November 23rd, 2009
06:00 PM ET

Should the wealthy pay more taxes to send more troops to Afghanistan?

[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/11/23/soldiers.jpg caption="Should the wealthiest Americans pay more taxes to send more troops to Afghanistan?"]

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Some top Democrats think the wealthy should have to pony up more taxes in order to pay for a troop increase in Afghanistan.

Democrat Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, says people earning more than $200,000 or $250,000 a year should pay an "additional income tax."

Levin says richer Americans have done "incredibly well,” and that it's important to pay for a troop surge instead of increasing the federal debt.

Democratic Rep. David Obey, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, also says
he favors a so-called "war surtax."

Obey says that people making $400,000 or $500,000 per year should be asked to pay as much as 5 percent of their incomes, while lower earners might pay a smaller amount - down to 1 percent.

Obey says if we don't increase taxes, the war in Afghanistan will "bleed every dollar in the budget away from any other initiative." Unless of course the government cut spending elsewhere. Hah!

First they wanted to tax the rich to pay for health care reform. Now they want to do it to pay for more troops for war. This administration also plans to increase the top income tax rate. Pretty soon the rich won't be.

The White House suggests it could cost as much as 40 billion dollars per year to send 40,000 additional troops into Afghanistan. President Obama is expected to announce his decision in the next few weeks. He will meet with his national security team tonight - again.

Here’s my question to you: Should additional taxes be levied against wealthy Americans to pay for more troops in Afghanistan?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Bill from Mexico says:
I just saw your question about taxing the rich to pay for the additional troops in Afghanistan. That's fine with me. But I would prefer to tax those who are in favor of sending more troops.

Nancy says:
Is this the new catch phrase for 2009, tax the wealthy? I'm not wealthy and I'm beginning to get scared for this group of people. If we tax them for everything they have suggested, they will no longer be in the higher income bracket. We are not trying to spread the wealth around – we're spreading poverty.

Kevin from Chicago says:
Sure? Why not? I would fall into the tax bracket which would be exposed to the so-called "war tax"... and I don’t have an issue with ensuring the security of our nation.

Hansen from Canada says:
If each decision to go to war included a tax increase to pay for it, there would be a lot less wars.

Jeff from Hawaii says:
Jack, No, the rich should not be taxed for the war in Afghanistan. All of us as Americans should do our fair share, from the poorest to the wealthiest. Why doesn't the government try selling war bonds or placing a value added tax on all goods and services? Our troops deserve the best from all of us, not just from the elite.

Brad from Memphis, Tennessee says:
Jack, It's two separate questions: Yes, the wealthy should pay more taxes. No, we don't need any more useless deaths in Afghanistan.

Jack says:
No way. If you keep taxing the people, rich or poor, you will have another Boston Tea Party and believe me, it’s coming!

Adrienne says:
A resounding "yes”! The rich run this country, and if there's a sacrifice from them, the war will come to a screeching halt! About time!

Filed under: Afghanistan • Taxes
soundoff (300 Responses)
  1. Russ in PA

    Now, wait, didn't CNN hear about the Share the Sacrifice Act of 2010 where Democrats want to tax all of us for the war, and not just the wealthy? I guess it's true that the two parties are the same duck with different colors: neither party want to end the wars.

    Come on, people! Demand an end to the wars! Buying the "fight them over there" line is just nonsense! Some day everyone is going to regret not having voted for Ron Paul when they had the chance...

    November 23, 2009 at 1:57 pm |
  2. Don

    No, they should be taxed to pay for health care reform. We can afford to spend a trillion dollars over 10 years for health care, but we cannot afford to spend a trillion on mismanaged (Afganistan) and unjust and unjustifiable (Iraq) wars. Get the trrops out and save lives and money!!

    Houston, Texas

    November 23, 2009 at 2:01 pm |
  3. Sandra in Temecula, CA

    No – the way this administration is going the wealthy should just pack up and move to another country, NOW and take their jobs with them. Instead of getting all the tax revenue Obama currently gets, he will get NONE. Even the wealthy can only be pushed so far, take a look at New Jersey and what happened when their taxes sky rocketed......they left.

    November 23, 2009 at 2:04 pm |
  4. Conor in Chicago

    Raise taxes during a war? What a terrible idea. Better to borrow from foreign governments and depreciate the dollar into extinction.

    November 23, 2009 at 2:15 pm |
  5. Jimmy from Houston, TX

    Sure why not? Let's just suck every last dollar out of their pockets until they are just as poor as the rest of us. As per Democrats own words, their goal is to...........eliminate economic inequality. What better way to do it, than tax them exclusively to fund every spending project on the face of the earth until they are equal.

    November 23, 2009 at 2:16 pm |
  6. Charlie in Belen, New Mexico

    The middle and lower classes pay a much larger percentage of income for taxes than the "wealthy", who have tax lawers to find loopholes etc to reduce "taxable income" as much as possible. Isn't it time that they carried their share ??? After all it isn't their priviliged private school offspring doing the actual fighting and dying . That honor is reserved for the kids who can't afford to go to an expensive private university, or even a state college. So, I say YES. The "wealthy" should be charged for the "privilages" derived from their wealth. It's only money.

    November 23, 2009 at 2:16 pm |
  7. diridi

    none...Afganistan is a waste of thinking....don't you learn out of Iraq????

    November 23, 2009 at 2:41 pm |
  8. Heather

    How about a windfall tax on people who own stock in those companies which produce arms and provide support services for the troops?

    November 23, 2009 at 2:43 pm |
  9. southerncousin

    Oh certainly the should. That is the standard liberal answer for everything. Class warfare until there are no more hard working, successful people left in the country. I would like to see the gang members sent to Afghanistan and we could perhaps solve that problem, but I am sure that Obama & the libertards want to make sure we keep paying for all of the costs of the "great society" without ending any of the problems.

    November 23, 2009 at 2:46 pm |
  10. Marry

    Well, they seem to have more they want to protect, right? Since many of them are not willing to protect the US with their sons and daughters blood, maybe they should pay! Best would of cause be – not to start wars for profit, and perhaps one should try to find out where the wealth comes from. If it is out of “war profiteering” the tax on that should be 99.9%. There might be a lot less war if that was the tax on it. Remember the old question: Imagine there was a war and nobody would go there.
    At the moment in Germany

    November 23, 2009 at 2:48 pm |
  11. dick from indiana

    I would rather send the wealthy Americans to Afghanistan. In no time at all the Taliban would be homeless, bankrupted, broke and hungry – just like most people in America.

    November 23, 2009 at 2:48 pm |
  12. Charles, Lansing, MI

    What is wrong with the levy of a war profits tax on the companies that are making money off the war such as Haliburton. They should pay back half of their unconscionable profits.

    November 23, 2009 at 2:50 pm |
  13. Tom in Desoto, Tx

    George W Bush, Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld, they're wealthy Americans, should foot the bill for the wars, They were their ideas.

    November 23, 2009 at 2:53 pm |
  14. Michael Alexandria, VA

    Absolutely, since the alternative is to borrow more money from the rich or from China.

    November 23, 2009 at 2:56 pm |
  15. Richard Fairview, Texas

    No Jack they should not. We need to get all of our troops the poor the middleclass and the wealthy ones the hell out of Afghanistan. The government mandating paying more for things because you are wealthy and can afford them does not make them right. Taking money from those that have it and redistributing it for causes that make no sense is a fools errand. Forcing western ways on to middle eastern countries is wrong. Let them decide their own way of life.

    November 23, 2009 at 2:59 pm |
  16. Scott - San Diego, CA

    No and anyone who honestly thinks the rich should be funding all the spending needs to get off public assistance, get a job and start paying taxes like the rest of us. There is no longer an incentive to work hard and earn a decent living or run a business, that provides jobs.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:00 pm |
  17. Joan B

    You push the wealthy too far, and there won't be any wealthy to ride the backs of. Review what is happening in New York.
    We are lower middle class and can understand common sense.
    Joan B

    November 23, 2009 at 3:03 pm |
  18. Melissa

    No, the wealthy should pay more taxes to contribute to society in the form of proper health care for all that doesn't bankrupt civilians or the government.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:10 pm |
  19. Mike, Syracuse, NY

    Jack, 53% of us pay ALL federal tax. How about taxing the freeloaders? Or better yet, restrict the right to vote to those who pay taxes. I think you'll find we get a balanced budget overnight.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:12 pm |
  20. M.L. Squier

    No, bring the troops home now. Additional taxes should be levied against wealthy Americans to pay for Health Care.

    M.L. Squier in El Paso

    November 23, 2009 at 3:13 pm |
  21. Harold, in ANCHORAGE, AK

    No, and neither should what is left of the middle class. We need to cut our losses and get out. Why should American lives be sacrificed to support drug and war lords?

    November 23, 2009 at 3:14 pm |
  22. Terry, Chandler AZ

    Or how about less taxes for all of us and bring the troops home?

    November 23, 2009 at 3:16 pm |
  23. Andy in Vancouver, BC

    Here's a thought: up the taxes of people who got us into these wars. I'm sure Bush and Cheney have some memoir fees forthcoming that could pay for more troops.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:19 pm |
  24. Ed

    This didn't start with Cheney or Bush. During the Civil War, draftees could buy their way out of the war. They should either pay for it or they can go to Afghanistan and Iraq themselves.


    November 23, 2009 at 3:20 pm |

    Yes, but not just to send more troops to Afghanistan, but for "anything" needed: why just to send more troops? Why not to build more & better bridges and roads and for more and better health care? The more it's you get, the more it's you (have to) pay!! There is nothing wrong with A SOCIAL LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLE like that: the lack of such a US Tax System is what caused the US FINANCIAL CRISIS to BEGIN WITH: IF the US GOV had MUCH MORE RICH PEOPLE'S TAX MONEY US wouldn't have SUCH AN INCREDIBLY HIGH BIG MONEY DEFICIT!

    November 23, 2009 at 3:21 pm |
  26. Moe Thompson Texas

    Certainly ! ! they make more money from the increase on their stocks a make weapons......Takes money and war to make money as history proves..

    November 23, 2009 at 3:23 pm |
  27. Gary of El Centro, Ca

    If the decision is made to send more troops, then maybe the wealthy should be the ones to pay for it since I don't expect that they or their children will be the ones participating.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:26 pm |
  28. Tom from Philly

    Let me think... Well rich people are generally republicans whose policies have created and nurtured the working poor and economic conditions that keep wages down forcing the poor to join the military for the only legal opportunity to succeed that they might ever have in their life. Democrats are generally anti war, republicans want war. Ok, i made up my mind unleash the nuclear arsenal right up the arse of the rich and blast the money out. Where is the unified republican / conservative voice that is blasting obama for deficit spending?

    November 23, 2009 at 3:27 pm |
  29. Melissa M

    Well, additional taxes certainly cannot be levied against the poor or middle class.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:30 pm |
  30. Lou from North Carolina

    We should bring the troops home from Afghanistan and Iraq and Saudi Arabia and any other Muslim country and then we would have enough money to take care of America. Use the weathy money to fund a health care system.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:31 pm |
  31. Ro from Ohio

    We should not be in Afghanistan, period. It is another Viet Nam.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:34 pm |
  32. bonnie from nj

    Yes, absolutely. They are reaping the benefits of the defense budget and I doubt they have many actually doing the fighting. The soldiers are of overwhemingly middle to lower class economic status. They should start paying extra taxes for something and this would suit the bill fine.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:36 pm |
  33. A. Smith, Oregon

    Jack, the Wealthy in America should help pay to have America leave Iraq and Afghanistan as quickly as possible. After all Jack, that would be in mega American Corporations best interest.

    Jack, the Wealthy in America should help pay to help treat PTS soldiers that Bush-Cheney had removed from basic medical treatment after their deployment and further service in the US Military.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:37 pm |
  34. Simonsays/Orlando

    They should confiscate any income earned above $1,000,000. Let the Hollywood crowd and the professional sports players pay for this war.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:38 pm |
  35. Hubert Bertrand Oberlin La.

    Congress is not paying att. to 100% of the troops.They only hear what they want to hear. Why should anyone pay.It's another way for congress to hide more money and blame us tax payers

    November 23, 2009 at 3:39 pm |
  36. Peg from NY

    Yes. The wealthy got a nice ride with our previous President. Now they need to own up and pony up for the 98% less fortunate U.S. citizens.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:40 pm |
  37. CurtJ

    Why not Jack? We're already paying the 6 billion sent each year to the Israelis in aid, which they in turn give it back to the U.S. to the munitions and war materials and supplies, in the industrial War Complex. See who profitted off the backs of our over 4500 dead military or the 1,000 Mercenaries who died profitting off the pain, suffering, murder and slaugher of civilians in a war zone? Did any family relations, friends or political donors to Bush, Cheney, or other politicians and officials Make a profit off any decision or vote> Conflict of Interest and Collusion is against the law. When are we as a nation, going to say enough is enough, and start prosecuting and driving these crooked Republican, Democratic and Independent legislators, and officials out of our government?

    November 23, 2009 at 3:42 pm |
  38. David in San Diego

    No one should pay more (or even anything) to prop up an unsustainable and corrupt regime there, one that thinks it can't provide its own police security for five years or more! No more Vietnams! ! Bring the troops home, and protect the homeland through diplomacy abroad and intelligence work at home.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:46 pm |
  39. Brad in Memphis, TN

    Jack, it's two separate questions. Yes, the wealthy should pay more taxes. No, we don't need any more useless deaths in Afghanistan.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:47 pm |
  40. Gina in Racine, Wi

    Why shouldn't the wealthy pay, Jack? After all....it is their war.

    These wealthy fat cats are making lots and lots of cold hard cash from both Wars.

    But the poor and working class are the ones who get to sacrifice their childrens blood.....for the wealthiests treasure.

    Not too many rich kids enlisting in the armed forces....the incentives (money, tuition, etc) isn't appealing because they don't need it.

    November 23, 2009 at 3:49 pm |
  41. Ricardo - Cypress, TX

    Dear Jack,
    I'm a christian who is totally against violence and "gun stuff", and I support 100 % our democratic system . But if the MORONS over there in congress approve any additional taxes to be levied against wealthy Americans to pay for more troops in Afghanistan BEFORE approve any health care reform our something like that to help the AMERICAN PEOPLE we really should ALL make a revolution in this country and take those bastards away from the power !!! And send them back to their bosses in CHINA...
    PS: I voted for Obama last election !!! And I already regret it very much. The only thing that make me feel better about that is that the other option was John McCain. Look what we have become...God help us !!!

    November 23, 2009 at 3:51 pm |
  42. Mr. D

    Rich people paying for poor people to go to war-how novel. This has been going on since the beginning of time. How about the poor paying to send the rich to war? Read my lips "no new taxes to keep win-less wars going".

    November 23, 2009 at 4:00 pm |
  43. The Broker.

    No! No! No! If they have to pay extra Tax etc. Then it should be towards kids welfare and schooling..

    November 23, 2009 at 4:02 pm |
  44. Scott - San Diego, CA

    No, No and No. The new rich will be earning 199,000.00 and not one dollar more. People who work hard to earn a decent living shouldn't be the ATM machines to the Democrats over spending. Time for a flat tax and EVERYONE contributes the same percent, no more tax breaks for the 47% of Americans that pay no income tax.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:02 pm |
  45. Maria

    I believe Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, and the Shrub should foot the bill all on their own.

    They wanted the invason of Iraq...and by extension invasions of any country with oil to be stolen. So let them pay for these invasions and wars.



    November 23, 2009 at 4:05 pm |
  46. Dan from Alliance, OH

    The wealthy are alway the target for taxes.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:11 pm |
  47. Fred R Deleon

    Well, the way I see it is that this Congress is looking how to get the money they are waisting. Before taxing more Americans they should name ONE good thing they've done in behalf of America.
    Have they come up with THE JOBS ISSUE for AMERICA?

    November 23, 2009 at 4:12 pm |
  48. Pablo in Arlington Texas

    the wealthy should pay more taxes, PERIOD!
    Arlington, Texas

    November 23, 2009 at 4:16 pm |
  49. Jackie in Dallas

    They have to, Jack...those of us in the middle class and below have been tapped out paying for their bailouts! We already pay more for health care, food, and a greater percent in taxes because we don't have all those tax shelters! Besides, it is the wealthy making MONEY from the wars that are keeping them going.

    I'd also like to see them pay extra taxes if the companies they are executives in, or own, send jobs offshore. Make them pay the equivalent of what an American worker would have paid in Federal taxes for every job they ship offshore!

    November 23, 2009 at 4:19 pm |
  50. Rory Murray

    I am by no means wealthy but...Hell No!
    We need to capture Bin Laden, put his head on a stick and get out!

    Want to save money? Let's cancel all the cost-plus, no-bid contracts with Haliburton, Blackwater, CACI, KBR and other mercenary "War Pigs" that charge a fortune for shoddy work, and actually put our
    troops in harms way?

    Rory Murray
    San Bernardino, CA

    November 23, 2009 at 4:20 pm |
  51. Joe in MO

    Everybody should pay more taxes to support the war, and there should be a draft. George W. Bush's big hoodoo on the American people was to fight two wars without reinstating a draft and raising taxes. That decision liked to have destroyed us all.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:21 pm |
  52. JENNA

    Should additional taxes be levied against wealthy Americans to pay for more troops in Afghanistan?


    What we need to see is an exit strategy! You know the one GW Bush left for whoever replaced him..

    As it is, Al Qaeda is in Pakistan and our tax dollars need to be used to rebuild OUR nation and not Afghanistan and Iraq.

    Roseville CA

    November 23, 2009 at 4:21 pm |
  53. DT from Fort Walton Beach, FL

    In my opinion yes, the wealthy are just that...wealthy. They will be fine regardless with their 5 homes and 20 car garages. Our troops deserve way more then they are currently getting...especically since they are fighting for those very same people.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:22 pm |
  54. Karen - Missouri

    More twisting of the news and meanings...are you all Republican or something? Boo hoo...rich have to pay taxes. Fine...draft the rich instead and let them serve time overseas.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:23 pm |
  55. Arlene, Illinois

    As a retired Senior I thought I already paid my share when we
    sent soldiers into Iraq?

    November 23, 2009 at 4:24 pm |
  56. Alex in Seattle

    Why not? Some of the rich are the ones profiting from government contracts for equipment, supplies and mercenaries. The rest profit from the stock market which benefits from the war industry humming along during these protracted conflicts. The government pays $400 a gallon for fuel delivered in the combat zone. Shouldn't the government get some of that exorbitant price back via taxes?

    November 23, 2009 at 4:24 pm |
  57. Tom, Avon, Me, The Heart of Democracy

    The gap between rich and poor is greater now than it was at the time of the pharaohs. You're not crying over an endangered species.

    Having said that, if you threw a military umbrella over just one tribe and wiped out every other tribe in Afghanistan, you could possibly set up a working government. Otherwise you're just wasting their money.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:26 pm |
  58. Rick Medina,OH


    Although at first blush it seems appealing to see a few thousand Goldman Sachs guys take a 'hair cut,' this is bad policy. We cannot continue to treat the wealth and incomes of our nation's most successful people as a 'piggy bank' we can tap at will. The purpose of the tax code is to pay for government expenses, not fund agendas, or encourage or discourage anything. It needs to be perceived as stable and fair.

    Maybe we should just send the rest of the troops home.

    Rick, Medina, OH

    November 23, 2009 at 4:29 pm |
  59. steve

    They should go back to the tax rate they were at before C-Augustus started handing out the treats.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:30 pm |
  60. Jayne

    I don't think we should be sending more troops to Afghanistan or anywhere else, but if that decision is made, ALL AMERICANS need to contribute – rich, poor and in between. If we had paid for George Bush's Iraqi folly we wouldn't be in the horrendous economic mess we're now experiencing. A whole lot of people talk tough – usually ones who have no skin in the game – and they ought to pay for the privilege. Is there any way we can tax only chickenhawks?

    November 23, 2009 at 4:34 pm |
  61. Nancy, Grand Ledge,MI

    No! I am all for the wealthy paying more taxes, but not for this war!! We should bring our troops home before our country is bankrupted the way the Soviet Union was. If we have as much success as they did, we can kiss the old USA goodbye. We will have 50 independent republics instead. Those who already want to secede from the union and those advocating stronger states rights will be happy to oblige!

    November 23, 2009 at 4:35 pm |
  62. Ed from California

    It's been the case that we get into wars (1&2) to help us get out of a recession ( build for the war effort). U.S. workers build tanks, trucks, guns, bombs etc.. The govt puts Americans to work and it puts money in their pockets, right?
    How many Americans are out of work? Where are their jobs? If those people were working wouldn't they be paying taxes? Wouldn't those taxes be used for the war effort? Did you see the opening of SNL over the weekend? It seems that some comedy writer on a TV show has a better pulse on the situation than you do.
    If were going to fight this battle we need our jobs back, we need to start the draft (yeah, I know), and we need HONEST leaders in charge of our country, who will tell us the sorted truth.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:37 pm |
  63. keith in ky

    How about we take the people already costing us the tax payers , the able bodied ones, and just send them to Afganistan,problem solved, ha

    November 23, 2009 at 4:38 pm |
  64. Mode (PDX, OR)

    I think the wealthy need to sober up and grow up. Its counter intuitive to be fighting forward wars while our tax and trade policies hemorrhage wealth. If the rich would only invest in their own Country, then we wouldn't need to tax them more.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:40 pm |
  65. Ron, in Ohio

    I don't fall into that category but I believe it is wrong to tax people for being successful. How many things can they tax the rich for? They are sure taking away any incentive for people to do well.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:40 pm |
  66. Mode (PDX, OR)

    I think the wealthy need to sober up and grow up. Its counter intuitive to be fighting foreign wars while our tax and trade policies hemorrhage wealth. If the rich would only invest in their own Country, then we wouldn't need to tax them more.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:41 pm |
  67. John from Alabama

    Jack: Listen!! The wealthiest in this nation got taxcut from 2004 untl the end of 2010. They did not pay for 2 wars and the restoration of New Orleans. It is about time we all put all in to the pot, especially those who have the most to give because of the freedoms they now have in America. Why ask a specialist in the Army to bear all the weigh while his family is on food stamps back at home.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:44 pm |
  68. Steve, Clifton, VA

    I remember during the Viet-Nam war all Americans sacrificed be they wealthy, poor or middle class. The recent wars which are fought with the products of the volunteer army places the burden of freedom on the poor. Yes the wealthy should have to help pay for the freedom that this wonderful; country enjoys!! The wealthy enjoys the freedom, the tax cuts and the life styles of the rich. Yes they should help pay for America;s wars/fights for freedom and for the health care of this great nation.


    November 23, 2009 at 4:44 pm |
  69. Kevin

    I think it would be a pretty quick way to get our troops back home. It's the GOP's war and always has been so they should pay for it. They always want somebody else to foot the bill with either money or blood preserve their "Freedom". Never offering a cent or drop of their own. I'd bet my bottom dollar if it came down to a tax increase on the top 1% to continue funding a war against these criminals the GOP hypocrits would be ready and willing to abandon all efforts to bring Bin Laden to justice.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:45 pm |
  70. sharon


    November 23, 2009 at 4:46 pm |
  71. Will

    While middle class income has stagnated for the last two decades, the richest Americans income has skyrocketed. During the same two decades the top tax bracket dropped by over 60% (did your taxes drop by more than 1/2 in the last 20 years?) The wars in the middle east are over oil.

    So the rich get even richer. They are the ones that wanted these wars, they are the ones who profit from it, let them pay for it.

    Canon City CO

    November 23, 2009 at 4:47 pm |
  72. Jane (Minnesota)

    Absolutely! Most of them are probably benefiting from those ill-advised wars – easpecially if they own part of the defense contracting business.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:48 pm |
  73. ron mancini

    We should send all our politicians to the war in Afghanistan,including all in the white house,then we can start over with average american citizens holding political offices.Oh,all lobyists must go to the war also.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:51 pm |
  74. Larry from Georgetown, Tx

    We have a lot of audacity to tell Afghanistan to clean up their act and solve their corruption problem when we are the most corrupt society on the face of the earth. No we should not spend one more dime, nor lose one more American life in that country or Iraq.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:51 pm |
  75. Diane Dagenais Turbide

    The high cost of war is Another reason to speed up the training of the Afghan! How about taxing military related businesses making a bundle from war...I'm sure they can share some of their wealth back in the U.S.!

    November 23, 2009 at 4:52 pm |
  76. texasgomer

    Yes, a thousand times, yes!

    Ray Kinserlow
    Lubbock, Texas

    November 23, 2009 at 4:56 pm |
  77. Richard, Syracuse, NY

    How about this idea. How about the Wealthy send their own KIDS to Afghanistan to help fight. I love how all the Wealthy's kids get to sit back at home while those who make less money and have less influence run off to fight the wars that make the Wealthy Wealthier.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:57 pm |
  78. Steve Canada

    It seems that putting these costs on a "VISA" card like the other administrations have done is not the answer..Maybe it would force some people to consider where to fight, instead of the "Fight them All" mentality that seems so prevalent anymore..I mean, really, how many countries have you got troops in now, 50?, 60?....WOW

    November 23, 2009 at 4:58 pm |
  79. Irv Lilley Ephrata, Pa.

    Jack, No the wealthy should not be taxed more. Bush , and Cheney
    got us into this mess. Let them pay more.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:59 pm |
  80. Rob of Brooklyn

    no. We need to get out of these countries. Its time to worry about the USA. Enough with these people wasting our hard earned money. They don't want us there .Everyone else left that country and we should too.

    November 23, 2009 at 4:59 pm |
  81. dave

    No. If we are going to fight they should pay their fair share. But if you are a defense contractor they should pay more because they're profiting from the war.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:01 pm |
  82. Bizz, Quarryville, Pennsylvania

    If you were to ask the rich they would probably say they are being attacked unfairly. I don't think that is the case. I think they're finally ask to pay their fair share. For too long they have been give tax breaks that have allow them to pay less tax than the people who cleaned their homes and offices. Their children hardly ever fight on the front lines in wars and the only connection they have with wars are on the business side. Halliburton being a good example of that. Cheney who ran the company kept out of the Vietnam war because of his money and influence just like Bush and Clinton. They going to go kicking and screaming and fighting back with money and influence but if we want to continue fighting wars they have to help pay their fair share.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:01 pm |
  83. J Sanz

    A war surtax ? Yes. But why only to wealthy Americans. Our soldiers are fighting for all of us not just the wealthy. I personally think we should get out of Afghanistan but if the majority of Americans think our soldiers need to stay there then let us all contribute and help in any way we can. Let us all pay taxes instead of borrowing from the Chinese and provide our soldiers with the best weapons, resources and equipment we can.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:02 pm |
  84. Paulette from Dallas,PA

    I think taxes on the wealthy should be higher than on the middle class but not to send more troops to Afghanistan. We don't belong their and should be developing an exit strategy not trying to figure out how we are going to pay to stay their and lose more lives and cause much more heart ache.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:05 pm |
  85. Lori - PA


    The wealthy can't be expected to pay for everything. Would those in Senate and Congress put a freeze on giving themselves raises for five years? And why can't those in Congress and Senate stop approving spending that does not make sense?

    November 23, 2009 at 5:06 pm |
  86. Darin

    I think the war should end, period. That money (should taxes increase or the rich dish out the cash) should be spent in our own country in our own economy, not on a war with no end in sight. When are we going to realize that after 8 years, nothing has been resolved. Wake up America!

    November 23, 2009 at 5:09 pm |
  87. ckdarwin

    I think the war should end, period. That money (should taxes increase or the rich dish out the cash) should be spent in our own country in our own economy, not on a war with no end in sight. When are we going to realize that after 8 years, nothing has been resolved. Wake up America!

    November 23, 2009 at 5:10 pm |
  88. Johnny C (Los Angeles)

    Hi Jack –

    I am beginning to see much more clearly how Congress and the House of Representatives work ... while most Americans are cutting their excess spending to make budget, our Legislators don't need to worry about that. They have a new definition for the rich who have worked hard for their money:

    R Relief
    I Income for
    C Congress and the
    H House of Representatives

    Enough already ... Stop thinking that taxing is the only way ... Americans deserve good government and postponing some of their spending actions until we can afford them again will be appreciated by the masses.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  89. Jesse Andrade

    the wealthy should pay more for the war in afghanistan, because they are a part of this country too and should pay their share based on their income and assets.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  90. Jerry Jacksonville, Fl.

    What need to happen is get the hell out of there, when will the idiots in Washington learn that you can't kill a belief, you can kill all the Afghans over there and you'll never win the war. Bring our soldiers home

    November 23, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  91. Subhash

    It is very difficult to say no to a cause related to soldiers.
    However,having said this,is it not time to think of the millions who are hungry in the US....stop the war and invest in the country .

    November 23, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  92. Sarah

    Yes, wealthy people should pay much more tax on every areas.

    Irvine, Ca.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  93. Stanley, NC

    Additional taxes should be levied against ALL Americans to pay for the wars. Maybe if the middle class felt the pain of war, albeit financial, we would hold pols more accountable for their chest thumping. There should be more than a law specific to the current wars but a constitutional amendment requiring an automatic increase in taxes for any household with income greater than $50,000 per year anytime our military in engaged in any action not just "war" for period greater than 30 days. Remember Vietnam wasn't a declared war.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:17 pm |
  94. Janice From NJ

    Well, since their kids aren't out there dying, why not?

    November 23, 2009 at 5:17 pm |
  95. MagPad

    I agree with Levin. They are able to 'loophole' their way out of paying most of what they owe anyway.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  96. John Hughes

    Yes! They have been accepting the safty that the un-wealthy military vets have provided them since the Civil War!

    November 23, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  97. Jeff in E. Lyme, CT

    No, however I believe those who profiteered off the Iraq debacle & conspired in the lies that allowed it should, by force if necessary, foot the entire bill for that. This includes Halliburton, Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rice, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Exxon/Mobil, Robertson, Limbaugh, etc. and be prosecuted.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:19 pm |
  98. Victor in Saanich, B.C. Canada

    Let me get this right !! The wealthy should pay higher taxes to send more of the lower classes to their deaths on a battlefront that has little chance of EVER becoming a successful endeavour in a country where most live under medieval circumstance and have little education ??? !!!
    Save the extra tax money for internal matters and BRING THE TROOPS HOME ASAP !!!!

    November 23, 2009 at 5:22 pm |
  99. Wm, Penna


    YES !

    The radical tax cuts for the rich must be ended.

    Taxes for all of us must be raised.

    It is unpatriotic not to support our military.

    Stealing from our children, our returning troops is cowardly!

    November 23, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  100. pat

    NO.at what point will the democrats realize that robbing the rich will not win a war.for the love of God!let's stop paying politicians for their votes and cut all foriegn aid till ou debt's are paid. stop all domestic aid till our debt is gone unless it involves loss of life in america.
    sop paying farmers to not grow food in america . when we grow too much ,then sell it to other nations.US first.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:24 pm |
  101. Perry

    The rich got some big tax breaks during the Bush administration and their taxes need to be raised. We do not need to spend any more funds on troops in foreign countrys, bring them all home and save both money and lives. Remember Viet Nam??

    November 23, 2009 at 5:26 pm |
  102. HD in Phoenix, AZ

    Absolutely. And...these wealthy GOP chicken hawks should also pay back taxes towards their war against Iraq as it was their special interests and their choice in White House politicians that drove such illegal and unconstitutional actions.

    HD in Phoenix, AZ

    November 23, 2009 at 5:26 pm |
  103. Ryan, Galesburg, IL

    How about if the oil companies pay instead? Half the reason we are there is to supports George Bush's little pipeline project, and he left us stuck in Afganistan with no good way out. Let's first admit why we are really there, and then find an appropriate solution to get us out.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:26 pm |
  104. ken, NJ

    Absolutely. Roosevelt raised the taxes to 90% for millionaires to pay for world war II. The same needs to be done to pay for iraq, afghanistan, and soon to come iran. This is a no brainer. The greedy need to shut up and pay up.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:26 pm |
  105. harold schwartz

    The rich should pay more because they have more assets to protect.
    And since the poor can not get jobs they are the ones fighting these wars, let the rich volunteer to fight like the rest of us,(joke,joke) These guys and gals over their getting killed and wounded while the wall street gang and the banks were stealing their homes. That's what the fat cats were doing for the war effort.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:28 pm |
  106. Richard, Kankakee, IL.

    Yes in the past the wealth use to pay far more around 90% of their income, but the Republicans have tricked the American People into allowing them to pay 5 to 10 points less in taxes then the rest of us because they have enough money to start businesses that employs people! We need to go back to the past!

    November 23, 2009 at 5:29 pm |
  107. George Montrose,PA

    Bring back the draft! When fortunate sons and daughters and non- believers are forced to bare all the hardships that our overly stessesd troops are facing now, maybe the war would come to its due end.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:32 pm |
  108. Uncle Sam in Florida

    No. Just bring all the troops home, but if there must be a tax, then tax the big corporations that are making all the big bucks from the war materials that are manufactured for the war in Afganistan and in Iraq.
    I'm sure some of the big CEO's of these corporations are wealthy Americans!!!!!

    November 23, 2009 at 5:32 pm |
  109. Chris Walker

    Yes, but not just the wealthy. there should be an across-the-board war surtax on everyone until the Afghanistan and Iraq wars are both paid for in full, including interest. Only by ensuring that all taxpayers share the sacrifice will these wars ever end.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:33 pm |
  110. Tina Tx

    What an assine idea. Why not re-instate the draft? Make all young men and women sign up at age 18 for the draft. I heard you don't do this anymore. Is this the truth?

