Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

'Cuz the times, they are a changin'Follow

#1 Sep 20 2011 at 10:26 AM Rating: Good
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
I like it when the AP tells the liberals they're full of sh:t.

In other news, I was heartened when the comments section of the local liberal paper showed a significantly higher volume of "f'uck 'em" comments to the story about the President's tax plan than I normally would have expected. The overwhelming sentiment was that if we're going to advocate for a fair share being paid, the 46% of Americans who pay no federal income tax should pony the f'uck up.

People are waking up to the fact that there are a whole lot of people in this country getting a free ride.

Cheesy 90's tunes for 400, Alex:
Bob Dylan didn't have this to sing about, you know it feels good to be alive.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#2 Sep 20 2011 at 10:37 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
11,446 posts
I'm all for paying my 'fair share' if/when something gets passed. It feels kind of silly to get so much back from the government. Not sure how that meshes with that 'no higher taxes' pledge though.

In the meantime yay for the child tax credit I guess. Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#3 Sep 20 2011 at 3:07 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,372 posts
Everyone who hasn't had their head stuck in the liberal punch bowl has known that the whole Buffet thing was BS from the start. I do find it amusing, that even in the midst of this sort of piece, apparently neither the writer nor the Secretary of the Treasury can accurately distinguish between "income" and "earnings" in a context where it's very important to make said distinction. Which is interesting given that the writer actually writes about the difference in the article, but then still uses the wrong word anyway.

Geithner, on the other hand, is just a tool.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#4 Sep 20 2011 at 10:33 PM Rating: Good
Moe wrote:
The overwhelming sentiment was that if we're going to advocate for a fair share being paid, the 46% of Americans who pay no federal income tax should pony the f'uck up.


Agreed.

Article wrote:

In 2009, 1,470 households filed tax returns with incomes above $1 million yet paid no federal income tax, according to the Internal Revenue Service.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#5 Sep 20 2011 at 11:07 PM Rating: Good
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Moe wrote:
The overwhelming sentiment was that if we're going to advocate for a fair share being paid, the 46% of Americans who pay no federal income tax should pony the f'uck up.


Agreed.

Article wrote:

In 2009, 1,470 households filed tax returns with incomes above $1 million yet paid no federal income tax, according to the Internal Revenue Service.

Cherry pick much?
Quote:
But that's less than 1 percent of the nearly 237,000 returns with incomes above $1 million.

Taxing those 1500 millionaires only gets us $2,000,000,000 a year.

If 46% of American households will pay no federal income tax, that's nearly 53,000,000 households. If those households average $20,000/yr., that's $30,000,000,000 in extra revenue a year (using the numbers from the article).
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#6 Sep 21 2011 at 2:35 AM Rating: Default
****
7,819 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
Cheesy 90's tunes for 400, Alex:
Bob Dylan didn't have this to sing about, you know it feels good to be alive.


It's so true. You see people paying for food with the Lonestar card and getting better food than you. They get free housing, free bus rides, free medical, child care. Their children go to school for free and get clothing free. The list goes on. I remember when I was laid off and spending all that time searching for another job and when my unemployment ran out could I get anything? Hell no!
____________________________
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v619/ImGatomon/Request.jpg

. “Power even if it is raw uncontrolled potential is just as dangerous as a trained assassin. It is unpredictable and deadly if your are not prepared." ~Gatomon From the story A Fox Among Wolves.
#7 Sep 21 2011 at 3:58 AM Rating: Excellent
Moe wrote:
If 46% of American households will pay no federal income tax, that's nearly 53,000,000 households. If those households average $20,000/yr., that's $30,000,000,000 in extra revenue a year (using the numbers from the article).


Cool. I'll agree to let you make the "poor" pay an income tax, which would require the elimination of the deductions they apply in order to lower what they owe to the point that they do not pay an income tax, if you agree to eliminate the deductions the "rich" use to not pay their full share of income taxes.

Oh, & at the same time, since many of the rich don't make their money via paychecks; increase the rate of capital gains taxes, investments, et. al, on those that don't receive a pay check & take out social security & medicare taxes too from those revenues too.

Deal?

Article wrote:

"People who are doing quite well and worry about low-income people not paying any taxes bemoan the fact that they get so many tax breaks that they are zeroed out," said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center. "People at the bottom of the distribution say, 'But all of those rich guys are getting bigger tax breaks than we're getting,' which is also the case."
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#8 Sep 21 2011 at 5:35 AM Rating: Good
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Oh, & at the same time, since many of the rich don't make their money via paychecks; increase the rate of capital gains taxes, investments, et. al, on those that don't receive a pay check & take out social security & medicare taxes too from those revenues too.

Deal?

It's not class warfare, it's math, right?
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#9 Sep 21 2011 at 7:01 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,537 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:


If 46% of American households will pay no federal income tax, that's nearly 53,000,000 households. If those households average $20,000/yr., that's $30,000,000,000 in extra revenue a year (using the numbers from the article).

Haha, we'll feed them, shelter them, exploit their paltry condition with low paying jobs and high-priced addictions, and then turn around and demand payment in the form of income tax?

More folks than ever are falling short of the lowest income tax bracket, and your solution is to what...lower the bracket?





Edited, Sep 21st 2011 3:01pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#10 Sep 21 2011 at 7:12 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,669 posts
Elinda wrote:
Haha, we'll feed them, shelter them, exploit their paltry condition with low paying jobs and high-priced addictions, and then turn around and demand payment in the form of income tax?
You know who you're talking to right? Are you actually trying to reach the compassionate* side of Moe?



* compassionate is not the right word here, but I think it gets the point across.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#11 Sep 21 2011 at 7:27 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
MoebiusLord wrote:
It's not class warfare, it's math, right?

When the only tool you have is rhetoric, every problem looks like "class warfare".

"Dismantle Medicare! Slash Medicaid! Privatize Social Security! Ban Planned Parenthood! Stop those leeching public kindergarten teachers!"
"End some Bush-era tax cuts?"
"OMG CLASS WARFARE!!!!"
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#12 Sep 21 2011 at 7:27 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,537 posts
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
Elinda wrote:
Haha, we'll feed them, shelter them, exploit their paltry condition with low paying jobs and high-priced addictions, and then turn around and demand payment in the form of income tax?
You know who you're talking to right? Are you actually trying to reach the compassionate* side of Moe?



* compassionate is not the right word here, but I think it gets the point across.

Compassion has nothing to do with it. There's a point where the natives get restless.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#13 Sep 21 2011 at 7:33 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,669 posts
Elinda wrote:
Compassion has nothing to do with it. There's a point where the natives get restless.
That's what boot heels are for.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#14 Sep 21 2011 at 7:34 AM Rating: Excellent
Moe wrote:
It's not class warfare, it's math, right?


You're the one that wants everyone to pay income taxes. I thought you meant EVERYONE. If you only meant the POOR, well, then I suppose it is.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#15 Sep 21 2011 at 7:38 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,191 posts
War on Drugs, War on Terror, Class Warfare.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#16 Sep 21 2011 at 7:47 AM Rating: Decent
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,021 posts
Jophiel wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
It's not class warfare, it's math, right?

When the only tool you have is rhetoric, every problem looks like "class warfare".

"Dismantle Medicare! Slash Medicaid! Privatize Social Security! Ban Planned Parenthood! Stop those leeching public kindergarten teachers!"
"End some Obama-era tax cuts?"
"OMG CLASS WARFARE!!!!"

FTFY
____________________________
Almalieque wrote:
I'm biased against statistics

#17varusword75, Posted: Sep 21 2011 at 7:50 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Joph,
#18 Sep 21 2011 at 7:50 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Quote:
FTFY

If that was true, the GOP would be screaming about how they're PURE SOCIALISM!! and a GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER!!

Edited, Sep 21st 2011 8:51am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#19 Sep 21 2011 at 7:53 AM Rating: Decent
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Elinda wrote:
Haha, we'll feed them, shelter them, exploit their paltry condition with low paying jobs and high-priced addictions, and then turn around and demand payment in the form of income tax?

More folks than ever are falling short of the lowest income tax bracket, and your solution is to what...lower the bracket?

You'd prefer that they pay for that second TV, or maybe the new XBox and a cell phone with the cash they have left over after we buy their food, pay their rent and provide them with health care? Thanks, but if I'm paying the freight, they're going to have to chip in.
Elinda wrote:
Compassion has nothing to do with it. There's a point where the natives get restless.

Hey, when she's right, she's right. The natives who are footing the bill are getting restless as hell. The end is near for the welfare state in America as we know it.
Omegavegeta wrote:
You're the one that wants everyone to pay income taxes. I thought you meant EVERYONE. If you only meant the POOR, well, then I suppose it is.

I do mean everyone. I also think if you have to declare all capital gains and pay taxes on them you should be able to deduct all capital losses (the cap is around $3,000 at the moment). Capital Gains are the return on the investment that makes the economy possible. Encouraging it is paramount in my opinion. The poor have the same opportunity to invest as the rich, they simply choose to spend their disposable income on other things (as evidenced by recently published data on the ammenaties the "poor" provide themselves with). Coupled with the fact that Capital Gains are after tax dollars anyway, it silly to suggest raising the rates there.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#20 Sep 21 2011 at 7:56 AM Rating: Default
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Jophiel wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
It's not class warfare, it's math, right?

When the only tool you have is rhetoric, every problem looks like "class warfare".

Just because it's the one most frequently applied doesn't mean it's the only one in the box. It is the most appropriate response to stupidity, and there's a f'uck ton of that around here.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#21 Sep 21 2011 at 7:57 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
varusword75 wrote:
Turns out that even Palin is within the margin of error were she to run against old barry.

Provided your poll has a 15 point margin of error, sure.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#22 Sep 21 2011 at 7:58 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
MoebiusLord wrote:
Just because it's the one most frequently applied doesn't mean it's the only one in the box. It is the most appropriate response to stupidity, and there's a f'uck ton of that around here.

I'm trying to find the correct rhetoric for my response.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#23 Sep 21 2011 at 8:04 AM Rating: Decent
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Jophiel wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
Just because it's the one most frequently applied doesn't mean it's the only one in the box. It is the most appropriate response to stupidity, and there's a f'uck ton of that around here.

I'm trying to find the correct rhetoric for my response.

I'm sure you'll figure something out. "herpderp" would be par for the course.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#24 Sep 21 2011 at 8:19 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
MoebiusLord wrote:
"herpderp" would be par for the course.

Kao's a-gonna ban you when he finds out you're another Proof-sock.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#25 Sep 21 2011 at 8:37 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,537 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
The end is near for the welfare state in America as we know it.
I'd be ok with that.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#26 Sep 21 2011 at 9:00 AM Rating: Good
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Jophiel wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
"herpderp" would be par for the course.

Kao's a-gonna ban you when he finds out you're another Proof-sock.

Wouldn't be the first time.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#27 Sep 21 2011 at 9:19 AM Rating: Excellent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,834 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
You'd prefer that they pay for that second TV, or maybe the new XBox and a cell phone with the cash they have left over after we buy their food, pay their rent and provide them with health care? Thanks, but if I'm paying the freight, they're going to have to chip in.

I thought that consumers had to spend their money on frivolous bullshit to keep the economy running?
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#28 Sep 21 2011 at 9:24 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,669 posts
Debalic wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
You'd prefer that they pay for that second TV, or maybe the new XBox and a cell phone with the cash they have left over after we buy their food, pay their rent and provide them with health care? Thanks, but if I'm paying the freight, they're going to have to chip in.

I thought that consumers had to spend their money on frivolous bullshit to keep the economy running?
And Moe will do just that when you reduce the taxes taken from him.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#29 Sep 21 2011 at 10:08 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
11,446 posts
After so many years of Republicans trying to lower my taxes I just have to chuckle that there are those among them that want to make them go up again.

Maybe I'm all turned around on this but I thought the child tax credit passed a Republican-controlled legislature in the first place?
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#30 Sep 21 2011 at 10:18 AM Rating: Excellent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,610 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
The poor have the same opportunity to invest as the rich, they simply choose to spend their disposable income on other things (as evidenced by recently published data on the ammenaties the "poor" provide themselves with).


Like refrigerators! Those "poor" people be living a life of luxury with their ability to store food at safe temperatures...
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#31 Sep 21 2011 at 10:37 AM Rating: Default
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
TirithRR wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
The poor have the same opportunity to invest as the rich, they simply choose to spend their disposable income on other things (as evidenced by recently published data on the ammenaties the "poor" provide themselves with).


Like refrigerators! Those "poor" people be living a life of luxury with their ability to store food at safe temperatures...

You can be pithy all you like, but if you have no outrage over the fact that you're subsidizing the poor so they can go out and pay cable TV, cell phone & internet bills, you're not qualified to chime in on the subject, period.

Here's the full graph.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#32 Sep 21 2011 at 10:41 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I was amused by things like refrigerators, air conditioning, dishwashers, cable, etc being listed. I would assume that people in the lower income brackets would be more likely to rent than own and many of these things are apartment-owned amenities.

Other things are technology that can be purchased for hella cheap these days. I was in a Goodwill the other day and they had 26" color televisions (CRT) for under ten dollars. Damn those fake poor people with their ten dollar TVs and apartment-provided dishwashers!

Edit: VCRs? Really? Smiley: laugh

Edited, Sep 21st 2011 11:43am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#33 Sep 21 2011 at 10:56 AM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,021 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Damn those fake poor people with their ten dollar TVs and apartment-provided dishwashers!

Do you have any idea how hard it is to find an apartment in Chicago with a dishwasher? Like finding a piece of the true cross.
____________________________
Almalieque wrote:
I'm biased against statistics

#34 Sep 21 2011 at 10:57 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,191 posts
That's what wives are for.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#35 Sep 21 2011 at 10:59 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
11,446 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
That's what wives are for.


Smiley: nod

We haven't even run the dishwasher since she moved in.

Crazy Hawaiians...
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#36 Sep 21 2011 at 11:15 AM Rating: Decent
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I was amused by things like refrigerators, air conditioning, dishwashers, cable, etc being listed. I would assume that people in the lower income brackets would be more likely to rent than own and many of these things are apartment-owned amenities.

Other things are technology that can be purchased for hella cheap these days. I was in a Goodwill the other day and they had 26" color televisions (CRT) for under ten dollars. Damn those fake poor people with their ten dollar TVs and apartment-provided dishwashers!

Edit: VCRs? Really? Smiley: laugh

Yep, focus on that. It's a good way to draw attention away from the fact that they're skating on a grand a year in income taxes so they can spend $100 a month on cable tv and cell phones. $30billion a year in unrealized revenue for the federal government so people making $22k/year can text while driving and watch Springer re-runs when they get home to the apartment the government pays for while eating the dinner the government paid for in front of the television the government allowed them to buy by subsidizing their actual needs.

Damn those rich people no paying their fair share. I wish it was easier to reduce that gem to mere rhetoric.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#37 Sep 21 2011 at 11:20 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Demea wrote:
Do you have any idea how hard it is to find an apartment in Chicago with a dishwasher? Like finding a piece of the true cross.

Explains why less than 40% have one!

They do have cell phones though. Technology so rare and expensive that it can only be owned by the wealthiest of princes.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#38 Sep 21 2011 at 11:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
MoebiusLord wrote:
Yep, focus on that. It's a good way to draw attention away from the fact that they're skating on a grand a year in income taxes so they can spend $100 a month on cable tv and cell phones.

Says who? The little chart you and Megyn Kelly wave around insisting that I be outraged over 15 year old TVs and pay-per-minute cellphones? Oh, wait, no... that didn't say that. It just said said that those poor people had the gall to have TVs and VCRs.

But totally my bad for pointing out how silly that is. Excellent use of rhetoric though what with all the "government bought!" and demands of outrage and all.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#39 Sep 21 2011 at 11:31 AM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,088 posts
Actually, a lot of the apartments around here also include basic cable in the package too. And due to monopolies, even if you could afford and wanted to pay money for a different cable company, or a sattelite dish, you're not allowed to.

About the only apartments I've lived in that didn't included at least basic cable as part of the rent were the Slumlord Deluxe (tm) places. One was a house built in the 1930s that was made of plaste and lathe walls and had squirrels in the roof. The other one was the bottom half of a duplex built in the 1960s that had clapboard shingles on the outside and a palmetto bug infestation that no number of calls to pest control could ever fix.

Ironically, our rent for that 1930s house was $1000 a month and the mortgage on our brand new, much nicer owned house is $660, including the escrow payments for insurance.

The crappy house was condemned by the county shortly after we moved out, and the owners were forced to do extensive repairs and rennovations in order to continue renting it out. Damn government regulations! Come to think of it, it didn't have a dishwasher either.

Edit: The "poor people shouldn't have cell phones" one always gets me, especially those who are homeless. How do you expect them to get a job if they can't get any phone calls? Most of the time, the homeless or indigent won't qualify for the contract based phone providers, so they're pre-paying for a lower quality of service and they had to pay cash up front for their phone, to boot. I'm not going to hold it against someone for paying $50 cash for a feature phone from MetroPCS and $40 a month for unlimited calls with no data plan. If you have no job, that $40 a month IS an investment.

Edited, Sep 21st 2011 1:36pm by catwho
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and the League of Extraordinary Crafters
#40 Sep 21 2011 at 11:31 AM Rating: Decent
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,021 posts
Clothes washer: 64.5%
Cable or satellite TV: 63.7%
Clothes dryer: 57.4%
Internet service: 42.6%
Big-Screen plasma/LCD TV: 33.7%
Video game system: 29.3%
Digital video recorder: 23.1%

All things that people above the poverty line who pay income taxes are sometimes forced to live without.

I think I may rob the next poor person I see with a DVR and pawn it for tax money.
____________________________
Almalieque wrote:
I'm biased against statistics

#41 Sep 21 2011 at 11:40 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Quote:
All things that people above the poverty line who pay income taxes are sometimes forced to live without.

Apparently all things that people below the poverty line are sometimes forced to live without as well. And I'm sure there's some people out there living above their supposed poverty stricken means. But you'll have to excuse me for leaving my torch unlit when presented with "Video game system - 29.3%" which means anything from an Atari 2600 to a first generation Gameboy or Playstation to an Xbox 360.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#42 Sep 21 2011 at 11:41 AM Rating: Good
Moe wrote:
$30billion a year in unrealized revenue for the federal government so people making $22k/year can text while driving and watch Springer re-runs when they get home to the apartment the government pays for while eating the dinner the government paid for in front of the television the government allowed them to buy by subsidizing their actual needs.


Moe wrote:
Taxing those 1500 millionaires only gets us $2,000,000,000 a year.


Just where are your priorities, Moe?
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#43 Sep 21 2011 at 11:47 AM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,021 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Quote:
All things that people above the poverty line who pay income taxes are sometimes forced to live without.

Apparently all things that people below the poverty line are sometimes forced to live without as well. And I'm sure there's some people out there living above their supposed poverty stricken means. But you'll have to excuse me for leaving my torch unlit when presented with "Video game system - 29.3%" which means anything from an Atari 2600 to a first generation Gameboy or Playstation to an Xbox 360.

Sure, you can nitpick on the lack of detail in certain small-ticket items (cell phones, video game consoles, TVs). It's true, at least in the sense that it can't be disproven.

