Obama : "It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody that, page 8

reply to post by Jadette

---

Tough cookies.

Lower income brackets tend to use and receive more in services for every tax dollar than those at the upper end.

They are using more and paying less.

Think that makes sense?

reply to post by Constitutional Scholar

---

So you admit Reagan hated America and wanted to destroy it since he charged more then Obama will.

reply to post by GamerGal

---

uh no. Reagan dropped the income tax rates on the higher brackets, whereas Obama wants to RAISE them.

Originally posted by Constitutional Scholar
reply to post by Jadette

---

Tough cookies.

Lower income brackets tend to use and receive more in services for every tax dollar than those at the upper end.

They are using more and paying less.

Think that makes sense?

We already know that we spend more in corporate welfare than we do for social welfare. We also know that the lowest income brackets spend more in sales taxes and other consumer taxes. We also know that someone like Warren Buffet only pays 17% of his total income in taxes when his Secretary pays 30% of hers.

The proverbial one percent isn't hurting from their current taxation at all. It's the 'middle class' instead that's being wounded.

reply to post by Constitutional Scholar

---

That's great. Let's give the people that don't need the money more of it and screw over the people that do need it.

A big misconception seems to be that the wealthy hire employees and start new ventures out of their own deep personal pockets. They don't. They use money from their other business ventures.

reply to post by Jadette

---

Have any idea how much spending the poor have to do to pay an equal amount of sales tax as a wealthy person does when they buy a lamborghini?

reply to post by Constitutional Scholar

---

Clearly more than enough, as per these statistics.

The average state and local tax on the richest families is only 7.9%.

Families in the middle of the income spectrum pay 9.8% of their incomes in state and local taxes--a rate one-quarter higher than the rate on the wealthy.

The poorest families pay a whopping 12.5% of their meager incomes in state and local taxes.

And that's the average rate per state - some individual states are much higher.

It's call Regressive Taxation. Look it up.

www.ctj.org...

Originally posted by Constitutional Scholar
reply to post by GamerGal

---

uh no. Reagan dropped the income tax rates on the higher brackets, whereas Obama wants to RAISE them.

70% in 1982 When Reagan was in office. Obama will be 39%. Nearly less then half what Reagan charged them.

reply to post by GamerGal

---

Reagan did end up dropping it to 28%, but not until his second term with the Tax Reform Act of 1986. But it was 50-70% for his first term.

reply to post by GamerGal

---

Uh why not do yourself a favor and post the tax rates under reagan when he left office.

reply to post by Jadette

---

Your source is 12 years old, lets use recent stats.

Overall, we find that America's lowest-earning one-fifth of households received roughly $8.21 in government spending for each dollar of taxes paid in 2004. Households with middle-incomes received $1.30 per tax dollar, and America's highest-earning households received $0.41. Government spending targeted at the lowest-earning 60 percent of U.S. households is larger than what they paid in federal, state and local taxes. In 2004, between $1.03 trillion and $1.53 trillion was redistributed downward from the two highest income quintiles to the three lowest income quintiles through government taxes and spending policy.

Source

Considering most state income taxes are more tha half of the number you cliam the wealthy pay, you may want to find a more reliable source.

reply to post by Anonymous ATS

---

Who are you to judge who "needs the money".

It's their money, need is not a factor in tax policy.

Originally posted by Constitutional Scholar
reply to post by Anonymous ATS

---

Who are you to judge who "needs the money".

It's their money, need is not a factor in tax policy.

Their money? Really? And how is it their money? Because they sent jobs overseas and use CHILDREN and SLAVES to do the work? Yeah they really need to be rewarded for making Americans unemployed while using children.

And here's a fact-check on the 'Joe the Plumber' McCain bandwagon. Not exactly the picture McCain wants to paint:

Joe the Plumber



[edit on 16-10-2008 by jtma508]

Originally posted by wonkamaniac
reply to post by llpoolej

---

Do the businesses you speak of net more than $250,000 per year? If not, you are completely safe. Also, are you willing to create jobs here in America? If so, you will get a deduction for that. Don't jump the gun on Obama, give him a chance, and all will be well. Believe me when I tell you that he does not want to hit small businesses at all, it's the major Global Corporations who do not pay their fair share that he is targeting. If you are not Exxon or Verizon, you'll be just fine.
Don't panic, it will be okay.
Believe me, I am not a Democrat. I am completely Independent at this point. I have done my homework on this particular subject, simply because I am a tax outlaw.
If we start using tax dollars to build roads and send people to college again like Obama states, and stop spending money on bombs that kill innocent people, I will start paying my fair share of taxes once again.

Since this thread has gone so long since I posted, I qouted this. You have it backwards Wonkamaniac. I sure hope within a couple of years my business makes over 250k! Why wouldn't I? I don't want to have to limit my success so I don't get it penalized. That is ridiculous.

YES, we would do employ people and as far as I see, it will just cost more with Obama as we will have to pay for their health insurance or be FINED. Right now it is not offered as we are SMALL. That will costs us thousands per month. We already are extremely family friendly and very good to work for.

Obama is not going to create jobs, and I am afraid I won't have a choice on giving him a chance. I didn't vote for him, and since I did vote, I reserve the right to bitch if he wins and creates the havoc I believe he will.

I explained the "redistribution of wealth" to my 8 year old daughter and she was horrified. It is so sad an 8 year old can see more clearly than so many adults. She said it perfectly "Mommy! That's not fair! They can't take your money and give it to someone else!". Oh yes, they can.

I have no problem paying a fair share of taxes. Believe me, I do pay. I have a problem with being penalized for success and then it given to those THE GOVERNMENT deams deserver it more. That's not fair. That's socialism

reply to post by llpoolej

---

Do you have workers who are not insured at all?
What's the percentage?

Thanks!

BREAKING rumour: Kim Jong-Un assassinated?
  Posted 3 days ago with 85 member flags

Maine GOP Chairman: Any Caucus Votes After Tonight Won\'t Count Towards Total
  Posted 1 days ago with 52 member flags

Iran, perceiving threat from West, willing to attack on U.S. soil, U.S. intelligence report finds
  Posted 13 days ago with 41 member flags

State Considers Law to Bypass Gun Permits
  Posted 3 days ago with 31 member flags

Parents furious as 13-year-old girls given contraceptive implants at school without their knowledge
  Posted 5 days ago with 28 member flags

European Parliament Official In Charge Of ACTA Quits, And Denounces The \'Masquerade\' Behind ACTA
  Posted 17 days ago with 26 member flags

Record 1.2 Million People Fall Out Of Labor Force In One Month, Labor Force Participation Rate Tumbl
  Posted 10 days ago with 25 member flags

Again, Eric Holder Caught Lying Under Oath Regarding F&F!!! He knew about Agent Terry\'s Murder
  Posted 14 days ago with 23 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: