Coming to a theater near you, October 2012.

[R/T Hemi]

What timing. Just a month before the November 2012 election the movie version of the Navy Seal's raid on Bin laden debuts. I can't help but think this is win/win/win for Obama as it portrays him with the oversized brass balls and courage necessary to authorized the raid.

I can't wait to hear Palin or Bachman's comments on this. Comedy gold.

[stebo0728]

Bet they cast Wesley Snipes as Obama! LOL

[Encryptshun]

Nah, it'll be Denzel fo sho.

[Cold_Zero]

I guess when you can't afford ticket prices because you lost your job and you can't put gas in the car (because it is too expensive) to drive to the movie theather, then we will see what the impact of this movie will be on the 2012 elections. My point is really simple, as I have said this before, right after the raid. People will care more about the economy and the price of gas then they will about those Red, White and Blue wave the flag moments because we killed a very bad man. I think that Obama, the Government and you and I need to get to work to improve this country.

[Encryptshun]

I think that Obama, the Government and you and I need to get to work to improve this country.

I think the question on everyone's mind, though is "How"? And, unfortunately, it's such a devisive issue that no progress is being made on it.

The Democrats' stimulus plan was the economic equivalent of trying to make ten gallons of gatorade with a dropper-full of mix.

The Republicans haven't done anything except offer criticism and polemics.

Neither side has been blessed with an overabundance of good intentions or of success.

[telcoman]

I guess when you can't afford ticket prices because you lost your job and you can't put gas in the car (because it is too expensive) to drive to the movie theather, then we will see what the impact of this movie will be on the 2012 elections. My point is really simple, as I have said this before, right after the raid. People will care more about the economy and the price of gas then they will about those Red, White and Blue wave the flag moments because we killed a very bad man. I think that Obama, the Government and you and I need to get to work to improve this country.

And I think it is people like you that are the problem.

Time to start raising taxes on the wealthy before you can talk about spending cutsthat effect the lower and middle class.

Telcoman

[Encryptshun]

And I think it is people like you that are the problem.

Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, pot.

Time to start raising taxes on the wealthy before you can talk about spending cutsthat effect the lower and middle class.

Telcoman

So the issue on the table was "getting to work to improve this country". How does what you are suggesting accomplish that?

[Cold_Zero]

And I think it is people like you that are the problem.

Time to start raising taxes on the wealthy before you can talk about spending cutsthat effect the lower and middle class.

Telcoman

Encryptshun, spoke about the Democrats trying to make Gatorade. Maybe for your sake he should have used the analogy of making Kool Aid. Keep drinking Howie, Jim Jones needs you to.

[Cold_Zero]

The Republicans haven't done anything except offer criticism and polemics.

One small correction/observation. Both parties seem to be very capable and ready to us polemics to make their case. This isnt something that is unique to the Republican party.

[Encryptshun]

^ Agreed, CZ. Both sides have used polemics. However (and I fully admit I may be predisposed to believe this), the Obama administration actually did try to do SOMETHING (like it or not, the ARRA was a plan and has actually produced jobs and tangible infrastructure improvements), while I have yet to hear any sort of economic stimulus plan from the Republicans. Cutting spending and lowering taxes are not plans designed to help spur economic growth, so I don't count them unless someone can explain to me how they will directly result in American jobs.

[szh]

The Republicans haven't done anything except offer criticism and polemics.

One small correction/observation. Both parties seem to be very capable and ready to us polemics to make their case. This isnt something that is unique to the Republican party.

Entirely agreed!

Z

[szh]

Time to start raising taxes on the wealthy before you can talk about spending cutsthat effect the lower and middle class.

Ah, yes, the old "rich people are evil because they don't pay any taxes" comments and misguided beliefs.

Yet, as I have shown in previous posts, they account for the largest amounts of taxes actually collected in this country.

Z

[szh]

Yet, as I have shown in previous posts, they account for the largest amounts of taxes actually collected in this country.

From an old post of mine:

This is yet more recent analysis and facts (sorry, I am an engineer ... I believe in the power of facts, not rhetoric ) from a different source:

This information is from a report at http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html - please look at the detailed data at that link (particularly this PDF of the full report: http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/ff249.pdf)! It makes for very interesting reading.

• "As the data below show, incomes reported by tax returns at the high end of the income spectrum plummeted from 2007 to 2008, as did their share of the nation's income and income taxes paid. In 2008, the top 1 percent of tax returns paid 38.0 percent of all federal individual income taxes and earned 20.0 percent of adjusted gross income, compared to 2007 when those figures were 40.4 percent and 22.8 percent, respectively."

So, in reality, the gross income of the rich actually went down compared to others (AGI's were a lot lower for the rich, compared to the non-rich). Not surprising - the recession hurt them too ... more than the "non-rich" in terms of percentages and absolutes.

• "Overall, these data on high-income tax returns appear to confirm that the recent recession had the same diminishing effect on income inequality that most recessions have, and that it occurred for the same reason, a sharp decline in income at the high end. This appears to contradict recent reports based upon Census data suggesting the opposite, that this recession had actually increased income inequality."

Hmmm ... income inequality change was actually opposite to what is believed to be the case?!? Interesting!

• "During 2007, the top 1 percent had actually paid more in federal income tax than the bottom 95 percent ... During 2008, the bottom 95 percent ... paid 41.3 percent of the total collected, a larger share than the 38.0 percent paid by the top 1 percent."

Changed a little bit in 2008. Again, effects of the recession. But, the absolute facts are still important. The top 1% paid more than the bottom 95% in 2007 and a few percentage points less in 2008. Thanks for doing more than your share, guys!

• "Although the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts were across the board (even though certain provisions within those cuts were targeted at various income ranges), the federal individual income tax remains highly progressive. The average tax rate in 2008 ranged from around 2.6 percent of income for the bottom half of tax returns to 23.27 percent for the top 1 percent. For the top 1 percent (as well as the top 0.1 percent), their average income tax rate actually increased from 2007 to 2008, despite shrunken income."

Shows the effects of reduced capital gains (which is taxed at lower tax rates than personal income) leading to reduced total gross income in 2008.

Z

[Cold_Zero]

maybe when we talk about people 'paying their fair share' we need to ask the people who dont pay Federal Income tax (40% of filers) to pay a little to help keep this country going?

[Encryptshun]

The tax statistics are very impressive, I'll give you that. But I rarely trust statistics. My favorite example -- 40% of employees working a standard work-week elect to call in sick on either a Monday or a Friday. This is clearly an abuse of the sick-leave program and we must issue a policy prohibiting sick-time on Mondays or Fridays!

I'm not dismissive of the numbers the tax foundation reported, but I am skeptical of how accurately they reflect the complete picture. I'll educate myself and then post.

[szh]

Even if you take 100% of the income from all the "rich", it still will not close the deficit gap. From the following link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... on_LEADTop

Consider the Internal Revenue Service's income tax statistics for 2008, the latest year for which data are available. The top 1% of taxpayers—those with salaries, dividends and capital gains roughly above about $380,000—paid 38% of taxes. But assume that tax policy confiscated all the taxable income of all the "millionaires and billionaires" Mr. Obama singled out. That yields merely about $938 billion, which is sand on the beach amid the $4 trillion White House budget, a $1.65 trillion deficit, and spending at 25% as a share of the economy, a post-World War II record.

Say we take it up to the top 10%, or everyone with income over $114,000, including joint filers. That's five times Mr. Obama's 2% promise. The IRS data are broken down at $100,000, yet taxing all income above that level throws up only $3.4 trillion. And remember, the top 10% already pay 69% of all total income taxes, while the top 5% pay more than all of the other 95%.

Z

[szh]

I'm not dismissive of the numbers the tax foundation reported, but I am skeptical of how accurately they reflect the complete picture. I'll educate myself and then post.

Excellent! Please do the research for sure - you will be amazed. Look at the reports at the IRS and at the CBO for clarity too.

Z

[szh]

More interesting facts from http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/27530.html that need to be understood. Note one important fact: the benefits of the "refunds" shown below went to the poor and lower middle class - all these entitlements are phased out for higher income folks anyway!

• Recently released IRS data for 2009, shows that taxpayers earning over $200,000 paid 50 percent of the $866 billion in total income taxes paid that year, or $434 billion. Skeptics will say, "That's because they earn the majority of the income in America. Not so. These taxpayers earned 25 percent of the $7.6 trillion in total adjusted gross income in the country that year.
• The 2009 IRS data also shows that a record 58.6 million tax filers had no income tax liability that year. This means that 42 percent of the 140 million Americans who filed tax returns that year contributed nothing to the basic cost of government.
• Millions of people received cash "refunds" in 2009 even though they paid no income taxes: Some 21 million nonpayers received $27.5 billion in refundable credits from the child credit; Obama's Making Work Pay program gave out $12.8 billion in refundable credits to 32 million filers; The Earned Income Tax Credit program doled out $54 billion in refundable credits to 24.9 million filers; and, nearly 5 million filers received $3.9 billion in refundable Education Credits and roughly 1 million filers got $4.65 billion in refundable credits under the First Time Homebuyers credit program.

Z

[szh]

More real data. Here is an Excel spreadsheet at the IRS web site: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/histab3.xls ... so you all would accept the data as real, I hope?

Look at column AK and add up the numbers in rows 28 through 34 ... the answer is just over $1.6 trillion.

In other words, if the government decides to take 100% of the income (not an increase in the tax rate - I'm talking 100% of the income!) of everybody making more than $200k per year (in 2009), you will perhaps cover the deficit in the budget this year alone!

I say "perhaps" because the deficit is about $1.1 to $1.4 trillion (depending on the estimate you look at) already, and the fiscal year ain't over yet!

And, given the economy, these totals are probably lower in 2010 and 2011.

Any belief that taxing the rich more can somehow bring us out of this mess and solve all our deficit problems is sheer fantasy land BS.

The government over-spending is simply not tenable in the long run - there is no realistic way to increase tax revenue to cover it.

And, spending cuts - across the board - just have to be part of the picture.

As an engineer - who relies on facts and figures (that DO NOT LIE) - I get totally irritated by political, ignorant rhetoric and expectation of miracles in the future.

Z

[heliochrome85]

if i cut back on my eating out 100% it wont cover my lingering 400k in graduate school debt. so to say that i should, is a ridiculous premise.

[Cold_Zero]

Have you officially graduated from school?

[heliochrome85]

Have you officially graduated from school?

4/7/2012 I collect my M.D., but my last official day of Medical School is March 21,2012.

[themadscientist]

Bet they cast Wesley Snipes as Obama! LOL

They have similar dubious financial history.

[mattblancarte]

They have similar dubious financial history.

Oh really?

[themadscientist]

[themadscientist]

Real estate cheat
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4111483&page=1

Tax cheat
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/11/ ... 2J20101119

[stebo0728]

Time to start raising taxes on the wealthy before you can talk about spending cutsthat effect the lower and middle class.

And again I remind you that even collecting 100% of every dollar a household makes above 250k STILL would NOT even get you to a trillion. Spending is your problem, and until you fix the massive overspending, you wont solve anything. Go ahead and throw another tax on the wealthy and you will see one of two outcomes. Either revenue will increase NOMINALLY and the massive overspending will still sink us, OR the outcome I see more likely, is that revenue levels will actually break even at best or possibly even decline due to reactionary measure by the already overtaxed sector that you just raped again.

[Cold_Zero]

Have you officially graduated from school?

4/7/2012 I collect my M.D., but my last official day of Medical School is March 21,2012.

It has been a long time since I dealt with med loans. So arent they in a deferment status until you graduate? (Other than paying interest payments while you are in school).

[Cold_Zero]

Time to start raising taxes on the wealthy before you can talk about spending cutsthat effect the lower and middle class.

And again I remind you that even collecting 100% of every dollar a household makes above 250k STILL would NOT even get you to a trillion. Spending is OUR problem, and until WE fix the massive overspending, IT wont solve anything. Go ahead and throw another tax on the wealthy and you will see one of two outcomes. Either revenue will increase NOMINALLY and the massive overspending will still sink us, OR the outcome I see more likely, is that revenue levels will actually break even at best or possibly even decline due to reactionary measure by the already overtaxed sector that you just raped again.

Fixed that for you Stebo, as you appear to be playing the game and seem to forget the transgressions of the Republicans for the past 10 years.

[themadscientist]

Extend the time frame further back, all the way to Reagan and I'll sign off on that statement.