That is funny... if they are withheld, but never sent to the government, then they are not really paid.
Another born-on-third-base story
- Thread starter Bodhisattva
- Start date
Great, we won't have to worry about you posting much longer because once the right person gets a look at your sign he's going to take your computer.Not trolling but I do have my "Gun Free Zone Sign Up in the Front Yard."
They are paid by the worker but stolen by the employer and it's not funny at all!:mad2:
Warren Buffet's secretary-- 30% of $60,000
Mitt Romney-- 13% of mega millions
Why sure that's fair! Cause he is still paying more than the secretary!
Maybe, but I got a picture of Bush and Iraq on it so they know there are WMDs close by.Great, we won't have to worry about you posting much longer because once the right person gets a look at your sign he's going to take your computer.
Seebell calm down we all know if the super rich pay little to no taxes; our Economy will boom and the U.S. will have 0 unemployment.
That's s great American success story indeed. But...social justice MUST be achieved whatever the cost.
There are millions of naked, starving people in the USA who need our money. Forever. Can't hardly throw a cat without hitting one.
There are millions of naked, starving people in the USA who need our money. Forever. Can't hardly throw a cat without hitting one.
That whole dog & pony show about Buffet wanting his taxes increased was a farce. He can write a check as big as he wants to the US Treasury, even going over what tax law requires. No one is stopping him. No one.
(also comparing income to wealth is apples and oranges)
Suggesting that people should just write a check is a ridiculous notion
Suffice it to say that if he really felt so awful about it he could restructure his compensation so that he could pay a whole lot more. It's his choice and he chooses to keep his money.
He could also easily pay all the taxes for the folks in his office if he felt so awful about it, but he chooses not to do that, but to keep his money, instead.
Paying his secretary of many years $60,000? I'd like to see her tax return because I don't believe the whole story, but if true, he's not only a hypocrite but a cheap, phony sob.
First off, you're not comparing apples to apples. Romney (and all others wise enough to be investors) are being taxed on money that was already taxed. Now, we know the Obama camp was being dishonest when they successfully duped the a lot of ignorant voters. Which group do you fall under?
Secondly, and more telling of the liberal mindset, is that the outrage is not that the secretary is paying too much, but that Romney was paying too little. The idea that taxes are too high is of no concern. Libs would trample the little guy (and prevent him from climbing the ladder) as long as they got to slightly financially wound the wealthy guy. That's blind jealousy and it makes for very poor tax policy.
Think about it. Investments from money already taxed shouldn't be taxed again. Any smart person would then know that they get to keep all the fruits of their investments. That's a great and proper incentive. Only the really stupid would not take advantage of this. Wealth would explode in this country. Fewer would need to leach off the government. Government could be much smaller. And the positive multiply effect rolls on and on. (Note, Obama wants capital gains taxes anywhere from 35% to 50%, which would kill the economy. This doesn't make sense because he's so smart and stuff.
)
Last edited:
You are right, it is ridiculous to expect someone to live by the standard they set for themselves. Totally ridiculous to expect someone who claims that they don't pay enough in taxes to live by that standard and pay more. It's funny to sit back and watch people ridicule Christians who may not totally live their faith but excuse people like Buffett.Suggesting that people should just write a check is a ridiculous notion
:
I'm only suggesting people should be able to do what they want with their own money.Suggesting that people should just write a check is a ridiculous notion
It's called leading by example.Suggesting that people should just write a check is a ridiculous notion
please elaborate.Suggesting that people should just write a check is a ridiculous notion
You and I agree on many things, however this is not one.First off, you're not comparing apples to apples. Romney (and all others wise enough to be investors) are being taxed on money that was already taxed. Now, we know the Obama camp was being dishonest when they successfully duped the a lot of ignorant voters. Which group do you fall under?
Secondly, and more telling of the liberal mindset, is that the outrage is not that the secretary is paying too much, but that Romney was paying too little. The idea that taxes are too high is of no concern. Libs would trample the little guy (and prevent him from climbing the ladder) as long as they got to slightly financially wound the wealthy guy. That's blind jealousy and it makes for very poor tax policy.
Think about it. Investments from money already taxed shouldn't be taxed again. Any smart person would then know that they get to keep all the fruits of their investments. That's a great and proper incentive. Only the really stupid would not take advantage of this. Wealth would explode in this country. Fewer would need to leach off the government. Government could be much smaller. And the positive multiply effect rolls on and on. (Note, Obama wants capital gains taxes anywhere from 35% to 50%, which would kill the economy. This doesn't make sense because he's so smart and stuff.
Take someone who is a ditch digger. This guy works long hours to provide for his family and maybe brings in 50k a year. Now lets say there is another guy who at the beginning of the year has 100M in the bank. Through wise investments he is able to get a 10% return, for a nice even 10M in income that year.
I understand the idea of the double taxation, but don't agree that it is truly double taxed in principle.
This comes back to my point I've stated time and again. Ones status and position in life should not make there be a different set of rules that those two people play by. Make both of their tax rates 10, 20, or 0% but don't treat someone who is profiting off of other people's work purely by choosing to invest in that company as any different than someone who is actually doing the work.
Primarily because investments allow someone to take a loss on a bad guess. That guy digging the ditch doesn't get to deduct on his taxes the days when he doesn't work because he made a bad decision to eat 4 day old sushi.
Also trickle down has been proven to not work time and time again. Until I see the proof that it actually does anything other than line the pockets of the rich I will continue to call BS that if only the American people would let the smart rich folks do what they want we will all be driving Cadillacs and eating lobster every night.
If you raise taxes on investments, you lower the amount of money that gets invested. Less investments mean fewer jobs.
Why is that difficult to understand?
The invested income allows companies to expand. No expansion, fewer jobs.
Fewer jobs, more wasted money in entitlements.
More receiving entitlements more that vote for Democrats...
OHHHHHHH! I get it now....Dang you Libs are Perty smart....
Nice racquet you guys got going
Why is that difficult to understand?
The invested income allows companies to expand. No expansion, fewer jobs.
Fewer jobs, more wasted money in entitlements.
More receiving entitlements more that vote for Democrats...
OHHHHHHH! I get it now....Dang you Libs are Perty smart....
Nice racquet you guys got going
Trickle down economics. Just look at the federal deficit in the 1980s and early 1990s for proof.
Last edited:
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
-
-
Texas Hill Country flooding...- Started by TIDE-HSV
- Replies: 29