Forum Post: Shouldn't poor people have to pay something too?
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 21, 2011, 11:46 a.m. EST by Trogdor
(65)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Why do i have to tell my kids that I cannot give them a swing set because some kid living in the projects, who has a common area with a playground, needs something else for free? I pay for my food and for theirs. I pay for my housing and for theirs. I pay for my utilities and subsidize theirs. I pay for my medical and subsidize theirs. I send my child to school with lunch and pay for the poor kids hot meals. I pay for my cell bill, the poor qualify for free, limited service. I pay for my internet, the poor can qualify for free. Why do I have to pay and they do not?
The poor are taxed on everything except income tax: sales tax, excise tax, property tax, value-added tax, and don't forget the taxes on corporations which are then simply added to the cost of the necessary goods they sell, like food, fuel and water.
As a percentage of income, the poor pay much, much, much more than the rich.
amen to that
You left out the dead peasant tax. Even in death they profit off us.
yes.
and now if you sell any thing on line they will send you 1099form at the end of the year
All of the taxes you mention are not paid by everyone at all times.
Some states do not have a sales tax.
Excise tax is typically only on certain discretionary products - cigarettes and alcohol. Discretionary in the sense the product is not a necessity. The only one where it is not discretionary is gasoline. However, you would have to assume the poor own cars and are not using public transportation. if a person can own a vehicle and maintain it along with insurance they are doing okay by most standards.
VAT is a rare tax in the U.S. and not applicable to normal consumer goods.
Taxes on corporations do reflect in the price of their goods but it is not an additional tax that is on top of the price of their goods. A person can choose to buy a lower priced item.
So I don't know how you get the poor paying so much more of the percentage of their income then someone who makes more.
The poor do not pay a higher percentage of taxes than the rich. It's simply not true. We have a progressive taxation system. Do a little tax planning for a few different economic scenarios and you'll eventually get it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=1
STFU....... marginal rates mean nothing
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/senator-coburn-presents-subsidies-rich-and-famous
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/ge-filed-57000-page-tax-return-paid-no-taxes-14-billion-profits_609137.html
If you claim to know all the tax code required to accurately file a 57,000 page tax return, I'd cock slap you across the forehead in town square.
Do you know what the Constitution says about being subjected to laws of which a reasonable man cannot, or should not, be expected to understand?
Of course you do not, nor do you believe it applies if an entity can afford 1 million CPA hours to find and exploit all the tax code their big money has purchased, which by the way, constitutes TREASON.
Wrong. See the book "the price of civilization". The poor pay more percentage wise than many millionaires do!
Income tax is progressive. Sales tax - not. Property tax - not. Taxes not called taxes, like Social Security - not. It all adds up.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
Property tax? they are poor they don't own anything...
and if you think that comes close to what the 1% pay in luxury taxes and property taxes you're insane 1% = 40% of the revenue
If they aren't living in public housing but are renting, property tax expense is passed on to them as part of their rent. When taxes go up, rents go up too.
But their rent only goes up slightly. The landlord does not pass 100% of their property taxes on the renter, they would never be able to rent property. Plus if a renter lives in a multi-unit property the increase is divided among the other renters. If they live in rent controlled areas (Santa Monica for example) the rent does not go up at all.
No, with rent control the local authorities allow increases in rent when certain "costs" like taxes go up. They are passed directly on to the tenants. Rent control just means there is a cap on the profit of the landlord, as there should be for all landlords since they do not do any work anyway.
" If they live in rent controlled areas (Santa Monica for example) the rent does not go up at all."
Hey, maybe that's true in California, but that's not true where I live. The property tax gets passed on, in a similiar percent, even in rent controlled units. A property tax increase is one of the instances where the l.l. CAN raise the rent higher than the allowed yearly increase.
Oh yes they do. In fact, when I have to raise my rent because of property taxes, I specifically show my tenants the bill from the county. I only raise the rent if the higher taxes or insurance would raise by an average of $50 a month too. So that means expenses overall have to go up $600 in order for a rent increase to take effect. But I do increase the rent by the entire amount.
Are you in a rent control area? Are your tenants also under section 8 subsidies?
I would never accept Section 8 as I take pride in the condition of my properties, and I sure as hell wouldn't be doing this if the nanny state thought they had any right to set the rates I charge. So in short, no.
:-) I sympathize with you.
I'm surprised. I thought I was going to get the "you're a greedy landlord" bit coupled with some "your tenants deserve a share of ownership" nonsense.
Nope. I was just pointing out to the original poster about rent increases. Landlords have it tough enough in Southern California.
I rent in the most NW county in Indiana. I live there too. But I refuse, absolutely refuse, to do business in IL. I won't support their communism with 8x the amount of property taxes I pay now.
OWS isn't mad at small business owners trying to duck it out with the Walmarts of the world. Or even people doing reasonably well as landlords. Its not even the whole 1%, just a very few that have their grubby little hands covered in Oil, Banks, Communications, Cable and internet, Phones, the world's seed production for food crops. Basically the only people I can stand to be annoyed with are the megalomaniacs that have billions and are crying for more more more!
And they own more than 80% of the wealth. Cry me a river. They're rich because they took advantage of the system. They can help pay for it. They really should be paying their taxes as a fraction of wealth ownership. During the Eisenhower years, marginal tax rate was 91% and there were plenty of rich people then.
and there was a shit load of write offs. You could write off interest paid to consumer credit cards, it was a huge list. No one ever, EVER paid a true 91% tax rate.
That's bullshit. The poor do indeed pay some taxes for local and state government, but almost nothing to the federal government. Some of those taxes are just to buy services that they get. You pay gas tax, but then drive on a road. Poor people use roads too. But then the meter starts running backwards with transfer payments. Earned Income Tax Credit, Food Stamps, Medicaid, General Assistance, and Section 8 are just staters. All are negative taxes and are all huge programs.
Find me a government entity that cashes a percentage. See, most I've heard of cash checks in dollars and it's dollars that are needed to carry our responsibility as citizens.
In case you were thinking social security and medicare, those monies come back later in life as entitlement payments. Here's how you can tell that something isn't a tax: real taxes don't come with an annual letter telling you about your growing future entitlement. So scratch those two.
Sadly, none of your rambling comment addresses any of the relevant points made in my original argument. I did not say the poor paid income tax. But they do pay many other taxes, particularly sales tax, which is doubly regressive: regressive to start, and further regressive because of corporate externalization of cost.
Wow, impressive, they pay a little sales tax. Government has a cost. Citizenship means responsibility. Government doesn't cash percentages, it cashes checks. We already subsidize the shit out of low income people, we hardly need to take it even further. So, throw a few nickels into the bucket and stop bitching about not being able to handle it.
No, low income people subsidize the shit out of the rich, and the rich extract tribute from the rest of us. Of and the poor people doing the subsidizing are forced to do it so it is tribute there too.
The reason you do not understand the situation with respect to the poor, and direct your anger at them, is that you have never heard the other side of the arguments. The poor do not have a voice. The rich do. Thus, they persuade people that they are not to blame, it is the poor. And the poor cannot speak the truth, so that is what you end up believing.
Well said.
I'm not angry with the "poor", I just don't believe in an entitlement state where you draw a salary simply for existing within our borders. I think the subsidies run the other way. In a modern social welfare state, a lot of value is shifted to those that can't or won't.
Exactly. The percentage basis is BS.
When they can show me a school that's kept open by a percentage and not dollars, I'll listen. But even then, they need to come up with an honest percentage and one not goosed by phony social security/medicare "taxes"and one that's net of government transfer payments.
And yet the left rejects Herman Cain's 9-9 -9 plan that would eliminate all of those hidden taxes, and give a prebate to all poor people. The left has lied about the 9 -9- 9 plan because it completely dismantles the governments efforts to rape the poor.
Herman Cain stole 9-9-9 from Sim City. He's not running for president; he wants to name recognition to sell his book and possibly get a network show like Huckabee. And they wonder why we protest. sigh.
Sorry but you don't seem to have your facts correct. The 9-9-9 plan would actually raise taxes on the lowest income americans while providing unprecedented tax breaks for the wealthiest. As in more tax breaks than they have ever seen.
But the question is why does my income have to go toward supporting the single mom with 4 kids by different men? We all pay those taxes too. Why should my family have to suffer in the slightest to provide for another?
Kids make people poorer and poorer faster than any other dumb decision you could make. Stop letting the lower classes breed, and in one generation there will be plenty for everyone.
Your income doesn't go toward that. It goes toward the governments debt they made to support the wars all over the world and the bailing out of banks. Why don't you ask yourself why you have to pay for that. Why would you focus on the poor when the problem is clearly the super rich.
I'm not a fan of war spending or bank bailouts either. In fact I despise those and welfare equally. Since this post is about welfare, that is what I am addressing.
My point was the last sentence. "Why would you focus on the poor when the problem is clearly the super rich."
I don't think it's the super rich. I think the super rich are behaving just as humans have always behaved since the end of time. If I can get more resources and security for my household, I'm going to do it. And whatever you don't outlaw, I'm going to do. The mass amounts of retarded people voting is more the issue than anything.
I'm not sure what any of this has to do with corporate corruption, but I will entertain you for a moment.
Family and Children social welfare spending as a fraction of federal budget is approximately 1/4 of 13% of your tax dollar. So if you eliminate programs like WIC and welfare add-ons for dependents, you can be assured of a $0.03 refund on your tax dollar. We'll get right on that.
source: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/welfare_budget_2012_4.html
3% return is not a bad investment in this day you realize.
Because the rich don't pay into it those programs. Who's left? The middle class, er, the government pocketbook.
Fuck off, Eugenia. You don't get to decide who can "breed".
Go beg the wizard for a heart and a soul so you can become human again.
And why not? Kids born to people who have no chance in hell of raising them affect me too. Higher crime rates, a lower tax base, etc.
As long as you can pay for the services and goods you use, then have as many kids as you can afford. Otherwise, you need to stop having them and those of us paying should have the right to stop you.
So, are you advocating a single child policy like China has?
We are supposed to live up to a moral code that dictates helping those in need. Your question is like my 11 year old saying she hit the 5 year old because the 5 yr old hit first. I tell her the same thing I am going to tell you. We don't do the right thing because someone else did it first, we do it because it is right. We do not base our actions on those of others, we are supposed to set our own standards and live by them. Your family is not suffering because of the people on welfare. Your eyes have been forced to look in the wrong direction for the source of the problem.
I don't know whether you intended the second statement as purely inflamatory or if you sincerely believe it. Either way, Hitler said the same about the Jews. Regardless of where I am at, I know that is deffinitely not the standard I want to live by, nor do I want to live in a world where that is the highest moral standing. Truly selfish and closed minded.
The rich pay more because of income tax brackets. The more they make the more they pay for taxes. Just because people are too lazy to get better jobs does not qualify them for anything.
As a tax prep I can tell you that you are dead wrong. There are three groups of people that come to see me. Those that get a refund (usually under 30,000 per year), those that come close to breaking even (the middle class) and then the third bracket is those people that are very wealthy. There are special loop holes that the rest of us don't qualify for because we don't make enough. Compile that with the idea that the more your income goes down the more you pay for durable and non durable goods. You say that isn't true. Price tags at the stores don't change based on income. It is true. People who are more than just making it have access to lower income rates, entirely seperate tax codes, and a disgusting number of loopholes and legalized tax evasion. In the end that means that Joe Schmo who makes 30,000 per year pays almost twice as much for a vehicle than Lawyer Dave two blocks over and three income brackets higher.
Its so sad when we lump everyone off into such small brackets. I am working class, and I have met FAR FAR more poor people who work their butts off than I have met people living on the dole. Sometimes its not what you know, its who you know, and the economic/eduction system we've created already makes sure that poor people are raised to think they are less than everyone else. The rich pay more, but the poor pay a larger percent. And when it comes to making $600/month working as a paraprofessional at a school, that higher percentage means a lot more than to the person making $3,000/month. Another point, just because a job doesn't pay a lot doesn't mean its not a worthwhile job. Child-care is one of the most underpaid professions in America. Should we encourage all child care providers to be "less lazy" and make more money working somewhere else?
Because your kids have access to the same parks in the projects. Have you tried taking them there to play? Of course not. It is dangerous, right? The premise you state indicates that the poor do not already pay. Is it in dollars? No. It is in things like dignity, humility, poor education, lack of community role models, hunger, limited access to information and other non-tangible things that help to keep them where they are. Yes they can fight against the system, uphill both ways and get out. Not all people are up to the challenge. The very hot lunch you say you pay for (and with tax dollar distribution the number of hot lunches 'your' tax money goes to is nearly nonexistant if it even buys one) is sometimes the only meal those children get.
Now why should you have to cut corners in times of economic stress yet are still expected to help support those that are at the very bottom of our socioeconomic structure? That is easy. It is our duty as human beings to recognize when others are suffering and to do something about it. The larger your income, the greater your responsibility to those less fortunate.
At one point I was selling peanuts as a fundraiser for a local charity. I was set up at the door way and a little old lady came up and asked what we were doing and why. We explained that we were raising funds to help improve the life of children the world over. She reached into her purse saying:
"I really needed to get toilet paper today, but I have found that when you need the most is when it is the most important to give."
She put ALL of the money she had with her in the donation jar and refused the peanuts. Instead of continuing on into the store, she went back to her car and left.
That is the reason it is important to explain to the children that they are not entitled to every luxury while others suffer.
Regardless of how many corners I cut, I am glad that my children are being taught a "me too" attitude rather than a "me first".
So.....you seem to be saying that this woman, poor as she was, did a NOBLE thing by giving all she had to the charity, rather than purchasing toilet paper for herself. And yet you let her leave without "recognizing her suffering and doing something about it" ? Was that not your duty? Were you not responsible to ease her burden?
Why it is considered a noble thing to let an old woman go without a basic necessity and yet NOT a noble thing to let some poor kid in the projects to go without high speed internet access or a cell phone?
I didn't think that posting the full 5 minute dialogue of us trying to give her money back would enhance the point further. She did do a noble thing. She made the choice on the area in her life she sacrificed. Who knows, maybe she had 3 rolls left at home, was expecting money within a day or so, or was wealthy and didn't have more cash on her. Personally beyond the $100 per year in dues I paid to that organization, I was volunteering almost 30 hours a month. I was doing my share to help others.
It is noble to go without a luxury to ease the suffering of others.
I would like to point out that inner city kids may have access to the internet, but how do they get a computer? Where as for years the members of the community rarely saw more than what was in their neighborhood, the internet is giving these kids a chance to see more, to strive for more, to learn tolerance and to think and make informed decisions on their own.
On the note of the "free cell phone". Most of those families don't have landlines let alone cable. Those cell phones can mean the difference between life and death. I.e. your child is choking....2 choices, 1 = going door to door to find someone with a phone to call for help, 2 = society has provided a cell phone and you can call right away.
What is the cost to me? Individually? Almost none. This endeavor with the phones was ingenius, if only because they are so ridiculously cheap. You didn't think that when you only pay $20 you will get this awesome new phone?
As far as I come from, worring over those social ills I cannot change, but that continue to create more and more victims is stressful. If I thought (which again the optimist speaks) that one persons life was changed because of a program that costs nearly nothing, then it was totally worth it.
On the other hand, you can ask what the government is doing with collossal amounts that are being put towards programs that are not only expensive, but a waste of time and against the will of the people.
I re-read the entire thread and I think you and I are more on the same page than I am with Trogdor. I apologize for not reading more before I spoke.
I agree that the government is sucking in vast amounts of money with absolutely zero accountability for where it's going and it has to stop. There is so much waste. So little responsibility. And so little outcome.
Thank you and apology accepted. It is all about finding the common thread between us.
Great post.
If I could afford it, why should I not buy it? I bet you did not grow up in a house with 5 people, 1 bathroom, no A/C in the southern summer. No shower, just a bathtub. 2 sons and 1 daughter. TV had only 3 channels and the reception was always crap on the 1 19inch we had. I worked hard to get out of that so that my children would not have to live that way, but you seem to want to hold me back because for some reason you feel I should be required to share. so much for freedom in your world.
I think that you are purposefully missing my point. That is ok, you are fully entitled to your opinion. On the other hand we live in a democracy so at this point you can chalk it up to the majority just not seeing things your way.
I grew up in a 900 sq ft tennant house, with single pane windows and a dirt crawl space underneath. We only had four people, and thank goodness both children were girls. Only one bathroom, until I was 12 we had one 13"tv that was black and white. We had a bath shower combo, but considering I grew up in the 80"s that was truly not that remarkable. I shared a room with my sister until I moved out. We didn't even have a window ac unit when I was a kid. Michigan isn't the south, but our summers can be just as unmerciful. We would sleep on the floor in front of fans, and then go out and hose off in the well water during the day. I am glad that you had the fortitude to get out of your situation. Bravo. But you still never addressed the altruism behind my statement. Do you truly think it is right for you to have so much beyond your needs when others don't have food, or (screw ac) have heat?
Even though it sounds like you have quite a bit more than my family.....why is it that the more priveleged out of the two of us is the one complaining about being charitable towards their fellow man?
Further, both sets of grandparents went through the Great Depression and only came out of it on this side because their families pulled together to help eachother and those that are less fortuneate.
Even if I am homeless, there are still those who are worse off than I am. I take care of my family and my needs first. The wants are periphery and material. As long as we are fed and full, I don't see why a new swingset is all that important.
And can you truly afford these things, if through buying them you are borrowing the money to do so, and you don't have enough left over to do something positive outside your own back yard?
If the swingset goes in the back yard and benefits the other children in the neighborhood who play on it, does that qualify as doing something positive for those outside?
Who said Trogdor had to "borrow the money"?
As long as it benefits all the children equally then it would qualify. But that would mean they could use it even when Trogdor wasn't there. Most people wouldn't be comfortable with that level of intrusion into their space.
BTW I never said 'had'. It was a question......thus the inquiries of "can you" "if" and the question mark.
I freely give. I have handed out cash, asked for no receipts so I could write off on taxes. it was money I freely gave to people I knew could not help themselves. That was before my oldest started going to college (yes, there is a large time frame between my children). My at this point is to get my oldest through college with zero debt. We chose a state college, as it has nationwide regard as being a fine accounting school. This keeps the tuition reasonable. We also had her go to the local state community college to get her core out of the way, which was very reasonable cost wise and the credits transferred. A result of this is that finances are a little tighter than they have been in the past and we have sacrificed vacations and what-not. I am just tired of being forced to give at the point of a gun to those who do not give, only take. I am sick and tired of being called heartless, greedy, selfish, and yes, racist, because a expect the poor to pick up some of the burden. Life is full of choices, I chose, and continue to choose better than those that are poor.
1.) most people that keep reciepts of charitable donations do not in fact get a tax write off. You have to file schedule A in order to get the tax writeoffs, which is pointless if your standard deduction is higher than your itemized.
2.) If you make enough money to be spending enough money to itemize, it is your own fault you didn't write it off. It still doesn't make you more riteous in your position.
3.) You do realize that you are in a priveledged group to be able to pay out of pocket for education for your daughter and only have finances be "a little tighter" than in the past.
4.) Most people are not poor by choice, and those in inner cities and extreme rural areas do not have the same opportunities as those that go to better schools.
5.) For the sake of argument, say that someone should be punished their entire life for a choice at 15. They accept this and then go on to work full time. They work, they work very hard, but still can't make the bills. What is the solution for them?
6.) You put forth a premise that poor people do not give. This is a false premise. When we go to goodwill to get clothes, we take old clothes to turn in with us. We let our family members live with us when they get old or sick or just broke. We put time in at community centers and our childrens school. We worry more about our family ties than our family posessions. We get excited when our kids are old enough for public transportation, not bummed because we can't buy them a car. In a poor family even the kids get jobs as soon as they are able. Whether it's babysitting, house cleaning, yard work, or a local restaurant. The poor give to their churches, sometimes over 20% of what income they have.
Please, before you start making such sweeping statements, instead of just giving your money away, why don't you take a few hours on a Sat. and go work in your local shelter. Go provide services to your local Indian Reservation. Go out into your community and put a face to these people you detest so much. You just might find that they are not quite what you had been led to believe.
Weepngwillow, riches are often thought of as material, those who think this are wrong. You are richer than many.
And you seem to keep putting forth the idea that "rich" people do NOT give. I believe that is a false premise. I'm sure many people would consider my family "rich", but we aren't. We both take and purchase clothing from good will etc. We take in our family members or help them out financially when we can and they need it. We put in time in our community centers and our children's schools. I could care less about our possessions as long as we have food and a roof over our heads. We didn't buy any of our children cars OR pay their insurance for them. They had to get jobs and do it themselves. (There is no public transportation where we live) They babysit, mow lawns, bus tables, take orders. We give to our church AND other charities.
Your sweeping statements about people like me are just as offensive as those about the poor are.
I don't know how I could put across an idea about rich people while I was talking about the other end of the spectrum. I can't speak for the rich, but I do know many of them donate to charities. Thus I would not put forth a premise that they do not give to charities. Not to be trite, but if the rich didn't donate to charities, I couldn't have picked up a Dior sweater at GoodWill for $2 last year.
If you truly feel I made a sweeping statement, please show it to me.
Trogdor, you make it sound like your life was so tough...we had running water, we ran and got it, the bathroom was 100 feet off the back door. TV? Three channels? I grew up thinking that was all any one had. No AC? Try -30 for 40 days straight and the fuel tank runs dry. Try shoveling snow that was deeper than you are tall. Everyone has a story.
I too worked hard and I did my part. And I gave. I paid my taxes and I actually helped elderly get help, food stamps and medical, I helped mothers apply for help so their kids would have a chance. It didn't hurt me one damned bit.
I donate to this day, and I pay my taxes because I know that my dollars go for a heck of a lot more than 'grandma's meds' and some kids school lunch. I know my dollars pay the paltry wages of our military, pay for schools for not only the local kids but for all kids, pay for sewer systems I'll never use, pay for universities and research for cures to diseases. Pay for swing sets in public parks, pay for National Parks which any and everyone can enjoy.
I also know that some of that dollar went for things I'd rather it didn't go for...like subsidizing investment banks and that's just one example.
Meantime, since you don't like paying taxes, why don't you boycott the things those taxes pay for? Things like highways, city sewer systems, subsidized groceries (farm subsidies) just for starters.
It is not the poor you should direct your anger towards. If the wealthy paid their fair share of taxes then you would not have to pay nearly as much! That is the only viable way to reduce your taxes.
Do not complain about having to pay money to prevent millions of american children from starving in your own backyard - complain about being forced to not be able to take care of your children adequately because some rich fatcats bought the government and are extracting tribute from you through the tax code so they can buy themselves another BMW!
If the tax code was just made more fair, you could have less than half the taxes to pay. And it would not result in mass starvation, and chronic crime thereafter, which starving children does.
It's not about having a heart, it's about having a head.
Social mobility is shrinking. It's becoming harder and harder to get that American dream coming from a background like yours. I respect all your hard work, but are you really going to turn your back on all the people who wear the shoes you wore? Do you really support an economy that only gives the fruits of our progress to the financial elite? Adjusting for inflation factory wages have not increased since the 1950's whereas the income of the financial elite has rocketed. It's not that anyone wants to take away what you have earned, it's that we all want a piece of what we all have earned together, and for some reason we aren't getting it. We want to find out why that is, and fix it.
I do not disagree that there are major issues that need to be addressed, and soon, but what OWS is doing, in my opinion, is not the correct path. the problem is NOT with Wall Street, it is with the government. Wall Street functions within the laws created by Washington. i am fully aware of the influence that Wall street has on our representatives, but the pressure being applied should be on our representatives to create new rules for the way THEY, Washington DC, does business. I would have no problem doing away with lobbyists and throwing elected officials in jail for violating the rules. Protest where it counts. I believe this whole occupy movement is just for show, but there is no desire to change anything, unless a republican wins the white house next year. I personally know a young man who is involved in the New york protest, he is a facilitator as well as one of the "founding principals" of this particular movement. I have known him since he was a child and i know what he is about. i know for a fact that he has attended several Marxist rallies and his goal, his true desire, is for a Marxist society. I hesitate posting his full name out respect for his mother, my wife's best friend since childhood. What is on the surface of this movement is not what it is, the goal of the originators is to destroy the capitalist society we have and bring on Marxism. This my sound like a conspiracy, but it is not. I KNOW what is going on.
I grew up under similar circumstances, which wasn't as near as bad how my mother grew up on a rural poverty stricken Indian reservation. My father was meat-cutter & my mother made mattress springs in a factory. I remember watching her tape her fingers before going to work because they would get so sore & calloused. I've basically been a single mother, who earned a Masters degree & now work as professional in administration & I've raised two beautiful daughters on my own. However, my mother taught me something apparently you lack which is known as compassion. She was forced to go to government boarding schools where she was beaten & humiliated for being Indian & as hard as she worked to rise above it...NOT once did she bypass giving what little change she had, or a dollar to a Burnside/Skid-row Bum (which was what the homeless alcoholics in downtown Portland were known as back them), NO matter how little money she had on her.
I ran out of compassion when everyone started demanding more from me. "you gave 5 , but could afford 10, cheap bastard". "For what you paid for that car you could have bought a house for someone". The poor, the government, and the liberal mindset all feel they deserve more than what I am willing to give.
I feel sorry for you but wish you and your family the best.
If you really believe that being poor is so great. Then what's stopping you from getting poor too? ;p
Never said it was great, my point is why should the poor get a free pass? Have you ever had to write a check on April 15th because you did not withhold enough while someone files on Jan1 and get a check for EIC, money they never "earned" all because they have too many kids and not enough income? How is that fair to me? I work, put in OT, sacrifice for my family to live better only to have someone who puts in little effort get a big fat check just for breeding.
Ok take the best case scenario for someone like that. They have 3 kids, they work full time, they qualify for the EIC max credit. So some $5,000 gets added to what their $12,000 yr income? They still are living on probably less than half of your income. Some big fat check.......it really isn't like hitting the lottery. Most poor people I know use that check to do things like by school shoes, deoderant, pay rent and pay back the balance on their energy bill or on the rent where they had fallen behind. Where in the world did you get the notion that this scenario is equivalent to leading a life of leisure? When was the last time you had to go admit in front of a room full of strangers that even though you are well bodied and able that you can't afford to feed your kids, let alone yourself?
Again, poor people pay through the nose on a daily basis. What are you contributing beyond your taxes? They don't have a "free pass" and get a "fat check". What makes you think that you work harder at your job and overtime than the single mother doing the same thing but at walmart or mc donalds?
It boils down to tolerance, grace, humility and pride. We help others not because we have a gun to our heads but because it is a moral imperative.
He got it from the 1%. The 1% love to make the poor the scapegoat so people direct their anger at them instead, since they cannot defend themselves by exposing the lies of the 1% because they do not have a voice, they make an easy target.
You have to realize this: the people making you pay those taxes are not the poor. They are the rich, because they know that somebody has to fork over the cash to keep society from imploding and their highness simply prefers that you do it. The middle class exploits the lower class, the upper class exploits the middle class. That's how it always works.
The lower class will never be able to fight back, but the middle class can fight the upper class and win.
For any "subsidies" paid to the poor, they have been won with blood and are based on hard-nosed accounting. Because the fact is everyone thinks like you do: people are selfish. They are not interested in helping the poor until you point out to them that it is cheaper to help them than to pay for the jails etc. that will be needed if they don't.
Well for one thing, being married and staying married isn't easy. It's something we have to work at. And I rest my case.
If I do not want to help, do I have that choice? If I do not pay my taxes I will have everything taken from me and thrown out on the streets by the government. If the poor don't pay taxes (and only take), they do not suffer such a fate.
in a world where people are judged by how much money they have or don't have, like status, your indifference is the result ....if you had ever lived in poverty, you might understand that there is something terribly wrong with a world that mocks, puts down, and has zero sympathy or concern for people living in poverty.....if life was a thing that money could buy, the rich would live and the poor would die.....
what the fuck are you complaining about??? when the 1% fucks you over and leaves you poor you'll be in the same projects "those" other people are...oh...and "those" people are your fellow man,women...and children..and about the swingset...wow what douchebag...remember when you do buy the swingset, to toss around some syringes..and empty baggies,and 40oz around so your kid can have that same projects effect as the kids your mocking
And why are there baggies, syringes, and 40oz cans laying about if they cannot afford basic necessities yet demand more out of my pocket? Why are the projects so slummy? Why is there no pride in the community in the projects? If they are not willing to help themselves by demanding better in their own hovel why should I be concerned about their well being?
you rode on the backs of poor people from this nation..and still do!.or are you telling me you dont use roads?the subway? the building you work in was built by the working class(poor)..matter of fact...someone that lives in those projects might have been a laborer at one of those projects..you see..everyone that lives in projects arent just jobless lazy fools...some need subsidized housing just to get by...so that means they added thru taxes the playground their kids play on..stop actin like you the only one who actually has a job and gets taxed..in other words stop actin like an asshole
For the same reason there is a pediphile living within a mile of your house. The reason that those things are found in urban parks is three fold, and I am simplifying.
Simple statistics - within every population there will be those that fall victim to vice, be it drink, drugs, food, money, greed. They do NOT make up a the majority of the people living in those places.
Increasing the number of people in any given area will, by default raise the crime rate.
Any concentrated population experiencing crisis or prolonged widespread stressors will have a larger numbers of those that not only fall to vice but do it in a very obvious and apparent manner. The drink themselves to death instead of maintaining as a functional alcoholic.
Allow me to simplify for you. Their culture allows it as they are expecting someone else to be responsible for their lives. I have lived in Chicago city limits, Cook County, where houses are piled on top of each other, but what we had was a neighborhood where everyone looked out for everyone else. Parents were well in tune as to whos child was doing what and had a certain amount of authority to discipline. The sub-culture in the projects is the way it is becaus ehtye want it that way...nowutahmsayin, yo.
I honestly am apalled at your comment. That has to be one of the most short sighted, closed minded, bordering on racist statements I have heard In over a decade.....congratulations?
[Removed]
You do not always have a choice. This is a democracy, you have as much choice as the next person in line. The issue is whether your opinion agrees with the majority or not. In this case, the majority, which was required to put these institutions in place, decided against you, decided that people in need should have help. The poor are supposed to have an equal voice to yours, regardless of their income. Don't make enough to pay taxes and see which situation is actually better for you. Besides, if poor people don't pay sales tax, they can't get toilet paper and food. EIC is a graduated program based on economic need. If you don't qualify, it is possible it is because society in general has decided that you make enough to live on and still afford to pay your taxes, without interrupting your ability to eat.
It's called caring for your fellow humans. You wouldn't hesitate to give your child, your mother or your brother help when they need it i'm sure. It is the humane thing to do. We are all bothers and sisters after all.
According to the IRS, you know how much money you are making and they provide you with the percentage you pay. It is your own fault for not making estimated payments on the income you know taxes hadn't been paid on. You can blame the person in the mirror for having to write a check at the end of the year. Or you can solve it by paying taxes on all of your income through out the year....just think...if you overpay....you will get a check too.
pointless argument. My pay changes every week based upon overtime. Are you suggesting that I update my W2 every week?
First, the form that is used to change your withholding is a W-4. It is supposed to be based on the number of exemptions you take at the end of the year. A W-2 only reports your income at the end of the year. If your OT is bumping you up into a higher tax bracket you need to claim 0 on your W-4. If by doing so with your employer doesn't fix it, and you honestly do not have additional income sources, the IRS gives you two choices. Be honest and extrapolate out how much you get per quarter and make the estimated quarterly payments on that amount.....OR the way you have been doing it and pay the lump sum once a year.
It's your choice.....keep voting for the people that put those "laws" into place...
Or don't.
now i agree to that, i know pple who live off the system. my sis-n-law does not work and hasnt in over 3yrs, she lives off the system and also not to long ago went and bought a car, how the hell is that. my husband has been without a job for 2yrs, he has applied everywhere, but for every place thats hiring theres 1500 to 2000 pple appling for that same job. i work 40hrs a week we have just enough to pay our bills, i have a mortage, electric, phone, cable and auto ins. oh and groceries thats all and let me tell you the goverment wont help me in any way, but if i quit my job go and have some kids ill get help then...i just dont get it...
At the rate the republicans are going you'll qualify for all that soon enough.
With the current system in place, it is pointless to blame either party because they are both equally to blame. Regardless of who is in office, R or D, they are still not fairly representing their constituents even in the face of mass write in and call campaigns from all sides. Please don't vilify or praise either because your personal party affiliation. Just because you are D does not mean that the D elected officials are free of the vices that the R suffer from. They are all ordinary men and women.......they just have more money and influence than we do.
You can argue R or D until the cows come home, but you won't make a difference until you refuse to buy into a rigged system.
Why do you blame the republicans? The Democrats own the Senate and the White house, The Dems held an unbeatable majority in the Senate and House the first 2 years of the Obama presidency and could not even agree on or pass a budget.
Because they crashed the economy and are doing all they can to keep it crashed.
Why do you trust them?
Please don't repeat that 2 year crap again.
It's republican propaganda. They've broken all filibuster records in the last 3 years.
Get your facts straight shooz. 60 member senate super majority, filibuster proof, for Obamas first two years. Obama and the dems worked their butts off to try and garner any repubublican votes. They went forward on obamacare anyway, thus dividing this nation to a point not seen in a while. Obama, Reid, and Pelosi are absolute far left ideologues. Pelosi serves her district well, as we all know it is the most liberal district in the union. Obama was a relative backbencher in the Illinois senate, and had never put forth any legislation, voting "present" in most of his votes is all he did. He is not a leader.
The facts are Obama was acting in the interests of the Americans pushing obamacare. It is what the people said they wanted. Universal Healthcare. Healthcare is a right. Agree or disagree with obamacare. He worked on what he ran on. It is much more accurate to say that he couldn't garner support from Republicans because they are completely out of step with the average Americans interests. And who is the party of deregulation? The repubs or the dems. Who deregulated Wall Street that allowed the economic crash to happen in the first place?
Who signed the repeal of Glass-Steagall? Who signed the community reinvestment act of 1977 into law? These two things are major contributors to banks crashing and the housing bubble burst. If republicans are so out of step, why did the dems get swept so bad in the last elections? Both parties are to blame for plenty of the citizens nightmare. The majority of Americans wanted reform in healthcare, not a Marxist takeover of it.
Why do you defend republicans? They started class warfare, crashed the economy, ran up the deficit with unfunded wars during the Bush years, and still refuse to increase tax revenues on the most wealthiest Americans, even though 68% of millionaires support their taxes being raised. These are facts. Grover Nordquist made all the damn republicans sign a PLEDGE not to increase any revenues. What about the PLEDGE they took to serve the people? Again, 68% of all Americans favor raising taxes on the wealthy, and among those who make a million or more, 68% of them favor it too. When are you going to look at the facts and not the rhetoric? The republicans in congress have made pledges on behalf of wealthy lobbiers and don't give a damn about you.
he blames republicans because he is a brain washed idiot. one of the "hope change" "yes we can" idiots who will remain an idiot for the rest of his life.
we live with people like shooz not because we want to, but because we believe everyone is entitled to be an Idiot if they so choose, or are born with half a brain.
feel sorry for the Shooz in this country, they really do believe what they do is for the best, just not intelligent enough to see they are the cancer killing this government
They are going to blame filibusters now as the textbook response given to them by the left wing media.That idea is laughable considering that filibusters have been going on since ancient Rome but today's lib thinks every bad thing in our system was invented by that evil tyrant Bush. Democrats seem to enjoy always being portrayed as the powerless victim. I don't understand why anyone would love to identify with that.
Well if they have broken records, then it seems to say that filibustering may have something to do with it. Just because its been around since the Roman era doesn't mean it can't keep things from getting done.
Just because they break records doesn't mean it's something only they do. You guys love to use misleading terminology like this to demonize a side. Both parties are guilty of it I agree. Just because one side does it a little more than the other doesn't validate the side that does it less. That kind of childish logic is constantly used by the left and it infuriates me.
hehe, "us" and "them" But if the republicans are breaking records during the two years when Obama and the Democrats had a majority, then regardless of who does or doesn't do this, it could still have affected why nothing got done. Not that I am saying it is the only reason, just that it could legitimately have something to do with it.
the poor pay a nice chunk of their money in taxes too. and I dont' get why you can't get your kid a swingset because a poor kids is getting a playground. that's like saying its your fault that your kids can't go to Hawaii because you need to go to the dentist. there is not direct corolation at all. How about this. you can't get a swing set because your wages haven't grown in the last 20 years and the cost of living has. you can't get a swingset because a college education for your kids is crazy expensive. you can't get a swing set for your kids because your health insurance still is outrageous and god forbid anyone gets really sick...then your kids won't even get matchbox cars.
very strange and selfcentered connections you are making. reconsider: when we all do better, we all do better. lets make legislation that lifts us all up.
i love it!!!
Very well put.
This sort of income tax argument is foolish and completely irrelevant- no matter how you look at it.
Who cares how much the Federal government gets from us (the poor or the rich) in the form of income tax?
Corporate control over government will always dictate that federal money go to the wrong places anyway (defense contracts, bailouts, etc).
These initiatives aren't for our benefit.
And for all those preaching: "Tax the Rich" out there, please know that taxes make up only a portion of our federal budget, and the rich always get most of their money back in some way or another.
The problem isn't federal revenue. The problem is that the vast majority of the money is spent on programs that don't benefit citizens.
Otherdreams, for many it comes down to the 'me' factor. In attempts to bring to light the 'larger picture' one has to start on the 'me' level.
We do need to get corporate money out of politics, we also need to get union money out. Our congress has every appearance of being For Sale. the problem is that we're buying but we aren't getting what we pay for.
Thank you for that point!!! II don't think we need to be raising the tax rates (except for the extreme wealthy that are using loopholes to pay less than the wealthy of middle class). In fact I'm sick to death of hearing about raising taxes is the solution to all problems. The government wastes vast amounts of money on things that aren't needed. I'm not saying we need to eliminate military spending, but I will never understand why trillions and trillions have been wasted on this most recent war. The government needs to be held more accountable for our tax money, or it will never be utilized for the programs that need it or to decrease the debt.
"Why do I have to pay and they do not?" Because they are poor and they have no money. Lol
Not my problem. if they use use something they should pay SOMETHING!!!
What would you like then? Their house? Some blood? A kidney? Or do you just want to kill them so you don't have to worry about anyone but you, your money, and your children who may or may not need financial assistance one of these days. Look up the new poor (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3445_162-57328305/americas-new-poor/), watch as they drive to food banks in their Audis and BMW's. It doesn't take much to lose it all.
Poor people pay taxes all the time. Sales tax is the most regressive tax of all taxes. To suggest they don't pay taxes is ridiculous. As far as income tax if you make below the poverty rate how could you possibly afford an income tax. The problem is those at the top aren't paying enough.
Quote from the Great Depression.
"Three or four million heads of households don't turn into tramps and cheats overnight, nor do they lose the habits and standards of a lifetime... They don't drink any more than the rest of us, they don't lie any more, they're no lazier than the rest of us.... An eighth or a tenth of the earning population does not change its character which has been generations in the molding, or, if such a change actually occurs, we can scarcely charge it up to personal sin."
37 Million Americans now in or near poverty. I'm just saying.
What caused the Great Depression? Read your history books before you start blaming the poor.
the poor do a disproportionate amount of the labor
Okay, just so everybody knows, I have read through most of this and concluded that trogodor does not really want to know the answers to these questions. They are just a troll.
No, what you missed is that I disagree with the way the tax system is setup and that if we are "all in this together" then everyone should contribute. period. By the way, I am singular, not plural.
We pay every time we have to tell our child I'm sorry you cant have that.
We pay every time we sit starvng while our child eats.
We pay with the clothes on our backs and the day to day struggles that being impoverished places on us.
I did not ask to be born poor I just was, I did not ask to not be able to afford college or better my life by education, I just couldn't.
You cry about being able to afford to do all these things while the "poor" people have it so good.
Tell me why do i sit and wonder where my next meal is coming from? Why is it I starve most days? How come my workmanship my skills are not enough for an employer to hire me before another?
Sir or M'am I wish I had your problems, because I can tell you this in the life ive lived and the experiences I've had. I've prayed to god for $1.08 cts just so i can get a burger at mcdonalds scraping pennies off the floor.
There will be no thanks giving for me, my daughter wont get a christmas. Our new year is uncertain, I've become unemployed and im fighting to pull teeth just to land another job.
So kind rich person I pay every day for the things I cannot afford and the roof I no longer will have over my head
Sincerely ,
a poor freeloader whos hit hard times
what are you using to post on this forum? you cannot be so poor that you have a smart phone and/or a pc with a data plan and/or internet access.
wow.. you read all that and that's your response? ever heard of a library? smmfh
Baruchyah = Correct
I come to my local library every day to put in applications for a job. Your right I do have a cell phone but its prepaid and i dont use it save for if an employer calls me.
Unemployment denied me because the employer wont say their name fought me in court and of course won!
Des = food stamps are giving me the run around because they need a written statement from the employer stating that i was terminated
Heres the best part the employer refuses to write me a later and tells me its against company policy.
So trogdor my situation is just what you read above..
Hey, everyone should come here:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/make-a-stand-join-the-clan/
You don't have to pay a thing. Membership is free!
Its attitudes like yours that has f-up our country! Just think of yourselves & f-everyone else & if others don't have what you have there must be something wrong with them! What if we didn't have selfish, self-centered asshats like you who take time of their busy lives raising their precious children to come to a OWS forum to bitch about having to help feed & provide swing sets for poor children! Do you actually think these people did something wrong to deserve their fate so basically, these poor children don't deserve to eat or play! What if we didn't judge others like you do & actually believed we could all work together to improve the lives for everyone? What if we didn't just think of ourselves but the future of our planet and our grandchildren's children? What if there weren't any asshat's like you? I bet the world would be a much better place & we wouldn't be destroying our mother earth!
Such people exist because the propaganda of the wealthy has created them, though, just remember that.
The information environment that such people live in is an alternate reality. What do you think got this guy excited like this? His arguments were inserted into his head by the media.
Its sad! Look I'm just as guilty of being sucked up in this consumer BS world but I was never pissed off that some of my tax money may help feed & provide swing sets for poor kids! I'd rather see it go to them than WAR! This person's thought process is so f-ked up its beyond words! Its like listening to the audience applause about the possibility of executing an innocent person, someone dieing because they can't afford health insurance, how water boarding isn't torture & guns & war are good @ the GOP debates! What is wrong with these people? Are they f-n sociopaths? Just wired different? Or do they believe their so holier than thou they must TRULY be the chosen...asshats?
Why do you have to pay subsidies to the oil companies when they make the highest profits on the planet?
Why do you have to pay agricultural subsidies when those go to companies with substantial income?
Those are the more important questions.
Why can the wealthiest communities peacefully coexist only a few blocks from the poorest neighborhoods? NYC is home to some of the most wealthy Liberals and Conservatives but they know the value of social programs that contain a large segment of lower class citizens. Eliminate Section 8 and all other social welfare programs and you have migratory problem , as well as, a lower class of citizen that actually votes.
So what you are implying is that a wealthy person can walk through the "hood" unmolested and a "thug" can walk through the wealthy area without having the police called for suspicious behavior? Lower class citizens generally do not go to the polls unless it is for something that will benefit themselves as an individual and not for the betterment of the community. Case in point; our current POTUS.
I'm not implying co-mingling. What I am saying is that social welfare programs have a significant benefit to wealthy communities. These programs contain lower class people so that they do not become migratory. Let's, for argument sake, take away social programs. Do you think some poor family will remain 20 stories up in an apartment for an extended prior in time? We have shipped jobs oversees that could provide opportunities in both large and small communities. Even this corporate ability to move jobs to third world countries works because social programs fill the void. Let's get rid of all unemployment benefits too. That should finally wake up the voting class.
Thank you Trogdor for helping those less fortunate than you.
I am fortunate that I worked hard? I am fortunate that I sacrificed? I am fortunate that I have looked beyond today and spent less? to paraphrase from "A Princess Bride"; "you keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means"
There seems to be no argument anyone can put forth to make you think that poor people merit anything. In a discussion about a society of collective individuals and their merits within that system - you cry about you a whole lot. Woe always me. Society is so unfair, we have poor people. Deal with it. That is reality. Either you can deal with the societal problem of poverty in a fair, mature way or you can't. Either way it is a reflection of your values and we have every right to paint you as an uncaring self-centered person.
Well put. This is reality.
The appropriate thing to do is man up and figure out how to solve poverty. This guy thinks letting poor people die will work. First of all that is wrong, if the screws are put to them any more they will riot and turn to crime etc.
And if he is thinking of killing them on purpose to solve that, he's in for a surprise there too.
The poor people cannot be pushed down or allowed to be pushed down (and most of the problems they suffer are in fact a result of predation and crime by wealthier people). They must be brought up. That is the only way that can work in the real world.
Nobody is asking for anything free. THE PROBLEM IS NOT THAT WE DO NOT HAVE FREE THINGS. The problem is that the GOVERNMENT IS CORRUPTED. You should read and make your self familiar with what is going on in congress, who makes the rules and why. WHO pays taxes and how much. Capital gains are the key ingredient of income disparity in the US-- and the force behind the winner takes all mantra of our economic system. If you want even out earning power in the U.S, you have to raise the 15% capital gains tax.
Income and wealth disparities become even more absurd if we look at the top 0.1% of the nation's earners-- rather than the more common 1%. The top 0.1%-- about 315,000 individuals out of 315 million-- are making about half of all capital gains on the sale of shares or property after 1 year; and these capital gains make up 60% of the income made by the Forbes 400.
It's crystal clear that the Bush tax reduction on capital gains and dividend income in 2003 was the cutting edge policy that has created the immense increase in net worth of corporate executives, Wall St. professionals and other entrepreneurs.
Trogdor doesn't appreciate facts. She appreciates whining about herself.
If the government provided equal and decent healthcare, housing, and education for everyone, then your tax dollars (and those taxes that the poor pay also via sales tax, etc.) would help YOU TOO! And you wouldn't have to incur those costs out of your own pocket.
Um, without trying to sound ignorant here, who would pay for these things? Again, it won't be poor people that is for sure. The only thing equal will be the LACK of quality health care. Like "no child left behind" really means"all children left behind". Health care for all will mean Health care for all, but it will suck equally. ask you doctor, they will tell you the truth about rationed health care (because to pay for all you will have to cut for all)
That's retarded, and violates certain basic laws the rest of us call "Arithmetic".
I have lost patience with this person. People have explained to them over and over and they are not interested in changing their mind.
A quick search:
Mar 31, 2008, (Reuters) - More than half of U.S. doctors now favor switching to a national health care plan and fewer than a third oppose the idea. Your doctor has opinion, but want does the majority of Americans want.
Does It Surprise You Most Doctors Support Universal Health Care?
I'm sure there are plenty of doctors who don't support it, but in a society, it is not all about what you want, it is about what the majority thinks is best for the country. Or do you not believe in democracy?
Sometimes the majority is wrong. That's why we are not a Democracy, we are a Republic.
If you want to play that game, then OK. the majority of people did not want women to vote (I can get behind that). The majority of people did not want to grant equal citizenship to blacks. The majority of people wanted to continue segregation. That is why we do not live in a democracy.
You're on a forum that advocates democracy.
you truly do not want democracy as it is also known as mob rule.
Ochlocracy is the official word for "Mob Rule". Read to your delight.
In ancient Greek political thought ochlocracy was considered as one of the three "bad" forms of government (tyranny, oligarchy and ochlocracy) as opposed to the three "good" forms of government (monarchy, aristocracy and democracy). The distinction between "good" and "bad" was made according to whether the government form would act in the interest of the whole community ("good") or special interests ("bad").
This is an old argument.
What type of government do you think we have now? Seems more like an oligarchy of "special interests" to me.
Oligarchy (from Greek) is a form of power structure in which power effectively rests with an elite class distinguished by royalty, wealth, family ties, commercial, and/or military legitimacy.
As opposed of the current system of cutting off those with no resources to argue, but leaving your family alone?
Define rich and define poor.
I'm generally fairly conservative and Republican. My husband makes quite a bit of money (although not in the 1%), and I do not believe that raising taxes, pulling money out of banks, walking away from debt, or some of the other things I've heard on this forum are the solution. I do disagree, however, with taxing the very poor. I understand your anger and your resentment over the poor qualifying for free assistance, parks, housing, etc, but I do believe we can help the poor and avoid taxing them without burdening the system. Tell the damn government to stop wasting trillions on wars that aren't needed and misusing taxpayers' money in a thousand other ways, and we can still help the poor and get this country into a better position. Their life is difficult, and when you're that poor, often with children, it is difficult to climb out of that. They can barely pay rent, afford to eat, etc, and we don't need to burden them to the point that they are homeless.
First we must separete poor and lazy. Is not the same, then we must separete aged to work or children and old people.
If they are poor and have age or skill to work, goverment should give them free stuff but in exchange of public work or whatever. Send the poor that have some skill , to build road, to make farming,laundry on hospitals or whatever is need, if not skil them educated them so they can get out of been poor.
If they are children or old people and they dont have any family that can take care of them, we should help this people.
You don't live in isolation. Those people are a part of your lifestyle whether you know it or not. Don't be so heartless.
Modern society is so amazingly interconnected. Thus, our responsibilities are interconnected as well - our responsibilities to each other.
Maybe if you lived on Mars, grew your own food, and made your own internet to talk with us here on Earth, you'd have a point. You don't. Instead you're just being selfish.
[Removed]
Q: Why does any1 have to pay, to live on a planet, on which the infrastructure has already been built?
A: Because the misleaders have convinced the masses that "working hard" (even void of any achievement) is some sort of noble badge of honor, and if you just "Work hard," then you will always have enough. And that, is the BIg Lie. How bout we all stop the madness, and meditate until the electromagnetic field responds with a different reality, than that which lends itself to the pestilencism.
pff, not you have it all wrong. None of those things that you just said are true.
A small fraction of the poor get subsidized housing, but only a small fraction. Some of the things you just complained about are not even true. You don't get a discount on cell phone service or the internet if you are poor, silly.
Totally out of the loop. And the poor are also constantly being preyed upon by wealthier people all the time too so it's not like a walk in the park. Plus you are poor.
Also, you subsidize everyone's electricity. It is de facto subsidized in a variety of ways such as tax breaks for the companies, direct subsidies etc.
