-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
Tax Protests and the Tea Party- Why Now?
- Thread starter Geo
- Start date
Geo. I think that they are concerned with the level of spending. Our deficits were $1.41 trillion in 2009, 1.56 trillion in 2010, and are expected to be $1.27 trillion in 2011. The record before that was $458 billion. The current tax rates are a function of the Bush tax cuts, so I don't know why one would credit that to Obama. Besides, Bush cut taxes without cutting programs, resulting in deficits that were too high. It's as though we purchased a house using a negative ammortization loan with a teaser rate. Although we feel O.K. now, in the long run, it is not sustainable.
I don't know that being concerned about this level of spending makes one a racist fearmonger. I think that we need to raise taxes (yes, this coming from a fiscal conservative), cut spending, and address the social security shortfalls now rather than wait for the implosion.
Interstingly enough, nobody real discerns between non-militaty discretionary, vs. non-discretionary spending. In truth, assuming that we are going to have a military, our President and legislative branch only affect about 15% of our spending. We spend a lot of time complaining about some of the earmarks, etc..., but in truth, Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security, dwarf everything else by a longshot. This is going to only get worse as the last of the boomers are now turning 50.
I don't know that being concerned about this level of spending makes one a racist fearmonger. I think that we need to raise taxes (yes, this coming from a fiscal conservative), cut spending, and address the social security shortfalls now rather than wait for the implosion.
Interstingly enough, nobody real discerns between non-militaty discretionary, vs. non-discretionary spending. In truth, assuming that we are going to have a military, our President and legislative branch only affect about 15% of our spending. We spend a lot of time complaining about some of the earmarks, etc..., but in truth, Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security, dwarf everything else by a longshot. This is going to only get worse as the last of the boomers are now turning 50.
scooterbug44
SoWal Expert
I'm upset about this:
As are most of us - but we recognize that the line did not start at $0 on Obama's inauguration day and that there are a variety of factors and things that need to change.
I've already used my "stimulus" credits to pre-pay part of my 2010 taxes (giving the government that money to get interest on) and have said I will pay more taxes and give up some things/services to help get the debt under control.
And I think my plan to tax politicians' campaign contributions and take away all the government credit cards, expense accounts, and perks could make a solid dent in our out of control spending and mounting debt.
What solution have the Tea Party folks come up with?
30ashopper
SoWal Insider
^ spending initiatives. But generally yes, which is no different than when dems are in the minority, both sides tend to push partisan policy when in power, and the other side always opposes it. I remember when Pelosi took power in congress in 2006, she proclaimed nothing would pass the house until the next election in an attempt to make Bush a lame duck. She meant it too.
I would add too, from my recollection, it was different in the 90's with Clinton and Newt, and the 80's with Reagan and O'Neil.
I think the democrats are largely at fault here, they became so horrendously angry, ugly and unprofessional over thier differences with Bush. Nothing's been the same since, the rest is just fall out.
Maybe we can move beyond it at some point and bring back some civility, but I'm not going to hold my breath.
Last edited:
Andy A
Beach Fanatic
Geo, really, what are you smoking today? There are at least three threads explaining what the Tea Party Movement is all about and it ish't just taxes. Not only that, only 47% of Americans pay income tax, the top 5% pay roughly 95% of the income tax and the top 1 or 2% pay the first 5l%. If you would like, I'll show you my tax return for 2009 and 2010, my income for both years and then let you tell me my taxes decreased. But then I am just a stupid, ignorant and uninformed citizen who can go only on his personal situation and doesn't believe his taxes are lower this year than last simply because the government tell him so. (I admittedly am going on memory regarding the above percentages but I think they are close and I have neither the inclination nor desire to "Google" it to find out). What I am saying is I am sure someone will do it for me if I am incorrect. The board members are really good at that. We have big trouble brewing in this country unless people start working together. Our Congress is a disaster, our government is the only enity growing in employment and area and we are quickly spending ourselves into oblivion. I don't think, even you, can argue with that. I'll issue you the same challenge I have issued previously. Come to the meeting of Tea Partiers at the Library on the 2nd Thursday of the month at 6:00 P.M. If you would like, I'll be glad to take you and you can meet all us idiots, uneducated and uninformed people for yourself, first hand.
Arkiehawg
Beach Fanatic
"would add too, from my recollection, it was different in the 90's with Clinton and Newt, and the 80's with Reagan and O'Neil.
I think the democrats are largely at fault here, they became so horrendously angry, ugly and unprofessional over thier differences with Bush."
While I would agree with your thoughts on Reagan/O'Neil," I would disagree with the Willie/Newt thought. If memory serves correctly, Newt was leading the charge to impeach Willie (while having his own affair).
IMO, the catalyst to the partisanship was started during that period of time when the GOP worked very hard to have Willie removed.....As they would say, payback resulted when "w" took office....
I think the democrats are largely at fault here, they became so horrendously angry, ugly and unprofessional over thier differences with Bush."
While I would agree with your thoughts on Reagan/O'Neil," I would disagree with the Willie/Newt thought. If memory serves correctly, Newt was leading the charge to impeach Willie (while having his own affair).
IMO, the catalyst to the partisanship was started during that period of time when the GOP worked very hard to have Willie removed.....As they would say, payback resulted when "w" took office....
Last edited:
30ashopper
SoWal Insider
I don't agree, if you look at the list, congress was pretty productive during that time. (Heck we got NAFTA passed, Tax Payers bill of rights, Welfare reform, all sort of things.) In looking at the list, congress was fairly productive up until around 2007. So maybe I was wrong to blame democrats, it's seems that partisanship has more to do with lobsided control, or maybe the players. People like Bush, Pelosi and Reid are all polarizing figures -
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_federal_legislation
All in all, I hope the partisanship will recede. I think we just need a more balanced congress, and from the looks of thing, we're about to get it.
Last edited:
Em
Beach Fanatic
My guess is that the 50% of Americans who don't pay income taxes would protest if they had to pay taxes, too. If taxes are so good, why not have everyone paying them?
Perhaps everyone, including the Tea Party, should dust their history books and learn about the founding of our country and the Boston Tea Party.
It was the Sugar Act of 1764 which placed tariffs on sugar, coffee, wines and other imported products. That spurred "no taxation without representation.
Only a year later, Parliament tightened the screws and created the Stamp Act of 1765 which taxed most anything that was printed, eg- newspapers, legal documents (we still pay today), playing cards, etc. The people grew very upset and boycotted the stamps and all English goods. London's merchants were hit in the pocket book, and Parliament repealed the tax a year later. People in America were still pissed.
Parliament, not learning their lesson added another tax in 1767 called the Townshend Acts. Again, "Americans" boycotted, and the Brit's answer was to send in troops, flooding Boston. There was one British soldier in Boston, for every four residents of Boston. The British soldiers began competing for work with laborers in Boston, "stealing" their jobs. Tempers grew. A small group of harbor workers confronted a small group of soldiers and the soldiers opened fire, killing them all. (Ever hear of the "Boston Massacre?" That pissed off even more people in Boston. They say that more than half the population of Boston marched at the funeral procession of those 5 men. On the day of the "Boston Massacre," the the Townshend Acts were repealed.
Samuel Adams was still pissed and wanted to raise a little hell. The boycotts were lifted, and things began to settle down, and Sam Adams wanted to keep the fire "burning."
A few years later, came the Boston Tea Party, and it wasn't about taxes. It was about Parliament giving a legal monopoly to the East India Company on the sale of tea. Patriots thought if England could do this with tea, they could do it with anything and that they WOULD do it with everything, which would suppress the Patriots. East India Company was nearly bankrupt and this would save them, but it would hurt many others, including John Hancock, who was one of the wealthiest people in America. John jumped on board Samuel Adams quest to fire things up. Three ships loaded with tea came into the Boston Harbor in 1773. The Patriots refused to let the tea land, so the ships remained in the harbor fully loaded. The Governor of Massachusetts stood to profit by the landing of the tea as he was in cahoots with King George. Two months later came the dumping of the tea from those ships.
