Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

What do you rhink about Obama taxing the wealthy?

NEW YORK ( -- Most voters are aware that Barack Obama wants to raise taxes on high-income taxpayers if he's elected president in November.

But what does the Democratic candidate mean by high-income? Who'd be affected and how? While the Obama campaign must still settle on more details about their plans, outlines are starting to emerge.

To start, Obama frequently cites $250,000 as the line between those who would be subject to higher taxes and those who wouldn't.

Indeed, under Obama's tax plan, married couples with at least $250,000 in gross income are likely to see their taxes go up if Obama is elected president.

But what about single filers? The line for them would likely be about $200,000, according to an Obama adviser.

Those groups could end up paying anywhere from several thousand dollars to tens of thousands of dollars more to Uncle Sam than they do now, according to estimates from the Tax Policy Center.<


Asked by mommy_of_two388 at 10:38 AM on Sep. 21, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 43 (154,356 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (101)
  • I would rather the wealthy get nailed with taxes than the middle class who are trying so hard these days just to make ends meat. In my opinion, $250,000.00 is a lot of money to make. I have friends who make 1/2 that & live pretty darn good.

    Answer by samurai_chica at 10:42 AM on Sep. 21, 2010

  • All taxpayers should pay a percentage of their income, the "wealthy" shouldn't have to pay a higher tax because they are successful. If everyone paid 10%, a household making $50,000 a year would pay $5,000, one making $500,000 per year would pay $50,000. That's fair. Asking the higher income home to give up MORE of a percentage isn't fair.

    Answer by Scuba at 10:55 AM on Sep. 21, 2010

  • What right does our government have to take ANYONE'S money?! Because you make more they get to take more? That is a purely socialist ideal. Besides if you are in that top 2% of wealth there are many ways of "hiding" your assets to avoid such outrageous taxation and none of it illegal! If they keep "punishing" financially successful people they will only drive their wealth elsewhere and the tax burden will keep increasing on the middle and even lower incomes because we don't have the means to privately and selectively "redistribute" our money.

    Answer by jessa1091 at 12:54 PM on Sep. 21, 2010

  • Us lower and middle class already get a break... Many don't even pay taxes. (as in, zero tax burden... you get everything you paid in back at the end of the year).

    The "wealthy" are the ones who create the job that we need to survive. We raise taxes on them and they will create less jobs. Simple as that... money in the system is better than money in the government.

    Answer by LeanneC at 10:59 AM on Sep. 21, 2010

  • $250. is NOT rich, PEOPLE! They pay for everything you don't !

    Like Scuba answer ^^^^^^^^

    Answer by gammie at 11:56 AM on Sep. 21, 2010

  • I agree 250 is not rich- it's closer to zero than to multi-millions and billions- the people who are able to dodge taxes with the government stamp of approval. The Congress legislates in their own favor-the loopholes are for them, the super rich. They have set it up so WE (the underlings) fight amongst ourselves and they get off Scot-free.

     We are so distracted with our bickering,they think we do not notice THEM robbing US blind. We ALL need to wake up and rally against THEM and not each OTHER!


    Answer by Sisteract at 12:05 PM on Sep. 21, 2010

  • So many things to say. So little room.. LOL
    1) $250K is not rich, it is not truly wealthy. Truly wealthy people are worth very high figures, and most of them skate by without paying a whole lot of taxes due to loopholes and shelters.
    2) if the wealthy are truly behind job creation, then where are the jobs. The wealthy have had this set of tax cuts (the Bush cuts) for years now, job growth has been stagnent. Jobs have not been created. However, American corporation are sitting on a huge nestegg right now. That money is not being spent on hiring people, that money is just sitting collecting more money. And their profits continue to stay steady or rise.
    3)People stay so focused on who has what, who is "taking"what from whom, that they miss the "shellgame" that is really going on with our economy. By missing this shell game, people do not really see where all the money is going and how it's being used.

    Answer by pixie_trix at 12:39 PM on Sep. 21, 2010

  • 4) The corporate tax structure, far more than the individual taxpayer tax structure, needs to be reformed . This would help greatly in regards to bringing the federal revenue (ie: tax dollars) back up.. It was released in 08' that between the years of 98' and 05' that 2 out of every 3 US corporations paid $0.00 in federal income taxes. However, you can bet that these same corporations received their share of tax credits/breaks and corporate welfare give me's.

    The tax issues in this country are complex. And raising/cutting taxes on one specific indidvidual tax payer demographic will not solve the nation's issues in regards to taxes/tax revenue.. However. An honest discourse in regards to what our real issues are, would be the best place to start in order to try and solve the issues. The issue I see, politicians are not willing to and do not want to, have this honest open look at and discussion about the issues at hand.

    Answer by pixie_trix at 12:43 PM on Sep. 21, 2010

  • PIXIE- YOU nailed, girl. Are you and I the only ones that get the shellgame?
    The 250K is only a distraction so the masses do not catch on to the real game being played.

    Wake up people!!!!

    Answer by Sisteract at 1:20 PM on Sep. 21, 2010

  • It's fine if you want more of the same high unemployment and hoarding of money by everyone. Dems ask if America wants more of the same Bush policies all the time. Well the Bush so called failed policies are peanuts compared to the Obama failed policies. I don't want the same old, same old Obama has to offer. No raising of taxes on anyone in a recession. (and don't say "they say the recession is over", that's lame)

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 11:11 AM on Sep. 21, 2010