$100K-Plus Earners Pay 72% of Federal Income Taxes

[Redfish]

And that would be lower if all ranchers paid to graze their cattle on federal land. But the RW loons on here feel that a rancher that has a multi-million dollar ranch should not pay his fair share. They should be glad that they are paying it for him....idiots.

If you don't like the free range laws, get them changed. The guy broke no laws, the govt was trying to create new law without congress. the people won. the constitution won. the tyranical obama govt lost.

 

[bendog]

I think they always do - eventually.

Back when we had unions and a highly progressive income tax, the middle class paid more as a percentage, yet taxes/gnp was not a lot different.

Historical Source of Revenue as Share of GDP

That's the part the lefties never understand. The percentage of total taxes paid skews towards the top when marginal rates are lowered.

Look, I apologize for my earlier post which I've deleted. I don't see the logic in your post. The % of total taxes paid by the top skews upwards when the top makes more money than the rest. If you lower the rate from 70% to 28%, the top pays LESS unless it's income arises, roughly, at least 270%

 

[nodoginnafight]

And that would be lower if all ranchers paid to graze their cattle on federal land. But the RW loons on here feel that a rancher that has a multi-million dollar ranch should not pay his fair share. They should be glad that they are paying it for him....idiots.

If you don't like the free range laws, get them changed. The guy broke no laws, the govt was trying to create new law without congress. the people won. the constitution won. the tyranical obama govt lost.

LOL - he was breaking law - law that congress wrote - think he's gonna get his cows back?

This story just goes to show how violent the takers can get when you try to pry their lips off the government teat.

 

[Redfish]

ok now tell us why its good that 43% of americans pay nothing towards the expense of government. Do you think those 43% might feel differently about govt waste if some of it was coming out of their pockets?

What was Mitt Romney's effective tax rate? About 16% if memory serves.

Makes it pretty silly to argue that the rich are over taxed.

But I think everyone - even street corner beggars - should pay SOMETHING. Even if it's $2.
That gives them ownership and a greater interest in where our tax dollars go.

The idea that the government has this endless fountain of money has got to stop.

My answer to your question - was already answered.

Romney's taxes were in complete compliance with the US tax code. the tax code was written by the party that has controlled congress for most of the last 75 years, if you don't like what the rich are paying---------------------blame democrats, they made it so.

 

[Redfish]

And that would be lower if all ranchers paid to graze their cattle on federal land. But the RW loons on here feel that a rancher that has a multi-million dollar ranch should not pay his fair share. They should be glad that they are paying it for him....idiots.

If you don't like the free range laws, get them changed. The guy broke no laws, the govt was trying to create new law without congress. the people won. the constitution won. the tyranical obama govt lost.

LOL - he was breaking law - law that congress wrote - think he's gonna get his cows back?

This story just goes to show how violent the takers can get when you try to pry their lips off the government teat.

according to the latest reports, he already has them back. no laws were broken by the rancher. the govt backed off because they knew they would lose in court.


try this--------google harry reid and land for solar farms, the guy is as dirty as they come.

 

[nodoginnafight]

ok now tell us why its good that 43% of americans pay nothing towards the expense of government. Do you think those 43% might feel differently about govt waste if some of it was coming out of their pockets?

What was Mitt Romney's effective tax rate? About 16% if memory serves.

Makes it pretty silly to argue that the rich are over taxed.

But I think everyone - even street corner beggars - should pay SOMETHING. Even if it's $2.
That gives them ownership and a greater interest in where our tax dollars go.

The idea that the government has this endless fountain of money has got to stop.

My answer to your question - was already answered.

Romney's taxes were in complete compliance with the US tax code. the tax code was written by the party that has controlled congress for most of the last 75 years, if you don't like what the rich are paying---------------------blame democrats, they made it so.

Dude - why are you intent on arguing? I posted an opinion earlier than yours that virtually MIRRORED what you said later.

I have no problem with Romney's effective tax rate - why would you try to pretend that I do? I think anyone who pays more than they are required to is an absolute idiot.

So who and what are you trying to argue with?

 

[DiamondDave]

Back when we had unions and a highly progressive income tax, the middle class paid more as a percentage, yet taxes/gnp was not a lot different.

Historical Source of Revenue as Share of GDP

That's the part the lefties never understand. The percentage of total taxes paid skews towards the top when marginal rates are lowered.

Look, I apologize for my earlier post which I've deleted. I don't see the logic in your post. The % of total taxes paid by the top skews upwards when the top makes more money than the rest. If you lower the rate from 70% to 28%, the top pays LESS unless it's income arises, roughly, at least 270%

And still more than those who pay no income tax.. lest we forget that with those higher top rates, you had more exceptions, deductions, and things that were not defined as income

Hence the problem.. those over complicated pandering tax laws.. and there is pandering at all levels of it... ensuring that no matter what or who is pandered to in specific instances, the government gathers more power

It is why they fear the flat tax

 

[nodoginnafight]

If you don't like the free range laws, get them changed. The guy broke no laws, the govt was trying to create new law without congress. the people won. the constitution won. the tyranical obama govt lost.

LOL - he was breaking law - law that congress wrote - think he's gonna get his cows back?

This story just goes to show how violent the takers can get when you try to pry their lips off the government teat.

according to the latest reports, he already has them back. no laws were broken by the rancher. the govt backed off because they knew they would lose in court.


try this--------google harry reid and land for solar farms, the guy is as dirty as they come.

They already won in court - MULTIPLE times.

 

[asterism]

57% of American will pay income tax this year.

Where did that statistic come from?

43% Of Americans Don't Pay Federal Income Tax - Business Insider

Thanks.

 

[Redfish]

Back when we had unions and a highly progressive income tax, the middle class paid more as a percentage, yet taxes/gnp was not a lot different.

Historical Source of Revenue as Share of GDP

That's the part the lefties never understand. The percentage of total taxes paid skews towards the top when marginal rates are lowered.

Look, I apologize for my earlier post which I've deleted. I don't see the logic in your post. The % of total taxes paid by the top skews upwards when the top makes more money than the rest. If you lower the rate from 70% to 28%, the top pays LESS unless it's income arises, roughly, at least 270%

if the tax rates are lowered, there will be more rich people, revenue to the govt will increase, jobs will be created, the deficit will be reduced, unemployment will go down.

this is really not complicated, its just that reality and math fly in the face of liberal philosophy.

 

[Redfish]

My answer to your question - was already answered.

Romney's taxes were in complete compliance with the US tax code. the tax code was written by the party that has controlled congress for most of the last 75 years, if you don't like what the rich are paying---------------------blame democrats, they made it so.

Dude - why are you intent on arguing? I posted an opinion earlier than yours that virtually MIRRORED what you said later.

I have no problem with Romney's effective tax rate - why would you try to pretend that I do? I think anyone who pays more than they are required to is an absolute idiot.

So who and what are you trying to argue with?

my mistake, I guess I misread the intent of your post.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Where did that statistic come from?

43% Of Americans Don't Pay Federal Income Tax - Business Insider

Thanks.

No problem - so many folks come on here talking crap and throwing out "facts" that are incorrect.

I just like to keep it real.

 

[Jarhead]

And that would be lower if all ranchers paid to graze their cattle on federal land. But the RW loons on here feel that a rancher that has a multi-million dollar ranch should not pay his fair share. They should be glad that they are paying it for him....idiots.

If you don't like the free range laws, get them changed. The guy broke no laws, the govt was trying to create new law without congress. the people won. the constitution won. the tyranical obama govt lost.

LOL - he was breaking law - law that congress wrote - think he's gonna get his cows back?

This story just goes to show how violent the takers can get when you try to pry their lips off the government teat.

Your post pretty much shows us how little you know about the crux of the situation.

Federal Government land is the peoples land. If the federal government develops it for a specific use, so be it. It is used for that purpose. If, however, the federal government claims land as theirs and they do nothing with it, it comes to question as to why they actually took it to begin with...FOR IT IS THE PEOPLES LAND....and until it is developed for a specific use, the people should have access to it.

Seems to me you have forgotten that the government is not just FOR the people....but BY the people.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Romney's taxes were in complete compliance with the US tax code. the tax code was written by the party that has controlled congress for most of the last 75 years, if you don't like what the rich are paying---------------------blame democrats, they made it so.

Dude - why are you intent on arguing? I posted an opinion earlier than yours that virtually MIRRORED what you said later.

I have no problem with Romney's effective tax rate - why would you try to pretend that I do? I think anyone who pays more than they are required to is an absolute idiot.

So who and what are you trying to argue with?

my mistake, I guess I misread the intent of your post.

Thanks - I appreciate that.

Now let's go at it over this Bundy crap

 

[nodoginnafight]

If you don't like the free range laws, get them changed. The guy broke no laws, the govt was trying to create new law without congress. the people won. the constitution won. the tyranical obama govt lost.

LOL - he was breaking law - law that congress wrote - think he's gonna get his cows back?

This story just goes to show how violent the takers can get when you try to pry their lips off the government teat.

Your post pretty much shows us how little you know about the crux of the situation.

Federal Government land is the peoples land. If the federal government develops it for a specific use, so be it. It is used for that purpose. If, however, the federal government claims land as theirs and they do nothing with it, it comes to question as to why they actually took it to begin with...FOR IT IS THE PEOPLES LAND....and until it is developed for a specific use, the people should have access to it.

Seems to me you have forgotten that the government is not just FOR the people....but BY the people.

And not just by this one people who wants to get free feed for his cattle.

He never claimed it was his land
He never denied that he owed grazing fees
He just got his panties in a twist over a bunch of turtles and said he wasn't going to pay what he owed any more.

This isn't a story about governmental abuse. It's not a story about government talking his land (it's not his land). The issue has been decided in the courts many times.

This is a story about a freeloader who threw a hissy fit when he got tossed off the gravy train.

 

[nodoginnafight]

btw - there are many other threads devoted to Bundy. Out of respect for the OP and the discussion on that - I won't comment more on Bundy here. Sorry, but there are plenty of places to butt heads over that.

 

[Jarhead]

LOL - he was breaking law - law that congress wrote - think he's gonna get his cows back?

This story just goes to show how violent the takers can get when you try to pry their lips off the government teat.

Your post pretty much shows us how little you know about the crux of the situation.

Federal Government land is the peoples land. If the federal government develops it for a specific use, so be it. It is used for that purpose. If, however, the federal government claims land as theirs and they do nothing with it, it comes to question as to why they actually took it to begin with...FOR IT IS THE PEOPLES LAND....and until it is developed for a specific use, the people should have access to it.

Seems to me you have forgotten that the government is not just FOR the people....but BY the people.

And not just by this one people who wants to get free feed for his cattle.

He never claimed it was his land
He never denied that he owed grazing fees
He just got his panties in a twist over a bunch of turtles and said he wasn't going to pay what he owed any more.

This isn't a story about governmental abuse. It's not a story about government talking his land (it's not his land). The issue has been decided in the courts many times.

This is a story about a freeloader who threw a hissy fit when he got tossed off the gravy train.

Interesting take.

Speaks volumes.

 

[bendog]

That's the part the lefties never understand. The percentage of total taxes paid skews towards the top when marginal rates are lowered.

Look, I apologize for my earlier post which I've deleted. I don't see the logic in your post. The % of total taxes paid by the top skews upwards when the top makes more money than the rest. If you lower the rate from 70% to 28%, the top pays LESS unless it's income arises, roughly, at least 270%

if the tax rates are lowered, there will be more rich people, revenue to the govt will increase, jobs will be created, the deficit will be reduced, unemployment will go down.

this is really not complicated, its just that reality and math fly in the face of liberal philosophy.

there is absolutely no statistisal correlation to declining top rates and growth in gnp.

STUDY: Tax Cuts Don't Lead To Growth - Business Insider

 

[Jarhead]

LOL - he was breaking law - law that congress wrote - think he's gonna get his cows back?

This story just goes to show how violent the takers can get when you try to pry their lips off the government teat.

according to the latest reports, he already has them back. no laws were broken by the rancher. the govt backed off because they knew they would lose in court.


try this--------google harry reid and land for solar farms, the guy is as dirty as they come.

They already won in court - MULTIPLE times.

It is the courts role to determine if a law has been broken. It is not the courts role to determine if the law is just.

You do not know much about this topic as was evident by your take as expressed in an earlier post.

I am finding that you are not the poster I believed you to be.

 

[Redfish]

LOL - he was breaking law - law that congress wrote - think he's gonna get his cows back?

This story just goes to show how violent the takers can get when you try to pry their lips off the government teat.

Your post pretty much shows us how little you know about the crux of the situation.

Federal Government land is the peoples land. If the federal government develops it for a specific use, so be it. It is used for that purpose. If, however, the federal government claims land as theirs and they do nothing with it, it comes to question as to why they actually took it to begin with...FOR IT IS THE PEOPLES LAND....and until it is developed for a specific use, the people should have access to it.

Seems to me you have forgotten that the government is not just FOR the people....but BY the people.

And not just by this one people who wants to get free feed for his cattle.

He never claimed it was his land
He never denied that he owed grazing fees
He just got his panties in a twist over a bunch of turtles and said he wasn't going to pay what he owed any more.

This isn't a story about governmental abuse. It's not a story about government talking his land (it's not his land). The issue has been decided in the courts many times.

This is a story about a freeloader who threw a hissy fit when he got tossed off the gravy train.

I told you to check into Harry Reid and using govt land for a solar power panel farm, did you do that? If not, you should because you might find out what this is really about.