You Own a Business? "You Didn't Build That," Says Obama

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obama is acting like he is personally giving us roads and other infrastructure.

I have no idea how you're getting this from his statement. Some people really are beyond reason's grasp, I guess.

Count me as another person beyond reason's grasp.

You guys and gals do know that if we were to tax the rich at, say, 100% of income, the crash course trajectory that the country is on is only delayed a few years, right? And if you tax the rich and confiscate all their wealth, we delay a bit longer but still are in trouble, right? You do know this, don't you? This is why some on the right want to see commitments to structural changes to the things that are driving the problem: entitlements.

++++1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get sorry weary of right wing republicans who claim they are self-made men and women. They are Americans who were blessed enough to grow up in America where we have a strong infrastructure of roads and schools, and where people abide by the rules of law.

By and large the wealthy do not fight, bleed or die in our wars and they don't want to pay for them in the form of taxes. Right-wing republicans want all of the benefits of being Americans, but they don't want to share in any of the burdens.

Wealthy Americans enjoy their abundant wealth and paying a few more percentage points in income taxes will not diminish their quality of life one bit.

Stop complaining and start doing your fair share to keep this country great.

What is that fair share? If 50% of people pay no federal income taxes and the top 20% pay almost 70% of the federal income tax, how much more do you think is fair?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304356604577338122267919032.html

Don't confuse fairness with equity.

50% of the people pay no federal INCOME taxes because they are too poor. (And they pay plenty in other taxes).

We have a progressive tax system that places more burden on people with the ability to pay more, and appropriately so.

Since 1979, most income growth has gone to the top 1% of earners. Their income grew by 275%.

That 50% of the population you disdain so much? The share of income going to higher-income households rose, while the share going to lower-income households fell.

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/42729#.UAa8hgXvAco.facebook

To answer your question: The people whose share of income has outpaced everyone else can afford to pay more. And they should.

I asked what amount is fair? You did not answer the question with a specific number. Is it 50% of someone's income? 60%? 70%?

I don't disdain anyone. I am just tired of my DH and myself being called rich, that I am sitting back doing nothing when they reality is we both work 15 hour days to support my children and our parents, keep paying more and more to MoCo and Maryland and the Federal govt, watch so much of it pissed away and then be told we are lazy and did nothing to be successful. We don't have a second house, we both drive used cars and we don't have a mansion. we are trying to save for retirement because by the time we are old enough, there won't be social security. we are saving for college because they keep telling us we are too rich but the reality is we are in the top 10% and won't be able to get any financial aid. We also paid for graduate school ourselves no loans or help from family.

If you keep taking from people like us we are just trying to make a success of our businesses, we hire people, provide benefits including healthcare, At some point we won't have anything left to support ourselves and the people who work for us.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, then why don't we all pay 100% taxes, and then Obama can give us whatever he thinks we deserve?

Or, let's pay no taxes at all. Let each one of us fare for ourselves.

Or we could just leave tax rates where they are. The rich are already paying a higher percentage than poor and middle-class people. But that's still not good enough for so many on the left.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, then why don't we all pay 100% taxes, and then Obama can give us whatever he thinks we deserve?

Or, let's pay no taxes at all. Let each one of us fare for ourselves.

Or we could just leave tax rates where they are. The rich are already paying a higher percentage than poor and middle-class people. But that's still not good enough for so many on the left.

Actually, some of the rich pay a higher percentage. But, like Mitt Romney, many pay less than 15%. I think Mitt and company could stand to pay a bit more.

[jsteele]

Check out this quote:

I know that you recognize a lot of people help you in a business. Perhaps the banks, the investors. There’s no question your mom and dad, your school teachers, the people that provide roads, the fire, the police. A lot of people help.

This is exactly the same thing that Obama said:

Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.

What is the difference between these two quotes?

Well, one difference is that the first one was said by Mitt Romney. Today. Mitt Romney said it today.

So, I guess we can end this discussion. The two guys agree.

[Anonymous]

I thought al gore invented the internet?and didnt ford Invent the car before roads? This is a little nuts.. There will always be ppl willing to take personal risks with their own money, time, and ideas to create companies and in turn create jobs. Someone with all the advantages in life, can choose say to be a lawyer and work for someone else. This person may become quite wealthy but didnt take the risks in life to go out on their own. Entrepreuners should be celebrated and incented.... The vast majority of small businesses fail so it is quite a gamble. obama got this one way wrong..

[Anonymous]

Hey thanks for posting the actual text, 00:35. That was actually inspiring!

[Anonymous]

Freeman wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Collectivism is for weak nations. Celebration of the individual is the revolutionary ideal that built the greatest nation to ever cross the horizon of this world.

E pluribus unum: "Out of many, one." That sounds a lot like collectivism to me. That's also been the motto of the US since the time of the American revolution, and it is still present on the Seal of the United States. Do you understand what that means? Our nation was founded by many great individuals WORKING TOGETHER to build something greater than they could achieve separately. We commonly refer to our Founding Fathers, not just a single individual, when we talk about those times as well. We celebrate individualism when warranted, but not individualism at the expense of everything else.

Freeman, you're making my heart flutter! What a great thread!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get sorry weary of right wing republicans who claim they are self-made men and women. They are Americans who were blessed enough to grow up in America where we have a strong infrastructure of roads and schools, and where people abide by the rules of law.

By and large the wealthy do not fight, bleed or die in our wars and they don't want to pay for them in the form of taxes. Right-wing republicans want all of the benefits of being Americans, but they don't want to share in any of the burdens.

Wealthy Americans enjoy their abundant wealth and paying a few more percentage points in income taxes will not diminish their quality of life one bit.

Stop complaining and start doing your fair share to keep this country great.

What is that fair share? If 50% of people pay no federal income taxes and the top 20% pay almost 70% of the federal income tax, how much more do you think is fair?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304356604577338122267919032.html

Don't confuse fairness with equity.

50% of the people pay no federal INCOME taxes because they are too poor. (And they pay plenty in other taxes).

We have a progressive tax system that places more burden on people with the ability to pay more, and appropriately so.

Since 1979, most income growth has gone to the top 1% of earners. Their income grew by 275%.

That 50% of the population you disdain so much? The share of income going to higher-income households rose, while the share going to lower-income households fell.

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/42729#.UAa8hgXvAco.facebook

To answer your question: The people whose share of income has outpaced everyone else can afford to pay more. And they should.

I asked what amount is fair? You did not answer the question with a specific number. Is it 50% of someone's income? 60%? 70%?

I don't disdain anyone. I am just tired of my DH and myself being called rich, that I am sitting back doing nothing when they reality is we both work 15 hour days to support my children and our parents, keep paying more and more to MoCo and Maryland and the Federal govt, watch so much of it pissed away and then be told we are lazy and did nothing to be successful. We don't have a second house, we both drive used cars and we don't have a mansion. we are trying to save for retirement because by the time we are old enough, there won't be social security. we are saving for college because they keep telling us we are too rich but the reality is we are in the top 10% and won't be able to get any financial aid. We also paid for graduate school ourselves no loans or help from family.

If you keep taking from people like us we are just trying to make a success of our businesses, we hire people, provide benefits including healthcare, At some point we won't have anything left to support ourselves and the people who work for us.

I'd consider reinstating tax rates to where they were in 1999 to be fair. For everybody, by the way, not just the top 1%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, then why don't we all pay 100% taxes, and then Obama can give us whatever he thinks we deserve?

Or, let's pay no taxes at all. Let each one of us fare for ourselves.

Or we could just leave tax rates where they are. The rich are already paying a higher percentage than poor and middle-class people. But that's still not good enough for so many on the left.

I'd have no problem with leaving tax rates where they are, if Republicans would stop complaining about the deficit and the debt. But, since they have decided that's an issue, higher taxes are part of the fix.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
If you keep taking from people like us we are just trying to make a success of our businesses, we hire people, provide benefits including healthcare, At some point we won't have anything left to support ourselves and the people who work for us.

All of those things are tax-deductible. They come right off the top. Paying more in taxes doesn't affect your ability to do those things. You pay someone a salary, you get to deduct it from your business income. Ditto the benefits. So, what is the point you are trying to make?

[Anonymous]

It's amazing how little people know about services their government performs for them. Life-saving cancer drugs are developed by pharmaceutical companies, but only after NIH has done all of the basic, non-appropriable initial research. HUge numbers of the products we enjoyed inthe 70's, 80's and 90's were originally developed by the space program.

Wealthy people take risks, but only because they are often the only people with enough of a cushion to take the risk and not starve their families. If you have $100 million in the bank, nothing you do for the rest of your life will ever be much of a risk. It's also hard to make the argument that many of the superrich are succeeding on hard work alone. How many hedge funders are hired because they can solicit business from friends of wealthy parents? Let Mitt Romney's sons change their last name and see how well they do as "businessmen".

The entitlements that will eventually bust the budget are the ones that aren't means-tested, and it will be Medicare that does it, not AFDC or food stamps.

[Anonymous]

Again, I get so tired of wealthy Americans shirking their responsibilities as citizens. Sure wealthy people pay more in taxes than people who sell their labor for wages; often times low wages. Given the choice would you rather earn $1 million per year and pay 40% in income tax leaving you with $600k per year in disposable income or would you prefer to earn $20k per year, pay no income tax and have $20k of disposable income to survive on for the year ahead?

Would you move out of your comfortable to home and into the type of apartment you might be able to afford on $20k. Would you send your sons and daughters to serve a couple tours of duty in Afghanistan so they can earn a partially paid for college education on the G.I. Bill??

Probably not??? Stop complaining and start being thankful for the good life you live as affluent Americans.

[Anonymous]

Everybody gets the same tax break on the first 20K they make. Rich or poor, you are all getting the same deal for the same income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everybody gets the same tax break on the first 20K they make. Rich or poor, you are all getting the same deal for the same income.

Your number is wrong. Individuals get $5,950 standard deduction plus $3,700 personal exemption. So, the break is $9,650.