None of you are rich. Why are you defending billionaires?

[bripat9643]

Once more for the cheapseats and mentally impaired: A tax is something YOU pay...and if a system is creating based on taxes diverted from your paycheck, YOU PAY INTO IT. Then when you reach retirement age, you collect your social security check.

So if a mugger holds you up at gunpoint and takes all your cash, you've "PAID INTO" your mugger account and expect to get something back?

Liberals are a hoot!

A matter of fact, a matter of history ... unless our resident neocon/teabagger imbeciles can show how the Soc. Sec. fund magically has money alloted to it outside the taxing of American citizens.

There's no money in it, nitwit. What do you think we've been trying to pound into your skull for weeks and weeks?

Now will somebody please explain it to Bripat again, as I'm tired of dealing with insipidly stubborn neocon/teabagger's willful ignorance and lame ass Limbaugh mantras.

Explain what, how you have some kind of "account" with Social Security that has actual spendable money in it?

After that can you explain how the tooth fairy gets the money under my pillow?

 

[oreo]

I didn't know being successful was wrong.

Especially if you masterminded a successful business from the bottom up..

This administrations policy from the very get-go was always to punish success while rewarding failure. Obama's comments to Joe the Plumber when he thought he wasn't being video-taped could not have been more clear. It's called wealth-redistribution aka SOCIALISM.

Barack Obama--sounds more like a banana republic 3rd world dictator--when he gives his class warfare speeches. Obama doesn't lift people up--he tears them down--and he has scared the b--b--gees out of business in this country with his continual threats of higher taxes--on hard working successful people. In return they have tucked in like a turtle and are waiting for the threat to leave.



One Big Ass Mistake America

 

[Bfgrn]

HA! There is no such thing as "earned programs" or "paid" ( not "payed") into".
If your theory regarding entitlements is that ALL money TAXED yes, TAXED would be returned to the payor..Not so. In each of the entitlement programs. workers are TAXED then only a small portion of that money is returned to the taxpayer
There are no "accounts". There are no "trust funds".
Learn this and learn well. Medicare/ SS and FICA are TAXES. Period.
The only difference between these taxes and other taxes is that regular taxes go to pay for government services. The above taxes are used for other purposes and a small portion of the money is returned to the taxpayer.
You people think social entitlements are not large enough. You'd like to see tax rates skyrocket to fund your pet programs.
Look, this is going to piss you off. Those in DC who want to expand entitlements and transfer payments don't give a rat's ass about the people who these things are directed to. All they want are the votes. The more dependence on government they can create, the more likely the elected people who provided the goodies would keep their seats.
That's all and that's it.

Thank you for proving you have no connection with reality.

Social Security is a social insurance program that is primarily funded through dedicated payroll taxes called Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax (FICA). Tax deposits are formally entrusted to the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, or the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund.

Medicare alone has lifted millions of elderly Americans from poverty. Before Medicare, 56% of retired Americans had NO medical insurance. Elderly Americans were among the most likely to end up in poverty. NOW, they are among the least likely to end up in poverty. Medicare gave senior citizens the dignity to sustain the end of their lives independent of their children and family.

It is the VERY BEST of what government can do for WE, THE PEOPLE.

Yes, that it the definition of these programs. However, they are in no way administered in that manner. The bottom lien is while the so called trust funds exist in theory, they are NOT funded with cash. They are funded with IOU's.
Both systems are broken. They are underfunded and mismanaged. The money taken in the form of taxes is used for other than the intended purpose.
THAT is reality.

Well, you can thank Reagan for that. But the government has always paid the IOU's. Are you saying they shouldn't?

The programs are solvent and can be properly funded without drastic changes.

 

[Unkotare]

[

You got problems if you cannot live well on 1/4 mill per year.

The national average wage index for 2009 is 40,711.61

250k is over 6 times the average national wage.

It's probably too much, eh comrade? Gotta take enough of that away to make 'em humble, right?

 

[Dr Grump]

[

You got problems if you cannot live well on 1/4 mill per year.

The national average wage index for 2009 is 40,711.61

250k is over 6 times the average national wage.

It's probably too much, eh comrade? Gotta take enough of that away to make 'em humble, right?

Naw, don't tax the rich. They're spethill.....

 

[The Gadfly]

Translation: the link I provide PROVES that the ballyhoo by neocon/teabagger toadies about taxes on those making $250,000 is very misleading. So unless SiModo is making over 200,000 as an individual or $250,000 with his wife, he's just talking sheer BS, as Obama's tax increase is NOT aimed at him. So Si Modo's last sentence was obviously a projection of his own self.

Yet again, you demonstrate that your party is full of morons - you being one of them. You state the obvious assuming I have no idea what the limits are.

Moron.

A household income of $250K does not make me rich.

Idiot.

it sure as hell does not make you the working poor either.

You got problems if you cannot live well on 1/4 mill per year.

The national average wage index for 2009 is 40,711.61

250k is over 6 times the average national wage.

So what? I make more than that, BUT I spent a lifetime earning it; honestly, I might add; I didn't somehow "steal it from the workers." Now, according to you, I owe it to you and anyone else who was less successful? I don't think so. You want what I've got, you have two options: earn it, or come and try to take it. Of course, you and your party of choice advocate another option: have government steal for you, what you are either too lazy, too incompetent, or too gutless to earn or even steal for yourselves! If that doesn't prove the democrat party is nothing, absolutely NOTHING, but the party of thieves, malcontents and assorted losers and parasites, I cannot imagine what would!! I don't know what else to call it, except what it is. I not only despise your party, I HATE it, I would love to see it destroyed. You wanted to create class enemies, out of your damn spite and envy, so be it! You have made yourselves the enemies of every successful person in the country. I do not, and I never will, support ANY compromise with you people on ANYTHING! I prefer absolutely ANYTHING, even war, if it comes to it, over democrat rule! So I tell you what; I can be as nasty as you, so I will oppose ANYTHING, that benefits your party, or any of its constituencies, out of the same spite you have continually demonstrated; our side can play that game too! That is just as "reasonable" as you people are!

 

[bripat9643]

Naw, don't tax the rich. They're spethill.....

You're a special kind of moron.

 

[MikeK]

Most of us who vehemently disagree with Obama's agenda of "taxing the rich" i.e., taxing achievement, are not against an economically sound taxation of the billionaires, and I mean billionaires. There is no doubt that beyond a certain point of taxation the billionaires will pick up their investments and play their games in other countries, with tremendous benefits to those other countries.

The overwhelming number of us, if not all, are against Obama's agenda of taxing those with single incomes ~ $200,000 and Married incomes ~250,000 which is the income of successful people who earned the money not to be doled out to the undeserving lazies because of Obama's clearly Socialistic or Communistic agenda.

The main reason the overwhelming number of us are against Obama's agenda is that people with incomes ~$200,000 - $500,000 are usually the small business owners who are responsible for ~75% of our Nation's employment. And, in spite of the Obama rhetoric of being a "warrior" for the middle class, it is the very class that the mendacious Obama is destroying.

And, even taxing the corporations is non-productive because clearly the corporations pass on their taxes to the consumers. Even a retarded nincompoop knows that.

In view of the above, it is monumentally obvious that Obama is ideologically committed to Socialism even though his European model is clearly a disaster or near disaster. Also, even though some Socialistic Scandinavian countries with a homogenous population and a semi-equal level of achievement can get away with a Socialistic structure, it is clearly an impossibility to foist the Socialistic structure on our 300 million population which is comprised of tens of millions of ignorant inhabitants, tens of millions of permanent welfare parasites, drug addicts, and incorrigible lazies.

Nevertheless Obama is committed to Socialism (or interim Communism) and is disguising it as a "class warfare" issue for the 2012 election purposes.

Really? So - they don't benefit us, but if they receive a reasonable tax rate, they'll go bless someone else beyond their wildest dreams? I gotta doubt that.

I am simply amazed how you can distort what I stated to the point where your interpretation of what I stated hasn't any resemblance to my actual statements.

First, billionaires benefit us because their investments provide us with jobs. You got that ass-backwards. Second, I stated that if billionaires are taxed beyond a reasonable amount they will leave our country and other countries will benefit from their investments thus causing a shortfall here, and a benefit to the other countries.[...]

It seems you are too easily deluded by imaginative right-wing propaganda. The fact is taking one's marbles and going elsewhere is not as simple a proposition as you make it out to be.

While I will say it would be easier to do with a fascist power structure such as the Bush Administration in place, even a moderately patriotic government would not permit an individual or a corporate entity to just walk away with the proceeds derived from exploiting the material, economic and human resources of the United States as if it doesn't owe this Nation a debt.

Consider the fact that today's individual and corporate tax rates are extremely low compared with what they were during the economic boom years of the 40s through to the 80s when the top progressive rate was ninety-one percent! Did any millionaires or blue-chip corporations leave or threaten to leave back then because they didn't like the tax rate? They did not for three reasons.

First, to do so would be regarded as a form of treachery which would leave them subject to appropriate retaliation in the event of radical changes in world economy. Second, where could they go where they would be guaranteed a permanently lower tax rate and equally secure legal protections? Third and most important, there happens to be a rather substantial Exit Tax which must be paid to the IRS prior to personal and/or economic expatriation. While it is not as prohibitive today is it was in the past there is no reason why it cannot be increased to whatever level is deemed appropriate under existing circumstances.

Just because the present day corporatocracy has been getting away with murder in terms of expansive tax loopholes and diluted foreign trade and labor regulations all of that could be changed overnight if need be -- just as it was with FDR's New Deal. So that notion of super-rich individuals and corporations just picking up and leaving the U.S. because they don't like the tax rate is a lot of hot air.

 

[Unkotare]

[

You got problems if you cannot live well on 1/4 mill per year.

The national average wage index for 2009 is 40,711.61

250k is over 6 times the average national wage.

It's probably too much, eh comrade? Gotta take enough of that away to make 'em humble, right?

Naw, don't tax the rich. They're spethill.....

No, you must humble them until they recognize the inherent superiority of the proletariat!

 

[Si modo]

Translation: the link I provide PROVES that the ballyhoo by neocon/teabagger toadies about taxes on those making $250,000 is very misleading. So unless SiModo is making over 200,000 as an individual or $250,000 with his wife, he's just talking sheer BS, as Obama's tax increase is NOT aimed at him. So Si Modo's last sentence was obviously a projection of his own self.

Yet again, you demonstrate that your party is full of morons - you being one of them. You state the obvious assuming I have no idea what the limits are.

Moron. Don't be hard on yourself, your just another neocon/teabagger toadie talking BS on a thread...because the current proposals regarding Buffet are NOT about YOUR particular income bracket. You'd know that if you ever got your head out of Limbaugh's ass.

A household income of $250K does not make me rich. Well, YOU don't make over $250K, bunky. And again, the tax increase for that range wouldn't make you poor either, as my link aptly explained. But you obviously didn't read it carefully and comprehensively.
Idiot.

Again, don't be so hard on yourself...just because the Limbaugh shuffle you parrot doesn't cut it in an real discussion is no reason to belittle yourself so. Buck up.

God, you really must enjoy showing us all what a moron you are.

Don't worry, you're with the party of your peers.

 

[Flaylo]

Yet again, you demonstrate that your party is full of morons - you being one of them. You state the obvious assuming I have no idea what the limits are.

Moron. Don't be hard on yourself, your just another neocon/teabagger toadie talking BS on a thread...because the current proposals regarding Buffet are NOT about YOUR particular income bracket. You'd know that if you ever got your head out of Limbaugh's ass.

A household income of $250K does not make me rich. Well, YOU don't make over $250K, bunky. And again, the tax increase for that range wouldn't make you poor either, as my link aptly explained. But you obviously didn't read it carefully and comprehensively.
Idiot.

Again, don't be so hard on yourself...just because the Limbaugh shuffle you parrot doesn't cut it in an real discussion is no reason to belittle yourself so. Buck up.

God, you really must enjoy showing us all what a moron you are.

Don't worry, you're with the party of your peers.

This coming from an unemployed asshat that spends her time online trolling people, ever look at that face in the mirror?

 

[Si modo]

Again, don't be so hard on yourself...just because the Limbaugh shuffle you parrot doesn't cut it in an real discussion is no reason to belittle yourself so. Buck up.

God, you really must enjoy showing us all what a moron you are.

Don't worry, you're with the party of your peers.

This coming from an unemployed asshat that spends her time online trolling people, ever look at that face in the mirror?

Still mad about that neg, eh?

 

[Flaylo]

It's probably too much, eh comrade? Gotta take enough of that away to make 'em humble, right?

Naw, don't tax the rich. They're spethill.....

No, you must humble them until they recognize the inherent superiority of the proletariat!

Last time I checked the right are getting richer and the poor poorer and the middleclass is shrinking, the rich has nothing to complain about and shouldn't complain about Obama since he's made them richer.

 

[Skull Pilot]

What does it matter to any of you what another person's income is?

Everyone should be able to keep as much of what they earn as possible. Period.

 

[Flaylo]

God, you really must enjoy showing us all what a moron you are.

Don't worry, you're with the party of your peers.

This coming from an unemployed asshat that spends her time online trolling people, ever look at that face in the mirror?

Still mad about that neg, eh?

Mad? no, you've been doing the same thing for how long? The only mad person is you because you'e doing the neg repping.

 

[Flaylo]

What does it matter to any of you what another person's income is?

Everyone should be able to keep as much of what they earn as possible. Period.

Thats not how a country works and runs, have the balls to be optimistic yet realistic at the same time.

 

[Si modo]

This coming from an unemployed asshat that spends her time online trolling people, ever look at that face in the mirror?

Still mad about that neg, eh?

Mad? no, you've been doing the same thing for how long? The only mad person is you because you'e doing the neg repping.

And you still whine and get bent out of shape about them.

You always deliver.

 

[Skull Pilot]

What does it matter to any of you what another person's income is?

Everyone should be able to keep as much of what they earn as possible. Period.

Thats not how a country works and runs, have the balls to be optimistic yet realistic at the same time.

So it's not possible to keep taxes low for everyone?

 

[editec]

What does it matter to any of you what another person's income is?

Everyone should be able to keep as much of what they earn as possible. Period.

Thats not how a country works and runs, have the balls to be optimistic yet realistic at the same time.

So it's not possible to keep taxes low for everyone?

Not as long as the MASTERS insist on also having EMPIRE, no.

 

[Unkotare]

Thats not how a country works and runs, have the balls to be optimistic yet realistic at the same time.

So it's not possible to keep taxes low for everyone?

Not as long as the MASTERS insist on also having EMPIRE, no.

What "masters" and what "empire"?