Ben Stein Calls For Higher Taxes On The Wealthy

[mrjarrell]

He makes the point that spending cuts alone won't attack the real problems that we are facing. What's this say when a darling of the right and staunch republican says we need higher taxes on the rich? Of course, there will be no spending cuts, to speak of, regardless of who gets elected this year. Neither of the two candidates for the Boot On Your Neck Party have the balls or the will to do the necessary thing. It's a stone certainty that Obamney would never raise taxes on his donors. And Obama is unlikely to get tax increases past the house. The light at the end of our tunnel is an oncoming freight train and we're gonna go full steam ahead, regardless of which of the two cretins is at the wheel.

[ame]http://youtu.be/OFZ8h2ygIcg[/ame]

 

[Super Bee]

I hate to burst your bubble, but Ben has been saying this for years. And heres another news flash, but taxing the rich 100% will run the government for four months, and thats if we spend the same next year as this year. Plus, that cuts nothing from the deficit.

This is from two years ago.

Daily Kos: Conservative Ben Stein: Raise Taxes On The Wealthiest Americans

 

[foszoe]

I think he has also endorsed non Republicans such as Al Franken and Ralph Nader. Doesn't really fit my definition of staunch Republican.

 

[mrjarrell]

He may have been saying it for awhile now, but he's still on his bandwagon and people strongly associate him with the conservative movement. His history is a long one, unlike many in the movement today. Didn't see the Faux news pundits going after him very strongly, either. It's out there and people will be listening.

 

[Super Bee]

I think he has also endorsed non Republicans such as Al Franken and Ralph Nader. Doesn't really fit my definition of staunch Republican.

Yea, he is more of a Dick Lugar Republican , not really a Rand Paul Republican.

 

[Classic]

I hate to burst your bubble, but Ben has been saying this for years. And heres another news flash, but taxing the rich 100% will run the government for four months, and thats if we spend the same next year as this year. Plus, that cuts nothing from the deficit.

This is from two years ago.

Daily Kos: Conservative Ben Stein: Raise Taxes On The Wealthiest Americans

You are so right. Not enough people understand this. It has been tried in other times and other countries. It generally results in the rich moving somewhere else and economic growth slowing. Instead of arguing about who has the biggest piece of the pie we need to focus on making the pie bigger. Reducing taxes may seem counter intuitive but it attracts investment and growth.

 

[griffin]

He makes the point that spending cuts alone won't attack the real problems that we are facing.

I disagree. Spending cuts can easily take care of the problem. But very few in government are willing to make those cuts. We need to start eliminating entire departments. But instead we'll print more money.

 

[IncendiaryGunner]

I disagree. Spending cuts can easily take care of the problem. But very few in government are willing to make those cuts. We need to start eliminating entire departments. But instead we'll print more money.

The problem is, people like some of those departments - so politically, that is not going to happen.

 

[flightsimmer]

"Everyone should pay their fare share".

To me that means that if I'm taxed $100.00 a year then everyone else should pay $100.00 a year whether I make $20,000 and you make $20,000,000.00 a year or not.

I see nothing in the Constitution that says that you should have to pay more than I do just because you make more.

If you want it to be a "fare percentage" then I pay 10% and you pay 10% of our incomes (even GOD doesn't ask more than that).

But when I ask them to stop spending on frivolous stuff and being wasteful the Government say's No! we can't do that so you'll just have to pay more taxes.

Where do we draw the line and when?

 

[griffin]

Where do we draw the line and when?

The answer isn't popular.

 

[mrjarrell]

"Everyone should pay their fare share".

To me that means that if I'm taxed $100.00 a year then everyone else should pay $100.00 a year whether I make $20,000 and you make $20,000,000.00 a year or not.

I see nothing in the Constitution that says that you should have to pay more than I do just because you make more.

If you want it to be a "fare percentage" then I pay 10% and you pay 10% of our incomes (even GOD doesn't ask more than that).

But when I ask them to stop spending on frivolous stuff and being wasteful the Government say's No! we can't do that so you'll just have to pay more taxes.

Where do we draw the line and when?

Neither of the two candidates from the duopoly will ever consent to even drawing the line anywhere. Obamney has already said he's going to increase the spending for his buddies in the military/industrial complex. And Obama will continue to spend, too. Hell, even the gop's wunderkind vp pick Ryan can't come up with a plan that doesn't result in years of continued deficit spending. All of them are gutless and could give a rats ass about spending our children's future and enslaving them to their whims.

 

[Classic Liberal]

If Ben truly believed people in the higher income bracket need to pay more, has he voluntarily given more of his, to get the ball rolling?

 

[cobber]

"Everyone should pay their fare share".

To me that means that if I'm taxed $100.00 a year then everyone else should pay $100.00 a year whether I make $20,000 and you make $20,000,000.00 a year or not.

I see nothing in the Constitution that says that you should have to pay more than I do just because you make more.

If you want it to be a "fare percentage" then I pay 10% and you pay 10% of our incomes (even GOD doesn't ask more than that).

But when I ask them to stop spending on frivolous stuff and being wasteful the Government say's No! we can't do that so you'll just have to pay more taxes.

Where do we draw the line and when?

Fair means nobody makes more than I do. Or has two cows when I have one. That's pretty obvious.

(Destroy the kulaks as a class.)

 

[foszoe]

If Ben truly believed people in the higher income bracket need to pay more, has he voluntarily given more of his, to get the ball rolling?

You have it backwards. It only counts if you are FORCED to give it under penalty of law

 

[rockhopper46038]

This is going to sound odd coming from me, but I'm not 100% against the idea of some tax increases to dig this country out of the hole we've dug for ourselves, under a few conditions.

Additional revenue raised through taxes would have to be offset with spending cuts at a ratio somewhere north of 10-1.

The taxes would "sunset" automatically in a predetermined number of years, and are NOT renewable.

The new taxes are used explicitly and solely to pay off the National debt. They cannot be shifted to any other purpose.

These taxes cannot be approved without a rider that requires every citizen of voting age to either pay SOME taxes, or work in some job that is currently held down by a Federal government employee.

I dislike taxes mightily, but mostly I lament that fact that a very large portion of those taxes are poured down a rat hole to no discernible advantage, and I abhor the system that promotes dependence on Government handouts. Eliminate those issues and I'll pay over my "fair share" for a while if it will put us back on the path our Founders set for us, and that we have left.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

If Ben truly believed people in the higher income bracket need to pay more, has he voluntarily given more of his, to get the ball rolling?

Dude, Ben's money is in munis and irrev. trusts. He doesn't pay a dime.

 

[No2rdame]

I feel like everyone should have a little skin in the game. I'm not so sure raising taxes exclusively on the wealthy will be the answer Obummer thinks it will. However, why not raise the social security tax so it hits more just the first $109,000 in salary or whatever it is. Close the loopholes for millionaire retirees to get as many social security benefits as someone who needs them more. Quit giving tax credits to people who pay no income taxes, and in fact make more people pay some form of income tax (elderly and military excluded). Quit funding programs and giving money away to illegal immigrants. Cut the bureaucracy. Quit paying every other country's bills while ours go unpaid. Lower corporate tax rates and give incentives for companies to do business here. Simple ideas that would help, but since these changes would impact constituents of both parties and would likely result in a one-term president we'll never see any of these in place.

By the way, for those of you clamoring to pay more in taxes you will get your wish. The temporary 2% social security tax reduction will disappear January 1, so your tax rate will automatically increase. And if the Bush-era tax cuts aren't renewed expect to pay even more.

 

[88GT]

I feel like everyone should have a little skin in the game. I'm not so sure raising taxes exclusively on the wealthy will be the answer Obummer thinks it will. However, why not raise the social security tax so it hits more just the first $109,000 in salary or whatever it is. Close the loopholes for millionaire retirees to get as many social security benefits as someone who needs them more. Quit giving tax credits to people who pay no income taxes, and in fact make more people pay some form of income tax (elderly and military excluded). Quit funding programs and giving money away to illegal immigrants. Cut the bureaucracy. Quit paying every other country's bills while ours go unpaid. Lower corporate tax rates and give incentives for companies to do business here. Simple ideas that would help, but since these changes would impact constituents of both parties and would likely result in a one-term president we'll never see any of these in place.

By the way, for those of you clamoring to pay more in taxes you will get your wish. The temporary 2% social security tax reduction will disappear January 1, so your tax rate will automatically increase. And if the Bush-era tax cuts aren't renewed expect to pay even more.

Then the 51% of the people in this country who don't pay a dime in federal income taxes need to start ponying up.

 

[John Galt]

This discussion always cracks me up. If anyone truly believes that the sociopaths in Washington would take that "extra" money made from taxing the rich at a higher rate and apply it towards debt, and not spend it on MORE government should pony up for the bridge I have for sale.
What concerns me most is the lack of discussion regarding property rights. So what if they're rich, IT'S THEIR MONEY, and just because they have a lot of it, why should they pay a higher percentage than the next guy? Once we start justifying, even encouraging, government to pick winners and losers based on "each according to their abilities to those according to their needs", we have just held open the door for the tyranny and oppression that eventually follows.
History has proven this all too often.
Who is John Galt .....

 

[PAMom]

You are so right. Not enough people understand this. It has been tried in other times and other countries. It generally results in the rich moving somewhere else and economic growth slowing. Instead of arguing about who has the biggest piece of the pie we need to focus on making the pie bigger. Reducing taxes may seem counter intuitive but it attracts investment and growth.

Reading your post made me think of a blog I read a few months ago.
IWF - American Tax Refugees Saying ?Enough is Enough.?