Bernie Sanders.....Can you smell the burn ???

[basquebromance]

Lindsey Graham took to Twitter Thursday to call for a vote on Sen. Bernie Sanders’ proposal to allow imprisoned felons to vote in a bid to see publicly where lawmakers stand on the issue.

 

[Billy000]

I can only smell the hypocrisy.......




he is a millionaire ....he is talking out his backside
https://nypost.com/2019/04/09/bernie-sanders-tax-returns-reveal-hes-a-millionaire/

God this is so stupid. Bernie has never suggested that millionaires shouldn’t exist. You do realize, of course, under his tax plan, his own taxes would increase, right?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The 50's was a much different time than today. First off, Americans had more solidarity with their countrymen than today. An American company would not do well moving overseas and importing stuff back to the US. For one, travel was not nearly as safe as today. Now we have satellites, radar, and much safer planes. Two, our labor was closer to others around the world. Transpiration would have killed any additional profit, and actually would have cost more to produce overseas.

Businesses always had to have meetings, so it would not have been economical to fly all those Americans to wherever to have monthly meetings. Communications were very primitive. So there was really no places else to go.

Today, a business owner can run his company sitting on the toilet from virtually anywhere in the world. He can have face to face meetings via internet, and be able to check his investments up to the second. As long as he can produce products cheaper than can be produced in the US, his products will sell the most.

The rich already pay most of the income taxes for the rest of us, yet nearly the bottom 50% pay not a dime.

Top 20% of Americans Will Pay 87% of Income Tax

Okay, but we are in agreement that their high tax rate was beneficial to them at the time right? This simply proves that their tax rate was not harmful to the economy. And yes, the economy we have today is much different. I’m not even suggesting that their tax rate be that high. It just has to be a lot different from now based on deductions and loopholes. 2/3 of corporations don’t pay federal income tax because of what they can take advantage of on the tax code. Meanwhile, the poor and middle class class end up paying higher effective tax rates because they don’t get those same generous deductions.

As was already pointed out, very few paid this 91% you speak of. The average for the top 1% was about 42% compared to about 37% today when you figure in all income taxes including state and city.

Taxes on the Rich Were Not Much Higher in the 1950s - Tax Foundation

So riddle me this: If 87% of taxes paid by the top 20% are not enough, what should they be paying?

Um no I didn’t. They didnt have nearly the same tax code we have now. When I talk about deductions, I am talking about now.

Okay so now you’re flipping back to this narrative of 87% when you already acknowledged that rich people have generous deductions. That doesn’t make sense.

As the article points out, with or without deductions, they are not paying that much less today than 65 years ago. With the current deductions, the top 20% are still paying 87% of all collected income taxes.

percentage of taxes of a group has to go along with percentage of total income earned by that same group, i.e:

this was 4 years ago.
current numbers here
If a group pays X percent of all taxes, its because they earn X percent of all income.

Which is how the left has brainwashed you.

There is no such thing as "the wealth." That's because money is infinite in our country. You have been led to believe the theory that the reason some have too little is because others have too much. A lie.

The reason some have too little is due to irresponsible decisions and behavior, lack of education, social programs, general laziness, recreational narcotics, prison time. It has nothing to do with the wealthy.

If money were finite as the Democrats brainwashed you into believing, then if I went and asked my boss for a raise, he would tell me he'd love to give me one, but he can't because the rich have all the money. Or if I went for a car loan, the bank would tell me in spite of my fantastic credit, they don't have the money to loan because the rich have it all.

In this country, you can make as much as you want or little as you want, but it's all up to you, not the rich people.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The 50's was a much different time than today. First off, Americans had more solidarity with their countrymen than today. An American company would not do well moving overseas and importing stuff back to the US. For one, travel was not nearly as safe as today. Now we have satellites, radar, and much safer planes. Two, our labor was closer to others around the world. Transpiration would have killed any additional profit, and actually would have cost more to produce overseas.

Businesses always had to have meetings, so it would not have been economical to fly all those Americans to wherever to have monthly meetings. Communications were very primitive. So there was really no places else to go.

Today, a business owner can run his company sitting on the toilet from virtually anywhere in the world. He can have face to face meetings via internet, and be able to check his investments up to the second. As long as he can produce products cheaper than can be produced in the US, his products will sell the most.

The rich already pay most of the income taxes for the rest of us, yet nearly the bottom 50% pay not a dime.

Top 20% of Americans Will Pay 87% of Income Tax

Okay, but we are in agreement that their high tax rate was beneficial to them at the time right? This simply proves that their tax rate was not harmful to the economy. And yes, the economy we have today is much different. I’m not even suggesting that their tax rate be that high. It just has to be a lot different from now based on deductions and loopholes. 2/3 of corporations don’t pay federal income tax because of what they can take advantage of on the tax code. Meanwhile, the poor and middle class class end up paying higher effective tax rates because they don’t get those same generous deductions.

As was already pointed out, very few paid this 91% you speak of. The average for the top 1% was about 42% compared to about 37% today when you figure in all income taxes including state and city.

Taxes on the Rich Were Not Much Higher in the 1950s - Tax Foundation

So riddle me this: If 87% of taxes paid by the top 20% are not enough, what should they be paying?

Um no I didn’t. They didnt have nearly the same tax code we have now. When I talk about deductions, I am talking about now.

Okay so now you’re flipping back to this narrative of 87% when you already acknowledged that rich people have generous deductions. That doesn’t make sense.

As the article points out, with or without deductions, they are not paying that much less today than 65 years ago. With the current deductions, the top 20% are still paying 87% of all collected income taxes.

No the article makes no mention of their effective tax rate. This all also doesn’t account for the economic gains they get from the corporations they own where the effective tax rate is 11%. 2/3 don’t pay federal taxes at all.

It's the first paragraph below the graph. I don't know how you missed it:

The data shows that, between 1950 and 1959, the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid an average of 42.0 percent of their income in federal, state, and local taxes. Since then, the average effective tax rate of the top 1 percent has declined slightly overall. In 2014, the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid an average tax rate of 36.4 percent.

 

[dudmuck]

Okay, but we are in agreement that their high tax rate was beneficial to them at the time right? This simply proves that their tax rate was not harmful to the economy. And yes, the economy we have today is much different. I’m not even suggesting that their tax rate be that high. It just has to be a lot different from now based on deductions and loopholes. 2/3 of corporations don’t pay federal income tax because of what they can take advantage of on the tax code. Meanwhile, the poor and middle class class end up paying higher effective tax rates because they don’t get those same generous deductions.

As was already pointed out, very few paid this 91% you speak of. The average for the top 1% was about 42% compared to about 37% today when you figure in all income taxes including state and city.

Taxes on the Rich Were Not Much Higher in the 1950s - Tax Foundation

So riddle me this: If 87% of taxes paid by the top 20% are not enough, what should they be paying?

Um no I didn’t. They didnt have nearly the same tax code we have now. When I talk about deductions, I am talking about now.

Okay so now you’re flipping back to this narrative of 87% when you already acknowledged that rich people have generous deductions. That doesn’t make sense.

As the article points out, with or without deductions, they are not paying that much less today than 65 years ago. With the current deductions, the top 20% are still paying 87% of all collected income taxes.

percentage of taxes of a group has to go along with percentage of total income earned by that same group, i.e:

this was 4 years ago.
current numbers here
If a group pays X percent of all taxes, its because they earn X percent of all income.

Which is how the left has brainwashed you.

There is no such thing as "the wealth." That's because money is infinite in our country. You have been led to believe the theory that the reason some have too little is because others have too much. A lie.

The reason some have too little is due to irresponsible decisions and behavior, lack of education, social programs, general laziness, recreational narcotics, prison time. It has nothing to do with the wealthy.

If money were finite as the Democrats brainwashed you into believing, then if I went and asked my boss for a raise, he would tell me he'd love to give me one, but he can't because the rich have all the money. Or if I went for a car loan, the bank would tell me in spite of my fantastic credit, they don't have the money to loan because the rich have it all.

In this country, you can make as much as you want or little as you want, but it's all up to you, not the rich people.

Only relevant whether labor is infinite or finite. Since money can only be used for labor, only labor availability is relevant.

Trump hasnt done a thing for average americans. And we're growing more slowly than any time since the great depression.

who wants to have kids when they’re going to experience the end of the human species while our POTUS tweets about “oranges of the investigation?”

 

[basquebromance]

"Bernie is colluding with Trump to let Trump win the election" - Gutfeld

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

As was already pointed out, very few paid this 91% you speak of. The average for the top 1% was about 42% compared to about 37% today when you figure in all income taxes including state and city.

Taxes on the Rich Were Not Much Higher in the 1950s - Tax Foundation

So riddle me this: If 87% of taxes paid by the top 20% are not enough, what should they be paying?

Um no I didn’t. They didnt have nearly the same tax code we have now. When I talk about deductions, I am talking about now.

Okay so now you’re flipping back to this narrative of 87% when you already acknowledged that rich people have generous deductions. That doesn’t make sense.

As the article points out, with or without deductions, they are not paying that much less today than 65 years ago. With the current deductions, the top 20% are still paying 87% of all collected income taxes.

percentage of taxes of a group has to go along with percentage of total income earned by that same group, i.e:

this was 4 years ago.
current numbers here
If a group pays X percent of all taxes, its because they earn X percent of all income.

Which is how the left has brainwashed you.

There is no such thing as "the wealth." That's because money is infinite in our country. You have been led to believe the theory that the reason some have too little is because others have too much. A lie.

The reason some have too little is due to irresponsible decisions and behavior, lack of education, social programs, general laziness, recreational narcotics, prison time. It has nothing to do with the wealthy.

If money were finite as the Democrats brainwashed you into believing, then if I went and asked my boss for a raise, he would tell me he'd love to give me one, but he can't because the rich have all the money. Or if I went for a car loan, the bank would tell me in spite of my fantastic credit, they don't have the money to loan because the rich have it all.

In this country, you can make as much as you want or little as you want, but it's all up to you, not the rich people.

Only relevant whether labor is infinite or finite. Since money can only be used for labor, only labor availability is relevant.

Trump hasnt done a thing for average americans. And we're growing more slowly than any time since the great depression.

who wants to have kids when they’re going to experience the end of the human species while our POTUS tweets about “oranges of the investigation?”

Money can only be used on labor? That comment alone says a lot about your understanding of business. How do you call the first quarter growth of this year at 3.2% the slowest growth since the depression? Currently we have more jobs than workers. How much more growth do you need than that?

I must not be an average American, because thanks to Trump, I'm bringing home more in my paycheck. Thanks to Trump, I had an outstanding income tax return for 2018. Thanks to Trump, no more Commie Care fines on little people.

WTF did Hussein ever do for the little guy?

End of our species? You must be an Alexandria Kelly Bundy fan. Before you make the decision not to have kids, and then regret it later after you find you've been duped, maybe read a couple of other predictions made in the past.

You ask, I provide. November 2nd, 1922. Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt.

Global warming 'could trigger alien attack'

Report: 95 percent of global warming models are wrong

And That’s the Way It Was: In 1972, Cronkite Warned of ‘New Ice Age’

Flashback 1989: UN Predicted Global Warming Would Destroy Entire Nations By 2000

 

[basquebromance]

I got news for ya Bernie: not on our watch! criminals & rapists will not get the right to vote, not now NOT EVER!

 

[Zorro!]

 

[Zorro!]

He was only right about one matter. CEOs make too much and they do so because of their connections to Washington (my ad lib). Otherwise he is a whacky hypocrite as he is a millionaire himself. Profiting from his fame.

What does a salary of a CEO have to do with Washington? They don't pay the CEO's.

I was at income equality with my neighbor, then he won the lottery, my life is now ruined!