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.
No, I didn't call anyone a taker. I called folks on welfare that should be working, leeches.
Reading comprehension isn't a Dem's best friend, is it....
Don't bother Pollyrobin, the definition of a leech to them is an unborn child.
NO, your's is an argument for entitlement and laziness.
You get tips when you work service jobs. Minimum Wage jobs are for the lowest of the skilled. It give one purpose. It gives them income. It gives them work experience.
I would never agree with one who doesn't think a guy can't make a
living as a fruit vendor or by growing plants and selling them
The Profits and Productivity should be going to the employees and employers and not somestockholders and hedge fund criminals that are raping us American Muppets left and right.
Without a potential for a ROI, why would anyone invest their money?
Without investors, how does anyone grow their business?
Do not the economies of scale benefit the end consumer?
Without a potential for a ROI, why would anyone invest their money?
Without investors, how does anyone grow their business?
Do not the economies of scale benefit the end consumer?
middle-aged mom, you got no answer. They don't even understand what ROI is. Now they will look it up to appear as if they do. They just don't get the whole thing and why we are in big do do.
Because the tax laws need to be changed..Too many loopholes for the rich.why do they get loopholes and poor people dont.. Let them pay up and shut up or just leave..PS the election is over
Don't you think the code favors low and high income earners?
High income earners do not qualify for the earned income tax credit.
High income earners do not qualify for child tax credits.
A family of 4 exempts $15,200 of income from taxation which, when combined with the earned income tax credit and child tax credit means most low income earners do not pay federal taxes. They will however, pay FICA and state income tax.
15 percent now. Obama wants to raise it 20 percent.
But remember, the top 1 percent, $500,000 a year or more, are all not little Mitt Romney's
There is the argument that the increase in capital gains tax could be up to 70B a year,
but at the same time it would discourage investing; which in turn doesn't helps the economy
and then there's this other little thing called double taxation
All this back and forth could be solved with repealing the IRS and simply having
a Nat'l sales tax.
The U.S. is the only rich country in the world without a national sales tax.
e.g. Germany has one at 19%, Britain at 20%, Korea at 10%.
But I guess if you folks want to fight over a broken tax system and pit
the rich against the poor go at it. I just don't see any winners in that scenario.
But a sales tax would mean less money for the poor. Current tax system will allow us to tax everything the evil rich people have. That way we can take it and give it to unions and the poor and green energy.
Round up the rich take it all
All hail Obama
Thus, why most of the working poor pay no federal income tax, qualify for SNAP benefits and in some cases, Section 8 rent assistance.
While the tax code favors low ( and high) income earners, it robs those at the low end of their dignity because the middle and high income earners call it a hand out.
Have you heard that old truism, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction? Do you not think that if people in high finance and industry, etc. experience increased costs, they will just pass it on the consumers of there product as a price increase? Thus, it is the little guy, the alleged 99 percent person who will get hurt in the end. Now will one of you brilliant liberals tell me where I am making a mistake in my thinking?
America has had a progressive income tax for over 100 years.
I think the main argument for a redistributive taxes is so that we don't allow a core of very, very wealthy people to horde money and destroy our republic by using that money to buy the government.
The wealthy should pay more taxes. If a person makes 10 times as much as someone else, they should pay 10 times the taxes....
The problem with our tax system isn't that the rich need to pay more. It's that the bottom 50% pay nothing in federal taxes.
I do agree with your logic though. Regan taught us that trickle down economics works (his policies ushered in the longest boom time we've ever seen). When people who have money spend money demand for goods goes up. When demand for goods go up, jobs are created. When jobs are created, the people who get those jobs pay taxes and have money to spend. When they spend their money, demand for goes goes up....and so on and so on and so on. Too bad obama didn't have the sense to use the debt he racked up to do some trickle down.....a one time stimulus lasts as long as it takes to cash the check. You have to think long term to deal with an economy like this. We need Regan back.
The stock market crashed badly under Ronald Reagan. His policies were an utter disaster. That old "greed is good" mentality of the 1980's.
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.