Correction: my income DID change under Obama. IT WENT DOWN. In the year the tax cuts expired, it was $120 less a month. Another year, in response to all the anti-teacher rhetoric because we're all living like Trump, the state shifted the burden of retirement contributions onto teachers -- another $50 in lowered benefits. In the year after the ACA, my school district overhauled its health benefits, so my premium increased by $30 for much shittier coverage, and next year they are implementing a $2000 deductible including office visits. So there goes that "benefit." Thanks, Obama, for all the hope and change I voted for.
excuse me...the tax cuts that you are talking about were a stimulus. That was always temporary. Obama didn't change anything...the GOP congress voted to let those cuts expire and that is what happened. They blasted Obama for not doing away with the expiration but if he would have extended it they would have blasted him for increasing the deficit.
I would bet that you pay very little federal income tax. If you have a child you are paying $0 income tax so quit exaggerating.
Jesus, what do I have to do, submit my pay stubs and W2 forms to you people? Get over yourselves!! I pay 33% of my income to the feds and state. Then I pay all those additional taxes on just plain old living.
Correction: my income DID change under Obama. IT WENT DOWN. In the year the tax cuts expired, it was $120 less a month. Another year, in response to all the anti-teacher rhetoric because we're all living like Trump, the state shifted the burden of retirement contributions onto teachers -- another $50 in lowered benefits. In the year after the ACA, my school district overhauled its health benefits, so my premium increased by $30 for much shittier coverage, and next year they are implementing a $2000 deductible including office visits. So there goes that "benefit." Thanks, Obama, for all the hope and change I voted for.
excuse me...the tax cuts that you are talking about were a stimulus. That was always temporary. Obama didn't change anything...the GOP congress voted to let those cuts expire and that is what happened. They blasted Obama for not doing away with the expiration but if he would have extended it they would have blasted him for increasing the deficit.
I would bet that you pay very little federal income tax. If you have a child you are paying $0 income tax so quit exaggerating.
Jesus, what do I have to do, submit my pay stubs and W2 forms to you people? Get over yourselves!! I pay 33% of my income to the feds and state. Then I pay all those additional taxes on just plain old living.
You've told us what you make....if you pay 33% income tax you are doing your taxes wrong.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
sooo ... what are you proposing!?? ... make the game EVEN more favourable to the rich so they will consider staying and not hiding money or leveraging loopholes? ...
Sorry, got distracted by life. Anyhoo, to wade back into it -
Simplify the tax code and stop worrying about legislating against hoggishness. Continuing to raise taxes on the rich and pretending that they don't have ways around it only further puts the middle class in a bind. Perhaps, if you make the actual tax rate less, there will be less need to "hide," avoid, etc and you can grow your base by both having less need to hide riches and more incentive to pay down the scale.
Look at it another way - If I'm rich and hoggish and want my million dollar boat, am I going to accept less net pay or just increase my pay (or hide it if you will) until my net pay matches my desired outcome? So, let's go with the latter. Now, if I can gross less to net more, I can either decrease prices on my goods or pay my staff more. Either way, the less rich and hoggish benefit (and for the truly hoggish, there's nothing you're ever going to do, so let's leave them out of this for a moment - they will move to the moon if that's what's necessary).
Now, that is a WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYY over simplification. And true pigs are going to be true pigs - we can't legislate against it now, so what makes you think you can legislate against it later?
Now, maybe this is a scheme where you lower income tax and increase sales tax, so everyone pays the same %. Eliminate loopholes, even eliminate the child tax credit (I love it and take advantage of it, but honestly, I don't get the concept - I decide to have children, so others give me a break?)
However, my massive tax plan is - stop spending money we don't have, so you don't need to continually need to consider raising taxes. Stop entitlement programs (you need some, but they have grown so outsized that a disincentive is created - 99 weeks of unemployment? Good lord - just 1 example.)
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Correction: my income DID change under Obama. IT WENT DOWN. In the year the tax cuts expired, it was $120 less a month. Another year, in response to all the anti-teacher rhetoric because we're all living like Trump, the state shifted the burden of retirement contributions onto teachers -- another $50 in lowered benefits. In the year after the ACA, my school district overhauled its health benefits, so my premium increased by $30 for much shittier coverage, and next year they are implementing a $2000 deductible including office visits. So there goes that "benefit." Thanks, Obama, for all the hope and change I voted for.
excuse me...the tax cuts that you are talking about were a stimulus. That was always temporary. Obama didn't change anything...the GOP congress voted to let those cuts expire and that is what happened. They blasted Obama for not doing away with the expiration but if he would have extended it they would have blasted him for increasing the deficit.
I would bet that you pay very little federal income tax. If you have a child you are paying $0 income tax so quit exaggerating.
Jesus, what do I have to do, submit my pay stubs and W2 forms to you people? Get over yourselves!! I pay 33% of my income to the feds and state. Then I pay all those additional taxes on just plain old living.
You've told us what you make....if you pay 33% income tax you are doing your taxes wrong.
Regardless if it's 33% or 15% - the point is this is middle class. When the rich go and "hide" their income from taxes, which direction is that tax rate going to go to cover the expenses?
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
keep laughing...it's the exact same plan that the repubs would have used. Romney was begging for it
thank you for pointing it out.
you would think the revisionists on here had never heard of romneycare before. :facepalm:
Facepalm all you want. The whole thing is a boon doggle, and this is the single biggest piece of shit that made me dislike Romney. He is a stupid Masshole.
I do enjoy how all your responses involve painting everyone in black and white brushes. Kind of makes you look foolish. Though it is telling that you think everyone thinks a certain way b/c they speak about certain things a certain way. The funding is irrelevant if you don't do the wrong headed method to begin with. And not to get on healthcare (though I realize I started it) - aside from being predominantly unfunded, it is a complete and utter failure at it's stated purpose and hidden agenda. It has clearly not bent the cost curve, and it clearly has not provided everyone (or even nearly everyone) coverage. And as rates continue to go up due the Actuarially correct pricing, it will be an even bigger failure. Just in time for the next Administration to clean it up. you think Obama had to clean up after Bush? Wait until the next Administration gets this pile of shit thrown at its door. Funny how some very critical components go into effect - next year.