So to recap, you have it all ass backwards. And if you pay too much in taxes your anger should be directed at the 1%ers who don't pay their share. Silly fool.
Why don't we make welfare, pensions, health and education things that everyone has a right to and everyone gets the same based on need. If you want more you can provide more for youself.
Then no-one is paying for anyone as we are all benifiting from what the state provides. If all those things where provided I would even support a flat-rate of income tax (all income no deductables or loop holes) and no other taxes.
Plus because it's such a simple system there would be less ways for the politicians to manipulate it to suit their donars
We could base the rate of tax by simply deferring it for a year and then we could see what we spent for that year plus what everyone's income was and tax according i.e. if the total private income was 1Trillion and we spent 0.5Trillion then the tax rate for that year would be 50% for everyone.
The politics would be reduced to who can keep the costs down rather than ideology that is simply used to drive wealth into the hands of the party donars.
Now how's that unfair?
they dont have money to pay, just like the 'middle class' won't be able to very soon.
Hey everyone. Check out this song for the 99% of us!! Great song that gets your adrenaline going.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6BuQcemmtM
Percentage wise poor pay more than rich, anyone saying different ,must be having a hard time reading the tax code, of course 14% of 60 billion is more total dollars that 28% of my 80k, but its a fact its less percent, the twist that we look at it from a total dollars paid is just spin , and I m sorry some American 's buy that argument .I would expect people to buy that argument .in a 3rd world country not the United States of America.
Everyone pays taxes in one way or another enforced by our government system that made sure of that a long time ago. Yes, it is true that people that don't have a job don't pay income tax but whose fault is that right now?
LUCKY YOU! my wife and I both work and pay a lot in taxes. Neither of us is resentful for what we pay . If someone has less than we do I am happy that our taxes help them. Isn't that the Christian way. I thank God that we both have Jobs when many don't.
Warren buffet paid 14% on this 60 billion Dollars, I paid 28% on my 80K
Not his fault, though he is a blow hard. He pays big money for accountants to find loopholes and write-offs. He has the ability to pay more, but instead crys that he does not pay as much, percent wise, as his secretary. He can do one of two things, or both. Write a check to the gov't and stop the write-offs and tax shelters, or pay his secretary more.
No, buffet is on our side. He's a fifth columnist.
or he can pay the same tax rate as me, which would be the right thing to do!
The difference is he derives his income differently than you or I, his is through investments which are taxed at a lower rate. He is being disingenuous when he states that income taxes need to be raised for the wealthy, he has no "income" as defined by the IRS code.
I m sorry I don't understand your point, you are telling me why he pays less and that doesn't really matter to me. I stated very clearly I think he should pay the same, the specifics of why he pays less really don't matter. It just matters that he does pay less.
Do you want to pay 14% or should he pay 35%?
REVEALED: The 30 American Companies That Paid Less Than $0 In Income Tax Over The Last 3 Years
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/these-are-the-30-american-companies-that-paid-less-than-zero-income-tax-from-2008-2010-2011-11?op=1#ixzz1eRid18yn
Just to get an idea of where you ideology lies, what if any welfare supplied was contingent on either getting a in-demand education, actively looking for a job, getting treatment for a psychological disorder, or being truly unable to work due to age or disability? Would you be willing to part with some of your money if it was only going to those that were actually working toward paying back into the system themselves? Also keep in mind that welfare is generally quite a bit cheaper than prisons, so spending some of your wealth to get people on their feat happy and productive is actually fiscally conservative in the long term. You may not like it, but it's true.
That said, if we are talking about progressive taxes on working people in general, then I will say this: If someone offered you a billion dollars, but in return you had to be hungry for the rest of your life, and sleep in the street, and suffer through any illness with only emergency treatment, would you take that deal? Probably not. Why? Because food, a bed, and reasonable health care are more valuable to a person than wealth is. For that reason wealth should always be taxed more than the necessities of life. A progressive tax is both fair and reasonable. Yes, our tax system is broken and needs to be fixed. There are all kinds of loopholes and unnecessary complexities. But it absolutely should not be made flat, and if anything could stand to be a little more progressive.
It is so easy to demand people who have money should give more when it does not affect you. You are saying it is ok to take from me because I have something you want, what do I get out of this transaction?
A) You get to live in a civil society with an educated and productive workforce and a functioning infrastructure, all essential for your own wealth and prosperity.
B) You get to pay less in taxes and keep the greater part of your wealth. Welfare and a progressive tax system are both cheaper than prisons and reduce the risk that you will be mugged, murdered, or face an uprising of the masses. Again, you may not like it, but it's true.
C) You get a fair deal. If you want your wealth to be considered equal in value to food then you are just wrong, it is not, it is worth less. The old saying is that the first million is the hardest. If that is really true then the first million is more valuable than what you make after that. To tax that first million the same as you tax the second and the third would not account for the fact that the second and third are less significant.
I don't abhor your wealth. I'm sure you deserve it and I wish nothing but the best for you and your children. However, it is certainly fair and reasonable that you pay more in taxes. Not so much so that we force equality on all, that would be absurd and would discourage chasing the American dream. However, if we don't look to the greater well-being of the nation and all it's people then none of us will know prosperity, not even you.
Stop paying.
The Revolution has a theme song!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGaRtqrlGy8&feature=related
http://occupywallst.org/forum/make-a-stand-join-the-clan/
The Revolution starts here! No one can silence the Revolution!
Watch Inside Job and you will understand what we mean. No one on here thinks that you should not be able to afford a swingset for your children. What we are protesting is the people who have 12 houses with 12 swingsets, a boat, a jet - and paid for all of it by lying to everyday people and tricking them into investing their life savings into junk bonds they knew were going to fail. Then, after collapsing the economy, firing another 30,000 people to maintain their unnecessarily high salary. And not being charged with any crimes. And getting taxpayer money to bail them out from their bad decisions to save their company on top of all that. And still remaining in power to this day.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hx16a72j__8
Im poor and I pay plenty. I also work 230 hours a month, and sleep at my work half the month also! My job is difficult. I've got no extra money to spend and my health insurance is like human veterinary insurance. I have enough to eat, and a roof over my head tonight.
They may have paid their entire lives. Not everyone is born onto a level playing field. Yes, there are some people who are lazy and take advantage of the system, but I believe most people now are genuinely hurting. Life is change and you never know when you might find yourself in a position of needing help. Wouldn't you want someone to help you without resentment?
Not many people realize that if no new money was created, the prices would be dropping at the same rate as the amount of new value generated by the economy (new products/goods). The very fact that inflation exists is a proof that the value we generate is secretly taxed at more than 50% by introducing (at least) the same face value of money into the economy. That's before any other official tax or duty.
The Income tax is there to pay interest on the money the FED prints out of thin air. But the money printed out of thin air carries the value of our work. The FED doesn't create anything of value; we do. Therefore, the FED printed money belongs only to us.
You're asking the wrong questions. What causes people to be poor?
I will assume you are poor in information and that is why you are asking uninformed questions.
Here is a fact. America is the richest nation in the world, yet 37 million Americans live below the official poverty line and millions more struggle to get by every month.
Now, armed with the facts, can you seriously suggest to anyone with a brain that 37 million Americans are lazy. Really? Some. Okay. But all 37 million. No way.
Ask better questions Trogdor, like ...
Why do we have so many home foreclosures? Your Answer. It must be the 37 million poor Americans. Real Answer. Wall Street. Get your own facts.
Where did all the jobs go? Your Answer. Why, it must obviously be the 37 million poor Americans. Real Answer. Wall Street Crash. Get your own facts.
Then come back and ask more questions. Open your mind.
If you can not afford to buy your kid a swing set then you are most likely poor yourself and you should apply for some assistance I am happy to have my tax dollars help you, not because I want to help you, but because I want to help a child who by no fault of their own can not enjoy the same opportunities rich children have.
poors not great, the problem is people abuse it. their collecting a government check, but yet they can afford to buy drugs. have you ever stood behind someone in line at the grocery store using foodstamps, then turn around and buy a few cases of beer with cash or credit card. wat is that
Yes. My father. Was that my fault?
no thats not your fault
All walks - all classes - of life abuse power, not just the poor. It's sad, but true. I'm not defending my dad for doing some of the things he did, and in fact, I hated him for a really long time for a lot of the things he did. But I got older and got over it, because there were times when he did realize he needed help. And tried to work his ass off to get his priorities right and improve his quality of life. But it can be really hard on limited resources, and made increasingly difficult by attitudes of the community around him that say his human life does not count as much as others.
You know, the people prone to summing a person's entire character up because they see them use foodstamps at the grocery store and then pay cash for beer, and in their mind from that one event, they fill their heart with contempt and disdain, write that person off, and show very little understanding or empathy for a fellow human being. It would take a mighty person with some super powers to know all about that person from one single run in at the grocery store - an arrogant super power at that.
Maybe that is why he turned to drinking in the first place. - even a glance can show a man what you think about him - a look in the eyes - You tell a man he is worth nothing for long enough, and he might just start believing it. He might turn to something else for comfort.
I know what my human life is worth. Which is equal to you and yours. I know firsthand how people look upon the poor. I know how you get treated in school because your poor. I lived it my whole childhood and I felt ashamed. I have to remind myself all the time that I am worth something, because there are arrogant predators out there in society who would tell me otherwise. Abuse is a chain and can have many subtle forms. You may be guilty of it as well.
With what? They're poor right, which means they don't have anything to pay for anything, or are you of the view they should starve and freeze because they have fallen on some bad fortune?
How Robin Hoods men really treated the poor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=167IhlXnN2Y
Pbbbbbtttt. Yeah, right.
http://wweek.com/portland/article-17350-9_things_the_rich_dont_want_you_to_know_about_taxes.html
You'll never know how degrading it is to be living in poverty (hopefully), no one asked you for your money, nor do the poor want your strings attached.......
I HAVE been poor, but pulled myself out. Why not have strings attached? do you give your children an allowance just because they are breathing?
no I don't...but....no one want's to be living in poverty....it's not like they do it on purpose to piss you off.....
You and I pay for these things because corporations and the wealthy don't pay their fair share. That's the whole point of this tax debate is that those with the most money pay the least in taxes as a percentage of their income. I guess, when I say "you and I", I'm making the assumption you're not wealthy enough to be in the "1%" and not a corporation. I apologize if my assumption is incorrect. If my assumption is wrong, than my first sentence should begin "I pay for these things...".
