Taxes, My son gets it!

Anthony said:
The problem is that people like you and me are sharing the pain while 43% of the Americam public is mostly taking from our pain.
Click to expand...
Early today Anthony was complaining about 40% of people that were to damn lazy, this evening it is 43%!!!

Those damn kids just need to get off of their lazy butts and get jobs huh?? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Anthony how many hours a day do you think the kids should be working in the sweat shops? :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Everskyward said:
I'm glad to be in the position of one of the ones paying rather than taking. I'm not saying this in a moral sense, I'm just glad I have the income to fit into the 67% who are paying. I certainly wouldn't want to trade places.
Click to expand...


That's 57% :D

Me too. Not saying we shouldn't help our brother/sister, but the "middle class" earners trying to make ends meet, holding down two jobs, buying baby formula and trying to save for their kids college, are getting abused.
 
Anthony said:
That's 57% :D

Me too. Not saying we shouldn't help our brother/sister, but the "middle class" earners trying to make ends meet, holding down two jobs, buying baby formula and trying to save for their kids college, are getting abused.
Click to expand...

That's true! But in all fairness, of the 44 million, about a third are less than 24 years of age. Another third are families eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit. What I did find surprising is that +/-20% are above the age of 45.

I hear what you are saying, but the reality is that a progressive income tax is necessary to raise the revenue. The "rich" will always pay more - they have the money. The question then becomes how to define "rich".

Gary
 
Gary said:
...

The question then becomes how to define "rich".

Gary
Click to expand...

We are well on our way to the point where "rich" is loosely defined as "anyone who is earning a living."
 
SCCutler said:
We are well on our way to the point where "rich" is loosely defined as "anyone who is earning a living."
Click to expand...

Yeah... I can undestand that. But, I've got to give the IRS credit, they do know how to get the maximum revenue out of the population. The IRS is certainly the most reviled government agency, but they are quite efficient and meticulous recordkeepers, a data geek favorite. They have already figured out who is "rich" and have been quite good at determining that "sweet spot" for taxation.

It's a bit dry, but these bulletins are chock full of info:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/09winbul.pdf

The best range of income for taxation is the $40k to 500k range. There are lots of them and the best bang for the effort. Most deductions start phasing out in the $75k area so that increases taxable income and the AMT ain't just a rich man's tax anymore.

So... maybe the "definition" of rich is greater than $250k, but you start creeping above $40k, you are dead in the IRS gunsight. Is that middle class? Maybe... depends on the situation.

Gary
 
SCCutler said:
We are well on our way to the point where "rich" is loosely defined as "anyone who is earning a living."
Click to expand...

A big problem I think is that the feds have to deal with the fact that my income of 40K here in Greenwood isn't the same as 40K in Columbia which isn't the same as 40K in Charlotte which isn't the same as 40K in New York City. There isn't a geographic scale to offset those differences, so while 75K here is living quite well, 75K in NYC is a whole different story.
 
wbarnhill said:
A big problem I think is that the feds have to deal with the fact that my income of 40K here in Greenwood isn't the same as 40K in Columbia which isn't the same as 40K in Charlotte which isn't the same as 40K in New York City. There isn't a geographic scale to offset those differences, so while 75K here is living quite well, 75K in NYC is a whole different story.
Click to expand...

It's really not that difficult. They know where you work (zip code) and they know where you live (zip code) and they know what the poverty rate is for the area. It's so ridiculously simply to manage.
 
SCCutler said:
We are well on our way to the point where "rich" is loosely defined as "anyone who is earning a living."
Click to expand...

Its a real problem. Class envy is being promoted by certain politicians (who will remain nameless as this is not SZ) and by the media. Suddenly, its embarrassing to legally make money and be successful.
 
Anthony said:
Suddenly, its embarrassing to legally make money and be successful.
Click to expand...
Indeed. There are no more hated individuals in this country than Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Michael Jordan, and Oprah. As a result of their financial success, they are embarrassed to show their faces in public. It is always a sad spectacle when a lotto winner stands there in front of the photographers, holding that giant check, face downcast forlornly in shame.
-harry
 
Anthony said:
CEO's, bankers and wall street execs are demonized on a regular basis in the MSM, and by certain, left leaning politicians.

The Hollywood types and CEO's that donate and promote certain politicians and agendas are magically ommitted. Gee, how does that work?
Click to expand...
Banker are demonized not because they are making money. They are being demonized for using bail out money to pay themselves bonus for driving their business into the ground and then having the tax payers bail them out. In what way do you suggest that we should we celebrate the mediocrity of the bankers?

In this society, the true Cadillac driving welfare people are the bankers. They are thriving thanks to American taxpayers supporting their lavish lifestyles.
 
Previous post deleted by me as its probably more SZ material than not, even though no specific politicians nor political parties were mentioned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top