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.
No, they're not. They're paying the same low rate on their income in the lower income brackets as the 90 percent. We don't tax "people" -- we tax income. Income in the higher brackets gets taxed at a higher rate than income in the lower brackets because the lower bracket income goes toward food, shelter, clothing, etc.
You'd be correct if it were not for the AMT and tax deductions that are phased out for some but not for others. Given such tax laws (and others like the EITC which not everyone gets), you are wrong.
Hence, the HUGEdisparities in effective federal income tax rates between higher and lower income earners.
You'd be correct if it were not for the AMT and tax deductions that are phased out for some but not for others. Given such tax laws (and others like the EITC which not everyone gets), you are wrong.
Hence, the HUGEdisparities in effective federal income tax rates between higher and lower income earners.
There are other tax breaks that wealthy people benefit from that poorer people don't. However, I agree with you that we should phase out all loop holes. (The one percent would never let that happen.) I disagree with you though that we shouldn't have a progressive tax on "income" -- not people.
Ummmm nope that's not it. I have compassion for those less fortunate, there's a difference. But I don't expect you to understand that because it's a concept that's completely foreign to right wing extremists.
So, you be compassionate to those that you feel need it and I'll be compassionate towards those whom I choose.
It's real easy to be compassionate with other people's money.
So, you be compassionate to those that you feel need it and I'll be compassionate towards those whom I choose.
It's real easy to be compassionate with other people's money.
Just keep the checks coming and shut up, alpha. If you're a good boy a member of the recepient class might buy you a little something with your own money for Christmas.
Just keep the checks coming and shut up, alpha. If you're a good boy a member of the recepient class might buy you a little something with your own money for Christmas.
You're right. As you know, I'm a liberal. I'm also a taxpayer and hard worker who has never taken any money from public assistance. In a way, we're in the same "class." I don't like people who game the system anymore than you do. But look at the numbers. It's not welfare that is costing taxpayers bundles -- it's defense, social security and medicare. Why do you go on and on about a small piece of the problem?
What kind of 'tax breaks' make one pay 3 times or more the rate of nearly everyone else, WestCobb?
Informed, the "three times more" figure does no impress me at all. I would like to see them pay more like 200 times more since they have more than 200 times the wealth.
So, you be compassionate to those that you feel need it and I'll be compassionate towards those whom I choose.
It's real easy to be compassionate with other people's money.
This, of course, is the hypocrisy of liberalism. They want OTHER PEOPLE to pay for the "guilt" that they feel by providing benefits to others who have not earned those benefits. Ask a liberal themselves to pay more taxes and they will be shocked at the suggestion. That is the job of "other people".
Without the 1%, whom they despise, the dependent class would be in deep trouble. They need "the rich", much like a parasite needs a host. When the host dies, so does the parasite.
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.