Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-14-2012, 12:34 PM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,149 posts, read 8,419,987 times
Reputation: 4190

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Either you don't understand what IS whining or you've mistakenly responded to my post. But thanks for letting us know that you understand, that if republicans succeed in holding tax cuts for up to $250K hostage to serve those who make more than that, we will see Clinton rates.
Hostage or not, the tax "increase" is nothing more than a return to the Clinton rates, which were still low by historical measure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-14-2012, 12:41 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,822,592 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrapperJohn View Post
Hostage or not, the tax "increase" is nothing more than a return to the Clinton rates, which were still low by historical measure.
Tell that to the OP.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2012, 12:43 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,822,592 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
AND higher ER charges. So we're back to which is least expensive. Obviously, those experiencing the least expense are those who don't pay for the services they receive. Who is that?
No, higher ER charges AND higher charge for everything else as well which also affects insurance premiums.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2012, 12:51 PM
 
Location: Del Rio, TN
39,870 posts, read 26,514,597 times
Reputation: 25773
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Tell that to the OP.
The OP is smart enough to know that under the Clinton tax rates he will be paying about $3000 more per year in income tax. The OP actually took his (lower middle class) tax returns in ~2003 and ran the numbers using 2000 (pre BTC) 1040s and found that out that he saved thousands under the BTCs. The OP was actually able to figure out that referred to these as "Bush Tax Cuts for the Rich" were nothing but liars.

I'm OK with letting them expire, even though I don't know where I'll come up with the extra money. It will be worth it when much of the working population that lacks basic math skills sees their first paycheck in JA. Heck, that's about the only entertainment I'll be able to afford, better enjoy it.

I've resigned my self to the Obama tax increase. Getting back to the topic...where will you cut spending in order to pay your "share"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2012, 12:53 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,822,592 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake View Post
The OP is smart enough to know that under the Clinton tax rates he will be paying about $3000 more per year in income tax.
Is the OP smart enough to show me the math? But, you should really be responding to the person who said it will still be historically low levels.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2012, 12:55 PM
 
Location: Del Rio, TN
39,870 posts, read 26,514,597 times
Reputation: 25773
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Is the OP smart enough to show me the math? But, you should really be responding to the person who said it will still be historically low levels.
Tell ya what, I'll dig up my old tax returns (if I have them that far back), or see if the 2000 tax tables and deductions are available on line.

eta:

lets assume an adjusted gross income of $50k in our example.

2000 rates (married filing jointly) Federal personal income tax rates for 2000.

28%x43850+(50000-43850)X28%=$8299 due under the "Clinton Rates" you propose returning us to.


2012 rates

17,400x10% + (50,000-17,400)x15%=$6630

What I have not allowed for is the increase in standard deductions and personal exemptions as part of the BTC. So, if we revert to the Clinton rates, for the same gross income you will be paying tax (at your top marginal rate) on several thousand more dollars. IIRC (and I will confirm this) we get a combined exemption of about $11k now vs $7000 under Clinton, a difference of $4000. $4000 at a marginal rate of 28% is $1120, so your "Clinton rate" tax is $9419, vs $6630 as of now under the Bush rates. A difference of $2789. And this is only allowing for the personal exemption difference, not the standard deduction, which is also several thousand dollars larger under the "Bush Tax Cuts" rates.

Let me know when I can help you with math again. Can I ask you for help with art appreciation, should the need arise?

Last edited by Toyman at Jewel Lake; 12-14-2012 at 01:44 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2012, 12:58 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,822,592 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake View Post
Tell ya what, I'll dig up my old tax returns (if I have them that far back), or see if the 2000 tax tables and deductions are available on line.
I'm not interested in delay for something that will never happen. Just show me an estimate. I'm curious and especially consider one of many gems posted by you such as this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake View Post
What I question is will Obama toss 98% of the country under the bus if he doesn't get his opportunity to punish the 2%? Seems pretty petty to hurt everyone just because you can't take revenge on your political opponents.
PS. I see you edited the post following my response. So, let us look at it:
Quote:
eta:

lets assume an adjusted gross income of $50k in our example.

2000 rates (married filing jointly) Federal personal income tax rates for 2000.

28%x43850+(50000-43850)X28%=$8299 due under the "Clinton Rates" you propose returning us to.


