Biden says again, “the wealthy need to pay their fair share”

[BluesLegend]

I see Democrats are blaming the 'rich' again. Do they have any new talking point that wasn't invented in 1972?

It's too bad the Forbes' flat tax was never adopted. That's the way to go.

What I think we need is a consumption tax in this country. The money will go strictly to our over spending and debt. People on the left love things like free college, paid time off, reparations, free medical care because they know they won't have to pay for it. If we all had to pay, you'd see how fast they'd realize nothing is free, and lose interest in having the federal government provide these things.

If you rob Peter to pay Paul, the Paul's of your society generally have no objections.

It won't work because it doesn't address the underlying problem. No amount of tax revenue will stop these stupid shits in Washington from spending every last dime and continuing to borrow and spend more on top of that. And I have seen that 'dedicated to...' BS pulled at the state level. Oregon promised to dedicate lottery revenue to schools, which they did. Then they took all the money for schools that had been in the general budget and spent that on other crap. Hence the lottery revenue was a net new increase in overall taxation and spending, shocker.

My state did the exact same thing with the lottery.

Politicians spend nothing without the support of the people. Economist Walter E Williams put it best when he said "I'm going to run for Congress. My platform will be that if elected, I will bring no money back to my state. Would you vote for me?"

People overwhelmingly support spending they don't have to pay for. With a consumption tax, everybody has a horse in the race. Our consumption tax will be 10% of every dollar spent. You want free college? It goes up to 11%. You want a greener country, it goes up to 12%. You want healthcare for all, it goes up to 20% and so on.

If we actually had to pay for all this spending, people would refuse to support the politicians that needlessly spend money and that would help solve our spending problem. Some people want stimulus checks and an extra 600 bucks for unemployment. If it raised our consumption tax another percent, you'd see how fast the public would turn against Piglosi on such matters.

If we made two changes, there would be immediate and strident demands for spending reform:

1. Eliminate payroll tax withholding.
2. One of the tax payment deadlines falls the week before election day.

If everyone had to make those payments personally instead of just seeing their take home pay, they would realize how much they're really paying in taxes, even at minimum wage, and then a week after being required to make one of those payments they get to vote for or against the guys who decide how much that payment is.

That might have worked at one time, but based on what I see in stores, nobody pays cash or writes checks anymore except us older people. Everything is electronic and people just take those debit receipts and throw them in the garbage can on the way out of the store. If people had to pay the IRS directly because of no deductions, they would put an automatic transfer from their checking or savings account.

True that writing the actual numbers on a check would be most effective. Seeing that transfer from your account every so often, though, would have an impact unless people completely ignore their accounts.

And they do, trust me, I see it on a consistent bases. As for myself, I always use cash for two reasons: one is nobody can steal my identity that way, and two is I have several tenants who pay rent in cash, and I don't like going to the ATM to deposit cash unless I have to. So I use that for spending money.

When I did use a debit card in the past, the receipt went into my wallet. When it got annoying enough, I would pull it out and deduct the debit from my checking account. I don't see people doing that today.

I pay all tips in CASH to cheat government out of its share.

 

[Nostra]

Since none of them can, I will define "FAIR SHARE"...........everyone pays the same on every dollar they make. No deductions, no exemptions, nobody pays zero taxes if they have an income.

If someone makes 10X someone else, they pay 10X the taxes. Everyone pays the same rate, everyone has a skin in the game.

That is fair, but libtards would never go for fair.

 

[easyt65]

'Biden says again, “the wealthy need to pay their fair share”

That's pretty funny considering his criminal, drug-addict, 'dead-beat dad' son won't even pay child support for his illegitimate son that Biden has refused to count among his family members....



(Pole dancers of America take notice - you are worth some politician's son having an affair with, but you and your illegitimate children you are left with deserve nothing.....

....I'm pretty sure Biden has lost the 'Exotic Dancer' / 'Single Mother Exotic Dancer Receiving no Child Support From Politicians' 'Deadbeat Dad' Sons' vote.)

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The top 1% of earners pay nearly 40% of all income tax.

Facts are a bitch.

Your figure is correct. But it's misleading. It's only part of the taxes collected. You left out the lions share called the Payroll Tax. And the Rich pay almost zero payroll tax.

This April 15, Don’t Fall for the Right’s Favorite Lie About Taxes

The actual taxes, by group, is paid by the Middle Class.

If you live the average life expectancy in the US, you get all those payroll taxes back. So it's really not a tax, it's more like a savings account.

You will get all the SS money you paid into SS and more. You will get all your Medicare taxes you paid, and much more. Your local taxes like city and state go for things you use every day like the highways, police and fire, street lights.......

Only income tax actually supports our federal government and bureaucracies--not payroll tax. Income tax pays all our federal politicians, supports the structures they work in, supports our military, all our social programs outside of SS, supports foreign aid, maintains federal land, supports our federal prisons........

Nearly half of our country pays nothing into income taxes. If the federal government cannot control their spending, then it's time to start taxing the people that have never paid into the system, not take more from the people who already are supporting nearly the entire system.

I used this Graph for a reason. It's total payroll taxes.

If you take the figure from the the poor to the upper middle class and add then together, you get a huge amount over the top 5%. Then if you use the next 15 you will see that they pay much more taxes than the top 1% by far.

Now start figuring in the total population of each group. Yes, each person from the bottom 85% pays less per person but that is almost 99% of the population. And each time you go down the percentage list, the higher the number of population increases. And when you reach to 60% level, you will notice the lack of disposable income. In order to raise the taxes on 60% of the population, you would have to create more disposable income and there is no way to create more disposable income. Before the Feds can get their hands on it, the top 40% will notice that the bottom 60% now has disposable income and will figure out a way to get that through increase in housing, food, clothing, etc.. And if it goes historically on par, they'll take even a bit more.

That leaves the top 40% that has disposable income and can afford to pay additional taxes. And the ones with the highest disposable income are the top 5% of the earners who constantly figure out a way to pay 18% rather than the obligated 27%. Remember when Presidential Candidates actually showed their Tax Returns? Obama: 18%, Romney: 12%. And both are multi millionaires. If you had them pay the 27 to 39% amount and took away all those loopholes including off shore accounts then they would have paid a million or more in federal taxes. I was an agent for a Multi Millionaire (yes I once sold my soul) and handled the companies financial accounts as well as the purchasing accounts. The methods used to get around personal ownership of anything in their personal lives would shock the hell out of you. Most don't really own a damned thing. The Corporation owns most of it. Right down to the paper towels and remodeling of their personal domiciles. The cars they drive, the education of their kids, even the shopping for their home supplies is all done on company bank cards. If this sounds illegal, it is but it's "Overlooked" because the ones that would be looking into it do the same thing themselves. We have the Foxes guarding the Henhouse.

So, no, the Rich aren't paying their fair share. And even if you were to increase the real percentage to 39% and take away all the "Loopholes" and "Cheats" they would still not notice it. As one Multi Millionaire I once knew said, it's hard to take 5 bucks and turn it into 10 bucks but it's really easy to take 5 million and turn it into 10 million.

 

[easyt65]

Since none of them can, I will define "FAIR SHARE"...........everyone pays the same on every dollar they make. No deductions, no exemptions, nobody pays zero taxes if they have an income.

If someone makes 10X someone else, they pay 10X the taxes. Everyone pays the same rate, everyone has a skin in the game.

That is fair, but libtards would never go for fair.

'Flat Tax' / 'Fair Tax' Plan?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The Rich DON'T pay their fair share and it doesn't matter their partisan backing.

Really, what's a f'ing fair share then you mooching deadbeat? I pay umpteen times what the average taxpayer pays that's not a fair share for the same goddamn government services??

Maybe I will send you the information so that you can send it directly to me and we can just skip the middle guy.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

What the hell does that mean? Is that actionable legislation?

Who is WEALTHY? What is their FAIR SHARE?

Millionaires living in California and New York pay nearly 60% of their earnings in taxes.

If thats not enough...what is enough?

Who is wealthy and what should they be taxed?

What Joe is saying is fucking meaningless drivel.

Except they don't pay 60%. The pay anywhere from 19 to zero.

Funny how the rich pay the vast
majority of income taxes without paying taxes.

How does that work?

Dems keeping demonizing the 'rich' because it works. Millions of dumb ass rank and file Dems actually believe the 'rich' don't pay their fair share, what idiots.

It is funny how idiots always buy the richest elites telling them that rich people are evil.

Somehow they forgot to ask Burisma Biden what his net worth is - and how is it possibly tenable that a public servant ended up with so much pork.

So he''s rich. But not nearly as loaded as the Rump kids or even the Walmart Kids. There is point here.

The Rich DON'T pay their fair share and it doesn't matter their partisan backing. They are Capitalist first an everything else second. And unchecked Capitalism is not a good thing.

well the point genius is if he felt as if he wasn't paying his fair share, he should have been giving more at tax time. it's really that simple. so the question is, why hasn't he?

I bring this up timeafter time after time.

WHY DONT RICH LIBERALS GO AHEAD AND PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE????

There is no maximum tax, only a minimum tax. Lead by example and pay what you think is fair! I am talking to Hillary, Joe,and every other liberal politician.

They arent lying frauds, are they? Why not lead by example?

I've been on that same page for years now in here. As of this moment, not one demofk on here has explained 'fair share' Not a fking one of em. They know it's a bullshit line. means absolutely nothing except to wip up hate at people who make money. I challenge again, any mther fking demofk on here to explain 'fair share'?

BTW, there will be a mass exodus of them commenting in here due to that challenge. happens every time. they have no fking guts to take on a subject.

When I already pay umpteen times as much as the average taxpayer for the exact same government services it chaps me when these Dems accuse me of not paying my fair share.

Then you do have more disposable income. Are you saying that you don't? You are fortunate to be in the top 40%. Meanwhile the bottom 40% has either very little or zero disposable income. They can't pay more. You can.

 

[22lcidw]

The top 1% of earners pay nearly 40% of all income tax.

Facts are a bitch.

Your figure is correct. But it's misleading. It's only part of the taxes collected. You left out the lions share called the Payroll Tax. And the Rich pay almost zero payroll tax.

This April 15, Don’t Fall for the Right’s Favorite Lie About Taxes

The actual taxes, by group, is paid by the Middle Class.

We always argue about the federal taxes. The hundreds of other taxes combined, hit the lower classes hard.

 

[Nostra]

What the hell does that mean? Is that actionable legislation?

Who is WEALTHY? What is their FAIR SHARE?

Millionaires living in California and New York pay nearly 60% of their earnings in taxes.

If thats not enough...what is enough?

Who is wealthy and what should they be taxed?

What Joe is saying is fucking meaningless drivel.

Except they don't pay 60%. The pay anywhere from 19 to zero.

Funny how the rich pay the vast
majority of income taxes without paying taxes.

How does that work?

Dems keeping demonizing the 'rich' because it works. Millions of dumb ass rank and file Dems actually believe the 'rich' don't pay their fair share, what idiots.

It is funny how idiots always buy the richest elites telling them that rich people are evil.

Somehow they forgot to ask Burisma Biden what his net worth is - and how is it possibly tenable that a public servant ended up with so much pork.

So he''s rich. But not nearly as loaded as the Rump kids or even the Walmart Kids. There is point here.

The Rich DON'T pay their fair share and it doesn't matter their partisan backing. They are Capitalist first an everything else second. And unchecked Capitalism is not a good thing.

well the point genius is if he felt as if he wasn't paying his fair share, he should have been giving more at tax time. it's really that simple. so the question is, why hasn't he?

I bring this up timeafter time after time.

WHY DONT RICH LIBERALS GO AHEAD AND PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE????

There is no maximum tax, only a minimum tax. Lead by example and pay what you think is fair! I am talking to Hillary, Joe,and every other liberal politician.

They arent lying frauds, are they? Why not lead by example?

I've been on that same page for years now in here. As of this moment, not one demofk on here has explained 'fair share' Not a fking one of em. They know it's a bullshit line. means absolutely nothing except to wip up hate at people who make money. I challenge again, any mther fking demofk on here to explain 'fair share'?

BTW, there will be a mass exodus of them commenting in here due to that challenge. happens every time. they have no fking guts to take on a subject.

When I already pay umpteen times as much as the average taxpayer for the exact same government services it chaps me when these Dems accuse me of not paying my fair share.

Then you do have more disposable income. Are you saying that you don't? You are fortunate to be in the top 40%. Meanwhile the bottom 40% has either very little or zero disposable income. They can't pay more. You can.

The bottom 40% pays ZERO income taxes. You really are clueless.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The top 1% of earners pay nearly 40% of all income tax.

Facts are a bitch.

Your figure is correct. But it's misleading. It's only part of the taxes collected. You left out the lions share called the Payroll Tax. And the Rich pay almost zero payroll tax.

This April 15, Don’t Fall for the Right’s Favorite Lie About Taxes

The actual taxes, by group, is paid by the Middle Class.

If you live the average life expectancy in the US, you get all those payroll taxes back. So it's really not a tax, it's more like a savings account.

You will get all the SS money you paid into SS and more. You will get all your Medicare taxes you paid, and much more. Your local taxes like city and state go for things you use every day like the highways, police and fire, street lights.......

Only income tax actually supports our federal government and bureaucracies--not payroll tax. Income tax pays all our federal politicians, supports the structures they work in, supports our military, all our social programs outside of SS, supports foreign aid, maintains federal land, supports our federal prisons........

Nearly half of our country pays nothing into income taxes. If the federal government cannot control their spending, then it's time to start taxing the people that have never paid into the system, not take more from the people who already are supporting nearly the entire system.

I used this Graph for a reason. It's total payroll taxes.

If you take the figure from the the poor to the upper middle class and add then together, you get a huge amount over the top 5%. Then if you use the next 15 you will see that they pay much more taxes than the top 1% by far.

Now start figuring in the total population of each group. Yes, each person from the bottom 85% pays less per person but that is almost 99% of the population. And each time you go down the percentage list, the higher the number of population increases. And when you reach to 60% level, you will notice the lack of disposable income. In order to raise the taxes on 60% of the population, you would have to create more disposable income and there is no way to create more disposable income. Before the Feds can get their hands on it, the top 40% will notice that the bottom 60% now has disposable income and will figure out a way to get that through increase in housing, food, clothing, etc.. And if it goes historically on par, they'll take even a bit more.

That leaves the top 40% that has disposable income and can afford to pay additional taxes. And the ones with the highest disposable income are the top 5% of the earners who constantly figure out a way to pay 18% rather than the obligated 27%. Remember when Presidential Candidates actually showed their Tax Returns? Obama: 18%, Romney: 12%. And both are multi millionaires. If you had them pay the 27 to 39% amount and took away all those loopholes including off shore accounts then they would have paid a million or more in federal taxes. I was an agent for a Multi Millionaire (yes I once sold my soul) and handled the companies financial accounts as well as the purchasing accounts. The methods used to get around personal ownership of anything in their personal lives would shock the hell out of you. Most don't really own a damned thing. The Corporation owns most of it. Right down to the paper towels and remodeling of their personal domiciles. The cars they drive, the education of their kids, even the shopping for their home supplies is all done on company bank cards. If this sounds illegal, it is but it's "Overlooked" because the ones that would be looking into it do the same thing themselves. We have the Foxes guarding the Henhouse.

So, no, the Rich aren't paying their fair share. And even if you were to increase the real percentage to 39% and take away all the "Loopholes" and "Cheats" they would still not notice it. As one Multi Millionaire I once knew said, it's hard to take 5 bucks and turn it into 10 bucks but it's really easy to take 5 million and turn it into 10 million.

We should not be taxing people based on their disposable income nor anybody else, because everybody's disposable income is different. If you and I made 37K a year, you may have more disposable income than I have based on where you live, how large of a mortgage you have, your car payment, insurance and so on.

I may have more disposable income than you because I was never married or had children, I own and live in rental property which provides me additional income, my last car purchase was a used car last year ( a 2016 with 20,000 miles) and I put a nice downpayment on it which makes my car payment only $126.00 a month.

My sister makes over twice as much as me, but I bet I still have more disposable income than her. She's still paying on two college loans for her kids, and will likely be paying until she retires in five years. She just bought a new townhouse in a development. Besides a larger mortgage, she also has to pay maintenance fees. Everybody is different.

In any case, my idea would work the best, and that is have a consumption tax for our over spending and national debt. We've always had a consumption tax where I live. The state gets 5%, and the county gets 3%. Everybody here pays 8%. The rich play it, the poor pay it, and the middle-class pay it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Biden says again, “the wealthy need to pay their fair share”

That's pretty funny considering his criminal, drug-addict, 'dead-beat dad' son won't even pay child support for his illegitimate son that Biden has refused to count among his family members....

He was also in arrears to the IRS for taxes he never paid.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Once again, folks this is the narrative. It doesn't have to be true. Only sound good.
As has been stated 1000 times, if every $millionaire in America paid 100% tax rate - we would still fall short.
The amount of money the government overspends is FAR-FAR-FAR above what they could possibly bring in.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I see Democrats are blaming the 'rich' again. Do they have any new talking point that wasn't invented in 1972?

It's too bad the Forbes' flat tax was never adopted. That's the way to go.

What I think we need is a consumption tax in this country. The money will go strictly to our over spending and debt. People on the left love things like free college, paid time off, reparations, free medical care because they know they won't have to pay for it. If we all had to pay, you'd see how fast they'd realize nothing is free, and lose interest in having the federal government provide these things.

If you rob Peter to pay Paul, the Paul's of your society generally have no objections.

It won't work because it doesn't address the underlying problem. No amount of tax revenue will stop these stupid shits in Washington from spending every last dime and continuing to borrow and spend more on top of that. And I have seen that 'dedicated to...' BS pulled at the state level. Oregon promised to dedicate lottery revenue to schools, which they did. Then they took all the money for schools that had been in the general budget and spent that on other crap. Hence the lottery revenue was a net new increase in overall taxation and spending, shocker.

My state did the exact same thing with the lottery.

Politicians spend nothing without the support of the people. Economist Walter E Williams put it best when he said "I'm going to run for Congress. My platform will be that if elected, I will bring no money back to my state. Would you vote for me?"

People overwhelmingly support spending they don't have to pay for. With a consumption tax, everybody has a horse in the race. Our consumption tax will be 10% of every dollar spent. You want free college? It goes up to 11%. You want a greener country, it goes up to 12%. You want healthcare for all, it goes up to 20% and so on.

If we actually had to pay for all this spending, people would refuse to support the politicians that needlessly spend money and that would help solve our spending problem. Some people want stimulus checks and an extra 600 bucks for unemployment. If it raised our consumption tax another percent, you'd see how fast the public would turn against Piglosi on such matters.

If they whacked people with a 24% consumption tax like other countries do that would put some major breaks on the spending. But I predict Washington would start wailing and crying and in short order we'd have all the old taxes at the old levels plus the 24% consumption tax on top of it. If they abolished the income tax and property taxes and amended the Constitution to chisel that in stone so politicians couldn't re-implement those taxes then I'd talk a consumption tax.

It's less about spending and revenue than it is about people supporting all the BS both parties needlessly spend money on. Take the 600 bucks a week in unemployment. There are many people who are not looking for work because they make more sitting home on unemployment than they do getting another job. Of course they support it. But if it upped our consumption tax by 1% more, only those who are on it would support it because they'd make out better in the end. Everybody else? Forget about it. State unemployment was enough for other recessions, and it's enough for this one.

 

[BluesLegend]

What the hell does that mean? Is that actionable legislation?

Who is WEALTHY? What is their FAIR SHARE?

Millionaires living in California and New York pay nearly 60% of their earnings in taxes.

If thats not enough...what is enough?

Who is wealthy and what should they be taxed?

What Joe is saying is fucking meaningless drivel.

Except they don't pay 60%. The pay anywhere from 19 to zero.

Funny how the rich pay the vast
majority of income taxes without paying taxes.

How does that work?

Dems keeping demonizing the 'rich' because it works. Millions of dumb ass rank and file Dems actually believe the 'rich' don't pay their fair share, what idiots.

It is funny how idiots always buy the richest elites telling them that rich people are evil.

Somehow they forgot to ask Burisma Biden what his net worth is - and how is it possibly tenable that a public servant ended up with so much pork.

So he''s rich. But not nearly as loaded as the Rump kids or even the Walmart Kids. There is point here.

The Rich DON'T pay their fair share and it doesn't matter their partisan backing. They are Capitalist first an everything else second. And unchecked Capitalism is not a good thing.

well the point genius is if he felt as if he wasn't paying his fair share, he should have been giving more at tax time. it's really that simple. so the question is, why hasn't he?

I bring this up timeafter time after time.

WHY DONT RICH LIBERALS GO AHEAD AND PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE????

There is no maximum tax, only a minimum tax. Lead by example and pay what you think is fair! I am talking to Hillary, Joe,and every other liberal politician.

They arent lying frauds, are they? Why not lead by example?

I've been on that same page for years now in here. As of this moment, not one demofk on here has explained 'fair share' Not a fking one of em. They know it's a bullshit line. means absolutely nothing except to wip up hate at people who make money. I challenge again, any mther fking demofk on here to explain 'fair share'?

BTW, there will be a mass exodus of them commenting in here due to that challenge. happens every time. they have no fking guts to take on a subject.

When I already pay umpteen times as much as the average taxpayer for the exact same government services it chaps me when these Dems accuse me of not paying my fair share.

Then you do have more disposable income. Are you saying that you don't? You are fortunate to be in the top 40%. Meanwhile the bottom 40% has either very little or zero disposable income. They can't pay more. You can.

By "disposable income" are you referring to MY MONEY? The bottom 40% can get off their big fat lazy lard asses and work a job and pay their own fair share.

 

[jc456]

What the hell does that mean? Is that actionable legislation?

Who is WEALTHY? What is their FAIR SHARE?

Millionaires living in California and New York pay nearly 60% of their earnings in taxes.

If thats not enough...what is enough?

Who is wealthy and what should they be taxed?

What Joe is saying is fucking meaningless drivel.

Except they don't pay 60%. The pay anywhere from 19 to zero.

Funny how the rich pay the vast
majority of income taxes without paying taxes.

How does that work?

Dems keeping demonizing the 'rich' because it works. Millions of dumb ass rank and file Dems actually believe the 'rich' don't pay their fair share, what idiots.

It is funny how idiots always buy the richest elites telling them that rich people are evil.

Somehow they forgot to ask Burisma Biden what his net worth is - and how is it possibly tenable that a public servant ended up with so much pork.

So he''s rich. But not nearly as loaded as the Rump kids or even the Walmart Kids. There is point here.

The Rich DON'T pay their fair share and it doesn't matter their partisan backing. They are Capitalist first an everything else second. And unchecked Capitalism is not a good thing.

well the point genius is if he felt as if he wasn't paying his fair share, he should have been giving more at tax time. it's really that simple. so the question is, why hasn't he?

I bring this up timeafter time after time.

WHY DONT RICH LIBERALS GO AHEAD AND PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE????

There is no maximum tax, only a minimum tax. Lead by example and pay what you think is fair! I am talking to Hillary, Joe,and every other liberal politician.

They arent lying frauds, are they? Why not lead by example?

I've been on that same page for years now in here. As of this moment, not one demofk on here has explained 'fair share' Not a fking one of em. They know it's a bullshit line. means absolutely nothing except to wip up hate at people who make money. I challenge again, any mther fking demofk on here to explain 'fair share'?

BTW, there will be a mass exodus of them commenting in here due to that challenge. happens every time. they have no fking guts to take on a subject.

When I already pay umpteen times as much as the average taxpayer for the exact same government services it chaps me when these Dems accuse me of not paying my fair share.

Then you do have more disposable income. Are you saying that you don't? You are fortunate to be in the top 40%. Meanwhile the bottom 40% has either very little or zero disposable income. They can't pay more. You can.

By "disposable income" are you referring to MY MONEY? The bottom 40% can get off their big fat lazy lard asses and work a job and pay their own fair share.

A-fking-men

 

[jc456]

I see Democrats are blaming the 'rich' again. Do they have any new talking point that wasn't invented in 1972?

It's too bad the Forbes' flat tax was never adopted. That's the way to go.

What I think we need is a consumption tax in this country. The money will go strictly to our over spending and debt. People on the left love things like free college, paid time off, reparations, free medical care because they know they won't have to pay for it. If we all had to pay, you'd see how fast they'd realize nothing is free, and lose interest in having the federal government provide these things.

If you rob Peter to pay Paul, the Paul's of your society generally have no objections.

It won't work because it doesn't address the underlying problem. No amount of tax revenue will stop these stupid shits in Washington from spending every last dime and continuing to borrow and spend more on top of that. And I have seen that 'dedicated to...' BS pulled at the state level. Oregon promised to dedicate lottery revenue to schools, which they did. Then they took all the money for schools that had been in the general budget and spent that on other crap. Hence the lottery revenue was a net new increase in overall taxation and spending, shocker.

My state did the exact same thing with the lottery.

Politicians spend nothing without the support of the people. Economist Walter E Williams put it best when he said "I'm going to run for Congress. My platform will be that if elected, I will bring no money back to my state. Would you vote for me?"

People overwhelmingly support spending they don't have to pay for. With a consumption tax, everybody has a horse in the race. Our consumption tax will be 10% of every dollar spent. You want free college? It goes up to 11%. You want a greener country, it goes up to 12%. You want healthcare for all, it goes up to 20% and so on.

If we actually had to pay for all this spending, people would refuse to support the politicians that needlessly spend money and that would help solve our spending problem. Some people want stimulus checks and an extra 600 bucks for unemployment. If it raised our consumption tax another percent, you'd see how fast the public would turn against Piglosi on such matters.

If they whacked people with a 24% consumption tax like other countries do that would put some major breaks on the spending. But I predict Washington would start wailing and crying and in short order we'd have all the old taxes at the old levels plus the 24% consumption tax on top of it. If they abolished the income tax and property taxes and amended the Constitution to chisel that in stone so politicians couldn't re-implement those taxes then I'd talk a consumption tax.

It's less about spending and revenue than it is about people supporting all the BS both parties needlessly spend money on. Take the 600 bucks a week in unemployment. There are many people who are not looking for work because they make more sitting home on unemployment than they do getting another job. Of course they support it. But if it upped our consumption tax by 1% more, only those who are on it would support it because they'd make out better in the end. Everybody else? Forget about it. State unemployment was enough for other recessions, and it's enough for this one.

It’s over though, my daughter’s unemployment just ended. Got to believe most everyone else’s is too. No new money. Hmmmm

btw, she wanted to work, but the school district wouldn’t open up. Guess what, they just opened . Funny huh?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I see Democrats are blaming the 'rich' again. Do they have any new talking point that wasn't invented in 1972?

It's too bad the Forbes' flat tax was never adopted. That's the way to go.

What I think we need is a consumption tax in this country. The money will go strictly to our over spending and debt. People on the left love things like free college, paid time off, reparations, free medical care because they know they won't have to pay for it. If we all had to pay, you'd see how fast they'd realize nothing is free, and lose interest in having the federal government provide these things.

If you rob Peter to pay Paul, the Paul's of your society generally have no objections.

It won't work because it doesn't address the underlying problem. No amount of tax revenue will stop these stupid shits in Washington from spending every last dime and continuing to borrow and spend more on top of that. And I have seen that 'dedicated to...' BS pulled at the state level. Oregon promised to dedicate lottery revenue to schools, which they did. Then they took all the money for schools that had been in the general budget and spent that on other crap. Hence the lottery revenue was a net new increase in overall taxation and spending, shocker.

My state did the exact same thing with the lottery.

Politicians spend nothing without the support of the people. Economist Walter E Williams put it best when he said "I'm going to run for Congress. My platform will be that if elected, I will bring no money back to my state. Would you vote for me?"

People overwhelmingly support spending they don't have to pay for. With a consumption tax, everybody has a horse in the race. Our consumption tax will be 10% of every dollar spent. You want free college? It goes up to 11%. You want a greener country, it goes up to 12%. You want healthcare for all, it goes up to 20% and so on.

If we actually had to pay for all this spending, people would refuse to support the politicians that needlessly spend money and that would help solve our spending problem. Some people want stimulus checks and an extra 600 bucks for unemployment. If it raised our consumption tax another percent, you'd see how fast the public would turn against Piglosi on such matters.

If they whacked people with a 24% consumption tax like other countries do that would put some major breaks on the spending. But I predict Washington would start wailing and crying and in short order we'd have all the old taxes at the old levels plus the 24% consumption tax on top of it. If they abolished the income tax and property taxes and amended the Constitution to chisel that in stone so politicians couldn't re-implement those taxes then I'd talk a consumption tax.

It's less about spending and revenue than it is about people supporting all the BS both parties needlessly spend money on. Take the 600 bucks a week in unemployment. There are many people who are not looking for work because they make more sitting home on unemployment than they do getting another job. Of course they support it. But if it upped our consumption tax by 1% more, only those who are on it would support it because they'd make out better in the end. Everybody else? Forget about it. State unemployment was enough for other recessions, and it's enough for this one.

It’s over though, my daughter’s unemployment just ended. Got to believe most everyone else’s is too. No new money. Hmmmm

btw, she wanted to work, but the school district wouldn’t open up. Guess what, they just opened . Funny huh?

You mean the fed supplement or the state unemployment? Did she lose both?

 

[initforme]

One cannot live on 37k anywhere in america. Perhaps in some poor run down hicktown. That's not living.

 

[jc456]

I see Democrats are blaming the 'rich' again. Do they have any new talking point that wasn't invented in 1972?

It's too bad the Forbes' flat tax was never adopted. That's the way to go.

What I think we need is a consumption tax in this country. The money will go strictly to our over spending and debt. People on the left love things like free college, paid time off, reparations, free medical care because they know they won't have to pay for it. If we all had to pay, you'd see how fast they'd realize nothing is free, and lose interest in having the federal government provide these things.

If you rob Peter to pay Paul, the Paul's of your society generally have no objections.

It won't work because it doesn't address the underlying problem. No amount of tax revenue will stop these stupid shits in Washington from spending every last dime and continuing to borrow and spend more on top of that. And I have seen that 'dedicated to...' BS pulled at the state level. Oregon promised to dedicate lottery revenue to schools, which they did. Then they took all the money for schools that had been in the general budget and spent that on other crap. Hence the lottery revenue was a net new increase in overall taxation and spending, shocker.

My state did the exact same thing with the lottery.

Politicians spend nothing without the support of the people. Economist Walter E Williams put it best when he said "I'm going to run for Congress. My platform will be that if elected, I will bring no money back to my state. Would you vote for me?"

People overwhelmingly support spending they don't have to pay for. With a consumption tax, everybody has a horse in the race. Our consumption tax will be 10% of every dollar spent. You want free college? It goes up to 11%. You want a greener country, it goes up to 12%. You want healthcare for all, it goes up to 20% and so on.

If we actually had to pay for all this spending, people would refuse to support the politicians that needlessly spend money and that would help solve our spending problem. Some people want stimulus checks and an extra 600 bucks for unemployment. If it raised our consumption tax another percent, you'd see how fast the public would turn against Piglosi on such matters.

If they whacked people with a 24% consumption tax like other countries do that would put some major breaks on the spending. But I predict Washington would start wailing and crying and in short order we'd have all the old taxes at the old levels plus the 24% consumption tax on top of it. If they abolished the income tax and property taxes and amended the Constitution to chisel that in stone so politicians couldn't re-implement those taxes then I'd talk a consumption tax.

It's less about spending and revenue than it is about people supporting all the BS both parties needlessly spend money on. Take the 600 bucks a week in unemployment. There are many people who are not looking for work because they make more sitting home on unemployment than they do getting another job. Of course they support it. But if it upped our consumption tax by 1% more, only those who are on it would support it because they'd make out better in the end. Everybody else? Forget about it. State unemployment was enough for other recessions, and it's enough for this one.

It’s over though, my daughter’s unemployment just ended. Got to believe most everyone else’s is too. No new money. Hmmmm

btw, she wanted to work, but the school district wouldn’t open up. Guess what, they just opened . Funny huh?

You mean the fed supplement or the state unemployment? Did she lose both?

Unemployment is all I know. 600 a week

 

[jc456]

One cannot live on 37k anywhere in america. Perhaps in some poor run down hicktown. That's not living.

Go get a higher paying job. Btw, husband wife would be 74k