That would be great if every wealthy person did that. But not all of them do. A higher tax would mandate it.
And yes, an indeterminate amount would be wasted. That's a downside for sure. But it doesn't outweigh the positives.
Do you equally think the poor should be mandated to help themselves?
Should finishing high school be a requirement for getting help? Should not having more kids than they ccan afford be a requirement for receiving aid? Should we not help people who become poor as a result of their own poor decisions?
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
Here I am offering you a chance to live up to your responsibilities yet you shun the chance and only make excuses. What kind of human are you? Does your lust and greed know no end?
I'm a man in need and you make excuses for not helping. What happened to that responsibility thing that humans have you went on about? Am I to assume you are not human?
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
but no one is asking (or in your case demanding) that your taxes be raised. not one person. you seem to have it stuck in your head that taxes have to be raised. they dont.
A couple of points. I get the feeling that some people think I am trying to pass of my tax burden to the more wealthy. That is not the case. I will gladly pay what I pay now in taxes without complaint. I actually support a slight tax increase on all classes except the poor because of the deficit, the war, the failing schools, the shitty health care, the housing market etc. We also need the next Administration to spend more responsibly so that maybe I'm wrong about the taxes needing to go up.
At the same time if I can handle my taxes going up slightly without complaint then the wealthy can do the same. I guarantee when i get to the wealthy class (and its my goal to do so) I will not complain about the taxes. Seriously we are talking about less then a hundred dollars difference not thousands and thousands of dollars.
My Aunt was always a middle class liberal until she divorced her husband and got a huge settlement. Now shes upper class and votes Republican just because of the taxes. It makes her look really cheap which is probably why I feel the way I do about taxes.
10/31/2000 (****)
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
It's based on a simple principle - you have more, you give more. Is it fair? Not really, per se. But it's the right thing to do. The upper class should recognize that they have a responsibility to share some of their wealth because they can afford to do so.
But they ALREADY GIVE MORE. MUCH MORE. Higher raw dollars. A higher percentage of income.
When is enough, enough? When you say so? When the government does? The government is like a fucking crackhead, always wanting more and more money. How about we stop being enablers, and stop feeding the beast? More, more, more. Enough is already enough.
In swear, one day we'll be sitting here going, "The wealthy already give 95 percent of their income to the government. What's five more percent? After all, they can afford it."
everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do
So why doesn't barack propose cutting spending, so he won't have to raise taxes on anyone?
(No need to answer. This is a rhetorical question. He doesn't believe in cutting spending. He's a Democrat.)
Yes and George Bush was soooo fiscally responsible. He did a great job raising our deficit that Clinton had down to almost nothing in 8 years.
10/31/2000 (****)
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
I'm not talking about multi millionaires fellas. the highest tax rate starts at like 350k I believe? at like 40% of income?? and even lower then that, like 100k a year get taxed at 35%. and you wantt o increase that? no thanks. It took alot of hard work to get where im at and I dont want to continue to work harder and move up only to have to give it back.
not every wealthy person makes as much as Arod and buffet.
The highest tax rate in Australia starts at $150,001, its 45c for each dollar over that. The level below that is $75,001 and thats 40c. We worked 12 hour day/night shifts on a 4 on 4 off roster. More often than not we would have to work our days off because of staff shortages. We would work 12 hours overtime - get paid for 24 hours (double time) and then pretty much lose the extra in higher taxes anyway.
I wouldn't mind paying the extra taxes if i thought it was benefiting someone. But nothing ever changed. Instead of taking the extra dollars raised by increased taxes and actually using it to train extra medical staff so that we wouldn't be faced with nightmare working conditions all the time, nothing ever happened. Things just got worse.
But they ALREADY GIVE MORE. MUCH MORE. Higher raw dollars. A higher percentage of income.
When is enough, enough? When you say so? When the government does? The government is like a fucking crackhead, always wanting more and more money. How about we stop being enablers, and stop feeding the beast? More, more, more. Enough is already enough.
In swear, one day we'll be sitting here going, "The wealthy already give 95 percent of their income to the government. What's five more percent? After all, they can afford it."
Again a slight increase would mean a difference of less then a hundred dollars in most cases. If you can't see the difference between a Cal Trans worker giving up 20% oh his 40K vs. a Lawyer giving 35% of his 500K then I don't know what else to tell you. The sad part is the Lawyer could hire an expensive accountant and figure out a way to write everything off paying less then the Cal Trans Worker.
10/31/2000 (****)
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
Again a slight increase would mean a difference of less then a hundred dollars in most cases. If you can't see the difference between a Cal Trans worker giving up 20% oh his 40K vs. a Lawyer giving 35% of his 500K then I don't know what else to tell you. The sad part is the Lawyer could hire an expensive accountant and figure out a way to write everything off paying less then the Cal Trans Worker.
The problem here lies in the fact that the lawyer is already giving up more than that 35% plus about 10% to the state, in California, probably an 8.25% in sales tax, 7.85% in social security and medicare (more than all of these if he is unlucky enough to have gone into business for himself). This adds up to over half of what he earns.All of this goes into some big pools of money and is doled out to different organizations who proceed to figure out how to spend a little bit more than what they have so that they can get more next year.
Instead of only talking about those who make $500K+, why is everyone brushing aside the fact that these "upper class" taxes hit those who make just over $100K as well?
Once again, this is not about upper class vs. lower class in the broad picture. This is about getting the money of everyone who makes one dollar more than oneself.
The problem here lies in the fact that the lawyer is already giving up more than that 35% plus about 10% to the state, in California, probably an 8.25% in sales tax, 7.85% in social security and medicare (more than all of these if he is unlucky enough to have gone into business for himself). This adds up to over half of what he earns.All of this goes into some big pools of money and is doled out to different organizations who proceed to figure out how to spend a little bit more than what they have so that they can get more next year.
Instead of only talking about those who make $500K+, why is everyone brushing aside the fact that these "upper class" taxes hit those who make just over $100K as well?
Once again, this is not about upper class vs. lower class in the broad picture. This is about getting the money of everyone who makes one dollar more than oneself.
Ok hypothetically if taxes were to go up you think it is fair for the middle class to be effected the same as the wealthier class. If middle class taxes went up say 2% why couldn't it go up 4% for the wealthy? To me that would be equal financial burden.
IF taxes are raised.
Also how is this wanting money from people who make one dollar more then oneself? Do wealthy people really think this way? It sounds so cheap. Maybe that kind of paranoia is what helps the wealthy hold onto there money.
10/31/2000 (****)
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
Ok hypothetically if taxes were to go up you think it is fair for the middle class to be effected the same as the wealthier class. If middle class taxes went up say 2% why couldn't it go up 4% for the wealthy? To me that would be equal financial burden.
IF taxes are raised.
That's fair enough. I just see hypothesizing about a tax raise to be a waste of time since I do not see our Federal deficit as being a sign that Americans are under taxed but that our Government enjoys overspending.
Also how is this wanting money from people who make one dollar more then oneself? Do wealthy people really think this way? It sounds so cheap. Maybe that kind of paranoia is what helps the wealthy hold onto there money.
I only say that because nobody arguing that taxes need to be raised on the wealthy in this thread has been able to define wealthy. There have been many absurd examples with no real concrete definition. To your credit, you have given more realistic examples than dropping names from the top of the Fortune 500 list. The Government has a definition and I find that threshold to be too low. It just seems as though the ones arguing for a tax raise on the wealthy in this thread do not really have a definition of wealthy. Most just feel comfortable in the fact that they are not part of this class.
Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda.
i am curious about exactly how many troops Obama would keep in Iraq "if al Qaeda attempts..."
also, "we will not build any permanent bases", but we already have permanent bases, so will Obama remove them?
i doubt the media will ask him these questions, so if anyone sees him, could you please ask them for me?
by the way, a big group of Obama supporters (all college kids) swarmed towards me as I was getting on the Silver Line (Boston's electric bus subway) after work today. made me miss my bus that I was running to catch, but anyway, apparently there was a Obama rally at the Seaport hotel. there was a sign outside the subway station that said "WALK THIS WAY FOR CHANGE". i found it comical.
That's a good question. But its not my class so that's all that matters.
Last year I had to pay $700 in taxes and I'm only a year out of school. It took me most of the year to pay it fully.
I think it sucks that there are people wealthier then me who can write off everything and pay nothing in taxes.
They are able to "write off everything" because they spend considerable more amounts of money than you do and use these expenditures to increase their worth. These people drive the economy and if you tax them they will not have insentive to increase their income.
show me a poll that says Iraqis dont mind el queda setting up bases of operation in their neighborhoods. and secondly, if el queda does set up bases of operation, I would hope we have a president that does something about it.
jlew! When did you become the voice of reason?! Right on.
Bill Clinton was the greatest president in the history of the United States. and I am voting for Hilary because she will bring true change to our country.
Bill Clinton was the greatest president in the history of the United States. and I am voting for Hilary because she will bring true change to our country.
hehehehehehhehehe
i had to scroll down to get to the giggle. Skeered me for a few seconds.
"When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
show me a poll that says Iraqis dont mind el queda setting up bases of operation in their neighborhoods. and secondly, if el queda does set up bases of operation, I would hope we have a president that does something about it.
al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq until U.S.-led forces got there!!!
We could tax things we don't like as opposed to things we need. Pollution emissions or financial speculation, even stocks, for example could be taxed. When a working class individual buys food or medicine he pays a flat sales tax. Yet some stock broker who buys 100,000 shares in Haliburton pays ZERO sales tax. Is that fair?
A tiny tax on the stock market could pay for universal health care, lifting the burden on the lower classes even more.
they do pay taxes... capital gains tax.
honestly none of us are that far off, we are arguing semantics. It depends on which form of government and or the powers we think that government should hold.
It's all perspective. Of course the other issue is that one with corporate taxes...my issue is the more they pay, the more I pay... all of that is just passed on to the eventual consumer.
We all essentially are after the same stuff here man, it's just different ideas on what it takes to get there.
My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
considering the day before super tuesday we have a 6 page thread going about obama, and literally not one thread devoted to hillary in months, if ever... i think it is safe to say the wave of change and a fresh direction are about to crash from shore to shining shore tommorow...
considering the day before super tuesday we have a 6 page thread going about obama, and literally not one thread devoted to hillary in months, if ever... i think it is safe to say the wave of change and a fresh direction are about to crash from shore to shining shore tommorow...
~bring the troops home NOW
~abolish the IRS and Fed Reserve (return to the Gold Standard)
~less Government = More Freedoms
~Obama = member of the CFR (if you don't know, look it up)
~bring the troops home NOW
~abolish the IRS and Fed Reserve (return to the Gold Standard)
~less Government = More Freedoms
~Obama = member of the CFR (if you don't know, look it up)
RonPaul2008.com
get educated
i am educated... and i would vote for obama over paul in a nanosecond chief
~bring the troops home NOW
~abolish the IRS and Fed Reserve (return to the Gold Standard)
~less Government = More Freedoms
~Obama = member of the CFR (if you don't know, look it up)
RonPaul2008.com
get educated
Ron Paul = No Chance In Hell
Get Educated, the American people will never elect a troll for president no matter how smart
Seriously though no matter how you look at it Obama is the lessor of evils that have a chance.
Comments
There is nothing positive about advocating theft and coersion.
Should finishing high school be a requirement for getting help? Should not having more kids than they ccan afford be a requirement for receiving aid? Should we not help people who become poor as a result of their own poor decisions?
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
I'm a man in need and you make excuses for not helping. What happened to that responsibility thing that humans have you went on about? Am I to assume you are not human?
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
A couple of points. I get the feeling that some people think I am trying to pass of my tax burden to the more wealthy. That is not the case. I will gladly pay what I pay now in taxes without complaint. I actually support a slight tax increase on all classes except the poor because of the deficit, the war, the failing schools, the shitty health care, the housing market etc. We also need the next Administration to spend more responsibly so that maybe I'm wrong about the taxes needing to go up.
At the same time if I can handle my taxes going up slightly without complaint then the wealthy can do the same. I guarantee when i get to the wealthy class (and its my goal to do so) I will not complain about the taxes. Seriously we are talking about less then a hundred dollars difference not thousands and thousands of dollars.
My Aunt was always a middle class liberal until she divorced her husband and got a huge settlement. Now shes upper class and votes Republican just because of the taxes. It makes her look really cheap which is probably why I feel the way I do about taxes.
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
So why doesn't barack propose cutting spending, so he won't have to raise taxes on anyone?
(No need to answer. This is a rhetorical question. He doesn't believe in cutting spending. He's a Democrat.)
for the least they could possibly do
But they ALREADY GIVE MORE. MUCH MORE. Higher raw dollars. A higher percentage of income.
When is enough, enough? When you say so? When the government does? The government is like a fucking crackhead, always wanting more and more money. How about we stop being enablers, and stop feeding the beast? More, more, more. Enough is already enough.
In swear, one day we'll be sitting here going, "The wealthy already give 95 percent of their income to the government. What's five more percent? After all, they can afford it."
for the least they could possibly do
Yes and George Bush was soooo fiscally responsible. He did a great job raising our deficit that Clinton had down to almost nothing in 8 years.
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
I wouldn't mind paying the extra taxes if i thought it was benefiting someone. But nothing ever changed. Instead of taking the extra dollars raised by increased taxes and actually using it to train extra medical staff so that we wouldn't be faced with nightmare working conditions all the time, nothing ever happened. Things just got worse.
Yeah, he sucked when it came to fiscal responsibility, which is one of the key reasons he's lost the support of most of his base. It ain't the war.
for the least they could possibly do
Again a slight increase would mean a difference of less then a hundred dollars in most cases. If you can't see the difference between a Cal Trans worker giving up 20% oh his 40K vs. a Lawyer giving 35% of his 500K then I don't know what else to tell you. The sad part is the Lawyer could hire an expensive accountant and figure out a way to write everything off paying less then the Cal Trans Worker.
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
The problem here lies in the fact that the lawyer is already giving up more than that 35% plus about 10% to the state, in California, probably an 8.25% in sales tax, 7.85% in social security and medicare (more than all of these if he is unlucky enough to have gone into business for himself). This adds up to over half of what he earns.All of this goes into some big pools of money and is doled out to different organizations who proceed to figure out how to spend a little bit more than what they have so that they can get more next year.
Instead of only talking about those who make $500K+, why is everyone brushing aside the fact that these "upper class" taxes hit those who make just over $100K as well?
Once again, this is not about upper class vs. lower class in the broad picture. This is about getting the money of everyone who makes one dollar more than oneself.
Ok hypothetically if taxes were to go up you think it is fair for the middle class to be effected the same as the wealthier class. If middle class taxes went up say 2% why couldn't it go up 4% for the wealthy? To me that would be equal financial burden.
IF taxes are raised.
Also how is this wanting money from people who make one dollar more then oneself? Do wealthy people really think this way? It sounds so cheap. Maybe that kind of paranoia is what helps the wealthy hold onto there money.
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
That's fair enough. I just see hypothesizing about a tax raise to be a waste of time since I do not see our Federal deficit as being a sign that Americans are under taxed but that our Government enjoys overspending.
I only say that because nobody arguing that taxes need to be raised on the wealthy in this thread has been able to define wealthy. There have been many absurd examples with no real concrete definition. To your credit, you have given more realistic examples than dropping names from the top of the Fortune 500 list. The Government has a definition and I find that threshold to be too low. It just seems as though the ones arguing for a tax raise on the wealthy in this thread do not really have a definition of wealthy. Most just feel comfortable in the fact that they are not part of this class.
Bringing Our Troops Home
Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda.
i am curious about exactly how many troops Obama would keep in Iraq "if al Qaeda attempts..."
also, "we will not build any permanent bases", but we already have permanent bases, so will Obama remove them?
i doubt the media will ask him these questions, so if anyone sees him, could you please ask them for me?
by the way, a big group of Obama supporters (all college kids) swarmed towards me as I was getting on the Silver Line (Boston's electric bus subway) after work today. made me miss my bus that I was running to catch, but anyway, apparently there was a Obama rally at the Seaport hotel. there was a sign outside the subway station that said "WALK THIS WAY FOR CHANGE". i found it comical.
why are you looking for a specific number? how about enough troops to get the job done?
I think obama's policy is on Iraq is exactly what's needed.
They are able to "write off everything" because they spend considerable more amounts of money than you do and use these expenditures to increase their worth. These people drive the economy and if you tax them they will not have insentive to increase their income.
You got to spend it all
Polls taken of Iraqis time and time again show that they want us out entirely, so how is it that any of us could know better about what is needed?
show me a poll that says Iraqis dont mind el queda setting up bases of operation in their neighborhoods. and secondly, if el queda does set up bases of operation, I would hope we have a president that does something about it.
Bill Clinton was the greatest president in the history of the United States. and I am voting for Hilary because she will bring true change to our country.
hehehehehehhehehe
i had to scroll down to get to the giggle. Skeered me for a few seconds.
al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq until U.S.-led forces got there!!!
they do pay taxes... capital gains tax.
honestly none of us are that far off, we are arguing semantics. It depends on which form of government and or the powers we think that government should hold.
It's all perspective. Of course the other issue is that one with corporate taxes...my issue is the more they pay, the more I pay... all of that is just passed on to the eventual consumer.
We all essentially are after the same stuff here man, it's just different ideas on what it takes to get there.
dont let us down
Good point...
~bring the troops home NOW
~abolish the IRS and Fed Reserve (return to the Gold Standard)
~less Government = More Freedoms
~Obama = member of the CFR (if you don't know, look it up)
RonPaul2008.com
get educated
PEARL JAM~San Antonio, TX. 4~5~03
INCUBUS~Houston, TX. 1~19~07
INCUBUS~Denver, CO. 2~8~07
Lollapalooza~Chicago, IL. 8~5~07
INCUBUS~Austin, TX. 9~3~07
Bonnaroo~Manchester, TN 6~14~08
i am educated... and i would vote for obama over paul in a nanosecond chief
....and by educated you mean??????????
PEARL JAM~San Antonio, TX. 4~5~03
INCUBUS~Houston, TX. 1~19~07
INCUBUS~Denver, CO. 2~8~07
Lollapalooza~Chicago, IL. 8~5~07
INCUBUS~Austin, TX. 9~3~07
Bonnaroo~Manchester, TN 6~14~08
Ron Paul = No Chance In Hell
Get Educated, the American people will never elect a troll for president no matter how smart
Seriously though no matter how you look at it Obama is the lessor of evils that have a chance.