I Feel Sorry For Democrats

[rightwinger]

Great. So to prove [roughly] half of income earners pay no tax, you produce evidence the number is actually closer to about 9%. And even that was in 2009 and decreasing.

Thanks!

You need to read a little better or go to the story:

Question: So the reports that half the U.S. doesn't pay taxes are true?

Answer: No, they're not. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington, D.C., 46% of tax filers will owe no federal income tax this year.

Now, out of that 46% that pay no federal income tax, 76% of those people make under $25,000 per year.

Half do not pay income tax because Republicans needed to cut taxes on low wage workers to justify their tax cuts for billionaires

Now they look at the low wage workers not paying taxes and whine that it is not fair to billionaires

Only from the standpoint that Democrats are crying we need more tax money. Other than that, we are all for lower taxes on everybody.

Bottom line: if we have to tax some group of people, why not those who pay no income tax now? Why should we go to the people who pay most all of our tax for the entire country?

How much revenue do you think can be found among about 9% of filers not paying taxes, the vast majority of whom are among the least income earners?

As I said earlier, I think we should have a federal consumption tax. That's what we have in the county I live in. Over here, we all pay 7.75 cents on every dollar that you purchase items wth. The poor pay this tax, the middle-class pay this tax, and the wealthy pay this tax. The more you buy, the more tax that you pay.

It can't get much fairer than that.

Who would it hurt more? The working poor or the wealthy?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You need to read a little better or go to the story:

Question: So the reports that half the U.S. doesn't pay taxes are true?

Answer: No, they're not. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington, D.C., 46% of tax filers will owe no federal income tax this year.

Now, out of that 46% that pay no federal income tax, 76% of those people make under $25,000 per year.

Half do not pay income tax because Republicans needed to cut taxes on low wage workers to justify their tax cuts for billionaires

Now they look at the low wage workers not paying taxes and whine that it is not fair to billionaires

Only from the standpoint that Democrats are crying we need more tax money. Other than that, we are all for lower taxes on everybody.

Bottom line: if we have to tax some group of people, why not those who pay no income tax now? Why should we go to the people who pay most all of our tax for the entire country?

How much revenue do you think can be found among about 9% of filers not paying taxes, the vast majority of whom are among the least income earners?

As I said earlier, I think we should have a federal consumption tax. That's what we have in the county I live in. Over here, we all pay 7.75 cents on every dollar that you purchase items wth. The poor pay this tax, the middle-class pay this tax, and the wealthy pay this tax. The more you buy, the more tax that you pay.

It can't get much fairer than that.

Who would it hurt more? The working poor or the wealthy?

We don't tax people based on who it would hurt more. Hurting people was not the idea of taxation unless you are Obama or various other Democrat control freaks.

Taxation is to fund our society which (to my knowledge) we are all part of.

Nobody eats at a fine restaurant for free because they don't make enough. Nobody goes to an amusement park or movie for free because they don't make enough. Nobody escapes road taxation because they don't make enough. When you buy gasoline for your car, you pay taxes on the gasoline that you use.

 

[Faun]

Great. So to prove [roughly] half of income earners pay no tax, you produce evidence the number is actually closer to about 9%. And even that was in 2009 and decreasing.

Thanks!

You need to read a little better or go to the story:

Question: So the reports that half the U.S. doesn't pay taxes are true?

Answer: No, they're not. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington, D.C., 46% of tax filers will owe no federal income tax this year.

Now, out of that 46% that pay no federal income tax, 76% of those people make under $25,000 per year.

The article you cite has it wrong. They cite the Tax Policy Center but the Tax Policy Center indicates they're talking about households, not individual tax filers...

TPC Tax Topics | Who Doesn't Pay Federal Taxes?

When it comes to individual filers, your article points to 76% of those earning under $25K and 1% earning more than $200K ... at most, 9% of all tax filers.

One more time: 46% of wage earners will not have to pay income taxes. What don't you understand about that? It's right there in the article.

That's simply not true. The Tax Policy Center says it's [currently] 43% of "households," not individual wage earners. You even posted that yourself.

Do you not understand that "housholds" are not the same as "wage earners?"

I can't understand why this is so difficult for you. Let's look at the article again:

Tax breaks, credits ease tax burden

In recent years, the tax code has exploded with more ways for Americans to be forgiven part of their income tax burden, so much so that more Americans seem to avoid paying taxes at all.

Well, there are still those pesky Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes, as well as various state and local sales taxes that are harder to avoid. But more middle- and even upper-income taxpayers are avoiding federal income taxes.

In recent months, estimates that as many as half of all U.S. tax filers might owe no federal income tax at all this year have caused critics to argue the issue of fairness — especially as President Obama and Democratic members of Congress push for higher taxes on wealthier earners.

A tax filer is a person who made income.

Holyfuckingshit!

Again.... you're citing sn article which is misrepresenting its own source. While the article you site says 46% of "filers" paid no federal income tax, its own source, the Tax Policy Center, says it's talking about "households."

I can't help that you're incapable of understanding the distinction.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You need to read a little better or go to the story:

Question: So the reports that half the U.S. doesn't pay taxes are true?

Answer: No, they're not. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington, D.C., 46% of tax filers will owe no federal income tax this year.

Now, out of that 46% that pay no federal income tax, 76% of those people make under $25,000 per year.

The article you cite has it wrong. They cite the Tax Policy Center but the Tax Policy Center indicates they're talking about households, not individual tax filers...

TPC Tax Topics | Who Doesn't Pay Federal Taxes?

When it comes to individual filers, your article points to 76% of those earning under $25K and 1% earning more than $200K ... at most, 9% of all tax filers.

One more time: 46% of wage earners will not have to pay income taxes. What don't you understand about that? It's right there in the article.

That's simply not true. The Tax Policy Center says it's [currently] 43% of "households," not individual wage earners. You even posted that yourself.

Do you not understand that "housholds" are not the same as "wage earners?"

I can't understand why this is so difficult for you. Let's look at the article again:

Tax breaks, credits ease tax burden

In recent years, the tax code has exploded with more ways for Americans to be forgiven part of their income tax burden, so much so that more Americans seem to avoid paying taxes at all.

Well, there are still those pesky Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes, as well as various state and local sales taxes that are harder to avoid. But more middle- and even upper-income taxpayers are avoiding federal income taxes.

In recent months, estimates that as many as half of all U.S. tax filers might owe no federal income tax at all this year have caused critics to argue the issue of fairness — especially as President Obama and Democratic members of Congress push for higher taxes on wealthier earners.

A tax filer is a person who made income.

Holyfuckingshit!

Again.... you're citing sn article which is misrepresenting its own source. While the article you site says 46% of "filers" paid no federal income tax, its own source, the Tax Policy Center, says it's talking about "households."

I can't help that you're incapable of understanding the distinction.

You're misreading the report. The article is not from some blog site, it's from USA Today which is a national publication with the finest editors and reporters, but you seem to know more. Unbelievable.

 

[Faun]

Half do not pay income tax because Republicans needed to cut taxes on low wage workers to justify their tax cuts for billionaires

Now they look at the low wage workers not paying taxes and whine that it is not fair to billionaires

Only from the standpoint that Democrats are crying we need more tax money. Other than that, we are all for lower taxes on everybody.

Bottom line: if we have to tax some group of people, why not those who pay no income tax now? Why should we go to the people who pay most all of our tax for the entire country?

How much revenue do you think can be found among about 9% of filers not paying taxes, the vast majority of whom are among the least income earners?

As I said earlier, I think we should have a federal consumption tax. That's what we have in the county I live in. Over here, we all pay 7.75 cents on every dollar that you purchase items wth. The poor pay this tax, the middle-class pay this tax, and the wealthy pay this tax. The more you buy, the more tax that you pay.

It can't get much fairer than that.

Who would it hurt more? The working poor or the wealthy?

We don't tax people based on who it would hurt more. Hurting people was not the idea of taxation unless you are Obama or various other Democrat control freaks.

Taxation is to fund our society which (to my knowledge) we are all part of.

Nobody eats at a fine restaurant for free because they don't make enough. Nobody goes to an amusement park or movie for free because they don't make enough. Nobody escapes road taxation because they don't make enough. When you buy gasoline for your car, you pay taxes on the gasoline that you use.

Correct. We tax people based on whom it would least. Which is why we have a progressive tax system and not a flat tax.

 

[Faun]

The article you cite has it wrong. They cite the Tax Policy Center but the Tax Policy Center indicates they're talking about households, not individual tax filers...

TPC Tax Topics | Who Doesn't Pay Federal Taxes?

When it comes to individual filers, your article points to 76% of those earning under $25K and 1% earning more than $200K ... at most, 9% of all tax filers.

One more time: 46% of wage earners will not have to pay income taxes. What don't you understand about that? It's right there in the article.

That's simply not true. The Tax Policy Center says it's [currently] 43% of "households," not individual wage earners. You even posted that yourself.

Do you not understand that "housholds" are not the same as "wage earners?"

I can't understand why this is so difficult for you. Let's look at the article again:

Tax breaks, credits ease tax burden

In recent years, the tax code has exploded with more ways for Americans to be forgiven part of their income tax burden, so much so that more Americans seem to avoid paying taxes at all.

Well, there are still those pesky Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes, as well as various state and local sales taxes that are harder to avoid. But more middle- and even upper-income taxpayers are avoiding federal income taxes.

In recent months, estimates that as many as half of all U.S. tax filers might owe no federal income tax at all this year have caused critics to argue the issue of fairness — especially as President Obama and Democratic members of Congress push for higher taxes on wealthier earners.

A tax filer is a person who made income.

Holyfuckingshit!

Again.... you're citing sn article which is misrepresenting its own source. While the article you site says 46% of "filers" paid no federal income tax, its own source, the Tax Policy Center, says it's talking about "households."

I can't help that you're incapable of understanding the distinction.

You're misreading the report. The article is not from some blog site, it's from USA Today which is a national publication with the finest editors and reporters, but you seem to know more. Unbelievable.

I don't give a fuck who it's from. They cite their source. Their own source belies their mistaken claims.

Even worse, the specific numbers they throw out indicate only about 9% of filers pay no tax.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

One more time: 46% of wage earners will not have to pay income taxes. What don't you understand about that? It's right there in the article.

That's simply not true. The Tax Policy Center says it's [currently] 43% of "households," not individual wage earners. You even posted that yourself.

Do you not understand that "housholds" are not the same as "wage earners?"

I can't understand why this is so difficult for you. Let's look at the article again:

Tax breaks, credits ease tax burden

In recent years, the tax code has exploded with more ways for Americans to be forgiven part of their income tax burden, so much so that more Americans seem to avoid paying taxes at all.

Well, there are still those pesky Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes, as well as various state and local sales taxes that are harder to avoid. But more middle- and even upper-income taxpayers are avoiding federal income taxes.

In recent months, estimates that as many as half of all U.S. tax filers might owe no federal income tax at all this year have caused critics to argue the issue of fairness — especially as President Obama and Democratic members of Congress push for higher taxes on wealthier earners.

A tax filer is a person who made income.

Holyfuckingshit!

Again.... you're citing sn article which is misrepresenting its own source. While the article you site says 46% of "filers" paid no federal income tax, its own source, the Tax Policy Center, says it's talking about "households."

I can't help that you're incapable of understanding the distinction.

You're misreading the report. The article is not from some blog site, it's from USA Today which is a national publication with the finest editors and reporters, but you seem to know more. Unbelievable.

I don't give a fuck who it's from. They cite their source. Their own source belies their mistaken claims.

Even worse, the specific numbers they throw out indicate only about 9% of filers pay no tax.

Correct. You are right, and USA Today is wrong. The CBO is wrong. Everybody is wrong except you in spite of the multiple sources presented.

 

[rightwinger]

Half do not pay income tax because Republicans needed to cut taxes on low wage workers to justify their tax cuts for billionaires

Now they look at the low wage workers not paying taxes and whine that it is not fair to billionaires

Only from the standpoint that Democrats are crying we need more tax money. Other than that, we are all for lower taxes on everybody.

Bottom line: if we have to tax some group of people, why not those who pay no income tax now? Why should we go to the people who pay most all of our tax for the entire country?

How much revenue do you think can be found among about 9% of filers not paying taxes, the vast majority of whom are among the least income earners?

As I said earlier, I think we should have a federal consumption tax. That's what we have in the county I live in. Over here, we all pay 7.75 cents on every dollar that you purchase items wth. The poor pay this tax, the middle-class pay this tax, and the wealthy pay this tax. The more you buy, the more tax that you pay.

It can't get much fairer than that.

Who would it hurt more? The working poor or the wealthy?

We don't tax people based on who it would hurt more. Hurting people was not the idea of taxation unless you are Obama or various other Democrat control freaks.

Taxation is to fund our society which (to my knowledge) we are all part of.

Nobody eats at a fine restaurant for free because they don't make enough. Nobody goes to an amusement park or movie for free because they don't make enough. Nobody escapes road taxation because they don't make enough. When you buy gasoline for your car, you pay taxes on the gasoline that you use.

That is exactly what we do

We don't want to take money away from families struggling to survive. You tax where the money is, not where it is not

 

[Faun]

That's simply not true. The Tax Policy Center says it's [currently] 43% of "households," not individual wage earners. You even posted that yourself.

Do you not understand that "housholds" are not the same as "wage earners?"

I can't understand why this is so difficult for you. Let's look at the article again:

Tax breaks, credits ease tax burden

In recent years, the tax code has exploded with more ways for Americans to be forgiven part of their income tax burden, so much so that more Americans seem to avoid paying taxes at all.

Well, there are still those pesky Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes, as well as various state and local sales taxes that are harder to avoid. But more middle- and even upper-income taxpayers are avoiding federal income taxes.

In recent months, estimates that as many as half of all U.S. tax filers might owe no federal income tax at all this year have caused critics to argue the issue of fairness — especially as President Obama and Democratic members of Congress push for higher taxes on wealthier earners.

A tax filer is a person who made income.

Holyfuckingshit!

Again.... you're citing sn article which is misrepresenting its own source. While the article you site says 46% of "filers" paid no federal income tax, its own source, the Tax Policy Center, says it's talking about "households."

I can't help that you're incapable of understanding the distinction.

You're misreading the report. The article is not from some blog site, it's from USA Today which is a national publication with the finest editors and reporters, but you seem to know more. Unbelievable.

I don't give a fuck who it's from. They cite their source. Their own source belies their mistaken claims.

Even worse, the specific numbers they throw out indicate only about 9% of filers pay no tax.

Correct. You are right, and USA Today is wrong. The CBO is wrong. Everybody is wrong except you in spite of the multiple sources presented.

Too fucking stupid. USAToday's own source indicates they misrepresented what the Tax Policy Center stated.

Whom do you believe? USAToday or the source they cite? How on Earth could the Tax Policy center be wrong but USAToday be right when USAToday is citing the Tax Policy Center?

And now, for the coup de grace....

Another USAToday article, from roughly the same time period, also citing the Tax Policy Center, but without misrepresenting their own source...

Fact check: The wealthy already pay more taxes

The Tax Policy Center estimates that 46% of households, mostly low- and medium-income households, will pay no federal income taxes this year. Most, however, will pay other taxes, including Social Security payroll taxes.​

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Only from the standpoint that Democrats are crying we need more tax money. Other than that, we are all for lower taxes on everybody.

Bottom line: if we have to tax some group of people, why not those who pay no income tax now? Why should we go to the people who pay most all of our tax for the entire country?

How much revenue do you think can be found among about 9% of filers not paying taxes, the vast majority of whom are among the least income earners?

As I said earlier, I think we should have a federal consumption tax. That's what we have in the county I live in. Over here, we all pay 7.75 cents on every dollar that you purchase items wth. The poor pay this tax, the middle-class pay this tax, and the wealthy pay this tax. The more you buy, the more tax that you pay.

It can't get much fairer than that.

Who would it hurt more? The working poor or the wealthy?

We don't tax people based on who it would hurt more. Hurting people was not the idea of taxation unless you are Obama or various other Democrat control freaks.

Taxation is to fund our society which (to my knowledge) we are all part of.

Nobody eats at a fine restaurant for free because they don't make enough. Nobody goes to an amusement park or movie for free because they don't make enough. Nobody escapes road taxation because they don't make enough. When you buy gasoline for your car, you pay taxes on the gasoline that you use.

That is exactly what we do

We don't want to take money away from families struggling to survive. You tax where the money is, not where it is not

Then why was DumBama's first initiative to place a sin tax on cigarettes when he got into office---cigarettes which are mostly used by lower income to middle-class people? Why was there no concern about what the poor could afford when DumBama closed down coal fired power plants and placing heavy and expensive restrictions on those that remained open which costs will be transferred to the consumer?

When it comes to paying income taxes, no way should those poor, poor people pay. But costs that promote a Democrat agenda, no problem, those poor people have the money.

 

[rightwinger]

How much revenue do you think can be found among about 9% of filers not paying taxes, the vast majority of whom are among the least income earners?

As I said earlier, I think we should have a federal consumption tax. That's what we have in the county I live in. Over here, we all pay 7.75 cents on every dollar that you purchase items wth. The poor pay this tax, the middle-class pay this tax, and the wealthy pay this tax. The more you buy, the more tax that you pay.

It can't get much fairer than that.

Who would it hurt more? The working poor or the wealthy?

We don't tax people based on who it would hurt more. Hurting people was not the idea of taxation unless you are Obama or various other Democrat control freaks.

Taxation is to fund our society which (to my knowledge) we are all part of.

Nobody eats at a fine restaurant for free because they don't make enough. Nobody goes to an amusement park or movie for free because they don't make enough. Nobody escapes road taxation because they don't make enough. When you buy gasoline for your car, you pay taxes on the gasoline that you use.

That is exactly what we do

We don't want to take money away from families struggling to survive. You tax where the money is, not where it is not

Then why was DumBama's first initiative to place a sin tax on cigarettes when he got into office---cigarettes which are mostly used by lower income to middle-class people? Why was there no concern about what the poor could afford when DumBama closed down coal fired power plants and placing heavy and expensive restrictions on those that remained open which costs will be transferred to the consumer?

When it comes to paying income taxes, no way should those poor, poor people pay. But costs that promote a Democrat agenda, no problem, those poor people have the money.

They call them sin taxes for a reason

Republicans are making poverty a sin and seeking to raise taxes on it

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I can't understand why this is so difficult for you. Let's look at the article again:

Tax breaks, credits ease tax burden

In recent years, the tax code has exploded with more ways for Americans to be forgiven part of their income tax burden, so much so that more Americans seem to avoid paying taxes at all.

Well, there are still those pesky Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes, as well as various state and local sales taxes that are harder to avoid. But more middle- and even upper-income taxpayers are avoiding federal income taxes.

In recent months, estimates that as many as half of all U.S. tax filers might owe no federal income tax at all this year have caused critics to argue the issue of fairness — especially as President Obama and Democratic members of Congress push for higher taxes on wealthier earners.

A tax filer is a person who made income.

Holyfuckingshit!

Again.... you're citing sn article which is misrepresenting its own source. While the article you site says 46% of "filers" paid no federal income tax, its own source, the Tax Policy Center, says it's talking about "households."

I can't help that you're incapable of understanding the distinction.

You're misreading the report. The article is not from some blog site, it's from USA Today which is a national publication with the finest editors and reporters, but you seem to know more. Unbelievable.

I don't give a fuck who it's from. They cite their source. Their own source belies their mistaken claims.

Even worse, the specific numbers they throw out indicate only about 9% of filers pay no tax.

Correct. You are right, and USA Today is wrong. The CBO is wrong. Everybody is wrong except you in spite of the multiple sources presented.

Too fucking stupid. USAToday's own source indicates they misrepresented what the Tax Policy Center stated.

Whom do you believe? USAToday or the source they cite? How on Earth could the Tax Policy center be wrong but USAToday be right when USAToday is citing the Tax Policy Center?

And now, for the coup de grace....

Another USAToday article, from roughly the same time period, also citing the Tax Policy Center, but without misrepresenting their own source...

Fact check: The wealthy already pay more taxes

The Tax Policy Center estimates that 46% of households, mostly low- and medium-income households, will pay no federal income taxes this year. Most, however, will pay other taxes, including Social Security payroll taxes.​

That's 46% of heads of households that actually bring in income. That's the only people the tax policy can count.

From FactCheck.org:

Figures come from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, and its most recent analysis in July 2011 put the figure for that year at 46.4 percent. That comes to about 76 million individuals or families who paid no federal income taxes in 2011. TPC projected that the percentage would fall to 46 percent this year, and to 44 percent in 2013, under current tax policies.

Dependency and Romney’s 47 Percenters

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

As I said earlier, I think we should have a federal consumption tax. That's what we have in the county I live in. Over here, we all pay 7.75 cents on every dollar that you purchase items wth. The poor pay this tax, the middle-class pay this tax, and the wealthy pay this tax. The more you buy, the more tax that you pay.

It can't get much fairer than that.

Who would it hurt more? The working poor or the wealthy?

We don't tax people based on who it would hurt more. Hurting people was not the idea of taxation unless you are Obama or various other Democrat control freaks.

Taxation is to fund our society which (to my knowledge) we are all part of.

Nobody eats at a fine restaurant for free because they don't make enough. Nobody goes to an amusement park or movie for free because they don't make enough. Nobody escapes road taxation because they don't make enough. When you buy gasoline for your car, you pay taxes on the gasoline that you use.

That is exactly what we do

We don't want to take money away from families struggling to survive. You tax where the money is, not where it is not

Then why was DumBama's first initiative to place a sin tax on cigarettes when he got into office---cigarettes which are mostly used by lower income to middle-class people? Why was there no concern about what the poor could afford when DumBama closed down coal fired power plants and placing heavy and expensive restrictions on those that remained open which costs will be transferred to the consumer?

When it comes to paying income taxes, no way should those poor, poor people pay. But costs that promote a Democrat agenda, no problem, those poor people have the money.

They call them sin taxes for a reason

Republicans are making poverty a sin and seeking to raise taxes on it

Yes, they call them sin taxes for a reason. And the reason is it's a sin to try and control people through taxation.

So how is it Republicans are making poverty a sin and Democrats not? Did any Democrat consider what burning up our food supply would do to the cost of food for poor people when they came out with ethanol? Of course not. They didn't care. As long as it promotes a greener environment, that's all that matters.

 

[jasonnfree]

I guess these long threads drift away from the first post. Like the dems debate was silly and inept, which it wasn't.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I guess these long threads drift away from the first post. Like the dems debate was silly and inept, which it wasn't.

Of course it wasn't. Sanders tried to say that global warming will fuel terrorism. How can anybody call that silly or inept?

 

[rightwinger]

Who would it hurt more? The working poor or the wealthy?

We don't tax people based on who it would hurt more. Hurting people was not the idea of taxation unless you are Obama or various other Democrat control freaks.

Taxation is to fund our society which (to my knowledge) we are all part of.

Nobody eats at a fine restaurant for free because they don't make enough. Nobody goes to an amusement park or movie for free because they don't make enough. Nobody escapes road taxation because they don't make enough. When you buy gasoline for your car, you pay taxes on the gasoline that you use.

That is exactly what we do

We don't want to take money away from families struggling to survive. You tax where the money is, not where it is not

Then why was DumBama's first initiative to place a sin tax on cigarettes when he got into office---cigarettes which are mostly used by lower income to middle-class people? Why was there no concern about what the poor could afford when DumBama closed down coal fired power plants and placing heavy and expensive restrictions on those that remained open which costs will be transferred to the consumer?

When it comes to paying income taxes, no way should those poor, poor people pay. But costs that promote a Democrat agenda, no problem, those poor people have the money.

They call them sin taxes for a reason

Republicans are making poverty a sin and seeking to raise taxes on it

Yes, they call them sin taxes for a reason. And the reason is it's a sin to try and control people through taxation.

So how is it Republicans are making poverty a sin and Democrats not? Did any Democrat consider what burning up our food supply would do to the cost of food for poor people when they came out with ethanol? Of course not. They didn't care. As long as it promotes a greener environment, that's all that matters.

Actually cigarette smoking is way down. The price of a pack is a big contributor

Seems Republicans are trying the same tactic....making it too expensive to be poor

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

We don't tax people based on who it would hurt more. Hurting people was not the idea of taxation unless you are Obama or various other Democrat control freaks.

Taxation is to fund our society which (to my knowledge) we are all part of.

Nobody eats at a fine restaurant for free because they don't make enough. Nobody goes to an amusement park or movie for free because they don't make enough. Nobody escapes road taxation because they don't make enough. When you buy gasoline for your car, you pay taxes on the gasoline that you use.

That is exactly what we do

We don't want to take money away from families struggling to survive. You tax where the money is, not where it is not

Then why was DumBama's first initiative to place a sin tax on cigarettes when he got into office---cigarettes which are mostly used by lower income to middle-class people? Why was there no concern about what the poor could afford when DumBama closed down coal fired power plants and placing heavy and expensive restrictions on those that remained open which costs will be transferred to the consumer?

When it comes to paying income taxes, no way should those poor, poor people pay. But costs that promote a Democrat agenda, no problem, those poor people have the money.

They call them sin taxes for a reason

Republicans are making poverty a sin and seeking to raise taxes on it

Yes, they call them sin taxes for a reason. And the reason is it's a sin to try and control people through taxation.

So how is it Republicans are making poverty a sin and Democrats not? Did any Democrat consider what burning up our food supply would do to the cost of food for poor people when they came out with ethanol? Of course not. They didn't care. As long as it promotes a greener environment, that's all that matters.

Actually cigarette smoking is way down. The price of a pack is a big contributor

Seems Republicans are trying the same tactic....making it too expensive to be poor

The problem we Republicans have is that these poor people will vote for anybody that promises to take money away from somebody else to give to them. That tactic would be brought to a halt if everybody had to contribute.

With my consumption tax suggestion, if you want socialized health care, then we all pay more tax. If you want free college, then we all pay more tax. If you want to go to war with ISIS, then we all pay more tax. If you want to give 45 million Americans food stamps, then we all pay more tax.

Our social programs are out of control, and the reason is Democrats promise to give goodies to the majority at the expense of the minority, therefore, the minority has no way to protect themselves from this robbery.

If everybody had to pay for all these goodies, you would see how less compassionate those Democrats would be, and we would finally be able to reign in our excessive social program spending.

 

[Faun]

Holyfuckingshit!

Again.... you're citing sn article which is misrepresenting its own source. While the article you site says 46% of "filers" paid no federal income tax, its own source, the Tax Policy Center, says it's talking about "households."

I can't help that you're incapable of understanding the distinction.

You're misreading the report. The article is not from some blog site, it's from USA Today which is a national publication with the finest editors and reporters, but you seem to know more. Unbelievable.

I don't give a fuck who it's from. They cite their source. Their own source belies their mistaken claims.

Even worse, the specific numbers they throw out indicate only about 9% of filers pay no tax.

Correct. You are right, and USA Today is wrong. The CBO is wrong. Everybody is wrong except you in spite of the multiple sources presented.

Too fucking stupid. USAToday's own source indicates they misrepresented what the Tax Policy Center stated.

Whom do you believe? USAToday or the source they cite? How on Earth could the Tax Policy center be wrong but USAToday be right when USAToday is citing the Tax Policy Center?

And now, for the coup de grace....

Another USAToday article, from roughly the same time period, also citing the Tax Policy Center, but without misrepresenting their own source...

Fact check: The wealthy already pay more taxes

The Tax Policy Center estimates that 46% of households, mostly low- and medium-income households, will pay no federal income taxes this year. Most, however, will pay other taxes, including Social Security payroll taxes.​

That's 46% of heads of households that actually bring in income. That's the only people the tax policy can count.

From FactCheck.org:

Figures come from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, and its most recent analysis in July 2011 put the figure for that year at 46.4 percent. That comes to about 76 million individuals or families who paid no federal income taxes in 2011. TPC projected that the percentage would fall to 46 percent this year, and to 44 percent in 2013, under current tax policies.

Dependency and Romney’s 47 Percenters

Fair enough. The link ....

Baseline Distribution of Tax Units with No Tax Liability, Current Law, Current Policy and Administration's FY2012 Budget Proposals, 2012-2022

... identifies them not as "households," but as "tax units."

 

[rightwinger]

That is exactly what we do

We don't want to take money away from families struggling to survive. You tax where the money is, not where it is not

Then why was DumBama's first initiative to place a sin tax on cigarettes when he got into office---cigarettes which are mostly used by lower income to middle-class people? Why was there no concern about what the poor could afford when DumBama closed down coal fired power plants and placing heavy and expensive restrictions on those that remained open which costs will be transferred to the consumer?

When it comes to paying income taxes, no way should those poor, poor people pay. But costs that promote a Democrat agenda, no problem, those poor people have the money.

They call them sin taxes for a reason

Republicans are making poverty a sin and seeking to raise taxes on it

Yes, they call them sin taxes for a reason. And the reason is it's a sin to try and control people through taxation.

So how is it Republicans are making poverty a sin and Democrats not? Did any Democrat consider what burning up our food supply would do to the cost of food for poor people when they came out with ethanol? Of course not. They didn't care. As long as it promotes a greener environment, that's all that matters.

Actually cigarette smoking is way down. The price of a pack is a big contributor

Seems Republicans are trying the same tactic....making it too expensive to be poor

The problem we Republicans have is that these poor people will vote for anybody that promises to take money away from somebody else to give to them. That tactic would be brought to a halt if everybody had to contribute.

With my consumption tax suggestion, if you want socialized health care, then we all pay more tax. If you want free college, then we all pay more tax. If you want to go to war with ISIS, then we all pay more tax. If you want to give 45 million Americans food stamps, then we all pay more tax.

Our social programs are out of control, and the reason is Democrats promise to give goodies to the majority at the expense of the minority, therefore, the minority has no way to protect themselves from this robbery.

If everybody had to pay for all these goodies, you would see how less compassionate those Democrats would be, and we would finally be able to reign in our excessive social program spending.

Give poor people jobs and they will vote Republican forever

What is stopping you?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Then why was DumBama's first initiative to place a sin tax on cigarettes when he got into office---cigarettes which are mostly used by lower income to middle-class people? Why was there no concern about what the poor could afford when DumBama closed down coal fired power plants and placing heavy and expensive restrictions on those that remained open which costs will be transferred to the consumer?

When it comes to paying income taxes, no way should those poor, poor people pay. But costs that promote a Democrat agenda, no problem, those poor people have the money.

They call them sin taxes for a reason

Republicans are making poverty a sin and seeking to raise taxes on it

Yes, they call them sin taxes for a reason. And the reason is it's a sin to try and control people through taxation.

So how is it Republicans are making poverty a sin and Democrats not? Did any Democrat consider what burning up our food supply would do to the cost of food for poor people when they came out with ethanol? Of course not. They didn't care. As long as it promotes a greener environment, that's all that matters.

Actually cigarette smoking is way down. The price of a pack is a big contributor

Seems Republicans are trying the same tactic....making it too expensive to be poor

The problem we Republicans have is that these poor people will vote for anybody that promises to take money away from somebody else to give to them. That tactic would be brought to a halt if everybody had to contribute.

With my consumption tax suggestion, if you want socialized health care, then we all pay more tax. If you want free college, then we all pay more tax. If you want to go to war with ISIS, then we all pay more tax. If you want to give 45 million Americans food stamps, then we all pay more tax.

Our social programs are out of control, and the reason is Democrats promise to give goodies to the majority at the expense of the minority, therefore, the minority has no way to protect themselves from this robbery.

If everybody had to pay for all these goodies, you would see how less compassionate those Democrats would be, and we would finally be able to reign in our excessive social program spending.

Give poor people jobs and they will vote Republican forever

What is stopping you?

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. There are plenty of jobs out there but the lazy society suckers are sitting at home in front of their big screen with their Obama phone. They don't want to work because in many cases, being on the dole is just as advantageous as working.

The only way some of these people will take a job is if there are no other choices. But given the choice, they will stay unemployed.