Joe Miner Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 This is all total bull. Per citizen? Read the article at the start of the thread. The point is that $11,000 a 1% isn't jack. Their tax burden could be higher and their life style wouldn't even be affected if you generated 20% more revenue from them. You are using averages to disguise the very point that there is a huge stratification of wealth in the nation. And please do not read anything into this that I have not stated, like the crap about 100% taxation. Your straw men are silly Who cares? It's not going to ever happen The guy that doesn't pay taxes because he gets a refund is determining others' fair share of the tax burden. Priceless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 (edited) This is all total bull. Per citizen? Read the article at the start of the thread. The point is that $11,000 a 1% isn't jack. Their tax burden could be higher and their life style wouldn't even be affected if you generated 20% more revenue from them. You are using averages to disguise the very point that there is a huge stratification of wealth in the nation. And please do not read anything into this that I have not stated, like the crap about 100% taxation. Your straw men are silly Who cares? It's not going to ever happen You must be the thickest sob on the entire planet. The federal government spends more that 70% of what it's citizens earn per year. The top 1% has an mean earned income of $394,000, and there are 1.35 million such earners in the United States. This amounts to a rough total of just over 500 Billion in total earnings. Incidentally, these top 1% pay roughly the same amount of gross income taxes as the entire bottom 95% of earners (roughly 40% of the entire national burden for each group). US government structures on the federal, state, and local level have commited to spending in excess of an estimated combined 6.4 TRILLION dollars for the year 2013; so even if you taxed the wealthiest 1% at a rate of 100% of their total earnings, you would still wind up with nearly a 6 TRILLION dollar annual budget shortfall. My point is, that your proposed "solution" doesn't fix any of your assumed "problems". All it does is attempt to punish those you deem to be "rich" for earning too much in order to make schleps like you feel better. The problem is that, even while you currently take from me more than 50% of my total earnings per year, combining Federal, State, and Local taxes; you still demand more, and even if you take everything that I have, you still don't come close to funding even 15% of your idiot government programs. Edited September 11, 2013 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted September 11, 2013 Author Share Posted September 11, 2013 You must be the thickest sob on the entire planet. The federal government spends more that 70% of what it's citizens earn per year. The top 1% has an mean earned income of $394,000, and there are 1.35 million such earners in the United States. This amounts to a rough total of just over 500 Billion in total earnings. Incidentally, these top 1% pay roughly the same amount of gross income taxes as the entire bottom 95% of earners (roughly 40% of the entire national burden for each group). US government structures on the federal, state, and local level have commited to spending in excess of an estimated combined 6.4 TRILLION dollars for the year 2013; so even if you taxed the wealthiest 1% at a rate of 100% of their total earnings, you would still wind up with nearly a 6 TRILLION dollar annual budget shortfall. My point is, that your proposed "solution" doesn't fix any of your assumed "problems". All it does is attempt to punish those youi deem to be "rich" for earning too much in order to make schleps like you feel better. I disagree with almost everything you say, but the last point you make is just overboard. You don't think the top 1% are rich?? Say what??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 I disagree with almost everything you say, but the last point you make is just overboard. You don't think the top 1% are rich?? Say what??? You disagree with statistics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted September 11, 2013 Author Share Posted September 11, 2013 Oh, I also don't think you need to pay off the debt. I wouldn't pay off my mortgage all at once, that's stupid. Neither should the government throw its revenue at the cheap debt it owes, so much better to invest the money in American human capital, infrastructure and innovation You disagree with statistics? No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 You disagree with the official government statistics I just posted?Every single data point, every single one, is available to you at IRS.gov and other government and tax payer advocate websites, and the data is not disputed. Additionally, earnings /= wealth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 Oh, I also don't think you need to pay off the debt. I wouldn't pay off my mortgage all at once, that's stupid. Neither should the government throw its revenue at the cheap debt it owes, so much better to invest the money in American human capital, infrastructure and innovation No He posted statistics, you said "i disagree" The bills are 0-1 in 2013. I disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted September 11, 2013 Author Share Posted September 11, 2013 The guy that doesn't pay taxes because he gets a refund is determining others' fair share of the tax burden. Priceless. I love when PPP rumors get going. Ok, I don't pay taxes? What? I know what you are talking about but you are an idiot for interpreting what I said as I don't pay taxes. He posted statistics, you said "i disagree" The bills are 0-1 in 2013 and I don't think they will ever win again. I disagree. And there was also an argument included with the stats, so I fixed your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 Oh, I also don't think you need to pay off the debt. I wouldn't pay off my mortgage all at once, that's stupid. Neither should the government throw its revenue at the cheap debt it owes, so much better to invest the money in American human capital, infrastructure and innovation No So the federal debt is akin to you having a mortgage? God that argument drives me nuts. You will eventually pay off your mortgage, you are on a payment plan that is paying down the principal and in the end you will have an asset that you own 100% and will likely never pay anything towards again. So I have two questions for you. 1. How is you having a mortgage on your house ANYTHING like the debt this country has. 2. Will you having 20% less income affect your personal life? (This is your second chance to answer this) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 And there was also an argument included with the stats, so I fixed your post. So then highlight WHAT YOU DISAGREE WITH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 I love when PPP rumors get going. Ok, I don't pay taxes? What? I know what you are talking about but you are an idiot for interpreting what I said as I don't pay taxes. Then let's go back to why I brought that up which you totally missed because you're a dumb ass. I want you to not have any taxes deducted from every paycheck next year and have to write one checke for the total amount owed for 2014. My question was, have you ever done that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 I love when PPP rumors get going. Ok, I don't pay taxes? What? I know what you are talking about but you are an idiot for interpreting what I said as I don't pay taxes. I enjoy taking the opportunity to mock your stupidity in a reminiscing manner across multiple threads. You seem to enjoy reaffirming your stupidity in every thread in which you participate. To each his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 (edited) I love when PPP rumors get going. Ok, I don't pay taxes? What? I know what you are talking about but you are an idiot for interpreting what I said as I don't pay taxes. And there was also an argument included with the stats, so I fixed your post. So your problem statement is that: "some people earn too much money."??? And that's the end of it??? There is no larger social goal? You just want to punish people who earn, what is in your estimation, "too much", in order to make those who earn less feel better; even though increasing their burden does absolutely nothing to address our deep economic structual problems? Really? Edited September 11, 2013 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted September 11, 2013 Author Share Posted September 11, 2013 So the federal debt is akin to you having a mortgage? God that argument drives me nuts. You will eventually pay off your mortgage, you are on a payment plan that is paying down the principal and in the end you will have an asset that you own 100% and will likely never pay anything towards again. So I have two questions for you. 1. How is you having a mortgage on your house ANYTHING like the debt this country has. 2. Will you having 20% less income affect your personal life? (This is your second chance to answer this) 1) Borrowing money isn't like borrowing money? 2) Me yes, but if I had $6 million, probably not So your problem statement is that: "some people earn too much money."??? And that's the end of it??? There is no larger social goal? You just want to punish people who earn, what is in your estimation, "too much", in order to make those who earn less feel better; even though increasing their burden does absolutely nothing to address our deep economic structual problems? Really? There is a larger socail goal, but it isn't to simply pay down debt. Want to know what I'd do with extra revenue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 There is a larger socail goal, but it isn't to simply pay down debt. Want to know what I'd do with extra revenue? Who's talking about paying down debt? Tasker's example illustrated what was needed just to break even and not incur further debt. But by all means, please tell us what you would do with the additional drop in the bucket? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted September 11, 2013 Author Share Posted September 11, 2013 Then let's go back to why I brought that up which you totally missed because you're a dumb ass. I want you to not have any taxes deducted from every paycheck next year and have to write one checke for the total amount owed for 2014. My question was, have you ever done that? Never, and I won't. And your insults, back at you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 1) Borrowing money isn't like borrowing money? 2) Me yes, but if I had $6 million, probably not 1. 2. Why only you? You ever have $6 million? Do you think they've built a plan around that $6million? Much of it includes investing large sums into the US economy, giving to charity, employing people, and leaving a legacy? So it's all about you. I will say the same to you that I've been saying to bird dog. How progressively tolerant of you. You selfish, ignorant, hypocritical ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted September 11, 2013 Author Share Posted September 11, 2013 Who's talking about paying down debt? Tasker's example illustrated what was needed just to break even and not incur further debt. But by all means, please tell us what you would do with the additional drop in the bucket? I think debt is a good idea, it spreads more wealth and is good for investment. If people borrow and succeed, if businesses borrow and succeed, why shouldn't governments? I think the balanced budget amendment crowd should be tossed in jail...sort of not serious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 Never, and I won't. And your insults, back at you. So you trust the government with your money more than you trust yourself? Writing that check every year is very eye opening to how much I actually give to the government but I still like having control of my money throughout the year. Also do you like getting your refund? I think debt is a good idea, it spreads more wealth and is good for investment. If people borrow and succeed, if businesses borrow and succeed, why shouldn't governments? I think the balanced budget amendment crowd should be tossed in jail...sort of not serious So corporate debt is the same and government debt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 2) Me yes, but if I had $6 million, probably not Bull. But you'll never get a chance to find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts