Vote for Mitt Romney...the opponent thinks our success is not because of hardwrk

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
When Obama speaks of his mind unscripted, you know it is dangerous.

And the top 5-10% income earners pay well over 60% of all income taxes. It is not enough according to Obama. America is getting closer and closer to socialism under Obama.
Members don't see this ad.
 
"In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. Thus, the top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.[8] However, after the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%. The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%.[8][9][10]"

Got this little gem from wikipedia, pretty much common knowledge that the top 1% in our country earn over DOUBLE what the bottom 80% earn, seem fair to you? Actually neuropathic, it seems like a great deal if the top 10% only pay 60% of the taxes, considering the top 10% of Americans earn 73.1% of all income...Obama isn't killing this country, greed is
 
bigkahunaburger said:
Got this little gem from wikipedia, pretty much common knowledge that the top 1% in our country earn over DOUBLE what the bottom 80% earn, seem fair to you? Actually neuropathic, it seems like a great deal if the top 10% only pay 60% of the taxes, considering the top 10% of Americans earn 73.1% of all income...Obama isn't killing this country, greed is
Click to expand...

I really don't like to argue with some nonsense. You are saying it's not fair when someone is making more money than others? It is a deal for top 10% of income earners paying 60% taxes? So, the top 10% income class should work everyday and feed the poor, unemployed, people on disability?

I hate to say you have no clue what you are talking about. Keep watching MSNBC and Chris Matthews. I guess that's the only way you feel happy.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
This country is founded on the backbone of hard working, blue collar Americans. We are systemically destroying the middle class, who's going to pick up your trash when there is no middle class? Keep watching Rush Limbaugh, seems to be doing you a lot of good.
 
bigkahunaburger said:
This country is founded on the backbone of hard working, blue collar Americans. We are systemically destroying the middle class, who's going to pick up your trash when there is no middle class? Keep watching Rush Limbaugh, seems to be doing you a lot of good.
Click to expand...

OK junior - how much of your hard-earned income should the government be able to take? Simple question - give me a percentage.

I know, just like Barry, you believe EVERY American should be able to attend the college of their choice, buy a home, etc. It doesn't work that way, and especially not as long as you think the government is the answer to every problem. As Neil Boortz would say - someone's got to cook the french fries.
 
Ok grandpa - If the top 10% make 70% of the total income, they should pay 70% of the taxes, seems pretty fair. Of course, someone has to cook the french fries, not everyone can be rich etc... However, to ignore the redistribution of wealth that has occurred in this country since the 1970's and simply label it as, "I work hard and deserve $800,000/year" attitude is laughable at best. People like you make me wonder, if the top 1% in this country earned 90% of the total income per year would you then admit there is problem? I have a slight inclination that if you were in that 1% it would be because you work really hard and deserve it, but if you were in the 90% I bet you wouldn't be as happy.
 
Who cares who owns what percentage of the national wealth? What really matters is what the standard of living is for the average american. If we had ~5% unemployment and the average income was 50-60k and college didn't cost an arm and a leg who cares if the richest americans owned 99% percent of the national wealth.

Liberals! listen to these words: Wealth is CREATED not a constant value. Meaning - there is not a finite amount of wealth that is constant and must be equally distributed as some sort of zero-sum process. It is possible for you to live a very good life style as a middle-middle family and others build an empire like Apple and GROW THE ECONOMIC PIE so that they hold a higher percentage of the wealth. Focusing on who owns what % is a stupid metric unless wealth was a finite-constant. It's not in the US - so long as we're a free nation where capitalism exists.

If you want to raise the standard of living make capitalism easier. Don't punish the "french fry cook" who is saving his money to invest in a business venture. If he makes a small business work he can do very well for himself and deserves that 800k/yr or w/e he makes. In capitalism it's possible for everyone to be rich as long as they create value and wealth. In the successful people's wake are jobs and consumption which begets more jobs.
 
Last edited:
jwk said:
Did you actually read this article? It doesn't support your point at all.
Click to expand...

:oops:

Ouch. I did read that article, though awhile ago. I meant to link this article. I don't argue that certain families don't pay federal income tax. However, a vast a majority of people do pay some sort of taxes, especially the taxes that pay for Social Security and Medicare. Often, these people pay more as a percent of their income because Social Security taxes are only assessed on the first $110K of a person's pay. Obviously, everyone equally pays sales taxes, etc. The key graph from the above link is this one:

taxpayers_by_age.png


So, the people by and large no paying taxes are the very young who may be earning a relatively small amount and taking standard deductions (a la my first accidental article post) or the older folks who are mainly drawing on pensions and retirement accounts.
 
bigkahunaburger said:
This country is founded on the backbone of hard working, blue collar Americans. We are systemically destroying the middle class, who's going to pick up your trash when there is no middle class? Keep watching Rush Limbaugh, seems to be doing you a lot of good.
Click to expand...

The poor.
 
It seems most of us should be able to agree that it's not all about people making money. The more people making great coin the better. Let the rich get rich. Whatever.

The problem, as I see it (and I don't see either party REALLY doing much about it) is the disintigration of our middle economic class. Unfortunately, I see no real end to it. That's why it seems like we're going to look a lot more like Brazil than a true first rate nation. Aren't "modern" industrialized economies judged based upon the masses? Quality of life, education of the masses, large middle classes..... Any backward country has it's 1%. But, the standard is what type of situation the masses find themselves. Our masses are in serious trouble for any number of reasons which could become a separate forum, yet alone thread..... Suffice it to say that the problems of the middle class are partly personal responsibility and partly piss-poor policies of a government which is failing it's people. (multiple governemts, red and blue..)
 
bigkahunaburger said:
"In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. Thus, the top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.[8] However, after the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%. The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%.[8][9][10]"

Got this little gem from wikipedia, pretty much common knowledge that the top 1% in our country earn over DOUBLE what the bottom 80% earn, seem fair to you? Actually neuropathic, it seems like a great deal if the top 10% only pay 60% of the taxes, considering the top 10% of Americans earn 73.1% of all income...Obama isn't killing this country, greed is
Click to expand...

:thumbup::thumbup:
 
bigkahunaburger said:
Actually neuropathic, it seems like a great deal if the top 10% only pay 60% of the taxes, considering the top 10% of Americans earn 73.1% of all income...Obama isn't killing this country, greed is
Click to expand...

bigkahunaburger said:
Ok grandpa - If the top 10% make 70% of the total income, they should pay 70% of the taxes, seems pretty fair.
Click to expand...

So I guess by your logic that in a couple of years when you are a resident and you suddenly find yourself to be a member of the world's 1%, you will be in favor of taxing yourself 40% or more to create a "safety net" to help out the true poor in the world who have no car on which to make a payment, no utility bills because they have no utilities, no health insurance and in fact no accessible health care system...


princechef said:
In my home state, the median household income is $50,000.
Click to expand...

Those that are earning median income in your state are well within the worldwide 1%. Those wealth accumulating bastards!


bigkahunaburger said:
"In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. Thus, the top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%."
Click to expand...

And the majority of those 80% are vastly wealthier than the majority of the worlds population. Your point is?


Yappy hit the nail on the head. The distribution of wealth is a meaningless metric. The countries with the highest standards of living for the poor and middle class are also the countries with some of the highest levels of wealth "inequality." America, where you drive home from the unemployment office to catch the DirecTivoed latest episode of Breaking Bad on your 60" plasma and set the alarm on your iPhone to wake you up for tomorrow's 99% rally. Yep the 99% have it real bad.


- pod
 
GoodmanBrown said:
Just as a heads up, this isn't true. (The part about 50% of Americans not paying taxes. I obviously don't know what you pay in taxes. ;)) Essentially all Americans pay taxes of some variety or another. Most of the ones that don't pay income taxes are 65+yo seniors who are retired.
Click to expand...

It actually was 50% in 2009. It hovers around 45+% typically. I'm talking about federal income tax, not payroll tax, etc. For federal income tax, 50% (seniors included) are exempt due to various deductions and credits (many even get money back). Most people pay payroll taxes, but keep in mind these go towards their own social security and medicare.

And I can assure you with all the various taxes, I probably pay close to 40%.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
periopdoc said:
So I guess by your logic that in a couple of years when you are a resident and you suddenly find yourself to be a member of the world's 1%, you will be in favor of taxing yourself 40% or more to create a "safety net" to help out the true poor in the world who have no car on which to make a payment, no utility bills because they have no utilities, no health insurance and in fact no accessible health care system...




Those that are earning median income in your state are well within the worldwide 1%. Those wealth accumulating bastards!




And the majority of those 80% are vastly wealthier than the majority of the worlds population. Your point is?


Yappy hit the nail on the head. The distribution of wealth is a meaningless metric. The countries with the highest standards of living for the poor and middle class are also the countries with some of the highest levels of wealth "inequality." America, where you drive home from the unemployment office to catch the DirecTivoed latest episode of Breaking Bad on your 60" plasma and set the alarm on your iPhone to wake you up for tomorrow's 99% rally. Yep the 99% have it real bad.


- pod
Click to expand...

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
 
You pay >70% by 0.47, really seems pretty fair to me. Nobody is saying you didn't work hard to make that kind of money, but this country has afforded you a lot of opportunities and you have capitalized on them. You live a better life than 95% of the country and still whine about paying taxes.
 
bigkahunaburger said:
You pay >70% by 0.47, really seems pretty fair to me. Nobody is saying you didn't work hard to make that kind of money, but this country has afforded you a lot of opportunities and you have capitalized on them. You live a better life than 95% of the country and still whine about paying taxes.
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is "from each according to their ability - to each according to their need". Does that sum it up in your view?
 
Flat tax, the only fair way.

To me, the dollar amount is not important, nor is the 'percent of total taxes paid'.. The only thing that is important as the percentage of income.
 
Haha trying to goat me into Karl Marx, nice try. I'm not a communist, but I do feel like a country is defined by it's middle class, you know, the people doing the jobs you would never want to do for an avg salary (I get it, that's still wayyyy better than the avg person living in the "world"--dumbest argument I've heard yet). The gap between the top 10% and the bottom 80% has been increasing at a fast rate, heaven forbid we protect the middle class. Now we're equating that to communism...ok. Why do you think that if a certain group makes 70% of the income that they shouldn't have to pay 70% of the taxes? Let's say one person in the US made 99% of the income, should they only have to pay 30% of the taxes? Ohhhh yeah I get it, you hate that the US helps out it's poor and indigent, we should just let all those freeloaders fall by the wayside so you don't have to pay so much in taxes, and you can purchase your third porsche.
 
"The test of our progress in not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much: it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
-Franklin D. Roosevelt-
 
bigkahunaburger said:
Haha trying to goat me into Karl Marx, nice try. I'm not a communist, but I do feel like a country is defined by it's middle class, you know, the people doing the jobs you would never want to do for an avg salary (I get it, that's still wayyyy better than the avg person living in the "world"--dumbest argument I've heard yet). The gap between the top 10% and the bottom 80% has been increasing at a fast rate, heaven forbid we protect the middle class. Now we're equating that to communism...ok. Why do you think that if a certain group makes 70% of the income that they shouldn't have to pay 70% of the taxes? Let's say one person in the US made 99% of the income, should they only have to pay 30% of the taxes? Ohhhh yeah I get it, you hate that the US helps out it's poor and indigent, we should just let all those freeloaders fall by the wayside so you don't have to pay so much in taxes, and you can purchase your third porsche.
Click to expand...

Try not to deal in generalities here. I asked a specific question.

An individual doesn't earn 70% of the income of the country. So, how much of your hard-earned income should the government be able to take? Simple question - give me a percentage.

And BTW - I could care less what the gap is. Success shouldn't be penalized. Profit is not a dirty word. You assume, just like our idiot president, that somehow because someone or some company is successful that it can't possibly be due to their own hard work - that itmust somehow be done by stepping on "the little guy", or the poor, or that the government somehow made it all possible. Yep - you don't really know squat, and it's actually the government that's going to med school, not you.
 
Last edited:
bigkahunaburger said:
"The test of our progress in not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much: it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
-Franklin D. Roosevelt-
Click to expand...


Listen, if your status is correct, it states you are a med student (who knows maybe a CRNA). At any rate. Let's assume you are a med student. In the next 4 years or so you will be a resident. You will likely maintain your liberal views until the end of residency.

Then you will enter the REAL world. You will then reflect on what type of hard work and dedication you put into everything to that point. Then you will change your way of thinking.

Many a resident/med student made the fatal error 4 years ago. Now each one of those guys/gals is an attending and are hopelessly wishing they didnt mk that fatal error.

Read this thread, this is the INSIGHT you need. Trust me, your insight will be different.
 
PinchandBurn said:
Listen, if your status is correct, it states you are a med student (who knows maybe a CRNA). At any rate. Let's assume you are a med student. In the next 4 years or so you will be a resident. You will likely maintain your liberal views until the end of residency.

Then you will enter the REAL world. You will then reflect on what type of hard work and dedication you put into everything to that point. Then you will change your way of thinking.

Many a resident/med student made the fatal error 4 years ago. Now each one of those guys/gals is an attending and are hopelessly wishing they didnt mk that fatal error.

Read this thread, this is the INSIGHT you need. Trust me, your insight will be different.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily.
 
PinchandBurn said:
Listen, if your status is correct, it states you are a med student (who knows maybe a CRNA). At any rate. Let's assume you are a med student. In the next 4 years or so you will be a resident. You will likely maintain your liberal views until the end of residency.

Then you will enter the REAL world. You will then reflect on what type of hard work and dedication you put into everything to that point. Then you will change your way of thinking.

Many a resident/med student made the fatal error 4 years ago. Now each one of those guys/gals is an attending and are hopelessly wishing they didnt mk that fatal error.

Read this thread, this is the INSIGHT you need. Trust me, your insight will be different.
Click to expand...

Very true, at least in most cases. Too many med students think like this until they realize what it's like to have 30-40% of your hard-earned income stripped away.
 
jwk said:
Go with the Fair Tax - even better.
Click to expand...

Not sure what the fair tax is, but an equal percentage from all parties with no deductions is the only fair way to do it in my opinion (and many others).
 
jwk said:
Go with the Fair Tax - even better.
Click to expand...

Yes :thumbup:

FiremedicMike said:
Not sure what the fair tax is, but an equal percentage from all parties with no deductions is the only fair way to do it in my opinion (and many others).
Click to expand...

As you know, the lowest tax bracket in the U.S. is 15% excluding the mandatory 7.65% payroll tax. The fair tax proposes to eliminate these taxes and instead have a 23% sales tax. There will be 0% income tax. You keep every dollar of what you earn and are only taxed on what you spend. There will be tax refunds for those below a certain income level for basic necessities. No tax evasion, no IRS, and everyone pays their fair share.

Edit: I think I remember reading that there is no sales tax on used goods under this system.
 
xf3rn4nd3sx said:
As you know, the lowest tax bracket in the U.S. is 15% excluding the mandatory 7.65% payroll tax. The fair tax proposes to eliminate these taxes and instead have a 23% sales tax. There will be 0% income tax. You keep every dollar of what you earn and are only taxed on what you spend. There will be tax refunds for those below a certain income level for basic necessities. No tax evasion, no IRS, and everyone pays their fair share.
Click to expand...

Does that math work?

I thought most European countries had a national sales tax (VAT) in the 10-15% range. They also have high income taxes. I'm just skeptical that a flat tax of 23% (which presumably would exclude food, clothing, probably some other necessities) would pay the bills.

I also wonder what kind of effect a 'consumption tax' would have on our economy, which is heavily dependent upon consumption.
 
pgg said:
Does that math work?

I thought most European countries had a national sales tax (VAT) in the 10-15% range. They also have high income taxes. I'm just skeptical that a flat tax of 23% (which presumably would exclude food, clothing, probably some other necessities) would pay the bills.

I also wonder what kind of effect a 'consumption tax' would have on our economy, which is heavily dependent upon consumption.
Click to expand...

From what I have read, people would actually not be spending much more on products they buy (in addition to having more money to spend). Most products (eggs, bread, electronics, furniture, etc.) have government taxes rolled into the price (compliance tax, VAT, and others). The fair tax eliminates these so the price of products would be greatly reduced. Labor will also be cheaper as a result of payroll tax elimination, which could further reduce the price of goods.

Here's the site: www.fairtax.org

It's an interesting concept.


Edit: It is supposed to raise the same if not more revenue than the current system, as tax evasion will be nonexistent. There is no longer need for people to hide their income overseas or protect it from taxes through complicated vehicles, as there will be no income tax or tax season. Corporations will no longer have the ability to pay 0 in taxes, but overall costs should be cheaper for them, so it's really a win-win.
 
Last edited:
neuropathic said:
Don't feed the trolls. Med student? More like medical assistant.
Click to expand...

I don't see anything that suggests troll. Sounds like someone who's worried about growth in the middle class.
I hate the idea of my money being wasted just as much as anyone else does, and I know it's wasted all the time by the ******ed economic policies of the government. That needs to be policed better and hopefully it will be now that the economy is in trouble. Everyone's getting burdened with this **** sandwich. Regardless, the more money that stays in the hands of the middle class, the more spending and the better we ALL thrive. I'm going to be just fine no matter my tax burden, and I'm willing to pay a larger share if it means the people in the middle have more to spend.
People need to get over this absolutely RIDICULOUS idea that rich people create jobs. People BUYING **** creates jobs, and supporting that'll benefit everyone.
 
xf3rn4nd3sx said:
Yes :thumbup:



As you know, the lowest tax bracket in the U.S. is 15% excluding the mandatory 7.65% payroll tax. The fair tax proposes to eliminate these taxes and instead have a 23% sales tax. There will be 0% income tax. You keep every dollar of what you earn and are only taxed on what you spend. There will be tax refunds for those below a certain income level for basic necessities. No tax evasion, no IRS, and everyone pays their fair share.

Edit: I think I remember reading that there is no sales tax on used goods under this system.
Click to expand...

Ah, I'd consider something like that..

Actually, my ideal tax idea would be like a 10% income tax for federal stuff (military, etc) and a sales tax that would cover all local stuff..
 
Those numbers are arbitrary, bean counters could figure out ideals..
 
xf3rn4nd3sx said:
Yes :thumbup:



As you know, the lowest tax bracket in the U.S. is 15% excluding the mandatory 7.65% payroll tax. The fair tax proposes to eliminate these taxes and instead have a 23% sales tax. There will be 0% income tax. You keep every dollar of what you earn and are only taxed on what you spend. There will be tax refunds for those below a certain income level for basic necessities. No tax evasion, no IRS, and everyone pays their fair share.

Edit: I think I remember reading that there is no sales tax on used goods under this system.
Click to expand...

It's not a sales tax - it's a VAT. Something that costs $1 today would still cost $1 under the Fair Tax, not $1.23. The idea is that 23% of the cost of every item sold is already due to taxes.

The concept, as laid out in the books by Neil Boortz and former Congressman John Linder, is fascinating as well as fair. No special interests, no deductions.

Herman Cain was actually a huge proponent of the Fair Tax, but so many people who are against it (stupid as they are) change the "rules" and make it something it's not to justify opposing it. That's why he came up with his 9-9-9 plan as an alternative. It was easier to explain.
 
periopdoc said:
Okay junior.

(Big graph)

We already pay >70% and you want us to pay more?

- pod
Click to expand...

Does anyone know what percentage of their pay each income bracket pays? I know there was that hubbub when Warren Buffett revealed his tax rate was actually lower than his secretary's because most of his income was capital gains.

I know most of the attendings feel like they're paying their fair share, but do you think Warren Buffett is? Should he be paying less than his employees rate-wise, even if the gross amount he's paying dwarfs theirs?
 
jwk, you want a specific percentage, ok, whatever you're being taxed at right now is a pretty good percent. Again, if the top 10% make 70% of the income, then they should pay 70% of the taxes plain and simple. Haha CRNA/medical assistant, ok, I actually made it into a top 25 school, I am jealous of the weather you got to experience in the caribbean though. Also, pooh and annie hit the nail on the head, you bozo's keep thinking that giving more money to the rich will create jobs, it doesn't, what a shocker. When rich people get more money, they just put more money in the bank, doesn't exactly help out the economy.
 
bigkahunaburger said:
jwk, you want a specific percentage, ok, whatever you're being taxed at right now is a pretty good percent. Again, if the top 10% make 70% of the income, then they should pay 70% of the taxes plain and simple. Haha CRNA/medical assistant, ok, I actually made it into a top 25 school, I am jealous of the weather you got to experience in the caribbean though. Also, pooh and annie hit the nail on the head, you bozo's keep thinking that giving more money to the rich will create jobs, it doesn't, what a shocker. When rich people get more money, they just put more money in the bank, doesn't exactly help out the economy.
Click to expand...

How did you get into medical school without being able to answer a simple question?

Try and follow along. What is the maximum rate an individual should pay towards income tax? Should someone pay 30% of what they earn? 40%? 50%? 60%? 70%? 80%? 90%?

What I pay is not at issue. You think collectively that those who make 70% of the income should pay 70% of the taxes. That doesn't answer my question. This is typical of someone who doesn't pay income tax and has ZERO concept of the tax system and how it works.

Do you recall the stats from earlier this year that if we taxed everyone that makes above $250k a year at 100%, we couldn't cover the budget deficit this year? Clearly the path we're on now isn't working.
 
Last edited:
I'll make it easy, what percent of your income do you pay in taxes?
 
Obviously, I don't have a specific answer or percent to give you, and I don't know what it's like to pay 30-40% of a paycheck towards taxes. I also don't know what it's like to be a paraplegic, but I can understand that it must be pretty unbearable. So, what do I think is fair, first off, whatever you're paying in taxes right now is fair. I feel that, for example, if we tax someone that makes $500,000 a year it should go accordingly; first $250,000 made need to be taxed at a certain rate, the next $250,000 should be taxed at a higher rate. Stop acting like you're some big bad #ss that didn't have any help from the "system" along the way. Paying it back to the system that allows you to have your Mcmansion, porsche, and trophy wife so that others don't have to struggle so hard to live doesn't seem like an unreasonable thing to ask.
 
This guy with his sailboat picture and thumb up pics, don't you have a Bill O'Reilly poster to drool over?
 
cchoukal said:
Wait, so WHO is giving you the GI scholarship? Some might count that opportunity as tax-supported government infrastructure.

Is it possible that BOTH individual effort AND government are important?
Click to expand...


Yes - both of them - IF the government represents us . But the fed is a leech ,,,
Sucking up our money and life, Papers movers ...They produce NOTHING,
WE PAY THEM!
They are accountable to us.
They should kiss our hands !
 
2win, completely agree with you, lobbyists control this country, bunch of BS. Glideyear, grow a pair will ya?
 
bigkahunaburger said:
Obviously, I don't have a specific answer or percent to give you, and I don't know what it's like to pay 30-40% of a paycheck towards taxes. I also don't know what it's like to be a paraplegic, but I can understand that it must be pretty unbearable. So, what do I think is fair, first off, whatever you're paying in taxes right now is fair. I feel that, for example, if we tax someone that makes $500,000 a year it should go accordingly; first $250,000 made need to be taxed at a certain rate, the next $250,000 should be taxed at a higher rate. Stop acting like you're some big bad #ss that didn't have any help from the "system" along the way. Paying it back to the system that allows you to have your Mcmansion, porsche, and trophy wife so that others don't have to struggle so hard to live doesn't seem like an unreasonable thing to ask.
Click to expand...

Once again - spoken like someone who has never paid taxes, and is perfectly willing to suck off the teat of the US taxpayer.

So - the first $250k should be taxed at a certain rate. What would that rate be? How about for the next $250k? The problem is, you don't pay taxes - you have no idea how taxes affect your personal bottom line.

Here's where you're showing your true liberal colors - Paying it back to the system that allows you to have your Mcmansion, porsche, and trophy wife so that others don't have to struggle so hard to live..... Paying back what to whom? You think I got my money from the government in the first place? This is what's wrong with stupid liberals like you and your Marxist/socialist president. They think the government owns it ALL, and that the government ALLOWS us to keep SOME of IT'S money, and give the rest BACK to the government where it all came from in the first place. Why is it MY responsibility to pay so that "others don't have to struggle so hard to live". WTF?!?!?!?

You don't get it. IT'S MY MONEY, not the government's. You're so friggin clueless it just kills me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

nimbus
Cedars Union Vote
Replies
39
Views
3K
anbuitachi
A
coffeebythelake
Supervising physician fined because DNP called herself Doctor.
Replies
14
Views
2K
anbuitachi
A
DrOwnage
Anyone else think its bogus our start up units are reimbursed based on the surgery itself?
Replies
16
Views
1K
GassYous
GassYous
DrOwnage
Our boy Rex had all charges dropped
Replies
22
Views
3K
Urzuz
U
GravelRider
Hospital Greed is Destroying Our Nurses
2
Replies
97
Views
6K
coffeebythelake
coffeebythelake
Top