While I disagree with OWS, this issue is a common one that I see and the answer is simple. It's part of the "great American System" A system designed so that in the event any of it's citizens falls on hard times that there are buffers and fallbacks.
Granted is seems some people abuse this system horribly but there are also many more people who fall into the "Ready willing and able to contribute" and the "Have contributed but now can't for various reasons" categories.
You and I may be able to buy the things we need on a day to day basis and a small amount of money goes to that system of buffers.
The other thing is that certain groups (won't get into the debate here) would have you believe that "everyone" who takes advantage of those buffers is a criminal/lazy/useless/illiterate/etc.. etc.. and that simply isnt' the fact.
The reason we pay more, and more people are forced into using these buffers (orginally designed to be there "just in case" not "at full capacity 24/7) are the issues we're discussing elsewhere (financial flow/opportunity disparity, legal system abuses etc.. etc..
The business you work for exists in a structure, that structure pays you and was built on the pre-existing condition and understanding that this would be the way things would progress. (ie all things are interconnected) It would be more obvious if you were in the situation where your boss was saying "I pay these people money why don't they go out and get their own healthcare, I'm not their nanny!"
I recently calculated all the benefits a family of 4 qualifies for, and how much a family of 4 not receiving government assistance would need to earn to have the same standard of living.
It's $84,000.
I do feel that we need a social safety net, but we are WAY beyond that in this country. I agree with the OP.
Socialists often ignore the fact that the hours in the year you work to pay for their social programs is mandated slavery.
I figure I've worked at least 400 hours as a slave to support social programs this year.
I don't mind that, but I think the folks reaping the benefits should have to work for them as well. If I have to work 400 hours in a year to pay for their benefits, why shouldn't they have to work to receive them?
The problem is the strategy to help move poor folks into contributing folks essentially does not exist.
[Removed]
Yeah like your 30 dollars in taxes a year that actually go to swing sets... if that... get over yourself.
Free internet at the library?
So basically you're saying, why do the poor get everything? Have you ever been poor? That's not how it works. If you don't want to pay income taxes, try making 16 grand a year. Tell me how awesome being poor is when that day comes.
Been there, I was better than those that sit and wallow in self pity or chose to show the kids how to be a generational welfare recipient.
I've been there too. It lasted 1 year when I was a kid. Not everyone on welfare is lazy. Times get rough when your dad disappears and leaves all the weight on the mom's shoulders.
I've never heard anyone be jealous of the poor. And to my knowledge they don't give people free internet. Unless you're state has a new law. But in my state people go to the library for free internet
how do i get free internet that sounds sweet
http://www.one-economy.com/free-internet-connects-poor-to-world-of-opportunities/#.TsquiFZidkg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNEEgQM_bjA
I do not believe that any person, who is unable to provide the necessities of life, for themselves and theirs, should be taxed. This means they are impoverished. However, I am opposed to passing out EIC's to anyone, impoverished incorporated natural persons or actual business entities.
Those given to the latter cost THE PEOPLE, much more than welfare for impoverished.
The marginal tax rate stops at 8000/year income for a single person. A single person cannot provide one person the necessities of life for that money. Family of 4? 21,000. Same.
Also note that huge amount of revenue are uncollected due the the "swiss-cheesed" and overly complex tax code which does not tax wealth, just income.
There are many ways to amass significant wealth and never have a dime of income.
Interestingly, even if you make less than 8,000/yr you still have to pay social security. I've never made over $4,000 a year, and I pay social security.
I think that instead of putting the person on the dole if they are unemployed, they should be connected directly to a temp-service which could help them find a job. But in this job climate, its hard to say if that would even help...
You do not IF, that income is from rental proceeds. And there are many other loopholes to circumvent SS with-holdings.
Get smarter.
rental proceeds? Before this year, I was happy to pay my social security. I thought I'd rather pay that than taxes anyway.
Rental money and capital gains are not subject to FICA tax.
well i'm pretty sure neither of those apply to me
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w
You can move to the projects and pay rent like they do. Why don't you try to survive poor. live there life. you can see how easy it is? It's awesome being poor and unemployed!!! You should give up your job to them and go for it!
You have no knowledge of how I grew up, but I will tell you I have lived in a car before. I NEVER accepted a hand out, this was BEFORE I got married and became responsible for my life. I work to keep my kids from living like that and I sacrificed a lot to get where I am. Do not be condescending to those who only want to keep what belongs to them. Wages are earned by sacrificing hours of our limited lifetime. If some one takes what does not belong to them, EIC for example, then they are taking part of my life, life I will not get back.
In my belief system, society is improved when none of its members are starving to death. You alone do not pay for all of these things; you multiplied by millions of others do. Do you have a public education? Do you have a job? Do you drive on city streets? Everyone including the poor have contributed to all of these things. Incidentally, you do not have to tell your kids they can't have a swing set because 1% or so of your tax burden was spent in a way you don't like; you can tell them they can't have a swing set because there was something, which I'm sure there was, that you personally wanted more.
Who is starving to death in America?
Fortunately, because of social programs, not many. I was under the impression that you thought such programs were unfair.
I have no problem with social programs to help those unable to help themselves, such as the sick, children, elderly and the disabled. Anything beyond that, however, yes, I have a problem with. Mainly because they don't work. We have been increasing aid to the poor ever since we started those programs in this country and yet, there poverty keeps increasing. Clearly our social programs aren't working and I do not believe the answer is to throw more money at them.
Society creates its poverty with its laws, regulations, etc., and then "throws money at them" to avoid making the real changes that would enable them to help themselves, such as good education and healthcare. An educated, healthy country, no matter who foots the bill, pays off in the long run. And, of course, now many, many of the jobs no longer exist, and even our nonpoor are finding themselves struggling like never before. I've heard this argument all my life, and I guess the fundamental difference between us is I believe every human being has more value than any thing can possibly have. I believe that is probably where you and I differ the most.
Cute trick there, with the "I guess you're just a materialistic heathen while I am in tune to the higher calling of humanity". Save it. Trust me, you do not want to compare humanitarian activities with me---I have done much, much more than most.
In this country we provide housing, education, food etc, etc, etc in ever increasing amounts for many decades now. Poverty keeps increasing. you are asserting that if we just do more of the same, it will work out. I am suggesting that your method is not working and you need to reexamine your premises.
I was not implying anything about a materialistic heathen. Others on this forum have stated that they do not believe everybody has value simply by being. If I state the opposite belief, it is only that: my belief. My main point was that the money we have been throwing at the problem has been ineffective because we have not provided the kind of education required both by the poor to enable them to function, as well as to help all of us understand our own behavior better.
You may be right, but what I have read here is not that they think people don't have VALUE, but rather that they shouldn't' be given money for doing nothing.
As to education, I agree that our education system sucks. The Federal government does a very poor job, as is typical when they are involved in anything. I would love to see them get out of the education business all together and let private institutions compete.
I also think there is a lot of personal responsibility that goes into getting an education. Students must take responsibility for learning, not merely show up and expect something magical to happen. Students must do their homework. if a student is living in an area with particularly bad schools, they should avail themselves of the public library to enhance their education. Parents, also need to take responsibility and ensure their children are doing their homework, and teach them the value of an education.
I would gladly support any student who was applying themselves. What I am not in favor of is the government redistributing my money with no accountability on the part of the recipients. Same goes for welfare in general. Anyone who is wiling to work and is trying, I am happy to do whatever I can to remove obstacles in their path. People who just want me to pay their way so they can do whatever they want, not so much.
I heard a pretty good quote: Broke is financial condition, whereas poverty is a state of mind. I don't think any of us who have only been broke can fully understand the limitations perceived by people living in poverty. I do know that no matter how fair and just and functioning a system can be, there will be some who game it. And I don't believe the truly poor do that; I believe the ones who are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves choose to game the system instead. Of course, recently the gamers were of a much higher calibre and pretty much crashed the economy. How about this for a slogan: "From Each According to His/Her Ability, To Each According to His/Her Contribution."
If you like that slogan, then I suggest you study the history of communism and see how that has worked out.
I lose 50%+ to taxes. If i have to sacrifice while paying for others stuff, then they must sacrifice as well. No cable, no cell phones, no fancy clothing, no TV. You only need food, water, shelter to live. If they want better they can provide for themselves. no luxury's.
Beggars Can't Be Choosers" line. This is an old argument, and a lazy one.
Look at this way, you are on this forum making your case, appealing to people about your individual situation. Why should I have to lift one finger to help the poor? Do you like your motivations being narrowly judged as heartless, self-centered, etc, before people even give you a fair shot at explaining yourself and your merits?
It is a lazy person's approach to take a class of people, group them all together, and assign motivations to everyone based on the actions of some individuals. It is harder work, but a fairer approach to judge the poor individually - TO EACH HIS OWN MERIT.
Every person deserves a name and a face and a fair shot at understanding before coming to any conclusion about that individual person.
I'm not advocating that you never condemn a lazy man or woman. I'm only tasking you with the personal guts to give that individual a name and a face, followed by a fair trial. Know his person and know his story. Know his MERITS.
Would it be fair for me to conclude, after hearing your stories, that every Working Person I meet or talk to from now going forward will share in your view about the poor?
Should I conclude from your words that all of the Working Class's minds are so lazy - so utterly lazy - they find the easiest path possible to one of society's oldest problems; brush a whole class of people into a nameless, faceless dust pan where they can conveniently dump it away and have a pleasant excuse to provide for themselves; wherein, they don't have to give a damn about anybody . . . but themselves.
I could draw that conclusion, but it would be lazy.
YOU MUST READ THIS !! this was written by a man in Boston MA. encapsulating very nicely a clear answer to the question "what is the 99% OWS movement about" Dear Wall Street: Wondering what all the fuss is about? Let me tell you: We gave you our blessing, and you laughed behind our backs for being gullible. We gave you our retirement savings and you gambled it away on products even you did not understand – and reaped billions doing so. We gave you plans for our children’s education, and you shredded each future sheepskin with your greed -- well, everyone's children but yours. We gave you tax breaks because we were told you would create jobs as a thank you for the privilege. Instead you gave yourself bonuses and built edifices to yourselves that would feed thousands of the hungry and educate many of our youth who deserve it. We gave your corporations break after break, and for what? So you could break the very backs that worked so hard to provide them. We gave you the largest amount of cash and savings the world has known, and you threw a party -- but forgot to invite us who paid for it. We gave you our trust, and you stacked the Supreme Court to allow you a freeway to buying our politicians. And now we are tired. We are tired of giving to you who have proven so ungrateful. We are tired of giving you breaks without a thank you. And most importantly, we are tired of your self-imposed self-entitlement. You have done nothing to deserve our trust, our money, or a break. And now we are going to work to take it all back. And you can blame yourself for it. And for the record, we do not hate money. We are not communists or socialists. We are Americans. We are Italians. We are Spaniards. We are Arabs. We are Germans. We are Democrats. We are Republicans. We are made of up many parts. Just like you. Remember, you created the vocabulary for this discussion, and if the issue at hand is about money for you, then it shall be about money for us............ Steve Lyons Boston, Massachusetts
[Removed]
You are obviously having a hard time. Just consider that taking it out on the less fortunate is not morally correct. Compassion will go a lot further than blaming the poor. Remember that it's the rich that control you, not the poor. The poor get nothing for free. You would never want to live as they do.
Really? Single mothers living on two or three hundred dollars a month in welfare and food stamps should have to pay taxes? From what income? The income she gets ...FROM THE GOVERNMENT?
Even if you just buy food and pay no sales tax your still paying taxes that are incorporated into the cost of the food. The grocery store has to pay business taxes, property taxes, taxes on it's employees, all of which is paid for when you buy a pound of hamburger.
No, the poor should pay nothing.
There is really only one truely fair way to have a tax structure and that is if we got rid of ALL current taxes and tarrifs and divided the budget by 310,000,000. Every man woman and child in America would owe exactly the same share for exactly the same thing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:LuckyDuckyComic.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_duckies#Backlash_from_critics
The Journal was frequently mocked for its use of the term “lucky duckies” to refer to people whose lack of a federal income tax burden is the direct result of their lower income. This attitude was satirized as “let them eat cake”-style myopia. Ruben Bolling’s Tom the Dancing Bug comic in Salon magazine, for instance, periodically features a poor duck who keeps “outwitting” a fat, top-hatted oligarch by cleverly submitting to the misfortunes of his economic class. Jonathan Chait, in The New Republic, reacted to the Journal editorial by writing: One of the things that has fascinated me about The Wall Street Journal editorial page is its occasional capacity to rise above the routine moral callousness of hack conservative punditry and attain a level of exquisite depravity normally reserved for villains in James Bond movies.[9] And one "lucky ducky" wrote to the Journal editor, offering to share his luck (in a form of logical argument sometimes known as a modest proposal): I will spend a year as a Wall Street Journal editor, while one lucky editor will spend a year in my underpaid shoes. I will receive an editor's salary, and suffer the outrage of paying federal income tax on that salary. The fortunate editor, on the other hand, will enjoy a relatively small federal income tax burden, as well as these other perks of near poverty: the gustatory delights of a diet rich in black beans, pinto beans, navy beans, chickpeas and, for a little variety, lentils; the thrill of scrambling to pay the rent or make the mortgage; the salutary effects of having no paid sick days; the slow satisfaction of saving up for months for a trip to the dentist; and the civic pride of knowing that, even as a lucky ducky, you still pay a third or more of your gross income in income taxes, payroll taxes, sales taxes and property taxes.[10]
[Removed]
Really? Single mothers living on two or three hundred dollars a month in welfare and food stamps should have to pay taxes? From what income? The income she gets ...FROM THE GOVERNMENT?
Even if you just buy food and pay no sales tax your still paying taxes that are incorporated into the cost of the food. The grocery store has to pay business taxes, property taxes, taxes on it's employees, all of which is paid for when you buy a pound of hamburger.
No, the poor should pay nothing.
There is really only one truely fair way to have a tax structure and that is if we got rid of ALL current taxes and tarrifs and divided the budget by 310,000,000. Every man woman and child in America would owe exactly the same share for exactly the same thing.
Is the quality of your life and your kids any better than the kids in the projects? Do you feel safe at night? Who gets better medical care you and your kids or the kids in the projects? Who ends up with a better education? Now I'm just asking and I don't want to debate the issue with you.
Those questions do not matter as they still do nothing for themselves or further the human condition. Do they go to school? Are they taught english, math and sciences like every other child? I went to a lower class school so tell me, how is it that I can speak proper english and many of my fellow class mates can not? Why did I learn math as well as other important skills and they did not? is it because they are stupid or maybe their families did not put the emphasis on education like my parents did? Why did the parents not do their job? I should have a better home, i should have better healthcare, everything have should be better than theirs and it should remain that way. The results you get coincide with the effort you put out.
As I stated I don't want to debate the issue with you. I asked you some questions and you failed to answer the questions so I 'll move on. Have a nice day.
word!
[Removed]
I don't completely disagree, but the military-industrial complex is a far greater threat.
[Removed]
Unfortunately, no one should be taxed, but few realize that government, as we define it in our world, is simply thievery, consented to by the masses. Stop following, stop consenting, stop paying to be a slave.
Because this country thinks that food, shelter, clothes, cell phones, etc are things that everyone has a right to just because they're breathing and breeding. Personally, if you need food, shelter, etc then fine. Here's your apartment in the government housing complex along with your work schedule, school schedule, and curfew. If you're going to live off my money, you WILL be working to earn it as well as working to get off the dole.
Ok, and the guy who got shot up defending you and grandma and the guy who was severely injured doing the job you couldn't do...yep they'll all get right on it.
Food, shelter, clothing, health care and education and opportunity. The government has been very lax about the health, education and opportunity part, which of course, makes for many more poor people.
Then get the government to use what tax dollars it already gets wisely. Until that happens, I don't want to hear a single word about raising taxes on ANYONE.
Well, it seems to me that, based on the growth of the ultra rich and the diminishing of the middle class, the tax structure is stacked against the working person. Based on that analogy, you would say 'Make the most of the cards you get, even if the game is rigged." I totally agree that tax dollars need to be spent more wisely and on things that matter. But I also think we need to shift the focus of tax code incentives.
Get rid of all deductions and credits. Get rid of all those "other" taxes like sales tax, fees for car tags, etc. Make everyone pay their share of the government in this country. Flat tax all the way.
You might have an argument from the States on those "other" taxes, since most of them are local rather than federal. Unless you want a flat tax to cover all the states' needs as well. And do you allow for "no tax" on incomes up to, say, $12,000? For example, everyone pays 25 percent of every dollar earned over 12,000 , no matter how it is earned? Then that percentage is somehow divided among the State governments and the Federal government?
All income is taxed. The states could implement their own flat tax on money not used to pay the federal tax. It would make it easier to compare tax rates between states and make it easier to decide where you wanted to live.
Wow; that's harsh. A person earns 12,000 a year, living expenses are pretty much a minimum of $12,000 (housing, utilities, food, transportation), but those people would still have to pay at least 2400 in taxes (that's only 20% to the Fed alone). Of course, the cost of living may not be as much in Griffith, IN as it is in Los Angeles or Denver or any other city where jobs would most likely be available. But if everyone is paying tax on $12001 on up, there is still plenty of revenue, but it doesn't grind the people at the lower end of the income spectrum down. That is the kind of thing that actually creates the despair of poverty.
But you have to realize, no sales tax, no car tag fees, no taxes on utility bills, no gas taxes. I'm sure someone making 12K now pays at least 2400 in all those ancillary taxes either directly or indirectly.
$1000 a month doesn't buy much, even if the prices would drop by the precise amount of the current sales, property or other taxes. I sincerely doubt, however, that the retailers would reduce the price by the total amount of the previous sales tax. Food isn't currently taxed, at least not in Arizona, and those prices are going up every day.
And that's true, but to say that someone making 12K can't afford 2400 in taxes seems wrong at the same time. If we leave the same structure in place, they are still paying those taxes anyways. They just don't realize it as much and therefore have no great feeling to do something about it one way or another.
I guess that's where we disagree, since every state has a different sales/property/income tax structure; it would seem to me to find out what that "break-even" point is for each state based on the current tax structure, i.e., at what point does a person go negative when comparing all taxes paid now versus a flat tax, and the income below that amount would not be taxed. Also, does this concept also include eliminating social security and medicare?
Yes, eliminate SS and medicare in the sense that there is not a separate tax for them. It's all taken care of in the flat rate. And yes, poor people might have to pay more. Tough. The rich will have to pay more too. Last I checked 25% was quite a bit higher than 15%. Once we get through the first couple of years of adjustment, things will start to even out. Prices will rise or fall to match after tax incomes, and life in the US will become infinitely simpler.
Didn't you know Trog that when you were born, there is a stamp on your ass that says, 'OWNED BY THE US GOVERNMENT'. None of your money is really yours, it is only what you are allowed to have, and if they want some of it back, then they will take it. You are not really entitled to have more than anyone else. Didn't they make you swear to that allegiance when you popped out of the womb?
Because...............shut up you racist bigot!!!
That's really not a good answer. Nowhere does he complain that it's only Black people getting welfare or Hispanics getting welfare. Even I know the majority of welfare recipients as an absolute number are White, however a larger percentage of the Black population than the White population receives welfare.
I agree that it was a crappy answer I was being sarcastic. That's the go to answer for any far leftist caught in the corner. It's sad because the race card is so over used that people find it hard to take real racism seriously now.
Set up a straw man and argue against it. That's the "far rightist" way especially the "far rightist" nut jobs that come to this forum.
Yes they should pay. A flat tax is the only truly fair system.
A flat tax is such a terrible idea its supporters in recent years have had to start calling it the Fair Tax to make it not sound so terrible.
Why is it a "terrible idea"?
Flat tax is a dirty word that should be used more often, a set tax that is subject to everyone’s income from the poor to the rich, if you make a buck you pay a predetermine percent on that buck, with no exception. Common sense taxation, the problem being it takes away from the vast organization that are in place that turn a profit by providing services to the poor. They have more lobbyist than any big corporation, and when a individual mention a flat tax they descend on that individual with such vengeance that they abandon the cause. I am open for a real solution to get a flat tax establish do you have any ideas