Tax plan comparisons in simple numbers and [not so] pretty pictures.

[SwimExpert]

After some cursory fiddling a few interesting things show up on the surface.

No surprise Sanders' plans involve tax increases for nearly everyone. But man, this guy really rams it up the ass on the poor! A single person with no dependents making only $9,000 a year would pay more than $500 in additional taxes at more than 23% tax rate. That's the highest rate of either of the four listed candidates. Now, Sanders does actually provide reduced taxes for some poor people. Add two kids, and that single person saves $300 a year. Personally, that pisses me off. As someone who at time struggled in my young adult life to get myself established and stable, and who was repeated denied financial aid because I my meager income was too much to qualify without dependents, I will never accept the premise that not being irresponsible enough to have children you can't afford should be a hindrance to a low income person receiving aid.

Cruz seems to be most favorable to low income married couples, compared to other candidates, while Trump is most edges him out as the most favorable to middle and upper class married couples. Cruz is also the most favorable for single low income individuals w/ no children, and high income single individuals w/ no children. Sanders gouges high income people for nearly $10k or more a year in taxes. And interestingly, his play lays higher taxes on high income individuals who are parents, than those without children. The same is true for married couples.

Of particular interest is the fact that Clinton's plan seems to involve negligible raises for pretty much everyone. Negligible in that the vast majority of people would pay less than $100 a year in additional taxes, and even $150K+ earners would seem to still be paying less than $1000 a year.

This simple calculator tells you how each presidential candidate's tax plan affects you

 

[Dale Smith]

After some cursory fiddling a few interesting things show up on the surface.

No surprise Sanders' plans involve tax increases for nearly everyone. But man, this guy really rams it up the ass on the poor! A single person with no dependents making only $9,000 a year would pay more than $500 in additional taxes at more than 23% tax rate. That's the highest rate of either of the four listed candidates. Now, Sanders does actually provide reduced taxes for some poor people. Add two kids, and that single person saves $300 a year. Personally, that pisses me off. As someone who at time struggled in my young adult life to get myself established and stable, and who was repeated denied financial aid because I my meager income was too much to qualify without dependents, I will never accept the premise that not being irresponsible enough to have children you can't afford should be a hindrance to a low income person receiving aid.

Cruz seems to be most favorable to low income married couples, compared to other candidates, while Trump is most edges him out as the most favorable to middle and upper class married couples. Cruz is also the most favorable for single low income individuals w/ no children, and high income single individuals w/ no children. Sanders gouges high income people for nearly $10k or more a year in taxes. And interestingly, his play lays higher taxes on high income individuals who are parents, than those without children. The same is true for married couples.

Of particular interest is the fact that Clinton's plan seems to involve negligible raises for pretty much everyone. Negligible in that the vast majority of people would pay less than $100 a year in additional taxes, and even $150K+ earners would seem to still be paying less than $1000 a year.

This simple calculator tells you how each presidential candidate's tax plan affects you

Federal income taxes only goes towards paying interest to the foreign owned Federal Reserve bankers. The chief financial officer of USA.INC (i.e the Treasury Department) receives less than 10 percent of what the IRS ( a Puerto Rican Trust #62 and collection arm of the IMF) collects on the sweat equity of the indentured debt slaves that were made surety on the debt due to the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy of 1933. I barter my labor in 8 hour increments in exchange for something that I can eek out an existence with and yet this corporate entity steals part of that to satisfy a debt that they really don't owe to an entity that extended that line of credit from thin air. It is without a doubt that cleverest form of slavery ever invented. You don't have to feed, clothe or house your slaves or provide them healthcare but you still collect 30 to 45 percent of what they earn on top of the birth certificate bond (that matures over the life of said slave) that you are the trustee off and collect the balance of when your slave dies......good work if you can get it. USA.INC likes to claim that they have empty pockets and must run a deficit every year but the truth of the matter is that the CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports) tell a much different story. Seems that USA.INC has been skimming money off the top for the last 85 years and has invested that money in the stock market and they are the current majority shareholders in every Fortune 500 company and their subsidiaries. They have their fingers in a lot of pies. Citizens that are awake have been worried about the privatization of things like prisons, toll roads and even the rights to charge for parking to make up for alleged short term budget crisis? Don't fret...USA.INC owns stock in those industries as well but don't have to manage them...just collect the dividend checks. USA.INC has over 60 Trillion dollars in assets that are in bank accounts in the Cayman Islands, Switzerland and the territories that fall under their jurisdiction like Puerto Rico. While USA.INC not only encourages the offshoring of jobs to help their bottom line, they also give tax breaks and interest free loans to companies that relocate because it will eventually pad their bottom line. In the mean time, they flood the country with illegals that will work under the table while shafting the rest of the country that collects welfare and unemployment...but who gives a shit? Da gubermint will just borrow more fiat currency from credit created from a few strokes o a keyboard in order to pay for these programs because the debt doesn't matter as long as the interest is being satisfied because their profits are not taxable because they are sent to tax havens. It's the quintessential squeezing the teats of what once once a strong cow but has been milked to the point that she can't give much more. I would laugh at the hilarity of it all if it wasn't so fucking tragic....and this same shit is going on all over the world that has a central bank which are owned by the same banking oligarchs.

 

[Norman]

After some cursory fiddling a few interesting things show up on the surface.

No surprise Sanders' plans involve tax increases for nearly everyone. But man, this guy really rams it up the ass on the poor! A single person with no dependents making only $9,000 a year would pay more than $500 in additional taxes at more than 23% tax rate. That's the highest rate of either of the four listed candidates. Now, Sanders does actually provide reduced taxes for some poor people. Add two kids, and that single person saves $300 a year. Personally, that pisses me off. As someone who at time struggled in my young adult life to get myself established and stable, and who was repeated denied financial aid because I my meager income was too much to qualify without dependents, I will never accept the premise that not being irresponsible enough to have children you can't afford should be a hindrance to a low income person receiving aid.

Cruz seems to be most favorable to low income married couples, compared to other candidates, while Trump is most edges him out as the most favorable to middle and upper class married couples. Cruz is also the most favorable for single low income individuals w/ no children, and high income single individuals w/ no children. Sanders gouges high income people for nearly $10k or more a year in taxes. And interestingly, his play lays higher taxes on high income individuals who are parents, than those without children. The same is true for married couples.

Of particular interest is the fact that Clinton's plan seems to involve negligible raises for pretty much everyone. Negligible in that the vast majority of people would pay less than $100 a year in additional taxes, and even $150K+ earners would seem to still be paying less than $1000 a year.

This simple calculator tells you how each presidential candidate's tax plan affects you

After 8 years of clueless obama, after 8 years of Rhino BUSH.... Are you really surprised that there are only bad alternatives left? Obama almost doubled the debt, held interest rates at zero for almost his whole term, the time to pay for his mistakes has come.

Of course, socialism is never the answer.

 

[MisterBeale]

After some cursory fiddling a few interesting things show up on the surface.

No surprise Sanders' plans involve tax increases for nearly everyone. But man, this guy really rams it up the ass on the poor! A single person with no dependents making only $9,000 a year would pay more than $500 in additional taxes at more than 23% tax rate. That's the highest rate of either of the four listed candidates. Now, Sanders does actually provide reduced taxes for some poor people. Add two kids, and that single person saves $300 a year. Personally, that pisses me off. As someone who at time struggled in my young adult life to get myself established and stable, and who was repeated denied financial aid because I my meager income was too much to qualify without dependents, I will never accept the premise that not being irresponsible enough to have children you can't afford should be a hindrance to a low income person receiving aid.

Cruz seems to be most favorable to low income married couples, compared to other candidates, while Trump is most edges him out as the most favorable to middle and upper class married couples. Cruz is also the most favorable for single low income individuals w/ no children, and high income single individuals w/ no children. Sanders gouges high income people for nearly $10k or more a year in taxes. And interestingly, his play lays higher taxes on high income individuals who are parents, than those without children. The same is true for married couples.

Of particular interest is the fact that Clinton's plan seems to involve negligible raises for pretty much everyone. Negligible in that the vast majority of people would pay less than $100 a year in additional taxes, and even $150K+ earners would seem to still be paying less than $1000 a year.

This simple calculator tells you how each presidential candidate's tax plan affects you

Federal income taxes only goes towards paying interest to the foreign owned Federal Reserve bankers. The chief financial officer of USA.INC (i.e the Treasury Department) receives less than 10 percent of what the IRS ( a Puerto Rican Trust #62 and collection arm of the IMF) collects on the sweat equity of the indentured debt slaves that were made surety on the debt due to the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy of 1933. I barter my labor in 8 hour increments in exchange for something that I can eek out an existence with and yet this corporate entity steals part of that to satisfy a debt that they really don't owe to an entity that extended that line of credit from thin air. It is without a doubt that cleverest form of slavery ever invented. You don't have to feed, clothe or house your slaves or provide them healthcare but you still collect 30 to 45 percent of what they earn on top of the birth certificate bond (that matures over the life of said slave) that you are the trustee off and collect the balance of when your slave dies......good work if you can get it. USA.INC likes to claim that they have empty pockets and must run a deficit every year but the truth of the matter is that the CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports) tell a much different story. Seems that USA.INC has been skimming money off the top for the last 85 years and has invested that money in the stock market and they are the current majority shareholders in every Fortune 500 company and their subsidiaries. They have their fingers in a lot of pies. Citizens that are awake have been worried about the privatization of things like prisons, toll roads and even the rights to charge for parking to make up for alleged short term budget crisis? Don't fret...USA.INC owns stock in those industries as well but don't have to manage them...just collect the dividend checks. USA.INC has over 60 Trillion dollars in assets that are in bank accounts in the Cayman Islands, Switzerland and the territories that fall under their jurisdiction like Puerto Rico. While USA.INC not only encourages the offshoring of jobs to help their bottom line, they also give tax breaks and interest free loans to companies that relocate because it will eventually pad their bottom line. In the mean time, they flood the country with illegals that will work under the table while shafting the rest of the country that collects welfare and unemployment...but who gives a shit? Da gubermint will just borrow more fiat currency from credit created from a few strokes o a keyboard in order to pay for these programs because the debt doesn't matter as long as the interest is being satisfied because their profits are not taxable because they are sent to tax havens. It's the quintessential squeezing the teats of what once once a strong cow but has been milked to the point that she can't give much more. I would laugh at the hilarity of it all if it wasn't so fucking tragic....and this same shit is going on all over the world that has a central bank which are owned by the same banking oligarchs.

31 Questions and Answers about the IRS, Revision 3.4

 

[g5000]

After some cursory fiddling a few interesting things show up on the surface.

No surprise Sanders' plans involve tax increases for nearly everyone. But man, this guy really rams it up the ass on the poor! A single person with no dependents making only $9,000 a year would pay more than $500 in additional taxes at more than 23% tax rate. That's the highest rate of either of the four listed candidates. Now, Sanders does actually provide reduced taxes for some poor people. Add two kids, and that single person saves $300 a year. Personally, that pisses me off. As someone who at time struggled in my young adult life to get myself established and stable, and who was repeated denied financial aid because I my meager income was too much to qualify without dependents, I will never accept the premise that not being irresponsible enough to have children you can't afford should be a hindrance to a low income person receiving aid.

Cruz seems to be most favorable to low income married couples, compared to other candidates, while Trump is most edges him out as the most favorable to middle and upper class married couples. Cruz is also the most favorable for single low income individuals w/ no children, and high income single individuals w/ no children. Sanders gouges high income people for nearly $10k or more a year in taxes. And interestingly, his play lays higher taxes on high income individuals who are parents, than those without children. The same is true for married couples.

Of particular interest is the fact that Clinton's plan seems to involve negligible raises for pretty much everyone. Negligible in that the vast majority of people would pay less than $100 a year in additional taxes, and even $150K+ earners would seem to still be paying less than $1000 a year.

This simple calculator tells you how each presidential candidate's tax plan affects you

Thank you for this. Well done. It's a shame I can't tag your post with all the awards.

Stipulating everything you say is correct, it is interesting Sanders punishes the rich for breeding and punishes the poor for NOT breeding.

That right there I find very interesting, even though it isn't really surprising Sanders would behave that way when you think about it.

When you get right down to it, though, every tax plan is a massive government behavioral control program. And Republicans are the worst when it comes to adding deductions, exemptions, and credits to influence Americans' behavior, at the tremendous expense of having to raise all of our tax rates and borrowing heavily.

Every candidate's tax plan, Republican and Democratic, adds to our debt. On the GOP side, Trump's adds the most of all the Republican candidates.

 

[SwimExpert]

After some cursory fiddling a few interesting things show up on the surface.

No surprise Sanders' plans involve tax increases for nearly everyone. But man, this guy really rams it up the ass on the poor! A single person with no dependents making only $9,000 a year would pay more than $500 in additional taxes at more than 23% tax rate. That's the highest rate of either of the four listed candidates. Now, Sanders does actually provide reduced taxes for some poor people. Add two kids, and that single person saves $300 a year. Personally, that pisses me off. As someone who at time struggled in my young adult life to get myself established and stable, and who was repeated denied financial aid because I my meager income was too much to qualify without dependents, I will never accept the premise that not being irresponsible enough to have children you can't afford should be a hindrance to a low income person receiving aid.

Cruz seems to be most favorable to low income married couples, compared to other candidates, while Trump is most edges him out as the most favorable to middle and upper class married couples. Cruz is also the most favorable for single low income individuals w/ no children, and high income single individuals w/ no children. Sanders gouges high income people for nearly $10k or more a year in taxes. And interestingly, his play lays higher taxes on high income individuals who are parents, than those without children. The same is true for married couples.

Of particular interest is the fact that Clinton's plan seems to involve negligible raises for pretty much everyone. Negligible in that the vast majority of people would pay less than $100 a year in additional taxes, and even $150K+ earners would seem to still be paying less than $1000 a year.

This simple calculator tells you how each presidential candidate's tax plan affects you

Federal income taxes only goes towards paying interest to the foreign owned Federal Reserve bankers. The chief financial officer of USA.INC (i.e the Treasury Department) receives less than 10 percent of what the IRS ( a Puerto Rican Trust #62 and collection arm of the IMF) collects on the sweat equity of the indentured debt slaves that were made surety on the debt due to the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy of 1933. I barter my labor in 8 hour increments in exchange for something that I can eek out an existence with and yet this corporate entity steals part of that to satisfy a debt that they really don't owe to an entity that extended that line of credit from thin air. It is without a doubt that cleverest form of slavery ever invented. You don't have to feed, clothe or house your slaves or provide them healthcare but you still collect 30 to 45 percent of what they earn on top of the birth certificate bond (that matures over the life of said slave) that you are the trustee off and collect the balance of when your slave dies......good work if you can get it. USA.INC likes to claim that they have empty pockets and must run a deficit every year but the truth of the matter is that the CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports) tell a much different story. Seems that USA.INC has been skimming money off the top for the last 85 years and has invested that money in the stock market and they are the current majority shareholders in every Fortune 500 company and their subsidiaries. They have their fingers in a lot of pies. Citizens that are awake have been worried about the privatization of things like prisons, toll roads and even the rights to charge for parking to make up for alleged short term budget crisis? Don't fret...USA.INC owns stock in those industries as well but don't have to manage them...just collect the dividend checks. USA.INC has over 60 Trillion dollars in assets that are in bank accounts in the Cayman Islands, Switzerland and the territories that fall under their jurisdiction like Puerto Rico. While USA.INC not only encourages the offshoring of jobs to help their bottom line, they also give tax breaks and interest free loans to companies that relocate because it will eventually pad their bottom line. In the mean time, they flood the country with illegals that will work under the table while shafting the rest of the country that collects welfare and unemployment...but who gives a shit? Da gubermint will just borrow more fiat currency from credit created from a few strokes o a keyboard in order to pay for these programs because the debt doesn't matter as long as the interest is being satisfied because their profits are not taxable because they are sent to tax havens. It's the quintessential squeezing the teats of what once once a strong cow but has been milked to the point that she can't give much more. I would laugh at the hilarity of it all if it wasn't so fucking tragic....and this same shit is going on all over the world that has a central bank which are owned by the same banking oligarchs.

 

[RDD_1210]

Sanders doesn't hide from the fact that his plan will raise taxes, but has also pointed out that his healthcare plan will more than offset that as people will not have the large monthly out of pockets for health insurance any longer.

 

[1stRambo]

After some cursory fiddling a few interesting things show up on the surface.

No surprise Sanders' plans involve tax increases for nearly everyone. But man, this guy really rams it up the ass on the poor! A single person with no dependents making only $9,000 a year would pay more than $500 in additional taxes at more than 23% tax rate. That's the highest rate of either of the four listed candidates. Now, Sanders does actually provide reduced taxes for some poor people. Add two kids, and that single person saves $300 a year. Personally, that pisses me off. As someone who at time struggled in my young adult life to get myself established and stable, and who was repeated denied financial aid because I my meager income was too much to qualify without dependents, I will never accept the premise that not being irresponsible enough to have children you can't afford should be a hindrance to a low income person receiving aid.

Cruz seems to be most favorable to low income married couples, compared to other candidates, while Trump is most edges him out as the most favorable to middle and upper class married couples. Cruz is also the most favorable for single low income individuals w/ no children, and high income single individuals w/ no children. Sanders gouges high income people for nearly $10k or more a year in taxes. And interestingly, his play lays higher taxes on high income individuals who are parents, than those without children. The same is true for married couples.

Of particular interest is the fact that Clinton's plan seems to involve negligible raises for pretty much everyone. Negligible in that the vast majority of people would pay less than $100 a year in additional taxes, and even $150K+ earners would seem to still be paying less than $1000 a year.

This simple calculator tells you how each presidential candidate's tax plan affects you

Yo, if you believe Hillary Clinton, after all she has been through, and lying out of her Blow Hole? You need to see a psychiatrist? They might be able to help your mental well being?

"GTP"
She Will Lie To You Like Obama Has!!!

 

[SwimExpert]

After 8 years of clueless obama, after 8 years of Rhino BUSH.... Are you really surprised that there are only bad alternatives left? Obama almost doubled the debt, held interest rates at zero for almost his whole term, the time to pay for his mistakes has come.

Of course, socialism is never the answer.

Other than my comment about Sanders punishing low income people for not being parents, I passed no judgements about the overall merits of anyone's plan. I merely present information.

 

[SwimExpert]

Sanders doesn't hide from the fact that his plan will raise taxes, but has also pointed out that his healthcare plan will more than offset that as people will not have the large monthly out of pockets for health insurance any longer.

That's really helpful for people who aren't consuming health care in the first place. Low income young people getting gouged so that high income rich people can get free pills. That's the ticket.

 

[Dale Smith]

After some cursory fiddling a few interesting things show up on the surface.

No surprise Sanders' plans involve tax increases for nearly everyone. But man, this guy really rams it up the ass on the poor! A single person with no dependents making only $9,000 a year would pay more than $500 in additional taxes at more than 23% tax rate. That's the highest rate of either of the four listed candidates. Now, Sanders does actually provide reduced taxes for some poor people. Add two kids, and that single person saves $300 a year. Personally, that pisses me off. As someone who at time struggled in my young adult life to get myself established and stable, and who was repeated denied financial aid because I my meager income was too much to qualify without dependents, I will never accept the premise that not being irresponsible enough to have children you can't afford should be a hindrance to a low income person receiving aid.

Cruz seems to be most favorable to low income married couples, compared to other candidates, while Trump is most edges him out as the most favorable to middle and upper class married couples. Cruz is also the most favorable for single low income individuals w/ no children, and high income single individuals w/ no children. Sanders gouges high income people for nearly $10k or more a year in taxes. And interestingly, his play lays higher taxes on high income individuals who are parents, than those without children. The same is true for married couples.

Of particular interest is the fact that Clinton's plan seems to involve negligible raises for pretty much everyone. Negligible in that the vast majority of people would pay less than $100 a year in additional taxes, and even $150K+ earners would seem to still be paying less than $1000 a year.

This simple calculator tells you how each presidential candidate's tax plan affects you

Federal income taxes only goes towards paying interest to the foreign owned Federal Reserve bankers. The chief financial officer of USA.INC (i.e the Treasury Department) receives less than 10 percent of what the IRS ( a Puerto Rican Trust #62 and collection arm of the IMF) collects on the sweat equity of the indentured debt slaves that were made surety on the debt due to the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy of 1933. I barter my labor in 8 hour increments in exchange for something that I can eek out an existence with and yet this corporate entity steals part of that to satisfy a debt that they really don't owe to an entity that extended that line of credit from thin air. It is without a doubt that cleverest form of slavery ever invented. You don't have to feed, clothe or house your slaves or provide them healthcare but you still collect 30 to 45 percent of what they earn on top of the birth certificate bond (that matures over the life of said slave) that you are the trustee off and collect the balance of when your slave dies......good work if you can get it. USA.INC likes to claim that they have empty pockets and must run a deficit every year but the truth of the matter is that the CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports) tell a much different story. Seems that USA.INC has been skimming money off the top for the last 85 years and has invested that money in the stock market and they are the current majority shareholders in every Fortune 500 company and their subsidiaries. They have their fingers in a lot of pies. Citizens that are awake have been worried about the privatization of things like prisons, toll roads and even the rights to charge for parking to make up for alleged short term budget crisis? Don't fret...USA.INC owns stock in those industries as well but don't have to manage them...just collect the dividend checks. USA.INC has over 60 Trillion dollars in assets that are in bank accounts in the Cayman Islands, Switzerland and the territories that fall under their jurisdiction like Puerto Rico. While USA.INC not only encourages the offshoring of jobs to help their bottom line, they also give tax breaks and interest free loans to companies that relocate because it will eventually pad their bottom line. In the mean time, they flood the country with illegals that will work under the table while shafting the rest of the country that collects welfare and unemployment...but who gives a shit? Da gubermint will just borrow more fiat currency from credit created from a few strokes o a keyboard in order to pay for these programs because the debt doesn't matter as long as the interest is being satisfied because their profits are not taxable because they are sent to tax havens. It's the quintessential squeezing the teats of what once once a strong cow but has been milked to the point that she can't give much more. I would laugh at the hilarity of it all if it wasn't so fucking tragic....and this same shit is going on all over the world that has a central bank which are owned by the same banking oligarchs.

31 Questions and Answers about the IRS, Revision 3.4

Thank you....always glad to come across someone else that has a clue....

 

[Siete]

After some cursory fiddling a few interesting things show up on the surface.

No surprise Sanders' plans involve tax increases for nearly everyone. But man, this guy really rams it up the ass on the poor! A single person with no dependents making only $9,000 a year would pay more than $500 in additional taxes at more than 23% tax rate. That's the highest rate of either of the four listed candidates. Now, Sanders does actually provide reduced taxes for some poor people. Add two kids, and that single person saves $300 a year. Personally, that pisses me off. As someone who at time struggled in my young adult life to get myself established and stable, and who was repeated denied financial aid because I my meager income was too much to qualify without dependents, I will never accept the premise that not being irresponsible enough to have children you can't afford should be a hindrance to a low income person receiving aid.

Cruz seems to be most favorable to low income married couples, compared to other candidates, while Trump is most edges him out as the most favorable to middle and upper class married couples. Cruz is also the most favorable for single low income individuals w/ no children, and high income single individuals w/ no children. Sanders gouges high income people for nearly $10k or more a year in taxes. And interestingly, his play lays higher taxes on high income individuals who are parents, than those without children. The same is true for married couples.

Of particular interest is the fact that Clinton's plan seems to involve negligible raises for pretty much everyone. Negligible in that the vast majority of people would pay less than $100 a year in additional taxes, and even $150K+ earners would seem to still be paying less than $1000 a year.

This simple calculator tells you how each presidential candidate's tax plan affects you

After 8 years of clueless obama, after 8 years of Rhino BUSH.... Are you really surprised that there are only bad alternatives left? Obama almost doubled the debt, held interest rates at zero for almost his whole term, the time to pay for his mistakes has come.

Of course, socialism is never the answer.

Obama doubled the debt ?

ignorance is never the answer, stupidity is never an excuse.


dont bother to look up the debt when Obama took office, just stay stupidly ignorant.

 

[RDD_1210]

Sanders doesn't hide from the fact that his plan will raise taxes, but has also pointed out that his healthcare plan will more than offset that as people will not have the large monthly out of pockets for health insurance any longer.

That's really helpful for people who aren't consuming health care in the first place. Low income young people getting gouged so that high income rich people can get free pills. That's the ticket.

Everyone needs healthcare eventually. No one is immune from disease and injury.

 

[SwimExpert]

Everyone needs healthcare eventually. No one is immune from disease and injury.

Everyone needs food. Should you be forced to pay for my dinner?

 

[Dale Smith]

After some cursory fiddling a few interesting things show up on the surface.

No surprise Sanders' plans involve tax increases for nearly everyone. But man, this guy really rams it up the ass on the poor! A single person with no dependents making only $9,000 a year would pay more than $500 in additional taxes at more than 23% tax rate. That's the highest rate of either of the four listed candidates. Now, Sanders does actually provide reduced taxes for some poor people. Add two kids, and that single person saves $300 a year. Personally, that pisses me off. As someone who at time struggled in my young adult life to get myself established and stable, and who was repeated denied financial aid because I my meager income was too much to qualify without dependents, I will never accept the premise that not being irresponsible enough to have children you can't afford should be a hindrance to a low income person receiving aid.

Cruz seems to be most favorable to low income married couples, compared to other candidates, while Trump is most edges him out as the most favorable to middle and upper class married couples. Cruz is also the most favorable for single low income individuals w/ no children, and high income single individuals w/ no children. Sanders gouges high income people for nearly $10k or more a year in taxes. And interestingly, his play lays higher taxes on high income individuals who are parents, than those without children. The same is true for married couples.

Of particular interest is the fact that Clinton's plan seems to involve negligible raises for pretty much everyone. Negligible in that the vast majority of people would pay less than $100 a year in additional taxes, and even $150K+ earners would seem to still be paying less than $1000 a year.

This simple calculator tells you how each presidential candidate's tax plan affects you

Federal income taxes only goes towards paying interest to the foreign owned Federal Reserve bankers. The chief financial officer of USA.INC (i.e the Treasury Department) receives less than 10 percent of what the IRS ( a Puerto Rican Trust #62 and collection arm of the IMF) collects on the sweat equity of the indentured debt slaves that were made surety on the debt due to the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy of 1933. I barter my labor in 8 hour increments in exchange for something that I can eek out an existence with and yet this corporate entity steals part of that to satisfy a debt that they really don't owe to an entity that extended that line of credit from thin air. It is without a doubt that cleverest form of slavery ever invented. You don't have to feed, clothe or house your slaves or provide them healthcare but you still collect 30 to 45 percent of what they earn on top of the birth certificate bond (that matures over the life of said slave) that you are the trustee off and collect the balance of when your slave dies......good work if you can get it. USA.INC likes to claim that they have empty pockets and must run a deficit every year but the truth of the matter is that the CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports) tell a much different story. Seems that USA.INC has been skimming money off the top for the last 85 years and has invested that money in the stock market and they are the current majority shareholders in every Fortune 500 company and their subsidiaries. They have their fingers in a lot of pies. Citizens that are awake have been worried about the privatization of things like prisons, toll roads and even the rights to charge for parking to make up for alleged short term budget crisis? Don't fret...USA.INC owns stock in those industries as well but don't have to manage them...just collect the dividend checks. USA.INC has over 60 Trillion dollars in assets that are in bank accounts in the Cayman Islands, Switzerland and the territories that fall under their jurisdiction like Puerto Rico. While USA.INC not only encourages the offshoring of jobs to help their bottom line, they also give tax breaks and interest free loans to companies that relocate because it will eventually pad their bottom line. In the mean time, they flood the country with illegals that will work under the table while shafting the rest of the country that collects welfare and unemployment...but who gives a shit? Da gubermint will just borrow more fiat currency from credit created from a few strokes o a keyboard in order to pay for these programs because the debt doesn't matter as long as the interest is being satisfied because their profits are not taxable because they are sent to tax havens. It's the quintessential squeezing the teats of what once once a strong cow but has been milked to the point that she can't give much more. I would laugh at the hilarity of it all if it wasn't so fucking tragic....and this same shit is going on all over the world that has a central bank which are owned by the same banking oligarchs.

I live and breathe this stuff.......I have invested thousands upon thousands of hours reading and researching things like this. Just because you can't wrap your teeny tiny mind around it does it mean that it isn't true....it is and the rabbit hole is deep and goes off in many directions. You have been played for a chump.

 

[RDD_1210]

Everyone needs healthcare eventually. No one is immune from disease and injury.

Everyone needs food. Should you be forced to pay for my dinner?

A basic level of food, yes. Hence why we have the food stamp program.

 

[Norman]

Everyone needs healthcare eventually. No one is immune from disease and injury.

Everyone needs food. Should you be forced to pay for my dinner?

The Sanders plan really is delusional. I don't think that even he honestly thinks that he is going to pull of the ridiculous government expansions and tax hikes in the economy that is already devastated. It's like he is living on a planet where gravity works upwards, that's how realistic his plans are. He has no clue, because he actually thinks socialism works.

Anyway, even if he was elected none of the things would happen, because there are actually people in the WH who aren't illiterate in economics... if he even believes them in the first place.

 

[HenryBHough]

When you see what the taxes amount to on your income when stuff is free you'll quickly come to ask yourself why you're doing any work and you'll be right in hat there's no need to work when all you need is free. Until, of course, it's not produced anymore because there's nobody working at making stuff to give away free.

Confused yet?

 

[RDD_1210]

When you see what the taxes amount to on your income when stuff is free you'll quickly come to ask yourself why you're doing any work and you'll be right int hat there's no need to work when all you need is free. Until, of course, it's not produce anymore because there's nobody working at making stuff to give away free.

Confused yet?

Can someone translate this in to English please.

 

[RDD_1210]

Everyone needs healthcare eventually. No one is immune from disease and injury.

Everyone needs food. Should you be forced to pay for my dinner?

The Sanders plan really is delusional. I don't think that even he honestly thinks that he is going to pull of the ridiculous government expansions and tax hikes in the economy that is already devastated. It's like he is living on a planet where gravity works upwards, that's how realistic his plans are. He has no clue, because he actually thinks socialism works.

Anyway, even if he was elected none of the things would happen, because there are actually people in the WH who aren't illiterate in economics... if he even believes them in the first place.

Let's be honest, you don't actually know what Sanders plan is, do you? You just know "SOCIALISM". Right?