Does this scare the hell out of anyone else?

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ScottyB
Sounds fine to me. I would be willing to pay up to 75% of my income depending on my wealth. I feel that $50,000 is a little high though. That is bordering on rich. It should be up to $20,000 then the taxes should start to slide up 30% at $50,000+, 50% at $100,000+ and 75% at $1,000,000+.

Didn't catch your edit before. WTF? You think $50k is bordering on rich? You're a fscking idiot. It's this kind of thinking that really scares me about the socialists, you preach about the middle class but then try to destroy it by calling it "rich". You can't even buy a house where I live if you only make $50k. $20k is below the poverty line. Your tax idea would be harder on the poor than the current tax system. Let me say it again: you're an idiot.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ScottyB

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ScottyB
Sounds fine to me. I would be willing to pay up to 75% of my income depending on my wealth.

Great. Then do so. Now. Voluntarily. You can do that you know. But don't force other people to. That's theft and it's wrong.

I have no income and I am around $32,000 in debt so I highly doubt I could do that.

Well, given the financial "wisdom" we've heard from you thus far, I suppose that really shouldn't surprise me...

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: ScottyB
Sounds fine to me. I would be willing to pay up to 75% of my income depending on my wealth. I feel that $50,000 is a little high though. That is bordering on rich. It should be up to $20,000 then the taxes should start to slide up 30% at $50,000+, 50% at $100,000+ and 75% at $1,000,000+.

You just made my sig of shame for a few weeks.

Ack...you were saved my the maximum character limit. But, seriously, that was one stupid post, man.

 

[Rob9874]

Do you guys realize that the top 25% of earners in the US (households that make over $55,255) pay 84% of all federal taxes? In fact, the bottom 50% of earners (households that make less than $27,682) only pay 3.91% of all federal taxes? So why then, when we're giving a $200 million tax break, should it go to those paying 3.91%?

To use the overused restaurant analogy, let's say you and I go to dinner at a nice restaurant to eat a $100 meal, and I'm paying $96.09 and you pay $3.91 (because I make more and can afford to pay more). The manager is in a good mood, and give us $5 off our meal. Should you get your $3.91 back?

 

[JDub02]

10% flat tax on everybody. no exceptions. the "rich" still pay more, since 10% of a million is a heck of a lot more than 10% of $40k. and this would considerably lower the tax burden on almost everybody.

as the song goes ... 10% is good enough for Jesus, it ought to be enough for Uncle Sam.

 

[Triumph]

Originally posted by: SweetSweetLeroyBrown
you cock svckers think you can take money with you when you die? haha lol get over yourselves....half of you won't ever pull in more than 40k a year anyhow hahaha lol

You are the worst poster ever. And your stupid handle continues to suck, messing up everyone else's browser.

 

[ScottyB]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ScottyB

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ScottyB
Sounds fine to me. I would be willing to pay up to 75% of my income depending on my wealth.

Great. Then do so. Now. Voluntarily. You can do that you know. But don't force other people to. That's theft and it's wrong.

I have no income and I am around $32,000 in debt so I highly doubt I could do that.

Well, given the financial "wisdom" we've heard from you thus far, I suppose that really shouldn't surprise me...

I'm in college.

 

[SweetSweetLeroyBrown]

i know you are but what am i


hahahaha lol

 

[Rob9874]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ScottyB
Sounds fine to me. I would be willing to pay up to 75% of my income depending on my wealth. I feel that $50,000 is a little high though. That is bordering on rich. It should be up to $20,000 then the taxes should start to slide up 30% at $50,000+, 50% at $100,000+ and 75% at $1,000,000+.

Didn't catch your edit before. WTF? You think $50k is bordering on rich? You're a fscking idiot. It's this kind of thinking that really scares me about the socialists, you preach about the middle class but then try to destroy it by calling it "rich". You can't even buy a house where I live if you only make $50k. $20k is below the poverty line. Your tax idea would be harder on the poor than the current tax system. Let me say it again: you're an idiot.

I'm glad someone has brains in here! I thought I was the only one who thought $50K isn't rich. The average home price in the US is about $150K. That's about a $1500/mo mortgage payment. How can you afford to buy a home on less than $50K?

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: ScottyB

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ScottyB

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ScottyB
Sounds fine to me. I would be willing to pay up to 75% of my income depending on my wealth.

Great. Then do so. Now. Voluntarily. You can do that you know. But don't force other people to. That's theft and it's wrong.

I have no income and I am around $32,000 in debt so I highly doubt I could do that.

Well, given the financial "wisdom" we've heard from you thus far, I suppose that really shouldn't surprise me...

I'm in college.

Yeah and you're thinking $50,000 is sooooo much money. But that's cause you're an ignorant kid. Stop posting about things which you know nothing about. Once you get a job and start a family, then come here and preach about how you're willing to give up 50% of your income.

 

[GtPrOjEcTX]

Originally posted by: Electric Amish
Doesn't bother me because I'll never see 100g/year.

 

[oboeguy]

As much as I would like richer people to pay my taxes for me, I have to agree that it seems idiotic that they should pay ALL of it.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: GtPrOjEcTX

Originally posted by: Electric Amish
Doesn't bother me because I'll never see 100g/year.

What about you and a spouse? That's totally feasible.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: ScottyB

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ScottyB

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ScottyB
Sounds fine to me. I would be willing to pay up to 75% of my income depending on my wealth.

Great. Then do so. Now. Voluntarily. You can do that you know. But don't force other people to. That's theft and it's wrong.

I have no income and I am around $32,000 in debt so I highly doubt I could do that.

Well, given the financial "wisdom" we've heard from you thus far, I suppose that really shouldn't surprise me...

I'm in college.

So what? Being in college doesn't preclude you from being naive and idiotic.

 

[ScottyB]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: ScottyB

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ScottyB

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ScottyB
Sounds fine to me. I would be willing to pay up to 75% of my income depending on my wealth.

Great. Then do so. Now. Voluntarily. You can do that you know. But don't force other people to. That's theft and it's wrong.

I have no income and I am around $32,000 in debt so I highly doubt I could do that.

Well, given the financial "wisdom" we've heard from you thus far, I suppose that really shouldn't surprise me...

I'm in college.

Yeah and you're thinking $50,000 is sooooo much money. But that's cause you're an ignorant kid. Stop posting about things which you know nothing about. Once you get a job and start a family, then come here and preach about how you're willing to give up 50% of your income.

I said 30% at $50,000 which is a little less than what it is now.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: SweetSweetLeroyBrown
i know you are but what am i


hahahaha lol

Where are the mods? This is the second thread I saw this guy trolling in today, the other one got deleted

 

[Freejack2]

Wesley Clark just ensured he will never be elected. The true power in this country lies with the wealthy. Any presidental candidate who crosses them will never get elected. People like us who make less than 100k a year don't have the power to influence an election. Clark is a fool to do this.

 

[DaWhim]

starve the beast!

 

[Mill]

Anyway, I think this is a terrible idea, but I haven't like Clark from the beginning. I haven't liked Dean either, but I do think the best Democrat out there is Lieberman. Too bad he won't be close to the nomination and he is in bad health from all the knife wounds he has in his back(Gore endorsing Dean).

 

[ThaPerculator]

Intelligence != $$$

 

[Rob9874]

Originally posted by: ScottyB

I said 30% at $50,000 which is a little less than what it is now.

$50K is taxed at 25% currently for head of household. For a married household making $50K, the federal tax is 15%.

And that's 25% of your income from $26,400 to $50,000. Everyone is taxed 10% for the first $7000, and 15% for $7001 to $26,399. So if you make $50,000, you pay a total of 19.1% of your income to federal taxes. And you're willing to pay 30%?

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: Electric Amish
Doesn't bother me because I'll never see 100g/year.

Same here....


Sysadmin

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: ScottyB

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ScottyB

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ScottyB
Sounds fine to me. I would be willing to pay up to 75% of my income depending on my wealth.

Great. Then do so. Now. Voluntarily. You can do that you know. But don't force other people to. That's theft and it's wrong.

I have no income and I am around $32,000 in debt so I highly doubt I could do that.

Well, given the financial "wisdom" we've heard from you thus far, I suppose that really shouldn't surprise me...

I'm in college.

Yeah and you're thinking $50,000 is sooooo much money. But that's cause you're an ignorant kid. Stop posting about things which you know nothing about. Once you get a job and start a family, then come here and preach about how you're willing to give up 50% of your income.

I agree 50,000 is on the looooow end of middle class.

Sysadmin

 

[FelixDeCat]

Well, the world is seriously overpopulated as it is. The poor people need to pay. We need to bleed the little people to the tune of a 50% tax rate. That'll teach 'em. :|


/sarcasm

 

[Rob9874]

Originally posted by: FelixDeKat
Well, the world is seriously overpopulated as it is. The poor people need to pay. We need to bleed the little people to the tune of a 50% tax rate. That'll teach 'em. :|


/sarcasm

No, but I think 10% is fair. It's the argument that Bush is giving money to the rich that pisses me off. If you're paying 90% of the taxes, and a tax cut is passed, guess who deserves the cut? The idea that the wealthy should continue to pay 35% and we should reduce the poor's contribution to 5% is ludicrous.


If you give the poor a few more bucks, they can buy a few more packs of cigs. But the wealthy can create jobs. </joke>