WWJD? Would He Support the Buffett Rule? President Obama Suggests Yes

[Altair]

ABC NEWS
At the annual prayer breakfast this morning, President Obama suggested that his proposed tax increases on the wealthy are in accordance with the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Ugh. Did he really have to go there? Can we PLEASE keep religion out of discussions of economic policy proposals, on both sides?

[mandrina]

Ugh. Did he really have to go there? Can we PLEASE keep religion out of discussions of economic policy proposals, on both sides?

well, it was at the Prayer breakfast, so what did you expect?  Although I'd like to see him ask WW thor D, just for fun.

[Altair]

Although I'd like to see him ask WW thor D

Hammer his point home?

[victoreia]

Hammer his point home?

 
*snort* :thup:

[Smokebender]

Hammer his point home?

 
:thup:

The added taxing is being asked of those that make 250,000 or more, not just the millionaires. Personally, I don't think that's go9ng to make much of a dent in the problem. We have other things that are adding to our debt such as military contractors that don't answer to anyone nor does anyone really know what they're doing except a few insiders. The Politicians have slacked off on it, but many are notorious for adding riders to bills that have been passed and these riders can add up to several million easy. What's aggravating is the riders probably don't have diddly to do with the Bill and only benefit a few. We the people also should not have to foot the bill for any elected official deciding to run for office at the end of their term. Mr. Paul so far has spent several million of taxpayers dollars running around the country for these debates. Why do we have the redundancy of Homeland Security? I thought we already had something like that. If I'm not mistaken it was called the Military, FBI and CIA. Instead of downsizing the military, keep it at strength and do away with Homeland Security. There's a LOT that needs fixing besides the current taxation system.

[mandrina]

:thup:

The added taxing is being asked of those that make 250,000 or more, not just the millionaires. Personally, I don't think that's go9ng to make much of a dent in the problem. We have other things that are adding to our debt such as military contractors that don't answer to anyone nor does anyone really know what they're doing except a few insiders. The Politicians have slacked off on it, but many are notorious for adding riders to bills that have been passed and these riders can add up to several million easy. What's aggravating is the riders probably don't have diddly to do with the Bill and only benefit a few. We the people also should not have to foot the bill for any elected official deciding to run for office at the end of their term. Mr. Paul so far has spent several million of taxpayers dollars running around the country for these debates. Why do we have the redundancy of Homeland Security? I thought we already had something like that. If I'm not mistaken it was called the Military, FBI and CIA. Instead of downsizing the military, keep it at strength and do away with Homeland Security. There's a LOT that needs fixing besides the current taxation system.

 

Part of the reason for having the taxpayers foot the bill for elections is so that the elections do not only go to the rich.  we go back and forth on the wiseness of having supported elections or having the candidates have to depend on their own fundraising.  the pendulum has swung at least one forward and back, I think.

[Smokebender]

Part of the reason for having the taxpayers foot the bill for elections is so that the elections do not only go to the rich.  we go back and forth on the wiseness of having supported elections or having the candidates have to depend on their own fundraising.  the pendulum has swung at least one forward and back, I think.

 

I understand the reasoning behind footing the bill. Being disabled, I haven't had to file tax returns for the last ten or so years. When I did however, I recall a box that I ticked asking for a small donation for the Presidents re-election campaign fund. This same thing could be done when State taxes are filled out for the Senators, Governor etc. With the Internet, it's now possible to reach more people. I donated to recall Scott Walker a few times and I'm donating to help elect Elizabeth Warren. I'm also a Coffee Party member and donate a bit to things they are doing. It took about 2 weeks for the organizers to raise about a half mill to recall Walker if I remember correctly and it was all done via the Internet.

[sailor]

I understand the reasoning behind footing the bill. Being disabled, I haven't had to file tax returns for the last ten or so years. When I did however, I recall a box that I ticked asking for a small donation for the Presidents re-election campaign fund. This same thing could be done when State taxes are filled out for the Senators, Governor etc. With the Internet, it's now possible to reach more people. I donated to recall Scott Walker a few times and I'm donating to help elect Elizabeth Warren. I'm also a Coffee Party member and donate a bit to things they are doing. It took about 2 weeks for the organizers to raise about a half mill to recall Walker if I remember correctly and it was all done via the Internet.

 
Depends upon what people mean by having the govt foot the bill.

Does it mean the candidate has to abide by more stringent rules for fund raising if they take govt matching funds but less rules if they raise all their own money? (current check off system)

Or does it mean that All funding, or at least all above a relatively low threshold Must come from the govt?