King George considered it an insult and set out for revenge by sending in a new governor and sending in more troops. Colonists banned together and created the First Continental Congress and the American Revolution soon began, along with the founding of our country.
I wish all politicians had to pass a history test.
Perhaps everyone, including the Tea Party, should dust their history books and learn about the founding of our country and the Boston Tea Party.
It was the Sugar Act of 1764 which placed tariffs on sugar, coffee, wines and other imported products. That spurred "no taxation without representation.
Only a year later, Parliament tightened the screws and created the Stamp Act of 1765 which taxed most anything that was printed, eg- newspapers, legal documents (we still pay today), playing cards, etc. The people grew very upset and boycotted the stamps and all English goods. London's merchants were hit in the pocket book, and Parliament repealed the tax a year later. People in America were still pissed.
Parliament, not learning their lesson added another tax in 1767 called the Townshend Acts. Again, "Americans" boycotted, and the Brit's answer was to send in troops, flooding Boston. There was one British soldier in Boston, for every four residents of Boston. The British soldiers began competing for work with laborers in Boston, "stealing" their jobs. Tempers grew. A small group of harbor workers confronted a small group of soldiers and the soldiers opened fire, killing them all. (Ever hear of the "Boston Massacre?" That pissed off even more people in Boston. They say that more than half the population of Boston marched at the funeral procession of those 5 men. On the day of the "Boston Massacre," the the Townshend Acts were repealed.
Samuel Adams was still pissed and wanted to raise a little hell. The boycotts were lifted, and things began to settle down, and Sam Adams wanted to keep the fire "burning."
A few years later, came the Boston Tea Party, and it wasn't about taxes. It was about Parliament giving a legal monopoly to the East India Company on the sale of tea. Patriots thought if England could do this with tea, they could do it with anything and that they WOULD do it with everything, which would suppress the Patriots. East India Company was nearly bankrupt and this would save them, but it would hurt many others, including John Hancock, who was one of the wealthiest people in America. John jumped on board Samuel Adams quest to fire things up. Three ships loaded with tea came into the Boston Harbor in 1773. The Patriots refused to let the tea land, so the ships remained in the harbor fully loaded. The Governor of Massachusetts stood to profit by the landing of the tea as he was in cahoots with King George. Two months later came the dumping of the tea from those ships.
King George considered it an insult and set out for revenge by sending in a new governor and sending in more troops. Colonists banned together and created the First Continental Congress and the American Revolution soon began, along with the founding of our country.
I wish all politicians had to pass a history test.
Last edited by a moderator:
scooterbug44
SoWal Expert
To clarify, it is not that only 47% of Americans pay taxes, it is that only 47% of Americans OWE additional taxes come tax time after they factor in credits and deductions.
For example, I did not PAY taxes this year ................... but I still had tax deductions from my paychecks, pre-paid part of my taxes, paid taxes on other income like stocks, etc.
So while it is true that I didn't write a check to the IRS come April (mainly because of the stimulus credits and a crappy income year), they still got money from me and I still paid federal income taxes.
Though it is true that the number of people who pay little or no income taxes is increasing over the years.
For example, I did not PAY taxes this year ................... but I still had tax deductions from my paychecks, pre-paid part of my taxes, paid taxes on other income like stocks, etc.
So while it is true that I didn't write a check to the IRS come April (mainly because of the stimulus credits and a crappy income year), they still got money from me and I still paid federal income taxes.
Though it is true that the number of people who pay little or no income taxes is increasing over the years.
30ashopper
SoWal Insider
You can thank FDR for withholding.