Ohio&Pa- HIGHEST jobless rates in nation- LIBRUL UTOPIA!

[Koios]

Yeah, those people who don't need to depend on government, they're self reliant, the ones that would be lol-ing at the urban people who couldn't survive on their own if their lives depended on it.

lol...I live on the west side of Pa and the idea you people in the red parts dont get help is absurd. Also i hate this state. You have one of the most fucked up methods of dealing with driving Id's and tickets.

Im from Boston and their DMV and Id laws are not this fucked up.

So do I, how do you explain that they're conservative and believe in conservative principles, i.e. vote conservative? If they were pro government handout, and survivng on said handouts, they'd be voting democrat.

Simple: they do not want to pay taxes. Republicans have made tax-aversion a core theme of their party.

That's the hand out: you can keep more of your paycheck, and still get everything you care about, without regard for others needs or benefit indirectly to us all.

Simple greed, and then whine about others wanting hand-outs, which is laughable. Obama wasn't saying they'd get another tax cut. He only said he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class.

Romney's hand-out, failed!!! And Obama was elected by the folks who don't need more handouts And even folks who would be taxed more, such as me. Higher-paid, and educated folks trended Obama significantly. Poorer, rural, nincumpoos went Romney, whining about having to pay for stuff they do not pay for. What's the FIT on a typical family with a kid, with household income of a measly $50 K or so? Zero? Maybe a little more, such as 2 or 3 percent, in effective FIT taxes?

And those losers whine about having to pay for handouts??? Give me a break. It's we urban Libs, paying more in tax than they take in, that are paying.

 

[Newby]

lol...I live on the west side of Pa and the idea you people in the red parts dont get help is absurd. Also i hate this state. You have one of the most fucked up methods of dealing with driving Id's and tickets.

Im from Boston and their DMV and Id laws are not this fucked up.

So do I, how do you explain that they're conservative and believe in conservative principles, i.e. vote conservative? If they were pro government handout, and survivng on said handouts, they'd be voting democrat.

Simple: they do not want to pay taxes. Republicans have made tax-aversion a core theme of their party.

That's the hand out: you can keep more of your paycheck, and still get everything you care about, without regard for others needs or benefit indirectly to us all.

Simple greed, and then whine about others wanting hand-outs, which is laughable. Obama wasn't saying they'd get another tax cut. He only said he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class.

Romney's hand-out, failed!!! And Obama was elected by the folks who don't need more handouts crowd. And even folks who would be taxed more, such as me. Higher-paid, and educated folks trended Obama significantly. Poorer, rural, nincumpoos went Romney, whining about having to pay for stuff they do not pay for. What's the FIT on a typical family with a kid, with household income of a measly $50 K or so? Zero? Maybe a little more, such as 2 or 3 percent, in effective FIT taxes?

And those losers whine about having to pay for handouts??? Give me a break. It's we urban Libs, paying more in tax than they take in, that are paying.

If they're poor to middle class, which many are in urban areas, they already don't pay taxes, try again.

 

[Koios]

So do I, how do you explain that they're conservative and believe in conservative principles, i.e. vote conservative? If they were pro government handout, and survivng on said handouts, they'd be voting democrat.

Simple: they do not want to pay taxes. Republicans have made tax-aversion a core theme of their party.

That's the hand out: you can keep more of your paycheck, and still get everything you care about, without regard for others needs or benefit indirectly to us all.

Simple greed, and then whine about others wanting hand-outs, which is laughable. Obama wasn't saying they'd get another tax cut. He only said he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class.

Romney's hand-out, failed!!! And Obama was elected by the folks who don't need more handouts crowd. And even folks who would be taxed more, such as me. Higher-paid, and educated folks trended Obama significantly. Poorer, rural, nincumpoos went Romney, whining about having to pay for stuff they do not pay for. What's the FIT on a typical family with a kid, with household income of a measly $50 K or so? Zero? Maybe a little more, such as 2 or 3 percent, in effective FIT taxes?

And those losers whine about having to pay for handouts??? Give me a break. It's we urban Libs, paying more in tax than they take in, that are paying.

If they're poor to middle class, which many are in urban areas, they already don't pay taxes, try again.

Wanna compare median household income in oh-so Liberal Seattle, San Francisico or Boston to the backwater PA Conservative nirvana ya'll rule folk populate? Bring it. I need a good belly laugh.

 

[Newby]

Simple: they do not want to pay taxes. Republicans have made tax-aversion a core theme of their party.

That's the hand out: you can keep more of your paycheck, and still get everything you care about, without regard for others needs or benefit indirectly to us all.

Simple greed, and then whine about others wanting hand-outs, which is laughable. Obama wasn't saying they'd get another tax cut. He only said he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class.

Romney's hand-out, failed!!! And Obama was elected by the folks who don't need more handouts crowd. And even folks who would be taxed more, such as me. Higher-paid, and educated folks trended Obama significantly. Poorer, rural, nincumpoos went Romney, whining about having to pay for stuff they do not pay for. What's the FIT on a typical family with a kid, with household income of a measly $50 K or so? Zero? Maybe a little more, such as 2 or 3 percent, in effective FIT taxes?

And those losers whine about having to pay for handouts??? Give me a break. It's we urban Libs, paying more in tax than they take in, that are paying.

If they're poor to middle class, which many are in urban areas, they already don't pay taxes, try again.

Wanna compare median household income in oh-so Liberal Seattle, San Francisico or Boston to the backwater PA Conservative nirvana ya'll rule folk populate? Bring it. I need a good belly laugh.

What do you think it would prove exactly?

 

[Koios]

If they're poor to middle class, which many are in urban areas, they already don't pay taxes, try again.

Wanna compare median household income in oh-so Liberal Seattle, San Francisico or Boston to the backwater PA Conservative nirvana ya'll rule folk populate? Bring it. I need a good belly laugh.

What do you think it would prove exactly?

Where revenues that are in fact paying for stuff come from? Just a thought.

 

[Newby]

Wanna compare median household income in oh-so Liberal Seattle, San Francisico or Boston to the backwater PA Conservative nirvana ya'll rule folk populate? Bring it. I need a good belly laugh.

What do you think it would prove exactly?

Where revenues that are in fact paying for stuff come from? Just a thought.

Not following you. How does that have anything to do with dependancy on government handouts? The revenues are the other side of it. I would guess that a higher percentage of those living in urban areas receive government assistance than those in urban areas. Take your example of Seattle, what percentage of the population in Seattle are taking government handouts? What percentage is taking handouts in Potter County, PA? I would say the higher percentage is in Seattle or any other big city.

 

[Vast LWC]

OK, so, I'm sure someone's mentioned this, but the OP is completely and utterly false.

"Ohio&Pa- HIGHEST jobless rates in nation- LIBRUL UTOPIA!"

Is a specious claim, and a lie.

Ohio Unemployment Rate: 7.0%
Penn Unemployment Rate: 8.2%

Neither is anywhere even close to the "highest jobless rate in the nation". One is average, and the other is considerably better than average.

 

[Koios]

What do you think it would prove exactly?

Where revenues that are in fact paying for stuff come from? Just a thought.

Not following you. How does that have anything to do with dependancy on government handouts? The revenues are the other side of it. I would guess that a higher percentage of those living in urban areas receive government assistance than those in urban areas. Take your example of Seattle, what percentage of the population in Seattle are taking government handouts? What percentage is taking handouts in Potter County, PA? I would say the higher percentage is in Seattle or any other big city.

No sweat. Happy to explain ...

Start with Progressive Tax on income. We pay the same taxes, all of us, on the same incomes. Those of us who pay more, and in higher percentage, only pay it on the higher income portion. But when considering it in "effective rate" terms, our avergage percentage is higher, and on higher incomes. So we put lots in, while a household with mom, dad and a kid, with say $50K gross, and thus around $35 K taxable, might pay in FIT about $1,800, or an effective tax rate of 3.6%.

Then take someone who's older and the kids are grown who makes $150K or so. Maybe $140K is taxable, and the FIT is nearer to $30K, or an effective rate of 20%. And 20% of a number three times as large, is waaaaaaaay more than 3.6% of the smaller amount.

And consider that if we take the Federal Budget, and then divide it by the population, we have a number around $12K, per warm body, including new borns. So just to pay "their share," the rural family making a measly $50K, with three warm bodies, would pay, in FIT alone, $36K. So their $1,800 really isn't paying for stuff, proportional to the number of warm bodies in their family. In fact, they're paying 5% of their share. Someone else is picking up their other 95% to pay for stuff, including handouts, i.e. the single dude making $150K, and folks north of him.

Does that help?

 

[del]

Where revenues that are in fact paying for stuff come from? Just a thought.

Not following you. How does that have anything to do with dependancy on government handouts? The revenues are the other side of it. I would guess that a higher percentage of those living in urban areas receive government assistance than those in urban areas. Take your example of Seattle, what percentage of the population in Seattle are taking government handouts? What percentage is taking handouts in Potter County, PA? I would say the higher percentage is in Seattle or any other big city.

No sweat. Happy to explain ...

Start with Progressive Tax on income. We pay the same taxes, all of us, on the same incomes. Those of us who pay more, and in higher percentage, only pay it on the higher income portion. But when considering it in "effective rate" terms, our avergage percentage is higher, and on higher incomes. So we put lots in, while a household with mom, dad and a kid, with say $50K gross, and thus around $35 K taxable, might pay in FIT about $1,800, or an effective tax rate of 3.6%.

Then take someone who's older and the kids are grown who makes $150K or so. Maybe $140K is taxable, and the FIT is nearer to $30K, or an effective rate of 20%. And 20% of a number three times as large, is waaaaaaaay more than 3.6% of the smaller amount.

And consider that if we take the Federal Budget, and then divide it by the population, we have a number around $12K, per warm body, including new borns. So just to pay "their share," the rural family making a measly $50K, with three warm bodies, would pay, in FIT alone, $36K. So their $1,800 really isn't paying for stuff, proportional to the number of warm bodies in their family. In fact, they're paying 5% of their share. Someone else is picking up their other 95% to pay for stuff, including handouts, i.e. the single dude making $150K, and folks north of him.

Does that help?

apparently not

math is hard, barbie

 

[Newby]

Where revenues that are in fact paying for stuff come from? Just a thought.

Not following you. How does that have anything to do with dependancy on government handouts? The revenues are the other side of it. I would guess that a higher percentage of those living in urban areas receive government assistance than those in urban areas. Take your example of Seattle, what percentage of the population in Seattle are taking government handouts? What percentage is taking handouts in Potter County, PA? I would say the higher percentage is in Seattle or any other big city.

No sweat. Happy to explain ...

Start with Progressive Tax on income. We pay the same taxes, all of us, on the same incomes. Those of us who pay more, and in higher percentage, only pay it on the higher income portion. But when considering it in "effective rate" terms, our avergage percentage is higher, and on higher incomes. So we put lots in, while a household with mom, dad and a kid, with say $50K gross, and thus around $35 K taxable, might pay in FIT about $1,800, or an effective tax rate of 3.6%.

Then take someone who's older and the kids are grown who makes $150K or so. Maybe $140K is taxable, and the FIT is nearer to $30K, or an effective rate of 20%. And 20% of a number three times as large, is waaaaaaaay more than 3.6% of the smaller amount.

And consider that if we take the Federal Budget, and then divide it by the population, we have a number around $12K, per warm body, including new borns. So just to pay "their share," the rural family making a measly $50K, with three warm bodies, would pay, in FIT alone, $36K. So their $1,800 really isn't paying for stuff, proportional to the number of warm bodies in their family. In fact, they're paying 5% of their share. Someone else is picking up their other 95% to pay for stuff, including handouts, i.e. the single dude making $150K, and folks north of him.

Does that help?

I understand what you're saying, but I'm not seeing how it applies to the point of the convo. I don't even remember what point it was you were trying to even make without going back and reading it. Last I remember, we were talking about handouts, not taxes. I'll try to go back and reread the discussion if I get a chance.

 

[Newby]

My initial argument or point was that the poor and low/middle class do not pay taxes (or very minimal), your illustration simply reiterates that fact. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with it?

 

[Erand7899]

^ ^ ^ And LadySpamSlinger wonders why most here wouldn't piss in her mouth if her teeth were on fire.

Actually, "DOT.COM" who started an entire thread ion me due to his obsession- I don't care what you old liberal gramps think. LOL

thats the problem w/ "you people" (young, emo, Repubs). You disregard, out of hand, advice from moderates in your own party (the few that remained). Thats one of the reasons you got your asses handed to you on Tuesday. Three more Dem seats in the senate

The only problem with conservatives is that we believe you dumbass liberals have the right to be stupid. We can guarantee winning the next two elections with a simple, but effective strategy. Give them what they want. Go along with the tax increases, and the phony spending cuts, let the economy go down the tubes, and say we told you so.

Doing so will create a lot of misery for a lot of people, but it may be the only real method of demonstrating to the voters that they are being taken for a ride by the liberal minority.

 

[pinqy]

OK, so, I'm sure someone's mentioned this, but the OP is completely and utterly false.

"Ohio&Pa- HIGHEST jobless rates in nation- LIBRUL UTOPIA!"

Is a specious claim, and a lie.

Ohio Unemployment Rate: 7.0%
Penn Unemployment Rate: 8.2%

Neither is anywhere even close to the "highest jobless rate in the nation". One is average, and the other is considerably better than average.

The OP doesn't understand the data. What she was really referring to was that PA and OH had the highest increase in initial UI benefits claims from the previous week. Both still had fewer initial claims than CA, which had the largest decrease in initial claims.

None of which has anything to do with Unemployment rates because UE rates aren't based on UI claims.

 

[Koios]

I understand what you're saying, but I'm not seeing how it applies to the point of the convo. I don't even remember what point it was you were trying to even make without going back and reading it. Last I remember, we were talking about handouts, not taxes. I'll try to go back and reread the discussion if I get a chance.

Okie doke: handouts. Good or bad?

Answer: good. They do not cost typical middle class wage earners much at all. Maybe a few dollars a month, if that. And where do the handouts end up? In workers' pockets. The poor can buy stuff, that drives the need for more workers to meet the demand, improving average Americans' job prospects.

Bear in mind, we're a consumer economy. Our value is not what we do for work; it's what we buy in stores. So by empowering the poor to consume, it helps the middle class, who on balance, pay next to nothing for the economic benefit that spending provides.