Actually, it's not the "rich". Those people don't pay taxes either. It all goes on the debt, along with the cost of defense.....the two biggest expenses we have, are welfare and defense. And every day, the debt grows.
Also, there are two forms of welfare......one for the top 5% and another for the poorest Citizens.
I think the "rich" should be grateful.....and chip in their fair share...the middle class is shrinking and can't do it all by themselves.
Which "Rich" are we talking about that pay taxes.
Buffet admits that he pays less taxes than the people working low level jobs in his businesses.
Many of our richest corporations dodge taxes by having their headquarters overseas, in addition to exploiting slave wages in places like China. Apple is an example of this.
How about the bankers that get free money via QE? So what if they pay taxes on their "profits", their "profits" are growing our debt!
If you're referring to the upper middle class when you say "rich", then I can somewhat agree with you there.
But as far as the truly rich are concerned, they've had it easy for the past fifteen years.
Before GW. Bush, they paid 40% capital gains, and managed to prosper just fine. No one was #$%$ during the Clinton years. But those policies that ran a balanced budget (with surplus), and were bringing down the debt, were abandoned forever.
Then again Clinton signed NAFTA......something no one talks about, but was just as instrumental in setting up the crisis as the loose banking regulations and tax reform from Bush.
The convervatives, aka republicans in this country, are aligned with the Christian Churches. This is mostly due to their anti-abortion stance.
But they also favor policies that benefit the rich and hurt the poor. Clearly this is the opposite of what the Christ of the bible tried to teach.
The Christ I got to know from reading the bible, (whether he's real or not is irrelevant to this topic) would be sickened by the attitudes of the typical conservative in this country.
The Christ of the bible taught generosity to the poor, non-violence, and a willingness to forgive others if you yourself would want to be forgiven.
Conservatives view the poor as parasites to be eliminated from the face of the Earth, try to legislate morality, and have a condemning view of those who think differently from them.
And on the left, we have folks who talk about fixing the economic in-equality problem, which is now at levels worse than just before the great depression, but pander to the rich as well.
Many middle class Americans are mistakenly looking to the Tea Party as the answer, which it clearly is not.
On a percentage basis, the rich do not pay the brunt. And in the case of the Romneys of the world......we all know how that goes.
To be middle class is to be poor these days, based on real inflation vs. wage increases over the past twenty years.
People that used to be comfortable are now in the poor house due to this.
I'll give you a chance to make your case.
Specifically, how did he destroy:
B. The middle class
C. The American dream
What were the executive orders, and how did they do these things?
Are you sure he's not just another run of the mill, Bush like president, bowing to the lobbyists such as the insurance companies and big oil?
Are those folks just as happy now as they were when we had G.W. Bush?
LOL I'm more sympathetic to the working poor. Most people who don't understand production of value in exchange for things of value are mentally ill, based on what I've seen.
If you think that's bad, look at silver! Down 5.5 %........
Silver is starting to look tempting here, but could go lower. Good place to add if you're dollar cost averaging bullion, and anything below $12/oz. would be load the boat territory, if it gets there. That would also be a good place to sell puts on the white metal.
Don't be ridiculous. How many terrorists would delay getting a slice of pizza in order to mess with Vegie?
Back in the 80's and early 90's, businesses were sold on "customer service", they believed it was the best way to be competitive.
These days they're sold on "the bottom line" and cost cutting, only looking at the numbers on the computer screen.
It's all about profits on paper these days.
We could have a combination of cuts and a return to sensible taxation.
We could have work for welfare, and that's fine, but unless they reverse the Nafta gift to the rich (slave labor overseas, where there is not environmental legislation, either), then it's not fair to cut the nuts off the poor man,
Make decent work in the manufacturing space available once again, in the USA.
Maine is divided fairly equal, with perhaps a better voting turn out for democrats when it comes to presidential elections.
However, there is a strong down east republican part of the population, as well as a considerable tea party element in Maine. Governor Lepage won re-election last fall, a very conservative republican.
I've given you several thumbs up in this thread, not because I agree with you 100%, but for bringing a good topic front and center.
I think we should go back to that tax structure from the 90's that involved the balanced budget act, that eventually got past the gatekeeper Clinton.
And those tax rates were less favorable to the rich than what we have now, in one sense, but look at the economy we had......it was worth it to the rich.
Slow but steady wins the race, a concept the greedy to get "everything now" don't understand.
The post is very generalized. I'm talking about the "typical".
I too am against abortion, although I feel it's the individuals choice, not the job of government to legislate the morality of it. Just like it's none of the government's business if an individual wishes to consume too much soda pop and cheese burgers.
In general, conservatives favor policies that "ease the tax burden" or create loopholes, for the super rich, leaving the middle class to bare the brunt of paying for those things that make up the infrastructure of this country.
They also are in favor of huge defense contracts, that benefit mostly the super rich.
They are big on eliminating safety nets for the poor, but would never be in favor of ending corporate welfare.
Cutting welfare or defense spending by 50% would reduce government spending by aprox. 25%
Because defense is aprox. 50% of what we spend, and entitlements are aprox. the other 50%.
Neither party wants to take aim at the industrial military complex, but instead would cut the safety nets from the very people who funded them over the years, paying in when times were good and good paying jobs were plentiful.
The income tax doesn't amount to squat. I'd rather chip it in and know that all the kids in my city get to eat at least once a day.