Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2011 8:36:28 GMT -5
When will "Its Bush's fault" ever end? Granted I never cared for him but I never blamed Carter for all the crap that piled up in the 80's either.
Grimace hit the nail on the head, we need to tax imports coming into the US to keep our work force on an equal playing field. We will never catch up and pay off our debts if we dont.
But politicians on both sides have their wallets filled by foreign interest.
|
|
|
|
Post by jobs1stb4polarbear on Sept 23, 2011 8:50:41 GMT -5
Envious?
Taxes under Clinton 1999 Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K - tax $8,400 Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $14,000 Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $23,250 Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K - tax $16,800 Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $21,000 Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $38,750 Married making 125K - tax $31,250
If you want to know just how effective the mainstream media is, it is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above thought Bush was screwing them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. ALL these retards(democrats) say they will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can't wait for it to happen. This is like the movie The Sting with Paul Newman; you scam somebody out of some money and they don't even know what happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by marcus on Sept 23, 2011 9:11:09 GMT -5
Im all for keeping the Bush tax cuts.
|
|
|
|
Post by bulldognuts on Sept 23, 2011 12:42:52 GMT -5
Approximately 47% percent of americans pay no federal taxes at this time,and many of those that pay no taxes get a refund due to earned income tax credit.Everyone should pay something.Even if it is just 1%.In my opinion We should go to a flat tax with 3 brackets ,5% or less, 10% and 15%.With these rates there should be no deductions,you would be able to file your taxes on a postcard. We should not withhold federal taxes,instead we should only allow people to pay Quarterly or yearly.This way people will be acutely aware of what they are paying in taxes.We should also pass a law that requires that if any bracket goes up, all brackets go up at the same percentage..We should also Lower corporate taxes.We currently have one have the highest corporate tax rates in the world.Lowering corporate tax rate would give corporations the incentive to move HeadQuarters, and operations back to U.S. .Before any body replies and tells me that I'm nuts that this is never going to happen,I'm fully aware that this is never going to happen.There are to many people in power who would have that power diminished by actually doing something that would truely be fair.To the people who say that this would not raise enough revenue,I say that this would bring in has much or more than current revenue.It would give people the motivation to Invest and take risk.It would also stabilize the economy by letting people know exactly what their taxes and associated cost would be.The federal government needs to start reducing budget by 10% yearly.Until it is balanced.The budget currently goes up automatically yearly by law regardless if it is needed or not.This must also be stopped.The only way this is going to happen is if more people get involved and under stand how the Federal goernment is spending OUR money.
|
|
|
|
Post by bulldognuts on Sept 23, 2011 13:08:52 GMT -5
In the previous post I did not really address the Buffet tax.What some people may not be aware of is that Warren Buffet choses to not receive a salary from his various businesses,instead he receives stock income and dividends.This way he his not taxed at the highest income rate,he is taxed at 15% capital gains rate.His secretary more than likely earns a very high salary so is taxed at a higher income tax rate.If warren Buffet is truely upset about what he pays,why does he not just pay the rate that he would have to pay if he was earning an income by salary.What I find interesting is that when discussing this issue no one points out that maybe the secretary is paying to much,it is only looked at that Buffet is'nt paying enough.I personally have no problem that he is only paying 15% as I said in above post that should be the highest rate.
|
|
|
|
Post by jobs1stb4polarbear on Sept 23, 2011 14:04:26 GMT -5
Finally!
|
|
|
|
Post by rollvikes on Sept 23, 2011 16:43:06 GMT -5
Polar Bear, you are right on! As for you Grimace, Hitler did the samething your talking about in Germany in the 30's and early 40's. He put the unemployed and the people who didn't believe in his social programs out in the streets rebuilding what was destroyed during the 1st World War. I hope your not suggesting that we as a country should result in practicing socialism. If you don't believe me please read "Social & Economic History of Germany from William II to Hitler 1888 to 1939" By Bruck. Hitler used the same game plan as you democrats are preaching to us today. It didn't work then, so how do you expect it to work now? The only thing Hitler was able to do was create a war machine to try and destroy Europe and Northern Africa. Maybe you democrats want to create your own machine to destroy our country from within. Maybe you democrats have already succeeded by creating class warfare and voting in socialist and communist in political offices. Hitler took away money and property from the Jews in Germany and Poland. Then when he took all that they had and used them to create is war chest and war machine, he killed them like dogs. Maybe what Hitler did to the Jews, is exactly what the democrats want to do to the republicans in this country. Take from us until we don't have anything else to give, brainwash our children in the public schools so they will think as you do and take all that they'll ever have. Create your own machine to destroy the American way of life and put in place your own dictator to rule. Wait, you have already did that. Now all you have to do is get rid of all of the republicans and you'll have your Aidenn. For all of you Obama followers, you should know what Aidenn means. Socialism and the people who worship the word of socialism , are the parasite that is killing its host.As long as I and people like me breath, America and what it originally stood for will never die. And that is what scares you progressives and liberals the most.
