Tax break for the rich??
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
From: norfolk
THIS IS TO BHIBBS, i really don't like to call people names but you really are a dumbass. in your one example you had a guy making 9700.00 paying 970.00 in federal taxes and then 5000 in extra taxes which i am assuming that you mean things like living expenses, well i live in probably the most taxed state that there is and alot of stuff is taxed at 10% so i can't see your example being more than 10% taxes which would mean if your joe poor is paying 5000 in taxes he is making 50k not 9700---idiot
01xl sport we must meet someday, i think i like you
01xl sport we must meet someday, i think i like you
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,394
Likes: 0
From: San Antonio
Originally posted by kobiashi
I would give some of these examples more credence if some of you would learn the difference between, and proper usage of, "then" and "than". (A distinction that has come up repeatedly in the past in other topics...but I digress).
In my life I've made no money, I've made a little money, and I've made a lot of money.
The more I made, the more the a-holes at the IRS took (and I'm not talkin' overall dollars...I'm talking percentage of income).
Then I hired tax attorneys and paid them well so that I could keep all the money I'm entitled to keep.
Now I'm thinking....I'm moving to Switzerland, right after I hide all my money in a secure Austrian account...not having paid any more taxes.
F the IRS. F'in ******.
Carry on.
I would give some of these examples more credence if some of you would learn the difference between, and proper usage of, "then" and "than". (A distinction that has come up repeatedly in the past in other topics...but I digress).
In my life I've made no money, I've made a little money, and I've made a lot of money.
The more I made, the more the a-holes at the IRS took (and I'm not talkin' overall dollars...I'm talking percentage of income).
Then I hired tax attorneys and paid them well so that I could keep all the money I'm entitled to keep.
Now I'm thinking....I'm moving to Switzerland, right after I hide all my money in a secure Austrian account...not having paid any more taxes.
F the IRS. F'in ******.
Carry on.
dont forget about that "extra" cali state tax , local sales and use tax of 7.25 percent on top of an 18.4 cent-per-gallon federal excise tax and an 18.0 cent-per-gallon State excise tax. ..........and then thanhttp://www.scstatehouse.net/sess115_.../bills/176.htm
CA extra clean and MTBE free gasoline.........Make CA taxpayers pay more taxes because it cost the" tax break" refinerys more to supply Cali's fuel type demand
uhhhhhhh tax the users
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,867
Likes: 0
From: NH
It seems the “proper” argument with “proper” math and with logical reality is not the issue with the liberals and their dysfunctional calculators.
Math is math and there is no way to make 2 + 2 = 5
Therefore, the true liberal argument is the illusion that for some reason Joe Poor is somehow paying more taxes based on his actually income he has in his pocket, or as a few of them have stated a “percentage of income”.
As usual that liberal argument is flawed from the beginning, because again as usual the liberals never “think through” their argument before they make it. When they realize their argument is flawed the just continue with it the best they can and try to reason with people it is not flawed rather then admit, and take personal responsibility for their mistake and come out and say “oops, I made a mistake”.
So let me try to present to you, and the liberals their flawed argument based on “percentage of income” to make this simple I will just use some simple numbers which will prove my point clearly, well so we shall wish…
Joe Poor make’s $350 for this week.
Joe Rich make’s $700 for this week.
They both walk into Home Depot with the above amount of money and each man purchases an AC unit at the cost of $200. Their state tax (for this example) is 10% so they both pay $20 in taxes on their purchase, total cost is $220.00 for the very same AC unit.
Now, for the “percentage of income” argument it breaks down like this:
Joe Poor paid 5.7% of his income in taxes for his purchase
Joe Rich paid 2.9% of his income in taxes for his purchase
Again both men bought the same item, in the same store, in the same state.
Now what the liberals are arguing is that to be fair to Joe Poor that Joe Rich should have to pay the same “percentage” of taxes, or in this example he should have to pay 5.7% of his income in taxes for the purchase above.
That would mean the AC unit would cost:
Joe Poor $220 (no change for him)
Joe Rich $240 (increases his tax to 5.7% of his income)
So again I ask my liberal friends WHY should Joe Rich have to pay MORE money for the very same thing, in the same store and in the same state?
Math is math and there is no way to make 2 + 2 = 5
Therefore, the true liberal argument is the illusion that for some reason Joe Poor is somehow paying more taxes based on his actually income he has in his pocket, or as a few of them have stated a “percentage of income”.
As usual that liberal argument is flawed from the beginning, because again as usual the liberals never “think through” their argument before they make it. When they realize their argument is flawed the just continue with it the best they can and try to reason with people it is not flawed rather then admit, and take personal responsibility for their mistake and come out and say “oops, I made a mistake”.
So let me try to present to you, and the liberals their flawed argument based on “percentage of income” to make this simple I will just use some simple numbers which will prove my point clearly, well so we shall wish…
Joe Poor make’s $350 for this week.
Joe Rich make’s $700 for this week.
They both walk into Home Depot with the above amount of money and each man purchases an AC unit at the cost of $200. Their state tax (for this example) is 10% so they both pay $20 in taxes on their purchase, total cost is $220.00 for the very same AC unit.
Now, for the “percentage of income” argument it breaks down like this:
Joe Poor paid 5.7% of his income in taxes for his purchase
Joe Rich paid 2.9% of his income in taxes for his purchase
Again both men bought the same item, in the same store, in the same state.
Now what the liberals are arguing is that to be fair to Joe Poor that Joe Rich should have to pay the same “percentage” of taxes, or in this example he should have to pay 5.7% of his income in taxes for the purchase above.
That would mean the AC unit would cost:
Joe Poor $220 (no change for him)
Joe Rich $240 (increases his tax to 5.7% of his income)
So again I ask my liberal friends WHY should Joe Rich have to pay MORE money for the very same thing, in the same store and in the same state?
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 599
Likes: 0
I'm starting to think that Math is just "Fuzzy" for many of you in general. Especially that dumb *** Bubblehead who can't read enough to even figure out what we're talking about here. Just go away. You've already been labeled as a troll in the 2004 forum.
$5,000. was just an EXAMPLE. I even re-figured it for you for only $2500.00 and still made my point. I know it's a lot of words, but you can do it Bubblehead.
XLT, your example is absolutely Correct! BUT, I'm not saying Joe Rich should have to pay a higher tax or anything. You're trying to put Socialist, liberal things into my head.
ALL I'M SAYING IS TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU'RE BITCHING ABOUT JOE POOR ONLY PAYING 20% OF HIS INCOME TAX WHEN HE'S PAYING A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF HIS INCOME ON TAXES EVERY DAY ON EVERYTHING ELSE HE BUYS. Especially Gas, fees, etc.
That's a great example XLT, that proves my point, Exactly.
$5,000. was just an EXAMPLE. I even re-figured it for you for only $2500.00 and still made my point. I know it's a lot of words, but you can do it Bubblehead.
XLT, your example is absolutely Correct! BUT, I'm not saying Joe Rich should have to pay a higher tax or anything. You're trying to put Socialist, liberal things into my head.
ALL I'M SAYING IS TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU'RE BITCHING ABOUT JOE POOR ONLY PAYING 20% OF HIS INCOME TAX WHEN HE'S PAYING A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF HIS INCOME ON TAXES EVERY DAY ON EVERYTHING ELSE HE BUYS. Especially Gas, fees, etc.
That's a great example XLT, that proves my point, Exactly.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,867
Likes: 0
From: NH
Originally posted by BHibbs
ALL I'M SAYING IS TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU'RE BITCHING ABOUT JOE POOR ONLY PAYING 20% OF HIS INCOME TAX WHEN HE'S PAYING A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF HIS INCOME ON TAXES EVERY DAY ON EVERYTHING ELSE HE BUYS. Especially Gas, fees, etc.
That's a great example XLT, that proves my point, Exactly.
ALL I'M SAYING IS TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU'RE BITCHING ABOUT JOE POOR ONLY PAYING 20% OF HIS INCOME TAX WHEN HE'S PAYING A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF HIS INCOME ON TAXES EVERY DAY ON EVERYTHING ELSE HE BUYS. Especially Gas, fees, etc.
That's a great example XLT, that proves my point, Exactly.
I am not rich by any means. I make a decent salary, not great, but not poor either, just decent.
I can tell you that I pay no where the amount of taxes as the guy making $100,000. Now I agree I will have less money in my pocket at the end of the day then the guy with $100,000 but that is because I start out with less to begin with. That is neither my fault nor his, its just life and reality.
I don’t believe this decision had anything to do with the “rich” whining about how the “poor” only pay X amount in taxes but rather it is more in line with reality and that of the “poor” whining about why the “rich” don’t get screwed worse then they do now.
The “poor” also whine because for what ever reason they are jealous of the “rich” for having more then they do. The “poor” believe they should have the ability to have as many of the same things as do the “rich” but not have to pay for it and have the “rich” pay for it since they seem to have so much left over money.
That is the problem and one created by socialist liberals with their “class” warfare and pitting one class of people against the other. Kind of like some kids get to buy ice cream from the truck and others don’t so in this case the kids that can’t buy the ice cream think since they can’t afford it then the other kids shouldn’t have the ability to have ice cream either. It gets back to the “false” premise of being “fair”.
It is indeed a false premise of being fair because more then likely the kids buying the ice cream have went out and mowed a few yards in order to buy the ice cream while the other kids who sat at home watching cartoons all morning.
In any possible example with people of different tax brackets the ones in the higher tax brackets will always pay a higher percentage of their income to taxes, more then Joe Poor could ever imagine…
You can not judge fair by what everybody has left in their pockets after paying taxes you can only use proper math and calculate what “percentage” of ones take home pay goes towards taxes, that is not a “false” premise of fair and reality that is actual reality and the real world.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,867
Likes: 0
From: NH
Originally posted by Haku
As 01 clearly stated before, anyone making under 28k/year is NOT paying federal tax.
Hak
As 01 clearly stated before, anyone making under 28k/year is NOT paying federal tax.
Hak
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 599
Likes: 0
"You can not judge fair by what everybody has left in their pockets after paying taxes you can only use proper math and calculate what “percentage” of ones take home pay goes towards taxes, that is not a “false” premise of fair and reality that is actual reality and the real world."
You're one hundred percent correct XLT.
See, we are on the same page.
I still think, as my numbers, and YOUR numbers demonstrate, things are a lot more equal than the Republicans want you to believe. Sure they're getting a break if you make less. I'm not denying that. I've said before, I'm kind of ok with it.
The Rich spend more on accountants to figure out ways to Save money on taxes than most of us even make in a year. This entire argument didn't even include all the loopholes and such (example, writing off a Hummer as a business expense and therefore paying no tax on it).
I'm not jealous of the Rich or anything. I'm working to be one of them. I honestly think it's the Republicans that want to start a Class war with all this contempt for Joe Poor making 20k a year and only getting taxed at 15 or 20% of his income. But that's just me.
I think I'm done argueing for the weekend. It's time to chill and contribute some money towards the Alcohol tax!
You're one hundred percent correct XLT.
See, we are on the same page.
I still think, as my numbers, and YOUR numbers demonstrate, things are a lot more equal than the Republicans want you to believe. Sure they're getting a break if you make less. I'm not denying that. I've said before, I'm kind of ok with it.
The Rich spend more on accountants to figure out ways to Save money on taxes than most of us even make in a year. This entire argument didn't even include all the loopholes and such (example, writing off a Hummer as a business expense and therefore paying no tax on it).
I'm not jealous of the Rich or anything. I'm working to be one of them. I honestly think it's the Republicans that want to start a Class war with all this contempt for Joe Poor making 20k a year and only getting taxed at 15 or 20% of his income. But that's just me.
I think I'm done argueing for the weekend. It's time to chill and contribute some money towards the Alcohol tax!
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,867
Likes: 0
From: NH
Originally posted by BHibbs
Tell that to the guy making 28k who had to pay $4200.00 that year. 15% is 15%....
Tell that to the guy making 28k who had to pay $4200.00 that year. 15% is 15%....
Income - $28,000
Standard deduction - $4,750
Exemption deduction - $3,050
Taxable income - $20,200
Total tax - $2,680 (9.57% of gross income, or 13.3% of taxable income)
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,867
Likes: 0
From: NH
BHibbs:
I think the issue with republicans in general and pointing out to the public about the difference’s about who pays how much in taxes is directly related to how the liberals in general “try” to pound into the heads of Americans that the “rich” do NOT pay their fair share in taxes and thus deserve to be screwed to the wall.
It is typical class warfare that the liberals use on a daily basis to pit one group of people against another group all in the name of gaining and/or trying to keep control of power over the people.
I could “generally” agree that when it comes down to it that those who “actually” pay taxes be it rich or middle class more then likely come close to paying about the same when it comes to “percentage of income” what ever that number may come out to be.
Thus, this is why the argument will continue for most people in society because they just don’t want to see the truth and will continue to portray the “rich” as getting away with something because at the end of the day the “rich” will always have more money in their pocket when the tax bill is paid and this will continue to make some of the poor jealous, and to them I say “Oh well, so sad go out and get a second or third job if you want more disposable income”
If I want or need more disposable income then I could go out and get a second job. Would that suck? Well kind of, it would take time away from my daughter so at this point I do not wish to take a second job because I really don’t need to unless I would like more toys…
However I will still envy the “rich” and respect them for with out them I wouldn’t have a job be it working for someone and getting a salary or if I was to one day have my own business. You have to have someone with disposable income in order to have any job and those that do not pay taxes or get the big bonus at the end of the year do not provide jobs or create jobs…
I think the issue with republicans in general and pointing out to the public about the difference’s about who pays how much in taxes is directly related to how the liberals in general “try” to pound into the heads of Americans that the “rich” do NOT pay their fair share in taxes and thus deserve to be screwed to the wall.
It is typical class warfare that the liberals use on a daily basis to pit one group of people against another group all in the name of gaining and/or trying to keep control of power over the people.
I could “generally” agree that when it comes down to it that those who “actually” pay taxes be it rich or middle class more then likely come close to paying about the same when it comes to “percentage of income” what ever that number may come out to be.
Thus, this is why the argument will continue for most people in society because they just don’t want to see the truth and will continue to portray the “rich” as getting away with something because at the end of the day the “rich” will always have more money in their pocket when the tax bill is paid and this will continue to make some of the poor jealous, and to them I say “Oh well, so sad go out and get a second or third job if you want more disposable income”
If I want or need more disposable income then I could go out and get a second job. Would that suck? Well kind of, it would take time away from my daughter so at this point I do not wish to take a second job because I really don’t need to unless I would like more toys…
However I will still envy the “rich” and respect them for with out them I wouldn’t have a job be it working for someone and getting a salary or if I was to one day have my own business. You have to have someone with disposable income in order to have any job and those that do not pay taxes or get the big bonus at the end of the year do not provide jobs or create jobs…
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 691
Likes: 1
From: Gulf Coast
The Rich spend more on accountants to figure out ways to Save money on taxes than most of us even make in a year. This entire argument didn't even include all the loopholes and such (example, writing off a Hummer as a business expense and therefore paying no tax on it).
I would have to disagree with this statement. The vehicle is operated on public streets. The business stills pays the taxes on the vehicle, probably more than you or me because it is used for business and could be subjected to higher taxes. If the business is set up as anything other than a corproation then the person is still paying the taxes for it. The only difference is they can write off the cost for operating it. Taxes are always able to be written off whether they are paid by a corporation, business, or a person.
As I stated eairlier the poor might pay close to the same percentage as the rich, but most of the taxes paid are voluntary so they have no room to complain about the amount.
I would have to disagree with this statement. The vehicle is operated on public streets. The business stills pays the taxes on the vehicle, probably more than you or me because it is used for business and could be subjected to higher taxes. If the business is set up as anything other than a corproation then the person is still paying the taxes for it. The only difference is they can write off the cost for operating it. Taxes are always able to be written off whether they are paid by a corporation, business, or a person.
As I stated eairlier the poor might pay close to the same percentage as the rich, but most of the taxes paid are voluntary so they have no room to complain about the amount.
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,506
Likes: 6
From: Puyallup, WA
I think I'm done argueing for the weekend. It's time to chill and contribute some money towards the Alcohol tax!
This post has generated more responses then any "tech" post I've made!! I knew it would stir the pot as such. That's what makes this country so great!!
