Joe the Plumber? More like Joe the Scammer

[CADsortaGUY]

lol @ at all the libbies getting their panties twisted over JTP. :laugh: Especially the OP - "scammer"? really? Nothing in the link or anything else supports that claim - except the OP's hatred.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Joe is a joke.

Not sure how you guys come up with the 'face of the Republican Party" BS.

Are you high!? His name was coming out of McCain's and dummy Palin's mouth every 30 seconds! That's where it came from! He might not be the "face" of the party, but you can blame the aforementioned boobs for thinking hoisting him up in front of the country was a good idea.

COUNTRY FIRST! http://chattahbox.com/images/2008/12/joe.jpg

Yeah, profjohn is delusional.

 

[geno]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
lol @ at all the libbies getting their panties twisted over JTP. :laugh: Especially the OP - "scammer"? really? Nothing in the link or anything else supports that claim - except the OP's hatred.

Hey, pay me a dollar to vote as to whether or not I should try to singlehandedly disassemble the IRS. That doesn't sound like a scam to you? Can we leave the (D) and (R) shit out of this, and, oh I don't know, react as a reasonable human and admit the link in the OP is a giant crock of shit to keep Joe's name out there?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
lol @ at all the libbies getting their panties twisted over JTP. :laugh: Especially the OP - "scammer"? really? Nothing in the link or anything else supports that claim - except the OP's hatred.

Hey, pay me a dollar to vote as to whether or not I should try to singlehandedly disassemble the IRS. That doesn't sound like a scam to you? Can we leave the (D) and (R) shit out of this, and, oh I don't know, react as a reasonable human and admit the link in the OP is a giant crock of shit to keep Joe's name out there?

scam? no. stupid? sure, maybe. People know what they are getting for their money(nothing) so it's not a scam. It's really no different than those voting things you see for shows where it costs you a dollar to vote.

 

[child of wonder]

Anyone have a link that objectively analyzes the Fair Tax? I'm curious to see what someone with some economic education and experience has to say about it.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: child of wonder
Anyone have a link that objectively analyzes the Fair Tax? I'm curious to see what someone with some economic education and experience has to say about it.

There probably isn't one. With a name as polarizing as 'Fair Tax', there's bound to be a lot of propaganda.

If you want to know how it might work, look at European VAT, and think of it at a higher rate, or as a way to reduce, but not eliminate income taxes.

The long and short of it, of course, is that reducing spending is the only way to reduce taxes, and no pie in the sky scheme is going to fix this.

 

[Jack Flash]

Originally posted by: child of wonder
Anyone have a link that objectively analyzes the Fair Tax? I'm curious to see what someone with some economic education and experience has to say about it.

http://www.factcheck.org/taxes...nning_the_fairtax.html

 

[her209]

I thought his name was Sam.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: child of wonder
Anyone have a link that objectively analyzes the Fair Tax? I'm curious to see what someone with some economic education and experience has to say about it.

There probably isn't one. With a name as polarizing as 'Fair Tax', there's bound to be a lot of propaganda.

If you want to know how it might work, look at European VAT, and think of it at a higher rate, or as a way to reduce, but not eliminate income taxes.

The long and short of it, of course, is that reducing spending is the only way to reduce taxes, and no pie in the sky scheme is going to fix this.

"Fair Tax" really means shifting the tax burden to someone else.

 

[brandonbull]

Originally posted by: Jack Flash

Originally posted by: child of wonder
Anyone have a link that objectively analyzes the Fair Tax? I'm curious to see what someone with some economic education and experience has to say about it.

http://www.factcheck.org/taxes...nning_the_fairtax.html

"The 23 percent number in H.R. 25 is the equivalent of the 4.8 percent in the previous example. To calculate the real rate of the sales tax, we have to determine the original purchase price of an item. We can begin with the same $100 item, keeping in mind that a price tag that reads $100 has sales tax already built in. If our tax rate is 23 percent of the tax-inclusive sales price, then of the $100 final price, $23 of those dollars will be for taxes, meaning that the original pre-tax price of the item is $77. To get $23 in taxes on a $77 item, one must impose a 30 percent tax. In other words, a 23 percent sales tax on the tax-inclusive sales price is equivalent to a 30 percent tax on the actual price of the item."

First they present the math by working backwards from $100 dollars. $X = $100 - ($100*.23). Then they trick people with $77 + ($77 * X) = $100. Those are totally different figures.

Let's see what numbers we get when we try 77 + (77 * .23). That would be $94.71 and not $100. Maybe we should try $100 = x + (x * .23). That number is $81.30 not the $77 we are trying to be tricked into thinking.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: brandonbull

Originally posted by: Jack Flash

Originally posted by: child of wonder
Anyone have a link that objectively analyzes the Fair Tax? I'm curious to see what someone with some economic education and experience has to say about it.

http://www.factcheck.org/taxes...nning_the_fairtax.html

"The 23 percent number in H.R. 25 is the equivalent of the 4.8 percent in the previous example. To calculate the real rate of the sales tax, we have to determine the original purchase price of an item. We can begin with the same $100 item, keeping in mind that a price tag that reads $100 has sales tax already built in. If our tax rate is 23 percent of the tax-inclusive sales price, then of the $100 final price, $23 of those dollars will be for taxes, meaning that the original pre-tax price of the item is $77. To get $23 in taxes on a $77 item, one must impose a 30 percent tax. In other words, a 23 percent sales tax on the tax-inclusive sales price is equivalent to a 30 percent tax on the actual price of the item."

First they present the math by working backwards from $100 dollars. $X = $100 - ($100*.23). Then they trick people with $77 + ($77 * X) = $100. Those are totally different figures.

Let's see what numbers we get when we try 77 + (77 * .23). That would be $94.71 and not $100. Maybe we should try $100 = x + (x * .23). That number is $81.30 not the $77 we are trying to be tricked into thinking.

You mean the fair tax people are trying to trick us, right?

If you think factcheck.org is trying to trick you, then you need to go read the article again.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
lol @ at all the libbies getting their panties twisted over JTP. :laugh: Especially the OP - "scammer"? really? Nothing in the link or anything else supports that claim - except the OP's hatred.

Panties in a twist? More like laughing at this chump.

 

[bipartisanpwnage]

Republicans will be an extinct species if they keep selecting people like Joe to speak on their behalf. No wonder the keep losing the youth vote. Seriously GOP, get it together so we don't have the Democrats vs Green party in 20 years haha.

 

[ProfJohn]

BTW... I don't see the 'fair tax' as being fair. The lower your income the worse it hurts you.

I think the flat tax is a much better idea. Especially a graduated flat tax which essentially the same thing we have now without all the BS deductions and with a far more simpler filing system.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: bipartisanpwnage
Republicans will be an extinct species if they keep selecting people like Joe to speak on their behalf. No wonder the keep losing the youth vote. Seriously GOP, get it together so we don't have the Democrats vs Green party in 20 years haha.

Since when did this guy speak on our behalf??

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: bipartisanpwnage
Republicans will be an extinct species if they keep selecting people like Joe to speak on their behalf. No wonder the keep losing the youth vote. Seriously GOP, get it together so we don't have the Democrats vs Green party in 20 years haha.

Since when did this guy speak on our behalf??

You can thank John McCain for that.....nice try at mis-direction though...rofl

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: bipartisanpwnage
Republicans will be an extinct species if they keep selecting people like Joe to speak on their behalf. No wonder the keep losing the youth vote. Seriously GOP, get it together so we don't have the Democrats vs Green party in 20 years haha.

Since when did this guy speak on our behalf??

You can thank John McCain for that.....nice try at mis-direction though...rofl

I don't think McCain did that though.

He pointed to Joe and his question of Obama and I think invited him to a few campaign stops and that was about it.

 

[UberNeuman]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: bipartisanpwnage
Republicans will be an extinct species if they keep selecting people like Joe to speak on their behalf. No wonder the keep losing the youth vote. Seriously GOP, get it together so we don't have the Democrats vs Green party in 20 years haha.

Since when did this guy speak on our behalf??

You can thank John McCain for that.....nice try at mis-direction though...rofl

I don't think McCain did that though.

He pointed to Joe and his question of Obama and I think invited him to a few campaign stops and that was about it.

PJ - stop acting like you don't know what the intent of the McCain camp was doing... Please.

 

[ProfJohn]

The campaign was trying to put a face on Obama's policies.

Same thing every politician does when he points to someone in the audience and holds them up as an example.

 

[UberNeuman]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The campaign was trying to put a face on Obama's policies.

Same thing every politician does when he points to someone in the audience and holds them up as an example.

Why are you being this foolish? Really, sir - why?

Did not the McCain camp bring "Joe" along to offer his voice on the campaign trail...

 

[UberNeuman]

He's a man who "gets it."

 

[JKing106]

Joe the Plumber was a cynical attempt to engender favor with the blue collar crowd for the Neocons, who having nothing in common with blue collar citizens whatsover, except skin color. Period. "He's a hard workin' dude, like me, and them egg head poindexters with them fancy Harvard degrees think they're better than us! They're gonna raise my taxes! And he's a n****r!" The same the with Palin and female voters. It's disgusting.

 

[brandonbull]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: brandonbull

Originally posted by: Jack Flash

Originally posted by: child of wonder
Anyone have a link that objectively analyzes the Fair Tax? I'm curious to see what someone with some economic education and experience has to say about it.

http://www.factcheck.org/taxes...nning_the_fairtax.html

"The 23 percent number in H.R. 25 is the equivalent of the 4.8 percent in the previous example. To calculate the real rate of the sales tax, we have to determine the original purchase price of an item. We can begin with the same $100 item, keeping in mind that a price tag that reads $100 has sales tax already built in. If our tax rate is 23 percent of the tax-inclusive sales price, then of the $100 final price, $23 of those dollars will be for taxes, meaning that the original pre-tax price of the item is $77. To get $23 in taxes on a $77 item, one must impose a 30 percent tax. In other words, a 23 percent sales tax on the tax-inclusive sales price is equivalent to a 30 percent tax on the actual price of the item."

First they present the math by working backwards from $100 dollars. $X = $100 - ($100*.23). Then they trick people with $77 + ($77 * X) = $100. Those are totally different figures.

Let's see what numbers we get when we try 77 + (77 * .23). That would be $94.71 and not $100. Maybe we should try $100 = x + (x * .23). That number is $81.30 not the $77 we are trying to be tricked into thinking.

You mean the fair tax people are trying to trick us, right?

If you think factcheck.org is trying to trick you, then you need to go read the article again.

I just showed you the math. They are not doing a correct comparison of numbers.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: brandonbull

Originally posted by: eskimospy
You mean the fair tax people are trying to trick us, right?

If you think factcheck.org is trying to trick you, then you need to go read the article again.

I just showed you the math. They are not doing a correct comparison of numbers.

Factcheck is doing their math perfectly. If you don't see that, it's because you are confused by math exactly as the "Fair Tax" proponents hope. The "Fair Tax" proponents are presenting their proposed tax rate in an unconventional and misleading way.

In common conversation, a 23% sales tax means paying 23 cents of tax for every dollar's worth of goods purchased. That is not how the "Fair Tax" is calculating their rate, however. As Factcheck points out, they are actually adding about 30 cents for every dollar of goods. Most people would call that a 30% tax. "Fair Tax" proponents justify calling it 23% by calculating the total cost first, then saying the tax is only 23% ... of the total. While that is technically true, it is misleading because they are using an unconventional definition of sales tax rate.

Let's try a slightly different example than the one Factcheck offers. Let's look at an item with a sales value (i.e., a pre-tax cost) of $100. Under the "Fair Tax" it will sell for $130. Would you call that a 30% tax -- $100 + 30% -- or would you call it a 23% tax -- $30 is 23% of $130? Most people would call it a 30% tax. "Fair Tax" proponents call it 23% based on their unconventional, and therefore misleading definition of a sales tax.

 

[SP33Demon]

Now he's taking 99 cent "donations" to get rid of the IRS? No wonder Repub's are sick of their party when they have asshats like this bloodsucker. The sad thing is that Rush would probably praise him for such a "just and valiant" cause. "Republican" will soon be a relic of the past in our dictionaries, the IQ gap is too large for them to continue to brainwash any majority of the masses and this proves why.