- Joined
- Feb 6, 2010
- Messages
- 100,421
- Reaction score
- 53,130
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
nice squid action
lots of ink
good evasion
You're the one cherry-picking federal income taxes to make the numbers look better for you.
nice squid action
lots of ink
good evasion
its so obvious. make the rich pay more and more so the money can be used to buy votes for dem masters
You're the one cherry-picking federal income taxes to make the numbers look better for you.
how is a 15% rate on investment income unfair?
Because it is discriminatory and preferential and impacts the wealthy with the greatest benefit of such favoritism while money earned through work or labor is taxed at a different and less preferential rate.
One million dollars put into somebody's pocket or account in labor wages are taxed at nearly 35% or a tax bill of nearly $350,000.00 with no other deductions.
One million dollars put into somebody's pocket or account in long term capital gains are taxed at 15% or a tax bill of $150,000.00 with no other deductions.
One million dollars put into somebody's pocket or account in inheritance is tax free and taxed at 0% or a tax bill of $00.00 with no deductions needed.
A million dollars is a million dollars is a million dollars. Stack it up and it all looks the same. It all spends the same. It is the same. But the Golden Rule allows discriminatory preferences to be given to the sources of money that benefit the rich the most over workers and wage earners.
If there is anything in that answer that you do not comprehend, please just ask and I will try to break it down for you in smaller words you can understand.
the facts are tough for the parasite support team
the richest one percent pay almost all the death taxes and almost 40% of the income taxes
the richest one percent make 22% of the income
overcome those facts
that is dishonest. the only "unfairness" is based on the fact that the rich are taxed at much higher rates on earned income than others
There is no tax on death so your 'fact' fails right out of the gate.
The rest about the 40% and 22% is irrelevant since nobody is disputing those numbers. You debate what is being disagreed about. If you would have debated in college you would have learned that.
LOL your debate skills are not reflected in your posts
whining that the rates on investment income are UNFAIR because you think the progressive rates on EARNED Income are fair
that's a piss poor argument. its based on your ASSumption that rates on earned income are proper and that requires you to claim the law is fair but the same law sets the rates on investment income
How bad are your reading skills Turtle?
How woefully inadequate are your complete lack of comprehension skills Turtle?
FAIR can go screw itself into the ground and then get pissed on for all I care.
My argument is based on the fact that one million dollars coming into the pocket of anyone is still one million dollars and spends as such. If you stacked those three pilels high, you would be utterly impotent to tell the three apart.
Got it?
My argument is based on that reality.
It is further based on the reality that tax disparities are created as a result of the Golden Rule and as such are highly discriminatory and preferential.
Because it is discriminatory and preferential and impacts the wealthy with the greatest benefit of such favoritism while money earned through work or labor is taxed at a different and less preferential rate it should not be tolerated.
One million dollars put into somebody's pocket or account in labor wages are taxed at nearly 35% or a tax bill of nearly $350,000.00 with no other deductions.
One million dollars put into somebody's pocket or account in long term capital gains are taxed at 15% or a tax bill of $150,000.00 with no other deductions.
One million dollars put into somebody's pocket or account in inheritance is tax free and taxed at 0% or a tax bill of $00.00 with no deductions needed.
A million dollars is a million dollars is a million dollars. Stack it up and it all looks the same. It all spends the same. It is the same. But the Golden Rule allows discriminatory preferences to be given to the sources of money that benefit the rich the most over workers and wage earners.
I believe the middleclass is pissed off enough at him from the huge tax hike on them in the form of Obamacare.
Ah, the Fox is strong in this one...
your rant is based on the fact that you think 35% should be applied to ALL TYPES OF INCOME
so your howling is based on your belief that a rich person's income no matter what its derivation should always be taxed at the top rate
the government that created the laws that make me pay more of my next EARNED DOLLAR IN TAXES THAN YOU DO has DETERMINED THAT my INVESTMENT INCOME SHOULD BE TAXED DIFFERENTLY
I understand that you think its wrong that I can have income that is not taxed at 35% marginal rates
BUT THE FACT IS-the GOVERNMENT THAT YOU SUPPORT WHEN IT MAKES ME PAY MORE ON EARNED INCOME THAN YOU DO
has DECIDED
that when it comes to INVESTMENT INCOME
I SHOULD PAY THE SAME AS YOU
so quit whining
BUT THE FACT IS-the GOVERNMENT THAT YOU SUPPORT WHEN IT MAKES ME PAY MORE ON EARNED INCOME THAN YOU DO
So what you are babbling about Haymarket is that
1) The law is RIGHT when it makes me pay more of my next EARNED DOLLAR to the government than you do but
2) THE LAW IS WRONG when my next investment income dollar is not taxed more than yours?
the GOVERNMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT TAXES should be different for different TYPES of INCOME
YOu lose on that
if you want all income to be taxed at the same rate fine with me as long as the rate is the same no matter how much
THE ONLY CONSISTENCY WE SEE FROM YOU IS WANTING THE RICH TO ALWAYS PAY MORE
This is the last time I'm going to explain this to you.
That bridge that brings people to businesses owned by wealthy investors was built by and is maintained by TAX REVENUE. The wealthy investors benefit the most from the partnership between government and business, therefore they contribute the most to keep the ALL the necessary programs running.
Get it?
The giant ramp off the 5 Freeway in Anaheim that delivers cars right to the Disneyland Resort parking structure was paid for with tax dollars. Why? Because the Disney company was going to double their employment with the expansion of the resort. Disney stock goes up, investors make money, CEOs get bonuses +++ people get jobs, get a salary and buy goods and services. The ramp was stimulus. It created 10 jobs for ever $1 tax dollar. Get it?
All this is made possible because of a partnership between the PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS. Wealthy investors and business owners benefit the most when the economy is working. So they contribute the most to keep the Necessary Programs running.
I explained this to you a year ago, using the same example. You never refuted it or offered anything but a meaningless string of Limbaugh talking points.
You understand nothing about the economic principles behind taxation and how government functions to support businesses.
Your rants are the moronic talking point variety of those educated only by right wing super hype. IMO, you are dishonest about your education and background.
If you can't understand how things work, stop pretending like you do. Your posts are pathetically stupid and void of content, revealing a complete fraud, IMO.
Do you know the difference between apples and oranges?
Do you know the difference between apples and cinder blocks?
Based on your post the obvious answer is NO written in 200 foot high letters chiseled into the side of a mountain face.
A rate schedule treating different levels of income is one thing all by itself.
Discriminatory rates extended to sources of income that benefit mostly the wealthy is an entirely different thing.
One can support one without supporting the other.
Lets see who I can get to testify in support of that proposition? I KNOW? How about a Ohio labor lawyer... sorry --- corporation management lawyer ... who styles himself as a expert on these matters? Yeah - lets bring him to the stand and see if one can support one but disagree with the other.
So testify for my side Turtle. Tell us how you can oppose the progressive tax schedule on the one hand but support discriminatory and preferential rates for investment and inheritance income on the other hand.
The expert Turtle sees nothing at all wrong or intellectually inconsistent with this. He only makes that charge when you flip it around and accept the progressive rte schedule but recognize the faults of discriminatory preferences which benefit the wealthy over workers.
Your your CONSISTENCY argument FAILS and you were the witness who swayed the judge and jury.
Thanks and you can now step down and go back to your seat in the back.
Speaking of evasions - your unwillingness to answer the questions is noted.nice squid action
lots of ink
good evasion
sorry you lose
the GOVERNMENT is what determines the rate
the only discrimination is making the rich pay more
how are you HURT by the RICH not paying the same rates on INVESTMENT INCOME as they do on EARNED INCOME
Speaking of evasions - your unwillingness to answer the questions is noted.
You do not even make sense.
You want to change the government rate for earned income but keep the government preferential discriminatory rates for the rich on other sources of income.
I want to change both.
Your CONSISTENCY argument fails utterly and completely just as all your selfish motivated posts do on this issue.
How am I hurt? Perhaps you have heard of something called the F
ederal Debt which is being passed on to our children and grand children?
your only consistency is wanting every law to require the rich to pay more tax dollars at higher rates
BBBBBZZZZZTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
that buzzer is telling you that you have just fouled out of the game. But I have a sneaking suspicion that since Daddykins owns the arena the result is preordained otherwise.
In point of fact, and something you know darn well because it has been explained to you a thousand times - I favor increasing taxes on ALL Americans who earn dollar one across the board.