Page 18 of 23 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 228

Thread: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

  1. #171
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Objective Voice;1059176421]The question wasn't did they help wage earners keep more money in their pockets. Pres. Obama's tax cuts via the Stimulus did that, but a mere $15-25 put back in my paycheck isn't going to get me into that $50-100K income bracket. Of course, anyone who thinks such a meager tax decrease would move the bar so drastically is just plain foolish. What I and others here have been arguing is that the Bush tax cuts (or the continuance of Reaganomics..."tickle-down economics") didn't do as promised. They didn't:

    - create new jobs for lower income people
    - increase salaries to lower and middle income people
    - expand business opportunities particularly in manufacturing and infrustructure
    - reduce poverty
    You really have a distorted view as to the role of the Federal Govt. in a free enterprise, capitalistic economy. It isn't the role of the govt. to create jobs, guarantee salaries, and expand. That is the role of the private sector which Obama doesn't understand nor do his supporters.

    You also have a distorted view of the Obama tax cuts. How are they helping you today? Looks to me like you aren't employed because you have no idea. Those were rebate checks, not ongoing tax cuts. Once they were spent they were gone. No withholding cuts at all which would have meant more take home pay on EACH paycheck.

    You seem to have a problem with people keeping more of what they earn. It is THEIR money first

    Instead, by all accounts they did the exact opposite. Why? Because the tax breaks were geared more to aid the higher wage earns than those at lower income brackets which I totally understand. However, the issue many lower and middle-class wage earners have a problem with is those at the top didn't put their money back into growing their businesses, didn't increase wages substantially, and they didn't provide those opportunities for prosperity that those who believe in the tax cuts claimed they would do. The Census data I presented bore out those facts which you really can't deny (though you will continue to try).
    Now there you go again, "tax breaks were geared more to aid the higher wage earners" which then ignores Obama's comments that extension of tax cuts to the middle class benefit the economy. Which is it? Did the middle class get a Bush tax cut or not?

    Stop with the strawman and diversion from reality. The Bush economy prior to 2008 created 8.5 million jobs. Obama has lost 4 million jobs since his economic stimulus plan was put into place. Bush inherited a recession, had 9/11, and the financial bubble bursting.

    Tax cuts mean more take home pay and still benefit all workers today. Tell me why 47% of income earners don't pay any Federal Income taxes? Is that fair? So instead of focusing on those 47% you focus on the top 2% which pay almost 40% of the Federal Income taxes now. That doesn't make any sense to anyone who can think clearly.

  2. #172
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Nope, have no interest in what Warren Buffet says about someone else's taxes. The question is why do you care what his opinion is and why aren't you asking the question as to why 47% don't pay any Federal income taxes? Are you telling me that in today's world that all the people in that 47% don't make enough to pay something in income taxes? You are speculating without true knowledge nor do you seem to care.

    Instead of focusing on the real problem you build a strawman, how many of those people who don't pay any income taxes live on the streets? you don't seem to understand the Federal Income system, we are talking ONLY those with income not the total population. Those on the streets probably don't have a job thus aren't earning any income.

    Stop thinking with your heart and think with the brain God gave you.
    You don't want to use those on the street...ok lets use my family.

    $14,480. That is what my wife's checks are gross. I don't have a job as I stay home and take care of the kids. Our tax bracket is 10%. 10% of $14,480 is $1,448 taking out.

    Now this is why you focusing on just the federal income taxes is disengenous. (the feds take these into consideration when they discuss their taxes so as to not put too much of a burden on people)

    Our state tax bracket is 7.4%. So after feds take thier cut we get another 964.37 taking out. That leaves us with $12,067.63. Note that this doesn't include the taxes taken out for SS and Medicare. But we'll leave those be for now.

    So, 12,067.63. Rent $750 a month = 9000 a year. Leaves us with 3067.63 to live on for the rest of the year.

    Now we do get the taxes we paid in for the year back so that gives us an additional 2412.37 + 2,000 (have two kids). So that leaves us with $7480 to live on through out the year.

    This is something that the government takes into consideration when discussing tax rates. If they didn't and instead kept the money that we paid in we would have $3067.63 to live on through out the year. Even less once SS and Med gets taken out. Even more less if Obama hadn't signed the tax cuts bill.

    So. Now do you understand why those that make a certain amount per year end up getting it back and thereby in essence not paying a net income tax? You've already acknowledged that if we lived on the streets we wouldn't have a job and thereby wouldn't be paying anything at all into the federal gov through out the year. And I can gauruntee you that if we only had 3067.63 to live on through out the year we WOULD be on the streets.

    Now that all that has been established lets go one step further. Let's again assume that instead of getting tax returns back we didn't. Only it's not just me and my family. It includes thousands more, possibly even reaching a million, indeed it could even reach....47% of the population. That's alot of people living on the streets. A lot of people that are not productive members of society for the simple fact that you thought it was unfair that we didn't pay a net income tax. A lot of kids living in the street because you thought it was unfair that we didn't pay a net income tax.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  3. #173
    pirate lover
    liblady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St Thomas, VI
    Last Seen
    03-14-16 @ 03:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    16,165
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    You don't want to use those on the street...ok lets use my family.

    $14,480. That is what my wife's checks are gross. I don't have a job as I stay home and take care of the kids. Our tax bracket is 10%. 10% of $14,480 is $1,448 taking out.

    Now this is why you focusing on just the federal income taxes is disengenous. (the feds take these into consideration when they discuss their taxes so as to not put too much of a burden on people)

    Our state tax bracket is 7.4%. So after feds take thier cut we get another 964.37 taking out. That leaves us with $12,067.63. Note that this doesn't include the taxes taken out for SS and Medicare. But we'll leave those be for now.

    So, 12,067.63. Rent $750 a month = 9000 a year. Leaves us with 3067.63 to live on for the rest of the year.

    Now we do get the taxes we paid in for the year back so that gives us an additional 2412.37 + 2,000 (have two kids). So that leaves us with $7480 to live on through out the year.

    This is something that the government takes into consideration when discussing tax rates. If they didn't and instead kept the money that we paid in we would have $3067.63 to live on through out the year. Even less once SS and Med gets taken out. Even more less if Obama hadn't signed the tax cuts bill.

    So. Now do you understand why those that make a certain amount per year end up getting it back and thereby in essence not paying a net income tax? You've already acknowledged that if we lived on the streets we wouldn't have a job and thereby wouldn't be paying anything at all into the federal gov through out the year. And I can gauruntee you that if we only had 3067.63 to live on through out the year we WOULD be on the streets.

    Now that all that has been established lets go one step further. Let's again assume that instead of getting tax returns back we didn't. Only it's not just me and my family. It includes thousands more, possibly even reaching a million, indeed it could even reach....47% of the population. That's alot of people living on the streets. A lot of people that are not productive members of society for the simple fact that you thought it was unfair that we didn't pay a net income tax. A lot of kids living in the street because you thought it was unfair that we didn't pay a net income tax.
    it's pretty sad when a person thinks someone with your income should be paying taxes.

    Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:

    These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.


  4. #174
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,418

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    You don't want to use those on the street...ok lets use my family.

    $14,480. That is what my wife's checks are gross. I don't have a job as I stay home and take care of the kids. Our tax bracket is 10%. 10% of $14,480 is $1,448 taking out.

    Now this is why you focusing on just the federal income taxes is disengenous. (the feds take these into consideration when they discuss their taxes so as to not put too much of a burden on people)

    Our state tax bracket is 7.4%. So after feds take thier cut we get another 964.37 taking out. That leaves us with $12,067.63. Note that this doesn't include the taxes taken out for SS and Medicare. But we'll leave those be for now.

    So, 12,067.63. Rent $750 a month = 9000 a year. Leaves us with 3067.63 to live on for the rest of the year.

    Now we do get the taxes we paid in for the year back so that gives us an additional 2412.37 + 2,000 (have two kids). So that leaves us with $7480 to live on through out the year.

    This is something that the government takes into consideration when discussing tax rates. If they didn't and instead kept the money that we paid in we would have $3067.63 to live on through out the year. Even less once SS and Med gets taken out. Even more less if Obama hadn't signed the tax cuts bill.

    So. Now do you understand why those that make a certain amount per year end up getting it back and thereby in essence not paying a net income tax? You've already acknowledged that if we lived on the streets we wouldn't have a job and thereby wouldn't be paying anything at all into the federal gov through out the year. And I can gauruntee you that if we only had 3067.63 to live on through out the year we WOULD be on the streets.

    Now that all that has been established lets go one step further. Let's again assume that instead of getting tax returns back we didn't. Only it's not just me and my family. It includes thousands more, possibly even reaching a million, indeed it could even reach....47% of the population. That's alot of people living on the streets. A lot of people that are not productive members of society for the simple fact that you thought it was unfair that we didn't pay a net income tax. A lot of kids living in the street because you thought it was unfair that we didn't pay a net income tax.
    That's why a flat tax of, say $200 a montth; money that the government keepswould be better for you and the government, instead of taking all that money in payroll taxes, then turn around and give it back to you.

    The government would realize more tax revenue, because they're not giving you money back to you. You would more money in yoour pocket now vice next year. The government would save untold millions, by not having to pay for a refunding department.

    But, I'm sure that makes way too much sense and takes away from the, "soak the rich", argument.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  5. #175
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    You don't want to use those on the street...ok lets use my family.

    $14,480. That is what my wife's checks are gross. I don't have a job as I stay home and take care of the kids. Our tax bracket is 10%. 10% of $14,480 is $1,448 taking out.

    Now this is why you focusing on just the federal income taxes is disengenous. (the feds take these into consideration when they discuss their taxes so as to not put too much of a burden on people)

    Our state tax bracket is 7.4%. So after feds take thier cut we get another 964.37 taking out. That leaves us with $12,067.63. Note that this doesn't include the taxes taken out for SS and Medicare. But we'll leave those be for now.

    So, 12,067.63. Rent $750 a month = 9000 a year. Leaves us with 3067.63 to live on for the rest of the year.

    Now we do get the taxes we paid in for the year back so that gives us an additional 2412.37 + 2,000 (have two kids). So that leaves us with $7480 to live on through out the year.

    This is something that the government takes into consideration when discussing tax rates. If they didn't and instead kept the money that we paid in we would have $3067.63 to live on through out the year. Even less once SS and Med gets taken out. Even more less if Obama hadn't signed the tax cuts bill.

    So. Now do you understand why those that make a certain amount per year end up getting it back and thereby in essence not paying a net income tax? You've already acknowledged that if we lived on the streets we wouldn't have a job and thereby wouldn't be paying anything at all into the federal gov through out the year. And I can gauruntee you that if we only had 3067.63 to live on through out the year we WOULD be on the streets.

    Now that all that has been established lets go one step further. Let's again assume that instead of getting tax returns back we didn't. Only it's not just me and my family. It includes thousands more, possibly even reaching a million, indeed it could even reach....47% of the population. That's alot of people living on the streets. A lot of people that are not productive members of society for the simple fact that you thought it was unfair that we didn't pay a net income tax. A lot of kids living in the street because you thought it was unfair that we didn't pay a net income tax.
    Personal choice, you choose to stay home and take care of your kids, you choose where to live thus your state and local tax structure, you are one of those 47% that don''t pay any Federal Income taxes as your entire withholding is returned to you.

    The Federal Govt. doesn't take into consideration state taxes at all. I live in TX and pay the same Federal Tax rate as those in NY. My state has no state income taxes.

    SS and Medicare are use taxes, you get something back from those taxes in personal benefits.

    I really suggest you read a little bit more and use the brain God gave you. This thread is about FEDERAL INCOME TAXES that have nothing to do with the state taxes. 47% don't pay any Federal Income taxes according to the IRS. Is it fair that 53% of the income earners pay your share of the Federal Govt?

  6. #176
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    it's pretty sad when a person thinks someone with your income should be paying taxes.
    You think it is fair that 53% of the people in this country pay for the Federal Services of the rest of the population including the 47% of income earners? You, like so many, mistake the Federal Govt expenses from state and local issues. I listed what the Federal Govt funds each year so tell me why 53% of the INCOME EARNERS pay for the benefits of the rest of the population? That is fair to you? You confuse state and local issues with Federal Issues, not surprising but a typical strawman.

  7. #177
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:27 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,831

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    from Conservative

    If you want to talk honesty then focus on the thread topic which has nothing to do with all the taxes people pay. This thread is about what Obama signed and it has nothing to do with state and local taxes. You want to talk total taxes start a new thread. In the meantime tell me what is fair about 47% of the people paying zero federal income taxes to fund the items in the FEDERAL BUDGET? I know why you divert because you know there is no defense for your position thus you have to bring in other taxes yet you never answered the questions I posted about those other taxes. Wonder why?
    If you want honesty, that is what I desire also. And throughout this thread there have been the usual people who have used it to discuss their pet cause of forwarding a ideology to reduce taxes riches upon the rich. To justify such a scheme they, and you, love to trot out your favorite right wing statistic on the 47% and the income tax. Sorry, but that is pure politics and has really nothing to do with Obama signing any law either.

    It is dishonest and intellectually fraudulent to discuss one tax in isolation for the pure political purposes of getting people to agree with your scheme if you intentionally ignore the larger issue of the tax burden which pains a very different picture indeed.

    Why are you against people being able to look at the complete picture of taxation and the tax burden on Americans?
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  8. #178
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    from Conservative



    If you want honesty, that is what I desire also. And throughout this thread there have been the usual people who have used it to discuss their pet cause of forwarding a ideology to reduce taxes riches upon the rich. To justify such a scheme they, and you, love to trot out your favorite right wing statistic on the 47% and the income tax. Sorry, but that is pure politics and has really nothing to do with Obama signing any law either.

    It is dishonest and intellectually fraudulent to discuss one tax in isolation for the pure political purposes of getting people to agree with your scheme if you intentionally ignore the larger issue of the tax burden which pains a very different picture indeed.

    Why are you against people being able to look at the complete picture of taxation and the tax burden on Americans?
    It is pure fantasy on the part of the left to try and tie Federal Taxes and what Obama signed into state tax and spending issues. I have no problem looking at the entire tax structure but that isn't this thread. You want to discuss total taxes start another thread. Your problem is you don't seem to understand use taxes vs. income taxes nor do you ever focus on individual responsibility.

    What is pure politics are the attacks on the top 2% that pay most of the Federal Income taxes now? Why aren't you focused in the size of the govt. or the large percentage that doesn't help fund the Federal Expenses? Do state and local taxes that you pay fund Federal expenses? For someone who taught civics I question how you missed out on the responsibilities of the state, local, and Federal Govt. as well as lacking a basic understanding of use taxes vs. income taxes.

  9. #179
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Personal choice, you choose to stay home and take care of your kids, you choose where to live thus your state and local tax structure, you are one of those 47% that don''t pay any Federal Income taxes as your entire withholding is returned to you.
    Ok lets say I got a job and put my kids in a day care. Lets double the $7480 to $14,960 (assuming I got a job that pays the same as my wife...which is above minimum wage). Day care costs $640 per month (I know because I've looked into it before). $640 X 12 = 7,680. 7,680 - 14,960 = 7,280 to live on the rest of the year. Now I'm minus $200 to live on for the rest of the year. So obviously daycare is not an option.

    As far as me choosing where I live...have you ever tried to move on this type of income? Got to find a job, got to find an affordable place to rent, Rent it which includes first, last, and deposit (which is a big sum of money to get when you're living paycheck to paycheck). Make sure to pay any bills that you still owe. etc etc etc. It's not as simple as choosing to stay or move somwhere else ya know.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  10. #180
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Kal'Stang;1059176618]Ok lets say I got a job and put my kids in a day care. Lets double the $7480 to $14,960 (assuming I got a job that pays the same as my wife...which is above minimum wage). Day care costs $640 per month (I know because I've looked into it before). $640 X 12 = 7,680. 7,680 - 14,960 = 7,280 to live on the rest of the year. Now I'm minus $200 to live on for the rest of the year. So obviously daycare is not an option.
    You continue to miss the point and that is the size of the Federal Govt and the expenses at the federal level that the taxpayers have to fund. You ignore that many of those expenses are duplicated at the state level as well which leads to the question as to why?

    I am one here that admires you for staying at home with your kids but again the issue isn't state or local taxes, the question is who should fund the Federal Govt and why 47% of the people including you can't provide something?

    As far as me choosing where I live...have you ever tried to move on this type of income? Got to find a job, got to find an affordable place to rent, Rent it which includes first, last, and deposit (which is a big sum of money to get when you're living paycheck to paycheck). Make sure to pay any bills that you still owe. etc etc etc. It's not as simple as choosing to stay or move somwhere else ya know.
    Actually the opportunities are much greater at that income level than you would think. I live in TX and stories every day are about people like you that fled high tax states to move here where jobs are being created. Good people take lemons and turn them into lemonade rather than sit around in a high tax state. TX doesn't have a state income tax and it doesn't cost $640 a month for day care.

    Yes, it is just as simple as that, move where you want to move or stay where you want to stay. Neither changes the size or the role of the Federal Govt. nor does it change the reality that 47% of the people including you pay nothing for the the Federal Expenses that benefit all Americans.

Page 18 of 23 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •