Shared publicly  - 
We put together an infographic that breaks out the kinds of priorities we'd have to give up for the $150,000 tax break that Republicans want to give to the nation's millionaires and billionaires. Check it out and share it with your friends.
Godwin Ayendi's profile photoRichard Gerry's profile photoJamie Valentin's profile photosafwan bakais's profile photo
Amit Vora
While i agree that its not fair to us, middle class, what's your proposal? Have to do something to control deficit for future generations.
奥黑不更新,中国人只能来白宫了 - -,
It's a bad budget to be sure, but whenever you slap "fairness" on your propaganda, you lose. Fairness is a subjective measure that you are trying to use to qualify objective data. Fail.
Why is the White House participating in the petty feud between 2 political parties? Do you not have enough to focus on with the task of running my country?
Mark Neff
+Matt Senter You hit it right on the head! It would be nice if someone in politics could actually take the high ground and, instead of telling me why the other guy is wrong, they tell me why they are right!
+Matt Senter Matt, your concept of fairness is flawed. If what you say is true, then no judge in the world can hand down a decision that is fair because all of the data (e.g., testimony, samples, exhibits) is intended to be viewed in an objective light. (emphasis on intended).

Yes, you can communicate fairness and entrust the leaders we elect to provide it, whether you view it as subjective or not. That's why we elect them. To create and uphold law, as well as deliver a fair judgment that embodies what our Constitution claims to believe in.

Call it propaganda if you like, but that doesn't make it inaccurate or wrong. Also, you're use of the word "fail" communicates a lot about your maturity and concept of the terms "objective" and "subjective."
This is so dishonest...

I'm following +The White House because I want to be informed about the Executive Branch, not so I can hear the Obama campaign bash the Republican Party on a daily basis, while providing no substantial and effective alternatives.

You don't make yourself look good by making your opponents look bad.

Mr. President, the Congressional stalemate is entirely because of your poor leadership. Good leadership inspires others to follow. Great leadership inspires those of an opposing party to cooperate. Those Republicans who were elected in 2010 were elected for the sole purpose of blocking your bad leadership. So how about you stop whining about the Republicans in Congress, and start actually leading the United States of America, like you were elected to do!?!? I'm sick of hearing all of this insubstantial bull crap against Republicans in Congress.

+The White House page needs to be party neutral. Leave it to the +Barack Obama page to spout nonsensical rhetoric and play the blame game with everyone except himself. 
+Lance Miller Yes, I'd prefer this be about the White House and not Obama's personal campaign account.
I'd like to see the budget proposal to judge for myself this apparent tax break that is in there??
+Candace Nicholson you are confusing "fair" with "just." "Fair" is a subjective term. Obama thinks that Robin Hood economics is "fair." I don't. I think that a reward equal to your efforts is fair. Rewarding laziness is not fair, nor is it just. On the other hand, rewarding the illegal behavior of some business isn't just either.

Dems: "fair" means equal outcome.
Reps: "fair" means equal opportunity.

"justice" means the same to everyone. 
I expect news from the White House to be about the country as a whole. I would like a president that is the president of the United States of America and not head of the democratic or republican party. Propose solutions and work together, don't bring the office of the president into petty partisan battles.
The White House only does this stuff to try and make us aware--admittedly from their own filtered perspective--what they want us to focus on and be vocal about. Politics is the way these decisions are made and if we don't participate in the politics then our elected leaders are free to do what they personally want done. No one likes politics, but everyone engages in it and, unfortunately, it's how our country is run. If we, as a people, stopped supporting this ridiculous cycle of Republicans vs. Democrats, this graphic wouldn't exist. This is our collective fault, not President Obama's or his administration or any particular Senator or Representative--ALL OF US.

There are other, subtle indicators in this graphic (red vs. blue, lack of details) that speak volumes, but the crux of the thing is for us to decide whether to support the concept on the left or the concept on the right of the graphic as well as whether or not to continue supporting GOP vs. Democrats as if there are no other choices.

Regardless, call your congressperson and vote, make your voice heard in that basic sense, support candidates who support how you think the country should be run--regardless of party affiliations. This bickering, individualistic nonsense is unsustainable.
Ms. Nicholson's response to Senter I found to be very accurate as far as the other posts about White If you are the president than the site will obviously show your policies and accomplishments, if you want to see what the GOP has go to their site just understand your ability to get factual information which can be verified by other sources will be at White
+Erik Collett Precisely. It's just marketing. Unfortunately, it's the kind of marketing that works on people like +Candace Nicholson .

+Candace Nicholson "Fairness" cannot be determined by majority (mob) rule. It will always favor the mob. If you want to steal from the rich to give to the poor, so be it, but don't call it "fair." Don't be so naive.
+Robert Sullivan While I agree with you that the POTUS should be above partisanship... this is election season and you can't blame President Obama for putting forth his best effort to win a second term.
Besides... if you look at history objectively... President Obama has gone farther than any POTUS in generations to bridge the partisan gap... only to be rejected outright. (See: McConnell, Mitch)
I agree with the many previous posts. The president needs to act in the interest of the union. Not in the interest of the party they represents. The wealthiest of America do their part in paying taxes. If we continue to suppress and tax those who make money, why will anyone strive for greatness? Just a thought.
TJ Downes
This is definitely a misuse of the White House stream. I'm neither Democrat or Republican, and personally I wanted this stream to be about my country's issues, not the issues between two parties.
Giving people who pay less in taxes while making exponentially more isn't fair, balanced, or even justice; it's stupid. The tax rates should increase with income as a reflection of absurdity. If you want fair, institute a flat tax, or a simple tiered tax system. And the idea that justice is the same for all is silly too. Its why so many celebrities plea bargain with public defenders, right....? Pfft
I agree with the president on this entirely. Balancing the budget requires less expenditures and/or more income. Additional tax breaks for millionaires isn't either of those--it is a lessening of income and is the opposite of what needs to happen.

For the posters who are asking "what is the alternative", the alternative is to not provide tax breaks to millionaires. If we are providing tax breaks, they should go to small-business people to encourage growth which will eventually produce more total tax income even though their rates are lower.

+Aaron Meck, +Lance Miller , You want postings that don't relate to political parties? All relevant action is going to have a political aspect. Unless you want the White House to just post about the Easter Egg Roll, topics are going to be political. There is no way to comment on the budget, for example, without commenting on R or D proposals since Congress writes the budget proposals.
+Benny Cameron I hear what your saying, but I understand the opposing view as well. Many people feel that the wealthy are exploiting tax loopholes to avoid paying what is intended to be their share. Perhaps if we were to simplify the tax codes, it would be easier to come to an understanding.
+Matt Senter - I agree. Fairness is akin to Justice. And Justice operates on pre-defined elements. Terms that are agreed upon or, at least, generally accepted by the general population. At that point, it becomes more scientific and less emotional or marketing fluff.

And there is a lot of marketing fluff to whip people into a frenzy. We spend far too much time burning energy on emotional reactions and irrational responses to get anything real done. Unfortunately, that emotional reaction is addicting, or perhaps viral, because once someone pulls that card, the counterpoint steps up their game and exacerbates it. This kind of escalation will only end in tears and heartache.

Oh look! It already has. :(
This is bullshit and all of you know it. You are not more interest in helping the middle class than you are in putting hydroponic greenhouses on the moon.
Its always look at the Republicans. When the democrats are throwing out every single idea on spending cuts. Obama is an incompetent president!
+Flora Wong People will always need help. If we don't get the budget under control, how long will we continue to be able to help them?
continue to believe the constant barrage of lies that come from this administration. this is not a socialist society! this is not a communist country! I am not a wealthy person, but still cant imagine how this Liberal assault on Capitalism and success continues to show up. we could tax the top 10% of Americans 100% and it wouldn't help slow the out of control spending this country is currently engaged in. The blatant liars of this administration are masters of telling half truths and figure its not a lie. Unbelievable.
We don't have a capitalist society in this Country, which is a common misconception. We have corporatism. BIG DIFFERENCE.
Both plans are horrible, and in the end, feed the country the same problem it's grown sick of.
Get something more, cut really spending, stop introducing more money to the already grand supply, devaluating our dollar further.

Ron Paul 2012
this looks like a political advert, I don't think the White House officially should be putting this out. looks very bad to do this, you can blame congress as a whole, but when you single out the Republicans it looks like you have a politically motivated agenda, and are spending tax payer resources on a party agenda. I as a tax payer do not approve in the least.
They need a -1 for crap like this. Lets make those who already pay more in taxes, do more for charities, and the nation as a whole pay an even higher %, so the guy who blows all his money on things he cant afford can have more money to blow and further increase his debt
Amen. People cannot prosper on handouts and thats exactly what Obama is doing to get his votes. Us taxpayers are paying for it. We need some serious spending cuts and alot less of government involvement in our businesses so we can bring more jobs here instead of taking it overseas. If it keeps up our rights and freedoms will slowly dwindle. We shouldnt be a target for other countries to push around, so Obama can stop apologizing to the middle east and stand up for our country. I really hope the US can comeback from his term in office!
It really pisses me off when I hear people talk about the rich not being taxed enough... They are taxed just the same as everyone else. If you made 90% of your income from investments, you would pay a lower relative percent of your income as well. Capital gains are taxed differently than a paycheck is, because it's "old" money, meaning it's already been taxed as income, and you have to count for inflation, etc. Billionaires don't get a paycheck, they get returns on investments. They have earned their billions by giving millions to companies that needed it to get started, and they were compensated proportionally to the growth of the company they invested in. Now, there are some that get billions through dishonorable and even illegal means, but if we start to think that they are the majority, our economy will only get worse as we punish (or force them to pay "their fair share" because "they can afford it") those who drive the economy. They pay their fair share. They contribute more to society than any "middle class" person on welfare.

Now, I do agree that business should be more focused on employees rather than the executives, but that's something the government needs to inspire, not legislate. We need to get rid of corruption, but we can't assume that business is inherently corrupt.
If you actually read Rep. Ryan's budget, there is no tax cut for millionaires and billionaires. He revamps the tax code with two tiers: 10% and 25%, and eliminates most of the breaks and loopholes. Do the rich end up ahead? I have no idea, but there's no way I'd ever believe any propaganda piece from the White House.

And all I do see from the WH is a 4.5+ TRILLION budget, when our revenues are only around 3T. And a budget that hasn't passed in 3 years.

Ryan is at least attempting to fix the problem. His proposals on Medicare have vastly improved. This from Bloomberg, which says something in itself.
+Lance Miller Right on! Leave the campaigning to campaign thread. +The White House Should be about what happening at the White House. I'd love to see all your Executive Order posted here the day they're signed. Oh wait, Then people would know you just stated that ALL resources can be taken from us during peacetime without due process....
The chart looks cheesy. Sorry, White House.
Clever, the info graphic says all the things it COULD go to, not a bunch of the bloated government spending it WOULD likely go to. I'm not one way or the other here, I just think to be fair the red graph should say: "$50,000 keeping an existing employee in a small business, $50,000 donated to various charities to help cure cancer, feed hungry children and educate the poor, $50,000 to invest in the American economy via the stock market and purchasing American made products." Believe what you want, something must not be broken because we have some of the best medical care in the world, a huge middle class with disposable income, opportunity, freedom and tons of people from other countries that want to live here. Keep that in mind before you go damning capitalism and America. Not a perfect system, but not even close to the worst by comparison to other countries.
+Everyone- Is it republicans who are the problem? How about the democrats? Taxes? How about Medicare? What you may find is that all of these problems root from the same tree. The facts are that both the government and the private sector are all in a perpetual debt machine constructed by a central banking system called the Federal Reserve. ALL DOLLARS ARE DEBT! You have to ask yourself... do I want money that is worthless pieces of paper? Do I want my country to be in debt forever for using this type of monetary system? Or, do I want to get back to a Resource Based Economy? (google Jaque Fresco if you wish to know more about a Resource Based Economy)
Sounds good to me. Tax cuts for everyone!
If these comments are representative of the thinking of most Americans I can see little hope for this country. The majority of the comments are either naive, misinformed, selfish, bigoted, or a combination of all of these. I might add that many are downright mean spirited.

Also what is this nonsense about keeping politics out of the White House? Since when is taking a stand on a US budget petty politics? How else can the Executive branch operate? Oh I see! Only the party that is not yours is political. Your party of course is just not political.

If you don't love your fellow Americans, then you don't love America. Period. What else is there?
It's critical that people understand the staggering inequality that's written into the House Republican budget. Their proposal will continue to eat away at the Middle Class, throwing more and more people into poverty. It's a fact that a healthy middle class is essential for a functioning democracy. The House Republican war on the middle class must stop now.
Let's start taxing corporate entities! They're people, too!
+Bill Rogers I think the problem is, there's a perception out there that the wealthy are using tax loopholes to not pay the amount they are intended to. I think we should start by simplifying the tax code before we can really say who should pay what. If wealthy, highly educated Americans are paying people to handle their taxes for them, then our tax system is clearly too complicated.
Republican and Democratic "ideals" are both constructed to create a two party system where all people do is argue and not realize their being screwed over by the unequal distribution of wealth by the banks. End Fiat currency please!
Once we start focusing on what's really important, serving our own needs as efficiently as possible - nutritious food, clean water, fresh air, warmth (including shelter), sunlight, and outlets for using our body's excess matter and energy - we'll find out how amazingly abundant this world really is. But that won't happen until people find a way to get past their unhealthy religious beliefs about money and power-over-others as being the goals in life. I'm not sure how to help others do this, but having done it myself, I know that it's possible. Until then, we'll continue to see a slowly dying dinosaur government that tries to get us to compete against ourselves, keeping us trapped in a fantasy that our left hand can"win" if we beat our right hand to death, or vice versa.
+Thomistic Enquirer It is a loss to society when the breaks get so complicated and convoluted that even highly educated people have a difficult time understanding it. How can we have any idea what a proposed change to the tax code will have when we can't even understand it now?
So when did it become the Federal Gov job to pay for: School Computer Lab, Medicare, Making college more affordable, firefighters, police officer, or first responders pay. I think this responsibility falls on the States, right? "We the People" are giving the Fed Gov way to much responsibility and not taking it on ourselves. Most of those that are rich worked their tails off to get there. Guess what I am trying to do as well? Work my tail off to get there, and when I get there I don't want the Gov taking their "Fair" share to give it to the Lazy. Don't get me wrong I am not saying we don't need to help the unable. There is a major difference between the unable and the lazy. There are alot of so called unable that are just plain Lazy. The need to start finding out where the wasteful spending is first before they start taking any more money.
I'd just like to thank Lance for showing how little understanding most American's have of how the capital gains tax has been manipulated by the super rich.

Its not just that old money is being taxed as capital gains, but new money as well. Major executives have learned to tax large portions of their pay in stock options which means all of their new wages get taxed at the growth of the stock (or capital gains) instead of at income wages...not an option most regular Americans have a choice of making.

Another example are hedge fund managers who invest other peoples' money (which arguably should warrant a capital gains rate) but then when they take their commissions on these investments they are allowed to be taxed capital gain rates as well. There might only be a few hundred or low thousands of these huge hedge fund managers, but when they are earning billions of dollars apiece their contribution to the tax base becomes quite substantial...and they only have to pay half the effective rate of many Americans.

Finally, don't let anyone kid you into thinking people affected by capital gains taxes are "job creators". Job creators are typically the small scale manufacturing and service jobs that make their income from revenue from sales, not from investments. The people who do make their money off investments tend to view things like "labor" as just another commodity in the equation, and if they can export it overseas and save a few percentage points, and hence raise their net worth, they do it, because they aren't concerned with making anything besides money. What should be the point is that business isn't bad...its just business that is too big to be concerned with anything but making itself better is bad.
+John Lawrence Have you even read the House Republican budget? Your statements are patently false. While I would prefer three tax levels at 10, 20 and 30% with few deductions, Ryan is trying to bring revenue and spending back to historical norms. We can't continue spending the way we are and expect to have any middle class (the wealthy will be fine and the poor will still be poor, along with the middle class). Though we do have a revenue problem, mainly due to sluggish economy, we have a serious spending problem that is eroding the middle class more than anything.
Nothing more than the usual class warfare rhetoric. Put some action behind your rhetoric! If you truly wanted to fight inequities and treat every American as equal under the law, you would get behind a complete overhaul of the system and support the non-partisan +FairTax.

The non-partisan +FairTax is a consumption tax (national sales tax) and is simple, if you choose to spend more, then you pay more, but unlike the current corrupt system it does not play favorites. All Americans pay the same rate at the register and you keep your entire paycheck. No more loopholes, no more shelters, no more embedded taxes hidden in the price of the items you buy everyday. It's not left or right, it's simply common sense.
This is bullshit political hack spam. Take me off your list... where's the "unfriend" button!
You can manupulate these numbers any way you want!Ou economy is going down the tubes.
+Kevin Carney Fiat currency is necessary in a society where production capacity is increasing. If we go back to gold, for example, which is finite, but the number of goods and services is ever increasing, then the value of gold will continue to increase, because it will be relatively more scarce than the goods and services.
If the millionaire or billionaire, who probably owns a business, was allowed to keep his money that 150k could also pay for 3 full time jobs for new employees. Obama isn't interested in that though.
And let's contrast this budget with the Democrat's budget proposal. Oh, wait, the Democrats HAVEN'T come up with a budget of their own...
Shared Responsibility? I just had to stroke a check for thousands of dollars. I'm tired of "shared responsibility" meaning "upwardly trending confiscatory and disincenting tax policy". Everyone focuses on the millionaires when over half the country pays no tax and nearly half of those are net tax receivers. We need to put people back to work, and demonizing the people who have the capacity to do that only puts more at the gubment teat. And I pay more again next year to make up for the shrinking tax base.

And if you raise tax on the wealthy enough, remember they are the ones with the means to pull up stakes, relocate, and find a more favorable and welcoming place to live, along with their money.

Assholes or idiots, I can't decide which.
And why do the nation's billionaires need a tax break? It seems that the 1% has enough money as it is.
You don't work you don't eat. If you family doesn't care enough to help you then your on your own. No of my family should be using any help. I grew up in the country and I have a lot of family that has a lot of land. I think we should stop getting help from the government and start helping our own families. Look at the Amish they work hard for what they have. I bet if you don't work there you don't eat. I so think I need to go Amish.
Wow people, you're really missing the point here.

Those are examples of how that tax money could be used to help average Americans rather than putting EVEN MORE money into the hands of the already extremely wealthy.

I don't see how giving TAX BREAKS to the 1% reflects a fair and balanced budget, when our country is in economic crisis and needs to reinvest into our PEOPLE and our INFRASTRUCTURE.

Yes, Obama IS interested in creating jobs. It's the Republicans who are giving money away to their rich friends INSTEAD of creating jobs and opportunities... You don't create jobs by giving tax breaks to wealthy people. Hasn't that point been proven already? And repeatedly?
+Madoc Pope, They haven't had a budget the entire time Obama has been in office. I have never seen a President be able to pass every piece of legislation he wants and still blame the other side when it doesn't work.

This guy has failed us. Time for him to move on.
Oh, and I agree with the +Fair Tax comment above. And don't act like you don't want to tax the working poor, what the hell do you think cigarette taxes, alcohol taxes, other "sin" taxes and the lottery are?

This is the worst White House in my lifetime. And I remember Jimmy Carter, so that's saying something.
Hey Mr. president i always believe in you with no doubt. Tell the people to turn down the suck and turn up the good. BooYaa!!!!!!!
I don't like demagoguery. One thing when it comes from parties. Another kind of awful when it comes from the government itself. 
+Paul Meyer, a few dozen Fortune 500 companies pay an effective tax rate of 0% or less. Many people are aware of this, and upset about it. We should focus on simplifying our tax code to make sure people are paying their intended share.
Way to just take the most sensational, heart-string-tugging bullshit items you could find. Glad to see the White House is putting out WWII style propaganda.
In the same proposal, Ryan's Medicare proposal would institute means testing, meaning if you make over a certain amount you would have to cover some or all of your own medical expenses. Take that rich people!
You Democrats are IDIOTS!!!!!
+Amanda Kudalis, Obama is Captain of the ship. He had complete control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency for 2 full years without Republicans having a say in anything. Our under/unemployment numbers are still very high.

What he has done is not working. It is his fault. He is in charge.
+Amanda Kudalis Have you even looked at the proposal in question? It does not give more tax breaks to the rich, as the graphic above would lead you to believe. It lowers the rate and eliminates tax breaks and loopholes. Something Dems have been screaming for. Overall, revenue would remain pretty flat, even among the wealthy.

People blindly believing whatever is thrown at them (from either party) is what is dragging our political system down the drain.
Why is the White House on G+ a propaganda machine? Use the Obama Gplus account for this partisan crap. The "White House" account should be more general and attempt to be unbiased. Ownership of the account is going to constantly shift from one party to the next, getting a bunch of left or right leaning followers and then having to reshuffle them every 4-8 years is a stupid use of social media. Your message is going to be inconsistent over the long term.
Come on now, White House. I thought you all were all "uniters not dividers." All I see on G+ is "look at how bad they are." (Meaning GOP). You guys had 4 years of the majority to get your agenda through and couldn't. And the stuff you did get through hasn't done a darn thing. Something tells me that it's NOT the GOP. Washington seems to be the problem. not a party. Let's shrink the bureaucracy by 50%. That would be a good start.
To those who have commented on the idea of "keep politics out of the White House page" I say this: nobody said that... The WhitenHouse page should be party neutral when it comes to political issues. The White House page should NOT be campaigning for Obama. That is what people have said.

If someone makes money through their investments, then it should not be taxed as regular income. The current system encourages and rewards investments, which drive the economy, and allow job creators to create jobs. While the super wealthy may not directly create jobs, they enable small business owners and entrepreneurs to create jobs.

We cannot be tricked by the current administration into thinking that it's a good idea to punish those who pursue the American Dream. I honor and respect those who have become successful through investing in the American economy. If Obama cared about the American people more than his own job, then he wouldn't be encouraging them to turn against the American Dream, and the people who drive our economy.
Oh. Fox News is commenting on this post. Mute.
Most "wealthy" got where they are thru hard work and/or smart decisions. Most "wealthy" contribute more to our economy in a year than most poor.

How does Obama explain all our money given to big banks under his watch and by his appointees?

Make no mistake: Goldman Sachs owns Obama. They (and Israel) are USING shamerica against Iran.

Support the only honest politician: Ron Paul
If this is the state of public discourse, I am ashamed of our citizens.

I happen to work in the financial industry, and this chart is fiscally relevant.

The question is: what are we going to use federal money to accomplish? Will we use those funds to reinvest into our people or to hand more money to the wealthy few that are CAUSING the financial crisis in the first place.

The first rule of the investment market is DIVERSIFICATION. In other words, don't put all your eggs in one basket. We need to stop giving back to the rich (1%!!!!!!!) and start investing time and energy into rebuilding the 99%.

That issue has nothing to do with political parties, aside from simply acknowledging which party is STILL fighting for the corporate fat cats and NOT for the people who elected them.
the USA has become "land of the Greedy". The wealthy rule this country - SAd!
The White House is trying to make a case for their budget proposal. They have to oppose Republicans because that's the party actively opposing their proposals. This isn't really a pro-Obama message at all. Cut it out.
I'm blocking you -- your oversimplified and inaccurate posts are driving me crazy.
How many people even trust this government anymore?
+Stephen Gaskins Jr.
I don't know what "magic" world you live in where eight years of deregulation and poor financial priorities are magically fixed in three years....
I happen to remember that the market crashed BEFORE Obama took office, and we have seen steady improvements since.
Yes, it's slow. Growth takes longer than destruction. Plain and simple.

+Donald Hume

The more money you have, the more methods there are available to avoid paying taxes entirely. There are loop holes for both corporations and individuals. This proposal does not close those loop holes and therefore does not fix the problems in question.

When people are trying to protect rich people from paying their FAIR SHARE of taxes, I liked to point out that rich people already have TONS of ways to invest their money and avoid paying taxes on it. My "favorite" is the Charitable Remainder Trust:

This allows you to keep an asset and gain income from it for the rest of your life, while removing it as a taxable asset from your estate and annual taxes. Guess what? Only millionaires and billionaires have the sort of assets that this sort of trust applies to.

I'm not the one talking out my ass here.
I agree with +Amanda Kudalis. These comments are sad and sound like nothing but talking points everyone saw on a pseudo-conservative blog. It's pretty sad that nobody's really trying to discuss anything and instead are just yelling out whatever they think is relevant. That's not a new phenomena, but please make sure you have your claims backed up by a reputable source before you vomit them all over a post.
Barry, dont let the door hit you where God split ya!
No wealthy person hires because of tax savings. Hiring is based on customer demand, nothing else. If the lower class is edged out of a comfortable spending envelope, they cannot afford to create any demand. Many of the wealthiest among us derive their fortune from financial transactions. Those transactions increase their wealth, but they don't hire more people as a result. We need to build infrastructure. To me that means, roads, healthcare, education, internet accessibility. We need to repeal the Bush tax cuts to pay for it, and stay out of a war footing.
wanna save. Do away with free healthcare for politicians. Do away with all free perks. Maximizes contributions to 100K per TAX ID. Individuals or corporate. This makes honest people of them since they have to pay for shit and actually WORK and stops them from passing bullshit laws that are unfair to anyone sector or class of citizen.
Most of the spending items in the infographic are bad ideas, so sure, let's get a fellow citizen a tax cut instead.

For example, one school computer lab? Let's let local and state governments figure out whether a lab is needed. And heck, if we let the rich guy keep his money he might donate it himself!

Anyway, having worked in education for years I can say that a lot of this computer lab spending is nothing but vote buying. Its contribution to education is questionable.
The Spending......TURN IT OFF. This is such a skewed picture.
$150,000 could also go towards the $1.3 trillion dollar deficit. It's not much, but when you consider there's roughly 3 million millionaires in the country, we're talking, what $450 billion or so?
+Eric Toth You speak like a TPer.
Google the accomplishment of this president, in face of a nation that punishes him for trying to do what he said that he'll do. For the opposition from the racist old white male in the GOP/TParty and the failure of the american people to stand up and defend what they vote the president for, his accomplishment are astronomical. No one could have done better
Except tax revenue has been constant relative to GDP for decades. Argue about who pays, sure. Saying you will have to cut is false. You(Government) don't even know how to cut.
The Gates Foundation has nothing to do with this discussion. Why? Because their funding has done more harm than good in education. Nice try, but they do not understand thing one about education (just like the NY and CT governors).

Frankly, no one group or person should be trying to save education or any public programs. Everyone should be involved and realize that it has an impact on all of our lives. Forcing all of the rich people to give more only leads them to continue to find loopholes and ultimately screw us all over. How about we, as a country, work to educate the selfish and ignorant citizens to show them how cheating taxes and defunding institutions leads to bigger problems.

Nobody even bothers to think long-term anymore.
+Matt Senter: We had a fair tax structure in the 1950s. Tariffs on imports to protect our labor markets, lower working and middle class income tax rates, and the upper class and top 1% paid proportionally higher rates based on income. We had a balanced budget as a result and were doing things like starting NASA and building the Interstate system.
Did you fail to read the caption? This is the HOUSE Republican Budget. The same people who vowed to roadblock anything the President tried to get done are the same one proposing this crap. How can you point fingers at one man, and ignore half of a 535 member legislative branch that thinks this budget plan is okay?
+Lance Miller: You'd have more of a point if people didn't take the Republican Party seriously. Also, what's with this, "I have mine, so fuck you" attitude? Americans help each other in their time of greatest need. In a society who defines government as "by the people, for the people," why not do this through the very entity we established to protect the common good?
+Christophe Bobda What accomplishments? I remember the big fight over health care, but I also know that my premiums went up again this year. I'm not blaming Obama, I'm blaming the whole system. No one's accomplishing anything, because the moment someone sets foot in Washington they turn into a 3 year old who just lost their lolly pop.
We have a solution to the budget issue and history to shows it works.
Look at the individual and corporate tax rates leading up to the Great Depression, 1920's to the start of 30's. Notice it looks a lot like the late 80's when the US had a recession and started this debt hungry life style.Then look at the rates that got us out of the depression 1940's till mid 50's. Solution high taxes on corporations and individuals with excessive wealth so the government can afford to hire the companies that then have to hire workers to repair and build our country because corporation will not build roads and infrastructure out of the goodness of their hearts.
+Justin Reysack It is not as simple as that. Investment returns are "income", but a different kind. First, the money has already been taxed (as profit to the corp paying the dividend/gain). Second, it is almost always re-invested with the same company as shares purchased, which allows that company to re-invest, thus growing. Taxing it again, imo, is double taxation (same with the death tax). To be honest, it shouldn't be taxed at all, though I'm ok with the current rate.
Democratic game plan: cause a fuss before someone thinks of blaming us
My thought is if you are going to support anyone it should be the rich...they contribute to our society (building companies, inventing things, hiring people and buy more of the things other people produce), use the money to invest (in businesses like mine), pay most of the taxes, make most of the charitable contributions, and continue to make this country great. And for people like me: I strive to be a 1%er and know that I can be - without the help of the government (or winning the lottery).
+Paul Meyer: My comment to Lance Miller applies, too... but I have to wonder how you remember Carter but not Reagan or Bush. If you want big spending, more government intrusion with zero results, and then sell it to you as being exactly the opposite, vote for a neocon!
+Amanda Kudalis You lost me at "FAIR SHARE". While the proposal doesn't close all of the loopholes, the graph is nothing but propaganda (and poorly made propaganda). Our Fed govt shouldn't be spending any of the money on the things the graph shows, so it's all an attempt to tug on the heart strings to those that don't bother to read. But to state that the wealthy aren't paying their fair share is ludicrous. The top 10% pay about 90% of our Federal Income tax revenue, even with all of the deductions and loopholes. And taxing them 100% won't generate the revenue we need. So what is a "FAIR SHARE" in your opinion?

The solution is not to tax the wealthy more. The solution is to spread the tax base (so that the 20th thru 50th percentile pay a portion) and decrease spending. "FAIR SHARE" is nothing but class warfare, and you lose all credibility when you start spewing that nonsense.
+Matt LaMar: I don't trust either the Democrats or the Republicans with running our government. The Democrats are too conservative. The Republicans seem to be trying to establish a fascist state: Lasseiz-faire economy with the corporation as government.
Chris B shame on you and everyone else who uses racial slurs to make their case. We should never make our arguments or even part of one based on racial lines - it is beneath us.
I appreciate the graphics to help put a picture to the jargon. But really, $150,000 to a billionaire is not even a 'concession' or a tax cut. Funny thing is, if we moved the $150k over to the blue, it wouldn't even make it to the programs listed....because the government spends it on high paid elected officials first. Where's that graphic???
We all know that the government doesn't spend money that way. Its a nice idea like Communism, but ultimately falls short because people in power have almost no will power to help the common good over being elected again.
+Eric Toth
I have major disappointments in Obama's first term, as well. There are issues that were tabled that mattered to me, and progress has been much slower than I would have hoped.

That said, I still respect the man simply for his goals of government transparency and the fact that he talks to the American people like adults. Been a long time since I felt a politician was talking about the issue rather than talking around it, and I respect Obama for that.

Also, at the end of the day, while I have disappointments, he is STILL the candidate that shares my values and has a desire to address the problems I care about. I share his core values and goals for our country, and I am very sad that he has been so hamstringed by congress, been subject of racial hatred, and not given the respect and support he both needs and deserves.

Even a leader cannot accomplish things when they must fight against their own "team".

But there have been improvements. They have been slow and they have involved painful compromises, but at least it's moving in the right direction for a change.
the finger-pointing, blame-passing and misrepresentation needs to end. the core issue is gov't spending, and both sides of the aisle are to blame for it.

and frankly, the language coming from the White House is sounding more and more like a talk show. there's nothing wrong with embracing social media, but this kind of rhetoric should be saved for pundits.
+Amanda Kudalis YOU are missing the point. No one is pitting money into the hands of the hands"already extremely rich". IT IS THEIR MONEY. Not yours or anyone else's.

Do the poor create jobs or even pay any taxes? The gap between the rich and poor is created by years over liberal programs designed to margialize them and keep them living at a subsistence level.

And if you don't think it's the wealthy who create jobs, then who does? THE GOVERNMENT? Where do you think that money comes from? People like me and my family whose tax burden DOUBLED this year.

Class warfare is the road to ruin. Russia is 95 years into that experiment. How did it work out for them?
Why is the White house posting this? Go do something useful.
It looks to me like one side wants to do more spending that Government has no business doing, while the other side is trying to help the economy, allowing the "rich" to keep some more of THEIR money. Their money which they can then choose how to use as they see fit. They can donate to the schools, or to hospitals or various other charities that take care of everyone of those present government funded ares. This also reduces overhead, cutting out the middleman, (Or in this case the White House's money grubbing fingers.) It's not the government's job to choose how it's citizens appropriate THEIR OWN personal funds, and that's what those tax programs do. Steal from the rich and give to the poor, that's tyranny!
You mean I should only support 1% of people? And not the "other people" who produce? use what "money" to invest and pay taxes, if they don't have any? do 1 %ers have a monopoly on striving? Are you sure you've never benefited from government help or had a little luck?
Keep on thinking.
Money is always better spent in the private sector. If the 'evil' 1% keep their money it is always reinvested into the economy in taxable ways. For example, they can create more jobs which are taxed and provide a more residual type income for government, they can spend their money on stuff which provides sales tax and higher demand on goods, at worst they can put it in the bank which allows the the bank to have more capital and give more loans not to mention the interest is taxable.

If their money is given to the government in one lump sum the money will be spent on procedral nonsense and you might get a new street light in your neighborhood.

Feel free to accuse me of oversimplifying, but I included more detail than the infograph.

This administration does not articulate well how they would not waste additional tax income like they have in the past. Cutting spending is always the most important part of getting a budget under control.
Good message lost in a confusing graphic.
Erm the nations millionaires and billionaires are the reason non-millionaires and billionaires have jobs... Or who do you think spends the money that spurs growth? SMH
+Paul Meyer What you're effectively saying by the wealthy creating jobs is that they would rather keep the money they make from the company than take a little bit less from their business to create the jobs their business needs to flourish.
And other than taking a shot at Republicans, your solution would be? Stop with the bipartisanism and start solving problems, please.
+Christophe Bobda His accomplishments are astronomical? I remember he was supposed to cross the aisle, unite our government (hope and change), and eliminate partisan politics. Instead, he has created the biggest divide in government and started class warfare, dividing our people as well. His "leadership" in the beginning took away the inputs from the other side - everything republicans proposed to the health care bill was soundly rejected until they had no voice whatsoever. Then the bill was rammed thru in a shady deal, which led to republicans being the party of "no". That is the worst example of leadership I have ever seen. His latest accomplishment was to sign an executive order basically allowing him to declare martial law in peacetime. Personally, I can't think of one accomplishment that I'm proud of in the last three years, but most of all our President should be a leader, not a divider, and this country has never been more divided.
+Kevin Konczal
I don't earn minimum wage. I'm making $16/hr. I pay only for the basic utilities. I don't have cable television. I have an average apartment and a roommate to help make ends meet. I don't eat out every day. I save what I can. After I pay my rent, utilities, and car payment, I have very little left. I have no health insurance. If I got health insurance, I would only have $15-25 left over a week to allocate into gas and food. I have a college education. I'm no slouch and I work my ass off. Tell me again how I can pull 40-50 hours a week and live paycheck to paycheck and not pull ahead, and call that fair. I'm not here to support the wealthy. I'm greedy and here only to support myself.
The balance is way off and you cannot easily convince me otherwise. I don't call myself a 99er. But I am being oppressed by a government that's in place to serve itself and the lobbyists that support it.
If prices for everyday goods were at a more reasonable level, the money I earn and how much the rich got taxed wouldn't even be an afterthought for me. But, as it is at this point in time, it has become a forethought. This IS class warfare. The rich (as a whole) don't struggle to scrape enough money together to eat something during a recession.
It is nigh impossible for anyone who isn't middle- or upper-class to break through the glass ceiling without:
A. Becoming extremely lucky
B. Having a genius intellect
C. Having powerful or influential friends or business contacts
I strive to be the 1% as well, but the way the rest of us are being taxed and gouged on everyday necessities, that seems like nothing more than a pipe dream.
there's no difference. both parties have been, are, and will continue to wreck our economy. both sides have clever infographics like this. I don't buy into the rhetoric from either side. govern fail.
If folks would put down the bible and picked up "Freedom from the Known" by Jiddu Krishnamurti they might just stop this naive blind following(faith BS) and actually start asking questions and finding answers on their own. Faith was created so you won't question. QUESTION AUTHORITY!!!! Research! Understand!! Study!! Learn!!!
Under Obama - Gas prices, up; food prices, up; healthcare prices, up; clothing prices, up; taxes, up; home prices, down; freedom, down; employment, stagnant.
+Robert Sullivan Yeah right, because they are all about paying taxes. Trickle down is a clearly visible lie to anyone who understands math. Stop spewing that ignorant nonsense. The private sector pays themselves first, and then finds every way they can to avoid contributing to anything except their own bottom line. All they care about is their own personal gain, period. The job growth they promote is in other countries, and is a drain on our economy. Companies like Romney's Bain Capital have cost this country in jobs and money, only being a benefit to the investors. Everyone else gets their job taken, and their company closed. Stop defending those who would sell out our values in a second, if it increases their bottom line.
Bush was a republican, and his administration screwed things up worse than this one. Dont tell us republicans know whats what because they have been fucking things up for a long time. They only care about the top dollar, and us little folks scraping by at the bottom dont mean anything to them.
+Nick Longenbach I'm pretty sure Republicans and Democrats are capable of individual thought, even if they don't show it. How else would the country have changed over time?
+Donald Hume
"FAIR SHARE" indicates a percentage of total income. Did you know that rich people can put a good percentage of their annual income back into their companies and therefore avoid paying taxes on that chunk of income altogether? Did you know that a number of our largest, most profitable corporations are able to avoid paying almost ALL of their taxes?

Did you know that some teachers (making @$35k) are paying a higher overall tax rate than our ultra wealthy? That doesn't happen because of a flat income tax rate. That happens because the ultra wealthy have TONS of ways to tax shelter their own income. The Charitable Remainder Trust (link in another comment above) is only ONE way they can tax shelter their immense resources.

At the end of the day, poor people can't hide their money from taxes because they need every last cent to get by, to simply survive. The ultra wealthy hide all their expendable income from taxes entirely. There is no such thing as expendable income for our lower classes.

+Paul Meyer
Yeah, and the taxes I pay come out of my money. Thing is, with those taxes I am buying society and civilization. I am paying for roads, I am paying for schools, I am paying for firefighters and police men.

Our taxes buy society and the rich people who live here don't live in a bubble. Their profits are a result of living in a society that allows them to succeed. But Elizabeth Warren says it better than I do:
Ken, have your taxes really gone up? Mine haven't. Home prices are pretty much down in most of the country. I am still just as free as I was under W. Gas was higher in the summer of 2008. Way to throw around talking points instead of facts.
Don't forget about the percentage of the $150,000 that goes to making useless infographics.
Here's an idea: Dump the loophole-ridden, over burdening, draconian tax code (and the IRS while we're at it), and refactor the tax platform to something simple, without loopholes and writeoffs. Create a simple bracket system for tax rates if you want; but even that's probably not necessary.

Think for a moment about our current system. We're talking about raising tax rates while people who can afford it hire expensive accountants to find loopholes in the ridiculous tax code. Folks, that is completely insane thinking. Instead of raising taxes, simplify the code so there are no loopholes and you'll get the tax revenue. You also benefit by saving the people of this country a nightmare of headaches every Spring and eliminating the need for the gestapo IRS. Think about it.

Simplicity is the answer, not more complexity. Apparently we need more engineers, not lawyers, in government positions.
What a pathetic bunch of minions in here, defending those who push them down and steal from us. Get a clue people. The rest of us pay for this society, only so that they can profit on our labor and give as little back as they possibly can. And you are handing them our prosperity with a big stupid grin, thanking them for the opportunity of walking right over us.
So where is the info graphic on the White House budget to compare? Oh yeah, there isn't one. Sad the White House G+ page is just and arm of the Democrat Party attack machine and the Re-elect Barrack Hussein Obama effort.
okay this is realy fake and sucks how in the world are you going to calle us billionaires if the income from me and wife puts us in the $150,000 small that is the middle class now if they made a million then yes tax them not the small buss. that make less than a million that is what runs local economics who ever made this graph are trying to brain wash people logic im not dum i can read and see the numbers so i do they its a good think to give them a break so they can hire more people. were they get this they should lose their job making up numbers we need real people in the goverment
I like this graphic, but I think it would be nice to have one that compares the OMB/White House Budget to this budget proposal. You can't just say that the House one is bad; you need to show that the White House one is good.
How about we show the percentage of tax revenues paid by each "level" of tax payers (make sure to include those evil businesses and thier corporate taxes as well) and see how that "fair share" non-sequitur holds up? Try as I may to get on board with O this kind of petty politico crap is a major turn off. Accept that unfunded liabilities on Medicare and Social security will expand beyond total national assets and face the music.
Both paries are to blame, no doubt. But this administration has been the worst I have EVER seen. Incompetent and uncaring about the people. You think Democrats care about the little people? Only if it buys them a vote - which has apparently worked on you. Go ahead and vote Democrat. You will only get what you deserve.
+Amanda Kudalis First, "FAIR" would not dictate a HIGHER percentage for one group over another. 100% fair would be an equal amount for equal services. Realizing that would be disastrous, then the next idea of FAIR would dictate equal percentages - we ALL pay 25%, and since the rich person makes more, he pays more. A progressive tax is NOT fair. That being said, I understand the social benefit and perception of fair that a progressive tax brings, but it needs to be as fair as possible, meaning not zero percent for the bottom half and 50% for the upper half (which is what it is). Yes, there are a number of the upper half, and upper 10%, that use their wealth for avoidance. We ABSOLUTELY need to eliminate a lot of the breaks and loopholes. But that doesn't change the fact that the top half pays ALL of the Federal Income Tax revenue, and the bottom half pays NONE. While I have no problem with the bottom 20% paying none, that leaves 30% that should be paying their FAIR SHARE!!!
I think it is a simple fix, we just reset the tax on the wealthy back to what it was origionally, like 90% or so.
I'm not sure I trust the accuracy or honesty of this image at all. I think the cuts are across the board. And since I already see the huge chunk taking from my family (very middle class) from this admins enormous increases, I figure anyone getting a cut is welcome. I owe for the first time ever and it big enough that I had to wait to pay it...which means it will be more. And while some can't see the facts, cutting taxes on employers allows them to be able to employ more. It's always worked in the past to get people back to work. Why not cut YOUR COSTS? But oh no we must have socialize healthcare right?
+Frank Dunn Who do you think is in the White House? You think they should campaign for Santorum or something? It's a shame you just have childish whining about nothing to say, instead of something with any kind of substance. But that is Republicans for you, can't see the forest through the trees one single bit. Studies confirm that Republican voters are, for the most part, a low IQ having, Bible thumping bunch of minions who make social and political decisions without actually acquiring and filtering the pertinent information. They only have to believe something for it to be considered true, facts and reason don't influence their decisions. So I suppose, what would I expect from someone like you, you being as obvious as you are?
and i dont care if is democrats or republicans just dont make shit up and lie making people think what is not real dont put fear on peoples minds they should find a solution but if this comes from the democrats they really need to get their shit together.
I'd expect more from a president of the united states than acting like a petty teenage girl at ever turn...oh wait no I don't, not from this guy
to Santos Dominguez above. We made just above half what you did and we're having a hard time figuring out how to pay our taxes we owe for the first time ever! And it's about the same amount we normally get back. This admin doesn't work. So, even if I believe this photo (which I don't) I'd take anyone's plan over this admins.
Define middle class, This is typical Obama class warfare
Still pulling the ole Class Warfare crap, are ya? I'm blocking you and reporting abuse.
Why don't you get your Super PAC to pay the difference?
+Chris Aultman Chris...I have been out of work, not collecting a salary for almost two year, had to move out of my luxury high rise and rent a room in a friends condo...I sunk my measly savings and what was left over from my unemployment check (which I only chose on my own to collect for six months) into a new business (in what is actually the best economic times to start a new business) and with a lot of hard work, a lot of creative visualization and a little day I will once again, regardless of the government, the economy, nay sayers, or any other excuse that I could use - I will be success. I am 54 and you look to be in your 20's with a full life ahead of yourself...but using the excuses you cited - yes, you will be a 99% the rest of your life with that attitude. But if you find something you love to do and do it without ever thinking you will fail, you will succeed. One more bit of won't get rich working for someone else - making them rich...
Reminder: Even if +Barack Obama agreed 100% w/ the Republicans, they would still vote against him. He's not a Republican, nor should he act like one.

That is all.
+Lou Keefe Oh yeah, because that will satisfy you. They don't need to define it. If you don't understand the concept of middle class, that is your shortcoming, not theirs.
So this year i made 76k and end up paying about 13k in income tax after deductions. While a co-worker made the same amount and ended up paying no income tax. Is that fair.

Congress has not given federal worker a pay raise in two years, and is looking to freeze are pay till 2015. Yet congress really should focus on letting manager cut federal workers that dont produce. What some some of my coworker due in one year, i can due in one month. Is that fair

Is it Fair that we let people collect unemployment, food stamp and other welfare programs while the live in mexico? I know of one family that has a agreement with their boss where he fires thems around nov each year. They then file for unemployment have it deposited into their checking account then go live in mexico for three month for the holidays, before returning only to be rehired. Is that faire?

The fact of the matter is this, if you are a Republican reading a Democratic President's white house site, you are going to be angry. Wait until a republican wins the Presidency and you will be happy.

As for the idea of "Obama class warfare", Point to where he has even suggested this idea. The idea, as far as I have read, is only being thrown out there by political pundits who make their living by sowing discord in our society.
This is the worst tax argument i have ever heard
+Donald Hume
I'm not arguing for a higher percentage tax on the rich. I'm arguing that the rich aren't paying taxes on their full income, while the poor do. I'm fine with a flat tax rate across the board, as long as we get rid of all the loop holes.

My problem is that whatever percentage the rich DO pay doesn't actually apply to their full income, UNLIKE THE REST OF US.

Taxes SHOULD be higher for those who do not pay taxes on their full income, if you want to talk about "fair". In other words, poor people pay X taxes on 100% of their income, while rich people Y taxes on 70%? Flat tax rate over-simplifies the real world situation as long as we allow loop holes in the tax system.

And no, I DO NOT consider it fair that I am unable to hide part of my income from taxes while the wealthy do.

The problem here is that you do not understand that "income" means something different for the poor than it does for the rich.
Anything but actually cutting a dime off the actual Federal Budget (not the base-line budgeting nonsense).

How about:
- we let people keep what they earn and stop pretending like it's a crime
- we stop rewarding people who don't earn or didn't go to school or dropped out and just expect things for free

If I went out to a National Park and fed a wild animal I'd be condemned and fined because I'm making the animal dependent on people and not able to fend for itself.

We do the same thing with people but we encourage it.

Yes, people fall on hard luck. Stop making the Government the God that solves all of your problems and take care of yourself or look for a charity to give you a hand. Less paperwork (and corruption) and more of the dollars that are contributed actually go to the person that needs help. They also have the ability to cut off deadbeats whereas the government will continue feeding them (making them even more dependent - remember, this is wrong for me to do to a bear in the woods).
+Jeff Dyer: The White House page should be about White House stuff, not Republicans or Democrats. It should be about the Office of President, not the man who sits in the chair.

THIS post _ reeks of class warfare. Every time Obama blames the rich for the problems of the middle class, that is class warfare.
It completely amazes me that the LEFT can actually think that by taxing the wealthy, the debt crisis will be solved. There is not enough rich people in this nation to even put a large enough dent into the problem. The problem comes from the lazy people in this country that think they are owed something. Welfare has doubled since the Marxist "O" has been elected. This is how it is plain and simple.............It has been proven over and over that NO economy can lessen poverty by taxing the rich. Its rather a fundamental common sense economic reality. If one comes from the premise of needing a government to intervene for their basic needs, then it comes at the expense of those with self reliance and individual responsibility. We the people really need to wake up and realize that if this classic marxist is voted in again, then GOD help us all. America will indeed be spelled AmeriKa.
The income of the rich is taxed just like everyone else's, +Amanda Kudalis. Learn about what you're talking about before stating your misinformed opinion. The super wealthy don't have a regular income, as many have stated previously. They don't get a $1 Billion check every month. They get returns on their investments. It's their money that is increasing over time, but that increase isn't regular income.
at Chrislee above: it sounds like trickle down economics to me. All these companie that keep getting tax cuts historically, take the money and first payout the dividend, then find cheap labo overseas and send the jobs there.

I currently pay more than 10% of my income to pay for insurance for my family, at tax increase of 5% to pay for "Socialized medicine" would actually save me money. In addition, time and time again non-partisan research has shown that when a government pays for preventative care for all its citizens, it actually save money in the long run.
+Brian S. Shows, they just want to get the rich to fund their spending problem.

There is a spending problem in this nation's government. If you don't have enough money to take care of the people who need help, then stop paying the people who don't actually need help, but are collecting anyway. Stop blowing your money like there's no limit, and you might actually build a surplus without raising taxes. If you've shaved off all the spending you can, and there still isn't enough money, then we can talk about raising taxes.

Democrats talk like lowering taxes is such an irresponsible thing to do, when it's their spending that is irresponsible.
Mike B
+Lance Miller THIS post reeks of class warfare. Every time Obama blames the rich for the problems of the middle class, that is class warfare.

This post (much less Obama) doesn't blame the rich for anything. It blames those in the Republican (and occasionally Democratic) party of giving someone money they don't need by taking it from someone whose life depends upon it.

Stop bringing up the spectre of class warfare - there is none, and you look silly repeating Fox News talking points.
Thank the Non-Specific Deity that The White House Google+ page is so non-partisan! It's so refreshing to see this page not just slinging mud at the other side of the aisle! Hooray for objectivity! After all, when your only choice is made for you between Democrat and Republican, who needs informed opinions? What a hoot!

Like everyone else here that is talking about the rich not paying their fair share, go do some research. The richest 5% pay 70% of the nation's tax revenue. That is a statistical fact. The bottom 50%? They pay almost nothing. Most do pay nothing. The rich are paying their fair share, and they continue to invest their money in ventures that create jobs. So stop complaining about the people who provide for your paycheck.

And before anyone spouts the whole "the rich don't create jobs" crap again, the rich invest in the businesses which create jobs. While yes, they may not directly create jobs, their money does. If you tax the crap out of their investments, they will stop investing, and unemployment will increase. That is logic, and that is economics.
+Amanda Kudalis Also consider that 43% of the U.S. workers have no federal tax liability. Oddly, these are a lot of the people complaining about others not paying 'their fair share'.

I'm for a flat tax as it puts us all on the same side. No deductions. No credits. You don't get bonuses for having children or buying a house. Taxes should be about one thing: raising revenue for the government.

Now, the important bit about us all paying the same rate is that:
- if the tax rate is 15% then the rich guy is spending 15% of his year paying while the poor guy is also spending 15% of this year paying.
- We're no longer on the idiotic argument of who should pay more. We're all paying the same percentage.
- Since we're no longer arguing about who should pay more suddenly we're paying a lot greater attention to what the, those in D.C., both Democrat and Republican, are spending our hard-earned dollars on.
- We get angry at them instead of having the idiotic fight amongst ourselves.

Right now D.C. are robbing us blind and taking from generations to come. People who aren't even born yet in this country are being assessed a bill that they won't be able to pay. That is criminal.

Also note: If the folks in D.C. actually abided by the U.S. Constitution (and had been for decades - it's not just the current group) then we wouldn't be in this mess. Remember, they've sworn to uphold it, but more often than not they ignore it.
+Elizabeth Bahnasi It has already been proven (google it) that if you taxed everyone making over $1M a year, 100% of their income with no loopholes or breaks, that amount will NOT get our debt to zero, as you proclaim. In fact, adding that amount to our revenue would still not equal what we are spending, so we would in fact keep going further into debt. That total, by the way, is about $450B, and since our deficit is right now about $1.4T, we'd still be going backwards to the tune of nearly $1B a year. So in fact, +Brian S. Shows was correct.

And for the record, the "rich" (top 1%) paid 24% of their income, on average, in 2009, while the bottom 50% paid 1.85%
+Lance Miller
Dude, I work in the financial industry and help clients tax shelter their income.

You're right, the super wealthy don't have a regular income. The super wealthy DECLARE what their income is after they put as much of their money as they can in other places, so it doesn't qualify as "income." Man, I'd love to be able to declare how much money I made in a year rather than get a 1099 like pretty much everyone else.

I find it hilarious watching average Americans defending someone else's money while the rest of the country is in financial crisis....
The publication of this chart only serves to prove that the current white house regime has no plan of their own, all they can do is to continue to bash the opposition party's plans while having nothing to offer in return. It is this exact kind of no talent leadership that has us in debt more than 15 trillion dollars. We're all getting real tired of them blaming Bush and the Republicans for every ill that besets this country. It's high time that the democrats showed us something other than the same old same old victim mentality, i.e., "its everyone else's fault, but certainly not mine." Puh-leeze!
[-1] ... you can do that chart with any amount ... get $$$ taxes from one person - and give these to someone else or your pork projects
how about the white house use their social media for official business, not partisan mudslinging. doesn't the DNC have a google+ page for this nonsense?
Ed Hill
You don't get it do you? Steadily increasing the deficit is the path to failure. Cut the spending. Despite the Federal Reserve's ability to increase the money supply (M1, M2), there are consequences to the path you are on. Inflation being the main hazard. Tax increases will not solve the problem. You MUST slash the federal budget and undue the fiscal damage caused by G. Bush policies and B. Obama overspending policies. Malignant and unbounded growth is a policy more suited to cancer cells than to a government. Destruction is the end result of both.
That image is garbage. A budget fails if it doesn't balance, not if it's "fair".
+Amanda Kudalis I doubt anyone on the right (excluding our paid-off politicians) would argue against eliminating loopholes and tax breaks. The top tax rate needs to be lowered, and structured so that with a 30% rate, the tax burden is equal to 30%. So arguing that the wealthy have the means to play the system is not a valid argument, as even the middle class does everything in their power to decrease their tax burden. Yes, the problem is the system. We agree on that. But investment income and gains should be taxed at a lower rate, so complaining that a wealthy person pays less because it is not regular income means you do not understand finance and economics, not to mention double taxation and the effect those taxes have on economic growth.
I hope Americans are able to see past such trite class warfare and "loot the rich" schemes to elect a more business friendly administration in November. Whenever we realize that "raising taxes on millionares" is Democrat-speak for "forcing small business to raise costs for all their customers", it doesn't sound nearly as attractive.
+Donald Hume
I'm sorry that you think that someone who actually works in the industry and with people's finances doesn't understand what they're talking about.

I've actually been citing actual methods in which money is hidden from taxes throughout my comments. I'm sorry you don't understand that "income" doesn't mean just one, simple thing in our society. The issue is far more mathematically complex than you're giving it credit.

And yes, politicians are regularly arguing against eliminating loop holes and tax breaks, but only for corporations and the ultra wealthy. That's ass-backwards.
+Donald Hume
And HA! to your investment income and gains comment.

Explain to me how investment income should be privileged with lower taxes while the hard work that people do should be taxed more at income rates.

Investment income and gains taxes only apply to NON-QUALIFIED accounts.

Guess what, you have to have a lot of extra money to be able to simply invest it in the market, and NOT in a QUALIFIED RETIREMENT PLAN.

Your 401k proceeds? Taxed at normal income levels. IRA account? Also taxed at normal income levels.

Why should my retirement funds face higher taxes than some rich guy's petty cash?
I notice a lot of the posts that are pro-Republican conveniently ignore that Republican budget proposal isn't a "don't raise taxes" proposal; it is a "lower taxes on the ultra-rich". It's a lot easier to address the straw man argument of "tax & spend Democrats" than to address why anyone would want the ultra-rich to have lower taxes than they currently have when we have an immense deficit. Republicans don't want to raise taxes? Fine--but that's not the same thing as lowering them on their corporate funders.
+Amanda Kudalis Just because you work in the industry doesn't mean you know what you are talking about. A teller works in the financial industry but I'm not going talk taxes and investments with them. I have owned a successful business for many years and also have my MBA, so I at least have a clue. I'm not so sure yet about you.

So you are telling me that you help people legally shelter their income? I assume legally as you say you work in the industry. So why is that their problem? They are playing within the system, as I've said. And yes, if you read my posts, I fully understand that "income" can be a complex term, and I also fully support that not all "income" should be taxed equally. So yes, I am giving this mathematically complex subject full credit.

And your last paragraph makes no sense - if politicians are arguing about eliminating loopholes and tax breaks only for corporations and the wealthy, that is where the eliminating needs to happen. I'm just not seeing it.
+Donald Hume: Fair doesn't mean equal. Fair means paying proportionally for how you benefit from the commons. But hey, keep drinking that kool aid!
A cowboy named Bobby was overseeing his herd in a remote mountainous pasture in Montana when suddenly a brand-new BMW advanced toward him out of a cloud of dust.

The driver, a young man in a Brioni® suit, Gucci® shoes, RayBan® sunglasses and YSL® tie, leaned out the window and asked the cowboy, "If I tell you exactly how many cows and calves you have in your herd, will you give me a calf?"

Bobby looks at the man, who obviously is a yuppie, then looks at his peacefully grazing herd and calmly answers, "Sure, why not?"

The yuppie parks his car, whips out his Dell® notebook computer, connects it to his Cingular RAZR V3® cell phone, and surfs to a NASA page onthe Internet, where he calls up a GPS satellite to get an exact fix on his location which he then feeds to another NASA satellite that scans the area in an ultra-high-resolution photo.

The young man then opens the digital photo in Adobe Photoshop® and exports it to an image processing facility in Hamburg, Germany ...

Within seconds, he receives an email on his Palm Pilot® that the image has been processed and the data stored. He then accesses an MS-SQL® database through an ODBC connected Excel® spreadsheet with email on his Blackberry® and, after a few minutes, receives a response.

Finally, he prints out a full-color, 150-page report on his hi-tech, miniaturized HP LaserJet® printer, turns to the cowboy and says, "You have exactly 1,586 cows and calves."

"That's right. Well, I guess you can take one of my calves," says Bud.

He watches the young man select one of the animals and looks on with amusement as the young man stuffs it into the trunk of his car.

Then Bobby says to the young man, "Hey, if I can tell you exactly what your business is, will you give me back my calf?"

The young man thinks about it for a second and then says, "Okay, why not?"

"You're a Congressman for the U.S. Government", says Bobby.

"Wow! That's correct," says the yuppie, "but how did you guess that?"

"No guessing required." answered the cowboy. "You showed up here even though nobody called you; you want to get paid for an answer I already knew, to a question I never asked. You used millions of dollars worth of equipment trying to show me how much smarter than me you are; and you don't know a thing about how working people make a living - or about cows, for that matter. This is a herd of sheep.

Now give me back my dog
+Amanda Kudalis Your 401k and IRA are taxed at normal levels because you didn't pay taxes on that income in the first place. When withdrawn, and taxed, that is the first, and only, tax that money will see. And since, in retirement, you are probably in a lower tax bracket, that money is not taxed as much as when it was earned. And you never pay additional taxes on the gains. Now, if we could change the code to tax those gains separately from what was normal income, so that it gets taxed at the lower gains rate, I am all for that. Seems a bit complicated, but I'll back it.

As far as the rich guy living off his investments, do you know how few of those there are in this country? And like I've said, those gains come from the company's profit, which has already been taxed. How many times do we need to tax someone's money?
If the President wants everyone to pay their "fair share," everyone should pay the same percentage of their income, regardless of wealth.
For the folks complaining that the white house is playing partisan politics, consider this: Which party is obstructing everything at every step of the way? There's many parties in this country, three that are represented currently at the national level, and only one that doesn't want to play ball.
I agree with +Lance Miller
Your google+ page should be a way to keep us informed, not as your propaganda machine for unsubstantiated, biased bashing of a much-needed party within our own government... Thumbs down to +The White House for this post.
+Brian S. Shows: It worked for us in the 1950s, but Nixon and Reagan did away with that. So did taxing China's imports to the US, but Nixon did away with that.
Actually, +Paul Johnson , fair does mean equal, or roughly so. From
Fair implies the treating of all sides alike, justly and equitably

Equitably. Now, you could define fair as equal burden or pain, so I do understand the "fairness" of a progressive income tax. I just do not believe progressive should be 50% paying all of the burden and 50% paying none. Which is what we currently have.
+Donald Hume: Then fix labor. And by "fix," I don't mean "destroy." What you're seeing there is the result of half of America working their fingers to the bone for a McWage.
+Donald Hume Also consider this:

Let's say you taxed every American at 100% of their income (no deductions or credits, you just took everything).

Let's say, for the sake of this argument, that all Americans continued going to work.

I'd be willing to bet that D.C. would STILL run a sizable deficit.

They pull in $2T now and burn an extra $1.5T. They are out of control. $2T just isn't enough for them. I'd bet that if they were somehow able to tax to actually reach the $3.5T budget that they'd then be spending $5-6T/year.

They don't even have a budget (1000+ days now). Even when they had a budget they haven't stuck to it in decades.

There is no amount of money that will satisfy them.

There is also no end to the regulations they want to enforce. They want you to ask them for permission to do anything, even buy a light bulb.
shakes head yea give more to the to the corps for tax cuts and all wonder why i think voting has became a game of wasted time, again the companies get more while Americans suffer or need to make a living. any one have my passport ready for my trip to where i belong yet? I'm wanting to go home to United Kingdom were I should be least if i have to suffer id rather do it were i was descent from least people with my skills can have better offers to making a living.
+Bradley Bishop: That giant sucking sound is a military that's three times larger than it needs to be to remain the largest, most heavily equipped military force in the world, and a department of homeland security that has proven itself to be infinitely less effective than Bubba taking action when something doesn't seem right.
+Paul Johnson If you remember a few years ago, this little thing called "Affordable Care Act", the Dems COMPLETELY shut out the Repubs on every discussion or change to the bill. Then rammed it thru. So, if you remember, after that Republicans stated they would vote no on all democrat bills. Which they have. Honestly, they are doing what they said they'd do, which is rare in politics.

And honestly, the house has passed lots of bills, which have all been shot down in the democratically controlled Senate. So they are doing the same thing. You are just spewing leftist talking points.
+Paul Johnson If our military is 3 times larger than it needs to be, why are so many soldiers doing more tours than they're suppose to?
+Donald Hume: If by "complete shut out the Republicans," you mean "caved to their wildest wet dream," then you're exactly right. We asked for universal, single payer healthcare. We got the same, corporate-profit-driven system made mandatory. There's a reason why insurance company stock shot up after it passed.
like soon america will be corp ran and based living, no one will be doing nothing. the only people that will be doing anything are companies siting around with products that can't sale cause the american people are poor as hell and without while corp mongers eat up all the growth of food the poor work and plant. have you thought of the food yet? I'm not eating tv's or computers, stereos yea might be goof fiber but to much fiber kills.
Analogy is moronic since its SO disproportionate. How many millionaires are there vs middle class? Need to divide the numbers in blue by the relative number of middle class to one millionaire. Or pick which of the millions of middle class get the money... So if the rich arent paying enough, how much IS enough? Is there a point where the authors would agree: 'Ok, I think that tax rate is high enough.'
+Kevin Burger: Because it's much harder to fight an offensive war on someone else's soil than it is to play defense. The Colonies taught the world that lesson when they kicked England's ass on the eastern seaboard in the 1700s. A ragtag bunch of men fighting in winter with inadequate clothing, many without shoes, some without guns, successfully fought off the best equipped, largest military of the era in what is still considered among the most one-sided revolts in world history.
+Paul Johnson And the fact that they caved so much to Republicans while controlling both houses and the white house is all more the reason to vote them out of office. What's the point in voting Democrat if even when you put them in control, they won't take control?
Fair IS everyone paying their "fair" share in taxes. Millionairea and Billionaires should NOT pay a smaller percentage in taxes than middle-class America. Fair is NOT grinding the middle class into the dirt to fund the budget while reducing the services that are paid for with said tax dollars. Bottom line is it is doing what is right and fair for ALL the people who put you in office.
+Donald Hume
Ya know what, investment proceeds and capital gains refer to income that HAS NOT YET BEEN TAXED, and only applies to the growth in the account above your COST BASIS (the amount of money you spent and was already taxed).

In other words, those taxes apply to the account value, MINUS the COST BASIS.

Stop telling me how my industry works. YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG.
+Paul Johnson "We" asked....only about 25% of America wants single-payer health care. The vast majority wanted (and want) it left the way it is, with more access for the poor and some sort of cost control. So because "you" asked for it doesn't mean we have to cave in and give it, especially if it's not what most Americans want.

Oh, and insurance company stock shot up because they were going to add 39 million healthy people that chose not to have insurance. So yeah, screw those 39 million and what they actually want.
+Donald Hume
Loop holes tend to be legal. Yes, I know where the loop holes are, and I think many of them should be closed.
+Kevin Burger: I don't disagree at all. Problem is, thanks to the electoral college and a statistically substantial portion of voters willing to vote against their best interest this fall, voting for president in this country this year is either maintain the status quo or make things worse, much like it was make things better or maintain the status quo in '08. Until we either move to a more parliamentary style way of selecting the president (where the party leader of the majority party becomes president) or we move to exclusively public-funded elections (so everyone who runs has the same budget to run on), or both, we're stuck with the choice of "gigantic douchebag" or "turd sandwich" every four years, with candidates like Stewart Alexander and Lyndon LaRouche only making nationally televised appearances on +The Daily Show's political commentary.
+Paul Johnson No, it's not hard to fight an offensive war on someone else's soil. It is hard to do it with both arms tied behind your back. We're not at war, we're at occupation. The only reason we won the revolution is because the French navy showed up to trap the English. Otherwise they were free to relocate troops by sea with impunity. And even then, they were fighting with one arm tied behind their backs because they weren't trying to win a war, they were trying to crush a rebellion of people with whom they would like to reestablish commerce.
Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street Firms, Bankers, Mortgage Companies and the lack of Government Control, created a Ponzi Scheme called - “Derivatives,” and when their scheme failed, it wiped out the American Home-Ownership, causing millions of Home-Owners to lose their homes and millions more with their Homes “under-water.” [Under water is the term used when your mortgage becomes larger than the worth of your home]
seems as well the only focus the white house has is companies. oh yea we forgot to help the people that have to help them companies run or the ones without who need those companies to LIVE what are you gonna do lineup the poor and shoot them dead? might as well move to hitters country for that matter. I'm poor "oh you have to die today then" hey I don't care if I'm killed I'll just come back make you life a living hell oh and I have the right to speak of my mind oh wait lets go back to those ripping up the 4 fathers rights to the people low life hmmmm i have a good life i don't vote. they all lie to get in the office i don't see why obama just don't re run kick all their ass to the curb.
+Paul Johnson It also helps that we were using guerrilla tactics and taking cover while they were still standing in organized rows and wearing bright red. Had they employed the same tactics, the British might have won that fight, and we would be having this discussion while drinking tea, eating crumpets, and tossing out the occasional, "God save the Queen." Not to dissuade anyone from the main topic at hand, just tossing it out there.
+Donald Hume: Not sure where you're getting your figures. ABC News/Washington Post did a poll on that exact topic. 62% want universal healthcare. 32% don't. 6% were undecided or had no opinion. Margin of error is 3%.
it should not be white house any more should be the demonic house we are so screwed if obams is gone I'm telling you.
+Chris Aultman: Not terribly different from our situation in Iraq and Afghanistan. We're rolling around in big-ass vehicles wearing uniforms and body armor. The enemy we're fighting is pretty much indistinguishable from the civilians we're protecting, wearing civilian clothes, driving civilian vehicles, sometimes bringing their family with 'em to the battlefront.
+Donald Hume Nice attempt at justifying thievery with obfuscation. Spoken like a true minion. You even brought up, and completely misconstrued, the definition of fair. Fair does not mean equal. Something can be equal without being fair. This whole argument is a matter of greed versus duty. It is every individual's duty in a society to contribute on a level proportionate to their means. If you don't agree, then you are a greedy sycophant, and you should be deported. It's like you believe that corporations and the ultra-rich have a concern for anything more than their bottom line, and would give a fair amount, if we would just stop asking them to. You can turn a blind eye to human nature with your every man for himself attitude if you like. But what we will be left with after deregulation runs it's course and corporate interest becomes the sole means of providing societal benefits is poverty and misery for all but the greediest and least ethical of us. That is what you want, and it is what makes you unreasonable and unpatriotic. Go move to a deserted island and start your own society, since you don't think that the ultra-rich need the benefit of a society to leech off of. See how many millions you can make without any workers or consumers, since you don't want to treat them fairly or equally.
another big load of leftist bullshit!!!!!
+Vladimir Odessit What an ignorant figure. %50 huh? You are saying then, that small children, homeless people, and retirees aren't paying enough in taxes? I'm so sick of people quoting BS figures they don't even understand. Rethink your argument, because your data is simply wrong.
To those who are trying to claim that the super rich work harder for their money than the lazy: Both the mean and median income for an American household sits just below $50k. In order to be in the top 1%, you must make in excess of $500k. For the dollar:effort ratio to be justifiable, you would have to believe that the upper 1% work in excess of 10 times harder than the average American. In order for that to hold true, the median American would have to work 16.8 hours per week, and the upper 1% would have to work literally every hour of every day.
+Ryan Allen: And even if we are talking just the workforce (playing devil's advocate), wouldn't that mean that half the population is underemployed or unemployed, and thus not able to pay taxes anyway? And if that's the case, what better way to get people working again than to rebuild this nation's highways, cycleways, national parks, etc., so we have more tax-paying labor out there? This whole "soak the poor, retired and unemployed" idea isn't going to work, blood from a stone and what not. But bringing back the Civil Conservation Corps and the Public Works Administration will.
+Kevin Burger: If you leave out the statistically outlying incomes (basically, the unbelievably rich like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, and people who make no money whatsoever), median income is just above $28,000, the top 1% starts somewhere in the vicinity of $120,000/year.
+Paul Johnson Even then, at such a ratio, the 1% would have to work every hour of every day for what would then become a roughly 40 hour work week for the average American. The wealthy don't necessarily work harder than the average American, they simply value themselves more. I can't really take a holier than thou stance on this, because everyone over values themselves, but something does need to be done to keep those with their hands on the purse strings from overvaluing themselves so much to the detriment of others.
How about returning the money to the people that actually earn it? How about the government not having any money for things that are not in the Constitution? Three things, provide for common defense, maintain free trade between the states, provide for a legal forum for states to resolve their differences. How about firing the entire federal government, and reminding the states that they are sovereign, and the fed is just a treaty among the states?
+Paul Johnson Not sure where you're getting your numbers....guess it depends on the poll. This poll is 32 percent for, 57% against.....and every poll I could find a vast majority want the AHA repealed and don't want the individual mandate, which leads me to believe that most don't understand what it is, and I'm sure don't understand that taxes would have to go up by about 20% to pay for it.
Why doesn't Obama list what the money will "really" be used for?
+Ryan Allen Wow, you're an ass. You don't agree with my opinion, so let's start attacking. I've done nothing but reasonably and rationally discuss the problem. Yes, the rich should pay more. No, the poor shouldn't pay anything. But the rich, and the "fair share", is such a propagandist scam that you obviously don't have a clue. When the top 50% of wage earners pay 100% of the federal income revenue, something is wrong - and that, dude, is not fair.
Didn't you take money from Medicare to pay for your Obamacare?
Yep Millionnaires/Billionnaires are "UNTOUCHABLE" REP/DEM alike.
Homeland gestapo is how I'm seeing this reign of incompetence. And to think I voted for your sorry ass!!!
+Louis LaFont: Feel free to check out the congressional budget office's website, you can get the whole budget there. Don't plan on printing it if you don't own a paper factory, though.
+Kevin Burger I think I disagree with you on the wealthy vs. average American. The normal (non-Rothschild-rich) wealthy got that way by choosing a career path that got them a job in a market that pays highly. Some were handed their money, others worked hard and made good decisions. I'm far from wealthy, but I make more than minimum wage. I trained hard and work hard in my field. I feel I am fortunate that I chose a field pays a really good wage for a day's work.
I believe the major disparity is when you compare the uber-rich type with the "lazy, good for nothing, sits around and collects welfare" type. Both are extremes, but this is what the "rich" think of when they're penalized for making a lot of money. I think we can all agree that nobody wants to work hard, only to have their money taken from them and have it given to someone who doesn't work at all. From that general standpoint, it doesn't seem fair.
Don't misunderstand me, I'm all for social reform and social programs that help those in need, but those in need must be willing to pull their weight as well. My family collected welfare benefits when I was a child (stood in line for the big block of cheese). I saw people pull up in very expensive cars and then stand in line for the same benefits my family recieved. That has always bugged me. It's too easy to claim a disability and collect a check, then go home instead of work. I believe the Government should provide assistance, but just make sure those who receive it really need it.
Quid pro quo is all it will ever be in politics.
How much is it worth if I create a useful widget that consumers want? A widget that made life easier for a handful of Americans. Or perhaps millions of Americans. What if it created two jobs that didn't exist before to manufacture said widget? What if it created 2,000 new jobs or more?

+Kevin Burger I understand your argument, but I think you are missing a major factor: multiply their efforts times the number of jobs their efforts produce. People who do jobs that produce other jobs or new benefits to society (making an existing widget better or cheaper for example) earn wealth at a great discount to the overall benefit produced.

Attacking these people and retarding their innovation hurts us all. It may score political points, but at a huge cost to a civil society. We are all Americans. Post-partisan dream deferred once again...
+Paul Johnson Let's see...he called me a "minion", "unreasonable" and "unpatriotic". So yes, it was an attack. Not one fact in there. But by all means defend him.

And I would say my 4 years at the Naval Academy and 12 years of service dispels the unpatriotic slander. Call me just about anything you want and I'll shrug it off, but call me unpatriotic and you'd better be able to defend yourself.
+Paul Johnson Oh, and ABC News/Washington post unbiased.....right......good luck finding an unbiased poll in any mainstream media source.
"Fact: Space does not exist."
What I'd like to see is an infographic of all the things that could have been done with the $500 billion you pissed away on Solyndra.
Okay, first of all all data in this photo is true, however the republican budget Is balanced and fair. Because you the people buy cars, and other shit, you can't pay for anything that is needed. Work two jobs if you need the stuff. Wealthy people who made their legitimate money can donate things but shouldn't HAVE to support YOU who got YOURSELF into the MESS you're in. The republicans are trying to make sure that the US of A is going to exist more than 10 years from now and that we're not following Greece.
Well done ! White House! You guys have started pushing through a clear message on what you want to spend 150K on ... and what the Republicans want it for. What is shocking is many commenters seem to lack the brains to understand and figure of your plan and strategy.
What is "shared responsibility"? I am responsible for myself, do your own work you scum bags. Cut taxes everywhere, get rid of everything.
+Paul Johnson Then you have not read my posts sir. Yes, I am a conservative, but not one thing I've said is a "talking point". To summarize, 3 tax brackets, little to no deductions or breaks, so that revenue goes from the top tiers (so that they are actually paying around 30%), and broaden the tax base so that the 25th thru 50th percentile pays about 10%. Don't think you've heard any of this as "talking points".

And yes, I believe in the American Dream. I was raised in a lower middle class family, got a degree, served my country, got a master's degree, worked hard (still work 60 hours a week), and am comfortably upper middle class. All on the sweat of my brow and hard work to attain knowledge and be the best in my field. Things anyone could do in this country. So if that is a "republican talking point", then yes, I'm guilty.
+Paul Johnson , so who cares about $150k? It's all BS anyway...Government will spend money whether they have it or not.
$150K would buy me a house too. But that doesn't mean the government should buy me one. By talking about fairness in taxes, everyone is falling into the trap of accepting the premise that the government even needs as much money as it takes in. The federal government was never intended to be this big and to spend this much. Focus on the spending first. Then we can have a reasonable conversation about taxes.
Just added White House to my "Celebrities" Circle. Seems appropriate...
+Donald Hume: Sounds like you're just reading off the Republican talking point checklist. Thank you for your service to our country, but you know you are allowed to think for yourself again once you're discharged, right?
End the Federal Reserve and restore sound constitutional money, then the government would have to tax us to line up with what they spend. We'd fix these problems real quick once we all feel the pain of all this out-of-control spending...
Shameful political propaganda….our country is failing because our politicians are focused and motivated on re-election rather than solving long term problems. When did being a politician serving America become a career….get these bozos to serve their term and then get ‘em out… as a society is shameful that they be treated differently than the average American….how about that for fairness? As to your graphic…take 100% of the income of the millionaires and billionaires and that wouldn’t be enough to balance our budget… so I think you are focused on blame and not on cutting costs, government, regulation and getting investors interested in investing in America again and putting the country back to work.
wow ... coming from Republicans who took a Budget Surplus to a Deficit in 8 years and destroyed the Economy and almost killed WallStreet ?
Think of it; if all the millionaires had that much extra to spend, how much would they buy? Who makes what they buy? Who gets paid by them? And then think about the govt. devouring that money. Which do you prefer?
+Gerald Hines I am debating creating a circle for repeat abusers of the term "infographics." What should I call it ? lolgraphics? propagraphics? Any ideas will be considered. Ideas with infographics will be strongly considered.
+Donald Hume So you think that I personally am trying to scam money? You don't even know what bracket I am in. My personal opinion of you is what it is. My opinion goes beyond just you being wrong though. I actually say pertinent things, if you pay attention. No one likes to be insulted, I know. But I'm not naive enough to think I can change your mind. All I can do is call you on your bullshit and present the reasoning behind my train of thought. I'm sorry if you're train of thought is derailed by a little snark. But your claim that %50 of the nation pays %100 of the tax is a misrepresentation of the facts, and ignores key issues. I have to assume you are opposed to child labor and euthanizing the elderly and disabled. Assuming that, I have to ask what you think can be done to make money off of the elements of society whose burden we must all share. Because if you ask me, out of that %50, %99 of them are paying a huge chunk of their income, and thus living below their means. Reason seems to dictate that Shell Oil should have to pay more taxes than me, and so should a millionaire investment banker. A higher percentage than me? Not necessarily. But an amount on par with the income they have generated using American consumers and resources? It only seems fair. You seem to be opposed to fairness and accountability. Maybe if you didn't seem like such a terrible person, I would not be directing so much hostility towards you. But, from your words, it seems like a standard tea-bagger temper tantrum, spitting out "facts" without understanding the scope of the consequences or reason behind the numbers. Not that some poll or aggregate percentage is REALLY a fact...
bah humbug rupublican's......who need's them anyway!
+Donald Hume It is absolutely unpatriotic to snub millions of Americans well being in favor of a few hundred Americans overstuffed bank accounts. You sir, are an enemy of the American citizen. Same as you, I am stating my opinion. The difference is that you think you are presenting facts, while I never claimed to be stating anything other than my opinion.
+Clayton Catanzarite And you think that is admirable or respectable or something? Your post reads "I choose ignorance." Ignorance is worthless. You can choose not to take part in the National debate if you like, but then you must never vote or complain, since you chose to remain ignorant.
This is what annoys me. Instead of spending time pointing out how the other party is being stupid maybe just stop being angry, whiny, etc. and fix the country. Together Both sides do it. It's old. It's unproductive. And it is very, very childish.
+Ryan Allen Regardless of the facts presented on either side, the position that 'those with less than those with more' deserve some of that which 'those with more' have obtained is the crux behind all the 'tax the rich' sentiment. It really is a socialist mandate and tantamount to reallocation of wealth. Progressive taxation has been in place for many years - the rich already pay a MUCH higher percentage than the poor. If the rich are STILL not paying enough, then how much IS enough? 40%? 50%? Stop wrangling over vague principles and DEFINE what exactly is a fair percentage...
+Spencer Andrews: The economy depends on money being spent one way or the other. If they're not willing to spend it by hiring people, and thus furthering the economy, eventually the economy grinds to a halt as all the money gets pooled among a few people. It's not +Ryan Allen's fault that reality has a progressive bias.
+Spencer Andrews The top tax bracket was above 50% between 1932 and 1986, with it going as high as 94% at the end of WWII, so I say we tax the hell out of the rich, because they're obviously not going to leave. Empty threats called.
+Craig Finnegan The top 1% has an income 10 times higher than the average American. If you think that top 1% works 10 times harder than the average American, then you're high.
Is this the good of the bad, or the bad of the good?
There will come a time when the only thing the poor will have to eat are the rich.
Has anyone seen the comments on the white house facebook page? It's clear google plus is a more thoughtful community.

I'm not sure how this infographic does anything more than inform the public of the discussion at hand. It is as simple as its made to be. There are tax cuts for the wealthy. Should they be extended? This is the other things we could do with the money. I will still strive to be wealthy. It's not like I'm going to say, "oh, I'm not going to get that tax cut? I might as well just give up my position as CEO and go get on welfare, because being rich isn't worth it anymore." Thats just not going to happen. They had the time of stimulating the economy with trickle down effect, and we are crumbling. To save this country we need to save industry and innovation. The best way to do this is to get as many people educated as possible. It's the same theory of song a day. If people are free to persue what they are passionate about instead of being exhausted just trying to sustain their basic needs, by sheer volume of innovations some of them are bound to be life changing, brilliant, etc.

Pointing fingers on the flaws of the op and methods of procedure isn't any better than the finger pointing one party is doing to another. Find what you believe in and take a stand.
334 comments so far. 334 people disagreeing with each other. 334 reasons why the white house should stay away from social media.
It seems to me that no matter what's said or done. The rich will keep getting richer, while the poor continue to get poorer.
+Craig Finnegan Because the average American works 40 hours a week, and as we recently found out a great many of those top 1%'s weren't even smart enough to keep a bank running. Don't get me wrong, I do think they work harder/smarter than the average American over all, but 10 times harder? That's just to make it into the 1%, most of them make several magnitudes more.

And the simple matter is, that most of that is new money, people who started businesses, etc, so yes, they do deserve more money than the average person. But they didn't get there alone, the average person helped them get there, and those people simply aren't sharing the wealth with the people who worked hard to help them get there, simply because greed is human nature and they happen to control the purse strings. They didn't do much more to get there, there was just no one to stop them from taking a disproportionate amount.
Or we could get housing for 15 homeless people, or put solar panels on 15 houses. We could install 10 ground-source heating and cooling systems saving families from heating oil price shocks.
+Craig Finnegan So what, Craig? They take and risk more than just their own dollars. Why do you think we just gave them billions more? You probably don't know so I'll fill you in. It's because they made a bunch of bets designed to fail, with other people's money. Our money. Then when they destroyed the economy with their scheming and thievery, they asked for more money and we bailed them out, with more of our money. Saying that they take a real risk with their money is like saying Jesus died for our sins. He was resurrected three days later, and thus there was no risk involved on his part. The difference is that if you die, no one is going to resurrect your poor ass, however much love you give them. It doesn't take long hours or hard work, it takes enormous greed, lack of ethics, and a willingness to knife every single person who is also trying to climb that ladder. More than anything, it involves being born to some well-off white folks.
+Paul Johnson Reality doesnt have a progressive bias, the 'have nots' do. What is the assertion 'if they're not going to spend it by hiring people' based on? What does it have to do with justifying tax rates for the rich, or anyone for that matter?
Considering this post is supposed to be coming from the free world and disarm any partisan rhetoric, whether one agrees with the policy or not, I can't believe the juvenile tone of this post! Definitely doesn't reflect well on the future of our country.
Of course Dems claim it's the Republicans that are the villains. It would be nice if the White House would grow up and reveal all information in context- including the Dems plans! Jeez Dems, raise taxes and spend more right?
+Kevin Burger So what rate is fair? And if it was high enough to 'make them leave', then who's gonna have enough money to pay your salary? Corporations? And they'd be more generous than wealthy individuals? Skipping past all kinds of other miss the single most important reason why individual wealth is a GOOD thing: it inspires and motivates other individuals to acheive wealth for themselves. But maybe that's the missing link: some assume they alone manifest their own destiny while others look to those around them to provide it. I prefer to create my own destiny, perhaps you do not.
Anyone heard of the Fair Tax? I have read books about it and visited the site. Look it up, educate yourself, and discuss this as a viable solution...or not.
Lets just say we went with the cutting spending scenario.
You have at home your cable tv with all the bells and whistles, your high speed internet connection.
Now your home budget gets cut in half because you got ill and needed to go to the hospital and you spent 2 weeks there and 4 months recovering at home.

Now you need to cut back on spending. Where do you make those cuts first. TV goes down to just basic cable and you cut your internet down to the minimum. So now you hate your tv and now you can't even use the internet because it so slow.

This is the same thing that happens in the government. Where are those cuts made. Education always gets cut. So now our kids are just learning the basics of education. No special skills. What else gets cut is medicare.

What happens is now our kids are not able to keep up with any nation in jobs because they can only do hard labor jobs because they lack the education. Their parents can't afford to keep up with their health care needs so their kids help out, now they can't make ends meet. So these kids go to the government looking for financial aid and are turned down because the government does not fund any programs to help these people out because of spending cuts.

So what happens when our kids can't do the high tech jobs because they are lacking in education because we cut spending?
These high tech jobs get sent over seas to countries where the kids got the education they needed with the special skills.

Might not be the best scenarios, but we need to fund programs. We can't just sit by and watch our country fall apart.
These people with billions and millions of dollars had a chance to earn their money and that is fair, but lets think about a time when they made their money. It was in a time when we cared about our country and we funded education. It was in a time when we cared about our elderly and we funded healthcare and social programs for the poor. It was in a time when we helped our neighbors. It was in a time when we were one country. It was a time when we were proud to be Americans.
So maybe, just maybe if we decided to be proud to be Americans, and we became one country again. Maybe if we helped our neighbors. Maybe if we founded social programs for the poor and healthcare. Maybe if we cared about our elderly. Maybe if we funded education, and maybe if we actually cared about our country, maybe we all could be a little better off.
+Spencer Andrews Yeah right. So, you believe then, that it's to the benefit of America for multi-billion dollar corporations and the independently wealthy to pay a smaller percentage (in some cases %0) of their income in taxes than the average worker? Well then, I'll accept that I may be a socialist, if you admit that you're a fascist. Do you really think that "those with more" as you put it, generated their wealth in a bubble, without the help of society? No man is an island, as they say. Why should the burden of tax not be spread equally? We all rely on the benefits of American workers and American consumers. Why should we force the poor and the working class to finance a nation where only the rich get richer? You think that everyone has a shot at getting into the top %1, and that it can be done without the help of societal advantages? You think there is true upward mobility? The deck is stacked, and the American people are stacking it against themselves with opinions like yours. Same as ever, I ask all these questions, and all those who disagree with me can do is try to change the subject.
+Spencer Andrews I don't know what rate is fair right now, because there are so many incentives and loopholes, you can't effectively say who is paying what. We need to simplify our tax code before we change our tax amounts, so that we can have an accurate understanding of who pays what and what impact a change would make. I know that our taxes don't need to be as high as they were in the 50's.

And while I agree that individual wealth is a good thing, there is a problem when the person with their hands on the purse strings is greedy. A very large number of people in the upper 1% are people who started a business themselves. Naturally, they took a risk and deserve to be wealthy because that risk paid off. However, they did not succeed on their own. They had to hire people, who also worked hard to help the business succeed. Those people also had a great deal of risk involved, because they would be just as screwed if the company didn't make it. However, the owners decided to take a disproportionate amount of wealth for themselves, and short change the people who helped make them a success.
+Spencer Andrews There's an easy way to resolve the complexities and hypotheticals involved in setting a fair tax rate. You just look back to the last time the economy was undisputedly healthy and both individual and corporate interests were advancing. That time would be the mid-1990s. At the very least, we can agree that whatever the tax rates were then, they worked well for the economy. Easy problem.

Unfortunately, the crux of the current debate centers around the fact that since that time, we've slashed taxation on the wealthiest Americans. So, the question is: should we go back to what we were doing then, or should be continue down the path that has put us into massive debt? Not a hard problem, really. I'd take the 1990s tax rate any day, even though the implications for me, personally would be to raise my tax rate in the short term.

I'm always in favor of a more stable economy in which my income is slightly lower than a turbulent economy in which it's slightly higher. It's simple self-interest.
+Spencer Andrews If the top 1% feel like they deserve 99% of the nations income, then they should be paying 99% of the income tax. They are the ones who profit off everyone's hard work. It's not like they pay their workers enough that any of them could even afford more taxes. Minimum wage will not support even one person. The American dream is a myth. How is it reasonable or fair for you to have to make lemonade out of a handful of dirt, when the guy who used all your lemons to make his lemonade is just standing there laughing at you, and trying to sell you dirt?
And perhaps I should further explain how the people who work for someone who is getting their own business off the ground are screwed as well. The person who starts the business has increased risk because they took some of their own money to invest in that business. The people who are hired by that owner to help make the business are a success because statistically new businesses cannot offer competitive wages, and are less likely to be able to give raises to help their employee's salaries keep up with inflation. So the employees are taking a risk in the company via foregone wages. The new business owners who make it into the 1% conveniently forget about that risk that their employees took to help the business succeed.
I am struggling to understand the difference between the direction progressives want to take our economy compared to the Greecian predicament. Seems like that's where they want to go. There isn't any economic magic that will create more wealth as government redistribution destroys the means of wealth creation. Let's not fool ourselves.
Don't worry only an idiot would vote repub this election, go Prez. Obama 2012
You want that $ 150,000 so you can spend it on the study of worms & how they live. Spend all that money on a box of tooth pic's for the White House !
+Kevin Burger That's where you're confused.....foregone salary is not a risk, it's a decision. And I assume there was no better offer or they would have taken it. So all of the risk is with the owner, as he's the only one with any stake in the game. Now if they were smart, they'd ask for a percent of the business when profits exceed x amount, but there's still not risk involved as he has nothing to lose.
the solution to all the problems of the world.... changing tax rates! lol, and who says politics isn't funny? ^_^
+Donald Hume So is choosing to use your money to start a business. We can come up with all kinds of hypothetical situations to the terms of employment where you feel justified to screw over the people who work for you. But the fact of the matter is that those people helped you succeed. If they are so easily replaced, then you must face the fact that the risk in starting your business was very low, because apparently anyone can make that business succeed.
So why doesn't the government unilaterally confiscate a large percent of the cash reserves of Apple? Presumably that would be a logical course of action to progressives.
+Jim Clark indoctrination seems to be the only answer. It's one of the main reasons I'll never join a political party. The other main reason is that I'm conservative about some things, and liberal about others.
conservative about some, liberal about others. Let me guess, liberal socially, conservative fiscally??

It designed that way. You're NORMAL!! They split freedom down the middle so that half would fight for one side and half the other....

Then we fight against each other instead of THEM.
Kind of funny that we are debating whether rich people should pay a higher percentage or not.
Let's put this into perspective.
Do rich people use the roads more? Do they breath more air? Do they have more babies?
If you think about it, a more logical argument could be made to actually reduce the % paid as income rises. OMG do you mean reward smart/hard work instead of penalize it? Imagine that! Let's say you make $10 Million per year. Tax you 1% and you are contributing $100,000 a year to roads, police, national defense, etc. Who here has paid $100,000 a year in taxes ever? I paid $35,000 on a good year and I felt like I was being jacked. It is hilarious to me that a [honest] wealthy business man can contribute so much (jobs, spending on expensive items, etc.) and yet be so demonized and yeah, demonized by those who contribute so little.
+Scott Swain They get demonized because they screw over the people who helped them get there. How many of those wealthy people are the sole employee of the company that made them money? How much are the people who helped turn their business into a success making? So many of the wealthy are demonized not because they work harder, but because they're keeping so much of the rewards from the work of so many for themselves, and there's no one to stop them. All we can do is tax them more. You pay more in taxes, because you're choosing not to pay other people fairly for their work.
+Kevin Burger really? What survey told you this super high percentage of rich people screw people over to get what they got? Also, what book/god/omniscience said it isn't cool to keep what you made? Perhaps that is a basis of what we are all arguing about? Some believe it is up to you to do what you want with what you make and others believe it is __ who should decide what is best to do with what you make?
I think posts from the White House shouldn't be one way or the other in political parties. I would think it would be unbiased to the parties and be for the people, but I guess it depends what party the president belongs to, eh?
+Scott Swain It's simple. That money had to come from somewhere. They didn't make it all for themselves. The people that work for them worked hard to help the business succeed. Why are these people not more justly compensated for their efforts, like they used to be.

Let me put it to you another way. Adjusted for inflation, the GDP per capita is triple what it was in the 1950's. Logically, that means that in order to maintain the same relative standard of living as life in the 1950's, the average American would only have to work about 1/3rd as much. Obviously this is not the case, so where is that money going? It has been shifting to the incredibly wealthy, as they have been holding on to an increasingly larger percentage of the pie for themselves. Have they been doing more to earn a larger percentage of that pie? It's hard to say, but it is pretty easy to say that the amount of extra work they are putting in does not match the amount of extra money they are taking out.
Folks, please don't forget that what Obama is trying to do here is get a wrecked enonomy in order. Clintons last four years was budget surplus years. Then Bush was elected, scrapped the pay-no-go-rule, started two wars costing a total of 1.6 trillion and cutting 1.8 trillion dollars in taxes(mainly for the already rich), and other things, and left the white house eight years later with the biggest budget deficit in american history. That is what Obama now is dealing with, and the aftermath of the financial crisis. Don't blame him for not wanting to reduce the tax of the already rich. Your country need that money for other more important things.
You guys are in a down slope, compared to europe, just look at school charts, child poverty, your food stamp usage, inequality charts and compare yourself to the rest of the developed world. Huge tax cuts didn't work for Reagan, Bush the older or the younger. Haven't you learned something from past attempts?
You need a strong school and and an educated new generation to get back in business, you won't get that by giving the already insanely rich more. Remember that they have been highest priorty for decades, it's the middle class turn to be important now, don't you think? 
You mean the tax break you and your gay Republican lovers want to give to your fellow rich empowered minorities at the expense of the rest of us.

I wish you'd just fucking quit insulting people's intelligence with your blatant fucking lies.
love is love...美国与中国是一国两区,天堂娱乐区与地狱生存区。
I just want to say no one wants to tax the rich to death and no one that thinks correctly believes that doing so will fix the budget however the very wealthy do NOT need tax cuts especially at this time.The best thing I would hope for is a fair tax rate for all and that will only happen with a flat tax.( One senator stated that the flat tax would have to be around 20% which I guess he figured was high but if I add all the taxes I pay out right now its near 33%)
For those of you who are confused click here:

These sort of riff raft "factual" propaganda claims by democrats are so based on distortions of anything that resembles honesty that it is amazing anyone would listen to them. Sadly... they appeal to the uninformed masses that just want to line up for a pay check from the feds and want the feds to do the "thinking" for them... and tell them what to do. Obviously those masses are illiterate in history or they would see what is going on here... and that they are being led with a bigger and bigger noose around their necks.
I'm so sick of hearing about "tax cuts for the rich". It seems like nobody is happy unless the rich get a higher increase when taxes are raised and then less back when taxes are lowered. I remember when people complained that they got no money from a tax cut when they weren't even paying any (income) tax! Give me a break.
Its quite entertaining too watch USA deteriorate and crumble. To bad the rest of the world drags down with it...
Chris E
I'm just sick of the political warfare in this country.
Excuse me, but the rich should pay more taxes according to their assets. Middle class suffers when we pay more tax percent than the rich. Come on, isn't that clear enough?
I'm so glad that I live in Canada. This is ridiculous, and I sincerely hope for you guys that Obama gets re-elected, otherwise you're all screwed. In my opinion.
Funny thing is...raising taxes would do nothing to address any of those expenditures anyways. That money would simply be sucked into the bottomless hole that is our debt. Under the current fiscal policy the President can and has in the past, simply spent money that he does not have. How does raising taxes on the rich enable him to do so more effectively? Once again, this doesn't hold up. Nice try though.
The one constant throughout all politics still holds true: Biased Propaganda.

You never fail to meet my expectations, +The White House. Needless to say, those expectations are pretty damn low.
Ah more propaganda from the nobama spin doctors
+Viktor Nordenstam Bush spent way to much. That presidency goes down as a wasted opportunity in my book, in part because of 9/11. Still Bush did spend a lot of money, But roughly 3 years in, Barack is working on 5 trillion added to the debt. No president has ever spent that much in our history. We Americans need to abandon this false perception that you can throw money at a problem and expect it to go away. We tried it with education. Fail. We tried it with Pakistan and Africa. Fail. Now we are applying that philosophy to our entire budget. Guess what's going to happen?
+Lance Miller so when are you running for president cause you have my vote. I agree 100% but have a hard time explaining it to others. Well said sir.
Anyone been to their local library recently?
Tony C
How about a tax system that is so fair that there's no need for exemptions and tax breaks? EVERYONE gets taxed the same. It could be a progressive system....but if 2 people made the same income, their tax liability would be the same, regardless of marriage, home ownership, dependents, etc. 
Our government won't ever appropriate that money to the proposed areas mentioned anyway, so I say: let the millionaires keep their money.

We don't have a bad economy, we have bad government. We don't have a problem with taxes, we have bad government. We don't have a problem with healthcare, we have bad government. The list goes on.

I believe to speak for a good portion of Americans and the rest of the world by saying: "We have very little faith in the US government, but we wish it didn't have to be that way."

Once the problem is fixed, the perceived problem will fix itself.

What's the problem? Bad government.
What's the perceived problem? Everything else.
It's too bad that police officers and firefighters aren't paid with federal dollars and that investments to cure chronic diseases should and do come from the private sector. Stop crowding us out and let us keep our money Obama! 
instant budget balancing program, lets only pay the polititians that actually earned their pay. and didn't spend our money on bs.
The problem with the US government is not the government, it's the people. When a bunch of ignorant morons with no intent to logically consider all of the issues start voting and complaining about things they refuse to make an effort to understand, they are the heart of all the problems. 90% of everything posted in this thread is just a complete misinterpretation of the data, and useless made up facts being applied like they are some kind of black and white picture of the problem. Democracy is clearly a failure here, since people seem to think ignorance, gut feelings, and the bible are a substitute for knowledge, understanding, and compassion. There is no hope for America, or the rest of the world for that matter, since humanity refuses to grow up and take some responsibility for it's collective actions and learn from it's mistakes.
Tired of "millionaires and billionaires." It's a nice little slogan you have, but tired and worn out. And don't forget: you could take EVERY SINGLE PENNY that belongs to those millionaires and billionaires you hate and you still wouldn't be able to run this accounting nightmare you call the government for even a year. Even a full blown conversion to socialism won't save us if you don't stop spending money.
Instead of your war of words, why don't you ask the Senate to actually pass a budget, something they haven't done for over a year?
Yeah pass ryans budget, ha ha, hes 1 of the biggest liars!!! Yes i'll say what the talkers won't say,, republicans are liars. They need 2 stack the deck in their favor w/ voter id laws, pathetic, they know they can't win fair and square. Go get an etch a sketch.
Wow... just wow... An actual intellectual response from a liberal, instead of the typical, "You make more money, you must give it to me!!!"

I am offended by this because it is misleading. It makes you think that if you charge people more for being successful, that the problems will be fixed. Afterall, it couldn't possibly have anything to do with this COUNTRY as a WHOLE spending way out of their means. As individuals. The Government is doing no different. If you can't afford it, you don't need it. I grew up poor, we never starved, never were neglected, never were abused, always had enough to get by on. Oh darn, I didn't go on a vacation several times a year. I never had brand new Jordans. We always had a used car and fixed it ourselves. If the Government would follow my mom's advice, and life-model, we would't be in debt! There wouldn't be an outcry to punish people for making a success out of themselves. If my small business would have blossomed from hard work into a multi-million dollar corporation, I'd be rightly pissed every time I see some yahoo wanting my money because they can't afford 2 car payments, a mortgage, 4 kids and 3 vacations every year
The problem is that people are not trying to punish other for succeeding. the point of the matter is, if you are making more you need to cover your fair share. People are angry not because they have stuff but because for every tax break they get, we have to cover it by paying more and by we I mean the people middle and poor class. It's not fair to force other to cover what is fair for a rich person to pay. It's not right that the top 1% who control the wealth do not pay as much in taxes as the ones making less money. people are so quick to scream and yell about how we are trying to punish the rich for succeeding. Why are we being punished for not reaching that same level of success? Why do we... the consumer and workers, essentially have to pay a tax for being poor?
So, +Alicia Black let me get this strait. The top 10% of wage earners pay 70% of our burden, and you want them to pay more of their "fair share"? For that matter, the top 25% pay 87%, leaving the remaining 13% to 75% of the taxpaying population? Oh, and the top 1% pay 37% of the taxes....and yet they should pay more because paying 37% of the tax burden is not enough? Where does it end???
Wow, +Donald Hume , you're still on this thread harassing people directly?
Look, people who RECEIVE 90% of the income in our country should also pay 90% of the taxes. Of course you're going to shoulder a greater burden if you have a greater income. And exactly how do you justify CORPORATIONS dodging taxes almost entirely? (I did post a link on this topic in a comment in this thread last week...)

You can't expect people with little to no income to shoulder MORE of the tax burden. That simply bankrupts our economy, which is pretty self-evident right now.
Actually, +Amanda Kudalis, taxing corporations will cause one of two things to happen (a) it can make it unfavorable for them to do business, which will hurt our economy both in terms of hiring and their contribution to GDP, or (b) forcing them to raise prices on all their customers, including poor people, which also hurts our economy. Fiscal liberals see a big pile of money and flatter themselves that nothing bad will happen if they assert their superior wisdom over the greedy, ignorant masses by confiscating it... but they are wrong, there are usually unintended consequences.
+Andrew Vogan Yes, we wouldn't want to expose them as the lying, whining, greedy, inhuman pieces of shit that they claim not to be, yet clearly are. If we had to hold them to a standard, why would they bother being a benefit to the people who make their wealth possible? You are right, fuck the workers, if they were so smart, they would be rich too. It's a good thing there are no consequences to your line of thinking either... like maybe a class war or, the total destruction of our economy because it's all built on the lies that the rich tell the poor to keep them firmly in place. Lets make sure the burden rests on the poor, and that corporations and the super rich can use loop holes and tax credits to avoid paying any taxes at all. That can only be a benefit right? Sure it takes 100 workers to run that company, but they don't need to make a living wage to survive. Only one person on top should be benefiting from all that hard work. Otherwise, why would he bother to hire people at all?
+Ryan Allen, you didn't address my point. I freely admit that redistribution of wealth by increasing corporate taxation appears desirable to many people (including you) in the short term, I just pointed out some ways in which it can lead to unintended and highly undesirable consequences in the longer term, such as causing layoffs and higher prices. Do you disagree with that part of my post? If so, can you explain how raising corporate taxes won't lead to layoffs and higher prices of goods?
+Andrew Vogan
If this is a capitalist society, we should allow failing businesses to go under and require businesses to also contribute to the society they benefit from.

I refuse to feel sorry for a giant corporation for being expected to contribute to the success of their own country. And I also refuse to worry about whether or not they'll leave. Aren't we already seeing layoffs and higher prices of goods? Don't you think the economic system is already having problems?

Why is it so hard to believe that EVERONE (including corporations who have their own Tax IDs) should either pitch in for the overall financial health of our country or leave? Don't you think our country would be better off if everyone had to play fair?
Apple, the largest corporation, is worth $100B in cash. Unfathomable number in the corporate world. How often does spend that? I do agree Amanda that we should get the government out of the business of picking winners amongst corporations and products.
+Amanda Kudalis, it depends on how you define "fair". It's also apparent that you frequently can't boil these questions down to an either-or, black and white choice. Obviously taxation is necessary, and it becomes a question of degree. But where you draw that line is affected by your philosophy, for example, whether you feel that wealth is something created by government (or population size?) and evil corporations are trying to greedily monopolize that scarce resource, versus if you take the more economically accurate view that wealth is created by private industry, and that government is in general a destroyer of wealth and stifler of prosperity. I'm not suggesting bringing back child labor, but a more pro-business stance is what our failing economy needs right now from this administration, not the anti-business stance it has unfortunately maintained.
I should add that I also agree with +Amanda Kudalis about letting failing businesses fail -- unless it's a truly life and death national security issue, which I don't think has ever actually happened. It's true that it's "better" to save a business, save people's investments, etc., but in the long view, such attempts at tight control cause more problems than they solve.
+Andrew Vogan
I agree that "fair" is a complex issue. But there are obvious imbalances right now that need to be addressed.

I'll go back to one of my original points in an earlier comment. The key to market investment is diversification. The more you spread out your wealth the less likely you are to lose it due to one bad investment. It's a bad idea to have so few parent companies in our country. Spreading that wealth out into our country's infrastructure: schools, government jobs, etc is actually an investment into our country's future.

It is good for our country to support small business and encourage advances in new technology. That is how we maintain a sustainable and well diversified growth. Quit giving tax breaks to corporations and start giving the breaks to small businesses who already work harder to survive.

And that's just on the corporation side of the argument. We should also be investing into the health and well-being of our people. Did you know that when people are able to get their basic needs met, crime goes down? Desperation leads to desperate acts. It is good for everyone to be getting their basic needs met.
I want the rich people to keep there money as much is I want to keep mine. If you find the accusation that "you are a socialist" is absurd Mr. Obama, remember, actions speak louder than words, and you have been screaming socialist since you took office. Just to let you know.
A Nigerian, I agree with all of the above and would crucially add that all we are experiencing in various degrees sums up to the mournful failure of capitalism, and so called free market system. Surly we are on the verge of a major evolutionary happenstance,the collapse of one civilisation, and rise of another.
The problem isn't capitalism. What we have IS socialism, for and by Corporations. Capitalism is all about the free market and competition. The most anti-competitive entity on the planet is the american corporation.
Interestingly, many of the small businesses I've worked for tend to get much of their business from larger corporations. How does one burn the forest of large trees without hurting the young offshoots?
Fiat money is the problem. It is time to go back gold currencies. 
Add a comment...