    November 23, 2009 at 5:34 pm |
  111. Ray in Nashville

    Jack, forget the war tax, we should go back to taxing the rich proportionately anyway, back the way it was before President Reagan began his enormous wealth redistribution program that favored the very rich.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:37 pm |
  112. steve - Waterloo, Iowa

    Yes, and on every other American too. We cannot continue follow the Bush/Cheney economic plan. Iraqui oil will pay for the war, yah right. If President Bush would of had to fully fund a war, I don't think we would be fighting two wars, one justified the other a Cheney/Haliburton deal.
    If it's worth going to war it's worth going to the American people and asking for the money to fund it.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:39 pm |
  113. Dennis North Carolina

    we should pay to support our troops.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:40 pm |
  114. Adam Simi Valley, CA

    I guess that is fair because they are only fighting to support and protect the wealthy...wait a minute. Why don't we just drop the formality and make wealth illegal, except for union bosses and government bureaucrats, pay everyone else a living wage and let good old Uncle Sam take care of us all. I think the Dems would be fine with that, but who is going to go to work at that point?

    November 23, 2009 at 5:41 pm |
  115. Loren, Chicago

    This is so wrong that I'm at a loss for words. Is that the answer of the Democrats–just raise taxes on those with higher incomes whenever they want to add a program? Whatever happened to fiscal responsibility. Or even "change". This is just business as usual for the Democrats. I don't know what's on their minds, but you'd think the Democrats don't want to be reelected at the mid-term elections.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:45 pm |
  116. anthony...nj

    Under George W. Bush, the wealthy have been raking in the dough for years. It's time for them to pay the piper since most of their ill-gotten gains were acquired before the Wall Street collapse.
    I have no sympathy for them and much loyalty to our beleagured troops. While the rich lounge in the sun, our troops are dying in it.
    Since patriotism isn't enough, let's mandate their contribution.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:45 pm |
  117. Lynda, Greenville NC

    I am no wear near that income bracket and I feel its rediculous to tihnk that every solution to spending in the government is add another tax to the "rich". The "rich" are so because they are smart and motivated and work REALLY hard for what they have, which they can do in another country that doesn't take their money for no reason. Why should a doctor be required to pay more to support a war than their nurse or secretary when they both are benefitting (or suffering) because of it equally? On top of the fact that the doctor is already paying a higher percentage of income?

    November 23, 2009 at 5:45 pm |

    Yes. Why not.
    Jack, just look at the familys average income from which these soldiers came. I don't expect you see a large number of soldiers out there who come from rich familys. Rich kids have much more incentive to avoid the military because of the silver spoon syndrome.
    With that in mind the rich can at least send in thier millions to support the war effort, or is that also too much to ask.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:45 pm |
  119. Michael Roepke - Dallas, TX

    Almost every dollar we have spent in the middle east since WWII has been a crude oil subsidy and cheep oil has allowed corporate America to make selfish choices and amass fortunes. Now that it is time to pay the tab, shouldn’t the people that sat around the table break out their wallets?

    November 23, 2009 at 5:49 pm |
  120. concern denver Co

    Yes If Mccain & Cheney want this war then yes they should pay for it becasue we should not be in a war we can not afford bring our troops home and give us helath reform with a public option

    November 23, 2009 at 5:54 pm |
  121. GWTripp, Mch'sburg, PA

    Those who have excess wealth and who believe in this war should donate as much as they can for this effort. (This would be tax deductible, of course)Tax not the peasants who toileth in the fields. Obama and his merry men would'st be well advised to send in the Peace Corps and United Nations to help the Afghanis build schools and wells and to plant pomegranates instead of poppies while the king's men (International Coalition and US Troops) protect them all from ne’er-do-wells.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:55 pm |
  122. Lucy

    Idealistically, of course not. Realistically, it's probably not the worst idea. Meaning, SHOULD they be taxed more, no, but I don't think we SHOULD be in a war to begin with.
    SF, CA

    November 23, 2009 at 5:55 pm |
  123. Chad N.

    I am a veteran. I don't think that the weathly should be taxed more than anyone else when it comes to paying for the war. I believe the war is for them though. Rather than taxing them so they can pay for low and middle income people to go and fight the wars for them, I think it would be better for them to volunteer themselves and thier sons and daughters to go off to war and fight for whatever agenda it is that they have. I will fight for what is right and not ask them to fight for me, I think I should be able to demand the same from them. They can go and fight for what they believe is right and not ask me or mine to do it for them.

    Chad N., Fresno California

    November 23, 2009 at 5:55 pm |
  124. Ken M, Millington MI.

    Hell Jack. Yeah sure if the Democrats want to lose the Majority in Congress. What a fine mess this country is in we can't stimulate the job market without another stimulus which is more debt for us and we are caught paying for endless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Not to mention Health care reform costs and the list could go on. Mean while all our Republican and Democratic leadership can do is fight and bicker. My God what a mess were in!

    November 23, 2009 at 5:56 pm |
  125. Cliffton Whitaker

    If you have never been deployed to fight for the freedom of our country, you should do whatever it takes to show support. Many Americans preach and complain about Iraq and Afganistan. Most of them have never served in our military, but are allowed freedom of speech. Since we have those that talk and those that do. Those that talk should pay for those that do.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:56 pm |
  126. John

    What a great idea. Yes, they should because that is the only way a stupid war will end.

    November 23, 2009 at 5:57 pm |
  127. Dan - Saratoga Springs UT

    Of course the rich should pay more. How else are we supposed to keep expanding government programs and spending. Heaven forbid we actually make cuts to any government programs and ask the federal government to 'live within its means' or some other antiquated idea. Lets try that good ol' soak the rich policy – see how far we can push those who create jobs...

    November 23, 2009 at 5:57 pm |
  128. Tom from Vermilion, Ohio

    $40 Billion per 40,000 troups per year? That comes to $1 Million per troup per year! Who in the hell is grossing $950,000 plus per troup per year? (That comes to $38 Billion Plus per Year). Those Corporations, CEOs and individuals are the ones who should be taxed!

    November 23, 2009 at 6:01 pm |
  129. concern denver Co

    Yes If Mccain & Cheney want this war then yes they should pay for it becasue we should not be in a war we can not afford bring our troops home and give us helath reform with a public option

    November 23, 2009 at 6:01 pm |
  130. Tino

    For war? NO! For health care? YES!

    November 23, 2009 at 6:03 pm |
  131. RJ from Lake,MI

    Tough question but I believe that we should get the hell out of there now. I doubt it will happen but thats what needs to be done! If they wont start a draft and start taking these young men and women into the military fairly despite of wealth class yes they should have to pay more! Its all the poor kids in this country that are dying over there, not the rich kids! So if they wont start the draft then yes tax the rich for failure to pitch in equally!

    November 23, 2009 at 6:03 pm |
  132. Ann C from Nashville

    Wealthy Americans should pay more taxes but not to send additional troops to Afghanistan....but to help the buidling deficit that they and President Bush created. Bush cut taxes for the wealthiest and then send troops to a unnecessary war that will cost us trillions of dollars. Tax em' Jack tax em"

    November 23, 2009 at 6:04 pm |
  133. Robert

    Why is it that every time the government wants more money it is always those who "make" more than the rest of us. When has the government said, "We will have to cut spending here or there to do what we want to do now...isn't that how most citizens manage their own affairs. I can think of numerous way to reduce spending, bring the troops home from almost every outpost where we have troops stationed. WWII has been over for over 60 years yet we maintain a war footing in Europe, give Okinawa back to the Japanese, after all it is their land. Drop the Dept of Education, ever since its creation our children have not improved in their learning according to the international testing. We could go on but then we'd create an additional unemployment of 5% of the under performing workforce of the US Government.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:04 pm |
  134. Stephanie, Vancouver, BC

    I would imagine if you did an analysis of who is actually doing the fighting in Afghanistan, it would be largely members of the poor, working and middle class who are contributing the blood. Surely, the rich especially those benefitting financially from the war should contribute the treasure.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:06 pm |
  135. Mari Fernandez, Utah

    Yes, Jack! Especially those who want the war to continue. And in addition, every war-monger...... old, young, rick or poor who wants the war, should be forced to fight in Afghanistan!

    November 23, 2009 at 6:07 pm |
  136. Bob - Rawson Argentina

    Jack, when will "a few more weeks" become "Today?" It's been "a few more weeks" for a few too many "months" now.

    You just have to start to believe that this is a "No action unless it's spending" president after waiting this long for a decisoin.

    I'm glad I'm not being shot at while Obama imitates Nero in Rome.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:09 pm |
  137. Woody F. Blytheville AR

    I'm not rich by their definition but how often can we keep going to those earning more than 250k a year, lets see, health care, afghan war, etc..etc..etc..eventually these folks take home pay will put them at the poverty level and will need welfare..lol...you can only go to the well so many times before it dries up .. just ask NY,, folks there are leaving the state due to increase in taxes causing a shortfall in revenue for the state. It doesn't work, you can keep taking from the earners, while the takers just keep taking.. and taking ... and taking...stop it already.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:09 pm |
  138. vern-anaheim,ca

    no,it is not fair to tax the rich more to send troops to afghanistan.we should not be there and should get out as soon as possible as it is a war we cannot win,examples england and the soviet union.bring our brave troops home and save the unnecessary loss of u.s. military lives and spend the money we waste having our troops there on things that benefit our people here in the u.s.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:10 pm |
  139. Jessie

    Afghanistan is the necessary war for all Americans because we were attacked. But, as for Iraq, any oil company, or other American company, that makes a dime on any contract with the Iraqi government should have the entire profit subject to a windfall tax for profits bought with American blood and treasure.

    Flagstaff, AZ

    November 23, 2009 at 6:15 pm |
  140. Ralph Spyer chicago Il

    No way we are going to spend a million dollars a year per man in Afghanistan let the C.I.A. use their drug money to pay for this war

    November 23, 2009 at 6:18 pm |
  141. Mike from St. Paul

    Since the U.S. has made such little impact on its forty year old war on drugs, and we can't even stem the flow of narcotics when we occupy the country that produces most of it, maybe we should legalize drugs and use that tax base to fund the war in Afghanistan.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:24 pm |
  142. Mike from Denver

    (insert colorful metaphor here) NO! Why is it that Democrats want to punish people for being successful? To remove the benefits of success is a quick way to move that success and the money that goes with it to other countries.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:24 pm |
  143. Meg from Troy

    No American should be paying more money to send more troops to Afghanistan. As a matter of fact, those troops should be coming home–as soon as possible.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:26 pm |
  144. Chad from Los Angeles


    What a conundrum this would create for the war-happy GOP! They padded their pockets with war supporting lobbyists like Halliburton; now make them pay for their war propaganda and profit scheme they tricked the American people into supporting.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:27 pm |
  145. Linda in Arizona

    NO. We should get the hell OUT of Afghanistan. But your comment, "Pretty soon the rich won't be" is silly. Anyone making over a quarter of a million a year should absolutely pay more than they've been getting away with up to now. Don't waste your time worrying about them. They can afford accountants to find them the best loopholes and deductions. Puleeze. The rich have NOTHING to complain about.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:28 pm |
  146. adem

    Yes; they are making tons of money regardless the economic situation!

