It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Quit Complaining -- $100K-Plus Earners Pay 72% of Federal Income Taxes

page: 6
18
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by HanzHenry
 


We're no talking about thrift items and you know it. We're talking about people who live on public assistance with the latest and greatest tech gadgets, large flat screens, the latest game consoles and games and new or newish cars.

I don't live on public assistance. I have a basic cell flip phone. We have a bubble back TV. We have two 10-year-old cars, one is getting ready to roll over for the third time, but they're both paid for. Our computers are both home-built collections of spare parts we assembled, and do not own any game consoles. None of these are luxury items.




posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 08:07 PM
link   

eNumbra

So does much of the rest of the country while the true top end, corporations and those that earn the dizzying amounts get away with paying little to nothing percentage wise while the rest of us drown under inflation and the cost of living.

So here we have the true issue. You have a bone to pick with corporations, yet the BS shoveled about social justice and taxes hurts those that really have nothing to do with this. SO...instead of actually wanting a return to how the country was formed, where there were no special carve-outs for such, where everyone took care of themselves and didn't look to the Govt to tak from their neighbor to fund their life, you wish to apply the moronic argument of "Well, 20% for someone making $20k a year hurts them more then 20% of someone making $100k a year". If we are talking fair, then everyone, EVERYONE needs to pay the same amount or percentage. If it hurts you financially, then maybe you should look to increase your earnings. But no. People like you and the handful of group thinkers will parrot the same Progressive crap.
Social Justice, Living Wage and so on.
Never before in life have I seen any success come from Govt handouts. And for anyone to say this would be a liar. The programs waste money like a drunken sailor, is run by corrupt Govt officials, must first steal from someone to give to others and has yet to produce any wealth for those on the receiving end.

You want to know the secret to actually being successful in life and business???? Work harder then anyone else.
But, I bet you got an excuse for every one of these things.

Life isn't fair. They are born poor. The Man has got them down. Corporate America and excuse after excuse after excuse.

You and the rest of the people not only receiving handouts and championing this crap keep making excuses for each other.
And when you look around after another year has gone by, and don't have much to show for it, you go on and make another excuse as to why it is.


eNumbra
Because anyone who thought that my "progressive" point was that everyone earning more than me needed to be taxed more fails at reading comprehension. The Bob/Tom example was nothing more than that. Any with a brain recognize the real issue, others trip up amidst the context.

That is the basis of your argument.
Otherwise, why provide the example.
The subconscious seems to show your true path.
You chose that crap for a reason.


eNumbra
That said, your family could live on Mac & Cheese, minced spam and ramen noodles too could they not? We all could and we'd save money while doing it.


Excuse me????
First, I never said such a thing.
Second, I work so that my family DOESN"T have to.
Third, I work damn hard. Hard enough that when goobers start spouting off that I should be paying more in taxes, to fund their poor life choices, I am going to smack it down every time.
If you want to live life eating in that manner, that is your choice. Don't expect me to do so, just to provide for others.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 08:12 PM
link   

macman
That is the basis of your argument.
Otherwise, why provide the example.
The subconscious seems to show your true path.
You chose that crap for a reason.

Obviously the military never taught you how to read, though your bone to pick with the poor is obvious. I suppose we are at an impasse, you'd rather blame the hood rich, I'd rather blame the one thing that has done nothing but take from this country. Anyone who would defend corporations and their practices, is wholly uneducated on the issue.

In addendum: Who is the real problem? The man screwing the government and taxpayers for $1000 a year? Or the man screwing the government and taxpayers for $1,000,000 a year?

There are so many issues with who's actually paying. playing and where the money is going that we both have points.
edit on 4/15/2014 by eNumbra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 08:45 PM
link   

macman
That is great. So.....The poor have luxury items

You're the one calling them luxury items just to try and prove your point.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 10:04 PM
link   
Hmm. Some years ago, I wrote a paper over income, and so I have these figures pretty readily available. I want to use them to illustrate a point - these are household income figures, rather than individual income figures, and in 2005 adjusted dollars.

The first is simply before-tax income:

The second is after-tax income:

Total change would be the sum of the increase over those 27 years. It's a bit dated, obviously... only going from 1979 to 2005. You'll note that the increase is larger in the After-tax income than it is in the Before-tax income figures. Yes, every income group has benefited from an overall increase. You'll notice that this gain trends very well with how rich - an thus powerful - a group is. The triangle is a pretty standard shorthand for the change from the previous year to that year, hence the - for the first year of the figures. Q represents quintile, each representing the average income of a group of 1/5th of the households in the United States. An interesting thing you will see is how greatly the wealthiest groups' income can fluctuate from year to year compared to the more stable, almost static, income of the poorer groups. For now, I argue no points; I only present this for thought.
edit on 22Tue, 15 Apr 2014 22:05:46 -0500America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago4 by Greven because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 08:15 AM
link   

eNumbra
Obviously the military never taught you how to read,





eNumbra
though your bone to pick with the poor is obvious.

