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 01-22-2013, 06:29 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,241 posts, read 15,325,752 times
Reputation: 4583

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Nope. I am a physician who makes a fairly large income, but have other sources of revenue as well. I usually pay about $500K and get $60-70K back after taxes.

Many of my friends are doing the same thing- making less money for 2013. We do not need high incomes, as we are "set", and therefore would rather have a lower W-2 to prevent the feds from heisting more money. No one wants to give those bums a higher percentage of income.

Now why in the world do you think Warren Buffet (who "wants to pay more taxes") keeps his W-2 income as low as possible in order to avoid paying taxes? Investment income is taxed at a lower rate and trusts have excellent tax benefits.

I would offer that the higher tax rate (as has been shown in the past and Obama acknowledged is true in the 2008 primaries) will REDUCE federal income and accomplish NOTHING- nothing except a less robust economy.
Wow! Most, no all, of my friends that make that much, have to pay the IRS each year. Perhaps it's because people who actually earn that much feel they can better handle their Tax money for the year than can the IRS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-22-2013, 07:37 AM
 
Location: Va. Beach
6,396 posts, read 4,412,267 times
Reputation: 2278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post
Another loser whining about welfare, and single moms, and the poor.

Think anout what this loser is saying THE problem with America is that a poor single mom on welfare gets a $4000 tax return. Even if you accept his clearly false story, why would that be what's wrong with America?

Answering that question gets to the core of conservative thinking.

Consistently conservatives seek to demonize the poor, single moms, minorities, etc. over and over again day after day.

This is why it should be apparent that the core of conservatism is exclusion.
What the above loser is saying is, "Take no reponsibility for you and your life, do what you what, when you want, however you want, and there will be no recourse, because someone else who is working for a living will end up supporting you".

Wrong Wrong Wrong.

If a mom, is a single mom, because she was married and had children, THEN needs help, Or was already working, and lost their job due to no fault of their own, Sure, let's help. Help them learn a trade, help them get a job, help them receive child support from the DNA verified father, help them with support for a short time, let's say up to 6 months.

If a mom is a single mom, because she CHOSE to be irresponsible, we should help identify the correct father for the child or children, and then between the parents, they provide their own living. I am amenable to providing medical/dental, and ensuring the children are fed with healthy, wholesome food.

It should appear that the above poster is telling us that the core of Democrats is "Lack of responsibility, do what you want because we will force some other responsible person to pay your way".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 07:55 AM
 
Location: Wonderland
45,043 posts, read 36,285,285 times
Reputation: 63743
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arus View Post
If she is earning nothing (on welfare) she has $0 income. How would she get $4000 in refunds?
You didn't realize that when it comes to tax "refunds" - many people actually get back a LOT more than they paid in?

Wake up!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 07:59 AM
 
Location: Wonderland
45,043 posts, read 36,285,285 times
Reputation: 63743
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
Cept that this woman is not getting a refund because she has no earned income, according to the OP.
I haven't read thru the entire thread, but one thing that immediately jumps out at me is that the OP didn't say that the woman in question hadn't worked all year. She isn't working at present.

You don't have to earn much, or pay much in, to get WAY more than you paid in back in the form of a "refund" if you have four kids.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 08:03 AM
 
Location: Florida
21,686 posts, read 11,144,833 times
Reputation: 7905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox Terrier View Post
I have a hard time believing this story.
Filing for Earned Income Credit with four children can get one $6000 .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 08:09 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,241 posts, read 15,325,752 times
Reputation: 4583
I am surprised people would think this anecdotal story is wrong, or apparently to some, representing something bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 08:41 AM
 
66,581 posts, read 30,389,883 times
Reputation: 8690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post
The charts you found contains no information about who owns what. It breaks down ownership in broad terms like households, or private pensions, etc. Those charts don't break it down specifically which is why you chose that representation, because it uses vague categories that can mislead.
You're fooling yourself, man. No sane person would believe that of the 36% of equities owned by ALL households and non-profit organizations, all but 1% of that is owned by the top 1%. Only those duped easily by propagandists with an agenda buy into such a preposterous assertion.

Quote:
The information i found is specific it says what percentage of the population owns what percentage of wealth. This is what we are talking about the top 1% controls a huge amount of the wealth in this nation and the top 10% controls nearly everything.
"Controls" is NOT "owns." Looks like you've fallen for the classic slight of words manipulation. It's not too hard to understand that 1% or less of the population works in the financial industry and "controls" others' individually owned assets.
Quote:
Therefore equity and business wealth is not broadly shared in this nation that is an objective fact.
Of course it's not, and here's why: SOME people actually worked hard, made personal sacrifices (lived below their means, delayed starting their family, etc.) and earned their millions. In fact, MOST millionaires (about 80%) are first-generation affluent. That means they DIDN'T inherit their money. Read more about them:
The Millionaire Next Door
Quote:
Now stop lying and go educate yourself. Have some integrity.
You need to look in the mirror and say that to the person you see looking back at you.

Critical thinking, man. Learn it. Use it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 08:47 AM
 
66,581 posts, read 30,389,883 times
Reputation: 8690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkatt View Post
It would appear that the above poster is telling us that the core of Democrats is "Lack of responsibility, do what you want because we will force some other responsible person to pay your way".
It appears that way because that IS the Democrat Party's core belief. It's what earns them their voting base.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 09:06 AM
 
8,399 posts, read 5,314,284 times
Reputation: 2314
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
You're fooling yourself, man. No sane person would believe that of the 36% of equities owned by ALL households and non-profit organizations, all but 1% of that is owned by the top 1%. Only those duped easily by propagandists with an agenda buy into such a preposterous assertion.

"Controls" is NOT "owns." Looks like you've fallen for the classic slight of words manipulation. It's not too hard to understand that 1% or less of the population works in the financial industry and "controls" others' individually owned assets.
Of course it's not, and here's why: SOME people actually worked hard, made personal sacrifices (lived below their means, delayed starting their family, etc.) and earned their millions. In fact, MOST millionaires (about 80%) are first-generation affluent. That means they DIDN'T inherit their money. Read more about them:
The Millionaire Next Door
You need to look in the mirror and say that to the person you see looking back at you.

Critical thinking, man. Learn it. Use it.

The information I listed didn't say anything about controls. Here is reality again. Please debunk it

In terms of types of financial wealth, the top one percent of households have 35% of all privately held stock, 64.4% of financial securities, and 62.4% of business equity. The top ten percent have 81% to 94% of stocks, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and almost 80% of non-home real estate. Since financial wealth is what counts as far as the control of income-producing assets, we can say that just 10% of the people own the United States of America.

Please show me that you can't read for comphrehension and you think the word control used in that paragraph has any relation to your fantasy thinking. Lol

Again show some integrity man. There are no sources and the one you gave certainly doesn't claim it that shows that equity wealth and business profits are widely shared in this society.

Produce information like I did that says the 1% only owns a this pecentage of the wealth of stocks and business wealth in this nation. Produce information that says the top 10% control this percentage of the wealth of stocks and business wealth.

You can't and you won't produce that clear information about who owns what percentage of the wealth because you are either deliberately lying or you an uninformed fool.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 09:09 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,560,873 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
I paid around $500K. Fortunately, I am cutting my income for 2013 to deny the feds more revenue. I would rather make less in income than to give those pigs one more cent. This is probably one of the reasons that federal revenues drop with tax increases. But I guess it is not about revenue, it is all about "fairness".
So let me get this straight, you make about $5million a year and you spend your time posting on City-Data? I think I smell BS in the room and it is coming from your direction.
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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top