«

»

Sep
13

Top 5% Pays 60% of Federal Income Taxes – WRONG AGAIN BOB!

Cenk Uygur (http://www.twitter.com/cenkuygur) host of The Young Turks breaks down Mitt Romney’s statement from the latest debate that “the top five percent p…
Video Rating: 4 / 5

pub-6343053178602209

25 comments

No ping yet

  1. Jason Payne says:

    Romney wasn’t misleading, his answer was talking about income tax. The topic they were debating. How is it misleading to say that his plan will keep the top 5% paying? the same percentage of income tax that they already are? Cenk Ungur then goes on to prove what Romney said is right. However, he then changes the debate and ads variables that weren’t even being discussed.

  2. Jason Sizemore says:

    maybe if you watched more of TYT you would see he has called obama out multiple times .. Conservative trash never understand truth, so they make up? their own

  3. manonthemount says:

    tax contributions are a function of income. every tear they shed about their tax burden is dried with the stacks of income they are being taxed on. rig me 65% of the income, and you won’t hear any complaints about taxation.

    also, Cenk turned down an? analyst position at MSNBC because they wanted him him to play ball and submit to censorship.

    do your homework and these points wouldn’t be necessary

  4. Ellicott Mills Brewing says:

    its actually wrong. its closer to 65 percent. lol.? cenk how many networks have fired you?

  5. GlobalSM says:

    When JESUS CHRIST comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, HE will sit on His glorious throne. OPEN YOUR HEART TO JESUS CHRIST !?

  6. sooshka petrushka says:

    Cenk, are you like desparate to bust romney or something? Why don’t you watch obama’s clip where? he promised to cut deficit in half in 2008, and compare that to what he’s done right now. Fucking biased ass liberal.

  7. farminstoltzfus says:

    What the? F?? You want to skew that number and add state and local income tax and sales tax…. in case you didn’t realize Romney, nor any President can control what states and local governments do. Some states don’t even have State Income tax… Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington and Wyoming. Some states don’t have sales tax… Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire and Oregon. All that the president and Congress can control is Federal Income tax rates and who pays what

  8. Robert Van Gilder says:

    He? didn’t lie…He spoke the truth.

  9. nate rand says:

    State taxes aren’t even HALF as compared to the Fed Income Taxes for 95% of the states…irrelevant and dumb. Not to mention I’m not adamantly against paying state tax, b/c I actually reap SOME of the benefits.The federal income tax doesn’t pay salaries for the government. I’m 30, SS is? GONE for me. Even if it wasn’t gone, if it were supposed to work how it was designed to I’d see 55% of the money I put into it…great MANDATORY retirement investment. But hey as long as its “fair” right? lol

  10. Jack Black says:

    Once upon a time,? before 1913, there was no stinking Fed Income Tax or IRS.” “There were no Food Stamps, Student Loans, Child Deduction$, Loopholes, Welfare, Energy, Health, Education, EPA Depts. There were no Czars. There were no? Grant$ handed out to just about anyone that could fill out a form. There was no Turbo Tax or H&R Block. Lots more trees, because they weren’t cut down to make piles of tax return forms.

  11. fuckoff187 says:

    romney didnt lie, he said federal not including state? and local.

  12. lis437 says:

    In the 50’s, under Eisenhower, the top marginal rate was 91 or 92% every year. Now the right claims a top rate of 36 or so would cause massive layoffs and business closings. The thing is, nothing of the sort happened under Eisenhower.

    The top rate was 60 something to 70 something, after Ike, till Ronnie. I don’t recall it ruining our economy.

    It’s all about the rich getting even richer – why should anyone have to scrape? by with 300 million when they can have 370 million or more.

  13. Codylupardus says:

    We agree that people should be rewarded for their work? in theory. But you think theft counts as earning money. I don’t. That is where we differ. 🙂

  14. mathicsatem says:

    Codylupardus:”People who do not work and just live on welfare are better than? the rich.”
    I rest my case.

  15. mathicsatem says:

    Ok, Codylapardus. How about we end our discussion by acknowledging that you are a mix of Marxist (which is the foundation of much communism and socialism) and an anarchist (which in essence involves no government). As such, you support this video and its ideas. We will also acknowledge that I basically believe we should be rewarded based on how valuable our work is, not based on the fact that we were born. You believe that if someone becomes successful, his or her money should? be confiscated.

  16. mathicsatem says:

    Cenk, your point is wrong. Romney says? INCOME TAX. I checked the INCOME TAX statistics. Mitt Romney is right.

  17. david chandler says:

    A flat tax solves everything. Children being the only deduction. We pay sales tax at a fixed rate. Correct?? A Flat tax across the board. Fair is fair!!

  18. Codylupardus says:

    ” just state exactly what you want politically ”
    I’m somewhere between a Marxist and an anarchist. That should give you some idea if you knew what those are…

    Dictionaries sometimes provide okay quick meaning. Multiple page definitions? are nice. Especially when the definitions are for words whose meanings have splintered over the years.

  19. Codylupardus says:

    Almost everyone who makes more than 1million/year would be included in “they”,

    Germany in the 30s was controlled by a “socialist” party. But they were fascists- on the opposite side of the spectrum.? So party name is irrelevant. And the child policy means that China is authoritarian (which means that are not Marxists or socialists). And that has nothing to do with the economic system (as that is what communism refers too).

  20. mathicsatem says:

    Don’t go off on? a tangent in hopes of confusing those reading your post with political jargon and elevating your image to someone who knows what he’s talking about, just state exactly what you want politically (other than cannibalizing the wealthy, you obviously want that) and that way you cannot use your made-up definitions of words and facts. W.T.I.D. has been published for over 100 years and is defined by prominent scholars from around the world. It is not half-assed. Your argument is.

  21. mathicsatem says:

    First of all, Codylupardus, you speak as though all rich people are one nebulous mass ¨they¨. Define ¨they¨. Also, I´m not proposing that every single rich person came across his or her fortune honestly, but to act as though you know the life story of every single rich human being betrays your ignorance.
    Secondly, please tell me your sources of political information, because the P.R.C. is still run by the Communist Party of China, and? the government still controls how many kids families have.

  22. Codylupardus says:

    Lol. I love sarcasm. Especially when people believe you were being serious. But no? one is that stupid, right?

  23. Codylupardus says:

    They didn’t earn it- other people did. They exploited the people who earned it and stole it.
    The most basic? governments usually prevent theft. Not sure how saying that the government should do its most basic job is authoritarian.
    Cuba and China are not Marxists. China is basically capitalist now. And Cuba is state socialist. I’m supportive of democratic socialism, Marxism, anarchy, and automation socialism. Not state socialism. Plus, its the USA that is holding the world back. So I will stay.

  24. Codylupardus says:

    Russia is not socialist. They may? have been for a few years directly following the revolution in the beginning of the 20th century and then quickly became state capitalists.

  25. Codylupardus says:

    Socialism implies no such thing. And if you ask anarchists (other names include libertarian, libertarian socialist, anarco-syndicalist/communist), socialism cannot have? a government as that goes against its very nature. I actually know where I am politically- the far-far left, between Marxist and anarcho-syndicalist. And I actually read Marxist, socialist, and anarchist materials. Not some 1/2 a**ed dictionary definition.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>