Republicans: why do you ignore the wealth inequality issue?

[thereisnospoon]

And why is it someone elses responsibility to fix that for you? Why are YOU not responsible for having less wealth than someone else. I was watching a talk show the other day basically about a teenager kinda like you. A person that so far in her life, beating people up, yelling at them, and essentially being an immature brat has so far worked for them in getting what they want. Other people just cave. Both of you will learn when you eventually mature to adulthood that will no longer work in getting what you want. In your case changing income inequality is going to work on YOUR part mainly. If you don't like that others make more than you, then it's on YOU to correct that. Not on those that have more to simply give it to you.

I'm not saying it's anyone's job to fix it, I'm saying it's a problem that needs to get fixed.

I'm 50 years old. I own a home, I've served in the military and I've been working since I was 16. I don't expect anything to be "given" to me.

But the concentration of wealth in a few hands is not a healthy society. It's France in 1787, Russia in 1917 or Cuba in 1959 or Iran in 1979. It's five minutes before the ax comes down on the oblivious.

When I'm paying 25% taxes on my measly five figure salary and Mittens is paying 13%, there is something seriously wrong with that.

Let's just assume that your five figure earnings ar $60K for simplicity. 25% of 60K is $15K of which you will most likely get some of it returned. The news reports that Romney will have made $45M over 2010 and 2011, so let's split the difference in half to $23M. 13% of $23M is $2,990,000. Mitt Romney paid your $15K 199.33 times over. He paid 200 times what you paid in taxes. So tell us, what do you consider Romney's "fair share" to be?

If you think you'll get a straight answer from that question, please do not hold your breath.

 

[kwc57]

I'm not saying it's anyone's job to fix it, I'm saying it's a problem that needs to get fixed.

I'm 50 years old. I own a home, I've served in the military and I've been working since I was 16. I don't expect anything to be "given" to me.

But the concentration of wealth in a few hands is not a healthy society. It's France in 1787, Russia in 1917 or Cuba in 1959 or Iran in 1979. It's five minutes before the ax comes down on the oblivious.

When I'm paying 25% taxes on my measly five figure salary and Mittens is paying 13%, there is something seriously wrong with that.

Let's just assume that your five figure earnings ar $60K for simplicity. 25% of 60K is $15K of which you will most likely get some of it returned. The news reports that Romney will have made $45M over 2010 and 2011, so let's split the difference in half to $23M. 13% of $23M is $2,990,000. Mitt Romney paid your $15K 199.33 times over. He paid 200 times what you paid in taxes. So tell us, what do you consider Romney's "fair share" to be?

If you think you'll get a straight answer from that question, please do not hold your breath.

Here is the problem. Conservatives realize that Obama's class warfare rhetoric of a "fair share" is pure undefinable bullshit. Liberals don't care what the definition is, they just like repeating it because Dear Leader says it. I've seen the question asked a million times to define a "fair share". I've yet to see anyone do so. That's why you have to break it down into real dollars. When one of those evil bastard millionaires is paying 200 times in taxes to what you pay, it's kind of hard to define their "fair share" as 400 or 500 times your tax bill.......or at least it should be.

 

[Valerie]

Let's just assume that your five figure earnings ar $60K for simplicity. 25% of 60K is $15K of which you will most likely get some of it returned. The news reports that Romney will have made $45M over 2010 and 2011, so let's split the difference in half to $23M. 13% of $23M is $2,990,000. Mitt Romney paid your $15K 199.33 times over. He paid 200 times what you paid in taxes. So tell us, what do you consider Romney's "fair share" to be?

If you think you'll get a straight answer from that question, please do not hold your breath.

Here is the problem. Conservatives realize that Obama's class warfare rhetoric of a "fair share" is pure undefinable bullshit. Liberals don't care what the definition is, they just like repeating it because Dear Leader says it. I've seen the question asked a million times to define a "fair share". I've yet to see anyone do so. That's why you have to break it down into real dollars. When one of those evil bastard millionaires is paying 200 times in taxes to what you pay, it's kind of hard to define their "fair share" as 400 or 500 times your tax bill.......or at least it should be.

The other thing people seem to be oblivious to is the differences in types of income.


Income you earn from wages is reported on form W-2 and all earned W-2 income is equally subject to the same tax rate table...

W-2

The Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement, is used to report wages paid to employees and the taxes withheld from them. Employers must complete a Form W-2 for each employee to whom they pay a salary, wage, or other compensation as part of the employment relationship. An employer must mail out the Form W-2 to employees on or before January 31. This deadline gives these taxpayers about 2½ months to prepare their returns before the April 15 income tax due date. The form is also used to report FICA taxes to the Social Security Administration. The Form W-2, along with Form W-3, generally must be filed by the employer with the Social Security Administration by the end of February. Relevant amounts on Form W-2 are reported by the Social Security Administration to the Internal Revenue Service.

IRS tax forms - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All other forms of income are reported on form 1099 and subject to different taxation on different Schedules. THIS is the type of income on Mitt Romney's most recent tax returns...Various types of 1099 income, not income earned from W-2 wages.

1099 series



Form 1099 series is used to report various types of income other than wages, salaries, and tips (for which Form W-2 is used instead). Examples of reportable transactions are amounts paid to independent contractor for services (in IRS terminology, such payments are nonemployee compensation). The ubiquity of the form has also led to use of the phrase "1099" to refer to the independent contractors themselves. In 2011 the requirement has been extended by the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 to payments made by persons who receive income from rental property.

Each payer must complete a Form 1099 for each covered transaction. Three copies are made: one for the payer, one for the payee, and one for the IRS.[7] Payers who file 250 or more Form 1099 reports must file all of them electronically with the IRS.[8] If the fewer than 250 requirement is met, and paper copies are filed, the IRS also requires the payer to submit a copy of Form 1096, which is a summary of information forms being sent to the IRS. The returns must be filed with the IRS by the end of February immediately following the year for which the income items or other proceeds are paid. Copies of the returns must be sent to payees, however, by the end of January. The law provides various dollar amounts under which no Form 1099 reporting requirement is imposed. For some Form 1099s, for example, no filing is required for payees who receive less than $600 from the payer during the applicable year.

Variants for Form 1099

As of 2011, several versions of Form 1099 are used, depending on the nature of the income transaction:

1099-A: acquisition or Abandonment of Secured Property
1099-B: Proceeds from Broker and Barter Exchange Transactions
1099-C: Cancellation of Debt
1099-CAP: Changes in Corporate Control and Capital Structure
1099-DIV: Dividends and Distributions
1099-G: Government Payments
1099-H: Health Insurance Advance Payments
1099-INT: Interest Income
1099-K: Merchant Card and Third Party Network Payments
1099-LTC: Long Term Care Benefits
1099-MISC: Miscellaneous Income
1099-OID: Original Issue Discount
1099-PATR: Taxable Distributions Received From Cooperatives
1099-Q: Payment from Qualified Education Programs
1099-R: Distributions from Pensions, Annuities, Retirement Plans, IRAs, or Insurance Contracts
1099-S: Proceeds from Real Estate Transactions
1099-SA: Distributions From an HSA, Archer MSA, or Medicare Advantage MSA
1042-S: Foreign Person's U.S. Source Income
SSA-1099: Social Security Benefit Statement
SSA-1042S: Social Security Benefit Statement to Nonresident Aliens
RRB-1099: Payments by the Railroad Retirement Board
RRB-1099R: Pension and Annuity Income by the Railroad Retirement Board
RRB-1042S: Payments by the Railroad Retirement Board to Nonresident Aliens
W-2G: Certain Gambling Winnings

Form 1040 has 11 attachments, called "schedules", which may need to be filed depending on the taxpayer. For 2009 and 2010 there is an additional form, Schedule M, due to the "Making Work Pay" provision of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 ("the stimulus"):

Schedule A itemizes allowable deductions against income; instead of filling out Schedule A, taxpayers may choose to take a standard deduction of between $5,700 and $15,800 (for tax year 2010), depending on age, filing status, and whether the taxpayer and/or spouse is blind.
Schedule B enumerates interest and/or dividend income, and is required if either interest or dividends received during the tax year exceed $1,500 from all sources or if the filer had certain foreign accounts.
Schedule C lists income and expenses related to self-employment, and is used by sole proprietors.
Schedule D is used to compute capital gains and losses incurred during the tax year.
Schedule E is used to report income and expenses arising from the rental of real property, royalties, or from pass-through entities (like trusts, estates, partnerships, or S corporations).
Schedule EIC is used to document a taxpayer's eligibility for the Earned Income Credit.
Schedule F is used to report income and expenses related to farming.
Schedule H is used to report taxes owed due to the employment of household help.
Schedule J is used when averaging farm income over a period of three years.
Schedule L is used to figure an increased standard deduction in certain cases.
Schedule M (2009 and 2010) is used to claim the Making Work Pay tax credit (6.2% earned income credit, up to $400).[5]
Schedule R is used to calculate the Credit for the Elderly or the Disabled.
Schedule SE is used to calculate the self-employment tax owed on income from self-employment (such as on a Schedule C or Schedule F, or in a partnership).

In most situations, other Internal Revenue Service or Social Security Administration forms such as Form W-2 must be attached to the Form 1040, in addition to the Form 1040 schedules. There are over 100 other, specialized forms that may need to be completed along with Schedules and the Form 1040.

Once you finish all the appropriate Schedules and punch each number onto the 1040 form, then you calculate your taxable income amount...All ultimately subject to the same tax table...

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1040tt.pdf

 

[M14 Shooter]

Conservatives see income inequality as a positive sign that capitalism is working, and winning over socialism, unionism, etc.

Best thing about you, son, is that you aren't at all embarassed of your thoughtless partisan bigotry, and are more than willing to display it for all to see.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives see income inequality as a positive sign that capitalism is working, and winning over socialism, unionism, etc.

Best thing about you, son, is that you aren't at all embarassed of your thoughtless partisan bigotry, and are more than willing to display it for all to see.

How many conservative policies/beliefs can you name that serve or would serve to diminish income inequality?

List them.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Conservatives see income inequality as a positive sign that capitalism is working, and winning over socialism, unionism, etc.

Best thing about you, son, is that you aren't at all embarassed of your thoughtless partisan bigotry, and are more than willing to display it for all to see.

How many conservative policies/beliefs can you name that serve or would serve to diminish income inequality?
List them.

There's no need for me to do so as I reject the premise of 'income inequality' as something that must be addressed/diminished.

All -you- want to do is create a condition of involuntary servitude so that your partisan masters can gain and retain as much power as possible.

They are -quite- proud of their useful idiot.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Conservatives see income inequality as a positive sign that capitalism is working, and winning over socialism, unionism, etc.

Best thing about you, son, is that you aren't at all embarassed of your thoughtless partisan bigotry, and are more than willing to display it for all to see.

How many conservative policies/beliefs can you name that serve or would serve to diminish income inequality?

List them.

People as individuals diminish the net difference between themselves and those who earn more by using their training and skills to increase their income potential.
I am a perfect example. When I startedin the business in which I currently call my career, I made $15 per hour. Two years later after taking numberous certification courses and gaining experience, I make 50% more than my starting wage plus bonus if jobs come in under budget. If I sell a job I am paid a commission based on the gross value of the project plus my hourly wage.
It's called doing what one must to improve their skill set thus their value to their employer.
I my formal education is HS plus community college. No degree.
Now if I can do this, anyone can.
Next step, project manager. More $$....This is how it should work.
Not "I have been here 5 years doing the same job so you owe me a big raise because I put in my time"....
I would fire a person like that. One who shows no drive or ambition to better themselves.
I have no need for people who just want to settle in. I only need hungry people.
Most businesses operate this way. Entry level to start, then show intitiative to move up or move out.

 

[kwc57]

Conservatives see income inequality as a positive sign that capitalism is working, and winning over socialism, unionism, etc.

Best thing about you, son, is that you aren't at all embarassed of your thoughtless partisan bigotry, and are more than willing to display it for all to see.

How many conservative policies/beliefs can you name that serve or would serve to diminish income inequality?

List them.

You're the guy who stands in the locker room shower crying because of dick inequality aren't you?

 

[JoeB131]

When I'm paying 25% taxes on my measly five figure salary and Mittens is paying 13%, there is something seriously wrong with that.

Let's just assume that your five figure earnings ar $60K for simplicity. 25% of 60K is $15K of which you will most likely get some of it returned. The news reports that Romney will have made $45M over 2010 and 2011, so let's split the difference in half to $23M. 13% of $23M is $2,990,000. Mitt Romney paid your $15K 199.33 times over. He paid 200 times what you paid in taxes. So tell us, what do you consider Romney's "fair share" to be?

I'm paying 25%, he should pay at least that amount.

That seems fair to me.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh just shut it will you. You're whining.
Good union salaries? HUH? How the hell can you mention union wages when 93% of American workers are non-union?
And what about the millions who use credit responsibly? Many many times more people successfully use credit with no worries.
No one is "taking away good paying jobs".
The pro organized labor movement ran out of gas a long time ago. We have gotten along without the problems brought on by unions for quite some time now.
As far as I am concerned, unions can wither away and die. Unions once served a purpose. Forcing government to create just labor laws to protect workers. Forcing employers to create and maintain safe and productive work environments. The work of unions is done.
Union leadership is to blame for organized labor's downfall by failing to adjust to the times. Unionism's most obvious issue is Leadership cannot get away from the notion of the adversarial relationship between labor and management.
I have seen many posts on this subject made by pro union people claiming if unions disappeared, the country would backslide into the sweat shop era.
Really?....You people must think we Americans are stupid.

No, we aren't "getting along fine". The middle class is declining, we've lost our manufacturign infrastructure, and people are struggling to make ends meet. Lots of people have both parents working, sometimes two jobs, to achieve what one parent working a good union job was able to achieve. Romney and the "let them eat cake" mentality is contributing to that problem.

I do think that the leadership of the unions has been criminally poor. Not making the argument they are well run or haven't caused a lot of their own problems. So have our poor spending habits.

But I'll state it one more time. If you are taking away good union jobs with salaries and benefits and replacing them with McJobs that force people to seek government assistance, you are really doing the Democrats job for them.

The reason we can't shrink government (that was a Conservative/Republican goal, right?) is because so many people depend on these programs to put a roof over their heads and food on the table. A man bringing home a paycheck with dignity isn't going to vote for that sort of thing, but that's the guy the Mitt Romneys of the world have been targetting.

When you got more people in the wagon than pulling the wagon, the wagon doesn't go very far.

 

[editec]

As is evident by a wide variety of reponses here.

Most GOPers do not think wealth inequity is or can be a problem to the overall economy.

I think they're wrong, but so what?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

As is evident by a wide variety of reponses here.

Most GOPers do not think wealth inequity is or can be a problem to the overall economy.

oh its a problem but we'd rather address it by helping the poor off the welfare state heroin than by stealing from the successful at the point of a gun to have even more heroin for the liberal welfare state.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Best thing about you, son, is that you aren't at all embarassed of your thoughtless partisan bigotry, and are more than willing to display it for all to see.

How many conservative policies/beliefs can you name that serve or would serve to diminish income inequality?
List them.

There's no need for me to do so as I reject the premise of 'income inequality' as something that must be addressed/diminished.

Which nicely confirms what I said:

Conservatives see income inequality as a positive sign that capitalism is working

Thanks.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

How many conservative policies/beliefs can you name that serve or would serve to diminish income inequality?

conservatives support capitalism which eliminates inequality. Look at China. They just switched to capitalism and now everyone is getting rich as opposed to slowly and equally starving to death under liberal communism.

A liberal will be perfectly brainwashed and as a result have no idea what has happened to him.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Best thing about you, son, is that you aren't at all embarassed of your thoughtless partisan bigotry, and are more than willing to display it for all to see.

How many conservative policies/beliefs can you name that serve or would serve to diminish income inequality?

List them.

You're the guy who stands in the locker room shower crying because of dick inequality aren't you?

And you're the guy who somehow always finds a way to ease the conversation on around to the other guy's dick.

 

[JoeB131]

As is evident by a wide variety of reponses here.

Most GOPers do not think wealth inequity is or can be a problem to the overall economy.

I think they're wrong, but so what?

I think it's a problem of how you approach it.

I think it is a huge problem, but the government trying to fix it would just make it worse.

because everything the government gets involved in they just make worse.

 

[NYcarbineer]

How many conservative policies/beliefs can you name that serve or would serve to diminish income inequality?

conservatives support capitalism which eliminates inequality. Look at China. They just switched to capitalism and now everyone is getting rich as opposed to slowly and equally starving to death under liberal communism.

A liberal will be perfectly brainwashed and as a result have no idea was has happened to him.

You're an idiot.

China is getting jobs from Americans who used to them for decent wages because the Chinese do them for 30 cents an hour, when they're not throwing themselves out the factory windows to end it all.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

because everything the government gets involved in they just make worse.

true enough. The government just got out the way in China and instantly ended 1000's of years of en masse starvation.

A liberal will be in near perfect denial! Chinese capitalism conflicts with the near perfect brainwashing they receive.

 

[JoeB131]

because everything the government gets involved in they just make worse.

true enough. The government just got out the way in China and instantly ended 1000's of years of en masse starvation.

A liberal will be in near perfect denial! Chinese capitalism conflicts with the near perfect brainwashing they receive.

Sorry, guy, I wouldn't want to live in China and neither would you.

It's still a communist dictatorship. It's just one that now encourages investment and manufacturing. They used to call that "fascism". China's going to have some huge problems down the road. They are already ramping back on press and media freedoms, as they don't like the hedonism commercialism encourages.

 

[thereisnospoon]

When I'm paying 25% taxes on my measly five figure salary and Mittens is paying 13%, there is something seriously wrong with that.

Let's just assume that your five figure earnings ar $60K for simplicity. 25% of 60K is $15K of which you will most likely get some of it returned. The news reports that Romney will have made $45M over 2010 and 2011, so let's split the difference in half to $23M. 13% of $23M is $2,990,000. Mitt Romney paid your $15K 199.33 times over. He paid 200 times what you paid in taxes. So tell us, what do you consider Romney's "fair share" to be?

I'm paying 25%, he should pay at least that amount.

That seems fair to me.

What it seems to you is irrelevant.
3 million is much more than 15k.