Let's see some more Pioneer ACOs and Federally backed Exchange Health Plans go out of business and leave tax payers holding the bag.
Anyway, just an example of spending money we don't have foolishly. I'm sure the so called rich will just accept another tax hike.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
sooo ... what are you proposing!?? ... make the game EVEN more favourable to the rich so they will consider staying and not hiding money or leveraging loopholes? ...
Sorry, got distracted by life. Anyhoo, to wade back into it -
Simplify the tax code and stop worrying about legislating against hoggishness. Continuing to raise taxes on the rich and pretending that they don't have ways around it only further puts the middle class in a bind. Perhaps, if you make the actual tax rate less, there will be less need to "hide," avoid, etc and you can grow your base by both having less need to hide riches and more incentive to pay down the scale.
Look at it another way - If I'm rich and hoggish and want my million dollar boat, am I going to accept less net pay or just increase my pay (or hide it if you will) until my net pay matches my desired outcome? So, let's go with the latter. Now, if I can gross less to net more, I can either decrease prices on my goods or pay my staff more. Either way, the less rich and hoggish benefit (and for the truly hoggish, there's nothing you're ever going to do, so let's leave them out of this for a moment - they will move to the moon if that's what's necessary).
Now, that is a WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYY over simplification. And true pigs are going to be true pigs - we can't legislate against it now, so what makes you think you can legislate against it later?
Now, maybe this is a scheme where you lower income tax and increase sales tax, so everyone pays the same %. Eliminate loopholes, even eliminate the child tax credit (I love it and take advantage of it, but honestly, I don't get the concept - I decide to have children, so others give me a break?)
However, my massive tax plan is - stop spending money we don't have, so you don't need to continually need to consider raising taxes. Stop entitlement programs (you need some, but they have grown so outsized that a disincentive is created - 99 weeks of unemployment? Good lord - just 1 example.)
sooo ... basically, because the rich are greedy assholes ... we should create a tax system that makes them happy!? ... don't take this the wrong way but I totally appreciate and understand your position here and there is reasonable logic to it ... and it makes a lot of sense in so much as we live in a world where people are shit ...
still, in the end - what are you going to be left with? ... still a populace of massive income disparity and wealth ... which ultimately leads to societal failures ...
Correction: my income DID change under Obama. IT WENT DOWN. In the year the tax cuts expired, it was $120 less a month. Another year, in response to all the anti-teacher rhetoric because we're all living like Trump, the state shifted the burden of retirement contributions onto teachers -- another $50 in lowered benefits. In the year after the ACA, my school district overhauled its health benefits, so my premium increased by $30 for much shittier coverage, and next year they are implementing a $2000 deductible including office visits. So there goes that "benefit." Thanks, Obama, for all the hope and change I voted for.
excuse me...the tax cuts that you are talking about were a stimulus. That was always temporary. Obama didn't change anything...the GOP congress voted to let those cuts expire and that is what happened. They blasted Obama for not doing away with the expiration but if he would have extended it they would have blasted him for increasing the deficit.
I would bet that you pay very little federal income tax. If you have a child you are paying $0 income tax so quit exaggerating.
Jesus, what do I have to do, submit my pay stubs and W2 forms to you people? Get over yourselves!! I pay 33% of my income to the feds and state. Then I pay all those additional taxes on just plain old living.
You've told us what you make....if you pay 33% income tax you are doing your taxes wrong.
Regardless if it's 33% or 15% - the point is this is middle class. When the rich go and "hide" their income from taxes, which direction is that tax rate going to go to cover the expenses?
Thank you for understanding. I totally get your point, and I agree with you completely that tax hikes on the rich ALWAYS suck the middle class dry.
In response to Gern: I just calculated all the REQUIRED deductions coming out of my paycheck, requirements that the government decided I have to have:
Fed taxes= 18% FICA = 6% Medicare = 1% State tax = 5% Health plan and state pension =5% Disability insurance = 1%
So, in my math, that is 39% of my paycheck GONE before I even leave the building. Don't tell me I'm doing my taxes wrong. They take it against my will.
Then I go to do my taxes in the spring. Even though the government already knows what they took from me, I have to fill out a paper to see if they get more. As I file these taxes, I see the government giving all kinds of everybody something back in the form of credits, but I don't get shit. Why? Because the government has decided certain behaviors should be rewarded over others. That is a fucked up system.
Correction: my income DID change under Obama. IT WENT DOWN. In the year the tax cuts expired, it was $120 less a month. Another year, in response to all the anti-teacher rhetoric because we're all living like Trump, the state shifted the burden of retirement contributions onto teachers -- another $50 in lowered benefits. In the year after the ACA, my school district overhauled its health benefits, so my premium increased by $30 for much shittier coverage, and next year they are implementing a $2000 deductible including office visits. So there goes that "benefit." Thanks, Obama, for all the hope and change I voted for.
excuse me...the tax cuts that you are talking about were a stimulus. That was always temporary. Obama didn't change anything...the GOP congress voted to let those cuts expire and that is what happened. They blasted Obama for not doing away with the expiration but if he would have extended it they would have blasted him for increasing the deficit.
I would bet that you pay very little federal income tax. If you have a child you are paying $0 income tax so quit exaggerating.
Jesus, what do I have to do, submit my pay stubs and W2 forms to you people? Get over yourselves!! I pay 33% of my income to the feds and state. Then I pay all those additional taxes on just plain old living.
You've told us what you make....if you pay 33% income tax you are doing your taxes wrong.
Regardless if it's 33% or 15% - the point is this is middle class. When the rich go and "hide" their income from taxes, which direction is that tax rate going to go to cover the expenses?
Thank you for understanding. I totally get your point, and I agree with you completely that tax hikes on the rich ALWAYS suck the middle class dry.
In response to Gern: I just calculated all the REQUIRED deductions coming out of my paycheck, requirements that the government decided I have to have:
Fed taxes= 18% FICA = 6% Medicare = 1% State tax = 5% Health plan and state pension =5% Disability insurance = 1%
So, in my math, that is 39% of my paycheck GONE before I even leave the building. Don't tell me I'm doing my taxes wrong. They take it against my will.
Then I go to do my taxes in the spring. Even though the government already knows what they took from me, I have to fill out a paper to see if they get more. As I file these taxes, I see the government giving all kinds of everybody something back in the form of credits, but I don't get shit. Why? Because the government has decided certain behaviors should be rewarded over others. That is a fucked up system.
so first off...your withholding % isn't what you are technically paying...it's what you are depositing toward what you owe. Maybe you get a refund and maybe you don't....if you don't then the withholding % is accurate.
The person I was responding to suggested that they make about $36K/year....my point was that if they filed with a child their tax would be zero. I do taxes for a living so that's a fact.
and by the way...that totals 36%
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
sooo ... what are you proposing!?? ... make the game EVEN more favourable to the rich so they will consider staying and not hiding money or leveraging loopholes? ...
Sorry, got distracted by life. Anyhoo, to wade back into it -
Simplify the tax code and stop worrying about legislating against hoggishness. Continuing to raise taxes on the rich and pretending that they don't have ways around it only further puts the middle class in a bind. Perhaps, if you make the actual tax rate less, there will be less need to "hide," avoid, etc and you can grow your base by both having less need to hide riches and more incentive to pay down the scale.
Look at it another way - If I'm rich and hoggish and want my million dollar boat, am I going to accept less net pay or just increase my pay (or hide it if you will) until my net pay matches my desired outcome? So, let's go with the latter. Now, if I can gross less to net more, I can either decrease prices on my goods or pay my staff more. Either way, the less rich and hoggish benefit (and for the truly hoggish, there's nothing you're ever going to do, so let's leave them out of this for a moment - they will move to the moon if that's what's necessary).
Now, that is a WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYY over simplification. And true pigs are going to be true pigs - we can't legislate against it now, so what makes you think you can legislate against it later?
Now, maybe this is a scheme where you lower income tax and increase sales tax, so everyone pays the same %. Eliminate loopholes, even eliminate the child tax credit (I love it and take advantage of it, but honestly, I don't get the concept - I decide to have children, so others give me a break?)
However, my massive tax plan is - stop spending money we don't have, so you don't need to continually need to consider raising taxes. Stop entitlement programs (you need some, but they have grown so outsized that a disincentive is created - 99 weeks of unemployment? Good lord - just 1 example.)
sooo ... basically, because the rich are greedy assholes ... we should create a tax system that makes them happy!? ... don't take this the wrong way but I totally appreciate and understand your position here and there is reasonable logic to it ... and it makes a lot of sense in so much as we live in a world where people are shit ...
still, in the end - what are you going to be left with? ... still a populace of massive income disparity and wealth ... which ultimately leads to societal failures ...
Well, you could read it that way. Honestly, I don't mind a progressive tax. But, at some point you have to realize there are actually diminishing returns. And either way, the Middle Class has to bear the brunt. You cannot simply continue to spend money you don't have. And anticipating the prospects of taxing the rich more is foolhardy at best. We all seem to be agreeing that the truly rich have the means and capability to do what they can to avoid at least a portion of taxes.
We should also simplify things to make enforcement easier (not easy, but easier). We would spend more trying to chase those dollars down than they would net us. The last thing we need is more bureaucracy.
So, I'm not in fact saying - make a system that makes anyone happy (I mean, really, c'mon). But, what I am saying is some prudent, intelligent tax code thinking (which I will admit is beyond me) is wiser than simply spending and crying for higher taxes on the truly rich that end up impacting the middle class more b/c someone has to pay at least the part of the bill the gov't intends on paying.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
sooo ... what are you proposing!?? ... make the game EVEN more favourable to the rich so they will consider staying and not hiding money or leveraging loopholes? ...
Sorry, got distracted by life. Anyhoo, to wade back into it -
Simplify the tax code and stop worrying about legislating against hoggishness. Continuing to raise taxes on the rich and pretending that they don't have ways around it only further puts the middle class in a bind. Perhaps, if you make the actual tax rate less, there will be less need to "hide," avoid, etc and you can grow your base by both having less need to hide riches and more incentive to pay down the scale.
Look at it another way - If I'm rich and hoggish and want my million dollar boat, am I going to accept less net pay or just increase my pay (or hide it if you will) until my net pay matches my desired outcome? So, let's go with the latter. Now, if I can gross less to net more, I can either decrease prices on my goods or pay my staff more. Either way, the less rich and hoggish benefit (and for the truly hoggish, there's nothing you're ever going to do, so let's leave them out of this for a moment - they will move to the moon if that's what's necessary).
Now, that is a WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYY over simplification. And true pigs are going to be true pigs - we can't legislate against it now, so what makes you think you can legislate against it later?
Now, maybe this is a scheme where you lower income tax and increase sales tax, so everyone pays the same %. Eliminate loopholes, even eliminate the child tax credit (I love it and take advantage of it, but honestly, I don't get the concept - I decide to have children, so others give me a break?)
However, my massive tax plan is - stop spending money we don't have, so you don't need to continually need to consider raising taxes. Stop entitlement programs (you need some, but they have grown so outsized that a disincentive is created - 99 weeks of unemployment? Good lord - just 1 example.)
sooo ... basically, because the rich are greedy assholes ... we should create a tax system that makes them happy!? ... don't take this the wrong way but I totally appreciate and understand your position here and there is reasonable logic to it ... and it makes a lot of sense in so much as we live in a world where people are shit ...
still, in the end - what are you going to be left with? ... still a populace of massive income disparity and wealth ... which ultimately leads to societal failures ...
Well, you could read it that way. Honestly, I don't mind a progressive tax. But, at some point you have to realize there are actually diminishing returns. And either way, the Middle Class has to bear the brunt. You cannot simply continue to spend money you don't have. And anticipating the prospects of taxing the rich more is foolhardy at best. We all seem to be agreeing that the truly rich have the means and capability to do what they can to avoid at least a portion of taxes.
We should also simplify things to make enforcement easier (not easy, but easier). We would spend more trying to chase those dollars down than they would net us. The last thing we need is more bureaucracy.
So, I'm not in fact saying - make a system that makes anyone happy (I mean, really, c'mon). But, what I am saying is some prudent, intelligent tax code thinking (which I will admit is beyond me) is wiser than simply spending and crying for higher taxes on the truly rich that end up impacting the middle class more b/c someone has to pay at least the part of the bill the gov't intends on paying.
that's really not true....most of the rich are paid just like you are via W-2
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
Who are all of you to judge how I live? My rent alone in the DC metro area, for a 1 bedroom apartment built in 1986, is $1500. If trying to live by myself as single 46 year-old woman in the community where I work is "living like Trump," then just go fuck you if you choose to live in a trailer in the woods among the Amish. I don't even know why I bother to participate in these discussions. These threads are full of nothing but condescending know-it-alls who think they are going to change the world by telling everybody else how to live and breathe, including how to run my own household finances on a salary that hasn't changed since 2008, no thanks to Obama and his grand economic succces. I should be so lucky to know everything.
I asked if you were. Settle down Beavis.
For somebody who told us all how it is, you certainly don't like it when others tell you how it is.
If you think a Republican Government cares more about teachers salaries at public schools and the middle class tax burden than Democrats....... I will tell you how it is, you are completely wrong.
sooo ... what are you proposing!?? ... make the game EVEN more favourable to the rich so they will consider staying and not hiding money or leveraging loopholes? ...
Sorry, got distracted by life. Anyhoo, to wade back into it -
Simplify the tax code and stop worrying about legislating against hoggishness. Continuing to raise taxes on the rich and pretending that they don't have ways around it only further puts the middle class in a bind. Perhaps, if you make the actual tax rate less, there will be less need to "hide," avoid, etc and you can grow your base by both having less need to hide riches and more incentive to pay down the scale.
Look at it another way - If I'm rich and hoggish and want my million dollar boat, am I going to accept less net pay or just increase my pay (or hide it if you will) until my net pay matches my desired outcome? So, let's go with the latter. Now, if I can gross less to net more, I can either decrease prices on my goods or pay my staff more. Either way, the less rich and hoggish benefit (and for the truly hoggish, there's nothing you're ever going to do, so let's leave them out of this for a moment - they will move to the moon if that's what's necessary).
Now, that is a WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYY over simplification. And true pigs are going to be true pigs - we can't legislate against it now, so what makes you think you can legislate against it later?
Now, maybe this is a scheme where you lower income tax and increase sales tax, so everyone pays the same %. Eliminate loopholes, even eliminate the child tax credit (I love it and take advantage of it, but honestly, I don't get the concept - I decide to have children, so others give me a break?)
However, my massive tax plan is - stop spending money we don't have, so you don't need to continually need to consider raising taxes. Stop entitlement programs (you need some, but they have grown so outsized that a disincentive is created - 99 weeks of unemployment? Good lord - just 1 example.)
sooo ... basically, because the rich are greedy assholes ... we should create a tax system that makes them happy!? ... don't take this the wrong way but I totally appreciate and understand your position here and there is reasonable logic to it ... and it makes a lot of sense in so much as we live in a world where people are shit ...
still, in the end - what are you going to be left with? ... still a populace of massive income disparity and wealth ... which ultimately leads to societal failures ...
Well, you could read it that way. Honestly, I don't mind a progressive tax. But, at some point you have to realize there are actually diminishing returns. And either way, the Middle Class has to bear the brunt. You cannot simply continue to spend money you don't have. And anticipating the prospects of taxing the rich more is foolhardy at best. We all seem to be agreeing that the truly rich have the means and capability to do what they can to avoid at least a portion of taxes.
We should also simplify things to make enforcement easier (not easy, but easier). We would spend more trying to chase those dollars down than they would net us. The last thing we need is more bureaucracy.
So, I'm not in fact saying - make a system that makes anyone happy (I mean, really, c'mon). But, what I am saying is some prudent, intelligent tax code thinking (which I will admit is beyond me) is wiser than simply spending and crying for higher taxes on the truly rich that end up impacting the middle class more b/c someone has to pay at least the part of the bill the gov't intends on paying.
but it's more than just changing the tax code ... it boils down to fundamentally how society is organized ... you can be heavily taxed and lightly taxed and they could both be "successful" on the basis that everyone subscribes to the principles behind the tax structure ...
of course, you are absolutely correct in that the gov't needs to spend efficiently and wisely and not waste tax dollars ... i think you would gain more traction focusing on that then trying to change a tax system that will inherently favour one group over another ...
sooo ... what are you proposing!?? ... make the game EVEN more favourable to the rich so they will consider staying and not hiding money or leveraging loopholes? ...
Sorry, got distracted by life. Anyhoo, to wade back into it -
Simplify the tax code and stop worrying about legislating against hoggishness. Continuing to raise taxes on the rich and pretending that they don't have ways around it only further puts the middle class in a bind. Perhaps, if you make the actual tax rate less, there will be less need to "hide," avoid, etc and you can grow your base by both having less need to hide riches and more incentive to pay down the scale.
Look at it another way - If I'm rich and hoggish and want my million dollar boat, am I going to accept less net pay or just increase my pay (or hide it if you will) until my net pay matches my desired outcome? So, let's go with the latter. Now, if I can gross less to net more, I can either decrease prices on my goods or pay my staff more. Either way, the less rich and hoggish benefit (and for the truly hoggish, there's nothing you're ever going to do, so let's leave them out of this for a moment - they will move to the moon if that's what's necessary).
Now, that is a WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYY over simplification. And true pigs are going to be true pigs - we can't legislate against it now, so what makes you think you can legislate against it later?
Now, maybe this is a scheme where you lower income tax and increase sales tax, so everyone pays the same %. Eliminate loopholes, even eliminate the child tax credit (I love it and take advantage of it, but honestly, I don't get the concept - I decide to have children, so others give me a break?)
However, my massive tax plan is - stop spending money we don't have, so you don't need to continually need to consider raising taxes. Stop entitlement programs (you need some, but they have grown so outsized that a disincentive is created - 99 weeks of unemployment? Good lord - just 1 example.)
sooo ... basically, because the rich are greedy assholes ... we should create a tax system that makes them happy!? ... don't take this the wrong way but I totally appreciate and understand your position here and there is reasonable logic to it ... and it makes a lot of sense in so much as we live in a world where people are shit ...
still, in the end - what are you going to be left with? ... still a populace of massive income disparity and wealth ... which ultimately leads to societal failures ...
Well, you could read it that way. Honestly, I don't mind a progressive tax. But, at some point you have to realize there are actually diminishing returns. And either way, the Middle Class has to bear the brunt. You cannot simply continue to spend money you don't have. And anticipating the prospects of taxing the rich more is foolhardy at best. We all seem to be agreeing that the truly rich have the means and capability to do what they can to avoid at least a portion of taxes.
We should also simplify things to make enforcement easier (not easy, but easier). We would spend more trying to chase those dollars down than they would net us. The last thing we need is more bureaucracy.
So, I'm not in fact saying - make a system that makes anyone happy (I mean, really, c'mon). But, what I am saying is some prudent, intelligent tax code thinking (which I will admit is beyond me) is wiser than simply spending and crying for higher taxes on the truly rich that end up impacting the middle class more b/c someone has to pay at least the part of the bill the gov't intends on paying.
that's really not true....most of the rich are paid just like you are via W-2
I think you and I define rich very differently. I don't think Bill Gates receives a W-2.
I love the revenue projection. How hard do you think it is for a millionaire to get an address outside LA County if they didn't want to pay this? Or, worse, what if they decided to move their business because of it? Well, let's be honest - that's where the tax breaks negotiations begin..... The other part I love is people approving the spending of other people's money - 76% approve! Really - so, folks are approving spending someone else's money b/c they feel those people have too much money? Who pays their salaries?
I'm sure all the liberal movie stars will willingly keep their LA County addresses as their main tax paying addresses.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Who are all of you to judge how I live? My rent alone in the DC metro area, for a 1 bedroom apartment built in 1986, is $1500. If trying to live by myself as single 46 year-old woman in the community where I work is "living like Trump," then just go fuck you if you choose to live in a trailer in the woods among the Amish. I don't even know why I bother to participate in these discussions. These threads are full of nothing but condescending know-it-alls who think they are going to change the world by telling everybody else how to live and breathe, including how to run my own household finances on a salary that hasn't changed since 2008, no thanks to Obama and his grand economic succces. I should be so lucky to know everything.
I asked if you were. Settle down Beavis.
For somebody who told us all how it is, you certainly don't like it when others tell you how it is.
If you think a Republican Government cares more about teachers salaries at public schools and the middle class tax burden than Democrats....... I will tell you how it is, you are completely wrong.
I've talked about myself and my experiences. I don't tell people they're lying or doing something wrong with their life if their experience isn't like mine.
And no, I don't think a Republican or Democratic government makes a difference. Both parties are equal opportunity thieves. I live in one of the most conservative states in the country, and ironically one of the highest taxed. Income tax, sales tax, property tax. We've got them all. That's why I said I would estimate at least 50% of my income going toward some form of taxation, if I were to save every receipt and add it all up (with a calculator, so it's right).
keep laughing...it's the exact same plan that the repubs would have used. Romney was begging for it
thank you for pointing it out.
you would think the revisionists on here had never heard of romneycare before. :facepalm:
Facepalm all you want. The whole thing is a boon doggle, and this is the single biggest piece of shit that made me dislike Romney. He is a stupid Masshole.
I do enjoy how all your responses involve painting everyone in black and white brushes. Kind of makes you look foolish. Though it is telling that you think everyone thinks a certain way b/c they speak about certain things a certain way. The funding is irrelevant if you don't do the wrong headed method to begin with. And not to get on healthcare (though I realize I started it) - aside from being predominantly unfunded, it is a complete and utter failure at it's stated purpose and hidden agenda. It has clearly not bent the cost curve, and it clearly has not provided everyone (or even nearly everyone) coverage. And as rates continue to go up due the Actuarially correct pricing, it will be an even bigger failure. Just in time for the next Administration to clean it up. you think Obama had to clean up after Bush? Wait until the next Administration gets this pile of shit thrown at its door. Funny how some very critical components go into effect - next year.
Let's see some more Pioneer ACOs and Federally backed Exchange Health Plans go out of business and leave tax payers holding the bag.
Anyway, just an example of spending money we don't have foolishly. I'm sure the so called rich will just accept another tax hike.
romney would have won had he not run away from his crowning legislative achievement. his party of regressives made him run away from something that was successful in Mass and say that it would never work if implemented across the US.
you know why it is not working? because intransigent governors are refusing federal money to finance the exchanges. so, rather than take federal money to insure everyone who does not have private insurance, they would rather pass along more costs to those paying for insurance through their work, and making those without insurance go without. good plan, regressives.
i apologize if painting with black and white brushes makes me look foolish to you. i couldn't care any less. i have had it with regressives holding my country back. i am embarrassed that so many of my countrymen complain about the taxes they are paying that goes to benefit other people. selfishness is the hallmark of conservatism. this is why the gop will not gain the white house for a generation. selfishness does not translate well across all 50 states.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
keep laughing...it's the exact same plan that the repubs would have used. Romney was begging for it
thank you for pointing it out.
you would think the revisionists on here had never heard of romneycare before. :facepalm:
Facepalm all you want. The whole thing is a boon doggle, and this is the single biggest piece of shit that made me dislike Romney. He is a stupid Masshole.
I do enjoy how all your responses involve painting everyone in black and white brushes. Kind of makes you look foolish. Though it is telling that you think everyone thinks a certain way b/c they speak about certain things a certain way. The funding is irrelevant if you don't do the wrong headed method to begin with. And not to get on healthcare (though I realize I started it) - aside from being predominantly unfunded, it is a complete and utter failure at it's stated purpose and hidden agenda. It has clearly not bent the cost curve, and it clearly has not provided everyone (or even nearly everyone) coverage. And as rates continue to go up due the Actuarially correct pricing, it will be an even bigger failure. Just in time for the next Administration to clean it up. you think Obama had to clean up after Bush? Wait until the next Administration gets this pile of shit thrown at its door. Funny how some very critical components go into effect - next year.
Let's see some more Pioneer ACOs and Federally backed Exchange Health Plans go out of business and leave tax payers holding the bag.
Anyway, just an example of spending money we don't have foolishly. I'm sure the so called rich will just accept another tax hike.
romney would have won had he not run away from his crowning legislative achievement. his party of regressives made him run away from something that was successful in Mass and say that it would never work if implemented across the US.
you know why it is not working? because intransigent governors are refusing federal money to finance the exchanges. so, rather than take federal money to insure everyone who does not have private insurance, they would rather pass along more costs to those paying for insurance through their work, and making those without insurance go without. good plan, regressives.
i apologize if painting with black and white brushes makes me look foolish to you. i couldn't care any less. i have had it with regressives holding my country back. i am embarrassed that so many of my countrymen complain about the taxes they are paying that goes to benefit other people. selfishness is the hallmark of conservatism. this is why the gop will not gain the white house for a generation. selfishness does not translate well across all 50 states.
Yeah, it's not the fact that expenses >revenue regardless if the governors accepted funds or not
Why would a liberal worry about that equation.
And to get further into that, at least those governors are being fiscally responsible. What happens when the fed money is phased out? Then who pays? And what does that have to do with the increasing exchange subsidies when rates go up?
Post edited by EdsonNascimento on
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
I saw a news report several months back talking about how rich get around taxes. Its not that they don't get W2's, or hide their income or anything like that. They are so rich that their hobbies get them tax breaks. They used Bon Jovi and Springsteen as two examples, both who pay a combined total less that what I pay in tax according to the report. One has a bee farm on their land so they can make and use their own honey, and the other had several horses that qualified as a "ranch" according to tax codes just to give a couple examples they used. I didn't do any research, just what the news report said (and it wasn't Fox News), and I believe it was referring to property tax only (and possibly on only some of their homes and not all, I can't remember for sure), and not all income tax, because that would be too ridiculous if they avoided all taxes because of a little bee farm. Those are some of the tax breaks that annoy me. You get so rich you don't know what to do, so you decide to open up your own distillery or winery as a hobby in a second vacation home, and now that vacation home qualifies as a business and all the expenses that go with your new vacation home is now a tax write off, even though it is less than 1% of your income-or even lose money on the "business" and get even more tax breaks. Not that I blame anyone, if the tax laws allowed me to not pay taxes, I wouldn't either.
Who are all of you to judge how I live? My rent alone in the DC metro area, for a 1 bedroom apartment built in 1986, is $1500. If trying to live by myself as single 46 year-old woman in the community where I work is "living like Trump," then just go fuck you if you choose to live in a trailer in the woods among the Amish. I don't even know why I bother to participate in these discussions. These threads are full of nothing but condescending know-it-alls who think they are going to change the world by telling everybody else how to live and breathe, including how to run my own household finances on a salary that hasn't changed since 2008, no thanks to Obama and his grand economic succces. I should be so lucky to know everything.
Hahaha don't knock it till you try it! I actually literally do live in a "trailer" in the woods among the Amish!
Seriously, I do.
We own a 1400 sq ft manufactured home with a full basement, a detached 4 car garage, and 5 acres, mostly wooded. I have garden space of about 650 sq ft that provides me with literally about a ton of produce every year, about 20 gallons per year of wild black raspberries, and as much deer and turkey as I care to harvest. The mortgage payment to own the house and land is less than half what you pay monthly to rent a 1 bedroom apartment.
I'm not judging you, and I wasn't intending to call you a liar or imply that you were being dishonest, I just saw that things weren't adding up in my mind. Knowing that you choose to live in a very expensive region makes it come into focus better.
If you move out of the city life will be a breeze!
sooo ... what are you proposing!?? ... make the game EVEN more favourable to the rich so they will consider staying and not hiding money or leveraging loopholes? ...
Sorry, got distracted by life. Anyhoo, to wade back into it -
Simplify the tax code and stop worrying about legislating against hoggishness. Continuing to raise taxes on the rich and pretending that they don't have ways around it only further puts the middle class in a bind. Perhaps, if you make the actual tax rate less, there will be less need to "hide," avoid, etc and you can grow your base by both having less need to hide riches and more incentive to pay down the scale.
Look at it another way - If I'm rich and hoggish and want my million dollar boat, am I going to accept less net pay or just increase my pay (or hide it if you will) until my net pay matches my desired outcome? So, let's go with the latter. Now, if I can gross less to net more, I can either decrease prices on my goods or pay my staff more. Either way, the less rich and hoggish benefit (and for the truly hoggish, there's nothing you're ever going to do, so let's leave them out of this for a moment - they will move to the moon if that's what's necessary).
Now, that is a WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYY over simplification. And true pigs are going to be true pigs - we can't legislate against it now, so what makes you think you can legislate against it later?
Now, maybe this is a scheme where you lower income tax and increase sales tax, so everyone pays the same %. Eliminate loopholes, even eliminate the child tax credit (I love it and take advantage of it, but honestly, I don't get the concept - I decide to have children, so others give me a break?)
However, my massive tax plan is - stop spending money we don't have, so you don't need to continually need to consider raising taxes. Stop entitlement programs (you need some, but they have grown so outsized that a disincentive is created - 99 weeks of unemployment? Good lord - just 1 example.)
keep laughing...it's the exact same plan that the repubs would have used. Romney was begging for it
thank you for pointing it out.
you would think the revisionists on here had never heard of romneycare before. :facepalm:
Facepalm all you want. The whole thing is a boon doggle, and this is the single biggest piece of shit that made me dislike Romney. He is a stupid Masshole.
I do enjoy how all your responses involve painting everyone in black and white brushes. Kind of makes you look foolish. Though it is telling that you think everyone thinks a certain way b/c they speak about certain things a certain way. The funding is irrelevant if you don't do the wrong headed method to begin with. And not to get on healthcare (though I realize I started it) - aside from being predominantly unfunded, it is a complete and utter failure at it's stated purpose and hidden agenda. It has clearly not bent the cost curve, and it clearly has not provided everyone (or even nearly everyone) coverage. And as rates continue to go up due the Actuarially correct pricing, it will be an even bigger failure. Just in time for the next Administration to clean it up. you think Obama had to clean up after Bush? Wait until the next Administration gets this pile of shit thrown at its door. Funny how some very critical components go into effect - next year.
Let's see some more Pioneer ACOs and Federally backed Exchange Health Plans go out of business and leave tax payers holding the bag.
Anyway, just an example of spending money we don't have foolishly. I'm sure the so called rich will just accept another tax hike.
If I remember right, you said you're in the health insurance biz. My notion is that the ACA is a step towards a single payer system. What do you think of that? The private industry doesn't seem to be able to reduce costs, and the ACA puts it out to the public that we're all in.
The number of emigrants cited in the article is small. And to answer your question in terms of your analogy, the bartender invests his earnings upgrading the infrastructure of his bar attracting new customers. The opposite approach, lower prices and don't keep up the bar, then the bar turns into a dive.
Correction: my income DID change under Obama. IT WENT DOWN. In the year the tax cuts expired, it was $120 less a month. Another year, in response to all the anti-teacher rhetoric because we're all living like Trump, the state shifted the burden of retirement contributions onto teachers -- another $50 in lowered benefits. In the year after the ACA, my school district overhauled its health benefits, so my premium increased by $30 for much shittier coverage, and next year they are implementing a $2000 deductible including office visits. So there goes that "benefit." Thanks, Obama, for all the hope and change I voted for.
excuse me...the tax cuts that you are talking about were a stimulus. That was always temporary. Obama didn't change anything...the GOP congress voted to let those cuts expire and that is what happened. They blasted Obama for not doing away with the expiration but if he would have extended it they would have blasted him for increasing the deficit.
I would bet that you pay very little federal income tax. If you have a child you are paying $0 income tax so quit exaggerating.
Jesus, what do I have to do, submit my pay stubs and W2 forms to you people? Get over yourselves!! I pay 33% of my income to the feds and state. Then I pay all those additional taxes on just plain old living.
You've told us what you make....if you pay 33% income tax you are doing your taxes wrong.
Regardless if it's 33% or 15% - the point is this is middle class. When the rich go and "hide" their income from taxes, which direction is that tax rate going to go to cover the expenses?
Thank you for understanding. I totally get your point, and I agree with you completely that tax hikes on the rich ALWAYS suck the middle class dry.
In response to Gern: I just calculated all the REQUIRED deductions coming out of my paycheck, requirements that the government decided I have to have:
Fed taxes= 18% FICA = 6% Medicare = 1% State tax = 5% Health plan and state pension =5% Disability insurance = 1%
So, in my math, that is 39% of my paycheck GONE before I even leave the building. Don't tell me I'm doing my taxes wrong. They take it against my will.
Then I go to do my taxes in the spring. Even though the government already knows what they took from me, I have to fill out a paper to see if they get more. As I file these taxes, I see the government giving all kinds of everybody something back in the form of credits, but I don't get shit. Why? Because the government has decided certain behaviors should be rewarded over others. That is a fucked up system.
well put just think what it costs to own a car? tax at time of purchase property tax yearly emissions registration...every 2 years drivers license...every 4 insurance gas...taxed oil...taxed maintenance...taxed
you get the pleasure of going work so that all these agencies can tell you they are overworked and underpaid. after that $1 is earned, take home...it's taxed every time it comes out of you pocket
You're complaining because of the costs associated with driving after you choose to drive? And you'd like to see poor families with kids pay more in taxes?
You're complaining because of the costs associated with driving after you choose to drive? And you'd like to see poor families with kids pay more in taxes?
I'm not sure about the poster above, but my answer to the question is no, I don't want to see anyone pay more in taxes. Poor people drive, too. They shouldn't be taxed for owning a car, either, after they've paid a tax for buying the car. That's the point . . . the excessive taxation hurts everybody.
But what do you use to determine excessive taxation? The individual tax rate for Americans is relatively low compared to other modernized countries. Specific to cars, gas tax and fees associated with owning a car only covers about 50 -60% of the cost of building and maintaining roads because that crap's expensive and people don't want to pay for it. Don't get me started on our addiction/dependence on cars!
the individual rate for the taxes is just one tax. it's endless. think of all these government agencies that are there solely to collect. company pays it, then you pay it as it's passed along. you also get the privilege hiring someone to figure it out. and possibly have to prove it. the car is one item. poor people were mentioned...how's the penny and a half gonna fly on sugar drinks...close to a $1 on 64 ounces. if money was properly spent, no one would say a word on taxes in general, but it's way too far gone. i live in ct and we are watching in real time this state circling the drain and we have high taxes, but, we have even more people feeding off the teet and putting nothing in.
I'm referring to individual tax rate as in what individuals pay in overall taxes. I can think of two agencies that are there solely to collect taxes, the federal department of revenue and your state dept. of revenue. Your post is kind of all over the place. And your state is cutting the budget due to less revenue, isn't that what you want?
Comments
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
Simplify the tax code and stop worrying about legislating against hoggishness. Continuing to raise taxes on the rich and pretending that they don't have ways around it only further puts the middle class in a bind. Perhaps, if you make the actual tax rate less, there will be less need to "hide," avoid, etc and you can grow your base by both having less need to hide riches and more incentive to pay down the scale.
Look at it another way - If I'm rich and hoggish and want my million dollar boat, am I going to accept less net pay or just increase my pay (or hide it if you will) until my net pay matches my desired outcome? So, let's go with the latter. Now, if I can gross less to net more, I can either decrease prices on my goods or pay my staff more. Either way, the less rich and hoggish benefit (and for the truly hoggish, there's nothing you're ever going to do, so let's leave them out of this for a moment - they will move to the moon if that's what's necessary).
Now, that is a WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYY over simplification. And true pigs are going to be true pigs - we can't legislate against it now, so what makes you think you can legislate against it later?
Now, maybe this is a scheme where you lower income tax and increase sales tax, so everyone pays the same %. Eliminate loopholes, even eliminate the child tax credit (I love it and take advantage of it, but honestly, I don't get the concept - I decide to have children, so others give me a break?)
However, my massive tax plan is - stop spending money we don't have, so you don't need to continually need to consider raising taxes. Stop entitlement programs (you need some, but they have grown so outsized that a disincentive is created - 99 weeks of unemployment? Good lord - just 1 example.)
I do enjoy how all your responses involve painting everyone in black and white brushes. Kind of makes you look foolish. Though it is telling that you think everyone thinks a certain way b/c they speak about certain things a certain way. The funding is irrelevant if you don't do the wrong headed method to begin with. And not to get on healthcare (though I realize I started it) - aside from being predominantly unfunded, it is a complete and utter failure at it's stated purpose and hidden agenda. It has clearly not bent the cost curve, and it clearly has not provided everyone (or even nearly everyone) coverage. And as rates continue to go up due the Actuarially correct pricing, it will be an even bigger failure. Just in time for the next Administration to clean it up. you think Obama had to clean up after Bush? Wait until the next Administration gets this pile of shit thrown at its door. Funny how some very critical components go into effect - next year.
Let's see some more Pioneer ACOs and Federally backed Exchange Health Plans go out of business and leave tax payers holding the bag.
Anyway, just an example of spending money we don't have foolishly. I'm sure the so called rich will just accept another tax hike.
still, in the end - what are you going to be left with? ... still a populace of massive income disparity and wealth ... which ultimately leads to societal failures ...
In response to Gern:
I just calculated all the REQUIRED deductions coming out of my paycheck, requirements that the government decided I have to have:
Fed taxes= 18%
FICA = 6%
Medicare = 1%
State tax = 5%
Health plan and state pension =5%
Disability insurance = 1%
So, in my math, that is 39% of my paycheck GONE before I even leave the building. Don't tell me I'm doing my taxes wrong. They take it against my will.
Then I go to do my taxes in the spring. Even though the government already knows what they took from me, I have to fill out a paper to see if they get more. As I file these taxes, I see the government giving all kinds of everybody something back in the form of credits, but I don't get shit. Why? Because the government has decided certain behaviors should be rewarded over others. That is a fucked up system.
The person I was responding to suggested that they make about $36K/year....my point was that if they filed with a child their tax would be zero. I do taxes for a living so that's a fact.
and by the way...that totals 36%
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
We should also simplify things to make enforcement easier (not easy, but easier). We would spend more trying to chase those dollars down than they would net us. The last thing we need is more bureaucracy.
So, I'm not in fact saying - make a system that makes anyone happy (I mean, really, c'mon). But, what I am saying is some prudent, intelligent tax code thinking (which I will admit is beyond me) is wiser than simply spending and crying for higher taxes on the truly rich that end up impacting the middle class more b/c someone has to pay at least the part of the bill the gov't intends on paying.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
For somebody who told us all how it is, you certainly don't like it when others tell you how it is.
If you think a Republican Government cares more about teachers salaries at public schools and the middle class tax burden than Democrats....... I will tell you how it is, you are completely wrong.
of course, you are absolutely correct in that the gov't needs to spend efficiently and wisely and not waste tax dollars ... i think you would gain more traction focusing on that then trying to change a tax system that will inherently favour one group over another ...
Here's an example of what I'm talking about:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/los-angeles-weighs-a-millionaire-tax-aimed-at-ending-homelessness/ar-BBtPg0a?li=BBnbfcN
I love the revenue projection. How hard do you think it is for a millionaire to get an address outside LA County if they didn't want to pay this? Or, worse, what if they decided to move their business because of it? Well, let's be honest - that's where the tax breaks negotiations begin..... The other part I love is people approving the spending of other people's money - 76% approve! Really - so, folks are approving spending someone else's money b/c they feel those people have too much money? Who pays their salaries?
I'm sure all the liberal movie stars will willingly keep their LA County addresses as their main tax paying addresses.
And no, I don't think a Republican or Democratic government makes a difference. Both parties are equal opportunity thieves. I live in one of the most conservative states in the country, and ironically one of the highest taxed. Income tax, sales tax, property tax. We've got them all. That's why I said I would estimate at least 50% of my income going toward some form of taxation, if I were to save every receipt and add it all up (with a calculator, so it's right).
you know why it is not working? because intransigent governors are refusing federal money to finance the exchanges. so, rather than take federal money to insure everyone who does not have private insurance, they would rather pass along more costs to those paying for insurance through their work, and making those without insurance go without. good plan, regressives.
i apologize if painting with black and white brushes makes me look foolish to you. i couldn't care any less. i have had it with regressives holding my country back. i am embarrassed that so many of my countrymen complain about the taxes they are paying that goes to benefit other people. selfishness is the hallmark of conservatism. this is why the gop will not gain the white house for a generation. selfishness does not translate well across all 50 states.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Why would a liberal worry about that equation.
And to get further into that, at least those governors are being fiscally responsible. What happens when the fed money is phased out? Then who pays? And what does that have to do with the increasing exchange subsidies when rates go up?
I didn't do any research, just what the news report said (and it wasn't Fox News), and I believe it was referring to property tax only (and possibly on only some of their homes and not all, I can't remember for sure), and not all income tax, because that would be too ridiculous if they avoided all taxes because of a little bee farm.
Those are some of the tax breaks that annoy me. You get so rich you don't know what to do, so you decide to open up your own distillery or winery as a hobby in a second vacation home, and now that vacation home qualifies as a business and all the expenses that go with your new vacation home is now a tax write off, even though it is less than 1% of your income-or even lose money on the "business" and get even more tax breaks. Not that I blame anyone, if the tax laws allowed me to not pay taxes, I wouldn't either.
Seriously, I do.
We own a 1400 sq ft manufactured home with a full basement, a detached 4 car garage, and 5 acres, mostly wooded. I have garden space of about 650 sq ft that provides me with literally about a ton of produce every year, about 20 gallons per year of wild black raspberries, and as much deer and turkey as I care to harvest.
The mortgage payment to own the house and land is less than half what you pay monthly to rent a 1 bedroom apartment.
I'm not judging you, and I wasn't intending to call you a liar or imply that you were being dishonest, I just saw that things weren't adding up in my mind. Knowing that you choose to live in a very expensive region makes it come into focus better.
If you move out of the city life will be a breeze!
And to answer your question in terms of your analogy, the bartender invests his earnings upgrading the infrastructure of his bar attracting new customers. The opposite approach, lower prices and don't keep up the bar, then the bar turns into a dive.
just think what it costs to own a car?
tax at time of purchase
property tax yearly
emissions
registration...every 2 years
drivers license...every 4
insurance
gas...taxed
oil...taxed
maintenance...taxed
you get the pleasure of going work so that all these agencies can tell you they are overworked and underpaid.
after that $1 is earned, take home...it's taxed every time it comes out of you pocket
the car is one item.
poor people were mentioned...how's the penny and a half gonna fly on sugar drinks...close to a $1 on 64 ounces.
if money was properly spent, no one would say a word on taxes in general, but it's way too far gone. i live in ct and we are watching in real time this state circling the drain and we have high taxes, but, we have even more people feeding off the teet and putting nothing in.