|
|
|
|
Post by bo862 on Sept 23, 2011 16:59:33 GMT -5
Envious? Taxes under Clinton 1999 Taxes under Bush 2008Single making 30K - tax $8,400 Single making 30K - tax $4,500Single making 50K - tax $14,000 Single making 50K - tax $12,500Single making 75K - tax $23,250 Single making 75K - tax $18,750Married making 60K - tax $16,800 Married making 60K- tax $9,000Married making 75K - tax $21,000 Married making 75K - tax $18,750Married making 125K - tax $38,750 Married making 125K - tax $31,250If you want to know just how effective the mainstream media is, it is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above thought Bush was screwing them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. ALL these retards(democrats) say they will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can't wait for it to happen. This is like the movie The Sting with Paul Newman; you scam somebody out of some money and they don't even know what happened. Looks like a great plan to cut social programs. Make everyone happy they are keeping some money in their pocket today, allow the debt to go up, and then use that debt as an excuse to cut the programs; robbing them of the benefits they have paid for over the last 30-50 years. Maybe Bush wasn’t as stupid as he seemed. |
|
|
|
Post by rollvikes on Sept 23, 2011 17:21:29 GMT -5
"Money for Nothing and Chicks for Free", you people are so used to giving up your money to people who put nothing back that you'll believe anything. Just write a check to the government and give them everything you have so the drug pusher or crack whore, having one baby after another can have the internet and cable tv. If that is what America is to you, then you have been brainwashed. Or you went to a public school. Some of you people need to start reading more and stop watching the Obama run media. But if you went to public school, you probably can't read. I bet they didn't have that subject in your educational facility. Probably had redistribution of wealth class that semester.
|
|
|
|
Post by ktpelec on Sept 23, 2011 17:28:57 GMT -5
The tax code is a whole lot more compacted that the numbers previously quoted. To label it all as "Federal Income Tax" is not correct. The Buffett Rule would address investment gains, not payroll taxes, billionaires typically don't receive a payroll check anyway. Social Security tax isn't paid after earning $106,000 either. Taxes on investment income differ on the type of investment and the time period it is held. In 1995 this rate was at approximately 29%, today it is 15-18%. That means a Hedge Fund Manager like Buffett can buy a corporation, make changes (sometimes laying off workers) drive the stock price up and resell it, all in very little time, making enormous amounts of money, with very little tax owed. The Buffett Rule will not cripple these billionaires, it might even drive them to gear up and invest, making more money. www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/09/21/buffett-rule-facts-and-fictions |
|
|
|
Post by bulldognuts on Sept 23, 2011 20:16:43 GMT -5
ktpelec you either did not read all of the above replies or as most liberals do you chose to ignore inconvienent facts,you state the obvious that Buffet takes capital gains as his salary but ignore the fact that he is the one complaining that he doesn't pay enough in taxes.As I pointed out above, if he truely believes what he is saying he could just volunteer to pay his fair share.But for some reason he does not.Based on this very fact he as no credibility on this issue.President Obama has no interest in the things I pointed out either he just wants to use this issue as a wedge issue to get reelected.President Obama should be pointing out that secretary is paying to much not Buffet paying to little.You also say that billionaires would work harder to make more if they were taxed at higher rates,that may very well be true,I have no way of knowing.All I know is that if my taxes started to reach astronomical levels I do not beleive I would take on a extra job and make more so the government can take it and spend so much more wisely than I could.
|
|
|
|
Post by bo862 on Sept 23, 2011 23:45:34 GMT -5
Buffett volunteering to give extra will do nothing to solve the nations debt. But taxing everyone at previous levels will. He knows this and would rather this be a group effort to fix the problem than throwing his money away.
