• 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 to call for middle class tax cut extension

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.
 
its so obvious. make the rich pay more and more so the money can be used to buy votes for dem masters

blah blah blah..... masters and teats and dependents and vote buying all all the other nonsense that is not even up to the quality of a decent bag of garden manure.

Again, you lie about my position on taxation. Again you pervert what is said and twist it to what you want it to mean and then you have the gall to proclaim that it is truth revealed to you by some mysterious arcane powers that apparently were bestowed by God only to you.

I want ALL Americans who earn dollar one to have their taxes increased by five points across the board.

That applies to the poor Turtle.
And Turtle, that applies to the working class.
And that would be good for the wealthy upper classes also Turtle.

Got it now? Can you read those words? FIVE FREAKIN' POINTS ACROSS THE BOARD FOR EVERYONE EARNING DOLLAR ONE.
 
You're the one cherry-picking federal income taxes to make the numbers look better for you.


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
 
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.
 
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.

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
 
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

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.
 
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

Dishonest!??!?!?!?!?!? Because you say so!?!?!?!?!?

You keep pulling out bags of manure and placing labels on them and pretend that the rubes in the audience cannot smell. It is ALL INCOME Turtle. ITS ALL FREAKIN INCOME.

Tell me where my examples are in error. They are 100% factually true in every way shape and form.
 
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
 
furthermore the rates on investment income are not dependent on the fact that a few people with huge investment proceeds have little or no earned income. Tax the rich more types think that because some people are only paying the 15% tax on investment income that is UNFAIR because those same soak the rich advocates think the rich should be paying 35 or more on ALL income. that has nothing to support it and the argument for the investment income rates is not diminished due to the TYPE of income a few thousand have
 
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.
 
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.


your rant is based on the fact that you think 35% should be applied to ALL TYPES OF INCOME

the GOVERNMENT feels other wise

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 upsets you

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
 
Ah, the Fox is strong in this one...

ah the FDS is strong with this one and no-we aren't talking about a feminine product
 
from Turtle

your rant is based on the fact that you think 35% should be applied to ALL TYPES OF INCOME

That is blatantly false. Tell you what - if that is my position, lets each put up your vaunted $10 grand and see who is right.



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

If they are in the top bracket, we should make no distinction about the source of the money. Money is money is money. It looks the same and spends the same. All you are trying to do is the same thing you always do - lower your own tax bite and it it means sucking up to discriminatory preferences you pucker up eagerly and enthusiastically.

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

And that is called the Golden Rule. And that is what must be changed.



I understand that you think its wrong that I can have income that is not taxed at 35% marginal rates

I have already repeatedly told you for a long time now that I DO NOT SUPPORT taxing your income at 35% rates. Why do you persist in misrepresenting my position?

BUT THE FACT IS-the GOVERNMENT THAT YOU SUPPORT WHEN IT MAKES ME PAY MORE ON EARNED INCOME THAN YOU DO

Actually it was the American people through the 16th Amendment that decided that reality.


has DECIDED

that when it comes to INVESTMENT INCOME

I SHOULD PAY THE SAME AS YOU

so quit whining

Yes, the Golden Rule benefitting those who have the gold and make the rules. We are well aware of the terrible injustice of it all. Thanks for reminding us.

And after all that we are still left with this sad reality of life in America: 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.
 
Last edited:
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
 
BUT THE FACT IS-the GOVERNMENT THAT YOU SUPPORT WHEN IT MAKES ME PAY MORE ON EARNED INCOME THAN YOU DO


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.
 
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

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.
 
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.

left wing rants delivered from a hackish position are not "explanations"

the fact is this thread is about obama appealing to class warfare and its idiotic to claim that someone making 220K needs to pay more no matter their locale vs someone making 199K keeping their same rate


You can claim I am dishonest about my education and we can start up the failure to get to law school nonsense about you I suppose

the fact is I did graduate from a top law school and you didn't
 
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.

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
 
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

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 Federal Debt which is being passed on to our children and grand children?

Read and learn

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt
 
Last edited:
Speaking of evasions - your unwillingness to answer the questions is noted.

what question? The fact is there is no reason to say someone making 250K needs to pay more but someone making 199k needs to keep their current rates

someone making a million is far closer in spending habits to someone making 195K than they are to someone who makes a billion or 100 million or 50 million
 
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
 
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.
 
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.

You want the rich to pay even more when they pay more of the tax burden than their share of the income

tell us why its UNFAIR to YOU that I don't pay 35% on my investment income?
 
Back
Top Bottom