57Brave
Well-known member
Those are consumption taxes. Not income taxes and coded seperatly. Shoot, the money I make I'd rather not pay a penny -- but I also like paved roads, public schools CDC FAA Food and Drug Admin etc.
SOTU?
- Thread starter acesfull86
- Start date
Those are consumption taxes. Not income taxes and coded seperatly. Shoot, the money I make I'd rather not pay a penny -- but I also like paved roads, public schools CDC FAA Food and Drug Admin etc.
57Brave
Well-known member
they do
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
If you believe in a society that benefits all, yes. If you believe in social Darwinism, than no.
50PoundHead
Hessmania Forever
I'm not advocating one position or another, but you've outlined the rub in our tax policy. We have a boatload of tax expenditures that reward certain patterns of consumption or saving and is that the right way to approach tax policy and I think we need to start considering why some of these decisions are favored. The tax code is littered with a number of credits--promoted by both the left and right--and that number doesn't seem to ever go down. Whenever you protect income from taxation, you put more pressure on tax rates and I find it hard that some argue "Let's keep all the tax expenditures and still lower the tax rates." The math problem there is self-evident unless you cut the daylights out of defense (which I wouldn't necessarily oppose).
I actually thought parts of Mitt Romney's tax plan made sense, except that there is a reluctance on the part of many to ever have capital gains treated as simple income. I can acknowledge that a case can be made that capital gains income and regular wage income are different, but it's another income exclusion that keeps marginal tax rates higher than they should be.
Saving for retirement is good in and of itself. I don't know why we need to provide a tax advantage to accompany that consumer decision.
50PoundHead
Hessmania Forever
Because the marginal benefit of things that protect Donald Trump are higher for him than it is for the average Joe.
Just a pawn in the game.
yeezus
It's OVER 5,000!
I NEVER said "life should be easy." And life for kids of my generation is by no means easy, or easier than it was for older people. Bull****.
I DID say, however, that just because life sucked at "X" point, doesn't mean the goal should be to maintain that struggle.
It's not possible for everyone to work and pay their way through student loans. The cost of schooling in this country is insane. I can't pay for 4-5 years of school while attending it full-time.
yeezus
It's OVER 5,000!
LMAO that people defend that piece of **** crook who would steal a dollar from you if you turned around for a minute. Cracks me up while saddening me. He would eat your testicles if it meant he got your money. He's a massive piece of ****. No wonder conservatives like him!
yeezus
It's OVER 5,000!
SOCIALIST!!! AHHHH!!!
yeezus
It's OVER 5,000!
I know, I know. We give poor people EVERYTHING for free. That's why they have SO much! That's why they have a nice house than me, drive better cars, buy better food. Makes me sick that I work 40+ hours a week to get by and they're living the high life! ****, I'll just quit my job and become poor and have everything handed to me! THAT will be a better life.
Whose defending him? What is being defended. The simple question is why should X person who has that amount of money have to pay a higher % than anyone else? If your answer is because they have a lot of money then what is that threshold that determined you have a lot of money? How often will that change?
The reason they are where they are is because they get a lot for free. Nothing motivates someone more than if their livelihood is at stake.
There are plenty of universities out there that aren't that expensive and as long as you work hard and get a high GPA you'll get a good job. Queens college for example is where I went back to school for accounting. $260 dollars per credit is manageable and even more so if you are working somewhere that helps with tuition reimbursement. I got a 4.0 GPA and got a job with a great company.
yeezus
It's OVER 5,000!
We define thresholds ALL the time. So that's a silly question.
Why? Because it's much easier to build your money exponentially when you have a **** ton. Because when you have a **** ton, you don't need it all, therefore don't spend it all, therefore it's dead. That's not good for anyone except the one holding all the money. Off-shore accounts are also quite popular which really **** over a lot of people...EXCEPT the ones that put their money there, of course.
But yeah, let's all continue to let them **** us over and bitch about a far less amount of money (safety nets) than they're stashing away. Keep defending their right to **** you in the ass. And watch that wealth gap get bigger. Wooo hooo.
So wealthy people I guess do not help anyone but themselves in your world view? Who has given you a job?
Corporate taxation and corporate policies of sending work overseas is a completely different animal.
yeezus
It's OVER 5,000!
Dude, you are GOLD.
First of all, $260 a credit isn't necessarily common.
"Even more so if you are working somewhere with tuition reimbursement." YEP, because those jobs are plentiful and a person raised in Camden will definitely land one. You're SO right.
You're also leaving out transportation, books (which is another **** ton of money), and all the university fees they give you.
Paying your way through college is a pipe dream for a large majority of people. And besides, should we WANT all of our kids to be working FT while going to school FT? Shouldn't we, uh, NOT want that? Education in general will suffer. We should be fighting AGAINST that, not pushing FOR IT.
yeezus
It's OVER 5,000!
Not what I ****ing said. Stop straw-manning every single argument of mine.
sturg33
I
*raises hand*
I'm a top 10% by government standars. My gf and future wife is studying to be an orthopedic surgeon.
By the way, I was raised by a teacher and a secretary. In order to go to college, I took $40K out in loans. I've already paid those loans back.