Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No they aren’t. They pay in a far lower amount than what is extracted for payment to the welfare recipients. It’s simple math. The average tax payer pays in about $40 per year that goes to welfare. The average welfare recipient receives about $300 per month. So no, they didn’t pay for the cost.Following your train of thought, their family only paid ina percentage of why they would get. Logically the second generation welfare recipient would get a very small amount. However they are getting full benefit which their parents didn’t pay.Nobody finds much interest in discussing the micro percentages of anything. Further, my wealth is my children’s wealth...isn’t that how it’s suppose to work?
If you say that, then the welfare a poor person collects comes from the tax dollars that their previous family members paid in.
You’ll need to make better sense bud.
Are you attempting to tie an analogy together here?
Try to keep up. If your kids wealth is hard earned and productive by association because of what you did, then a person's welfare isn't something they didn't earn and coming out of YOUR tax dollars... it could very well be money THEIR family worked hard for and paid in... by the same association. So if you think your answer is a valid point, the same can be argued on the other side.
What? If their parents of other members of their family paid in and never drew anything out of their own... especially counting interest, then they are more than covering the little amount of welfare the people are getting.
No they aren’t. They pay in a far lower amount than what is extracted for payment to the welfare recipients. It’s simple math.Following your train of thought, their family only paid ina percentage of why they would get. Logically the second generation welfare recipient would get a very small amount. However they are getting full benefit which their parents didn’t pay.If you say that, then the welfare a poor person collects comes from the tax dollars that their previous family members paid in.
You’ll need to make better sense bud.
Are you attempting to tie an analogy together here?
Try to keep up. If your kids wealth is hard earned and productive by association because of what you did, then a person's welfare isn't something they didn't earn and coming out of YOUR tax dollars... it could very well be money THEIR family worked hard for and paid in... by the same association. So if you think your answer is a valid point, the same can be argued on the other side.
What? If their parents of other members of their family paid in and never drew anything out of their own... especially counting interest, then they are more than covering the little amount of welfare the people are getting.
It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?
Obviously neither do you. So your supposition is a mute point. However, the averag taxpayer pays about $40 per year to welfare. The average recipient gets $300 per month. So their parents would have had to work for roughly 7.5 years to cover their expense, but seeing that those payments were not reserved solely for their kids it would be much longer. The other hole in your argument is, I highly doubt any one making $1,000,000 per year would have a kid on welfare. This is way to easy!No they aren’t. They pay in a far lower amount than what is extracted for payment to the welfare recipients. It’s simple math.Following your train of thought, their family only paid ina percentage of why they would get. Logically the second generation welfare recipient would get a very small amount. However they are getting full benefit which their parents didn’t pay.You’ll need to make better sense bud.
Are you attempting to tie an analogy together here?
Try to keep up. If your kids wealth is hard earned and productive by association because of what you did, then a person's welfare isn't something they didn't earn and coming out of YOUR tax dollars... it could very well be money THEIR family worked hard for and paid in... by the same association. So if you think your answer is a valid point, the same can be argued on the other side.
What? If their parents of other members of their family paid in and never drew anything out of their own... especially counting interest, then they are more than covering the little amount of welfare the people are getting.
You have no idea how much the person paid in that was a family member of a person that received welfare... it is on a case by case basis. It could be a person that made $20,000 a year... or it could have been a person that made $1 million a year. you also have no idea how many years a person paid in and never withdrew any welfare money of their own.
Tax cuts for the top 1% while saying there is no money to govern?It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?
It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?
The most productive didn't get tax cuts.
Only worthless inheritance kids that never worked a day in their worthless lives from the time the whores who birthed them.
Trump being one of them.
But just 100 more days until the midterms. When the Dems get back control of the House, the money dries up, day one.
Nice thread you got here though.
Obviously neither do you. So your supposition is a mute point. However, the averag taxpayer pays about $40 per year to welfare. The average recipient gets $300 per month. So their parents would have had to work for roughly 7.5 years to cover their expense, but seeing that those payments were not reserved solely for their kids it would be much longer. The other hole in your argument is, I highly doubt any one making $1,000,000 per year would have a kid on welfare. This is way to easy!No they aren’t. They pay in a far lower amount than what is extracted for payment to the welfare recipients. It’s simple math.Following your train of thought, their family only paid ina percentage of why they would get. Logically the second generation welfare recipient would get a very small amount. However they are getting full benefit which their parents didn’t pay.Try to keep up. If your kids wealth is hard earned and productive by association because of what you did, then a person's welfare isn't something they didn't earn and coming out of YOUR tax dollars... it could very well be money THEIR family worked hard for and paid in... by the same association. So if you think your answer is a valid point, the same can be argued on the other side.
What? If their parents of other members of their family paid in and never drew anything out of their own... especially counting interest, then they are more than covering the little amount of welfare the people are getting.
You have no idea how much the person paid in that was a family member of a person that received welfare... it is on a case by case basis. It could be a person that made $20,000 a year... or it could have been a person that made $1 million a year. you also have no idea how many years a person paid in and never withdrew any welfare money of their own.
Tax cuts for the top 1% while saying there is no money to govern?It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?
Gee, why would that be bad, eh?
And funny how trumpkins do t care about blowing a home in the deficit to distribute wealth upwards to the people who don’t need it.
Trumpkins are vapid
Sorry I don’t give credenza to lies told by uninformed, uneducated broke losersTax cuts for the top 1% while saying there is no money to govern?It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?
Gee, why would that be bad, eh?
And funny how trumpkins do t care about blowing a home in the deficit to distribute wealth upwards to the people who don’t need it.
Trumpkins are vapid
The top 1%...huh?
Consult with Dont Taz Me Bro and @sealyboboabout that. I’m thinking neither are “inheritance kids”.
You people prove just how twisted and lost you really are in nearly every single post. Thanks for that.
Considering that welfare ( not as we know it today ) didn’t start until 1935 and was completely different then, you are just grasping at straws. The government has raided the pantry’s of all programs, so there is no interest and very little principle. Plus you keep forgetting or at least acknowledging that others have benefited from those deposits. It wasn’t a bank account directly for their kids. These programs are set up for “ the common good”. Please try again..Obviously neither do you. So your supposition is a mute point. However, the averag taxpayer pays about $40 per year to welfare. The average recipient gets $300 per month. So their parents would have had to work for roughly 7.5 years to cover their expense, but seeing that those payments were not reserved solely for their kids it would be much longer. The other hole in your argument is, I highly doubt any one making $1,000,000 per year would have a kid on welfare. This is way to easy!No they aren’t. They pay in a far lower amount than what is extracted for payment to the welfare recipients. It’s simple math.Following your train of thought, their family only paid ina percentage of why they would get. Logically the second generation welfare recipient would get a very small amount. However they are getting full benefit which their parents didn’t pay.
What? If their parents of other members of their family paid in and never drew anything out of their own... especially counting interest, then they are more than covering the little amount of welfare the people are getting.
You have no idea how much the person paid in that was a family member of a person that received welfare... it is on a case by case basis. It could be a person that made $20,000 a year... or it could have been a person that made $1 million a year. you also have no idea how many years a person paid in and never withdrew any welfare money of their own.
But you are assuming this is a single generational thing. It's not. If I had a great-grandparent that paid in 100 years ago, do you know how much money that would be with 100 year's interest? Not to mention each year and each generation?
Tax cuts for the top 1% while saying there is no money to govern?It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?
Gee, why would that be bad, eh?
And funny how trumpkins do t care about blowing a home in the deficit to distribute wealth upwards to the people who don’t need it.
Trumpkins are vapid
The top 1%...huh?
Consult with Dont Taz Me Bro and @sealyboboabout that. I’m thinking neither are “inheritance kids”.
You people prove just how twisted and lost you really are in nearly every single post. Thanks for that.
Considering that welfare ( not as we know it today ) didn’t start until 1935 and was completely different then, you are just grasping at straws. The government has raided the pantry’s of all programs, so there is no interest and very little principle. Plus you keep forgetting or at least acknowledging that others have benefited from those deposits. It wasn’t a bank account directly for their kids. These programs are set up for “ the common good”. Please try again..Obviously neither do you. So your supposition is a mute point. However, the averag taxpayer pays about $40 per year to welfare. The average recipient gets $300 per month. So their parents would have had to work for roughly 7.5 years to cover their expense, but seeing that those payments were not reserved solely for their kids it would be much longer. The other hole in your argument is, I highly doubt any one making $1,000,000 per year would have a kid on welfare. This is way to easy!No they aren’t. They pay in a far lower amount than what is extracted for payment to the welfare recipients. It’s simple math.What? If their parents of other members of their family paid in and never drew anything out of their own... especially counting interest, then they are more than covering the little amount of welfare the people are getting.
You have no idea how much the person paid in that was a family member of a person that received welfare... it is on a case by case basis. It could be a person that made $20,000 a year... or it could have been a person that made $1 million a year. you also have no idea how many years a person paid in and never withdrew any welfare money of their own.
But you are assuming this is a single generational thing. It's not. If I had a great-grandparent that paid in 100 years ago, do you know how much money that would be with 100 year's interest? Not to mention each year and each generation?
.
My aren’t you misinformed. They only people that get tax cuts inherited their wealth? Are you prepar d to prove that? Likewise are you prepared to show how the midterms will change all of this to the point where a bunch of Prlisi clones will run things?It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?
The most productive didn't get tax cuts.
Only worthless inheritance kids that never worked a day in their worthless lives from the time the whores who birthed them.
Trump being one of them.
But just 100 more days until the midterms. When the Dems get back control of the House, the money dries up, day one.
Nice thread you got here though.
The purpose of a tax cut in these days of perpetual, massive deficits is to incentivize desired economic activity, whether it be selling capital assets and paying (lower) taxes on them, spending money to stimulate economic activity, or encourage investment or paying down debt.
As for tax cuts generally, Republicans tend to over - estimate the benefits, while Democrats refuse to acknowledge that tax changes affect behavior.
You haven’t addressed the simple math or the simple truth. What you put in to the fund is not reserved for your family. It seems you are challenged. Maybe your next door neighbor can help you. When I put money in my bank account, it is mine and my families. When I put money in the tax system it is for all of America thus it get diluted. Please tell me if this concept is to difficult for you to follow.Considering that welfare ( not as we know it today ) didn’t start until 1935 and was completely different then, you are just grasping at straws. The government has raided the pantry’s of all programs, so there is no interest and very little principle. Plus you keep forgetting or at least acknowledging that others have benefited from those deposits. It wasn’t a bank account directly for their kids. These programs are set up for “ the common good”. Please try again..Obviously neither do you. So your supposition is a mute point. However, the averag taxpayer pays about $40 per year to welfare. The average recipient gets $300 per month. So their parents would have had to work for roughly 7.5 years to cover their expense, but seeing that those payments were not reserved solely for their kids it would be much longer. The other hole in your argument is, I highly doubt any one making $1,000,000 per year would have a kid on welfare. This is way to easy!No they aren’t. They pay in a far lower amount than what is extracted for payment to the welfare recipients. It’s simple math.
You have no idea how much the person paid in that was a family member of a person that received welfare... it is on a case by case basis. It could be a person that made $20,000 a year... or it could have been a person that made $1 million a year. you also have no idea how many years a person paid in and never withdrew any welfare money of their own.
But you are assuming this is a single generational thing. It's not. If I had a great-grandparent that paid in 100 years ago, do you know how much money that would be with 100 year's interest? Not to mention each year and each generation?
.
80 years or 100 years... you look like the one grasping at straws here.
Just because someone is rich doesn't mean they are the most productive. Lots of rich people got their money off the work of their parents or the parents of their parents or the parents of their parents parents.
Nobody finds much interest in discussing the micro percentages of anything. Further, my wealth is my children’s wealth...isn’t that how it’s suppose to work?
If you say that, then the welfare a poor person collects comes from the tax dollars that their previous family members paid in.
You’ll need to make better sense bud.
Are you attempting to tie an analogy together here?
Try to keep up. If your kids wealth is hard earned and productive by association because of what you did, then a person's welfare isn't something they didn't earn and coming out of YOUR tax dollars... it could very well be money THEIR family worked hard for and paid in... by the same association. So if you think your answer is a valid point, the same can be argued on the other side.
My aren’t you misinformed. They only people that get tax cuts inherited their wealth? Are you prepar d to prove that? Likewise are you prepared to show how the midterms will change all of this to the point where a bunch of Prlisi clones will run things?It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?
The most productive didn't get tax cuts.
Only worthless inheritance kids that never worked a day in their worthless lives from the time the whores who birthed them.
Trump being one of them.
But just 100 more days until the midterms. When the Dems get back control of the House, the money dries up, day one.
Nice thread you got here though.
Great advice. Those unexpected costs can crush new homeowners without a big cushion.I've always found it's smart to buy far less house than you can afford. I once had a realtor trying to convince my to buy a house that would required $4000/mo in payments. No thanks.If their house went up in value, then yes they could. However the basic premise applies, if you can’t adford it, don’t buy it. Any idiot that goes out on a limb thinking they may be able to alleviate their problem in the future deserves to lose their ass.It's a fact, asshole.
Come back when you grow up enough to talk to me without calling me names. I don't feel the need to teach someone else the correct way to talk to a person. I already have a toddler at home, that's enough.
Let me get this straight: you insult anyone who voted for Trump, but you think you're entitled to be treated with respect?
If you are stupid enough to borrow more then you can comfortably pay back? Then you are the one at fault. Even a six year old can understand that you can not pay someone two dollars if you only have one.
The bank can foreclose and sell the house. If you are older then six then do you really feel that you need someone to hold your hand all the time?
The big difference is between a Broker and a Fiduciary. The Broker is a salesperson who wins when s/he makes a sale, even if the product purchased by the buyer is likely not to his or her benefit.
The bank is the broker, and they will make a loan without full disclosure to the buyer. A fiduciary would not omit telling the buyer that real estate is not a sure thing, and the balloon payment due in 5 years might not be able to be payed off if the home has gone underwater.
The bank then will bundle all the likely failures to payoff the balloon payment and sell them, they they profit twice, and screw both the buyer and those who bought the bundle.
Everyone who has purchased a home, and signed the loan papers signs a large number of documents with large amount of fine print, and is rushed to sign them even when they are not sure; and trust the loan officer who is a broker, not a fiduciary.You seem to think that everyone should have someone to blame. I am sorry if you are unable to read a contract, if you are unable to fiqure out the math necessary to tell if a ballon payment may be too big for you to handle. Those who are adults read contracts, do math, even consider all the alternatives. If you need someone to hold your hand might I suggest you have a parent or adult guardian walk you through all the ins and outs. Have them explain fiscal responsibility to you in simple enough language that you fully understand it.If you are stupid enough to borrow more then you can comfortably pay back? Then you are the one at fault. Even a six year old can understand that you can not pay someone two dollars if you only have one.
The bank can foreclose and sell the house. If you are older then six then do you really feel that you need someone to hold your hand all the time?
The big difference is between a Broker and a Fiduciary. The Broker is a salesperson who wins when s/he makes a sale, even if the product purchased by the buyer is likely not to his or her benefit.
The bank is the broker, and they will make a loan without full disclosure to the buyer. A fiduciary would not omit telling the buyer that real estate is not a sure thing, and the balloon payment due in 5 years might not be able to be payed off if the home has gone underwater.
The bank then will bundle all the likely failures to payoff the balloon payment and sell them, they they profit twice, and screw both the buyer and those who bought the bundle.
Everyone who has purchased a home, and signed the loan papers signs a large number of documents with large amount of fine print, and is rushed to sign them even when they are not sure; and trust the loan officer who is a broker, not a fiduciary.
It is not others responsibility to make sure that you do not do something stupid.
Many first time home buyers were told they could refinance before the payment is due, and actually get money back from the equity they would accrue.
You must know this to be true, so why lie by omission?
You haven’t addressed the simple math or the simple truth. What you put in to the fund is not reserved for your family. It seems you are challenged. Maybe your next door neighbor can help you. When I put money in my bank account, it is mine and my families. When I put money in the tax system it is for all of America thus it get diluted. Please tell me if this concept is to difficult for you to follow.Considering that welfare ( not as we know it today ) didn’t start until 1935 and was completely different then, you are just grasping at straws. The government has raided the pantry’s of all programs, so there is no interest and very little principle. Plus you keep forgetting or at least acknowledging that others have benefited from those deposits. It wasn’t a bank account directly for their kids. These programs are set up for “ the common good”. Please try again..Obviously neither do you. So your supposition is a mute point. However, the averag taxpayer pays about $40 per year to welfare. The average recipient gets $300 per month. So their parents would have had to work for roughly 7.5 years to cover their expense, but seeing that those payments were not reserved solely for their kids it would be much longer. The other hole in your argument is, I highly doubt any one making $1,000,000 per year would have a kid on welfare. This is way to easy!You have no idea how much the person paid in that was a family member of a person that received welfare... it is on a case by case basis. It could be a person that made $20,000 a year... or it could have been a person that made $1 million a year. you also have no idea how many years a person paid in and never withdrew any welfare money of their own.
But you are assuming this is a single generational thing. It's not. If I had a great-grandparent that paid in 100 years ago, do you know how much money that would be with 100 year's interest? Not to mention each year and each generation?
.
80 years or 100 years... you look like the one grasping at straws here.
It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?
The most productive didn't get tax cuts.
Only worthless inheritance kids that never worked a day in their worthless lives from the time the whores who birthed them.
Trump being one of them.
But just 100 more days until the midterms. When the Dems get back control of the House, the money dries up, day one.
Nice thread you got here though.
My aren’t you misinformed. They only people that get tax cuts inherited their wealth? Are you prepar d to prove that? Likewise are you prepared to show how the midterms will change all of this to the point where a bunch of Prlisi clones will run things?
