amor Posted March 15, 2012 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,194 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 34 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/18/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted March 15, 2012 The point is that a progressive tax system is fairer. Furthermore, there is nothing particularly holy about a flat tax rate His is it fairer then a flat tax? Should not everyone pay the same rate, or are we not created equal? As for the flat tax being "holy", please show where anyone said it was. In my oponion It's fair to ask those with a larger disposable income to pay a larger proportion of that income towards pinlic services than those on a lower income who mighr be forced to forego basic needs to pay that tax. As to the comments about holiness, i refer to the way that questioning a right wing position - advocatinhg flat taxes is dismissed as a sign of personal greed and envy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bold Believer Posted March 15, 2012 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 121 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 1,931 Content Per Day: 0.35 Reputation: 126 Days Won: 8 Joined: 01/22/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/13/1955 Share Posted March 15, 2012 ((((((((families earning more than $250,000)))))))) "Beware, and be on your guard against every form of greed" ~Jesus So those blessed with higher incomes shouldn't begrudge paying tax on a larger proportion of there income as tax than those on lower incomes. Progressive taxarion is fairer than flat rate taxation. A rich person signs your paycheck bud. Don't forget that. Why should the rich be punished for being rich? Most of them worked for it. What a communistic crock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Durnan Posted March 15, 2012 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 121 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,782 Content Per Day: 0.37 Reputation: 49 Days Won: 1 Joined: 06/14/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted March 15, 2012 Be sure to elect a new President in Novenmber 2012! Obama: A one-term President! Make Certain! God Bless America! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherSinner Posted March 15, 2012 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 47 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 628 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 94 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/13/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/14/1984 Share Posted March 15, 2012 A rich person signs your paycheck bud. Don't forget that. Why should the rich be punished for being rich? Most of them worked for it. Is this...your way of saying those who are low income do not work? What of this family?: A father works nights and sometimes doubles as a chef for minimum wage. One check is enough to pay their monthly rent. He gets two, sometimes three checks a month as he is paid every two weeks. The mother is a stay at home mom who tends to their two boys. One of which is struggling with health/developmental issues. They had to swallow their pride and apply for help. They receive medicaid for their children, wic, and now food stamps. They do not have basic television, or cable. They do not have multiple cars and have only now just gotten their first so this way they do not have to rely on others to help them get around. Otherwise, they walk everywhere they go. They do not ask for any more aid than the help they already get and feel bad for having to ask for... The mother is looking for a job so as to help the father out. Are they any less deserving than a wealthy person? Why? Think sometimes people have a hard time looking past their own noses....not to mention think some of the low income families are belittled because of their situation. While so few actually take the time to consider that not everyone was born middle or upper class. Some of us do not get the education that others do, some of us simply cannot afford it and make due with what we have. Think that social status should not denote or measure a person's worth...PERIOD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exrockstar Posted March 15, 2012 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 34 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,673 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 111 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/21/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted March 15, 2012 A rich person signs your paycheck bud. Don't forget that. Why should the rich be punished for being rich? Most of them worked for it. Is this...your way of saying those who are low income do not work? What of this family?: A father works nights and sometimes doubles as a chef for minimum wage. One check is enough to pay their monthly rent. He gets two, sometimes three checks a month as he is paid every two weeks. The mother is a stay at home mom who tends to their two boys. One of which is struggling with health/developmental issues. They had to swallow their pride and apply for help. They receive medicaid for their children, wic, and now food stamps. They do not have basic television, or cable. They do not have multiple cars and have only now just gotten their first so this way they do not have to rely on others to help them get around. Otherwise, they walk everywhere they go. They do not ask for any more aid than the help they already get and feel bad for having to ask for... The mother is looking for a job so as to help the father out. Are they any less deserving than a wealthy person? Why? Think sometimes people have a hard time looking past their own noses....not to mention think some of the low income families are belittled because of their situation. While so few actually take the time to consider that not everyone was born middle or upper class. Some of us do not get the education that others do, some of us simply cannot afford it and make due with what we have. Think that social status should not denote or measure a person's worth...PERIOD there's a bigger picture. let's say that the chef ends up opening up restaurant (then a couple more) in his future after years of his struggling. Taxing him more after he built his assets from the ground up would be like punishing him for his success. as for the second bold point - that is a problem in the family and community. they do not tend to give back after they have moved up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherSinner Posted March 15, 2012 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 47 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 628 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 94 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/13/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/14/1984 Share Posted March 15, 2012 (edited) A rich person signs your paycheck bud. Don't forget that. Why should the rich be punished for being rich? Most of them worked for it. Is this...your way of saying those who are low income do not work? What of this family?: A father works nights and sometimes doubles as a chef for minimum wage. One check is enough to pay their monthly rent. He gets two, sometimes three checks a month as he is paid every two weeks. The mother is a stay at home mom who tends to their two boys. One of which is struggling with health/developmental issues. They had to swallow their pride and apply for help. They receive medicaid for their children, wic, and now food stamps. They do not have basic television, or cable. They do not have multiple cars and have only now just gotten their first so this way they do not have to rely on others to help them get around. Otherwise, they walk everywhere they go. They do not ask for any more aid than the help they already get and feel bad for having to ask for... The mother is looking for a job so as to help the father out. Are they any less deserving than a wealthy person? Why? Think sometimes people have a hard time looking past their own noses....not to mention think some of the low income families are belittled because of their situation. While so few actually take the time to consider that not everyone was born middle or upper class. Some of us do not get the education that others do, some of us simply cannot afford it and make due with what we have. Think that social status should not denote or measure a person's worth...PERIOD there's a bigger picture. let's say that the chef ends up opening up restaurant (then a couple more) in his future after years of his struggling. Taxing him more after he built his assets from the ground up would be like punishing him for his success. as for the second bold point - that is a problem in the family and community. they do not tend to give back after they have moved up. I know this chef...he would not do that. I married him. He is a humble sort. He would pay back what he owes, but fortune and fame are not him. He has seen what money does to people. How do you know if they would give back? Are you them? Are you me? Are you him? We pay our taxes when they are due. We are not asking for more help than we need. We are not asking for welfare money. We are not asking someone else to pay for our education. We are not asking anyone to buy our children clothes or give them to us. We are not asking for someone to pay our bills. We do not get TANF. We ARE working towards saving up to get my education finished. We ARE working towards both of us working steadily so that way we no longer need government programs. We ARE trying to give what we can of what we do not need so others who do can have it. Really like...how assumptions are always made...it is sad. Edited March 15, 2012 by AnotherSinner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winsomebulldog Posted March 15, 2012 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 20 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 732 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 113 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/26/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/30/1971 Share Posted March 15, 2012 The point is that a progressive tax system is fairer. Furthermore, there is nothing particularly holy about a flat tax rate His is it fairer then a flat tax? Should not everyone pay the same rate, or are we not created equal? As for the flat tax being "holy", please show where anyone said it was. In my oponion It's fair to ask those with a larger disposable income to pay a larger proportion of that income towards pinlic services than those on a lower income who mighr be forced to forego basic needs to pay that tax. As to the comments about holiness, i refer to the way that questioning a right wing position - advocatinhg flat taxes is dismissed as a sign of personal greed and envy. The problem is that you (and apparently the government) are assuming that a higher income automatically translates to more disposable income. It doesn't. Referring back to my earlier post where I described our situation, the income we were taxed on wasn't disposable in that it was mere surplus because we were just so rich we had nothing to do but spend wildly. We were in a situation where circumstances dictated that we only had two options: 1) We could withdraw a portion of my husband's retirement, lose almost half of it to the government in taxes & penalties, and ensure that our home was secure, all our debts were paid off, and our credit rating was kept in good standing. 2)OR we could have waited until all our bills were months past due, our home was in danger of foreclosure and our credit rating was destroyed, then withdrawn even more of that same retirement money (to cover the accrued past due penalties) and still paid higher taxes, but been granted a reprieve on the penalties. Basically, we were punished for not being poor enough and for making sure our bills were always paid on time. It's easy to sit here and assume that a family with a combined income of $250,000 is just rolling in dough and should be happy to "do their part" to "share the wealth" with those who are "less fortunate." The reality is that, like with us, those assumptions are sometimes flat out wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherSinner Posted March 15, 2012 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 47 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 628 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 94 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/13/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/14/1984 Share Posted March 15, 2012 The point is that a progressive tax system is fairer. Furthermore, there is nothing particularly holy about a flat tax rate His is it fairer then a flat tax? Should not everyone pay the same rate, or are we not created equal? As for the flat tax being "holy", please show where anyone said it was. In my oponion It's fair to ask those with a larger disposable income to pay a larger proportion of that income towards pinlic services than those on a lower income who mighr be forced to forego basic needs to pay that tax. As to the comments about holiness, i refer to the way that questioning a right wing position - advocatinhg flat taxes is dismissed as a sign of personal greed and envy. The problem is that you (and apparently the government) are assuming that a higher income automatically translates to more disposable income. It doesn't. Referring back to my earlier post where I described our situation, the income we were taxed on wasn't disposable in that it was mere surplus because we were just so rich we had nothing to do but spend wildly. We were in a situation where circumstances dictated that we only had two options: 1) We could withdraw a portion of my husband's retirement, lose almost half of it to the government in taxes & penalties, and ensure that our home was secure, all our debts were paid off, and our credit rating was kept in good standing. 2)OR we could have waited until all our bills were months past due, our home was in danger of foreclosure and our credit rating was destroyed, then withdrawn even more of that same retirement money (to cover the accrued past due penalties) and still paid higher taxes, but been granted a reprieve on the penalties. Basically, we were punished for not being poor enough and for making sure our bills were always paid on time. It's easy to sit here and assume that a family with a combined income of $250,000 is just rolling in dough and should be happy to "do their part" to "share the wealth" with those who are "less fortunate." The reality is that, like with us, those assumptions are sometimes flat out wrong. Think either way you go...it is not a win win situation. Those who make enough money to live on, make too much. Those who make too little are mooches. Those who could basically buy themselves a life....well....it is just.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winsomebulldog Posted March 15, 2012 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 20 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 732 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 113 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/26/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/30/1971 Share Posted March 15, 2012 A rich person signs your paycheck bud. Don't forget that. Why should the rich be punished for being rich? Most of them worked for it. Is this...your way of saying those who are low income do not work? What of this family?: A father works nights and sometimes doubles as a chef for minimum wage. One check is enough to pay their monthly rent. He gets two, sometimes three checks a month as he is paid every two weeks. The mother is a stay at home mom who tends to their two boys. One of which is struggling with health/developmental issues. They had to swallow their pride and apply for help. They receive medicaid for their children, wic, and now food stamps. They do not have basic television, or cable. They do not have multiple cars and have only now just gotten their first so this way they do not have to rely on others to help them get around. Otherwise, they walk everywhere they go. They do not ask for any more aid than the help they already get and feel bad for having to ask for... The mother is looking for a job so as to help the father out. Are they any less deserving than a wealthy person? Why? Think sometimes people have a hard time looking past their own noses....not to mention think some of the low income families are belittled because of their situation. While so few actually take the time to consider that not everyone was born middle or upper class. Some of us do not get the education that others do, some of us simply cannot afford it and make due with what we have. Think that social status should not denote or measure a person's worth...PERIOD there's a bigger picture. let's say that the chef ends up opening up restaurant (then a couple more) in his future after years of his struggling. Taxing him more after he built his assets from the ground up would be like punishing him for his success. as for the second bold point - that is a problem in the family and community. they do not tend to give back after they have moved up. I know this chef...he would not do that. I married him. He is a humble sort. He would pay back what he owes, but fortune and fame are not him. He has seen what money does to people. How do you know if they would give back? Are you them? Are you me? Are you him? We pay our taxes when they are due. We are not asking for more help than we need. We are not asking for welfare money. We are not asking someone else to pay for our education. We are not asking anyone to buy our children clothes or give them to us. We are not asking for someone to pay our bills. We do not get TANF. We ARE working towards saving up to get my education finished. We ARE working towards both of us working steadily so that way we no longer need government programs. We ARE trying to give what we can of what we do not need so others who do can have it. Really like...how assumptions are always made...it is sad. I don't think anyone is suggesting that they know you or your husband or that they know what either of you would do. Nor do I think anyone here is accusing you or your family of being "mooches" or of "abusing the system." We are merely refuting the notion that everyone who has an income over some arbitrarily set number should automatically be forced to pay a higher amount of taxes. Our taxation system has virtually no way of taking the reality of day to day life into consideration. Ask anyone what their income is and it might sound like a lot of money. But when you start taking away the mortgage payment, the cost of the vehicle they have to have in order to commute to a job, the cost of fuel for that vehicle, the cost of medical coverage for their chronically ill family member, the cost of simple utilities and food, and that income frequently winds up closer to zero or even in the negative. Yet that isn't often considered. "Loopholes" for extenuating situations are either impossible to find or have standards that are ridiculously onerous. Believe me, we looked for every possible way to to alleviate our tax and penalty burden but there simply wasn't one. Having said all this, I want to make it clear that we are profoundly grateful that we were blessed to be in a situation were we had money to fall back on. We never had to fear foreclosure. We now live debt free and have vowed to remain so. God has been there every single step of the way for us, even when my husband still didn't have a permanent job and I got a cancer diagnosis, God stepped in and provided not only the job we needed, but the absolute best insurance either of us has ever seen. We are immeasurably blessed. But our current government-run tax and welfare system isn't working. And it is the fault of both those who make obscene amounts of money but still want more and those who are too blasted lazy to make any effort at all and remain content to live off the charity of others. Both extremes are wrong and both exist. I am simply frustrated by the fact that so many out there seem to believe that taxing the middle class to death is the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherSinner Posted March 15, 2012 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 47 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 628 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 94 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/13/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/14/1984 Share Posted March 15, 2012 (edited) A rich person signs your paycheck bud. Don't forget that. Why should the rich be punished for being rich? Most of them worked for it. Is this...your way of saying those who are low income do not work? What of this family?: A father works nights and sometimes doubles as a chef for minimum wage. One check is enough to pay their monthly rent. He gets two, sometimes three checks a month as he is paid every two weeks. The mother is a stay at home mom who tends to their two boys. One of which is struggling with health/developmental issues. They had to swallow their pride and apply for help. They receive medicaid for their children, wic, and now food stamps. They do not have basic television, or cable. They do not have multiple cars and have only now just gotten their first so this way they do not have to rely on others to help them get around. Otherwise, they walk everywhere they go. They do not ask for any more aid than the help they already get and feel bad for having to ask for... The mother is looking for a job so as to help the father out. Are they any less deserving than a wealthy person? Why? Think sometimes people have a hard time looking past their own noses....not to mention think some of the low income families are belittled because of their situation. While so few actually take the time to consider that not everyone was born middle or upper class. Some of us do not get the education that others do, some of us simply cannot afford it and make due with what we have. Think that social status should not denote or measure a person's worth...PERIOD there's a bigger picture. let's say that the chef ends up opening up restaurant (then a couple more) in his future after years of his struggling. Taxing him more after he built his assets from the ground up would be like punishing him for his success. as for the second bold point - that is a problem in the family and community. they do not tend to give back after they have moved up. I know this chef...he would not do that. I married him. He is a humble sort. He would pay back what he owes, but fortune and fame are not him. He has seen what money does to people. How do you know if they would give back? Are you them? Are you me? Are you him? We pay our taxes when they are due. We are not asking for more help than we need. We are not asking for welfare money. We are not asking someone else to pay for our education. We are not asking anyone to buy our children clothes or give them to us. We are not asking for someone to pay our bills. We do not get TANF. We ARE working towards saving up to get my education finished. We ARE working towards both of us working steadily so that way we no longer need government programs. We ARE trying to give what we can of what we do not need so others who do can have it. Really like...how assumptions are always made...it is sad. I don't think anyone is suggesting that they know you or your husband or that they know what either of you would do. Nor do I think anyone here is accusing you or your family of being "mooches" or of "abusing the system." We are merely refuting the notion that everyone who has an income over some arbitrarily set number should automatically be forced to pay a higher amount of taxes. Our taxation system has virtually no way of taking the reality of day to day life into consideration. Ask anyone what their income is and it might sound like a lot of money. But when you start taking away the mortgage payment, the cost of the vehicle they have to have in order to commute to a job, the cost of fuel for that vehicle, the cost of medical coverage for their chronically ill family member, the cost of simple utilities and food, and that income frequently winds up closer to zero or even in the negative. Yet that isn't often considered. "Loopholes" for extenuating situations are either impossible to find or have standards that are ridiculously onerous. Believe me, we looked for every possible way to to alleviate our tax and penalty burden but there simply wasn't one. Having said all this, I want to make it clear that we are profoundly grateful that we were blessed to be in a situation were we had money to fall back on. We never had to fear foreclosure. We now live debt free and have vowed to remain so. God has been there every single step of the way for us, even when my husband still didn't have a permanent job and I got a cancer diagnosis, God stepped in and provided not only the job we needed, but the absolute best insurance either of us has ever seen. We are immeasurably blessed. But our current government-run tax and welfare system isn't working. And it is the fault of both those who make obscene amounts of money but still want more and those who are too blasted lazy to make any effort at all and remain content to live off the charity of others. Both extremes are wrong and both exist. I am simply frustrated by the fact that so many out there seem to believe that taxing the middle class to death is the answer. No need to convince me on expenses. May be young...but know that the cost of living in itself is out right...well in a word.......costly! Now days seeing rent prices is frightening enough. Can only imagine what morgage rates look like! Gas...say no more! This is going to sound so anarchist...so I apologize...but Money is a darn nuisance. Think it was a mistake inventing currency. Edited March 15, 2012 by AnotherSinner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.03b9a592ab3fbf402fba028ca0d40a97.thumb.jpg.2258d605d3ad1f34b6effde23d20e7d7.jpg)
Recommended Posts