Biden says paying higher taxes is Patriotic

[bjl584]

Biden calls paying higher taxes a patriotic act - Yahoo! News

I thought that the first true patriots of our country were fighting against the high taxes imposed on the colonies by England? Or did I miss something?

[kork13]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Bravo, good sir! BJL - 1 | Biden - 0

[txex86]

Joe Biden--the quintessential foot-and-mouth diseased politician.

[geojen]

I don't really see this as a valid comparison. Yes, they were mad about high taxes, but it was because they were taxed without representation in parliament. (i.e. the slogan taxation with representation). That is obviously not the case here.

Not that I necessarily agree with what Biden said, I'm just saying, I think your comparison is a non sequiter.

[kork13]

I don't really see this as a valid comparison. Yes, they were mad about high taxes, but it was because they were taxed without representation in parliament. (i.e. the slogan taxation with representation). That is obviously not the case here.

Not that I necessarily agree with what Biden said, I'm just saying, I think your comparison is a non sequiter.

Technically, one could make an argument to this... Congress (our "representation") has in recent years appeared to not be acting entirely in the best interest of those they represent. Case in point: gridlock that is/has been the House and Senate for years. Yes, it's a poor case, but one that I have actually heard made.

[belic3000]

Everyone seems to be concentrating on the patriotic statement. Did no one notice what he said before that. That they intended to take money from those that can afford it and give it back to the middle class. Just a fancy way of saying wealth redistribution, isn't it?
If being a patriot is determined by how much you pay in taxes, I am afraid that this country won't see many patriots step up.

[sweeps]

Really dumb thing for Biden to say, and makes for a good Republican sound bite, but the rest of the article speaks volumes.

[genchan]

OK - I'll bit on this one.

Biden is saying that those people making $250,000 a year or more need to step up and pay their fair share of taxes. All that they are proposing is that the tax cuts that Bush gave to them with the promise that it would trickle down to the middle and poor (we can see how well that worked) will go back to what they were before. If the poor and middle class people are the majority of the people actually doing the fighting over in Iraq, isn't it the resposibility of the rich to pay their fair share in taxes to pay for this war (or is that the responsibility of the middle and poor too and those making over $250,000 have no responsibility but to their own pocket book?) What exactly have the rich sacrificed for Iraq?

Those of you who are so much for McCain, look at where the economy currently is. This is what the republicans have done. You really want another 4 years of this, you get what you deserve.

[kork13]

my greater concern with Obama's tax policy ideas is the raising of business taxes. It's absurd to expect that the cost that those additional taxes incur upon business owners will not "trickle down" to the customers of those businesses. Those tax increases are, in effect, an increased tax burden upon ALL classes--not just the rich corporate CEOs, as is more the case with the $250k+ issue... It hits the lower class, the middle class, and the upper class. One could even argue that it impacts the lower classes more, because the price increases for goods/services would represent a more significant proportion of a poor family's income than a rich family's income, since the prices are fixed--your income doesn't matter in pricing for most goods/services. Finally, on the business taxes, a significant portion of business owners are the DEFINITION of the middle class. Yes, CEOs of big companies aren't middle class by any means, but local, home-grown business ventures are often what propels a lower-middle class family into the middle- or upper-middle class realm. Higher business taxes will hit those families hard.

One note on the $250k/yr issue.... Is that generally accepted by everyone as the definition of "rich" in our country? I've tried to define "rich" myself, but I really can't, and would be interested in everyone's opinions.

[pfblueprint]

That's funny because Judge Learned Hand once said...

Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes. Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands

[kork13]

That's funny because Judge Learned Hand once said...

Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes. Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands

That's exactly my argument though... that the law should demand a simple, inescapable tax. Base it on income level, perhaps including a very limited amount of "exclusions" such as for children, then otherwise you owe exactly X% of your annual income. Can you imagine how that, without ANY % increase in tax rates, would increase tax revenue? It'd be significant, IMO...

However, I recognize that this is not something that will likely happen, because it would be largely unpopular, and unpopular issues get no support in Congress due to self-preservation. So........ yea. Whatev...