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.
Every report I've ever read displayed that Buffet paid a hell of a lot more money than his secretary. Do you want to actually read the reports, or listen to the babble which comes from peoples mouth?
Well of course he did.
But if I make 50,000 a year, and he makes 500,000 a year, and my tax rate is 10%, then I pay 5000 dollars. Giving him a 5% tax rate isn't fair, and the fact that he paid in 25,000 in taxes just shows he earns more.
I pay more in taxes then someone making less then me, the dollar amount has nothing to do with how fair the tax is. Every American should pay the same tax rate on all income over 40,000 dollars.
This thread just shows how far to the right that conservatives on CD are. I am waiting for them to call Coburn, who is one of the most conservative members of congress, a Rino or a communist or maybe even a socialist.
"A leading Senate conservative is taking aim at tax breaks that he says amount to welfare for millionaires, a line of critique that usually comes from liberal Democrats. The report found millionaires enjoy about $30 billion worth of “tax giveaways” and federal grants every year — almost twice NASA’s budget, the report notes.
“From tax write-offs for gambling losses, vacation homes and luxury yachts to subsidies for their ranches and estates, the government is subsidizing the lifestyles of the rich and famous. Multimillionaires are even receiving government checks for not working,” Coburn said in a statement Monday. “This welfare for the well-off — costing billions of dollars a year — is being paid for with the taxes of the less fortunate, many who are working two jobs just to make ends meet, and IOUs to be paid off by future generations."
His staff found that millionaires received $74 million worth of unemployment checks from 2005 to 2009; $316 million in farm subsidies from 2003 to 2009; $89 million for the preservation of lands on ranches and estates in 2009 and 2010; and $7.5 million to compensate for property damages caused by disaster.
And it found that nearly 1,500 millionaires did not pay federal income tax in 2009."
Wow, this coming from Senator Tom Coburn, a Republican from Oklahoma. Now refresh my memory, isn't there some right wing talking point about 47% of low income "moochers" paying no federal income tax?
The righties seem to think it is OK because they are the ones that supply our jobs. You know the trickle down economics that has been existence to help get rid on the middle class. Funny how jobs are pretty scarce tho.
I don't agree. Not everyone can afford to buy a home.
Besides, how many decent responsible citizens with pretty good jobs bought homes, qualified for mortgages, only to find themselves laid off from work and discover in this great recession that their homes were now worth less than what they paid for it?
You can disagree, but you're still wrong. Anyone can afford to buy a home. ANYONE. You may choose to stay in a low paying job, or spend your money on things other than your home, or be too lazy to save. That's your choice. But if you really wanted to own a home, you could afford it.
Actually not true. Unemployment is welfare as defined by the IRS tax code. If you have ever received it, you have received welfare. Hey, I have no problem with that, but lets call it like it is. It would probably upset you to think that you have received welfare because conservatives use the term in the pejorative. Those who receive it are to be looked down upon in disdain, which is why you have a difficult time believing the rich receive it because of the conservative wealthy worship..
Social security is also welfare. Nobody receives what they put in. They are paying for people that are already receiving it. It is not a retirement plan. It is a welfare plan. It should be means tested so that they very wealthy do not receive any of it since they are not in need of it.
Coburn paints welfare with a broad brush. It is meant to get the point across. You are not being intellectually honest if you don't see that. Of course, you may just not be able to see the forrest for the trees.
Please show me in the code where it says that. Because all I'm finding is that they're in the same section. But they're not the same. Same with SS being welfare.
Please show me in the code where it says that. Because all I'm finding is that they're in the same section. But they're not the same. Same with SS being welfare.
Keep looking. I don't think ss is in the tax code as welfare. That is just my opinion since it was set up for older people in need who never paid into the system. What would you have called it when it was first implemented?
But if I make 50,000 a year, and he makes 500,000 a year, and my tax rate is 10%, then I pay 5000 dollars. Giving him a 5% tax rate isn't fair, and the fact that he paid in 25,000 in taxes just shows he earns more.
I pay more in taxes then someone making less then me, the dollar amount has nothing to do with how fair the tax is. Every American should pay the same tax rate on all income over 40,000 dollars.
Please show me in the code where it says that. Because all I'm finding is that they're in the same section. But they're not the same. Same with SS being welfare.
The federal government argued that Social Security was welfare because it was a tax program, followed by a welfare payout when someone got older. The US SUpreme Court has agreed numerous times with this argument.
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.