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.
And you stated it was for "average taxpayers" when the article is discussing the marginal rate of high income tax payers.
In other words, your statements are complete nonsense. Hey did you know that Romneys marginal federal rate was over 30%....and his effective rate was under 15%?
Sigh.
But you guys are the left have been moaning and groaning that deductions were bad, and that deductions are subsidies.. Ironic that the more Democratic a state is, the higher the difference between effective, vs marginal?
When did deductions become valid in your mind, after Romneys taxes were no longer an issue, or after ACA passed, where the left went moaning and groaning that health insurance write offs were "subsidies"?
btw, Romneys 15%, did not include state, property etc, and you know that...
But you guys are the left have been moaning and groaning that deductions were bad, and that deductions are subsidies.. Ironic that the more Democratic a state is, the higher the difference between effective, vs marginal?
When did deductions become valid in your mind, after Romneys taxes were no longer an issue, or after ACA passed, where the left went moaning and groaning that health insurance write offs were "subsidies"?
Oh look, smacked around for being deceptive about taxes...and you change the topic to...subsidies now. Really? Thats just sad. Actually I think we're more upset about people lying, misinforming, and straight out being deceptive.....then deductions etc.
Quote:
btw, Romneys 15%, did not include state, property etc, and you know that...
Please note-I SPECIFICALLY pointed out I was talking about federal rates there. Last I noticed that did not include state or property, so yes, I did in fact know that, and took pains to point it out. Apparently those efforts were in vain.
Could it be the proposed 6 hour work day is to provide more jobs? IIRC Sweden is one of the places where extensive automation has reduced the number of workers needed so reducing hours increases demand for workers.
The conservative ideal is the old fashioned Company Town where long hours were combined with company housing and the Company store so the workers could never have anything left over to save. They were effectively slaves. We do not want to return to those days. This is the main reason we need a universal Union to counteract the one big company.
At the very heart of conservatism is the idea that monetary and physical possessions are more important than anything else. This is a result of worshipping money first and foremost.
You may want to read about the struggles to reduce the work day to 8 hours and who opposed this decision. In this thread you can see the opposition to the shorter work week, this is typical if workoholic right wings.
False. Income taxes and property taxes for average worker in NJ, NY, CT are higher than in Sweden.
LMAO....Here's a real genius of a post. Those are LOCAL taxes, the total of ALL taxes are MUCH higher in Sweden. I don't understand how there are so many really, I mean REALLY stupid people in this country. It's downright embarrassing.
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.
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.
