|
 Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 2 hours
|
 Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11195817 - 10/06/09 05:35 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It would work out fine. If the employer is taxed more then he will be forced to cut his workforce and/or cut wages.
Either way there is more welfare to go around and increased unemployment/drop in wages is blamed on "greedy capitalist business owners" instead of government!
http://mises.org/story/3752
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 10 hours, 10 minutes
|
 Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11196088 - 10/06/09 06:19 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah. That's the ticket.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 13 minutes, 17 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11197782 - 10/06/09 10:27 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Wow, what a guy. Here's what your proposed tax increases are
200K........$12,000
300K........$24,000
400K........$36,000
$3,000 you want to pay. What a fucking prince.
Trust me, I'd MUCH rather pay $36k or even $100k, because that means I'd be taking home a shitload more money.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
The rich pay far more in taxes proportionately to their income than the poor.
Waaaa!  It's one hell of a lot easier for someone making $1M per year to pay 5% than it is for someone making $20k. Duh.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
And it has only gone up since these fallacious tax "cuts" were enacted under Bush. The rich aren't bankrupting the country. The bums are.
Do you know how much Wall Street is getting from the taxpayer??? It's one hell of a lot more than the "bums".
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
You want to increase taxes on the wealthy by, holy fucking shit, 12.4%!!!!!! That's draconian.
Oh my god you're a whiner.
You say it's "draconian" for the rich to pay 12%, but that's exactly what the poor are paying. What planet are you from to expect sympathy for asking the rich to pay as much as the poor??? Unbelievable.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
As a nod to saving this fiasco I will agree to forego any benefits if I never have to pay another dime into it. I'm 52. They can keep the fucking money they already hosed me out of and shove it up their commie asses but stop asking for more. How's that?
Your proposal doesn't save social security. Mine does.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
 
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 13 minutes, 17 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11197804 - 10/06/09 10:29 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Everybody gets retirement benefits from Soc Sec regardless of need and based solely on what they paid in.
You wished. Although that may have been the original intent, everyone knows Social Security never worked that way.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 13 minutes, 17 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11198028 - 10/06/09 11:03 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
It would work out fine. If the employer is taxed more then he will be forced to cut his workforce and/or cut wages.
Either way there is more welfare to go around and increased unemployment/drop in wages is blamed on "greedy capitalist business owners" instead of government!
Of course that would be the case. The employee pays more taxes, and he either accepts it, or goes to work for someone else... where he still pays more taxes, so I guess he'd just have to accept it. Social Security is saved, as the employee is now paying as much FICA as his lower income coworkers. Sucks being treated like the lower income guys have always been treated (6% FICA), doesn't it?
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 13 minutes, 17 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11198064 - 10/06/09 11:08 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
But the employees don't pay federal, state or local tax on that lost $60,000. Lost tax revenue on guys in that tax bracket varies by state but it is $20,000 to $25,000.
That is a good point, and it's your only good point.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 2 hours
|
|
Yes let's save all the socialist welfare programs.
Let's have socialist healthcare.
Socialist everything!
Viva Socialism!
We'll pay everyone welfare with money that is worth less than the paper it's printed on!
|
 Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,648
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck 
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11199242 - 10/07/09 07:55 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
hopefully it becomes a welfare state, we can all quit our jobs, collect
welfare and live a better life than the working man... oh wait, there wont
be a working man...
--------------------
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,193
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 hours, 54 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11199641 - 10/07/09 09:25 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
> oh wait, there wont be a working man...
That is phase two. The part they don't talk about where the government puts the people to work so that those running the government can continue to live in style.
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 10 hours, 10 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Everybody gets retirement benefits from Soc Sec regardless of need and based solely on what they paid in.
You wished. Although that may have been the original intent, everyone knows Social Security never worked that way.
What are you talking about? Except for disability benefits that is exactly how it is done. You don't get back enough but what you do get is entirely determined by what you contributed.
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 10 hours, 10 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Wow, what a guy. Here's what your proposed tax increases are
200K........$12,000
300K........$24,000
400K........$36,000
$3,000 you want to pay. What a fucking prince.
Trust me, I'd MUCH rather pay $36k or even $100k, because that means I'd be taking home a shitload more money.
Why don't you just pay it anyway?Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
The rich pay far more in taxes proportionately to their income than the poor.
Waaaa! It's one hell of a lot easier for someone making $1M per year to pay 5% than it is for someone making $20k. Duh.
Yeah so? And your example is a joke. Someone making 20K pays virtually nothing in federal and state tax. And by that I mean 0%. Someone making a million pays over 40%. You also keep floating this bogus 5% or 6%. It is actually DOUBLE or TRIPLE that. 12.4% Soc sec and 2.9% M/M. Anything else you think they should pay just because they can?Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
And it has only gone up since these fallacious tax "cuts" were enacted under Bush. The rich aren't bankrupting the country. The bums are.
Do you know how much Wall Street is getting from the taxpayer??? It's one hell of a lot more than the "bums".
It is? I doubt it. Of further note, do you know how much in taxes Wall Street pays? Or how much in taxes the bums pay? Do you also know that the banks are rapidly repaying much of the loans back? At a tidy profit to the taxpayer, I might add. This will not be the case with auto companies. Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
You want to increase taxes on the wealthy by, holy fucking shit, 12.4%!!!!!! That's draconian.
Oh my god you're a whiner.
And you are crook. If I go to your house and take 12% of your possessions will you call the police? Of course you will, because you are a crybaby. Boohoo.Quote:
You say it's "draconian" for the rich to pay 12%, but that's exactly what the poor are paying. What planet are you from to expect sympathy for asking the rich to pay as much as the poor??? Unbelievable.
No, it's 12% MORE, on top of the already grotesque taxes they pay. THAT is draconian. Over 50% on their last dollar. They pay way more than the poor. The poor don't pay anything but Soc sec and M/M. Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
As a nod to saving this fiasco I will agree to forego any benefits if I never have to pay another dime into it. I'm 52. They can keep the fucking money they already hosed me out of and shove it up their commie asses but stop asking for more. How's that?
Your proposal doesn't save social security. Mine does.
And again I ask why should we keep this Ponzi scheme afloat? The government steals the money and puts it into the general fund. Maybe if they stopped doing that it could be saved. Maybe if they stopped doing that it would be worth saving. As it is right now it is a complete sham. Raise the retirement age, cut bennies, stop putting receipts in the general fund. Your answer is and always will be take more from those who succeed. Punish and punish and punish success until it can't be punished no more. Some behavior model you got there. Work hard, get fucked.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 13 minutes, 17 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11200316 - 10/07/09 11:30 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Yes let's save all the socialist welfare programs.
Let's have socialist healthcare.
Socialist everything!
Viva Socialism!
We'll pay everyone welfare with money that is worth less than the paper it's printed on!
The decline of the dollar has nothing to do with socialism. Do you even know what socialism is? Please look it up. America is not a socialist country by a long shot.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 13 minutes, 17 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11200330 - 10/07/09 11:33 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
hopefully it becomes a welfare state, we can all quit our jobs, collect welfare and live a better life than the working man... oh wait, there wont be a working man...
I'm not calling for a welfare state. I'm proposing fixing social security so grandma isn't out on the street. I'm all for welfare reform.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 13 minutes, 17 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11200692 - 10/07/09 12:30 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
It's one hell of a lot easier for someone making $1M per year to pay 5% than it is for someone making $20k. Duh.
Yeah so? And your example is a joke. Someone making 20K pays virtually nothing in federal and state tax. And by that I mean 0%. Someone making a million pays over 40%. You also keep floating this bogus 5% or 6%. It is actually DOUBLE or TRIPLE that. 12.4% Soc sec and 2.9% M/M.
It doesn't matter if it's 6% or 12%. It's easier for a millionaire to pay 12% than it is for someone making $20k. That's why we have a progressive tax system for income tax. Social Security is another matter. The solution being proposed isn't even progressive, it's FLAT.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Do you know how much Wall Street is getting from the taxpayer??? It's one hell of a lot more than the "bums".
It is? I doubt it.
Yes, Wall St got more: 2008 United States federal budget
Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending was $324 billion; much less than the Wall St bailouts.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Of further note, do you know how much in taxes Wall Street pays? Or how much in taxes the bums pay? Do you also know that the banks are rapidly repaying much of the loans back? At a tidy profit to the taxpayer, I might add.
Only some of them are paying it back:
Number of Banks Not Making TARP Payments Skyrockets
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
And you are crook. If I go to your house and take 12% of your possessions will you call the police? Of course you will, because you are a crybaby. Boohoo.
That would be against the law.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
No, it's 12% MORE, on top of the already grotesque taxes they pay. THAT is draconian. Over 50% on their last dollar. They pay way more than the poor. The poor don't pay anything but Soc sec and M/M.
They got by just fine before from 1932 - 1986. Then Reagan implemented tax cuts on the wealthy, and massive deficit spending began in the US.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Your answer is and always will be take more from those who succeed. Punish and punish and punish success until it can't be punished no more. Some behavior model you got there. Work hard, get fucked.
For fuck's sake, quit playing an idiot. I've never suggested that CEOs make the same as fast food cooks. I'm saying if you make more you pay more, but of course you still keep more.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 10 hours, 10 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
It's one hell of a lot easier for someone making $1M per year to pay 5% than it is for someone making $20k. Duh.
Yeah so? And your example is a joke. Someone making 20K pays virtually nothing in federal and state tax. And by that I mean 0%. Someone making a million pays over 40%. You also keep floating this bogus 5% or 6%. It is actually DOUBLE or TRIPLE that. 12.4% Soc sec and 2.9% M/M.
It doesn't matter if it's 6% or 12%. It's easier for a millionaire to pay 12% than it is for someone making $20k. That's why we have a progressive tax system for income tax. Social Security is another matter. The solution being proposed isn't even progressive, it's FLAT.
I like to have my facts in order. You? Not so much.
Of course it's easier for them to pay. So what? Why stop there. Tax the rich down to the level where everybody has the same takehome. Why should they have any more at all?
We already have an egregiously unjust progressive taxation wherein the very few pay almost all of the tax bills for the many.Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Do you know how much Wall Street is getting from the taxpayer??? It's one hell of a lot more than the "bums".
It is? I doubt it.
Yes, Wall St got more: 2008 United States federal budget
Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending was $324 billion; much less than the Wall St bailouts.
LOL. That isn't all the bums got, is it? Now, how much did Wall Street get? In loans. Unlike the bums who aren't paying their mortgages they actually have been paying it back. You like Wiki? I got Wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program
Quote:
As of February 9, 2009, $388 billion had been allotted, and $296 billion spent, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Among the money committed, includes:
For the math challenged 296 is less than 324, which was a phony number anyway.
Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Of further note, do you know how much in taxes Wall Street pays? Or how much in taxes the bums pay? Do you also know that the banks are rapidly repaying much of the loans back? At a tidy profit to the taxpayer, I might add.
Only some of them are paying it back:
Number of Banks Not Making TARP Payments Skyrockets
Well no shit. They haven't all paid it back in the less than 12 months. What a stunner. Most of the banks on that list have nothing to do with Wall Street, by the way.Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
And you are crook. If I go to your house and take 12% of your possessions will you call the police? Of course you will, because you are a crybaby. Boohoo.
That would be against the law.
So are compelling soc sec contributions beyond 12% of $106,000. What's your point? You want to change a law, I want to change a law.Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
No, it's 12% MORE, on top of the already grotesque taxes they pay. THAT is draconian. Over 50% on their last dollar. They pay way more than the poor. The poor don't pay anything but Soc sec and M/M.
They got by just fine before from 1932 - 1986. Then Reagan implemented tax cuts on the wealthy, and massive deficit spending began in the US.
Did they? One could quite well argue that those tax rates were quite damaging even then. If tax revenue goes up is it a tax cut? That's the beginning of deficit spending? Under Reagan? Now you're just being a buffoon.Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Your answer is and always will be take more from those who succeed. Punish and punish and punish success until it can't be punished no more. Some behavior model you got there. Work hard, get fucked.
For fuck's sake, quit playing an idiot. I've never suggested that CEOs make the same as fast food cooks. I'm saying if you make more you pay more, but of course you still keep more.
We already pay more. Disproportionately more. Hideously, flagrantly, grotesquely, disproportionately more. So much more that I could hire a harem of welfare queens and get market rate blow jobs 5 times a day, every day for less.
