Page 3 of 17 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
13
... LastLast
  1. #41
    The Lightbringer Deadvolcanoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    3,599
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    The tax increases for the median and below incomes are really quite minor.
    This certainly isn't true, especially if they fail to patch the alternative minimum tax. We're talking thousands of dollars to families that make well below 100k. The impact on consumption will be enormous.
    It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.

  2. #42
    Stood in the Fire downnola's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    370
    Quote Originally Posted by Rukentuts View Post
    Raise estate and capital gains tax rates back up to the way they were under Clinton with that bill as well then I'll be sold.
    why? you're perfectly fine with less revenue at the expense of a higher rate?

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by downnola View Post
    why? you're perfectly fine with less revenue at the expense of a higher rate?
    Because capital gains is used as income and should be taxed as such and the estate tax on property of the ones with massive amounts of property and income would help deal with inherited power getting so out of hand. I understand getting what your parents left behind, but there has to be a cutoff point so things don't get too far out of hand. Leads to way too much consolidation of power over generations.

    Edit: Or just treat all incoming money as income and tax it all as a lump some, regardless of source.

    You take the money you get from your paycheck, from capital gains, from your interest in your bank account, take the total lump sum and then tax that entire thing as income.

    But still won't fix enough till they close ways of people funneling their income to other nations or tax shelters to avoid paying taxes on it here or loopholes to get tax exemptions as both people and companies. Too many loopholes......

    The fact that my dad was paying in more in taxes as a percentage of his income building tires for 24 years than Mitt Romney or Google or virtually any other big company that I know of let alone couldn't get money back like G.E. That is just insane. My friend pays over 35% taxes while they pay less than 14%.
    Last edited by Fugus; 2012-11-27 at 11:58 PM.

  4. #44
    Republicans are the Grinch who Stole Christmas.

    I don't understand how people are spending money during the holidays, I'd suggest to hold on to what you got, you may need every cent of it if we slide down the fiscal cliff.

  5. #45
    Pandaren Monk Silhouette of Seraphim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Y'ha-nthlei
    Posts
    1,953
    Quote Originally Posted by alturic View Post
    This, coming from a person who can't stand what Obama has done to the country.
    What is that, exactly?
    They can dynamite Devil Reef, but that will bring no relief, Y'ha-nthlei is deeper than they know.

  6. #46
    They aren't holding tax cuts hostage, they're holding the middle class hostage in order to give huge breaks only to the richest corporations that have proved they will only lay off more people.

  7. #47
    You don't need to slash programs to effect savings.

    Here is a fact about Social Security. When it was originally passed the life expectancy for an American was 58 years of age, and the retirement age was 62. It was even worse for men who had a lower life expectancy than woman and at the time were the primary wage earners.

    Currently the retirement age is still 62 years of age, but the average life expectancy for an American is 78. That is the problem. People are living on average 20 years longer, but can retire at the same age as they did 70 years ago.

    By simply bumping the retirement age to 70, Social Security would be completely solvent and we would be well on our way to a ballanced budget. Just need to combine that with moderate cuts in defense spending and things would be golden.

    The problem is no one has the political will to do it.

  8. #48
    Pandaren Monk Silhouette of Seraphim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Y'ha-nthlei
    Posts
    1,953
    They can get rid of Social Security and Medicare, but I better see every dime back I've ever put into either.
    They can dynamite Devil Reef, but that will bring no relief, Y'ha-nthlei is deeper than they know.

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Kulanae View Post
    You don't need to slash programs to effect savings.

    Here is a fact about Social Security. When it was originally passed the life expectancy for an American was 58 years of age, and the retirement age was 62. It was even worse for men who had a lower life expectancy than woman and at the time were the primary wage earners.

    Currently the retirement age is still 62 years of age, but the average life expectancy for an American is 78. That is the problem. People are living on average 20 years longer, but can retire at the same age as they did 70 years ago.

    By simply bumping the retirement age to 70, Social Security would be completely solvent and we would be well on our way to a ballanced budget. Just need to combine that with moderate cuts in defense spending and things would be golden.

    The problem is no one has the political will to do it.
    Actually Social Security is running a surplus and always has, they have just taken that surplus to fund other stuff to hide a portion of their spending on the books. And the surplus has been in the BILLIONS with a "B". It ran a 95 billion dollar surplus in 2011. So the life expectancy is not a problem and the problem isn't with Social Security at all. If they were to cancel it and remove the taxes we pay to it, they would actually lose money on that one.

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-27 at 09:28 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Silhouette of Seraphim View Post
    They can get rid of Social Security and Medicare, but I better see every dime back I've ever put into either.
    I would rather they cut stuff that actually needs to be cut.

    But they could give us national healthcare (as in paid by taxes) then they could cut Mediacare, Medicaid, and even the need for their healthcare plan or the VIA hospital to cover the military and would be much cheaper (about 33-66% cheaper if we made it a carbon copy of the Canadian style) while being drastically better.

    Then we could cut our military spending in more than half while still being overly adequate on our military defense and still spending more than any other nation on it. But to be honest, I would rather we cut it down to levels at least equal to what the 2nd highest nation spends on it.

  10. #50
    Fluffy Kitten
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    5,171
    Quote Originally Posted by galluk View Post
    To be perfectly honest, I would extend the tax cuts, except for the rich IN EXCHANGE for a law that strictly states a person cannot, under any circumstance, receive a federal tax return of more than they paid in federal taxes. Course, no democrat would ever vote for such a heinous law, so meh.
    All they would really need to do is set a deduction cap to target higher income levels. There isn't much of a reason to take away EITC, but I would like to see some of the refundable credits be made non-refundable. Some of my clients get more in tax returns than they bring in with earned wages.

  11. #51
    Pandaren Monk Silhouette of Seraphim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Y'ha-nthlei
    Posts
    1,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Fugus View Post
    I would rather they cut stuff that actually needs to be cut.
    Oh sure, I absolutely agree. I have grandparents that worked their whole lives and are collecting Social Security that they're owed.

    I'm just saying if they did, then they better plan on refunding all the money they've collected from everyone over all these years, and give it to banks an oil companies.
    They can dynamite Devil Reef, but that will bring no relief, Y'ha-nthlei is deeper than they know.

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Silhouette of Seraphim View Post
    Oh sure, I absolutely agree. I have grandparents that worked their whole lives and are collecting Social Security that they're owed.

    I'm just saying if they did, then they better plan on refunding all the money they've collected from everyone over all these years, and give it to banks an oil companies.
    I really think you miss typed.

  13. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Kulanae View Post
    You don't need to slash programs to effect savings.

    Here is a fact about Social Security. When it was originally passed the life expectancy for an American was 58 years of age, and the retirement age was 62. It was even worse for men who had a lower life expectancy than woman and at the time were the primary wage earners.

    Currently the retirement age is still 62 years of age, but the average life expectancy for an American is 78. That is the problem. People are living on average 20 years longer, but can retire at the same age as they did 70 years ago.

    By simply bumping the retirement age to 70, Social Security would be completely solvent and we would be well on our way to a ballanced budget. Just need to combine that with moderate cuts in defense spending and things would be golden.

    The problem is no one has the political will to do it.
    Social Security, let’s lay it to rest once in for all…Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security trust fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing the budget or erasing or lowering the deficit.

    - Ronald Reagan

  14. #54
    Pandaren Monk Silhouette of Seraphim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Y'ha-nthlei
    Posts
    1,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Fugus View Post
    I really think you miss typed.
    Possibly, I am about to head to bed as I'm tired.

    Either way, what I mean to say is I'd very much not want them to cut Social Security.
    They can dynamite Devil Reef, but that will bring no relief, Y'ha-nthlei is deeper than they know.

  15. #55
    Let the Bush Tax Cuts end. Trickle down economics doesn't work, and trying to prop up this way of thinking is pointless.

    /thread
    "Imagine coming across a mentally disabled person who was not only drunk, high, but had a full frontal lobotomy leaving little to no intelligence left in their body.

    He would be NORMAL, compared to me."

  16. #56
    Pandaren Monk Silhouette of Seraphim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Y'ha-nthlei
    Posts
    1,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Remnas View Post
    Let the Bush Tax Cuts end. Trickle down economics doesn't work, and trying to prop up this way of thinking is pointless.

    /thread
    The money was never intended to trickle down in the first place, anyway.
    They can dynamite Devil Reef, but that will bring no relief, Y'ha-nthlei is deeper than they know.

  17. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by Silhouette of Seraphim View Post
    Possibly, I am about to head to bed as I'm tired.

    Either way, what I mean to say is I'd very much not want them to cut Social Security.
    Agreed, I paid into it, I am getting something out of it. Not having it scrapped and all the money paid into it going to help some of their pork barrel projects to hide even more of their budget while refusing to actually get rid of the tax they used to collect it as they are no longer collecting the money for it's intended purpose.

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by Remnas View Post
    Let the Bush Tax Cuts end. Trickle down economics doesn't work, and trying to prop up this way of thinking is pointless.

    /thread
    I agree with you personally it's pointless. We tried this time with Bush. He had the best ecomnic times almost in the history of the nation the person before him 24 million jobs were added. They had a surplus they were making so much money. Bush stepped in and used the tax cuts which is at 35 percent taxes for the rich. We can't write a bill to extend tax cuts for the not rich.

    The senate did just that and it had to pass through the House which majority is controlled by Republicans who lead by Mitt Romney not too long ago. Thought the best balanced way was not to raise taxes and go back to the same methods that were used before. The people overwhelmingly rejected his idea. Thought it's now very very hard to get anything passed.

    It would require a deal from both republicans and democrats. The last time we got close to a big situation. We got our credit down graded because we came so close. Both sides seem to be more divided then ever and in only 32 days it has to get done. This cannot wait. Or everyone's taxes will go up.

  19. #59
    I love how liberals can't make the connection between revenue and unemployment.

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Riidii View Post
    I love how liberals can't make the connection between revenue and unemployment.
    What are you talking about?
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Everyone is pro-US. They just don't know it yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fyre View Post
    Internet lives in the sky, don't need no cables for that.
    A nice list of logical fallacies. In picture form!

Posting Permissions

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