You know, I really do tend to read links which tend to support a position taken but they should be serious and unbiased. Such is not the case with the link you sent. When snarky comments are included with whatever points they are trying to make then it should be disqualified for serious consideration.
As do fox news pundits.
Is this an opinion, or do you have facts to back up your statement?
You know, I really do tend to read links which tend to support a position taken but they should be serious and unbiased. Such is not the case with the link you sent. When snarky comments are included with whatever points they are trying to make then it should be disqualified for serious consideration.
By all means feel free to show this in significant numbers. Would you like to see some of the destruction around the world? hows that clean water thing doing everywhere?
"Significant numbers" is very much the same as "fair". Unfortunately, both are whatver you want it to be. One can not disprove your opinion here.
If your job threats our ecosystem, you have a crappy job and you should lose it. Our ecosystem is far more important than someone's crappy job.Worrying "about it as much as they would here" is very unlikely as the US has become paranoid to the extreme. We all want clean water, etc. but the lengths the US has gone to puts people out of work and does no real good in the long run. When the possibility of a bird's nest being disturbed causes an entire shut down, or regulations become so stifling that human interaction is made difficult, then you know that that a bridge has been crossed which makes business, and life in general, just too difficult.
Look, I am not asking to take up a collection for CEOs. Just trying to point out that the bonus income is taxed at the highest marginal rate, not the long term capital gains rate that you presumed. Sorry if the facts do not fit a partisan position. I thought you just had the facts wrong, thus my response. If you just want a political argument rather than deal in fact I probably should not have responded in the first place.
It's $200k per individual and $250k per household -- nothing new there.
This is a perfectly reasonable way to pay for the plan.
Maybe you should have read my post a bit more thoroughly; if you had you would have noticed that this part of my post I THOUGHT covered exec compensation when I showed his bonus/stock options $11,358,445.I assumed that he would be keeping his stock for a while, surely a CEO wouldn't want stockholders seeing him dumping it.
This part of your post kinda perked me up though “When you start talking about "wealthy" that becomes an interesting term. “
Do you think that someone that makes per year “$11,358,445 “wealthy? Do you think that someone that makes $1,093,989 in salary and pays his full social security in about six weeks is poor? I don’t.:2wave:
Maybe you are not considering that the rich will then leave this country and the oil companies will just pass the loss in capital gains due to more taxes onto the people buying the oil. This is a terrible plan that doesn't even look good if you judge it by it's cover.
Maybe you are not considering that the rich will then leave this country and the oil companies will just pass the loss in capital gains due to more taxes onto the people buying the oil. This is a terrible plan that doesn't even look good if you judge it by it's cover.
I gave you a few links from different places. But as I keep telling people, bias means nothing. It is accuracy that counts. I only discount a source when it becomes inaccurate. Forbes, for example, is biased, but often accurate. Same with WSJ. If you can show something is inaccurate, please do.
By all means feel free to show this in significant numbers. Would you like to see some of the destruction around the world? hows that clean water thing doing everywhere?
A few more:
One is that rich economies seem to provide disproportionate and growing returns to the already wealthy
Should the government do more to close the gap between rich and poor? | The Economist
But one big part of the reason we have so much inequality is that the top 1 percent want it that way. The most obvious example involves tax policy. Lowering tax rates on capital gains, which is how the rich receive a large portion of their income, has given the wealthiest Americans close to a free ride. Monopolies and near monopolies have always been a source of economic power—from John D. Rockefeller at the beginning of the last century to Bill Gates at the end.
Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1% | Society | Vanity Fair
The Top 10 Tax Breaks -- And How They Help The Wealthy The Most
The Top 10 Tax Breaks -- And How They Help The Wealthy The Most
From the Associated Press.
President Barack Obama says he wants to make sure millionaires are taxed at higher rates than their secretaries. The data say they already are. . . .
On average, the wealthiest people in America pay a lot more taxes than the middle class or the poor, according to private and government data. They pay at a higher rate, and as a group, they contribute a much larger share of the overall taxes collected by the federal government.
The 10 percent of households with the highest incomes pay more than half of all federal taxes. They pay more than 70 percent of federal income taxes, according to the Congressional Budget Office. . . .
This year, households making more than $1 million will pay an average of 29.1 percent of their income in federal taxes, including income taxes, payroll taxes and other taxes, according to the Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank.
Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will pay an average of 15 percent of their income in federal taxes.
Lower-income households will pay less. For example, households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will pay an average of 12.5 percent of their income in federal taxes. Households making between $20,000 and $30,000 will pay 5.7 percent.
If your job threats our ecosystem, you have a crappy job and you should lose it. Our ecosystem is far more important than someone's crappy job.
BTW, no one is proposing regulations anywhere close to what you're concerned about above. But keep in mind, it was the lack of appropiate regulations that created the meltdown we just scraped out of. Having politicials again request we lower government regulation borders on insanity imo.
But here we are hearing Cons do just that. You can't make this up.
As long as they leave and stay gone that's fine with me. The oil thing too, we need better solutions, and that would provide the impetus.
Better than living with the "Better do what they want or we're ****ed bull**** you just repeated.
The moneys all imaginary. They can't take the actual potatos, and we could just reissue the money. Maybe blue this time.
Its all a game, why do you think they keep saying they need to stay "competitive"?
Show over-regulation? Sure. Haven't you heard about it?
http://archive.sba.gov/advo/research/rs264tot.pdf
It’s Official; Supermajority Thinks We’re Over-Regulated
You want me to comment on water supplies everywhere?
What you're doing here is listing the taxes not paid but not taxes actually paid.
List who pays what and you'd find that who pays most of the taxes in the United States.
The President of the United States is either a fool or a liar, some would say both, but for once the mainstream media is willing to set the record straight.
In fact I have no idea whether they are accurate or not because what you sent was inserting snide comments in whatever opinions they were expressing. It was obviously an opinion piece and whether these opinions were based on facts, distorted facts, or incomplete facts, I cannot say.
:lamo :lamo :lamo You should first try and find out if they are accurate.
No, you should submit links which you know to be accurate and not opinion pieces. I 'm just not interested in checking your submissions for accuracy, That should be done beforehand.
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?