• 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!

Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

Status
Not open for further replies.
"The Office of Tax Analysis of the United States Department of the Treasury summarized the (1981) tax changes as follows[2]:

phased-in 23% cut in individual tax rates over 3 years; top rate dropped from 70% to 50%

accelerated depreciation deductions; replaced depreciation system with ACRS

indexed individual income tax parameters (beginning in 1985)

created 10% exclusion on income for two-earner married couples ($3,000 cap)

phased-in increase in estate tax exemption from $175,625 to $600,000 in 1987

reduced Windfall Profit taxes

allowed all working taxpayers to establish IRAs

expanded provisions for employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs)

replaced $200 interest exclusion with 15% net interest exclusion ($900 cap) (begin in 1985)"

Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


So your position is that 38% > 70%? And that's not even counting all the other tax cuts provided to the wealthy.

What the hell are you babbling about now, I posted the actual percentage of the taxes collected by the Federal Govt. I don't give a damn about percentages, the govt. doesn't spend percentages, they spend actual dollars. The numbers are for 2009 with the Bush tax cuts in effect, 47% of income earners don't pay any Federal Income taxes and all of them are in come levels of 50,000 or less. That destroys your argument.
 
the only hate i see comes from rich democrats who loathe the thought of the poor becoming less dependent on the government or the middle class becoming wealthy.

half of my closest friends(club) are millionaires, the other half are mostly blue collar friends from the gun and sportsmens club. no one rich I know hate the middle class and none of my hourly wages buddies think that either. what both groups tend to dislike are rich libs who whine about the plight of the poor while scheming to keep them that way

See, what you did here, though: you started complaining about the poor living off the rich; when this conversation was about teachers, fire fighters, and other public workers.

You think of working people like these in same you think of the mythological welfare mamas.

Stephen Fincher - 8th district TN - received $3.2 million in farm subsidies over the past decade. Now, he's getting $174,000 + tax-payer funded healthcare + $320,000 a year in farm subsidies. That means he's going to get $494,000 a year in farm subsidies.

Again, Walker gets paid $137,500 / year to be governor. I don't see him sacrificing anything. I don't see Fincher sacrificing anything.

Teachers, cops, and fire fighters have to sacrifice so the wealthy welfare queens (like all the companies that get no-bid contracts from the Pentagon, for example) can continue to suckle the government teat. The welfare queens on Central Park West (and in the House of Representatives) cost you and I a lot more tax dollars than the ones in the projects. I'm just tired of people thinking the poor are their enemy - especially the working poor - when there's someone making millions off our tax dollars just because they can shake the right hand. If we can take care of those welfare queens first, I'll join your crusade against the few poor people who exploit the system.
 
Those figures say NOTHING about the supposed difference between the 91% tax rated cited by many and your claim of a far different effective rate that was actually paid. YOU HAVE NEVER PRESENTED ANYTHING TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM.

NEVER.

So can you do it now for all of us to see or is this just another case of your mouth writing checks that the rest of you cannot cash with actual evidence?

Silly question - I know. You have never been able to do it and will not be able to do it now.

frantic response

the top one percent pay more of the fit burden now than before

time for people like you to pay your fair share
 
See, what you did here, though: you started complaining about the poor living off the rich; when this conversation was about teachers, fire fighters, and other public workers.

You think of working people like these in same you think of the mythological welfare mamas.

Stephen Fincher - 8th district TN - received $3.2 million in farm subsidies over the past decade. Now, he's getting $174,000 + tax-payer funded healthcare + $320,000 a year in farm subsidies. That means he's going to get $494,000 a year in farm subsidies.

Again, Walker gets paid $137,500 / year to be governor. I don't see him sacrificing anything. I don't see Fincher sacrificing anything.

Teachers, cops, and fire fighters have to sacrifice so the wealthy welfare queens (like all the companies that get no-bid contracts from the Pentagon, for example) can continue to suckle the government teat. The welfare queens on Central Park West (and in the House of Representatives) cost you and I a lot more tax dollars than the ones in the projects. I'm just tired of people thinking the poor are their enemy - especially the working poor - when there's someone making millions off our tax dollars just because they can shake the right hand. If we can take care of those welfare queens first, I'll join your crusade against the few poor people who exploit the system.

the working class hero crap never resonated with me -or anyone else who knows the score
 
So we are talking about unions and you want to bring up taxes that have nothing to do with paying teachers. I get it you have nothing.

Actually - you just proved my point.

Walker's bill will do nothing to lower taxes. It merely takes rights away from workers. Taxpayers will save nothing in the end.
 
the working class hero crap never resonated with me -or anyone else who knows the score

And you actually ignore the fact that the wealthy mooch off the government much more than the poor do.

You obviously support cronyism.
 
Actually - you just proved my point.

Walker's bill will do nothing to lower taxes. It merely takes rights away from workers. Taxpayers will save nothing in the end.

good idea for him to destroy an organ of the opposition's party
 
And you actually ignore the fact that the wealthy mooch off the government much more than the poor do.

You obviously support cronyism.

really

sounds like crap to me-you must be thinking of rich dems who are rich because of the government

the poor don't pay anything in federal income taxes
 
your envy and hatred comes to the surface

why-he already paid lots of taxes while accumulating it

where do you get off wanting the government to confiscate the property that was legally earned?

Earned by the dead guy; not his worthless offspring.

I value work. He worked for it. She didn't.

You support birthright and believe in aristocracy over work.
 
really

sounds like crap to me-you must be thinking of rich dems who are rich because of the government

the poor don't pay anything in federal income taxes

Michelle Bachmann - Anti-socialist Bachmann got $250K in federal farm subsidies - On Congress - POLITICO.com
Stephen Fincher - Stephen Fincher received state farm grant in addition to federal farm subsidies » The Commercial Appeal

Just two examples of wealthy people suckling the government teat.

Anyone at Halliburton is another prime example of wealthy teat-sucklers.

Anyone who works on Wall St. post 2007 - rich government teat-sucklers.

All of 'em.
 
Earned by the dead guy; not his worthless offspring.

I value work. He worked for it. She didn't.

You support birthright and believe in aristocracy over work.

worthless offspring?

wow your hatred is mind numbing

since the dead guy EARNED it doesn't he have the right to determine what happens to it

and your idiotic assumptions are just that

maybe the heir cared for his father for years

I know one thing-people like you don't deserve it nor should you pay less income taxes when those socked by the estate tax pay more than you do as it is

time to stop expecting others to carry your share of the load
 
Michelle Bachmann - Anti-socialist Bachmann got $250K in federal farm subsidies - On Congress - POLITICO.com
Stephen Fincher - Stephen Fincher received state farm grant in addition to federal farm subsidies » The Commercial Appeal

Just two examples of wealthy people suckling the government teat.

Anyone at Halliburton is another prime example of wealthy teat-sucklers.

Anyone who works on Wall St. post 2007 - rich government teat-sucklers.

All of 'em.

47%don't pay any income taxes yet they certainly use alot more than ZERO percent of the stuff paid for by those taxes

only the top one percent of people have estates hit by the death tax-do you claim that those one percent use all the stuff paid for by the death tax

your claim about wall street

STUPID
 
rates have nothing to do with how progressive the tax burden is

that really demonstrates a rather shocking lack of understanding on your point

The Tax Foundation - Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data

note what share of the income tax the top 1 percent paid

"Speaking at a $4,600-a-seat fundraiser in New York for Senator Hillary Clinton, Mr Buffett, who is worth an estimated $52 billion (£26 billion), said: “The 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter. If you’re in the luckiest 1 per cent of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99 per cent.”

Mr Buffett said that he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year, without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, while his secretary, who earned $60,000, was taxed at 30 per cent. Mr Buffett told his audience, which included John Mack, the chairman of Morgan Stanley, and Alan Patricof, the founder of the US branch of Apax Partners, that US government policy had accentuated a disparity of wealth that hurt the economy by stifling opportunity and motivation.

The comments are among the most signficant yet in a debate raging on both sides of the Atlantic about growing income inequality and how the super-wealthy are taxed."


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/tax/article1996735.ece
 
"Speaking at a $4,600-a-seat fundraiser in New York for Senator Hillary Clinton, Mr Buffett, who is worth an estimated $52 billion (£26 billion), said: “The 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter. If you’re in the luckiest 1 per cent of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99 per cent.”

Mr Buffett said that he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year, without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, while his secretary, who earned $60,000, was taxed at 30 per cent. Mr Buffett told his audience, which included John Mack, the chairman of Morgan Stanley, and Alan Patricof, the founder of the US branch of Apax Partners, that US government policy had accentuated a disparity of wealth that hurt the economy by stifling opportunity and motivation.

The comments are among the most signficant yet in a debate raging on both sides of the Atlantic about growing income inequality and how the super-wealthy are taxed."


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/tax/article1996735.ece

what relevance does that have

its not your percentage of income that counts

its paying for what you use

and are you so deluded as to claim that buffett uses more than he pays in taxes

its time for people like you to stop whining about the rich and spend more time working or learning how to become more valuable in the market place
 
"Speaking at a $4,600-a-seat fundraiser in New York for Senator Hillary Clinton, Mr Buffett, who is worth an estimated $52 billion (£26 billion), said: “The 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter. If you’re in the luckiest 1 per cent of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99 per cent.”

Mr Buffett said that he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year, without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, while his secretary, who earned $60,000, was taxed at 30 per cent. Mr Buffett told his audience, which included John Mack, the chairman of Morgan Stanley, and Alan Patricof, the founder of the US branch of Apax Partners, that US government policy had accentuated a disparity of wealth that hurt the economy by stifling opportunity and motivation.

The comments are among the most signficant yet in a debate raging on both sides of the Atlantic about growing income inequality and how the super-wealthy are taxed."


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/tax/article1996735.ece

what that comment says is untruthful

buffett takes only 100K in the higher taxed salary income (how many executives of his level take onl 100K in salary?) why does he do that?
 
47%don't pay any income taxes yet they certainly use alot more than ZERO percent of the stuff paid for by those taxes

only the top one percent of people have estates hit by the death tax-do you claim that those one percent use all the stuff paid for by the death tax

your claim about wall street

STUPID

You ignore facts presented RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE.

Rich Republicans are suckling the government teat with their farm subsidies.

You don't think Wall Street took bailout money? You don't think Wall Street had anything to do with the collapse?

No...no you're right. The people who were already living in the projects caused the economy to collapse.

Talk about STUPID.
 
what that comment says is untruthful

buffett takes only 100K in the higher taxed salary income (how many executives of his level take onl 100K in salary?) why does he do that?

He's talking about the Capital Gains, man.

C'mon. Don't act so blind.

The $46 Million he made is only taxed at 17%, while his receptionist pays a higher tax on her income.

IT'S UTTER FACT. It's not a lie at all.
 
You ignore facts presented RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE.

Rich Republicans are suckling the government teat with their farm subsidies.

You don't think Wall Street took bailout money? You don't think Wall Street had anything to do with the collapse?

No...no you're right. The people who were already living in the projects caused the economy to collapse.

Talk about STUPID.

you come up with a few examples that don't counter the fact that

1) the richest 1 percent pay 40 percent of the income tax and people like you claim that is not enough
2) the top 5% pay more than the REST OF THE COUNTRY and GET absolutely no extra benefits and can be outvoted by those who dont have as much skin in the game
3) those hit by the death taxes are the same class that already pays 40 times as much of the income taxes than than almost 50% of the country

what is causing the economy to collapse are those who vote in more and more free spending politicians who buy their votes with money taken from a small group

since most of the voters don't understand the cost of government they have no reason to try to cut down the reckless spending
 
He's talking about the Capital Gains, man.

C'mon. Don't act so blind.

The $46 Million he made is only taxed at 17%, while his receptionist pays a higher tax on her income.

IT'S UTTER FACT. It's not a lie at all.

its a bit dishonest

he paid a higher rate on his salary than she did

and if she had capital gains they wouldn't be taxed higher than his capital gains

and he also could pay himself a salary of ten twenty or forty million
 
See, what you did here, though: you started complaining about the poor living off the rich; when this conversation was about teachers, fire fighters, and other public workers.

You think of working people like these in same you think of the mythological welfare mamas.

Stephen Fincher - 8th district TN - received $3.2 million in farm subsidies over the past decade. Now, he's getting $174,000 + tax-payer funded healthcare + $320,000 a year in farm subsidies. That means he's going to get $494,000 a year in farm subsidies.

Again, Walker gets paid $137,500 / year to be governor. I don't see him sacrificing anything. I don't see Fincher sacrificing anything.

Teachers, cops, and fire fighters have to sacrifice so the wealthy welfare queens (like all the companies that get no-bid contracts from the Pentagon, for example) can continue to suckle the government teat. The welfare queens on Central Park West (and in the House of Representatives) cost you and I a lot more tax dollars than the ones in the projects. I'm just tired of people thinking the poor are their enemy - especially the working poor - when there's someone making millions off our tax dollars just because they can shake the right hand. If we can take care of those welfare queens first, I'll join your crusade against the few poor people who exploit the system.

You make no sense. How about you compare the governors salary to school admistration salary like the school superintendents

Local school superintendents average $130,000 - JSOnline

Public school districts in southeastern Wisconsin reported paying their top leaders an average salary of nearly $130,000 in the 2009-'10 school year
 
Michelle Bachmann - Anti-socialist Bachmann got $250K in federal farm subsidies - On Congress - POLITICO.com
Stephen Fincher - Stephen Fincher received state farm grant in addition to federal farm subsidies » The Commercial Appeal

Just two examples of wealthy people suckling the government teat.

Anyone at Halliburton is another prime example of wealthy teat-sucklers.

Anyone who works on Wall St. post 2007 - rich government teat-sucklers.

All of 'em.

What about democrats

EXCLUSIVE: Senator's husband's firm cashes in on crisis - Washington Times
 
You ignore facts presented RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE.

Rich Republicans are suckling the government teat with their farm subsidies.

You don't think Wall Street took bailout money? You don't think Wall Street had anything to do with the collapse?

No...no you're right. The people who were already living in the projects caused the economy to collapse.

Talk about STUPID.

So lets tell congress to stop all government subsidies
 
He's talking about the Capital Gains, man.

C'mon. Don't act so blind.

The $46 Million he made is only taxed at 17%, while his receptionist pays a higher tax on her income.

IT'S UTTER FACT. It's not a lie at all.

That is deception. One is income one is capital gains not the same situation
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom