• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

Status
Not open for further replies.
TheDemSocialist said:
First off not all working class people are "poor"
Second off ever heard of internet cafes? Ever heard of a library? Ever heard of donated computers? Or i know a a couple of "poor" (impoverished) people that own computers...
Click to expand...

LOL-the most prolific anti rich posters on this board post here constantly: two of our most vociferous welfare socialists are averaging about 100 posts a day and are posting most of the day and most of the night.
 
TurtleDude said:
Yet the lies keep on coming. "Progressive" as meaning opposed to the crown or a dictatorial centralized monarchy is very different than the perverted meaning which is a fancy way of dressing up the turd known as welfare socialism. our economy was the strongest in the world before the New Deal nonsense came along and "rightwing" income redistribution is a silly way of talking about mainly a somewhat free market.

rightwing income redistribution bothers the untalented and unproductive-and most of all those who pretend they are valuable and talented but not rewarded for their "skills" by "benighted" managers or corporations or the labor market.
Click to expand...

and the rightwing mistatements of fact keep on coming. Rightwingers don't even know what the word progressive means. We even have a rightwinger claiming that "debt owed to the public" is the only debt our govt has. our economy was the weak before the New Deal came along and "rightwing" income redistribution is a silly way of running an economy.

income redistribution bothers the untalented and unproductive rich-and most of all those who pretend they are valuable and talented but not rewarded for their "skills" by owning everything
 
Thunder said:
more dishonesty.

I stopped posting last night at 12 am and started again this morning at around 9:30.
Click to expand...

most of the night to normal people means between dinner and bedtime. You are posting while at work it seems constantly and you claim to be a government worker. Hmmmm
 
TheDemSocialist said:
First off not all working class people are "poor"
Second off ever heard of internet cafes? Ever heard of a library? Ever heard of donated computers? Or i know a a couple of "poor" (impoverished) people that own computers...
Click to expand...

TUrtleDudes knowledge of the poor is even less than his knowledge of economic matters. He thinks the poor have multiple cars and designer clothes.
 
sangha said:
and the rightwing mistatements of fact keep on coming. Rightwingers don't even know what the word progressive means. We even have a rightwinger claiming that "debt owed to the public" is the only debt our govt has. our economy was the weak before the New Deal came along and "rightwing" income redistribution is a silly way of running an economy.

income redistribution bothers the untalented and unproductive rich-and most of all those who pretend they are valuable and talented but not rewarded for their "skills" by owning everything
Click to expand...

most millionaires are first generation millionaires. Your rants about the rich display much envy and very little knowledge.

and claiming the "progressive ideals" that founded this country are akin to taxing the rich more so the recipients of government welfare vote for rich dems is pathetic
 
TurtleDude said:
LOL-the most prolific anti rich posters on this board post here constantly: two of our most vociferous welfare socialists are averaging about 100 posts a day and are posting most of the day and most of the night.
Click to expand...

LOL-the most prolific anti worker posters on this board post here constantly: two of our most vociferous welfare wingnuts are averaging about 100 posts a day and are posting most of the day and most of the night.
 
TurtleDude said:
LOL-the most prolific anti rich posters on this board post here constantly:
Click to expand...
First off socialism is not "anti rich".
Second off: So what they are on here a lot? What is your point?

two of our most vociferous welfare socialists are averaging about 100 posts a day and are posting most of the day and most of the night.
Click to expand...
Cool. Their politics are to the left of yours and they are on here a lot.... Whats your point? Are you saying if you have a computer and you post on here a lot you should not be a socialist or a left leaning individual? Is this your way of reasoning? Because that is some pretty ignorant reasoning.
 
TurtleDude said:
most millionaires are first generation millionaires. Your rants about the rich display much envy and very little knowledge.

and claiming the "progressive ideals" that founded this country are akin to taxing the rich more so the recipients of government welfare vote for rich dems is pathetic
Click to expand...

most millionaires are not paying their fair share. Your rants about the working class and the poor display very little knowledge.

and claiming that welfare is akin to taxing the rich more so the recipients of government welfare vote for dems is pathetic
 
sangha said:
TUrtleDudes knowledge of the poor is even less than his knowledge of economic matters. He thinks the poor have multiple cars and designer clothes.
Click to expand...

where did I mention designed clothes and many of those you claim are too poor to pay taxes (almost half the country_ do own multiple cars the USA has 779 cars per 1000 people and when you factor out children and those unable to drive (the advanced elderly etc) what does that tell you

I also note that many wealthy people in places like NYC own no vehicles-my brother is a wealthy professional in Manhattan as is his wife and they own no cars. same with the guy who was best man in my wedding and his wife (my girlfriend in college) they own a penthouse on Central Park and own no cars

RITA | BTS | Table 1-11: Number of U.S. Aircraft, Vehicles, Vessels, and Other Conveyances
 
TurtleDude said:
where did I mention designed clothes and many of those you claim are too poor to pay taxes
Click to expand...

Well you kinda used that sort of reasoning here: "LOL-the most prolific anti rich posters on this board post here constantly: two of our most vociferous welfare socialists are averaging about 100 posts a day and are posting most of the day and most of the night."
 
TurtleDude said:
another lie-an article you posted several weeks ago from a woman in the NYT mentioned those making between 1-5 million a year paid the highest effective federal income tax rate
Click to expand...

Do you think no one ever notices how you exclude all taxes but the Federal income taxes?

"Due to the regressive nature of total payroll taxes the superrich are paying a total tax rate lower than all those who make more than $20,000. The superrich pay roughly the same tax rate as the poor. The rest of us pay more!

Initially, we thought we were asking, "Is it fair for the poor to pay nothing, while the rich pay 27%?" but now that we account for all the payroll taxes, the question becomes, "Is it fair to demand over 25% from the middle class, while the superrich pay less than 25%?" We also now ask, "How many people are being pushed into poverty by the high tax rate placed on the lower wage earners?" Our fear of impoverishing people through taxation has led us to lower taxes on those who are not even at risk of falling to middle class through taxation, while keeping taxes on the lower income families high enough to push them towards, even into, poverty. "
Payroll Taxes & Tax Fairness
 
Catawba said:
Do you think no one ever notices how you exclude all taxes but the Federal income taxes?

"Due to the regressive nature of total payroll taxes the superrich are paying a total tax rate lower than all those who make more than $20,000. The superrich pay roughly the same tax rate as the poor. The rest of us pay more!

Initially, we thought we were asking, "Is it fair for the poor to pay nothing, while the rich pay 27%?" but now that we account for all the payroll taxes, the question becomes, "Is it fair to demand over 25% from the middle class, while the superrich pay less than 25%?" We also now ask, "How many people are being pushed into poverty by the high tax rate placed on the lower wage earners?" Our fear of impoverishing people through taxation has led us to lower taxes on those who are not even at risk of falling to middle class through taxation, while keeping taxes on the lower income families high enough to push them towards, even into, poverty. "
Payroll Taxes & Tax Fairness
Click to expand...

The title of the thread is "Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes".

The debate is therefore about federal taxes, not state, municipal, and so on.
 
Thunder said:
what was America's total natonal debt on January 21st, 2009?
Click to expand...
It depends on what you want to call debt:
  1. The number is 6.3 trillion if you're talking about current obligations.
  2. That jumps to over 10 trillion if you include the so-called "trust funds" for Social Security and Medicare, which of course are empty. These are future debt obligations and at best represent money collected by payroll taxes that was spent on other things.
  3. The real number is over 60 trillion when you count the unfunded liabilities politicians have promised and we cannot afford to pay.
 
Catawba said:
Do you think no one ever notices how you exclude all taxes but the Federal income taxes?

"Due to the regressive nature of total payroll taxes the superrich are paying a total tax rate lower than all those who make more than $20,000. The superrich pay roughly the same tax rate as the poor. The rest of us pay more!

Initially, we thought we were asking, "Is it fair for the poor to pay nothing, while the rich pay 27%?" but now that we account for all the payroll taxes, the question becomes, "Is it fair to demand over 25% from the middle class, while the superrich pay less than 25%?" We also now ask, "How many people are being pushed into poverty by the high tax rate placed on the lower wage earners?" Our fear of impoverishing people through taxation has led us to lower taxes on those who are not even at risk of falling to middle class through taxation, while keeping taxes on the lower income families high enough to push them towards, even into, poverty. "
Payroll Taxes & Tax Fairness
Click to expand...

several posters noted how dishonest it is for you to shift the conversation to state taxes or social security payments when the taxes that are under consideration for being increased are income taxes on the rich.

saying that you should not have to pay income taxes because you pay state sales taxes is bogus and dishonest.

I know the answer but I will ask it anyway

if someone is unable to pay for their own existence and thus should be a ward of the state what moral right do they have to vote up taxes on others when they pay none themselves?
 
Grant said:
The title of the thread is "Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes".

The debate is therefore about federal taxes, not state, municipal, and so on.
Click to expand...


that is a constant bit of dishonesty on this board. they talk about peaches when the issue is only watermelons
 
sangha said:
The debt is above $14t, most of it accumulated under republican presidents. "Debt held by the public" is just a portion of the total debt
Click to expand...
No it's well over $60 trillion given all of the unfunded liabilities (most of it accumulated under democrats, if you want to play the partisan game).
 
TurtleDude said:
where did I mention designed clothes and many of those you claim are too poor to pay taxes (almost half the country_ do own multiple cars the USA has 779 cars per 1000 people and when you factor out children and those unable to drive (the advanced elderly etc) what does that tell you

I also note that many wealthy people in places like NYC own no vehicles-my brother is a wealthy professional in Manhattan as is his wife and they own no cars. same with the guy who was best man in my wedding and his wife (my girlfriend in college) they own a penthouse on Central Park and own no cars
Click to expand...

No, you never said anything about designer clothes

TurtleDude said:
lots of "unnecessary stuff such as wide screen tv's multiple cars, cell phones, 160 dollar designer athletic shoes (worn by people whose only athletic endeavors involve outrunning store security) etc
Click to expand...
 
Grant said:
The title of the thread is "Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes".

The debate is therefore about federal taxes, not state, municipal, and so on.
Click to expand...

So you think a citizens' total tax burden is of no consideration in determining affordability of Federal taxes? That would explain how you think you can get blood from a turnip and why in 2009 one in seven Americans lived in poverty.
 
TurtleDude said:
so you believe that none or even a few of the 47% who pay no income taxes or the 60% or so who are getting back more from the federal government than they pay in have no disposable income? I realize you are in Kansas but you must have some depressed urban areas like we do in Cincinnati and Dayton and I have spent enough time in section 8 housing interviewing witnesses to see lots of "unnecessary stuff such as wide screen tv's multiple cars, cell phones, 160 dollar designer athletic shoes (worn by people whose only athletic endeavors involve outrunning store security) etc
Click to expand...

Grant said:
The title of the thread is "Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes".

The debate is therefore about federal taxes, not state, municipal, and so on.
Click to expand...

Says the thread nanny who commented about Bill Ayers. Not too hypocritical
 
TurtleDude said:
several posters noted how dishonest it is for you to shift the conversation to state taxes or social security payments when the taxes that are under consideration for being increased are income taxes on the rich.
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

Read the subject line of this thread. It says nothing about limiting the raises to FIT. In fact, Obama has also offered to lower payroll taxes as part of a deal. The republicans objected to that because they don't want tax reductions; they only want tax reductions for their wealthy overlords
 
TurtleDude said:
several posters noted how dishonest it is for you to shift the conversation to state taxes or social security payments when the taxes that are under consideration for being increased are income taxes on the rich.

saying that you should not have to pay income taxes because you pay state sales taxes is bogus and dishonest.

I know the answer but I will ask it anyway

if someone is unable to pay for their own existence and thus should be a ward of the state what moral right do they have to vote up taxes on others when they pay none themselves?
Click to expand...

I pay a higher percentage rate of total taxes than you do, and I get less services than you do. I can see how you would like to avoid that fact. Too ****ing bad! :sun
 
sangha said:
No, you never said anything about designer clothes
Click to expand...

thanks for admitting you lied

clothes are not shoes and given your previously almost obsessive fixation with "accuracy" your claim is dishonest
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom