[RunD1987]

Originally Posted by nep321

Getting rid of the minimum wage will only allow businesses to pay people even LESS. It's basically slavery. That is not right. We need to raise the minimum wage to at least $13 an hour, and make it variable depending on the cost of living in each metro area. We can't have a country where millions of people are working 40+ hours a week for $4 an hour. GIVE ME A BREAK!

Liveable wage in CT for 1 Adult based off these calculations be $12.12. Think Fairfield County is in the $13 an hour range. In essence it would push CT to lower COL. Because if COL is high liveable wage increases and companies will eventually go to a State with lower COL/lower wages.

Texas a living wage is $10.15 an hour for 1 adult.

I don't know if companies should pay the calculated wages if had a child. It's a tough call. Because 1 adult and 1 child in CT is like $26 an hour. Think 1 adult should be the set wage and offer more tax friendly incentives to businesses who have tuition reimbursement plans something like that.

[HumpDay]

Originally Posted by nep321

What a load of BS!

Fair share of taxes means that someone making millions or billions of dollars should NOT be able to get away with paying little to no taxes for ANY year. Net operating loss carryforwards should be ABOLISHED!

Taxation is NOT theft! It is a patriotic, constitutional contribution that we all make to society in order to achieve things that cannot be achieved by private enterprise or individuals. Things like infrastructure, military, social programs, space exploration, etc. Good luck running a country with NO taxes!

Income inequality is THE NUMBER ONE issue of our time! It is currently at extreme levels NEVER seen since the guilded age. It's BAD for the economy, is unsustainable and is BAD morally. We need to go back to how it was in the 50's where income inequality was relative low and reasonable.

It is absurd that 400 people own HALF of the country's wealth. Disgusting!

If I'm in the 1% then explain to me why the government should earn a bigger percentage of my money when I make more money. What's the point of excelling myself when I'm just going to get heavily taxed?

I'm not saying taxes shouldn't exist but we need taxes to go down. The government is too big and we're paying for too many things. The government was NEVER meant to handle all of things were paying for today. I find the government to be similar of a hockey referee. They don't pick winners or losers, they're not the water boy, or the cheerleader. Their purpose and only purpose is to enforce the rules and ensure the safety of the players. That's is all! Split the relationship between government and the private sector so we'll get better results. Anyways, who are you to say how wealth should be distributed?

As for the income inequality argument...give me a break. The gap between the top 1% and the 99% isn't necessarily a bad thing. In a free market economy, people become very wealthy making what the rich and the overall general population enjoy today into something nearly everybody can enjoy tomorrow. In reality, the rich are quiz takers.

I would be more than happy to debate all of this with you in the political forum since we're going off track. I guess we just have different views on politics. I'm more conservative and I tend to notice your stances are liberal. At least we can agree Trump is bad for Ameican politics. I mean he's been predominataly liberal most of his life.

[RunD1987]

I don't agree on taxing the 1%. They earned that money. However, for ending tax loopholes especially with large corporations. Furthermore would prefer if lobbyists stopped donating money to politicians.

[nep321]

Originally Posted by RunD1987

I don't agree on taxing the 1%. They earned that money. However, for ending tax loopholes especially with large corporations. Furthermore would prefer if lobbyists stopped donating money to politicians.

That's baloney. Almost all of the gains since 2008 have gone to the top 1% or whatever the exact figure is. They're not working harder or putting in more effort to make that money. They simply have the income producing assets in place, to generate those gains. And they should pay their fair share of taxes. I don't understand why that's so hard to understand.

[nep321]

Originally Posted by HumpDay

If I'm in the 1% then explain to me why the government should earn a bigger percentage of my money when I make more money. What's the point of excelling myself when I'm just going to get heavily taxed?

I'm not saying taxes shouldn't exist but we need taxes to go down. The government is too big and we're paying for too many things. The government was NEVER meant to handle all of things were paying for today. I find the government to be similar of a hockey referee. They don't pick winners or losers, they're not the water boy, or the cheerleader. Their purpose and only purpose is to enforce the rules and ensure the safety of the players. That's is all! Split the relationship between government and the private sector so we'll get better results. Anyways, who are you to say how wealth should be distributed?

As for the income inequality argument...give me a break. The gap between the top 1% and the 99% isn't necessarily a bad thing. In a free market economy, people become very wealthy making what the rich and the overall general population enjoy today into something nearly everybody can enjoy tomorrow. In reality, the rich are quiz takers.

I would be more than happy to debate all of this with you in the political forum since we're going off track. I guess we just have different views on politics. I'm more conservative and I tend to notice your stances are liberal. At least we can agree Trump is bad for Ameican politics. I mean he's been predominataly liberal most of his life.

The more money someone makes, the higher the percentage of taxes they should pay. It's called a graduated tax system. And it leads to a more stable economy, and an economy that invests in the middle class. If I made millions or billions, I would be VERY HAPPY to pay a 50% tax, for example.

Tax rates are graduated based on layers of income, by the way. It's not a single rate applied to ALL income earned.

Also, Hillary Clinton is NOT going to raise taxes on ANY income under $250K. So that means 95% of households will NOT see a tax increase.

I love her. We need her. She's supremely qualified and will make an amazing first woman president. Can't wait til she wins in 25 days!!!

[JayCT]

I must say I get angry when people say they will only vote Republican or Democrat. You should be voting for the candidate and NOT the party. Either people are too lazy to do a little research on the elections or they just listen to the propaganda of the left and right biased media and believe everything they say. People need to do more than that. IF you can't then you should not even bother voting in the election. JMHO, Jay

[nep321]

Originally Posted by JayCT

I must say I get angry when people say they will only vote Republican or Democrat. You should be voting for the candidate and NOT the party. Either people are too lazy to do a little research on the elections or they just listen to the propaganda of the left and right biased media and believe everything they say. People need to do more than that. IF you can't then you should not even bother voting in the election. JMHO, Jay

Obviously, it would be ideal if all voters knew every single candidate for every single position on the ballot. However, that's not practical, and generally not necessary. For example, I identify myself as a Democrat because I agree with the party platform virtually 100%. Therefore, if someone on the ballot is running as a Democrat, it's safe to assume that that candidate generally agrees with most of what is in the party's platform. So, even though I would say that I'm knowledgeable of only Clinton and Blumenthal on the ballot, the other three Democrats are PROBABLY going to have similar ideologies to Clinton and Blumenthal. So, although it would be ideal to know every candidate inside and out, most of us just don't have the time, interest or motivation do research them to that degree of depth, because even after going through all the research, we will probably end up voting for the candidate that is with the same party as the presidential candidate anyway.

[CAJ13]

Originally Posted by nep321

The more money someone makes, the higher the percentage of taxes they should pay. It's called a graduated tax system. And it leads to a more stable economy, and an economy that invests in the middle class. If I made millions or billions, I would be VERY HAPPY to pay a 50% tax, for example.

Tax rates are graduated based on layers of income, by the way. It's not a single rate applied to ALL income earned.

Also, Hillary Clinton is NOT going to raise taxes on ANY income under $250K. So that means 95% of households will NOT see a tax increase.

I love her. We need her. She's supremely qualified and will make an amazing first woman president. Can't wait til she wins in 25 days!!!

I highly doubt this and you should too. It's quite evident she is known to lie.

Originally Posted by JayCT

I must say I get angry when people say they will only vote Republican or Democrat. You should be voting for the candidate and NOT the party. Either people are too lazy to do a little research on the elections or they just listen to the propaganda of the left and right biased media and believe everything they say. People need to do more than that. IF you can't then you should not even bother voting in the election. JMHO, Jay

It's both actually.

[CAJ13]

Originally Posted by nep321

I don't mind getting more taxes taken out of my paycheck, if that's what happens! The only people complaining about taxes, quite frankly, are RICH people! They just want more and more and more and more money and more and more tax breaks, deductions, exemptions, and all that nonsense.

I believe in contributing to society and having trust in government and paying my FAIR share of taxes for the good of my state and country.

At which point would you mind having money taken out of your paycheck? 75%? Or are you generous enough to sign over you entire check to the Fed? You are allowed to pay more in taxes than required if you wish.

I am by no means rich or part of the 1% but, I would like to be able to keep more of my paycheck.

[RunD1987]

Have to say Carter and Clay are 2 very different Republicans. Still bummed that Price couldn't get on as the Independent.