Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 14 to 26 of 55
  1. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Andalucia
    Posts
    3,238
    Quote Originally Posted by kirbinster View Post
    Why not?

    If you are going to pit one group against another why not attack the athletes and the actors.

    While you fight for the group that has prospered the most these past 30 years I hope congress and the president fight for fairness.

  2. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Dothan, Al
    Posts
    3,453
    Quote Originally Posted by pageyjim View Post
    While you fight for the group that has prospered the most these past 30 years I hope congress and the president fight for fairness.

    Fairness is NOT what you are talking about here....

    Re-distribution is what you are talking about.

    Fair would be EVERYONE paying the SAME percentage of their income in taxes.
    The rich would still pay more, because they make more.....

    Your way, we PUNISH those that make it to that level, so we punish ACHEIVERS, while using what they have achieved to FUND those that don't
    achieve anything.............

    Yea, I'd say that is fair, HUH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Richard
    Lets get H.I.G.H. http://www.theletsgethigh.com
    Honesty, Integrity, Gallantry, Honor

  3. #16
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Northern Indiana
    Posts
    1,406
    Why shouldn't Hollywood put it's money where it's mouth is? They trot around the world in first class luxury with everyone kissing their ass. They whine and moan about the wealthiest 1% every chance they get. When it comes to their share????? Well, Hell! Aren't our humanitarian causes enough?

    It's a pretty simple concept....we have this notion of corporate greed and misuse of workers in this country. Don't get me wrong, there are corporations who abuse their employees. Enron, WorldCom, Adelphia etc.. That was just plain rotten. That's why we have this us against "the man" philosophy in this country. People hear that Obama and the Dems are going to "stick it to the man" and they get excited. What are all of these greedy corporations going to do if their taxes are raised? Are they going to hire more workers? Produce more goods? Expand their product and research new and efficient ways to run on less? Yeah, right!

    People use Hollywood and sports to escape reality. They don't want to see that go away. When Brad Pitt goes on TV and tells them that Republicans are evil and want them to starve while "the man" gets fat off of their labor they get all giddy inside.

    You want to raise taxes on the wealthy? Go ahead....Make some of these mouthy prima donnas pay their fair share. Oprah Winfrey could eliminate a large percentage of the national debt on her own.

    This absolute STUPID notion that one party favors the "working man" is the biggest bunch of bull ever put forth. A politician is a politician no matter what. Just follow the money trail.

    How about making the Presidency, Senate, Congress, Supreme Court and Cabinet positions all volunteer. How much is that per year? What about University Profs making $200,000 a year teaching 1 hour a week? Why does noone ever ask why the cost of tuition goes up every single year? Yep, it's about time some of these crybabies step up and do something about it.

  4. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Plant City, Florida
    Posts
    2,198
    Quote Originally Posted by kirbinster View Post
    Why not?

    If you are going to pit one group against another why not attack the athletes and the actors.
    If they took all of their money it wouldn't be enough, you can't solve this countries spending problem by taxing people, you control it by cutting spending.

    This country will be run into the ground because of uncontrolled spending.

    The end of the US will not be due to war, it will be due to PC and uncontrolled spending, we will be another short lived world power.

  5. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Near Atlanta, GA.
    Posts
    14,579
    If they took all of their money it wouldn't be enough, you can't solve this countries spending problem by taxing people, you control it by cutting spending.

    This country will be run into the ground because of uncontrolled spending.
    ^^This^^

    The notion of raising taxes on actors or athletes is wrong and in-conflict with conservative principles. Though I have no great love for these groups; it's no more right for us to target them for tax increases than it is anyone else.

    Besides...before I willingly pay higher taxes I want to see spending put under control. The bleeding needs to be stopped before I give my blood just to sustain more loss.

  6. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    394
    Its really simple to fix all the problems, have a two year freeze on taxes then don't let them increase by more than inflation and force the government to have a balanced budget - that means they have to cut spending. Only when the government is forced to live within our means can we solve our mess.

  7. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Andalucia
    Posts
    3,238
    Quote Originally Posted by daytonafan View Post
    Why shouldn't Hollywood put it's money where it's mouth is? They trot around the world in first class luxury with everyone kissing their ass. They whine and moan about the wealthiest 1% every chance they get. When it comes to their share????? Well, Hell! Aren't our humanitarian causes enough?

    It's a pretty simple concept....we have this notion of corporate greed and misuse of workers in this country. Don't get me wrong, there are corporations who abuse their employees. Enron, WorldCom, Adelphia etc.. That was just plain rotten. That's why we have this us against "the man" philosophy in this country. People hear that Obama and the Dems are going to "stick it to the man" and they get excited. What are all of these greedy corporations going to do if their taxes are raised? Are they going to hire more workers? Produce more goods? Expand their product and research new and efficient ways to run on less? Yeah, right!

    People use Hollywood and sports to escape reality. They don't want to see that go away. When Brad Pitt goes on TV and tells them that Republicans are evil and want them to starve while "the man" gets fat off of their labor they get all giddy inside.

    You want to raise taxes on the wealthy? Go ahead....Make some of these mouthy prima donnas pay their fair share. Oprah Winfrey could eliminate a large percentage of the national debt on her own.

    This absolute STUPID notion that one party favors the "working man" is the biggest bunch of bull ever put forth. A politician is a politician no matter what. Just follow the money trail.

    How about making the Presidency, Senate, Congress, Supreme Court and Cabinet positions all volunteer. How much is that per year? What about University Profs making $200,000 a year teaching 1 hour a week? Why does noone ever ask why the cost of tuition goes up every single year? Yep, it's about time some of these crybabies step up and do something about it.
    "Median annual earnings of all postsecondary teachers in 2006 were $56,120. The middle 50 percent earned between $39,610 and $80,390. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $27,590, and the highest 10 percent earned more than $113,450"

    If we have all volunteers in office we will only succeed in electing even more millionaires.

    Many of the people you are criticizing are calling for taxes to be raised on themselves.

    If we really want politicians to look out for us we should take money out of campaigns and overturn "Citizen's United."

    And as far as taxes and the corporate tax being too high.

    "The 36% figure is for the OECD countries as a group. However, the range is wide, from 50.1% in Sweden to a low of 26.7% in South Korea. The U.S., at 28.2%, ranked in the fifth quartile along with Greece, Japan and South Korea."
    http://hubpages.com/hub/Are-US-Taxes-Too-High

    “two out of every three United States corporations paid no federal income taxes from 1998 thru 2005."
    http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/06/exxon-tax/

  8. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    7,814
    Quote Originally Posted by acmanko View Post
    The Bush tax cuts: What nobody is talking about

    If they're right -- or if lawmakers adopt any other type of extension for high-income households -- they'll have another big fight on their hands: how to pay for the cost.

    "This is one of a handful of things that can tie-up or slow-down an across-the-board extension," said Sean West, a U.S. policy analyst for the Eurasia Group.

    Under rules passed earlier this year, lawmakers are obligated to pay for any extension of the Bush tax cuts that apply to higher income households.

    If lawmakers opt to make the middle class tax cuts permanent that will add an estimated $3 trillion to the country's debt over 10 years. A two-year extension could cost roughly $383 billion.
    This is the stuff that drives me nuts! The Federal Government and their folks rename things to fit their purpose...and the general public doesn't get it.

    If the tax cuts are not extended then there is no cost simply because the Federal Government does not get that amount of money. There is no bill. There is no check that has to be written.

    What does happen is that, upfront, the Feds do not have access to our pay checks so that they may spend more..again.

    Here's the way it works: We all go to work and work hard, or not, for the money we earn. The Federal Government takes a certain portion of that money, which is ours, to run the country for our interest, not theirs.

    Should we not make as much as we though we would, then we cut back on our expenses. If the Feds don't get open access to our pay checks they should also live within the money they receive..but it has not been this way for years. All they do is take just because they can and no one person is doing a thing about it.

    In the long run, the more money that is kept in circulation by individuals and companies of all sizes, the better off and more stable our economy is and becomes. But it take disicipline to do this, which is not a principal our our lives and our country anymore.

    Telling me all about the laws written and the power the Feds have to take our money does not preclude the original fuction of the Federal Government. It's a con job done by the best con-artists and it the world..and they have a gulliable audience.
    "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers it can bribe the public with the public's own money.
    - Alexis de Toqueville, 1835

  9. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    forney texas
    Posts
    17,890
    The more money you make, the easier it becomes to take full advantage of credits and deductions found in the tax code.

    To get a handle on the situation, first you have to shrink the government. Do away with all the bureauocracies that duplicate the same work.

    Then after you shrink the government bureaus, you start cutting back on funding.

    it's no different than paying down personal debt. You make a plan and then follow it.

  10. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    7,814
    Quote Originally Posted by acmanko View Post
    The more money you make, the easier it becomes to take full advantage of credits and deductions found in the tax code.
    Actually, that's not necessary true. The more money you make the harder you have to work to be able to keep your own money. Take for instance, as just one small example, the death tax, which is about to be renewed.
    "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers it can bribe the public with the public's own money.
    - Alexis de Toqueville, 1835

  11. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Andalucia
    Posts
    3,238
    Quote Originally Posted by DeltaT View Post
    Actually, that's not necessary true. The more money you make the harder you have to work to be able to keep your own money. Take for instance, as just one small example, the death tax, which is about to be renewed.
    What is the "death tax?" Are you concerned with the "death tax?"

  12. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    7,814
    We had a tax and will again that if you are a person, as an example, that built your way up to a rich level of life in a business, say 5 billion dollars, and you die, then your heirs must pay a 50% estate tax on your assets.

    This tax has killed the majority of business which are the core of our nation such as the individual farmer, the local manufacturer, etc.

    Their are ways to deal with it but it must be done legally and way before the prime holder of the assets die.
    "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers it can bribe the public with the public's own money.
    - Alexis de Toqueville, 1835

  13. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    forney texas
    Posts
    17,890
    Quote Originally Posted by pageyjim View Post
    What is the "death tax?" Are you concerned with the "death tax?"
    the death tax is only applicable to estates over 1 million dollars and it could be up to 3 million. Its been awhile since I looked at it.

    Regardless the Tax code is written so taxpayers can get as much of their money back as they can. You do it with credits and deductions, a lot of which a person working for wages will never be able to take advantage of. I suggest you start doing your own taxes and you'll see what I mean.


    It's not illegal to avoid paying taxes, it is illegal to evade paying taxes.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event