Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
 
Old 04-14-2014, 12:34 PM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,431,937 times
Reputation: 22471

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40 View Post
When I heard about some potential legislation to place more tax burden on single people without kids recently, I flipped my lid. The US tax system is so unfairly balanced right now, and it is pushing me out of the middle class into poverty.

Almost 1/4 of my gross incomes goes directly to state and federal taxes. And I only make 43K. My net take home ends up being 30K. The system punishes my demographic because we are single with no kids. My GF made close to 100K last year, and she was taxed nearly 25K. Again, 1/4 of the income.

Maybe the government looks at it that we are getting to keep three fourths of our hard earned money without dealing with the expenses of kids. Screw that. A married couple has the benefit of a dual income. They are the ones I see with the nice houses, the garages full of stuff. I am in my 40s, and can't afford a house. I've never owned a lawnmower because I've never had my own yard.

Yes, kids are expensive, but I believe a dual income more than makes up for that especially with all the tax breaks. But the government wants to take more away from me to help familes? Why should I be punished because I was a responsible adult and didn't engage in risky behavior or poor parenting? I have a friend on FB who has a new kid every year. He now has 7 kids. He was bragging about his big tax refund and how his family would get to enjoy a nice cruise. Does he really deserve a break and not me?

I'm all for everyone paying their fair share. So if I have to fork over 25% then everyone should have to do the same.
It's what happens when over half of babies are now born to welfare households. Families paying taxes are shrinking in number. Liberals want to bring in millions of indigents from third world nations and reward them for having babues they can't afford.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-14-2014, 12:38 PM
 
7,846 posts, read 6,369,044 times
Reputation: 4025
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
now you are adding payroll into the equation too????


7% (6+1) is mandated for payroll
40-50k is in the 12% bracket for federal (with you paying about 9%)
and only 2 states have a bracket over 10%...most states are between 3-6%

the FACT is you are paying LESS than 25%


the math isnt all that difficult
7+9+4 is what.......20


heck my property taxes are 20% of my income....that's why I itemize and write them off my federal
No, you are incorrect.

Let's do some basic math.

6.2% (FICA) + 1.45% (Medicare) + 5.1% (New York State) + 12.9% (Fed) = 25.65%

Property taxes for me are included in my rent. I live alone and am 24 years old. No surprises. Like I said, I was over 25% for the year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 12:44 PM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,431,937 times
Reputation: 22471
Quote:
Originally Posted by tamajane View Post
Well, they would like mandatory community service for most everyone, starting in school. Just to get people involved in the communiIn factempted would be the elderly and disabled, and welfare recipients with children.

I'm sure the conservatives would also give mom a break. Everyone else can get to trash pick-up duty for the common good. Especially those low-income single people who pay a quarter of their meager wages so welfare mom can have a smart phone and middle class family of six can take a Euro vacation.
Why would you keep rewarding irresponsible breeding? That is much of the problem with over 50 % of births going to indigent women who cannot afford them. In fact, single mothers are exactly the people who need to learn a work ethic, their kids have no other parent to teach them about going to work, getting a job, being responsible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 12:45 PM
 
Location: Spokane, WA
1,989 posts, read 2,522,777 times
Reputation: 2363
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErikBEggs View Post
No, you are incorrect.

Let's do some basic math.

6.2% (FICA) + 1.45% (Medicare) + 5.1% (New York State) + 12.9% (Fed) = 25.65%

Property taxes for me are included in my rent. I live alone and am 24 years old. No surprises. Like I said, I was over 25% for the year.
But how much was your refund?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 12:45 PM
 
Location: New Orleans, La. USA
6,354 posts, read 3,632,318 times
Reputation: 2522
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
1. the ''bush tax cuts'' were mostly for the middleclass and the poor...infact the rich got only a small cut in the income tax

the bush tax cuts/credits helped mainly the poor and middleclass

the credits:
expanded child CARE credit
expanded child credit
energy star credit
tution credit
health care credit
retirement fund (401k/tsp/roth) credit

the 01/03 (aka "bush' ) tax cuts/credits were for EVERYONE..with the poor and middleclass getting the biggest part of the cuts/credits.....\prior to the 'bush' tax cuts there was not a 10% bracket..it was 15%....the rich was cut from 39% to 35%


2. but the biggest part of the cuts/credits was not the tax rates ....... but the CREDITS ( child care credit, child credit, energy efficiency credit, retirement 401k credit, education tuition credit, and the health costs credit) which the "rich" those households over 180k could NOT take




the only cut the "rich' got solely was thier rate dropped from 39 to 35...a 4 point drop

EVERYONE got the capitol gains cut

the POOR got a 5 point drop from 15% down to 10%

and EVERYONE under 180k got the credits...(energy credit, tuition credit, child credit, child care credit, retirement(401k) credit, and health care cost credit)....the 'rich' were not allowed thoise credits as they prorated down on incomes over 180k

the 01/03 cuts and credits benefited the poor and the middleclass much more



to even say 'tax cuts for the rich'...is a LIE
Here's a source that shows the Bush tax cuts were for the rich.
Bush Tax Cuts After 2002: June 2002 CTJ Analysis

And I can provide many more sources to back up my statement.


Can you provide a source that shows what you said above?
Answer: No, because everything you said was either a lie or manipulation.

I feel sorry for any person who is gullible or stupid enough to believe anything you say.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 12:47 PM
 
Location: Spokane, WA
1,989 posts, read 2,522,777 times
Reputation: 2363
Quote:
Originally Posted by chad3 View Post
I feel sorry for any person who is gullible or stupid enough to believe anything you say.
Everything he said in the post you quoted of his, is false?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 12:51 PM
 
7,846 posts, read 6,369,044 times
Reputation: 4025
Quote:
Originally Posted by aplcr0331 View Post
But how much was your refund?
I owed New York State, and get $156 from Fed. I was roughly even.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 12:52 PM
 
7,846 posts, read 6,369,044 times
Reputation: 4025
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
Why would you keep rewarding irresponsible breeding? That is much of the problem with over 50 % of births going to indigent women who cannot afford them. In fact, single mothers are exactly the people who need to learn a work ethic, their kids have no other parent to teach them about going to work, getting a job, being responsible.
Everything about you conservatives is about "reward" or "work ethic" or "teach." Life is not a sermon. Get over it and move on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 12:55 PM
 
Location: New Orleans, La. USA
6,354 posts, read 3,632,318 times
Reputation: 2522
Quote:
Originally Posted by aplcr0331 View Post
Everything he said in the post you quoted of his, is false?
95% of it was a lie or manipulation (that's why he can't provide sources for his statements.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2014, 12:59 PM
 
41,111 posts, read 25,571,549 times
Reputation: 13868
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
Why would you keep rewarding irresponsible breeding? That is much of the problem with over 50 % of births going to indigent women who cannot afford them.
Government uses the tax code to manipulate people into doing what they want. Maybe rewarding irresponsible breeding is exactly what the democrats want. More people living in poverty, more democratic voters.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 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