- Joined
- Oct 21, 2015
- Messages
- 54,974
- Reaction score
- 11,162
- Location
- Kentucky
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
LOL. It's funny that Democrats want to raise the cap on SALT deductions, benefitting only the rich. The poor don't pay over $10,000 in SALT. This is all about those high taxed states like California and New York being mad because those high taxed states used to be able to tell their richer citizens, "Don't worry about our state's high tax rates because the federal government will subsidize our high taxes so you really aren't paying them." If these states are going to tax rich people more then they shouldn't allow the federal government to give the money right back to those rich people. They should own their high tax rates and their liberal rhetoric.
Schumer: Democrats will try to overturn tax deduction cap
I applaud any action which lowers taxes. :applaud
I wish they would eliminate them entirely! . . . For EVERYONE!!
If these states are going to tax rich people more then they shouldn't allow the federal government to give the money right back to those rich people. They should own their high tax rates and their liberal rhetoric.
Schumer said:"I think we are very, very close," Schumer said. He said Americans living in suburban neighborhoods in high-tax states, like New York and California, are already paying some of the highest property and school taxes in the nation and "for the federal government to then penalize them is so unfair."
LOL. It's funny that Democrats want to raise the cap on SALT deductions, benefitting only the rich. The poor don't pay over $10,000 in SALT. This is all about those high taxed states like California and New York being mad because those high taxed states used to be able to tell their richer citizens, "Don't worry about our state's high tax rates because the federal government will subsidize our high taxes so you really aren't paying them." If these states are going to tax rich people more then they shouldn't allow the federal government to give the money right back to those rich people. They should own their high tax rates and their liberal rhetoric.
Schumer: Democrats will try to overturn tax deduction cap
LOL. It's funny that Democrats want to raise the cap on SALT deductions, benefitting only the rich. The poor don't pay over $10,000 in SALT. This is all about those high taxed states like California and New York being mad because those high taxed states used to be able to tell their richer citizens, "Don't worry about our state's high tax rates because the federal government will subsidize our high taxes so you really aren't paying them." If these states are going to tax rich people more then they shouldn't allow the federal government to give the money right back to those rich people. They should own their high tax rates and their liberal rhetoric.
Schumer: Democrats will try to overturn tax deduction cap
If these states are going to tax rich people more then they shouldn't allow the federal government to give the money right back to those rich people. They should own their high tax rates and their liberal rhetoric.
Indeed. It's really too bad that rich people in California and New York don't want to pay their fair share.
The states that have higher state taxes can afford their own education, health care and infrastructure. As a result they don't need to be subsidized by the Federal government. It therefore makes no sense for their citizens to be taxed twice.
Most & Least Federally Dependent States
The states who are the most dependent on federal dollars are southern conservative states like Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, Louisiana, South Carolina, Kentucky... The reason is because they don't collect enough in state taxes to support themselves so the Federal government has to subsidize them.
The states who are the least dependent on Federal dollars are generally Northern Liberal states like Minnesota, Illinois, New Jersey, Connecticut... The reason is because they collect enough in state taxes to support themselves so the Federal government doesn't have to.
Since conservative refuse to collect state taxes from their wealthy residents the Federal government has to do it for them. But if your state shows a willingness to appropriately tax your own citizens then there's no reason for the federal government to do it again.
The states that have higher state taxes can afford their own education, health care and infrastructure. As a result they don't need to be subsidized by the Federal government. It therefore makes no sense for their citizens to be taxed twice.
Most & Least Federally Dependent States
The states who are the most dependent on federal dollars are southern conservative states like Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, Louisiana, South Carolina, Kentucky... The reason is because they don't collect enough in state taxes to support themselves so the Federal government has to subsidize them.
The states who are the least dependent on Federal dollars are generally Northern Liberal states like Minnesota, Illinois, New Jersey, Connecticut... The reason is because they collect enough in state taxes to support themselves so the Federal government doesn't have to.
Since conservative refuse to collect state taxes from their wealthy residents the Federal government has to do it for them. But if your state shows a willingness to appropriately tax your own citizens then there's no reason for the federal government to do it again.
Because it is irrelevant. Why states are paying more into the tax base is irrelevant. The fact is that they are. If a state is generating a certain amount of money for the Federal Government it stands to reason that they should expect to receive a similar amount back.Every now and then a progressive drags that study out. Its weighting in predicated on how much taxes are paid before any other factors are considered. So take New York, which pays a large amount of Federal taxes because it generates large amounts of income from financial sectors, logistics as a port and sheer population density. So if you figure contracts out it wont work out to be much even if the amount sent in is enormous. This study is ignoring economies of scale like it doesn't exist.
Yet you cannot provide a single solitary rebuttal to anything I said.What a bunch of horse ****.
I don't, and they're not. You're attempting to distort reality and it's not going to work. They're simply paying State taxes instead of Federal Taxes. Who collects the tax is largely irrelevant so long as it is collected and invested. In fact, by and large I would say it is generally better if the taxes are collected at the lower levels of government as that makes it less likely to be exposed to corruption and gives local voters more say in how their tax dollars are spent.Why do you believe rich people should be able to dodge paying taxes?
I will agree with you on one thing, California gets a very low return for the dollars they put in. Perhaps that would change if more populous states were subdivided after certain population numbers were reached. It would allow better representation as well.
If they are "getting a deal on Federal" then they are not paying the same. Fortunately, that has been remedied and the rich are paying more of their fair share. You'd think thr left would be pleased.bwahahahahahahahaha!!!!! Are you really that bad at math? They are paying the same. They're paying more in State taxes as a result they get a deal on Federal. When you pay nothing in state, you don't get a deal on Federal.
The federal government would love states to be fiscally responsible and pay for their own bills. Salt is how you reward the responsible states and punish the cheapskates that the federal government then has to subsidize.
Yes, they are. They're just not paying it directly to the Federal government. They're paying it to the state. If you pay $8 in state taxes and $10 in Federal it equals $18. If you pay $10 in state taxes and $8 in Federal then you're still paying $18. It's the same either way.If they are "getting a deal on Federal" then they are not paying the same.
LOL. It's funny that Democrats want to raise the cap on SALT deductions, benefitting only the rich. The poor don't pay over $10,000 in SALT. This is all about those high taxed states like California and New York being mad because those high taxed states used to be able to tell their richer citizens, "Don't worry about our state's high tax rates because the federal government will subsidize our high taxes so you really aren't paying them." If these states are going to tax rich people more then they shouldn't allow the federal government to give the money right back to those rich people. They should own their high tax rates and their liberal rhetoric.
Schumer: Democrats will try to overturn tax deduction cap
I applaud any action which lowers taxes. :applaud
I wish they would eliminate them entirely! . . . For EVERYONE!!
If they are "getting a deal on Federal" then they are not paying the same. Fortunately, that has been remedied and the rich are paying more of their fair share. You'd think thr left would be pleased.
Mississippi received $2.13 for every tax dollar the state sent to Washington in 2015, according to the Rockefeller study. West Virginia received $2.07, Kentucky got $1.90 and South Carolina got $1.71.
Meanwhile, New Jersey received 74 cents in federal spending for tax every dollar the state sent to Washington. New York received 81 cents, Connecticut received 82 cents and Massachusetts received 83 cents.
Those are two totally different taxes supporting totally different sets of programs. If you're "getting a deal" on your Federal taxes, then you're not paying your fair share of Federal taxes.Yes, they are. They're just not paying it directly to the Federal government. They're paying it to the state. If you pay $8 in state taxes and $10 in Federal it equals $18. If you pay $10 in state taxes and $8 in Federal then you're still paying $18. It's the same either way.
I applaud any action which lowers taxes. :applaud
I wish they would eliminate them entirely! . . . For EVERYONE!!
Yes, like Obama said, we're asking folks who can afford it, to pay a little more. I mean, there's only so much you can eat. There's only so big a house you can have.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?