    November 23, 2009 at 6:32 pm |
  147. Mike S., New Orleans

    I think Republicans should have higher taxes to pay for the wars they started based on faulty intelligence during their eight year reign of terror.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:33 pm |
  148. Michael Keane

    I'd like to see our taxes, whether from the wealthy or the average individual, go to reinforcing and improving the broken-down infrastructures in the U.S.

    A look around the US will show roads, bridges, schools, local governments, transportation systems (and a whole lot more) that need our attention and our funding now. That's my advice.

    I have a lot of difficulty trusting the advice General MacChrystal is giving to the President, since MacChrystal has been blabbing it all over Washington anyway. And it appears that the general was complicit in the Pat Tillman cover-up.

    I place using our funding to reduce domestic neglect over supporting MacChrystal's war.

    North Bennington, Vermont

    November 23, 2009 at 6:34 pm |
  149. Linus McKinney,Texas

    Not no but hell no. This war in Afghanistan is Obamas war not Americas war. If he wants to fight it let him pick up a rifle and go fight it. Taxing hard working Americans who happen to make a good living does not justify this Obama war. In fact I challenge each and every member of Congress that gave authority for this war to jump up and into a HumVee drive it up into the back of a C-130 and tear their ass to Afghanistan. Send us a letter and let us know how that works for you. If you need help we will get back to you in a few months.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:35 pm |
  150. Wally in State Collage PA

    YES...If the rich did have to pay more when we went to war, not 5% .Like 30-40% more.Idont think we would be in Iraq or Afganistan today..

    November 23, 2009 at 6:38 pm |
  151. Kim in mpls

    No I would just like to see their family members serve in the military or let's not be the worlds police so none of our families have to serve.

    As to who pays for a war on foreign land... If they don't want us and won't pay us don't invade them unless they attacked us first, as for Bin laden, nuke'em until Afghanistan is flat that way they will know we mean business.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:41 pm |
  152. Jackie in Dallas

    They have to, Jack...those of us in the middle class and below have been tapped out paying for their bailouts! We already pay far more for health care, food, and a greater percent in taxes because we don't have all those tax shelters! Besides, it is the wealthy making MONEY from the wars that are keeping them going.

    I'd also like to see them pay extra taxes if the companies they are executives in, or own, send jobs offshore. Make them pay the equivalent of what an American worker would have paid in Federal taxes for every job they ship offshore!

    November 23, 2009 at 6:43 pm |
  153. David, Tampa, Fl

    It dosen't really matter Jack. If they pay more in taxes, they will get it back through the stock and bond markets. I would only favor a tax on the wealthy if the money was used to bring our troops home. Well, on second thought, we might want to leave them there for awhile since there are no jobs for them here and at least they are getting hazardous duty pay on top of their regular pay.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:46 pm |
  154. cindy

    If the war was ended then we would not be faced with this problem. We all are paying for it in more ways than we know.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:47 pm |
  155. David in Raleigh, NC

    More soak the wealthy Populism from the Democrats.

    We need to go to a flat tax with no deductions and loopholes where everybody pays the same percentage rate of their income in taxes.

    Only then we have a fair and balanced tax code.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:48 pm |
  156. Independent Joe


    No! Maybe Obama should re-open his principles of economics book and study the laffer curve one more time. He would learn what over-taxation does to government revenue and maybe he would start to think outside the "Marxist box".

    Independent Joe (Mn)

    November 23, 2009 at 6:49 pm |
  157. Andrew, Amherst NY

    So if we add this 5%, to the 5% in the "Health Care Bill" and the 4% from the Bush Tax cut's, plus the nearly 10% in New York state income tax and all the other FICA and SS taxes. People making $500,000 a year (which isn't much in many big cities) would be paying over 70% of there income in taxes. Meanwhile, the bottom 47% won't be paying a cent... talk about "fair share"

    November 23, 2009 at 6:51 pm |
  158. Kim in Dodge City, KS

    Why is the obvious so hard for politicians to grasp. If you can't afford to go to war, then don't. The simple answer is to withdraw our troops and deploy them to our southern border and let the taxpayers money work to protect this country instead of empire building. If you want to tax someone, then tax only the politicians and their lobbyist cronies.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:51 pm |
  159. jeff in hawaii


    No, the rich should not be taxed for the war in Afghanistan. All of us as Americans should do our fair share, from the poorest to the wealthiest. Why doesn't the Government try selling war bonds or placing a value added tax on all goods and services? Our troops deserve the best from all of us, not just from the elite.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:54 pm |
  160. Antonio from Washington D.C.

    Well yeah, it's called fairness!

    November 23, 2009 at 6:54 pm |
  161. Adam - Milwaukee

    I agree with putting some additional burden on the American people for this war. Only at the point where the American people feel the real burden this war places on each and every one of us, will it finally end. The only burden now is the burden shouldered by the families of the soldiers surviving in Afganistan and Iraq. Though this type of legislation will never pass, it does make you wonder just how are we going to pay for that large of a troop increase, and whether the benefit we get from chasing some dam extremist through the mountains in a forgotten country is really greater than the $40 Billion it will cost. There are so many other things that could be done with the Billions we spend in Afganistan and Iraq.

    November 23, 2009 at 6:58 pm |
  162. Trey

    Since everyone wants to blame George Bush and the GOVERNMENT for the problems that we are in, they why in the hell in the midst of a recession is the government the only one spending money and not cutting back like everyone else? How many votes would a bill get if it was against the law for Uncle Sam to raise taxes on anyone until they paid for the necessities and paid off the federal debt?

    Charleston, SC

    November 23, 2009 at 7:00 pm |
  163. Eric - Houston

    Jack, with our progressive income tax system, the wealthy pay more for just about everything. If I remember the statistics correctly, the bottom 50 percent of income earners pay around 3 percent of the income tax whereas the top 5 percent of income earners pay around 60 percent of the income tax. So, yes the wealthy do and should pay more than the non-rich for Afghanistan, I just don't believe that they should pay a higher percentage than they do now for everything else.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:02 pm |
  164. Clarence

    No the taxpayers have enough of a load on their backs now.Let the rich foot the bill.After all the troops are dieing to protect them and their wealth.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:04 pm |
  165. Rita Elliott

    Short and to the point:NO!!!!

    November 23, 2009 at 7:04 pm |
  166. Nancy from Tennessee

    Is this the new catch phrase for 2009, tax the wealthy? I'm not wealthy and I'm beginning to get scared for this group of people. If we tax them for everything they have suggested, they will no longer be in the higher income bracket. We are not trying to spread the wealth around – we're spreading poverty.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:05 pm |
  167. Bob Kole


    I would add one more zero to those numbers (2.0 to 2.5 million income) and tax those incomes additionally, IF we can get a definative plan for our forces and a timetable to remove them.

    I would also require that every member of the House, Senate the president and any other cabinate members who make the decision to go to war be taxed as well for each conflict we sent troops too.

    Bob Kole
    New York, NY

    November 23, 2009 at 7:05 pm |
  168. Pete - Augusta Ga

    Yes, and start with US Congressmen & Senators & their senior staff – bump their tax rates up to 50% unless or until they cut pork barrel spending enough to cover the war requirements & the budgeted deficit spending. Raiding other funded programs (Social Security, Medicaire, Medicaide, FDIC, etc) not permitted (one of their favorite tricks)

    Lets see how quickly they cut out budget fat & start doing their job and act fiscally responsible.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:10 pm |
  169. Wm, Penna


    YES !

    It is unpatriotic to fail to fund our military with pay as we go cash.

    It is theft to steal money in the form of credit from our returning troops and our children.

    Time to end the cuts we gave the millionaires and time to raise ALL our taxes and return to a fair tax system. Under Eisenhower the top marginal rate was 98% and brought us huge prosperity! Lets end the greed and show some support for America.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:11 pm |
  170. Noah Rockville MD

    Well let's step back a few feet. The war in Afghanistan is a war that America doesn't need to b

    November 23, 2009 at 7:11 pm |
  171. Sue From Idaho

    no Jack, let's tax unemployed people that I'm sure that caused all the wars

    November 23, 2009 at 7:11 pm |
  172. JJC


    November 23, 2009 at 7:11 pm |
  173. Stewart Hearn

    Absolutely not!!!

    November 23, 2009 at 7:11 pm |
  174. SandH - Pekin, Il.

    While the wealthy were living fat off the hog, they did not care that the middle class was falling by the wayside. The Country can't run very well without the middle class. You keep yelling that jobs numbers are down, many thanks to the rich for their greediness. I guess that since they shipped all of our jobs to other Countries, then maybe they should pay. I get so tired of all of you trying to make me feel sorry for the wealthy. Won't happen.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:12 pm |
  175. Gary - Woodhaven, Michigan

    I recall seeing a sign from a Vietnam protest in the 60's, it went:

    "What if we gave a war and no one came?"

    Today that sign could read; what if we gave a war and no one paid for it?

    If there is interest for this war, and the Iraq war, let's do what they did in WWII, fund it by buying war bonds. How do you think that would go over?

    November 23, 2009 at 7:12 pm |
  176. Kim in Austin

    Yes! Proportionally, fewer rich are represented in the military – they should at least be represented financially! If the rich anti-up, maybe we'll have fewer wars.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:12 pm |
  177. D.A.Emert

    Sure. Why not preReagan taxes 69.5%...We had very little debt.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:12 pm |
  178. Bernadette Loesch

    Jack, No more wars. It is long overdue to take care of domestic programs. Bring our troops home. PLEASE! Haven't we had enough deaths in wartime?!

    November 23, 2009 at 7:12 pm |
  179. Ryan

    The U.S. Government can't have its cake and eat it too; if we are to tax the rich it has to be one or the other – healthcare reform or funding for the war.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:12 pm |
  180. helen

    i would like to know what president bush's plans were to pay for the trillion dollar war? he got us into something we can never get out of. what kind of fool is that.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:12 pm |
  181. Noah Rockville MD

    Well let's step back a few feet. The war in Afghanistan is a war that America doesn't need to be in this war. If we withdrew our troops, we wouldn't even be in this conundrum and we wouldn't be spending billions of dollars to help Karzai and give him a solid gold palace.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:13 pm |
  182. Eric

    Maybe they should first ask the American people if they want troops in Afganistan.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:13 pm |
  183. david doherty

    Yes Jack! After all the reason the troops are fighting, is to protect the American dream. I don't know about you Jack, but the dream for me and most of America died with the election of dumb dumb. Now the only ones living the dream are the rich, so let them pay for the good life that are troops are dying for!

    Dave from NH.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:13 pm |
  184. Kevin in Chicago

    Sure? Why not? I would fall into the tax bracket which would be exposed to the so-called "war tax"... and I dont have an issue with ensuring the security of our nation. But we need to control the waste, fraud and abuse in all areas of our society... business, industry and government. We could probably rebuild our entire infrastructure with the wasted money in the country.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:13 pm |
  185. Sara Bloom

    If you can't afford it, don't buy it. Isn't that the advice we're supposed to be following with our personal finances? Well, government should follow suit. We can't afford this war. Let's not buy it. Bring the troops home.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:13 pm |
  186. Roman Deutsch, Butler, PA

    Well Jack. to answer that question, one has to acknowledge why we are in this mess. Bush and company wanted the oil in Iraq. The oil companies wanted $5.00 gallon gas. What we got was broke. So I would tell my legislatures to somehow tax the oil companies and mandate that they can not pass the increase to consumers. The wanted to be the big cheese well it's time the oil companies to ante up.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:14 pm |
  187. Bill

    Everybody - not just the wealthy - should pay more taxes to fund the wars. When a nation goes to war, the fighting is done in the name of everyone. Thus, everyone should pay. We've borrowed for eight long years to fight these wars of choice, and if the wars are worth fighting, we all should be willing to pay for them up front. If they're not worth paying for, then they're not worth fighting, and we should bring the troops home.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:14 pm |
  188. Adrienne Smith

    A resounding "YES"! The rich run this country, and if there's a sacrifice from them, the war wil come to a screeching halt! 'Bout time!

    November 23, 2009 at 7:14 pm |
  189. john Springer

    Simpler question: should Americans pay (as opposed to borrow) for more troops in Afghanistan? This question should have been asked about Iraq. There should always be a "war tax" in times of war. If you don't want to pay for it, don't get into it.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:14 pm |
  190. BruceMichigan

    We could pay all the costs if the White House would find the money they spent in districts that don't exist and the 60 BILLION send to LA that is unaccounted for. We have to stop paying for Government incompetence.
    Washington needs to Balance their checkbook just like the American people do.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:14 pm |
  191. Karl

    Absolutely! We need to pay as we go. If we cannot afford to go to war, then we should not go to war. What a concept! If everyone obeyed this rule our country would not have had this last recession. Golden Rule – only spend what you can afford.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:14 pm |
  192. Chris

    I guess if pulling out of Afghanistan qualifies as cutting spending, I agree with you Jack. Let's cut spending and we won't need a war surtax.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:14 pm |
  193. richard cheslik

    Yes, not only the rich but everybody. Then maybe these stupid, unnecessary, and unconstitutional wars will end.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:14 pm |
  194. John

    No, It's an American war and we should all have a hand in paying
    for it. We are not fighting for the rich we fighting for all of us.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:14 pm |
  195. Joseph

    No - we should not tax the wealthy to pay for the war in Afghanistan. Instead, we should have their children serve in the military there. I wonder how long it would take to develop an exit strategy. Hmm.

    Joe in Delray Beach, FL

    November 23, 2009 at 7:14 pm |
  196. Brenda


    Since it is usually the poor and middle class who make up the ranks of the military and have to pay the ultimate; I would think that it be only fitting that the rich should have to pay something for it...


    November 23, 2009 at 7:14 pm |
  197. Craig Beitzel

    Jack, I am not in favor of taxes on the riuch to finance a war. But I am more against taxing every citizen for an illegal Iraqi War which costs thousands of lives. In terms of your sour comments about timing of Obama's decision..thank God he is taking his time, demanding an actual strategy, and analyzing all aspects...prior to jumping into another war escalation lke the Republicans love to do. He is showing leadership, not delay.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  198. Anthony M. Alba

    yes, from poor to rich gradualy according to income. I favor a progressive war sub tax. After all the rich are the ones benefiting the more from these foreing entanglements.


    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  199. Monica

    Lets see the low and middle income are paying for these wars with their time, sweat and LIVES. Is it too much to ask those that do not want to serve this country to contribute in a monetary way. The men and women in the Armed Forces are not wealthy. More enlisted families are on welfare then you would think.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  200. Ivan S.

    No, why is it we target the rich for working to become rich? Isn't this a capitalist country? What have we become a socialist country? There is a very simple and basic solution to the money problem in Afghanistan; CUT SPENDING. But, of course, I don't think any of the Washington politicians are familiar with the word "cut spending". All Americans are doing is allowing the American government to tax them to death all while they spend more and more money. It's sad, I wonder how life in the U.S will be in a few years when I graduate from High School..hmm...

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  201. Grandrapids

    Absolutely! They want it every way, but expect no one has to pay for it.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  202. Andrea US Soldier

    No, I think our fellow Americans should not be taxed with this additional burden. If our Government wants to continue to wage this war then they should start thinking about their spending habits, and the second and third order effects of its actions and how it effects the rest of the American people.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  203. Joe - Chicago

    Jack, tell me again why are we in Afghanistan? How much money would we be saving by pulling out of Afghanistan and Iraq? As a country we do not endless resources which it seems Congress believes. It's time to file for bankruptcy.

    Maybe the members of Congress should give up a portion of their salary to support the troops. After all they are the ones that are sending them there.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  204. Deborah Eisberg

    Since "the rich" were given a major tax break at the time of the Iraq War; perhaps it's a good opportunity for them, having to help fun the Afgan War. (The first of which, as we've learned from Iraq wasn't a necessary war; nor, undoubtedly will the Afgan war. No matter who pays).

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  205. Harold Chenoweth

    If the war is worthy of USA involvment and a tax surcharge is needed. It must be paid equally by all Americans. We can not conduct foreign policy for just a select few

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  206. Susan Gordon

    George W. Bush, Dick Chaney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, George Tenent, Condoleeza Rice should pay higher taxes, along with all the other dummies that decided it was a good idea to start two wars without an exit strategy and a way to pay for it.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  207. Bob

    I love to hear the wealthy people in our country cry about a tax increase, they have had it to good for to long. They pay less in taxes already and just want more and more.
    If they like living here in the US the country that probably allowed them to become as successful as they have become then it's time to pony up and help the country like the rest of us always do. If not then i say go try another country and see if you can get a better deal because if thats the case we dont want you here.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  208. larry padavich jr

    More taxes? Sure let me print some money afterall thats what we are doing to pay for everything....

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  209. Philip Wainwright

    I believe we should all pay a surtax that is progressive in nature. If we had done that before going in to Iraq we would not be in such poor financial condition today. War is not free. If we pay for it as we go maybe Americans will take more ownership in how their money is spent.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  210. Constance M. LaRussa

    Yes, Yes, Yes!! That is what the rich can contribute to they're country. This country has been very good to them. Most of the people fighting in Iraq are not the super rich. This is a good way to show they're patrititism.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  211. Scott Stodden

    No Jack I don't agree with this plain and simple the rich should pay more in taxes for healthcare I believe that but to support a war in Afghanistan no I think people's taxes are high enough without having to pay to support a war that the country and our President isn't sure about, Hey President Obama wake up and make a decision about weather to send more troops to Afghanistan, I pray that he does send more troops to fight this war and take out these terroists to withdrawl would be the biggest mistake ever that the United States could make but in no way should the rich or wealthy pay for this war.

    Scott Stodden (Freeport,Illinois)

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  212. Al Bledsoe in Dallas

    Wealthy kids should be sent to war paid by their parents. Get the poor man out of these wars. They just volunteered because the man cut back on jobs so he can make more profits.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  213. Joanne

    Yes, wealthy tax payers should be taxed on sending our troops over to other countries because they are the rich ones can afford to. We already fill their pockets with our own hard working money.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  214. Michel Llorens

    What wrong with taxing the rich, besides the million they get each year, and the bonuses they also get, it won't affect them one bit. I think the rich need to stop being so greedy with their money and start lending some that will help the country.

    If I won the millions they did, I wouldn't mind giving some out to help out my country, especially in this hard times. So my message to the rich- wake up and come to reality.

    Michel Llorens,
    Miami, Florida

    November 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
  215. Mike D

    Yes, the rich should pay more period. Or at least the tax brackets should be much steeper.

    In the '50's & 60's, the top bracket was 91%
    Did the rich pay 91% ? NO WAY !
    They hired people and invested in long term projects to avoid taxes and build for the future.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm |
  216. Don, Fl

    Its simple Jack.
    Get the money from Exxon-Mobil, they make 45 Billion a year.
    The government gives them huge sums for tax credits, its time we ask for some of that in return...Imagine that one?

    November 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm |
  217. Jeff

    I think we should take the troops out of afhanistan all together. If the war had produced something than i might argue further ocupation. What we need to do is tax he rich and put towards paying off our 12 trillion dollar debt.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm |
  218. Philip

    Wealthy people should pay more and more taxes. They get richer and richer and they can afford to pay extra taxes and they can pay accountants that get them out of paying their share anyway.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm |
  219. Chad from Los Angeles

    Wow, there are a lot of ignorant people out there. Please pick up a book, those of you who did not realize the wealthy have had it easy since the 80's tax cuts.

    Prior to Reagan, 50-70% tax rates were the norm!

    The wealthy have no room to talk, they have shrunk the middle class to become the poverty class!

    Time to take back. I feel so sorry if you have to sell one of your homes so my family can eat!

    November 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm |
  220. Bill, Illinois

    Allegedly, this is America's war, therefore all Americans should pony up and pay for it.
    If all Americans are not willing to do so and instead happy for someone else to pay for it, either with their lives or because they are in a particular tax bracket, then we as a country have no business being there in the first place.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm |
  221. John in San Francisco


    Who among our Citizens benefits the most from our foreign wars? Is it the Rich? Is it the Poor?

    If the Poor among us are the ones who die, then the Rich should at least pay for it.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm |
  222. William - Pinellas

    Yes Jack, I think the elite class should pay for the war in afghanistan because they wanted this war they should pay for it.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm |
  223. Pat from elizabethtown

    Of course the rich should pay for their war. The distribution of wealth in this country is rivaled only in the poorest of third-world countries. Our standard of living is falling every year in relation to advanced countries...because the rich have had a free ride for about 30 years now.

    Why do know-nothings complain about paying for a health care overhaul but allow unneeded "wars" to be fought on a credit card?

    It's about time Americans woke up to the fact that a steeply progressive income tax is what built the US middle clas and our national infrastructure. Now as the middle class disappears and our country crumbles around us we have the choice of coming to our senses or become accustomed to living in an idiocracy.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm |
  224. Clark Davis

    Moving closer and closer to Socialism, redistribute the wealth! No reason to work for your money. Got a problem, government will fix it!

    Must have forgot what Amerca was built one.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm |

    This war in Afghanistan is a waste of time,money and lives.If the Afghans love freedom they should stand up and fight for it, we have heard that you can hire the Afghan but you can't buy one,fine ! it is time they spilt their own blood and guts in defense of their country and not wait on outsiders. And to this nutty suggestion by the democrats, it's not worth a reply.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm |
  226. H Gehlon

    As a small business owner with 8 employees and being in the bracket where this tax would apply, I believe all rich should be taxed highly for every problem facing this nation and for the war. Once all rich individuals loose their business and employees loose their jobs we will have two Afghanistans to deal with.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm |
  227. Constance M. LaRussa

    Yes, they are the only ones who can afford to help.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm |
  228. Larry

    Jack, i am about to solve this issue of how we will pay for the war in Afghanistan. We don't tax the wealthy...we tax the people that agree with the war. We do a survey,and those Americans that support this war effort will be taxed. All of the rest of us will not be taxed. Let's make people vote on staying in Afghanistan. If you're wealthy, and you don't agree with this expensive war, you will get a pass. Does that mean all registered republicans should be willing to pay higher taxes?

    November 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm |
  229. Otto Floto

    Absolutely not. Tax the rich for other reasons, maybe, but get out of Afghanistan now. Look what happened to the USSR following its adventure in that land. I voted for Obama because in his eyes he represented peace, not war. I'm still holding out hope that he'll do the right thing.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm |
  230. Shoefits Wearit

    In light of the fact that 85% of the current deficit was caused by the Bush tax cuts to wealthy and the Iraq optional war, hell yeah, the wealthy should have to help pay for the Afghanistan war. Duh?

