FingerLakes1.com Forums
Page 2 of 9 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >
Topic Options
#1237528 --- 12/03/10 03:16 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: Chosenspot]
Animal Lover Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 10/13/06
Posts: 1339
Loc: NY
Even if there is the possibility of being rich it doesn't mean a person has to become greedy. How much money does a person need? How can you compare a person making $50 million netting $25 million after taxes to a person netting $50,000. $50,000 is chump change to a multi-millionaire.

Top
FingerLakes1.com
#1237537 --- 12/03/10 04:14 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: Animal Lover]
kyle585 Offline
Gold Member

Registered: 02/18/09
Posts: 19801
Loc: Somewhere out there
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/inq-phillydeals/Tax_us_more_some_rich_say.html

"In a spirit of Thanksgiving," as they put it, more than 400 U.S. business owners and professionals have signed a petition circulated by a Boston group, Wealth for the Common Good, calling on Congress and President Obama "to allow the Bush-era tax cuts for those with taxable incomes over $200,000 (individual) and $250,000 (couple) to expire on Dec. 31," raising "an estimated $700 billion over 10 years" to invest in "education, health, job creation, renewable energy, transportation,"

They're not the only ones. "People at the high end - people like myself - should be paying a lot more in taxes," the richest American, Berkshire Hathaway boss Warren Buffett, told ABC News in a program scheduled to air Sunday Nov. 28. The idea that money will "trickle down" from the rich to workers "has not worked the last 10 years, and I hope the American people are catching on."
_________________________
**** ATTENTION! BAD POLITICIANS ARE ELECTED BY GOOD PEOPLE WHO DON'T VOTE! ****

Top
#1237540 --- 12/03/10 04:27 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: kyle585]
Greymane Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/09/06
Posts: 6848
Loc: Central PA
The problem is not about tax money coming in or any other revenues. The problem is that BOTH SIDES will spend every penny the taxpayers give, every penny they can get the Fed to print, and every penny they can borrow from outside the US. THEY MUST BE STOPPED. If we want Congress to represent the average American, it must be composed of the average American. Nobody who ever made more than $50k per year. Nobody who didn't hold a REAL job prior to service. Nobody whose father, uncle, mother, aunt ...... owns / sits on the board of a Fortune 500 company.
_________________________
Against logic there is no armor like ignorance. - Dr. Lawrence J. Peter

Top
#1237549 --- 12/03/10 05:52 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: Zorn]
sands Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 09/05/05
Posts: 8255
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: Zorn
Why are you ok with your party adding to the debt,



Must be the same reason you are OK with your party adding the $60 billion to the debt it will cost to extend the tax cuts for those making under $250,000.
_________________________
01 - 20 - 2017

Top
#1237552 --- 12/03/10 06:03 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: Animal Lover]
sands Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 09/05/05
Posts: 8255
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: Animal Lover
The truth is the rich became rich off of the backs of the rest of us between gambling on Wall Street and shipping jobs offshore.



The problem with you, and most liberals, is that you truly believe that.
_________________________
01 - 20 - 2017

Top
#1237576 --- 12/03/10 08:05 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: Animal Lover]
cwjga Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 11/06/08
Posts: 12660
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: Animal Lover
Even if there is the possibility of being rich it doesn't mean a person has to become greedy. How much money does a person need? How can you compare a person making $50 million netting $25 million after taxes to a person netting $50,000. $50,000 is chump change to a multi-millionaire.


There you go. The government should decide how much everyone should make. So how much is it. $25,000, or $50,000. I do not think you should need much more. After all what do you really need. $50,000 should take care of your needs very well.

As a token of good faith, I think everyone that is ready to, should send a check for everything they make over $50,000 to the Fed's.

Top
#1237581 --- 12/03/10 08:59 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: Chosenspot]
cwjga Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 11/06/08
Posts: 12660
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: Chosenspot
Originally Posted By: cwjga
Why should the average American oppose taxing the rich more? Because every American has the ability, possibility of being rich.



How can anyone argue with this logic? I can't.


Your right you can't. Our system is predicated on the ability to improve your lot in life. If there we do as someone suggests, and take all the money someone makes above a certain amount, say $50,000 because everyone making more than that does not need it and is greedy, then there is no reason to work harder and improve.


Edited by cwjga (12/03/10 08:59 PM)

Top
#1237583 --- 12/03/10 09:01 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: sands]
Zorn Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 09/06/06
Posts: 1376
Loc: ny
Originally Posted By: sands
Originally Posted By: Zorn
Why are you ok with your party adding to the debt,



Must be the same reason you are OK with your party adding the $60 billion to the debt it will cost to extend the tax cuts for those making under $250,000.



