majority of Americans want Obama's deficit reduction plan

Twist all you want... It doesn't change the fact:

Something the Dog Said wrote: 56% of Americans want the Obama deficit reduction plan including a combination of raising taxes and cutting spending. Only 19% want the Republican plan of simply cutting spending. It is time for the Republicans to listen to the American people, rather than continuing to be tools for the corporations and ultra-wealthy.


"The poll found that 56 percent of Americans want to see a combination of government spending cuts and tax increases included in a deal to bring down the U.S. budget deficit and permit a vote to raise the country's $14.3 trillion debt ceiling.

This is the approach favored by Obama and his fellow Democrats to begin to put America's fiscal house in order."

In the poll, 19 percent said the best approach is only to cut existing programs, and 12 percent said only raising taxes would be the favored solution

The Reuters/Ipsos poll found that 31 percent of respondents held Republican lawmakers responsible for the debt impasse, 21 percent blamed Obama and 9 percent blamed Democratic lawmakers.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/ ... Q220110726

Does it...

Any way you slice it, the GOP loses....

Something the Dog Said wrote: As has been repeatedly discussed ad nausem, the limits are that the powers be in the general welfare of the individuals, and to those powers that are necessary and proper for the federal government to execute its duties. This has been established over 200 years and no one, but no one, dispute that other than you and a few deranged individuals. You can continue with your Printsmith Revisionist History Channel, or travel back in time, but neither is going to change the role of the federal government.

Nor does it alter the wisdom of doing it Obama's way. A common sense approach to fixing the problem seems to be beyond the grasp of Democrats for some odd reason. I have faith that the general population at large has more common sense than the Democrats in DC, or Democrats in general for that matter.

LadyJazzer wrote: As has already been pointed out, the upper 1% have 20% of the money. They pay an effective tax rate of 21.2%. The secretaries, (who would be at the level of working for upper-earners), would generally make in the $65K-80K range... They will pay an effective tax rate of 25-28%, assuming they itemize, are married, and own a home for a mortgage deduction... They don't get all the breaks that the millionaires get, and they generally can't afford the tax attorneys who know how to shield their income, and even if they did, they don't get to shield very much because most of the deductions for the middle class have been eliminated.

No, it's not all "capital gains", but you're right about a few of the super-rich, (er, the super-[job creators]) do skate by based on the capital gains rates. In truth, most of the folks in the upper 1-2% are taxed at marginal rates around 17-18%....

Ahh... no.

Effective tax rate means what percentage tax you actually pay on your income, not your top marginal tax bracket. You calculate it after subtracting all exemptions and deductions (plus some other stuff). I could explain it in more detail, but don't think it's necessary for my point.

And you are very generous about what a secretary makes, not that it matters (and do see you are talking about secretaries working for the rich, not that it means they make that much). I know some can make that much, but not most.

http://www1.salary.com/Secretary-I-Salary.html

The 25-28% you quote is the top tax bracket for a well paid secretary. That is not the effective tax rate when you subtract the exemptions and deductions. It doesn't consider the fact that their income below that is taxed at 10, 15, and 25%. Plus, as you mention, with that salary they would probably own a home which would reduce the taxable income even more with the mortgage deduction.

I could run examples, but I think I've made my point. They wouldn't pay anything near 25-28% as you stated. Maybe not even half that, especially if they have a mortgage.

And those "rich" people that have capital gains pay 15% on those capital gains (assuming they were held a year). It doesn't mean their effective tax rate is 15%.

Plus you are very confused about marginal rates vs. effective rates.

Ramadan is rapidly approaching...

pineinthegrass wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: As has already been pointed out, the upper 1% have 20% of the money. They pay an effective tax rate of 21.2%. The secretaries, (who would be at the level of working for upper-earners), would generally make in the $65K-80K range... They will pay an effective tax rate of 25-28%, assuming they itemize, are married, and own a home for a mortgage deduction... They don't get all the breaks that the millionaires get, and they generally can't afford the tax attorneys who know how to shield their income, and even if they did, they don't get to shield very much because most of the deductions for the middle class have been eliminated.

No, it's not all "capital gains", but you're right about a few of the super-rich, (er, the super-[job creators]) do skate by based on the capital gains rates. In truth, most of the folks in the upper 1-2% are taxed at marginal rates around 17-18%....

Ahh... no.

Effective tax rate means what percentage tax you actually pay on your income, not your top marginal tax bracket. You calculate it after subtracting all exemptions and deductions (plus some other stuff). I could explain it in more detail, but don't think it's necessary for my point.

And you are very generous about what a secretary makes, not that it matters (and do see you are talking about secretaries working for the rich, not that it means they make that much). I know some can make that much, but not most.

http://www1.salary.com/Secretary-I-Salary.html

The 25-28% you quote is the top tax bracket for a well paid secretary. That is not the effective tax rate when you subtract the exemptions and deductions. It doesn't consider the fact that their income below that is taxed at 10, 15, and 25%. Plus, as you mention, with that salary they would probably own a home which would reduce the taxable income even more with the mortgage deduction.

I could run examples, but I think I've made my point. They wouldn't pay anything near 25-28% as you stated. Maybe not even half that, especially if they have a mortgage.

And those "rich" people that have capital gains pay 15% on those capital gains (assuming they were held a year). It doesn't mean their effective tax rate is 15%.

Plus you are very confused about marginal rates vs. effective rates.

I've been saying this but they don't listen. :thumbsup:

Question for Republicans and Democrats. When you vote to send someone to Washington to represent you, be it a president or a congressperson or Senator, do you expect them to do what is right for you.....or what is best for the country even if it isn't exactly what you voted for?

So far in the debt/deficit negotiations I feel like the Democrats have pretty much sold out their base with all the compromises, and I'm not sure the Republicans even know who their base is anymore.....they fight for one faction only to anger the other. I really don't see how congress will ever get much done as long as each side holds onto their own ideologies like it is the holy grail....and forget that we are all Americans. We can't have a government designed JUST for Democrats, or JUST for Republicans, that isn't how our country is made up.

Sorry, but this whole debacle in Washington is depressing....if they all had weapons it would be civil war on Capitol Hill......it's just damn disgusting.

I feel that they do what they want to do and play the me game first. All their pet projects, their payback projects, and special interests come before what is right for anyone and country.
we are up the river.

archer wrote: Question for Republicans and Democrats. When you vote to send someone to Washington to represent you, be it a president or a congressperson or Senator, do you expect them to do what is right for you.....or what is best for the country even if it isn't exactly what you voted for?

I would like him to do what is best for the country. I expect him to do what is best for himself.

neptunechimney wrote:

archer wrote: Question for Republicans and Democrats. When you vote to send someone to Washington to represent you, be it a president or a congressperson or Senator, do you expect them to do what is right for you.....or what is best for the country even if it isn't exactly what you voted for?

I would like him to do what is best for the country. I expect him to do what is best for himself.

yeah......ain't that the truth though.

otisptoadwater wrote: Ramadan is rapidly approaching...

:rofl rofllol Will obama take off or fast for 30 days?