If the rich can afford to donate even more to politicians, they can afford to pay more in taxes, right? (brainwash, millionaire)
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.
Thanks for posting that. This information is widely and easily available.
I mean, during the 2012 presidential campaign, Mitt Romney admitted his effective tax rate was only around 13%. There are plenty of middle class people paying an effective higher rate than that.
You really have no idea how it works do you? capital gains is taxed at 13 percent for EVERYONE, not just rich people. Middle class people who don't have CG pay the REGULAR rate as as everyone else who doesn't have CG.
Except it didn't work that way at all and you know it.
Actually it did work, and oretty well, despite the corruption in the appointment process.
Quote:
Do you understand why the 17th Amendment was enacted?
Yes. To remove the protections against Big Government expanding and taking powers rightfully belonging to states.
Quote:
Do you care?
Yes. That's why I want it repealed.
The protections against Big Government did far more good than the corruption did harm. And if government can be gotten out of the business of regulating everything from retirement to unemployment to health insurance to toilet flow rates, they'll have more time to do their real jobs... such as prosecuting corruption.
Kind of a theoretical question that must be asked in lieu of the Supreme Court's decision earlier this week. If the rich have so much money to give that they needed the high court to allow them to give even more money to political campaigns, they should be able to afford to pay higher taxes, right?
This assumes, of course, that the only reason we need to charge them more taxes than middle-income people, is because they have it.
A famous bank robber felt the same way. When asked why he kept robbing banks, he replied, "Because that's where the money is!"
Liberals have the same attitude toward money... with the same morality behind it.
A few differences: That bank robber didn't try to pretend the people he was robbing, owed the money to him; and he didn' try to pretend he was doing anybody a favor (except himself) by taking it from them.
In many ways, that bank robber was more honest than today's liberals.
They have no idea what the actual tax data is, either. They keep spewing nonsense that can easily be proven false by simply posting IRS data.
Then again, the key to Democrats' political victories and their ability to stay in political power is to keep as many people as dumbed-down and poor as possible. The Dems' largest margin education-level voter base is those who haven't even earned a high school diploma. Among that group, 64% vote Democrat, 34% vote Republican.
.
Family money that the heirs did nothing to earn, which discredits the point I was addressing, that these people earned what they have.
Moreover, we see today that most of the top 0.1% are in the executive suite, which earns hundreds of times the AVERAGE worker (not the lowest worker). Nobody can show that these executives work hundreds of times harder than the average work.
Why normal people defend the privileged aristocracy is beyond me.
I don't defend "the privileged" any more than anyone else because I think everyone should pay the same rate with no deductions and no exemptions.
If everyone paid the same rate then everyone would have reason to get mad when the government raised taxes instead of crying about how some don't "pay their fair share" when they already pay far more in actual dollars than they use in government services than other people do.
Also, money that is inherited has already been taxes once as income when it was originally earned.
How many time should the government be allowed to tax the same dollar over again as income when it stays in the family?
I don't defend "the privileged" any more than anyone else because I think everyone should pay the same rate with no deductions and no exemptions.
If everyone paid the same rate then everyone would have reason to get mad when the government raised taxes instead of crying about how some don't "pay their fair share" when they already pay far more in actual dollars than they use in government services than other people do.
Also, money that is inherited has already been taxes once as income when it was originally earned.
How many time should the government be allowed to tax the same dollar over again as income when it stays in the family?
Do you know it I sold you a loaf of bread and at no point in the production...delivery and marketing of the bread....with NO deductions in the process...you would be lucky to get it for $200?????
Do you know it I sold you a loaf of bread and at no point in the production...delivery and marketing of the bread....with NO deductions in the process...you would be lucky to get it for $200?????
I think maybe during some point in the production, delivery and marketing you might want to check that bread for a certain type of hallucinogenic mold.
I think maybe during some point in the production, delivery and marketing you might want to check that bread for a certain type of hallucinogenic mold.
You do the math....businesses have many types of deductions.
If they take none.....and none have been taken by their suppliers and back to grain of wheat the farmer put in the ground...all these cost will go to you...or, they would not be in business.
Kind of a theoretical question that must be asked in lieu of the Supreme Court's decision earlier this week. If the rich have so much money to give that they needed the high court to allow them to give even more money to political campaigns, they should be able to afford to pay higher taxes, right?
Can they? Of course they could afford it, everyone could afford to pay more in taxes but why should they? Regardless of what liberals think government is not entitled to every dollar that someone makes. Just because someone chooses to give some of their income away does not mean that their tax rate is too low.
Just because someone can afford to buy a $1,000,000 house instead of a $100,000 house doesn't mean the government should get $900,000 in taxes and force the person to buy that $100,000 house.
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.
