Because republicans like to make tax cuts that are fiscally irresponsible which in turn drives the deficit sky high, creates job loss, higher unemployment, and less financing for social programs resulting in program cutbacks and the jobs associated with. There has not been a positive job growth under a republican majority in the last 30+ years.
2007-11-07 17:21:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by MyMysteryId 3
·
2⤊
2⤋
Obviously you haven't listened to Senator Rangle.
But why go there, Lets take an example. The Alternative Minimum Tax. Democrats created it, Democrats passed it and implemented it. It was originally designed to get corporations that got out of paying tax through tax loopoles. Granted, a nice idea....to start.
But then it started ensnaring people with taxes that it was never meant to. 3 million average people now days are ensnared with the ATM program and if they don't do something this year, it will ensnare 20 million. Mr. Rangle wants to change it this year because of that. Pissed off people tend to hold it against you, but he's only fixing it during an election year.
Rangle also wants to "compensate" for the lost 65 billion that are ill gotten gains from this program by raising taxes somewhere else.
We currently spend 3 months a year paying for taxes. Do you really think that your taxes will go down if you get someone like Hilary in the white house. She's said she is for a tax raise, and how else do you think they are going to raise money for all the socialist programs they want to implement ?
These aren't lies, its history, its the present and its economics 101.
2007-11-07 17:19:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by Nightwind 7
·
4⤊
3⤋
I wouldn't mind paying taxes as long as I know what they are being used for, and that the use is just. Right now, from what I have heard, democrats do not have good ideas to spend my tax money on. Neither do republicans, but if they are promising me lower taxes to spend on ideas that I hate, why wouldn't I support that?
2007-11-07 18:44:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
I cannot.
"Obviously you haven't listened to Senator Rangle"
Sounds like tax cuts for all.
"Chairman Rangel’s landmark legislation will provide tax relief to more than 90 million hardworking families through permanent repeal AMT, refundable child tax credit, an increase in the standard deduction, and enhanced earned income tax credit."
"The Tax Reduction and Reform Act of 2007 also includes a significant reduction in the top corporate marginal tax rate to help American companies remain competitive internationally. The bill proposes a reduction in the rate to 30.5% from the current 35% level."
"While the legislation begins to limit these benefits for taxpayers earning $200,000, an overwhelming percentage of families earning between $200,000 and $400,000 will still receive a net tax cut, since they will no longer have to pay the enormous tax liability of the AMT."
2007-11-07 17:29:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by Think 1st 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Democrats have always been known for their ' Tax & Spend '. Yes...they want to raise the tax on the rich.....but do you honestly think they will stop there???? Once they have taxed the rich and spent all that money...they will have to go to the lower tax base to get more money because they have spent it on Pork Barrell programs.
I would rather pay the taxes now and loose part of my money than have them tax the owner of the company I work for and they have to lay me off...then I make no money. The Democrats complain that we are spending all this money on the war...well they spent even more and there wasn't a war...so where did it go???
2007-11-07 17:49:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
Amen Dems owned the government for 2 years.. ought to've handed any regulation they wanted. yet.. Libs nevertheless scream at Reps for no longer passing regulations that develop taxes or close loopholes. lol that's outstanding
2016-10-15 10:53:10
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not all Democrats want to raise taxes, look at the one that wants to, and don't included the entire party with this BS.
2007-11-07 17:11:08
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Here's an example. Oregon's version of s chips.
How do you think it would be fianced?? More taxes, of course.
The voters have spoken
2007-11-07 17:38:29
·
answer #8
·
answered by TedEx 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
1991... i made 48 grand... paid 3400 in fed taxes.. not counting ss...a republican was in office
1993 i made 50 grand... paid 5600 in fed taxes...
a democrat was in office..
its been this way for 70 plus years ... dems rasie taxes..
repubs lower them... its on record... look it up
2007-11-07 17:20:58
·
answer #9
·
answered by pokerfaces55 5
·
4⤊
2⤋
Because their liberals, and liberals tax and spend.
2007-11-07 17:51:30
·
answer #10
·
answered by tfoley5000 7
·
2⤊
2⤋