Politics thread

Typical El Presidente Random Thoughts type stuff

Who should be the President of the United States?

Barack Obama
6
15%
Sarah Palin
2
5%
Tom Brady
16
39%
Other
17
41%
 
Total votes : 41

Re: Politics thread

Postby cool_hand » Sat Aug 13, 2011 4:59 pm

lugnutz wrote:I've reduced it to this for me. I will join the tea party when people making millions of dollars pay in at the same tax percentage as I do. Then I am all for balancing the budget and controlling spending.



I you dont believe they dont, you've been brainwashed.
cool_hand
Serious Stoolie
 
Posts: 636
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 12:27 pm
Location: Charlestown

Re: Politics thread

Postby AY » Sat Aug 13, 2011 9:38 pm

lugnutz wrote:I've reduced it to this for me. I will join the tea party when people making millions of dollars pay in at the same tax percentage as I do. Then I am all for balancing the budget and controlling spending.


So you're for tax cuts?
"You stay bought into it when you see your opponent sucking air and physically failing, and you're still fit and ready, and you know you own his ass."
-Former Bama LB Cory Reamer on Coach Cochran's training program
User avatar
AY
Not As Awesome as I think!
 
Posts: 6654
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 9:31 pm

Re: Politics thread

Postby MCA » Sat Aug 13, 2011 9:44 pm

lug here's what I believe are the 2011 tax brackets.


Image

Are you asking to overhaul the tax code? Or do you really not know what you're upset about?
Dress to Impress / Tropical Attire
User avatar
MCA
Alt-Tab Master
 
Posts: 4912
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:17 am
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Politics thread

Postby AY » Sat Aug 13, 2011 9:47 pm

what he's saying is that all the rich use loopholes to get out of paying taxes.

While that may be true in some rare instances, that's not the rule. Me personally? I'm actually a proponent of the progressive tax system as I believe those who have more should pay more, I just think some go ridiculously overboard about it while ignoring the fact that 51% of adults in this country pay no income taxes.
"You stay bought into it when you see your opponent sucking air and physically failing, and you're still fit and ready, and you know you own his ass."
-Former Bama LB Cory Reamer on Coach Cochran's training program
User avatar
AY
Not As Awesome as I think!
 
Posts: 6654
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 9:31 pm

Re: Politics thread

Postby AY » Sat Aug 13, 2011 9:48 pm

Bachmann wins Iowa Straw Poll.

Image
"You stay bought into it when you see your opponent sucking air and physically failing, and you're still fit and ready, and you know you own his ass."
-Former Bama LB Cory Reamer on Coach Cochran's training program
User avatar
AY
Not As Awesome as I think!
 
Posts: 6654
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 9:31 pm

Re: Politics thread

Postby cool_hand » Sat Aug 13, 2011 10:00 pm

The proper liberal argument should be that the wealthy are in a better position to carry more of the burden. But they have all these angry festering radical fomenting so much class hatred by pretending the rich are somehow not paying taxes, and gouging the middle class.

Those above brackets are correct:

Current income tax RATES:

10% Bracket $0 – $8,500
15% Bracket $8,500 – $34,500
25% Bracket $34,500 – $83,600
28% Bracket $83,600 – $174,400
33% Bracket $174,400 – $379,150
35% Bracket $379,150+

This is who pays federal income taxes:

the top 1% of wage earners in 2008 paid 38% of all federal income taxes.
the top 5% of wage earners in 2008 paid 59% of all federal income taxes.
the top 10% of wage earners in 2008 paid 70% of all federal income taxes.
the top 25% of wage earners in 2008 paid 86% of all federal income taxes.
the top 50% of wage earners in 2008 paid 97.3% of all federal income taxes.
the top 51% of wage earners in 2008 paid 100% of all federal income taxes.
the bottom 49% of wage earners in 2008 paid 0% of all federal income taxes. These are many of the same people bitching about "fair share".


Onerous estate state taxes only apply to the rich. The burden of property taxes is carried disproportionally by the wealthy. Current capital gains tax is 15% but only 0% for the bottom tiers. Same is true for dividend taxes. There are a bunch of luxury taxes that are paid by the rich - for example the class warriors implements a yacht tax that just made boat owner buy and dock there boats overseas, while the local boat building industries were destroyed, but they "got the rich".

On top of all that they use fewer services. They don't get pell grants and subsidized student loans. The don't ride public transportation. They wont get Medicare. They probably don't even send their kids to public schools. "Fair share" is all relative.
cool_hand
Serious Stoolie
 
Posts: 636
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 12:27 pm
Location: Charlestown

Re: Politics thread

Postby MCA » Sun Aug 14, 2011 9:39 am

So lug really wants an overhaul of the tax code.
Dress to Impress / Tropical Attire
User avatar
MCA
Alt-Tab Master
 
Posts: 4912
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:17 am
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Politics thread

Postby midd » Mon Aug 15, 2011 10:13 am

Put Warren Buffet down as a donor to the Lugz in 2012 campaign.




OUR leaders have asked for “shared sacrifice.” But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.

While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.

These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.

Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.

If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine — most likely by a lot.

To understand why, you need to examine the sources of government revenue. Last year about 80 percent of these revenues came from personal income taxes and payroll taxes. The mega-rich pay income taxes at a rate of 15 percent on most of their earnings but pay practically nothing in payroll taxes. It’s a different story for the middle class: typically, they fall into the 15 percent and 25 percent income tax brackets, and then are hit with heavy payroll taxes to boot.

Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher, and my percentage rate was in the middle of the pack. According to a theory I sometimes hear, I should have thrown a fit and refused to invest because of the elevated tax rates on capital gains and dividends.

I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.

Since 1992, the I.R.S. has compiled data from the returns of the 400 Americans reporting the largest income. In 1992, the top 400 had aggregate taxable income of $16.9 billion and paid federal taxes of 29.2 percent on that sum. In 2008, the aggregate income of the highest 400 had soared to $90.9 billion — a staggering $227.4 million on average — but the rate paid had fallen to 21.5 percent.

The taxes I refer to here include only federal income tax, but you can be sure that any payroll tax for the 400 was inconsequential compared to income. In fact, 88 of the 400 in 2008 reported no wages at all, though every one of them reported capital gains. Some of my brethren may shun work but they all like to invest. (I can relate to that.)

I know well many of the mega-rich and, by and large, they are very decent people. They love America and appreciate the opportunity this country has given them. Many have joined the Giving Pledge, promising to give most of their wealth to philanthropy. Most wouldn’t mind being told to pay more in taxes as well, particularly when so many of their fellow citizens are truly suffering.

Twelve members of Congress will soon take on the crucial job of rearranging our country’s finances. They’ve been instructed to devise a plan that reduces the 10-year deficit by at least $1.5 trillion. It’s vital, however, that they achieve far more than that. Americans are rapidly losing faith in the ability of Congress to deal with our country’s fiscal problems. Only action that is immediate, real and very substantial will prevent that doubt from morphing into hopelessness. That feeling can create its own reality.

Job one for the 12 is to pare down some future promises that even a rich America can’t fulfill. Big money must be saved here. The 12 should then turn to the issue of revenues. I would leave rates for 99.7 percent of taxpayers unchanged and continue the current 2-percentage-point reduction in the employee contribution to the payroll tax. This cut helps the poor and the middle class, who need every break they can get.

But for those making more than $1 million — there were 236,883 such households in 2009 — I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more — there were 8,274 in 2009 — I would suggest an additional increase in rate.

My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.
User avatar
midd
PostDemPixls
 
Posts: 1127
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 10:33 am

Re: Politics thread

Postby TEE » Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:05 am

Warren could cut a check today for a couple billion and send it to the gov, but he doesn't.
Warren could also stop using loopholes to get away from taxes, but he doesn't.
The rich pay a lot. It's the bottom 50% that gets the free ride. There are people who get back more on a tax return than they pay in. That's crazy.
User avatar
TEE
Alt-Tab Master
 
Posts: 2720
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:45 am
Location: My cat's breath smells like catfood

Re: Politics thread

Postby midd » Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:17 am

"bottom 50% pay nothing" is an eye catching talking point, but does anyone have the amount of money the government is losing out on these taxpayers? who here is willing to get rid of the standard deduction on their returns?



how many are 14 year old kids bagging groceries? old people living off pensions and/or social security? sure some are deadbeats, but demographics will dictate that a shitload of people will never pay taxes.
User avatar
midd
PostDemPixls
 
Posts: 1127
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 10:33 am

Re: Politics thread

Postby B Luc » Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:24 am

TEE wrote:Warren could cut a check today for a couple billion and send it to the gov, but he doesn't.
Warren could also stop using loopholes to get away from taxes, but he doesn't.
The rich pay a lot. It's the bottom 50% that gets the free ride. There are people who get back more on a tax return than they pay in. That's crazy.

No offense, but I'm going to value the opinion of a billionaire more than yours on this topic.

But I 100% agree that people getting back more than they paid in taxes is absolutely retarded. But if you make <$20k, or whatever reasonable bench mark you want to set, aren't on government assistance and can't be claimed as a dependent...yeah, I'm ok with you getting back a large majority of what you paid in taxes on your tiny income.
Whores til proven otherwise. And they so rarely do.
User avatar
B Luc
I post a lot
 
Posts: 15336
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 1:24 pm
Location: In a hole with a shovel

Re: Politics thread

Postby lugnutz » Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:07 pm

MCA wrote:lug here's what I believe are the 2011 tax brackets.


Image

Are you asking to overhaul the tax code? Or do you really not know what you're upset about?



Look i get that the code says they pay that percentage, but we all know their very well connected and tax savy millionaire lawyers and accountants help "adjust" that number a lot.

In fact my info came from this article


http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertlenzn ... -tax-rate/
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3090

But there are many written about the facts from other sources if you dont like Forbes the CBPP.


Buffets words, not mine.

"Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent."

Image

"The effective federal income tax rate for the 400 taxpayers with the very highest incomes has declined by nearly half over the past two decades, even as their pre-tax incomes have grown five times larger, new IRS data show.[1]
The top 400 households paid 16.6 percent of their income in federal individual income taxes in 2007, down from 30 percent in 1995. This decline works out to a tax cut of $46 million per filer in 2007, or a total of $18 billion in tax cuts for these households per year."

"The top 400 taxpayers — 3 out of every 1 million filers — enjoyed even larger gains in pre-tax incomes. Between 1992 and 2007, their average adjusted gross income increased by over 400 percent, after adjusting for inflation: from $68 million to $345 million (in 2007 dollars). Their incomes grew rapidly between 1995 and 2000, dropped during the 2001 recession, then rose rapidly again from 2002 to 2007."

They didn't go to job creation or to the working class. It went in their pockets. The only jobs they created were those that gained them more wealth. IMO
2011 Canning Bowl Beer Pong Champion!
lugnutz
I post a lot
 
Posts: 25498
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 4:50 pm
Location: Laconia Smithsonian Museum

Re: Politics thread

Postby lugnutz » Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:14 pm

cool_hand wrote:
lugnutz wrote:I've reduced it to this for me. I will join the tea party when people making millions of dollars pay in at the same tax percentage as I do. Then I am all for balancing the budget and controlling spending.



I you dont believe they dont, you've been brainwashed.



You sir are the brainwashed. You and people like you (I presume you are not very wealthy, my apologies if you are)walk around spouting the Republican line that less taxes on the wealthy create jobs and opportunities for the other working classes to help them achieve the American dream. Meanwhile they have fleeced our investments on wall street, helped to raise our insurance premiums 5 fold during the last 15 years, and all the while gained 400% more wealth for themselves.

Giving tax cuts to the wealthy during the last 10 years has not worked and will never work again. They do not do the right thing with that money, something I believe our forefathers did do, which is make all classes of people int his country better off and grow together.

Pick on the content, the grammar, or the basic premise, I dont much care. There is a class warfare coming the likes of which this country has never seen, and history proves the wealthy will not stay that way with a discontent working class. ALL MY OPINION.

My stance is still this:

Collect proper taxes on all American's that can afford to pay it when their profits are gained on the backs of society as a whole. Not over taxed, just an equal percentage. Then and only then can we properly prepare a budget that makes this country stronger, and hold our reps responsible for keeping it.
2011 Canning Bowl Beer Pong Champion!
lugnutz
I post a lot
 
Posts: 25498
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 4:50 pm
Location: Laconia Smithsonian Museum

Re: Politics thread

Postby lugnutz » Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:19 pm

I will state in addition that a lot of liberal programs and pie in the sky dreams of an Utopian society do not mesh with my belief system either. Which is one reason why I say I am not a liberal. I also believe in 100% the right to bare arms, that if you do not want an abortion you shouldn't have one, and that if you want to practice an ancient and faith based religion you may do so in your home, and not in the courts.
2011 Canning Bowl Beer Pong Champion!
lugnutz
I post a lot
 
Posts: 25498
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 4:50 pm
Location: Laconia Smithsonian Museum

Re: Politics thread

Postby lugnutz » Mon Aug 15, 2011 1:00 pm

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44143776/ns ... me_oneline

I am seriously hoping this gets lots of play. Any candidate who is against repealing the tax cuts on the wealthy, or leaving the loopholes they use to avoid paying a similar percentage that we do, is not a candidate for this countries future.


For the record I wrote my opinion WAY before I knew one of the most respected financial men in this country weighed in. I am convinced this fact will play an important role in the next year politically, and those who think putting greed before our country is wrong will benefit.
2011 Canning Bowl Beer Pong Champion!
lugnutz
I post a lot
 
Posts: 25498
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 4:50 pm
Location: Laconia Smithsonian Museum

PreviousNext

Return to Misc

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest