In response to:

Let the Real Fat Cats Pay Their Fair Share

MTglass Wrote: Dec 13, 2012 1:01 AM
Mr. Hanson, it's a spending problem, not a tax problem.
karpe diem Wrote: Dec 13, 2012 1:11 AM
actually it is also a shrinking economy problem. from the day obama became president he did everything he could to choke the economy and reduce employment while wasting money supposedly growing the economy. the list of such actions is long: coal contracts denials, the Canada pipeline denial, drilling for oil off short denials, regulations which suffocate businesses, EPA rules that do nothing for the environment but strangle the economy. had he not done any of these horrid things we would have a much smaller deficit problem. but raising taxes is not about economics, it is about destroying america as we know it.
NewJAl Wrote: Dec 13, 2012 9:15 AM
Part of what is wanted by his mentor and friend, Bill Ayres, and his closest female adviser.
It has been a month or two since I mentioned Bill Ayres' old book, 'You dont have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing', that I got free from an e-library. Ayres and his wife should be known by every voter. He escaped jail for planting bombs, but she did not. I suspect he wrote 'Dreams of my father' for Obama.
Jeffrey286 Wrote: Dec 13, 2012 1:11 AM
The Country is suffering with a spending problem, you're absolutely correct.

But President Obama is suffering with a TAX problem. He wants to tax the rich. He wants everyone to pay their fair share.

Dr. Hanson's point, I think, was that maybe we should make sure EVERYONE is paying their fair share. If $10 million dollars is enough, according to Obama, then why can't Tom Cruise and Johnny Depp, both of whom have way more than $10 million dollars, take a serious pay cut? If they take a pay cut, they don't need to spend as much to make movies, therefore we, the 99% as the left has labeled us, shouldn't have to continue to pay $10 for a movie ticket, or $60 for a concert ticket to see Mick Jagger, who also has made way more than $10 million.
Jeffrey286 Wrote: Dec 13, 2012 1:15 AM
I'm betting, if we went to Tim Robbins, Johnny Depp, Matt Damon, Bruce Springsteen and Roger Moore and Warren Buffet, and told them "They had enough money" I'm betting they'd change their politics real quick.
Lars795 Wrote: Dec 13, 2012 2:33 AM
I wonder how fast the Dems/Libs would yell if it came down that NO ONE could be worth more than 10 million, including perks.
Carl469 Wrote: Dec 13, 2012 10:12 PM
They have every right to keep their money. They have talent. They used it successfully. I could care less what their politics are. By they way, you've got the wrong Moore. Roger Moore is British and well into his Eighties. He last played James Bond in 1985's "A View to a Kill." Michael Moore is the guy you're probably thinking of.
Jeffrey286 Wrote: Dec 14, 2012 3:27 AM
You're right of course, my apologies to Roger Moore. :)

And yes, I agree. Tom Cruise and Micheal Moore have a right to keep their money. Just the same as the oil company who sold a product that the customer wanted to buy at a price the customer was willing to pay. If they made a billion dollars in profit, good for them. They should pay their taxes and get to keep the rest.

Who exactly were the rich who, as the president said, were not "paying their fair share"? The rapper Jay-Z (net worth: nearly $500 million)? The actor Johnny Depp (2011 income: $50 million)? Neither seems to have heard the president's earlier warning that, "at a certain point you've made enough money."

Could both zillionaires simply have quit making money at $10 million -- and thereby given their poorer audiences a break on ticket prices?

With all the talk of raising taxes on the supposedly conservative wannabes who make $250,000 per year, why not additionally levy a $3 surcharge on discretionary tickets for...