The Poor pay More in Taxes than the Rich

[hcap]

Contrary to this boards usual song and dance, these are the facts:

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum

Still and all, it's true that the federal income tax is indeed progressive. Conservatives are right about that—though it's not as progressive as it used to be, back before top marginal rates were lowered and capital gains taxes were slashed in half. But conservatives are a little less excited to talk about other kinds of taxes. Payroll taxes aren't progressive, for example. In fact, they're actively regressive, with the poor and middle classes paying higher rates than the rich.

And then there are state taxes. Those include state income taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, and fees of various kinds. How progressive are state taxes?

Answer: They aren't. The Corporation for Enterprise Development recently released a scorecard for all 50 states, and it has boatloads of useful information.

http://scorecard.assetsandopportunity.org/2012/issue-area/finance

That includes overall tax rates, where data from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy shows that in the median state (Mississippi, as it turns out) the poorest 20 percent pay twice the tax rate of the top 1 percent. In the worst states, the poorest 20 percent pay five to six times the rate of the richest 1 percent. Lucky duckies indeed. There's not one single state with a tax system that's progressive. Check the table below to see how your state scores.

http://www.motherjones.com/files/images/blog_tax_burden_states_0.img_assist_custom-414x1380.gif

[Tom]

What is more, hcap....

2% of $200,000
or 20% of $10,000

Spin all you want, the top 2% pay MOST.

[DJofSD]

Liberals just love OPM.

[hcap]

What is more, hcap....

2% of $200,000
or 20% of $10,000

Spin all you want, the top 2% pay MOST.
According to you guys the poor are simply free loaders and anchors. It now is obvious that they pay more as a percentage of income than the rich.

As far as the amount in terms of absolute dollars, what are you suggesting? Everyone in the country pay one fixed amount, say 15,000? 50,000?

So now the conservative argument is no longer the oft repeated babble about 47% of the country PAY NO TAXES, to the poor pay an absolute dollar amount much less than the rich ??

[LottaKash]

Well Hcap, get your sleepin'-bag, and tent pegs, cause it's back to the park and occupyin' for you....Right ?....you'll be there, at least in spirit...

The nerve of some people using the proper tax codes to conduct their business....

Shame on people with kash....Occupy "NOW"....:jump:

[ArlJim78]

state and local governments are more responsible and fair, that is why they don't have progressive tax systems. that stuff sells at the federal level only.

why don't liberals ever pick up on the real story that is sitting right in front of their faces? there are too many taxes and government spends too much. when liberals report on the high tax burden their only concern is that someone else should pay for it, not that the overall burden is too high.

if we're going to have class warfare and fairness, then the first thing that has to happen is the public unions must give up their big benefits to bring their compensation in line with the private sector. it's not fair that we pay taxes to fund their lavish packages while our benefits have been hacked to pieces over the years. let's see some coverage of that injustice.

[hcap]

Well Hcap, get your sleepin'-bag, and tent pegs, cause it's back to the park and occupyin' for you....Right ?....you'll be there, at least in spirit...

The nerve of some people using the proper tax codes to conduct their business....

Shame on people with kash....Occupy "NOW"....:jump:So apparently the Occupy Movement is based on facts. And the babble re: The poor are freeloaders is unmitigated crap

[delayjf]

Not it terms of Federal Taxation - The rich pays the bills. Just because sales taxes etc are not progressive doesn't mean the rich aren't paying more. Post some numbers as total revenue paid for by the rich / poor.

How do you implement a progressive sales tax??

[rastajenk]

You get your 1040 line 37 amount tattooed to your forehead, I s'pose.

[Tom]

We have known we needed tax law reform for years now.
Why has this not been addressed the by dems, who had it all for two years?

Maybe because GE, who paid no taxes, is a huge Obama contributor?
I also remind you that those so-called Bush tax cuts for the rich cut the bottom group by 50%. You always forget that.

[badcompany]

What about deductions, like the Earned Income Credit, and Dependent Exemptions?

The Dependent exemption is a fixed amount, but, obviously, someone who sends their kids to Private School is spending more on their kids then their public school counterpart.

Also, many deductions have "phase out" amount. If you make over a certain amount, you can't take the deduction.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Not it terms of Federal Taxation - The rich pays the bills. Just because sales taxes etc are not progressive doesn't mean the rich aren't paying more. Post some numbers as total revenue paid for by the rich / poor.

How do you implement a progressive sales tax??

Thanks for pointing out the obvious. I'm guessing the moral of the story is that we need to overcomplicate what is an already overreaching burden by making every tax/fee progressive?

I scrolled around the site and it appears you (hcap) have most if not all of that blog entry quoted - it seems rather cheesy to repeatedly use the phrase 'tax rate' when by all accounts the data is 'tax/fees as a percentage of income'.

It's not enough to potentially pay more (progressive) in property tax based on a system that demands a percentage of the value of a home, now that should be adjusted based upon income also? Am I understanding the idea/complaint posed originally? You need to swipe your national identification card with your vitals (income being most important in 2020) at the register to see if a loaf of bread costs nine cents or nine dollars? Auto registration is first based upon the vehicle, then based upon the driver? Fishing license, dog tags, building permits, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc...

Sounds like it would just be easier to give government all of our money right up front and then when they get through turning it into mere paper, we just all get the same measly allowance and say an amen for never having to worry about what the future may hold.

[LottaKash]

So apparently the Occupy Movement is based on facts. And the babble re: The poor are freeloaders is unmitigated crap

"Many", but not all, of the poor are freeloaders....You don't see their fraud ?

For a bright guy, that you don't see that this is true, well, it escapes me about you....

In all fairness Hcap, unless you admit, that at least some of this is true, well, you will never the get the full respect that you think you deserve....

"Couldn't possibly be", that's you...I see this...

best,

[badcompany]

"Many", but not all, of the poor are freeloaders....You don't see their fraud ?

For a bright guy, that you don't see that this is true, well, it escapes me about you....

In all fairness Hcap, unless you admit, that at least some of this is true, well, you will never the get the full respect that you think you deserve....

"Couldn't possibly be", that's you...I see this...

best,

The problem with Liberals is not intelligence. It's emotional maturity. They just never grow up.;)

[PaceAdvantage]

Sounds like it would just be easier to give government all of our money right up front and then when they get through turning it into mere paper, we just all get the same measly allowance and say an amen for never having to worry about what the future may hold.Thanks for the morning laugh!! :lol:

Sadly, the above would signal the arrival of utopia to some on here...

[badcompany]

I think we should tax job creators more.

Then, when they stop creating, we can bitch about how there's no jobs.:jump:

[hcap]

Gentlemen. All of your responses are bullticky.

I am waiting for one enlightened con to admit what all youse cons have posted over and over and over again. That the poor are freeloaders and 47$ of Americans PAY ABSOLUTELY NO TAXES, is an absolute crock.

Any one brave enough?

[Jeff P]

why don't liberals ever pick up on the real story that is sitting right in front of their faces? there are too many taxes and government spends too much. when liberals report on the high tax burden their only concern is that someone else should pay for it, not that the overall burden is too high.
Spot on Jim.

The bolded part of the above quote very eloquently states the real problem.

-jp

.

[LottaKash]

Sounds like it would just be easier to give government all of our money right up front and then when they get through turning it into mere paper, we just all get the same measly allowance and say an amen for never having to worry about what the future may hold.

Yikes JHS, that is scary....But, what is more scary, at least to me, from my vantage point at least, is, "that spectre", is now on "my" horizon.....I see it as plain as day...:eek:

I am worried for my children, and their's...

best,

[badcompany]

Gentlemen. All of your responses are bullticky.

I am waiting for one enlightened con to admit what all youse cons have posted over and over and over again. That the poor are freeloaders and 47$ of Americans PAY ABSOLUTELY NO TAXES, is an absolute crock.

Any one brave enough?

What's the point?

You and your buddies here have shown you have no idea how wealth is created.

Hint: it's not by taking money out of the hands of the most productive people in the economy and giving it to politicians.

Your argument is just pointless liberal "Punish the rich" silliness.

[LottaKash]

Any one brave enough?

Not me, you are far too bright for me....I quit you...

[HUSKER55]

Did you read how those taxes were calculated. Property taxes and such are fixed and were included in that study. That means there are a lot of people paying off houses with lower incomes that probably should not have been given a loan in the first place that still have to pay city and state taxes that are fixed.

That is what started the problem... right?

[johnhannibalsmith]

...and 47$ of Americans PAY ABSOLUTELY NO TAXES, is an absolute crock.

Any one brave enough?

Of course its an absolute crock. I didn't realize this was news - I always assumed people were referring to federal income taxes. I'm sure I have FAR less income than just about anybody here and I'm taxed every time I think. It sure doesn't feel like I'm getting a very good return on the neverending confiscations of what little I have though.

[Tom]

Gentlemen. All of your responses are bullticky.

I am waiting for one enlightened con to admit what all youse cons have posted over and over and over again. That the poor are freeloaders and 47$ of Americans PAY ABSOLUTELY NO TAXES, is an absolute crock.

Any one brave enough?

OK, but first, a number!

O6gtISlR2dk

[ArlJim78]

the crock is believing that higher taxes on the wealthy solves our problems, it doesn't.

lets stop getting distracted by the sideshow (class warfare) and focus on the real issues. do we really need more government redistribution of weath in pursuit of fairness? is that what is lacking in our society?
or is the problem that government has over-reached, over-spent and over- promised? I think it's obvious.

[elysiantraveller]

That includes overall tax rates, where data from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy shows that in the median state (Mississippi, as it turns out) the poorest 20 percent pay twice the tax rate of the top 1 percent. In the worst states, the poorest 20 percent pay five to six times the rate of the richest 1 percent. Lucky duckies indeed. There's not one single state with a tax system that's progressive. Check the table below to see how your state scores.

http://www.motherjones.com/files/images/blog_tax_burden_states_0.img_assist_custom-414x1380.gif

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't we typically talking about Federal income taxes and Federal programs when we refer to entitlement.

I've posted this a few times about the federal tax system. It consistently gets ignored.

US Federal Tax System Most Progressive in the World (http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2011/03/what-nation-has-most-progressive-tax.html)

[elysiantraveller]

Oh and another thing. Since no one else is really arguing this with you I figure I'd tear it apart.

Your study takes into account sales taxes. Thats a problem.

You can't include something like sales taxes and try to pervert them into income taxes. They aren't one and the same. Sales taxes are not progressive yet you attempt to "fit" them into a progressive tax argument which isn't fair. Being against a sales tax is fine and I'll agree they affect the poor more than the rich but making the leap then that income tax rates are unfair is a pretty big step.

They also hugely alter your data... so much so the top 5 states you have on your chart all don't have state income taxes only sales taxes. By using that logic the person in the top 20% would have to buy 4 times as many goods and services of just a single person in the lower 80... Thats illogical.

Just more proof you can make a "chart" say anything you want...

[lsbets]

Gentlemen. All of your responses are bullticky.

I am waiting for one enlightened con to admit what all youse cons have posted over and over and over again. That the poor are freeloaders and 47$ of Americans PAY ABSOLUTELY NO TAXES, is an absolute crock.

Any one brave enough?

Because no one says no taxes at all. They say federal income taxes. They've said that to you a million times, yet you always ignore it because you think you are making some brilliant point but it has nothing to do with federal income taxes.

[bigmack]

Hard to believe you cats falling for one of hcap's graphs.

Of course he knew everyone was referring to Federal income tax. Ignorance should be ruled out for hcap & his comrades. It's pure, unadulterated dishonesty.

Mother Jones specializes in jimmy'ed-up graphs. They then put up the title "The poor pay more in taxes than the rich."

hcap LIVES for this crap. Little games with graphs. Same dealio as with his global warming idiocy.

Trust me, hcap has been told umpteen times the quote is Federal taxes. Like mosty, he bypasses fact and waltzes in here with his "You gentlemen" didactic routine.

Poisonally, I find it hoot.

[Tom]

I enjoy the back and forth, sort of relaxing, like a game almost.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Hard to believe you cats falling for one of hcap's graphs.

...

Actually, as ArlJim mentioned - its more a case of hcap falling for his own graphs. More than anything, unless you are trying to make the case for progressive tax/levying on EVERYTHING, his graph points out who actually suffers as government continues to stuff its face for votes. The same people that tend to rally for government doing more and more and more for them are the ones that are pinched most as a percentage of income.

[acorn54]

i think the tax system based on steve forbes idea is the best way to handle taxes
tax free income on the first fifty thousand, and a flat tax on any income above that.

[Tom]

i think the tax system based on steve forbes idea is the best way to handle taxes
tax free income on the first fifty thousand, and a flat tax on any income above that.

Are you in any of the primaries, 'cause you will get my vote!

[acorn54]

Are you in any of the primaries, 'cause you will get my vote!


thanks for your vote tom, you could put me in as a write in lol

[Tom]

Done.

[sammy the sage]

Thanks for the morning laugh!! :lol:

Sadly, the above would signal the arrival of utopia to some on here...

It WILL be ACTUALLY the SAME thing if the big corporations or military or BOTH if they end w/control...ie...BANKERS...

Which many here defend :rolleyes:

[badcompany]

Mother Jones specializes in jimmy'ed-up graphs. They then put up the title "The poor pay more in taxes than the rich."

hcap LIVES for this crap. Little games with graphs. Same dealio as with his global warming idiocy.


Does this mean that Hcap's chart which shows that the poor create more jobs than the rich isn't true either?:mad:

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3kpHUdCQAAIohw.jpg

[dlivery]

This has been for so long and will continue as with all systems

Take From The Many To Give To The Few .... :bang: :jump:

[badcompany]

Libs love to bring up Norway, an isolated homogeneous country of 5 million and compare it to a heterogeneous global superpower of 300 million.

Absurd.

Then again, maybe oil isn't so bad when it's financing a welfare state.

http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l142/thinlizzy21/7ed828aa827f2bea8838910207f5e9e3_zpsecb41fbb.jpg

[JustRalph]

Nice to be able to crow about no deficit when you don't have a military of any size to speak of. You can't protect yourself.

[Tom]

Norway????
Norway????
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[pandy]

i think the tax system based on steve forbes idea is the best way to handle taxes
tax free income on the first fifty thousand, and a flat tax on any income above that.


This would be better than what we have now, and much easier.

[Tom]

But that won't tax the crap of the evil rich dudes.
How is that fair? :lol: :lol: :lol:

[AndyC]

I am new to this 2 year old thread but I had to laugh at how the evil rich were mathematically demonized. The rich pay a lower percentage of their income for food, water, transportation, housing, entertainment, gas & electric, etc. than a lower income person. DUH! The taxes in question were not income taxes, they were sales taxes, social security taxes, property taxes (using real artistic license as to what a renter pays), etc. It's amazing that someone could post this as "evidence" of unfairness.

[AndyC]

This would be better than what we have now, and much easier.


There already exists a flat tax for most high income people. It is called the Alternative Minimum Tax. There is also a negative income tax for low earners called the earned income credit.

[JustRalph]

There already exists a flat tax for most high income people. It is called the Alternative Minimum Tax. There is also a negative income tax for low earners called the earned income credit.

Actually that was the goal of AMT but it actually taxes more middle class types than the upper classes.

This article explains some of the facts on AMT.......


http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2013/03/31/alternative-minimum-tax-explainer/2026469/

[badcompany]

I am new to this 2 year old thread but I had to laugh at how the evil rich were mathematically demonized. The rich pay a lower percentage of their income for food, water, transportation, housing, entertainment, gas & electric, etc. than a lower income person. DUH! The taxes in question were not income taxes, they were sales taxes, social security taxes, property taxes (using real artistic license as to what a renter pays), etc. It's amazing that someone could post this as "evidence" of unfairness.

Liberals always rely on statistical arguments.

Why?

Because stats are easy to manipulate and use deceptively.

[AndyC]

Actually that was the goal of AMT but it actually taxes more middle class types than the upper classes.

This article explains some of the facts on AMT.......


http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2013/03/31/alternative-minimum-tax-explainer/2026469/

As a CPA specializing in taxes I am all too familiar with the AMT. It is really a very simple tax to calculate but thanks to our friends at the IRS they have made it a process that Rube Goldberg would be proud of.

The best tax reform might be to scrap everything but the AMT!

[delayjf]

The chart on the first thread needs to be update with regards to CA. If I recall correctly, the highest tax rate is now 13.0 % on any income over 1 million dollars.

[horses4courses]

Some ideas stand the test of time.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3tGxYxCAAE3KXN.jpg

[Clocker]

Some ideas stand the test of time.

Are we to assume that you are in "the rich don't pay their fair share" rooting section?

How about "the rich pay everybody's share"?


http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/cbo11.jpg


Source (http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share/)

[Tom]

Some ideas stand the test of time.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3tGxYxCAAE3KXN.jpg

Like the right to keep and beat arms?
Or do you just cherry pick what rights you want?

[dartman51]

Some ideas stand the test of time.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3tGxYxCAAE3KXN.jpg


Some people need to get their facts straight before photo shopping quotes onto a picture. I get them all the time in e-mails and 99% are bullshit. Adam Smith was a Scottish 'moral philosopher', who was known as the 'father of modern economics', NOT capitalism. Someone took a passage from his book, and tried to make it say what they wanted, to prove a point. The actual passage:
The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.

Not only is Smith not endorsing a progressive income tax, he isn't endorsing any sort of income tax. Reading further into the passage, he successively rejects taxes on income from capital, taxes on wages, and taxes on the income of professionals. The only income he approves of taxing is the income of government officials. What he is arguing for is a system of taxation whose effect is proportional to income, not a tax on income.

http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/2011/03/misrepresenting-adam-smith.html

[davew]

Are we to assume that you are in "the rich don't pay their fair share" rooting section?

How about "the rich pay everybody's share"?


http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/cbo11.jpg


Source (http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share/)

The Poor pay More in Taxes than the Rich, but get back even more than they paid....

[Clocker]

Some people need to get their facts straight

Facts? That's all you got?

You want to let facts get in the way of the right side of history, when the millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share (as determined by those who know what is good for us), and we all live happily ever after?

[AndyC]

In the interest of furthering this discussion could someone please define what "fair share" is?

[pandy]

The typical working rich person probably pays at least 50% of their income to taxes. I don't see how this isn't enough. I know that some liberals think that the rich should pay 70%, but when does it become unconstitutionally unfair?

[Tom]

In the interest of furthering this discussion could someone please define what "fair share" is?

Every penny they have.
Right now, many are paying far less than their fair share, and it is hereditary.

[Clocker]

In the interest of furthering this discussion could someone please define what "fair share" is?

'When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

Welcome to Wonderland.

In the real world, you start with your income and then budget your spending. In Washington, you start with how much you are going to spend, then you decide each taxpayer's share of that spending. Since we are spending more than we are taking in, someone is not paying their fair share.

As Nancy Pelosi is fond of saying, we don't have a spending problem, we have a pay-for problem. And only those with the wisdom to determine what the money is spent on have the wisdom to determine what everyone's fair share of the pay-for should be.

[Clocker]

The typical working rich person probably pays at least 50% of their income to taxes. I don't see how this isn't enough. I know that some liberals think that the rich should pay 70%, but when does it become unconstitutionally unfair?

In Newspeak, fair share means share of the spending, not share of your income. For most on the left, share of income is not relevant. I don't remember it ever being seriously discuss in government, and I think it should be the threshold question in setting tax policy.

I'm not sure there is an objective way to determine "fair share", but I would argue intuitively that you are entitled to a greater share of your income than the government. Anything above 50% seems like confiscation of property to me, and confiscation is unconstitutional. If I was the Emperor, I would arbitrarily cap it at 33%. That is certainly less arbitrary that those that effectively believe in no cap.

[pandy]

It reminds me the high school teacher's union in Saucon Valley school district here in the Lehigh Valley (PA.). It is the "rich" area. The teachers are among the highest paid in the country, some earn over $60,000 and the benefits are excellent. But every two years they go on strike. Why? Because a lot of people in that school district have good incomes. They are greedy, but they figure they can get it. The government works the same way.

[boxcar]

The simple solution to the poor paying more: Make the income tax null and void and implement a national sales tax. This way the poor pay the same tax rate as the rich but less in actual dollars since they can't outspend their better heeled counterparts. Eminently fair.

[horses4courses]

Like the right to keep and beat arms?
Or do you just cherry pick what rights you want?

Adam Smith was a Scottish philosopher.
I don't get your point, which happens a lot.

The Founding Fathers may not have seen
automatic assault rifles on the horizon,
but they did get plenty of things right.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3tFwqNCIAA4dQv.jpg:large

[Tom]

Define fair share, then.

[Clocker]

…if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment.

That sounds pretty much like legal immigration. Glad to see we agree on that.

[newtothegame]

The left will never define fair share.....
reason is that once they do, they can then be held to it. Leaving it as vague as possible is the best way for them..... :bang:

[Clocker]

The left will never define fair share.....
reason is that once they do, they can then be held to it. Leaving it as vague as possible is the best way for them..... :bang:

Obama can't define it, but he knows it when he sees it. :D

[badcompany]

Pinko Libs want Socialism. It's as simple as that. Sure, they deny it, but actions speak louder than words.

To achieve their goal, they must confiscate all private property. The poor, with their lack of private property, are of no use to Left for anything other than to provide a wedge. The wealthy, on the other hand...

[pandy]

The simple solution to the poor paying more: Make the income tax null and void and implement a national sales tax. This way the poor pay the same tax rate as the rich but less in actual dollars since they can't outspend their better heeled counterparts. Eminently fair.


There are a few politicians here in PA. that are trying to eliminate real estate taxes, and their plan is to increase the sales tax by 1 to 1.5%. I doubt it will ever go through but I think it's a great idea. People don't realize how many seniors either foreclose or are forced to sell their home because they can't pay their real estate taxes.

A national sales tax would work and wouldn't it be great if we could do our taxes in 5 minutes.

[horses4courses]

Pinko Libs want Socialism. It's as simple as that. Sure, they deny it, but actions speak louder than words.

To achieve their goal, they must confiscate all private property. The poor, with their lack of private property, are of no use to Left for anything other than to provide a wedge. The wealthy, on the other hand...

This Pinko Liberal thinks that capitalist systems are the best.
They just need some tweaking in certain sectors where
supply/demand, free market situations can't always cope.

Sorry to burst your bubble...... :rolleyes:

[Clocker]

They just need some tweaking in certain sectors where
supply/demand, free market situations can't always cope.



Great idea, given the government's demonstrated competence and effectiveness in tweaking the private sector.

Like the stimulus. Shovel ready jobs, anyone? Or government investment in green industries, like Solyndra or electric cars? Or Quantitative Easing, which was a huge success in redistributing wealth to rich people. Or ObamaCare, which tweaked health care costs upward to the point that the young and healthy are being driven out of the market. Or the coal industry, which has been nearly tweaked out of existence. Or the oil industry, which is showing great growth despite stricter federal regulation and big declines in production on federally controlled land and federal refusal to approve any expansion, like the Keystone pipeline.

Any other markets you feel are in need of tweaking?

[badcompany]

Any other markets you feel are in need of tweaking?

The tech sector could use a government shot in the arm in the form of this bad boy:


http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l142/thinlizzy21/7FBC303C-00E0-401A-9D07-D48492E49EF1_zpseduansus.jpg (http://s95.photobucket.com/user/thinlizzy21/media/7FBC303C-00E0-401A-9D07-D48492E49EF1_zpseduansus.jpg.html)

[boxcar]

There are a few politicians here in PA. that are trying to eliminate real estate taxes, and their plan is to increase the sales tax by 1 to 1.5%. I doubt it will ever go through but I think it's a great idea. People don't realize how many seniors either foreclose or are forced to sell their home because they can't pay their real estate taxes.

A national sales tax would work and wouldn't it be great if we could do our taxes in 5 minutes.

It probably won't pass. But you have to give someone a big E for Effort for coming up with a great idea.

Government is loathe to relinquish any control over the populace. Control is what the income and property taxes are all about.

And by the way, if the income tax law was abolished and replaced by a national sales tax, no one would have to spend any time computing taxes. All taxes would be paid and collected at the point of sale.

[pandy]

Which would be great, a lot less stressful.

[AndyC]

There are a few politicians here in PA. that are trying to eliminate real estate taxes, and their plan is to increase the sales tax by 1 to 1.5%. I doubt it will ever go through but I think it's a great idea. People don't realize how many seniors either foreclose or are forced to sell their home because they can't pay their real estate taxes.

A national sales tax would work and wouldn't it be great if we could do our taxes in 5 minutes.

While I certainly feel sorry for any senior who is having financial difficulty it certainly isn't property tax that has put them there. I understand that the tax may be the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back but I doubt it is the primary cause of financial problems.

I would be totally against the elimination of property taxes. It is actually one of the more fairer taxes used.

I have always been an advocate for the national sales tax. It would make all income taxable and reduce the countless unproductive hours spent filing income tax returns. I worry, however, that a VAT may be implemented because it is buried in the retail cost to the consumer.

[boxcar]

I would be totally against the elimination of property taxes. It is actually one of the more fairer taxes used.

Care to elaborate?

[AndyC]

Care to elaborate?

Property taxes are based on the value of your property and the revenues are used locally to maintain and improve infrastructure, schools, etc.

Property taxes are paid either directly or indirectly through rents by everybody. I believe that property tax is more of a user fee oriented tax rather than a strictly revenue raising tax such as an income tax.

[boxcar]

Property taxes are based on the value of your property and the revenues are used locally to maintain and improve infrastructure, schools, etc.

Property taxes are paid either directly or indirectly through rents by everybody. I believe that property tax is more of a user fee oriented tax rather than a strictly revenue raising tax such as an income tax.

So, how is the one more fairer than the other? And why can't the revenue for schools, infrastructure, etc. be raised in other ways.

Also, the property tax is a revenue-raising tax for the purposes you stated above. So are sales taxes.

Sales taxes are the most equitable way to go because it gives more control to the consumer/taxpayers than do other taxes. It removes quite a bit of the manipulative control that the other kinds of taxes engender from the hands of self-serving, dishonest politicians. People, for example, living on fixed income have more direct (hands-on) control over their house budgetary needs than what a property tax allows.

Sales taxes are also great way to keep the cost of government down. The politicians would be forced to make a good case to the public/consumer/taxpayer as to why they should pay more for goods and services. Sales taxes foster transparency in government spending and programs, etc.

[AndyC]

So, how is the one more fairer than the other? And why can't the revenue for schools, infrastructure, etc. be raised in other ways.

Also, the property tax is a revenue-raising tax for the purposes you stated above. So are sales taxes.

