Bill Whittle nails it- Soak the rich


Explained so even a liberal SHOULD be able to understand it.
This country has a spending problem, not an income problem.

No votes yet

This is absolutely on spot, and best of all there is no argument anyone can make to refute it. Take all that money that Bill suggests and we still just barely make it through the year.

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

I don't understand the position of those wealthy who want to raise the taxes of everyone to pay for our budget deficit. Why not just give their wealth to cover the deficit. Perhaps they should be allowed to give as much as they wish to the federal government to cover the deficit, and then be allowed to "bank" the additional charity against future earnings. Maybe we should allow a wealthy person to give a larger share of their profits to the "charity" of government taxes, and use it against future earnings. For example, someone who makes a billion dollars or more a year in profit could give 90% of it to the U. S. government, and then not be required to pay taxes for three or four years. They get the public adulation for paying down the national debt, and future earnings without taxation until they "catch up" to the rest of us. It seems to me that the wealthy would be "looser" with their money if there was some benefit to them for paying taxes. Of course, another option is to get rid of programs like Medicare which seems like only a program to give doctors practice before they operate on wealthy patients.

Old South End Broadway

Just like a libtard. Talk out of both sides of their mouths.
The truth is, Warren Buffett OWES ALMOST $1BILLION IN BACK TAXES.

Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Owes Taxes Going Back To 2002

"A little over two weeks ago, Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett, the third-richest person in the world, penned an op-ed critical of the low tax rates for the superrich. It would seem his own company hasn't prioritized paying its rightful share in a timely fashion either.

Berkshire Hathaway, the eighth-largest public company in the world according to Forbes, openly admits to still owing taxes for years 2002 through 2004 and 2005 through 2009, according to the New York Post. The company says it expects to "resolve all adjustments proposed by the US Internal Revenue Service" within the next year. "

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a

Go home and get your shine box boy, you clear channel lackey ;)

Well OldSouthEndBrdy it's because if all the millionaires and billionaires gave up all of their wealth their would still be a large deficit.

The problem with getting them to pay their "fair share" is no one defines what "fair share" is. I'm not totally opposed to raising taxes on them but the libs refuse to define that because they want to dip into the cookie jar again later.

I say you want to raise the taxes on them? Fine. Let's pass a constitutional amendment that says the top X earners pay Y and the top Z earners pay W so then government has it's limits defined and we can quit the raise/lower taxes argument. Additionally with that I would do away with all deductions, because that's the government's way of pulling the wool over the people's eyes because they will keep a high mortgage for that precious home deduction (regardless how dumb it is) while the friends of the politicians get the real deductions.


How about a flat individual income tax of say maybe 10% after exempting the first $25,000.00 of an individual's income? No other deductions or exemptions or credits.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.