• 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!

Unemployment dips to 8.9 pct., 192K jobs added

-chuckles- Oh I know, you were pointing out that they do pay some taxes, it was your comparison to of saying they pay as a percentage of income more then those that do pay income taxes I was taking exception to.

Gets out my handy dandy calculator, I'll even give you a break, the bottom of the top 5% of income earners is 180,000 dollars. Now lets say they get off paying just 15% in income taxes, (that figure is half of what they are suppose to pay) that means you are going to have to show me proof of where a person earning say 30,000 pays 4,500 dollars in some sort of federal tax . Just to get to an even percentage rate of the upper 5 %... after you do that.... then we can get into the spending the habits of the upper 5% and those in the lower 47%

He wasn't arguing federal, just saying.
 
-chuckles- Oh I know, you were pointing out that they do pay some taxes, it was your comparison to of saying they pay as a percentage of income more then those that do pay income taxes I was taking exception to.

Gets out my handy dandy calculator, I'll even give you a break, the bottom of the top 5% of income earners is 180,000 dollars. Now lets say they get off paying just 15% in income taxes, (that figure is half of what they are suppose to pay) that means you are going to have to show me proof of where a person earning say 30,000 pays 4,500 dollars in some sort of federal tax . Just to get to an even percentage rate of the upper 5 %... after you do that.... then we can get into the spending the habits of the upper 5% and those in the lower 47%

Family of four making $30,000 spends $800.00 per month on groceries. I’ll use the Denver area as an average for sales tax purposes. 3.62%, 4% and 7.25%, which averages out to around 5%.

The federal excise tax on gasoline is 18.4 per gallon, state adds another $.32 for an average of $.50 per gallon. I have read somewhere that a family puts on an auto about 12000 miles per year. For Social security and Medicare this family pays around $200 per month.

Monthly income $2500

Average spent on clothing for a family of four $160 per month.Sales tax on that is=$8.00

Sales tax on groceries $40.

Fuel tax $20.

Social Security and Medicare $191.

Net=$2241


taxes paid=$259

% Of income paid in taxes is around 11.5 %
 
Family of four making $30,000 spends $800.00 per month on groceries. I’ll use the Denver area as an average for sales tax purposes. 3.62%, 4% and 7.25%, which averages out to around 5%.

The federal excise tax on gasoline is 18.4 per gallon, state adds another $.32 for an average of $.50 per gallon. I have read somewhere that a family puts on an auto about 12000 miles per year. For Social security and Medicare this family pays around $200 per month.

Monthly income $2500

Average spent on clothing for a family of four $160 per month.Sales tax on that is=$8.00

Sales tax on groceries $40.

Fuel tax $20.

Social Security and Medicare $191.

Net=$2241


taxes paid=$259

% Of income paid in taxes is around 11.5 %

Thank you you just proved my point, they don't spend as much in percentage as a family of 4 making 180,000 a year, (top 5%) their tax rate is 30%, for my figures I cut their rate in half, (of which many don't do that well) So they pay 15% just in federal income taxes, before we ever get to spending. So I have nothing left to point out .
 
Do you support subsidizing retirement health care costs for AT&T?

Not in the least, and I didn't see anywhere I ever said I did, nor do I see where it has anything to do with what was being talked about .. . except another feeble attempt by a liberal to distract.

This was in response to another post, that obamacare has nothing to do with business not investing in the future.

Now maybe you agree, that another billion dollar in health care costs, facing one company alone might not have anything to do with future hiring plans, I just happen to have a different idea. It would seem …..... kind of like good business sense to me to begin trimming costs, when you are facing a billion dollars more in your insurance costs because of a passed health care bill ..I guess in your liberal view, this evil company should be good little sheep and just absorb an extra billion dollars of cost.
 
Last edited:
Thank you you just proved my point, they don't spend as much in percentage as a family of 4 making 180,000 a year, (top 5%) their tax rate is 30%, for my figures I cut their rate in half, (of which many don't do that well) So they pay 15% just in federal income taxes, before we ever get to spending. So I have nothing left to point out .

I’m trying my best to be polite to you barbarian but I must admit your making it rather hard with your lack of reading comprehension and all. Do you remember when I referred you to post #212? Where I said this in response to post #208.


<Considering that they pay a higher percentage of their income on gas tax, a higher percentage of their income on property tax, pay a higher percentage of their income on sales tax, pay a higher percentage of their income on tolls (where there are tolls). a higher percentage of their income on Social Security tax and a higher percentage of their income on Medicare tax.>

<When all is added up, it would be a pretty safe bet that they might even pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the top percent.>


You say I proved your point. How did I prove your point when evidently you didn’t comprehend and guess you still don’t comprehend the point is was making wasn’t about income taxes? Here I will bold some pertinent parts for you.

Pay particular attention to the part that is not only bolded but underlined as well. :2wave:
 
I simply do not believe the numbers you just used. In the tax cut deal, payroll taxes were cut by 2%. So anyone making over $5k annually would benefit by $100. I don't know your tax bracket but most Americans make more than $5K, which is about half my property tax.

You are welcome to submit your documentation to refute the Congressional Record if you can.
 
From my post to Catawba: you do realize that 47% of the income earners don't pay ANY Federal Income Taxes?

As donc has shown, they do pay a large percentage already on taxes, but please explain how you would suggest adding additional taxes to a family of 4, trying to live on $22,000 a year?

And then square that with the $91,000 tax cut on average that each of those making over 1 million dollars have been enjoying for years.
 
I simply do not believe the numbers you just used. In the tax cut deal, payroll taxes were cut by 2%. So anyone making over $5k annually would benefit by $100. I don't know your tax bracket but most Americans make more than $5K, which is about half my property tax.

I think you two are talking about two seperate tax cut bills.

Last I recall, the Bush 2003 bill, which Catawba's link cites (See the date, it can't be the new bill) did not cut payroll taxes. Obama's compromise dropped the payroll 2%.
 
Hold up. You are talking about the Bush 2003 tax cuts. Washnut is talking about the recent tax cut deal. 2003 bill vs 2010 bill.

Yes, I just saw that. But we have been discussing the totals of money provided through unfunded tax breaks through history, and I posted data for the Bush tax cuts.
 
What does that have to do with the post saying that the IRS says that 47% of all income earners DON'T PAY ANY FEDERAL INCOME TAXES? What does percentage of income have to do with it since most of the taxes you list are use taxes not income taxes? Do people who don't pay any Federal Income taxes use any of the services that the rest of the taxpayers provide?

Considering how those people still pay FICA and Social Security and Medicare are the 800 lb gorillas of the budget, your argument is moot. Income tax and payroll taxes are roughly the same amount.

Federal Government's Sources of Revenues and Taxes

And before you pull out your "liberal source" bull**** argument, Heritage is about as Conservatively biased as you can get short of WND.
 
Do you or anyone really believe the stuff in the post above?

You should.

Unless you think that we shouldn't cut wasteful spending, we are moving towards another great depression, you are for corporate welfare and for trillions in tax cuts. Not sure about the military portion. That said, corporate welfare is relatively small portion of our budget. Without entitlement reform, any "fiscal conservativism" is a lie.

Not sure what statistics you are looking at when saying that the wealthy get trillions of dollars of tax breaks.

How big are the cuts?
 
Unemployment dips to 8.9 pct., 192K jobs added - Yahoo! News

If this keeps up. Like him or not, Obama will be unbeatable in 2012.

Only if you pay no attention to the estimated true unemployment rate of 17%. The number of people still out of work who are no long counted is not going doen enough to make a difference.

An Obama opponent willing to tell the facts amd truth about tha failure Obama has been and the waste of stimulus money, The opponent also needs to point out how he has only give lip service to the Border protection, and and been on a couple apology tours running down the Nation at every turn and he suddenly looks like what he is. A total failure and a lying bastard who will say whatever he has to to votes, and when he caught in a lie he simply tells an even bigger one to change the subject.

Liberals always fall for his BS no matter what the facts show to be true.
 
As donc has shown, they do pay a large percentage already on taxes, but please explain how you would suggest adding additional taxes to a family of 4, trying to live on $22,000 a year?

And then square that with the $91,000 tax cut on average that each of those making over 1 million dollars have been enjoying for years.

What do local and state taxes have to do with the cuts in Federal income Taxes? Trying to weasil out of the absurd comments you made? The Bush tax cuts were for Income taxes and that is what you claimed was in the trillions for the rich. Try to stay on track instead of diverting. You are wrong and just cannot admit it.
 
Considering how those people still pay FICA and Social Security and Medicare are the 800 lb gorillas of the budget, your argument is moot. Income tax and payroll taxes are roughly the same amount.

Federal Government's Sources of Revenues and Taxes

And before you pull out your "liberal source" bull**** argument, Heritage is about as Conservatively biased as you can get short of WND.

FICA IS Social Security tax or didn't you know? And that is like putting money into a 401K. Is investing in retirement a tax? You just cannot help yourself can you? Diverting not only from the thread topic but also from the income tax issue that 47% don't pay?
 
You should.

Unless you think that we shouldn't cut wasteful spending, we are moving towards another great depression, you are for corporate welfare and for trillions in tax cuts. Not sure about the military portion. That said, corporate welfare is relatively small portion of our budget. Without entitlement reform, any "fiscal conservativism" is a lie.

How big are the cuts?

Love how liberals always focus on the amount of money going to the Federal govt. not how that money is spent. Corporate welfare? Yep, corporations making money and keeping more of what they earn is just money put into a pile and burned, right? Don't know what you do for a living but if you truly care so much about the revenue going to the govt. send them more of your check.
 
Only if you pay no attention to the estimated true unemployment rate of 17%. The number of people still out of work who are no long counted is not going doen enough to make a difference.

An Obama opponent willing to tell the facts amd truth about tha failure Obama has been and the waste of stimulus money, The opponent also needs to point out how he has only give lip service to the Border protection, and and been on a couple apology tours running down the Nation at every turn and he suddenly looks like what he is. A total failure and a lying bastard who will say whatever he has to to votes, and when he caught in a lie he simply tells an even bigger one to change the subject.

Liberals always fall for his BS no matter what the facts show to be true.

Pay attention before to the actual figures before you resort to false statements. The U-6 unemployment rate fell to 15.9%.

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization
 
Last edited:
Pay attention before making false statements. The U-6 unemployment rate fell to 15.9%.

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization

And it only cost over a trillion dollars to get the unemployment to this level. Some continue to believe the govt. can spend its way to OUR prosperity. Since liberals believe tax cuts are an expense, then why not expense that trillion dollars in tax cuts to businesses and the American people? Millions of unemployed Americans going back to work will return to paying taxes at various levels.
 
Do you support subsidizing retirement health care costs for AT&T?

Prior to Obama's health care passage, those particular health care benefits were given by AT&T, but subsidized by the Federal Government.That's why their cost is expected to rise, because they are no longer allowed to push that cost onto all tax payers.
 
And it only cost over a trillion dollars to get the unemployment to this level. Some continue to believe the govt. can spend its way to OUR prosperity. Since liberals believe tax cuts are an expense, then why not expense that trillion dollars in tax cuts to businesses and the American people? Millions of unemployed Americans going back to work will return to paying taxes at various levels.

Again, you cannot spend your way to prosperity, but you can stave off a greater depression.
 
And it only cost over a trillion dollars to get the unemployment to this level. Some continue to believe the govt. can spend its way to OUR prosperity. Since liberals believe tax cuts are an expense, then why not expense that trillion dollars in tax cuts to businesses and the American people? Millions of unemployed Americans going back to work will return to paying taxes at various levels.

Tax cuts this, tax cuts that.

Cut taxes and everything will be better!

You know what I think, stimilus or no stimilus, tax cuts or no tax cuts... I think the system is broken, I don't think it'll ever "Be the way it was".

We can all go back to high paying jobs and it'll all be cool again... the world has changed. America simply is not as competitive anymore, not to mention the utter failure of the Legislative and Executive branches of Government for the last 20 years to regulate effectively the financial industry that caused this catastrophe that we find ourselves in.

I think you're clinging to the past, I don't think it matters what we do, we need to figure out something new or we'll just build a new bubble to burst all over again.
 
Prior to Obama's health care passage, those particular health care benefits were given by AT&T, but subsidized by the Federal Government.That's why their cost is expected to rise, because they are no longer allowed to push that cost onto all tax payers.

How does AT&T "push the costs" on to taxpayers? I wasn't aware that a company keeping more of what they earn is an expense to the Federal Govt. I haven't found on the Budget of the United States a line item in the expense category for individual corporate deductions. The way to cut the deficit is to cut the unnecessary spending and not supplement it by taking more revenue out of the private sector.
 
Tax cuts this, tax cuts that.

Cut taxes and everything will be better!

You know what I think, stimilus or no stimilus, tax cuts or no tax cuts... I think the system is broken, I don't think it'll ever "Be the way it was".

We can all go back to high paying jobs and it'll all be cool again... the world has changed. America simply is not as competitive anymore, not to mention the utter failure of the Legislative and Executive branches of Government for the last 20 years to regulate effectively the financial industry that caused this catastrophe that we find ourselves in.

I think you're clinging to the past, I don't think it matters what we do, we need to figure out something new or we'll just build a new bubble to burst all over again.

Yes, everything will be better for the individual and the companies as they need less of that so called liberal help that the govt. supposedly provides. Do you think the way to go back to high paying jobs is through govt. intervention and higher tax rates? What exactly do you think businesses do with the extra money they get to keep as a results of lower taxes?
 
Again, you cannot spend your way to prosperity, but you can stave off a greater depression.

People keeping more of their own money don't face a depression. How did Obama stave off a greater depression?
 
How does AT&T "push the costs" on to taxpayers? I wasn't aware that a company keeping more of what they earn is an expense to the Federal Govt. I haven't found on the Budget of the United States a line item in the expense category for individual corporate deductions. The way to cut the deficit is to cut the unnecessary spending and not supplement it by taking more revenue out of the private sector.

Who should pay this particular benefit, the government or AT&T?

Secondly, retirement health care expenses are a liability, not revenue.
 
Back
Top Bottom