Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 48

Thread: Joe Biden: Paying higher taxes patriotic for wealthy

  1. #1
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    33,703

    Default Joe Biden: Paying higher taxes patriotic for wealthy

    Biden on Tax Increase for Wealthier Citizens: ‘Time to Be Patriotic’



    With recent heightened emphasis on the U.S. economic woes, Republicans are finding new ammunition in comments by Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden that raising tax rates on wealthier Americans is a matter of patriotism.

    “We want to take money and put it back in the pocket of middle class people,” Biden said today during an appearance on Good Morning America. “Anyone making over $250,000…” the host began to question, “Is going to pay more,” Biden interjected. “You got it. It’s time to be patriotic, Kate. It’s time to jump in, it’s time to be part of the deal, it’s time to help get America out of the rut.”

    The comments, certain to sure to excite the fiscal wing of the GOP, were circulated this morning by the Republican National Committee.

    It’s not the first time Biden has made the connection between higher taxes and patriotism. At a campaign appearance in Sarasota, Fla., earlier this month, Biden was asked by a supporter what she should tell her wealthy friends concerned about the Democratic presidential ticket’s tax increase for those making more than $250,000.

    “It’s time to be patriotic, that’s what you say to them,” he replied. He received a rousing standing ovation, suggesting Democrats are more supportive of the notion.

    Washington Wire - WSJ.com : Biden on Tax Increase for Wealthier Citizens: 'Time to Be Patriotic'
    It's no longer a dog whistle, it's a fucking trombone


    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  2. #2
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    Damn right it is!

  3. #3
    Elite Member Little Wombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,616

    Default

    A good way to spin higher taxes for the upper class. I mean, who would want to be seen as unpatriotic?

  4. #4
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    33,703

    Default

    The Government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.
    -George Bernard Shaw



    We don't have debt because we haven't taxed enough; we have debt because we spend too much.
    It's no longer a dog whistle, it's a fucking trombone


    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  5. #5
    Elite Member AllieCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    4,212

    Default

    ^ hell yeah we spend too much! That war is where most of the money is being spent these days.

  6. #6
    Elite Member ManxMouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lemuria
    Posts
    7,608

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by witchcurlgirl View Post
    We don't have debt because we haven't taxed enough; we have debt because we spend too much.
    But we can't really unspend that money now, can we? Something's got to give due to this spending orgy we've been on for the last 8 years. I read an article stating that no matter which candidate wins, we're very likely to get higher taxes in the coming years because there just won't be an alternative.
    Santa is an elitist mother fucker -- giving expensive shit to rich kids and nothing to poor kids.

  7. #7
    Elite Member sluce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Top Secret Spy for Leann Rimes
    Posts
    37,336

    Default

    What really sucks is that the average person may overspend. They cannot then go to their boss and say "listen I really screwed up. I made very stupid financial decisions and lived beyond my means. Now I need more money to live so you need to pay me more." The govenment can make bad decision after bad decision and then we get a tax hike to bail them out. Bush spent more than we had and then gave tax cuts and rebates. He never understood the big picture.

  8. #8
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    33,703

    Default

    How about that as they want to raise our taxes they want us to pay for this:


    Global Poverty Act

    It appears the Senate version is being pushed not only by Biden and Obama, a member of the committee, but Lugar, the ranking Republican member.

    A nice-sounding bill called the "Global Poverty Act," sponsored by Democratic presidential candidate and Senator Barack Obama, is up for a Senate vote on Thursday and could result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States. The bill, which has the support of many liberal religious groups, makes levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations.

    Senator Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has not endorsed either Senator Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in the presidential race. But on Thursday, February 14, he is trying to rush Obama's "Global Poverty Act" (S.2433) through his committee. The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends.

    The bill, which is item number four on the committee's business meeting agenda , passed the House by a voice vote last year because most members didn't realize what was in it. Congressional sponsors have been careful not to calculate the amount of foreign aid spending that it would require. According to the website of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, no hearings have been held on the Obama bill in that body.

    A release from the Obama Senate office about the bill declares, "In 2000, the U.S. joined more than 180 countries at the United Nations Millennium Summit and vowed to reduce global poverty by 2015. We are halfway towards this deadline, and it is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day."

    The legislation itself requires the President "to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day."

    The bill defines the term "Millennium Development Goals" as the goals set out in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution 55/2 (2000).

    The U.N. says that "The commitment to provide 0.7% of gross national product (GNP) as official development assistance was first made 35 years ago in a General Assembly resolution, but it has been reaffirmed repeatedly over the years, including at the 2002 global Financing for Development conference in Monterrey, Mexico. However, in 2004, total aid from the industrialized countries totaled just $78.6 billion-or about 0.25% of their collective GNP."

    In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that declaration commits nations to banning "small arms and light weapons" and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

    The Millennium Declaration also affirms the U.N. as "the indispensable common house of the entire human family, through which we will seek to realize our universal aspirations for peace, cooperation and development."

    Jeffrey Sachs, who runs the U.N.'s "Millennium Project," says that the U.N. plan to force the U.S. to pay 0.7 percent of GNP in increased foreign aid spending would add $65 billion a year to what the U.S. already spends. Over a 13-year period, from 2002, when the U.N.'s Financing for Development conference was held, to the target year of 2015, when the U.S. is expected to meet the "Millennium Development Goals," this amounts to $845 billion. And the only way to raise that kind of money, Sachs has written, is through a global tax, preferably on carbon-emitting fossil fuels.

    Obama's bill has only six co-sponsors. They are Senators Maria Cantwell, Dianne Feinstein, Richard Lugar, Richard Durbin, Chuck Hagel and Robert Menendez. But it appears that Biden and Obama see passage of this bill as a way to highlight Democratic Party priorities in the Senate.

    The House version (H.R. 1302), sponsored by Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), had only 84 co-sponsors before it was suddenly brought up on the House floor last September 25 and was passed by voice vote. House Republicans were caught off-guard, unaware that the pro-U.N. measure committed the U.S. to spending hundreds of billions of dollars.

    It appears the Senate version is being pushed not only by Biden and Obama, a member of the committee, but Lugar, the ranking Republican member. Lugar has worked with Obama in the past to promote more foreign aid for Russia, supposedly to stem nuclear proliferation, and has become Obama's mentor. Like Biden, Lugar is a globalist. They have both promoted passage of the U.N.'s Law of the Sea Treaty, for example.

    The so-called "Lugar-Obama initiative" was modeled after the Nunn-Lugar program, also known as the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program, which was designed to eliminate weapons of mass destruction in the former Soviet Union. But one defense analyst, Rich Kelly, noted evidence that "CTR funds have eased the Russian military's budgetary woes, freeing resources for such initiatives as the war in Chechnya and defense modernization." He recommended that Congress "eliminate CTR funding so that it does not finance additional, perhaps more threatening, programs in the former Soviet Union." However, over $6 billion has already been spent on the program.

    Another program modeled on Nunn-Lugar, the Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention (IPP), was recently exposed as having funded nuclear projects in Iran through Russia.

    More foreign aid through passage of the Global Poverty Act was identified as one of the strategic goals of InterAction, the alliance of U.S-based international non-governmental organizations that lobbies for more foreign aid. The group is heavily financed by the U.S. Government, having received $1.4 million from taxpayers in fiscal year 2005 and $1.7 million in 2006. However, InterAction recently issued a report accusing the United States of "falling short on its commitment to rid the world of dire poverty by 2015 under the U.N. Millennium Development Goals..."

    It's not clear what President Bush would do if the bill passes the Senate. The bill itself quotes Bush as declaring that "We fight against poverty because opportunity is a fundamental right to human dignity." Bush's former top aide, Michael J. Gerson, writes in his new book, Heroic Conservatism, that Bush should be remembered as the President who "sponsored the largest percentage increases in foreign assistance since the Marshall Plan..."

    Even these increases, however, will not be enough to satisfy the requirements of the Obama bill. A global tax will clearly be necessary to force American taxpayers to provide the money.
    • Americans who would like their senators to know what they are voting on can contact them through information at this official Senate site.
    Obama’s Global Tax Proposal Up for Senate Vote


    So let's not do it, I mean all we ever hear is what a bunch of bastards we Americans are anyway...That would keep $845 BILLION here......Fix our own problems- like poverty, and then once it's fixed here, we can help other countries.

    Or how about the Senate and congress, as a show of good faith with the patriotic rich take a pay cut?

    Or how about they voluntarily contribute more on taxes....No one ever fills that line out on the 1040

    Or stop pumping money into Fannie, Freddie, Lehman Bros, etc....that would put some cash in the coffers
    It's no longer a dog whistle, it's a fucking trombone


    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  9. #9
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    And yet, without taxes where would we get money for our military? Or anything else? The United States spends the most money in the world on its military.

    If folks don't want to pay income tax, then perhaps the US should reinstate tariffs on imported goods, which is where the US funded most of its government before the inception of the income tax.

  10. #10
    Elite Member kingcap72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    10 miles from Pootie Tang
    Posts
    21,909

    Default

    With recent heightened emphasis on the U.S. economic woes, Republicans are finding new ammunition in comments by Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden that raising tax rates on wealthier Americans is a matter of patriotism.
    Today Palin twisted Biden's quote at a rally in Iowa and said that he 'thinks paying higher taxes is patriotic,' she left off the part about wealthier Americans.

  11. #11
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    33,703

    Default

    If folks don't want to pay income tax, then perhaps the US should reinstate tariffs on imported goods, which is where the US funded most of its government before the inception of the income tax.


    We still do have tariffs on imported goods.....I pay them to US customs all the time.

    Tariff Information Center


    Only select countries have no duty/tariff treaties......NAFTA......806/807 Carribbean nations




    We need taxes, but we also need the Gov to spend what we give it more wisely.
    It's no longer a dog whistle, it's a fucking trombone


    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  12. #12
    Elite Member ManxMouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lemuria
    Posts
    7,608

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sluce View Post
    What really sucks is that the average person may overspend. They cannot then go to their boss and say "listen I really screwed up. I made very stupid financial decisions and lived beyond my means. Now I need more money to live so you need to pay me more." The govenment can make bad decision after bad decision and then we get a tax hike to bail them out. Bush spent more than we had and then gave tax cuts and rebates. He never understood the big picture.
    Yep. The one issue that I lean a little right on is the total lack of ACCOUNTABILITY by the government. We can't do jack shit about reckless and wasteful spending other than kick the idiots out when their term is up, and that is a very blunt and ineffective tool. When I think of the millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars down the drain due to fraud and incompetence by the contractors in Iraq (think Haliburton), it makes my blood boil. They don't even know where it went in some instances, they were just giving it out hand over fist and not even keeping fucking records of it. This never really made big news....just another outrageous act under this administration, I guess.
    Santa is an elitist mother fucker -- giving expensive shit to rich kids and nothing to poor kids.

  13. #13
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by witchcurlgirl View Post
    If folks don't want to pay income tax, then perhaps the US should reinstate tariffs on imported goods, which is where the US funded most of its government before the inception of the income tax.
    We still do have tariffs on imported goods.....I pay them to US customs all the time.

    Tariff Information Center

    Only select countries have no duty/tariff treaties......NAFTA......806/807 Carribbean nations

    We need taxes, but we also need the Gov to spend what we give it more wisely.
    And those countries in NAFTA, such as Canada, are some of the U.S. biggest trading partners. Last I recall, Canada was our largest trading partner. Yes, tariffs still exist but not in the way that they used to. They are not as large or, as Palin would say, as "impactful" as they used to be.

  14. #14
    Elite Member Sweetie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Den of the roving cunty bitches
    Posts
    24,533

    Default

    Maybe they could cut out programs and assistance for people that abuse it. Then after all of that is done raise taxes.
    I am sure we could save a ton if we quit supporting all the deadbeats that could work, that won't. Or if we quit supporting children and make their parents actually do it. Or we quit paying outrageous amounts to military contractors. I could keep going...

  15. #15
    Elite Member HWBL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    18,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little Wombat View Post
    A good way to spin higher taxes for the upper class. I mean, who would want to be seen as unpatriotic?
    A) only it isn't spin. It's true, the upper class has been treated with kid gloves
    way too long and didn't seem to mind that more and more "fellow Americans"
    are falling below the poverty line.
    B) It's the Repugs who abused the term "patriotism" for all kinds of
    dictatorial, Big Brother is watching you measures. How can it be unpatriotic
    to ask rich citizens to help their (another term the Repugs over used) "fellow
    Americans"? That's how this nation began: by families helping families,
    neighbors helping neighbors. These rich Americans can stay in their multi
    dollar mansions, but it would indeed be a patriotic thing to do to help their
    less fortunate "neighbors" out. Or is it more patriotic to buy yet another
    Hummer or Louis Vutton? Some of those items could house or feed a family
    for a considerable amount of time!
    Warren Beatty: actor, director, writer, producer.

    ***** celeb

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: April 25th, 2008, 04:20 AM
  2. Republicans raising usual faux-patriotic crap over Democrat ad
    By Grimmlok in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: July 13th, 2006, 06:50 PM
  3. Replies: 9
    Last Post: May 18th, 2006, 01:40 PM
  4. Replies: 19
    Last Post: April 4th, 2006, 06:12 PM
  5. Harper will cater to whims of wealthy
    By Grimmlok in forum Politics and Issues
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: January 16th, 2006, 09:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •