Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually this started when people who are paying taxes were attacked as being told they were the enemy and that they were not paying their fair share.
When did this happen? My taxes are in a fairly high percentile, and I don't recall being attacked at all. Is there some some sort of catch-up appointment one can make?
The fact that too many conservatives appear to insist on a policy of inaccurately denigrating huge swaths of Americans as "moochers" is precisely why they are losing major elections.
So if you want to go the way of the dinosaur... keep it up.
At the core of American conservatism is exclusion. To me this is the key to understanding conservatives' public policy ideas and the behavior of their voters.
83% of that "47%" pool either works low-wage jobs and still kicks in for payroll taxes or is retired.
It is only a minority of the total that is of working age and does not work.
And, 8 of the 10 states with highest percentage of people not paying federal taxes are Southern red states, so if you assume a constant distribution of workers/retired/moochers, then it's likely that many of the moochers are conservatives who vote Republican.
These are what we call "facts"; they do not disappear just because you do not like them.
And the "red" state of Texas has solid Dem counties that are all below poverty line.
Those "moochers" as you put it are solid Dem voters.
Texas has 3 of the poorest 10 counties in the nation. Get rid of those 3 and we'd be a net giver of tax dollars instead of a net taker.
Ok so you won. Tax the rich and we get $82 billion next year. Entitlement programs cost over $1 trillion a year. Where is the other $918 billion coming from ? And that figure will increase as the number of people needing government subsidies increase.
An excellent question. I remember following the tax policy positions of people like Paul Ryan and others. Back when they were allowed to discuss them, they talked at length about Broadening the Tax Base. It became very unpopular this year discussing tax policy, because nobody really knew for sure what the platform was from week to week. Obviously, Broadening The Tax Base (BTTB), meant raising taxes on those that didn't pay any. Not a popular thing to discuss with Grover breathing down your neck. At that time, it was quite popular to discuss tax cuts for Job Creators. That discussion ended when Romney said he would not cut taxes for the wealthy.
We now have a proposed budget, of which $1.2 trillion is so-called discretionary programs. Of that, approximately $850 billion is defense. So they are reduced to discussing cuts to the remaining $400 billion.
Within the budget, three categories stand out.
1. Defense
2. Social Security
3. Medicare
There are taxes directly associated with #2 and #3. Obviously, the Trust Funds are gone, they spent it. Many now want to change the programs forward. Medicare is extremely onerous from a future liability and cost standpoint. SS far less.
The so-called Fiscal Cliff has "cuts" that go into effect for both defense and all other discretionary expenditures. However, the Defense Budget, even after so-called cuts, rises forever. In fact, they all rise. What's being "cut" is the rate of growth.
Solutions? Sure.
The three most expensive programs ever are in the above list. #1 can be cut in many ways, and without touching common sense or security. #3 can be cut in many ways, and additionally funded by another tweaking. #2 is difficult, but not that harmful. SS taxes could be tweaked, as can the retirement age, benefit raises, and the types of programs it covers.
None of this is very difficult, in fact it's pretty easy. Sound planning and lack of histrionics can make the next ten years a model for common sense budgeting.
Ok so you won. Tax the rich and we get $82 billion next year. Entitlement programs cost over $1 trillion a year. Where is the other $918 billion coming from ? And that figure will increase as the number of people needing government subsidies increase.
Closing legal loophooles IE legal deductions for the upper tier will vastly increase government revenues beyond just simple taxation of income.
This is in the well deserved strong arm approach concerning the fiscal cliff in order to bully the bully's.
We have to to continue to do backroom deals and closed door discussions with the conservatives prior to them dying off completely literally.
The graying of you people is quite a sight to see and I'm glad this 46 year old is around to see the human dinosaurs die off.
The question remains is once your party is dead can we turn your remains into valuable petrol chemical products, because, after all the country still relies on such for the foreseeable future.
An excellent question. I remember following the tax policy positions of people like Paul Ryan and others. Back when they were allowed to discuss them, they talked at length about Broadening the Tax Base. It became very unpopular this year discussing tax policy, because nobody really knew for sure what the platform was from week to week. Obviously, Broadening The Tax Base (BTTB), meant raising taxes on those that didn't pay any. Not a popular thing to discuss with Grover breathing down your neck. At that time, it was quite popular to discuss tax cuts for Job Creators. That discussion ended when Romney said he would not cut taxes for the wealthy.
We now have a proposed budget, of which $1.2 trillion is so-called discretionary programs. Of that, approximately $850 billion is defense. So they are reduced to discussing cuts to the remaining $400 billion.
Within the budget, three categories stand out.
1. Defense
2. Social Security
3. Medicare
There are taxes directly associated with #2 and #3. Obviously, the Trust Funds are gone, they spent it. Many now want to change the programs forward. Medicare is extremely onerous from a future liability and cost standpoint. SS far less.
The so-called Fiscal Cliff has "cuts" that go into effect for both defense and all other discretionary expenditures. However, the Defense Budget, even after so-called cuts, rises forever. In fact, they all rise. What's being "cut" is the rate of growth.
Solutions? Sure.
The three most expensive programs ever are in the above list. #1 can be cut in many ways, and without touching common sense or security. #3 can be cut in many ways, and additionally funded by another tweaking. #2 is difficult, but not that harmful. SS taxes could be tweaked, as can the retirement age, benefit raises, and the types of programs it covers.
None of this is very difficult, in fact it's pretty easy. Sound planning and lack of histrionics can make the next ten years a model for common sense budgeting.
And what are the chances of seeing that happen in the halls of Congress in our lifetime ?
Closing legal loophooles IE legal deductions for the upper tier will vastly increase government revenues beyond just simple taxation of income.
This is in the well deserved strong arm approach concerning the fiscal cliff in order to bully the bully's.
We have to to continue to do backroom deals and closed door discussions with the conservatives prior to them dying off completely literally.
The graying of you people is quite a sight to see and I'm glad this 46 year old is around to see the human dinosaurs die off.
The question remains is once your party is dead can we turn your remains into valuable petrol chemical products, because, after all the country still relies on such for the foreseeable future.
LOL..I'm not Silent Generation nor am I even early Baby Boomer generation.
Just a few years older than you. I just lived beneath my means and saved so I could retire early.
My party ? Well I was hoping that "my party" would have gotten 5% of the vote so they could get public funding but that didn't happen this year. Will try for 2016 though.
Closing legal loophooles IE legal deductions for the upper tier will vastly increase government revenues beyond just simple taxation of income.
This is in the well deserved strong arm approach concerning the fiscal cliff in order to bully the bully's.
We have to to continue to do backroom deals and closed door discussions with the conservatives prior to them dying off completely literally.
The graying of you people is quite a sight to see and I'm glad this 46 year old is around to see the human dinosaurs die off.
The question remains is once your party is dead can we turn your remains into valuable petrol chemical products, because, after all the country still relies on such for the foreseeable future.
So eliminating the Obama cuts for the rich is but the first step.
How much do you plan to let them keep when you're all done and finished changing the tax code ?
So eliminating the Obama cuts for the rich is but the first step.
How much do you plan to let them keep when you're all done and finished changing the tax code ?
Once deductions and loopholes have been rectified we can then concentrate on passing laws making it fully illegal punished by imprisonment to offshore monies in an attempt to circumvent paying taxes on it.
My party likes to tout the 1960's as being the decade where corporations were taxed at 50 percent on average yet due to unionization of labor the majority of working men and women, especially within the context of manufacturing, enjoyed a solid middle class existence.
What many fail to realize is that the countries population was notably smaller than it is now and because of that fact we can not rely on that math when it comes to the equation of middle class structure and compensation.
We currently have the baby boom generation acting as a tidal wave concerning upward stresses on social services, healthcare, etc.
We need a certain amount of population addition in order to balance out the coming years of need and care that this and subsequent generations like mine will be in need of.
Once we have sufficiently dropped in number there needs to be heavy financial penalties placed on childbirth in order to sustain a symbiotic relationship between the countries population and the then current employment needs.
Once this balance is in place we can then move forward concerning raising the quality of life standards for the population we will have at that future date.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
