House proposes top income tax rate of 90% (illegal, brainwash, companies)
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.
Simply refuse. I know, I know, everyone is freaking out over those two simple words right now. But it is the simple solution to this possible problem. If the citizens simply stand TOGETHER and say no, there is nothing our government can do about it. The reason we don't currently have more control over the running of this country is because we are so divided there is never an overwhelming majority of people calling for the same action. If we stand together and say no, that is that. No room for debate, no chance of enforcement. That is, of course, unless the government begins to openly threaten us for standing up to them. And when that happens, they will have lost the game. Because there is a difference between governing and ruling, and they will have crossed that line. And only the most cowardly American would stand by and allow them to take your freedom and force unfair laws and taxes down your throat. And since I know most Americans would fight this, I am not worried. We are the driving force, the power, and the will of this country. If we stand together, what we want is what we will get.
Simply refuse what? The OP is about taxing the bonuses of employees who work for companies receiving bailout funds.
The U.S. House approved a bill Thursday that would impose a new tax on the $165 million paid to bailed-out insurance giant AIG as Senate Republicans stepped up criticism of the Obama administration's handling of bonuses.
The House measure would apply a 90% tax on bonuses given to employees who earn more than $250,000 at any firm that received more than $5 billion in bailout money. U.S. House OKs bill for new tax on AIG bonuses - USATODAY.com
90% is applied to the amount you make OVER $250,000. So if your salary or whatever is $250,001, the govt takes 90% of that one dollar you made over $250K, or 90 cents. Plus the (lower) tax on the rest of your pay, of course.
Graduated tax rates always work that way.
What it really means is, if you're in one of these companies, and your boss asks you to work you arse off over a couple weekends on an emergency, and you miss you're kid's Little League championship game and the other things you had scheduled, but he promises you a $1,000 bonus to compensate you for it... you wind up taking home $100 of that bonus.
And according to Charlie Rangel, your State govt will then reach out and pluck that out of your hand, thankyouverymuch, and you get nothing for your extra effort.
And people wonder why high tax rates discourage people from working hard, and result in decreased productivity. (BTW, if you refuse your boss's request for that sacrificial weekend for obvious reasons, guess how much extra the Fed gets from you as a result of its tax increase to 90%? Nothing...)
Ahh... I see... I thought it was 90% over everything...hahaha... if that's true, then I would like to see a 100% tax... cause you aren't really working for a private company anymore, its the government that owns AIG, Freddie, Fannie, etc... I hope they pass it in this case... somehow the senate is going to mess this up, its going to be only if you take in 500 billion or some silliness like that which means 99% of "government" companies are going to get away with it.. personally, I would of set the limit even lower... if any company takes more than 5 MILLION of government money that is just cause enough...
Simply refuse. I know, I know, everyone is freaking out over those two simple words right now. But it is the simple solution to this possible problem. If the citizens simply stand TOGETHER and say no, there is nothing our government can do about it. The reason we don't currently have more control over the running of this country is because we are so divided there is never an overwhelming majority of people calling for the same action. If we stand together and say no, that is that. No room for debate, no chance of enforcement. That is, of course, unless the government begins to openly threaten us for standing up to them. And when that happens, they will have lost the game. Because there is a difference between governing and ruling, and they will have crossed that line. And only the most cowardly American would stand by and allow them to take your freedom and force unfair laws and taxes down your throat. And since I know most Americans would fight this, I am not worried. We are the driving force, the power, and the will of this country. If we stand together, what we want is what we will get.
So, you believe the bailout funds should be used to pay multimillion dollar bonuses to executives at a company that was failing so badly the Government had to bail them out?
Passed by the house ;who always plays to the maddening crowds like clowns.I worry about of the administration can't over see this then what doing to happen with the billions of stimulus money.Bet the waste ;fraud and corruption really gets turned up.
This is laughable... although I understand they want to recoup those bonuses (which is a good thing)... but 90%? Say you make 250k... 90% taxes means you get 25k... divide that by 12 and you get roughly 2k per month... which is roughly someone making BELOW the average US salary... hehehe... I understand the politics of it all but I doubt that it will even pass... why are they doing this? They KNOW the way they have "phrased" it will make it a DEAD bill in congress... its all grandstanding without any real action? They are trying to draw voter sympathy for politicians but at the same time removing the bite of any actual reform... If it did pass (one in a billion chance), I guarantee Obama will veto it...
Not really... if it was a private company, I would say that is between the company and its shareholders... but if this was a government owned company like AIG, Fannie, Freddie, GM, etc. etc. they have a right to correct payroll... since this was only for companies that "accepted" government money then I don't have a problem with it... however at first, I thought it was 90% over all income (not just income that is over 250k), I stand corrected...
Funny thing is, most of the executives at AIG who got these bonuses are British citizens...how is this tax supposed to be applied to them? I am afraid this is just more smoke and mirrors from our mighty and fearless leaders in DC.
Simply refuse. I know, I know, everyone is freaking out over those two simple words right now. But it is the simple solution to this possible problem. If the citizens simply stand TOGETHER and say no, there is nothing our government can do about it. The reason we don't currently have more control over the running of this country is because we are so divided there is never an overwhelming majority of people calling for the same action. If we stand together and say no, that is that. No room for debate, no chance of enforcement. That is, of course, unless the government begins to openly threaten us for standing up to them. And when that happens, they will have lost the game. Because there is a difference between governing and ruling, and they will have crossed that line. And only the most cowardly American would stand by and allow them to take your freedom and force unfair laws and taxes down your throat. And since I know most Americans would fight this, I am not worried. We are the driving force, the power, and the will of this country. If we stand together, what we want is what we will get.
The following posts were in response to the post above.
Originally posted by newtoli
Quote:
So, you believe the bailout funds should be used to pay multimillion dollar bonuses to executives at a company that was failing so badly the Government had to bail them out?
Originally posted by nvxplorer
Quote:
Simply refuse what? The OP is about taxing the bonuses of employees who work for companies receiving bailout funds.
The following will be my reply to the two posts above.
Did either of you read the entire OP, or just the first line. Because immediately after the opening line, the OP expressed concerns that the document was worded in such a way as to possibly levy this tax against ANYONE making more than $250,000, not just the infamous bonus receivers. That is what my post was about.
As far as the bailout companies are concerned, none of them should have ever gotten a cent of the tax payer's money. This entire bailout fiasco has been nothing more than a way to make regular citizens support corporations and bail them out of messes they have created themselves. None of these companies deserves a thing from us. Yet these crooks are using our dollars to make themselves rich. Do any of you think this small discovery covers even a fraction of the mismanagement of these funds. I gaurantee this is just the tip of the iceberg. And we will never see the bottom.
Last edited by Reads2MUCH; 03-19-2009 at 01:50 PM..
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.