Sales taxes are the most equitable way to go because it gives more control to the consumer/taxpayers than do other taxes. It removes quite a bit of the manipulative control that the other kinds of taxes engender from the hands of self-serving, dishonest politicians. People, for example, living on fixed income have more direct (hands-on) control over their house budgetary needs than what a property tax allows.

Sales taxes are also great way to keep the cost of government down. The politicians would be forced to make a good case to the public/consumer/taxpayer as to why they should pay more for goods and services. Sales taxes foster transparency in government spending and programs, etc.

I am for a sales tax. But the benefits from the use of property taxes generally go to the owners of the property or to local needs.

There are certain items that must be paid for every year for local needs and a person should not be able to avoid such expenses simply through good budgeting on their part.

[pandy]

There are a few things that I don't like about property taxes. First of all, they aren't fair. Property taxes go up as property values go up. However, property taxes never GO DOWN when the value of real estate drops. This is an outrageous rip off.

Also, property taxes go up almost every year. In my opinion the tax should be locked in and set on the price you paid for your house. The way the taxes go up all the time, it becomes too much of a burden on homeowners. In Florida, if you buy a horse for $200,000, your real estate tax stays the same as long as you own your home. That makes sense because you bought a house that you could afford. If 10 years later your house is worth $300,000, and your rate goes up, who's to say that you can afford a $300,000 home? You paid $200,000 for it.

Another problem, property taxes are school taxes. Tax payers have no controls over the school board. They can give themselves, and teachers, pay increases, they can vote to put in a new scoreboard for the high school football field, etc. Taxpayers often get screwed.

With something like a sales tax, if the politicians voted to increase it, voters could vote them out and vote in others who propose to decrease it. There are no controls over school taxes or school boards.

There are a lot of problems with real estate taxes.

[AndyC]

There are a few things that I don't like about property taxes. First of all, they aren't fair. Property taxes go up as property values go up. However, property taxes never GO DOWN when the value of real estate drops. This is an outrageous rip off.

Also, property taxes go up almost every year. In my opinion the tax should be locked in and set on the price you paid for your house. The way the taxes go up all the time, it becomes too much of a burden on homeowners. In Florida, if you buy a horse for $200,000, your real estate tax stays the same as long as you own your home. That makes sense because you bought a house that you could afford. If 10 years later your house is worth $300,000, and your rate goes up, who's to say that you can afford a $300,000 home? You paid $200,000 for it.

Another problem, property taxes are school taxes. Tax payers have no controls over the school board. They can give themselves, and teachers, pay increases, they can vote to put in a new scoreboard for the high school football field, etc. Taxpayers often get screwed.

With something like a sales tax, if the politicians voted to increase it, voters could vote them out and vote in others who propose to decrease it. There are no controls over school taxes or school boards.

There are a lot of problems with real estate taxes.

Why should your property tax stay the same if the value of your home increases? What living expense that you know of stays the same year after year? The expenses paid by the property taxes also go up.

Do you think that property taxes just magically appeared? They are implemented by elected politicians who also can be voted out of office.

[boxcar]

I am for a sales tax. But the benefits from the use of property taxes generally go to the owners of the property or to local needs.

There are certain items that must be paid for every year for local needs and a person should not be able to avoid such expenses simply through good budgeting on their part.

Ahh...of course not. So much power in the hands of the little guy. That kind of power is best left in the hands of the elected crooks. :rolleyes:

[horses4courses]

What's wrong with this picture?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B30YW4xCEAEWbcf.jpg

[pandy]

Why should your property tax stay the same if the value of your home increases? What living expense that you know of stays the same year after year? The expenses paid by the property taxes also go up.

Do you think that property taxes just magically appeared? They are implemented by elected politicians who also can be voted out of office.

Because, as I said, A). they don't go down when your property value decreases, as it did during the recession. And B), most people purchase a house at a price they can afford. The tax should be based on the buying price, because that's the price they can afford. Millions of seniors in this country are forced out of their homes because of escalating property taxes.

[Tom]

Why should your property tax stay the same if the value of your home increases? What living expense that you know of stays the same year after year? The expenses paid by the property taxes also go up.

They do go up, even when your home value doesn't.
They are an unfair tax because the unfairly penalize home owners.
The anchors living public housing don't have to pay them. The home owners get double hit on that one.

[pandy]

The fact that these tv evangelists don't pay taxes is a sore point with me, too. Totally absurd. These people are zillionaires.

[AndyC]

They do go up, even when your home value doesn't.
They are an unfair tax because the unfairly penalize home owners.
The anchors living public housing don't have to pay them. The home owners get double hit on that one.

Everybody pays property taxes. Renters pay it because it is passed through as rent.

Property taxes only go up if taxpayers or legislature votes for an increase. Don't like it, vote them out.

[AndyC]

The fact that these tv evangelists don't pay taxes is a sore point with me, too. Totally absurd. These people are zillionaires.


If it were true it would be absurd. Clergy are allowed a special housing allowance under code section 107 but there basic earnings are taxed.

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B348vaFIUAAPpIA.jpg

[Clocker]

Ummm.......which road to take?


How about the road to truth?

Where do you get these things, the National Association for the Economically Impaired? The numbers and the concepts in this cute little graph are bogus, just as has been pointed out by many concerning your previous gems.

[horses4courses]

How about the road to truth?

Where do you get these things, the National Association for the Economically Impaired? The numbers and the concepts in this cute little graph are bogus, just as has been pointed out by many concerning your previous gems.

Liked that, eh?
Here's some more fun ones........

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B35QHSQCUAA1h8Z.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B35QER5CMAELGHe.jpg

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3yAtH8CAAABUzs.png

[Clocker]

Feeling stressed?

If so, maybe you shouldn't have gone deeply into debt, emulating your idol Obama. He knew he could bail out at the end of the term and have no responsibility for his actions. You, however, are stuck with your debts and his. :(

[Tom]

Everybody pays property taxes. Renters pay it because it is passed through as rent.

Property taxes only go up if taxpayers or legislature votes for an increase. Don't like it, vote them out.

Don't like them vote not to have them.;
Not everyone pays them.
People that have their rent paid for them do not - taxpayers do.

[Tom]

Post all the funnies you want but two major points are undeniable:

1. $18 trillion in debt, up 70%
2. Millions few have jobs thank to Obama

Go home and giggle.

[AndyC]

Don't like them vote not to have them.;
Not everyone pays them.
People that have their rent paid for them do not - taxpayers do.


I also like them because they are a steady predictable income stream. Much easier to budget from a predictable base.

Yes, some people do get their rents paid for them but that isn't a function of the type of tax being implemented.

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B4X16ulCYAArILn.jpg:large

[Clocker]

Who is John Green?

Oops, I meant who is John Galt?

