And now we’ve got the proposed February tax hike.

I wonder what the March tax hike will look like.

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2013 at 10:17 AM

Personally I’ve had quite enough of Boehner rolling over and purring for Obama as the Marxist in Chief destroys America.

On another note, that pic of Nancy on the front page is just gorgeous. She hasn’t looked that smoking hot since she guest starred on The Walking Dead.

The rule would cap deductions and loopholes for millionaires so they pay at least 30 percent of their salary in taxes.

The “millionaires”, who truly are millionaires, most likely don’t have this thing called a “salary”. They have things known as “interest income”, “capital gains”, “dividends”, “kick-backs” and so on and so forth.

Obama himself is a millionaire, but he doesn’t earn $1M in salary. So he wouldn’t be paying this tax. But rest assured, if his salary was over $1M, he’d gladly be paying this tax.

Bite me.

This cut, not implemented yet, is for the LAST debt limit hike, not the one Obama wants NOW.

Good point, what the hell is a millionaire? I’m guessing my dad (farmer) and mom (teacher) make somewhere in the neighborhood of $85,000 a year combined, but if we’re talking net worth, they’re north of $10 million because of farm land.

LukeinNE on February 14, 2013 at 9:39 AM

You have to follow their “decade rule” logic, by which all revenues and “savings” are presented.

By rights, if you make $100K a year, that is a $1 million dollars in revenue! You are a defacto Millionaire!

Will the GOP be blamed regardless of what happens? Of course.

Which means they think they will be crushed if sequestration comes to pass (which it will). Back in 2011 they were so sure that the GOP would cave by now that they thought they were pretty damned smart. Too bad reality had to kick in.

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2013 at 10:13 AM

I think the Dems thought this would be on the Republican President’s lap. Now they don’t know what to do.

The rule would cap deductions and loopholes for millionaires so they pay at least 30 percent of their salary in taxes.

LOL

What a joke. Those evil millionaires aren’t smart enough to change how they’re paid!

ne’er assembly required

Murf76 on February 14, 2013 at 11:16 AM

The essence of progressivism.

correct but this is ‘ensure’, heavy on the certainty.

wonderful

The wealthy have the ability to reach the low-information voter. They own the media and advertising companies, and so far… they’ve played along with socialist Democrats voluntarily. They’re wined and dined, convinced of the altruism of “the cause”, manipulated by their own guilt over enjoying more success than their brethren, and incentivised by regulatory policy. But that’s a serpent whispering sweet-nothings in their ears.

Murf76 on February 14, 2013 at 11:16 AM

Spot-on.

if only it was that, ’tisn’t

They KNOW that Republicans have no intention of raising taxes again. They also KNOW that they could strip “the rich” of every dime and still not have enough to fund their reckless spending spree for more than a single year, if that. Again, we find them engaged in Class Warfare for the purpose of socialist ideology and the empowerment of the state.

They seek to eliminate any challenge to their own authority, and they perceive the so-called “rich” as a threat. The wealthy have the ability to reach the low-information voter. They own the media and advertising companies, and so far… they’ve played along with socialist Democrats voluntarily. They’re wined and dined, convinced of the altruism of “the cause”, manipulated by their own guilt over enjoying more success than their brethren, and incentivised by regulatory policy. But that’s a serpent whispering sweet-nothings in their ears. It’s goal is their impotence.

These people are in a position to save the liberty of us all. Democrats know that if they were ever to turn on them, they’d be ruined. Thus far, the very targets of socialist policy are collaborating with the theft of their own public influence. If they don’t stop them soon, they won’t be able to.

LukeinNE on February 14, 2013 at 10:50 AM

And it’s 1 easy tax to raise !
I knew you got it .

They’d spend it all and then some.

Steve Eggleston on February 14, 2013 at 10:38 AM

Why would you believe that? Give them more revenue and they will just spend more. The dems haven’t given us any reason to believe otherwise.

chemman on February 14, 2013 at 10:46 AM

Point taken, guys. If they proposed those things, I’d believe they were serious about raising revenues in meaningful way. My main point was that the Buffet Rule and hiking taxes by 3 points on the rich as a way to raise real revenue is a farce. That they’ll continue to increase spending way faster than GDP is kind of a given.

Lucano on February 14, 2013 at 10:17 AM

Oh, I agree, I certainly don’t support a VAT. It is, however, an indisputably highly effective way for the government to rake in a load of taxes.