Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-27-2011, 10:37 PM
 
24,488 posts, read 41,141,698 times
Reputation: 12920

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by txgolfer130 View Post
Here's how.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/bu...5tax.html?_r=1

The loop holes need to go.
So does progressive tax rates. Flat tax and no loopholes!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-27-2011, 10:51 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,554 posts, read 86,977,099 times
Reputation: 36644
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest View Post
So does progressive tax rates. Flat tax and no loopholes!
Exactly. If Melanie Gates and a single mom taking classes at the community college and paying for child care both get a part time job at a convenience store, they should both pay exactly the same tax on what they earn. Fair is fair.

Oh, wait. She shouldn't have had kids, it's her own fault if she can't pay all that tax and still make ends meet. If the kids suffer, it's her fault for having them, not yours for gouging their family resources in order to increase your own after-tax income at their expense. I forgot that sex is only morally permissible among the rich.

How do you feel about free and easy abortions on demand for all those moms who can't really afford the cost of having kids, but like to have sex just as much as you do? Have you lobbied your congressman for that, so those poor women can more easily subsidize your tax liability? Or are you pro-life AND pro flat tax for the poor, the halt, the lame, the retired? Force them to have their babies, and then keep right on taxing them the full flat tax rate, no loophole, like for dependents.

Last edited by jtur88; 03-27-2011 at 11:08 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2011, 12:32 AM
 
18,250 posts, read 16,920,340 times
Reputation: 7553
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post

How do you feel about free and easy abortions on demand for all those moms who can't really afford the cost of having kids, but like to have sex just as much as you do? Have you lobbied your congressman for that, so those poor women can more easily subsidize your tax liability? Or are you pro-life AND pro flat tax for the poor, the halt, the lame, the retired? Force them to have their babies, and then keep right on taxing them the full flat tax rate, no loophole, like for dependents.
I believe someone once suggested that the whole reason for Roe vs Wade was to give poor women who couldn't afford their babies a way out, thus freeing government (Read: taxpayers) from having to subsidize their upbringing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2011, 06:40 AM
 
199 posts, read 528,480 times
Reputation: 345
GE gave Obama a hughe campain donation, that's how it's done.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2011, 11:48 AM
 
24,488 posts, read 41,141,698 times
Reputation: 12920
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Exactly. If Melanie Gates and a single mom taking classes at the community college and paying for child care both get a part time job at a convenience store, they should both pay exactly the same tax on what they earn. Fair is fair.

Oh, wait. She shouldn't have had kids, it's her own fault if she can't pay all that tax and still make ends meet. If the kids suffer, it's her fault for having them, not yours for gouging their family resources in order to increase your own after-tax income at their expense. I forgot that sex is only morally permissible among the rich.

How do you feel about free and easy abortions on demand for all those moms who can't really afford the cost of having kids, but like to have sex just as much as you do? Have you lobbied your congressman for that, so those poor women can more easily subsidize your tax liability? Or are you pro-life AND pro flat tax for the poor, the halt, the lame, the retired? Force them to have their babies, and then keep right on taxing them the full flat tax rate, no loophole, like for dependents.
I tried to read your response and wasn't able to tell whether you were sarcastic or not... and whether you are really for or against flat tax.

I'm for flat tax, but I also believe it would be fair to eliminate tax on the first $10,000 (just throwing out a number, I am in no position to define the actual amount). That way the poorest of the poor working folks have an opportunity to live without relying on welfare. And the rich and the poor all beenfit on the first $10,000, so it's fair in my opinion.

Ofcourse, above all this, I prefer eliminating earned income tax all together and focusing on captial gains and consumption tax. But that's just me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 07:20 AM
 
Location: West Orange, NJ
12,546 posts, read 21,403,981 times
Reputation: 3730
one thing a lot of folks need to realize is that GE is a huge benefactor of some "green" tax breaks given out to companies because they are the largest manufacturer of windmills in the world. so, while I agree they shouldn't be paying $0 in taxes, it's not all due to evil loopholes. the company is somewhat following the incentives that exist right now for the environment as well as many of the other incentives that are out there (good and bad).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 08:18 AM
 
24,488 posts, read 41,141,698 times
Reputation: 12920
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradykp View Post
one thing a lot of folks need to realize is that GE is a huge benefactor of some "green" tax breaks given out to companies because they are the largest manufacturer of windmills in the world. so, while I agree they shouldn't be paying $0 in taxes, it's not all due to evil loopholes. the company is somewhat following the incentives that exist right now for the environment as well as many of the other incentives that are out there (good and bad).
Good point. This is the same way on how I got the government to pay for 75% of my new (well now 1.5 years old), hybrid car.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 02:03 PM
 
Location: NJ
17,573 posts, read 46,144,871 times
Reputation: 16279
People seem so hung up that the number is zero (or a credit). Let's assume for a second that GE earned another XX billion of profits that their credits didn't cover and that resulted in a billion of tax expense. I'm guessing most people wouldn't even blink an eye. Yet, it would be the same "reduction" from whatever number they started with as their tax exposure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2011, 03:51 AM
 
707 posts, read 1,293,389 times
Reputation: 438
GE is the perfect example of corporate welfare. They were the largest recipients of TARP funds, continuously offshore jobs to countries with slave labor, pay their executives huge compensation and when it's their turn to step up to the plate, they don't contribute. Immelt is Oblahblah's buddy and no scrutiny. This company is scum. If it wasn't for the largesse of the taxpayers in 2008, this pig wouldn't even exist today
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2011, 04:05 AM
 
4,765 posts, read 3,732,475 times
Reputation: 3038
Quote:
Originally Posted by lynxville View Post
GE gave Obama a hughe campain donation, that's how it's done.
Interesting screen name. I used to spend time in a town named Lynxville, WI.

Actually, GE has given much more to Republicans historically. But, they would certainly do their best to court any potential winner.

Last edited by shaker281; 03-31-2011 at 04:16 AM..
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 > Economics

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:58 AM.

© 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