GFY General Weasley Clark
 

Fucker wants to nail hardcore income tax increase on anyone who makes more than a million a year.

:BangBang: Go take your commie anti-capitalist philosphies to Siberia.

He got my vote.

yeah I saw that highly doubt he will be able to make that happen

well somebody gotta pay for Bushs crap, damn sure cant be the poor people KRL.

sorry but this must be done.

:thumbsup

Its amazing how many people are ignorant to the fact that its the wealthy people who provide the investment capital to create new businesses which in turn creates new jobs for the non-wealthy people.

Humm...
I do not see many wealthy people investing in America these days they are outsourcing it all.

Sit back, write off Hummers through strategic loop holes and yeah, this is helping America.

http://intellectualize.org/archives/003009.html

Maybe helping Alaska!

:thumbsup

damn where is 12clicks when you need him...lol


the top 5% of the income earners pay something like 40% of all income tax.


however...they also have many bonuses for being there.


suckls but sooner or later you have to ask yourself, are you for your country or against

dont want to pay taxes..then move out

im paying like 43% here

sucks balls

KRL dont you get a deduction for donations you make ?


A great charity is set up at the following paypal address [email protected]

heh

I like him

The top 5% DO NOT pay 40% of all income tax, they pay 90%
the rich are doing far more for this country than the other 95% combined. It's time the poor paid more or for them to demand the government spend and tax less. after all, the poor have a 95% voice.

Out of the three or four candidates who have a chance in hell of getting the nomination, Clark's the only one I'd even consider voting for.

hahahhaha lying is fun.

I don't see why everyone rules out a Kucinich/Sharpton ticket in '04.

Hey if it comes out of Rush's mouth, it's not a lie.

its not gonna happen
dont think so

Hey KRL, drop me some investment capital so I can worry about this tax next year. :glugglug

he's got my vote, he won't get the bill through so don't worry KRL!

Clark :thumbsup

We have to pay down this debt some how.

:2 cents:

:thumbsup

Just borrow more money from the banks and China to pay the dept! Oh wait

KRL :thumbsup :thumbsup

France.

Siberia is actually a very nice place with extremely acceptable taxation. Let alone some of the finest trim I have seen in a while.

12clicks - We never got a chance to preach the gospel about subjects like these in Vegas. I guess it was mutually accepted that the Epoch dinner was not the place.

Anyways good meeting you.

KK has the abilities of bringing the right people around.

-dd

There's a difference between lying and exaggerating.

Here's a somewhat out dated link from the Congressional Budget Office talking about tax burden:

http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index...m=0&sequence=0

Here's a nice analysis of it:
http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/

Put very simplistically the top 5% paid about 50% of income taxes in 1999, up from 38% of income taxes in 1977.

from this Clark guys website:

that part sounds good.
personally, if I was making over 1mil a year, I wouldn't worry about +/- 5%
(I don't think I'd worry about much of anything) :winkwink:

um, yeah. I hit the "9" by accident and went to lunch. I know its 50% (although sometimes it feels like 90%):winkwink:

Correct, and what most people on here do not realize is the definition of 'rich' is being lowered each year.

To be deemed the top 5% of income earners you need to break just over a 1/4 mil a year. Which, by my definition, isn't rich. Yet the Democrats keep on using the term 'rich' and the mass media watchers eat it up. Yeah, yeah, cruficy those nasty 'rich' people.

-dd

Thats the problem. Until you make it, you don't realize how little it actually is.

David, good meeting you too but you might not want to say that in these parts. :winkwink:

I have to stay out of this thread or myself and 12clicks may get a little to close to agreeing about something. Although I think the US's new tax breaks are a little over the top, I'm not a big fan of putting a lot more of the tax burden on the wealthy. The way to keep taxes down is to have a government that doesn't spend money like a child with mom's visa.

You must have been infected by Bush's own fuzzy math.
And I noticed those who support Bush and say that the rich are "overtaxed" fail to point out that the amount of money you pay in taxes is based on the AMOUNT YOU MADE. So of course the rich are going to be paying a lot of tax money!

The problem is, the lower and middle class are getting socked at an even higher rate than they should be taxed. They don't have the loopholes and exemptions that the rich can currently use to pay less taxes.

Close the loopholes..and make this tax system truly a "progressive" tax..based upon the ability to pay.

Now THAT is very funny! Yeah..those POOR rich people! :1orglaugh

I'm all for a flat tax. It's only losers like yourself who wouldn't go for that.

wrong.

ah yes, the chant of the failure. I can't succeed so let me get my government services for free.
here's an idea, can't afford to pay for your own government services, don't receive them.

ahhhh, the small mind of the always poor.

ok. maybe I should do the math so I realize?


The average house in the USA costs ~$150K

The average car costs ~$20K
Assume you "need" 4 new cars over a lifetime
and allow $5K into each car for repairs
= ~100K


So far that's 250K (3 months salary if you're netting 1mil a year),
to have shelter and transport taken care of for your entire lifetime.


Now you budget about $10K/year for a familys worth of food
($200/week is more than we're spending on 5 adults here)
how much for electricity? $15K/year reasonable? ($300/month)

That's 1.25mil for 50 years. I would adjust for inflation,
but those costs will go down enough once kids are gone
to more than compensate for rising rates.


total thus far is 1.5mil for quite a comfortable life.

of course every american needs insurance,
so lets tack on $10K a year for that.

bringing us to an even 2mil


if your kids go to college, and depending on where they go,
this may cost you an extra 10-40K per kid over 4 years.
+ kids need toys and trips to disneyland while growing up.
+ you might want to buy THEM their own cars too.
(if you don't make them work for it)
this is a hard total to even guess at, since there are so
many variables and depending on how many kids you have.


I think I've been pretty fair, even generous, with these numbers.
I won't include gross excess like $200K cars and $2mil homes,
because nobody 'needs' all that "blingbling" as GFY calls it.
This math is already allowing you to live far for comfortably
than most people in the world, including low-income american families.

But if you are making 'only' 1mil a year, without taxes you could
have your entire life paid for in 2-3 years. With a heavy 45-50%
tax on income (according to this thread) it would take you closer
to 4-5 years and you'd never have to work again . .
or you can now devote any additional years income to the "blingbling".

In India and China. :winkwink:

The poor, by definition, are poor. They can barely afford to pay for a sub-par standard of living. They have a 95% voice which is easily manipulated by a government telling them that they are somehow going to benefit from a $300 tax rebate check and a child credit, if they happen to have children or a dual-income family. It's sad, but most of the people who voted for GWB, just by sheer force of numbers, have not benefitted at all from his administration's policies. He will be the first president since Hoover to have a net loss of jobs on his watch. But if he runs enough TV ads, he'll get re-elected. And the poor will still be poor, and the Republicans will dismantle welfare and medicare/medicaid because, as you put it, they simply cannot pay for 'their own' aid and services.

The problem cannot be fixed by taxes, though I am for repealing this recent ridiculous tax cut. We don't need more taxes as much as we need a streamlined, pork-and-fat-free government. If the American public knew how much money leaked out of our current system and into the pockets of individuals, they'd revolt.

- Titus

I'm telling you, when shit becomes valuable the poor will be born without assholes.

People are all for nailing the rich bastards with heavier taxes, then sit back and wonder a year later why the local plant is laying off hundreds of workers, why a job is so hard to come by. How can anyone successful afford to expand and hire locals when their tax bracket just got bumped up to "insane"?

Outsourcing starts looking pretty good after the taxman bites more than half your wallet when he only deserves maybe 30%. Hellow?

Your examples, pardon my French, are all fucked up. Using your examples I should be happy having to 'donate' my wealth, and after a certain level, all of it should be taken from me. Why should I live like a popper to take care of those who can't or don't choose to succeed?

Your entire post is about someone else (you in this case) determining what I should need to live. That is totally against what this country was founded on.

What is my motivation to pump more and more money into the economy if I am living the way you describe above? I pump large amounts of cash into the US and the WORLD economy because I can, and I alone am responsible for numerous people being employed.

I balance my budget each and every year, and I expect the country I live in to do the same. I would love to see ALL entitlements wiped out, all handouts to foreign nations wiped out, and the entire executive branch ordered to do what they are supposed to do.

The federal government is supposed to protect me from foreign invaders (which they don't), provide a stable currency (which they don't), and deal with foreign relations (which they don't). It has now become a whored out free for all with the tax payers money -- THE PEOPLE WHO PAY TAXES.

The control should be squarely in the hands of the states. So if I wanted to live in a Socialist Republic I could move to California, New York, or Massachusetts. On the other hand if I wanted to move to a state that practiced fiscal responsibility and reap those benefits I could.

At this point, the only way I can exit the spend happy whorehouse we now have, is to leave country I love.

I, like others in this thread, truly suffer from taxation without representation. That is what is frustrating, aside from the fact that people do not realize any of this until they actually make some real money.

-dd

Ok, I'm Canadian and proud of it.

i have a 7 figgure income and pay a lot of tax and personally I'm shocked by the US tax system and how it favors the wealthy. It's digusting. I would pay a LOT less tax if I was an american.

do i think the rich should pay all the tax - NO - EVERYONE should pay their fair allotment according to what they can afford. Do i think that one should pay as little as possible - YES - only a fool would pay more than they have to.


THINK ABOUT THIS - you wouldn't BE WEALTHY if it wasn't for your govenment.


Do I think that someone with a million dollar income should pay less income tax than a teacher or a nurse?
NOW I think that's FUCKED UP.

Yes people should be punished for succeeding. :disgust

That's only because they stole it from the downtrodden masses to begin with!

The fact you are missing is that a school teacher, after deductions, etc. pays 10% in taxes or less.

Someone who makes over a million is paying in excess of 40%, and then even more after their state whacks them.

Fair?

Flat Tax or consumption based tax is all we are asking for. On top of the possibility of the government pissing through every dime they get and running us into budget overruns year after year. Most of their spending is not even allowed under the constitution.

i'm not missing anything - i'm talking real dollars. i have several millionaire friends who pay less DOLLARS - not percentage - than teachers or nurses do in income tax LEGALLY

..or how precious, Precious!

And all you blow (besides cock) in your messages is hot air.
So fuckin right wing you're not able to ever be specific (or ACCURATE in your specifics).

But that's to be expected..because when you turn in only one direction...THE RIGHT, you always go in circles!
:1orglaugh

Praise Jesus! You nailed it bro! :thumbsup

No, my post was in response to this 12clicks guy suggesting
I don't realize "how little" a 1mil+/year income really is.
And my point was, it makes you very financially comfortable.

And if you truely think that's not much money, then you should
have a great deal of empathy for the familys of teachers and
firemen and nurses making far less than 1/20th of that.

Not all poor people are lazy;
most just work in jobs that society doesnt reward enough.

The point of taxing according to income is that some people
can afford to be taxed while others can barely afford to eat.

This isn't an entirely selfless attitude.
If you want to live in a safe society, you damn well better
make sure everybody can afford to take care of their family.
:2 cents:

That's a pretty interesting statement. So the government is responsible for wealth? Are the poor, poor because of the government?