My main problem with Bush

[jbooma]

Originally posted by DjTj

It shouldn't even be a question whether or not the rich should pay more in strict dollar terms. Even flat tax proposals are asking for flat percentage rates, not flat dollar amounts.

I agree with you but should they even be paying more then they do now??

[chomerics]

Originally posted by jbooma

They got the same as everyone around 2 and 3%.

My question is why do you care??

Someone making

$200K pays I think 32% so that equals to $64,000

Someone making $64K pays 28% which equals to $17K

Almost 3 times as much as the other person.

So why do they need to pay more when everyone is getting the same type of service from the government to begin with, you can say the poor get more.

Please don't give me this crap that richer people can deduct more etc....

Having been on both sides of the fence Booma it isn't crap. The more you earn the less of a % you pay. When you earn over 88K, you don't have to pay SSI anymore. You also have the benifit of hiring an accountant and the benifit of hiding your money from the government.

As far as aomebodying making 200K, they are not paying 32%, I'd say more like around 20% in income taxes. Compare this to the person who earns $35K. They pay around 20% in income taxes as well. Now, SSI is a MUCH higher % of their pay is that fair? How about when the price of milk goes up and other non-income forms of taxes gas, insurance, health care all the rest.

If you want to consider %'s, you should bring in ALL forms of taxes, not just income, but then if you did that, you would show everyone how truly unfair the tax system is.

But then again, if people making over 200K don't want to pay that much in taxes, they have a choice. . . choose a lower salary so you don't have to pay the GOD AWFUL 32%. . . Oh the HORROR!!!

[jbooma]

Originally posted by chomerics

As far as aomebodying making 200K, they are not paying 32%, I'd say more like around 20% in income taxes. Compare this to the person who earns $35K. They pay around 20% in income taxes as well.

Then get rid of deductions or make them pay the 32% in tax.

Your math is off though. How can someone making 200K get to the 20% bracket?? Lets say if they deduct $80k then they are still paying taxes on $120 which is 28% or 30% so again tell me where did this 20% come from??

Here is the exact brackets:

Single

Taxable income is over But not over The tax is Plus Of the amount over

$0 $7,150 $0.00 10% $0

7,150 29,050 715.00 15% 7,150

29,050 70,350 4,000.00 25% 29,050

70,350 146,750 14,325.00 28% 70,350

146,750 319,100 35,717.00 33% 146,750

319,100 92,592.50 35% 319,100

Married Filing Jointly

Qualifying Widow(er)

Taxable income is over But not over The tax is Plus Of the amount over

$0 $14,300 $0.00 10% $0

14,300 58,100 1,430.00 15% 14,300

58,100 117,250 8,000.00 25% 58,100

117,250 178,650 22,787.50 28% 117,250

178,650 319,100 39,979.50 33% 178,650

319,100 86,328.00 35% 319,100

[DjTj]

Originally posted by jbooma

I agree with you but should they even be paying more then they do now??

I can't answer that question for "them", but I think it's almost impossible to come up with a *fair* number for everyone. Not everyone with a particular income is in the same situation. Democracy has fudged the solution by making us pay whatever Congress tells us to pay...

In any case, I think the tax code is far too complicated and we could certainly stand to eliminate a lot of the deductions, but the moderate up-and-down shifts every election cycle aren't all that big a deal. The wealthy are free to lobby and vote for their interests, and the poor can do the same. The chips can fall where they may...

[chomerics]

Originally posted by NavyDave

The economy is booming even though the press and media is determined to downplay it the fact is 600,000 jobs is 600,000 jobs the problem is that the accurate report wil come out after the election so Bush needs to gets the facts out since most people won't go to the labor website.

What are you smoking ND. . . The Dow is down for the year and still hasn't approached any where near the level of the 90's. Jobs were created during a three month span, but they've been in the negative since he took over. Interest rates are on the rise, so is inflation, this is NOT a booming economy, no matter how many times Fox News tells you.

[Kilmer17]

I think you just hit upon the very crux of this election chom.

Those supporting Kerry think doom and gloom about the economy, while those supporting Bush see it as booming.

We'll see who is right in Nov. But I promise if Kerry wins, the lefty media will be signing the praises of the economy within a couple of months.

It's kind of like how there's never a story about homeless in the NY times during a Dem Pres, but a couple a month during a GOPer.

It's a booming economy when compared to every decade of the last 200 years. Attempting to compare it to the inflated and literally bursting economy under Clinton isnt a smart economic stance to take.

[docdru]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

It's a booming economy when compared to every decade of the last 200 years.

Wow, how do I add this to my profile?

[Kilmer17]

You should start by doing research instead of pulling your info from Dem talking points memo's.

[docdru]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

You should start by doing research instead of pulling your info from Dem talking points memo's.

Im sure you spent a lot of time researching that last statement.

[docdru]

No but seriously, off topic, but how do you add comments/pictures to the bottom of your messages?

[chomerics]

Originally posted by jbooma

Then get rid of deductions or make them pay the 32% in tax.

Your math is off though. How can someone making 200K get to the 20% bracket?? Lets say if they deduct $80k then they are still paying taxes on $120 which is 28% or 30% so again tell me where did this 20% come from??

Well, 30% of $120K is $36K correct? So now tell me what % that would be on 200K? Well, that would be 18% of 200K. Do you see how it works now? The more you make, the less of a % you end up paying because of benifits you recieve when making that amount of money. Compare this with the person making 40K and paying 10K. This isn't even counting the fact that $110K of the money doesn't have SSI taken out of it.

So now do you see why it is not fair?

[Kilmer17]

plenty actually.

But therein lies the difference between an intelligent person like myself, and an aping political nave like yourself.

Do your own research. We all know what the part line is. We dont need to see you regurgitate it on every thread.

[Kilmer17]

Seriously?

Go to usercp and then to Edit Profile.

[chomerics]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

It's a booming economy when compared to every decade of the last 200 years. Attempting to compare it to the inflated and literally bursting economy under Clinton isnt a smart economic stance to take.

WOW, here's to the post of the year

Probably the mose asanine thing I've ever read from you Kilmer and you've had a few good ones.

[docdru]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

plenty actually.

But therein lies the difference between an intelligent person like myself, and an aping political nave like yourself.

Do your own research. We all know what the part line is. We dont need to see you regurgitate it on every thread.

i seriously doubt you've done any of your own research. In fact i'd bet thousands of dollars that you've never done any original research in your life. I come from a family of professors. My grandfather was one, my father was one, my uncles are professors, they all do real RESEARCH for a living. You probably just surf the web and consider that research. Real research is hard long work and people make careers out of it. It's what I plan to do with my life. You're just a nitwit who thinks he knows what he's talking about. I wish I could stand here and berate you longer but I get off work now. I shall continue this in an hour. Good day sir.

[docdru]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

Seriously?

Go to usercp and then to Edit Profile.

thanks

[JackC]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

The same tax cut that everyone else got.

My tax cut was less than $700, no one got more of a cut than my $700? Oh I guess I didn't understand it was the same.

[Mister Happy]

Originally posted by chomerics

Well, 30% of $120K is $36K correct? So now tell me what % that would be on 200K? Well, that would be 18% of 200K. Do you see how it works now? The more you make, the less of a % you end up paying because of benifits you recieve when making that amount of money. Compare this with the person making 40K and paying 10K. This isn't even counting the fact that $110K of the money doesn't have SSI taken out of it.

So now do you see why it is not fair?

So you are implying that the majority of people making $200K are deducting around $80K, so they only pay 20 percent?

Interesting.

[NoCalMike]

Personally I think the Bush administration has set a dangerous precedent of non-accountability for actions taken. His administration is making up new rules as they break, bend, pull or outright ignore, and when questioned they just give the same old, "what you want me to follow the rules? Umm 9/11 silly, the world is different, nah nah nah nah nah"

The fact that our President deliberately or not deliberately led us into war based on errornous pretenses has just kind of been glossed over by the corporate media. He is getting a free pass. "The intelligence was faulty" is not an excuse, that would be a decent excuse for me or you, or a fellow citizen, but not the commander in chief, the #1 guy running the entire ship.

Not that I think the Democrats are much better, they are even slightly worse these days because they talk a mean game, and then help vote in the wretched republican bills.

Both parties are basically slaves to coporate interests, regardless if one supports abortion and one is against abortion, that is just an example of a feeble non-issue designed to keep americans distracted from more important issues.

[jbooma]

Originally posted by chomerics

WOW, here's to the post of the year

Probably the mose asanine thing I've ever read from you Kilmer and you've had a few good ones.

Actually it is correct, people like you think the stock market of the 90's was real.

I hate to break it to you but companies stock prices should never be in the 300's. The market got over 10k which is a huge success for a realistic stock market. You are not seeing inflated prices like you saw back in the 90's. The job report Navy I think was talking about with the 600K jobs, well that is correct as well. You see the job report that came out last week that said 30k in new jobs, is one that doesn't include young companies and contractors Do some research and find out the other report

People who make over 200K still have to pay 33% percent, they can't get out of it.

I am still curious where you get this 20% from, your math amazes me.

[jbooma]

Originally posted by docdru

i seriously doubt you've done any of your own research. In fact i'd bet thousands of dollars that you've never done any original research in your life. I come from a family of professors. My grandfather was one, my father was one, my uncles are professors, they all do real RESEARCH for a living. You probably just surf the web and consider that research. Real research is hard long work and people make careers out of it. It's what I plan to do with my life. You're just a nitwit who thinks he knows what he's talking about. I wish I could stand here and berate you longer but I get off work now. I shall continue this in an hour. Good day sir.

well my dad did this, and his dad did this, and his brother's uncle in jail's girlfriend did this

listen to yourself you sound like a spoiled little kid :doh:

[NoCalMike]

Originally posted by jbooma

People who make over 200K still have to pay 33% percent, they can't get out of it.

I am still curious where you get this 20% from, your math amazes me.

You have got to be kidding me? Corporations don't hide profits and exaggerate expenses? People don't write off like crazy for items and expenses that have nothing REALLY to do with their buiness? Get serious. The more money you make the better accountant you can hire which in turn gets you out of paying taxes for the most part. Hell if corporate loopholes were closed instead of contstant burden being shifted to the middle-class, we may actually be able to lower the tax rate for EVERYONE and not run into a huge defeciet.

[jbooma]

Originally posted by NoCalMike

You have got to be kidding me? Corporations don't hide profits and exaggerate expenses? People don't write off like crazy for items and expenses that have nothing REALLY to do with their buiness? Get serious. The more money you make the better accountant you can hire which in turn gets you out of paying taxes for the most part. Hell if corporate loopholes were closed instead of contstant burden being shifted to the middle-class, we may actually be able to lower the tax rate for EVERYONE and not run into a huge defeciet.

No $hit but are you going to make $200k turn into $50k I don't think there is such a accountant out there, if there is where is their number

Now for people making over 500K yes I believe but we only tax up to 319K anyway. So if you make 500k and you get it down to 319 you are still paying 112k in taxes, and you think that is fair!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If it was you would be screaming.

If that person kept the salary at 500k they would end up paying 175k in taxes, sorry but that is not fair. I don't care how much the make.

[Mister Happy]

Originally posted by NoCalMike

You have got to be kidding me? Corporations don't hide profits and exaggerate expenses? People don't write off like crazy for items and expenses that have nothing REALLY to do with their buiness? Get serious. The more money you make the better accountant you can hire which in turn gets you out of paying taxes for the most part. Hell if corporate loopholes were closed instead of contstant burden being shifted to the middle-class, we may actually be able to lower the tax rate for EVERYONE and not run into a huge defeciet.

Are you implying that only the rich cheat on their taxes?

Interesting.

[SnyderShrugged]

Originally posted by chomerics

Well, 30% of $120K is $36K correct? So now tell me what % that would be on 200K? Well, that would be 18% of 200K. Do you see how it works now? The more you make, the less of a % you end up paying because of benifits you recieve when making that amount of money. Compare this with the person making 40K and paying 10K. This isn't even counting the fact that $110K of the money doesn't have SSI taken out of it.

So now do you see why it is not fair?

Cho,

I think that you are basing your thoughts on one main point. That SSI isnt deducted on income after $88K.

There is one thought I have here, Isnt the $88K set as the bar because after that point your real deductions start to far outweigh the allotted benefits you would receive later in life?

We can't use the non-payment after $88K as rationale for unfairness then. WE shouldnt expect anyone to pay into a retirement system anything beyond the beneifts that anyone else would receive.

I also feel that too many people are looking at this in whole dollars as opposed to their percentage of gross income. I'm in the camp of equality in proportion. Nickle and diming other "expenses" and the use of accountants as a reason that the rich are more benefitted doesnt work here either.

Lastly, as far as deductions. There is no disparity in what an individual is allowed to itemize as a deduction nor is there a limitation as to who is entitled to pay for a top notch accountant, nor is there any prohibition to any individual reaserching the tax codes and figuring out for themselves how to maximize their deductions.

The rules are fair in my book. Anyone with the motivation, will and fortitude to succeed can utilize the current tax system to gain maximum returns. By saying that they earn less and therefor can't afford the luxury of being self informed is just plain silly.