Obama's 2012 budget as much fiction as 2011's
Congressmen get their first look at President Obama's fiscal 2012 budget on Monday.
February 14th, 2011
10:28 AM ET

Obama's 2012 budget as much fiction as 2011's

President Barack Obama on Monday introduced his fiscal 2012 budget, a $3.7 trillion amalgamation of guesses and calculations which stands no chance of being enacted in the form the president’s bean counters put it together.

Before it gets back to Obama’s desk for a signature, the spending blueprint will go through no less than 40 congressional committees, 24 subcommittees, countless hearings and a number of floor votes in the House and Senate, CNNMoney’s Jeanne Sahadi writes.

Republicans wasted no time in letting the president know what they liked nothing. Here’s what House Speaker John Boehner said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press”:

"He's going to present a budget tomorrow that's going to continue to destroy jobs by spending too much, borrowing too much, taxing too much."

Considering that all government spending originates in the House, where Boehner’s Republicans hold a 241-to-193 advantage, you can see how big a fight is ahead.

And recent history shows that all this may not mean anything. The federal government still hasn’t passed a budget for fiscal 2011, which began October 1.

The country has been paying its bills with continuing resolutions, the latest of which expires on March 4.

Post by:
Filed under: Barack Obama • Economy • Politics
soundoff (517 Responses)
  1. Gunner

    Folks who characterize letting the rich keep what they earn as "redistribution" have it exactly backwards. It reeks of envy, rather than seeking fairness. I say if we need the rich to pay more to get us out of debt- fine, but it MUST be concurrent with deep cuts in domestic spending, most of which was paid for by the rich in the first place! Taxing is the easy part, cutting spending in a meaningful way is politically almost impossible.

    February 14, 2011 at 12:19 pm | Report abuse |
  2. ddrmac

    i hope this works and proves all the skeptics, doubters, and naysayers wrong. obama administration republican and democrat work overtime to asure america will be positive and prosperous than ever before.

    February 14, 2011 at 12:20 pm | Report abuse |
  3. ddrmac


    February 14, 2011 at 12:21 pm | Report abuse |
  4. ddrmac

    crackdown on people beating the system.

    February 14, 2011 at 12:23 pm | Report abuse |
  5. ddrmac

    protect us!!!...

    February 14, 2011 at 12:24 pm | Report abuse |
  6. FU9L

    Once again they wat to take from the poor pel grants electric subs to do something to help what a load. how about less goverment and lower taxes yeah he lowerd taxes and then what the individual states keep upping them as hes lowering them so in sence there is no lower taxes thats also a load both it not one party or the other brain dead people its the whole system we need new people who are not life long politicians its not rocket science when the goverment spends over 1 trillion dollars a year on pet projects and stupid crap that is not benificial to us its dumb and shows they dont give 2 s%^&s about us at all. since the 70's its been getting worse.. id the constution were written today it would read a goverment for the goverment at the expence of the people.... what ever happened to the for the people part it got white washed by both perties with there own agendas

    February 14, 2011 at 12:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • Gunner

      Giving less is not the same as "taking from."

      February 14, 2011 at 12:39 pm | Report abuse |
  7. ddrmac

    impove the tax code

    February 14, 2011 at 12:25 pm | Report abuse |
  8. ddrmac

    crackdown on businesses mistreating the customer.

    February 14, 2011 at 12:26 pm | Report abuse |
  9. FU9L

    also remember there are still 7 million people out of work and neeither party really cares as long as it dosent hurt there rich pockets.......

    February 14, 2011 at 12:27 pm | Report abuse |
  10. ddrmac

    end subsides to oil companies. invest in better energy.

    February 14, 2011 at 12:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • FU9L

      ddrmac no thats not the answer because of this crap about ethanol the corn we use to send out is growing short in supply and it is driving the price of food way up however the end subsides to oil companies is completely right why dose a company that is turning a profit big time even need subsides..

      February 14, 2011 at 12:42 pm | Report abuse |
  11. ddrmac

    raise those taxes on the wealthy 2012.

    February 14, 2011 at 12:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ralf the Dog

      The lower incomes drive the economy. I would prefer my customers get a tax break any my taxes go up. Put the money in the hands of those who spend it.

      February 14, 2011 at 12:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ian

      Typical response. Your jealously of the successful in this country and allowing the Government to rob them is pathetic. 49% pay ZERO in Federal taxes in this country. Those are the people that need to put in their fair share.

      February 14, 2011 at 12:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • John

      It seems to be working well for IL. Wealthy people and large industry are moving out in droves...

      February 14, 2011 at 12:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • John

      I support a flat tax for all with a tax code we can all understand. Of course that won't work for either party. Gee, I wonder why?

      February 14, 2011 at 12:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mark

      Flat tax wouldn't work. It would be a massive tax cut for those at the top end of the spectrum and a massive tax increase for those at the bottom. As if the working poor aren't struggling enough.
      Better to add extra brackets at the top and raise everyone's taxes back up to the 50 year average. Right now they're at 50 year lows.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • dkriegs

      define wealthy. over 200k? over 250k? over 500k? When will people realize that theres a big difference between a hardworking family making 300k a year and multi millionaires like ___________ (Insert fortune 500 CEOs/althetes/hollywood)

      February 14, 2011 at 1:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • Brian

      And what exactly is wealthy?

      February 14, 2011 at 1:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • John

      Mark, imagine that. SO a person paying 36% of the million they are making still needs to pay more that a person paying 36% of the 25K they are making. Hmmm. I think the dems either don't know this or just forget it.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • Henry Miller

      No, raise taxes on the 47%, the lazy welfare bums, who don't pay any federal taxes at all. Why we continue to give these losers a free ride escapes me utterly.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:13 pm | Report abuse |
    • Harry(NJ)

      Ian, the problem with that statement is that many of the 47-49% of people who don't pay taxes believe that they do:
      The reality is that many people fall into not owing any tax burden, for example, you make 50K a year and your spouse goes to college, you receive a tax credit of 4K which lowers your taxable income to 46K, then what would also happen if you gave 4K to your church, then your taxable income is then lowerd to 42K and so on, so eventhough you are paying taxes through your payroll deductions, in reallity you don't end up owing the government anything or in fact you end up getting a refund. So many of those 47 – 49% of americans are getting money back from the government are individuals who work every single day like you and me. Most of these people aren't the Welfare mothers, Disability recipients, Retirees or non-workers that many people think of that aren't paying taxes.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • James

      @John- It's because even though it seems simple, and those not particularly educated in tax law think it makes sense, it actually just means that poor people pay a ton more money that they don't have and the rich pay much, much less. You can see how that doesn't really work for most people.

      I take it you are very wealthy? Me too. That's why I'm for the fair tax.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • Morgan

      I make over 300k a year, I am out of town 300+ days a year. I work new years, Christmas, Thanksgiving, July 4, and every other important holiday. Why should I pay more in taxes? I work literally 84 hours a week minimum. If my weekly paycheck is 6000 dollars, I am only bringing home 3200 bucks if I am lucky.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • pkfops

      The 47% of people who pay little or no taxes aren't bums. They just know how to fill out a 1040. (I'm one of them). If you use the 1040EZ you are an idiot..........LOL

      February 14, 2011 at 1:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jon

      Exactly. I don't care what you say, if you make 250k plus a year, you're rich. If you make that much and have financial problems, you're a fool that doesn't know how to handle money. That's more money than anyone needs so stop complaining.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mark

      Everything gets cut that affects tax payer however the defense budget increases by 5% to $ 678 000 000 000.00. We are the new Soviet Union. Military military nothing for people. Obama is a joke.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • Andy

      The notion that domestic consumer demand is what drives the whole economy has been getting less and less true with each passing year, as production moves overseas, and shopping goes online. Some industries benefit from increased local demand, but it is NOT the overwhelming driver it used to be. New ideas are needed. Lower income people (bottom half of filers) already pay zero or get money back in taxes. You can't give them additional "tax cuts." You can give them welfare payments by another name, only.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • eolufemi

      Raise taxes & Reduce spending.

      Finding the proper combination of the two is the challenge.

      On the revenue side, they definitely need to reform the tax code by closing the loopholes and reduce corporate taxes, but require the corporations to actually ante up what they owe. Right now, some of the largest corporations in America have a net tax liability of less than 5%. They also need to change how social security taxes are calculated. Instead of capping taxable income at $106,000, they should make 50% of everybody's income taxable at the 6% rate. Fix the capital gain tax at 20% or so, and consider a consumption tax on non-essential items and services of 2%. That'll take care of the revenue side.

      On the spending reduction side they need to close non-essential bases, cancel defense contracts, and reduce the US military footprint abroad. If they do that in addition to what Obama's currently proposing, fixing the budget deficit should be achievable over the next 20 years.NYTimes had a pretty good budget puzzle that folks should check out:

      February 14, 2011 at 1:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • Andy

      Another trouble spot here is the constant conflation of high earners with wealthy people. The truly wealthy could have incomes of zero and stay wealthy, paying no taxes. Much of what they "earn" are unrealized capital gains, which no tax is due on. The class warfare liberals demonize these people when they talk about raising taxes, but then target the most productive people in the society for their tax increases: the high earners.

      Mark – stating that a flat tax would result in a huge tax cut for the top earners is not true, because those people currently DO NOT PAY the top rates. They have the flexibility to move money into shelters and claim deductions, bringing their net rate down to around 23%. The best benefit of a flat tax with a lower rate, sizable personal exemption and no deductions is that it would eliminate all the wasted effort spent avoiding paying the current rates.

      The tax code is unbelievably distorting to the economy. If those with capital were free to invest it in the most profitable choices, instead of hiring attorneys to show them how to mis-allocate those funds in order to avoid taxes, everyone would benefit.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • Nate

      I don't under stand why we don't just legalize pot and tax it. The benefits of doing so are outstanding. More money for the government. Less criminals in jail = less tax money going to feed their butts. I just want one good counter argument on why pot shouldn't be legalized. In a time when the government needs money, this seems to be a perfect opportunity.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • Andy

      @eolufemi – It is not right to force high earners to pay into Social Security on all of their income when the benefits are capped. Social Security, notwithstanding the treasonous SCOTUS Helvering v. Davis case, is a contributory retirement program. It is an EARNED benefit for those contributing.

      To change it in the way you suggest converts it from being an earned retirement benefit into a welfare program, which is never what it was intended to be.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • Charlie

      While we are at it, raise the taxes on the 47% who PAY NOTHING!!!!!!

      February 14, 2011 at 1:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • UHhello

      @harry and Henry the problem with your numbers is you do not consider the considerable economic power those 47% you claim pay no taxes have on the economy. They make everything go in this counrty the rich are 1-2% of the population they don't eat as much, drink as much, buy as much clothes or goods as even 5% of the poorest ppl. Yes they are largely responsible for big ticket items I will give you that, but many do that through tax shelters off shore or as business tax write offs. The 1 -2 % of the highest earners in America do not pull their own weight and since they got their big tax cuts in 2001 and got them extended in 2010 they have done NADA for job creation, they have done NADA for wages, the have done NADA for healthcare contribution percentages paid by employees. If you want to tout who is making keeping America going it is the working class not the rich simple.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • UHhello

      @ Morgan 1 you are a work aholic why dont' you stay home and watch your kids grow up? 2. Your kids colleges are paid for. 3. your retirement is paid 4. You have more than one property ( how is that lake cabin?) 5. I am middle class with 5 kids at home (mixed marriage) I make 50 K my wife makes 18K we struggle to pay for our bills each week. We have 2 old mini vans to get around we cannot afford swiming lessons or tutors for our kid with ADHD, I work 45 hrs a week (it is slow now) and my wife works 38 (because her cheap company wont let her work more). 6. your bring home amount is still more than my wife and I. 7. you are not reporting how much Pre tax health insurance you are putting our or 401 investments etc.....8. you get to write off most clothing and clean bills for travel, you get a ton of flying perks, you get a ton of hotel perks, your probably scam your per diem daily to make money off that, 9 your company pays for all your travel you pay in missed time with your family. 10. We know you are full of it when you cry wolf like this pony up you big cheap-A.....

      February 14, 2011 at 2:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • Yaledelay

      "I discovered that two-thirds of US corporations don’t pay income taxes. I learned the $3 in my wallet was more than the income tax liability of multi-billionaire Fortune 500 headliners like GE, ExxonMobil, Bank of America and Citibank combined."


      You pay more in taxes than GE, ExxonMobil, Bank of America and Citibank combined. Want to solve our budget problems? lets hit the streets.

      February 14, 2011 at 2:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • Harry(NJ)

      @UHhello, I am not suggest that you should or should not force the 47% of people to pay more or less taxes, rather I am pointing out that they are not what most people consider to be "exempt" from taxes. Many of these folks are people who work everyday and have payroll deductions, but get money back every year on their taxes because of our current system. These are not welfare recipients or disabled individuals or retirees. But working americans like you and me.

      February 14, 2011 at 2:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • PJL

      Yep. All they do is put it in overseas companies. We need to recapture some of that money and put it work in the US.

      February 14, 2011 at 2:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • John

      End the war on drugs, save billions.

      February 14, 2011 at 2:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • Todd

      You know who pays no taxes and is wealthy? Religious organizations. The catholic church is the worst of it, but far from the only one.

      Tax the churches.

      It would help.

      February 14, 2011 at 2:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ben Alcobra

      Henry Miller, you said "No, raise taxes on the 47%, the lazy welfare bums". So 47% of the population consists of "lazy welfare bums", eh? Right. And you say you can't understand why those freeloaders get paid? It's simple. You don't understand because you live in Fantasy Land, where 47% of the population is on welfare. Sure explains those close calls in that last few elections, doesn't it? But don't worry – when you retire, or if you get disabled, you'll be happy to pick up your government sponsored, socialist Social Security checks. You won't understand why you're being paid for doing nothing, but you'll pick up those checks and spend the taxpayer's money anyway. It's a wonderful Fantasy Land, isn't it?

      February 14, 2011 at 2:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • PJL

      I wish I could charge off most of my income like the corporations do. If I could I would be able to take off rent or house payments, clothing, food, car payments and expenses, medical care, in other words about 90% of my income. I would then only have to pay taxes on 10% of my income. The standard deduction is supposed to help the poor, but at 5700 dollars for an individual it's a joke.

      February 14, 2011 at 2:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dink

      "Raise taxes on the wealthy" ?? That'll work – with a year or two of hyperinflation, we'll all be defined as wealthy – and it'll be a flat tax because we'll all be in the highest bracket.

      Funny how the federal government speding too much became the responsibility of the average citizen.

      February 14, 2011 at 2:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • Andy

      @PJL – Your position is so false, and in so many ways. First, your exemptions for yourself and dependents are intended to allow just that – tax abatement for necessities, much like business expenses. Second, it is perfectly reasonable to tax businesses on their profits, as opposed to their gross revenues. If you have $1 million in revenue, and spend $900K in combined salaries, benefits, rent, capital purchases, etc, do you think it is right that you should have a $350K tax liability? This is an insane idea. There would be NO businesses at all if they could not deduct business expenses from revenues when calculating tax liability.

      Finally, when you tax businesses, the "corporation" doesn't pay the tax. People pay all taxes. All. When you try to tax a company, you are only truly taxing that company's employees, stockholders, or, most likely, its customers. It's a mirage to think you can tax corporations. Think about who you are really taxing there, and what the impact is. Tax companies too much, and they leave, or go out of business. That is NOT what is good for the public.

      February 14, 2011 at 2:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mavent

      Ian, you (like most Republicans) are an idiot. The rich pay more in taxes because they can afford to. Bill Gates isn't going to starve, no matter how much he pays in taxes. Demanding that someone who makes 20k a year pay the same taxes as Tiger Woods is completely stupid. Republicans need to move past their juvenile, 1-dimensional mindsets.

      February 14, 2011 at 2:49 pm | Report abuse |
  12. ddrmac

    american people demand that the government deals with issues seriously.

    February 14, 2011 at 12:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • John

      Not true, but the Tea Party does. It is scaring the heck out of both parties. The crazy spending on both sides needs to stop.

      February 14, 2011 at 12:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • Beatrum

      John – I think its pretty funny that you think "Tea Party" is the only one concerned for the budget, like no one else cares. Here's the truth, people wants cuts in the things they don't care about, where it only applies to them. If money is being spent on it and they don't like it, suddenly its govt 'spending gone crazy!'.

      Its a headline catcher to say that, and certainly appeals to the 'doesnt read beyond that' minded people. What the Tea Party followers need to realize is that this government was built on compromise that not all people are going to agree on everything.

      In my opinion, the 2 parties need to get off their high horse. We need to quit treating this like a sports game. When the opposing team is winning, they are all then called the worst names in the book and must be thrown out no matter if you sacrifice your own principles. Also it would be great to quit using the phrase "The american people want ..." because the american people(tm) can't decide on any 1 thing, its split between party lines.

      February 14, 2011 at 2:13 pm | Report abuse |
    • Harry(NJ)

      Beatrum, you are absolutely right, Folks are getting mad at stuff that they don't understand or care about. You live in some town in South Carolina, for example, some program benefits pregnany teens in NYC, you get made because the money does not benefit you and you therefore scream up and down wasteful spending. However, the company that you work for, gets a milliion $ subsidy from the same federal government that builds weapons that may never be used and cannot be tested. Why no complain about how wasteful the government is then?

      February 14, 2011 at 2:32 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Mike

    Boy! I'm sick of hearing both side of theis rich vs poor crap, I'm a independent but lean more red, but what about the flat tax? I was for it years ago when Jerry Brown brought it up and still think it is the way to go! $10,000 or $10,000,000 a year you pay x amount on the dollar, if you need some type of assistance (food, heat etc.) you go to X,Y or Z line. this would do away with all loop holes and still reward the one (like myself) that jsut want to work hard and leave as much as I can for my kids!

    February 14, 2011 at 12:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • Michaelk

      To keep revenues constant, the poor and middle class would pay much more than they do now and the wealthy would pay less.

      Not a very good idea.

      February 14, 2011 at 12:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ralf the Dog

      The problem is, those of us who have unlimited income don't need to worry about things like house payments and utilities. Those at the bottom end of the economic scale (Who work harder than we do, I know because I once was one) may or may not have the money for food.

      A percentage of ones income goes to survival. Everything else is luxury. Tax the luxury not the basic cost of being alive.

      February 14, 2011 at 12:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • Stephen

      So you're saying because you have kids you would be willing to pay extra because they use government schools?

      February 14, 2011 at 12:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • John

      Please, how could the dems survive without rich vs poor, black vs white, working vs non-working, haves vs have nots – need I go on? The socialist agenda at its best.

      February 14, 2011 at 12:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • CSMinDC

      I agree with Ralf the Dog. Have a flat tax, which I'm a proponent, but after a certain level of income. Like the first $20K will not be taxed, or whatever.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hangman

      You all realize with the amount of comments here, this is the same thing the dems and reps are having. Everyone is always right and no one will compromize to make an end work. There is no progress. And because we the people have had no progress – because everyone is right and no one will make a compromise to meet an end – it is going to get more and more difficult to fix the problem. No one wants spending cuts and taxes raised, but we need some serious spending cuts and tax increases, the kind that is going to hurt – some serious sacrifice – in order to get back into the black and save our country. I don't have an overall solution to share, but if we continue with our selfish ways, it will solidify our end.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • Henry Miller

      Do people making $100 thousand per year get government that's twice as good as people making $50 thousand per year? Of course not! So why should the have to pay twice as much?

      The only truly fair tax is is a head tax: so much per person. Any tax based on income or wealth is basically just a punishment for working harder.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • Andy

      @Henry Miller – Actually, yes they do get more. They have more assets to protect, and the primary role of government is to protect the rights of the citizens. In that regard, a progressive tax system is not only workable, it is right. That said, a flat tax IS a progressive tax system. The more you earn, the more you pay.

      The best argument for it, though, is not a mealy mouthed whinefest about "fairness," but one of expediency and efficiency of capital allocation. With our current monstrous tax code, the "rich" are able to avoid paying the published rates through a myriad of loopholes, and to do it, they do two things that hurt everyone: 1) mis-allocate funds to less productive, but sheltered, investments, and 2) Hire attorneys and accountants to manage this, and force the government to also hire accountants to go over all of it.

      If they paid a flat, lower rate, they would end up paying the same percentage of income they do now, only they'd invest in the best choices, helping everyone, not just themselves. All the tax attorneys and litigation over taxes is a gigantic millstone around the neck of the economy.

      February 14, 2011 at 2:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • Welcome to Reality

      Thank you! America was founded on the idea that hard work pays off. How is it fair that those who work hard in school, going through years of 18 hours days to get their grades, and come out with triple digit debt, have to pay for everyone else? How are they "rich"? If you have a couple hundred thousand dollars in debt, but you make $150K or more, how are you rich? These people don't even start earning a paycheck until they are close to – or older than – 30 years old. Most of you started your careers when you were in your early 20's, and have a family at this point – but the future doctors of America don't have that luxury. Don't the democrats WANT our doctors to have the incentive of good pay to go through the he-11 they have to for 8+ years, so that they become our best and brightest? Don't you WANT someone who actually took their education seriously performing surgery on you, and not someone who just drank their college away and said, "yep – all C's this semester will work for me!" Do you really think someone is going to subject themselves to years of extremely hard work, very little partying or going out, just to leave school with a mountain of debt to be told "you must pay over half of your wages in taxes in order to spread the wealth around"? Honestly?! Really?! You really believe all that!?

      WHY?! What on EARTH could leave you thinking that there are Americans out there willing to subject themselves to a hard life for a decade, and not be compensated for their hard earned and highly advanced knowledge?!

      I really try to be open minded. I do. But this mindset is so extremely selfish, I just cannot begin to understand what would drive a human being to think like this. It's this "I'm going to get mine, screw you and America, as long as I have mine I don't care what happens" mentality that is ruining this country.

      February 14, 2011 at 2:22 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Ralf the Dog

    My taxes need to go up. The taxes of my customers (People who make less than me) need to go down.

    February 14, 2011 at 12:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • John

      I love when I hear this. Just pay more if you think you should be.

      February 14, 2011 at 12:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • GoodAdvice

      Someone told me this the other day. Where in the world did this come from? Just pay more taxes if you feel like you should be taxed more? I'd love to hear how you propose doing that. Do you understand how the tax system works at all?

      February 14, 2011 at 12:56 pm | Report abuse |
    • John

      Check your tax form. You can pay more (futures). You can also donate to any socialist cause you want – Oh, donating is not a dem thing – I get it.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • John

      Oh, to truly answer your question. Nobody understands how the tax codes actually work in this country. Just ask Charlie Wrangle, the person who wrote many of them.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • brian

      Most people are unaware that in the U.S. you can pay more taxes if you want to or deem necessary.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ralf the Dog

      An interesting fact, You can't pay more taxes than you owe. In the past, there was a box labeled, "Donate to reduce the Federal debt." You could put as much or as little as you wanted. Ronald Reagan did not like the idea, so he had it removed by executive order.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • YesYouCan


      "Donate" as much as you want.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hangman

      I agree with Ralf, the IRS will not accept more than you owe.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • GoodAdvice

      Notice that everyone's reply is filled with "facts", and yet none of them coincide. Here's a new one, just try to "donate" your money when you do taxes this year. Maybe you'll find a nifty way to not get part of your refund, or you won't write off as much as you hoped, but you're not donating a dime. And did you ever wonder what happens to the billions of dollars that aren't claimed every year? I'll give you a hint: It's not pocketed by fat-cats, and it's not spent on fixing your roads.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • Henry Miller

      Send the IRS anything you like. They won't turn it down.

      But don't presume to offer them my money.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • krus


      February 14, 2011 at 1:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • ds

      You certainly CAN donate anything you like. You're right that it's not "taxes", and the IRS won't take it, but Treasury will. Just google "gifts to us treasury."
      If you think you don't pay your fair share, why don't you go pay it? The reason, of course, is that you don't want to pay your fair share unless everyone else pays what you think their fair share is.
      And that's why all these people saying "of COURSE I want to pay more taxes" are such dirty liars. They mean, "I'll pay more, if all you stupid proles pay a LOT more too"

      February 14, 2011 at 1:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • GoodAdvice

      DS, you're right that this is a gift and not paying extra through taxes. I'm not sure if anyone else gets why that is different though.

      However, I will say that bashing those that say they want their taxes raised but only if everyone else has theirs raised is a bit lame. There's no reason to live your life as a hobo just so that you can make a tiny dent in a debt that will never be paid, but when there are people in "charge" who are supposed to set up a system that allows for you to live your life AND have a functioning country something should be done. The issue is that if I give the government $100,000 this year, it will be completely meaningless and will cover research on the flow of ketchup. If everyone in the country paid their share, then we could pull completely out of debt within a Presidency.

      But with rich Republicans complaining that they don't want to give up a couple thousand from their hard earned billions, and poor Republicans complaining that they won't have jobs if the billionaire Republicans give up a couple thousand, it will never happen. What about the Democrats? Well, I've never met a poor Dem that wasn't on welfare, but then I've never met a poor Republican that wasn't on welfare either, so that cancels out. And I've never met a wealthy Democrat that wasn't a complete philanthropist. I've met a lot of people in my travel through life, and I have not found more than a handful of exceptions. Although, every Republican I've ever met, even in the early 80's, believed 100% that anything that a Democrat was telling them was a lie to steal their money. I have story after story I could tell you about personal experiences with Republicans that ruined someone that was a Democrat or a liberal when that Democrat or liberal was attempting to help people because the Republican firmly believed that something evil had to be going on behind their back. When you are constantly doing bad things, you tend to find it difficult to see that anyone else could do any different.

      February 14, 2011 at 1:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • boardsoffl

      Anyone who wishes to pay more in taxes but may not should simply send the money directly to me. I will then stimulate the economy with it.

      February 14, 2011 at 3:19 pm | Report abuse |

    If we just quit giving money away to I don't know how many countries, I think we would be fine.

    February 14, 2011 at 12:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • Michaelk

      What we give away to other countries would not make much of a difference. We would still have to cut defense by 20% (leaving plenty left to take out everyone else on planet), raise Social Security taxes 2 percentage points, stop allowing tax deductions on overseas labor and stop the war on drugs.
      That would be a start and would still keep America strong.

      February 14, 2011 at 12:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • Biflspud

      Foreign aid is a minute part of our budget. Less than 1% of our budget is spent on foreign aid (much of it goes to Israel, by the way) - a full 78%(ish) goes to the big 3 "Untouchables" - military, social security, and medicaid. Find a politician willing to risk their own future by touching those third rails, and you'll have real spending solutions.
      http://masbury.wordpress.com/2008/09/29/what-percent-of-us-budget-goes-to-foreign-aid/ breaks down our budget nicely, I thought.

      February 14, 2011 at 12:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • idiot

      your truly and idiot

      February 14, 2011 at 2:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ian

      Kind of ironic considering you spelled you're your


      February 14, 2011 at 3:49 pm | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16