Seeking Alpha

In his pitch to raise taxes on the wealthy, Pres. Obama says it's “a simple choice," not...

In his pitch to raise taxes on the wealthy, Pres. Obama says it's “a simple choice," not class warfare: Millionaires and billionaires vs. "teachers and construction workers and veterans." On the 5% millionaire surtax proposed by Senate Democrats: "I'm fine with the approach they are taking." (WSJ live blog)
Comments (30)
  • Terry330
    , contributor
    Comments (867) | Send Message
     
    If I was working as a 12 year career school teacher,should I pay more taxes( precent) than a oil company executive who makes 200x my teaching salary?
    6 Oct 2011, 12:18 PM Reply Like
  • Lint
    , contributor
    Comments (391) | Send Message
     
    a public school teacher, eh?

     

    You don't pay more taxes than high net worth individuals. You never have and you never will.
    6 Oct 2011, 12:25 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10307) | Send Message
     
    Terry....you have never answered the question of what is a "fair" amount to take from anyone. Is is 40%, 50%, 60%....what is it? Does that included Fed, State, Local, etc. What should the number be. Then, when that person dies who paid all those taxes, should the "government" be able to take their estate? What do you think? Can you explain your view point?
    6 Oct 2011, 12:38 PM Reply Like
  • Terry330
    , contributor
    Comments (867) | Send Message
     
    Taxes on wealthy are at 58 year low. Tell GOP congress to support President Obama jobs plan.
    6 Oct 2011, 12:20 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10307) | Send Message
     
    If you were a public school teacher....should you be able to retire with 20 or 25 years service and get a pension larger than my SS will be?

     

    The fact of the matter is that if you are a public school teacher - and i know you are not - you work for me and all the rest of the people like me. Unfortunately, we allowed you to unionize...too bad. We were stupid. Now we know what we did wrong.
    6 Oct 2011, 12:36 PM Reply Like
  • sean.parmelee
    , contributor
    Comments (790) | Send Message
     
    Don't feed the trolls, Mark.
    6 Oct 2011, 02:10 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10307) | Send Message
     
    But Sean....look how many thumbs I get when I do? Do you think Terry is a girl or a guy?
    6 Oct 2011, 03:57 PM Reply Like
  • sean.parmelee
    , contributor
    Comments (790) | Send Message
     
    Definitely male. The obviously-not-him avatar just adds to the irritation factor he's going for.
    6 Oct 2011, 04:08 PM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3854) | Send Message
     
    Hi Terry,

     

    Of course you should be paying more in taxes than the Oil Company Exec.

     

    After all, maybe you donate $100 to your political party and they give millions to both sides.

     

    Nowadays, fairness is measured by influence purchases.
    6 Oct 2011, 12:24 PM Reply Like
  • kmi
    , contributor
    Comments (4023) | Send Message
     
    Reality check: if that was true the 95% of Americans who make less than $1m in income annually would quite easily and handily vote their interests into power.

     

    However, this is not the case.
    6 Oct 2011, 01:04 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10307) | Send Message
     
    KMI...I believe the 50% of the tax filers who pay no Federal Income tax have a pretty good shot at always voting in their candidate - that is if you can get them to the polls.
    6 Oct 2011, 01:10 PM Reply Like
  • kmi
    , contributor
    Comments (4023) | Send Message
     
    I'll believe it when I see it. Politics is about purchasing influence, and that 50% has no interest or ability to purchase.... anything. Well, I guess there are always iPhones to keep them busy with.
    6 Oct 2011, 01:15 PM Reply Like
  • davidbdc
    , contributor
    Comments (3154) | Send Message
     
    To bad he doesn't tell people the truth... in order to balance the budget all programs will have to be cut... and everyone will have to pay more in taxes (not just the millionaires). That would actually be leadership.

     

    But I guess getting re-elected is more important than the future of the country.

     

    Very tired of hearing him lecture and spew half truths.
    6 Oct 2011, 12:26 PM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3854) | Send Message
     
    Hi Davidbdc,

     

    I agree with what you say. We are only getting half the truth.

     

    But it's not just from Obama, it's from all of Congress. Politicians have learned, over time, to tell the people what they want to hear."Spin" has replaced Truth.

     

    Unfortunately, to paraphrase Jack Nicholson, "...We can't handle the truth"
    6 Oct 2011, 12:51 PM Reply Like
  • Hubert Biagi
    , contributor
    Comments (696) | Send Message
     
    Do these lib wackos even know what they're talking about?

     

    This year, households making more than $1 million will pay an average of 29.1 percent of their income in federal taxes:

     

    http://abcn.ws/qUG2rP/

     

    http://bit.ly/pKsanj
    6 Oct 2011, 12:26 PM Reply Like
  • Terry330
    , contributor
    Comments (867) | Send Message
     
    Tax cuts for wealthy only allow them to buy more lobbyists, to pass laws to take more from poor and middle class Americans.
    6 Oct 2011, 12:30 PM Reply Like
  • Lint
    , contributor
    Comments (391) | Send Message
     
    Your local labor unions say hello.

     

    Besides, with the largest central government in human history, you'd think you'd get the hint that Government cannot save you.
    6 Oct 2011, 12:32 PM Reply Like
  • Terry330
    , contributor
    Comments (867) | Send Message
     
    Lint, your Washington lobbyists said to sent this months check.
    6 Oct 2011, 12:33 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10307) | Send Message
     
    Terry....your union leaders say thanks for this month's dues contribution. You do understand that collectively, the union is no better than the rest of the lobbyists....except you have no say in what they do.....
    6 Oct 2011, 12:39 PM Reply Like
  • kmi
    , contributor
    Comments (4023) | Send Message
     
    Reality check: Bush the Minor presided over the largest expansion in the government workforce.

     

    "That, in fact, was an understatement. No president since FDR... has presided over as rapid a growth in government when measured as a percentage of the total economy." http://bit.ly/r6v4z9

     

    Of course, Obama has not curtailed the expansion of both the budget and government employment and the result is indeed an excessive size in the central government.
    6 Oct 2011, 01:10 PM Reply Like
  • Hoopono
    , contributor
    Comments (238) | Send Message
     
    If Obama had been serious about creating jobs, he would have used his first year in office to get America working again-filling pot holes, re-building infrastructure, getting people off the dole and on a payroll. But he didn't do that. He spent the first 14 months pushing a very asinine plan to help insurers make more profits and in the process making healthcare less affordable.

     

    The jobs plan is merely a distraction. Only the ignorant do not see that.
    6 Oct 2011, 12:35 PM Reply Like
  • kmi
    , contributor
    Comments (4023) | Send Message
     
    Obama continued the Bush stimulus efforts, and extended tax cuts which most folks agreed and believed at the time would stimulate ther economy, and which everyone now knows did not. It's revisionist to claim he made no effort, or simply uninformed.
    6 Oct 2011, 01:12 PM Reply Like
  • Terry330
    , contributor
    Comments (867) | Send Message
     
    There is a simple plan for wealthy to pay low federal taxes, pay their workers more like in the 1950's. Back then top tax rate 90%, and America was thriving, unions were strong.
    6 Oct 2011, 12:43 PM Reply Like
  • Lint
    , contributor
    Comments (391) | Send Message
     
    Unfortunately for you, math does not support your stance. There is a law of diminishing returns. There is a point where your beloved central government collects less the more it charges.
    6 Oct 2011, 12:48 PM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3529) | Send Message
     
    And women were stay at home moms leaving more jobs open for men. Do you really want to go back there?
    6 Oct 2011, 02:05 PM Reply Like
  • Terry330
    , contributor
    Comments (867) | Send Message
     
    The US would be in far better shape if only the GOP would pay off the W. Bush debt of 5.6 Trillion.
    6 Oct 2011, 12:46 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10307) | Send Message
     
    Terry....when you gonna ask you beloved Obama to get the troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan like he promised? I guess when he fire a missle from the Predator drone, you don't have a problem....but if Bush and Cheney do it you have a caniption fit. Right?

     

    And....I suspect Obama will leave office after 4 years with more debt than Bush did in 8 years. I'll put Obama's 4 year total at probably $7.0 Trillion or above.
    6 Oct 2011, 12:54 PM Reply Like
  • tjohn1
    , contributor
    Comments (152) | Send Message
     
    As Buffett has acknowledged the wealthy have won the class war. I also believe much of the wealth in many cases is ill gotten. The underclass does not pay any taxes. It is obvious if this country has to control its deficits the wealthy must be taxed. The wealthy have armies of tax lawyers and CPAs to help them avoid taxes. Many salaried middle class do not have that advantage. The trickle down theory has not been working. Other wise why no new plants and no new hires? The wealthy and Republicans use the trickle down theory all the time to keep themselves wealthy. Unless the wealthy do not pay their fair share, this country will continue to decline. You do not know what will happen. We know what happened in Germany leading to Hitler. I hope it does not happen here!
    6 Oct 2011, 01:39 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10307) | Send Message
     
    The wealthy have armies of tax lawyers and CPAs to help them avoid taxes. Many salaried middle class do not have that advantage.

     

    Come on Tjohn1 - I pay $300 a year to have a CPA do my taxes - mostly because I am lazy and never did like keeping up with tax law changes. But if one makes under $250,000 a year, one's taxes are not all that complex to require an "army" of tax lawyers. The company I used to work for was an LLC and we had a pretty complex tax return because of some business transactions. We only paid $4000 for our corporate return.

     

    Trickel down theory doesn't work because it should be called "Tricked Down Theory". We have been tricked...including by Clinton who pushed for NAFTA. The free trade agreements we have signed have been responsible for pushing jobs out of the US to low wage alternative countries like Mexico and China. That's why our wages have been flat in real terms for 10 years.

     

    Just like everyone has had to manage with flat incomes, the government should have been made to manage with a flat income. If they had capped Federal spending and stuck to it 10 years ago....we would be in much better shape.
    6 Oct 2011, 01:49 PM Reply Like
  • NetGeezer?
    , contributor
    Comments (9) | Send Message
     
    Terry330,

     

    I am glad you are spending your day on Seeking Alpha posting comments rather than teaching my children. Your grammar is awful.

     

    Respectfully,
    Public School Parents
    6 Oct 2011, 01:39 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|