Majority of Americans favor wealth tax on very rich: Reuters/Ipsos poll

[j-mac]

While I can agree with you Ray that 'we the people' have gotten used to voting ourselves largesse from the treasury, our politicians who make the laws have to be accountable...That is why the Penny Plan makes so much sense...Only in DC is not approving an increase in spending marketed to the people as a cut. What I am saying is that if every budget stays the same except for .01 cent per dollar is cut, the programs will continue on while we balance our budget, and at some point start paying down debt...I see that as a win, win....

It still would require major spending cuts. To put it better, let me reiterate something economist Walter E Williams came up with:

"I am running for an office in Congress. My platform is, I will not bring any money back to my state. I will vote against all spending bills. Would you vote for me?"

We are going to get there sooner or later are we not? Now I love Mr. Williams...he is spot on with everything he says...But we have to change attitudes, and we don't do that by saying 'it's not possible', and giving up.

Agreed. That's why I wrote the solution in my response to Gator. A consumption tax to eliminate the deficit and reduce the debt would make everybody aware. Currently, only a small part of our country is aware of the problem, and a smaller amount even care. Hell, I'm almost 60 now. I'll likely be long off this earth when our country collapses. Why should I care? But if I had to pay for this debt every time I make a purchase, and pay even more for new social spending, you bet I'd care. You bet I would be going to the polls to make sure new spending politicians don't get into power.

So why do we need yet another new tax to do that?

Because that new tax would bring everybody into the ball game. People have no realization or understanding of deficits, debt and eventual collapse. They have no idea where the money comes from which they spend. You know, Obama money?

If we all felt the pain of spending, then the public would turn against those politicians wanting more social programs. They would support various cuts to the budget and take paying of the debt more seriously.

All due respect Ray...NO! No more taxation...I already give way too much to those corrupt assholes...They need to learn to live within thier means, or we need to get the rallies out there to inform people. Vote them out if they don't do what WE want....Period.

 

[jc456]

While I can agree with you Ray that 'we the people' have gotten used to voting ourselves largesse from the treasury, our politicians who make the laws have to be accountable...That is why the Penny Plan makes so much sense...Only in DC is not approving an increase in spending marketed to the people as a cut. What I am saying is that if every budget stays the same except for .01 cent per dollar is cut, the programs will continue on while we balance our budget, and at some point start paying down debt...I see that as a win, win....

It still would require major spending cuts. To put it better, let me reiterate something economist Walter E Williams came up with:

"I am running for an office in Congress. My platform is, I will not bring any money back to my state. I will vote against all spending bills. Would you vote for me?"

We are going to get there sooner or later are we not? Now I love Mr. Williams...he is spot on with everything he says...But we have to change attitudes, and we don't do that by saying 'it's not possible', and giving up.

Agreed. That's why I wrote the solution in my response to Gator. A consumption tax to eliminate the deficit and reduce the debt would make everybody aware. Currently, only a small part of our country is aware of the problem, and a smaller amount even care. Hell, I'm almost 60 now. I'll likely be long off this earth when our country collapses. Why should I care? But if I had to pay for this debt every time I make a purchase, and pay even more for new social spending, you bet I'd care. You bet I would be going to the polls to make sure new spending politicians don't get into power.

fk dude, 47% of the country pays no money to the debt. how fking stupid is that? We have the stupidest folks representing our districts. By the way, we took in around 3.4 trillion in revenue last year, the spending is more than that amount. I'm not claiming to be a rocket scientist, but, anything over that amount means deficit. How about fking saying to the folks in congress, fk off and balance the budget?

So look at our spending and tell me what you would cut. Social Security? Medicare? Welfare? What?

Tell me what could be cut that would satisfy both parties enough to pass it.

Well social security is based on SS tax, medicare on the medicare tax, and not the earned income tax. I thought we were discussing earned income tax. My payroll deduction. But since you asked, SS should stop collecting money period, and allow earners to invest in their own 401ks. Allow SS to liquidate on the 55 and over crowd. I'm 64 haven't collected a dime yet. so I'm not using the 3,000 a month I could collect. Move the age to collect to mandatory 70. The same with Medicare, stop collecting from the under 55'ers and let them get their own insurance, obammycare or whatever they come up with at the exchanges. Change to sales tax program and collect all the revenue and see what you make. I believe they would rake in far more than the 3.5 trillion. it would be amazing the revenue. Hugely receipts. That's my idea.

 

[jc456]

It still would require major spending cuts. To put it better, let me reiterate something economist Walter E Williams came up with:

"I am running for an office in Congress. My platform is, I will not bring any money back to my state. I will vote against all spending bills. Would you vote for me?"

We are going to get there sooner or later are we not? Now I love Mr. Williams...he is spot on with everything he says...But we have to change attitudes, and we don't do that by saying 'it's not possible', and giving up.

Agreed. That's why I wrote the solution in my response to Gator. A consumption tax to eliminate the deficit and reduce the debt would make everybody aware. Currently, only a small part of our country is aware of the problem, and a smaller amount even care. Hell, I'm almost 60 now. I'll likely be long off this earth when our country collapses. Why should I care? But if I had to pay for this debt every time I make a purchase, and pay even more for new social spending, you bet I'd care. You bet I would be going to the polls to make sure new spending politicians don't get into power.

fk dude, 47% of the country pays no money to the debt. how fking stupid is that? We have the stupidest folks representing our districts. By the way, we took in around 3.4 trillion in revenue last year, the spending is more than that amount. I'm not claiming to be a rocket scientist, but, anything over that amount means deficit. How about fking saying to the folks in congress, fk off and balance the budget?

So look at our spending and tell me what you would cut. Social Security? Medicare? Welfare? What?

Tell me what could be cut that would satisfy both parties enough to pass it.

Let's get in the way back machine all the way to the end of this past November....From The Hill:

"As Congress deals with yet another manufactured year end spending “crisis” that will result in more spending of money our country does not have, a new poll highlights a potential effective solution to the national spending problem that enjoys shockingly high levels of public support across all party lines. That solution is known as the penny plan, which simply requires the federal government to reduce the budget by one penny for every dollar it spends annually over a period of five years.

The new poll, commissioned by Club for Growth, found support for the penny plan runs wide as 76 percent of Republicans, 68 percent of Independents, and 63 percent of Democrats surveyed said they back it. Why not? The penny plan is not some radical policy. It simply requires a spending cut of 1 percent in the next year. The penny plan is not new. Neither is its strong level of support across party lines. This new poll tracks what Tea Party Patriots found three years ago. In that survey, 82 percent said they would support reducing spending “by just one penny out of every dollar spent” over the next five years to balance the budget.

Why does the penny plan have such strong support? Because Americans have come to realize that the deficit problem in Washington is caused by spending too much rather than taxing too little."

Congress must pass the penny plan

Now, I believe that those kinds of numbers mean it could pass in a bipartisan fashion....

I said something to that two years ago, cut across the board 1%. Everything. do it until the budget is balanced.

 

[jc456]

It still would require major spending cuts. To put it better, let me reiterate something economist Walter E Williams came up with:

"I am running for an office in Congress. My platform is, I will not bring any money back to my state. I will vote against all spending bills. Would you vote for me?"

We are going to get there sooner or later are we not? Now I love Mr. Williams...he is spot on with everything he says...But we have to change attitudes, and we don't do that by saying 'it's not possible', and giving up.

Agreed. That's why I wrote the solution in my response to Gator. A consumption tax to eliminate the deficit and reduce the debt would make everybody aware. Currently, only a small part of our country is aware of the problem, and a smaller amount even care. Hell, I'm almost 60 now. I'll likely be long off this earth when our country collapses. Why should I care? But if I had to pay for this debt every time I make a purchase, and pay even more for new social spending, you bet I'd care. You bet I would be going to the polls to make sure new spending politicians don't get into power.

So why do we need yet another new tax to do that?

Because that new tax would bring everybody into the ball game. People have no realization or understanding of deficits, debt and eventual collapse. They have no idea where the money comes from which they spend. You know, Obama money?

If we all felt the pain of spending, then the public would turn against those politicians wanting more social programs. They would support various cuts to the budget and take paying of the debt more seriously.

All due respect Ray...NO! No more taxation...I already give way too much to those corrupt assholes...They need to learn to live within thier means, or we need to get the rallies out there to inform people. Vote them out if they don't do what WE want....Period.

cut today, should be the montage. 'cut today', 'cut today', 'cut today', 'cut today', 'cut today', 'cut today', 'cut today', 'cut today', 'cut today', 'cut today', 'cut today', cut today', 'cut today',

 

[Aldo Raine]

Perfect answer, end thread. Exactly what I have been advocating this whole time!
. Thank you for doing it in a much more concise way than I as well.

when did your opinion become law? explain.

Never said it did, explain!!!

sure you did, in that post. you said it was immoral to add more than a trillion dollars, why didn't you say so when obammy did it? seems you are immoral because you have no consistency with respect to the law. therefore you believe your opinion rules. well, knock knock, nope!

As usual ewe fucked up. I didn't say that try again.
Ewe really are a freaking tool. And not even a sharp one at that.

are you really going to say you didn't say 'it is immoral to be adding more than a trillion dollars'? Are you really that impure? wow, again, you have zero credibility then.

Yes dumbfuck, I didn't say it. Golfing Gator may have. Do ewe need someone to read it for ewe?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It still would require major spending cuts. To put it better, let me reiterate something economist Walter E Williams came up with:

"I am running for an office in Congress. My platform is, I will not bring any money back to my state. I will vote against all spending bills. Would you vote for me?"

We are going to get there sooner or later are we not? Now I love Mr. Williams...he is spot on with everything he says...But we have to change attitudes, and we don't do that by saying 'it's not possible', and giving up.

Agreed. That's why I wrote the solution in my response to Gator. A consumption tax to eliminate the deficit and reduce the debt would make everybody aware. Currently, only a small part of our country is aware of the problem, and a smaller amount even care. Hell, I'm almost 60 now. I'll likely be long off this earth when our country collapses. Why should I care? But if I had to pay for this debt every time I make a purchase, and pay even more for new social spending, you bet I'd care. You bet I would be going to the polls to make sure new spending politicians don't get into power.

fk dude, 47% of the country pays no money to the debt. how fking stupid is that? We have the stupidest folks representing our districts. By the way, we took in around 3.4 trillion in revenue last year, the spending is more than that amount. I'm not claiming to be a rocket scientist, but, anything over that amount means deficit. How about fking saying to the folks in congress, fk off and balance the budget?

So look at our spending and tell me what you would cut. Social Security? Medicare? Welfare? What?

Tell me what could be cut that would satisfy both parties enough to pass it.

Well social security is based on SS tax, medicare on the medicare tax, and not the earned income tax. I thought we were discussing earned income tax. My payroll deduction. But since you asked, SS should stop collecting money period, and allow earners to invest in their own 401ks. Allow SS to liquidate on the 55 and over crowd. I'm 64 haven't collected a dime yet. so I'm not using the 3,000 a month I could collect. Move the age to collect to mandatory 70. The same with Medicare, stop collecting from the under 55'ers and let them get their own insurance, obammycare or whatever they come up with at the exchanges. Change to sales tax program and collect all the revenue and see what you make. I believe they would rake in far more than the 3.5 trillion. it would be amazing the revenue. Hugely receipts. That's my idea.

Well that 70 retirement age only works for some people. There are people who can barely make it to 65 or 67 now. You can't tell the guy carrying a 40 lbs bail of shingles over his shoulder, climbing up two or three stories to the roofers that you want him to work until 70. You can't tell a bricklayer or laborer to work until the age of 70. You can't tell the garbage man you want him picking up heavy bags of garbage or garbage cans to do that until the age of 70. Or even a mail carrier. Hell, I'll even use my own line of work. Do you want to be in the car in front of me on the highway went it comes to a complete stop, and my 68 year old ass is trying to stop a 75,000 lbs tractor-trailer?

So that's really no solution because it can't be applied evenly. All those people would be filing for disability.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It still would require major spending cuts. To put it better, let me reiterate something economist Walter E Williams came up with:

"I am running for an office in Congress. My platform is, I will not bring any money back to my state. I will vote against all spending bills. Would you vote for me?"

We are going to get there sooner or later are we not? Now I love Mr. Williams...he is spot on with everything he says...But we have to change attitudes, and we don't do that by saying 'it's not possible', and giving up.

Agreed. That's why I wrote the solution in my response to Gator. A consumption tax to eliminate the deficit and reduce the debt would make everybody aware. Currently, only a small part of our country is aware of the problem, and a smaller amount even care. Hell, I'm almost 60 now. I'll likely be long off this earth when our country collapses. Why should I care? But if I had to pay for this debt every time I make a purchase, and pay even more for new social spending, you bet I'd care. You bet I would be going to the polls to make sure new spending politicians don't get into power.

So why do we need yet another new tax to do that?

Because that new tax would bring everybody into the ball game. People have no realization or understanding of deficits, debt and eventual collapse. They have no idea where the money comes from which they spend. You know, Obama money?

If we all felt the pain of spending, then the public would turn against those politicians wanting more social programs. They would support various cuts to the budget and take paying of the debt more seriously.

All due respect Ray...NO! No more taxation...I already give way too much to those corrupt assholes...They need to learn to live within thier means, or we need to get the rallies out there to inform people. Vote them out if they don't do what WE want....Period.

And that's what we've been doing for decades. How's it working out???

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It still would require major spending cuts. To put it better, let me reiterate something economist Walter E Williams came up with:

"I am running for an office in Congress. My platform is, I will not bring any money back to my state. I will vote against all spending bills. Would you vote for me?"

We are going to get there sooner or later are we not? Now I love Mr. Williams...he is spot on with everything he says...But we have to change attitudes, and we don't do that by saying 'it's not possible', and giving up.

