U.S. House plan boosts taxes on rich to 20-year high

Thursday 16th July, 06:23 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 71 Total Comments Show All

TheQuestion at 12:44 PM JST - 18th July

You have made a darn good point as to why we need to tax the rich. What are most investment houses doing with their money? Are they investing it in the United States? No, they are profiting from us. So why not increase their taxes.

Why increase or decrease the taxes of anyone? I've always been in favor of an equal, simple, flat tax. A reasonable one not exceeding more than 20% and having that rate locked in place.

If we raise taxes then the federal gov has more money to pay off our war debt. We need to get out of the red or maybe get our heads from under at least. Where else is our government going to get funds unless it taxes.

So... because the government is irresponcible with the money it has to work with those that are either smart, crafty, or skilled enough to keep their jobs must suffer? Its like giving a monkey more bananas and expecting it to do something other than hand you back fists full of feces it has been giving you since you bought it.

There are a few precious things the government is needed for, those being protection, justice, and stability. As soon as it begins to overstep it starts to mess up; the handling of social security, medicare, the postal service, the first stimulas package, and of course the glorious Amtrak. All of which are either loosing money or are unsustainable in their present form. I think it's because congress keeps fancying themselves as business experts, the difference is that a businessman spends his own money while a politican spends someone elses.
rogerbentham at 08:39 PM JST - 18th July

how dare they! i mean the rich are soo innocent. this is outrageous.
amerijap at 05:54 AM JST - 19th July

Well, the top 1% of an upper income bracket is classified as a super wealthy family. They could be the patrons or the glitterati like the Helmlesys, the Haliburtons, or the Gilmores(!? Just kidding.) They were born with a silver spoon in their mouths, and have chipped in extra cashes for almost 9 years thanks to the tax break since 2000.
helloklitty at 02:38 PM JST - 20th July

This will increase unemployment even further. The rich will wonder what the point of working harder is if they only get to keep 40% of their marginal income.

You can eat the rich - once.
jessssicaaa at 11:12 PM JST - 20th July

Yes raise the taxes, they can afford it.
zurcronium at 11:47 PM JST - 20th July

The lords of finance at JP Morgan and Goldman are going to make huge bonuses after the US taxpayers saved those companies from financial collapse. They are reporting huge profits now. These are the people, average income of $750k (yes average), who need to pay for reformed healthcare and other pressing needs of the USA right now. They made out like bandits from the bush give to the rich tax breaks and bush bailout so now its time to pay up.
Beelzebub at 02:43 PM JST - 21st July

Since the rich can be expected to use their money to buy political influence, they will simply pool their resources and get the Dems out, first by chipping away at their majority in congress next year and then by grabbing back the presidency in 2012.
JenniferKim at 04:18 PM JST - 21st July

This is absolutely insanity. Why a tax hike on ANYBODY is being considered during a grinding recession is totally beyond me.

An across-the-board tax cut for ALL businesses and individuals would get our economy moving again almost instantly. It would create more wealth which could then be taxed, which could in turn be used to fund all those things that Obama wants to fund, but for which we don't even have the money.
JenniferKim at 04:20 PM JST - 21st July

My brother works for the Chamber of Commerce for a major US West Coast city. He tells me that the business community in that city -- and, presumably, the business community of every other city -- has ZERO confidence in Obama or the Democrat Congress.

The current Democrat government are a bunch of ideologues who are making decisions based on ideology rather than effectiveness.
Beerplease at 09:01 PM JST - 21st July

Yeah, we saw how effective the Bush years with the GOP-controlled Congress were.
Sarge at 09:24 PM JST - 21st July

"Yeah, we saw how effective the Bush years with the GOP-controlled Congress were"

The economy performed remarkably well during most of the Bush years, even with 9/11 happening 8 months into his presidency. Look it up.
Beerplease at 10:57 PM JST - 21st July

Performed remarkably well for the thieves who ended up reigning misery down on those who do an honest day's work for a living.
realist at 06:53 PM JST - 22nd July

Now the REAL scourge of Obamaism is appearing, in its true colors. Tax, Tax and more Tax! Yippee - bring it on! Serves you right, you Americans who voted him (and them) into office!
zurcronium at 10:50 PM JST - 22nd July

Most of the rich didnt vote for obama, it was the workers who have been screwed over for the last 8 years by the rob from the middle class and give to the rich republicants. Only the rich did well under bush, the rest of americans saw them incomes decline, their houses collapse in value due to greed that bush allowed to run rampant and the their stock holidings vanish.
OldGeezer at 08:18 AM JST - 23rd July

What many "tax the wealthy" proponents fail to understand is that the wealthy will retain their tax loopholes and gain financial opportunities by lobbying politicians. It is natural selection: the most opportunistic and exploitative are the ones that will continue to succeed. For example, Goldman Sachs has been heavily represented in every recent administration (including this one), has received bailout money, made a profit loaning said money to local and state government, and stands to make billions more through the proposed cap-and-trade / carbon tax bill. The wealthy that provide jobs and economic growth on the capital/industrial side are going to be encouraged to move more and more production overseas, because those who keep production in the United States are going to lose out.

In the 1990s, with the signing of NAFTA, normalization of trade relations with China, and increasing of taxes, U.S. capital began moving out of country in vast amounts. In its place were temporary consumption-side jobs. This transfer of capital created huge profits for companies, but it basically set the stage for recession: real GDP exceeded potential GDP; consumption-side grew while capital-side shrank. Who really lost out? The American citizen-taxpayer. Who really won? Government and the investment banks.

Taxes and other fees are used to support government, but it must not be forgotten that it also influences decision-making in a global marketplace. If taxes are primarily targeted at income, it encourages capital-side flight. If taxes are targeted at economically static wealth, it encourages investment in capital assets. Taxes should be aimed at encouraging the creation of capital-side jobs in the United States, not encouraging capital flight.