The republicans want to raise your taxes

The republicans want to raise your taxes

Of course they do...what do you think FLAT TAX is really all about except putting more of the tax burden on the shoulders of the bottom 80-90% of income earners?


yes which is why the wealthy pay the big bucks to try and gain ground for such ideas.

Some people are jsut gullible enough for them to manipulate.
 
GOP may OK tax hike that Obama hopes to block - politics - msnbc.com

News flash: Congressional Republicans want to raise your taxes.
Impossible, right? GOP lawmakers are so virulently anti-tax, surely they will fight to prevent a payroll tax increase on virtually every wage-earner starting Jan. 1, right?
Apparently not.

Many of the same Republicans who fought hammer-and-tong to keep the George W. Bush-era income tax cuts from expiring on schedule are now saying a different "temporary" tax cut should end as planned. By their own definition, that amounts to a tax increase.

The tax break extension they oppose is sought by President Barack Obama. Unlike proposed changes in the income tax, this policy helps the 46 percent of all Americans who owe no federal income taxes but who pay a "payroll tax" on practically every dime they earn.

Fucking pricks. Per "Breezy Wheeze" at Fark:

Stewart had a brilliant and brilliantly scathing bit about this last Thursday. How the pundit class thought $700b wasn't enough of a dent in the National Debt to be worth taxing the rich over.

Those same talking heads then went on to decry how poor people don't pay US Federal Income Tax, and that we should "broaden the tax base" and "everyone should pay their fair share." Stewart noted that the bottom 40% of the the "tax base" owned less than 2.5% of the nation's wealth. To get $700b from this bottom FORTY percent, you'd literally have to confiscate half of their entire net worth, not just tax their income.
 
GOP may OK tax hike that Obama hopes to block - politics - msnbc.com

News flash: Congressional Republicans want to raise your taxes.
Impossible, right? GOP lawmakers are so virulently anti-tax, surely they will fight to prevent a payroll tax increase on virtually every wage-earner starting Jan. 1, right?
Apparently not.

Many of the same Republicans who fought hammer-and-tong to keep the George W. Bush-era income tax cuts from expiring on schedule are now saying a different "temporary" tax cut should end as planned. By their own definition, that amounts to a tax increase.

The tax break extension they oppose is sought by President Barack Obama. Unlike proposed changes in the income tax, this policy helps the 46 percent of all Americans who owe no federal income taxes but who pay a "payroll tax" on practically every dime they earn.

Fucking pricks. Per "Breezy Wheeze" at Fark:

Stewart had a brilliant and brilliantly scathing bit about this last Thursday. How the pundit class thought $700b wasn't enough of a dent in the National Debt to be worth taxing the rich over.

Those same talking heads then went on to decry how poor people don't pay US Federal Income Tax, and that we should "broaden the tax base" and "everyone should pay their fair share." Stewart noted that the bottom 40% of the the "tax base" owned less than 2.5% of the nation's wealth. To get $700b from this bottom FORTY percent, you'd literally have to confiscate half of their entire net worth, not just tax their income.

"Breezy Wheeze" at Fark?

Way to boost your creds there BDPoop. What utter horseshit.

:lol:
 
DO YOU EVER TYPE ANYTHING that DIDN'T FILTER THROUGH YOUR ASS FIRST?

All of your cut n paste hack jobs stink of left wing hackery.

Everything passes through her ass. Hostess Ding Dongs, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Big Macs, Dunkin Donuts, Domino's Pizza. You name the trailer park "fare," she's on it.
 
It's social security tax.

At issue is a tax that the vast majority of workers pay, but many don't recognize because they don't read, or don't understand their pay stubs. Workers normally pay 6.2 percent of their wages toward a tax designated for Social Security. Their employer pays an equal amount, for a total of 12.4 percent per worker.
As part of a bipartisan spending deal last December, Congress approved Obama's request to reduce the workers' share to 4.2 percent for one year; employers' rate did not change. Obama wants Congress to extend the reduction for an additional year. If not, the rate will return to 6.2 percent on Jan. 1."
 
Let's get this thread back on track:

Obama cited the payroll tax in his weekend radio and Internet address Saturday, when he urged Congress to work together on measures that help the economy and create jobs.

"There are things we can do right now that will mean more customers for businesses and more jobs across the country. We can cut payroll taxes again, so families have an extra $1,000 to spend," he said.

Social Security payroll taxes apply only to the first $106,800 of a worker's wages. Therefore, $2,136 is the biggest benefit anyone can gain from the one-year reduction.
The great majority of Americans make less than $106,800 a year. Millions of workers pay more in payroll taxes than in federal income taxes.
The 12-month tax reduction will cost the government about $120 billion this year, and a similar amount next year if it's renewed.

That worries Rep. David Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, and a member of the House-Senate supercommittee tasked with finding new deficit cuts. Tax reductions, "no matter how well-intended," will push the deficit higher, making the panel's task that much harder, Camp's office said.

But Republican lawmakers haven't always worried about tax cuts increasing the deficit. They led the fight to extend the life of a much bigger tax break: the major 2001 income tax reduction enacted under Bush. It was scheduled to expire at the start of this year. Obama campaigned on a pledge to end the tax break only for the richest Americans, but solid GOP opposition forced him to back down.

Many Republicans are adamant about not raising taxes but largely silent on what it would mean to let the payroll tax break expire.

GOP may OK tax increase that Obama hopes to block - Yahoo! News
 
So do you guys support this tax cut?

No - and for the UMPTEENTH fucking time -

# In 2002 the latest year of available data, the top 5 percent of taxpayers paid more than one-half (53.8 percent) of all individual income taxes, but reported roughly one-third (30.6 percent) of income.

# The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 33.7 percent of all individual income taxes in 2002. This group of taxpayers has paid more than 30 percent of individual income taxes since 1995. Moreover, since 1990 this group’s tax share has grown faster than their income share.

# Taxpayers who rank in the top 50 percent of taxpayers by income pay virtually all individual income taxes. In all years since 1990, taxpayers in this group have paid over 94 percent of all individual income taxes. In 2000, 2001, and 2002, this group paid over 96 percent of the total.

Treasury Department analysts credit President Bush's tax cuts with shifting a larger share of the individual income taxes paid to higher income taxpayers. In 2005, says the Treasury, when most of the tax cut provisions are fully in effect (e.g., lower tax rates, the $1,000 child credit, marriage penalty relief), the projected tax share for lower-income taxpayers will fall, while the tax share for higher-income taxpayers will rise.

# The share of taxes paid by the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers will fall from 4.1 percent to 3.6 percent.

# The share of taxes paid by the top 1 percent of taxpayers will rise from 32.3 percent to 33.7 percent.

# The average tax rate for the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers falls by 27 percent as compared to a 13 percent decline for taxpayers in the top 1 percent.
 
Truth matters I think you know most of us believe in a fair tax. So yes even the poor should pay their share. Now go back to your fetal position and continue sucking on the liberal teet.
 

Forum List

Back
Top