Well Im not in the party that talks about fiscal responsibility, am I? Although... if you look at the last 8 or so presidents, which party has the most fiscally responsible presidents? \:\)

I say, tax the rich even more to pay for the tax cuts for the rest of us. The top 1% of the country holds 35% of the wealth. The bottom 80% only have 15% of the wealth.

If you made an example of 100 people with $100 to split up between them, this would be like giving one person $35, but then giving the bottom 80 people $15 to split up amongst themselves.

Now imagine that one single guy with $35 complaining that his taxes will go up 3%.

The income disparity in the US cannot be seen in hardly any other industrialized country, you have to move to dictatorships to find the income gap like the US has.

And it is all thanks to people like you guys, who suck up the propaganda and - amazingly - 30 years after Reagan started it, STILL believe it!
_________________________
"I guess I want smaller government and my Social Security". - Tea Party Member

Top
#1237585 --- 12/03/10 09:03 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: cwjga]
Zorn Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 09/06/06
Posts: 1376
Loc: ny
Originally Posted By: cwjga
Originally Posted By: Chosenspot
Originally Posted By: cwjga
Why should the average American oppose taxing the rich more? Because every American has the ability, possibility of being rich.



How can anyone argue with this logic? I can't.


Your right you can't. Our system is predicated on the ability to improve your lot in life. If there we do as someone suggests, and take all the money someone makes above a certain amount, say $50,000 because everyone making more than that does not need it and is greedy, then there is no reason to work harder and improve.


This is stupid, no one is suggesting that we take all of the money made over $50K.

But look at the 1950s, the top income tax bracket was 90%. Go look it up. ANd yet there was plenty of economic growth and ambition back then, wasn't there?
_________________________
"I guess I want smaller government and my Social Security". - Tea Party Member

Top
#1237587 --- 12/03/10 09:10 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: Zorn]
sands Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 09/05/05
Posts: 8255
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: Zorn
If you made an example of 100 people with $100 to split up between them, this would be like giving one person $35, but then giving the bottom 80 people $15 to split up amongst themselves.



Bad example since in real life 47 of those 100 people pay no federal income tax!
_________________________
01 - 20 - 2017

Top
#1237595 --- 12/03/10 10:02 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: sands]
citydog Offline
Member

Registered: 08/29/10
Posts: 383
Loc: Ontario County
Originally Posted By: sands
Bad example since in real life 47 of those 100 people pay no federal income tax!


Can you provide a reference to show that 47% pay no income tax whatsoever?
_________________________
Who let the dogs out

Top
#1237644 --- 12/04/10 03:09 AM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: citydog]
sands Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 09/05/05
Posts: 8255
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: citydog
Originally Posted By: sands
Bad example since in real life 47 of those 100 people pay no federal income tax!


Can you provide a reference to show that 47% pay no income tax whatsoever?



I never said they pay no income tax. I said they pay no federal income tax. We are talking about the federal deficit are we not?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36226444/ns/business-tax_tactics/
_________________________
01 - 20 - 2017

Top
#1237648 --- 12/04/10 04:04 AM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: Zorn]
Animal Lover Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 10/13/06
Posts: 1339
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: Zorn
Originally Posted By: cwjga
Originally Posted By: Chosenspot
Originally Posted By: cwjga
Why should the average American oppose taxing the rich more? Because every American has the ability, possibility of being rich.



How can anyone argue with this logic? I can't.


Your right you can't. Our system is predicated on the ability to improve your lot in life. If there we do as someone suggests, and take all the money someone makes above a certain amount, say $50,000 because everyone making more than that does not need it and is greedy, then there is no reason to work harder and improve.


This is stupid, no one is suggesting that we take all of the money made over $50K.


Stupid is not a good enough word. It's downright asinine. To equate someone making $50,000 to someone making $50,000,000 is ridiculous and these morons that do crap like that in a conversation are uncaring jerks. The person who makes $50,000 is just trying to get by, while the multi-millionaire is trying to decide if they want (not need) a new luxury car or maybe instead they'll buy a boat. Oh heck, they'll buy both.

When I'm thinking of people who make $50,000/yr. I picture a family with a mortgage or rent between $600-$1000 a month, health insurance premiums and co-pays, electric, gas, water and a telephone bill, not to mention groceries and gasoline. When everything is paid there is very little disposable income. Heck, I didn't even mention a car payment, or other taxes, or possibly trying to help put their kid through college, let alone luxury items. You know those things that us peons don't deserve like cell phones and cable television.

Seriously, why do some people have to be such jerks? Greedy jerks at that.

Top
#1237650 --- 12/04/10 04:10 AM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: sands]
Animal Lover Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 10/13/06
Posts: 1339
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: sands
Originally Posted By: Animal Lover
The truth is the rich became rich off of the backs of the rest of us between gambling on Wall Street and shipping jobs offshore.



The problem with you, and most liberals, is that you truly believe that.


The problem with you and MOST conservatives is that you are greedy liars who say crap that you know is ridiculous to try to make a point when you don't actually have one.

Top
#1237683 --- 12/04/10 11:25 AM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: Zorn]
cwjga Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 11/06/08
Posts: 12660
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: Zorn
Originally Posted By: cwjga
Originally Posted By: Chosenspot
Originally Posted By: cwjga
Why should the average American oppose taxing the rich more? Because every American has the ability, possibility of being rich.



How can anyone argue with this logic? I can't.


Your right you can't. Our system is predicated on the ability to improve your lot in life. If there we do as someone suggests, and take all the money someone makes above a certain amount, say $50,000 because everyone making more than that does not need it and is greedy, then there is no reason to work harder and improve.


This is stupid, no one is suggesting that we take all of the money made over $50K.

But look at the 1950s, the top income tax bracket was 90%. Go look it up. ANd yet there was plenty of economic growth and ambition back then, wasn't there?


Here is the post

"Even if there is the possibility of being rich it doesn't mean a person has to become greedy. How much money does a person need? How can you compare a person making $50 million netting $25 million after taxes to a person netting $50,000. $50,000 is chump change to a multi-millionaire."

I took that to mean that if someone makes over $50,000 they do not need it and are being greedy. If they are greedy it follows that they will not give up the money so the Govt. should just take it.

Top
#1237684 --- 12/04/10 11:35 AM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: Zorn]
Ranger Offline
Diamond Member

Registered: 10/23/00
Posts: 25141
Loc: GOD's 1/2 acre
Originally Posted By: Zorn
also found this on the $3 trillion in loans.

"They are overnight loans that were rolled over so each loan may have been counted multiple times. Its like me lending you 10 dollars at 9 am you paying me back at 5pm everyday over the course of the year and then me saying I lent you 3650 dollars. It isn't technically wrong but it is fairly misleading to the general public. I never needed 3650 to loan you that amount and I never had more than 10 dollars loaned out at any period in time so my exposure was never more than 10 dollars.
One of the problems with the banking crisis is a lot of the investment banks were using overnight repo to bankroll investments. This is money that is lent out on a daily basis so if all the sudden the people running money markets don't want to loan you money you have a VERY VERY short time period to fill that hole. The reserve was essentially plugging that hole to prevent firesales and provided liquidity needed to complete transactions."



Business & Economy
Financial Crisis Response Extended Much Farther Than Thought

"The financial crisis stretched even farther across the economy than many had realized," reports The Washington Post, "as new disclosures show the Federal Reserve rushed trillions of dollars in emergency aid not just to Wall Street but also to motorcycle makers, telecom firms and foreign-owned banks in 2008 and 2009." Apparently, "too big to fail" extended to General Electric, Caterpillar, Toyota, Harley-Davidson and Verizon, as well as, inevitably, foreign banks with U.S. subsidiaries. Of course, some of the world's biggest banks, such as Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Swiss-based UBS and Britain's Barclays received aid, with Goldman cashing in for an astonishing $600 billion.

According to the Post, "The data reveal banks turning to the Fed for help almost daily in the fall of 2008 as the central bank lowered lending standards and extended relief to all kinds of institutions it had never assisted before." Total aid reached $3.3 trillion, though the Fed is saying it hasn't (yet) lost any money on its lending.

You know things are bad when we agree with self-proclaimed socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), who insisted that this disclosure requirement be included in the Frank-Dodd financial regulatory bill. "The American people are finally learning the incredible and jaw-dropping details of the Fed's multi-trillion-dollar bailout of Wall Street and corporate America," Sanders said. "Perhaps most surprising is the huge sum that went to bail out foreign private banks and corporations. As a result of this disclosure, other members of Congress and I will be taking a very extensive look at all aspects of how the Federal Reserve functions." Thomas Jefferson certainly had a point when he wrote to Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin in 1802, "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies."

Next up, bailing out the European Union through the International Monetary Fund, in which the U.S. is the largest "shareholder."
_________________________
TRUTH HAS NO AGENDA

Top
#1237720 --- 12/04/10 03:22 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: cwjga]
Animal Lover Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 10/13/06
Posts: 1339
Loc: NY
Quote:
I took that to mean that if someone makes over $50,000 they do not need it and are being greedy. If they are greedy it follows that they will not give up the money so the Govt. should just take it.


Of course you did.

It's not even worth discussing something like this with someone like yourself. You knew what I meant. People making $50 million have everything they need whereas someone making $50,000 may have the absolute necessities but don't have the luxuries or option to have that second home or luxury car. Nowhere did I say that gov't should take everything over a certain amount but if you are a multi-millionaire then you can afford to be taxed at a higher rate.

Top
#1237725 --- 12/04/10 03:36 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: Animal Lover]
citydog Offline
Member

Registered: 08/29/10
Posts: 383
Loc: Ontario County
Originally Posted By: Animal Lover
Originally Posted By: Zorn
Originally Posted By: cwjga
Originally Posted By: Chosenspot
Originally Posted By: cwjga
Why should the average American oppose taxing the rich more? Because every American has the ability, possibility of being rich.



How can anyone argue with this logic? I can't.


Your right you can't. Our system is predicated on the ability to improve your lot in life. If there we do as someone suggests, and take all the money someone makes above a certain amount, say $50,000 because everyone making more than that does not need it and is greedy, then there is no reason to work harder and improve.


This is stupid, no one is suggesting that we take all of the money made over $50K.


Stupid is not a good enough word. It's downright asinine. To equate someone making $50,000 to someone making $50,000,000 is ridiculous and these morons that do crap like that in a conversation are uncaring jerks. The person who makes $50,000 is just trying to get by, while the multi-millionaire is trying to decide if they want (not need) a new luxury car or maybe instead they'll buy a boat. Oh heck, they'll buy both.

When I'm thinking of people who make $50,000/yr. I picture a family with a mortgage or rent between $600-$1000 a month, health insurance premiums and co-pays, electric, gas, water and a telephone bill, not to mention groceries and gasoline. When everything is paid there is very little disposable income. Heck, I didn't even mention a car payment, or other taxes, or possibly trying to help put their kid through college, let alone luxury items. You know those things that us peons don't deserve like cell phones and cable television.


That family making $50,000/year would have the possibility of getting rich if there was some family wealth to start with... say a grandfather in the oil business who leaves a half million to each of the grandkids. Or they could just save their "excess" income, or that huge amount of money they might get in a refundable tax credit -- that is if they didn't waste it all by taking the family out to Ponderosa and a movie once a month, or blow it on take out pizza every other week.

I've seen first hand how people with such modest income work hard and try to cut back, but the day before payday there's not enough to buy groceries for the weekend so it goes on a credit card that never gets paid off in full and thus keeps accumulating interest charges at 18-25%. And the bank keeps hitting them with service charges for a simple checking account because they can't maintain the minimum balance required to avoid service charges. It's like swimming upstream, fighting the current, and hoping that some debris isn't going to hit you and send you under water. Meanwhile a rich kid in the power boat passes you and says "swim harder, you can make it!"

Greedy jerks? Not necessarily. My guess is that they're really clueless (or have forgotten) about what it's like to live on the margin, much less at the poverty level. And if it's so great living on $50K or less, why aren't those making $250K just shucking it all and dropping their income level so they can avoid paying an additional 4.6% in Federal income taxes? Probably because for every $10,000 they make above $250,000, it only costs $460 in tax -- about what they would pay for a monthly dinner and theater evening in NYC (note: not Ponderosa and a movie at Cinema 6).
_________________________
Who let the dogs out

Top
#1237728 --- 12/04/10 03:47 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: Animal Lover]
sands Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 09/05/05
Posts: 8255
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: Animal Lover
Nowhere did I say that gov't should take everything over a certain amount but if you are a multi-millionaire then you can afford to be taxed at a higher rate.



Is that why the 2% of households that make over $250,000 a year already pay 47% of federal income tax?

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/what_percentage_of_the_us_population_makes.html
_________________________
01 - 20 - 2017

Top
#1237779 --- 12/04/10 09:51 PM Re: Republicans add $70 billion to annual deficit. [Re: Animal Lover]
cwjga Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 11/06/08
Posts: 12660
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: Animal Lover
Quote:
I took that to mean that if someone makes over $50,000 they do not need it and are being greedy. If they are greedy it follows that they will not give up the money so the Govt. should just take it.


Of course you did.

It's not even worth discussing something like this with someone like yourself. You knew what I meant. People making $50 million have everything they need whereas someone making $50,000 may have the absolute necessities but don't have the luxuries or option to have that second home or luxury car. Nowhere did I say that gov't should take everything over a certain amount but if you are a multi-millionaire then you can afford to be taxed at a higher rate.


So then what good does it do to whine and call people greedy. And how do you know that a millionare can afford to be taxed at a higher rate. Why not tax everyone at the same rate. That way the more you make the more you pay.


Edited by cwjga (12/04/10 09:53 PM)

Top
Page 2 of 9 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >