- Joined
- May 19, 2005
- Messages
- 30,534
- Reaction score
- 10,717
- Location
- Louisiana
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
True, and amen to eliminating the Fed. They have done nothing but devalue the dollar since we got off the gold standard.
True, and amen to eliminating the Fed. They have done nothing but devalue the dollar since we got off the gold standard.well yeah, there's that. But that seems to be the nature of everything in life. Every solution creates another problem. Even still, I'd rather have a state tax problem than a federal one. It's easier to deal with on a state level.
And while we're at it, let's eliminate the Fed. :mrgreen:
well yeah, there's that. But that seems to be the nature of everything in life. Every solution creates another problem. Even still, I'd rather have a state tax problem than a federal one. It's easier to deal with on a state level.
And while we're at it, let's eliminate the Fed. :mrgreen:
More third-grade thinking. First of all, the number you cite is the percentage of 1040's filed showing a positive AGI but no NET tax owed. If that wasn't enough to lose you, consider that better than 20% of them are from full-time students who file a 1040 just to get back the taxes that were withheld while they worked summer or other part-time jobs. Did you ever do that? Further, the bottom 20% actually pays an average of 16.3% of their income in federal, state and local taxes, despite the fact that their federal income tax rates become negative due to the EITC and ACCC WORKFARE programs that we administer through the IRS.
The wealthy pay such a high share of all taxes because they have such a high share of all income. Indeed under Bush their effective tax rates were sinking like a stone, but their income share was increasing so rapidly that their share of taxes went up anyway.
Yes, if we had left income taxes the way they were under Clinton, a lot of these problems could have been avoided.
Another ridiculous claim. A great many corporations end up owing no income tax, but not continuously. Zero tax this year, lots next year. Do some research. Corporations are not stupid. They contribute to both sides while leaning toward candidates who appear likely to win. That may indeed stand to hurt Republicans a good bit.
I guess you would support a system under which everyone paid taxes, but then the government turned around and sent everyone a check for the exact same amount. That would be "fair" in your eyes, but anything else it seems would not.
The two basic functions of any society are risk-sharing and redistribution of income. Can't handle it? Don't live in a society.
The Constitution in Article I-Section 8 calls on the new federal government to establish post offices and post roads. These enable mail to move efficiently around the new country. The bulk of the new country's residents are illiterate and have no use for mail. This is a transfer of wealth to the purposes of the already wealthy and well-educated.
They don't OWE anything. Most of them make less than $20 THOUSAND per year. These are the big horses you think should be carrying the load??? That's a crackpot notion.
LOL! It seems that more than one lily has been gilded around here!
Strange, I thought "WE THE PEOPLE" was the first words of the preamble to the Contitution of the United States.
Guess I better check my history.....I did it is.eace
Let's just face it, folks. The system we have now sucks a lot of ass. I hope we can all agree on that much. So the question remains: do we really need a system where the US tax code has over 71,000 pages? Why not simply tax everyone exactly the same regardless of income? No deductions, no loopholes, nothing. The exact same across the board. Then no one can bitch about people paying more or less than others. The states themselves can collect the income tax reducing our need for federal bureaucracy. Billions are spent each year by the IRS simply collecting the taxes because of unnecessary bureaucracy. Just consider it. :shrug:
That's a welcome bonus.do you understand how drastic a castration of politicians' powers such a change would create?
You have a point. But one could always leave a ridiculous state for a less ridiculous state.
There is a type of poster who can best be described as a drive-by poster. They enter quickly, say something fast and seemingly pithy, and get the hell out as fast as they can. The whole idea is to let others know they disagreee and feel strongly but to give little than can actually be debated with. It is the antithesis of actual debate.
Well, after the entertainment value wears off, see if you can uncover a way to counter the actual substance of those posts. These little quippies aren't going to get the job done.
It is-cite me the law review article that claims such a phrase is a code for income redistribution
I think the rule of law is more than enough legal position on the matter. Let us know when your case has been successful in the Supreme Court.
You mean like the housing bubble? Followed by the commodities bubble? Not one but two bubbles in eight years. Seems like that would have been more than enough if what you say is true.More illogical drivel. For the clinton tax system to work we'd need another huge dot com bubble that meant those being taxed more were actually getting more net income. Nice try but your claim is bogus
More appeals to idiotic and irrelevant authority
The two basic functions of any society are risk-sharing and redistribution of income. Can't handle it? Don't live in a society.
Yeah, and that's CF, for the most part. Funny thing, though, haymarket, is that you tend to disappear when you get a substantial response.
Its hilarious hearing someone that has claimed to be a "lawyer" calling the rule of law an irrelevant authority. :lamo:mrgreen::lamo
Those are the two basic functions of society? Care to prove it?
He believes in proper law, not the convoluted interpretest crap that a bunch of jackasses have been foisting on us.Its hilarious hearing someone that has claimed to be a "lawyer" calling the rule of law an irrelevant authority. :lamo:mrgreen::lamo
Just provide the threads, post numbers and quotes and show me where this happened. Do that. Do it today. I challenge you to back this up with evidence.
Seems to me that you are trying to hide your own faults and lack of substance by using the school yard "I know you are but what am I" when somebody correctly identifies your own posting style.
But do please step up and support your silly charge.
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?