Start A Petition

The Value Of Taxing The Wealthy: $56 Billion

US Politics & Gov't  (tags: politics, Bush tax cuts, policy, obama, elections, democrats, republicans, media, government, ethics, americans, usa )

- 2168 days ago -
The debate is back over what to do with the Bush tax cuts, which are scheduled to expire at the end of the year.So just how much are those worth? About $56.3 billion in fiscal 2013 alone, the Tax Policy Center estimates, using Treasury data, or about $850

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Past Member (0)
Wednesday July 11, 2012, 5:16 pm

Carol H (229)
Wednesday July 11, 2012, 6:29 pm
noted,thanks Cal

Jason S (50)
Wednesday July 11, 2012, 6:44 pm

Elle B (84)
Wednesday July 11, 2012, 6:48 pm
Thanks Cal. Words of the wise that the infotained fail to comprehend . . .

"It is time that all Americans realized that the place of labor is side by side with the businessman and with the farmer, and not one-degree lower." —Pres. Harry S. Truman, US President

"The Wealth of Nations," March 9, 1776, by Adam Smith, Father of Modern Economics or as the right wingers refer to him... Father of Free Market Economics...i guess they skipped a lot and didn't read his complete works. . .

"Labour was the first price, the original purchase - money that was paid for all things. It was not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all wealth of the world was originally purchased."

''No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity, besides, that they who feed, clothe and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labour as to be themselves tolerably well fed, clothed and lodged.''

"The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state."

"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more in proportion."

"Every tax, however, is, to the person who pays it, a badge, not of slavery, but of liberty."

''Even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand: neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences.''

Obviously, neither Ronald Reagan nor Margaret Thatcher read the work in it's entirety if at all. . .before they began waving it around and uttering Cato Crowd key words and phrases gibberish nonsense.

Elle B (84)
Wednesday July 11, 2012, 6:56 pm
And don't forget these guys. . .

"No business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. By living wages I mean more than a bare subsistence level --I mean the wages of decent living. ―Franklin D. Roosevelt, US Pres.

"For it is an absurdity to call a country civilized in which a decent and industrious man, laboriously mastering a trade which is valuable and necessary to the common weal, has no assurance that it will sustain him while he stands ready to practice it, or keep him out of the poorhouse when illness or age makes him idle.". — H.L. Mencken

“The absence of effective State, and, especially, national, restraint upon unfair money-getting has tended to create a small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men, whose chief object is to hold and increase their power. The prime need to is to change the conditions which enable these men to accumulate power which it is not for the general welfare that they should hold or exercise. We grudge no man a fortune which represents his own power and sagacity, when exercised with entire regard to the welfare of his fellows. Again, comrades over there, take the lesson from your own experience. Not only did you not grudge, but you gloried in the promotion of the great generals who gained their promotion by leading their army to victory. So it is with us. We grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used. It is not even enough that it should have been gained without doing damage to the community. We should permit it to be gained only so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community.” ―US Pres. Theodore Roosevelt

"We should measure the success of our economy by the breadth of our Middle Class and the scope of opportunity offered to the poorest child to climb into that Middle Class." -- John Sweeney

“Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.”
—Dwight Eisenhower, Republican, U.S. Pres.

"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." — Abraham Lincoln

"All that harms labor is treason to America." — Abraham Lincoln

JM A (176)
Wednesday July 11, 2012, 9:37 pm

Nancy L (141)
Thursday July 12, 2012, 11:42 am
What is their fair share? JMA???

What % of taxes do you pay? How much is "fair"????

They either need to let them expire and have us all pay the same %

Michael T (82)
Thursday July 12, 2012, 12:43 pm
The article, by putting the amount that could be collected into focus seems to hint that it is a small amount.

However, it is a step in the right direction. Add to it a decrease in military spending, hopefully eventual changes in the tax codes for corporations, revamping the estate tax, and pretty soon it will get us into a position where we'll have a handle on things.


Gene J (290)
Thursday July 12, 2012, 1:46 pm
Okay that amount is not going to solve the deficit or really do much to affect it. But what it does do is bring things closer to balance, to elementary fairness and the perception that WE are ALL in this together and paying our fair share. That is important to America because it is the basic principle we believe in, we are one county, a Union of states, and of people, committed to the greater good and one way we demonstrate that is through our contribution to the funds used to promote and create the needs of our nation, our infrastructure from which we all benefit, education, health and welfare of our citizens from which we all benefit. There's no harm here, only good can come of all of us contributing in proportion to our means to the nation's future. Now let's see us ACT on this.

Past Member (0)
Thursday July 12, 2012, 1:59 pm
We need to go back to FDR's 90% after a million and 70% after recovery.

Nancy L (141)
Thursday July 12, 2012, 3:52 pm
Why would you want to take 90% of another persons income? That is un American.

John B (185)
Thursday July 12, 2012, 4:15 pm
Thanks Cal for posting the NPR report by Theo Francis and Lam Thuy Vo. The numbers are impressive and it would even the tax burden. I hope the President sticks to his proposal and doesn't back off from the Repub threats that will be coming from Speaker Boner and his cohorts in the House.
Read, noted and spam flagged.

Lois Jordan (63)
Thursday July 12, 2012, 5:10 pm
Noted. I, too, just hope Obama doesn't cave to the Repukes on this again. He "promised" to get rid of those tax cuts...if we in the middle class lose ours, too, so be it. I'd love to see him stand his ground for a nice change. I was unhappy when he cut the payroll tax because that feeds money to Social Security. Although the liars in Congress kept insisting Social Security was "broken"--with the payroll tax cut continuing it could put Social Security funds "at risk"....even though The Fed owes the fund billions it borrowed to pay for the "wars."

Wayne W (12)
Thursday July 12, 2012, 6:22 pm
Nan L., 91% was the marginal tax rate under Republican President Eisenhower. The effective tax rate at that time was about 51%. Currently, the ultra-rich pay about 18%, barely a third. But this discussion is about income tax, not the primary source of wealth for the ultra-rich. That would be capital gains. The capital gains tax now is 15%. Starting in Reagan's second term, through George H. W. Bush's entire term, to 1997 under Clinton, the rate was almost 30%. While the capital gains rate was raised during and maintained throughout two GOP administrations, the GOP has called a proposal to raise the capital gains rate to just 18% "socialist". To me, this is a good illustration of the contempt that the GOP has for the American people. They're convinced that the American people not only don't know that but are sure they can't look it up.

Wayne W (12)
Thursday July 12, 2012, 6:26 pm
Another point of which everyone should be aware is that regardless of how much income one has the current tax rate would be preserved for the first $250,000 of income. Even the Koch's and Mitt Romney would keep that tax break. Someone making $300,000 would pay the current rate for $250,000 and a higher rate, still lower than that under most of Reagan's Presidency, for the $50,000.

David C (129)
Thursday July 12, 2012, 7:17 pm
heard Romney talking about cut, cut, cut...except the military of about if we went back to the US government taking the payment it deserves for all the good it provides.......roads, FAA, EPA, FDIC, DOD, etc, etc, etc....not just welfare and handouts that the Greedy Old Politicians claim....

. (0)
Friday July 13, 2012, 10:45 am
It will be interesting to see just how deep Obama will go in terms of taxing the wealthy; as there were were the only people who profited in getting jobs .

Michael T (82)
Friday July 13, 2012, 10:48 am
Allan, um, that isn't likely to happen unless we eliminate enough GOP/Tea Party congressmen and replace them with Dem's or independents to move a bill through, and keep the control of the Senate in a Democratic majority.

If those things don't change it will be nearly impossible to move through any legislation of any value as the GOP will hold America hostage. IMO.

JL A (281)
Friday July 13, 2012, 1:47 pm
It is noteworthy that current GOP candidates do not even try to claim similarity to the past GOP presidents on this issue..........
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in US Politics & Gov't

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.