2012 rates

17,400x10% + (50,000-17,400)x15%=$6630

What I have not allowed for is the increase in standard deductions and personal exemptions as part of the BTC. So, if we revert to the Clinton rates, for the same gross income you will be paying tax (at your top marginal rate) on several thousand more dollars. IIRC (and I will confirm this) we get a combined exemption of about $11k now vs $7000 under Clinton, a difference of $4000. $4000 at a marginal rate of 28% is $1120, so your "Clinton rate" tax is $9419, vs $6630 as of now under the Bush rates. A difference of $2789. And this is only allowing for the personal exemption difference, not the standard deduction, which is also several thousand dollars larger under the "Bush Tax Cuts" rates.

Let me know when I can help you with math again. Can I ask you for help with art appreciation, should the need arise?
In other words, you're doing the same math that Tax Foundation debunked five years ago.

"Recently an incorrect comparison of income taxes under Presidents Clinton and Bush has been making the rounds of the internet, showing up in forwarded e-mails and on numerous blogs and message boards."

Comparing Income Taxes under Bill Clinton and George Bush

Is there no life in republicanism beyond reliance on chain emails and letters?

And, for obvious reasons, you've no issue with this (and the feeling is mutual)...
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrapperJohn View Post
Hostage or not, the tax "increase" is nothing more than a return to the Clinton rates, which were still low by historical measure.
BUT... if your tears are more than those that belong on a crocodile, educate self on a simple fact: Obama wants to keep Bush tax rates under $250K incomes.

Last edited by EinsteinsGhost; 12-14-2012 at 02:09 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2012, 01:28 PM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,951,723 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidkaos2 View Post
If Clinton balanced the budget then why was the national debt 1.5 trillion higher at the end of his administration than it was at the beginning?

The myth that Clinton balanced the budget comes from judging paper instead of reality.
The national debt, calculated the way you are saying, includes money the government owes itself.

It's explained here: FactCheck.org : The Budget and Deficit Under Clinton
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2012, 01:58 PM
 
Location: Del Rio, TN
39,870 posts, read 26,514,597 times
Reputation: 25773
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
I'm not interested in delay for something that will never happen. Just show me an estimate. I'm curious and especially consider one of many gems posted by you such as this:

OK, I've done some more digging. Under Clinton the personal exemption was $2800 per person and the std deduction was $7350 (married/jointly). These were raised as part of the "Bush Tax Cuts", they are now $3800 and 11,900 respectively.

So, lets go through the math again.

Assuming gross income of $70k, and married filing jointly, currently (under the so-called Bush Tax Cuts) you will pay:
Taxable amount:
$70,000 gross-(2*3800)-11,900=$51,400

Tax:
17,400x.10+(51400-17400)*.15=$6,840 tax due

If Obama vetos the extension of the cuts, and we pay the Clinton rates, you'll pay:
Taxable amount:
$70,000-(2*2800)-7350=57050

Tax:
43850*15%+(57050-43850)*.28=$10,273 tax due under the "Clinton Rates" if the BTC expires

A difference of $3433. On a gross income of $70k. Yeah, the Bush Tax Cuts only benefitted the rich.

And if you believe that the Bush Tax Cuts only helped the rich, I have some money that I need to transfer from Nigeria, just send me your bank account number and I'll split it with you.

Again, let me know whenever you need help with math. I'll do what I can.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2012, 02:05 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,822,592 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake View Post
OK, I've done some more digging. Under Clinton the personal exemption was $2800 per person and the std deduction was $7350 (married/jointly). These were raised as part of the "Bush Tax Cuts", they are now $3800 and 11,900 respectively.

So, lets go through the math again.

Assuming gross income of $70k, and married filing jointly, currently (under the so-called Bush Tax Cuts) you will pay:
Taxable amount:
$70,000 gross-(2*3800)-11,900=$51,400

Tax:
17,400x.10+(51400-17400)*.15=$6,840 tax due

If Obama vetos the extension of the cuts, and we pay the Clinton rates, you'll pay:
Taxable amount:
$70,000-(2*2800)-7350=57050

Tax:
43850*15%+(57050-43850)*.28=$10,273 tax due under the "Clinton Rates" if the BTC expires

A difference of $3433. On a gross income of $70k. Yeah, the Bush Tax Cuts only benefitted the rich.

And if you believe that the Bush Tax Cuts only helped the rich, I have some money that I need to transfer from Nigeria, just send me your bank account number and I'll split it with you.

Again, let me know whenever you need help with math. I'll do what I can.
See above.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:39 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top