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.

 

Hillary Clinton: The RICH aren't paying their fair share

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by brainwrek
 


You are welcomed.

As long as you deceptively insist on basing your arguments on semantics and not on the reality of monetary flows, then you will always be stuck in that quagmire of supporting the delusions of the rich played out on you.

Cheers.




posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:35 AM
link   
Below is a concise article which explains how the working poor do pay taxes. Basically, when it comes to taxes, the devil is in the details. Many people aren't perceptive or informed enough to look beyond the charade which has been cast upon them.

www.999ideas.com...



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 


Facts are now considered semantics?

Just out of curiosity, does it rain ice cream cones and puppies in the fantasyworld you live in?



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by brainwrek
reply to post by ldyserenity
 


Well you just posted yourself into a corner.

If your earnings are low enough to qualify for the EITC, you certainly wouldnt have paid income taxes. You may have had them withheld, but you wouldve received a full refund if your earnings were that low, unless there was an outstanding tax burden that you owed.

You are either:

a) lying to sadly try to back up your point (hahaha)

or b) in desperate need of an education on how to do your taxes or find someone actually qualified to do them.


Bottom line: If you received the EITC, you wouldnt have paid any taxes.

[edit on 29-5-2010 by brainwrek]

Not when I didn't have kids not until I had kids, but that is why I said seven years I didn't get nothing back read it more carefully half the time I lived (the seven years) at home so I was still claimed by parents the other half I was on my own but still didn't get stuff back until I had a kid at twenty three. My mother always made too much to get any back but we certainly weren't wealthy not in the least. I knew single parents that their kids had more crap than I did. that'
s because they got money back every year my mother was married so nothing back. At all.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:39 AM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 


The taxes referenced on that site for the most part are STATE taxes, which is a different topic than what Hillary The Idiot was talking about. That is a state issue, not a federal one.

Should the poor not pay a dime to social security or medicare when they will be receiving those benefits in the future?



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by brainwrek
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 


Facts are now considered semantics?

Just out of curiosity, does it rain ice cream cones and puppies in the fantasyworld you live in?


Ahh...resorting to ad hominems, now are we?

Facts? Your facts perhaps, but is it REALITY? Do you have a problems accepting and handling reality? Enjoy your blue pill.

Cheers



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:46 AM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 


Yes, it is reality than the "rich" pay the lions share of the taxes.

Prove me wrong with statistical data



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:54 AM
link   
Amazing,
It is not enough for the Elites to manipulate the races against each other.
It is not enough for the Elites to manipulate religions against each other.

The Elites must also manipulate poeple of higher and the lower income against each other.

Divide and conquer. (New World) Order from chaos

Wake up everyone. The Elites do not pay enough taxes.


Do you really think that when the Elites speak of the "rich" needing to pay more taxes that they are referring to themselves????



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by brainwrek
 


No wonder you are so easily fooled. Statistics is NOT science or reality.

But what statistic data you want? I can easily pull and manipulate data just like anyone else to support anything I wish, simply omitting other relevant bits, the way climate scientists did it.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by illusions
Amazing,
It is not enough for the Elites to manipulate the races against each other.
It is not enough for the Elites to manipulate religions against each other.

The Elites must also manipulate poeple of higher and the lower income against each other.

Divide and conquer. (New World) Order from chaos

Wake up everyone. The Elites do not pay enough taxes.


Do you really think that when the Elites speak of the "rich" needing to pay more taxes that they are referring to themselves????


TRUE THAT!!!!!
This is stupid to fight about. The fact is money is not natural that's why it will fail it isn't survival of the fittest or we'd see the laborors making the lionshare...this is why it'll fail, the world is meant to be in balance; with this system it is totally and manipulatively kept out of balance on purpose.

In the beginning of man only the strong and smart would survive did you ever see these people who are millionaires, yeah there the ones you put headfirst in trash cans and gave swirlies to in school. They would not survive in a survivalisst world, and this is their revenge.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:19 AM
link   
Gee, I wonder if that means that Hillary would be willing to support that the entire federal government of the US, gets an irs audit, and treated like everyone else. That means fines, late fees, and jail time for tax evasion, having to go through and provide proof of every deduction and every asset.
The other little thing that Hillary tends to forget, and if she looks back to the post depression businesses, and why they got to be sucessful, is alot of companies, were not publically traded. It was alot of partnerships, and the way they ran the businesses were very conservative, there was no taking extrodinary risks and businesses played it on the safe side. You see the difference between a public traded company and a partnership is this: A public traded company, if it fails, it is the stock holders that are left eating the debt and taking the loss. In a partnership, it is the partners that invest the money, and are financially responsible. If the company goes down, then the partners lose their assets, their money, homes, cars, boats, rolexes, everything. If you are running a public traded company and take a hit, you lose nothing. But if you are in a partnership, then you have to explain to the partners why you lost the money as they break out their personal checkbooks and paid off the debts. I think we as a country needs to go back to doing business like that, and the question of bailouts and too big to fail, as well as a business failing would never be a problem.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join