RE: Let's Raise Taxes

RE: Let's Raise Taxes (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 3:11:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Archer Still waiting for the specfied "rich" breakpoint to be anonced instead of the etheral class warfare cry of those evil rich. Come on lets define it. otherwise claims of "wihich includes everyone here" are meaningless at best. Where you wanna put the break point Top 20% of income? 20%? Get real. Not boasting here, just stating a fact. The last year that my ex and I filed jointly, our AGI was 273K. No yacht, no private plane, no Villa in France, no McMansion, no new Bimmer/Benz/Bentley, no dining out every night, no wine cellar fulk of Grand Cru Burgs, no bespoke tailor suits, none of that shit. In short, we weren't rich.

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 3:23:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Archer Funny the documented facts show they lead to LOWER per year deficits (Personally that's good but not good enough for me) As I have said several times it is the spending side of the equation that needs to be handled. Doesn't seem to matter which party of the two is in Congress both spend beyond a ballanced budget. How much beyond makes some difference but not enough to get us out of debt. This is something which is completely bizarre to me. Many people who post in political threads such as this go on about how such and such is a "documented fact" but never seem to be able to find the documentation. Go to the recent thread on Racism. Note how I link to an original source to support my point. Note how I always provide a link to that which factually supports my points (NOT blogs or op-ed pieces; facts). I rarely see anyone do that here. If people did that shit on the B.com "Politics and Such" forum, they'd be laughed off it. Also note that the above makes no mention of partisanship.

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 3:36:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth MC, Don't see how what you said is a response to what I said. You believe there is no waste in government, no place to cut, no entitlement that deserves to be eliminated? But anyway... Why is their an expectation for "dues" be paid for success? How is wanting to live well off the work that generated success the "best of both worlds" to want to determine where and how that money is used? Where is it stated that they want to "keep all their wealth"? Do the research, currently the top 1% of income earners pay over 39% of all federal income tax. quote: the top 1 percent and the tax share paid by the top 1 percent have reached all-time highs. In 2005, the top 1 percent of tax returns paid 39.4 percent of all federal individual income taxes and earned 21.2 percent of adjusted gross income, both of which are significantly higher than 2004 when the top 1 percent earned 19 percent of AGI and paid 36.9 percent of federal individual income taxes. Source: http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/250.html Pity no one watched that vid on basic exponential growth I put up a few days ago. Let's examine this "significantly higher": (21.2-19)/19 x 100 = 11.58% increase (39.4-36.9)/36.9 x 100 = 6.77% increase. So the rich had an 11.58% increase in AGI, but only a 6.77% increase in taxes? Sweet. THEY GOT A TAX CUT!!!!.

Crush -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 4:02:34 PM)
What US Citizens were promised for taxes has been a broken promise for decades. Instead of trying to tweak a broken system, it is time to put in place a new system, based on what we've learned from the errors we've seen come about. "Scope creep" has been a problem in government ever since the New Deal. Good intentions, funded by social concerns, those funds taken via the "power of arms" are at the root cause of many social ills. And the unexpected consequences just make things worse. See public housing as a prime example. Yeah and verily, "The road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions." Ever since we decided that everyone needed to be helped to survive, not by our neighbors, family and friends, but by the government, things have gone wrong. Not by intention, but definitely the result.

domiguy -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 4:07:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey I don't think Bush made them temporary. I think it was congress that did that since Bush can't write his own and then sign it. But I agree that it was a mistake not to make it permanent. Why would this surprise you...Bush is nothing but one big mistake...I can't think of one thing he did with dignity. Is this why you created this thread? You think Bush is a huge ass hole?

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 4:19:02 PM)
Remove this broken tax system and you will remove those brokwn promises for our progeny.

Stephann -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 4:22:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster quote: ORIGINAL: Archer Still waiting for the specfied "rich" breakpoint to be anonced instead of the etheral class warfare cry of those evil rich. Come on lets define it. otherwise claims of "wihich includes everyone here" are meaningless at best. Where you wanna put the break point Top 20% of income? 20%? Get real. Not boasting here, just stating a fact. The last year that my ex and I filed jointly, our AGI was 273K. No yacht, no private plane, no Villa in France, no McMansion, no new Bimmer/Benz/Bentley, no dining out every night, no wine cellar fulk of Grand Cru Burgs, no bespoke tailor suits, none of that shit. In short, we weren't rich. What, you just stacked the bills and used them for heating? Can you even imagine how you'd live off of $3,000 a year? That's what my earnings were, each year, for the past four years. Just sayin. Stephan

Mercnbeth -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 4:24:12 PM)
In the spirit of [sm=horse.gif] . Read this today... quote: "In a free market, there's going to be good times and bad times, that's how markets work," Bush said. "The market is in the process of correcting itself; markets must have time to correct." http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080314/bush.html?.v=2 I feel much better now! [sm=ofcourse.gif]

mnottertail -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 4:31:21 PM)
It ain't about raising or lowering taxex, for fucks sake, the 300 buck spiff you get from Bush ain't gonna change your life, buy tires, or get you a decent blowjob. It is all about what the fuck you do with the money as a government that you pay your taxes to, and whether or not you want to bloat spending to analyze ketchup, to study the effects of formaldehyde (again, and again and again) that is in building materials, start a fucking war in Iraq and Iran, because you just kaint get warm up to them motherfuckers even if you are side by side on a funeral pyre, existing in a world economy under lassize faire, and all that asswipe. It is fiscal responsibility, when times are good, don't spend beyond your means or like there is no tomorrow, and when times are bad have enough shucked away that you don't bankrupt. It ain't much harder than that. Ron

Stephann -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 4:38:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Estring quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver There is taxing the rich and there is asking the rich to pay their fair share to the health of society that allows them to accummulate wealth. America is a welfare state for the rich which is why America has more rich people and more poor people than other western states. What is the problem with expecting people who can afford it to contribute to a society that allows them to accummulate and enjoy their wealth? Interesting how a ward of a "nanny" state will comment on how much the rich should pay here in the US. The rich already pay the majority of the taxes in the US. The poor in the US do not pay taxes. And the rich contribute tons of job opportunities to this society. What do you contribute? You mean besides the sizable wet bite out of our minimum wage checks that go to pay for a pension program that will be bust by the time they need to cash in on it? Ironically, I agree with Merc and Archer; the wealthy create jobs. The middle class take jobs. Yet Meat's spot on, that the wealthy also buy the influence they desire to ensure they stay wealthy. It's a vicious cycle. Hence my belief that there should be a flat tax, and serious transparency over how our tax dollars are spent. Reduce the amount we spend, period, and make every person who enjoys the benefits of this fine country pay for it, no matter how rich or poor they are. It's not the government's job to decide who 'deserves' lower taxes. Setting a very firm, clear system in place that all may understand sets a precedent that, over time, becomes tradition. People don't think twice about standing in line; why not make a 15% sales tax on every new good and service, and do away with every other tax. That means people pay tax, when they buy things. Poor people don't pay as much, because they don't buy as much. Rich people pay more, because they spend more. It's a system that's already in place in every state, and understood by all. Stephan

KenDckey -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 5:36:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey I don't think Bush made them temporary. I think it was congress that did that since Bush can't write his own and then sign it. But I agree that it was a mistake not to make it permanent. Why would this surprise you...Bush is nothing but one big mistake...I can't think of one thing he did with dignity. Is this why you created this thread? You think Bush is a huge ass hole? I don't understand what you are saying. Bush may have had some input thru his friends in congress, but congress is the one that wrote the temporary laws. I personally think they should have been permanent. How is it that when it got to his desk it is his fault? Way to much crap that congress does is blamed on a president (which one is not material it has always been this way since we were formed) If there is pork, it must have been that the President put it in there (any president any pork) without the permission of congress. Congress created the telephone tax to fund the Spanish/American War (another war based upon bad intelligence). It took until Bush's time to get congress to repeal it. Long after the war was paid for. When Congress wrote the law shouldn't they have said something to the effect that the tax be withdrawn and not taken out any longer? But they didn't They made it permanent. and so for over 100 years monies dedicated to go to the Spanish American War payments came out of the hands of the tax payers (so now we are talking great great grandchildren or so paying for the sins of the time). As for Bush. I agree with some he has done and not with all. I have felt that way about all presidents. But to say he was a mistake from the beginning? no I won't say that about anyone. And yes there are Presidents out there that I just aboslutely hate. As for the reason I created the thread - I felt and still feel it should have been made permanent tax cuts from the beginning and that congress, not Bush, not any one individual, is at fault for that. It is the fault of the system in Congress and the fault of the people that keep electing the clowns there that do things like this.

Stephann -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 5:44:26 PM)
Which is the point of my post; pretending that there are any 'cuts' worth making in the first place is the carrot on a stick you're still chasing. It's not that cuts should be made permanent. It's that we need to drastically change the way we think of taxation and government spending. Everything else is just smoke and mirrors. Stephan

KenDckey -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 5:48:46 PM)
Stephan I agree onthe flattax but I disagree on the implementation. I believe it should be taken out of your check from the beginning by the fed and reapportioned based upon population to the state and local governments. Of course this would require a good census and it would benefit the state and local governments to make sure that happened.

Owner59 -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 5:59:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: camille65 quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Could we all at least agree,that folks who earn a living from investments(ie stock brokers,money traders,etc)ie. "capital gains" should pay the same rate as those who earn wages? Could we at least agree that "capital gains" should be taxed at the same rate as regular income? If yes,say bub-bye to the "leave no millionair behind" tax cut law. That is, quite literally what I live on. Interest from investments. It comes to a whopping 16 grand a year, out of that 11 grand goes to medication and 4 grand to property taxes.I still have to pay federal taxes on it. Not everyone living off investments is living large. Actually I have about 4 months before I sink lower than the Titanic. This law(Bush`s tax cut) doesn`t apply to someone at your income level. The Bush tax cut we`re talking about didn`t benefit you. The expiration of that tax cut won`t affect you either. Not to worry. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ It`s important to distinguish who`s getting Bush`s tax cuts,and who aren`t. The middle class is not benefiting from Bush`s tax cuts. We are paying for them though ,......and will pay decades after Bush leaves office. That is as obvious as day and the main reason for why the now defunct "trickle down" theory was given to us. Why else would republicans have to sell those tax cuts (for the very wealthy)with a silly theory that that money will ultimately "trickle down" to the middle class? The only way the republicans were able to sell the tax cuts(for the rich) to the American public,was to say that the middle class would also benefit those same tax cuts. We now know that that`s not true. It really was "voodoo economics" and still is.

KenDckey -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 6:23:29 PM)
Hey Owner Facts and verifiable numbers don't imnpress you much do they? Remember I gave you my personal tax information where I got a tax break. And I barely make over $30,000 a year. Doesn't equal protection under the law apply to the rich as well as the poor?

Owner59 -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 6:28:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey Hey Owner Facts and verifiable numbers don't imnpress you much do they? Remember I gave you my personal tax information where I got a tax break. And I barely make over $30,000 a year. Hey you back. The law we`re discussing doesn`t affect you. When it expires,it won`t affect you. Capiche?

KenDckey -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 6:37:32 PM)
Owner - Your assertion is that the tax cuts only went to the rich and did not affect us. But when we provide proof contradicting your assertion you just continue to persist. If I got a tax cut I got a tax cut. If only the Rich got a tax cut then logcally your assertion is that I am rich at my meager income and should be taxed more. Doesn't equal protection under the law mean anything?

Owner59 -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 6:53:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey Owner - Your assertion is that the tax cuts only went to the rich and did not affect us. But when we provide proof contradicting your assertion you just continue to persist. If I got a tax cut I got a tax cut. If only the Rich got a tax cut then logcally your assertion is that I am rich at my meager income and should be taxed more. Doesn't equal protection under the law mean anything? Again,when this law expires(and it will) you won`t be affected. You`re complaining about nothing. Have at it.

KenDckey -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 6:58:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey Owner - Your assertion is that the tax cuts only went to the rich and did not affect us. But when we provide proof contradicting your assertion you just continue to persist. If I got a tax cut I got a tax cut. If only the Rich got a tax cut then logcally your assertion is that I am rich at my meager income and should be taxed more. Doesn't equal protection under the law mean anything? Again,when this law expires(and it will) you won`t be affected. You`re complaining about nothing. Have at it. Actually it affects all of us, Just like so many other things that aren't right. It falls under equial protection in the constitution. The law must apply to all of us or none of us. Equally fiarly and honorably. So if you choose to be excluded from that or whatever your point is, then go ahead. Personally, It is, at least in my opinion, the same as saying the law doesn't apply to the rich or the poor or the white or black or whateever other discrim8inator that people wish to choose because they don't count anyway.

Owner59 -> RE: Let's Raise Taxes (3/14/2008 7:53:17 PM)
http://www.cbpp.org/9-19-05tax.htm The highly respected Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center reports that households with incomes of more than $1 million a year — the richest 0.2 percent of the U.S. population — already are receiving tax cuts averaging $103,000 this year, before these two new tax cuts take effect. The Tax Policy Center finds that the two tax-cut measures in question will give these “millionaires” nearly another $20,000 a year in tax cuts, when the measures are phased in fully. According to the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center, a majority of the tax cuts from these two tax-cut measures — 54 percent of these tax cuts, to be precise — will go to the 0.2 percent of households that have annual incomes of more than $1 million a year. These households will receive added tax cuts averaging nearly $20,000 a year from these two tax-cut measures, when the measures are fully in effect. Some 97 percent of the tax cuts from these two measures will go to the 3.7 percent of households that have incomes of over $200,000 a year. Virtually none of the tax cuts from these measures will go to families in the middle of the income spectrum. Capiche?

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.492188E-02