    November 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm |
  231. Gloria Williams

    No the rich should not be taxed for the additional troops. We are already taxing them and if we keep doing this we will no longer have rich people. End both wars!!!!

    November 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm |
  232. John New Jersey

    Wow This is great. The rich supporting all of us. I am not rich. My only problem is that I am now too old for the rich to help me. I would have never worked. What a waste I took the American Way. I worked and earned everything I have now. I think we should all have welfare for everyone except the rich. By the way do the rich also fight the wars for us. I would have appreciated this also. GOD BLESS AMERICA

    November 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm |
  233. Jean

    No. We need to get out. We need to redirect the money we have. Bin Laden is dead or soon will be. God will take care of his punishment. Let's do everybody a favor and just do good to Afghanistan and us and get out.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm |
  234. sandi g

    I say bring them all home. Let's get our priorities straight and get our own people's lives improved. Remember last week how many Americans went hungry last yr? Use this war chest to feed and help these people. Our priorities should be jobs, quality of life (food, health care and education) and immigration changes. We are sick of wars and no one can prove it has made us any safer. It certainly has not made us safer to travel globally- some people hate us more than ever. I am glad I am not wealthy since those people are going to be taxed up the yingyang for all Washington's little pet projects.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm |
  235. Ken in NC

    No Jack. We could not afford the war in Iraq and Afghanistan is going to finish breaking us so maybe it is time to pack our bags and come home. Let the rest of the countries of the world duke it out. If any of them attack us then we should dispatch sufficient force to neutralize the country in one shot or two and forget about rebuilding it. As far as paying for it, the military are the protectors of all Americans and as such we all pay for them according to our ability to pay.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm |
  236. jonathan

    One word YES.....The rich should pay for it cause bush got us in this war.. ,,,It was there president that got us in this war in the first place ..Our president should get us out ..they wont cause of all of the jobs it makes for our country ..I will not vote for the next president period

    November 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm |
  237. C. Pittman

    Do people making over 250K a year enjoy more safety from terrorists that the war is to provide us than the rest of America? Do people making over 250K a year use more health care than the rest of America?? What did people making over 250K in America do to deserve such punishment from the Democrats? This is truly taxation without representation! If health care and the war are truly important goals, than everyone should help pay for them! Remember, the only thing that people did "wrong" to make over 250K a year is to stay in school, study hard and then work hard!

    November 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm |
  238. Kathleen Hall

    Jack, they are the ones who have made money from the war, look at it like it is an excess profit tax. With an income earnings in excess of 300 times of the employees where else would the money be located??

    November 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm |
  239. Doug

    We're taxed to death already, and even after death, we should not be there, or Iraq, or Germany, or Korea, or Japan, we should look after our domestic situation which is a complete fiscal mess and stop being the world's policeman, we simply can't afford it, but we should maintain the highest level of internal security to protect the American people.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm |
  240. george kosinski

    jack what ever happened to the old fashioned war bond sounds to me it would be a much fairer way of raising money to support the troops simple as that.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm |
  241. Joel - Wisconsin


    Yes, I think the rich should be taxed appropriately for all government services. We were told earlier this year that the richest 1% of our country receive 23% of the income. I therefore think that the richest 1% should pay 23% of the taxes that is required to support our government in all of its services and endevors including the wars. Then the lowest 23% of the income could pay only a 1% tax. Sounds good to me.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:18 pm |
  242. Dale McCartney

    I think everybody should pay an equal percentage in taxes. It is fair if we all pay the same percentage of our income in taxes. Being fair will also certainly reduce a lot of bickering.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:18 pm |
  243. Allen

    Taxing the wealthy to pay for the war in Afghanistan is ridiculous. The wealthy didn't start the war in Afghanistan. As I recall, a vast majority in this country supported going to war in Afghanistan. If we send more troops to Afghanistan and feel that is a priority, we should all pay for it. Maybe we should levy a special tax on Congress. As i understand it, 235 Congressional representatives are millionaires. Of course, their incomes alone won't be enough. Perhaps we should take a lesson from the estate tax and just take 55% of everything Congressional representatives own. We could just tax Congress out of existence as Congress is attempting to tax family businesses out of existence.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:18 pm |
  244. Jack verterber

    No way. If you keep taxing the people rich or poor you will have another Boston Tea Party and believe me its coming!

    November 23, 2009 at 7:18 pm |
  245. Sharon Woodall

    Absolutely NOT!!
    President Obama needs to close useless agencies and cut government spending LIKE HE SAID HE WOULD.
    Those who have worked hard to achieve a bit of financial stability should not be expected to pay for increased government spending.
    By the way, I am not one of the wealthy. I fall into a low income bracket and do not expect others to share their wealth with me.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:18 pm |
  246. Dave

    The rich keep whining about the poor re-distrubuting the wealth.
    Baloney, the fact is they have all kinds of shelters and taxes should be raised just to compensate for these gimmicks set up by the rich for the rich.

    If we want to stay in Afghansitans (and I don't) let the people who have the most to lose pay a higher percentage of their income.
    To them higher taxes means forgoing a new winter home, to some of us it means food or medicine.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:18 pm |
  247. Annie, Atlanta

    No. Republicans (sometimes known as warmongers) desperately yearn for the way we were back in the 50s. Bring back the progressive tax from that era, and give them at least a little of what they want.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:18 pm |
  248. suz

    I think taxes should be raised from the wealthy people in Congress who show us everyday that they are clueless. Let them pay the taxes...actually make them forfeit the salaries they "earn" while running this country into the ground.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:18 pm |
  249. Pete Mills

    Hey Jack;
    Though I'm not that big of a fan of the Republicans, considering the events of the past few weeks, it seems that the Democrats feel about taxes, much like Will Rogers was said to have felt about his fellow man, in that "he never met a man he didn't like", the Dems have never met a tax they did not like.
    What do ya think?
    Thanks Pete Mills Mt. Gilead, Ohio

    November 23, 2009 at 7:18 pm |
  250. George Carlucci


    Having served tours in Viet Nam and mobilized for enduring freedom (after 9/11) I think we should bring the troops home and spend the money on Americans and our own multitude of infrastructure problems, poor, unfed and disillusioned people of our country.


    November 23, 2009 at 7:18 pm |
  251. Douglas Dye

    First Lets send Europe a bill for winning the cold war

    Yes the rich should pay and because the Republicans started the war they should pay even more!

    If congress cannot pay for the war we should pull out.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:19 pm |
  252. Darrell

    The Rich get most of the breaks in America already and they need to sacrifice something toward the war since for the last eight years " good old Bush" helped most of the to make a major profit off of the people who have family members fighting in this "Nowhere War" in the first place!

    November 23, 2009 at 7:19 pm |
  253. Bill from pa

    Reinstate the draft and have it apply to everyone, including women, and watch how much support for wars you see coming out of congress, including the right-wing war wimps so anxious to ransom this country for the military industrial complex, but not a penny for health care for its citizens. No, do that, then you could lower everybodys taxes.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:19 pm |
  254. Neville Heyliger

    The wealthy are the ones who benifit more than th poor and middle
    class, therefore they should pay for the wars. They will reap the
    economic advantages when we conquer a nation with our Democracy.
    It opens up a free market and since the poor and middle class are
    not entrepreneur only the Rich can corner this market. Its like an
    investment. They will reap good returns. Good investments for the RICH.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:19 pm |
  255. Matt, Washington DC

    In short, NO!

    First of all, there is no law to tax income which means our government is already stealing from us. Consider states like California. They nickel and dime you to death, then pick your pocket once you're gone.
    Is California any better off than states like Texas that have no income tax? Absolutely not. Government IS the problem, not the solution.
    To add insult to injury they want to tax the very people who are providing what few jobs this country has left?

    To paraphrase rapper Jay Z...

    'I know we're facing a recession but the choices they're making will make it a great depression'

    November 23, 2009 at 7:19 pm |
  256. Keith

    We are the least taxed developed country in the world and we continue to complain about our taxes. Like the draft, if we we're all involved either actually (our sons and daughters being drafted) or financially (actually having to pay for our wars (Afghanistan and Iraq) via a war tax or general tax rate increase, we would be far less hawkish about them.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:19 pm |
  257. Jim - Michigan

    It truly does not matter what we say or think, this administration is on a tax and spend frenzy and NOTHING is going to slow them down. How about going after the 800 Billion Dollars wasted in the health care system each and every year? Yes, per year!!! There is massive waste, but instead of going after it, this administration would rather tax the hell out of any group they can find support to go after.

    Politicians, especially this one knows how to rally people but they are completely ignorant when it comes to business. Tax the wealthyuntil they bleed, then blame others for investors who help create a business environment for creating jobs. Remove all incentives for an insurance company to offer insurance and you will find them walking away from it. Dictate low payments for doctors and you will have millions of people insured but unable to find a doctor that will accept their insurance.

    I dont care what your political affiliation is, you would not run your personal budget like this and although the marketing behind these bills and spending sounds great the reality is it will bankrupt this country and the current jobless rate will become something we long for. I encourage Americans from both parties to stop being lead around like sheep, put common sense behind what your leaders are promising, put the realities of the real world into context.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:19 pm |
  258. Webster

    The rich create jobs. Leave them alone. Obama is just mad none of them (in their right mind) voted for him.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:19 pm |
  259. karolyn Iyer

    Jack... your question on taxing the wealthy for the war..
    not no but hell no..... if we cant afford the war then get out....... end of subject....

    November 23, 2009 at 7:19 pm |
  260. Ashley

    "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money." - Margaret Thatcher

    And that, for those liberals out there, is Economics 101.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:19 pm |
  261. Wayne in Leitchfield, KY

    Yes, Jack. By all means, tax the rich; they got lucky. Barbara Streisand understands that; Rush Limbaugh probably thinks he worked hard for it.

    But tax them for Afganistan? Absolutely not! Don't go by me, though. In 1964 I was thinking we should get out of Viet Nam.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:19 pm |
  262. Thom

    NO. Whatever happened to providing for our MUTUAL defense? When will Congress and this Administration govern for ALL of us? Take a position, make a decision, tell us what it costs, tax us accordingly. If that doesn't work for us, you'll know.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:19 pm |
  263. James

    I say yes,yes a thousand times yes. Because even after all their taxes are paid for, the wealthy will still be rich. Remember JFK's famous line?
    "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country"? It's time to pay up, because today freedom LITERALLY cost.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:20 pm |
  264. Barry Cutler

    Since the corporate world has no problem soaking the poor, I've got no problem soaking the rich with higher taxes. But not to support this foolish war. If Obama wishes to continue operating out of weakness and hyporcrisy, shirking of his leadership responsibility as Commander-in-Chief by bowing lower to the whims of our generals than to the leaders of China, then – as far as I'm concerned – he can go soak his head. We should get out of Iraq and Afghanistan now.

    Palm Desert, CA

    November 23, 2009 at 7:20 pm |
  265. Marcus Palstra


    The question of sending more troops to Afghanistan, or withdrawing all troops, is debatable. I won't get into the politics on that.

    But taxing the rich more?? Why?? To start with, the government has no business knowing how much each individual earns; and if more money is demanded from the so-called 'rich' than the 'not-so-rich', where is the incentive to become 'rich'? It's starting to look like it's more advantageous to stay 'poor'....

    Marcus Palstra, Santa Cruz, Bolivia

    November 23, 2009 at 7:20 pm |
  266. David G

    If you accept that wars we now fight are justified,and a tax on a war certainly says it is,and you accept that the wars we now fight are for the protection and safety of all Americans then all Americans must contribute to the support of these wars.singling out one group as the Democrats so often do to pay more and pay exclusively for a war that benefits all is unfair.Yes all must pay and all must sacrifice to support the sacrifices being made by those who fight our wars for us and pay the highest of all prices.Lately it's been fashionable to paint the wealthy as cash cows who don't deserve what they work to create and should view their earnings as a source of governmental wealth instead of their own however when it comes to war that is for the protection of all no one group should foot the bill.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:20 pm |
  267. J

    If Carl Levin thinks 200-250,000 is being rich he better get real cause that's not what u come home with. Most people have no home life to make this kind of money

    November 23, 2009 at 7:20 pm |
  268. Diana

    Jack, a Civil war saying was "it's a rich man's war and a poor man's fight." I think it's time to tax those who want to continue this nonsense. Diana in Marietta

    November 23, 2009 at 7:20 pm |
  269. Paul

    In my opinion, the answer is no. And I'm not in the wealthy group. I voted for for Obama but I think if we are so far in debt lets just pull out of the wars in the mideast. Instead, let's concentrate on using surgical strikes and covert operations to cripple the insurgent leadership and to locate Osama Bin Laden.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:21 pm |
  270. Sly, Alpena, Mi

    Why not Jack, Former President Bush gave the wealthy Americans a Tax Cut in which some stated that they did not need a tax cut: President Bill Clinton, Warren Buffett, etc.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:21 pm |
  271. Estilita Grimaldo

    I do not think the US should send more troops to Afghanistan. Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar and other oil-producing countries in the region should be the ones to send troops and foot the bill.
    The US needs to take care of its own. Create jobs with that kind of money. Where are the clean energy producing jobs President Obama promised?
    Stop so much aid to Israel. Invest in the US. No more money for banks and financial institutions which are not even lending to the small business. And by small I don't mean companies with 200 employees. I think small business has to be redefined.
    "Charity begins at home".

    November 23, 2009 at 7:21 pm |
  272. Kevin

    Absolutely, if the lower working class population of Americans are asked to sacrifice the lives of their sons and daughters in the war then there is no reason why the wealthy upper class Americans, can pony up a few percent of thier income to pay for the war. And to be fair we can even give them the option of sending 5% of thier income or one of thier children. Oh, and while were at it lets take another 5% to help the returning veterans, who were lucky enought to survive the war.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:21 pm |
  273. kirk skaggs

    yes jack ... the wealty should be taxed to pay for the war .... after all it is they whom benifit from our system of government .... they wouldn't be able to aquire the wealth they have if it wern't for the sacrifice of the common man/woman ....

    November 23, 2009 at 7:21 pm |
  274. LT Mike

    We (the people) have a duty to keep our government honest and fair. The government exists as a SERVICE to us. In exchange for these services we agree to live by the laws that our DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED gonvernment (both Federal and State) enact. Now in saying this, we the people expect to have a Military SERVICE, in order to fund this service (amongst others, roads, social security, medicare, etcetera) we also agree to be taxed. Every american is responsible for paying taxes in order to receive these services, no matter how much income they make. Just as the income tax is today, you pay a certain percentage based upon your income, there is no need to charge anyone 'extra' or 'less'. Make it fair accross the board, if we need to raise taxes to fund these wars, then so be it. America, if you do not agree with the current campaigns, exercise your CIVIC DUTY and VOTE, get involved with your local gonvernment and lobby groups to demand change. Simply complaining about it or whining to the media, makes for a good story and entertainment, but just as we demand ACTION from our Government, we must be ACTIVE in GUIDING our Government.

    LT Mike
    United States of America, public servant.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:21 pm |
  275. Bear

    Let anyone who doesn't have a family member serving in Afganistan or Iraq pay the sur tax for this war. That way everyone contributes to support the war.

    Bear in Crosslake, MN

    November 23, 2009 at 7:21 pm |
  276. Wes Thornton

    I got a better idea, let's save all those billions of dollars and declare this situation over and bring all the equipment and men home, If that country is in such dire need of our assistance, let them pay the bill, not the US taxpayers.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:21 pm |
  277. Betty V

    Yes, the wealthy should paymore taxes to support the war as it the poorest yound men and women in this country that are fighting in this war.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:21 pm |
  278. Rick De La Pezuela

    Give the wealthy a choice: Pay a war surtax or hire additional workers at their businesses.

    Brook Park, OH

    November 23, 2009 at 7:22 pm |
  279. Jim

    Your darn tootin Jack. Ever since Ronald Reagan's reign, the rich have prospered in this country due to amazing tax cuts, while the middle class has shrunk in income and assets. Trickle down theory doesn't work. It's time for the country's rich to take account of why they're so rich, take responsibility for their good fortunes and pay their share. Where else but in America are they given the free opportunity to advance their wealth? If they couldn't do it here, they'd move elsewhere.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:22 pm |
  280. Josh

    I'm a Soldier and a tax payer. I make WAY less than $250,000 a year and can not believe anyone would consider taxing one segment of our population to fight a war for the whole of our population. If we as a nation agree to stay engaged is the conflict, we should share the burden, not push it off on a minority who happens to be successful.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:22 pm |
  281. Corey in Iowa

    It makes sense to pay for more troops through taxation, but I have a problem with the idea that all Obama's problems and programs (are these two interchangeable?) will be solved by taxing the big bad rich folks. If we, the people, want more troops, or want health care, or want cash for clunkers, we're going to have to pay for it eventually.

    If taxes were really based on what the public demands, I expect the public would demand a lot less. By going further in debt the current and many former administrations are simply not being honest with the real cost of what we’re doing.

    So lets raise taxes – on everyone – and see the public thinks in 2012.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:22 pm |
  282. The weapons manufacturers

    should be the ones paying for the war. They are the profiteers of our kids dying over there.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:22 pm |
  283. Bill from Clinton, Maryland


    We need to leave. We can't nuke without being nuked ourselves.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:22 pm |
  284. Sgt Ames U.S. ARMY

    Yes! The Wealthy have benefited from every disaster they have put us through. They benefit from our Taxes through Bailouts (Welfare for the rich), while we loose our homes & pensions! They benefit from the best schools, because we built them! They benefit from the wars, while we fight them! The least we can ask these leaches to do, is pay for them!

    November 23, 2009 at 7:22 pm |
  285. Ben

    Jack –

    More poor and middle class people become soldiers than wealthy people. Therefore, they disproportionately sacrifice more for this country than the rich by sacrificing their lives and limbs for liberty.

    The least the wealthy can do is open up their overflowing purse strings a bit.

    Maybe if the rich, who comprise the political-ruling class of this country and the class that stands to profit the most out of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars (i.e. Halliburton CEOs) were to actually have to pay something back for a change – then maybe they"d be a bit more reluctant in the future to start a war to further fill their coffers.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:22 pm |
  286. Carolyn

    Will the wealthy be any more safe because of it? I'm unemployed and far from wealthy and I think that idea is way off base. If you want money from the wealthy, close tax loopholes. That would be fair.

    More savings could come from novel ideas such as cutting spending and perhaps leaving Afghanistan. Big cost savings there. For rich and poor.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:22 pm |
  287. w t stephens

    I beleive that the families that make less than $200,000 per year are paying more than share of taxes in blood , death and mangled bodies for both party's stupid wars. If the rich (around here that would be anybody that makes more than $100,000/year) don't like additional taxes to support their wars maybe they would like to pony up more of their best and brightest.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:23 pm |
  288. Linda

    The poor send their children to fight and die. The least the rich can do is send some of their money. Or we could just call it off, bring all of the troops home and put all of those billions of dollars to better use.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:23 pm |
  289. Andy Dobson

    Hi Jack, the wealthy have generally lagged behind a little when it comes to sending their sons and daughters to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan or indeed anywhere else where US forces have been in harm's way over the last 60 years or so. Expecting them to cough up a little extra cash to pay for poorer Americans to fight their wars does not seem unreasonable.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:23 pm |
  290. JP

    Not only the rich, just everyone that supports jepordizing our economy on a war, which has turned in to a search party for a 6'2 terrorist nut, hooked up to an I.V. We were all affected by 9/11 but is it worth us being a modern day Russian in the future – more broke than we are now.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:23 pm |
  291. Gigi Oregon

    Lets put back the rate for the rich that was in the 1990's they have had a free ride long enough.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:23 pm |
  292. Jacque

    First off all when does the Military ever ask for less troops? No we should not tax the rich to pay for more troops we should call out the NRA to go to afganistan then they could use their 2nd amendment right to do so something more than just making money for their lobby.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:23 pm |
  293. Kwasi Danso

    Of course! How else would the war be funded? Isn't the war our war? If the wealthy cannot or would not go to war, they can at least send their money. We all (both poor, wealthy and those in between) need to pay more taxes to prosecute this war and bring it to a swift conclusion.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:23 pm |
  294. Harvey --Minneapolis

    No more troops to Afghanistan! I do not object to a surtax on the very rich but it will have to be a "Peace Surtax" because more Military is a continuation of the failed Rumsfeld and Viet Nam Policies.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:24 pm |
  295. Roy

    The poor have been fighting this country's wars since 1776. it's about time the rich pitched in and did something.

    Hammond La.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:24 pm |
  296. w t stephens

    It's like John Dillenger answered when asked why he robbed banks: That's where the money is.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:24 pm |
  297. Charles Hollenkamp

    How much additional responsibility is fair to place on our nation's wealthy? I am a college student struggling to make ends meet and all around me I see "adults" running away from problems and passing off any responsibility for their actions as both individuals and as a group. The rich are not the only ones vulnerable so why should they pay more to secure one region or solve one societal problem? People seem to only feel bad for the middle class and somehow forget that its those people who have the greatest responsibility to better our nation, as they are the backbone of our society. I am not pretending to have a solution or some motivational effect that triggers an accountability pandemic, but I do hope that we refocus our priorities and find ways for both sides to get off their high horses and compromise already !!!!

    November 23, 2009 at 7:24 pm |
  298. Kathy

    I not only think the taxes should be increased to pay for the war, I think there should be a draft. If these two proposals were enacted we would not be leaving a huge war debt to our children, and I'll bet if there were a draft the war would end abruptly.

    Middle East problems are historical and as it was a tragedy for the US to attack Iraq and escalate civil unrest, there is no way for the US to solve the civil war in Afghanistan. We should bring out soldiers home.

    November 23, 2009 at 7:24 pm |
  299. Christi in North Carolina

    That makes as much sense as digging out my teeth with a sharp spoon. This is a war that the average American does not agree with, and now the government wants us to fund it against our will? I want my small business to have NO PART in Bush's war that has now become Obama's albatross.

    Can I be a conscientious tax objector?

    Christi from North Carolina

    November 23, 2009 at 7:24 pm |
  300. CP

    Simple equation.

    Issue/Tragedy/Stupidity = War in Afghanistan

    War in Afghanistan = Lobbyists

    Lobbyists = Wealthy People

    Wealthy people = Wealth + Power

    Wealth + Power = Political Pressure

    Political Pressure to stop War = Peace 🙂

    November 23, 2009 at 7:26 pm |