What will be the first to go if libs take over?

[Superlative]

Of course, thiose numbers are AFTER the Bush tax cuts

Your little survey proves a couple things.

Rich people pay more taxes because they are rich, therefore after taxes they still have lots of money.

And they collect less money from the government because they are rich, and they need less money in health care benefits.

How much tax do you expect someone to pay if they make $23,000 a year?

How much tax do you expect someone to pay if they make $100,000 a year?



All of this money, this supposed 86% in Taxes being paid by the rich and America is where?

UNICEF child-welfare study found that............... America finished dead last in terms of infant-mortality rates, vaccinations, the percentage of newborns with low birth weights and deaths from accidental injuries. We finished second to last when the researchers assessed a child's diet, physical activity and weight, exposure to violence and bullying and the number of 15-year-olds who smoke, drink and have sex.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/he...y04,0,6368667.story?coll=bal-health-headlines


The US is ranked 15th out of 27 in Reading literacy.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/edu_rea_lit-education-reading-literacy
http://www.nationmaster.com/statistics

 

[red states rule]

supposed 86% in Taxes being paid by the rich?

The info from the IRS is right there to see

Of cousre when the facts go against libs (which usually happens) they have to change the subject

So now, you fall back on how people have to fork over more money for the common good

The fact is a small minority were paying the most in taxes before the tax cut

The same small minority are paying the most in taxes after the tax cut

If there is a problem let the parent of the baby make sure the kid has medical coverage - why should I pay for someone elses healthcare?

The government is spending record amounts on education - pouring more money in it will not solve the problem

 

[Superlative]

supposed 86% in Taxes being paid by the rich?

The info from the IRS is right there to see

Of cousre when the facts go against libs (which usually happens) they have to change the subject

So now, you fall back on how people have to fork over more money for the common good

The fact is a small minority were paying the most in taxes before the tax cut

The same small minority are paying the most in taxes after the tax cut

If there is a problem let the parent of the baby make sure the kid has medical coverage - why should I pay for someone elses healthcare?

The government is spending record amounts on education - pouring more money in it will not solve the problem

How do you not understand that if you make $100,000 a year, you will pay more taxes?

if someone who makes $23,000 and paid the same amount in taxes they would be dead of starvation cause they would have no money.

Per income you are taking away the same amount of money from the Rich as you are the Poor.

If you only have $10 and I take away $3 or 3%, there is $7 left over.

But if you have $100 and I take away $30, there is $70 left.

Do you see a difference?

its about $63 if you cant do the math

Rich people pay more because they have more.

And I think having books in schools and paying teachers will help fight a literacy problem.

Maybe you need to go back to school, you obviously got jipped.

 

[red states rule]

Good way to eflect the FACT, a very small minority is already paying a HUGE majority in taxes

Yet to libs, it is not enough

Also, the left ignores the huge benefits the Bush tax cuts have returned to the economy.

 

[LOki]

Conservatism is based on logic and reason. It's also based on reality whereas liberalism is based on fantasy -- how you think things should be.

Please feel free to try again though.

Liberalism (this, for instance) is not neccessarily based on fantasy. Conservatism, however, is neccessarily based in the past, and despite the strength of a conservative's mod power, that past is chock full of bullshit rationalizations, founded upon faith in superstitions.

 

[LOki]

Rich people pay more because incompetent folks have cast more votes towards entitling themselves to the earnings of others.

Fixed.

 

[Superlative]

Fixed.

And rich people wouldnt be as rich without the poor people gtting credit cards, and buying crap from Walmart.

 

[red states rule]

And rich people wouldnt be as rich without the poor people gtting credit cards, and buying crap from Walmart.

Wal Mart has done more for working families then any government program has ever accomplished

 

[Superlative]

Wal Mart has done more for working families then any government program has ever accomplished

How? by keeping poor people poor?


In 2001, sales associates, the most common job in Wal-Mart, earned on average $8.23 an hour for annual wages of $13,861.

The 2001 poverty line for a family of three was $14,630

A 2003 wage analysis reported that cashiers, the second most common job, earn approximately $7.92 per hour and work 29 hours a week. This brings in annual wages of only $11,948.

The average two-person family (one parent and one child) needed $27,948 to meet basic needs in 2005, well above what Wal-Mart reports that its average full-time associate earns.

Wal-Mart claimed that its average associate earned $9.68 an hour in 2005. That would make the average associate's annual wages $17,114.

Wal-Mart has known for years of a massive companywide problem of fair labor standards violations but did not take sufficient steps to address the problem.

An internal Wal-Mart audit of one week of time records in 2000 from 25,000 employees had alerted Wal-Mart officials to potential violations. The audit found 60,767 missed breaks and 15,705 lost meal times. It also alerted Wal-Mart executives to 1,371 instances of minors working too late, during school hours, or for too many hours in a day

Despite this knowledge, Wal-Mart had to settle in January 2005 for violations that took place from 1998 to 2002, Wal-Mart agreed to pay $135,540 to settle U.S. Dept. of Labor charges that the company had violated provisions against minors operating hazardous machinery.

In March 2005, Wal-Mart agreed to pay $11 million to settle allegations that it had failed to pay overtime to janitors, many of whom worked seven nights a week


Wal-Mart reported in January 2006 that its health insurance only covers 43% of their employees.
Wal-Mart has approximately 1.39 million US employees.

Part-timers—anybody below 34 hours a week – must wait 1 year before they can enroll. Moreover, spouses of part-time employees are ineligible for family health care coverage for 2006.

Full-time hourly employees must wait 180 days (approximately 6 months) before being able to enroll in Wal-Mart’s health insurance plan. Managers have no waiting period.

Nationally, the average wait time for new employees to become eligible is 1.7 months. For the retail industry it is 3.0 months.

Since the average full-time Wal-Mart employee earned $17,114 in 2005, he or she would have to spend between 7 and 25 percent of his or her income just to cover the premiums and medical deductibles, if electing for single coverage.

The average full-time employee electing for family coverage would have to spend between 22 and 40 percent of his or her income just to cover the premiums and medical deductibles. These costs do not include other health-related expenses such as medical co-pays, prescription coverage, emergency room deductibles, and ambulance deductibles.

One 200-employee Wal-Mart store may cost federal taxpayers $420,750 per year.

This cost comes from the following, on average:
$36,000 a year for free and reduced lunches for just 50 qualifying Wal-Mart families.
$42,000 a year for low-income housing assistance.
$125,000 a year for federal tax credits and deductions for low-income families.
$100,000 a year for the additional expenses for programs for students.
$108,000 a year for the additional federal health care costs of moving into state children's health insurance programs (S-CHIP)
$9,750 a year for the additional costs for low income energy assistance.

The first ever national report on Wal-Mart subsidies documented at least $1 billion in subsidies from state and local governments.

A Wal-Mart official stated that “it is common” for the company to request subsidies “in about one-third of all [retail] projects.” This would suggest that over a thousand Wal-Mart stores have been subsidized.

http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/facts/

 

[red states rule]

Wal-Mart paid 1.1 billion in worker benefits in 2006
Posted May 3rd 2007 7:50PM by Zac Bissonnette
Filed under: Internet, Wal-Mart (WMT), Marketing and advertising, Employees, Scandals

Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT) announced today that it paid $1.1 billion to U.S. hourly associates through profit sharing and 401(k) accounts, stock purchase plans and merchandise discounts. The company did not disclose how those numbers compared with the prior year (making them far less interesting) but did say that it has historically contributed 2% of worker wages to a profit-sharing plan and 2% to a 410(k) plan, and that employees do not have to contribute their own money to qualify for these benefits, which is probably good because most Wal-Mart associates probably couldn't afford to.

Releasing a big number like this will do nothing to squelch the complaints of Wal-Mart's critics, one of whom recently issued a scathing report on the company's union-busting tactics.

Wal-Mart can go through every PR maneuver it wants to try to change its image -- free self-help classes for employees, environmentally-friendly initiatives, and walk-in health clinics. But until the company makes substantive changes on the issues people are most concerned about (like illegal union-busting and intimidation), these announcements have the hollow ring of public relations drivel.

http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/03/wal-mart-paid-1-1-billion-in-worker-benefits-in-2006/

 

[Superlative]

Do you read your own cut and posts?

 

[red states rule]

Do you read your own cut and posts?

Yes

I post what Wal Mart does for its workers and yet it still will not make a difference to the Wal Mart bashers

Libs have it in for Wal Mart simply because they will not let the unions in and fuck up the company

I see you ran like hell from the income tax issue and how the top 25% pay 85% of the taxes

 

[Superlative]

Yes

I post what Wal Mart does for its workers and yet it still will not make a difference to the Wal Mart bashers

Libs have it in for Wal Mart simply because they will not let the unions in and fuck up the company

I see you ran like hell from the income tax issue and how the top 25% pay 85% of the taxes

I never ran from anything you posted, i went to bed to avoid the headache I would get from you ignoring a rational debate to post your idiotic Op-Eds.

 

[red states rule]

I never ran from anything you posted, i went to bed to avoid the headache I would get from you ignoring a rational debate to post your idiotic Op-Eds.

No, you went to bed after you saw a small minority is paying a huge majority of taxes

Libs can't counter the facts

 

[LOki]

And rich people wouldnt be as rich without the poor people gtting credit cards, and buying crap from Walmart.

Rich people (read: those whose capacity to create wealth out-paces their consumption of wealth) are not forcing anyone to get credit cards or shop at Wal-Mart. The incompetent (read: merit poor), particularly those with bullshit spending habits (read: cash poor because their capacity to consume wealth far out-paces their capacity to create weath), force (via the coercion of taxation) those who have earned their money to subsidize their bullshit spending practices.

 

[red states rule]

I never ran from anything you posted, i went to bed to avoid the headache I would get from you ignoring a rational debate to post your idiotic Op-Eds.

Care to commnet on how a small minority pay a huge majority of income taxes?