Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Tuesday, Jan. 31, 2012 | 2:02 a.m.
With so many people in the United States who go to bed hungry, and with Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich spending millions of dollars trying to become the next president, it’s totally insane that they both say they want to help people. If they are so sincere, why don’t they spend half of their money on commercials and the other half helping feed people who are hungry?
One thing that irks me: Millionaires who complain about paying 30 percent in taxes. Ask any American not making a million dollars if they would be willing to pay 30 percent in taxes on a million-dollar income. So Republicans should stop complaining when President Barack Obama says we should make the paying field level.
Mr. Obama has a stated goal of raising $1,000,000,000 ( $1B ) for his re-election bid, much of which is expected to come from small donors. Should he, too, contribute half that amount to charity?
Mike missed the point where Romney has heavily contributed to charity.
How would Obama get elected if the billion dollars that Obama is soliciting from his crony capitalist friends like George Soros, Phil Falcon, Warren Buffet had to go to Democrats charities like Moveon.org and OWS.
>>>>>>>
There is only one question to ask Obama - what does Obama want to accomplish over the next four years? - Over the next four years that Obama demands he needs; and that conservatives and independents should vote him in to do.
Obama's 2012 Taxin' Campaign
Cuz Obama demands we "Stop complainin'. Stop grumblin'. Stop cryin'." -- and Start Taxin'
And Biden says Start Taxin' -- "Its a big Fin' Deal"
As part of Obama's Vision for his next four years, Obama has only one idea and it is not growing the economy and not growing jobs. Obama's vision to accomplish for America is wealth redistribution by dividing the people.
Millionaire Obama has a billion to spend. And he's not even willing to spend it, preferring to campaign on the taxpayer's dime.
Hey Rusty, name one president running for reelection who hasn't used Air Force One, State of the Union address, press conferences, etc. to their advantage in an election year. It's part of the perks of office. They ALL DO IT! It is what it is, like it or not.
It's so easy for "entitlement society" freaks like Kerzetski, Simmons, etc. to spend other peoples earnings, isn't it? When did it become their business to tell others what do do with their money and why is it only the Republicrats they have a problem with? Because, it is not about money at all; it is about power and control and that's what those on the left crave like an addict craves heroin. Dumb as dirt, these folks want to tell the rest of how how to live, what to eat and whom we should asscociate with. They have a voracious appetite to rule and are dangerous as dynamite to our Constitutional freedoms be they financial, economic or personal. Be very wary of the wolves in sheep's clothing. They do not have your best interests at heart!
Sigh...Jerry lvfactless101,
"entitlement" is a propaganda term. SS and Medicare are paid for by all who work or have worked and is to help people. This you are against as you would take us back to a Hobbesian "war of every man against every man" world where life would "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." In a civil society, which you are against, we all vote and decide by who we vote for whether we want a functioning country and help one another or your Hobbesian ideal. You know nothing about anything but persist in posting as if sane people won't walk past you on the street and feel pity.
No mention of what Obama should have done with the 750 million he raised and spent on his election and what to do with his campaign money he has collected for this next race.. Now the question I ask is will these same people who want to tax millionaires at 30% be WILLING to pay the same 30% tax on their income INCLUDING those who do not pay any income now?? Not so sweet sounding deal anymore ..
So Peter would tax someone making $20,000 a year $6,000, leaving them $14,000 to live on. Meanwhile someone making $2,000,000 a year would pay $600,000 and only have $1,400,000 to live on. Poor rich people...it is sooo unfair.
If I contribute to a campaign I expect the money to be used to campaign -- not handed out to charity. I can do that without some politician as a middleman.
Of all the people running for President this year, including President Obama, which person has given more of thier OWN money to charitable causes. Anybody know?
>>So Peter would tax someone making $20,000 a year $6,000, leaving them $14,000 to live on. Meanwhile someone making $2,000,000 a year would pay $600,000 and only have $1,400,000 to live on. Poor rich people...it is sooo unfair.<<
Yes, exactly, seems fair to me. Someone only pays $6000 a year while the other pays $600,000 a year. I know the guy paying $600,000 is getting shafted, but is not that the reason for this? And you do want everyone to contribute, correct?
Someone makes 20k a year is still using governmental services and should pay what they can, the 15%. Heck most church's want that amount! These people can simpley stop giving money to the church and turn it over to the government who will do a better job with it. You must believe the government does a better job with the money, or would it be better for the guy that has to pay $600,000 pay $300,000 and donate the rest to a church?