But why on God's green earth should taxpayers be subsidizing anybody to purchase big-screen plasma/LCD TVs or internet? These aren't what I'd call "basic needs" any more than a pay-as-you-go cell phone or Atari 2600 are.
____________________________
Almalieque wrote:
I'm biased against statistics

#44 Sep 21 2011 at 11:50 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,191 posts
Tax payers don't seem to mind paying for internet, television, dvd players , projectors, computers, and cable for anything connected to defense spending.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#45 Sep 21 2011 at 11:51 AM Rating: Good
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Moe wrote:
$30billion a year in unrealized revenue for the federal government so people making $22k/year can text while driving and watch Springer re-runs when they get home to the apartment the government pays for while eating the dinner the government paid for in front of the television the government allowed them to buy by subsidizing their actual needs.


Moe wrote:
Taxing those 1500 millionaires only gets us $2,000,000,000 a year.


Just where are your priorities, Moe?

If that's a serious question, they are in scrapping the current tax code altogether for a flat rate income tax, regardless of source, that would hit every single income earner and corporation in the United States of America, lowering government spending on an annual basis to no more than 18% GDP and limiting deficit spending to 4% GDP in wartime.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#46 Sep 21 2011 at 11:53 AM Rating: Decent
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,021 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Tax payers don't seem to mind paying for internet, television, dvd players , projectors, computers, and cable for anything connected to defense spending.

The fact that you think that the two things are related concerns me.
____________________________
Almalieque wrote:
I'm biased against statistics

#47 Sep 21 2011 at 11:55 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,191 posts
Demea wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Tax payers don't seem to mind paying for internet, television, dvd players , projectors, computers, and cable for anything connected to defense spending.
The fact that you think that the two things are related concerns me.
So we're not talking about wasted tax payer's money?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#48 Sep 21 2011 at 11:55 AM Rating: Good
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Tax payers don't seem to mind paying for internet, television, dvd players , projectors, computers, and cable for anything connected to defense spending.

I would not object to closing every overseas base, airfield, port, listening station, etc., that we currently operate not in a U.S. territory outside a theater of war. I would also not be opposed to unilaterally ending U.S. military involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan & Libya immediately.

Then again, I'm not a Republican.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#49 Sep 21 2011 at 12:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
11,446 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Demea wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Tax payers don't seem to mind paying for internet, television, dvd players , projectors, computers, and cable for anything connected to defense spending.
The fact that you think that the two things are related concerns me.
So we're not talking about wasted tax payer's money?

This is about your vibrating chair again isn't it?

I'm still envious. Smiley: glare
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#50 Sep 21 2011 at 12:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I should nitpick every detail I want because I'm being asked to be outraged over it.

At the time that chart was made, 10% of US households were still on dial-up. I guess I'm just not willing to assume ownership of someone else's life and micromanage their choices on account of me paying taxes. Which is what this list boils down to -- I'm supposed to get all pissed off if someone has a $14.99 dial-up account on a shitty Pentium II computer because they're not paying federal income tax. It's like an even more pathetic remake of the Reagan "Cadillac Welfare Queens" story except this one just uses misleading statistics instead of outright lies and wants be to be all upset over televisions and VCRs instead of luxury cars.

Maybe there's a good argument for lowering the level at which you wind up not paying federal income tax. These half-assed appeals to emotion under the guise of "data" aren't it.

Edited, Sep 21st 2011 1:02pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#51 Sep 21 2011 at 12:06 PM Rating: Decent
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,021 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Demea wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Tax payers don't seem to mind paying for internet, television, dvd players , projectors, computers, and cable for anything connected to defense spending.
The fact that you think that the two things are related concerns me.
So we're not talking about wasted tax payer's money?

There's a Salvation Army joke in here somewhere, I just can't find it.
____________________________
Almalieque wrote:
I'm biased against statistics

« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 35 All times are in CDT
Sugeo, Anonymous Guests (34)