ill also add, you are missing the boat on the % argument

(07-10-2012 10:57 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 10:55 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 10:46 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Facts evade Roberta.

Um, how about the FACT that I am in the bottom 50% and I paid taxes. My brother makes slightly more, is in the bottom 50% and he paid taxes.

Also note, that we are talking % here. When you make little money, of course the % of taxes they pay doesn't amount to much in the overall scheme of things. When you are in the top 1% of course you are going to pay a larger portion because you are being taxes on a MUCH larger amount of money.

Thanks for contributing to the 2.7%

As I said, a little by someone who makes little doesn't add up to a whole hell of a lot as an overall percentage. But I am sure morons will see this graph and not understand that concept.

(07-10-2012 10:57 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 10:55 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 10:46 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Facts evade Roberta.

Um, how about the FACT that I am in the bottom 50% and I paid taxes. My brother makes slightly more, is in the bottom 50% and he paid taxes.

Also note, that we are talking % here. When you make little money, of course the % of taxes they pay doesn't amount to much in the overall scheme of things. When you are in the top 1% of course you are going to pay a larger portion because you are being taxes on a MUCH larger amount of money.

Thanks for contributing to the 2.7%

Note the last column... The bottom 50 pay an average income tax rate of 1.8% the top 50 pay on average 12.5% and the top 1% pay 25% of their income in *federal* income taxes.

(07-10-2012 11:22 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 10:57 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 10:55 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 10:46 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Facts evade Roberta.

Um, how about the FACT that I am in the bottom 50% and I paid taxes. My brother makes slightly more, is in the bottom 50% and he paid taxes.

Also note, that we are talking % here. When you make little money, of course the % of taxes they pay doesn't amount to much in the overall scheme of things. When you are in the top 1% of course you are going to pay a larger portion because you are being taxes on a MUCH larger amount of money.

Thanks for contributing to the 2.7%

Note the last column... The bottom 50 pay an average income tax rate of 1.8% the top 50 pay on average 12.5% and the top 1% pay 25% of their income in *federal* income taxes.

So how much of a percentage of virtually nothing would you like the poor to pay.

Btw, even if you did make them pay 25% how much more as a percentage do you honestly think that 2.7% would jump to?

(07-10-2012 11:26 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:22 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 10:57 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 10:55 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 10:46 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Facts evade Roberta.

Um, how about the FACT that I am in the bottom 50% and I paid taxes. My brother makes slightly more, is in the bottom 50% and he paid taxes.

Also note, that we are talking % here. When you make little money, of course the % of taxes they pay doesn't amount to much in the overall scheme of things. When you are in the top 1% of course you are going to pay a larger portion because you are being taxes on a MUCH larger amount of money.

Thanks for contributing to the 2.7%

Note the last column... The bottom 50 pay an average income tax rate of 1.8% the top 50 pay on average 12.5% and the top 1% pay 25% of their income in *federal* income taxes.

So how much of a percentage of virtually nothing would you like the poor to pay.

Btw, even if you did make them pay 25% how much more as a percentage do you honestly think that 2.7% would jump to?

who has said anything about making poor people pay more taxes?

answer my question in the OP, why is Obama doing this?

"fair share" bull**** that is

I would like to see a graph showing the total tax burden, state, local, property sales, gas. What would that graph look like?

(07-10-2012 11:33 AM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:26 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:22 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 10:57 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 10:55 AM)RobertN Wrote:  Um, how about the FACT that I am in the bottom 50% and I paid taxes. My brother makes slightly more, is in the bottom 50% and he paid taxes.

Also note, that we are talking % here. When you make little money, of course the % of taxes they pay doesn't amount to much in the overall scheme of things. When you are in the top 1% of course you are going to pay a larger portion because you are being taxes on a MUCH larger amount of money.

Thanks for contributing to the 2.7%

Note the last column... The bottom 50 pay an average income tax rate of 1.8% the top 50 pay on average 12.5% and the top 1% pay 25% of their income in *federal* income taxes.

So how much of a percentage of virtually nothing would you like the poor to pay.

Btw, even if you did make them pay 25% how much more as a percentage do you honestly think that 2.7% would jump to?

who has said anything about making poor people pay more taxes?

answer my question in the OP, why is Obama doing this?

"fair share" bull**** that is

Seems to me that Bull_in_excrement did just by saying the bottom 50% don't pay taxes.

Why does he want to raise taxes on the wealthy? Where else are we going to get the money to pay our bills? Tax the poor more(like Bull wants to do)? Tax the middle class more? THat would decrease much of the consumer spending in the country and hurt the economy and corporations. I suppose that it might "hurt" the "job creators" and decide to not buy the new yacht or create jobs. Of course, they aren't doing that stuff under the lower taxes either.

(07-10-2012 11:45 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:33 AM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:26 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:22 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 10:57 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Thanks for contributing to the 2.7%

Note the last column... The bottom 50 pay an average income tax rate of 1.8% the top 50 pay on average 12.5% and the top 1% pay 25% of their income in *federal* income taxes.

So how much of a percentage of virtually nothing would you like the poor to pay.

Btw, even if you did make them pay 25% how much more as a percentage do you honestly think that 2.7% would jump to?

who has said anything about making poor people pay more taxes?

answer my question in the OP, why is Obama doing this?

"fair share" bull**** that is

Seems to me that Bull_in_excrement did just by saying the bottom 50% don't pay taxes.

Why does he want to raise taxes on the wealthy? Where else are we going to get the money to pay our bills? Tax the poor more(like Bull wants to do)? Tax the middle class more? THat would decrease much of the consumer spending in the country and hurt the economy and corporations. I suppose that it might "hurt" the "job creators" and decide to not buy the new yacht or create jobs. Of course, they aren't doing that stuff under the lower taxes either.

you cannot be serious


simple question, if you have lot of debt and cannot pay your bills do you:

a) steal the money from the bank

b) buy more stuff to have more bills to pay

c) spend less than what you are taking in

plus what about the "fair share" bull ****? why does he keep saying that?

in your opinion, what is someones fair share?

(07-10-2012 11:55 AM)maximus Wrote:  plus what about the "fair share" bull ****? why does he keep saying that?

in your opinion, what is someones fair share?

Because the top 1% aren't paying their fair share? As for my opinion, I think that "fair share" is not using loopholes to pay a lower tax rate than those in the middle class. As for the poor, I might look at the EIC but other than that, not really sure.

(07-10-2012 12:05 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:55 AM)maximus Wrote:  plus what about the "fair share" bull ****? why does he keep saying that?

in your opinion, what is someones fair share?

Because the top 1% aren't paying their fair share? As for my opinion, I think that "fair share" is not using loopholes to pay a lower tax rate than those in the middle class. As for the poor, I might look at the EIC but other than that, not really sure.

hopeless


1% pays 38% of the total, yet thats not enough. crazy talk

(07-10-2012 11:53 AM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:45 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:33 AM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:26 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:22 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

Note the last column... The bottom 50 pay an average income tax rate of 1.8% the top 50 pay on average 12.5% and the top 1% pay 25% of their income in *federal* income taxes.

So how much of a percentage of virtually nothing would you like the poor to pay.

Btw, even if you did make them pay 25% how much more as a percentage do you honestly think that 2.7% would jump to?

who has said anything about making poor people pay more taxes?

answer my question in the OP, why is Obama doing this?

"fair share" bull**** that is

Seems to me that Bull_in_excrement did just by saying the bottom 50% don't pay taxes.

Why does he want to raise taxes on the wealthy? Where else are we going to get the money to pay our bills? Tax the poor more(like Bull wants to do)? Tax the middle class more? THat would decrease much of the consumer spending in the country and hurt the economy and corporations. I suppose that it might "hurt" the "job creators" and decide to not buy the new yacht or create jobs. Of course, they aren't doing that stuff under the lower taxes either.

you cannot be serious


simple question, if you have lot of debt and cannot pay your bills do you:

a) steal the money from the bank

b) buy more stuff to have more bills to pay

c) spend less than what you are taking in

answer this one

(07-10-2012 12:08 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 12:05 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:55 AM)maximus Wrote:  plus what about the "fair share" bull ****? why does he keep saying that?

in your opinion, what is someones fair share?

Because the top 1% aren't paying their fair share? As for my opinion, I think that "fair share" is not using loopholes to pay a lower tax rate than those in the middle class. As for the poor, I might look at the EIC but other than that, not really sure.

hopeless


1% pays 38% of the total, yet thats not enough. crazy talk

You are clueless. Of course the total % of the whole pie is a large porrtion because they have most of the damn money! But the percentage individually is low because their overall tax rate is lower than many/most of the middleclass. THey might pay 25% of their "income". Of course, MOST of the money they make is through other means such as stock options etc which have lower tax rates.

(07-10-2012 12:25 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 12:08 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 12:05 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:55 AM)maximus Wrote:  plus what about the "fair share" bull ****? why does he keep saying that?

in your opinion, what is someones fair share?

Because the top 1% aren't paying their fair share? As for my opinion, I think that "fair share" is not using loopholes to pay a lower tax rate than those in the middle class. As for the poor, I might look at the EIC but other than that, not really sure.

hopeless


1% pays 38% of the total, yet thats not enough. crazy talk

You are clueless. Of course the total % of the whole pie is a large porrtion because they have most of the damn money! But the percentage individually is low because their overall tax rate is lower than many/most of the middleclass. THey might pay 25% of their "income". Of course, MOST of the money they make is through other means such as stock options etc which have lower tax rates.

and pay the most damn taxes

so how the **** is that not fair

(07-10-2012 12:08 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 12:05 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:55 AM)maximus Wrote:  plus what about the "fair share" bull ****? why does he keep saying that?

in your opinion, what is someones fair share?

Because the top 1% aren't paying their fair share? As for my opinion, I think that "fair share" is not using loopholes to pay a lower tax rate than those in the middle class. As for the poor, I might look at the EIC but other than that, not really sure.

hopeless


1% pays 38% of the total, yet thats not enough. crazy talk

He is beyond hopeless.... They pay, after all their loop holes and deductions 1200% more of their income in taxes than the bottom 50% but to him thats "not their fair share"

(07-10-2012 12:09 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:53 AM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:45 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:33 AM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:26 AM)RobertN Wrote:  So how much of a percentage of virtually nothing would you like the poor to pay.

Btw, even if you did make them pay 25% how much more as a percentage do you honestly think that 2.7% would jump to?

who has said anything about making poor people pay more taxes?

answer my question in the OP, why is Obama doing this?

"fair share" bull**** that is

Seems to me that Bull_in_excrement did just by saying the bottom 50% don't pay taxes.

Why does he want to raise taxes on the wealthy? Where else are we going to get the money to pay our bills? Tax the poor more(like Bull wants to do)? Tax the middle class more? THat would decrease much of the consumer spending in the country and hurt the economy and corporations. I suppose that it might "hurt" the "job creators" and decide to not buy the new yacht or create jobs. Of course, they aren't doing that stuff under the lower taxes either.

you cannot be serious


simple question, if you have lot of debt and cannot pay your bills do you:

a) steal the money from the bank

b) buy more stuff to have more bills to pay

c) spend less than what you are taking in

answer this one

b. Although a. might sound like a good option, robbing a bank is a federal offense and comes with a lengthy prison sentence so if you were to rob some place, a bank would be stupid.

(07-10-2012 12:28 PM)RobertN Wrote:  b. Although a. might sound like a good option, robbing a bank is a federal offense and comes with a lengthy prison sentence so if you were to rob some place, a bank would be stupid.

Nancy Pelosi says robbing non-FDIC banks is better.

Quote: Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi bought stock in initial public offerings (IPOs) that earned hefty returns while she had access to insider information that would have been illegal for an average citizen to trade with – even though it’s perfectly legal for elected officials, CBS’s "60 Minutes" reported Sunday night.

(07-10-2012 12:28 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 12:25 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 12:08 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 12:05 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:55 AM)maximus Wrote:  plus what about the "fair share" bull ****? why does he keep saying that?

in your opinion, what is someones fair share?

Because the top 1% aren't paying their fair share? As for my opinion, I think that "fair share" is not using loopholes to pay a lower tax rate than those in the middle class. As for the poor, I might look at the EIC but other than that, not really sure.

hopeless


1% pays 38% of the total, yet thats not enough. crazy talk

You are clueless. Of course the total % of the whole pie is a large porrtion because they have most of the damn money! But the percentage individually is low because their overall tax rate is lower than many/most of the middleclass. THey might pay 25% of their "income". Of course, MOST of the money they make is through other means such as stock options etc which have lower tax rates.

and pay the most damn taxes

so how the **** is that not fair

I will try this one more time THE TOP 1% have a LARGE portion of ALL the damn money so the overall percentage of the pie will be higher even if they pay a lower individual rate. If you can't grast this simple concept, you truely are an idiot and won't bother trying to explain it to you anymore because it would just be a waste of time. I feel sorry for your patients. If you can't understand this simple concept, I don't know how you can do your job. I seem to recall you saying you have lost patients in the past. Is it because you are bad at your job? Maybe they keep dying on you?

(07-10-2012 01:02 PM)RobertN Wrote:  I will try this one more time THE TOP 1% have a LARGE portion of ALL the damn money so the overall percentage of the pie will be higher even if they pay a lower individual rate.

But they don't pay a lower rate you simp. To bring this up is merely an attempt to justify raising their taxes more even though a quarter of their income is going to the fed (to say nothing of the state)...

And before you get all self righteous about how rich that top 25% is please keep in mind that if your household makes 75K a year you're in the top 25%.

If you're making over 100K (which two middle aged married teachers make) you're in the top 15%

(07-10-2012 01:02 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 12:28 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 12:25 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 12:08 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 12:05 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Because the top 1% aren't paying their fair share? As for my opinion, I think that "fair share" is not using loopholes to pay a lower tax rate than those in the middle class. As for the poor, I might look at the EIC but other than that, not really sure.

hopeless


1% pays 38% of the total, yet thats not enough. crazy talk

You are clueless. Of course the total % of the whole pie is a large porrtion because they have most of the damn money! But the percentage individually is low because their overall tax rate is lower than many/most of the middleclass. THey might pay 25% of their "income". Of course, MOST of the money they make is through other means such as stock options etc which have lower tax rates.

and pay the most damn taxes

so how the **** is that not fair

I will try this one more time THE TOP 1% have a LARGE portion of ALL the damn money so the overall percentage of the pie will be higher even if they pay a lower individual rate. If you can't grast this simple concept, you truely are an idiot and won't bother trying to explain it to you anymore because it would just be a waste of time. I feel sorry for your patients. If you can't understand this simple concept, I don't know how you can do your job. I seem to recall you saying you have lost patients in the past. Is it because you are bad at your job? Maybe they keep dying on you?

You just don't get it