LookieNoNookie
Posts: 12216
Joined: 8/9/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: erieangel
quote:
57% of the population pays zero.
When I first read this line, I assumed you meant federal income taxes.
I am one of those 57% and it is because I am poor that I have no federal tax liability.
I work full-time take a deduction only for my disabled son and still have no liability.
I have no mortgage interest deduction because I never had a mortgage on my home.
I have no extraordinary expenses of any kind that can be deducted (Like Romney's $7,000 deduction for his wife's hobby horse).
This year, I do expect a tax credit for the new car I bought and I may get back more than I paid into withholding. (I know some don't think that's right and I'm not sure it is fair either). And yes, I can afford the car only because I have no rent or mortgage to pay, thanks to my grandmother for leaving me her house.
Part of the social contract that has been for decades has been to protect the working poor from having to pay income taxes on their meager wages. But guess what, that same income level the poor pays no income on--the wealthy doesn't pay taxes on that portion of their income either. When there is talk of raising taxes on those making $250,000 or more, people forget that the tax rate on the first $250,000 will stay right where its it--its only on the income of $250,001+ that will be paid at the higher rate.
Then there is the inheritance tax which republicans would love to get rid of, because, well, income taxes were already paid on that money--by the person who earned it!! But when somebody inherits something, they haven't earned it; which is why it had me over $2,000 to settle the deed to my house when my grandmother died. Ironically, I had lived that house for 10 months before she died, if she had lived for just 2 more months I wouldn't have to pay a dime.
My dear, I wholeheartedly agree with you on those exceptionally valid points.
My argument regards this topic isn't that everyone should pay federal taxes...some simply can't.
And I totally agree with you on the inheritance tax. All taxes were already paid on those funds....it's ridiculous for someone to have worked their tails off for however long they worked for it, hand it off to their kids in hopes for a better life for their children, only to see the state and feds cut a wide swath of it out for themselves.
My Dad did exceptionally well, died 2 years ago or so, and even after paying the taxes to those bloodsuckers, he provided for his family beyond any measure I could have ever dreamed of, but the checks I wrote out to both the state and the feds just pissed me off, and they were not small checks. Not because I felt that money should be "ours" (his family), but that it sure as shit didn't belong to the feds or the state.
As to Romney's plan to lower taxes on the wealthy...the premise is a good one (wealthy people spend more....start more businesses), but it entirely avoids the obvious: When Bush Jr. cut taxes for the wealthy, every newspaper in the country had daily articles from some of the wealthiest folks in America stating clearly...."We don't want it and we don't need it....pay off the damn debt please".
Romney's plan not only cuts taxes for the wealthiest, when they don't want or need it, it also includes making the Bush tax cuts permanent.
That's just foolishness.
|
RE: So, Mitt is paying 13% in taxes every year... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread