Palin
09-11-2008, 07:26 PM
#181
Best thing is they (dems) think 100k is rich while they themselves are worth millions. What's obama's family income? I think his proposed tax cuts end at $125k for a family. Double that 63K to 125K. When you have a 4k/ month house bill and another 1k in car payments, kids heading to college, etc. that 125k goes byebye pretty quick.
And yes, Cindy's quote is a burn. Feel the heat baby!
I'm not sure naming their little coffee clutch is white America. I think it's what you do to entertain yourself in the wasteland called Alaska. I'm sure there is lot's of alcohol involved in the naming thing too.
And yes, Cindy's quote is a burn. Feel the heat baby!
I'm not sure naming their little coffee clutch is white America. I think it's what you do to entertain yourself in the wasteland called Alaska. I'm sure there is lot's of alcohol involved in the naming thing too.
Reply
0
0
09-11-2008, 10:53 PM
#184
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 1,365
Total Cats: 0
FAIRTAX link
why can't someone just pick it up and run with it... it would be the single best political move of the century.
why can't someone just pick it up and run with it... it would be the single best political move of the century.
It heavily heavily effects lower classes and middle classes far more than it does the higher income levels.
The main argument being that people of lower levels of income have to spend a greater deal of their income on taxable items.
It ends up with an entirely lopsided tax system. I liked the idea until I read into it more intensively. We're discussing a 30% tax on all items. Throw in that its not indexed for inflation, it would devastate the economy.
Reply
0
0
09-11-2008, 11:02 PM
#185
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
oh god what a burn. Someone proclaiming they are too aggressive and throttle heavy calling themselves a bad driver and thus potentially kicking the rear out too much.
Also, um who cares if palin doesn't like cats? There have only been like 5 or 6 presidential cats, I'm posative there have been more birds and horses than cats. Last i checked everyone only cared about the presidential dog anyway. Oh yeah, and this is the Vice President. People aren't supposed to care that much about VP and last I checked, I don't.
Additionally who cares if they called themselves the "elite 6". calling themselves "super moms" or something just as gay would come off just a "supremest". Oh no, sara Palin has friends...and they named their group! Gasp...it's all too white america for me.
Democrats confuse me, Clinton thought that anyone making more than $63,000 a year was considered rich and should be more heavily taxed to pay for things for other people. Last I checked if you make 63,000 a year and are responsible for maintaining a household...well damn you don't have money to give away.
Also, um who cares if palin doesn't like cats? There have only been like 5 or 6 presidential cats, I'm posative there have been more birds and horses than cats. Last i checked everyone only cared about the presidential dog anyway. Oh yeah, and this is the Vice President. People aren't supposed to care that much about VP and last I checked, I don't.
Additionally who cares if they called themselves the "elite 6". calling themselves "super moms" or something just as gay would come off just a "supremest". Oh no, sara Palin has friends...and they named their group! Gasp...it's all too white america for me.
Democrats confuse me, Clinton thought that anyone making more than $63,000 a year was considered rich and should be more heavily taxed to pay for things for other people. Last I checked if you make 63,000 a year and are responsible for maintaining a household...well damn you don't have money to give away.
Obama's current tax plan would give breaks to just about everyone either over 65 or making under 250k. It's something like that. More than I make. More than any of us miata guys make.
Here's the thing about "fiscal conservatives".... they AREN'T. but the masses don't care about data and facts. they care about what they think it means.
you can haz comic.
Reply
0
0
09-11-2008, 11:08 PM
#186
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: VA, Germany, Afghanistan
Posts: 2,945
Total Cats: 3
Do you really truly honestly think this country has EVER been in a surplus? **** we still owe people money from WW1, it's all a number's shifting game for both parties, but Clinton didn't save us 200 Billion dollars that's for damn sure.
Reply
0
0
09-11-2008, 11:31 PM
#187
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Austin, TX yall
Posts: 846
Total Cats: 0
Reply
0
0
09-12-2008, 09:51 AM
#189
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...idential_terms
Before clinton, DOUBLE DIGIT increases in debt. after clinton, more increases. You see the pattern from the comic, right?
But yeah, you can thank Reagan/Bush Sr. for raising the debt so high it's not ever going to be paid off. and that's why "fiscal conservativism" is a HUGE LOAD OF UTTER BULLSHIT.
but dont take my word for it... the numbers are right there.
Reply
0
0
09-12-2008, 12:21 PM
#191
Because its just as idealistic as communism.
It heavily heavily effects lower classes and middle classes far more than it does the higher income levels.
The main argument being that people of lower levels of income have to spend a greater deal of their income on taxable items.
It ends up with an entirely lopsided tax system. I liked the idea until I read into it more intensively. We're discussing a 30% tax on all items. Throw in that its not indexed for inflation, it would devastate the economy.
It heavily heavily effects lower classes and middle classes far more than it does the higher income levels.
The main argument being that people of lower levels of income have to spend a greater deal of their income on taxable items.
It ends up with an entirely lopsided tax system. I liked the idea until I read into it more intensively. We're discussing a 30% tax on all items. Throw in that its not indexed for inflation, it would devastate the economy.
Each household (regardless of income level) receives a pre-bate check every month that covers the cost of paying those taxes up to the poverty level. So if the poverty level for a family of 3 is $23K then the head of house would get a check every month for (23K/12mo)*.23=$440. If they are below the poverty line that would actually have MORE money to spend rather than less.
It's also not fair to say there is a 30% tax level. Look at it in the same way as the standard income tax, inclusive not exclusive. 23/100=23% (not 23/77=30%), but with the current income tax system I pay closer to 40% once you include the payroll taxes (social security and medicare). The Fair tax eliminates both payroll taxes as well!
It's also not indexed for inflation because it doesn't need to be! As the economy grows (and it will, drastically) people will earn more and spend more... inflation is tightly connected to the economy, as is the fairtax.
I think you need to read up some more, the information you have is false/misleading. Read the actual bill and make your own conclusions. I think it is a great idea that will promote the upward mobility of everyone in our country, even those already at the top.
Reply
0
0
09-12-2008, 12:25 PM
#192
One more note... the only people I feel the fairtax "screws over" are the people not currently paying taxes due to illegal or undocumented income. That accounts for nearly 3 trillion dollars a year of our economy. Imagine if the drug dealers, prostitutes, and illegal immigrants all helped to support the country they live in...
Reply
0
0
09-15-2008, 03:37 AM
#197
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 1,365
Total Cats: 0
It does not heavily affect the lower and middle class... If I felt it did I wouldn't support it as I am in the middle class.
Each household (regardless of income level) receives a pre-bate check every month that covers the cost of paying those taxes up to the poverty level. So if the poverty level for a family of 3 is $23K then the head of house would get a check every month for (23K/12mo)*.23=$440. If they are below the poverty line that would actually have MORE money to spend rather than less.
It's also not fair to say there is a 30% tax level. Look at it in the same way as the standard income tax, inclusive not exclusive. 23/100=23% (not 23/77=30%), but with the current income tax system I pay closer to 40% once you include the payroll taxes (social security and medicare). The Fair tax eliminates both payroll taxes as well!
It's also not indexed for inflation because it doesn't need to be! As the economy grows (and it will, drastically) people will earn more and spend more... inflation is tightly connected to the economy, as is the fairtax.
I think you need to read up some more, the information you have is false/misleading. Read the actual bill and make your own conclusions. I think it is a great idea that will promote the upward mobility of everyone in our country, even those already at the top.
Each household (regardless of income level) receives a pre-bate check every month that covers the cost of paying those taxes up to the poverty level. So if the poverty level for a family of 3 is $23K then the head of house would get a check every month for (23K/12mo)*.23=$440. If they are below the poverty line that would actually have MORE money to spend rather than less.
It's also not fair to say there is a 30% tax level. Look at it in the same way as the standard income tax, inclusive not exclusive. 23/100=23% (not 23/77=30%), but with the current income tax system I pay closer to 40% once you include the payroll taxes (social security and medicare). The Fair tax eliminates both payroll taxes as well!
It's also not indexed for inflation because it doesn't need to be! As the economy grows (and it will, drastically) people will earn more and spend more... inflation is tightly connected to the economy, as is the fairtax.
I think you need to read up some more, the information you have is false/misleading. Read the actual bill and make your own conclusions. I think it is a great idea that will promote the upward mobility of everyone in our country, even those already at the top.
The amount calculated (23%) is 23% of the whole price versus how current retail tax is calculated. I can't remember the specific names for both tax systems, but it is named
Fairtax system: you buy a car for $10,000 and the 23% sales tax is added. Total price is $13,000 because $3000 is 23% of $10,000.
Current Retail Tax System : you buy car a car for $10,000 with a 7% sales tax. Total price is $10,700, because 7% of $10,000 is $700.
Throw in, a criminal blackmarket could bring you anything you want without the insane 30% sales tax.
There is no doubts current tax code is way way too complex and needs to be simplified, but the fairtax system is deceptive. I think you need to reread it, everyone who knows anything about tax code agrees that is a REGRESSIVE plan that puts more weight on lower incomes. And that prebate **** doesn't work either. It just like welfare, it ***** some people who don't meet the quota and encourages people to "under achieve" to meet the quota.
Last edited by naarleven; 09-15-2008 at 03:48 AM.
Reply
0
0
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
matthewdesigns
Current Events, News, Politics
18
08-19-2011 10:36 AM
