Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: reppingfor20 on November 14, 2011, 03:16:17 PM
-
People who pay an accountant to get through all the loopholes to get their tax rate down so they don't have to pay their fair share should be kicked out of this country or tried for treason, nuff said.
-
fuck you
If I made enough for the government to collect tax from me I would make sure to hire a smart jew accountant to find as many loopholes as possibles
in closing, if you have ever had to deal with any local, state, and or federal employees you too would be bitter towards paying taxes
-
Ignore him (her) its a troll.
-
I knew I was feeding the troll with my post as I was typing it
-
Ignore him (her) its a troll.
oh no look in the mirror
-
coach could never say no to this man's face, terrorist have nightmares of this man.
-
You pay an accountant a few grand to do things by the book and drop your bracket from 40% to 28%. I see no problem....or is 28% not a "fair share"?
-
You pay an accountant a few grand to do things by the book and drop your bracket from 40% to 28%. I see no problem....or is 28% not a "fair share"?
sorry 40% bracket doesn't exist. Rich people mostly always over exaggerate how much they pay in taxes. Their tax bracket is where it is for a reason, not to be semi criminally screwed around with to get around it.
-
People who pay an accountant to get through all the loopholes to get their tax rate down so they don't have to pay their fair share should be kicked out of this country or tried for treason, nuff said.
Geithner / Corzine / Summers / Gentsler / Summers
Eat it you obamabot.
-
I'm a strong believer there shot be a flat tax rate, everyone should pay 38 percent no loop wholes for the rich. Give everyone an equal amount back. I.E. free food and bedding(expands hostiles) +plus free public spaces for education/healthcare. Remove welfare, disability, old age pention, the massive food subsidies, the military, etc. The government would build locations and provide food. There would be a mandatary 10000 hours of public service that everyone must participate in.
-
Geithner / Corzine / Summers / Gentsler / Summers
Eat it you obamabot.
Continued.....
Kerry, Rangle, Sharpton...feel free to add to the list. And yes...like 333 added, the tax enforcer himself......Geithner!!
-
WHuut?
28 % tax rate in USA :o :o :-X
Whut happened to capitalism and market economy? Holy jeebus shit
Meanwhile in 'soviet' ::) Russia; flat tax rate 13% - no matter whatever you make a billion a year or 10k. Same 13%. Oh, how the parts change..
Just sayin'. Don't hang the messenger.
-
WHuut?
28 % tax rate in USA :o :o :-X
Whut happened to capitalism and market economy? Holy jeebus shit
Meanwhile in 'soviet' ::) Russia; flat tax rate 13% - no matter whatever you make a billion a year or 10k. Same 13%. Oh, how the parts change..
Just sayin'. Don't hang the messenger.
Americans including healthcare benefits pay just as much taxes as anyone in western europe. It's an epic delusion to think american,s are a free market. This only applies to the wealthy.
-
fuck income taxes, fake a gay and also unconstitutional. 16th amendment. was never met with enough states to to ratify it.
-
flat tax only benefits the rich, that is why the rich and gop are the only ppl pushing it.
-
flat tax only benefits the rich, that is why the rich and gop are the only ppl pushing it.
-
the political board suits you better, you can get your lies by people a lot easier since many have your same point of view.
-
the political board suits you better, you can get your lies by people a lot easier since many have your same point of view.
You've been proven wrong on so many subjects it's laughable. When you can't respond with anything tangible (almost always) you cut bait and move to your next troll attempt.
If you started a thread on the best methods for getting scrotum hair out from between your teeth, we might actually have something you have practical experience with. Other than that, you just post talking points you read somewhere else but don't understand.
-
You've been proven wrong on so many subjects it's laughable. When you can't respond with anything tangible (almost always) you cut bait and move to your next troll attempt.
If you started a thread on the best methods for getting scrotum hair out from between your teeth, we might actually have something you have practical experience with. Other than that, you just post talking points you read somewhere else but don't understand.
not sure what planet you live on, or what state of mind you have, but the numbers boy posting a picture that he has posted numerous times of Obama and some photoshopped image doesn't count as a reply LOL.
Also I haven't been proven wrong many times, coach making up facts and saying he is right, doesn't count as being proven wrong, you can make up facts, but that doesn't mean it is the truth, see you Republicans like to make up lies and keep repeating them until people start believing them. The Democrats are much smarter and deconstruct your pathetic efforts each time.
-
not sure what planet you live on, or what state of mind you have, but the numbers boy posting a picture that he has posted numerous times of Obama and some photoshopped image doesn't count as a reply LOL.
We're talking about you, not him. You're not qualified to discuss this stuff because you don't get it. You've been proven wrong on your thoughts around Iran's nukes, WWII, litigation settlements and how they pertain to actual guilt, etc. You just don't know much about anything. But it's OK, you seems to have found happiness in your ignorance. Enjoy.
-
We're talking about you, not him. You're not qualified to discuss this stuff because you don't get it. You've been proven wrong on your thoughts around Iran's nukes, WWII, litigation settlements and how they pertain to actual guilt, etc. You just don't know much about anything. But it's OK, you seems to have found happiness in your ignorance. Enjoy.
No I haven't lol, you and your conservative friends seem to think you win every argument, when in fact you haven't. You have lied to yourself so many times it just becomes the norm. What makes you qualified, do you have a degree in finance from a college university? If so bachelors, masters?
Many of the subjects there is no right or wrong answer, lol, Iran and nukes, there is no right or wrong answer, WW2 and nuking Japan, there is no right or wrong answer, it is all opinion, yet you fail to see that.
-
100% Inheritence tax, will bring dynastic family wealth and privilage to a permanent end. There will be no 1% of super-elite. If you don't agree, you're a friend of Wall street, a friend of criminal bankers, a friend of Zionism, a friend of the super wealthy rich elite.
The 1% are the real traitors. They don't pay a dime on tax, instead they collect. They get richer, you get poorer. Why? Because they pull the strings, and you let them.
Everyone who doesn't agree, is deluded, and a friend of the 1%.
The clock is ticking....
-
No I haven't lol, you and your conservative friends seem to think you win every argument, when in fact you haven't. You have lied to yourself so many times it just becomes the norm. What makes you qualified, do you have a degree in finance from a college university? If so bachelors, masters?
Many of the subjects there is no right or wrong answer, lol, Iran and nukes, there is no right or wrong answer, WW2 and nuking Japan, there is no right or wrong answer, it is all opinion, yet you fail to see that.
I agree with you that there are many subjective topics that are discussed, and claiming internet victory is feeble at best. But I'm not talking about that. I'm talking tangible exchanges like the one below:
You don't settle and give people money if you aren't guilty, you defend yourself. Not sure what planet you are living on LOL.
Right on cue you again show how little practical knowledge you have about anything.
Companies settle all the time, guilt being irrelevant. It's all about cost mitigation.
If you don't counter with something tangible, you lose. That's one isolated example of many I've seen with your posts.
-
100% Inheritence tax, will bring dynastic family wealth and privilage to a permanent end. There will be no 1% of super-elite. If you don't agree, you're a friend of Wall street, a friend of criminal bankers, a friend of Zionism, a friend of the super wealthy rich elite.
The 1% are the real traitors. They don't pay a dime on tax, instead they collect. They get richer, you get poorer. Why? Because they pull the strings, and you let them.
Everyone who doesn't agree, is deluded, and a friend of the 1%.
The clock is ticking....
good post, I agree.
-
I agree with you that there are many subjective topics that are discussed, and claiming internet victory is feeble at best. But I'm not talking about that. I'm talking tangible exchanges like the one below:
I am sure Mr Cain would have been notified there was a complaint about him and maybe a settlement. If he cared about his image he would have wanted to fight the charges and get a lawyer, look what it has done to him down the road, it has ruined his chances for president. Some money vs your character doesn't always matter if you aren't in the public eye, but Cain is, so he would want to protect his character at all costs so he wouldn't be dealing with the stuff he is now dealing with.
-
I am sure Mr Cain would have been notified there was a complaint about him and maybe a settlement. If he cared about his image he would have wanted to fight the charges and get a lawyer, look what it has done to him down the road, it has ruined his chances for president. Some money vs your character doesn't always matter if you aren't in the public eye, but Cain is, so he would want to protect his character at all costs so he wouldn't be dealing with the stuff he is now dealing with.
Now you are changing the argument again. You're changing context. What you typed was not what we were discussing.
-
"Quote from: Grape Ape on November 11, 2011, 07:36:07 PM
Right on cue you again show how little practical knowledge you have about anything.
Companies settle all the time, guilt being irrelevant. It's all about cost mitigation.
If you don't counter with something tangible, you lose. That's one isolated example of many I've seen with your posts."
I am replying to what you posted in your last post, you quoted two things, the last quote for some reason doesn't show up when I quote your post.
-
I am sure Mr Cain would have been notified there was a complaint about him and maybe a settlement. If he cared about his image he would have wanted to fight the charges and get a lawyer, look what it has done to him down the road, it has ruined his chances for president. Some money vs your character doesn't always matter if you aren't in the public eye, but Cain is, so he would want to protect his character at all costs so he wouldn't be dealing with the stuff he is now dealing with.
wasnt the suit that got settled involving the company he used to work for?
didnt they settle after he left?
-
People who pay an accountant to get through all the loopholes to get their tax rate down so they don't have to pay their fair share should be kicked out of this country or tried for treason, nuff said.
what of the ppl who pay no income taxes without an accountant?
are they equally as treasonous?
-
what of the ppl who pay no income taxes without an accountant?
are they equally as treasonous?
they would be called very poor.
-
they would be called very poor.
hahahah so 50% of the country is "very poor"?
-
hahahah so 50% of the country is "very poor"?
yes
-
People who pay an accountant to get through all the loopholes to get their tax rate down so they don't have to pay their fair share should be kicked out of this country or tried for treason, nuff said.
Hello Troll!
Anyways, your post is fucking retarded as are you.
Someone is a traitor for taking advantage of legal loopholes in the tax code?
Fuck off, Samson.
-
Hello Troll!
Anyways, your post is fucking retarded as are you.
Someone is a traitor for taking advantage of legal loopholes in the tax code?
Fuck off, Samson.
Yes they are, they know what their tax rate is, they get a lower one by using sneaky techniques. Terrible people, shame on them, shame on the rich.
-
Yes they are, they know what their tax rate is, they get a lower one by using sneaky techniques. Terrible people, shame on them, shame on the rich.
they dont get a lower rate they get deductions and credits the same that anyone else can do.
you think that 50% dont pay income tax simply b/c they dont make enough or b/c they get credits and deductions?
-
they dont get a lower rate they get deductions and credits the same that anyone else can do.
you think that 50% dont pay income tax simply b/c they dont make enough or b/c they get credits and deductions?
which effectively makes them pay what a 28%(depending on what deductions etc they use) tax bracket would be. Where does this broad 50% figure come from, never knew it was that straight forward 50%. The poor don't pay income tax because they can't afford it. The rich are suppose to make up for it, but try to get around it. They are terrible people, not helping the poor and helping themselves, thieves they are. The poor pay many other taxes though, state, local, sales, the are loyal patriots.
-
http://money.cnn.com/2011/04/14/pf/taxes/who_pays_income_taxes/index.htm
"45% of households, or about 69 million, will end up owing nothing in federal income tax"
lol so 50% of the country is to poor to afford to pay any income tax?
how are the rich theives? who are they stealing from?
the rich pay those same taxes as well on top of federal income tax why are they not patriots?
-
http://money.cnn.com/2011/04/14/pf/taxes/who_pays_income_taxes/index.htm
"45% of households, or about 69 million, will end up owing nothing in federal income tax"
lol so 50% of the country is to poor to afford to pay any income tax?
how are the rich theives? who are they stealing from?
the rich pay those same taxes as well on top of federal income tax why are they not patriots?
so it's 45%, not 50 thanks for clearing that up. Yes 45% is too poor to pay income taxes, jobs do not pay what they use to in this country thanks to outsourcing by un patriotic corporations. The rich don't pay their fair share of income tax, the income tax bracket is setup so the gov't will have enough money, that is why they are at the rate they are taxed at, it is not meant to be changed to be loopholed though. The rich know what they are doing is wrong and they are directly hurting the poor by doing so in not helping with funding for programs that help the poor. I do not know how these rich people can call themselves Christians yet do not care for the poor, who did Jesus hang out with when he was around? Yeah not the rich buddy.
-
so it's 45%, not 50 thanks for clearing that up. Yes 45% is too poor to pay income taxes, jobs do not pay what they use to in this country thanks to outsourcing by un patriotic corporations. The rich don't pay their fair share of income tax, the income tax bracket is setup so the gov't will have enough money, that is why they are at the rate they are taxed at, it is not meant to be changed to be loopholed though. The rich know what they are doing is wrong and they are directly hurting the poor by doing so in not helping with funding for programs that help the poor. I do not know how these rich people can call themselves Christians yet do not care for the poor, who did Jesus hang out with when he was around? Yeah not the rich buddy.
Jesus also believed in working and trying to take care of yourself.
The 45% do the same thing as the rich, so why are they not traitors?
they use loopholes and tax credits etc. to alleviate their tax burden why are they not traitors.
what amount of income is "poor" to you?
and why is it the responsibility of those who have made alot of money through their own actions to take care of those who havent?
-
Jesus also believed in working and trying to take care of yourself.
The 45% do the same thing as the rich, so why are they not traitors?
they use loopholes and tax credits etc. to alleviate their tax burden why are they not traitors.
what amount of income is "poor" to you?
and why is it the responsibility of those who have made alot of money through their own actions to take care of those who havent?
The 45% don't make enough money to pay income tax so explain to me them using loopholes, to get a lower tax rate than 0%? Poor is relative to where you live, NYC, in the back country, or in between, what amount you need to make to live a decent life. Most rich are lucky, or inherit their wealth, there is a small portion who actually have worked hard and made it, but most of the rich is made up of old money or people who got lucky pure and simple. The rich should help the poor, Jesus would say so as well. The poor are working by the way. You try to demonize poor people and blame them for being poor, lol, typical rich person perspective.
-
The 45% don't make enough money to pay income tax so explain to me them using loopholes, to get a lower tax rate than 0%? Poor is relative to where you live, NYC, in the back country, or in between, what amount you need to make to live a decent life. Most rich are lucky, or inherit their wealth, there is a small portion who actually have worked hard and made it, but most of the rich is made up of old money or people who got lucky pure and simple. The rich should help the poor, Jesus would say so as well. The poor are working by the way. You try to demonize poor people and blame them for being poor, lol, typical rich person perspective.
LOL the reason that 45% dont pay is b/c they get credits or tax breaks...
actually most of the 1% didnt inherit their money they earned their money...you should do your research...
Im not demonizing anyone, Im saying that ppl should be responsible for themselves
you never answered the questioni asked, why is it the responsibility of those who have made alot of money through their own actions to take care of those who havent?
-
LOL the reason that 45% dont pay is b/c they get credits or tax breaks...
actually most of the 1% didnt inherit their money they earned their money...you should do your research...
Im not demonizing anyone, Im saying that ppl should be responsible for themselves
you never answered the questioni asked, why is it the responsibility of those who have made alot of money through their own actions to take care of those who havent?
it is a moral responsibility, also part of contributing to society that helped them get to where they were. If it were not for our gov't there business or corporation wouldn't exist. It's a circle of or suppose to be a circle where everyone contributes gives back so the poor can come up like you did, unfortunately these new rich or rich within the past 10 - 20 years don't want to contribute to making the American dream possible for anyone anymore, they are selfish.
-
it is a moral responsibility, also part of contributing to society that helped them get to where they were. If it were not for our gov't there business or corporation wouldn't exist. It's a circle of or suppose to be a circle where everyone contributes gives back so the poor can come up like you did, unfortunately these new rich or rich within the past 10 - 20 years don't want to contribute to making the American dream possible for anyone anymore, they are selfish.
you just said everyone contributes...so why do you exclude the 45% that doesnt?
they arent contributing income tax at all as a matter of fact many of them get money back.
isnt that selfish?
what do you base your morals on that makes it their responsibility?
-
you just said everyone contributes...so why do you exclude the 45% that doesnt?
they arent contributing income tax at all as a matter of fact many of them get money back.
isnt that selfish?
what do you base your morals on that makes it their responsibility?
they are too poor to pay income tax, they need help for buying food and other programs just to get by with what they earn now. They do pay sales tax, and state tax, so they do pay taxes, just not federal income tax. Jesus wouldn't be trying to fleece the poor, but the GOP are, it is sickening.
-
they are too poor to pay income tax, they need help for buying food and other programs just to get by with what they earn now. They do pay sales tax, and state tax, so they do pay taxes, just not federal income tax. Jesus wouldn't be trying to fleece the poor, but the GOP are, it is sickening.
LOL at your envoking of Jesus, he wouldnt want abortions either but im sure youre a ok with a womens right to choose...lets leave Jesus out of this.
so 45% of the country is to poor to pay income taxes but you cant give me an idea of income on average is poor?
got it...
-
LOL at your envoking of Jesus, he wouldnt want abortions either but im sure youre a ok with a womens right to choose...lets leave Jesus out of this.
so 45% of the country is to poor to pay income taxes but you cant give me an idea of income on average is poor?
got it...
no I don't feel like looking it up, but it is fact, you can look it up if you like. Factor in housing they have to pay, gas if they have a car, insurance payments for car if they have one, heat, food stamps probably forget what % of American's are on food stamps. Everything is going up in price, 3 - 4 dollars a gallon of gas, these people are making 8$ an hour, how are the suppose to survive in a economy like this? They are living paycheck to paycheck and even worse many times, and you mock them as not being poor enough.
Also factor in the millions of people who have been laid off in the past years, who have lost their houses and everything they have worked for their entire life.
-
lets just use your 8 dollars an hour scenario as you wont dont know and wont do research for fear of actually going off of facts instead of emotions.
$8 dollars an hour at 40 hours at 52 weeks gives us $16,640 dollars...
the median household income in the US is...DRUM ROLL PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!
$49,445 and thats with the bad economy.
so the average family makes 3 times more then your saying is poor...
im not mocking anyone, I am also not demonizing anyone for being succesful like you are.
You didnt answer my question, what do you base your morals on that makes it their responsibility?
-
I answered your question twice, read my replies, they apparently did not satisfy you. 49k is bad in this economy. That is if you are employed, so many laid off and facing forecloser because of evil corporations. I am also guessing that 49k number is the base household income meaning more than just one income, so that is pathetic for this country. That is two people working, two people have to buy groceries, have cars, buy gas, etc etc. Everything has gone up in price. Do you think everyone is up in arms because they are doing well?
And I believe your figure is from 2009. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0691.pdf
49k / 2 = 24k a year, that is terrible and poverty level for one person to sustain on.
Also take into account that is average, many are below average, very many, and that is not acceptable and neither is the 49k household number.
-
I answered your question twice, read my replies, they apparently did not satisfy you. 49k is bad in this economy. That is if you are employed, so many laid off and facing forecloser because of evil corporations. I am also guessing that 49k number is the base household income meaning more than just one income, so that is pathetic for this country. That is two people working, two people have to buy groceries, have cars, buy gas, etc etc. Everything has gone up in price. Do you think everyone is up in arms because they are doing well?
And I believe your figure is from 2009. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0691.pdf
49k / 2 = 24k a year, that is terrible and poverty level for one person to sustain on.
Also take into account that is average, many are below average, very many, and that is not acceptable and neither is the 49k household number.
you never answered what you based your morals on to say that its morally irresponsible of the 1% maybe you should go back and read...
it said household, plenty of single ppl in the country
49k isnt bad for 2 ppl without kids, hoss...you can make it work and if you cant maybe you should re-evaluate your priorities and cut some of the waste.
plenty of ppl make more than that as well, so why do you begrudge them for their success?
-
you never answered what you based your morals on to say that its morally irresponsible of the 1% maybe you should go back and read...
it said household, plenty of single ppl in the country
49k isnt bad for 2 ppl without kids, hoss...you can make it work and if you cant maybe you should re-evaluate your priorities and cut some of the waste.
plenty of ppl make more than that as well, so why do you begrudge them for their success?
morals of how you were raised, told what is right and wrong, looking at a situation and seeing one guy in a company getting paid 300 - 500 x the amount of the normal employee working his ass off getting paid jack shit. This argument is going in a circle, I do not begrudge them, they need to help pay their fair share in taxes so the working poor and going to be poor soon can find a way up the ladder in this economic catastrophe we are in now, and the rich don't want to help at all in the time they are needed the most.
-
morals of how you were raised, told what is right and wrong, looking at a situation and seeing one guy in a company getting paid 300 - 500 x the amount of the normal employee working his ass off getting paid jack shit. This argument is going in a circle, I do not begrudge them, they need to help pay their fair share in taxes so the working poor and going to be poor soon can find a way up the ladder in this economic catastrophe we are in now, and the rich don't want to help at all in the time they are needed the most.
you answered the question, without answering the question...YES i know you feel this is wrong but what in your moral beliefs makes you feel this way. Simply saying b/c i was raised this way isnt the cause...what moral beliefs make you feel they rich must take care of the poor?
what in your mind is their fair share?
the 1% paying oh 90% or so of all federal income tax collected isnt enough yet?
-
We got a spending problem. Closing a few tax loopholes and increasing tax rates isn't going to help balance the budget. We're spending almost twice as much as we take in and a tax increase isn't going to come even close to closing the budget gap.
Re-prioritize the budget. If you want to maintain almost one thousand overseas military installations, stop beating around the bush and just outright say we have an Empire to maintain. Otherwise, close up shop and let the military personnel come home.
-
^^^
Agreed
I dont know if rep is arguing for that though seems like he is arguing more for redistribution of wealth. He doesnt sound like he wants the govt to pay down debt. He sounds like he wants the govt to take away from the 1% and give to the 45% b/c he feels its not "fair"
-
^^^
Agreed
I dont know if rep is arguing for that though seems like he is arguing more for redistribution of wealth. He doesnt sound like he wants the govt to pay down debt. He sounds like he wants the govt to take away from the 1% and give to the 45% b/c he feels its not "fair"
True, the rich got rich in a good economy, now when the economy is bad the rich do not want to help the poor get to the place they are. A tax rate of 45% would be good for people making over 1 million a year, and 40% for people making 250,000 and above is their fair share. We would not have deficit problems if it were not for wars we need not be in for the past 10 years, and tax cuts. If you cut taxes you cut revenue. Simply as that. We need more revenue to help with out situation and stop so much defense spending and the worthless wars.
Those making less than 30,000 a year individually, not household should not have to pay any income tax, but pay state tax and sales tax. Helping people get up in the economy is good for the rich anyways, then the middle class can have money to buy their products and will make them even more rich, they seem not to understand that. Soon most will be poor and not have enough money to buy many of their products and their sales will fall dramatically.
The moral question, it is just simple, ok I'll give you a comparison, if you see someone get knocked out, then the guy goes over and headstomps him, you know that is not right, it is just innate human characteristic, we know murder is not ok and stealing is bad, it is not hard to know the rich having all the money is not good either.
-
We got a spending problem. Closing a few tax loopholes and increasing tax rates isn't going to help balance the budget. We're spending almost twice as much as we take in and a tax increase isn't going to come even close to closing the budget gap.
Re-prioritize the budget. If you want to maintain almost one thousand overseas military installations, stop beating around the bush and just outright say we have an Empire to maintain. Otherwise, close up shop and let the military personnel come home.
good post. but the young liberal masses will simply not accept this as truth. they simply do not want to hear this shit. they want a scapegoat. it speaks to their mantra of absolute and total denial of any personal responsibility.
-
True, the rich got rich in a good economy, now when the economy is bad the rich do not want to help the poor get to the place they are. A tax rate of 45% would be good for people making over 1 million a year, and 40% for people making 250,000 and above is their fair share. We would not have deficit problems if it were not for wars we need not be in for the past 10 years, and tax cuts. If you cut taxes you cut revenue. Simply as that. We need more revenue to help with out situation and stop so much defense spending and the worthless wars.
Those making less than 30,000 a year individually, not household should not have to pay any income tax, but pay state tax and sales tax. Helping people get up in the economy is good for the rich anyways, then the middle class can have money to buy their products and will make them even more rich, they seem not to understand that. Soon most will be poor and not have enough money to buy many of their products and their sales will fall dramatically.
The moral question, it is just simple, ok I'll give you a comparison, if you see someone get knocked out, then the guy goes over and headstomps him, you know that is not right, it is just innate human characteristic, we know murder is not ok and stealing is bad, it is not hard to know the rich having all the money is not good either.
He idiot - in many states they are already over 50% when state taxes and property taxes are factored in.
-
True, the rich got rich in a good economy, now when the economy is bad the rich do not want to help the poor get to the place they are. A tax rate of 45% would be good for people making over 1 million a year, and 40% for people making 250,000 and above is their fair share. We would not have deficit problems if it were not for wars we need not be in for the past 10 years, and tax cuts. If you cut taxes you cut revenue. Simply as that. We need more revenue to help with out situation and stop so much defense spending and the worthless wars.
Those making less than 30,000 a year individually, not household should not have to pay any income tax, but pay state tax and sales tax. Helping people get up in the economy is good for the rich anyways, then the middle class can have money to buy their products and will make them even more rich, they seem not to understand that. Soon most will be poor and not have enough money to buy many of their products and their sales will fall dramatically.
The moral question, it is just simple, ok I'll give you a comparison, if you see someone get knocked out, then the guy goes over and headstomps him, you know that is not right, it is just innate human characteristic, we know murder is not ok and stealing is bad, it is not hard to know the rich having all the money is not good either.
ZERO knowledge of tax policy and economics. that statement is simply wrong. i know that it makes sense to you and you WANT it to be right. but it's just flat out wrong
-
He idiot - in many states they are already over 50% when state taxes and property taxes are factored in.
we were having a intelligent discussion, we were talking about federal income taxes, not state or sales tax or property tax.
ZERO knowledge of tax policy and economics. that statement is simply wrong. i know that it makes sense to you and you WANT it to be right. but it's just flat out wrong
Of course because the old argument by republicans is if you raise taxes, rich people will all the sudden stop working to make more money, not true, it is a old lie that is repeated. In Clinton years this did not happen, etc etc, the rich always want to get richer no matter what the tax rate is, it's called greed.
-
Of course because the old argument by republicans is if you raise taxes, rich people will all the sudden stop working to make more money, not true, it is a old lie that is repeated. In Clinton years this did not happen, etc etc, the rich always want to get richer no matter what the tax rate is, it's called greed.
Two things that throw a wrench in your analysis:
(1) Government spending as a percent of GDP was less during the Clinton years than during the Bush years.
(2) The economy benefited from a secular tech boom that had nothing to do with Clinton.
-
http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/reagtxct.htm (http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/reagtxct.htm)
The economic benefits of ERTA were summarized by President Clinton's Council of Economic Advisers in 1994: "It is undeniable that the sharp reduction in taxes in the early 1980s was a strong impetus to economic growth."
[...]
Since 1984 the JEC has provided factual information about the impact of the tax cuts of the 1980s. For example, for many years the JEC has published IRS data on federal tax payments of the top 1 percent, top 5 percent, top 10 percent, and other taxpayers. These data show that after the high marginal tax rates of 1981 were cut, tax payments and the share of the tax burden borne by the top 1 percent climbed sharply. For example, in 1981 the top 1 percent paid 17.6 percent of all personal income taxes, but by 1988 their share had jumped to 27.5 percent, a 10 percentage point increase.
[...]
The share of the income tax burden borne by the top 10 percent of taxpayers increased from 48.0 percent in 1981 to 57.2 percent in 1988. Meanwhile, the share of income taxes paid by the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers dropped from 7.5 percent in 1981 to 5.7 percent in 1988.
[...]
The 1993 Clinton tax increase appears to having the opposite effect on the willingness of wealthy taxpayers to expose income to taxation. According to IRS data, the income generated by the top one percent of income earners actually declined in 1993. This decline is especially significant since the retroactivity of the Clinton tax increase in that year limited the ability of taxpayers to deploy tax avoidance strategies, temporarily resulting in an increase in their tax burden. Moreover, according to the FY 1997 Clinton budget submission, individual income tax revenues as a share of GDP will be lower during the first four years of the Clinton tax increase, which include the effects of the 1990 tax increase, than under the last four years of the Reagan tax changes (FY 1986-89). Furthermore, according to a study published by the National Bureau for Economic Research,[2] the Clinton tax hike is failing to collect over 40 percent of the projected revenue increases.
-
Hmmmm....
Federal spending as a percent of GDP fell during the Clinton era, and we had a balanced budget and an economic boom:
(http://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Federal_Spending_1993-2000.jpg)
While federal spending as a percent of GDP rose during the Bush II era, and we had budget deficits and economic stagnation:
(http://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Federal_Spending_2001-2008.jpg)
-
Hmmmm....
Federal spending as a percent of GDP fell during the Clinton era, and we had a balanced budget and an economic boom:
(http://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Federal_Spending_1993-2000.jpg)
While federal spending as a percent of GDP rose during the Bush II era, and we had budget deficits and economic stagnation:
(http://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Federal_Spending_2001-2008.jpg)
you will do anything to discredit high taxes on the rich, let's take the time after the great depression. The rich did very well, and still made tons of money while taxes where at record highs. No matter what the tax bracket is for the rich, they will still get richer and richer, they will still try and earn more money because they are controlled by greed.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg/400px-MarginalIncomeTax.svg.png)
(http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chxt=y,x,y&chxr=0,0,50,20&chf=bg,s,e0e0e0&chdlp=t&chxl=1:|1986||||1990||||||||||2000|||||||||2009|2:||%|&chds=0,50&chs=300x200&cht=lc&chco=3072F3,FF0000&chd=t:6.4,7.3,9.3,8.5,8.3,7.6,8.3,7.8,7.7,8.4,9.4,10.5,11.5,12.3,13.4,10.6,9.3,9.5,11.0,12.6,13.4,14.3,11.7,9.9|25.7,24.8,27.6,25.2,25.1,24.8,27.5,29.0,28.9,30.3,32.3,33.2,34.8,36.2,37.4,33.9,33.7,34.3,36.9,39.4,39.9,40.4,38.0,36.7&chdl=Income|Tax&chls=2|2&chma=5,5,5,5&chtt=Top+One+Percent+Income+Taxes)
(http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chxt=y,x,y&chxr=0,0,50,20&chf=bg,s,e0e0e0&chdlp=t&chxl=1:|1986||||1990||||||||||2000|||||||||2009|2:||%|&chds=0,50&chs=300x200&cht=lc&chco=3072F3,FF0000&chd=t:9.43,9.29,9.14,9.00,8.94,8.88,8.66,8.45,8.32,8.32,8.24,8.35,8.50,8.37,8.38,8.38,8.17,7.90,7.77,7.62,7.59,7.66,7.44,7.40|6.46,6.07,5.72,5.83,5.81,5.48,5.06,4.81,4.77,4.61,4.32,4.28,4.21,4.00,3.91,3.97,3.50,3.46,3.30,3.07,2.99,2.89,2.70,2.25&chdl=Income|Tax&chls=2|2&chma=5,5,5,5&chtt=Lower+Half+Income+Taxes)
-
you will do anything to discredit high taxes on the rich, let's take the time after the great depression. The rich did very well, and still made tons of money while taxes where at record highs. No matter what the tax bracket is for the rich, they will still get richer and richer, they will still try and earn more money because they are controlled by greed.
(http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chxt=y,x,y&chxr=0,0,50,20&chf=bg,s,e0e0e0&chdlp=t&chxl=1:|1986||||1990||||||||||2000|||||||||2009|2:||%|&chds=0,50&chs=300x200&cht=lc&chco=3072F3,FF0000&chd=t:6.4,7.3,9.3,8.5,8.3,7.6,8.3,7.8,7.7,8.4,9.4,10.5,11.5,12.3,13.4,10.6,9.3,9.5,11.0,12.6,13.4,14.3,11.7,9.9|25.7,24.8,27.6,25.2,25.1,24.8,27.5,29.0,28.9,30.3,32.3,33.2,34.8,36.2,37.4,33.9,33.7,34.3,36.9,39.4,39.9,40.4,38.0,36.7&chdl=Income|Tax&chls=2|2&chma=5,5,5,5&chtt=Top+One+Percent+Income+Taxes)
(http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chxt=y,x,y&chxr=0,0,50,20&chf=bg,s,e0e0e0&chdlp=t&chxl=1:|1986||||1990||||||||||2000|||||||||2009|2:||%|&chds=0,50&chs=300x200&cht=lc&chco=3072F3,FF0000&chd=t:9.43,9.29,9.14,9.00,8.94,8.88,8.66,8.45,8.32,8.32,8.24,8.35,8.50,8.37,8.38,8.38,8.17,7.90,7.77,7.62,7.59,7.66,7.44,7.40|6.46,6.07,5.72,5.83,5.81,5.48,5.06,4.81,4.77,4.61,4.32,4.28,4.21,4.00,3.91,3.97,3.50,3.46,3.30,3.07,2.99,2.89,2.70,2.25&chdl=Income|Tax&chls=2|2&chma=5,5,5,5&chtt=Lower+Half+Income+Taxes)
lol, of course the rich will try to get richer! in fact, everyone tries to get richer! that doesn't mean that taxes don't place a damper on that! do you think people will work just as hard when there's a 99% tax rate as they will when there's a 10% tax rate?
and then there's also the issue of resources... at a 10% tax rate you'll earn a lot more and thus will have more to REINVEST than at a 20% tax rate.
-
lol, of course the rich will try to get richer! in fact, everyone tries to get richer! that doesn't mean that taxes don't place a damper on that! do you think people will work just as hard when there's a 99% tax rate as they will when there's a 10% tax rate?
and then there's also the issue of resources... at a 10% tax rate you'll earn a lot more and thus will have more to REINVEST than at a 20% tax rate.
did you look at the chart for top 1 percent, when their tax rate went up, so did their income.
-
did you look at the chart for top 1 percent, when their tax rate went up, so did their income.
I could just as easily post a chart that shows that when the tax rate goes down so the income of the top 1% rises. It really doesn't prove anything either way; there are many variables which effect income and tax rates are but one of those variables.
-
I could just as easily post a chart that shows that when the tax rate goes down so the income of the top 1% rises. It really doesn't prove anything either way; there are many variables which effect income and tax rates are but one of those variables.
then do it. If the taxes go up for the rich, they pay more into federal gov't, Federal gov't can then assist the poor and create jobs, those poor get those jobs and spend money thus enriching the rich.
-
then do it.
Done:
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_5aAsxFJOeMw/R_4UnvenNDI/AAAAAAAAA7Y/gv4NYHj78gE/s1600/Federal-Personal-Income-Tax-Collections.JPG)
Lower tax rates = higher tax revenues, which means higher incomes
If the taxes go up for the rich, they pay more into federal gov't, Federal gov't can then assist the poor and create jobs, those poor get those jobs and spend money thus enriching the rich.
If taxes go down for the rich then they invest more in factories, capital machinery, etc. This has two effects:
1) More factories, machines, etc. means that more goods are produced. This increases supply which decreases prices, making goods more affordable per unit of income (in other words: higher real incomes for everyone, including the poor).
2) Labor is needed to work the factories. Thus, demand increases for labor, thereby pushing wages real higher.
What you don't understand is that government cannot do this #1 as efficiently as the free market. That is why capitalism will always be superior to government.
-
sorry 40% bracket doesn't exist. Rich people mostly always over exaggerate how much they pay in taxes. Their tax bracket is where it is for a reason, not to be semi criminally screwed around with to get around it.
In the highest of the six tax brackets, 2011 Federal tax rate for a single filer or married filing joint with an adjusted gross income (after deductions) of $379,151 or more is 36%. An adjusted gross income of more than $34,501 but less than $83,600 for a single filer is 25%. For married, filing joint an adjusted gross income of more than $69,001 but less than $139,350 puts one in the 25% tax bracket.
-
In the highest of the six tax brackets, 2011 Federal tax rate for a single filer or married filing joint with an adjusted gross income (after deductions) of $379,151 or more is 36%. An adjusted gross income of more than $34,501 but less than $83,600 for a single filer is 25%. For married, filing joint an adjusted gross income of more than $69,001 but less than $139,350 puts one in the 25% tax bracket.
Income taxes don't tell the whole story... when investing, the wealthy have their investments taxed twice, first by a 35% corporate income tax and then by a 15% capital gains tax. That comes out to a total of a 45% tax rate.
-
Done:
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_5aAsxFJOeMw/R_4UnvenNDI/AAAAAAAAA7Y/gv4NYHj78gE/s1600/Federal-Personal-Income-Tax-Collections.JPG)
Lower tax rates = higher tax revenues, which means higher incomes
If taxes go down for the rich then they invest more in factories, capital machinery, etc. This has two effects:
1) More factories, machines, etc. means that more goods are produced. This increases supply which decreases prices, making goods more affordable per unit of income (in other words: higher real incomes for everyone, including the poor).
2) Labor is needed to work the factories. Thus, demand increases for labor, thereby pushing wages real higher.
What you don't understand is that government cannot do this #1 as efficiently as the free market. That is why capitalism will always be superior to government.
You do not understand, taxes are low now, almost the lowest they have ever been, where are the factories, jobs, that were suppose to be created by these bush tax cuts. You can spew your talk, but when it comes to actual real life, the corporations and rich just pocket the money for themselves and do not reinvest it for the most part as you can see with the jobs crisis.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg/400px-MarginalIncomeTax.svg.png
Please show me how taxes being low help the economy, use this graph.
-
Income taxes don't tell the whole story... when investing, the wealthy have their investments taxed twice, first by a 35% corporate income tax and then by a 15% capital gains tax. That comes out to a total of a 45% tax rate.
you are starting to use funny math howardroark, Prime thanks for providing the facts.
Howard you have shown your self to be nothing other than a shill for the rich. That is two different incomes being taxed, what they make working, what money makes for them sitting and doing nothing, so your argument doesn't hold any weight.
Facts posted below from Prime :
In the highest of the six tax brackets, 2011 Federal tax rate for a single filer or married filing joint with an adjusted gross income (after deductions) of $379,151 or more is 36%. An adjusted gross income of more than $34,501 but less than $83,600 for a single filer is 25%. For married, filing joint an adjusted gross income of more than $69,001 but less than $139,350 puts one in the 25% tax bracket.
-
you are starting to use funny math howardroark, Prime thanks for providing the facts. Howard you have shown your self to be nothing other than a shill for the rich.
Funny math? Sounds like someone failed high school...
You have $100 in profits. First it's taxed 35% at the corporate level, so you have $65 left. Then that $65 is taxed 15% at the individual level, so you have $55.25 left. That means that you only get to keep 55.25% of profits after taxes - which translates to a 44.75% tax rate.
Too difficult to understand for you?
-
You do not understand, taxes are low now, almost the lowest they have ever been, where are the factories, jobs, that were suppose to be created by these bush tax cuts.
Unemployment was pretty low before the housing bubble blew up. And what created the housing bubble? Government policies. Hmmmm...
You can spew your talk, but when it comes to actual real life, the corporations and rich just pocket the money for themselves and do not reinvest it for the most part as you can see with the jobs crisis.
A few posts ago you were saying that the rich were greedy so they'd always try to get richer ::)
What do you think the rich do with their money? Just bury it in the ground? No. They buy stocks, save it in a bank, start a business, etc. All of these are productive activities which create jobs and economic wealth.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/MarginalIncomeTax.svg/400px-MarginalIncomeTax.svg.png
Please show me how taxes being low help the economy, use this graph.
How about an econometric study which proves that lower corporate taxes increase economic growth? http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272704001343#SECX11 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272704001343#SECX11)
-
Funny math? Sounds like someone failed high school...
You have $100 in profits. First it's taxed 35% at the corporate level, so you have $65 left. Then that $65 is taxed 15% at the individual level, so you have $55.25 left. That means that you only get to keep 55.25% of profits after taxes - which translates to a 44.75% tax rate.
Too difficult to understand for you?
Yes funny math. Income tax is what we were talking about. You claim it was higher than it actually is, Prime posted the facts. Then you came back with oh how about their investments.
Investments are a whole different thing, just like sales tax. They choose to invest and have to pay tax on the money they make investing simple as that. If they chose not to invest they wouldn't have to pay that tax.
While were at it, why don't want talk about sales tax, property tax, state tax, and down the line and add that in as well, you simply diverted the discussion because you were confronted with the truth.
-
Unemployment was pretty low before the housing bubble blew up. And what created the housing bubble? Government policies. Hmmmm...
A few posts ago you were saying that the rich were greedy so they'd always try to get richer ::)
What do you think the rich do with their money? Just bury it in the ground? No. They buy stocks, save it in a bank, start a business, etc. All of these are productive activities which create jobs and economic wealth.
How about an econometric study which proves that lower corporate taxes increase economic growth? http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272704001343#SECX11 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272704001343#SECX11)
lol the housing bubble was from the private sector, not the gov't. You blame gov't policies LOL get a grip on reality.
The rich save their money, buy new houses personal items, they don't create new businesses with it or take any chance with their money to create jobs that is for sure. How many new businesses have the rich started and helped created jobs in the past 10 years? They have kept all their money from the tax cuts and created hardly any jobs, tax cuts are terrible!
Most corporations pay hardly any tax at all anyway, states try that to get corporations to come to their state. Corporations are terrible and should be eliminated, only family owned businesses/small businesses, no incorporating your business, it's terrible for the people, no corporations, no stock market, no more jew tactics used to screw the average American out of his savings.
-
lol the housing bubble was from the private sector, not the gov't. You blame gov't policies LOL get a grip on reality.
The rich save their money, buy new houses personal items, they don't create new businesses with it or take any chance with their money to create jobs that is for sure. How many new businesses have the rich started and helped created jobs in the past 10 years? They have kept all their money from the tax cuts and created hardly any jobs, tax cuts are terrible!
Most corporations pay hardly any tax at all anyway, states try that to get corporations to come to their state. Corporations are terrible and should be eliminated, only family owned businesses, no corporations, no stock market, no more jew tactics used to screw the average American out of his savings.
Actually government, private banks, AND people signing loans they shouldn't have were all to blame.
I think it's funny when people point at one group and say YOU'RE THE PROBLEM... When really, everyone had a part in it.
Too bad no one is willing to stand up and admit that at a higher level.
-
Yes funny math. Income tax is what we were talking about. You claim it was higher than it actually is, Prime posted the facts. Then you came back with oh how about their investments.
I never claimed that personal income tax rates were higher than they are... Prime wasn't responding to my post. I simply responded to his post saying that personal income tax rates don't tell the whole story. The wealthiest earn a very large part of their income from capital gains. That income is taxed at 35% at the corporate level and 15% at the personal level, for a total of a 45% tax rate.
Investments are a whole different thing, just like sales tax. They choose to invest and have to pay tax on the money they make investing simple as that. If they chose not to invest they wouldn't have to pay that tax.
Duh. But what do you do by advocating higher corporate and capital gains taxes? You are making it more difficult and less profitable to invest... so there will be less investment. Less investment = less economic growth = less prosperity.
While were at it, why don't want talk about sales tax, property tax, state tax, and down the line and add that in as well, you simply diverted the discussion because you were confronted with the truth.
I didn't divert the discussion. I wasn't "confronted" with the truth, I already knew what the tax rates were. I simply pointed out that personal income tax rates don't tell the whole story.
And yes, why don't we start talking about other taxes? Maybe then you'll realize how terribly overtaxed Americans are.
-
lol the housing bubble was from the private sector, not the gov't. You blame gov't policies LOL get a grip on reality.
No it wasn't. I'll let you in on a little secret: if we had a free market, then as soon as everyone would start buying houses, interest rates would rise and choke the housing bubble off. However, we don't have a free market. Central banks around the world kept interest rates too low for too long, which created all sorts of economic distortions including the housing bubble.
The rich save their money
Saving is very productive. You put your money in the bank, what does the bank do with it? It lends it out, usually to businesses which create goods and jobs.
buy new houses personal items, they don't create new businesses with it or take any chance with their money to create jobs that is for sure.
Warren Buffet, George Soros, Bill Gates, the Koch brothers... What do they all have in common?
They're wealthy and they reinvest their money in order to make more money.
JUST LIKE YOU SAID, THE RICH WILL TRY TO GET RICHER. How do they do that? By reinvesting in business. That is the ONLY way to get richer. That reinvesting creates material wealth and jobs.
How many new businesses have the rich started and helped created jobs in the past 10 years?
Millions of jobs were created before the housing bubble collapsed...
(http://gregor.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/United-States-Employment-in-Millions-01-11.png)
They have kept all their money from the tax cuts and created hardly any jobs, tax cuts are terrible!
See the above graph. It makes no sense for someone to just keep their money when they could earn more money by reinvesting it.
Most corporations pay hardly any tax at all anyway, states try that to get corporations to come to their state.
There is a 35% national corporate tax rate. Then many states have their own business taxes which corporations have to pay. Then they also have to pay the business side of payroll taxes on the national level, as well as property taxes on the state/local level.
Corporations are terrible and should be eliminated, only family owned businesses/small businesses, no incorporating your business, it's terrible for the people, no corporations, no stock market, no more jew tactics used to screw the average American out of his savings.
LOL, why are they terrible?
-
I never claimed that personal income tax rates were higher than they are... Prime wasn't responding to my post. I simply responded to his post saying that personal income tax rates don't tell the whole story. The wealthiest earn a very large part of their income from capital gains. That income is taxed at 35% at the corporate level and 15% at the personal level, for a total of a 45% tax rate.
Duh. But what do you do by advocating higher corporate and capital gains taxes? You are making it more difficult and less profitable to invest... so there will be less investment. Less investment = less economic growth = less prosperity.
I didn't divert the discussion. I wasn't "confronted" with the truth, I already knew what the tax rates were. I simply pointed out that personal income tax rates don't tell the whole story.
And yes, why don't we start talking about other taxes? Maybe then you'll realize how terribly overtaxed Americans are.
The rich choose to invest, just like the poor and regular people choose to buy things thus paying sales tax, if you invest and make money you pay the tax, simple as that, just like a sales tax. Bottom line is there tax rate is 36% federal income tax, period, no fudging the numbers with adding other taxes. Everyone has to pay other taxes so let's not just advocate for the rich. The rich can afford to pay these taxes as well. The 15% you are talking about for investments really should be 36% the same for what they earn, it is another loophole, and you are still complaining about it being low LOL!
American's are some of the least taxed people in the world, and the rich still complain of high taxes, move to another country and see if you like their tax structure.
Invest, in the stock market? It is a rich mans gambling floor. The middle class and poor are often screwed over and know nothing about what is really going on, insider trading, and end up losing money in the end, see many cases of this people put faith in their financial adviser, while the financial adviser tells them to put money in stocks they know are going to go down. The stock market is controlled by jew's and the elite, the middle class and poor should avoid it at all costs, do not buy this shit, save your money and use credit unions, boycott banks as they are another jew money changing practice, and you will have money after you retire.
-
No it wasn't. I'll let you in on a little secret: if we had a free market, then as soon as everyone would start buying houses, interest rates would rise and choke the housing bubble off. However, we don't have a free market. Central banks around the world kept interest rates too low for too long, which created all sorts of economic distortions including the housing bubble.
Saving is very productive. You put your money in the bank, what does the bank do with it? It lends it out, usually to businesses which create goods and jobs.
Warren Buffet, George Soros, Bill Gates, the Koch brothers... What do they all have in common?
They're wealthy and they reinvest their money in order to make more money.
JUST LIKE YOU SAID, THE RICH WILL TRY TO GET RICHER. How do they do that? By reinvesting in business. That is the ONLY way to get richer. That reinvesting creates material wealth and jobs.
Millions of jobs were created before the housing bubble collapsed...
(http://gregor.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/United-States-Employment-in-Millions-01-11.png)
See the above graph. It makes no sense for someone to just keep their money when they could earn more money by reinvesting it.
There is a 35% national corporate tax rate. Then many states have their own business taxes which corporations have to pay. Then they also have to pay the business side of payroll taxes on the national level, as well as property taxes on the state/local level.
LOL, why are they terrible?
Most corporations pay no where near 35%, they have loopholes, that is why everyone is up in arms about the corporate loopholes that exist in this system, most end up paying way less, and sometimes nothing at all. Money from banks is not re loaned out, banks are giving out loans like a jew gives out dimes, just doesn't happen much anymore.
-
we were having a intelligent discussion, we were talking about federal income taxes, not state or sales tax or property tax.
Of course because the old argument by republicans is if you raise taxes, rich people will all the sudden stop working to make more money, not true, it is a old lie that is repeated. In Clinton years this did not happen, etc etc, the rich always want to get richer no matter what the tax rate is, it's called greed.
it's called the Laffer Curve you fucking idiot. Maybe you should tour all of the college campuses and lecture the econcomics professors on how tax policy is affected by increases and decreases in tax rates. Lay off the MSNBC and start learning something for yourself about economics and tax policy. If increasing the tax rate on the rich would solve all our problems it would have been done a long time ago. It's just not that simple.
-
Actually government, private banks, AND people signing loans they shouldn't have were all to blame.
I think it's funny when people point at one group and say YOU'RE THE PROBLEM... When really, everyone had a part in it.
Too bad no one is willing to stand up and admit that at a higher level.
this. again. libs simply refuse to accept this as truth when it is blatantly staring them in the face. If they admit this all of their arguments for "spreading the wealth" go to shit. That's why they simply refuse to accept it.
-
Most corporations pay no where near 35%, they have loopholes, that is why everyone is up in arms about the corporate loopholes that exist in this system, most end up paying way less, and sometimes nothing at all. Money from banks is not re loaned out, banks are giving out loans like a jew gives out dimes, just doesn't happen much anymore.
you're probably one of those people who believe that GE paid NO federal income taxes last year right? because you read it online right?
-
Most corporations pay no where near 35%, they have loopholes, that is why everyone is up in arms about the corporate loopholes that exist in this system, most end up paying way less, and sometimes nothing at all. Money from banks is not re loaned out, banks are giving out loans like a jew gives out dimes, just doesn't happen much anymore.
name the tax loopholes that you're talking about too. i don't allow libs to say "tax loopholes" in a conversation without identifying them first so that they can be addressed.
-
The rich choose to invest, just like the poor and regular people choose to buy things thus paying sales tax, if you invest and make money you pay the tax, simple as that, just like a sales tax. Bottom line is there tax rate is 36% federal income tax, period, no fudging the numbers with adding other taxes. Everyone has to pay other taxes so let's not just advocate for the rich. The rich can afford to pay these taxes as well. The 15% you are talking about for investments really should be 36% the same for what they earn, it is another loophole, and you are still complaining about it being low LOL!
American's are some of the least taxed people in the world, and the rich still complain of high taxes, move to another country and see if you like their tax structure.
Invest, in the stock market? It is a rich mans gambling floor. The middle class and poor are often screwed over and know nothing about what is really going on, insider trading, and end up losing money in the end, see many cases of this people put faith in their financial adviser, while the financial adviser tells them to put money in stocks they know are going to go down. The stock market is controlled by jew's and the elite, the middle class and poor should avoid it at all costs, do not buy this shit, save your money and use credit unions, boycott banks as they are another jew money changing practice, and you will have money after you retire.
also US has the highest corporate tax rates in the world
-
The more I follow this thread the more amazed I am. Either JTsunami's (reppingfor20) education has totally failed him or he's just trolling, because every fact that has been brought to him he has refuted with utter stupidity. This is beyond naive. My 14 year literally understands business better than this kid. I can't believe ANYONE could possibly not see this is irrational thinking with no commonsense taken into consideration.
-
The rich choose to invest, just like the poor and regular people choose to buy things thus paying sales tax, if you invest and make money you pay the tax, simple as that, just like a sales tax. Bottom line is there tax rate is 36% federal income tax, period, no fudging the numbers with adding other taxes. Everyone has to pay other taxes so let's not just advocate for the rich. The rich can afford to pay these taxes as well. The 15% you are talking about for investments really should be 36% the same for what they earn, it is another loophole, and you are still complaining about it being low LOL!
American's are some of the least taxed people in the world, and the rich still complain of high taxes, move to another country and see if you like their tax structure.
Invest, in the stock market? It is a rich mans gambling floor. The middle class and poor are often screwed over and know nothing about what is really going on, insider trading, and end up losing money in the end, see many cases of this people put faith in their financial adviser, while the financial adviser tells them to put money in stocks they know are going to go down. The stock market is controlled by jew's and the elite, the middle class and poor should avoid it at all costs, do not buy this shit, save your money and use credit unions, boycott banks as they are another jew money changing practice, and you will have money after you retire.
also if you think that the middle class will not be negatively effected by the repeal of the Bush tax cuts you're quite simply ignorant.
-
JTsuckinsalami is nothing but a troll. You guys are wasting your time. Best to just ignore and let him go away.
-
The more I follow this thread the more amazed I am. Either JTsunami's (reppingfor20) education has totally failed him or he's just trolling, because every fact that has been brought to him he has refuted with utter stupidity. This is beyond naive. My 14 year literally understands business better than this kid. I can't believe ANYONE could possibly not see this is irrational thinking with no commonsense taken into consideration.
it's called being brainwashed
-
JTsuckinsalami is nothing but a troll. You guys are wasting your time. Best to just ignore and let him go away.
i absolutely believe that he believes the shit he posts.
-
Unemployment was pretty low before the housing bubble blew up. And what created the housing bubble? Government policies. Hmmmm...
Which goverment polices would those be exactly?
Crazy me, I thought it was deregulation of the banking industry which permitted banks to write and sell all those sub-pime mortgages. The same sub-prime mortgages that created the housing bubble and then the crash.
-
Which goverment polices would those be exactly?
Crazy me, I thought it was deregulation of the banking industry which permitted banks to write and sell all those sub-pime mortgages. The same sub-prime mortgages that created the housing bubble and then the crash.
Are you kidding? Really? Tell me you are joking.
-
Are you kidding? Really? Tell me you are joking.
he's not joking. this is the willful ignorance that i am talking about.
-
• 2000, Commodity Futures Modernization Act – Passed with support from the Clinton
Administration, including Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, and bi-partisan support in
Congress. The bill prevented the Commodity Futures Trading Commission from regulating
most over-the-counter derivative contracts, including credit default swaps.
• 2004, Voluntary Regulation – The SEC proposes a system of voluntary regulation under
the Consolidated Supervised Entities program, allowing investment banks to hold less capital
in reserve and increase leverage.
• 2007, Subprime Mortgage Crisis – Defaults on subprime loans send shockwaves
throughout the secondary mortgage market and the entire financial system.
Repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act
Provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act that prohibit a bank holding company from owning other financial companies were repealed on November 12, 1999, by the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act.[49][50]
The repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933 effectively removed the separation that previously existed between Wall Street investment banks and depository banks. This repeal directly contributed to the severity of the Financial crisis of 2007–2010.
Late-2000s financial crisis
The late-2000s financial crisis is considered by many economists to be the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s. It was triggered by a liquidity shortfall in the United States banking system and has resulted in the collapse of large financial institutions, the bailout of banks by national governments, and downturns in stock markets around the world. In many areas, the housing market has also suffered, resulting in numerous evictions, foreclosures and prolonged vacancies. It contributed to the failure of key businesses, declines in consumer wealth estimated in the trillions of U.S. dollars, and a significant decline in economic activity, leading to a severe global economic recession in 2008.
The collapse of the U.S. housing bubble, which peaked in 2006, caused the values of securities tied to U.S. real estate pricing to plummet, damaging financial institutions globally. Questions regarding bank solvency, declines in credit availability and damaged investor confidence had an impact on global stock markets, where securities suffered large losses during 2008 and early 2009. Economies worldwide slowed during this period, as credit tightened and international trade declined.Critics argued that credit rating agencies and investors failed to accurately price the risk involved with mortgage-related financial products, and that governments did not adjust their regulatory practices to address 21st-century financial markets. Governments and central banks responded with unprecedented fiscal stimulus, monetary policy expansion and institutional bailouts.
There is some debate as to what role the repeal of Glass–Steagall had on the late 2000s financial crisis.
Although there have been aftershocks, the financial crisis itself ended sometime between late 2008 and mid-2009. While many causes for the financial crisis have been suggested, with varying weight assigned by experts, the United States Senate issuing the Levin–Coburn Report found “that the crisis was not a natural disaster, but the result of high risk, complex financial products; undisclosed conflicts of interest; and the failure of regulators, the credit rating agencies, and the market itself to rein in the excesses of Wall Street.”
Both market-based and regulatory solutions have been implemented or are under consideration.
-
Incredible. You completely left out the CRA, Fannie and Freddy, the Federal Reserve making the money available via low rates, etc.
-
let me ask you something. do you think all this was done so that bankers could get rich? or do you think it was because the Clinton administration wanted to help lower income families buy homes?
-
Forbes
April 2010
It would appear that although the U.S. has one of the highest tax burden in the world, big corporations aren't paying it.
HOUSTON -- As you work on your taxes this month, here's something to raise your hackles: Some of the world's biggest, most profitable corporations enjoy a far lower tax rate than you do--that is, if they pay taxes at all.
The most egregious example is General Electric ( GE - news - people ). Last year the conglomerate generated $10.3 billion in pretax income, but ended up owing nothing to Uncle Sam. In fact, it recorded a tax benefit of $1.1 billion.
Avoiding taxes is nothing new for General Electric. In 2008 its effective tax rate was 5.3%; in 2007 it was 15%. The marginal U.S. corporate rate is 35%.
How did this happen? It's complicated. GE's tax return is the largest the IRS deals with each year--some 24,000 pages if printed out. Its annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission weighs in at more than 700 pages.
Inside you'll find that GE in effect consists of two divisions: General Electric Capital and everything else. The everything else--maker of engines, power plants, TV shows and the like--would have paid a 22% tax rate if it was a standalone company.
It's GE Capital that keeps the overall tax bill so low. Over the last two years, GE Capital has displayed an uncanny ability to lose lots of money in the U.S. (posting a $6.5 billion loss in 2009), and make lots of money overseas (a $4.3 billion gain). Not only do the U.S. losses balance out the overseas gains, but GE can defer taxes on that overseas income indefinitely. The timing of big deductions for depreciation in GE Capital's equipment leasing business also provides a tax benefit, as will loan losses left over from the credit crunch.
But it's the tax benefit of overseas operations that is the biggest reason why multinationals end up with lower tax rates than the rest of us. It only makes sense that multinationals "put costs in high-tax countries and profits in low-tax countries," says Scott Hodge, president of the Tax Foundation. Those low-tax countries are almost anywhere but the U.S. "When you add in state taxes, the U.S. has the highest tax burden among industrialized countries," says Hodge. In contrast, China's rate is just 25%; Ireland's is 12.5%.
Corporations are getting smarter, not just about doing more business in low-tax countries, but in moving their more valuable assets there as well. That means setting up overseas subsidiaries, then transferring to them ownership of long-lived, often intangible but highly profitable assets, like patents and software.
As a result, figures tax economist Martin Sullivan, companies are keeping some $28 billion a year out of the clutches of the U.S. Treasury by engaging in so-called transfer pricing arrangements, where, say, Microsoft's ( MSFT - news - people ) overseas subsidiaries license software to its U.S. parent company in return for handsome royalties (that get taxed at those lower overseas rates).
-
Forbes
April 2010
It would appear that although the U.S. has one of the highest tax burden in the world, big corporations aren't paying it.
jesus fucking H christ this shit makes me so fucking mad i want to throw my fucking computer out of a fucking window.
this is a prime example of some fucking hack liberal journalist trying to make a name for himself among a group of liberal fucking lemmings who only want to read what they want to hear.
this author has ZERO idea of how to read a financial statement and chooses to disseminate misinformation to his following of willfully ignorant and this article has had holes blown in it the size of minivans since it made it to press.
the sad fact is that he saw that GE had a Deferred tax asset on their books for 2010 and some fucking idiot thinks that deferred tax asset means that they got a refund.
-
Did GE get a $3.2 billion tax refund? No.
Did GE pay U.S. income taxes in 2010? Yes, it paid estimated taxes for 2010, and also made payments for previous years. Think of it as your having paid withholding taxes on your salary in 2010, and sending the IRS a check on April 15, 2010, covering your balance owed for 2009.
Will GE ultimately pay U.S. income taxes for 2010? After much to-ing and fro-ing -- the company says it hasn't completed its 2010 tax return -- GE now says that it will pay tax. (For more on GE's tax strategies, see GE's taxes: A case study)
Why should you care about this? Because we all have a stake in how this plays out. Thanks to the uproar over GE, we now risk ending up with legislation that targets GE but produces all sorts of unintended consequences. Public rage can make for bad law. For example, the Alternative Minimum Tax was adopted in 1969 amid an uproar generated by a Treasury report that said 155 wealthy families had paid no income tax. But the bill, badly designed and badly amended, has morphed into a mess that affects millions of middle- and upper-middle-class families, but not the really-high-income tax-minimizing families. They're not affected because the AMT fades out of the picture for families with income of $600,000 and up.
Now, let's take it from the top, slowly, and sort this all out.
GE's 2010 financial statements reported a $3.25 billion U.S. "current tax benefit," which is where the Times, which declined comment, got its $3.2 billion "tax benefit" number. But a company's "current tax" number has nothing to do with what it actually pays in taxes for a given year. "Current tax benefit" and "current tax expense" are so-called financial reporting numbers, used to calculate the profits a company reports to shareholders.
They have nothing to do with what a company sends to (or receives from) the IRS. "Any correlation between the 'current tax expense' and the current tax payable is likely coincidental," says a leading tax authority, Ed Outslay, Deloitte/Michael Licata professor of accounting at Michigan State University's business school.
After repeated conversations with GE -- remember, we've been working on this story too -- we can finally give you reasonably definitive answers.
The company says that it's not getting any refund for 2010 -- validating Outslay's analysis. Its 2010 tax situation? "We expect to have a small U.S. income tax liability for 2010," GE chief spokesman Gary Sheffer told us. How big is small? GE declined to say. The number is unlikely to ever be disclosed unless GE goes public with it, or is forced to do so.
THIS IS A DECENT RUNDOWN OF WHAT THE AUTHOR GOT WRONG
-
Actually government, private banks, AND people signing loans they shouldn't have were all to blame.
I think it's funny when people point at one group and say YOU'RE THE PROBLEM... When really, everyone had a part in it.
Too bad no one is willing to stand up and admit that at a higher level.
Exactly! Mortgage lenders did no force folks to borrow more than they could repay. It was this easy money that drove the housing market up and up. Not to forget that many people's housing expectations have become completely unrealistic considering their income level. The average house is considerably larger with many more amenities than houses of the past had. Just look at post WWII housing verses houses built recently. The difference is amazing. On the other hand, motgage brokers knew they were making bad loans. However, their motivation was the commision. Goverment regulators should have seen the "writing on the wall" since history often repeats itself....remember the Savings and Loan crisis of the 1980's and 1990's.
-
this is a prime example of some fucking hack liberal journalist trying to make a name for himself among a group of liberal fucking lemmings who only want to read what they want to hear.
this author has ZERO idea of how to read a financial statement and chooses to disseminate misinformation to his following of willfully ignorant and this article has had holes blown in it the size of minivans since it made it to press.
the sad fact is that he saw that GE had a Deferred tax asset on their books for 2010 and some fucking idiot thinks that deferred tax asset means that they got a refund.
Forbes Media LLC is a privately held publishing and new media company. Its flagship publication is Forbes, a bi-weekly magazine, with a circulation of over 900,000. The company’s website, Forbes.com, is the leading business site on the Web that reaches on average more than 21 million people monthly.
Articles in Forbes cover a wide array of topics from the worlds of industry, finance, international business, marketing, law, taxes, science, technology, communications, investments and entrepreneurship. Steve Forbes is the magazine's Editor-in-Chief and contributes a column in each issue called "Fact and Comment." Randall Lane is Editor and Rich Karlgaard is Publisher.
The re-architected Forbes has a greater focus on reporting—investigative, immersive and involved—by journalists operating from the center of the stories they are telling. The magazine is more participatory—with significantly more first-hand accounts from story subjects and the Forbes community at large.
-
Exactly! Mortgage lenders did no force folks to borrow more than they could repay. It was this easy money that drove the housing market up and up. Not to forget that many people's housing expectations have become completely unrealistic considering their income level. The average house is considerably larger with many more amenities than houses of the past had. Just look at post WWII housing verses houses built recently. The difference is amazing. On the other hand, motgage brokers knew they were making bad loans. However, their motivation was the commision. Goverment regulators should have seen the "writing on the wall" since history often repeats itself....remember the Savings and Loan crisis of the 1980's and 1990's.
yup. and i still see it today with most of the people that I come across in the real estate industry. especially as a tax preparer.
"Well my mortgage guy told me to leave off all of my Schedule C expenses so that my income would be higher".
And they think that this is perfectly acceptable behavior. A lot of them make no bones about the fact that they are there to get you into the most expensive house that you can qualify for. period.
the customer is usually the typical media baby who wants to live in the most expensive house and the real estate and mortgage guys want the biggest commission.
fact is that the housing bubble was not the fault of the banks. it was not the fault of the buyers. it was everyone. it is a culture of greed and envy like no where else in the world that got the US in the predicament that it is in.
-
Forbes Media LLC is a privately held publishing and new media company. Its flagship publication is Forbes, a bi-weekly magazine, with a circulation of over 900,000. The company’s website, Forbes.com, is the leading business site on the Web that reaches on average more than 21 million people monthly.
Articles in Forbes cover a wide array of topics from the worlds of industry, finance, international business, marketing, law, taxes, science, technology, communications, investments and entrepreneurship. Steve Forbes is the magazine's Editor-in-Chief and contributes a column in each issue called "Fact and Comment." Randall Lane is Editor and Rich Karlgaard is Publisher.
The re-architected Forbes has a greater focus on reporting—investigative, immersive and involved—by journalists operating from the center of the stories they are telling. The magazine is more participatory—with significantly more first-hand accounts from story subjects and the Forbes community at large.
journalism is dead
-
Thirty companies paid no income tax 2008-2010:
(Reuters) - Thirty large and profitable U.S. corporations paid no income taxes in 2008 through 2010, said a study on Thursday that arrives as Congress faces rising demands for tax reform, but seems unable or unwilling to act.
Pepco Holdings, a Washington, D.C.-area power company, had the lowest effective tax rate, at negative 57.6 percent, among the 280 Fortune 500 companies studied.
The statutory U.S. corporate income tax rate is 35 percent, one of the highest in the world, but over the 2008-2010 period, very few of the companies studied paid it, said the report.
The average effective tax rate for the companies over the period was 18.5 percent, said Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, both think tanks.
Their report also listed General Electric Co, Paccar Inc, PG&E Corp, Computer Sciences Corp and NiSource Inc as among the 30 that paid no taxes. All 280 corporations examined were profitable over the period.
Corporations will say rightly that the loopholes that let them slash their taxes were perfectly legal, the report said.
"But that does not mean that low-tax corporations bear no responsibility ... The laws were not enacted in a vacuum; they were adopted in response to relentless corporate lobbying, threats and campaign support," the report said.
As Congress and the Obama administration struggle with a sluggish economy and high deficits, corporations are pressing Capitol Hill for more tax breaks, including one that would let them bring home overseas profits at a reduced tax rate.
The congressional "super committee" tasked with finding at least $1.2 trillion in additional budget savings by November 23 is so far deadlocked across a familiar divide -- Republicans refusing any tax hikes, Democrats defending social programs.
On Tuesday, a panel of budget experts warned super committee members that they would fail the country if they do not meet their goal. Financial markets have been waiting for many months for signs that Washington can get its financial house in order, but few have been forthcoming.
-
yup. and i still see it today with most of the people that I come across in the real estate industry. especially as a tax preparer.
"Well my mortgage guy told me to leave off all of my Schedule C expenses so that my income would be higher".
And they think that this is perfectly acceptable behavior. A lot of them make no bones about the fact that they are there to get you into the most expensive house that you can qualify for. period.
the customer is usually the typical media baby who wants to live in the most expensive house and the real estate and mortgage guys want the biggest commission.
fact is that the housing bubble was not the fault of the banks. it was not the fault of the buyers. it was everyone. it is a culture of greed and envy like no where else in the world that got the US in the predicament that it is in.
I think we mostly agree on this.
Did you actually mean to say in your last paragraph that the "fact is that the housing bubble was not (only) the fault of the banks. it was not (only) the fault of the buyers. it was everyone....."
Because this is correct, the responsibility is shared among mortage lenders, borrowers and the financial regulations or deregulations (government).
I'm surprised and very disappointed to read that you still see evidence of borrowers and lenders manipulating their finances to get into properties they could not otherwise afford. I am surprised because I was under the impression that lenders were really tightening up and that unless someone has an A++ credit rating they were hard pressed to get any loan. I just refinanced my mortgage to lower the interest rate from 5.4% to 4.1% with no upfront costs, such as loan fees, title fees, etc. I was informed that the only people qualifying for these three step loan products were folks with very high credit scores (mine is 830). Additionally, the loan amount is only about 1/3 of my property's current assessed value, which is down about $200,000 from what it was in 2007.
-
Which goverment polices would those be exactly?
Crazy me, I thought it was deregulation of the banking industry which permitted banks to write and sell all those sub-pime mortgages. The same sub-prime mortgages that created the housing bubble and then the crash.
good post Prime, bringing sanity back to the insane conservatives piggy backing off each others posts :)
-
jesus fucking H christ this shit makes me so fucking mad i want to throw my fucking computer out of a fucking window.
this is a prime example of some fucking hack liberal journalist trying to make a name for himself among a group of liberal fucking lemmings who only want to read what they want to hear.
this author has ZERO idea of how to read a financial statement and chooses to disseminate misinformation to his following of willfully ignorant and this article has had holes blown in it the size of minivans since it made it to press.
the sad fact is that he saw that GE had a Deferred tax asset on their books for 2010 and some fucking idiot thinks that deferred tax asset means that they got a refund.
Prime made you (http://tctechcrunch.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/nuclear-bomb-badger350.jpg?w=350&h=295)
-
Exactly! Mortgage lenders did no force folks to borrow more than they could repay. It was this easy money that drove the housing market up and up. Not to forget that many people's housing expectations have become completely unrealistic considering their income level. The average house is considerably larger with many more amenities than houses of the past had. Just look at post WWII housing verses houses built recently. The difference is amazing. On the other hand, motgage brokers knew they were making bad loans. However, their motivation was the commision. Goverment regulators should have seen the "writing on the wall" since history often repeats itself....remember the Savings and Loan crisis of the 1980's and 1990's.
More regulation to help save the average working American from terrible greedy companies and corporations who don't care if people end up homeless, gov't regulations more more more please, it is good for the people.
-
yup. and i still see it today with most of the people that I come across in the real estate industry. especially as a tax preparer.
"Well my mortgage guy told me to leave off all of my Schedule C expenses so that my income would be higher".
And they think that this is perfectly acceptable behavior. A lot of them make no bones about the fact that they are there to get you into the most expensive house that you can qualify for. period.
the customer is usually the typical media baby who wants to live in the most expensive house and the real estate and mortgage guys want the biggest commission.
fact is that the housing bubble was not the fault of the banks. it was not the fault of the buyers. it was everyone. it is a culture of greed and envy like no where else in the world that got the US in the predicament that it is in.
the housing bubble was the banks fault aka the jews fault, they are greedy beyond belief.
-
good post Prime, bringing sanity back to the insane conservatives piggy backing off each others posts :)
what you meant to say is that he is telling you what you WANT to hear. and you're thanking him for it. it's actually sad to see the absolute denial from liberals that Congress sticking their nose into the housing industry was the biggest catalyst for the housing bubble. It's like as long as you don't ever admit that you don't have to accept the fact that we need LESS government, not more.
You liberals play on the word "deregulation" to infer that it was less government that caused the regulations to loosen up in order to allow more people to buy homes. The fact of the matter is that the Clinton administration and the Bush administration pushed this agenda in order to gain the approval of the lower income families. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were instructed by the federal government to accept these shitty loans so that we could get people into homes.
No one cared when everyone was making money. So it was a win win for everyone.
Now i will ask you. What about this don't you get?
-
More regulation to help save the average working American from terrible greedy companies and corporations who don't care if people end up homeless, gov't regulations more more more please, it is good for the people.
this post is bullshit. no one forced any of these people to buy a house with no money down, a zero interest loan, and a 5 year arm, that was way out of their price range. These people know what the fuck they're doing and THEY DON'T CARE. PERIOD. They want to be like the people on TV. PERIOD. And then they blame "greedy companies". Don't be a fucking liberal lemming and absolve the greedy people that signed on the dotted line from ANY AND ALL responsibility. Why are liberals so good at that?
-
Prime made you (http://tctechcrunch.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/nuclear-bomb-badger350.jpg?w=350&h=295)
yes he did. he set off my stupid bomb.
-
they've created lots of jobs.
overseas.
-
I think we mostly agree on this.
Did you actually mean to say in your last paragraph that the "fact is that the housing bubble was not (only) the fault of the banks. it was not (only) the fault of the buyers. it was everyone....."
Because this is correct, the responsibility is shared among mortage lenders, borrowers and the financial regulations or deregulations (government).
I'm surprised and very disappointed to read that you still see evidence of borrowers and lenders manipulating their finances to get into properties they could not otherwise afford. I am surprised because I was under the impression that lenders were really tightening up and that unless someone has an A++ credit rating they were hard pressed to get any loan. I just refinanced my mortgage to lower the interest rate from 5.4% to 4.1% with no upfront costs, such as loan fees, title fees, etc. I was informed that the only people qualifying for these three step loan products were folks with very high credit scores (mine is 830). Additionally, the loan amount is only about 1/3 of my property's current assessed value, which is down about $200,000 from what it was in 2007.
yeah it's a shitstorm. credit scores matter. but current income matters too. there is a big problem with greasy assholes holding themselves out as "professionals" and blatantly instructing their customers to commit tax and bank fraud. i tell all my clients the same thing. if it feels like cheating, it probably is. and if you're doctoring up legal and tax documents to qualify for a good loan package, you're just stupid and you deserve to be put in jail.
-
Yes they are, they know what their tax rate is, they get a lower one by using sneaky techniques. Terrible people, shame on them, shame on the rich.
Sneaky techniques? Fuck off.
Don't hate the player, hate the game.
-
the housing bubble was the banks fault aka the jews fault, they are greedy beyond belief.
You make it sound so simple....blame the Jews. Trust me, it's not that simple. Not all bankers are Jewish and not a Jews are bankers. Look hard enough and you will find some dumb Jew who over mortgaged his/her home, got the mortgage from a Christain mortgage broker and lost their home to foreclosure.
-
yeah it's a shitstorm. credit scores matter. but current income matters too. there is a big problem with greasy assholes holding themselves out as "professionals" and blatantly instructing their customers to commit tax and bank fraud. i tell all my clients the same thing. if it feels like cheating, it probably is. and if you're doctoring up legal and tax documents to qualify for a good loan package, you're just stupid and you deserve to be put in jail.
I doubt you say those exact words to your clients. If you do, you probably don't have many clients. However, I like your addage regarding cheating. I do my own taxes....only the IRS and I know if I cheat. LOL!
When it comes to income, looking at my own situation, all our household income is derived from retirement. -Can't quit or get fired. Guess that makes my wife and I a better risk.
-
More regulation to help save the average working American from terrible greedy companies and corporations who don't care if people end up homeless, gov't regulations more more more please, it is good for the people.
Some goverment regulations work out well and others do not.
-
I doubt you say those exact words to your clients. If you do, you probably don't have many clients. However, I like your addage regarding cheating. I do my own taxes....only me and the IRS know if I cheat. LOL!
When it comes to income, looking at my own situation, all our household income is derived from retirement. -Can't quit or get fired. Guess that makes my wife and I a better risk.
if a client walks into my office and asks me to knowingly prepare a return with falsified documents thats exactly what I would tell them. Thats my livelihood they're fucking with. I'm not that blunt but I've told a bunch of clients to disregard the advice they receive from their loan officer because "he's a criminal. plain and simple."
there is also a difference in being aggressive and being fraudulent. being aggressive you can have deductions disallowed and owe more money. being fraudulent gets you put in prison.
-
Sneaky techniques? Fuck off.
Don't hate the player, hate the game.
exactly. change the rules. don't make people make a judgement call on what rules are "good" and what rules are "bad".
and he's arguing like a young liberal nitwit. which specific tax loophole does he have a problem with? then and only then can we discuss it like rational adults.
I'll give him one to start off with. The offshore money being parked in banks outside the US. This is something we have to clean up. We have started to with the 2011 Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program. I have already prepared a couple. So the ball has gotten rolling on it. Money IS coming in from it.
So what else? Or is he just pontificating without knowing any actual facts?
-
and he's arguing like a young liberal nitwit. which specific tax loophole does he have a problem with? then and only then can we discuss it like rational adults.
The only specifics he has any hands on experience with are other men's scrotums and ball fuzz. He has no real knowledge of anything else. You'll never have a real conversation with him.
-
I am for closing all tax loopholes, if your rate is 35%, you pay 35% or go to prison for 10 years and lose all your money and assets. No early release nothing, you sit in jail cell 10 years.
this post is bullshit. no one forced any of these people to buy a house with no money down, a zero interest loan, and a 5 year arm, that was way out of their price range. These people know what the fuck they're doing and THEY DON'T CARE. PERIOD. They want to be like the people on TV. PERIOD. And then they blame "greedy companies". Don't be a fucking liberal lemming and absolve the greedy people that signed on the dotted line from ANY AND ALL responsibility. Why are liberals so good at that?
When you dingle a carrot in front of a bunny rabbit what do you think he is going to do? It is free food basically, does he know that you poisoned it? No, but that is his problem right? The people giving out these loans knew the people couldn't pay them back, and the people were lead to believe they could, pure and simple, deception, lying, all for more $$$$ greed.
-
I am for closing all tax loopholes, if your rate is 35%, you pay 35% or go to prison for 10 years and lose all your money and assets. No early release nothing, you sit in jail cell 10 years.
When you dingle a carrot in front of a bunny rabbit what do you think he is going to do? It is free food basically, does he know that you poisoned it? No, but that is his problem right? The people giving out these loans knew the people couldn't pay them back, and the people were lead to believe they could, pure and simple, deception, lying, all for more $$$$ greed.
do me a favor. tell me what you think a tax loophole is. and i mean specifically a provision in the IRC which you find to be an unfair tax loophole for the rich. i don;t think you can. what i see is that you're simply regurgitating what you see on MSNBC yet citing no specific examples and showing me that you have no real knowledge on the subject other than headlines that you read. prove me wrong.
-
do me a favor. tell me what you think a tax loophole is. and i mean specifically a provision in the IRC which you find to be an unfair tax loophole for the rich. i don;t think you can. what i see is that you're simply regurgitating what you see on MSNBC yet citing no specific examples and showing me that you have no real knowledge on the subject other than headlines that you read. prove me wrong.
I'm not a accountant that does that kind of stuff, your challenging that a tax loophole for the rich and corporations doesn't exist? Or that I should know the specific ones? That is like saying I am against street drugs, then a druggie asks you what street drugs explain what ones, what are they made of, and you don't know what crack cocaine and tar herion are, he refutes that you should be against drugs because you don't know what drugs he uses LOL.
Your a shill for the rich, accept it. Your a terrible person for defending the rich, trying to slam the poor, and Jesus would love to have a talk with you.
The word loophole is bad in itself and should tell you enough that it shouldn't exist, you just don't understand.
-
I'm not a accountant that does that kind of stuff, your challenging that a tax loophole for the rich and corporations doesn't exist? Or that I should know the specific ones? That is like saying I am against street drugs, then a druggie asks you what street drugs explain what ones, what are they made of, and you don't know what crack cocaine and tar herion are, he refutes that you should be against drugs because you don't know what drugs he uses LOL.
Your a shill for the rich, accept it. Your a terrible person for defending the rich, trying to slam the poor, and Jesus would love to have a talk with you.
The word loophole is bad in itself and should tell you enough that it shouldn't exist, you just don't understand.
lol, way to prove bears right. Stop now, he's made a complete ass of you.
Now you have to bring up fake religious dieties. ::)
-
I am for closing all tax loopholes, if your rate is 35%, you pay 35% or go to prison for 10 years and lose all your money and assets. No early release nothing, you sit in jail cell 10 years.
When you dingle a carrot in front of a bunny rabbit what do you think he is going to do? It is free food basically, does he know that you poisoned it? No, but that is his problem right? The people giving out these loans knew the people couldn't pay them back, and the people were lead to believe they could, pure and simple, deception, lying, all for more $$$$ greed.
Fortunately, not being a "bunny rabbit", I hope I am blessed with a little more intelligence and the wisdom to be more selective in choosing to take or not whatever carrot is dangled before me.
People make bad financial decisions all the time. Unfortunately, often instead of accepting responsibility for these dumb choices they look to blame others. Some mortgage lenders may be greedy for commissions at the expense of writing good loans for their clients. However, I think the term, "buyer beware" applies. Mortgage lenders are salesman, pure and simple.
-
do me a favor. tell me what you think a tax loophole is. and i mean specifically a provision in the IRC which you find to be an unfair tax loophole for the rich. i don;t think you can. what i see is that you're simply regurgitating what you see on MSNBC yet citing no specific examples and showing me that you have no real knowledge on the subject other than headlines that you read. prove me wrong.
I'm not saying you do this, but posting what one gets from watching MSNBC is no different than a lot of folks here who post directly from what the hear and see on FOX News. Eitherway, the media industry often overstates issues and sometimes even outright lies about them in order to gain viewership and/or readership. The truth is rarely found in the media, regardless of which side of the political spectrum one is on.
Because of the availability of so much information on the Internet and elsewhere today, it is harder and harder to really know the facts of any given situation. What is interesting to me is that good old fashioned logic seems lost on so many people these days. You see this with the Occupy folks who blame the banks for all our ills, or others who blame government or the rich as if anything could be that simple.
Some corporations probably do use tax loopholes to their advantage. Some may even do go so far as to do this outside the law. However, not all corporations are the same or are these big evil conglomerates so many would like to pin all our problems on. Not all rich people are the same. Sure some are greedy, like King Midas counting and hoarding all their gold coins. However, many rich folks are philanthropist and give generously to charities.
People like to complain that corporations outsource the manufacture of their products to other countries and nothing is made in America anymore, and yet they don't hesitate to purchase these cheaper products, which are often made in third world countries rather than support a U.S. industry. It is possible to buy "made in America" if you really try.
We are a nation of finger pointers....always pointing the finger at someone or something else. If you think government is corrupt, attend City Counsel meetings and speak up when you think something is being dealt with improperly. Attend State legislative sessions, watching your elected officials in action. If you don't like how they're voting, write or call them and tell them how you feel. Run for a political office yourself. It is always so much easier to criticize than it is to actually do something about the problems you see.
-
I'm not saying you do this, but posting what one gets from watching MSNBC is no different than a lot of folks here who post directly from what the hear and see on FOX News. Eitherway, the media industry often overstates issues and sometimes even outright lies about them in order to gain viewership and/or readership. The truth is rarely found in the media, regardless of which side of the political spectrum one is on.
Because of the availability of so much information on the Internet and elsewhere today, it is harder and harder to really know the facts of any given situation. What is interesting to me is that good old fashioned logic seems lost on so many people these days. You see this with the Occupy folks who blame the banks for all our ills, or others who blame government or the rich as if anything could be that simple.
Some corporations probably do use tax loopholes to their advantage. Some may even do go so far as to do this outside the law. However, not all corporations are the same or are these big evil conglomerates so many would like to pin all our problems on. Not all rich people are the same. Sure some are greedy, like King Midas counting and hoarding all their gold coins. However, many rich folks are philanthropist and give generously to charities.
People like to complain that corporations outsource the manufacture of their products to other countries and nothing is made in America anymore, and yet they don't hesitate to purchase these cheaper products, which are often made in third world countries rather than support a U.S. industry. It is possible to buy "made in America" if you really try.
We are a nation of finger pointers....always pointing the finger at someone or something else. If you think government is corrupt, attend City Counsel meetings and speak up when you think something is being dealt with improperly. Attend State legislative sessions, watching your elected officials in action. If you don't like how they're voting, write or call them and tell them how you feel. Run for a political office yourself. It is always so much easier to criticize than it is to actually do something about the problems you see.
all i ever ask from anyone when discussing this shit is that we talk about facts. Making blanket statements about "tax loopholes" and not addressing any specifics is simply a waste of time. I'm a tax guy. This is what I do for a living. I prepare a lot of corporate returns every year. I prepare a lot of individual returns every year. My job is to work within the boundaries of the law to minimize the tax liability of my client. All i ask is that when someone says "tax loophole", give me a specific provision of the Internal Revenue Code that you think is unfair and I am more than happy to discuss it. There are TONS of provisions that are unfair. However, there are a lot of provisions that are unfair to the high income taxpayer as well.
-
fair? The rich are getting richer and corporations are making more money than ever while the middle class and the poor are not making any more money than they were 10 years ago, factor in inflation and you have a very unfair situation. The rich should be happy they get to keep what they have, really in this time we should be taxing them at 50 - 60% to help the whole country.
-
fair? The rich are getting richer and corporations are making more money than ever while the middle class and the poor are not making any more money than they were 10 years ago, factor in inflation and you have a very unfair situation. The rich should be happy they get to keep what they have, really in this time we should be taxing them at 50 - 60% to help the whole country.
thats my biggest problem with you. you think that if we bring the federal income tax rates up to 50% that this will help. And you believe this mostly because of all the lies and distortions of the truth regarding corporate and individual federal income taxes you have seen and read about.
-
fair? The rich are getting richer and corporations are making more money than ever while the middle class and the poor are not making any more money than they were 10 years ago, factor in inflation and you have a very unfair situation. The rich should be happy they get to keep what they have, really in this time we should be taxing them at 50 - 60% to help the whole country.
also this post is short sighted and devoid of any practical knowledge of tax policy. plus you sound like you're blaming the rich. "the rich should be happy to keep what they get"? who the fuck are you?
-
also this post is short sighted and devoid of any practical knowledge of tax policy. plus you sound like you're blaming the rich. "the rich should be happy to keep what they get"? who the fuck are you?
He is this guy, seriously, this is him. So I wouldnt pay much mind to him. Now Jstunami/sucksdickfor20/largerthanlife/analpaulm, get back to the G&O so we can make fun of your love of goats ;)
-
He is this guy, seriously, this is him. So I wouldnt pay much mind to him. Now Jstunami/sucksdickfor20/largerthanlife/analpaulm, get back to the G&O so we can make fun of your love of goats ;)
LOL. That pic never gets old.
-
also this post is short sighted and devoid of any practical knowledge of tax policy. plus you sound like you're blaming the rich. "the rich should be happy to keep what they get"? who the fuck are you?
I am for fairness, if most of this country is christian they will vote out all republicans in 2012.
-
I am for fairness, if most of this country is christian they will vote out all republicans in 2012.
What? The Christian right supports the Republican right. Not that all "Christians" are Republicans or vice versa.
-
What? The Christian right supports the Republican right. Not that all "Christians" are Republicans or vice versa.
I'm saying if most of the country is suppose "Christians", they will vote out all the republicans guarding the very small number of rich people in this country from a small tax hike so the middle class can have a tax break. How so called Christians live with themselves I never know.
-
I'm saying if most of the country is suppose "Christians", they will vote out all the republicans guarding the very small number of rich people in this country from a small tax hike so the middle class can have a tax break. How so called Christians live with themselves I never know.
You are thinking too narrowly. There are a number of reasons people vote for Republican candidates. And don't kid yourself there are corrupt Democrates too. The reality is that money talks. Successful political campaigns are expensive. It is both good business and human nature for to support those who support your interests.
What you have proposed in previous posts regarding tax rates, including tax increases for the rich and decreases for the poor is nothing short of idealized communism. As much as many people seem to expect and enjoy socialism, communism is still quite a leap! Thank goodness for that, because communism goes against human nature and thus eventually fails. History has proved this over and over again.
Additionally, you have an idealized and wrong view of what it means to be a Christian. There is nothing that says Christians can't have wealth. It may be "Christian" to be charitable, but I don't believe anyone can logically expect someone to give away all their wealth and power in the name of Christianity....unless they are becoming a monk or a nun and taking a vow of poverty. There is not a lot of folks doing this, I'm afraid.
-
Communism carried out perfectly will work. Just like Capitalism will work if it is carried out right with regulations and no loopholes, as we have it now it is not capitalism, it is a system that is owned by corporations and corporate interests decide what goes on.
I never said a Christian can't be wealthy, but he must give to the poor and 10% to the church as well. Christians if they actually read the bible are told to help the poor, but modern so called Christianity demonizes the poor, just like the GOP are doing, they are so called modern day Christians, something Christ would deeply disprove of.
-
Communism carried out perfectly will work. Just like Capitalism will work if it is carried out right with regulations and no loopholes, as we have it now it is not capitalism, it is a system that is owned by corporations and corporate interests decide what goes on.
I never said a Christian can't be wealthy, but he must give to the poor and 10% to the church as well. Christians if they actually read the bible are told to help the poor, but modern so called Christianity demonizes the poor, just like the GOP are doing, they are so called modern day Christians, something Christ would deeply disprove of.
Can you sight an example of a time when communism worked for any extended period of time? I can't think of any examples....help me out here.
Many of the "loopholes" you reference are actually regulations and tax laws of which smart folks and corporations take advantage. I am not rich. However, when I do my taxes each year, I spend considerable time learning which tax rules serve me to best advantage so as to avoid paying one penny more in taxes than I have to. Tax laws and regulations come from government. People who break these laws are subject to punishment. If you've noticed, the IRS generally goes after the big fish and not the little guy.
People may think less of the poor for very interesting reasons. One of those reasons is a desire to separate oneself from those people. Most folks would rather believe they could never be in a position of begging for money or food than to look at the begger and realize that they may only be a paycheck or two removed from that person looking for a handout. Yet, I believe, somewhere in their minds they know just how vulnerable they are....we all are....and so they do everything they can to divorce themselves from those less fortunate. My wife and I have worked with homeless people and people relying on food banks for sustenance. Some of them have really heart breaking stories to tell which make clear how easy it is to fall from the top. Of course, some folks are perpetually in poverty because that's what they know or they haven't the will to change there miserable lives. No amount of handouts will help most of these people. It makes it really hard for caring people to know who to help and who not to help. Everyone has a sad story to tell. Some are for real and others, not so much.
-
Can you sight an example of a time when communism worked for any extended period of time? I can't think of any examples....help me out here.
Many of the "loopholes" you reference are actually regulations and tax laws of which smart folks and corporations take advantage. I am not rich. However, when I do my taxes each year, I spend considerable time learning which tax rules serve me to best advantage so as to avoid paying one penny more in taxes than I have to. Tax laws and regulations come from government. People who break these laws are subject to punishment. If you've noticed, the IRS generally goes after the big fish and not the little guy.
People may think less of the poor for very interesting reasons. One of those reasons is a desire to separate oneself from those people. Most folks would rather believe they could never be in a position of begging for money or food than to look at the begger and realize that they may only be a paycheck or two removed from that person looking for a handout. Yet, I believe, somewhere in their minds they know just how vulnerable they are....we all are....and so they do everything they can to divorce themselves from those less fortunate. My wife and I have worked with homeless people and people relying on food banks for sustenance. Some of them have really heart breaking stories to tell which make clear how easy it is to fall from the top. Of course, some folks are perpetually in poverty because that's what they know or they haven't the will to change there miserable lives. No amount of handouts will help most of these people. It makes it really hard for caring people to know who to help and who not to help. Everyone has a sad story to tell. Some are for real and others, not so much.
Good post about the poor Prime. Yes many people want to separate themselves from them, but they do not realize they could be in that very position a year or two down the line.
Communism is usually or mostly abused power from the top, that is why I said it had to be executed perfectly, although can you say the US system is working out well at it's current state?
Smart people taking advantage of not paying their fair share, that is smart? That sounds more devious behavior than smart.
-
Define Christian. 80% of the country believes in God but that doesn't mean they are "Christian". 50% of Catholics voted for Obama. Any good Catholic knows better than to vote for him.
-
Also, if you're anti-America (and you are) and pro-communist...what are you doing in this country?
-
Good post about the poor Prime. Yes many people want to separate themselves from them, but they do not realize they could be in that very position a year or two down the line.
Communism is usually or mostly abused power from the top, that is why I said it had to be executed perfectly, although can you say the US system is working out well at it's current state?
Smart people taking advantage of not paying their fair share, that is smart? That sounds more devious behavior than smart.
Maybe they do realize it could be them and that is why they mentally create this division hoping it will somehow insulate them from that happening.
So are you suggesting I not take every deduction available to me under the law? There is nothing devious about being well informed about tax laws and taking every possible legal deduction. Devious behavior would be cheating on ones taxes. There is a risk involved in such cheating. If caught, at the least you'll be fined and if the tax fraud is flagrant enough, you might be warming up a jail cell.
Personally, I'd rather save everything I legally can on my tax bill and donate that money to charity of my choice. Which, by the way, is another tax deduction. Did you know you can donate up to 30% of your gross income to legitimate charities without raising any red flags with the IRS? Not that my wife and I donate that much....just saying.
-
Any good Catholic knows better than to vote for him.
Really? Why?
Are you Catholic? Does your statement have anything to do with Obama's views on a woman's right to an abortion.
-
Also, if you're anti-America (and you are) and pro-communist...what are you doing in this country?
So if someone is a communist, which of the five remaining communist countries should they pick to live in: China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea or Vietnam?
-
Define Christian. 80% of the country believes in God but that doesn't mean they are "Christian".
Believing in God doesn't mean one is Christian. Most religions believe in God except perhaps Atheist and Agnostics. Jews believe in God, Muslims worship Allah and the Prophet Mohamed. who they believe is the last messenger of God. Christians, including Catholics believe in God and in Jesus as the son of God. Satanist worship the Devil. There are good folks and not so good folks in each of these faiths. But, apparently there are very few folks who bother to vote in a national election.
Only 37.8% of the voting age population voted in the 2010 Presidential election. I'll bet there were folks of all faiths who voted and who could be bothered to vote. Perhaps if more folks, regardless of their faith, took a moment out of their lives to vote in elections they'd have a louder voice. As it is, I, for one, have no time for folks who complain about how bad things are but can't even bother to vote to change them.
-
I am for fairness, if most of this country is christian they will vote out all republicans in 2012.
taking money away from rich people and giving it to poor people is not fairness. sorry. the idea of it may make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside but it still does not fall under the definition of fairness. fairness is a flat tax where everyone pays the same rate of tax no matter what they earn.
-
Good post about the poor Prime. Yes many people want to separate themselves from them, but they do not realize they could be in that very position a year or two down the line.
Communism is usually or mostly abused power from the top, that is why I said it had to be executed perfectly, although can you say the US system is working out well at it's current state?
Smart people taking advantage of not paying their fair share, that is smart? That sounds more devious behavior than smart.
there's more of your fairness.
"poor people follow the law. rich people don't follow the law if it helps you. only follow the law when it provides an opportunity for the poor to get their hands on more of your money. if the law works in your favor, don't follow it, or you're a bad person."
this is a prime example of young liberal logic. you're still in college aren't you?
-
Maybe they do realize it could be them and that is why they mentally create this division hoping it will somehow insulate them from that happening.
So are you suggesting I not take every deduction available to me under the law? There is nothing devious about being well informed about tax laws and taking every possible legal deduction. Devious behavior would be cheating on ones taxes. There is a risk involved in such cheating. If caught, at the least you'll be fined and if the tax fraud is flagrant enough, you might be warming up a jail cell.
Personally, I'd rather save everything I legally can on my tax bill and donate that money to charity of my choice. Which, by the way, is another tax deduction. Did you know you can donate up to 30% of your gross income to legitimate charities without raising any red flags with the IRS? Not that my wife and I donate that much....just saying.
me too. i want my money going to charities that I choose. i don't want those choices made for me.
-
Really? Why?
Are you Catholic? Does your statement have anything to do with Obama's views on a woman's right to an abortion.
I'm a non-denominational Christian but my wife, as with the rest of her family is a devout Catholic. And yes, that's one of the main reasons to not vote for him. And true Christian/Catholic shouldn't have anything to do with a politician let alone the POTUS that supports abortion and especially late term.
-
Maybe they do realize it could be them and that is why they mentally create this division hoping it will somehow insulate them from that happening.
So are you suggesting I not take every deduction available to me under the law? There is nothing devious about being well informed about tax laws and taking every possible legal deduction. Devious behavior would be cheating on ones taxes. There is a risk involved in such cheating. If caught, at the least you'll be fined and if the tax fraud is flagrant enough, you might be warming up a jail cell.
Personally, I'd rather save everything I legally can on my tax bill and donate that money to charity of my choice. Which, by the way, is another tax deduction. Did you know you can donate up to 30% of your gross income to legitimate charities without raising any red flags with the IRS? Not that my wife and I donate that much....just saying.
this is also what the libs call a "tax loophole" for rich people. You see in the mianstream media's eyes when a rich white business man donates his money, they call it a tax loophole. When a rock star or movie star does the same thing, they're "giving back to the community"
-
taking money away from rich people and giving it to poor people is not fairness. sorry. the idea of it may make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside but it still does not fall under the definition of fairness. fairness is a flat tax where everyone pays the same rate of tax no matter what they earn.
read the bible.
So if someone is a communist, which of the five remaining communist countries should they pick to live in: China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea or Vietnam?
How can I be anti America? I never said I was a communist, you just accuse me of this. I am against the American support of the illegal jewish state, America has a lot to clean up, that doesn't mean I am anti America, I can point out what they need to do to be a better country. Such as taxing the rich back to what the tax rate for them use to be, close tax loopholes, and stop corporate greed by passing new regulation.
Most rich people don't give to charity because they are charitable, they do it to get a tax break(loophole) bigger than what the donation is. So it works in their favor.
-
read the bible.
How can I be anti America? I never said I was a communist, you just accuse me of this. I am against the American support of the illegal jewish state, America has a lot to clean up, that doesn't mean I am anti America, I can point out what they need to do to be a better country. Such as taxing the rich back to what the tax rate for them use to be, close tax loopholes, and stop corporate greed by passing new regulation.
Most rich people don't give to charity because they are charitable, they do it to get a tax break(loophole) bigger than what the donation is. So it works in their favor.
will you seriously stop talking about shit that you have absolutely ZERO knowledge about! please tell me how the tax benefit of donating is bigger than the donation itself. this is like that episode of Seinfeld. seriously just stop. you're making a complete ass of yourself.
-
read the bible.
How can I be anti America? I never said I was a communist, you just accuse me of this. I am against the American support of the illegal jewish state, America has a lot to clean up, that doesn't mean I am anti America, I can point out what they need to do to be a better country. Such as taxing the rich back to what the tax rate for them use to be, close tax loopholes, and stop corporate greed by passing new regulation.
Most rich people don't give to charity because they are charitable, they do it to get a tax break(loophole) bigger than what the donation is. So it works in their favor.
you're literally sitting here blatantly making shit up. you're an idiot.
-
read the bible.
How can I be anti America? I never said I was a communist, you just accuse me of this. I am against the American support of the illegal jewish state, America has a lot to clean up, that doesn't mean I am anti America, I can point out what they need to do to be a better country. Such as taxing the rich back to what the tax rate for them use to be, close tax loopholes, and stop corporate greed by passing new regulation.
Most rich people don't give to charity because they are charitable, they do it to get a tax break(loophole) bigger than what the donation is. So it works in their favor.
No, you didn't outright say you were a communist. However, believing that the rich should share their wealth with the poor so that all folks have some money is communist idealism. Of course, this idealism doesn't work because people aren't wired like that. We are wired to take care of ourselves first and then our families. This is called survival of the fittest.
Does it make a difference to those receiving charity why someone donated their hard earned money to it? I don't think so. Furthermore, how can you know what all rich people think. I suspect many folks who have money donate to charity because they derive some good feelings from being charitable. I'll ask my wife, she's always donating money to one charity or another. She tends to be rather clueless about finances although she is fortunately fairly conservative when it comes to spending money on herself. On second thought, I can guarantee that my wife gives no thought to saving money on taxes by donating money to charities or tax loopholes as you refer to them.
America (the U.S.) is a capitalist country. You don't seem like a capitalist. By default, this makes you appear un-American.
By the way, I agree that we the people should demand our government make the tax laws simpler and more fair to all. However, you and I may disagree on what is fair. See, I have no problem with rich people being rich as you seem to have. My uneducated suggestion for taxes is to have one tax rate for all with no deductions whatsoever. If a couple decides to have twelve kids, that's their choice....why should they get a deduction for this? It is not like we need to boost the population. If I finance my home or give money to charity that is also my choice. The interest on my loan or the gifts I give should not translate to tax deductions. My guess is that the tax rate with no deductions would be very low compared to what it is now. Of course, this idea would put a lot of people out of work, like tax auditors and tax preparers. Shit! Nothing is ever as simple as it seems.
-
will you seriously stop talking about shit that you have absolutely ZERO knowledge about! please tell me how the tax benefit of donating is bigger than the donation itself. this is like that episode of Seinfeld. seriously just stop. you're making a complete ass of yourself.
Is it possible that he has never filed a tax return? Is it possible that he actually doesn't know that tax deductions don't translate to like dollars in your bank account? Is it possible that he represents what some people think is the 99%?
I am in the 99% as are most of us. That's why it is 99% of the people. Lots of us are doing OK, paying our taxes after taking whatever deductions we or our tax person believes we can legally take. Some of us give to others (charities of our choice) who are in need.
-
you're literally sitting here blatantly making shit up. you're an idiot.
Very common on this board. Guideline #1, actually.
-
No, you didn't outright say you were a communist. However, believing that the rich should share their wealth with the poor so that all folks have some money is communist idealism. Of course, this idealism doesn't work because people aren't wired like that. We are wired to take care of ourselves first and then our families. This is called survival of the fittest.
Does it make a difference to those receiving charity why someone donated their hard earned money to it? I don't think so. Furthermore, how can you know what all rich people think. I suspect many folks who have money donate to charity because they derive some good feelings from being charitable. I'll ask my wife, she's always donating money to one charity or another. She tends to be rather clueless about finances although she is fortunately fairly conservative when it comes to spending money on herself. On second thought, I can guarantee that my wife gives no thought to saving money on taxes by donating money to charities or tax loopholes as you refer to them.
America (the U.S.) is a capitalist country. You don't seem like a capitalist. By default, this makes you appear un-American.
By the way, I agree that we the people should demand our government make the tax laws simpler and more fair to all. However, you and I may disagree on what is fair. See, I have no problem with rich people being rich as you seem to have. My uneducated suggestion for taxes is to have one tax rate for all with no deductions whatsoever. If a couple decides to have twelve kids, that's their choice....why should they get a deduction for this? It is not like we need to boost the population. If I finance my home or give money to charity that is also my choice. The interest on my loan or the gifts I give should not translate to tax deductions. My guess is that the tax rate with no deductions would be very low compared to what it is now. Of course, this idea would put a lot of people out of work, like tax auditors and tax preparers. Shit! Nothing is ever as simple as it seems.
A flat tax would work, but then the people who are currently under paid would have to get a pay raise equivalent to what they are going to be paying in extra income tax or else those people will take a huge it, may lose their house, car, etc etc, so that needs to be taken into account.
-
A flat tax would work, but then the people who are currently under paid would have to get a pay raise equivalent to what they are going to be paying in extra income tax or else those people will take a huge it, may lose their house, car, etc etc, so that needs to be taken into account.
To say that people are underpaid is a whole different issue. Some people make little money because they have jobs which pay very little....this is not the same as being underpaid. Underpaid is when you have a job which normally pays what the market and competition dictates, but you are paid less than that for various reasons. If you are a resident MD making minimum wage, you are probably underpaid. If you pump gas and make minimum wage, you are not underpaid, you just have a low paying job.
Truly, what do these people pay in taxes now? Are they using tax "loopholes" to avoid paying taxes. The lowest tax bracket is 10% for single filers with an income income of $0 – $8,500, married filing joint with and income of $0 – $17,000 and head of household with an income of $0 – $12,150.
I could be wrong, but folks at this income level are probably on public assistance. It is very unlikely they are buying a house and perhaps not even a car worth keeping. Here's a scenario for you, if the flat tax were, say 10% for all, a couple making $17,000 a year with no deductions of any kind would owe $1700 in taxes. Chances are they work for an employer where taxes are taken out each time one is paid. So if they are paid once a month and they both earn the same amount of $8,500 annually, they each would have only $70.80 per month in federal taxes deducted.
On the otherhand, someone making $75,000 a year would pay at 10% flat tax $7,500 a year. Someone making $200,000 would pay $20,000 and someone making a million would pay $100,000.
I don't know what the tax rate would need to be if we were to go with a flat tax to keep it revenue neutral.
Some people feel a better tax is "fair tax" which does not tax income at all, but rather only goods and services (consumption or sales tax). This would replace our current system of income tax. Obviously, there are no "loopholes" with this method of taxation.
-
Is it possible that he has never filed a tax return? Is it possible that he actually doesn't know that tax deductions don't translate to like dollars in your bank account? Is it possible that he represents what some people think is the 99%?
I am in the 99% as are most of us. That's why it is 99% of the people. Lots of us are doing OK, paying our taxes after taking whatever deductions we or our tax person believes we can legally take. Some of us give to others (charities of our choice) who are in need.
he represents a good number of ppl in the ows movement. This was the crux of my posts in the beginning. The 99% take tax credits and deductions to lessen their tax burden 45% of the time to zero or to get a refund but somehow they are patriots...
you are ok in my book prime, we dont agree on much but at least you are reasonable.
-
he represents a good number of ppl in the ows movement. This was the crux of my posts in the beginning. The 99% take tax credits and deductions to lessen their tax burden 45% of the time to zero or to get a refund but somehow they are patriots...
you are ok in my book prime, we dont agree on much but at least you are reasonable.
We don't agree on much? I hadn't noticed. If you say it is so than it probably is. LOL!
I'm the kind of person who gets over things really quickly. Not much future in holding grudges. Some of my best friends are Republicans, believe it or not.
Thanks, I try to look at issues from all perspectives. If that makes me reasonable, then I'm doing something right. People have different lives and experiences which give them their own perspective on pretty much everything. I have found during my many years that there is a lot of gray area between the extremes. There is something to be learned from almost everyone. I look at Getbig as a huge melting pot of ideas. It is good to try and be open to other folks opinions and ideas.
-
Some of my best friends are Republicans, believe it or not.
This made me lol. "I'm not racist, some of my best friends are black".....
-
A flat tax would work, but then the people who are currently under paid would have to get a pay raise equivalent to what they are going to be paying in extra income tax or else those people will take a huge it, may lose their house, car, etc etc, so that needs to be taken into account.
just fuckin shut up already
-
I dont know how either party can claim God.
Jesus taught mercy and forgiveness - and Repubs love the death penalty.
Wouldn't Jesus forgive a killer, if that killer was truly sorry?
Maybe the repubs are "closer" to the religion than the dems are. But neither as perfect. Glass houses, etc.
Anyone in the GOP tries to "own" God with his party is pretty hilarious. Jesus handed out fish and bread to the poor - that's food stamps by today's standards.
-
I dont know how either party can claim God.
Jesus taught mercy and forgiveness - and Repubs love the death penalty.
Wouldn't Jesus forgive a killer, if that killer was truly sorry?
Maybe the repubs are "closer" to the religion than the dems are. But neither as perfect. Glass houses, etc.
Anyone in the GOP tries to "own" God with his party is pretty hilarious. Jesus handed out fish and bread to the poor - that's food stamps by today's standards.
it's easier to label religious conservatives as "hypocrites" because they have a set of rules that have been put forth out into the world for everyone to see. Non religious liberals are much more difficult to label because there is no set standard to which they ascribe themselves. they march to the beat of their own drummer. which is good in many ways don't get me wrong. however people tend to think of religious people as hypocrites because they set a high moral standard that is difficult to live by.
i mean think of it this way. have you ever done anything wrong? and when i say "wrong" i mean have any of you ever done anything that you knew was wrong but did it anyway. we ALL have. i guess we're all hypocrites right? i mean we would tell people not to do what we did even though we did it right?
i think non religious liberals have it a little easier in this respect because their moral code is not set in stone and no one can pore over it and dissect and criticize it for 2,000 years. That's why when i hear anyone criticize the Bible I tell them to put in writing their entire moral code and me and 100 of my friends will read it and let them know if their view on morality is perfect. I guarantee them that it will be an utter failure.
-
neither party has religious superiority - because neither party 'kicks out' it sinners.
both parties kill (death penalty and abortion)
both parties start pre-emptive wars for resources.
they're both a bunch of sick fcking sinners.
All of this talk about 'liberals can't be christians' or "god would have been a republican" is silly.
Both parties are evil bastards. If you want to argue "eviler", go for it.
-
I dont know how either party can claim God.
Jesus taught mercy and forgiveness - and Repubs love the death penalty.
Wouldn't Jesus forgive a killer, if that killer was truly sorry?
Maybe the repubs are "closer" to the religion than the dems are. But neither as perfect. Glass houses, etc.
Anyone in the GOP tries to "own" God with his party is pretty hilarious. Jesus handed out fish and bread to the poor - that's food stamps by today's standards.
you havent read the bible much have you 240? the Lord smites ppl and has ppl smited left and right.
a person being saved doesnt mean they are free from punishment
-
you havent read the bible much have you 240? the Lord smites ppl and has ppl smited left and right.
a person being saved doesnt mean they are free from punishment
Don't believe everything you read....especially everything you read in the bible which is basically as bunch of folklore.
I imagine I'll now be seeing a bunch of posts telling me that I'm going to hell for saying that. It's OK though, I don't believe in hell either.
-
Don't believe everything you read....especially everything you read in the bible which is basically as bunch of folklore.
I imagine I'll now be seeing a bunch of posts telling me that I'm going to hell for saying that. It's OK though, I don't believe in hell either.
good post!
-
Don't believe everything you read....especially everything you read in the bible which is basically as bunch of folklore.
I imagine I'll now be seeing a bunch of posts telling me that I'm going to hell for saying that. It's OK though, I don't believe in hell either.
LOL right back at you...
I wasnt referring to whether he was a believer or not simply referring to his post about Jesus and God forgiving murderers...
maybe you should comprehend all that you read as well...
-
LOL right back at you...
I wasnt referring to whether he was a believer or not simply referring to his post about Jesus and God forgiving murderers...
maybe you should comprehend all that you read as well...
Perhaps I should and perhaps you should be clearer in what you post. After rereading the associated posts, to me, my post is right on.
-
Perhaps I should and perhaps you should be clearer in what you post. After rereading the associated posts, to me, my post is right on.
Prime you are wise just like Bay, two very wise posters on getbig, gotta say that.
-
Prime you are wise just like Bay, two very wise posters on getbig, gotta say that.
Ha, ha. Maybe we gay and bisexual guys know a little something about that which we speak after all.
Thanks.