newsobserver.com projects - Tricia Cotham - Comments

Re: PhRMA to leave it to 'Beaver'

BitterEXdemocrat — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 13:18:50 -0400

'The Day National healthcare DIES'..

with all the gang violence at Eastland Mall in CLT, people will be too skeered to show up! Dont lettum shoot the Beav...

Re: More water for Senate tea leaves

Gosh — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:44:18 -0400

Hey DOME...WHEN will you be publishing the LIST of NC Legislators who purposely boycotted the Jesse Helms Honorarium last day or two?

Not that this has anything to do with anything, but I bet you could look up the photos of our legislators and guess.

Jerk.

Re: More water for Senate tea leaves

BitterEXdemocrat — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:39:55 -0400

Hey DOME...WHEN will you be publishing the LIST of NC Legislators who purposely boycotted the Jesse Helms Honorarium last day or two?

Re: More water for Senate tea leaves

Gosh — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:25:59 -0400

That said, Cunningham has a good biography and seems to be exciting the netroots.

Understatement of the year.

And I'm convinced the husband of a Lillian's List Board Member with his personal story can raise more money than my Grandmother.

No offense Granny Marshall.

Re: Harry the Hypothetical

RobSchofield — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 14:23:52 -0400

As noted here, Cotham took Tillis to school.

Re: Cotham: House could tax rich

piperscot — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 21:47:49 -0400

Okay, Mr. Harrison, let's make this a real simple learning moment. 3.9% of filers are paying 41% of income taxes. As a percent of filers, they are paying ten times the amount of other segments. For instance, the bottom 50% of filers are paying only 10% of the total income tax. Regardless of rate, the burden is already on the higher income filers. Additionally, your example does not work because the $100K filer pays at a top rate of 6.5% while the $1M filer pays at 7.5%.

Re: Shuler: Not running for Senate

PaulTerrell — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 21:08:54 -0400

Tricia Cotham should run so we can see how well her idea about raising taxes flies with both Democrats and then all of NC's voters if she wins the Democratic nomination.

Re: Shuler: Not running for Senate

CitizenOpinionated — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 16:51:21 -0400

Don't want to say I told you so but I told yall so...

Re: Shuler: Not running for Senate

cdtew — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 13:58:24 -0400

Shuler is a gentleman and has more in common with Burr than he does with the liberal NC Democrat apparatchiks. I'm glad to see he's standing by his word.

Time for basic math

scharrison — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 13:54:11 -0400

"they are already paying at a ratio of 10 times their share of all income that is taxed"

For the purpose of simplicity, we'll round up the income tax rate to 10%. A person making a million dollars per year pays $100,000. A person making $100,000 per year pays $10,000. They are each paying the same percentage, but one pays 10 times more because he made 10 times more.

Are you saying it would be "fair" if they both paid $10,000? One giving 10% of his salary while the other only gives 1% of his salary?

Re: Shuler: Not running for Senate

mfenley — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 13:52:52 -0400

Why would Schuler (or any other sitting member of the US House) want to give up a sure seat for what is going to be a very hard race to win. Regardless of what the PPP polls say, Burr has a solid track record, a strong campaign organization, a solid base, and very low negatives!

The Schuler seat - and maybe even the McIntire seat could easily go Republican and the dems would not only lose the Senate race, but two house seats!

Re: Cotham: House could tax rich

Jimblackmustgo — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 11:52:39 -0400

If 80% of NC's businesses are small businesses then they would be paying more under a income tax hike so you're not taxinng the "rich" as much as you think. Another comical aspect of this approach is that she wants to tax the rich but she hasn't said anything about the loopholes that the banks use (her district)? So while big companies cheat NC out of hundreds of millions per year she wants to tax small businesses ...this will really get the fat cats!

Re: Cotham: House could tax rich

piperscot — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 10:20:17 -0400

According to documents released by Democratic Sen. Clodfelter, currently 40.1% of income taxes collected in North Carolina are paid by just 3.9% of filers, generating $4.1B in revenue. That is for filers above the $199K AGI level. Each additional $1B in tax revenues generated on the "rich" raises their "fair" share of total tax revenues by 10%. I'd like to understand Rep. Cotham's position but they are already paying at a ratio of 10 times their share of all income that is taxed. Now she wants that to go higher???

Mind your inferences

jonoflocke — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 23:42:54 -0400

"... as self-defeatingly silly as that sounds to me, some actually opt for that tack ..."
"It would be fodder for serious public-policy debate, unless one were so deplorably unimaginative as to rely only on cheap invective as a way to navigate political uncertainty and attempt to persuade."

There are no personal attacks there.

Also, and perhaps this wasn't as clear as I thought it was, my comments directed at your post began after "As for this" followed by your quote. ;)

Okay, Jon

scharrison — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 18:22:27 -0400

I guess since I'm so "deplorably unimaginative" and "self-defeatingly silly" I can't recognize what is or is not a personal attack.

Thanks for the guidance. ;)