US Taxes

Professor S · 09-17-2005, 01:14 AM

I found this quite interesting.

It turns out that as of 2002, the tax burden to the poor (bottom 50%) lessened under Bush and was higher under Clinton.

http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6

Comments?

GameMaster · 09-17-2005, 01:36 AM

President Bush takes more vacations than President Clinton. I don't think a President should have more vacations than the common person.

One Winged Angel · 09-17-2005, 02:30 AM

Maybe you should try to make a comment relevant to U.S Taxes.

GameMaster · 09-17-2005, 03:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by One Winged Angel

Maybe you should try to make a comment relevant to U.S Taxes.

Our tax system is more confiscatory than it is progressive. Progressive tax is based on the premise that those with more income can afford to pay more taxes and those with little or no income should pay no tax. However, a quick look at Strangler's little charts show U.S. tax system has gone far beyond progressive. Fully half the taxpayers contribute almost nothing in individual income taxes.

Oh, what's that? I've uncovered your filth?

It's people like you who enjoy pulling the wool over the sheep's eyes that make me sick. Let's just see you even try to offer an expanation for the rotten scandel that I've presented to you.

And the next time you tell someone to make a relevant comment, be sure to make one yourself.

And if you even want me to consider exempting your two-timing, yellow-bellied carcass from an automatic ban for this terrible offense you've committed, I suggest you soil yourself and then slam your gonzo in a door as hard as you can.

Case closed.

Jonbo298 · 09-17-2005, 06:20 AM

Wow GM, a little harsh?

Anywho...I dont see the benefits from lower Taxes. Until my paycheck's dont have me "losing" approx 25% (some of that coming back in a years time), I wont see a benefit. Plus, Last check at my cell phone taxes, it was $15..literally. Thats insane.

Stonecutter · 09-17-2005, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Professor S

I found this quite interesting.

It turns out that as of 2002, the tax burden to the poor (bottom 50%) lessened under Bush and was higher under Clinton.

http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6

Comments?

Yeah, and the top ONE, FIVE, AND TEN % have gone down as well, while the top 50 and 25% brackets, the Middle Class, now pay more. The bottom 50 get a half point drop, while the top 1% got an almost 2.5 point drop, and the top 5% get close to a two point drop.

Did you even bother to look at the numbers before you posted them or did you just expect us to roll over and die?

Edit:

What's even better is this websites mission statement:

Quote:

NTU was established in 1969 to educate taxpayers, the media, and elected officials on a non-partisan basis on the merits of limited government and low taxes. NTU uses a variety of means to accomplish our work including direct mail, research papers, public speaking, email, advertising, the Internet, and lobbying.

They basically scream "WE'RE REPUBLICANS!" in its mission statement and even they can't bend the numbers to make it look like the middle or lower classes really make out in the bush cuts. Half a ****in percentage point on 26K is a pittance. 3% on a million is a big, big number, and it's the blue collar, middle working class that's bearing the brunt of the brake to the rich.

Perfect Stu · 09-17-2005, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stonecutter

Yeah, and the top ONE, FIVE, AND TEN % have gone down as well, while the top 50 and 25% brackets, the Middle Class, now pay more. The bottom 50 get a half point drop, while the top 1% got an almost 2.5 point drop, and the top 5% get close to a two point drop.

Did you even bother to look at the numbers before you posted them or did you just expect us to roll over and die?

Edit:

What's even better is this websites mission statement:

They basically scream "WE'RE REPUBLICANS!" in its mission statement and even they can't bend the numbers to make it look like the middle or lower classes really make out in the bush cuts. Half a ****in percentage point on 26K is a pittance. 3% on a million is a big, big number, and it's the blue collar, middle working class that's bearing the brunt of the brake to the rich.

Xantar · 09-17-2005, 02:12 PM

Even ignoring the details of what exactly has happened to the burden on the middle class etc., I will say that I don't have a problem with tax cuts in principle. It's when taxes are cut but spending isn't also reigned in that I have a problem with. The Economist has repeatedly criticized Bush on this score, and they're about as anti-tax as you'll get in a mainstream publication. When the government is borrowing money year after year, inflation must inevitably result.

Stonecutter · 09-17-2005, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xantar

Even ignoring the details of what exactly has happened to the burden on the middle class etc., I will say that I don't have a problem with tax cuts in principle. It's when taxes are cut but spending isn't also reigned in that I have a problem with. The Economist has repeatedly criticized Bush on this score, and they're about as anti-tax as you'll get in a mainstream publication. When the government is borrowing money year after year, inflation must inevitably result.

That's a hell of a point too.

Taxing like Republicans while spending more than Democrats is going to **** the economy up long term.

This administration doesn't seem to care about that though.

Where in the hell is this 62 billon for Katrina relief going to come from? You've got 200,000 people displaced, most of whom were poor, and they're each going to get $310,000? You can not possibly tell me that the property they lost was worth that much. Infrastructure is going to be taken care of mostly through the private sector and while the poor who lost their homes certainly didn't have property insurance, how many of them actually owned their property? I'd really like to know because anything that was rental property was definitely insured. Sadly that 62 million seems like a nice price to pay compared to that 200B number I saw floting around the other day.

And by the way, that war ain't ending anytime soon, how much more is that US crafted ****hole going to cost?

But of course, the upper 10% shouldn't have to pay any more than they already do...

Jason1 · 09-17-2005, 04:58 PM

Right, right, the rich are obviously the ones that really cant handle a tax hike anyways, so its good that their taxes got lowered.

Dont even get me started.

One Winged Angel · 09-18-2005, 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GameMaster

Oh, what's that? I've uncovered your filth?

My filth, what the **** are you talking about?

Quote:

Originally Posted by GameMaster

It's people like you who enjoy pulling the wool over the sheep's eyes that make me sick. Let's just see you even try to offer an expanation for the rotten scandel that I've presented to you.

I don't think you even had a chance to let me DEFEND myself. First off, I'm certainly not approving the Buss's Tax cuts. I'd rather not try to assert my point by using the fact that Bush has been using more vacation days than Clinton.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GameMaster

And the next time you tell someone to make a relevant comment, be sure to make one yourself.

It was relevant, it was to tell you to try and make a comment about the tax cuts, rather than the "OMG LAWL BUSH VACATION DAYS SO MUCH MORE".

Quote:

Originally Posted by GameMaster

And if you even want me to consider exempting your two-timing, yellow-bellied carcass from an automatic ban for this terrible offense you've committed, I suggest you soil yourself and then slam your gonzo in a door as hard as you can.

Case closed.

What terrible offense did I commit? I'm really trying to take your post seriously but I find it difficult to comprehend how stupid and ignorant you really are. Maybe it was the dip****s like you that made me leave this place years ago.

P.S. - You don't even know my politics, so I like you call me ignorant when I share basically the same political view on taxes.

GameMaster · 09-18-2005, 05:01 AM

How dare you call me that!

Need I remind you that it was I who brought you here in the first place, Mr. NeonNightCloud. So go ahead and leave. I got the doubloons I needed out of you.

And if I ever catch you crawling back in here and verbally assaulting someone again, I'll toss your account faster than a salad!

Happy hour is officially over so take your cheap suitcase and hit the road, Jack.

One Winged Angel · 09-18-2005, 05:05 AM

I've been here since it first opened in January about four years ago, this is my second account. Dont give me crap about you bringing me here, because I have NO idea what you are talking about.

Edit: LOL, did you seriously take credit for me joining here on this account? That's pathetic, to say the least.

Jason1 · 09-18-2005, 03:17 PM

Alright you two, thats about enough. We dont really need fighting around here, although I do enjoy it from time to time.

Stonecutter · 09-18-2005, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason1

Alright you two, thats about enough. We dont really need fighting around here, although I do enjoy it from time to time.

Normally I'd lock this kind of thread, but if we can ratchet the stupidity up a few more notches we might get to hand out some temp bans.