Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Stand corrected i should have clicked on the first link in stead of just the second. I still do not understand why people are upset he gives money to his children's schools.
I would guess it's because the money came from the Foundation and not from their personal pockets - those schools arent charity cases. Maybe something to do with tax benefits, but I'm too poor to know about that
The point would be that giving $500,000 to your kids schools while they are in school could be a way to curry favor for said kids. There could even be a quid pro quo. If you want to help the school, fine. It would be a bit wiser to do it after they have graduated to soften any insinuation of impropriety.
That might be the case but that is no more true than your opinion.
I would guess it's because the money came from the Foundation and not from their personal pockets - those schools arent charity cases. Maybe something to do with tax benefits, but I'm too poor to know about that
Well idk where you fall into the tax bracket but considering he is apart of the top 40% that pays 99.4% of taxes i say give more receive more deductions.
Well idk where you fall into the tax bracket but considering he is apart of the top 40% that pays 99.4% of taxes i say give more receive more deductions.
First, you are just referring to income taxes. Second, I think your numbers are a little off. Third, the flip side to that argument is that the tax burden coincides almost exactly with the wealth that people have. I don't remember the numbers exactly, but say the top 5% pay 65% of income taxes. The top 5% also have 65% of the wealth in this country (these numbers aren't exact, but the ratio is consistent through nearly the entire gamut of tax burdens different people carry). When you look at the income taxes people pay, it coincides with the amount of wealth they have. Now when you start to look at all the regressive taxes that poor people pay (along with the rich), their tax burden is much higher than rich people's as a percentage of income.
(I know Rush Limbaugh loves to spout out that stat of yours, but it really only tells part of the story)
First, you are just referring to income taxes. Second, I think your numbers are a little off. Third, the flip side to that argument is that the tax burden coincides almost exactly with the wealth that people have. I don't remember the numbers exactly, but say the top 5% pay 65% of income taxes. The top 5% also have 65% of the wealth in this country (these numbers aren't exact, but the ratio is consistent through nearly the entire gamut of tax burdens different people carry). When you look at the income taxes people pay, it coincides with the amount of wealth they have. Now when you start to look at all the regressive taxes that poor people pay (along with the rich), their tax burden is much higher than rich people's as a percentage of income.
For the dems to constantly say tax cuts for the rich is misleading. They pay the taxes. (yes income only) Then again they buy more so pay more sales tax to.
Now when you start to look at all the regressive taxes that poor people pay (along with the rich), their tax burden is much higher than rich people's as a percentage of income.
(I know Rush Limbaugh loves to spout out that stat of yours, but it really only tells part of the story)
Well on some thing yes but if i can afford the Benz i pay many more taxes then someone guy buying the Kia. The rich usually buy more expenses things and pay more in things like sales tax. Anyway you slice the rich pay more and spend more and most give more.
This illustrates two things, he's taking government money he doesn't need ( his wife is worth an estimated 100 million) and, most importantly, the mere fact that he is eligible for SS is another reminder of just how old this man really is.
Do you know how MUCH of his Social Security benefits are taxable? Probably ALL of it. There's NO reason that he should not receive benefits he's paid for. He's not DEAD, after all. If he was, he would probably stop receiving benefits.
First, he paid into Social Security, so he collects on it. That's the way the failed system works.
Second, he gives all book royalties to charities. In addition, he has donated all pay raises that he has received as a Senator to charity in opposition to Congress giving themselves pay raises.
Third, this age issue is ridiculous. Our Presidents back in the 1800's were all in the 50's and 60's back when life expectancy was in the early 40's. Like he said, he out campaigned all of the other Republicans and he will out campaign Hillary or Obama.
I don't know. Seems like his memory has been failing him an awful lot on the campaign trail. He still doesn't know who we are fighting in Iraq, when he supposedly has 'foreign policy expertise'. Or has he always been this slow?
I don't know. Seems like his memory has been failing him an awful lot on the campaign trail. He still doesn't know who we are fighting in Iraq, when he supposedly has 'foreign policy expertise'. Or has he always been this slow?
This has nothing to do with this thread. At least me an Arts tangent was dealing with money.
This illustrates two things, he's taking government money he doesn't need ( his wife is worth an estimated 100 million) and, most importantly, the mere fact that he is eligible for SS is another reminder of just how old this man really is.
He doesn't need it? Why do we need toilets while we can urinate in holes like people in the mountains of China? He worked for that money, he should have it, it's damn right his.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
