House GOP’s First Vote? A Gift To Wealthy Tax Cheats

Are they the norm or the exception?

68% earned their wealth
23% are a combination of earned, as well as inherited wealth
10% completely inherited their wealth


The Waltons
The Kochs
The DeVoss’
The Trumps
The Bush’s

Being in the 10%

Guess who complains about paying taxes the most?
 
68% earned their wealth
23% are a combination of earned, as well as inherited wealth
10% completely inherited their wealth


The Waltons
The Kochs
The DeVoss’
The Trumps
The Bush’s

Being in the 10%

Guess who complains about paying taxes the most?
Let me guess....Dimmer wackos like you who have no job?
Plus, its their money no matter how they received it, not yours doofus.
 
who complains about paying taxes the most?
Pew, pew,.. pew, pew, pew!
.

1Americans have several complaints about the federal tax system, most notably the impression that some corporations and wealthy people don’t pay their fair share. Almost two-thirds (64%) say they are bothered a lot by the feeling that some corporations aren’t paying what’s fair in federal taxes, and 61% say the same about some wealthy people. Just 20% say they are bothered a lot by the feeling that some poor people don’t pay their fair share. A greater share – 44% – say the complexity of the tax system bothers them a lot. Democrats are more likely to complain about corporations and the wealthy not paying their share, while Republicans register more irritation with the system’s complexity, the amount they pay, and some poor people not paying their fair share.

2While four-in-ten (40%) say they pay more than their
And the survey says..
Most people don't complain
"about paying taxes"
But..
 
The first “policy” vote of the new Republican-controlled House of Representatives continued with their theme of capitulation to the extreme right, and more pointedly the people who fundthe political careers of the far right. They voted along party lines, 221 to 210, to rescind the more than $70 billion in IRS funding included in the Inflation Reduction Act to help the agency modernize and more effectively do its job.

The Congressional Budget Office scored the bill, and determined that if that $70 billion was rescinded for real (it won’t be, the Senate won’t do it), it would decrease federal revenue by more than double that amount—$186 billion. That’s $186 billion in lost revenue FOR the nation’s coffers between now and 2032. That means it would actually cost the nation more than $114 billion in the next decade.

Yes, the party of fiscal responsibility.


Yep. Explode the deficit $100 billion on the first day, to give Elon Musk, and David Koch a tax cut.
Thanks for repeating Nancy Pelosi’s talking points.

We could all use a good laugh.
 
Democrats are more likely to complain about corporations and the wealthy not paying their share, while
Republicans register more irritation with the system’s complexity, the amount they pay, and some poor people not paying their fair share.
That says, in other words, Dems tend to dislike the Scrooge prior to being visited by Marley, whereas the Reps are more apt to admire and even emulate that earlier Scrooge version.
 
68% earned their wealth
23% are a combination of earned, as well as inherited wealth
10% completely inherited their wealth


The Waltons
The Kochs
The DeVoss’
The Trumps
The Bush’s

Being in the 10%

Guess who complains about paying taxes the most?
I just gotta say, what dickish link. Yeah, yeah, my sister and bro-in-law did the exact same then all anyone heard for decades was "Anyone can do it. All you need is a plan." Thank goodness they've finally gotten that out of their systems. Let me guess, this Steve Adcock grew up middle class, went to college with at least a bit of help from ma and pa, scored a high paying job in his field (but no luck involved mind you!), changed jobs three times, quit at 35, then actually got rich selling self-help horse manure like the insulting crap on that site. You getting a piece of that action or what?
 
Last edited:
No, it was the general public who arent rich who have been livid over hiring these agents. This was done for us, not the rich. :cuckoo:
That's what you were told to think, the IRS agents were to prevent tax fraud you know like what Donald Trump was found guilt of.
 
Um, the Senate will undoubtedly pass a version bill. Plus really? You want private interest burger flippers hired ahead of obviously needed, public interest accountants? The Congressional Budget Office scoring means absolutely nothing to you? Have you always gone so far out of your way to defend billionaire tax cheats or is this a new low?

Those 94,000 cannot even handle the returns of the middle class, they are a year behind processing returns.

I have documented my struggles with the IRS on here a few times, been fighting them since 2021. Actually got a email from my lawyer telling me the IRS still has not completed our case and also they have not even processed my 2021 taxes, though they did cash my check I sent with them.

The problem with the IRS is that they are the only agency where when they say you are guilty you have to prove your innocence.

I have been paying them 435 dollars a month to keep them from garnishing our wages while they "process" the returns I sent them to prove that I had indeed filed our taxes in the years they said I did not.

I personally am all for the hiring more people if they can actually do the job and get the IRS caught up.


Just to be clear here.

Congress has over decades passed and codified an overly complicated and convoluted tax code which incentivizes "billionaire tax cheats" to hire high powered lawyers and accountants to figure out ways to take advantage of that code to pay the least amount of taxes they can (legally and illegally). Congress's solution to this problem (that they have created BTW) is to hire MORE government employees spending MORE tax money to audit MORE people so that we can find those that have gotten it wrong either intentinoally or otherwise. And that's what you're defending? Really?

We could and I'm just spit Balling here, simplify the tax code so that we didn't have this problem. If you made the tax code simple and straightforward, there's no reason to try and find loopholes around paying the taxes and as a bonus we wouldnt need to spend nearly the amount of money on the IRS so we wouldnt need to collect quite so many taxes in the first place.
 
We could and I'm just spit Balling here, simplify the tax code so that we didn't have this problem. If you made the tax code simple and straightforward, there's no reason to try and find loopholes around paying the taxes and as a bonus we wouldnt need to spend nearly the amount of money on the IRS so we wouldnt need to collect quite so many taxes in the first place.

Yes, we could do that. In order to do that we would need to give Congress a reason to do so. As it stands we reelect our members of congress in this country at a greater than 90% clip....thus they have no reason to do so.

And that's what you're defending? Really?

What I am defending is that at this time I am personally feeling the pain due to the lack of people to do the job. If it takes more people to do the job assigned to them by Congress then they should have more people instead of making normal citizens wait more than a year to have an issue resolved.
 
Just to be clear here.

Congress has over decades passed and codified an overly complicated and convoluted tax code which incentivizes "billionaire tax cheats" to hire high powered lawyers and accountants to figure out ways to take advantage of that code to pay the least amount of taxes they can (legally and illegally). Congress's solution to this problem (that they have created BTW) is to hire MORE government employees spending MORE tax money to audit MORE people so that we can find those that have gotten it wrong either intentinoally or otherwise. And that's what you're defending? Really?

We could and I'm just spit Balling here, simplify the tax code so that we didn't have this problem. If you made the tax code simple and straightforward, there's no reason to try and find loopholes around paying the taxes and as a bonus we wouldnt need to spend nearly the amount of money on the IRS so we wouldnt need to collect quite so many taxes in the first place.
Mostly, yep.
And that's what you're defending? Really?
Nope.
Reality dictates that the system in place is what we're currently forced to deal with. Obviously "We could" do or could've done a lot of things. All water under the bridge now.
just spit Balling
Yep.
 
It amazes me to see so many uneducated proles who are on board with the globalist technocrat war against the middle class.
 
Mostly, yep.

Nope.
Reality dictates that the system in place is what we're currently forced to deal with. Obviously "We could" do or could've done a lot of things. All water under the bridge now.

Yep.
There's nothing stopping us from changing the tax code other than the millionaires and billionaire tax cheats currently residing in Congress....
 
That's what you were told to think, the IRS agents were to prevent tax fraud you know like what Donald Trump was found guilt of.
No, we were told by democrats that this specifically was to go after millionaires, but we dont have enough millionaires to support this many agents. We dont fucking believe you lying, money wasting dipshits.
 
No, we were told by democrats that this specifically was to go after millionaires, but we dont have enough millionaires to support this many agents. We dont fucking believe you lying, money wasting dipshits.
These agents are over 10 years, the attrition rate would cover most of these in that time. You GOPers really do hate proper and effective governance.
 
The first “policy” vote of the new Republican-controlled House of Representatives continued with their theme of capitulation to the extreme right, and more pointedly the people who fundthe political careers of the far right. They voted along party lines, 221 to 210, to rescind the more than $70 billion in IRS funding included in the Inflation Reduction Act to help the agency modernize and more effectively do its job.

The Congressional Budget Office scored the bill, and determined that if that $70 billion was rescinded for real (it won’t be, the Senate won’t do it), it would decrease federal revenue by more than double that amount—$186 billion. That’s $186 billion in lost revenue FOR the nation’s coffers between now and 2032. That means it would actually cost the nation more than $114 billion in the next decade.

Yes, the party of fiscal responsibility.


Yep. Explode the deficit $100 billion on the first day, to give Elon Musk, and David Koch a tax cut.


Billionaires get audited every year already, skews.

Its the Middle Class that Sleepy Joe has in his crosshairs.
 

Forum List

Back
Top