Interesting numbers on taxes

So right now the top 2% pay approximately $381 Billion dollars per year in taxes. If you took 100% of thier income they would only pay $1.23 trillion and the projected debt this year is $1.4 trillion. SO tax 100% of all the job creators income and they still wouldn't pay for just one years debt under Obama. Not to mention losing millions of jobs so then you would lose their tax revenue AND you would have to pay for them through more government programs which would cost Hundreds of billions if not trillions in lost revenue. Even taxing 100% of the top 2% income earners would end up as a wash at best and most likely cost trillions to our economy!

And if you tax every American 100% of their income it only collects $7.6 Trillion. About half of our naitonal debt. So you would have to tax EVERY American 100% of thier income for 2 years and not pay out anything for them to live on just to pay off our debt.

The Viking wrote: So right now the top 2% pay approximately $381 Billion dollars per year in taxes. If you took 100% of thier income they would only pay $1.23 trillion and the projected debt this year is $1.4 trillion. SO tax 100% of all the job creators income and they still wouldn't pay for just one years debt under Obama. Not to mention losing millions of jobs so then you would lose their tax revenue AND you would have to pay for them through more government programs which would cost Hundreds of billions if not trillions in lost revenue. Even taxing 100% of the top 2% income earners would end up as a wash at best and most likely cost trillions to our economy!

And if you tax every American 100% of their income it only collects $7.6 Trillion. About half of our naitonal debt. So you would have to tax EVERY American 100% of thier income for 2 years and not pay out anything for them to live on just to pay off our debt.

Nobody believes a word you write Viking..After all your lies and editing quotes your credibility is lower than Casy anthony's is right now..I strongly you suggest you come back under a new log on name if you want anybody to even read your postings..I know I don't read them and I know i'm not the only one you just bypasses them.

Youre an embarrassment to the community

Viking - why are you opposed to raising taxes on the top 1% (or so) by 3.6% to the levels they were in the Clinton era?

Kate wrote: Viking - why are you opposed to raising taxes on the top 1% (or so) by 3.6% to the levels they were in the Clinton era?

I just posted the numbers. And to answer your question. Obama even said while campaigning that you should NEVER raise taxes in a recession. Why did he think that? AND he voted against raising the debt ceiling under Bush, which he NOW claims was a mistake now that HE needs it. What changed his mind?

Vice Lord wrote:

The Viking wrote: So right now the top 2% pay approximately $381 Billion dollars per year in taxes. If you took 100% of thier income they would only pay $1.23 trillion and the projected debt this year is $1.4 trillion. SO tax 100% of all the job creators income and they still wouldn't pay for just one years debt under Obama. Not to mention losing millions of jobs so then you would lose their tax revenue AND you would have to pay for them through more government programs which would cost Hundreds of billions if not trillions in lost revenue. Even taxing 100% of the top 2% income earners would end up as a wash at best and most likely cost trillions to our economy!

And if you tax every American 100% of their income it only collects $7.6 Trillion. About half of our naitonal debt. So you would have to tax EVERY American 100% of thier income for 2 years and not pay out anything for them to live on just to pay off our debt.

Nobody believes a word you write Viking..After all your lies and editing quotes your credibility is lower than Casy anthony's is right now..I strongly you suggest you come back under a new log on name if you want anybody to even read your postings..I know I don't read them and I know i'm not the only one you just bypasses them.

Youre an embarrassment to the community

Waste of skin posting another waste of space post again that adds nothing to the conversation. But it is all that is expected of the 285Bound Court Jester. Keep dancing for us VL! You keep us entertained like a little monkey! :thumbsup:

Kate wrote: Viking - why are you opposed to raising taxes on the top 1%

It's crazy-Especially when you consider the fact that he's near the bottom 1%, lives in a dump and cooks on a hotplate

Hey VL how's the line looking at IKEA?

The Viking wrote: Waste of skin posting another waste of space post again that adds nothing to the conversation. But it is all that is expected of the 285Bound Court Jester.

How can you add to a coversation when your credibility poll numbers are into the negative?

You edit cut n pastes, you edit other peoples quotes and just like the Republicans on the hill, all you do is lie, and like your real family- Now your message board family has disowned you..

Martin Ent Inc wrote: Hey VL how's the line looking at IKEA?

I'm not sure what you are asking?

But MEI- You interested in great fishing? I know a spot, check it out. $50 to you- It's the friendship rate

<!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href=" 285bound.com/Forums/viewtopic.php?f=139&...899&p=138344#p138344 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">viewtopic.php?f=139&t=12899&p=138344#p138344<!-- l -->

The Viking wrote:

Kate wrote: Viking - why are you opposed to raising taxes on the top 1% (or so) by 3.6% to the levels they were in the Clinton era?

I just posted the numbers. And to answer your question. Obama even said while campaigning that you should NEVER raise taxes in a recession. Why did he think that? AND he voted against raising the debt ceiling under Bush, which he NOW claims was a mistake now that HE needs it. What changed his mind?

First, can someone not change their mind? Should we hold everyone (you included) to what they said three or four years ago?

Second, you haven't answered my question. Raising taxes to pre-Bush levels will raise how much? (BTW - Nobody is talking about taking 100% of their income.) So, is requesting more tax revenue from the richest citizens just folly or does every penny help us get out of this situation?

I'm just asking because it seems like we need to cut spending and increase revenue if we are to get out of this mess, and you seem to just think we can cut our way out without increasing revenue.