Agreed. That's why I wrote the solution in my response to Gator. A consumption tax to eliminate the deficit and reduce the debt would make everybody aware. Currently, only a small part of our country is aware of the problem, and a smaller amount even care. Hell, I'm almost 60 now. I'll likely be long off this earth when our country collapses. Why should I care? But if I had to pay for this debt every time I make a purchase, and pay even more for new social spending, you bet I'd care. You bet I would be going to the polls to make sure new spending politicians don't get into power.

fk dude, 47% of the country pays no money to the debt. how fking stupid is that? We have the stupidest folks representing our districts. By the way, we took in around 3.4 trillion in revenue last year, the spending is more than that amount. I'm not claiming to be a rocket scientist, but, anything over that amount means deficit. How about fking saying to the folks in congress, fk off and balance the budget?

So look at our spending and tell me what you would cut. Social Security? Medicare? Welfare? What?

Tell me what could be cut that would satisfy both parties enough to pass it.

Let's get in the way back machine all the way to the end of this past November....From The Hill:

"As Congress deals with yet another manufactured year end spending “crisis” that will result in more spending of money our country does not have, a new poll highlights a potential effective solution to the national spending problem that enjoys shockingly high levels of public support across all party lines. That solution is known as the penny plan, which simply requires the federal government to reduce the budget by one penny for every dollar it spends annually over a period of five years.

The new poll, commissioned by Club for Growth, found support for the penny plan runs wide as 76 percent of Republicans, 68 percent of Independents, and 63 percent of Democrats surveyed said they back it. Why not? The penny plan is not some radical policy. It simply requires a spending cut of 1 percent in the next year. The penny plan is not new. Neither is its strong level of support across party lines. This new poll tracks what Tea Party Patriots found three years ago. In that survey, 82 percent said they would support reducing spending “by just one penny out of every dollar spent” over the next five years to balance the budget.

Why does the penny plan have such strong support? Because Americans have come to realize that the deficit problem in Washington is caused by spending too much rather than taxing too little."

Congress must pass the penny plan

Now, I believe that those kinds of numbers mean it could pass in a bipartisan fashion....

That sounds good on paper, but the people surveyed don't understand what that might mean to them or their family. It still means drastic cuts.

 

[j-mac]

We are going to get there sooner or later are we not? Now I love Mr. Williams...he is spot on with everything he says...But we have to change attitudes, and we don't do that by saying 'it's not possible', and giving up.

Agreed. That's why I wrote the solution in my response to Gator. A consumption tax to eliminate the deficit and reduce the debt would make everybody aware. Currently, only a small part of our country is aware of the problem, and a smaller amount even care. Hell, I'm almost 60 now. I'll likely be long off this earth when our country collapses. Why should I care? But if I had to pay for this debt every time I make a purchase, and pay even more for new social spending, you bet I'd care. You bet I would be going to the polls to make sure new spending politicians don't get into power.

So why do we need yet another new tax to do that?

Because that new tax would bring everybody into the ball game. People have no realization or understanding of deficits, debt and eventual collapse. They have no idea where the money comes from which they spend. You know, Obama money?

If we all felt the pain of spending, then the public would turn against those politicians wanting more social programs. They would support various cuts to the budget and take paying of the debt more seriously.

All due respect Ray...NO! No more taxation...I already give way too much to those corrupt assholes...They need to learn to live within thier means, or we need to get the rallies out there to inform people. Vote them out if they don't do what WE want....Period.

And that's what we've been doing for decades. How's it working out???

Like I said, they already take far too much of my money....NO NEW TAXES....

 

[j-mac]

We are going to get there sooner or later are we not? Now I love Mr. Williams...he is spot on with everything he says...But we have to change attitudes, and we don't do that by saying 'it's not possible', and giving up.

Agreed. That's why I wrote the solution in my response to Gator. A consumption tax to eliminate the deficit and reduce the debt would make everybody aware. Currently, only a small part of our country is aware of the problem, and a smaller amount even care. Hell, I'm almost 60 now. I'll likely be long off this earth when our country collapses. Why should I care? But if I had to pay for this debt every time I make a purchase, and pay even more for new social spending, you bet I'd care. You bet I would be going to the polls to make sure new spending politicians don't get into power.

fk dude, 47% of the country pays no money to the debt. how fking stupid is that? We have the stupidest folks representing our districts. By the way, we took in around 3.4 trillion in revenue last year, the spending is more than that amount. I'm not claiming to be a rocket scientist, but, anything over that amount means deficit. How about fking saying to the folks in congress, fk off and balance the budget?

So look at our spending and tell me what you would cut. Social Security? Medicare? Welfare? What?

Tell me what could be cut that would satisfy both parties enough to pass it.

Let's get in the way back machine all the way to the end of this past November....From The Hill:

"As Congress deals with yet another manufactured year end spending “crisis” that will result in more spending of money our country does not have, a new poll highlights a potential effective solution to the national spending problem that enjoys shockingly high levels of public support across all party lines. That solution is known as the penny plan, which simply requires the federal government to reduce the budget by one penny for every dollar it spends annually over a period of five years.

The new poll, commissioned by Club for Growth, found support for the penny plan runs wide as 76 percent of Republicans, 68 percent of Independents, and 63 percent of Democrats surveyed said they back it. Why not? The penny plan is not some radical policy. It simply requires a spending cut of 1 percent in the next year. The penny plan is not new. Neither is its strong level of support across party lines. This new poll tracks what Tea Party Patriots found three years ago. In that survey, 82 percent said they would support reducing spending “by just one penny out of every dollar spent” over the next five years to balance the budget.

Why does the penny plan have such strong support? Because Americans have come to realize that the deficit problem in Washington is caused by spending too much rather than taxing too little."

Congress must pass the penny plan

Now, I believe that those kinds of numbers mean it could pass in a bipartisan fashion....

That sounds good on paper, but the people surveyed don't understand what that might mean to them or their family. It still means drastic cuts.

What? Tell me what one penny out of every dollar would mean to the recipient crowd?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Agreed. That's why I wrote the solution in my response to Gator. A consumption tax to eliminate the deficit and reduce the debt would make everybody aware. Currently, only a small part of our country is aware of the problem, and a smaller amount even care. Hell, I'm almost 60 now. I'll likely be long off this earth when our country collapses. Why should I care? But if I had to pay for this debt every time I make a purchase, and pay even more for new social spending, you bet I'd care. You bet I would be going to the polls to make sure new spending politicians don't get into power.

fk dude, 47% of the country pays no money to the debt. how fking stupid is that? We have the stupidest folks representing our districts. By the way, we took in around 3.4 trillion in revenue last year, the spending is more than that amount. I'm not claiming to be a rocket scientist, but, anything over that amount means deficit. How about fking saying to the folks in congress, fk off and balance the budget?

So look at our spending and tell me what you would cut. Social Security? Medicare? Welfare? What?

Tell me what could be cut that would satisfy both parties enough to pass it.

Let's get in the way back machine all the way to the end of this past November....From The Hill:

"As Congress deals with yet another manufactured year end spending “crisis” that will result in more spending of money our country does not have, a new poll highlights a potential effective solution to the national spending problem that enjoys shockingly high levels of public support across all party lines. That solution is known as the penny plan, which simply requires the federal government to reduce the budget by one penny for every dollar it spends annually over a period of five years.

The new poll, commissioned by Club for Growth, found support for the penny plan runs wide as 76 percent of Republicans, 68 percent of Independents, and 63 percent of Democrats surveyed said they back it. Why not? The penny plan is not some radical policy. It simply requires a spending cut of 1 percent in the next year. The penny plan is not new. Neither is its strong level of support across party lines. This new poll tracks what Tea Party Patriots found three years ago. In that survey, 82 percent said they would support reducing spending “by just one penny out of every dollar spent” over the next five years to balance the budget.

Why does the penny plan have such strong support? Because Americans have come to realize that the deficit problem in Washington is caused by spending too much rather than taxing too little."

Congress must pass the penny plan

Now, I believe that those kinds of numbers mean it could pass in a bipartisan fashion....

That sounds good on paper, but the people surveyed don't understand what that might mean to them or their family. It still means drastic cuts.

What? Tell me what one penny out of every dollar would mean to the recipient crowd?

Take Medicare for instance. We spent 580 billion in 2018. Now I don't have the calculator abilities to figure out what that would mean, but whatever that sum is, that's how much we would have to cut Medicare by. The problem is, Medicare is under funded as it is. Many times they only pay 2/3 of the expenses for their patients. Doctors and facilities have to increase their prices which eventually fall on private pay and private insurance companies to makeup the difference. It's one of the reasons medical insurance is unaffordable to many people in the US.

Then you do the same to Medicaid. Some doctors are refusing new Medicare and Medicaid patients as it is. With even less money to spend, you will see more medical care outlets rejecting even more new patients.

 

[Markle]

They're tax deductions and tax laws. I'd love a tax system that was fair and did not require me to have hired a CPA to do and file my taxes for the past 40 years. We don't have that so I deal with REALITY.

Yet you have still not said a bad word about it...seems you sort of like it, it gives you a chance to brag about using a CPA.

Apparently you have never earned enough that you needed to hire an accountant or CPA to file your taxes. But I'M the one who is too stupid to recognize that I need help filing my Federal Tax Return each year so that I don't pay one thin dime more than what I owe. Wouldn't you do the same?

The need for tax help has more to do with how you make it than how much you make.

Maybe I am stupid, I didn't have MD, DDS, CPA, or Esq. after my name so I worked, worked hard, really hard, 60 - 70 hours a week. I loved what I was doing so it never seemed like a job. How about you?

I am just a guy that spent 20 years serving his country in the Marine Corps, so no I was not getting rich during that time. Some weeks we worked 80 hours some we worked 30. I loved the Marines and my time there and would not have changed it for the world. After I got out I tried the 60-75 hour a week thing and decided I liked my family and golf more than I liked working so I went and got me a MS after my name and got me a job were I work about 40 hours a week give or take and pays me enough for the government to say I am in the top 10%. My wife makes close to what I do so between us we do pretty good, well enough that we can do whatever we want. I passed on jobs that offered me up to 20% more money but would have required me to work more hours, there are far too many other things more important than more money and work.

Thank you for your service...if you served. I did mine in the mid-60s in the Army.

I'm sorry but I do not believe you. Someone with a Master of Science would not use this language "so I went and got me a MS after my name and got me a job".

I never said that I LIKE the current complicated tax system. It is what it is and I deal in reality. Of course, I wish I didn't need a CPA, although we are now good friends. I'm not alone, there are tens of millions of people in the same boat. We're not the "elite" or multi-millionaires, we're upper-middle-class people have just moderately complicated incomes.

I'm sorry too that you did not like your various jobs. I have LOVED my work. I do not like golf, but if I did, I would still prefer time at work than being on the golf course more than a couple times a month.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

They're tax deductions and tax laws. I'd love a tax system that was fair and did not require me to have hired a CPA to do and file my taxes for the past 40 years. We don't have that so I deal with REALITY.

Yet you have still not said a bad word about it...seems you sort of like it, it gives you a chance to brag about using a CPA.

Apparently you have never earned enough that you needed to hire an accountant or CPA to file your taxes. But I'M the one who is too stupid to recognize that I need help filing my Federal Tax Return each year so that I don't pay one thin dime more than what I owe. Wouldn't you do the same?

The need for tax help has more to do with how you make it than how much you make.

Maybe I am stupid, I didn't have MD, DDS, CPA, or Esq. after my name so I worked, worked hard, really hard, 60 - 70 hours a week. I loved what I was doing so it never seemed like a job. How about you?

I am just a guy that spent 20 years serving his country in the Marine Corps, so no I was not getting rich during that time. Some weeks we worked 80 hours some we worked 30. I loved the Marines and my time there and would not have changed it for the world. After I got out I tried the 60-75 hour a week thing and decided I liked my family and golf more than I liked working so I went and got me a MS after my name and got me a job were I work about 40 hours a week give or take and pays me enough for the government to say I am in the top 10%. My wife makes close to what I do so between us we do pretty good, well enough that we can do whatever we want. I passed on jobs that offered me up to 20% more money but would have required me to work more hours, there are far too many other things more important than more money and work.

Thank you for your service...if you served. I did mine in the mid-60s in the Army.

I'm sorry but I do not believe you. Someone with a Master of Science would not use this language "so I went and got me a MS after my name and got me a job".

I never said that I LIKE the current complicated tax system. It is what it is and I deal in reality. Of course, I wish I didn't need a CPA, although we are now good friends. I'm not alone, there are tens of millions of people in the same boat. We're not the "elite" or multi-millionaires, we're upper-middle-class people have just moderately complicated incomes.

I'm sorry too that you did not like your various jobs. I have LOVED my work. I do not like golf, but if I did, I would still prefer time at work than being on the golf course more than a couple times a month.

Heck, if you have a tax preparer, they are likely a CPA.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Thank you for your service...if you served. I did mine in the mid-60s in the Army.

I'm sorry but I do not believe you. Someone with a Master of Science would not use this language "so I went and got me a MS after my name and got me a job".

I was mimicking your post dumbass. Do try and keep up.

I'm sorry too that you did not like your various jobs. I have LOVED my work. I do not like golf, but if I did, I would still prefer time at work than being on the golf course more than a couple times a month.

I have liked all of my jobs, I just happen to like my family and other things more. I hope you do not have a family, nothing worse for a kid or a spouse than being second to someone's job.

I do sort of pity you though, one day you will be too old to work and you will find you have nothing else in your life.

 

[Markle]

Only shows how much wealth they monopolize

If they don’t want to pay so much, they could share more of their wealth with their employees

Why?

When your tab is $100.00 a restaurant, do you add $50.00 for the tip?

The next time the plumber comes out to your house, will you add 20% to the invoice as you always do?

No idea what that has to do with a progressive tax rate

Really? Actually I'm not surprised.

You said employers should share their wealth with their employees, right? Is your server not working for you when they take care of you at a restaurant? My plumber works for himself, so I'm employing him whenever I had a plumbing problem. According to you, I should pay him more as my employee.

Why should an employer share more of their wealth with their employees? Are those same employees going to share the losses in a bad or down market? Would you take a job that typically paid $25.00 per hour if they said they would "share their wealth" and pay you $30.00 IF and only IF you agreed to accept $20.00 or $15.00 an hour if and when the business slowed down or lost money?

You an others think employees should be rewarded for NOT taking the risk the owner takes. You demand the reward without the risk. How is that fair to the person taking the risk?

 

[j-mac]

fk dude, 47% of the country pays no money to the debt. how fking stupid is that? We have the stupidest folks representing our districts. By the way, we took in around 3.4 trillion in revenue last year, the spending is more than that amount. I'm not claiming to be a rocket scientist, but, anything over that amount means deficit. How about fking saying to the folks in congress, fk off and balance the budget?

So look at our spending and tell me what you would cut. Social Security? Medicare? Welfare? What?

Tell me what could be cut that would satisfy both parties enough to pass it.

Let's get in the way back machine all the way to the end of this past November....From The Hill:

"As Congress deals with yet another manufactured year end spending “crisis” that will result in more spending of money our country does not have, a new poll highlights a potential effective solution to the national spending problem that enjoys shockingly high levels of public support across all party lines. That solution is known as the penny plan, which simply requires the federal government to reduce the budget by one penny for every dollar it spends annually over a period of five years.

The new poll, commissioned by Club for Growth, found support for the penny plan runs wide as 76 percent of Republicans, 68 percent of Independents, and 63 percent of Democrats surveyed said they back it. Why not? The penny plan is not some radical policy. It simply requires a spending cut of 1 percent in the next year. The penny plan is not new. Neither is its strong level of support across party lines. This new poll tracks what Tea Party Patriots found three years ago. In that survey, 82 percent said they would support reducing spending “by just one penny out of every dollar spent” over the next five years to balance the budget.

Why does the penny plan have such strong support? Because Americans have come to realize that the deficit problem in Washington is caused by spending too much rather than taxing too little."

Congress must pass the penny plan

Now, I believe that those kinds of numbers mean it could pass in a bipartisan fashion....

That sounds good on paper, but the people surveyed don't understand what that might mean to them or their family. It still means drastic cuts.

What? Tell me what one penny out of every dollar would mean to the recipient crowd?

Take Medicare for instance. We spent 580 billion in 2018. Now I don't have the calculator abilities to figure out what that would mean, but whatever that sum is, that's how much we would have to cut Medicare by. The problem is, Medicare is under funded as it is. Many times they only pay 2/3 of the expenses for their patients. Doctors and facilities have to increase their prices which eventually fall on private pay and private insurance companies to makeup the difference. It's one of the reasons medical insurance is unaffordable to many people in the US.

Then you do the same to Medicaid. Some doctors are refusing new Medicare and Medicaid patients as it is. With even less money to spend, you will see more medical care outlets rejecting even more new patients.

Ray, I already said it.....01cent per dollar....Look, I hate that we are in this situation, but we are....We no longer have the ability to pick and choose....We need to get the debt under control, and not one penny more in taxes....

Now, if you want Congress to do away with some of the absolute pork crap that Congresspeople use to buy their votes, then hey have at it...I just think at this point there needs to be that 1 penny per dollar cut and a majority of people polled agree with me.

 

[dblack]

With that said, I am a huge fan of the "penny plan" to address our debt...Government is bloated, and needs to at this point learn to tighten their belts....I have to do it, you have to do it....Why shouldn't they...

Why? Because then they'd lose their job.

It's not so much government is bloated, it's that the citizens are too comfortable to make any changes. If politicians start cutting this and cutting that to reduce the deficit, and eventually the debt, it means we all will have to do with less things from the government. People would get pissed, hold their representatives responsible, and then get voted out next election.

While I can agree with you Ray that 'we the people' have gotten used to voting ourselves largesse from the treasury, our politicians who make the laws have to be accountable...That is why the Penny Plan makes so much sense...Only in DC is not approving an increase in spending marketed to the people as a cut. What I am saying is that if every budget stays the same except for .01 cent per dollar is cut, the programs will continue on while we balance our budget, and at some point start paying down debt...I see that as a win, win....

It still would require major spending cuts. To put it better, let me reiterate something economist Walter E Williams came up with:

"I am running for an office in Congress. My platform is, I will not bring any money back to my state. I will vote against all spending bills. Would you vote for me?"

We are going to get there sooner or later are we not? Now I love Mr. Williams...he is spot on with everything he says...But we have to change attitudes, and we don't do that by saying 'it's not possible', and giving up.

Agreed. That's why I wrote the solution in my response to Gator. A consumption tax to eliminate the deficit and reduce the debt would make everybody aware. Currently, only a small part of our country is aware of the problem, and a smaller amount even care. Hell, I'm almost 60 now. I'll likely be long off this earth when our country collapses. Why should I care? But if I had to pay for this debt every time I make a purchase, and pay even more for new social spending, you bet I'd care. You bet I would be going to the polls to make sure new spending politicians don't get into power.

Congress would play the same games with a federal sales tax that they do with the income tax. Special interest lobbyists would be lined up around the block, angling for exemptions, credits and "incentives".

 

[Markle]

They're tax deductions and tax laws. I'd love a tax system that was fair and did not require me to have hired a CPA to do and file my taxes for the past 40 years. We don't have that so I deal with REALITY.

Yet you have still not said a bad word about it...seems you sort of like it, it gives you a chance to brag about using a CPA.

Apparently you have never earned enough that you needed to hire an accountant or CPA to file your taxes. But I'M the one who is too stupid to recognize that I need help filing my Federal Tax Return each year so that I don't pay one thin dime more than what I owe. Wouldn't you do the same?

The need for tax help has more to do with how you make it than how much you make.

Maybe I am stupid, I didn't have MD, DDS, CPA, or Esq. after my name so I worked, worked hard, really hard, 60 - 70 hours a week. I loved what I was doing so it never seemed like a job. How about you?

I am just a guy that spent 20 years serving his country in the Marine Corps, so no I was not getting rich during that time. Some weeks we worked 80 hours some we worked 30. I loved the Marines and my time there and would not have changed it for the world. After I got out I tried the 60-75 hour a week thing and decided I liked my family and golf more than I liked working so I went and got me a MS after my name and got me a job were I work about 40 hours a week give or take and pays me enough for the government to say I am in the top 10%. My wife makes close to what I do so between us we do pretty good, well enough that we can do whatever we want. I passed on jobs that offered me up to 20% more money but would have required me to work more hours, there are far too many other things more important than more money and work.

Thank you for your service...if you served. I did mine in the mid-60s in the Army.

I'm sorry but I do not believe you. Someone with a Master of Science would not use this language "so I went and got me a MS after my name and got me a job".

I never said that I LIKE the current complicated tax system. It is what it is and I deal in reality. Of course, I wish I didn't need a CPA, although we are now good friends. I'm not alone, there are tens of millions of people in the same boat. We're not the "elite" or multi-millionaires, we're upper-middle-class people have just moderately complicated incomes.

I'm sorry too that you did not like your various jobs. I have LOVED my work. I do not like golf, but if I did, I would still prefer time at work than being on the golf course more than a couple times a month.

Heck, if you have a tax preparer, they are likely a CPA.

Not necessarily. In the past, storefront offices like H & R Block would hire people and then hold classes late in the year and they would work through the tax season. My income, the last 30 or so years came from about 5 income sources. That is not unusual for seasoned Realtors.

 

[rightwinger]

Only shows how much wealth they monopolize

If they don’t want to pay so much, they could share more of their wealth with their employees

Why?

When your tab is $100.00 a restaurant, do you add $50.00 for the tip?

The next time the plumber comes out to your house, will you add 20% to the invoice as you always do?

No idea what that has to do with a progressive tax rate

Really? Actually I'm not surprised.

You said employers should share their wealth with their employees, right? Is your server not working for you when they take care of you at a restaurant? My plumber works for himself, so I'm employing him whenever I had a plumbing problem. According to you, I should pay him more as my employee.

Why should an employer share more of their wealth with their employees? Are those same employees going to share the losses in a bad or down market? Would you take a job that typically paid $25.00 per hour if they said they would "share their wealth" and pay you $30.00 IF and only IF you agreed to accept $20.00 or $15.00 an hour if and when the business slowed down or lost money?

You an others think employees should be rewarded for NOT taking the risk the owner takes. You demand the reward without the risk. How is that fair to the person taking the risk?

Well...if that employer is unwilling to share his wealth with employees, the taxpayer has to

If you can’t afford to support your family on what you are paid....the taxpayer has to

So why exactly are we cutting taxes on employers at the same time we have to pay for those who create his wealth?

 

[LeftofLeft]

Only shows how much wealth they monopolize

If they don’t want to pay so much, they could share more of their wealth with their employees

Why?

When your tab is $100.00 a restaurant, do you add $50.00 for the tip?

The next time the plumber comes out to your house, will you add 20% to the invoice as you always do?

No idea what that has to do with a progressive tax rate

Because you ignore that the high income EARNERS foot most of the tax bill. The tax “rate” as a basis for debate is a gimmick of the class warriors. Ultimately, all of the plans of the Left result in Middle Class workers getting less of their paycheck.