View Poll Results: Is it unreasonable to pay a little more?

Voters
97. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. I'm a greedy bastard!! I need MORE!!!

    28 28.87%
  • No. There's comes a point in wealthiness where it just doesn't even matter anymore.

    61 62.89%
  • I'm not sure.

    8 8.25%
Page 59 of 81 FirstFirst ... 949575859606169 ... LastLast
Results 581 to 590 of 809

Thread: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

  1. #581
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    when the rich agreed to fund welfare with their $$$$$, they expected people to use welfare as a step up to better themselves....not as a way of life
    Step up to what? The Bush Administration left us with 4 people for every job opening! The rich used the tax cuts we agreed to give them to move US jobs overseas, so there was no reason for the working class to continue to allow them. Its that ****ing simple. Sorry Charlie!
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  2. #582
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

    Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Step up to what? The Bush Administration left us with 4 people for every job opening!
    Bush & Co. did not decide how many jobs there would be or how many people there would be.

    Bush's was probably the worst administration in modern history, but the theatrical ways liberals try to blame him for all undesirable economic variables imaginable is absurd.

  3. #583
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Bush & Co. did not decide how many jobs there would be or how many people there would be.

    Bush's was probably the worst administration in modern history, but the theatrical ways liberals try to blame him for all undesirable economic variables imaginable is absurd.
    You'll get no argument from me that Bush wasn't an idiot. But we know his doubling down on trickle down economics and deregulation led us to the near depression we had when he left. That is why we rejected the candidates in 08 and last year that promised to continue them.

    People warned that the presidential election would be about the economy, and those that ignored the warning must have been surprised by the reelection of the president.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  4. #584
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    08-08-13 @ 08:21 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,932

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by ReformCollege View Post
    A lack of food isn't a problem in our country at least, too much food and the wrong kinds of food are the problems.
    That comment was made in response to some fool who suggested that libertarians ought to promote social darwinism.

  5. #585
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,588

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by iacardsfan View Post
    I agree that there is a deep need for spending cuts, but you cannot cut your way to prosperity.
    Ah, but you can tax your way to prosperity?
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  6. #586
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-15-17 @ 05:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    424

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by EarlzP View Post
    Maybe you could give us some examples of these real business people. Like the CEO's of Ford or GM that type or maybe the robber barons on Wall Street. Maybe ex-president Bush who borrowed money from China rather then raising taxes to finance two wars. Yepper lets get a real business person in office.
    Your cynicism is well founded.

    The CEOs of Ford, GM and Wall street are EMPLOYEES largely who have robbed shareholders to acquire their stake in the companies they run. Bush...come on...DADDY was the businessman who BUILT Pennzoil, etc., Jr. is just part of the silver spoon set. There are tens of thousands of real businesses in the US that were built by people who understand money and people, and who built the companies that actually drive the ENTIRE economy - Wall Streets and Washington's (which is actually Wall Street's these days).

    The problem as I see it is that you Uniparty advocates are so short sighted you only choose between the same-same choices that the Repigs and Dummycrats put on the table. Why WOULD you accept a BushII or an Obama for such an important office? Neither have ANY of the qualities or experience to do the job, and BOTH, just like their political party, are wholly owned subsidiaries of Goldman Sucks.

  7. #587
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-15-17 @ 05:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    424

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    You'll get no argument from me that Bush wasn't an idiot. But we know his doubling down on trickle down economics and deregulation led us to the near depression we had when he left. That is why we rejected the candidates in 08 and last year that promised to continue them.

    People warned that the presidential election would be about the economy, and those that ignored the warning must have been surprised by the reelection of the president.
    But, let's do remember that the kickoff to this round of truly irresponsible de-regulation was the repeal of Glass-Steagall by Clinton. Further, we witnessed your favourite miracle working saviour show up on camera even before being sworn in with the same economic advisory team the Goldman Sucks ran BushII with. Obama has had 5 years to actually DO something, but all we have seen is more Reagan-size tax and spend idiocy - not to mention the Wall Street bailouts of rewarding his masters for their treachery and incompetence - that has run the debt of the nation through the roof.

    Heck, if I was a RRR strategist, I would WANT the PCLL to put their sacrificial lamb back in office to take the fall. IMHO, that is why they ran such totally inappropriate candidates for the last two elections (I mean, have you forgotten Sarah already?????)

  8. #588
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Step up to what? The Bush Administration left us with 4 people for every job opening! The rich used the tax cuts we agreed to give them to move US jobs overseas, so there was no reason for the working class to continue to allow them. Its that ****ing simple. Sorry Charlie!
    sorry charlie, but this problem has been going on long before Bush became POTUS. but, hey, if it makes you feel better to keep bleating "it's all bush's fault' ...then by all means do continue
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  9. #589
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Are you serious that you have never heard of FICA taxes?
    Wow, mr. this 20% is more than that 20% is for real. FICA taxes are taken out for social security and medicare. If you paid a damn bit of attention to the original graph, you would have READ that it included social security and medicare taxes (um... FICA!)... here it is again:

    Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?-article-2256972-16bedfb0000005dc-324_634x495-jpg

    See it up there? So now that you've railed on saying the chart wasn't accurate, and came up with the 'missing' FICA that wasn't missing... What's the new spin we will see next? And you show how you can't even read a pie chart. Even with SS taxes back up to 6.2% as of January 1, that comes nowhere close to the 'revenue' brought in by normal FIT in terms of individuals. When you add in the employer paying the same amount to cover the employees lame ass, the numbers still aren't there in total.

    The working class has to pay FICA taxes on 100% of their income, but the wealthy who earn most of their income on capital gains, like Romney, pay almost no FICA taxes. That is why the average middle class worker pays a higher percentage of their income on total federal taxes than do people like Romney.
    Again, ignorance is no excuse. The 'rich' in general provide for themselves, they don't need government to do so, thus it they most often don't use SS or medicare, yet pay into it to support the system. Why should they pay MORE into a system they will never use? Don't they pay for enough stuff to take care of you already?
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  10. #590
    Professor

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    04-26-13 @ 03:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,404
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbo View Post
    Wow, mr. this 20% is more than that 20% is for real. FICA taxes are taken out for social security and medicare. If you paid a damn bit of attention to the original graph, you would have READ that it included social security and medicare taxes (um... FICA!)... here it is again:

    Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?-article-2256972-16bedfb0000005dc-324_634x495-jpg

    See it up there? So now that you've railed on saying the chart wasn't accurate, and came up with the 'missing' FICA that wasn't missing... What's the new spin we will see next? And you show how you can't even read a pie chart. Even with SS taxes back up to 6.2% as of January 1, that comes nowhere close to the 'revenue' brought in by normal FIT in terms of individuals. When you add in the employer paying the same amount to cover the employees lame ass, the numbers still aren't there in total.



    Again, ignorance is no excuse. The 'rich' in general provide for themselves, they don't need government to do so, thus it they most often don't use SS or medicare, yet pay into it to support the system. Why should they pay MORE into a system they will never use? Don't they pay for enough stuff to take care of you already?
    Your are right ignorance is no excuse The "rich" do provide for their selves by stealing from the poor, how? By buying elected officials who pass laws that protect them. So I hope you are not shedding to many tears for them.

Page 59 of 81 FirstFirst ... 949575859606169 ... 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
  •