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.
So it was just the recession and then in 1991 it was a depression duh... How many days can you keep up this nitpicking LOL? God what a waste of time... Every time in the last hundred years the GOP has had 8 years in office they've had a corrupt meltdown. And they're working on it again, dupe.Yep you're right the S and L crisis never happened. LOL whether it was a horrible Financial meltdown, a Great Recession, or depression, it cost a hell of a lot of money and ruined the country for several years. Another great job, scumbag GOP and silly dupes.Are you and Todd stir sock puppets because you are the most ridiculous people to debate with I've ever seen...
Pointing out your idiocy makes us ridiculous.......DERP!
Yep you're right the S and L crisis never happened.
It most certainly happened.
But there was no recession in 1989.
There for damn sure was no depression in 1989.
it cost a hell of a lot of money
Yup.
and ruined the country for several years.
Not even close. Twit.
So it was just the recession and then in 1991 it was a depression duh... How many days can you keep up this nitpicking LOL? God what a waste of time... Every time in the last hundred years the GOP has had 8 years in office they've had a corrupt meltdown. And they're working on it again, dupe.Yep you're right the S and L crisis never happened. LOL whether it was a horrible Financial meltdown, a Great Recession, or depression, it cost a hell of a lot of money and ruined the country for several years. Another great job, scumbag GOP and silly dupes.Are you and Todd stir sock puppets because you are the most ridiculous people to debate with I've ever seen...
Pointing out your idiocy makes us ridiculous.......DERP!
Yep you're right the S and L crisis never happened.
It most certainly happened.
But there was no recession in 1989.
There for damn sure was no depression in 1989.
it cost a hell of a lot of money
Yup.
and ruined the country for several years.
Not even close. Twit.
Splitting hairs for five pages... ZzzzzzzzzzzSo it was just the recession and then in 1991 it was a depression duh... How many days can you keep up this nitpicking LOL? God what a waste of time... Every time in the last hundred years the GOP has had 8 years in office they've had a corrupt meltdown. And they're working on it again, dupe.Yep you're right the S and L crisis never happened. LOL whether it was a horrible Financial meltdown, a Great Recession, or depression, it cost a hell of a lot of money and ruined the country for several years. Another great job, scumbag GOP and silly dupes.Are you and Todd stir sock puppets because you are the most ridiculous people to debate with I've ever seen...
Pointing out your idiocy makes us ridiculous.......DERP!
Yep you're right the S and L crisis never happened.
It most certainly happened.
But there was no recession in 1989.
There for damn sure was no depression in 1989.
it cost a hell of a lot of money
Yup.
and ruined the country for several years.
Not even close. Twit.
So it was just the recession and then in 1991 it was a depression duh..
No. There was no recession in 1989. There was no depression in 1991.
Neither of your claims is close to the truth.
How many days can you keep up this nitpicking
Pointing out that your claim, "in 1989 we had a Depression" was idiotic, when we had 3.7% real GDP growth,
better than every year under Obama, is nitpicking? You're a fucking moron.
View attachment 169921
Splitting hairs for five pages... ZzzzzzzzzzzSo it was just the recession and then in 1991 it was a depression duh... How many days can you keep up this nitpicking LOL? God what a waste of time... Every time in the last hundred years the GOP has had 8 years in office they've had a corrupt meltdown. And they're working on it again, dupe.Yep you're right the S and L crisis never happened. LOL whether it was a horrible Financial meltdown, a Great Recession, or depression, it cost a hell of a lot of money and ruined the country for several years. Another great job, scumbag GOP and silly dupes.Pointing out your idiocy makes us ridiculous.......DERP!
Yep you're right the S and L crisis never happened.
It most certainly happened.
But there was no recession in 1989.
There for damn sure was no depression in 1989.
it cost a hell of a lot of money
Yup.
and ruined the country for several years.
Not even close. Twit.
So it was just the recession and then in 1991 it was a depression duh..
No. There was no recession in 1989. There was no depression in 1991.
Neither of your claims is close to the truth.
How many days can you keep up this nitpicking
Pointing out that your claim, "in 1989 we had a Depression" was idiotic, when we had 3.7% real GDP growth,
better than every year under Obama, is nitpicking? You're a fucking moron.
View attachment 169921
Once again, the inheritance would be taxed once when the recipient receives the income, meeting your stringent requirement of "The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times." If you don't think that's the case, then explain to me where this individual would get taxed not once, not twice, not thrice, but 4-5 times. I'm counting one time: when his father dies and he receives the inheritance.Anyway, it's pointless debating income tax with you idiots when you don't even know what income is. We have this idiot, Ray, who can't figure out what "income" is:
The IRS did say so. And so did the courts.I didn't ask you if it was taxable, I asked you if it was income. You're the expert on the definition of "income," right? You tell me. Is it income?
Income is defined by the IRS and most importantly, by if it is taxable.
No, I don't think it's income. Even if the IRS said it was, who in the world would report finding cash???
Cesarini v. United States - Wikipedia
Between that and alimony, it sounds like you have no clue WTF you're talking about with your "capital or labor" bullshit. Those are just examples, as the definition indicates with its lack of commas. Even if you cherrypicked one definition of "income" from some dictionary that only listed labor and capital, it would just be cherrypicking. Everyone knows that "income" is basically "that which comes in" and generally wealth "comes in" when it changes hands/title. Just look at the damned word!
Followed by this genius who can't figure out that taxing inheritance as regular income to the recipient (the person getting the income) wouldn't tax an individual "multiply times" on the same money:
Money generally gets taxed by income tax whenever it changes hands, like if you use your taxed wages to buy a bagel. The bagel salesman pays tax on his profit. Is that stealing, too?Any Inheritance Tax that is imposed is a minimum of Double Taxation, in other words it's called stealing...
If I leave my wife, children, niece or nephew what I have already earned, yes it's Double Taxation and it's stealing. If I am buying a good or services they are taxed, the difference is simple, I earned it and I am giving it to whom ever I want, I am not buying something. The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times. Furthermore if it is such a just tax why not attach it to all monies instead of a select amount and higher?
And of course this jackass, who thinks income is only what you get from work or investments:
If you GET money from inheritance, it is income, just exempted from tax. Don't be an idiot.
I told him the same, don't be like bgrouse.
Someone said Trump got rich by working.
in·come
ˈinˌkəm/
noun
Got it?
- money received, for work or through investments.
Not at all, what the real issue is, you believe the Feds can tax someones inheritance, again and again and again and again
because they succeeded financially and you think its not fair they have it and you don't, period, that's the simple truth you're not willing to admit. Instead of a civil debate you resort to calling anyone who doesn't agree with you an Idiot, what it says is very clear, you're not very happy with your own failures...I'm calling you an idiot because that's precisely what you are given that you're stumbling over such simple matters as American income taxation basics and refusing to learn when taught.As for Income Taxes / Payroll Taxes (stay with me here, you have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt this is were you get lost) I am in favor of a Flat Tax, everyone contributes, no questions about it.
These are 2 totally different issues, act like a human and not a Civil Servant or worse a Democrat...
The DNC is now the Communist Party of America...
Don't blame the education system for your stunning stupidity. Taking responsibility for your own inadequacies is the first step to getting better. Now, let's take this one step at a time. I ask again:Once again, the inheritance would be taxed once when the recipient receives the income, meeting your stringent requirement of "The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times." If you don't think that's the case, then explain to me where this individual would get taxed not once, not twice, not thrice, but 4-5 times. I'm counting one time: when his father dies and he receives the inheritance.Anyway, it's pointless debating income tax with you idiots when you don't even know what income is. We have this idiot, Ray, who can't figure out what "income" is:
The IRS did say so. And so did the courts.Income is defined by the IRS and most importantly, by if it is taxable.
No, I don't think it's income. Even if the IRS said it was, who in the world would report finding cash???
Cesarini v. United States - Wikipedia
Between that and alimony, it sounds like you have no clue WTF you're talking about with your "capital or labor" bullshit. Those are just examples, as the definition indicates with its lack of commas. Even if you cherrypicked one definition of "income" from some dictionary that only listed labor and capital, it would just be cherrypicking. Everyone knows that "income" is basically "that which comes in" and generally wealth "comes in" when it changes hands/title. Just look at the damned word!
Followed by this genius who can't figure out that taxing inheritance as regular income to the recipient (the person getting the income) wouldn't tax an individual "multiply times" on the same money:
Money generally gets taxed by income tax whenever it changes hands, like if you use your taxed wages to buy a bagel. The bagel salesman pays tax on his profit. Is that stealing, too?
If I leave my wife, children, niece or nephew what I have already earned, yes it's Double Taxation and it's stealing. If I am buying a good or services they are taxed, the difference is simple, I earned it and I am giving it to whom ever I want, I am not buying something. The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times. Furthermore if it is such a just tax why not attach it to all monies instead of a select amount and higher?
And of course this jackass, who thinks income is only what you get from work or investments:
If you GET money from inheritance, it is income, just exempted from tax. Don't be an idiot.
I told him the same, don't be like bgrouse.
Someone said Trump got rich by working.
in·come
ˈinˌkəm/
noun
Got it?
- money received, for work or through investments.
Not at all, what the real issue is, you believe the Feds can tax someones inheritance, again and again and again and again
because they succeeded financially and you think its not fair they have it and you don't, period, that's the simple truth you're not willing to admit. Instead of a civil debate you resort to calling anyone who doesn't agree with you an Idiot, what it says is very clear, you're not very happy with your own failures...I'm calling you an idiot because that's precisely what you are given that you're stumbling over such simple matters as American income taxation basics and refusing to learn when taught.As for Income Taxes / Payroll Taxes (stay with me here, you have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt this is were you get lost) I am in favor of a Flat Tax, everyone contributes, no questions about it.
These are 2 totally different issues, act like a human and not a Civil Servant or worse a Democrat...
The DNC is now the Communist Party of America...
The only one stumbling is you, but that's typical of the floundering herd of low life's that have their hands out waiting on Uncle Sam to support them...
These learned deficiency's start at home usually, must have sucked to be you? The education system also is at fault. Justifying theft under the guise of the IRS, it's amazing how easy it is to brainwash so many wanderers...
Don't blame the education system for your stunning stupidity. Taking responsibility for your own inadequacies is the first step to getting better. Now, let's take this one step at a time. I ask again:Once again, the inheritance would be taxed once when the recipient receives the income, meeting your stringent requirement of "The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times." If you don't think that's the case, then explain to me where this individual would get taxed not once, not twice, not thrice, but 4-5 times. I'm counting one time: when his father dies and he receives the inheritance.Anyway, it's pointless debating income tax with you idiots when you don't even know what income is. We have this idiot, Ray, who can't figure out what "income" is:
The IRS did say so. And so did the courts.
Cesarini v. United States - Wikipedia
Between that and alimony, it sounds like you have no clue WTF you're talking about with your "capital or labor" bullshit. Those are just examples, as the definition indicates with its lack of commas. Even if you cherrypicked one definition of "income" from some dictionary that only listed labor and capital, it would just be cherrypicking. Everyone knows that "income" is basically "that which comes in" and generally wealth "comes in" when it changes hands/title. Just look at the damned word!
Followed by this genius who can't figure out that taxing inheritance as regular income to the recipient (the person getting the income) wouldn't tax an individual "multiply times" on the same money:
If I leave my wife, children, niece or nephew what I have already earned, yes it's Double Taxation and it's stealing. If I am buying a good or services they are taxed, the difference is simple, I earned it and I am giving it to whom ever I want, I am not buying something. The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times. Furthermore if it is such a just tax why not attach it to all monies instead of a select amount and higher?
And of course this jackass, who thinks income is only what you get from work or investments:
I told him the same, don't be like bgrouse.
in·come
ˈinˌkəm/
noun
Got it?
- money received, for work or through investments.
Not at all, what the real issue is, you believe the Feds can tax someones inheritance, again and again and again and again
because they succeeded financially and you think its not fair they have it and you don't, period, that's the simple truth you're not willing to admit. Instead of a civil debate you resort to calling anyone who doesn't agree with you an Idiot, what it says is very clear, you're not very happy with your own failures...I'm calling you an idiot because that's precisely what you are given that you're stumbling over such simple matters as American income taxation basics and refusing to learn when taught.As for Income Taxes / Payroll Taxes (stay with me here, you have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt this is were you get lost) I am in favor of a Flat Tax, everyone contributes, no questions about it.
These are 2 totally different issues, act like a human and not a Civil Servant or worse a Democrat...
The DNC is now the Communist Party of America...
The only one stumbling is you, but that's typical of the floundering herd of low life's that have their hands out waiting on Uncle Sam to support them...
These learned deficiency's start at home usually, must have sucked to be you? The education system also is at fault. Justifying theft under the guise of the IRS, it's amazing how easy it is to brainwash so many wanderers...
Once again, the inheritance would be taxed once when the recipient receives the income, meeting your stringent requirement of "The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times." If you don't think that's the case, then explain to me where this individual would get taxed not once, not twice, not thrice, but 4-5 times. I'm counting one time: when his father dies and he receives the inheritance.
It should be pretty easy for you to answer my question, unless of course you're stupid and were talking about something you do not understand at all.Don't blame the education system for your stunning stupidity. Taking responsibility for your own inadequacies is the first step to getting better. Now, let's take this one step at a time. I ask again:Once again, the inheritance would be taxed once when the recipient receives the income, meeting your stringent requirement of "The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times." If you don't think that's the case, then explain to me where this individual would get taxed not once, not twice, not thrice, but 4-5 times. I'm counting one time: when his father dies and he receives the inheritance.Anyway, it's pointless debating income tax with you idiots when you don't even know what income is. We have this idiot, Ray, who can't figure out what "income" is:
Followed by this genius who can't figure out that taxing inheritance as regular income to the recipient (the person getting the income) wouldn't tax an individual "multiply times" on the same money:
And of course this jackass, who thinks income is only what you get from work or investments:
Not at all, what the real issue is, you believe the Feds can tax someones inheritance, again and again and again and again
because they succeeded financially and you think its not fair they have it and you don't, period, that's the simple truth you're not willing to admit. Instead of a civil debate you resort to calling anyone who doesn't agree with you an Idiot, what it says is very clear, you're not very happy with your own failures...I'm calling you an idiot because that's precisely what you are given that you're stumbling over such simple matters as American income taxation basics and refusing to learn when taught.As for Income Taxes / Payroll Taxes (stay with me here, you have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt this is were you get lost) I am in favor of a Flat Tax, everyone contributes, no questions about it.
These are 2 totally different issues, act like a human and not a Civil Servant or worse a Democrat...
The DNC is now the Communist Party of America...
The only one stumbling is you, but that's typical of the floundering herd of low life's that have their hands out waiting on Uncle Sam to support them...
These learned deficiency's start at home usually, must have sucked to be you? The education system also is at fault. Justifying theft under the guise of the IRS, it's amazing how easy it is to brainwash so many wanderers...
Once again, the inheritance would be taxed once when the recipient receives the income, meeting your stringent requirement of "The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times." If you don't think that's the case, then explain to me where this individual would get taxed not once, not twice, not thrice, but 4-5 times. I'm counting one time: when his father dies and he receives the inheritance.
Unless a tidal wave of knowledge sweeps through the total vacuum between your ears, you're never going to get it, I'm okay with this, carry on...
It should be pretty easy for you to answer my question, unless of course you're stupid and were talking about something you do not understand at all.Don't blame the education system for your stunning stupidity. Taking responsibility for your own inadequacies is the first step to getting better. Now, let's take this one step at a time. I ask again:Once again, the inheritance would be taxed once when the recipient receives the income, meeting your stringent requirement of "The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times." If you don't think that's the case, then explain to me where this individual would get taxed not once, not twice, not thrice, but 4-5 times. I'm counting one time: when his father dies and he receives the inheritance.Not at all, what the real issue is, you believe the Feds can tax someones inheritance, again and again and again and again
because they succeeded financially and you think its not fair they have it and you don't, period, that's the simple truth you're not willing to admit. Instead of a civil debate you resort to calling anyone who doesn't agree with you an Idiot, what it says is very clear, you're not very happy with your own failures...I'm calling you an idiot because that's precisely what you are given that you're stumbling over such simple matters as American income taxation basics and refusing to learn when taught.As for Income Taxes / Payroll Taxes (stay with me here, you have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt this is were you get lost) I am in favor of a Flat Tax, everyone contributes, no questions about it.
These are 2 totally different issues, act like a human and not a Civil Servant or worse a Democrat...
The DNC is now the Communist Party of America...
The only one stumbling is you, but that's typical of the floundering herd of low life's that have their hands out waiting on Uncle Sam to support them...
These learned deficiency's start at home usually, must have sucked to be you? The education system also is at fault. Justifying theft under the guise of the IRS, it's amazing how easy it is to brainwash so many wanderers...
Once again, the inheritance would be taxed once when the recipient receives the income, meeting your stringent requirement of "The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times." If you don't think that's the case, then explain to me where this individual would get taxed not once, not twice, not thrice, but 4-5 times. I'm counting one time: when his father dies and he receives the inheritance.
Unless a tidal wave of knowledge sweeps through the total vacuum between your ears, you're never going to get it, I'm okay with this, carry on...
No. I want to have income tax apply to it.It should be pretty easy for you to answer my question, unless of course you're stupid and were talking about something you do not understand at all.Don't blame the education system for your stunning stupidity. Taking responsibility for your own inadequacies is the first step to getting better. Now, let's take this one step at a time. I ask again:Once again, the inheritance would be taxed once when the recipient receives the income, meeting your stringent requirement of "The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times." If you don't think that's the case, then explain to me where this individual would get taxed not once, not twice, not thrice, but 4-5 times. I'm counting one time: when his father dies and he receives the inheritance.I'm calling you an idiot because that's precisely what you are given that you're stumbling over such simple matters as American income taxation basics and refusing to learn when taught.
The only one stumbling is you, but that's typical of the floundering herd of low life's that have their hands out waiting on Uncle Sam to support them...
These learned deficiency's start at home usually, must have sucked to be you? The education system also is at fault. Justifying theft under the guise of the IRS, it's amazing how easy it is to brainwash so many wanderers...
Once again, the inheritance would be taxed once when the recipient receives the income, meeting your stringent requirement of "The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times." If you don't think that's the case, then explain to me where this individual would get taxed not once, not twice, not thrice, but 4-5 times. I'm counting one time: when his father dies and he receives the inheritance.
Unless a tidal wave of knowledge sweeps through the total vacuum between your ears, you're never going to get it, I'm okay with this, carry on...
So you want to start an inheritance tax?
No. I want to have income tax apply to it.It should be pretty easy for you to answer my question, unless of course you're stupid and were talking about something you do not understand at all.Don't blame the education system for your stunning stupidity. Taking responsibility for your own inadequacies is the first step to getting better. Now, let's take this one step at a time. I ask again:The only one stumbling is you, but that's typical of the floundering herd of low life's that have their hands out waiting on Uncle Sam to support them...
These learned deficiency's start at home usually, must have sucked to be you? The education system also is at fault. Justifying theft under the guise of the IRS, it's amazing how easy it is to brainwash so many wanderers...
Once again, the inheritance would be taxed once when the recipient receives the income, meeting your stringent requirement of "The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times." If you don't think that's the case, then explain to me where this individual would get taxed not once, not twice, not thrice, but 4-5 times. I'm counting one time: when his father dies and he receives the inheritance.
Unless a tidal wave of knowledge sweeps through the total vacuum between your ears, you're never going to get it, I'm okay with this, carry on...
So you want to start an inheritance tax?
Of course not, since it can be handled on the 1040.No. I want to have income tax apply to it.It should be pretty easy for you to answer my question, unless of course you're stupid and were talking about something you do not understand at all.Don't blame the education system for your stunning stupidity. Taking responsibility for your own inadequacies is the first step to getting better. Now, let's take this one step at a time. I ask again:
Once again, the inheritance would be taxed once when the recipient receives the income, meeting your stringent requirement of "The Federal Government, State or Local has no business taxing an individual multiply times." If you don't think that's the case, then explain to me where this individual would get taxed not once, not twice, not thrice, but 4-5 times. I'm counting one time: when his father dies and he receives the inheritance.
Unless a tidal wave of knowledge sweeps through the total vacuum between your ears, you're never going to get it, I'm okay with this, carry on...
So you want to start an inheritance tax?
So, you want to have an estate tax and then have inheritance added to income?
You actually have to work and make enough money to pay taxes to actually benefit.
That godam Trump and the evil republicans running the government fuck the little guy at every turn...
You actually have to work and make enough money to pay taxes to actually benefit.
That godam Trump and the evil republicans running the government fuck the little guy at every turn...
What? You have to work to get money? That’s racist.
Like why would one want to show up the lazy fks?You actually have to work and make enough money to pay taxes to actually benefit.
That godam Trump and the evil republicans running the government fuck the little guy at every turn...
What? You have to work to get money? That’s racist.
Isn’t that just morally wrong. I mean actually doing labor in exchange for money! It isn’t just racist, it is homophobic, sexist and damn greedy!
Lol! Media fed liar. Prove it.You actually have to work and make enough money to pay taxes to actually benefit.
That godam Trump and the evil republicans running the government fuck the little guy at every turn...
So it was just the recession and then in 1991 it was a depression duh... How many days can you keep up this nitpicking LOL? God what a waste of time... Every time in the last hundred years the GOP has had 8 years in office they've had a corrupt meltdown. And they're working on it again, dupe.Yep you're right the S and L crisis never happened. LOL whether it was a horrible Financial meltdown, a Great Recession, or depression, it cost a hell of a lot of money and ruined the country for several years. Another great job, scumbag GOP and silly dupes.Are you and Todd stir sock puppets because you are the most ridiculous people to debate with I've ever seen...
Pointing out your idiocy makes us ridiculous.......DERP!
Yep you're right the S and L crisis never happened.
It most certainly happened.
But there was no recession in 1989.
There for damn sure was no depression in 1989.
it cost a hell of a lot of money
Yup.
and ruined the country for several years.
Not even close. Twit.
It was never a depression and you time and time again have failed to post a reliable link saying the United States was in a depression in 1989, I have posted several showing it wasn't. Not post it or shut the hell up about it you scum liar.
Your a idiot the top few percent of wealthy people and corporations pay the majority of taxes.You actually have to work and make enough money to pay taxes to actually benefit.
That godam Trump and the evil republicans running the government fuck the little guy at every turn...
Or, you have to be screwing the govt over, in order to be making an absolute killing out of it.
We still won't know how much the rich are playing in taxes before or after, the catch must be they were paying little before, and they'll be paying fucking nothing after. In fact the govt will pay them to be rich.
I don't think in 12 years on message boards I have seen a democratic troll. We spend all our time trying to educate idiots on the right who believe a gigantic pile of crap propaganda and appear to have no idea of what a journalist is... Your brainwashing lying cheating thieving GOP is a disgrace and a disaster.So it was just the recession and then in 1991 it was a depression duh... How many days can you keep up this nitpicking LOL? God what a waste of time... Every time in the last hundred years the GOP has had 8 years in office they've had a corrupt meltdown. And they're working on it again, dupe.Yep you're right the S and L crisis never happened. LOL whether it was a horrible Financial meltdown, a Great Recession, or depression, it cost a hell of a lot of money and ruined the country for several years. Another great job, scumbag GOP and silly dupes.Pointing out your idiocy makes us ridiculous.......DERP!
Yep you're right the S and L crisis never happened.
It most certainly happened.
But there was no recession in 1989.
There for damn sure was no depression in 1989.
it cost a hell of a lot of money
Yup.
and ruined the country for several years.
Not even close. Twit.
It was never a depression and you time and time again have failed to post a reliable link saying the United States was in a depression in 1989, I have posted several showing it wasn't. Not post it or shut the hell up about it you scum liar.
We all know that francoHFW is one of the leading Trolls on this message board. He simply throws out trash and loves watching people prove him wrong and abuse him. He's one of those folks who loves having abuse and pain inflicted on him. I can never remember if that a sadist or masochist.
I've been a Realtor for over 40 years and have seen some interesting bedrooms in all that time. I bet our far left Progressive good friend francoHFW's is a treasure trove of whips and paddles.
if you count all taxes, we have a flat tax system that is a giveaway to the rich after 35 years of GOP controlling top tax rates. Every time they cut tax federal taxes, state and local taxes and fees which kill the Non rich go up. Meanwhile dupes like you can only think about federal income taxes, the only progressive tax we have which now brings in the same amount of money as payroll taxes. Google the only tax graph you need to know and wake up and smell the coffee, super duper.Your a idiot the top few percent of wealthy people and corporations pay the majority of taxes.You actually have to work and make enough money to pay taxes to actually benefit.
That godam Trump and the evil republicans running the government fuck the little guy at every turn...
Or, you have to be screwing the govt over, in order to be making an absolute killing out of it.
We still won't know how much the rich are playing in taxes before or after, the catch must be they were paying little before, and they'll be paying fucking nothing after. In fact the govt will pay them to be rich.