I think that all the tax increases should fall on people making between 100K and 200K. There's so many more of them it would be easy. The few at the top have been fucked to death already.
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,648
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
hopefully it becomes a welfare state, we can all quit our jobs, collect welfare and live a better life than the working man... oh wait, there wont be a working man...
I'm not calling for a welfare state. I'm proposing fixing social security so grandma isn't out on the street. I'm all for welfare reform.
why not let grandma have the option of cashing out and investing on her
own, it's obvious that SSA earns no interest on the billions it takes in
each year, they supposedly spend the surplus on the national debt but
then in years like this where 30 million people are out of work they
have shortfalls and start cutting benefits for people, if grandma
decides to give it to the grandkids then hopefully they are compassionate
enough to take care of her in her golden years, if not, let poor old
grandma eat the cat food and live in her box by the dumpsters
with the current system, no one can live on the $1000/mo that SSI pays,
it's unlikely that any improvements would be made, government is
incapable of doing anything that doesnt benefit it's self or those that
dont contribute to the system
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,648
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
I've never suggested that CEOs make the same as fast food cooks. I'm saying if you make more you pay more, but of course you still keep more.
it's unfortunate that they have a maximum payout of about $1800/mo, if I
payed in $30k every year I'd still only get $20k/yr during my retirement,
I feel I should get back what I payed in plus a modest interest rate,
obviously government is incapable of handling money properly or we'd be
earning interest off of our money
wanna fix social security, then end the shit
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 13 minutes, 17 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11203118 - 10/07/09 06:58 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:It's one hell of a lot easier for someone making $1M per year to pay 5% than it is for someone making $20k. Duh.
Yeah so? And your example is a joke. Someone making 20K pays virtually nothing in federal and state tax. And by that I mean 0%. Someone making a million pays over 40%. You also keep floating this bogus 5% or 6%. It is actually DOUBLE or TRIPLE that. 12.4% Soc sec and 2.9% M/M.
It doesn't matter if it's 6% or 12%. It's easier for a millionaire to pay 12% than it is for someone making $20k. That's why we have a progressive tax system for income tax. Social Security is another matter. The solution being proposed isn't even progressive, it's FLAT.
I like to have my facts in order. You? Not so much.
I was making a generalization there. I could have said "any" rather than 5%, but the number doesn't matter. My point is that it's easier for a wealthy person to pay X% of his income than it is for a poor person to pay X%.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Of course it's easier for them to pay. So what? Why stop there. Tax the rich down to the level where everybody has the same takehome. Why should they have any more at all?
For obvious reasons. People need to be incentivized. So long as people can still become millionaires, we'll see our brightest do their best. If your pay were to go down by 12%, would you take the paycut, or stop working? If you say you'd quit working, then you're not making nearly as much as you claim.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
We already have an egregiously unjust progressive taxation wherein the very few pay almost all of the tax bills for the many.
It's nowhere near what other civilized countries have, nor what we used to have. Stop whining.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
If tax revenue goes up is it a tax cut? That's the beginning of deficit spending? Under Reagan? Now you're just being a buffoon.
Have a look at US tax rates from 1980 to 1988 while Reagan was president: Top US Marginal Income Tax Rates, 1913--2003
And have a look at our deficit spending under Reagan:
Who's the buffoon???
Edit: Here is another link: Reagan and revenue
And let's not forget the Reagan TEFRA tax hike.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (10/07/09 08:45 PM)
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 10 hours, 10 minutes
|
|
You are. You think Reagan and the Dem Congress of the eighties invented deficit spending, which is monumentally ignorant. Obama and the Dem Congress are in the process of resizing that graph so that the bottom of it will go into this post.
--------------------
|
THC Titan
Spoonman
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 590
Loc: FL, USA
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11206505 - 10/08/09 08:12 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
You are. You think Reagan and the Dem Congress of the eighties invented deficit spending, which is monumentally ignorant. Obama and the Dem Congress are in the process of resizing that graph so that the bottom of it will go into this post.
It's not an ideological belief, the deficit under Reagan was increased to historic levels and so was peacetime defense spending. Coincidentally, two of the terrible legacies of Reagan that still afflict this country's politics.
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
