It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by wardk28
reply to post by Flatfish
I was hoping the ones that questioned this would actually check for yourselves but here is the link. Its common sense really, the more people employed= more income tax revenue.
Finally, if you want to see hypocrisy, one need go no further than the headline of Babington's outburst: "GOP may OK tax increase that Obama hopes to block." [B]How many times did an AP headline call "repealing the Bush tax cuts" a "tax increase" when Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, or any other Democrat was advocating their repeal? The educated guess here is darned near never. But when this AP headline writer had a chance to pin a tax increase on conservatives or Republicans, he or she didn't hesitate to let it rip.[/B]
Originally posted by Misoir
Originally posted by Tangled4u
Thank God when Ron Paul get's elected he will take away all taxes because it's unconstitutional.
Can't wait for that day.
How is something 'unconstitutional' when it is clearly legalized and appropriated to the federal government within the Constitution? That is like saying "free speech is unconstitutional" even though it is clearly stated freedom of speech is a right in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
You cannot just call something unconstitutional if you do not like it, just calling it so does not make it true.
Passed by Congress July 2, 1909. Ratified February 3, 1913.
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Originally posted by BakaKing
reply to post by Sunlionspirit
I'm one of the poor, always have been and barring some great stroke of
luck, always will be. Because of where I grew up most of the people I
know are poor (small town). Hell, with the exception of the business
owners I'd say damn near everyone is poor to middle class mostly in
the $20,000-40,000 range. Although there are a few that make more
(local business owners mostly) but they make their money by not paying
their workers anything but minimum wage or $1 over it. They're not
alone, most companies won't pay a decent liveable wage anymore. They
will pay you between $8-12 per hour for your services whether that's
driving a forklift, running a combine, working an assembly line,
machining, working as a cashier, soddering circut boards or working in
a office. It pretty much seems if you aren't a proffesional you have
a hard time breaking the $15 hour mark.
This is where I think most of our problems lie. Most of the
people I know have jobs similar to those mentioned above and the thing
every one of them has in common? They can't make ends meet on their
own and are all on some form of government assistance or another (Wick
& foodstamps mostly). These people are expected to live and raise
their families on this paltry amount, how? How do you support a kid
with a wage like that let alone send them to college? You don't. You
need assistance and most of the time that comes from family, friends,
or the government (usually all 3).
The working mans salary is for the most part a joke. You pay
us peanuts and then make us feel bad when we can't pay for all our
bills and need to go on some sort of government assistance. We pray
we don't have to go to the doctor since most of the medical plans
offered are expensive jokes that hardly cover anything but since your
company offered you a plan (a high priced POS usually) you can't get
on the good "state plans" medical care. I was on the "state plan" as
a child (father died when I was a young leaving my mom to raise 4 kids
by herself) and it was a great plan. Don't be fooled into thinking
the government can't do healthcare well. It can and in many states
The truth of the matter is, if the average worker had a decent
wage there wouldn't be such a need for so many government "handouts".
I'm not advocating that regular blue collar guys should get the same
wage as a proffesional but is enough to live on asking too much.
Originally posted by Gannicus
Another piece of Democrat patty propaganda from the AP. Why am I not surprised the people of ATS ate it up like good lemmings?
Originally posted by SmedleyBurlap
reply to post by neo96
You are a huge partisan shill so I will address this directly.
Originally posted by nyk537
reply to post by inforeal
You are so off base here it isn't even funny.
The "rich" are the only ones paying any taxes!
Originally posted by TupacShakur
Wow, so to Conservatives it's "class warfare" when we increase taxes on the rich, but it's completely legitimate to take money away from those receiving benefits from the government, at least according to Senator Dan Coats:Yeah, the country needs your help, poor people! It's about damn time the poor people chipped in and helped the country out, we need their money!--(says rich people with millions of dollars collecting dust in a bank who call the idea of using their money to help the country out "class warfare").
"Those who are not paying any taxes but are receiving benefits from the government because of their income status— there ought to be a reduction from the benefit they receive," Coats said. "Even if it's 10 bucks, or 15 bucks, we [need to say we] have deducted for your participation in helping to support our country's needs."
edit on 22-8-2011 by TupacShakur because: To edit my post
Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Um... this is Social Security payroll tax, which is not the same as income tax. Further, how do those who support the further extending of this payroll tax cut propose that Social Security stays afloat if the amount going into the coffers continues being roughly 17% lower than it was back when Social Security was already bleeding its funding dry?
Further, if we have 46% of wage earners not paying any payroll tax right now under this Obama initiative... I guess that means myself and the other 54% of wage earners are supposed to just keep paying for them? BULLPIES! Not freaking having it anymore. Either pay the fare like the rest of us continue to do, or get off the bus and walk for awhile. Thank you Jon Huntsman et al. for actually giving a flip about folks like me who are by no means "rich" but who make too much money to be considered lower middle class. Seems like my group is the one that consistantly falls through the cracks, even though we're the ones who have been holding this damn economy together, despite the efforts from the left to rip it apart through assbrained spending sprees and the efforts from the right to rip it apart through assbrained program cuts to important issues like our infrastructure.
Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Mishmashum
assumptions are the mother of all blank ups
guess people never heard of always on internet also guess they dont bother to read the time and date stamps on here either.
“While no one is talking about extending the Social Security payroll tax reduction beyond one year, AARP will oppose any efforts to make this holiday permanent.
“As outlined in the current package, the short-term payroll tax reduction is temporary, and the Social Security Actuary agrees that there is no negative impact on the Social Security Trust Fund from this temporary reduction. Employees will have credit towards their benefits for their work, and people in Social Security should be confident that their hard-earned benefits will be there for them when they need them.