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.
Still waiting for congress to impeach him, wondering why they have not done so yet. I know dirty harry reid would never go for it, but nobody in the house at all has even talked of it.
I am. I'm all for the rich paying their fair share and looking out for the good of the rest of us. I'm just not sure why you aren't. Somehow, I doubt you are rich. You probably never will be. But you seem awfully concerned that they might have to do without a polo pony.
Me. I want a police department that comes when I call it. I want bridges that aren't going to collapse when I'm trying to cross them. I want kids to be able to read and write when they get out of public school after 12 years so I don't have to support them into their 40's.
So how much additional should the rich pay so you can have what you want?
This year, households making more than $1 million will pay an average 29.1% of their income in federal taxes, including income taxes, payroll taxes and other taxes, according to the Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank.
Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will pay an average of 15% of their income in federal taxes.
Lower-income households will pay less. For example, households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will pay an average of 12.5% of their income in federal taxes. Households making between $20,000 and $30,000 will pay 5.7%. . . .
. . . .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. . . .
Fact check: The wealthy already pay more tax
By the time you add on state and local taxes, many of the rich--those earning a really comfortable income whether or not they are millionares--are easily paying close to 50% of their income or more in taxes. And that doesn't count the extra tax monies and fees required to conduct business as those rich folks are running the businesses that provide jobs and an income for everybody else.
At least those who will have jobs after 800,000 or more illegals get work permits.
Hell, I'm certainly not wealthy. And what was, until recently, a comfortable living has started to pinch a bit. I already work two jobs and run a small farm. What exactly would be my fair share?
Clinton lied on the stand to an immaterial issue.
He lied to save face and to avoid imbarressing his wife.
You idiots treat it like fucking treason and then Pretend Bush didnt lie this country into war.
your fucking retards
Clinton lied on the stand to an immaterial issue.
He lied to save face and to avoid imbarressing his wife.
You idiots treat it like fucking treason and then Pretend Bush didnt lie this country into war.
your fucking retards
fucking retards
Read my signature.Clinton lied on the stand to an immaterial issue.
He lied to save face and to avoid imbarressing his wife.
You idiots treat it like fucking treason and then Pretend Bush didnt lie this country into war.
your fucking retards
I'm one of the few centrists.
I'm one of the few centrists.
Stop right there you lying sack of crap. You are no centrist. Are you going to go back to pretending to be a Republican next? You have a real problem with honesty, jackass.
I'm one of the few centrists.
Stop right there you lying sack of crap. You are no centrist. Are you going to go back to pretending to be a Republican next? You have a real problem with honesty, jackass.
and u claim to be PC and religious, yet look how you talk to people.
I'm one of the few centrists.
Stop right there you lying sack of crap. You are no centrist. Are you going to go back to pretending to be a Republican next? You have a real problem with honesty, jackass.
You finally said something that makes sense! And then you had to go and ruin it with the nonsense about taking the wealthy "appropriately".
I would LOVE to relpace welfare with workfare. That would be outstanding. But since the wealthy are already taxed appropriately (and then some on top of some more), how about we just use the "workfare" workers to repair roads, clean highways, cut public lawns, etc. and the money saved on those things will pay for it? It's a win-win for everyone, except the liberal welfare group who refuses to earn anything.
I'm one of the few centrists.
Stop right there you lying sack of crap. You are no centrist. Are you going to go back to pretending to be a Republican next? You have a real problem with honesty, jackass.
You finally said something that makes sense! And then you had to go and ruin it with the nonsense about taking the wealthy "appropriately".
I would LOVE to relpace welfare with workfare. That would be outstanding. But since the wealthy are already taxed appropriately (and then some on top of some more), how about we just use the "workfare" workers to repair roads, clean highways, cut public lawns, etc. and the money saved on those things will pay for it? It's a win-win for everyone, except the liberal welfare group who refuses to earn anything.
It's only nonsense to you because you suffer from this sort of conservatard Stockholm syndrome where you feel bad for your abusers.
Frankly, this country ran at its best when the top marginal rate was 92% right after WWII. We never saw such prosperity as a nation. We didn't do to bad after JFK reduced it to 70%.
But you say 39% for people who can obviously afford it, and you scream like a stuck pig, when I doubt you'd be affected by it.
What are you talking about? Mahmoud Amhadajihad is a mortal enemy of the people of Iraq. They loathe him like liberals loathe America, freedom, captialism, and the US Constitution. He would be killed the second he entered Iraq.
Published: March 4, 2008
BAGHDAD President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, on the second day of his visit here, called on Monday for the withdrawal of American troops from Iraqi soil, saying their presence was the root of Iraqs instability and violence.
And just out of curiousity, besides the idiot liberal, who in their right freaking mind would have the perspective that spending $5 trillion into debt on friends and family is better than spending $2 trillion to rid the world of a madman?
Finally, Iraq has had several elections since Hussein was removed. So to say it is not a democracy is just pure liberal bullshit.
You finally said something that makes sense! And then you had to go and ruin it with the nonsense about taking the wealthy "appropriately".
I would LOVE to relpace welfare with workfare. That would be outstanding. But since the wealthy are already taxed appropriately (and then some on top of some more), how about we just use the "workfare" workers to repair roads, clean highways, cut public lawns, etc. and the money saved on those things will pay for it? It's a win-win for everyone, except the liberal welfare group who refuses to earn anything.
It's only nonsense to you because you suffer from this sort of conservatard Stockholm syndrome where you feel bad for your abusers.
Frankly, this country ran at its best when the top marginal rate was 92% right after WWII. We never saw such prosperity as a nation. We didn't do to bad after JFK reduced it to 70%.
But you say 39% for people who can obviously afford it, and you scream like a stuck pig, when I doubt you'd be affected by it.
How many millionaires were there after WWII you bumbling idiot?
It's only nonsense to you because you suffer from this sort of conservatard Stockholm syndrome where you feel bad for your abusers.
Frankly, this country ran at its best when the top marginal rate was 92% right after WWII. We never saw such prosperity as a nation. We didn't do to bad after JFK reduced it to 70%.
But you say 39% for people who can obviously afford it, and you scream like a stuck pig, when I doubt you'd be affected by it.
How many millionaires were there after WWII you bumbling idiot?
Quite a lot, not that it had anything to do with my point.
You finally said something that makes sense! And then you had to go and ruin it with the nonsense about taking the wealthy "appropriately".
I would LOVE to relpace welfare with workfare. That would be outstanding. But since the wealthy are already taxed appropriately (and then some on top of some more), how about we just use the "workfare" workers to repair roads, clean highways, cut public lawns, etc. and the money saved on those things will pay for it? It's a win-win for everyone, except the liberal welfare group who refuses to earn anything.
It's only nonsense to you because you suffer from this sort of conservatard Stockholm syndrome where you feel bad for your abusers.
Frankly, this country ran at its best when the top marginal rate was 92% right after WWII. We never saw such prosperity as a nation. We didn't do to bad after JFK reduced it to 70%.
But you say 39% for people who can obviously afford it, and you scream like a stuck pig, when I doubt you'd be affected by it.
How many millionaires were there after WWII you bumbling idiot?
Quite a lot, not that it had anything to do with my point.
It has everything to do with the tax base and money the govt takes in.
