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 04-17-2014, 10:36 AM
 
79,914 posts, read 44,174,531 times
Reputation: 17209

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812 View Post
I gave you an analogy, an illustration, of the numerous of times we are taxed to create and even purchase an end product. You just seem to be fine with a system that does it, and are trying to justify it because you've settled into the comfortable position of acceptance that it is, what it is.
The argument was that money was taxed more than once. I'm saying it isn't. Do you have something to show me where I am wrong in answering your example? Did you answer my question?

Quote:
If someone is already being taxed to create or sell a product, why tax the person who buys it? BTW, regulatory taxes do impact the cost of products we purchase and produce, not just income taxes from wages.

Stay on topic. My initial statement was concerning the B.S. from the website. Are there sales taxes after everything else? Yes, if you want to argue to get rid of sales taxes go ahead but it has nothing to do with what I said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-17-2014, 10:46 AM
 
24,832 posts, read 37,332,477 times
Reputation: 11538
All business expenses are write offs.....including the tax.

This is why when people say stop deductions I ask if they could afford it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2014, 10:52 AM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,722,558 times
Reputation: 14745
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812 View Post
Lying? Why, because you lack the ability to understand the topic at hand? We were at or under 5% UE at this point in 2007.
it is awfully convenient to cherrypick 2007 , isn't it?

bush was president until January of 2009 , when unemployment was 7.8%

unemployment is currently 6.7%

so for all you mathematics experts out there, that means that unemployment has actually fallen since Obama took office on January 20 2009.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2014, 10:56 AM
 
Location: On the Chesapeake
45,337 posts, read 60,512,994 times
Reputation: 60924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Think4Yourself View Post
The current unemployment rate is almost exactly the same as 2007 when Bush was President so you need to stop lying.

U.S. jobless claims hover near pre-recession levels | Reuters
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
it is awfully convenient to cherrypick 2007 , isn't it?

bush was president until January of 2009
This was where 2007 came from. Your guy. He was the one who cherrypicked the year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2014, 10:56 AM
 
14,292 posts, read 9,674,750 times
Reputation: 4254
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
The argument was that money was taxed more than once. I'm saying it isn't. Do you have something to show me where I am wrong in answering your example? Did you answer my question?

Stay on topic. My initial statement was concerning the B.S. from the website. Are there sales taxes after everything else? Yes, if you want to argue to get rid of sales taxes go ahead but it has nothing to do with what I said.
My response was simply to explain why people hold the views that things are being taxed twice, not validate them. And you're right, I was straying off topic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2014, 11:01 AM
 
14,292 posts, read 9,674,750 times
Reputation: 4254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Think4Yourself View Post
The current unemployment rate is almost exactly the same as 2007 when Bush was President so you need to stop lying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
it is awfully convenient to cherrypick 2007 , isn't it?

bush was president until January of 2009
Good grief, it was not me who picked the year 2007, and the charts i provided in response to defend ignorant charges of me "lying" went back to 2004.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2014, 12:29 PM
Status: "It Can't Rain All The Time" (set 26 days ago)
 
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,589,592 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by FBJ View Post
Leaving the US without funds?
I don't know. It was a report from one of those research centers.
Probably people who want to create businesses in a tax friendly country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2014, 12:40 PM
 
79,914 posts, read 44,174,531 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
it is awfully convenient to cherrypick 2007 , isn't it?

bush was president until January of 2009 , when unemployment was 7.8%

unemployment is currently 6.7%

so for all you mathematics experts out there, that means that unemployment has actually fallen since Obama took office on January 20 2009.
For the billions we have spent one might have hoped for more than 1.1%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2014, 12:41 PM
 
79,914 posts, read 44,174,531 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812 View Post
My response was simply to explain why people hold the views that things are being taxed twice, not validate them. And you're right, I was straying off topic.
A lot of people hold those views. The article posted held those views. They were wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2014, 12:43 PM
Status: "It Can't Rain All The Time" (set 26 days ago)
 
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,589,592 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
They aren't leaving. Remittances to Mexico and other Central American nations is way up.
Like anything it fluctuates:

https://www.weareoneamerica.org/root...ion-fact-sheet

There's a pretty decent report.

When Bush Jr. was in office I had the opportunity to look up migration from the U.S. and found it had increased movements of people into Canada. The same trend happened when Sr. was in office, as well.

I heard a man over a talk show once, phoned in from Australia, older gent, said he left he wasn't coming back and only visited son during the holidays. Life was better for him there. That was a couple of years ago and that conversation popped for me in a way to always remember it.

In 2012 Mexican migration into the U.S slowed; may have picked up since then. Bottom line....

The U.S. is loosing its appeal.
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.

© 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