We Need to Get Rid of the Death Tax

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]biltritewave wrote:
doogie wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

This is one of the funniest things I’ve ever read.

“…letting the government use it appropriatley…”

I have tears in my eyes.

I knew someone would say something about that.

But either that, or be against all government in general because you can’t trust them. And you aren’t an anarchist.

OR the correct choice of limiting the federal government to those tasks they are authorized by the Constitution to handle. Not healthcare, not education, ect.

Then they’ll need less money from all of us.

DING DING DING WE HAVE A WINNER

last i checked wealth redistribution isnt in the constitution[/quote]

Neither is torture, but your heros seem to have no problem with that.

42

[quote]harris447 wrote:
biltritewave wrote:
doogie wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

This is one of the funniest things I’ve ever read.

“…letting the government use it appropriatley…”

I have tears in my eyes.

I knew someone would say something about that.

But either that, or be against all government in general because you can’t trust them. And you aren’t an anarchist.

OR the correct choice of limiting the federal government to those tasks they are authorized by the Constitution to handle. Not healthcare, not education, ect.

Then they’ll need less money from all of us.

DING DING DING WE HAVE A WINNER

last i checked wealth redistribution isnt in the constitution

Neither is torture, but your heros seem to have no problem with that.
[/quote]

I haven’t read anything about pre-emptive invasions in there either, or being the world’s police.

43

[quote]ZEB wrote:
sasquatch wrote:

You want to play semantics. I want everyone to pay their fair share.

No I don’t want to play semantics or any other game!

I simply want you to point out all the loopholes that YOU said were in the tax system for the rich.

You made an assertion that “the wealthy of this country pay less than the middle class.”

And percentage wise (there are less rich people than middle class folks) they pay [MORE!

I gaurantee you people who pull $1 mil/yr are not paying 33% of their income in taxes.

How very wrong you are my friend:

DEPARTMENT OF THE TRASURY

“The individual income tax is highly progressive- a small group of higher-income taxpayers pay most of the individual income taxes each year.”

The top 5% of taxpayers (by income) paid almost 54% of all individual income taxes!

There goes your theory!

Here you go:

And I’ll take the next step and say people who’s net worth puts them in the top 10% of wealth figures take advantage of many of the loopholes and ‘programs’ not available to those of us who survive on a much more modest income.

More assertions of loopholes yet still you don’t offer up any so that I can take advantage of them. I could get this sort of cheap talk at the local pub. You know when guys have a few beers and start complaining about how the rich get away with everything and they…the poor suckers have to pay up.

It’s really all just cheap talk huh?

My contention–again–is with the uber rich who probably have already figured a way to bypass this tax anyway.

Well…you keep saying it but can’t seem to come up with any verification for your pie in the sky working class theories…

Yet, I have shown you proof that the top 5% of all income earners in the country account for almost 54% of all taxes paid.

Stop the apparent jealous fit. If it were not for what you term as the “rich” in this country I think it’s safe to say that we would be a lot worse off.

Have you hugged a millionaire today?

:slight_smile:

[/quote]

ZEB

If you want to convey that you are rich, you are quite welcome to do so. Your statistical blah blah doesn’t tell the whole story. Because they pay (x) amount of taxes does not mean that they didn’t avoid paying more.

Your subtle putdowns aside, you’ve done nothing but throw the same numbers around that people do when they want to ‘prove’ how much they pay. They should. The top 10% of the moneyu tree in this country probably control 90% of the cash flow.

44

[quote]sasquatch wrote:
ZEB wrote:
sasquatch wrote:

You want to play semantics. I want everyone to pay their fair share.

No I don’t want to play semantics or any other game!

I simply want you to point out all the loopholes that YOU said were in the tax system for the rich.

You made an assertion that “the wealthy of this country pay less than the middle class.”

And percentage wise (there are less rich people than middle class folks) they pay [MORE!

I gaurantee you people who pull $1 mil/yr are not paying 33% of their income in taxes.

How very wrong you are my friend:

DEPARTMENT OF THE TRASURY

“The individual income tax is highly progressive- a small group of higher-income taxpayers pay most of the individual income taxes each year.”

The top 5% of taxpayers (by income) paid almost 54% of all individual income taxes!

There goes your theory!

Here you go:

And I’ll take the next step and say people who’s net worth puts them in the top 10% of wealth figures take advantage of many of the loopholes and ‘programs’ not available to those of us who survive on a much more modest income.

More assertions of loopholes yet still you don’t offer up any so that I can take advantage of them. I could get this sort of cheap talk at the local pub. You know when guys have a few beers and start complaining about how the rich get away with everything and they…the poor suckers have to pay up.

It’s really all just cheap talk huh?

My contention–again–is with the uber rich who probably have already figured a way to bypass this tax anyway.

Well…you keep saying it but can’t seem to come up with any verification for your pie in the sky working class theories…

Yet, I have shown you proof that the top 5% of all income earners in the country account for almost 54% of all taxes paid.

Stop the apparent jealous fit. If it were not for what you term as the “rich” in this country I think it’s safe to say that we would be a lot worse off.

Have you hugged a millionaire today?

:slight_smile:

ZEB

If you want to convey that you are rich, you are quite welcome to do so. Your statistical blah blah doesn’t tell the whole story. Because they pay (x) amount of taxes does not mean that they didn’t avoid paying more.

Your subtle putdowns aside, you’ve done nothing but throw the same numbers around that people do when they want to ‘prove’ how much they pay. They should. The top 10% of the moneyu tree in this country probably control 90% of the cash flow.

[/quote]

That is true. The top %10 of the nation controls 90% of the wealth, and the rest of the country is left with the 10% that is left over.

30 million people control this country’s wealth. The other 270 million scrounge for the scraps.

That is neither Christian nor just nor fair.

45

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Diomede wrote:
because there are a million loopholes to get around the estate tax…

I keep hearing about these loopholes…but for some reason no one can point them out to me.

It’s almost like they aren’t there.

:)[/quote]

they’re called family trusts.

I am all for abolishing the estate tax…its stupid that people cant pass down all their fortune to their children.

46

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
grew7 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
grew7 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Fair is from each according to what they can pay,

So then it would be fair to tax everyone (middle class included) more heavily, too?

Tax them until they are are completely unable to purchase anything but what they absolutely need. They CAN pay a lot more. It’s possible. They don’t need a television or a computer or a gym membership or weights at home or supplements or a home with more than one bathroom and bedroom. They don’t need anything but food, water and shelter. Would that be fair?

That’s not what I said at all.

There is a huge difference between the middle class and the super rich that are affected by the estate tax.

And that difference is? People who are wealthy deserve to spend it as they see fit. It’s not like these aren’t hard-working people.

Really? All of them?

Good to know that no one is born into being super rich anymore, I’m glad we stopped that.

Again, you need to get out more.[/quote]

A great majority (around 3/4’s) are self-made…

47

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
ZEB wrote:
sasquatch wrote:

You want to play semantics. I want everyone to pay their fair share.

No I don’t want to play semantics or any other game!

I simply want you to point out all the loopholes that YOU said were in the tax system for the rich.

You made an assertion that “the wealthy of this country pay less than the middle class.”

And percentage wise (there are less rich people than middle class folks) they pay [MORE!

I gaurantee you people who pull $1 mil/yr are not paying 33% of their income in taxes.

How very wrong you are my friend:

DEPARTMENT OF THE TRASURY

“The individual income tax is highly progressive- a small group of higher-income taxpayers pay most of the individual income taxes each year.”

The top 5% of taxpayers (by income) paid almost 54% of all individual income taxes!

There goes your theory!

Here you go:

And I’ll take the next step and say people who’s net worth puts them in the top 10% of wealth figures take advantage of many of the loopholes and ‘programs’ not available to those of us who survive on a much more modest income.

More assertions of loopholes yet still you don’t offer up any so that I can take advantage of them. I could get this sort of cheap talk at the local pub. You know when guys have a few beers and start complaining about how the rich get away with everything and they…the poor suckers have to pay up.

It’s really all just cheap talk huh?

My contention–again–is with the uber rich who probably have already figured a way to bypass this tax anyway.

Well…you keep saying it but can’t seem to come up with any verification for your pie in the sky working class theories…

Yet, I have shown you proof that the top 5% of all income earners in the country account for almost 54% of all taxes paid.

Stop the apparent jealous fit. If it were not for what you term as the “rich” in this country I think it’s safe to say that we would be a lot worse off.

Have you hugged a millionaire today?

:slight_smile:

ZEB

If you want to convey that you are rich, you are quite welcome to do so. Your statistical blah blah doesn’t tell the whole story. Because they pay (x) amount of taxes does not mean that they didn’t avoid paying more.

Your subtle putdowns aside, you’ve done nothing but throw the same numbers around that people do when they want to ‘prove’ how much they pay. They should. The top 10% of the moneyu tree in this country probably control 90% of the cash flow.

That is true. The top %10 of the nation controls 90% of the wealth, and the rest of the country is left with the 10% that is left over.

30 million people control this country’s wealth. The other 270 million scrounge for the scraps.

That is neither Christian nor just nor fair.[/quote]

So? The %90 is still ALIVE with that %10, therefore they don’t NEED any more. I see nothing wrong here.

48

[quote]sasquatch wrote:
Your statistical blah blah doesn’t tell the whole story. Because they pay (x) amount of taxes does not mean that they didn’t avoid paying more.[/quote]

But my statistical bla bla bla is far more than you have produced in your many rantings regarding the rich and their loopholes.

WHERE ARE THE LOOPHOLES BUDDY? PRODUCE THEM PLEASE!

[quote]You’ve done nothing but throw the same numbers around that people do when they want to ‘prove’ how much they pay. They should. The top 10% of the moneyu tree in this country probably control 90% of the cash flow.

[/quote]

“Nothing but throw the same numbers down?”

That doesn’t even make sense. The numbers demonstrate that the rich pay, and they pay a lot.

Do I should use those stats because others have used them?

Um…the top 5% of income earners still pay well over 50% of the taxes. That demonstrates that they are paying at least their fair share.

Now for the fourth time please show me all the loopholes. That means your next post should be all about the loopholes in the tax system for the rich.

If it does not have those loopholes then please stop saying that they’re there.

That’s not unfair…right?

Thank you.

49

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

That is true. The top %10 of the nation controls 90% of the wealth, and the rest of the country is left with the 10% that is left over.

30 million people control this country’s wealth. The other 270 million scrounge for the scraps.

That is neither Christian nor just nor fair.[/quote]

You mention Christianity when you think it helps your point. But on the spiritual threads you fall all over yourself attacking Christians…Not cool.

In addition, I have never seen anything in the Bible that says speaks to the contrary relative to my points on this thread.

I have read that we should pay our taxes…“Render unto Caesar what is Caesars.”

And I also read this little gem: “If a man does not work he shall not eat.”

OUCH! there goes the welfare system huh? No more rewarding unwed mothers for having children…And there goes a large part of the democratic base… SWISH…

Um…maybe you should stop waiting for government to improve your life buddy. Go out get a better job…invest what you can.

Do what the majority of self made millionaires have done and actually stop crying about what’s fair and succeed. Make it happen man you can do it!

Those who wait for government to help them have already lost!

Crazy idea huh?

50

[quote]Diomede wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Diomede wrote:
because there are a million loopholes to get around the estate tax…

I keep hearing about these loopholes…but for some reason no one can point them out to me.

It’s almost like they aren’t there.

:slight_smile:

they’re called family trusts.

I am all for abolishing the estate tax…its stupid that people cant pass down all their fortune to their children. [/quote]

Family trusts are not loopholes!

And in fact they do nothing but shift money from one pocket to another…

They are also very strictly watched and guided by a myriad of laws.

51

[quote]ZEB wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
Your statistical blah blah doesn’t tell the whole story. Because they pay (x) amount of taxes does not mean that they didn’t avoid paying more.

But my statistical bla bla bla is far more than you have produced in your many rantings regarding the rich and their loopholes.

WHERE ARE THE LOOPHOLES BUDDY? PRODUCE THEM PLEASE!

You’ve done nothing but throw the same numbers around that people do when they want to ‘prove’ how much they pay. They should. The top 10% of the moneyu tree in this country probably control 90% of the cash flow.

“Nothing but throw the same numbers down?”

That doesn’t even make sense. The numbers demonstrate that the rich pay, and they pay a lot.

Do I should use those stats because others have used them?

Um…the top 5% of income earners still pay well over 50% of the taxes. That demonstrates that they are paying at least their fair share.

Now for the fourth time please show me all the loopholes. That means your next post should be all about the loopholes in the tax system for the rich.

If it does not have those loopholes then please stop saying that they’re there.

That’s not unfair…right?

Thank you.

[/quote]

I am not your buddy or your pal. Yelling at me does not strengthen your point. I have not ranted at all. I simply stated, that the wealthy take advantage of loopholes to lighten the load of their taxable income. They do nothing illegal. I’ve not called them criminals.

I never once said that the rich didn’t pay taxes nor did I infer that they didn’t pay a lot of taxes. I said they take advantage of the system to pay less. Can you understand this. Even by your own numbers-90% of the money pays 50% of the taxes. Get a clue.

You’re all hung up on the nomanclature I’ve chosen instead of the argument. Ok there are no loopholes. Just advantages available within the tax code that allow for some to lessen the declared amount of income that in turn drastically lowers their taxable total.

And you and your accountant are freakin’ morons if you aren’t taking advantage of them. I know my advisor and I have.

52

[quote]
doogie wrote:

OR the correct choice of limiting the federal government to those tasks they are authorized by the Constitution to handle. Not healthcare, not education, ect.

Then they’ll need less money from all of us.

FightinIrish26 wrote:

I haven’t read anything about pre-emptive invasions in there either, or being the world’s police.[/quote]

“provide for the common defense”

“provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States”

“To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations”

“and repel invasions”

“The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States”

You can argue about whether or not invading Iraq was the best way to protect us, but until you get elected to a national office your opinion doesn’t mean anything.

You notice the part about punishing offenses against the laws of nations? Those are things like:

[quote]
UNSCR 1441 - November 8, 2002

  • Called for the immediate and complete disarmament of Iraq and its prohibited weapons.
  • Iraq must provide UNMOVIC and the IAEA full access to Iraqi facilities, individuals, means of transportation, and documents.
  • States that the Security Council has repeatedly warned Iraq and that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations.

UNSCR 1284 - December 17, 1999

  • Created the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspections Commission (UNMOVIC) to replace previous weapon inspection team (UNSCOM).
  • Iraq must allow UNMOVIC “immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access” to Iraqi officials and facilities.
  • Iraq must fulfill its commitment to return Gulf War prisoners.
  • Calls on Iraq to distribute humanitarian goods and medical supplies to its people and address the needs of vulnerable Iraqis without discrimination.

UNSCR 1205 - November 5, 1998

  • “Condemns the decision by Iraq of 31 October 1998 to cease cooperation” with UN inspectors as “a flagrant violation” of UNSCR 687 and other resolutions.
  • Iraq must provide “immediate, complete and unconditional cooperation” with UN and IAEA inspectors.

UNSCR 1194 - September 9, 1998

  • “Condemns the decision by Iraq of 5 August 1998 to suspend cooperation with” UN and IAEA inspectors, which constitutes “a totally unacceptable contravention” of its obligations under UNSCR 687, 707, 715, 1060, 1115, and 1154.
  • Iraq must cooperate fully with UN and IAEA weapons inspectors, and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.

UNSCR 1154 - March 2, 1998

  • Iraq must cooperate fully with UN and IAEA weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access, and notes that any violation would have the “severest consequences for Iraq.”

UNSCR 1137 - November 12, 1997

  • “Condemns the continued violations by Iraq” of previous UN resolutions, including its “implicit threat to the safety of” aircraft operated by UN inspectors and its tampering with UN inspector monitoring equipment.
  • Reaffirms Iraq’s responsibility to ensure the safety of UN inspectors.
  • Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.

UNSCR 1134 - October 23, 1997

  • “Condemns repeated refusal of Iraqi authorities to allow access” to UN inspectors, which constitutes a “flagrant violation” of UNSCR 687, 707, 715, and 1060.
  • Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.
  • Iraq must give immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access to Iraqi officials whom UN inspectors want to interview.

UNSCR 1115 - June 21, 1997

  • “Condemns repeated refusal of Iraqi authorities to allow access” to UN inspectors, which constitutes a “clear and flagrant violation” of UNSCR 687, 707, 715, and 1060.
  • Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.
  • Iraq must give immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access to Iraqi officials whom UN inspectors want to interview.

UNSCR 1060 - June 12, 1996

  • “Deplores” Iraq’s refusal to allow access to UN inspectors and Iraq’s “clear violations” of previous UN resolutions.
  • Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.

UNSCR 1051 - March 27, 1996

  • Iraq must report shipments of dual-use items related to weapons of mass destruction to the UN and IAEA.
  • Iraq must cooperate fully with UN and IAEA inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.

UNSCR 949 - October 15, 1994

  • “Condemns” Iraq’s recent military deployments toward Kuwait.
  • Iraq must not utilize its military or other forces in a hostile manner to threaten its neighbors or UN operations in Iraq.
  • Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors.
  • Iraq must not enhance its military capability in southern Iraq.

UNSCR 715 - October 11, 1991

  • Iraq must cooperate fully with UN and IAEA inspectors.

UNSCR 707 - August 15, 1991

  • “Condemns” Iraq’s “serious violation” of UNSCR 687.
  • “Further condemns” Iraq’s noncompliance with IAEA and its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
  • Iraq must halt nuclear activities of all kinds until the Security Council deems Iraq in full compliance.
  • Iraq must make a full, final and complete disclosure of all aspects of its weapons of mass destruction and missile programs.
  • Iraq must allow UN and IAEA inspectors immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.
  • Iraq must cease attempts to conceal or move weapons of mass destruction, and related materials and facilities.
  • Iraq must allow UN and IAEA inspectors to conduct inspection flights throughout Iraq.
  • Iraq must provide transportation, medical and logistical support for UN and IAEA inspectors.

UNSCR 688 - April 5, 1991

  • “Condemns” repression of Iraqi civilian population, “the consequences of which threaten international peace and security.”
  • Iraq must immediately end repression of its civilian population.
  • Iraq must allow immediate access to international humanitarian organizations to those in need of assistance.

UNSCR 687 - April 3, 1991

  • Iraq must “unconditionally accept” the destruction, removal or rendering harmless “under international supervision” of all “chemical and biological weapons and all stocks of agents and all related subsystems and components and all research, development, support and manufacturing facilities.”
  • Iraq must “unconditionally agree not to acquire or develop nuclear weapons or nuclear-weapons-usable material” or any research, development or manufacturing facilities.
  • Iraq must “unconditionally accept” the destruction, removal or rendering harmless “under international supervision” of all “ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 KM and related major parts and repair and production facilities.”
  • Iraq must not “use, develop, construct or acquire” any weapons of mass destruction.
  • Iraq must reaffirm its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
  • Creates the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) to verify the elimination of Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons programs and mandated that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) verify elimination of Iraq’s nuclear weapons program.
  • Iraq must declare fully its weapons of mass destruction programs.
  • Iraq must not commit or support terrorism, or allow terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq.
  • Iraq must cooperate in accounting for the missing and dead Kuwaitis and others.
  • Iraq must return Kuwaiti property seized during the Gulf War.

UNSCR 686 - March 2, 1991

  • Iraq must release prisoners detained during the Gulf War.
  • Iraq must return Kuwaiti property seized during the Gulf War.
  • Iraq must accept liability under international law for damages from its illegal invasion of Kuwait.

UNSCR 678 - November 29, 1990

  • Iraq must comply fully with UNSCR 660 (regarding Iraq’s illegal invasion of Kuwait) “and all subsequent relevant resolutions.”
  • Authorizes UN Member States “to use all necessary means to uphold and implement resolution 660 and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area.” [/quote]

So, it’s one thing to say you disagree with it, bu you can’t honestly argue that invading Iraq was outside the scope of the Constitution.

Of course, that has nothing to do with the topic. Why didn’t you tell us how much money you send the IRS every year above and beyond what you owe?

and

Do you not think that this extra money you are willing to let the government have would be better spent by a private charity? Wouldn’t you like to be allowed to choose exactly where the money goes in order to make this country a better place?

53

[quote]grew7 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
ZEB wrote:
sasquatch wrote:

You want to play semantics. I want everyone to pay their fair share.

No I don’t want to play semantics or any other game!

I simply want you to point out all the loopholes that YOU said were in the tax system for the rich.

You made an assertion that “the wealthy of this country pay less than the middle class.”

And percentage wise (there are less rich people than middle class folks) they pay [MORE!

I gaurantee you people who pull $1 mil/yr are not paying 33% of their income in taxes.

How very wrong you are my friend:

DEPARTMENT OF THE TRASURY

“The individual income tax is highly progressive- a small group of higher-income taxpayers pay most of the individual income taxes each year.”

The top 5% of taxpayers (by income) paid almost 54% of all individual income taxes!

There goes your theory!

Here you go:

And I’ll take the next step and say people who’s net worth puts them in the top 10% of wealth figures take advantage of many of the loopholes and ‘programs’ not available to those of us who survive on a much more modest income.

More assertions of loopholes yet still you don’t offer up any so that I can take advantage of them. I could get this sort of cheap talk at the local pub. You know when guys have a few beers and start complaining about how the rich get away with everything and they…the poor suckers have to pay up.

It’s really all just cheap talk huh?

My contention–again–is with the uber rich who probably have already figured a way to bypass this tax anyway.

Well…you keep saying it but can’t seem to come up with any verification for your pie in the sky working class theories…

Yet, I have shown you proof that the top 5% of all income earners in the country account for almost 54% of all taxes paid.

Stop the apparent jealous fit. If it were not for what you term as the “rich” in this country I think it’s safe to say that we would be a lot worse off.

Have you hugged a millionaire today?

:slight_smile:

ZEB

If you want to convey that you are rich, you are quite welcome to do so. Your statistical blah blah doesn’t tell the whole story. Because they pay (x) amount of taxes does not mean that they didn’t avoid paying more.

Your subtle putdowns aside, you’ve done nothing but throw the same numbers around that people do when they want to ‘prove’ how much they pay. They should. The top 10% of the moneyu tree in this country probably control 90% of the cash flow.

That is true. The top %10 of the nation controls 90% of the wealth, and the rest of the country is left with the 10% that is left over.

30 million people control this country’s wealth. The other 270 million scrounge for the scraps.

That is neither Christian nor just nor fair.

So? The %90 is still ALIVE with that %10, therefore they don’t NEED any more. I see nothing wrong here.[/quote]

See,

you’re just arguing for arguing sake. I’ve not complained about the distribution of wealth. Though your statement is idiotic, like people only need what it takes to stay alive, that makes everything ok. I’ve not mentioned socialism or any other such program. I simply stated the tax burden–the burden of actual payment falls heavier on the middle and lower class than the rich. I’ve suggested that they use the code to their advantage to further lighten that load.

I know you, like other posters, want us to believe you are in this certain economic elite group. That the rest of the population should be happy they can at least stay alive. You just come across as some dumb punk who’s trying to internet live some lifestyle, some little peon unhappy with his rung on the ladder.

54

its makes me proud to be a republican everytime doogie refutes one of your idiotic bablings with hard evidence and/or facts.

carry on Doogie

the rest of you. especially you wanna be Massachusetts Dems from NJ (you know who you are). Get the fuck out of my state, you are an embarassment to everything that is good about the dirty Jers.

55

[quote]sasquatch wrote:
grew7 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
ZEB wrote:
sasquatch wrote:

You want to play semantics. I want everyone to pay their fair share.

No I don’t want to play semantics or any other game!

I simply want you to point out all the loopholes that YOU said were in the tax system for the rich.

You made an assertion that “the wealthy of this country pay less than the middle class.”

And percentage wise (there are less rich people than middle class folks) they pay [MORE!

I gaurantee you people who pull $1 mil/yr are not paying 33% of their income in taxes.

How very wrong you are my friend:

DEPARTMENT OF THE TRASURY

“The individual income tax is highly progressive- a small group of higher-income taxpayers pay most of the individual income taxes each year.”

The top 5% of taxpayers (by income) paid almost 54% of all individual income taxes!

There goes your theory!

Here you go:

And I’ll take the next step and say people who’s net worth puts them in the top 10% of wealth figures take advantage of many of the loopholes and ‘programs’ not available to those of us who survive on a much more modest income.

More assertions of loopholes yet still you don’t offer up any so that I can take advantage of them. I could get this sort of cheap talk at the local pub. You know when guys have a few beers and start complaining about how the rich get away with everything and they…the poor suckers have to pay up.

It’s really all just cheap talk huh?

My contention–again–is with the uber rich who probably have already figured a way to bypass this tax anyway.

Well…you keep saying it but can’t seem to come up with any verification for your pie in the sky working class theories…

Yet, I have shown you proof that the top 5% of all income earners in the country account for almost 54% of all taxes paid.

Stop the apparent jealous fit. If it were not for what you term as the “rich” in this country I think it’s safe to say that we would be a lot worse off.

Have you hugged a millionaire today?

:slight_smile:

ZEB

If you want to convey that you are rich, you are quite welcome to do so. Your statistical blah blah doesn’t tell the whole story. Because they pay (x) amount of taxes does not mean that they didn’t avoid paying more.

Your subtle putdowns aside, you’ve done nothing but throw the same numbers around that people do when they want to ‘prove’ how much they pay. They should. The top 10% of the moneyu tree in this country probably control 90% of the cash flow.

That is true. The top %10 of the nation controls 90% of the wealth, and the rest of the country is left with the 10% that is left over.

30 million people control this country’s wealth. The other 270 million scrounge for the scraps.

That is neither Christian nor just nor fair.

So? The %90 is still ALIVE with that %10, therefore they don’t NEED any more. I see nothing wrong here.

See,

you’re just arguing for arguing sake. I’ve not complained about the distribution of wealth. Though your statement is idiotic, like people only need what it takes to stay alive, that makes everything ok. I’ve not mentioned socialism or any other such program. I simply stated the tax burden–the burden of actual payment falls heavier on the middle and lower class than the rich. I’ve suggested that they use the code to their advantage to further lighten that load.

I know you, like other posters, want us to believe you are in this certain economic elite group. That the rest of the population should be happy they can at least stay alive. You just come across as some dumb punk who’s trying to internet live some lifestyle, some little peon unhappy with his rung on the ladder.
[/quote]

If I come across like a dumbass, it’s because I’m a dumbass and/or ignorant. I won’t argue that. I have only recently become interested in politics. Yes, I really am arguing only for the sake of arguing. That seems to be a good way to become exposed to different opinions. I didn’t think of that “%90 of the wealth pays %50 of the taxes,” thing. It’s a good point, if it’s true.

I also didn’t mean that people should be glad for whatever they get. My reading comprehension skills are not the greatest, I believed you were one of the people who were deciding what really was “needed,” by anyone. After re-reading my reply and your message that I quoted, I can see that I was wrong.

56

[quote]biltritewave wrote:
its makes me proud to be a republican everytime doogie refutes one of your idiotic bablings with hard evidence and/or facts.

carry on Doogie

the rest of you. especially you wanna be Massachusetts Dems from NJ (you know who you are). Get the fuck out of my state, you are an embarassment to everything that is good about the dirty Jers. [/quote]

Yea, nothing like having a different opinion huh?

You’re either a rich kid from North Jersey or an ass from South Jersey who is happy he doesn’t live in the “New York Part of New Jersey”.

Either a bullshitter or a hillbilly. Fuck off. The voters of NJ have decided that its my state, not yours.

Have fun losing elections in my state.

57

[quote]grew7 wrote:

If I come across like a dumbass, it’s because I’m a dumbass and/or ignorant. I won’t argue that. I have only recently become interested in politics. Yes, I really am arguing only for the sake of arguing. That seems to be a good way to become exposed to different opinions. I didn’t think of that “%90 of the wealth pays %50 of the taxes,” thing. It’s a good point, if it’s true.

I also didn’t mean that people should be glad for whatever they get. My reading comprehension skills are not the greatest, I believed you were one of the people who were deciding what really was “needed,” by anyone. After re-reading my reply and your message that I quoted, I can see that I was wrong.[/quote]

Whether you’re being sarcastic or not, that’s why I dig the politics forums. You learn stuff whether you want to or not.

58

what does over taxing your neighbor going to get you? it’s not like they are going to take less from anybody if they take most from somebody. the more they take the more they get. saying “i’m glad they tax rich people because they deserve it” sounds allot like misery needing company. now i’m not rich at all, but i make enough to survive. if my neighbor makes one thousand times what i do what do i care? i’m not jealous, and convincing others to take away from them so i can feel better about my status is not going to help me. get over it, pay your taxes. fight for lower taxes for everybody, don’t turn against your neighbor. fight for each other, so that you both may win. just my 2 cents, take it or leave it. sadly i feel the later will be most common.

59

[quote]sasquatch wrote:

I am not your buddy or your pal. Yelling at me does not strengthen your point. [/quote]

I simply want you to produce the loopholes. Thought bold caps would get my point across.

I see it didn’t.

I guess we’ll have to disagree on that one too.

Yes, you have repeated that over and over. And I challenged you to name the loopholes…And of course you can’t seem to do that.

I know you never said anything about them doing anything illegal. And I never stated that you did.

Why mention this?

Yes, and I asked how. And you can’t seem to tell me how.

You are not looking at that properly. 5% of the people pay over 50% of all the taxes. Now you can turn that into money, but that still does not mean that a tiny percentage of people are not shouldering the brunt of the tax burden.

Now YOU (oops I shouted sorry) are the one playing word games…How silly.

I am going to have to challenge you on that one too.

Please site the “advantages in the tax code” that allow for “some” (and I assume you mean the rich) to lessen their tax burden.

I’m a moron? Well when it comes to finding loopholes, or certain “tax advantages” you might be right, because I don’t know of any.

You spent an entire thread and did not name any loopholes. Instead you changed the wording to “tax advantages that lessen the declared amount of income.”

Now please name the tax advatages that are used to lessen the tax bite for those who are rich.

I have asked you this basic question several times. Why don’t you simply list them if they are there? Especially if you and “your advisor have” have taken advantage of them.

Thank you.

60

[quote]sasquatch wrote:
I simply stated the tax burden–the burden of actual payment falls heavier on the middle and lower class than the rich. [/quote]

And I think you are wrong about that. Especially in light of the fact that the top 5% income earners pay about 54% of all the taxes. It looks like the burden falls upon the rich huh?

Please show me where they have an advantage relative to the tax code.

[quote]I know you, like other posters, want us to believe you are in this certain economic elite group. That the rest of the population should be happy they can at least stay alive. You just come across as some dumb punk who’s trying to internet live some lifestyle, some little peon unhappy with his rung on the ladder.
[/quote]

LOL!

I had one good year man lighten up.

Oh and while you are lightening up please list all the tax advantages that the rich have. You called them loopholes before, now you call them tax advantages…

I don’t care what you call them in your next post just list them.

If you can’t list them then simply say so. I will then not ask you anymore.

Fair?