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.
Democrats are, as usual trying to stir the class warfare pot! Ad nauseum...and like playing the tattered, old "race card" it gets old, but thankfully most folks continue to see right through it.
The GOP'ers in my crowd want a flat tax. They also have wisdom and know that the Dems. always encourage their voters to "bite the hand that feeds them" by pushing for raising taxes on the rich. The rich, ya know...the class that provides the MOST JOBS.
Jeff, if it is true that the rich were taxed at over ninety-percent, that was highway robbery! insane and immoral, good grief. No, we need to have a flat tax for all. There is no way you can lump all of the rich together and claim, in honesty that they didn't create jobs, for it is not so.
I know more than one rich person and they do employ folks, they create jobs from their security to their business, and when they "have a good year" they give bigger Christmas bonuses than the previous year, etc.
When they are not taxed in such obnoxious amounts, they buy new equipment for their businesses, reinvesting in them. Just seems common sense, to me, and they do operate that way.
Flat tax for all is the way to go, and fair, etc. The rich folks I know actually work, and their employees are blessed. They are the type of rich folks that the unions hate because they are so danged good to their employees that unions can't even get enough signatures on their petitions to GET an election.
The people you describe are sadly the exception.. not the rule........if ALL employers were like that. there would be no need for unions..........
many years ago an old co-worker of mine said to me. "remember, it is corporations who created unions.If workers were treated fairly by all employers,there would be no need for unions"
The people you describe are sadly the exception.. not the rule........if ALL employers were like that. there would be no need for unions..........
many years ago an old co-worker of mine said to me. "remember, it is corporations who created unions.If workers were treated fairly by all employers,there would be no need for unions"
Is that why union membership has imploded since its heyday in the 50s and 60s?
So tax avoidance is good for you, but noboody else?
It's not tax avoidance and its not what is good for me. You are completely ignorant on this subject. If a company does not have a physical storefront presence in a state, they should not be responsible for collecting taxes on behalf of that state. Why would they? They do not receive any government services from said state to warrant such tax collection. This benefits NO ONE except the biggest retailers and stores overseas that will now have the advantage.
It's not tax avoidance and its not what is good for me. You are completely ignorant on this subject. If a company does not have a physical storefront presence in a state, they should not be responsible for collecting taxes on behalf of that state. Why would they? They do not receive any government services from said state to warrant such tax collection. This benefits NO ONE except the biggest retailers and stores overseas that will now have the advantage.
Yeah and they are FOR this tax. Showing your ignorance again on this concept....go learn about ecommerce in the US before acting like you know it all.
Not in California. They pulled their affiliates when it passed.
You source where they favor this.
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.