According to jobs little chart, we paid a lot more during the 90s, and from my understanding the economy grew during that time period. So I disagree with the idea that higher taxes are bad across the board.
|
|
|
|
Post by ktpelec on Sept 24, 2011 5:50:59 GMT -5
Please don't label me Bulldog, if you must know though, I'm a moderate.
The issue is lost government revenue because of a tax rate that isn't sufficient for the application. The facts on this tax change have been supplied here, there are different points of view on this issue. The ironic thing is that the same people that were so emphatic about getting the budget balanced by all means just a few weeks ago now balk at this revenue building plan.
|
|
|
|
Post by jobs1stb4polarbear on Sept 24, 2011 8:15:57 GMT -5
bo862....the issue is revenue(how much the US government collects).....Is the US government taking in more money than in the 90's?
Bulldog, I apologize, I forgot to mention that most people in here are so sensitive at being labeled. Mostly Liberals....
...and ktpelec....please, lets not insult the moderates by LABELING yourself as one, lol
|
|
|
|
Post by ktpelec on Sept 24, 2011 9:47:30 GMT -5
Another typical Republican response, ignore the issue and attack someone personally.
|
|
|
|
Post by jobs1stb4polarbear on Sept 24, 2011 11:17:59 GMT -5
Wow...you went from "labeling" to "attack".....stop whining! I did not know the word liberal was so bad.....I know many people who are proud to be and admit to be liberal......don't be shy, you can come out of the closet too....
....its just my opinion, again, if your sensitive(liberal) ass don' like it, too bad......oh,oh I said llliiiiibeeeerraalllll.....
|
|
|
|
Post by bulldognuts on Sept 24, 2011 12:13:27 GMT -5
I do not believe I have attacked anybody on this forum.I believe I just pointed out that the premise of the Buffet tax is complete nonsense when you look at the facts.If you consider it an attack to say that you are liberal,because you espouse the same policies as President Obama,Nancy Pelosi,Harry Reid,Dick Durbin,Charles Schumer,Charlie Rangel,Debbie Wasserman Shultz,Maxine Waters,Barbara Boxer,Henry Waxman,Bernie Sanders,Barney Frank, and all the other So called "Moderates" then I guess I'm guilty of attacking you.I would also like to point out that our debt has increased 5 trillion dollars since since Jan. 2008.Coincidentally that is when the "Moderates" took control of congress,and contained control of congress until Jan. 2011.Now I know that I shouldn't have to point out that congress controls the purse strings.President Obama likes to point out that we need a balanced approach to the budget deficit.He says we need to raise taxes Immediately,and promises that just as soon as the economy gets better we will get spending under control.Unfortunately history as shown that this never happens.I would like to also point out that The "moderates" had a complete super majority control of all three branches of government for two full years and could have Raised taxes or Let bush Tax cuts expire,or Institute The Buffet tax but for some reason they didn't.Instead they decided spending as much as they could through Stimulus spending was the answer.If I recall President Obama guaranteed if we spend this money we would not see Unemployment go over 8%.I believe unemployment was around 7% at the time.Unemployment quickly shot up to 10% and has remained at 9%+ ever since.Now we are hearing that if we would just spend more all will be well.I'm sure you are aware that this approach to economics is called Kenesian economics it states that more and then more government spending is the answer to a recession.It seems to me that it is not working.It almost appears that the "moderates" did all this spending to get us so far in debt that the only answer to our problems is to raise taxes.You most likely believe that I'm a Radical Right Wing conservative,but the funny thing is I also consider myself a moderate.
|
|
|
|
Post by ktpelec on Sept 24, 2011 12:52:03 GMT -5
No sensitivity here Pbear, just trying to correct another one of your inaccurate statements, there have been many on this topic, in my opinion. I consider my views on this nations politics neither far right or left, I have voted for both parties in my personal history.
Maybe the word attack was to harsh, perhaps I should say childish slandering of another individual, who doesn't share your opinion. It just seems that some people on this Forum often resort to name calling and such while ignoring someone else's points.
I've given my opinions and views on this particular topic.
I value and respect everyone's opinion on this Forum concerning every issue we discuss.
|
|
|
|
Post by jobs1stb4polarbear on Sept 24, 2011 14:07:50 GMT -5
Tantum Religio Liberalis Potuit Suadere Malorum Lucretius, DeRerum Natura ,jobs1stb4polarbear
......I know, but its hard to debate with someone that is so sensitive, and who thinks is a "moderate"...
|
|
|
|
Post by bulldognuts on Sept 24, 2011 14:55:37 GMT -5
It seems ktpelec only wants to prove to pbear he is not a liberal while completely ignoring the issue that I have brought up.Redirecting the conversation to anything other than the true issue is a tactic of someone who can not backup their position with any type of facts.It seems that if you disagree with some of the facts that I have pointed out you would do so.Please explain why none of these tax increases was passed when the Dem had full control.If you can not then should we assume that they are only now become so urgent because President Obama believes that he can gain support from his wavering base.One more thing,if they get the Buffet tax passed and it does not help to lower the deficit do you really believe that we will not next hear how we must now raise taxes on people who make less.It is just like the stimulas spending ,well all we need to do is spend more ,well all we need to do is raise more revenue.What needs to be done is cut spending.Stop the automatic increases in department budgets.Stop the baseline budgeting where each budget for each department goes up automatically.The Dems should Stop calling any reduction in planned increases Draconian cuts.Each department in the Federal government should be audited every year.Instead of saying that each department should automatically get what they got the previous year plus automatic increases we need to look for true cuts all the way around.This could be done but nobody has the political will to do so,because both sides do not want to decrease their ability to buy votes.
|
|
|
|
Post by ktpelec on Sept 24, 2011 17:24:17 GMT -5
I agree entirely Bdog, the Dems spent way to much when assuming control. I would also like to point out that the debt was already 10 trillion then. The myth that Dems spend more than Repubs is just that, a myth. All the administrations starting with Reagan have over spent, with Clinton spending the least.
I have supported both parties in past elections. I try to focus on what I believe is good for the middle class, no matter who proposes it.
The Topic though is the Buffett Rule, and I consider it a good idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by bo862 on Sept 24, 2011 21:51:03 GMT -5
Jobs, you start the post whining about the government collecting taxes. Finish with an insult
In post #4 you start with an insult then point out that the rich are special and will take their toys and go home if we don’t play the way they want.
Your 3rd post at #21 drifts on out to the definition that has nothing to do with anything on this forum, then continues on with serious ass kissing claiming everyone should grovel at the feet of the rich.
Your 4th post at 23 almost comes around by mentioning the buffet rule again.
5th post at #31 for the first time in months provide some form of actual information, but the information does not back anything that you have stated in this thread. Then you end with more insults and try to claim everyone else is being led by the nose while you are following the light of the world – the rich.
6th at 43 tries to let me know what the conversation is about; try to change the subject with “Is the US government taking in more money than in the 90's?” then you finish with insults.
Another fine example of changing the subject because you know your argument does not hold any water.
The rest of your posts continue with the same asshatery.
You have turned what could have been a decent discussion that migrated to a few other ideas from grimace on how to fix the issue with other ideas. Oh well.
Ktpelec, a person changing the subject with each post and continual insults suggests a person is unable to hold their own in an argument, or have an adult conversation. I have ignored a good portion of his posts up until now just to avoid the stupid crap, should have kept on skipping them. Maybe some of these other guys posting on this topic can represent the conservatives and start having some decent discussions in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by jobs1stb4polarbear on Sept 24, 2011 22:13:35 GMT -5
lol....don't forget #48
|
|
|
|
Post by marcus on Sept 25, 2011 6:46:05 GMT -5
Its so dang simple.Cut spending across the board dont take more of americans money.We ourselves can not spend more than we make!
|
|
|
|
Post by bulldognuts on Sept 25, 2011 8:14:27 GMT -5
If anybody truly wants to get the "Rich" then we should completely abolish earned income taxes.I mean completely get rid of withholding of federal earned income tax.We should go to a Value added tax.A national sales tax on all products bought and sold.That way all of these greedy and selfish rich folks could not use the federal tax code to avoid paying taxes.This way people couldn't claim rich aren't paying their fair share.The more expensive products they buy the more they pay.The current tax code is not really just a way to produce revenue for government.In reality it is a system of rewards and punishment.If people in power want to reward certain entities they can do so through the tax code.If they want punish certain groups they can do so through the tax code.I believe I read that the current tax code is over 80,000 pages.This seems a little insane,and also In my opinion proves that the tax code is not just about raising revenue. ktpelec we may agree on some issues involving the way politicians are running this country.But I once again must point out that the debt was around 10 trillion When Dems took control of purse strings,and in 4 years increased it by nearly half of the total for the countries history.So we may agree that both sides spend to much you seem to not really use any logic are reason for your belief that the answer is to just tax the rich at ever increasing amounts.You pointed out in previous post that things were so good under President Clinton and I agree.But you are surely aware that the good times you so fondly remember was mostly brought about by the fact that in 1994 the republicans took control of congress and contained control through out his Presidency.This was after a considerable amount of partisan bickering became a period of true bipartisanship.Clinton did not just constantly complain how about those mean old Republicans wanted to throw grandma into the street and starve children.He showed some true leadership and moved to the middle and truly worked with Republicans to do some good things for the country.Unfortunately the Dems now define bipartisanship as everybody must agree with what they want to do,or you are just trying to prevent President Obama our first black president from succeeding.President Obama talks and talks but never truly moves to the middle.
|
|
|
|
Post by ktpelec on Sept 25, 2011 8:15:11 GMT -5
Great post Bo, you described it very accurately. Completely true Bdog, I believe the influx of technology was the key to Clintons success. He did have to deal with a Republican majority though, and did that very well. The Jobs bill does have cuts for payroll taxes. Just cutting spending won't keep up with the interest owed on our debt, revenue must be raise also. Check out this video on YouTube: www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtVbUmcQSuk&feature=youtube_gdata_playerSent from my iPad |
|
|
|
Post by bulldognuts on Sept 25, 2011 9:00:58 GMT -5
It appears to me ktpelec that you believe that we should pass President Obama jobs bill that is still more deficit spending,please hold on for a moment while I hit my head against the wall...............................................................................................................................................Let me get this right ,you believe that if we would only spend 500 billion more that we will have to borrow and pay interest on is the answer to lowering our debt.I agree that we need more revenue but disagree on how to do it.As I have pointed out in previous post that Dems want to increase taxes now and hold off on true cuts until later.You also seem to ignore the fact that Dems intend to let bush tax cuts expire that will increase every one's taxes.The jobs bill has targeted tax cuts,such as if an employer hires people they will get a tax credit.I assume that you are aware that companies especially small business people do not hire to get a tax credit.They hire when they need more people to run their business so they can make more profit and expand and possibly make more money .Then go out and spend on whatever they chose, not what the government thinks the money should be spent on.One other thing you point out is that the jobs bill has payroll tax cuts.Is this not a complete contradiction of your position that we need more revenue from taxation.
|
|
|
|
Post by ktpelec on Sept 25, 2011 11:16:26 GMT -5
The topic is the Buffett Rule, and I support that portion of the Jobs bill.
I do believe that portions of the Bush tax cuts helped get the nation in the debt it is in. Is there a perfect solution to getting out of this debt that everyone can agree on? I doubt it, but if the long term goal is debt reduction, you have to cut spending and raise revenue. There is no doubt it will cause anger on both sides, and hopefully the middle class won't have to carry the entire burden.
The group of 12 has a short time to come to agreements on budget reduction, if they don't, huge cuts, starting with Defense will come automatically in early 2012.
|
|
|
|
Post by marcus on Sept 25, 2011 12:50:49 GMT -5
Just one year of cuts wont do it I know that.My cuts across the board would take time but we would get out of debt in time.You just have to do it,you can not spend yourself our of debt.We can take all the rich peoples money and it wont matter.
|
|
|
|
Post by ktpelec on Sept 25, 2011 13:05:34 GMT -5
Cutting sounds easy but what happens when all those cuts causes more unemployment?
Just the cuts in Defense will result in thousands of military jobs lost.
I don't consider making a Stock Futures trader whose actions drives commodities such as oil prices up to pay more tax, taking his money.
It's a very complicated problem, that's going to take lots of changes across the board.
|
|
