View Poll Results: Is This Statement True Of Federal Income Taxes?

Voters
30. You may not vote on this poll
  • True

    15 50.00%
  • False

    15 50.00%
Page 17 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7151617
Results 161 to 167 of 167

Thread: Is This Statement True Of Federal Income Taxes?

  1. #161
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,620

    Re: Is This Statement True Of Federal Income Taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Planar View Post
    I don't believe that the two stories are in the same tax year.

    Remember a link by chance? I don't expect you to as that was a few years back when the secretary claim was made. Didn't he pay 12% that year?
    its dishonest to compare earned income with investment income anyway. his secretary's taxes on her unearned income was lower than her taxes on her high salary too. and Buffett paid millions more actual dollars

    the wealth haters will support or attack the tax structure depending on how it screws the rich.

    If they claim a progressive tax rate is proper on earned income because the law says its so, they have to accept the law on unearned income as well. There is absolutely no "proof" that a progressive rate is proper btw. Its merely what the pimps in office have passed



  2. #162
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: Is This Statement True Of Federal Income Taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    Wait - let me get this straight - you're blaming the progressives for California's deficit in 2004? Who was the governator then? And yes, both houses of the legislature were majority-Democrat.

    HOWEVER, this may come as a shock to you, but just because almost all Republicans today are conservatives, you should NOT assume that all Democrats are liberal, much less progressive (there's a difference, you know). Even today, there's still several conservative Democrats in the U.S. Congress (read this on "Blue Dog Democrats")...and a lot more in state legislatures.

    In other words, the Democratic party is simply not nearly so dogmatically monolithic as the Republican party has become.
    Yes, you got it straight. I am blaming Progressives for the ills that have befallen my fair state. Beginning with Grey Davis in the late '90's and carrying through to today.

    The lame "Arnold was a Republican" meme is ridiculous. Once in office, Arnold proved how he stayed married to a member of the extended Kennedy clan through his actions while in office. For example, no Republican I know of would have championed and supported the draconian environmental laws that have crushed California and threatened the livelihood of it's citizens. But he did, and he's proud of it.

    As to your opinion regarding the Democrat Party, I disagree.

  3. #163
    Sage
    Glen Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, here I am...
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    15,498

    Re: Is This Statement True Of Federal Income Taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    Would you accept a federal MW law that links a reduction in the "taxpayer burden" equal to the percentage of the MW increase? It sounds like you want a liberal dream of mandated minimum wage increases followed by a COLA increase in the "safety net" entitlement amounts.
    We wouldn't need such a "reduction" rider in the law, because as soon as the entry-level workers are paid a living wage, they cannot by definition qualify for the social safety net.

    One must remember that only about 3% now earn the MW yet 15% receive "safety net" assistance.
    You're forgetting that if the business pays one penny per hour more than the minimum wage, they're no longer paying just minimum wage. The federal minimum wage is $7.25/hour. Most businesses like Wal-Mart, McDonald's and the like pay a little more than that...maybe $8/hour, maybe even a little more sometimes. THAT, sir, is where the rest of that 15% comes from.

    Do you think you can afford food, housing, and clothing for your family on $8/hr? You're making more than the minimum wage, remember...and working two jobs isn't always an option since there are currently about three people looking for work for every job that's available. Besides, is working multiple jobs really wise when one is trying to raise kids? What do kids do when mom is working at her second jobs - stay home and behave? Um, no, not usually. So someone having to work two jobs in order to raise a family is NOT good for the household...it's a recipe for trouble.
    To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what hes doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn

    "...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump

  4. #164
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,566

    Re: Is This Statement True Of Federal Income Taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    We wouldn't need such a "reduction" rider in the law, because as soon as the entry-level workers are paid a living wage, they cannot by definition qualify for the social safety net.



    You're forgetting that if the business pays one penny per hour more than the minimum wage, they're no longer paying just minimum wage. The federal minimum wage is $7.25/hour. Most businesses like Wal-Mart, McDonald's and the like pay a little more than that...maybe $8/hour, maybe even a little more sometimes. THAT, sir, is where the rest of that 15% comes from.

    Do you think you can afford food, housing, and clothing for your family on $8/hr? You're making more than the minimum wage, remember...and working two jobs isn't always an option since there are currently about three people looking for work for every job that's available. Besides, is working multiple jobs really wise when one is trying to raise kids? What do kids do when mom is working at her second jobs - stay home and behave? Um, no, not usually. So someone having to work two jobs in order to raise a family is NOT good for the household...it's a recipe for trouble.
    The MW is not now, or has it ever been, designed to allow a single full-time worker to support a family of four. Using 100% of the federal poverty level, for a family of four, ($23,850) it would take a MW of about $11.50/hour to "just get by" but that still enables that family to qualify for many "safety net" programs. What federal MW level do you propose?
    The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  5. #165
    Sage
    Glen Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, here I am...
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    15,498

    Re: Is This Statement True Of Federal Income Taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    The MW is not now, or has it ever been, designed to allow a single full-time worker to support a family of four. Using 100% of the federal poverty level, for a family of four, ($23,850) it would take a MW of about $11.50/hour to "just get by" but that still enables that family to qualify for many "safety net" programs. What federal MW level do you propose?
    As I've said before, a living wage needs to be determined at the regional or county level by each particular state - that $23,850 might well be enough to get by (esp. now that the ACA is in effect) in the MS Delta where I'm from...but it wouldn't even approach what it takes to live in more expensive areas like Dallas or New York City.

    Also, Australia might have a good idea on this - their minimum wage for adults in their 20's is $16.81 USD...but their minimum wage for teenagers is significantly less. Why should an unmarried teenager get paid what's required to raise a family? It's factors like this that would need to be taken into consideration - it's not a simple formula.
    To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what hes doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn

    "...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump

  6. #166
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,566

    Re: Is This Statement True Of Federal Income Taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    As I've said before, a living wage needs to be determined at the regional or county level by each particular state - that $23,850 might well be enough to get by (esp. now that the ACA is in effect) in the MS Delta where I'm from...but it wouldn't even approach what it takes to live in more expensive areas like Dallas or New York City.

    Also, Australia might have a good idea on this - their minimum wage for adults in their 20's is $16.81 USD...but their minimum wage for teenagers is significantly less. Why should an unmarried teenager get paid what's required to raise a family? It's factors like this that would need to be taken into consideration - it's not a simple formula.
    How about equal pay for equal work? Why should wages, yet not federal income taxes, vary based on regional cost of living? A burger flipper in Hawaii works no harder than a burger flipper in the MS delta. Employers set wages at the level needed to attract and retain qualified workers, which already takes into account these regional cost of living differences.
    The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  7. #167
    Sage
    Glen Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, here I am...
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    15,498

    Re: Is This Statement True Of Federal Income Taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    How about equal pay for equal work? Why should wages, yet not federal income taxes, vary based on regional cost of living?
    The amount of FITW would automatically vary...in that FITW is a percentage and not a set dollar amount. If wages vary, then the revenue from the FITW would vary accordingly.

    A burger flipper in Hawaii works no harder than a burger flipper in the MS delta. Employers set wages at the level needed to attract and retain qualified workers, which already takes into account these regional cost of living differences.
    That's a very common misconception, and easily proven false. For instance, the cost of living in Hawaii is very high (milk costs $9/gal on the local economy), and 2.1% of all workers there earn the minimum wage. However, only 0.6% of Colorado's workers earn the minimum wage. Colorado's certainly got a significantly lower cost of living than Hawaii.
    To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what hes doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn

    "...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump

Page 17 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7151617

Posting Permissions

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