Paul Ryan's speech RNC speech. No actual facts required.

Boxes&Books

pandora wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

tonifig8 wrote:

Pandora,
Why do you continue to defend Ryan? It is clear he lied several times and it's been stated clearly by numerous credible sources. Is this your idea of wholesome? As a woman how can you defend a man who doesn't even support equal pay for women?
You should be asking John B. where the jobs are because his congress has created zero jobs!?! Ryan voted for all the big spending, is that not clear? Don't you realize that from day one the GOP's number one goal was to make sure Obama failed, not to work together, but as Mitch M. said, " we want to make sure Obama fails" is that your idea of wholesome and commitment to our country? Obama has cut taxes for small business owners and has done everything in his power to support small business - heck the taxes rates are the lowest they have ever been... We still have the Bush tax cuts in affect.

you can not have a debate with someone who absolutely refuses to acknowledtge things called FACTS. i see it every day on AMT and in the national political scene. people are in denial of facts, and that is dangerous because it dumbs down all of american politics. our politicians, and by default, our own population must look like fucking morons to the rest of the world....the republicans are all about rhetoric and creating their own rhetoric with the outright dismissal and denial of basic facts. as evidence, try to see last night's real time with bill maher. he takes down this conservative director that made the hatchet job anti obama movie with FACTS, and the guy wilted. it was pretty sad and pethetic to watch...

pandora, why don't you just come out and say you are voting for romney and ryan? this reasonable and indecisive schtick is not working... we see right through it...

I would be a liar if i did so...
and your cynicism is showing and is always arrogant and insulting.
Are you not accustomed to independent thinking?

I will be watching the Democratic convention next week to see what future plans
this administration has that will help solve the problems.

The fact is we see many debating who consistently twist "facts" to fit their agenda.
This is seen very much so in politics.

But when a married President comes on national TV,
and blatantly lies to the people who trust him, denying having sex,
Well now that's a lie! ...
one that shows true lack of character.

Seems like you're clearly defending Ryan's lies, regardless of the facts, are you going to also be putting up this kind of fight for the democrats? Not to sure if your being very neutral here, it's pretty clear who you're supporting, regardless of the facts.

pandora

comebackgirl wrote:

pandora wrote:

I just answered your questions! alrighty then

practicality... what a cop out ... yes lets keep it this way its so much better :fp:

oh i'm sorry - I didn't realize I should be embracing ideas that have no feasibility of working in the real world. Instead of "copping out" I could personalize my argument against you and throw in the obligatory face palm.

So, in sum,the entire American population will be required to work one day a week for free, forgoing 1/5 of their salary or business profits, but they will get tax cuts

Forgot to add that anyone on public assistance will be doing this as well, including the elderly and the disabled

I did not say a business gives 1/5th of its profits but a business can donate time,
product, space, talent etc.

Individuals donate time. With everyone doing that perhaps
the free clinics which is off topic by the way that you brought up here for some reason...
would not require everyone to give one day...
in fact with everyone working together it might be one day every other week or month.
But if you are an example of people it might be a tough sell. This surprising to me.

You don't think the elderly or disabled have anything to offer a community
that works for the good of all?
I think some might be insulted there.
Many would be awesome greeters and mentors within the clinics, have former professions
to lend consult. Everyone can do something even from their own homes.

You don't think we can solve our current problems if we made a plan to give equally
of our time?

Would that not be worth a monetary sacrifice?

No, I guess you don't think so.

pandora

tonifig8 wrote:

pandora wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

you can not have a debate with someone who absolutely refuses to acknowledtge things called FACTS. i see it every day on AMT and in the national political scene. people are in denial of facts, and that is dangerous because it dumbs down all of american politics. our politicians, and by default, our own population must look like fucking morons to the rest of the world....the republicans are all about rhetoric and creating their own rhetoric with the outright dismissal and denial of basic facts. as evidence, try to see last night's real time with bill maher. he takes down this conservative director that made the hatchet job anti obama movie with FACTS, and the guy wilted. it was pretty sad and pethetic to watch...

pandora, why don't you just come out and say you are voting for romney and ryan? this reasonable and indecisive schtick is not working... we see right through it...

I would be a liar if i did so...
and your cynicism is showing and is always arrogant and insulting.
Are you not accustomed to independent thinking?

I will be watching the Democratic convention next week to see what future plans
this administration has that will help solve the problems.

The fact is we see many debating who consistently twist "facts" to fit their agenda.
This is seen very much so in politics.

But when a married President comes on national TV,
and blatantly lies to the people who trust him, denying having sex,
Well now that's a lie! ...
one that shows true lack of character.

Seems like you're clearly defending Ryan's lies, regardless of the facts, are you going to also be putting up this kind of fight for the democrats? Not to sure if your being very neutral here, it's pretty clear who you're supporting, regardless of the facts.

I countered the OP's comments with articles of fact ...period.
What did you do?

No, you are assuming way too much...
I will not have decided who I am voting for until I get to election time.
Much can happen between now and then. I have voted as much for Democrats as Republicans
in my more than 35 years of voting.
I am an Independent, should I presume you are not from your actions here :? ??

And what's the beef anyways?...
why does it matter to you my vote, my understanding of the issues, my opinion?

Just like gimme you are not to discuss a poster but the topic
is it because you are blue that you must attempt to discredit the opinion of one
who you think might be a red?
This is exactly what is wrong with our country. No working together....
and people just love to rag I guess ...
that is tiresome and a huge waste of time.

comebackgirl

pandora wrote:

comebackgirl wrote:

pandora wrote:

I just answered your questions! alrighty then

practicality... what a cop out ... yes lets keep it this way its so much better :fp:

oh i'm sorry - I didn't realize I should be embracing ideas that have no feasibility of working in the real world. Instead of "copping out" I could personalize my argument against you and throw in the obligatory face palm.

So, in sum,the entire American population will be required to work one day a week for free, forgoing 1/5 of their salary or business profits, but they will get tax cuts

Forgot to add that anyone on public assistance will be doing this as well, including the elderly and the disabled

I did not say a business gives 1/5th of its profits but a business can donate time,
product, space, talent etc.

Individuals donate time. With everyone doing that perhaps
the free clinics which is off topic by the way that you brought up here for some reason...
would not require everyone to give one day...
in fact with everyone working together it might be one day every other week or month.
But if you are an example of people it might be a tough sell. This surprising to me.

You don't think the elderly or disabled have anything to offer a community
that works for the good of all?
I think some might be insulted there.
Many would be awesome greeters and mentors within the clinics, have former professions
to lend consult. Everyone can do something even from their own homes.

You don't think we can solve our current problems if we made a plan to give equally
of our time?

Would that not be worth a monetary sacrifice?

No, I guess you don't think so.

I know you didn't, but working 1 day for free out of a typical 5 day work week equates to 1/5, no? That's how it would translate "in fairness."

Well there is a difference between "donating" and "requiring", no? Maybe people are happy to "donate" and they do. That's been my point. Sure - encourage people to donate. I fully support that idea.

Ahhh there's the personal jab again. Careful on that. I strongly encourage you to debate the issue with me, not me personally. It's not an issue I plan to address with you directly again.

I think many disabled and elderly have a lot to offer. However, many of them are on public assistance such as disability for a reason. Sure - support them in volunteering if they choose, but don't require it. That makes no sense to me.

I think a plan of everyone working to donate time is wonderful. I love the spirit of it. I've said that repeatedly. I don't agree with requiring it, nor do I see how that would benefit the economy if the poor and middle class are being forced to give up such a significant portion of their incomes (money they would put back into the economy).

Moonpig

quote="pandora"]

comebackgirl wrote:

Yes - this was my exact thought. I can have a say about what goes on in government, but not about what goes on in my uterus? :?

I have a sneaking suspicion that Mitt's mom is pro life. Murdering unborn babies is not a choice
pro lifers think should be had.[/quote]

That's a little strong Pandora, not everyone that disagrees with you is wrong. Surely everyone is entitled to an opinion, and it's not only yours that's up for grabs.

Oh and for the record, the media outlets over here have strongly called into question Paul Ryan's assertions, including SKY news, a Murdoch owned news outlet.

It is strange that you are defending something that the majority of analysts, from both sides of the fence, along with foreign news outlets have been in agreement with, at worst he lied outright to an audiance he knew wouldn't question rhetoric, or at the least, read verbatum falsehoods, provided to him, he didn't know to be untrue. Either way shows a clear lack of integrity or intelligence.[/quote]
Say what? I did not disagree here just brought the opinion his Mom was most likely
pro life... that is an assumption though. I have not researched.
Are you assuming I am not pro choice?
When did he lie? Not about the Janesville plant in his speech. If you read my article
you would understand this... now Clinton lied oh boy did he lie.

And yes everyone deserves an opinion including you and me.

But when I do not agree with you... am I wrong
I have a feeling I might be[/quote]

Yikes Pandora, where do I even begin. Your insistence that all these outlets and opinions must be wrong, except ironically enough, your own, is indication enough of your stance.

The man was either mistaken, or lied. That seems to be the general gist of it. Independent foreign media are mostly somewhat in agreement of atleast that. But you are going to hold true to one article, about one point, of the opinion that you and only you can be right, seems a little silly.

Hey I can be wrong, and often am, and in no way afraid to admit it. Yet by your posts you seem to talk at people until they either move on to another discussion or give up.

Please don't try to psycoanalyse me now. I was only making a point that you seem to be in a minority of 1 with respect to the stance you are taking, much like the Akin thread. And I am not even referring to the train, I mean through popular opinion, oh yeah and ofcourse fact (but sure we can deal with that little gem another time).

Oh and by the way, disagreeing with me doesn't make you wrong, I am not that arrogant to believe I know everything, no matter what you feel - actually now that we are talking about it, try backing up those feelings you get with evidence. Not about wrong or right, disagree away.

Moonpig

damn, sorry about the quotes debacle

mickeyrat

Moonpig wrote:

damn, sorry about the quotes debacle

take some aspirin now. It will help stave off the headache you will certainly get if you continue to engage in this convo.

pandora

comebackgirl wrote:

pandora wrote:

comebackgirl wrote:

oh i'm sorry - I didn't realize I should be embracing ideas that have no feasibility of working in the real world. Instead of "copping out" I could personalize my argument against you and throw in the obligatory face palm.

So, in sum,the entire American population will be required to work one day a week for free, forgoing 1/5 of their salary or business profits, but they will get tax cuts

Forgot to add that anyone on public assistance will be doing this as well, including the elderly and the disabled

I did not say a business gives 1/5th of its profits but a business can donate time,
product, space, talent etc.

Individuals donate time. With everyone doing that perhaps
the free clinics which is off topic by the way that you brought up here for some reason...
would not require everyone to give one day...
in fact with everyone working together it might be one day every other week or month.
But if you are an example of people it might be a tough sell. This surprising to me.

You don't think the elderly or disabled have anything to offer a community
that works for the good of all?
I think some might be insulted there.
Many would be awesome greeters and mentors within the clinics, have former professions
to lend consult. Everyone can do something even from their own homes.

You don't think we can solve our current problems if we made a plan to give equally
of our time?

Would that not be worth a monetary sacrifice?

No, I guess you don't think so.

I know you didn't, but working 1 day for free out of a typical 5 day work week equates to 1/5, no? That's how it would translate "in fairness."

Well there is a difference between "donating" and "requiring", no? Maybe people are happy to "donate" and they do. That's been my point. Sure - encourage people to donate. I fully support that idea.

Ahhh there's the personal jab again. Careful on that. I strongly encourage you to debate the issue with me, not me personally. It's not an issue I plan to address with you directly again.

I think many disabled and elderly have a lot to offer. However, many of them are on public assistance such as disability for a reason. Sure - support them in volunteering if they choose, but don't require it. That makes no sense to me.

I think a plan of everyone working to donate time is wonderful. I love the spirit of it. I've said that repeatedly. I don't agree with requiring it, nor do I see how that would benefit the economy if the poor and middle class are being forced to give up such a significant portion of their incomes (money they would put back into the economy).

Like I said everyone can do something ... the more involved the less each individual
must do...
think that is called teamwork. Might be an outdated notion maybe
We will agree to disagree on who can be part of the team.

And that is not a jab at all... you have said you would not be in favor of my plan
giving as a requirement this surprised me... are you in favor of Obamacare?

I think helping must be a requirement to get people involved...
maybe that could be compared to Obamacare ...
I guess that has been found to be constitutional to make it mandatory to carry health insurance
or pay penalties for both employee and employer.

But enough as I have asked before...
this is from a different thread you brought here for some reason.
Really does not apply to the unemployment rate
and how to solve our terrible jobless performance of the current administration.

comebackgirl

pandora wrote:

comebackgirl wrote:

pandora wrote:

I did not say a business gives 1/5th of its profits but a business can donate time,
product, space, talent etc.

Individuals donate time. With everyone doing that perhaps
the free clinics which is off topic by the way that you brought up here for some reason...
would not require everyone to give one day...
in fact with everyone working together it might be one day every other week or month.
But if you are an example of people it might be a tough sell. This surprising to me.

You don't think the elderly or disabled have anything to offer a community
that works for the good of all?
I think some might be insulted there.
Many would be awesome greeters and mentors within the clinics, have former professions
to lend consult. Everyone can do something even from their own homes.

You don't think we can solve our current problems if we made a plan to give equally
of our time?

Would that not be worth a monetary sacrifice?

No, I guess you don't think so.

I know you didn't, but working 1 day for free out of a typical 5 day work week equates to 1/5, no? That's how it would translate "in fairness."

Well there is a difference between "donating" and "requiring", no? Maybe people are happy to "donate" and they do. That's been my point. Sure - encourage people to donate. I fully support that idea.

Ahhh there's the personal jab again. Careful on that. I strongly encourage you to debate the issue with me, not me personally. It's not an issue I plan to address with you directly again.

I think many disabled and elderly have a lot to offer. However, many of them are on public assistance such as disability for a reason. Sure - support them in volunteering if they choose, but don't require it. That makes no sense to me.

I think a plan of everyone working to donate time is wonderful. I love the spirit of it. I've said that repeatedly. I don't agree with requiring it, nor do I see how that would benefit the economy if the poor and middle class are being forced to give up such a significant portion of their incomes (money they would put back into the economy).

Like I said everyone can do something ... the more involved the less each individual
must do...
think that is called teamwork. Might be an outdated notion maybe
We will agree to disagree on who can be part of the team.

And that is not a jab at all... you have said you would not be in favor of my plan
giving as a requirement this surprised me... are you in favor of Obamacare?

I think helping must be a requirement to get people involved...
maybe that could be compared to Obamacare ...
I guess that has been found to be constitutional to make it mandatory to carry health insurance
or pay penalties for both employee and employer.

But enough as I have asked before...
this is from a different thread you brought here for some reason.
Really does not apply to the unemployment rate
and how to solve our terrible jobless performance of the current administration.

I think it does apply to the topic, if your views on the issue are consistent and don't change based on whatever disagreement is being had in any given thread. You were speaking of small business owners; many in the helping profession are small business owners themselves. If they have to work for free one day per week, their businesses and profits would be disproportionately impacted. They often do pro bono work because it's part of their ethical credo, but requiring it of some small business owners and not others seems very biased. I also think that requiring this of everyone on public assistance misses the point of why many people are on assistance - it's a view from an ivory tower.

Yes I think it's important to have everyone in the country insured. Are you saying that this equates to having everyone work one day per week for free? I'm all for community organizing, I know the positive impact it can have. Many people see the intrinsic value of doing so, some may need external motivation (ie. tax breaks, recognition). I support encouraging people to do more, but passing a law to require it? How would you recommend the government go about doing that?

pandora

Moonpig wrote:

Yikes Pandora, where do I even begin. Your insistence that all these outlets and opinions must be wrong, except ironically enough, your own, is indication enough of your stance.

The man was either mistaken, or lied. That seems to be the general gist of it. Independent foreign media are mostly somewhat in agreement of atleast that. But you are going to hold true to one article, about one point, of the opinion that you and only you can be right, seems a little silly.

Hey I can be wrong, and often am, and in no way afraid to admit it. Yet by your posts you seem to talk at people until they either move on to another discussion or give up.

Please don't try to psycoanalyse me now. I was only making a point that you seem to be in a minority of 1 with respect to the stance you are taking, much like the Akin thread. And I am not even referring to the train, I mean through popular opinion, oh yeah and ofcourse fact (but sure we can deal with that little gem another time).

Oh and by the way, disagreeing with me doesn't make you wrong, I am not that arrogant to believe I know everything, no matter what you feel - actually now that we are talking about it, try backing up those feelings you get with evidence. Not about wrong or right, disagree away.

I posted articles that explain how Ryan did not lie. It is not a feeling...
If you want to read the articles and my posts to support this fine, if not fine.
I have posted them but I could be wrong don't think you read them.
You come here with your mind made up by the media perhaps?
Maybe by party leaning perhaps?

I do neither, just investigate on my own..
this time I posted articles addressing the OP's thread.

You will find me always making up my own mind...
not what the masses think or the media.

As far as Akin you found me understanding what he meant
where he got his notions, investigating that.
I was not agreeing nor condoning. There is a huge difference.
I wanted to understand what the heck he meant from the moment I heard it.
Not trash talk him. Just me learning and understanding.


You won't find me on the rag train, that I don't enjoy.
Its a stupid waste of time,
a bunch of people enjoying putting someone down that they don't agree with or like,
doesn't take a lot of brains and no compassion at all.
Our media... good lord

I prefer positive points for all....
and yes there will be some for the Democrats also after I watch the convention,
hopefully I will learn new strategy that is going to bring
in the next four some real change.

Boxes&Books

pandora wrote:

No, you are assuming way too much...
I will not have decided who I am voting for until I get to election time.
Much can happen between now and then. I have voted as much for Democrats as Republicans
in my more than 35 years of voting.
I am an Independent, should I presume you are not from your actions here :? ??

And what's the beef anyways?...
why does it matter to you my vote, my understanding of the issues, my opinion?

Just like gimme you are not to discuss a poster but the topic
is it because you are blue that you must attempt to discredit the opinion of one
who you think might be a red?
This is exactly what is wrong with our country. No working together....
and people just love to rag I guess ...
that is tiresome and a huge waste of time.

The issue here is that you're defending lies, even after it's been proven that they're lies. Why? Then you talk about how it makes you proud to once again see an honest wholesome family possibly returning back to the White House. The Obama's don't make you proud, huh? They aren't wholesome with real hardworking values huh? The Romney campaign is being dictated by a few Billionaires who are basically financing the entire campaign. Those people financing the campaign are going to be the persons who are really living in the white house. Romney is probably one of the worst flip floppers of all time, and Ryan has only proven to a complete hypocrite, yet you think they have strong values! hahaha

And I am not a Democrat! I am a register Independent. I've rarely voted for Dems, but I'd never vote for any of these sell out Republicans. The only true Republican is Ron P., but you corporate/christian conservatives don't want any part of that. He'd probably get my vote if he was the nominee.

pandora

comebackgirl wrote:

I think it does apply to the topic, if your views on the issue are consistent and don't change based on whatever disagreement is being had in any given thread. You were speaking of small business owners; many in the helping profession are small business owners themselves. If they have to work for free one day per week, their businesses and profits would be disproportionately impacted. They often do pro bono work because it's part of their ethical credo, but requiring it of some small business owners and not others seems very biased. I also think that requiring this of everyone on public assistance misses the point of why many people are on assistance - it's a view from an ivory tower.

Yes I think it's important to have everyone in the country insured. Are you saying that this equates to having everyone work one day per week for free? I'm all for community organizing, I know the positive impact it can have. Many people see the intrinsic value of doing so, some may need external motivation (ie. tax breaks, recognition). I support encouraging people to do more, but passing a law to require it? How would you recommend the government go about doing that?

Might be less than one day a week if everyone works ... everyone

So you are for Obamacare that is passing a law requiring it though :?
How is that different?

pandora

Pooltime !!!

enjoy your holiday weekend get out there in the sun folks its good for the spirit

even makes the other half more friendly

mookeywrench

People already work one day a week for the gov't when you consider payroll taxes.

comebackgirl

pandora wrote:

comebackgirl wrote:

I think it does apply to the topic, if your views on the issue are consistent and don't change based on whatever disagreement is being had in any given thread. You were speaking of small business owners; many in the helping profession are small business owners themselves. If they have to work for free one day per week, their businesses and profits would be disproportionately impacted. They often do pro bono work because it's part of their ethical credo, but requiring it of some small business owners and not others seems very biased. I also think that requiring this of everyone on public assistance misses the point of why many people are on assistance - it's a view from an ivory tower.

Yes I think it's important to have everyone in the country insured. Are you saying that this equates to having everyone work one day per week for free? I'm all for community organizing, I know the positive impact it can have. Many people see the intrinsic value of doing so, some may need external motivation (ie. tax breaks, recognition). I support encouraging people to do more, but passing a law to require it? How would you recommend the government go about doing that?

Might be less than one day a week if everyone works ... everyone

So you are for Obamacare that is passing a law requiring it though :?
How is that different?

It's a very socialist idea. Again - I love the spirit of everyone working together to help out. I don't think either candidate will be incorporating the idea into their platform though.

So in response to my question I'm inferring that you do support Obamacare and would want this plan enforced in the same manner?

Moonpig

pandora wrote:

Moonpig wrote:

Yikes Pandora, where do I even begin. Your insistence that all these outlets and opinions must be wrong, except ironically enough, your own, is indication enough of your stance.

The man was either mistaken, or lied. That seems to be the general gist of it. Independent foreign media are mostly somewhat in agreement of atleast that. But you are going to hold true to one article, about one point, of the opinion that you and only you can be right, seems a little silly.

Hey I can be wrong, and often am, and in no way afraid to admit it. Yet by your posts you seem to talk at people until they either move on to another discussion or give up.

Please don't try to psycoanalyse me now. I was only making a point that you seem to be in a minority of 1 with respect to the stance you are taking, much like the Akin thread. And I am not even referring to the train, I mean through popular opinion, oh yeah and ofcourse fact (but sure we can deal with that little gem another time).

Oh and by the way, disagreeing with me doesn't make you wrong, I am not that arrogant to believe I know everything, no matter what you feel - actually now that we are talking about it, try backing up those feelings you get with evidence. Not about wrong or right, disagree away.

I posted articles that explain how Ryan did not lie. It is not a feeling...
If you want to read the articles and my posts to support this fine, if not fine.
I have posted them but I could be wrong don't think you read them.
You come here with your mind made up by the media perhaps?
Maybe by party leaning perhaps?

I do neither, just investigate on my own..
this time I posted articles addressing the OP's thread.

You will find me always making up my own mind...
not what the masses think or the media.

As far as Akin you found me understanding what he meant
where he got his notions, investigating that.
I was not agreeing nor condoning. There is a huge difference.
I wanted to understand what the heck he meant from the moment I heard it.
Not trash talk him. Just me learning and understanding.


You won't find me on the rag train, that I don't enjoy.
Its a stupid waste of time,
a bunch of people enjoying putting someone down that they don't agree with or like,
doesn't take a lot of brains and no compassion at all.
Our media... good lord

I prefer positive points for all....
and yes there will be some for the Democrats also after I watch the convention,
hopefully I will learn new strategy that is going to bring
in the next four some real change.

What the feck???

Um are you claiming to be more enlightened than the masses? My leanings are to neither of your parties.

You are just as likely to be wrong, as anyone else. You are open to rash judgements, perceptions, limiting beliefs, just like us all.

From reading some of your posts I firmly believe that you have more than made your mind up, and are therefore looking for evidence that supports your perspective, including the patronizing manner in which you attempt to enlighten people. Take for instance the color of the sky, now I have an article here that says it is purple, now you can show me as much evidence as possible that it is actually blue, but hey, I don't care, because I have this one article that supports my view, and if you refuse to alter your perspective to suit mine, then I'm sorry for you and your closed uneducated mind.

And you know what, that's ok Pandora, it';s what makes you human, it's the way you try to hide it from others with convoluted thoughts and asinine perspective that gets peoples backs up.

Hell I become very judgemental when it comes to certain topics, like music and sport for instance. Or when I "try" win an argument with my girlfriend, but atleast I can admit it.

I'm sure this post will do nothing but draw another drawn out piece that attempts to say so much, but in reality, says very little. In conclusion, you are just like us all, the good, the bad and the ugly.....(ha, unintentionally topical high five)

comebackgirl

mookeywrench wrote:

People already work one day a week for the gov't when you consider payroll taxes.

and with this plan we'd be forgoing another 20% :? ...I think we might all need to be on public assistance then

mookeywrench

comebackgirl wrote:

mookeywrench wrote:

People already work one day a week for the gov't when you consider payroll taxes.

and with this plan we'd be forgoing another 20% :? ...I think we might all need to be on public assistance then

And then to add to that....businesses get to pay taxes of 8% wages paid to employees, then about 35% in taxes of whatever net income they bring in. Then the business owners get to pay about 30% in taxes of wages paid to themselves. Then you can factor in state and city taxes on top of federal taxes.

When a business owner sees about 45% of their gross income getting wiped out to taxes...they'd be crazy not to question if there's a spending issue with the gov't. How logical is it to ask that they fork over another 20% for the common good of society?

comebackgirl

mookeywrench wrote:

comebackgirl wrote:

mookeywrench wrote:

People already work one day a week for the gov't when you consider payroll taxes.

and with this plan we'd be forgoing another 20% :? ...I think we might all need to be on public assistance then

And then to add to that....businesses get to pay taxes of 8% wages paid to employees, then about 35% in taxes of whatever net income they bring in. Then the business owners get to pay about 30% in taxes of wages paid to themselves. Then you can factor in state and city taxes on top of federal taxes.

When a business owner sees about 45% of their gross income getting wiped out to taxes...they'd be crazy not to question if there's a spending issue with the gov't. How logical is it to ask that they fork over another 20% for the common good of society?

Yeah I think most business owners and workers would decide to give up the cause at that point. It would create learned helplessness. And it wouldn't be fair to require this of one type of business or set of professionals - you'd for sure see a sharp decline of people entering that field. It's not practical, but when I stated that before I was told that was a cop-op

Johnny Abruzzo

Pandora might say that Paul Ryan's statements were true... in his heart.