[JustRalph]

John Green is full of crap........ because he is living in a country full of stupid people...... and subsidizing a bunch of stupid teachers too..........

he's getting it from both ends

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B43W9JuCMAAYB1E.jpg

[Tom]

Great investment for all those jobs they created.
Contrary to Hillary, they DO create jobs.

We should upgrade their refund next year, it will really help the economy.
I just checked, the anchors created 0 jobs this year.

[badcompany]

Oh, brother.

Liberals are so tiresome and repetitive. They find a company that took a one time tax write off and use it as an example of how corporations pay no taxes.

These are the three previous years during which Boeing paid about 5 billion in taxes. How much did you pay during that time, H4C?

http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l142/thinlizzy21/82C66734-E3D9-481B-9183-30BBA91FC4AA_zps4in6ngts.png (http://s95.photobucket.com/user/thinlizzy21/media/82C66734-E3D9-481B-9183-30BBA91FC4AA_zps4in6ngts.png.html)

[horses4courses]

Oh, brother.

Liberals are so tiresome and repetitive. They find a company that took a one time tax write off and use it as an example of how corporations pay no taxes.

These are the three previous years during which Boeing paid about 5 billion in taxes. How much did you pay during that time, H4C?

http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l142/thinlizzy21/82C66734-E3D9-481B-9183-30BBA91FC4AA_zps4in6ngts.png (http://s95.photobucket.com/user/thinlizzy21/media/82C66734-E3D9-481B-9183-30BBA91FC4AA_zps4in6ngts.png.html)

Impressive phone data, bc
Can you bring up GE on there?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B43bvjyCYAAkjHN.jpg:large

[pandy]

These tax breaks are so dumb, and unfair.

[FocusWiz]

It's not just liberals. The populace complains about lack of jobs or a lackluster economy or lack of loans or high interest rates or communist activities in nearby countries or lack of alternatives to fossil fuels, etc. The government creates incentives to spur private activities in the form of interest free loans, reduced fees, or tax credits and faster write offs. Companies take advantage of these and reap increased profits or lower taxes and we demonize them. Banks were encouraged to make risky loans to South America and for home mortgages. They lost a ton of money. We act as if they lost money deliberately and then asked for a bailout. Both the Republicans and Democrats knew that "free money" got them votes. We talk about how the banks got favorable legislation by helping campaigns. It also works the other way around. The banking industry can be threatened with tighter regulations if they don't make cheaper loans. Bankers are more Mr. Mooney or Mr. Drysdale than Robin Hood.

Companies who are allowed huge investment credits or capital investment write offs or energy credits may not pay "their fair share" of taxes, but frequently they are responding to government incentives as part of a larger social policy goal.

I am not saying that the banks (or any large company) are good. I just find it odd that we ignored the actions of the federal government when we marched on Wall Street against the wealthy bankers who were ripping off the country. 90% of the hated bank employees probably made less than the protestors. Likewise, we ignore the goals of legislation that resulted in a company having an abnormally low tax liability when we rant against the evil company that complied with those incentives.

[Tom]

GE, huge contributor to Obama.
There ya go.

[pandy]

GE, huge contributor to Obama.
There ya go.


Exactly. These companies grease palms in Washington and get tax breaks. The system is broken.

[newtothegame]

GE, huge contributor to Obama.
There ya go.
And, wasn't Jeff Imelt some come of advisor to Obama.....??? Head of GE?
Hmmmm seems like a cohesive unit!!!! :lol:

[badcompany]

Liberals bring up GE as though it's an example of everything wrong with capitalism, when he company is a classic example of crony capitalism. Europe is full of companies like this that have been around forever and are "friends" of government.

Here's a company tha has no European counterpart, Google. It pays ~2.5 billion a year in taxes in addition to the value it create for all of us.

Do we really want to make a company like this smaller so that government can be bigger?

http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l142/thinlizzy21/329B3996-E820-400A-BADE-30A7DEEC3852_zps1wzaejxa.png (http://s95.photobucket.com/user/thinlizzy21/media/329B3996-E820-400A-BADE-30A7DEEC3852_zps1wzaejxa.png.html)

[FocusWiz]

The difference between a "growing" company and an established and somewhat stagnant company are dramatic. A growing company is seldom afraid to take risks and will write off their losses on failed attempts without risking a stockholder revolt since revenues will continue to climb to offset these losses. At one such company I worked for, their goal was to spend a minimum of 10% on training and development for just this reason.

A company like GE or Exxon/Mobil or JPMC or Citicorp is more concerned about market share and investor relations. A loss due to a failed venture can only be tolerated if other firms in the same industry are similarly impacted. They focus on squeezing the last dollar out of existing endeavors by cutting costs rather than investing in growth and new products. In reality there is limited potential for growth of companies of this size. This is part of the reason why they turn to Washington to improve their profit margins by reducing their expenses.

Recent changes in capital requirements by the Fed will significantly impact how much firms like JPMC have to invest. Look for them to seek even more legislation that favors them as they need to raise over $20 billion in the next five years to meet these requirements.

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6JXBWSCcAAx0nD.jpg:medium

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6IDJI1IAAAI-tx.jpg:medium

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6H5VITCAAAeiYl.jpg:medium

[Saratoga_Mike]

The primary cause of income equality is educational disparities. Period. I believe I can even find a quote from Bill Clinton saying as much.

What party wants to deprive poor minority kids a chance in life? That would be Dems. (Union) votes are more important than kids. Disgraceful.

[Mike at A+]

The primary cause of income equality is educational disparities. Period. I believe I can even find a quote from Bill Clinton saying as much.

What party wants to deprive poor minority kids a chance in life? That would be Dems. (Union) votes are more important than kids. Disgraceful.
:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: SPOT ON. Dems LOVE to focus on INCOME inequality but they ignore all the other inequalities like education, work ethic, ability to adapt, ability to stay out of trouble and SO MANY OTHER qualities that lead to a better life. There comes a point in life where it's too late for many to achieve that better life. And in the overwhelming majority of those cases, they have no one to blame but themselves. Running a distant second for the blame is the culture where the baby daddy leaves to spread his seed elsewhere and the single mom who makes bad choices.

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6JhPoYCMAAXD7e.jpg

[Mike at A+]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6JhPoYCMAAXD7e.jpg
Yeah, that all sounds great on the surface. But what would happen if things were different? How many jobs would be lost? What about professional sports? Why don't you have anything to say about an NBA player making an obscene amount of money? Or a singer? Loopholes exist for a reason. The government gets something in return for those loopholes.

[Mike at A+]

And as long as we're posting cute memes ...

[Track Collector]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6JhPoYCMAAXD7e.jpg

Here's some more math, in absolute terms:

In one of the groups mentioned above each person paid $180,000,000 in taxes, while the other group each person paid $8,000 each.

Your position might have been better argued if you insisted that the first group pay at a 20% rate (same as the second group) rather than 39.6% :p

The entire issue is a moot point as our government continues to run up huge debt. Without any serious attempt to reduce spending, some day in the not too distant future the entire system is going to come crashing down.

[AndyC]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6JhPoYCMAAXD7e.jpg

Of course a person making $40,000 would be paying at a 15% rate and a hedgefund manager would be paying at 23.8% but why let facts ruin a good rant.

[forced89]

Granted low income people pay a bigger portion of their income in sales taxes but the very low income get checks from the Government from the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Care Tax Credits. My gut tells me that those in the Upper Middle Class whose primary income comes from pay checks from which taxes are withheld pay more than their fair share. Can't prove it but it just seems that way.

[FocusWiz]

I did a study a few years ago on the effects of the Alternative Minimum Tax and this tax (as tweaked by Reagan and Clinton) was aimed at the incomes of a family of 4 from the mid $70,000 to just over $400,000. Originally designed in the 1960s to target the wealthy, it no longer affects their income. I think the Bush Tax Cuts for the Wealthy adjusted this tax to some extent for inflation and this particular Tax Cut for the Wealthy been made permanent (though the curve has simply shifted higher and it still does not affect the truly wealthy, but at least it no longer targets families earning under $100,000 a year...that is what The PPACA does).

[badcompany]

Granted low income people pay a bigger portion of their income in sales taxes but the very low income get checks from the Government from the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Care Tax Credits. My gut tells me that those in the Upper Middle Class whose primary income comes from pay checks from which taxes are withheld pay more than their fair share. Can't prove it but it just seems that way.

Supermarket food isn't subject to sales tax, as opposed to prepared food.

Upper middle class people eat in higher end restaurants and pay sales tax on expensive food.

There is simply no idea absurd enough so that Libs won't use it to support a failed ideology.

[FocusWiz]

Supermarket food isn't subject to sales tax, as opposed to prepared food.

Upper middle class people eat in higher end restaurants and pay sales tax on expensive food.

There is simply no idea absurd enough so that Libs won't use it to support a failed ideology.These are good points, but it is important to note that these laws vary from state to state with many states wary that it seems "unfair" to tax certain necessities. Some states also do not tax clothing or have limits on the sales tax on clothing.

I hate seeing discussions of who pays the most tax because the laws are so convoluted that no one (including me) has an adequate picture.

For example, many talk about the poor paying Social Security Tax despite the fact that the Earned Income Credit was designed to offset that tax for lower incomes. Likewise, there are non-taxable subsidies for some expenses of those with lower incomes which would be paid for with after-tax dollars by those with just enough to get them to the "middle class." Tax-free payments from the government are never considered when computing the income of the various "classes."

Few people and virtually no studies consider government credits, subsidies, and other benefits (which are paid for with tax dollars) as an offset to the taxes paid; they are treated as a separate item. Thus, programs like Medicaid, School Lunch programs and welfare programs are not considered a reduction in taxes paid. Likewise, the subsidies on federal and state subsidized loans are not considered a reduction in taxes paid. Worker upgrade and training programs, employer subsidies for hiring disadvantaged workers, and job search assistance are not considered a reduction in taxes paid. This is partly right and partly wrong. These programs are designed to help society as a whole, not the particular individuals who receive the help. However, some of these are targeted specifically at certain income levels and probably should be considered a refund of their taxes paid when we consider who pays the lion's share of taxes.

It is almost as if the rules and regulations are designed such that you can support any argument that the tax laws favor one group over another. The above argument that the poor pay the most taxes is as valid as the argument that the poor pay no taxes. Obfuscation is perhaps the only thing that Congress is actually good at.

[AndyC]

I did a study a few years ago on the effects of the Alternative Minimum Tax and this tax (as tweaked by Reagan and Clinton) was aimed at the incomes of a family of 4 from the mid $70,000 to just over $400,000. Originally designed in the 1960s to target the wealthy, it no longer affects their income. I think the Bush Tax Cuts for the Wealthy adjusted this tax to some extent for inflation and this particular Tax Cut for the Wealthy been made permanent (though the curve has simply shifted higher and it still does not affect the truly wealthy, but at least it no longer targets families earning under $100,000 a year...that is what The PPACA does).

The AMT was not implemented to target the wealthy it was implemented to target high earners with high deductions. I know you know that but using wealth and income interchangeably is misleading.

[AndyC]

These are good points, but it is important to note that these laws vary from state to state with many states wary that it seems "unfair" to tax certain necessities. Some states also do not tax clothing or have limits on the sales tax on clothing.

I hate seeing discussions of who pays the most tax because the laws are so convoluted that no one (including me) has an adequate picture.

For example, many talk about the poor paying Social Security Tax despite the fact that the Earned Income Credit was designed to offset that tax for lower incomes. Likewise, there are non-taxable subsidies for some expenses of those with lower incomes which would be paid for with after-tax dollars by those with just enough to get them to the "middle class." Tax-free payments from the government are never considered when computing the income of the various "classes."

Few people and virtually no studies consider government credits, subsidies, and other benefits (which are paid for with tax dollars) as an offset to the taxes paid; they are treated as a separate item. Thus, programs like Medicaid, School Lunch programs and welfare programs are not considered a reduction in taxes paid. Likewise, the subsidies on federal and state subsidized loans are not considered a reduction in taxes paid. Worker upgrade and training programs, employer subsidies for hiring disadvantaged workers, and job search assistance are not considered a reduction in taxes paid. This is partly right and partly wrong. These programs are designed to help society as a whole, not the particular individuals who receive the help. However, some of these are targeted specifically at certain income levels and probably should be considered a refund of their taxes paid when we consider who pays the lion's share of taxes.

It is almost as if the rules and regulations are designed such that you can support any argument that the tax laws favor one group over another. The above argument that the poor pay the most taxes is as valid as the argument that the poor pay no taxes. Obfuscation is perhaps the only thing that Congress is actually good at.

None of your points are ever acknowledged by those trying to demonize high earners.

[Saratoga_Mike]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6JhPoYCMAAXD7e.jpg

You're actually right on this one - carried interest should be taxed as ordinary income, not as a capital gain. It isn't the hedge fund mgr's capital at risk (associated with the carried interest piece).

[FocusWiz]

The AMT was not implemented to target the wealthy it was implemented to target high earners with high deductions. I know you know that but using wealth and income interchangeably is misleading.Valid point. I should have used the proper terminology.

Thanks.

[davew]

Does it matter that over 95% of the taxes paid by the poorest 20% gets returned in entitlement programs.

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9JozjnCAAAE-uS.jpg:medium

[Clocker]

Standard liberal racism, portraying the middle class as white and the poor as black.

[JustRalph]

Does it matter that over 95% of the taxes paid by the poorest 20% gets returned in entitlement programs.

Don't start throwing around relevant facts.......what are you? Crazy!!

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9C3KGLCEAIQRr3.jpg:medium

[Saratoga_Mike]

What is "paid leave for every American (not referring to sick pay)?"

[Clocker]

The only turmoil on the conservative side is trying to figure out how the Idiot in Chief can present a budget with a self-admitted $474 billion deficit and claim that it is fully paid for.

And free universal preschool too.

[Clocker]

What is "paid leave for every American (not referring to sick pay)?"

Nothing to worry about. It is free. Just like the free community college tuition. Not like it is coming out of anyone's pocket. :rolleyes:

[JustRalph]

What is "paid leave for every American (not referring to sick pay)?"

10 weeks of family medical leave per worker. Same as FMLA today, but paid.

Btw, when FMLA was first introduced Rush Limbaugh predicted the Dem's would try to eventually make it paid.

Score one for Rush

[Clocker]

Btw, when FMLA was first introduced Rush Limbaugh predicted the Dem's would try to eventually make it paid.

Score one for Rush

Yeah, like it takes a genius to see a Dem freebie coming out of left field. :D

[Tom]

Nothing to worry about. It is free. Just like the free community college tuition. Not like it is coming out of anyone's pocket. :rolleyes:

Obama bought a bag full of magic beans and all is well with the world.

[JustRalph]

Yeah, like it takes a genius to see a Dem freebie coming out of left field. :D


Agreed. But this was a Clinton era deal that they pushed through by saying it was unpaid time off. It took 20 yrs, but here we are

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B97TaxmCQAEjcB9.jpg:medium

[Clocker]

http://3-ps.googleusercontent.com/xk/-VEEfGChBP5mgx8qY_eD0fhvW8/www.powerlineblog.com/i2.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/admin/ed-assets/2015/02/Obama-Golf-Cap-copy.jpg,qresize=239,P2C267.pagespeed.ce.3uGWlll5n YIrvVT8S_F6.jpg .

[tucker6]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B97TaxmCQAEjcB9.jpg:medium
Here is Norman Mailer's legacy as described by Wiki. Be sure to point out his philanthropic works to us here on Pace, as wiki neglected to do so... :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Mailer

Your champion of liberalism was noted for one piece of "philanthropy" his entire life. In 1980, Mailer spearheaded convicted killer Jack Abbott's successful bid for parole. Once paroled, Abbott committed a murder in New York City six weeks after his release, stabbing to death 22-year-old Richard Adan.

So Mailer's entire life of helping people can be summed up by saying that he was a typical elitist liberal. "Do as I say and not as I do". He did squat for society if he wasn't being paid to do so. He did squat for poor people. He did squat for those needing a helping hand. Oh, but he gave extensively to democratic candidates. :rolleyes:

[horses4courses]

Here is Norman Mailer's legacy as described by Wiki. Be sure to point out his philanthropic works to us here on Pace, as wiki neglected to do so... :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Mailer

Your champion of liberalism was noted for one piece of "philanthropy" his entire life. In 1980, Mailer spearheaded convicted killer Jack Abbott's successful bid for parole. Once paroled, Abbott committed a murder in New York City six weeks after his release, stabbing to death 22-year-old Richard Adan.

So Mailer's entire life of helping people can be summed up by saying that he was a typical elitist liberal. "Do as I say and not as I do". He did squat for society if he wasn't being paid to do so. He did squat for poor people. He did squat for those needing a helping hand. Oh, but he gave extensively to democratic candidates. :rolleyes:

Getting a little nitpicky, aren't we?
I'm sure all your champions of conservatism are tremendous philanthropists :rolleyes:

What Mailer says above makes sense.
I realize that this matters little to conservatives, though.

[Tom]

What he says is not backed up with data.

[tucker6]

Getting a little nitpicky, aren't we?
I'm sure all your champions of conservatism are tremendous philanthropists :rolleyes:

What Mailer says above makes sense.
I realize that this matters little to conservatives, though.
Nitpicky?? Mailer was a scumbag whose sole purpose in life was to make money. Yet, he makes quotes like the one you've posted. That's rich of him to say that since he lived a privileged life without one iota of concern for the poor. He got a killer released from prison, and then made money when said parolee killed another man. And you hold this Mailer piece of crap up for us to ponder his words of wisdom? I hope he's burning in hell.

[Clocker]

I agree with Mailer about the poor "subsisting on welfare". I don't believe that all of the 47 million people on food stamps or all of the 43% of people that don't pay any federal income tax are subsisting on welfare. I don't believe that subsisting on welfare includes Obama phones or free community college or federally mandated sub-prime mortgages.

When the only people getting federal money are the poor subsisting on welfare, come back and we can talk about it.

[tucker6]

I agree with Mailer about the poor "subsisting on welfare".
I just hate the pompous quotes from the liberals, as if they have any moral authority to be preaching about anything. They give less per dollar of wealth than conservatives, yet claim they have a heart. :rolleyes:

[iceknight]

It is very appropriate for this thread title.

http://money.cnn.com/interactive/pf/debt-collector/government-agencies/

http://money.cnn.com/interactive/pf/debt-collector/millionaire/index.html

Here you have a firm that won't usually go after anyone that can afford a lawyer to file countersuit..

But they will definitely hide the information, hide the bills and then harass poor and middle class to collect their $ 110 x 15 million (a conservative estimate) - on an annual basis.

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-E-TRVCIAAO14C.jpg:medium

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-E6i_eCcAAINc_.jpg:medium

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-FnvzCCIAAyNra.jpg

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9uuz6BCMAI8xSx.jpg:medium

[Tom]

Ralph, do you suppose he really thinks those stupid cartoons are an intellectual reply to posts, of is he just lost in space? :lol: :lol: :lol:

hcap's charts just moved up an evolutionary notch.

[Saratoga_Mike]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9uuz6BCMAI8xSx.jpg:medium

FDR stopped the Depression by taxing the rich? You're the Sarah Palin of the left.

[JustRalph]

Ralph, do you suppose he really thinks those stupid cartoons are an intellectual reply to posts, of is he just lost in space? :lol: :lol: :lol:

hcap's charts just moved up an evolutionary notch.

I think it's a bot.........

[Clocker]

I think it's a bot.........

If that's the best someone can do in creating artificial intelligence, they need to find another line of work.

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CF5fCg6WEAAupUY.jpg

[Clocker]

That is some really relevant information. The House passed a bill that Obama has promised to veto. If passed, it would have resulted in a revenue loss to the country of about $14 billion a year. That's how much the US debt grows in a week. If libs are all that concerned about that debt, maybe they should think about the spending side of the equation.

Libs whine about accusations of death panels. How about thinking about the fairness of death taxes. What gives the government the right to someone's property after they die, when they have no right to it (YET!) while that person is still alive?

[upthecreek]

https://twitter.com/_CFJ_/status/603936648095731712?s=09