In response to:

So What If Taxing Rich Hurts the Economy?

Snarkasterous1 Wrote: Nov 22, 2012 10:07 AM
One cannot help but wonder just why Obozo's desire for neighborliness, defined by that craven socialist as being "willing to pay a little more," did NOT extend to the sweetheart deal the convicted felon Rezko gave Obozo in buying the two lots for his hugely expensive Chicago home. Was it neighborly for Obozo to accept a hugely below market price from a convicted felon with (illegal) business dealings? Apparently so. However, you and I paying "only" 15% cap gains on monies we have actually EARNED, SAVED, and INVESTED, and from which the feds have previously extracted their confiscatory portion - well, that is simply not fair. Maybe I need start transacting with slum lord felons, like the Socialist in Chief. - Snark
Consider this headline from a Reuters article in The Huffington Post: "Raising Taxes on Rich Won't Hurt Economic Growth, CBO Says."

But the first paragraph refutes the headline: "Allowing income tax rates to rise for wealthy Americans would not hurt U.S. economic growth much (emphasis added) in 2013 ..." The CBO did not say, as the headline suggests, that raising taxes on the rich has no negative economic effect. In fact, the CBO actually said that extending the Bush-era rates for all would increase economic growth by 1.5 percent. If, however, the Bush era rates expired for the rich -- but...