Republicans support tax increases - but only if they are regressive.

Apparently, the conservative PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE to Grover Norquist and his anti tax-increase policy, has an exception involving REGRESSIVE taxes that hit the middle-class and the poor the hardest.

Chances are good that the Republican Congress will approve a tax on Internet sales.

This represents a HUGE tax increase on the working poor who buy things online because they can't afford cars, and can't drive to the shopping center.

Didn't we learn in Economics that sales taxes were needed for roads leading to shopping centers, and for related services? How is this relevant to Internet sales?

Looks like the super-rich, who are the only real beneficiaries of Republican policies, approve of tax increases as long as they can escape paying their fair share.

 

Looks like tax increases are okay with conservatives, as long as they hurt the poor and the middle class.

 

Conservatives are hypocrites when it comes to taxes. Everything else, too.

 

The reason why this enforcement of the internet sales tax between states will pass is due to support from both parties.

I've actually heard more uproar from conservatives on this than from liberals.

And yes, if it passes, it will surely harm internet sales more than it brings in revenue for the associated states.

 

But those of us who live in no sales tax states, especially here in DE expect to see an increase of shoppers from out of state coming to our stores and outlets. They actually come on chartered buses from NJ, MD, PA to shop our outlet stores in DE to avoid their state sales tax.

 

Yeah, I find it hard to believe that Republicans (who have traditionally been against any and all taxes) are rallying support to vote for a tax bill. Perhaps you could provide a link that shows us and perhaps gives us the names of these 'R's who support this bill. And as a leftist who supports other political leftists who have always supported tax bills, why do you find this one in particular so tough to swallow, and why haven't I seen you complain about the massive tax increases we're going to get hit with from obamacare?

 

Most of our economic problems are related to thirty years of Reaganomics, which the Republican Congress won't allow to end.

The most important component of Reaganomics is huge tax cuts on the rich, necessitating the raising of taxes on the non-rich at state and local levels. Any new tax increase should reverse this by raising taxes on the rich, not the non-rich.

Leftists don't always support tax bills.

Obamacare will eventually result in healthcare costs more in line with what they are in other parts of the world, where it's half or less of what we pay. If Republican free-market aspects were eliminated from Obamacare, it would be much less expensive.

 

Don't worry, the Democrats control the Senate and can stop it, and the Democrat President can veto it, right? Oh darn, there's 22 Democrat co-sponsors of the bill! And 46 Democrats voted for it in cloture, with only 17 Republicans voting for it.

Only 4 Democrats voted against the bill.

 

Until we get MONEY (the greatest factor of corruption) out of government... laws will very likely ALWAYS favor the wealthiest in our society.

If the masses WAKE UP... things WILL IMPROVE. (Stop voting for greedy, rich guys... in general.)

 

WHY don't YOU include A source FOR your OUTLANDISH claims, WHICH are MOST likely NEW to MANY people???

 

”Most of our economic problems are related to… (Seventy–six) years of” the unconstitutional Democrat Welfare State allowed only after Democrat FDR threatened the Supreme Court in 1937 so they would stop ruling his “New Deal” unconstitutional. Google the “Switch in Time that Saved Nine!” The most costly things in the annual federal budget except the military (which is absolutely and irrefutable a legitimate function of government) were started by Democrats in violation of the Constitution. The truth is the American People will not pay a level of taxation high enough to pay for Democrats violations of the Constitution. If you had to balance the budget every year, and people would have to pay around 40% higher taxes they would demand budget cuts. What do you think they would demand cut, legitimate constitutional expenditures, or Democrats Wealth Distribution and Social Engineering schemes only allowed after the Supreme Court had been threatened?

Democrats created all the problems and Democrats created the need for debt in this country.

 

The point of the thread is Republican hypocrisy and favoring of the rich.

 

That's like asking for a source that UP is UP and DOWN is DOWN. Anyone with common sense wouldn't ask for a source on this.

- - - Updated - - -

Looks like you flunked Economics 101. Not to mention Common Sense 095!

 

huh, not surprised your afraid to post up any links to support your claim, because it turns out that of the 22 sponsors and co-sponsors, 17 are Democrats and 5 are Republicans. Trust you to market this as a purely Republican thing. It's another Democrat bill.

Alexander, Lamar [R-TN]
Blunt, Roy [R-MO]
Boozman, John [R-AR]
Corker, Bob [R-TN]
Durbin, Richard [D-IL]
Johnson, Tim [D-SD]
Pryor, Mark [D-AR]
Reed, John “Jack” [D-RI]
Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI]
Bingaman, Jeff [D-NM]
(joined Jan 24, 2012)
Cardin, Benjamin [D-MD]
(joined Jan 30, 2012)
Inouye, Daniel [D-HI]
(joined Mar 29, 2012)
Rockefeller, John “Jay” [D-WV]
(joined Mar 29, 2012)
Akaka, Daniel [D-HI]
(joined Jul 12, 2012)
Franken, Alan “Al” [D-MN]
(joined Jul 12, 2012)
Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN]
(joined Jul 12, 2012)
Levin, Carl [D-MI]
(joined Jul 12, 2012)
Nelson, Ben [D-NE]
(joined Jul 12, 2012)
Manchin, Joe [D-WV]
(joined Jul 23, 2012)
Landrieu, Mary [D-LA]
(joined Sep 11, 2012)
Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA]
(joined Nov 14, 2012)

- - - Updated - - -

yeah guys, stop trying to bring the truth into the discussion! THAT is NOT what THIS thread is ABOUT!

 

Since I'm the one who started the thread, I know what it's about.

It's about Republican hypocrisy and their favoring the interests of the rich.

Here are some sources:

The most recent McLaughlin Report, where it was agreed that the only way to get Republicans to support a tax increase is to make it a REGRESSIVE tax increase, that hits the middle class and the poor the hardest..

THE WORK OF NATIONS by Robert Reich. He explains how PROGRESSIVE Federal tax rates went way down on the rich, and how they were replaced with REGRESSIVE taxes at the state, county, and city level.

 

You apparently have some difficulty with this, and I'm more than happy to just educate my fellow human beings. Just click on the link below, and follow the procedures listed to copy and pastes links to your sources.

http://www.wikihow.com/Copy-and-Paste

 

There have not been thirty years of Reaganomics if there had we would not be in our current fix. The basic premise of Reaganomics did not last through his second term. And the tombstone was set up when Bush the first went back on his no new taxes pledge. And by the way color fonts doesn't improve your commentary it just makes you look like your 11 years old.

 

HOW MORONIC!

It's people like you who have no original thoughts.

You flatter yourself by claiming to be human.

 

I will take no advice from someone as uninformed and low in reasoning ability as you.

The active ingredients of Reaganomics are low taxes on the rich and deregulation that helps mainly the rich.

Those are still in place.

 

True... that is the irony of this situation. I suppose it's in the best interests of federal politicians that represent these states.

Since the states you just mentioned are primarily Democratic, I guess that explains some of the Democrats' motivation in this.

 

gf

DE is a Dem state today. But the kiss of death for any politician in this state is to suggest a sales tax. My Property (county and city) and school taxes combined are under $1500 per year, and my state income tax is about $2,500 per year, which is less than I would pay in Sales tax in PA, MD or NJ.

 

I do agree, what would have to happen, is to vote in leftist ideologues that get little or no money who somehow got a veto proof majority, and at that point it would be interesting to see if the monied interests would move against a legally elected govt. to stop them somehow.

 

I'm almost certain the poor representation carved out by MONEY... will lead this nation to other-than-peaceful resolutions of our existing problems. Most capitalists have a TERRIBLE HABIT of crewing the masses (unnecessarily so).

We need for the American people to WAKE UP and take FULL political control over THEIR democratic processes.

Letting the guys with the most money and bad ideas run everything isn't going to be edifying in the long run. Money does not necessarily equal 'goodness' and/or 'success'; we should know that by now.

 

I am going to have to go back to the old days of using anonymous routers. LOL I will just pipe through Florida or Montana where they have not sales tax.

 

True. I guess, in a weird way, ensuring the imposition of these sales taxes on internet purchases also is in the interests of states with lower taxes.

Either way, it's surprising how much in sales taxes that people in states like MD, PA, and NJ put up with.

- - - Updated - - -

More or less, although wouldn't the sales tax apply to whatever address you have the goods shipped to?