conservatives hear that Warren Buffett pays less in taxes than his secretary and say, “That ridiculous, the secretary needs to pay less.”
High taxes provide nothing more than incentive for business to bribe.....er lobby congress with massive amounts of money.
Eliminate the corporate taxes and roll back regulation and business will have little reason to buy congressmen.
Juswt confiscate all their wealth which won’t eve touch this years deficit and then we don’t have to listen to this sh6t from Obama an the Henry Blodgets of the world. This will of course raise the unemployment rate forthwith.
I thought the problem was that Warren Buffet and his type don’t pay their fair share. This taxes income and all their money comes from investments and capital gains. They keep their “income” lower just to avoid income taxes. Buffet still won’t pay any more taxes if this is passed.
How about because you cannot tax your way into prosperity...? Just a thought.
Blodget's claim to fame? Giving investment advice in the dot-com bubble era when anyone's janitor was making money...whoop-dee do.
If we were to take ALL of the money every single rich person has in the US, even money they don’t have but would have to sell stocks to get, we wouldn’t reach $950 billion, yet, Obama and the Congress spend trillions each year. Trillions. Rich people only have billions. So, just how is this BS story of taxing the rich make any sense to anyone but an ignorant liberal??? This is COMMUNISM being played out here.
“No personal insults please”
That’s going to be hard to do since we know this guy was charged with securities fraud and permanently banned from the industry.
How much money can actually be collected by raising the tax on millionaires?
How many Americans earn more than a million/year?
And finally, would the money collected actually balance the budget?
I only know the answer to the last question.
As soon as that question can be settled, then let's talk about the class-warfare-fueled, jealous, envious money grab by the confiscatory rules of the IRS of from those who happen to be legitimately successful. Ready? Go!
On the second page, they make a claim that business owners, in order to avoid tax, will instead invest back into their companies. That is certainly possible, and, the author just admitted that people do what they can to avoid taxes, many of the people on the list won’t pay them by avoiding them, and it won’t work.
Why debate a thief who has been banned for life from the securities industry? If you hadn’t put his article here, there wouldn’t be more than 50 people in the world who even read it.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549,
Plaintiff,
- against -
HENRY McKELVEY BLODGET,
Defendant.
Civil Action No.
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (”Commission” or “SEC”) alleges:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. The Commission brings this action against defendant Henry McKelvey Blodget to redress his violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (”Exchange Act”), pertinent rules thereunder, and pertinent rules of NASD Inc. (”NASD”) and the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (”NYSE”).
2. During the period January 1, 1999 to December 31, 2001 (the “relevant period”), Blodget was a Managing Director and the senior research analyst at Merrill Lynch Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated (”Merrill Lynch”), covering the Internet sector.
3. During the relevant period, Blodget issued research reports on one Internet company, GoTo.com, that violated antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws, and issued research reports on six other Internet companies that expressed views inconsistent with privately expressed negative views as discussed below. These reports violated NASD and NYSE rules that require, among other things, that published research reports have a reasonable basis, present a fair picture of the investment risks and benefits, and not make exaggerated or unwarranted claims.
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/comp18115b.htm
To me, the answer should include two components: (1) The problem is with too much spending, and (2) raising taxes on the millionaire will not be enough as long as (1) stands. Otherwise, sooner or later, the middle class will see their taxes up too.
The supply side answer may be correct, however, in the PR war (where the MSM will simply parrot what 0bama says) it won't be easy to sell.
Same old rubbish from another aspiring Krugman.
Regardless the arguments, we have an overspending problem that no amount of tax increases will solve.
Why would I want Obama to have more money? So that he can create more public mandates? Funnel even more to his political cronies? Find new venues for federal agents to feel up the public? Given all the crap that they’ve been doing in Washington lately the last thing I want them to have is even more money - anyone’s money, not just my own. Why should criminal incompetence be rewarded?
I’m against it, because there’s no point in it.
We don’t have an income problem, we have a spending problem.
Washington doesn’t deserve any more money no matter who it comes from.
Not one damn cent more.