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.
the government has come to be too much influenced by special interests and the wealthy. We are heading over a cliff if something isn't done quickly and one of those things would be to tax the wealthy more to pay down the debt.
Eisenhower had a top rate of 91% we probably dont need it that high but should take it to 65-70%
A tax on Wall Street transactions should also be imposed.
Nobody should owe any sort of % of that nature to any government.. government does not exist for your redistribution dreams
And perhaps, just perhaps, before spouting off about some 90+or 60+% rate, you should look at what was counted as income then, deductible then, etc. The effective rate for the top is actually not much different today than it was then...
What should be is equality in treatment across the board, regardless to age, race, sex, creed, income, situation, or whatever else... funny how equality in treatment, to a liberal, only counts when it benefits you.. but unequal treatment of someone else is ok, when it also benefits the liberal
Effective rate is a hollow argument. It matters little what or how past generations screwed the American people out of tax money and services. Now, loopholes should be closed, and America's NORMAL tax rate on the rich should be restored (70-80%)
Without loopholes, this WILL BE the effective tax rate. And as new tricky loopholes arise, Congress should shut them down. That's part of their job. Let them do it.
Graduated rates equals rates different on total income.. is there a difference between dollar #14 and dollar #198314?? No... You SUBJECTIVELY FEEL it means more to a personthe wealthy pay no more on their first $15000 say then anyone else. Who else are you going to get the money from? Paying down the debt benefits EVERYBODY not just me, not just "liberals" a term I reject.Nobody should owe any sort of % of that nature to any government.. government does not exist for your redistribution dreams
And perhaps, just perhaps, before spouting off about some 90+or 60+% rate, you should look at what was counted as income then, deductible then, etc. The effective rate for the top is actually not much different today than it was then...
What should be is equality in treatment across the board, regardless to age, race, sex, creed, income, situation, or whatever else... funny how equality in treatment, to a liberal, only counts when it benefits you.. but unequal treatment of someone else is ok, when it also benefits the liberal
A rising tax on the wealthy will lift all boats
Everyone should be treated equally, not just equally when it benefits YOU
Spend less, tax equally, audit the fed...
Your sloganeering is ludicrous
Nobody should owe any sort of % of that nature to any government.. government does not exist for your redistribution dreams
And perhaps, just perhaps, before spouting off about some 90+or 60+% rate, you should look at what was counted as income then, deductible then, etc. The effective rate for the top is actually not much different today than it was then...
What should be is equality in treatment across the board, regardless to age, race, sex, creed, income, situation, or whatever else... funny how equality in treatment, to a liberal, only counts when it benefits you.. but unequal treatment of someone else is ok, when it also benefits the liberal
Effective rate is a hollow argument. It matters little what or how past generations screwed the American people out of tax money and services. Now, loopholes should be closed, and America's NORMAL tax rate on the rich should be restored (70-80%)
Without loopholes, this WILL BE the effective tax rate. And as new tricky loopholes arise, Congress should shut them down. That's part of their job. Let them do it.
No government should be taking that much of anyone's income.. your approach ASSumes that the money is not that of the earner, but instead more rightfully belongs to the government on the behalf of the populace.. this is flat out wrong
What screws over Americans is the extraordinary spending by government that is taking place in the name of the American people
Effective rate is a hollow argument. It matters little what or how past generations screwed the American people out of tax money and services. Now, loopholes should be closed, and America's NORMAL tax rate on the rich should be restored (70-80%)
Without loopholes, this WILL BE the effective tax rate. And as new tricky loopholes arise, Congress should shut them down. That's part of their job. Let them do it.
No government should be taking that much of anyone's income.. your approach ASSumes that the money is not that of the earner, but instead more rightfully belongs to the government on the behalf of the populace.. this is flat out wrong
What screws over Americans is the extraordinary spending by government that is taking place in the name of the American people
Your opinion is that 70% of an income being taxed is flat out wrong. My opinion is that it is flat out right (as long as we're talking about VERY LARGE incomes). You are correct that I assume that SOME of the money is not that of the "earner" (more correct word might be recipient), but instead more rightfully belongs to the government on the behalf of the populace. I'd say that is flat out RIGHT.
As far as the extraordinary spending going on, I would agree that SOME of it screws over the American people (ex. welfare to illegal aliens, via the anchor baby racket). In other areas, not enough is being spent (ex. hiring ICE agents, CBP officers, and building the Mexican border double fence mandated in the 2006 Secure Fence Act)
Graduated rates equals rates different on total income.. is there a difference between dollar #14 and dollar #198314?? No... You SUBJECTIVELY FEEL it means more to a personthe wealthy pay no more on their first $15000 say then anyone else. Who else are you going to get the money from? Paying down the debt benefits EVERYBODY not just me, not just "liberals" a term I reject.
A rising tax on the wealthy will lift all boats
Everyone should be treated equally, not just equally when it benefits YOU
Spend less, tax equally, audit the fed...
Your sloganeering is ludicrous
like I said it doesn't benefit me any more than it would benefit everyone, including future generations.
what kind of psycho-babble is this about SUBJECTIVELY?
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DOLLAR 14 AND DOLLAR 200,000 .....IT HURTS LESS TO LOSE THE LAST......THATS JUST COMMON SENSE
I agree on auditing the fed
No government should be taking that much of anyone's income.. your approach ASSumes that the money is not that of the earner, but instead more rightfully belongs to the government on the behalf of the populace.. this is flat out wrong
What screws over Americans is the extraordinary spending by government that is taking place in the name of the American people
Your opinion is that 70% of an income being taxed is flat out wrong. My opinion is that it is flat out right (as long as we're talking about VERY LARGE incomes). You are correct that I assume that SOME of the money is not that of the "earner" (more correct word might be recipient), but instead more rightfully belongs to the government on the behalf of the populace. I'd say that is flat out RIGHT.
As far as the extraordinary spending going on, I would agree that SOME of it screws over the American people (ex. welfare to illegal aliens, via the anchor baby racket). In other areas, not enough is being spent (ex. hiring ICE agents, CBP officers, and building the Mexican border double fence mandated in the 2006 Secure Fence Act)
Whether it be right or wrong, you advocate it only for some.. but funny that if someone subjectively gives advantage in government to those very same rich, solely based on their income, you would bitch how it is unfair... hence your subjective equal treatment only
And no.. things do not inherently belong to government with that same government then deciding on subjective criteria what you get to keep
You advocate state power over freedom... something I swore to defend against... you are a statist, pure and simple.. and being a statist, you are against the limitation of powers set forth in the constitution, which then makes you and enemy...
I attended compulsory public school for years. When I graduated, I didn't see a single person advocating a totalitarian state, except a couple of Muslim loons.
Congratulations!
You presented an entire line of thought and were thus immediately dismissed by one of the biggest one dimensional dimwits on the board...The Rabbi.
Thanks. I'm actually quite used to being complimented, by being disparaged by fools.
You have no response to the quote, evidently. Got it.
The response was adequate for the childish view you hold. It's very obvious you've never signed the front of a paycheck. After you do, get back to me.
I signed paychecks for 12 years as owner of my own business (as I already stated a few posts ago). What the matter ? Your reading glasses fogging up ?
As for "childish" >> Yeah ? So another name caller, huh ? Well, this thread is just jumping leaps and bounds with distinguished posters. Like I challenged that other empty box, when you think you have some substance (it's called evidence), let's hear it. (get back to me) Hint: names don't rate.
Congratulations!
You presented an entire line of thought and were thus immediately dismissed by one of the biggest one dimensional dimwits on the board...The Rabbi.
Thanks. I'm actually quite used to being complimented, by being disparaged by fools.
Gee I nailed you in the first post as a statist moron and you've done nothing but proven me right every time.
No, no part of anyone's income belongs to the government. Not one thin dime. Gov't can legitimately commandeer some of it for social goods, but those goods do not extend to favors for people who simply don't want to try. Nor to cronies whether in business, unions, or social groups.
You are not a conservative. You are not 67 years old. You know Eisenhower only from some magazine article you might have read somewhere.
What you nailed is yourself as the dimwit you're known to be. No law against it.
The response was adequate for the childish view you hold. It's very obvious you've never signed the front of a paycheck. After you do, get back to me.
I signed paychecks for 12 years as owner of my own business (as I already stated a few posts ago). What the matter ? Your reading glasses fogging up ?
As for "childish" >> Yeah ? So another name caller, huh ? Well, this thread is just jumping leaps and bounds with distinguished posters. Like I challenged that other empty box, when you think you have some substance (it's called evidence), let's hear it. (get back to me) Hint: names don't rate.
I saw your fantasy post where you said you paid all your workers the equivalent of $364,000.00 per year. Excuse me if I call bullshit on that. But carry on in your delusional world.
I signed paychecks for 12 years as owner of my own business (as I already stated a few posts ago). What the matter ? Your reading glasses fogging up ?
As for "childish" >> Yeah ? So another name caller, huh ? Well, this thread is just jumping leaps and bounds with distinguished posters. Like I challenged that other empty box, when you think you have some substance (it's called evidence), let's hear it. (get back to me) Hint: names don't rate.
I saw your fantasy post where you said you paid all your workers the equivalent of $364,000.00 per year. Excuse me if I call bullshit on that. But carry on in your delusional world.
NO, I did NOT say I paid anybody the equivalent of $364,000.00 per year. YOU said that.
So NO, I don't excuse you. I fact, I condemn you for being an irresponsible poster who posts FALSE information. Now you may go back and read my post (which you falsely labeled "fantasy") and this time, get it right.
PS - If/whenever you finally get it right, apology is unecessary. They are for the benefit of the apologizer.
I saw your fantasy post where you said you paid all your workers the equivalent of $364,000.00 per year. Excuse me if I call bullshit on that. But carry on in your delusional world.
NO, I did NOT say I paid anybody the equivalent of $364,000.00 per year. YOU said that.
So NO, I don't excuse you. I fact, I condemn you for being an irresponsible poster who posts FALSE information. Now you may go back and read my post (which you falsely labeled "fantasy") and this time, get it right.
PS - If/whenever you finally get it right, apology is unecessary. They are for the benefit of the apologizer.
Yep, I noticed I got the math wrong and changed it to $312,000.00 equivilant per year which is what $150.00 per hour extends to. And I still call bullshit on that.
No.. the same dollar spends exactly the same.. there is no difference except what you BELIEVE it means to a person based on subjective criterialike I said it doesn't benefit me any more than it would benefit everyone, including future generations.Graduated rates equals rates different on total income.. is there a difference between dollar #14 and dollar #198314?? No... You SUBJECTIVELY FEEL it means more to a person
Everyone should be treated equally, not just equally when it benefits YOU
Spend less, tax equally, audit the fed...
Your sloganeering is ludicrous
what kind of psycho-babble is this about SUBJECTIVELY?
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DOLLAR 14 AND DOLLAR 200,000 .....IT HURTS LESS TO LOSE THE LAST......THATS JUST COMMON SENSE
I agree on auditing the fed
NO, I did NOT say I paid anybody the equivalent of $364,000.00 per year. YOU said that.
So NO, I don't excuse you. I fact, I condemn you for being an irresponsible poster who posts FALSE information. Now you may go back and read my post (which you falsely labeled "fantasy") and this time, get it right.
PS - If/whenever you finally get it right, apology is unecessary. They are for the benefit of the apologizer.
Yep, I noticed I got the math wrong and changed it to $312,000.00 equivilant per year which is what $150.00 per hour extends to. And I still call bullshit on that.
Maybe if you had taken 10 minutes to think about it, instead of only 9, you might have gotten it right. You're still WAYYYYYY off the mark. Think about it. And now you're twice as irresponsinble.
No.. the same dollar spends exactly the same.. there is no difference except what you BELIEVE it means to a person based on subjective criterialike I said it doesn't benefit me any more than it would benefit everyone, including future generations.
what kind of psycho-babble is this about SUBJECTIVELY?
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DOLLAR 14 AND DOLLAR 200,000 .....IT HURTS LESS TO LOSE THE LAST......THATS JUST COMMON SENSE
I agree on auditing the fed
Let me repeat
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DOLLAR 14 AND DOLLAR 200,000 .....IT HURTS LESS TO LOSE THE LAST......THATS JUST COMMON SENSE
If you think someone making 200,000 is bothered as much by a $2000 tax or even a $20000 tax as is someone making 20,000 is by a $2000 you are a fool.
This country is heading over a cliff, if we don't start paying down our debt, and the only way realistically to do it is to bring taxes on the rich up to a point that they were in the past, and/or reduce loopholes that the wealthy use.
Yep, I noticed I got the math wrong and changed it to $312,000.00 equivilant per year which is what $150.00 per hour extends to. And I still call bullshit on that.
Maybe if you had taken 10 minutes to think about it, instead of only 9, you might have gotten it right. You're still WAYYYYYY off the mark. Think about it. And now you're twice as irresponsinble.
Really, $150.00 per hr X 40 hrs = $6,000.00 per wk X 52 = $312,000.00 per year. So no I'm right on the mark as you say, unless you lied about the $150.00 figure to begin with. If your calculations are different, as the teacher says, show your work.
Let me repeat
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DOLLAR 14 AND DOLLAR 200,000 .....IT HURTS LESS TO LOSE THE LAST......THATS JUST COMMON SENSE
If you think someone making 200,000 is bothered as much by a $2000 tax or even a $20000 tax as is someone making 20,000 is by a $2000 you are a fool.
This country is heading over a cliff, if we don't start paying down our debt, and the only way realistically to do it is to bring taxes on the rich up to a point that they were in the past, and/or reduce loopholes that the wealthy use.
You may very well be right that it is the only way but what gives you the right to punish the rich for the mistakes made by the government supposedly to benefit the poor? I say supposedly, because so much of our entitlement programs are appropriated by those in power in Washington.
Immie
No.. the same dollar spends exactly the same.. there is no difference except what you BELIEVE it means to a person based on subjective criteria
Let me repeat
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DOLLAR 14 AND DOLLAR 200,000 .....IT HURTS LESS TO LOSE THE LAST......THATS JUST COMMON SENSE
If you think someone making 200,000 is bothered as much by a $2000 tax or even a $20000 tax as is someone making 20,000 is by a $2000 you are a fool.
This country is heading over a cliff, if we don't start paying down our debt, and the only way realistically to do it is to bring taxes on the rich up to a point that they were in the past, and/or reduce loopholes that the wealthy use.
You may very well be right that it is the only way but what gives you the right to punish the rich for the mistakes made by the government supposedly to benefit the poor? I say supposedly, because so much of our entitlement programs are appropriated by those in power in Washington.
Immie
Let me repeat
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DOLLAR 14 AND DOLLAR 200,000 .....IT HURTS LESS TO LOSE THE LAST......THATS JUST COMMON SENSE
If you think someone making 200,000 is bothered as much by a $2000 tax or even a $20000 tax as is someone making 20,000 is by a $2000 you are a fool.
This country is heading over a cliff, if we don't start paying down our debt, and the only way realistically to do it is to bring taxes on the rich up to a point that they were in the past, and/or reduce loopholes that the wealthy use.
You may very well be right that it is the only way but what gives you the right to punish the rich for the mistakes made by the government supposedly to benefit the poor? I say supposedly, because so much of our entitlement programs are appropriated by those in power in Washington.
Immie
Why is it thought to be "punishing" to restore the normal tax rates of the USA, before Reagan came along and rearranged everything, and threw the whole country into a tailspin that we haven't recovered from yet ?
And why is it thought that restoring the normal tax rate, is for mistakes made by the govt, when these rates 70-92% rates, are the normal rates that have existed in America for most of the past 95 years ?
As for "appropriated by those in power in Washington", could you clarify that ?
