Subject: Holy MF shiznet. My taxes are soooo low.........
Posted by: biliruben
- [81382416] Mon, Feb 09, 2015, 09:34
As you can guess, I just finished doing my taxes. WTF!
I invite others to do this same calculation
Income Tax PAid ________________________ =
Gross Unadjusted Income
8.4%
No, I'm not part of the 1%, we are a somewhat above average married family with a kid. We don't own a business. How does our country continue to function, maintain our infrastructure, take care of our elderly, and wage expensive wars? I'm baffled, and frankly concerned that this state of affairs cannot possibly continue.
What say you? What percentage of your unadjusted gross actually goes to supporting our countries viability? Small business owners should probably deduct their business expenses.
Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well.
38
biliruben
ID: 229341622 Tue, Feb 10, 2015, 18:37
I can understand the desire to feel like once you have paid off your house, you are good. Property taxes definitely get in the way of that feeling. But, as PD says, municipalities need revenue to function and give you all those niggling things you don't like to think about like schools and parks and sewers. If you wanted to live deep off the grid in Alaska, I'm guessing your property taxes would be very low. But I'd also guess you wouldn't be getting your roads plowed. Or built in the first place.
If your city offered you a deal where, for say, a 200k lump sum (maybe 20times your annual tax), you would never have to pay property taxes again, would you take it?
Weykool is looking at some definition that says a family of 4 making 28K is middle class. I never said any such thing and to imply that I did is nothing more than a lie. YOUR comment was LOWER middle class. My sense is that 28K is doing a little better than the poor so it must be the lower end of the LOWER middle class. Since you are the one who keeps making the blanket comments about the income classes perhaps you could provide a link with rock solid definitions? Otherwise we might need to sick the Link Police on you.
My socialist sister pretty much sounds identical to Boldy these days. The political spectrum is actually a circle. Ultra-conservatives are linked arm and arm with the radical left. Well... at least they play footsie.
Remember when libs were singing "Some man's gone and tried to run my life. Don't know what he's askin'. He can't even run his own life. I'll be damned if he'll run mine"?
That was before they were in position to switch roles and be the man. Now it's a GREAT idea if someone else runs your life.
As do many so-called Christians. Evil done in the name of religion is wrong. That's the simple point many of the Right reject from Obama's National Prayer Breakfast speech.
The point all you liberals choose to ignore is that Christ forbids the violence you decry and Islam literally demands.
It took centuries for the 'oppressive wolves' Jesus predicted would 'enter in among you' to arrive. It took centuries for them to introduce and overlay the concept of 'a just war' and paste them over Jesus words.
The Koran's encouragement of holy war is continuous from start to finish. It is omnipresent.
A christian has to leave the faith as originally delivered to pick up the sword.
A Muslim has to leave the faith to renounce the sword.
Don't get me wrong. I'm pleased as punch that a majority of muslims have managed to ignore the incitement to violence and the barbarity advocated in the Koran. I truly feel for the average muslim caught within the boundaries of ISIS.
Islamist terror starts at home and I expect the average muslim isn't gonna volunteer to have his throat slit when ISIS gives him the choice of following them.
So the more money you make the lower the effective tax rate. This website shows the difference in every state what the difference is at all income levels.
From the dark shadows of my memory and as I learned in my first course in Federal Taxation, the basis for graduated Income Tax rates as introduced in the '30's was to implement the theory of where-withall. Those with the where-withall paid more in taxes than those without the where-withall. This leveled the playing field and changed Federal Income Taxes from being regressive (damaging to the less wealthy) to being progressive. Thus at the end of the week, everyone could afford to buy milk, not just the wealthy. As tax rates have compressed in the last 40 years, Federal Income and Death taxes have again become regressive and favor the wealthy.
The Tea Party theory of reducing/eliminating taxes does not run contrary to progressive rates, but does offend the notion of wealth redistribution between the haves and the have-nots. (gawd there goes the liberal again)
No one...no one but a liberal politician or a RINO wants to tap a poor person on the shoulder and tell them, before you take that milk home you'll have to dance like Fred Astare you'll have to pay the taxman.
But maybe I am being too easy on liberals. Perhaps some ARE that desperate power-hungry.
Second, in Washington proposal after proposal is made by liberal politicians to substitute an income tax on the wealthy and drop the sales tax. Conservatives, fight it tooth and nail and win. The kochs spent 8 million fighting the last initiative.
No one...no one but a liberal politician or a RINO wants to tap a poor person on the shoulder and tell them, before you take that milk home you'll have to pay the taxman.
Simply not accurate. Paul Ryan, Louis Gohmert, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Jodi Ernst, John Boehner et al, are doing PRECISELY that.
Read something besides RWNJ blogs. Their proposals to cut SNAP, Soc Sec etc, are common place. I'm not going to spend time finding links you wont read anyway. Rather, I will challenge you to actually do a little bit of honest research yourself.
Since you lack the ability to do HONEST research, here you go...a starter. Continue on from here; (oh and btw, before you claim I said So-and-so, you do understand what 'et al' means, right?)
(oh and btw, before you claim I said So-and-so, you do understand what 'et al' means, right?) Yes we all know what 'et al' means. It means you cant back up post #68 with a link so you are going to attempt to use the lamest excuse these boards have ever seen.
I think you guys are looking at two different things. sarge is looking at who wants to cut benefits primarily which benefit the poor. Boldwin is looking at proposals which increase taxes on the poor.
These are, of course, two different things and mixing them up merely causes mixed up thinking.
as for consumption taxes, I have no clue about Rand Paul's tax plan outside of his budget plan (which relied on some unbelievably stupid assumptions, like unemployment dropping to 2.8% and so forth). As far as I know he's not looking for the kind of consumption tax that other GOP politicos are pushing. Others certainly are, but it is unfair, IMO, to lump those who want to slash benefits for the poor as those who want to increase taxes for the poor. Two different things.
You can make up all the lame excuses you want for Sarge, but his list was of NATIONAL republicans and then provided a link to a story about STATE republicans as his so called proof. You wouldnt let Boldwin get away with that kind of deception but since its someone on your side of the isle you have no problem with it. Shameful hypocrisy.
If we are talking sales tax, isn't that exclusively a state issue? Or it used to be until Citizen's United allowed the Kochs to build a defacto 3rd party with a budget larger than the Republican party, which has decided to throw vast wealth and screwing with state and local tax issues.
I posted #63 and all he has done was deny it without being able to prove it. What did you expect he would do? Admit he was ass-backwards?
He has to talk about every other tax plan except sales taxes, because he isn't going to find pro-tax increase conservatives, not for people in any tax bracket, let alone are they seeking to soak the poor at the expense of the rich.
In fact it's the other way around. Liberals constantly harping on the 1% are just deflecting attention from the fact that they want to raise taxes on everybody and they hope you actually believe there are some people whose pockets they don't want to pick.
They want to pick everyone's pocket's clean and then make you beg for reimbursement for all your stolen opportunities in life.
Plenty of marks don't notice the sleight-of-hand and actually appreciate the phony generosity of those pick-pockets.
wk, you havent seen a GOP proposal you werent ready to hop, skip and dance in support of.
PD...cutting SNAP and the like, has the exact same result as taxing the poor. The GOP at the national level wants to do that, to offset further tax cuts for the wealthy. Meanwhile, GOP leaders at the state level, are trying to raise consumption taxes. (sales tax) This then is a double whammy on the poor and further exacerbates the extreme hardships faced BY the poor.
B,...it surprises me not at all, that you are unable to see, let alone admit, this reality.
If is isn't called a tax, then don't use it as an example of a tax.
I find myself in agreement with weykool here.
There are plenty of actual things not to like about the GOP. You do your side a disfavor by insisting on something which isn't true when plenty of other facts are around to demonstrate the point you want to make.