Open Chat... All Day, Every Day! Express Your Views, Debate, and Challenge the Views of Others!

In order to keep up with the nature of free, spirited debate, I wanted to place the chat feature at the top of the homepage. This ensures people can come here and share their views on anything they wish and not have it be related to any specific discussion. Here, people can share ideas, links, and views "unmoderated" and an their own pace. To me, this makes The Elephant in the Room blog truly a place for debate.

Thursday, December 8, 2011

Polls: Americans Favor Taxing The Rich... Ok! Stop This Garbage

Yes, stop it! This is absolutely ridiculous. Here is the oft-quoted Gallup poll showing overwhelmingly that Americans favor taxing the rich more:

My take: Really?! No way! You're telling me the majority of Americans recognize we have a HUGE budget problem in this country, and they think the best way to solve it is to have someone other than themselves pay for it?! You know, if it wasn't for polls like these, I would have no idea this sentiment existed............ (cough)

Come on. Yes, I take the poll as a legitimate poll. I'm sure the numbers are correct. When the media reports it, it's not lying, but... come on. Think about it for a second... a two-thirds majority favor taxing someone else more. Does this surprise a single person? Is this a good thing to report out of context?

The fact that the media repeatedly trumpets this unscientific tripe in an attempt to make any kind of point is not only silly; it's just plain manipulative. To me, it's sleazy. Period. 

Here, I have some non-proven, unscientific poll stats that might surprise no one as well. They hold about as much value as this Gallup poll the media routinely cites:

- 93% of Americans think everyone else should donate a heart to help fight heart disease. 

- 86% of Americans want traffic alleviated by building a superhighway on the other side of town. 

I just hope the average American can see through the garbage the media puts out before making important voting decisions. 

Like what you read? Want to keep up with our blog's postings? Enter your email address for a free, direct-to-email subscription:


  1. First, I think most Americans want a BALANCED approach to solving our debt problem. Second, I think many Americans realize the Bush tax cuts have added a significant amount to our debt. Third, there isn't much evidence that tax breaks for the wealthy leads to prosperity for the middle and lower classes... trickle-down economics is BS IMO.

    I agree, we need to make changes to entitlements and cut government spending, but we should have a BALANCED approach - especially while many Americans are struggling after the 2007 nose dive. I think if you ask many of those who shout 'tax the rich', they'll say it's simply not fair to ask the middle and lower classes to sacrifice via cuts to entitlements, education, infrastructure, etc. while asking nothing of those who have benefitted tremendously over the past decade via tax cuts and loopholes.

    You say Obama is 'buying' votes with tax breaks for middle and lower class?? How about Republicans 'buying' votes with special tax breaks for the wealthy plus their war on regulations to benefit corporations??

  2. What the left fails to understand or choose to ignore - is that those 'evil rich', those 'terrible 1%ers' ALREADY contribute 40% of all monies paid in to the federal coffers. A pretty good portion of the '99%' PAY NOTHING, yet recieve the bulk of bennies from Gov.

    'Balanced approach' is Obama-speak for 'wealth redistribution.'

    As many states now realize - 'rich' Americans and corporations have the MEANS to MOVE away from places where they're treated as 'piggy banks', to be cracked open at will, to pay for the poor choices made by others.

    AND when the 'wealthy' were taxed at 90% of their income - a large percentage of them magically - disappeared! When the rate came down - ta,da they were back!

    It seems that most didn't mind paying their fair share... they just refused to be robbed.

    America's safety nets - set up for the TRULY needy in our society - have been turned into hammocks for those who've learned to game the system... in addtion they've been raped, pillaged and used as fodder for the benefit of politician's campaign promises. Enough already!

    I'm nohwere near a 1%er, but I wouldn't care if my taxes went up. On two conditions:

    a) government spending and WASTE need to be addressed FIRST.

    No more of the old political 'I'll gladly pay you Thursday for a hamburger today' garbage; raise taxes NOW - and cut wasteful spending 'later' - cuts that NEVER HAPPEN.

    and b) the tax percentage, whether it's 10 or 50 percent, needs to be level, across the board.

    A 'progressive' tax is nothing more than punishment for success.

  3. I like your Blog and agree much of the time but this is one issue where you are dead wrong.
    You shouldn't mix the two issues of us being in debt with Wealthy People not paying their fair share.

    Look at this clip.

    That's Ronald Reagan agreeing with me

  4. @ Anonymous - the two issues ARE conjoined.

    The 'wealthy people' did not incur the National debt. Creeping, growing, ballooning, out-of-control entitlements have blown the debt out of proportion to our GDP.

    AND - if you do your research, as I have, you'll find that Barney Frank's baby, the Affordable Housing Act - NOT the 'evil banks' or Wall St. - began the snowball that resulted in this present collapse.

    They're not innocent, by any stretch of the imagination - just not responsible for the initial problem.

    ENTITLEMENTS are our biggest, and fastest growing problem - taxation at ANY percentage of wealth - CAN NOT keep up.

    - and just what percentage would you consider a 'fair' share? For anyone? If we're all equal, shouldn't we ALL pay an EQUAL percentage of our income?

    Is it 'fair' that some pay zero federal taxes? And then recieve a 'refund' in excess of what their tax burden WOULD have been? addition to benefits for them, paid for by the Government (taxpayers) NOT offered nor allowed to the rest of us? Fair?

    Liberal hero, Elizabeth Warren, spouts that 'rich people use roads and services paid for by the Government' but FAILS to state - they ALREADY paid a MUCH higher rate for the 'privelege'!

    We The People need to get wasteful spending out of our Government, shrink it back down to the manageable size that our Founders envisioned - so that we ALL may once again be fruitful and prosper.

    I DO NOT want to leave a legacy of high taxation and insurmountable debt to my grandchildren.

    Do you?

  5. So you're saying that just because it won't fix the problem they are off the hook from paying their fair share of taxes???

    You ARE confusing the issue

  6. @ TruthSerumUSA - Thanks for your post. I will address your comments here.

    You said: "First, I think most Americans... trickle-down economics is BS IMO."

    Yes, balanced. You're correct. But I don't see how asking one part of the population to pay more while not asking EVERYONE to pay more is balanced. As I have stated in this blog repeatedly, we should ALL be paying, equally. I do not condone government discrimination of any kind, period.

    Secondly, the Bush era tax cuts did not add to the debt, spending did. Look at gov't revenues from 2003 to 2007 from this CBO study (

    2003: $1.782 T
    2004: $1,880 T
    2005: $2,154 T
    2006: $2,407 T
    2007: $2,568 T

    Now, from 2008 forward, the real estate market crashed, credit markets froze and we went into a recession. That's not statistically correlated to revenues. Under the Bush-era tax cuts, government revenues steadily increased, but yet the debt rose. Why? Spending and too much of it. The Bush-era tax cuts greatly increased government inflows, the government did not slow its outflows.

    As far as prosperity, I cite a BLS report (
    Unemployment rates at the end of each year, 2003-2007:
    2003: 5.7%
    2004: 5.4%
    2005: 4.9%
    2006: 4.4%
    2007: 5.0%

    Again, under the Bush-era tax cuts (before the recession that was not caused by Bush nor his tax cuts) unemployment steadily dropped until the recession began to hit at the end of 2007.

    With all that, I respectfully disagree. My position is that yes, cutting taxes, shown by empirical evidence above did not reduce gov't revenues and did trickle through to everyone in the economy, causing the unemployment rate to fall and causing everyone's standard of living to increase.

    I also don't think it's fair to ask the middle class to pay while not asking everyone to pay. I want to see the government ask everyone pay indiscriminately. I do not condone the gov't choosing select people to pay while choosing some that shouldn't. To me, that's not fair nor is it balanced. Incomes are not fixed. If an all encompassing tax burden hurts the poor, then can work harder to rise up to meet that burden AND keep more money as well.

    You said: "You say Obama is 'buying' votes... regulations to benefit corporations??" In my honest opinion, this makes no sense. Look at our post "Progressive Taxes: The Ultimate Conflict of Interest." How can you say republicans are buying votes by tailoring to the rich? They are such a smaller part of the population. Democrats pander to the larger voter base. To accuse republicans of buying votes by targeting such a small part of the population, again, to me, makes no sense. I don't think they are. They are trying to make things fair and non-discriminatory. Middle class voters outnumber millionaires by a rate of 275 to 1. I can't see how passing tax breaks to that small of a group would garner votes. With all this, I respectfully disagree.

    Thanks again, and I hope to hear back from you.

  7. @ Anonymous - 'off the hook'? fair?

    I think you missed the part that the 'rich'(the top 5%) are ALREADY 'on the hook' for nearly 50% of ALL 'revenues' (taxes) paid into the federal coffers.

    You see only the revenue side of the equation.

    If I spend more than I earn - I'll eventually wind up with a negative cash flow (broke).

    With that scenario in mind - your solution would be for me to demand (steal) the difference from my more fortunate (or harder working) neighbors.

    Mine would be to reduce my expenditures.

    But, I guess that would explain the difference between Conservative and Liberal mindsets.

    Nice chatting w/you : )

  8. @ Dara

    You didn't even watch the clip did you ?

    You are now arguing against a point I didn't even make.

    I am in favor of the flat tax.

    As it is now Middle Class families are paying a higher percentage than corporations and multi millionaires.

    Trust me, they won't go broke.

  9. Anonymous - only 0.0909% of middle class families pay a tax rate higher than millionaires. Yes, there are some, but there currently are only 94,500 millionaires that pay lower rates.

    Source: Congressional Research Service Report:

    Washington Post Article:

    Trust me. I want a flat tax above all things. Every American that works should pay the same flat rate. For every hour we work, we should contribute the same percentage (minutes) of that hour to the government. This one thing I'm not for is skewing facts. The Congressional Research Service report listed above is the same report Obama cited when giving his speech about income inequality in Kansas earlier this week. My problem is that he is making a bigger deal out of nothing; he is skewing the facts (shown in that report):

    Yes, some millionaires do pay a lower rate, about 94,500 of them (I'm against this.)

    Yes, some middle class families do pay a higher rate, about 10,400,000 of them (I'm against this.)

    There are 93,000,000 who pay greater tax rates than millionaires.

    I'm sorry, I cannot stand behind the statement: "As it is now Middle Class families are paying a higher percentage than corporations and multi millionaires." There are some, and it's a very small "some." Your statement implies it is many or all.

    A truly flat tax is the way to go.

    And finally, the average tax rate (bottom line taxes paid divided by bottom line income) paid by millionaires is around 30%.

    Average tax rate paid by middle class families is 19%.

    That's not fair. The government shouldn't discriminate. Make us all pay 19% or make us all pay 30% What do you think?

  10. Source: the above named CRS report.

  11. On top of all of this I want to say "thank you" to everyone. We are truly glad that people can come together and share ideas and engage and debate no matter how for or against each other they are. This blog has expanded so rapidly that it's tough for me (and the two other staff) to keep up. We are glad people are answering each other instead of just engaging with us. Thank you for that, and thank you for keeping it civil and intelligent. We look forward to much more!