George J. Mitchell Quotes

Governor Romney wants those who have less to do more, and those who have more to do less

The 55% of American households that make less than $40,000 will get a tax break of only $7 while the households that make more than $1 million will receive an average tax break of $32,000.

Israel's middle class is paying for those below it, and that's fine, but also for those who are above it, and that's very wrong.

Democrats single out glaring examples of tax preferences or spending priorities that favor the wealthy and Republicans cry 'class warfare!'

If we're not going to tax the rich anymore, we're going to create class warfare.

Why should Americans who can't afford yachts 26 feet or more in length be taxed to subsidize those who can? It's a reverse Robin-Hood.

Demanding that the rich get a tax cut as a condition for tax relief for others is simply elitist.

When I see the sort of mindless tax cuts for the wealthy, cuts to education, I just think we've got it exactly backward in this country.

All the political angst and moral melodrama about getting 'the rich' to pay 'their fair share' is part of a big charade. This is not about economics, it is about politics.

The laws are stacked for the wealthy.

I don't want to remember 2005 as a year that the government heaped unnecessary burdens upon American families. Stealing from the poor and middle class and giving to the rich, while increasing the deficit, is hardly responsible.

The tax relief that this Congress has given now in terms of four tax cuts has overwhelmingly gone to the people at the very top of the income scale in America.

There is a legitimate concern about wealth distribution in the United States, but the answer is not to scapegoat any individual who makes over $200,000 per year and to try to sell the fraud that the government can equitably take the money of those who have earned it and give it to those who haven't.

Even tax breaks that are supposed to help the middle class too often skew toward the wealthy. Consider the mortgage interest deduction. While political leaders in both parties have long considered it untouchable, it actually helps those at the top of the income scale far more than those at the bottom.

When a liberal says they are going to soak the rich, the middle class will get drenched.

In our rush to soak the rich make sure we don't drown the middle class.

The middle class has no more to give. The poor have nothing. Let's get it from those who've got it.

While lawmakers should eschew soaking the rich, that is no excuse for soaking the poor.

Here we have in New York Mr. Aster with an income of millions derived from real estate, … and we have along side of him a poor man receiving $1000 a year. What is the discrimination of the law in that case? It is altogether against the poor man—Everything that he consumes we tax, and yet we are afraid to tax the income of Mr. Astor. Is there any justice to it? Why, sir, the income tax is the only one that tends to equalize the burdens between rich and poor.

If the upper classes, through their political representatives, pass legislation that diminishes the income of the middle class and reduces services to the poor and further enrich the affluent, this is not class warfare. But if the middle class and the poor, and their representatives, complain that this is unfair, that is class warfare. So say some of our politicians who oppose class warfare.

The very rich are moving away from everyone else …. We should be taxing capital gains just like ordinary income.

Income splitting benefits only fifteen per cent, mostly the wealthiest Canadians, but it's paid for by everyone.

When states and cities and our country say we're going to tax the rich - and that word 'rich' or 'wealthy' doesn't sound like it comes from success of hard work, but from something negative - I resent it.

Trickle-down economics does not work, and tax reform should not be defined as partisan tax cuts for the wealthy and huge corporations.

Progressive taxation can offset the effect of growing inequality.