CA seeks to avoid tax hike... In this week's edition of Liberal Hypocrisy

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Krazysh0t

It wouldn't target them if they didn't have such high taxes would it?

What a dumb question... So how does that work? The states are high traffic areas and urban hubs. That means a lot of people. A lot of people increases the cost of living. Higher cost of living = higher taxes. It's that simple.

And is it fair that they get to avoid paying what they owe to the Federal government in favor of paying to the state and then vote for higher state taxes while also advocating for and voting for representatives who work to get a higher Federal tax burden on everyone else they can avoid?

What is this fair nonsense? Is it fair that red states take more than they pay into the system?

Surely they should pay their fair share to each of those two entities. Don't you think?

They already pay more in federal taxes than red states. Why should they be penalized further?

They pay more because of higher property value...If you can't afford to live in the rich neighborhood and pay the taxes on that mansion.....MOVE!!

Sheesh is that to hard to understand??

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So basically, they deserve to write off their Federal taxes, vote for ever higher state taxes, and then advocate for ever higher Federal taxes they then will never pay too?

How is that fair?

Please explain it.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Why should tax payers in lower tax states pay to subsidize the taxers of those choosing to live in higher tax states? Your argument that this is a targeted attack fails simply because this tax plan is far closer to equal protection under the law, something which the prior system of subsidizations couldn't claim. A man living in California or Illinois saw far more federal benefits and protections than a man living in Texas or Alaska saw... Your usual hyperbole aside, playing the "that's partisan" card pales in comparison to the "what does the law say" card.

a reply to: GuidedKill

Yep it's just that easy. Move. Just uproot all your contacts between friends and family. Magically come up with all the money to pay for moving expenses. Of course you have a job lined up. Man all that is just SO #ing easy to do right?

a reply to: burdman30ott6

How are states that take more in taxes than paying towards the system subsidizing anyone? Math man! If you are producing negative tax dollars than YOU are being subsidized not the other way around.

a reply to: ketsuko

They DESERVE to not be targeted just because they are Democrat led states!

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: GuidedKill

Yep it's just that easy. Move. Just uproot all your contacts between friends and family. Magically come up with all the money to pay for moving expenses. Of course you have a job lined up. Man all that is just SO #ing easy to do right?

OH for the love of Pete. We're talking about people above a $10,000 per year SALT threshold. These aren't people who have zero mobility or are ratcheted down to a single area. Of course, you already knew this but are obviously hoping others aren't as astute.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Talk about the mother of all assumptions. Just because you are affluent doesn't mean you have access to high mobility. Furthermore, all the jobs are in blue states. Startups aren't exactly kicking down the door to Wisconsin because it has a low tax rate.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: GuidedKill

Yep it's just that easy. Move. Just uproot all your contacts between friends and family. Magically come up with all the money to pay for moving expenses. Of course you have a job lined up. Man all that is just SO #ing easy to do right?

Well it's either pay and stay near all those sweet friends and cool houses and shut the # up or move....
Your choice cupcake!

That's the beauty of America, no one is forcing them to stay and pay.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

OK, let's nuke that welfare then, shall we? I'm game, are you?

a reply to: GuidedKill

Yea and before this bill you didn't have to be worried about being targeted by your government for your political persuasion. It's sad that you guys are celebrating politicians partisan hijacking the government. Unfortunately what comes around goes around though. When (not if) the Democrats resume control of the government, don't expect to forget these things. I don't even want retaliation to happen, but you guys are setting yourselves up for it.

Shouldn't be a problem for California seems as though they have plenty of money to give away. a reply to: Edumakated

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Krazysh0t

OK, let's nuke that welfare then, shall we? I'm game, are you?

I am!!

Dems and the Alt-Left aren't. I mean how else are they going to blatantly purchase votes? Once that EBT card declines that Dem vote is gone!!!

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Krazysh0t

OK, let's nuke that welfare then, shall we? I'm game, are you?

Uh... No. How about instead of "nuking" anything we figure out a fair way to restructure taxes that BOTH partisan sides agree on? Or is compromise a bigger bogeyman to you than sending most of the country into the financial abyss?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So you are all about the rich paying their fair share ... right up until a provision is introduced that actually helps make sure it happens, and then you whine about lost state revenue.

Typical.

Person A owes $25,000 in state and local taxes.

Person B owes $8,000 in state and local taxes.

Under the old rules, both deducted all of their state and local from their Federal tax bill.

Under the new rule, Person A can only deduct $10,000 and will have to pay up to $15,000 on his Federal bill he didn't have to previously. Person B still deducts all $8,000 and pays what is left of his Federal bill.

Oh, no! The rich guy (no matter his political affiliation or what state he lives in) is paying more of his taxes to the Feds!

I thought that was what you guys wanted? Also ironic that you never whine when you try to endlessly tax business like this.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: GuidedKill

Yea and before this bill you didn't have to be worried about being targeted by your government for your political persuasion. It's sad that you guys are celebrating politicians partisan hijacking the government. Unfortunately what comes around goes around though. When (not if) the Democrats resume control of the government, don't expect to forget these things. I don't even want retaliation to happen, but you guys are setting yourselves up for it.

You mean like the IRS scandal to target tea party and conservatives?? You're right, what comes around goes around.

Our turn snow flake!!

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Talk about the mother of all assumptions. Just because you are affluent doesn't mean you have access to high mobility. Furthermore, all the jobs are in blue states. Startups aren't exactly kicking down the door to Wisconsin because it has a low tax rate.

Not all blue states have retardedly high taxes. Washington, for example, has no income tax and, if you get a bit outside of the influence of Seattle, the property taxes aren't that bad.

Lack of affluence is the primary excuse accepted in the old "why don't you just move from the ghetto to where the jobs are" question... I am not surprised you'd argue it doesn't apply in this case, where acceptance of it would prove inconvenient.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

We just did compromise on taxes. The original intent was no SALT deduction, that was compromised to a $10,000 cap... why are you grousing?

a reply to: ketsuko

Great point! This new tax bill hurts the wealthy. That is exactly what Democrats love to do.

By the way, why is it taking California so long to leave the country?

a reply to: Edumakated

Hey lefitsts want to pay more taxes why would they complain????? Hike it up to 90% why don't u.