Maybe the one criticizing someone else should take their own advise.
As stated before, my issue is with and has always been with a Govt that steals from me to give to others because of their poor life choices.


eNumbra
I suppose we are at an impasse, you'd rather blame the hood rich, I'd rather blame the one thing that has done nothing but take from this country. Anyone who would defend corporations and their practices, is wholly uneducated on the issue.

I will defend the freedom of the people to chose to move their company as they see fit. Only people like you will push aside freedoms to justify their feelings of what is fair.


eNumbra
In addendum: Who is the real problem? The man screwing the government and taxpayers for $1000 a year? Or the man screwing the government and taxpayers for $1,000,000 a year?

The real problem again, is the Govt and people thinking it is okay to steal from some to give to others.


eNumbra
There are so many issues with who's actually paying. playing and where the money is going that we both have points.


And that is fantastic.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


Actually that was identified by others.

For me, an Escalde is indeed a luxury item. Same for the 52" TV, some goes for the Lexus 300.


But, I guess it's fine for you and others to deem some things as a luxury, yet not others, which in turn demonizes those you see as the enemy.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 08:35 AM
link   
Ok.......

Never mind the fact that the basis of the entire system is completely fictional .

"Let it be done"..."It shall be"...

Wealth by decree.

I Am That I am (rich and better than you who are not me).

God did it because he allowed it to happen because he doesn't exist.

Same old worn out arguments and charts and statistics that guarantee everything will remain as it has always been since the dawn of recorded and manipulated ( forgotten) history.
edit on 16-4-2014 by MyHappyDogShiner because: gock



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


eNumbra stated:

If you can afford luxuries, you can afford to pay more.


and you replied:

Guess those people in poverty, with TVs, iPhones and such can indeed pay more.


All I said was that those things are not luxuries (TV's, iPhones and such).

Escalades? Quite the goal post shift from $200-$500 consumer electronics to a $75,000 vehicle.

I don't have any enemies or any need to demonize anyone.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 11:17 AM
link   
I'm seeing an "Attitude Intensity Level" with this whole issue.

I see higher attitude intensity at the ends of both sides and a progressively lower intensity as both ends move towards the middle incomes.






posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


And yet those in Poverty are driving around in said vehicles. While tax payers fund them to eat and live in rent controlled housing that is offset by taxes.

It goes back to this very simple thing. If I can't define certain items as being a luxury, than how can anyone else define what someone else can afford.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 12:10 PM
link   

macman
And yet those in Poverty are driving around in said vehicles. While tax payers fund them to eat and live in rent controlled housing that is offset by taxes.

Maybe some but surely not many.

Let's not act naive. There are those working the system that have untaxed incomes in the 6 digits and then there are stolen goods that make their way into the homes of those who have no problem buying them.


It goes back to this very simple thing. If I can't define certain items as being a luxury, than how can anyone else define what someone else can afford.

You can define anything you want but that doesn't mean that your definition will be accepted.

I never said anyone else can define what someone else can afford. All I said is that, in this day and age things like TV's, iPhones and such, are not luxury items.

By the way, government doesn't tax based on what a person can afford. They say how much and you try to find loopholes and make ends meet.
edit on 16-4-2014 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 01:52 PM
link   

daskakik

Maybe some but surely not many.

Actually I see on a regular basis those on food stamps/ebt purchasing food with that, and then using cash for beer and everything else. So, this idea that it is very limited in scope is BS.



daskakik
Let's not act naive. There are those working the system that have untaxed incomes in the 6 digits and then there are stolen goods that make their way into the homes of those who have no problem buying them.

So now you equate people using loopholes to people stealing stuff.
Got a question for you. Who's money was it before the Govt steps in and takes it? Who earned that money.


daskakik
You can define anything you want but that doesn't mean that your definition will be accepted.

Well of course. There is the issue. you and others think you get to define what others can afford and what is a luxury item, and then cram it down people's throats via the media and the Admin.
I, ME, MYSELF get to define what I can afford and what is luxury, not the Govt and surely not my neighbor.


daskakik
I never said anyone else can define what someone else can afford. All I said is that, in this day and age things like TV's, iPhones and such, are not luxury items.

They are to some. If you can afford these things, I should not be funding your life choices.


daskakik
By the way, government doesn't tax based on what a person can afford. They say how much and you try to find loopholes and make ends meet.

Which is BS.

If the tax code was truly there to finance the Govt, EVERYONE would be paying the same percentage or amount.
Instead, we have a progressive tax code, that is punitive to those that earn more then the rest.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 02:00 PM
link   

macman
Actually I see on a regular basis those on food stamps/ebt purchasing food with that, and then using cash for beer and everything else. So, this idea that it is very limited in scope is BS.

You said driving escalades. Don't move that goal post.



So now you equate people using loopholes to people stealing stuff.

No, I said people can get expesive stuff cheap because it's stolen.


Got a question for you. Who's money was it before the Govt steps in and takes it? Who earned that money.

At the end of the day, it makes no difference.


Well of course. There is the issue. you and others think you get to define what others can afford and what is a luxury item, and then cram it down people's throats via the media and the Admin.
I, ME, MYSELF get to define what I can afford and what is luxury, not the Govt and surely not my neighbor.

That is what I said.


They are to some. If you can afford these things, I should not be funding your life choices.

Your not. As you said above it isn't your money after the gov relieves you of it.


Which is BS.

But it's the truth.


edit on 16-4-2014 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 02:01 PM
link   

eNumbra
Yet more propagandist statistics abuse to convince the foolish that the wealthy are overburdened.


CORK IT. $100,000 is NOT "wealthy" in America 2014. $100K is middle class, still only a month of lost paychecks away from losing everything.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   

xuenchen
I'm seeing an "Attitude Intensity Level" with this whole issue.


Of course you are, one side has an entitlement attitude that must be fully fed and subsidized by the other side which has an ownership attitude. When you get right down to brass tacks, if you've actually worked for and made the money, you're quite justified in feeling an ownership over it. The entitlement attitude, however, I have no idea how in the blue hell anyone can justify "I exist therefore you owe me XYZ" as an ethos.

Regardless, I paid my annual dowry to the freeloaders in DC this year... like a goddamned broken puppet, cursing and hating them all the whole time.
Why? Simple, I don't feel like castrating myself and my home with the penalties they inflict if you stand up and refuse to play their games.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 02:10 PM
link   

daskakik
You said driving escalades. Don't move that goal post.

No one moved it further. I actually made it closer by removing the $47k vehicle, and replaced it with something very simple.




daskakik
No, I said people can get expesive stuff cheap because it's stolen.

Umm, okay then.



daskakik
At the end of the day, it makes no difference.

Yeah it actually does. Your refusal to answer this very simple questions reveals more then you actually answering it.



daskakik
Your not. As you said above it isn't your money after the gov relieves you of it.

Which is wrong.
If I earned it, it is mine. Not anyone else.



daskakik
But it's the truth.

How so.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 02:17 PM
link   

macman
No one moved it further. I actually made it closer by removing the $47k vehicle, and replaced it with something very simple.

Some people work for cash and others have jobs and still get aide. So yeah some people do have cash for beer or whatever. I was talking about driving around in an Escalade or Lexus like the post I was replying to stated.



Yeah it actually does. Your refusal to answer this very simple questions reveals more then you actually answering it.

Really, can you tell me why it matters?



Which is wrong.
If I earned it, it is mine. Not anyone else.

It was.



How so.

Just look at burdman30ott6's post above yours.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 03:27 PM
link   

daskakik

Some people work for cash and others have jobs and still get aide. So yeah some people do have cash for beer or whatever. I was talking about driving around in an Escalade or Lexus like the post I was replying to stated.

So, they are fine to break the law?? And I am the evil mean person because I'm tired of paying more and more taxes just to fund other peoples lives.




daskakik
Really, can you tell me why it matters?

One question at a time. If you can, please start with the first ignored question, then we can move forward.




daskakik
It was.

Thus the problem.




daskakik
Just look at burdman30ott6's post above yours.

So, because he stated he doesn't want to rock the boat, I should sit down and shut up as well.

If only this were an OWS movement, I assume you would want it to be brought to the attention of everyone.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 03:37 PM
link   

macman
So, they are fine to break the law?? And I am the evil mean person because I'm tired of paying more and more taxes just to fund other peoples lives.

Did someone really say that to you. The nerve of them.


One question at a time. If you can, please start with the first ignored question, then we can move forward.

I already said that it belonged to you.


Thus the problem.

See, that was the answer to the question above.


So, because he stated he doesn't want to rock the boat, I should sit down and shut up as well.

No, you asked how could the statement that I had posted be true.

I pointed out burdman30ott6's post because the government didn't take into account his paticular situation and it was up to him to deal with it.


If only this were an OWS movement, I assume you would want it to be brought to the attention of everyone.

Nope, I couldn't care less.
edit on 16-4-2014 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join