The Big Cat Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Yes, and these are the people who are going to benefit the most from these tax increases. The people who were RECKLESS / IRRESPONSIBLE. The ones buying big houses they couldn't afford, big screen tv's they shouldn't be buying and driving new cars they shouldn't be driving. And just because a doctor went to school, got a job working at a clinic, and is licensed to write prescriptions, doesn't mean he should. I'm not saying people trying to live above their means aren't contributing to our problems, but A we're not talking about the banking crisis, and B part of the blame for people buying homes they couldn't afford belongs to the people lending them the money and the incentives built in to encourage them to do. Eventually it was doomed to blow up in everyone's faces. This week's This American Life is another "Financial Crisis for Dummies" episode, and the conclusion was that Americans of ALL income levels have spent too long living above their means. To suggest that's an epidemic exclusively amongst the non-wealthy is downright wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 I guess you don't really care if part of that paycheck that you EARNED is taken away. I do. I'm happy to donate time and money to worthy causes. I don't deem ACORN a worthy cause and get resentful if they get some of my money via a stimulus bill that is followed by a massive, ill-conceived tax hike. I mean, dropped the deduction for chairties by $.07 on the dollar....WTF? Chairities will be hurting enough due to corporate cutbacks/bankruptcies, no need to futher encumber them. You're right. My tax $ go to a TON of things I don't approve of, namely the shamefully large US Defense Budget. Of course, as we can clearly see, it's social programs eating up all my hard earn money: Link. Link Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Grab your ankles.... "Obama’s 2010 budget proposal, released today, would reinstate the top two Clinton-era tax rates of 36 percent and 39.6 percent in 2011, up from the 33 percent and 35 percent the richest Americans now pay. It would raise taxes on capital gains and dividends to 20 percent, up from the 15 percent. Obama also wants to reduce the rate by which wealthier people (couples making $250 k a year) can cut their taxes through deductions for mortgage interest, charitable contributions, local taxes and other expenses to 28 cents on the dollar, rather than the 35 cents they can claim now." Triple whammy. I agree with what some people have said here. In order to get out budget moving in the right direction there is no doubt that taxes have to be raised. I have absolutely no problem paying a little bit more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chump Change Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 You're right. My tax $ go to a TON of things I don't approve of, namely the shamefully large US Defense Budget. Of course, as we can clearly see, it's social programs eating up all my hard earn money: Link. Link Link So kid, do you make enough to be a tax contributor or are you one of the 50% who is a recipient? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 I agree with what some people have said here. In order to get out budget moving in the right direction there is no doubt that taxes have to be raised. I have absolutely no problem paying a little bit more. I wouldn't either...if I saw an iota of fiscal responsibility coming out of Washington. But we're looking at a $1.75 trillion budget deficit in '09, plus the supplemental spending outside the budget...so despite my increased taxes, the federal debt will increase by about $2.5 trillion over the next year. How can people be okay with the government going to the taxpayers saying "Just give us a little more money, and we'll be fine," but then turn around and B word about Citigroup or GM doing the exact same thing to the government? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 I wouldn't either...if I saw an iota of fiscal responsibility coming out of Washington. But we're looking at a $1.75 trillion budget deficit in '09, plus the supplemental spending outside the budget...so despite my increased taxes, the federal debt will increase by about $2.5 trillion over the next year. How can people be okay with the government going to the taxpayers saying "Just give us a little more money, and we'll be fine," but then turn around and B word about Citigroup or GM doing the exact same thing to the government? I am ok with GM asking for money. They have been run through the coals for the money they have received and the money they still desire. And they will continue to be run through the coals. The thing I am not fine with is companies that received money and did not use it correctly or rather the way they said it would be used. And seriously, AIG coming back for more? If they receive more cash something is seriously wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 The thing I am not fine with is companies that received money and did not use it correctly or rather the way they said it would be used. You are not okay with companies doing this, but you are okay with the current administation doing it? Somebody tell Dolly Parton she's on in five. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 So kid, do you make enough to be a tax contributor or are you one of the 50% who is a recipient? I make enough money to support my life in a safe neighborhood of a major American city (Chicago). I have never earned a dollar that I didn't pay taxes on. Am I one of the 80% of Americans (80% being the most conservative interpretation of what our president calls 95%) paying less in taxes now? Yes. I'm fairly certain that every tax-paying American my age (24) who isn't a professional athlete falls into that group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Am I one of the 80% of Americans (80% being the most conservative interpretation of what our president calls 95%) paying less in taxes now? Yes. I'm fairly certain that every tax-paying American my age (24) who isn't a professional athlete falls into that group. So if people were paying zero before and getting free money from other taxpayers and now they are still paying zero but getting even more free money from other taxpayers, are you including those as 'paying less'? I'll bet you haven't the slightest idea how many people fit into that category. But don't let that stop you from spouting all your IROC knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 I make enough money to support my life in a safe neighborhood of a major American city (Chicago). I have never earned a dollar that I didn't pay taxes on. Am I one of the 80% of Americans (80% being the most conservative interpretation of what our president calls 95%) paying less in taxes now? Yes. I'm fairly certain that every tax-paying American my age (24) who isn't a professional athlete falls into that group. That is until the people getting their taxes raised don't have the money to invest in the company you work for and you get laid off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 The thing I am not fine with is companies that received money and did not use it correctly or rather the way they said it would be used. And seriously, AIG coming back for more? If they receive more cash something is seriously wrong. Aren't the automakers all coming back for more despite having no viable plan for turnaround? Please feel free to point out where the automakers are cutting billions in expenses that are necessary for that to happen. Oh wait....AIG isn't at the mercy of union stooges so we should hold them to a different standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 That is until the people getting their taxes raised don't have the money to invest in the company you work for and you get laid off. Thanks for your well wishes. Such a confident prognistacator you are! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Thanks for your well wishes. Such a confident prognistacator you are! If you're going to use Big words Big Cat, please spell them correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted March 3, 2009 Author Share Posted March 3, 2009 I make enough money to support my life in a safe neighborhood of a major American city (Chicago). I have never earned a dollar that I didn't pay taxes on. Am I one of the 80% of Americans (80% being the most conservative interpretation of what our president calls 95%) paying less in taxes now? Yes. I'm fairly certain that every tax-paying American my age (24) who isn't a professional athlete falls into that group. Be careful using glittering generalities...I'll show you several examples, in law and finance, of 24 year olds making enough to be taxed more under Obama's new plan. I'm sure there are more examples in other industries of which I am not familiar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Aren't the automakers all coming back for more despite having no viable plan for turnaround? Please feel free to point out where the automakers are cutting billions in expenses that are necessary for that to happen. Oh wait....AIG isn't at the mercy of union stooges so we should hold them to a different standard. No one is at the mercy of anything. You stated the issue... no viable plan as of right now. Hopefully they will have one soon. And you asked the automakers have been making concessions with the unions that will save tons of money, they are closing plants and reconfiguring others on top of offering early retirement to many as well. They are making moves, unfortunately it may be to late. I love you continually bash unions. You are awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Be careful using glittering generalities...I'll show you several examples, in law and finance, of 24 year olds making enough to be taxed more under Obama's new plan. I'm sure there are more examples in other industries of which I am not familiar. By average, people between the ages of 21 and 28 have a net worth of $1, 200. Of course there are exceptions, but first year attorneys (most people graduate college at 21 and 22, assuming they go straight to law school, the youngest first year attorneys are 24 or (more likely) 25) don't make 250k. 125k, yes, but they'd have to already be married to another attorney also making 125k. I think that whittles the population of first year attorneys pretty thin. As for finance, I know a lot of guys/girls my age working in finance at some of the biggest firms in NYC (GS, UBS, MS, etc) and NONE of them are earning 250k. Again, it's possible to be married at my age, but that's fairly rare, and even rarer for the kind of career minded individuals already earning 6 digits at my age. Again, they MIGHT exist, but in such rarity that I don't rescind my glittering generalities. If you're going to use Big words Big Cat, please spell them correctly. I'm a hurrifick speller (also something I admitted in this thread) and on the computer I"m using, I don't have spell check and can't be bothererd to look stuff up. I'm over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 By average, people between the ages of 21 and 28 have a net worth of $1, 200. Of course there are exceptions, but first year attorneys (most people graduate college at 21 and 22, assuming they go straight to law school, the youngest first year attorneys are 24 or (more likely) 25) don't make 250k. 125k, yes, but they'd have to already be married to another attorney also making 125k. I think that whittles the population of first year attorneys pretty thin. As for finance, I know a lot of guys/girls my age working in finance at some of the biggest firms in NYC (GS, UBS, MS, etc) and NONE of them are earning 250k. Again, it's possible to be married at my age, but that's fairly rare, and even rarer for the kind of career minded individuals already earning 6 digits at my age. Again, they MIGHT exist, but in such rarity that I don't rescind my glittering generalities. You need to get out more and meet more people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 You need to get out more and meet more people. Yeah, no. I have a pretty good grasp on what people my age are like and what they're doing. There's no possibility of responding in detail to your post without sounding boastful about the number and variety of people I associate with. So, I'll just use an emoticon: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 I am ok with GM asking for money. They have been run through the coals for the money they have received and the money they still desire. And they will continue to be run through the coals. The thing I am not fine with is companies that received money and did not use it correctly or rather the way they said it would be used. And seriously, AIG coming back for more? If they receive more cash something is seriously wrong. GM deserves nothing. Not the first dollar. And not the next dollar. They are not going to turn around until they go to bankruptcy and burn a lot of people. Do you really think Americans are going to buy a car from a company teetering on the precipice? Answer: No. Will they buy a car from a smaller company with a cnace of survival? Yes. America needs to swallow the pill of what happens with GM and Chrysler when we don't give them money. That will get us to the end of this recession faster. Right now, the US is repeating (with alarming frequency) many of the mistakes Japan made. We're dragging out all the pain instead of just taking it and moving on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 GM deserves nothing. Not the first dollar. And not the next dollar. They are not going to turn around until they go to bankruptcy and burn a lot of people. Do you really think Americans are going to buy a car from a company teetering on the precipice? Answer: No. Will they buy a car from a smaller company with a cnace of survival? Yes. America needs to swallow the pill of what happens with GM and Chrysler when we don't give them money. That will get us to the end of this recession faster. Right now, the US is repeating (with alarming frequency) many of the mistakes Japan made. We're dragging out all the pain instead of just taking it and moving on. And if they go under that will affect the many companies that work with them and of course those jobs as well. Granted their piss poor management, designs and having to many lines were the main reason in them getting in this mess. Hopefully streamlining them out and continued consolidation will help get them on the right track for long term success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts