Fenton
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2012
- Messages
- 29,771
- Reaction score
- 12,231
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Yep !
And Cali should be nicer to their poor, with their Liberal policies, they create lots of them.
To the bolded: Good. That is great to hear.
Maybe that will attract success to this state. I'm not sure what the issue is for you. If poor people are better off in Cali, then by all means, they should stay there. What we need in this state is more success stories, and not more mouths to feed.
regarding its regressive tax policy, yes, it is
tejas/north mexico allows its lower income citizens the opportunity to subsidize the tax burden of the high income residents of the state ... assuming the target was that all would pay an equivalent/fair share of income in order to fund their state's government
I found this interesting because...well people always talk about a millionaire in California being fed up with taxes and leaving. If you're rich and want to not pay as much in taxes move to Texas.
If you're not rich or in the bottom 60% in income....move to California.
It shows what no income tax is really about. Of course every Conservative on this site is wealthy and owns their own business so they may not see the concern.
Edit: These are "effective tax rates". It includes all taxes paid by and individual as a percentage of their income.
View attachment 67163091
Posted below.
Of course...it means the taxes are coming from other things. In Texas the way taxes are collected burden the poor and the wealthy pay a lot less to maintain their state.
If you think the poor carrying a large burden (as a percentage of their income) rather than say a millionaire is being "mean" then sure. I'm just pointing out a fact. For the majority of both Californians and Texans...you'd pay lower taxes in California.
To each their own I guess. As long as the rich move into Texas to pay lower taxes it's fine for everybody else to pay a lot higher % of their income. Of course Texas has a higher number of minimum wage jobs per capita than any state other than Mississippi but hey...I'm sure it will trickle down eventually
I found this interesting because...well people always talk about a millionaire in California being fed up with taxes and leaving. If you're rich and want to not pay as much in taxes move to Texas.
If you're not rich or in the bottom 60% in income....move to California.
It shows what no income tax is really about. Of course every Conservative on this site is wealthy and owns their own business so they may not see the concern.
Edit: These are "effective tax rates". It includes all taxes paid by and individual as a percentage of their income.
View attachment 67163091
regarding its regressive tax policy, yes, it is
tejas/north mexico allows its lower income citizens the opportunity to subsidize the tax burden of the high income residents of the state ... assuming the target was that all would pay an equivalent/fair share of income in order to fund their state's government
Yep. But then, lets take a look at that.
Minimum wage $7.25, say a worker in both states works 30 hrs/week. $217.5 per week. 52 weeks in a year, so $11,310 per year. Now a person earning minimum wage in LA is earning the same amount in actual dollars as the person in Houston. However, Cost of Living Calculator: Compare the Cost of Living in Two Cities - CNNMoney the person in Houston pays 25% less for groceries, 89% less for housing, 6% less for utilities, 17% less for transportation and 10% less for healthcare. So in exchange for paying 2% more of their income in Taxes in Texas vs Cali, clearly they get much more for their money in Texas.
Texas residents pay 2% more of their income in Taxes, but decrease their other basic costs by an average of 29.4%. Yep, moving to California or copying California would really make a lot of sense. NOT!
People don't seem to realize how much federal dollars help support state and local needs.
If you want to dig into the data by all means
Who Pays? | The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP)
It includes income tax (for Texas zero) Sales and Excise Taxes, Property Taxes etc.
Hmmm, and these groups? Who do they fund?
- Annie E. Casey Foundation
- Bauman Foundation
- Coydog Foundation
- Ford Foundation
- Nathan Cummings Foundation
- Popplestone Foundation
- Steven M Silberstein Foundation
- Stoneman Family Fund
Since 2001 the Annie E. Casey Foundation has pumped at least $1,705,500 into the ACORN network, according to philanthropy database information.
http://www.juliagorin.com/wordpress/?p=2268
The suit would put only a small dent into the Bauman family fortune, and the $100 million foundation Bauman uses to influence liberal circles.
Bauman has contributed nearly $300,000 to Democratic candidates and causes since 2008, and has financing some of liberalism’s largest organizations.
She contributed $10,000 to American Bridge 21st Century, a Super PAC that performs opposition research against Republican candidates. The Bauman Foundation also gave a total of $6,300 to President Barack Obama’s 2008 and 2012 campaigns.
Report: Husband of Democratic donor accused of sexually harassing domestic worker | Washington Free Beacon
[Gives money to progressive groups like thinkprogress] -COYDOG FOUNDATION
Center for American Progress
Ford Foundation information Ford Foundation — Extremely liberal and leftist — read the lists of liberal groups they support — links dont work but you can copy and paste into google for a very scary search | Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian
For many Jewish progressive organizations, the beginning of 2014 has been marked by a scramble to find new sources of funding, as America’s largest backer of liberal Jewish groups changed its funding guidelines.
The Nathan Cummings Foundation, which has been giving nearly $6 million annually to Jewish causes, will no longer fund organizations through a separate program for Jewish life, but will instead allocate funds solely to programs that deal with income inequality and climate change.
Read more: Liberal Groups Scramble as Nathan Cummings Foundation Shifts Funding Guidelines
Popplestone http://www.undueinfluence.com/cap.htm
In 2003, the Stephen M. Silberstein Foundation gave $100,000 to Media Matters for America through the Tides Foundation.
http://ballotpedia.org/Stephen_M._Silberstein
Labor-backed groups hit ALEC in new report | Washington Free Beacon Stoneman family
Who the hell are these people?
Let's see who funds them?
Funding | The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP)
Hmmm, and these groups? Who do they fund?
A simple google search shows this itep is funded solely from organizations that push PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL causes. No funding from politically neutral or conservative sources. Progressive, Activist, Liberal.
I think we can just ignore this silly source and any junk it tries to pass off. Social Justice on a bar graph, who buys that crap?[/FONT][/COLOR]
To the bolded: Good. That is great to hear. Maybe that will attract success to this state. I'm not sure what the issue is for you. If poor people are better off in Cali, then by all means, they should stay there. What we need in this state is more success stories, and not more mouths to feed.
Keep up the good advertising. Feel free to hand out fliers of this in all low income neighborhoods in Texas.
Personally, I like the idea of sales tax vs income tax. If everyone pays the same percentage on things they purchase, then, yes, depending on their purchasing habits, it will be a higher percentage of the lower income earners total wages. Duh.
Not sure where you're getting all of this. It's not just the poorest in Texas...it's 60% of tax payers and includes middle class families.There is no need for tax forms. There is no need for agencies to review and process those tax forms. Everyone pays taxes, not just some. The more a person buys, the more money the state gets. Got any proof that those on the lowest end buy more than the ones at the top end? Also, since certain items are tax free, such as many foods, one has to wonder what all these people on welfare are buying that is taxable, when the government if footing the bill for them to live?
My issue is when people call Cali a high tax state and Texas a low tax state. Obviously that's not true for the majority of residents of either state.
Right. Because the state gets more from that 12.6% of $20K ($2520/year) than it gets from that 3.2% on a million dollar a year earner ($32000/year). Yep, those darn wealthy people are paying so much less to help maintain the state.
Yep. But then, lets take a look at that.
Minimum wage $7.25, say a worker in both states works 30 hrs/week. $217.5 per week. 52 weeks in a year, so $11,310 per year. Now a person earning minimum wage in LA is earning the same amount in actual dollars as the person in Houston. However, Cost of Living Calculator: Compare the Cost of Living in Two Cities - CNNMoney the person in Houston pays 25% less for groceries, 89% less for housing, 6% less for utilities, 17% less for transportation and 10% less for healthcare. So in exchange for paying 2% more of their income in Taxes in Texas vs Cali, clearly they get much more for their money in Texas.
Texas residents pay 2% more of their income in Taxes, but decrease their other basic costs by an average of 29.4%. Yep, moving to California or copying California would really make a lot of sense. NOT!
Who the hell are these people?
Let's see who funds them?
Funding | The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP)
Hmmm, and these groups? Who do they fund?
A simple google search shows this itep is funded solely from organizations that push PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL causes. No funding from politically neutral or conservative sources. Progressive, Activist, Liberal.
I think we can just ignore this silly source and any junk it tries to pass off. Social Justice on a bar graph, who buys that crap?[/FONT][/COLOR]
Well, I suppose when one depends on axe grinding Mother Jones to present the pretty graphs, and the axe supplying Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy to provide the selective data, one be thinking as they hoped.
Unfortunately for the majority of residents in one state, the humor provided by both is far from true.
Yup.
Libs HATE Texas and they hated Texas even before the 2008 Collpase.
Back then it was atttibuted to George Bush and that was enough to earn it their hatred.
NOW, its the fact that Texas is economically succesful while Blue Plague States are on the verge of bankruptcy.
The hate it because its a shining beacon of Conservatism and proof that Conservative economic principles work.
Yea, they might make inaccurate and dishonest claims that its success is due to Federal money and " subsidies ", but Texas isn't the only State that recieved Stimulus nor is it the only State that is the home of large Corporations who recieve tax incentives from the Federal Goverment.
California has GOOGLE, MicroSoft, APPLE and Silicon Valley which is awash in Federal "Subsidies ".
So they start nonsense threads like this and fill it with left wing sourced data and misinformation.
Its pretty hillarious actually.
So point out what was selective about it? I've seen two responses attacking the source and no one attacking the data.
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?