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.

 

If Bernie Sanders is president the amount in additional taxes I would pay equals a new Honda Civic

page: 16
19
<< 13  14  15    17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

maybe I missed it, but when did obama take over all student loans??? most student loans have always been backed by the gov't, outside of a few who for some reason, did take that route. This is what I found...

www.bankingmyway.com...

and I kind of wonder why, after what occured before the housing bust:

www.wdbj7.com...

it is such a bad idea for the gov't to tighten it's control on the student loans? these loans are gov't backed, they have been for decades. and well, to put it in as plain and simple terms as I can, the banks have proven themselves to be reckless and uncaring, especially when they know that the taxpayers will be the ones that end up taking the bullet when their antics blow up in everyone's face!




posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 05:34 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn



Whoa whoa whoa whoa WAIT. Hold on here.....
here is what I posted to you:

And, how about you take back that libelous allegation that "we people" are just 'envious of those who have more' and 'that is the sole and simple reason' that we back Bernie. Mmkay? Because, you said that.


And you replied:

I never said that to you.




Uh, yessir, you did:

You said:

You call people like me greedy and heartless simply for disagreeing, and yet you're the one who want to take people's money simply because they have more of it than you do, and want to punish anyone for daring to make more than what you people deem "just".


Nice try, but you DID say that. To "me" and "you people."

Own it. You typed it.
Grow a spine.

I'm not jealous of you, nor am I impressed by you. I am, on the contrary, sickened by people. People in general. And also people like "you people."



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 06:14 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

That's the reason I gave for wanting to take people's money, which, you do. The evil millionaires and billionaires... Remember?

Obviously that's not the only reason you support Bernie. You want stuff too, right? "Free" college? "Free" health care? Gotta take someone's money to make it happen...so...

Or anyone making 250k per year or more? How did you Bernie folks arrive at this number? Why is it considered rich?

Aren't rich people your enemy? Don't you want to take what they have to pay for what you want? Isn't that entirely Sanders campaign?


edit on 9 4 16 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 07:23 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn


You want stuff too, right? "Free" college? "Free" health care? Gotta take someone's money to make it happen...so...

NO. I want my adult children (who I'd wager are older than you are, based on your avy) to be able to have a secure life. I am 57 years old, son. I worked for 45 of those years....

I have done my part, and worked down in the trenches. Out on the front lines. I finished 'college' in 1982; and it wasn't "free." I worked. Two, three, four jobs at a time....took a few semesters off just to work.

Now.....young man.....you wanna keep it up? You go right ahead. Keep up with the misinfo, the maligning, the projection and arrogance......
All you're doing is exhibiting how much of a jerk some people allow themselves to get. You know what I mean....those guys who are dazzlingly, deafeningly self-righteous, sanctimonious, shallow, judgmental sycophants.....and vapid jerks.

Don't be one of those people.


edit on 4/9/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn


Aren't rich people your enemy? Don't you want to take what they have to pay for what you want? Isn't that entirely Sanders campaign?

Oh FFS. No.

That's not it at all.
Don't be obtuse.

If you really want to know, you have the same internet that I have - do some real research.....
might have to reach outside your comfort zone, though, since you appear to prefer to play the willfully ignorant loud-mouth Limbaugh-esque part.

Shame on you.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

when I was going to college, a single person could work a full time job (maybe not a minimum wage, but close to it, and put a little money aside and well, it wouldn't take that much time to have enough to be able to go to college part time. when my kids wanted to go to college, and he had been out of school at least a year, the financial counselor wanted to include our finances into his financial application... and well, us to cosign a loan for him. The kid had a good paying job at the time, and well, I brought up the idea that maybe he could do what oh so many kids did in my time, go part time and fund his education himself... she laughed at the idea telling me that it just couldn't be done.
I'm still trying to get him to just save up his money and take a course or two at a time.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 09:31 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Here's the thing, if you're not willing to instate confiscatory tax policies Mr. Sanders' promises can't work.

The thing socialists seem to forget is that the US isn't a small homogenous nation with a monolithic culture. Not everyone thinks the same or wants to live in the same manner.

The US is a collection of 50 different economies with their own social norms, issues, demographics, and economic concerns.

Each has different requirements for education, industry, and even infrastructure. There's a good reason for that. What the federal government must do for one state it must do for all. Since blanket economic policy at the level would inevitably decay into huge state debts and deficits, the Feds typically handle only interstate issues where specified by the powers afforded to it by the Constitution.

Inevitably socialists MUST TAKE from the people to keep the state alive.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 12:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Teikiatsu

I'm not saying to give the government a pass I'm saying to hold both parties who are responsible, responsible and not just one half of the partnership.

Let's use the analogy of assassination.

Someone wants someone else dead, so they find a hit man and pay him to kill that person and he does. Do you only hold the hit man responsible and give the person who payed for his services a free pass?

While it's the same thing here. Big business wants laws and regulations that benefit them and allow them to stifle new competition (aka small business), allow them to keep their money off shore so it doesn't get taxed, and make it easier for them to take their factories to third world nations where they can use slave labor and sweatshops with no penalty for doing so. Etc. So to get these laws they go up to government employees through lobbyist and hiring them for insane money to give a "talk" to bribe/hire them to pass these laws that favor them. Which many politicians accept and then do their part to pass it.

Government is the middle man in the employ of big business. Two things need to happen for a hit to occur, one a person must hire a hit man and two the hit man must accept and fulfill the contract, if either two parties don't do their part, no hit occurs.

Same with big business bribing government officials to allow them to bleed the populace dry and harm their competition, if EITHER PARTY doesn't do their part nothing happens, but you are only holding one party responsible. It's simple basic logic. Why do you insist it's just the government that's the issue?



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 01:44 AM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

I would like Bernie if only he wasn't a rabid Zionist

Those guys have been helping destroy US for quite a while now



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 04:10 AM
link   
I realize this probably differs a bit, but here it goes.

What is aprox the total tax % of a standard "middle class" income in the US?

Living in a society much like the one Mr. Sanders is proposing i am paying 35%.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: maplecustom

Curredntly, Your tax rate for a single person, 'middle class' from about 35k to 90k it is 5k a year plus 25% over 35k. New middle class, which is 90k to 190k, pays 18k plus 28% over 98k.

This is just FED. Then you have FICA (Soc Sec and Medicare) and state tax as needed.

IN some parts of NY people pay over 50% of their salary in taxes.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 11:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: maplecustom

Curredntly, Your tax rate for a single person, 'middle class' from about 35k to 90k it is 5k a year plus 25% over 35k. New middle class, which is 90k to 190k, pays 18k plus 28% over 98k.

This is just FED. Then you have FICA (Soc Sec and Medicare) and state tax as needed.

IN some parts of NY people pay over 50% of their salary in taxes.



Well this is the thing i just can't get my head around. It`s not like you guys would be buried in taxes if Bernie wins is it?

if, say 50% at the top end, of your income is tax with no "socialized" systems except fire, police and such is correct where does this tax go?!



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Can this be accurate? I would be on the hook for an additional 14k!!!! I have had it. If Bern gets it, and this is true, the middle aged hard workers like me need to leave our jobs and just let Bernie take care of us. I already pay over 22k a year combined taxes.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: texas thinker


Can this be accurate? I would be on the hook for an additional 14k!!!! I have had it. If Bern gets it, and this is true, the middle aged hard workers like me need to leave our jobs and just let Bernie take care of us. I already pay over 22k a year combined taxes.

It is neither accurate NOR true.
It is a bull-crap propaganda LIE. Please review the thread - the link to it's debunking is included.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 02:34 PM
link   
SANDERS has won Wyoming.



and....

SNAP.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: maplecustom

Here's what THEY don't get. That, if Sanders' plan gets implemented, THEY ALSO won't ever have to worry about starving or dying of some disease.

They pretend that if they buy in, or even hint at doing so, they will lose everything - which is patently ridiculous, because the whole damn idea is for EVERYONE TO BE OKAY.

Everyone Will Be Okay

Some will have "more" than others, and there will be plenty of options and freedoms, but NO ONE is going to Starve or Die of medical neglect.

How they can in good conscience argue against this I don't know, but argue against it they do.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

If you worked until your hands bled, so and so forth then I can bet a new shirt isn't five weeks out and you need welfare to eat.
I agree wages are stagnant and there does seem to be too much wealth accumulated in the hands of too few, but largely it's because of just the policies currently in place. The top would like no more than to expand and grow. That further creates wealth. Wages will increase when TRUE unemployment rates drop where they should be in a good economy to around 3.5-4%. When companies have to compete for the A players to fill demand they are forced to pay more, more than increase in costs of living. After 27years of full time work I was lucky enough to see a little bit of this. Unfortunately nothing resembling this type of environment has been in place for over a decade now. I do feel for the twenty somethings that are working hard and can't see this take place. But it's not the fault of rich corporations, it's government overreach restricting their ability to compete in a global market place. There has to be balance. EPA is a great example. We certainly needed the restrictions that were put in place over the 70s and 80s. This was responsible for a huge reduction in pollution and waste relative to goods produced. But there came a time to just hold steady but the restrictions kept getting tighter and tighter while China, Mexico, India, and so on were not subject to anything in the realm of what American and European countries were and are. EPA regs are just one example. OSHA, ADA act, and so on were GOOD things in principal, but then unchecked power in the hands of unelected people, and the lobbyist that control them took good ideas and choked us with them. I saw a large hospital system that had low emission equipment already in place be forced by the state to spend literally millions to upgrade to lower emission equipment. Annd yet we fuss about high medical costs and at the same time say we need more pollution control or global warming will kill us all. We demand a safer workplace, so at the slightest sign of hazard OSHA implements new laws. New safety equipment. More stringent drug test. And privately owned business has to cough up that dough vs paying employees better. Classic case of having your cake and eating it too. Something we want changed and it's government out to pass a law. Then we fuss at the consequences of that law.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 03:31 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

THEY? Who is they? Those who do not share your view? The enemy? The ignorant?

Everyone will not be ok. That is life. Right now, there is enough for everyone.

There are roughly 500k homeless. 1 in 6 suffer from hunger. Entitlement spending is just out of control. It has gone from less than .5 percent in 1900 to 19% of the GDP in 2010 and has only risen.

So, if we are also spending half of the federal budget on it, there is no need for more taxes....there is need for reform.

www.usgovernmentspending.com...

An estimated 1.1 trillon spent...

In FY 2015 total US government spending on welfare — federal, state, and local — was “guesstimated” to be $1,017 billion, including $565 billion for Medicaid, and $452 billion in other welfare.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 03:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

How they can in good conscience argue against this I don't know, but argue against it they do.


Being mandated by the government to hand over your money is neither freedom nor choice.



posted on Apr, 10 2016 @ 05:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

How they can in good conscience argue against this I don't know, but argue against it they do.


Being mandated by the government to hand over your money is neither freedom nor choice.



Do you pay any sort of tax right now? if yes then you are already handing your money over in the first place are you not?
Being mandated to do so and getting very little in return except citizenship is something else.




top topics



 
19
<< 13  14  15    17 >>

log in

join