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.

 

Bush the Tax Man - Just Like All Republicans

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 12 2006 @ 04:20 PM
link   
Republicans LOVE to tax the poor and give big tax breaks to the rich. Our current president is no exception. Although in 2006 he did give tax breaks to everyone. Here's how it breaks down:

Americans in lowest 20% personal income: Got an average tax break of $23

Americans in the middle 20%: Got an average tax break of $748

Americans in the top 1%: Got an average tax break of $39,000 and....

Americans making more than $10 million per year got an average tax break of $500,000

source: "Bad President" by R.D. Rosen, Harry Prichett and Rob Battles

So....the poorest of Americans got a tax break for a whole year that allowed them to feed their family for one day.

Middle class Americans got a tax break that perhaps helped pay half their mortgage for one month.

But...when you get to the top 1%......they got a tax break for the year that allowed them to buy a new Lexus.

And the top top wage earners, got a big enough tax break to buy a house in the Hamptons.

Those Republicans sure know how to take care of their rich friends, don't they?




posted on Nov, 12 2006 @ 04:34 PM
link   
If you don't pay taxes, how can you get a tax break?
You're not taxed on food stamps, and government assistance!

How's that for a little perspective?

Stop drinking the Kool-Aid, and think for yourself!



posted on Nov, 12 2006 @ 04:41 PM
link   
I agree excitable boy, My husband and I are in that percentage of the tax bracket that are caught in the middle, we pay a lot of taxes more than a single person would made in one month on wages, but we do not see any tax brake helping us at all.

With mortgage, children in college and expenses, like health insurance and others just to help us save enough for our retirement we still have to live on a budget and pray that my husband can keep his good pay job.

Living with uncertainties is not a healthy way to live at all.



posted on Nov, 12 2006 @ 05:17 PM
link   
@Marge

Well hopefully Democrats will keep Bush's tax cuts permanent, or your situation tax situation will become worse.

Marge, what would be better for you, a tax cut, or a tax increase?

You already answered that question by your previous post, I'm just seeing if you can be honest about it!



posted on Nov, 12 2006 @ 05:37 PM
link   
So RR, the people who make the most money should pay the least in taxes while people who make the least should pay the most? Weird, you'd think people who make a billion in a year might pay more then a 1,000 in taxes while people who make 10,000 would pay less then 200 in taxes yet its almost the opposite. The less you make the more you pay under Bush and Company while the more you make the less you pay.



posted on Nov, 12 2006 @ 05:58 PM
link   


If you don't pay taxes, how can you get a tax break?
You're not taxed on food stamps, and government assistance!

How's that for a little perspective?

Stop drinking the Kool-Aid, and think for yourself!


Stop drinking Kool-Aid...that's humorous. You're a funny guy.

Like a good Republican, you shifted the topic. You switched what I was talking about to a discussion of welfare. How does what I posted have anything to do with welfare?

You act like a smart guy, what with the smart wit and all and yet you completely missed my point...or more likely, are trying to distract from the point. The point is...MOST of the population of working age in the US got a "tax break" that is a joke....while the filthy rich got huge tax breaks.....this is how the Republicans scratch each other's backs. Chronyism........

What does this have to do with welfare?

And smart guy, this is for extra credit: Where do our tax dollars go? Who do they benefit?

Plus...if I earned $10 million....I got a 5% tax break. If the bottom 20% only got $23 in tax breaks....if they got a 5% tax break, that would mean they earn only $460 per year. I think the bottom 20% of Americans average earnings are an awful lot more than $460/year wouldn't you agree??

If they earned $16,000/year, which is pretty damn low....that means this person got a tax break equal to .14% of their income......While the filthy rich got a 5% break.

That's a little off balance friend!



posted on Nov, 12 2006 @ 06:54 PM
link   
How can you get a tax cut if you don't pay taxes?

If you pay taxes, you got a tax break. The more money you made the bigger the tax break in dollars, not percentage. It's called simple math!



posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 01:15 AM
link   
Simple Math:

1 Republican President + 56 Republican Senators + 231 Republican Representatives = 2400 new homeless people every day...

Pretty simple

SkittlesLA



posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 06:54 AM
link   


How can you get a tax cut if you don't pay taxes?

If you pay taxes, you got a tax break. The more money you made the bigger the tax break in dollars, not percentage. It's called simple math!


Again...WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE THAT DON'T PAY TAXES!

If the math is so simple, why can't you figure it out friend? Math not your strong point? Earners in the US got a 5% tax break if they made over $10 million and the bottom 20% got about a .14% tax break. You say the percentage is the same? So in your world 5% = .14%???

Face it math genius....the top earners got a 38% higher tax break than the bottom 20% of American earners. An earlier poster was trying to say it should be the other way around. The bottom earners should get a higher percentage tax break than the top earners. But instead....the low income people got a lower percentage tax break than the high income people. Who needs the extra money more?

Keep trying to make sense of that. Keep trying to make that percentage come out the same for everyone...because in reality IT DOESN'T!!

Let's take the middle of the road earner. Let's say you make $50,000 per year. Then you got a tax break of $748, which equals a tax break of .15%...almost the same as the bottom 20%. So the middle class and everyone below them, got a tax break of about .15% or less, while the top earners got a break of 5%.

So you think this is equal? How about a middle classer that earned $100,000? They got a tax break of .08%...even less than the bottom 20%. But this is all equal to you? It has nothing to do with percentages? It's equal for everyone??...more money made equals more money in tax breaks and the percentage is the same???....the percentages are the same in your world????...because they aren't the same in the real world genius.



The more money you made the bigger the tax break in dollars, not percentage.


You still want to stick to this comment?
Who's drinking the Kool-Aid?


Good Republicans...always take care of themselves and their rich friends!!



posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Well RR, see my husband has foreseen an increase in taxes because you can not keep the deficit and spending the way the administration has done without having some repercussions at the end.

Taxes will be increased because we are on record deficits.

My husband pays over taxes just in case he gets caught on the tax increased in the near feature, money that you don't see is money you don't need.



posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 06:25 PM
link   
The top 50% of wage earners pay 96.5% of all taxes.
The top 10% of wage earners pay 65.8% of all taxes.
The top 5% pay 54.36%
The top 1% pay 34.3%

The bottom half of wage earners only pay 3.5% of income taxes.

The rich need and deserve a tax break, look at the weight they are carrying.

Have any of you looked at the deficit lately? The government is taking in record revenues lately. Bush had a 6 year plan to cut the deficit in half, we are on pace to do that in 3 years.

Higher taxes = less activity
Lower taxes = more activity

Have you ever noticed that when interest rates go up, people hold off on bigger purchases?

Instead of saying "Simple Math", I'll call it "Economics 101"



posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 07:55 PM
link   


The rich need and deserve a tax break, look at the weight they are carrying.


Wow! You must be a rich repulican then.....Fantastic way to re-route the topic again and use propaganda as well. I thought one was supposed to provide sources to back up their claims? Are you above this policy? And the rich are carrying what "burden?"



Instead of saying "Simple Math", I'll call it "Economics 101"


So in Economics 101, they teach that 5% = .14% ?? I honestly don't think they teach that anywhere friend. You said:



The more money you made the bigger the tax break in dollars, not percentage.


And you were wrong...can't you be a man and admit that? Instead, you ignore your mistake and try to dance around the issue. ADMIT YOU WERE WRONG!



Have any of you looked at the deficit lately? The government is taking in record revenues lately. Bush had a 6 year plan to cut the deficit in half, we are on pace to do that in 3 years.


And this is an outright lie. The government is borrowing a record amount of money from the FED. That isn't helping the deficit...it's growing it!

Let's call that Economics for Beginners......



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
With mortgage, children in college and expenses, like health insurance and others just to help us save enough for our retirement we still have to live on a budget and pray that my husband can keep his good pay job.

As you put money away for your retirement, I hope you're saving enough to take care of me. Because I am moving in with you and your husband, and I have a certain lifestyle that I must maintain.


The middle class has always been squeezed to pay for the bulk of society. The rich invest their money into companies that provide jobs.

And while we're talking about "rich Republicans", just remember that most members of the Senate and House are wealthy. Look at Pelosi or Kerry, for example.

[edit on 14-11-2006 by jsobecky]



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

And while we're talking about "rich Republicans", just remember that most members of the Senate and House are wealthy. Look at Pelosi or Kerry, for example.

[edit on 14-11-2006 by jsobecky]


He, he, Js I will have you as a guess in my home anytime but the way things are going we probably will have to take upon ourselves the burden of taking care of my husband elderly parents.

My husband just help them get a new car because they live in PR an we are here in the US and thy needed transportation to go to the doctor.

See what is happening, we are saving money for us and others. You know what my 75 year old father did? he just went back to work so he can keep its standard of living, he was afraid that his retirement will go out to fast.

My husband parents has been retired since the 70s and has not worked a single day after that.

Now, about rich republicans/b] well you know that I always say that our two political parties are nothing than elite they have the money because they are the ones that hold the powers in our nation to make sure that we the regular joe don't get to much or more than them.



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 03:49 PM
link   


And while we're talking about "rich Republicans", just remember that most members of the Senate and House are wealthy. Look at Pelosi or Kerry, for example.



Agreed. There's plenty of Republicans and Democrats that are wealthy. Especially those that are in the pocket of the FED and other organizations that truly run this country. I truly believe this country has a one party system with 2 faces.....I guess I just prefer the Democratic face. It at least attempts to help out the middle class and lower...where as, the Republicans mainly help out their rich chronies....

I just have to laugh at RRC...saying the rich have a "burden."


[edit on 14-11-2006 by Excitable_Boy]



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 04:09 PM
link   
let me start with the statement that I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat. I am an american and a crakeurite.

first off, it isn't fair to look at the average tax dollar savings and compare it to the average tax savings of any other person. The tax dollar savings, as a percentage of taxes paid is a bit more fair of a comparison. then you must also take into consideration the concept that the top earners pay 35% federal tax vs. 10-15% or lower for the bottom earners. It's all relative.

that said, as a tax preparer, allow me to say that I saw very few people with decreases in their taxes this past year. Rather, I saw higher taxes for most and the $150k to $350K folks taking the biggest hit thanks to that pesky alternative minimum tax. I think it should also be pointed out that what is deemed "rich" and "top wage earners" nation wide is a joke. what is deemed middle class here in NY would be deemed wealthy or top wage earner elsewhere. When Kerry was running for office I remember how he kept saying he wanted to raise the tax bracket for the top 2 tiers and that would screw a hell of a lot more than just the top earners.

No administration can tinker with the tax system without people getting screwed. You have the republican concept of trickle down and the democrat concept which will probably be a tax raise. Either way, certain groups pay more and either way the bottom levels will feel the heat. The truth is, they can raise taxes on the super rich and they will just go hire themselves professionals, like myself, who will find new and interesting ways for them to pay as little as possible.



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
He, he, Js I will have you as a guess in my home anytime but the way things are going we probably will have to take upon ourselves the burden of taking care of my husband elderly parents.

My door is always open to you and your family also, marg.



Now, about rich republicans well you know that I always say that our two political parties are nothing than elite they have the money because they are the ones that hold the powers in our nation to make sure that we the regular joe don't get to much or more than them.

It's true. You have to be rich to even run for office these days.

The average cost of a US Senate campaignin 2006: $10 Million.


[edit on 15-11-2006 by jsobecky]



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 07:56 AM
link   
you don't need to be rich to run for office these days. you need to be rich to stand a chance in the higher levels of gov't. A very good friend of mine managed to get himself elected to office last year. He isn't very wealthy. He didn't do any local tv commercials. Rather, he made a ton of appearances and went door to door in his area, introducing himself to voters. He won by a landslide against a guy who held that office for ages and who ran with ads, commercials etc.

He's been getting such good face time with higher ups and he's started getting invites to all kinds of democrat events that the next step up the gov't ladder will be easily made with assistance from more well known politicians. WHat you have and who you know are very important in politics.



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 01:26 PM
link   
I'm tired of all the crying about the tax breaks.

Personally, I don't see what exactly is unfair about trying to balance the system of taxation (which is why the rich got a high percentage of break).

It doesn't matter if they need it or not, equality doesn't register need, only existance.

However, I would eliminate income tax all together, so this whole debate is framed wrong by both sides fighting simply to stain the other side with slanted info.

Biased garbage breeds biased garbage and solves nothing but increased division.

Enjoy.



posted on Nov, 16 2006 @ 06:12 PM
link   


However, I would eliminate income tax all together, so this whole debate is framed wrong by both sides fighting simply to stain the other side with slanted info.



Eliminating income tax is a topic for a different thread....though, a very good topic indeed. There should never have been an income tax in the US...ever! It goes against the constitution. Work for wages is supposed to be and IS an even trade. A swap...a barter. Therefore, your wages are not income. Income is supposed to be money received for nothing or money invested and earned from the investing, not from labor.

Companies that net a profit in a year, are supposed to pay tax on that profit because it is over and above what the company paid out in wages....which they bartered for.....just like they bartered for utilities and other "expenses"...They get to write off thier expenses and obviously one of their expenses is wages.

I win $100,000 in a lottery? Okay...tax it...I didn't work for the money. I didn't barter or trade for the money. That makes sense. Paying taxes on wages is ridiculous and wrong!......but, we (Americans) have had to do it ever since 1913....right after the FED was started. Coincidence? NO!

If I invest $10,000 in something, and make $5,000 this year on it.....tax the $5,000. I'm fine with that. But my wages should not be taxed. I traded even for that money. We've been victims of thieves ever since 1913! Our own government allowed this to happen and accepts it as Status Quo.

They never even give us a kiss after!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join