SOTU: Obama and Dems should be proud, despite GOP Gloom and doom bs- Best econ, UE, of any...ACA AE

[francoHFW]

Despite almost criminal obstruction and fear mongering. Solar power is up 2000%, Pot legal, Gay Marriage, much cheaper college loans, low health cost rise,. Better than 9/11 thru sheer incompetence, the stupidest wars ever, and a corrupt world depression.

Keep that little head burrowed deep in the sand. This economy is about to blow. Thx Obama.

Very helpful having 20-40%% of the country sabotaging the economy for 7 years now. Brainwashed party first fools...

It has been sabotaged by both disgusting parties in their never ending quest for freebies and kicking bills down the road.

So tell me the constructive ideas the GOP has proposed lol. And tax cuts for the rich ain't it. The GOP has blocked all kinds of Dem ideas, ACTUALLY bipartisan ideas in the past. See raising min wage, tax cuts for the nonrich, infrastructure bank and jobs, training for 3 million tech jobs, the Schumer/Lindsay Graham Immigration Bill with good SS ID card. NOPE, just fear mongering and mindless obstruction and brainwashing the chumps.

I honestly cant tell you of any good ideas that have come out of that sewer.

Big diff between the parties.

 

[Hedgology]

Speak for yourself…

You're arguing that regressive taxes are unfair because they're flat and disproportionately target low-income earners when they're specially designed to be flat and target low-income earners. Does that make any sense to you?

You don't measure tax progressivity by looking at regressive taxes. They don't change when your income changes, so it doesn't make sense to consider them progressive taxes. I don't think I can find any easier ways of explaining it so you can understand.

And state income taxes, payroll taxes and local taxes and fees don't count? They go up when fed taxes go down...

No, they don't. Payroll taxes and local taxes (Property, sales, excise, etc) are regressive. Regressive taxes don't change, regardless of income or how small your federal taxes are. That is the purpose of regressive taxes.

Pretty difficult to believe you're discussing tax policy without understanding how regressive taxes work, but only in America are people allowed to have an opinion without actually knowing anything.

Just ignore everything but bs rw propaganda then, dupe. Who cares about the middle class ..

Find a way of lowing these taxes without jeopardizing the necessary programs the middle-class utilizes, dupe.

BRING BACK more aid from the feds like before Reaganism, dupe, paid for by the bloated rich. DUH. Reaganists in practice lowered taxes on the rich, and raised the NONRICH taxes. With dupes like you, no problem!

Half true. You're forgetting the tax that he also lowered taxes on non-rich, while raising taxes on the rich. He also increased Capital Gains Tax, as these taxes were taxed the same as ordinary income. Also, Alternative Minimum Tax, a safety gap used when wealthy Americans managed to end up paying less of an effective rate than actually possible. He created the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, which lowered effective tax rates for low-income individuals. However, he increased the bottom marginal rate from 11% to 15%.

He lowered taxes and raised them all over the place, but to suggest that one particular group of people got off easier than the other is pure fiction. Facts matter.

You think there are no programs for the rich? LOL

Did I claim otherwise? Also, if they are, is that a concern of mine?

The only thing I said was if you believe these local taxes are such a drain on the middle-class, you should find an easier way to fund the programs they utilize without worrying about the taxes they pay.

Apparently, that requires too much thinking, so I can see why you simply diverted to the "problems for the rich," dupe.

Read the stats, double talking dingbat. Of course regressive taxes can rise and be cut on the rich. See payroll taxes, which Reagan hiked, and many others.

Regressive taxes aren't cut for any particular group of people. They're applied uniformly. By simply being regressive, they affect the poor more than they affect the rich because the overall tax constitutes a greater portion of low-income earners.

There are significantly less damaging ways of sounding uninformed without sounding completely clueless.

 

[francoHFW]

And state income taxes, payroll taxes and local taxes and fees don't count? They go up when fed taxes go down...

No, they don't. Payroll taxes and local taxes (Property, sales, excise, etc) are regressive. Regressive taxes don't change, regardless of income or how small your federal taxes are. That is the purpose of regressive taxes.

Pretty difficult to believe you're discussing tax policy without understanding how regressive taxes work, but only in America are people allowed to have an opinion without actually knowing anything.

Just ignore everything but bs rw propaganda then, dupe. Who cares about the middle class ..

Find a way of lowing these taxes without jeopardizing the necessary programs the middle-class utilizes, dupe.

BRING BACK more aid from the feds like before Reaganism, dupe, paid for by the bloated rich. DUH. Reaganists in practice lowered taxes on the rich, and raised the NONRICH taxes. With dupes like you, no problem!

Half true. You're forgetting the tax that he also lowered taxes on non-rich, while raising taxes on the rich. He also increased Capital Gains Tax, as these taxes were taxed the same as ordinary income. Also, Alternative Minimum Tax, a safety gap used when wealthy Americans managed to end up paying less of an effective rate than actually possible. He created the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, which lowered effective tax rates for low-income individuals. However, he increased the bottom marginal rate from 11% to 15%.

He lowered taxes and raised them all over the place, but to suggest that one particular group of people got off easier than the other is pure fiction. Facts matter.

You think there are no programs for the rich? LOL

Did I claim otherwise? Also, if they are, is that a concern of mine?

The only thing I said was if you believe these local taxes are such a drain on the middle-class, you should find an easier way to fund the programs they utilize without worrying about the taxes they pay.

Apparently, that requires too much thinking, so I can see why you simply diverted to the "problems for the rich," dupe.

Read the stats, double talking dingbat. Of course regressive taxes can rise and be cut on the rich. See payroll taxes, which Reagan hiked, and many others.

Regressive taxes aren't cut for any particular group of people. They're applied uniformly. By simply being regressive, they affect the poor more than they affect the rich because the overall tax constitutes a greater portion of low-income earners.

There are significantly less damaging ways of sounding uninformed without sounding completely clueless.

Yup, and there are more of them, and state income taxes have risen, and fees have gone HUGE to make up for cuts in Fed aid, ALL OF WHICH hit the nonrich DUH. Engage your brain, dupe.

 

[Hedgology]

No, they don't. Payroll taxes and local taxes (Property, sales, excise, etc) are regressive. Regressive taxes don't change, regardless of income or how small your federal taxes are. That is the purpose of regressive taxes.

Pretty difficult to believe you're discussing tax policy without understanding how regressive taxes work, but only in America are people allowed to have an opinion without actually knowing anything.

Find a way of lowing these taxes without jeopardizing the necessary programs the middle-class utilizes, dupe.

BRING BACK more aid from the feds like before Reaganism, dupe, paid for by the bloated rich. DUH. Reaganists in practice lowered taxes on the rich, and raised the NONRICH taxes. With dupes like you, no problem!

Half true. You're forgetting the tax that he also lowered taxes on non-rich, while raising taxes on the rich. He also increased Capital Gains Tax, as these taxes were taxed the same as ordinary income. Also, Alternative Minimum Tax, a safety gap used when wealthy Americans managed to end up paying less of an effective rate than actually possible. He created the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, which lowered effective tax rates for low-income individuals. However, he increased the bottom marginal rate from 11% to 15%.

He lowered taxes and raised them all over the place, but to suggest that one particular group of people got off easier than the other is pure fiction. Facts matter.

You think there are no programs for the rich? LOL

Did I claim otherwise? Also, if they are, is that a concern of mine?

The only thing I said was if you believe these local taxes are such a drain on the middle-class, you should find an easier way to fund the programs they utilize without worrying about the taxes they pay.

Apparently, that requires too much thinking, so I can see why you simply diverted to the "problems for the rich," dupe.

Read the stats, double talking dingbat. Of course regressive taxes can rise and be cut on the rich. See payroll taxes, which Reagan hiked, and many others.

Regressive taxes aren't cut for any particular group of people. They're applied uniformly. By simply being regressive, they affect the poor more than they affect the rich because the overall tax constitutes a greater portion of low-income earners.

There are significantly less damaging ways of sounding uninformed without sounding completely clueless.

Yup, and there are more of them, and state income taxes have risen, and fees have gone HUGE to make up for cuts in Fed aid, ALL OF WHICH hit the nonrich DUH. Engage your brain, dupe.

See, you are capable of learning. But that doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the United States having the most progressive income tax system in the industrialized world.

 

[Mustang]

Despite almost criminal obstruction and fear mongering. Solar power is up 2000%, Pot legal, Gay Marriage, much cheaper college loans, low health cost rise,. Better than 9/11 thru sheer incompetence, the stupidest wars ever, and a corrupt world depression.

With their constant doom and gloom forecasts (of both the future AND the present) Conservatives remind me of Eeyore. I think they should make it the new GOP mascot.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

the fact that the United States having the most progressive income tax system in the industrialized world.

this is true. Highest corporate tax in world, and, no country on earth depends on the top 1% for govt revenue like the liberal USA does!! The top 1% pay 38% of all federal income tax.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

, and state income taxes have risen, and fees have gone HUGE to make up for cuts in Fed aid, ALL OF WHICH hit the nonrich DUH. Engage your brain, dupe.

most states mirror the Federal govt. NY for example gets 52% of its revenue from the top 1% instead of 1% the way it should if fairness mattered at all.

 

[francoHFW]

SEE bottom 99% paying the same as the top 1%. Add in fees and they pay more. Great for the richest, bad for the rest and the country. And 1 in 4 giant corps pay nothing. Great job, GOP.

BRING BACK more aid from the feds like before Reaganism, dupe, paid for by the bloated rich. DUH. Reaganists in practice lowered taxes on the rich, and raised the NONRICH taxes. With dupes like you, no problem!

Half true. You're forgetting the tax that he also lowered taxes on non-rich, while raising taxes on the rich. He also increased Capital Gains Tax, as these taxes were taxed the same as ordinary income. Also, Alternative Minimum Tax, a safety gap used when wealthy Americans managed to end up paying less of an effective rate than actually possible. He created the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, which lowered effective tax rates for low-income individuals. However, he increased the bottom marginal rate from 11% to 15%.

He lowered taxes and raised them all over the place, but to suggest that one particular group of people got off easier than the other is pure fiction. Facts matter.

You think there are no programs for the rich? LOL

Did I claim otherwise? Also, if they are, is that a concern of mine?

The only thing I said was if you believe these local taxes are such a drain on the middle-class, you should find an easier way to fund the programs they utilize without worrying about the taxes they pay.

Apparently, that requires too much thinking, so I can see why you simply diverted to the "problems for the rich," dupe.

Read the stats, double talking dingbat. Of course regressive taxes can rise and be cut on the rich. See payroll taxes, which Reagan hiked, and many others.

Regressive taxes aren't cut for any particular group of people. They're applied uniformly. By simply being regressive, they affect the poor more than they affect the rich because the overall tax constitutes a greater portion of low-income earners.

There are significantly less damaging ways of sounding uninformed without sounding completely clueless.

Yup, and there are more of them, and state income taxes have risen, and fees have gone HUGE to make up for cuts in Fed aid, ALL OF WHICH hit the nonrich DUH. Engage your brain, dupe.

See, you are capable of learning. But that doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the United States having the most progressive income tax system in the industrialized world.

Irrelevant, only in theory. And I've been saying the same truth for pages now, dupe.

 

[Hedgology]

SEE bottom 99% paying the same as the top 1%. Add in fees and they pay more. Great for the richest, bad for the rest and the country. And 1 in 4 giant corps pay nothing. Great job, GOP.

Half true. You're forgetting the tax that he also lowered taxes on non-rich, while raising taxes on the rich. He also increased Capital Gains Tax, as these taxes were taxed the same as ordinary income. Also, Alternative Minimum Tax, a safety gap used when wealthy Americans managed to end up paying less of an effective rate than actually possible. He created the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, which lowered effective tax rates for low-income individuals. However, he increased the bottom marginal rate from 11% to 15%.

He lowered taxes and raised them all over the place, but to suggest that one particular group of people got off easier than the other is pure fiction. Facts matter.

Did I claim otherwise? Also, if they are, is that a concern of mine?

The only thing I said was if you believe these local taxes are such a drain on the middle-class, you should find an easier way to fund the programs they utilize without worrying about the taxes they pay.

Apparently, that requires too much thinking, so I can see why you simply diverted to the "problems for the rich," dupe.

Read the stats, double talking dingbat. Of course regressive taxes can rise and be cut on the rich. See payroll taxes, which Reagan hiked, and many others.

Regressive taxes aren't cut for any particular group of people. They're applied uniformly. By simply being regressive, they affect the poor more than they affect the rich because the overall tax constitutes a greater portion of low-income earners.

There are significantly less damaging ways of sounding uninformed without sounding completely clueless.

Yup, and there are more of them, and state income taxes have risen, and fees have gone HUGE to make up for cuts in Fed aid, ALL OF WHICH hit the nonrich DUH. Engage your brain, dupe.

See, you are capable of learning. But that doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the United States having the most progressive income tax system in the industrialized world.

Irrelevant, only in theory. And I've been saying the same truth for pages now, dupe.

Dozens of Economist already pointed out the U.S. Tax system is more progressive, so it's more than just a theory, sorry for you.

And you keep adding regressive taxes with progressive taxes, somehow believing your argument makes sense.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

SEE bottom 99% paying the same as the top 1%. Add in fees and they pay more. Great for the richest, bad for the rest and the country. And 1 in 4 giant corps pay nothing. Great job, GOP.

Half true. You're forgetting the tax that he also lowered taxes on non-rich, while raising taxes on the rich. He also increased Capital Gains Tax, as these taxes were taxed the same as ordinary income. Also, Alternative Minimum Tax, a safety gap used when wealthy Americans managed to end up paying less of an effective rate than actually possible. He created the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, which lowered effective tax rates for low-income individuals. However, he increased the bottom marginal rate from 11% to 15%.

He lowered taxes and raised them all over the place, but to suggest that one particular group of people got off easier than the other is pure fiction. Facts matter.

Did I claim otherwise? Also, if they are, is that a concern of mine?

The only thing I said was if you believe these local taxes are such a drain on the middle-class, you should find an easier way to fund the programs they utilize without worrying about the taxes they pay.

Apparently, that requires too much thinking, so I can see why you simply diverted to the "problems for the rich," dupe.

Read the stats, double talking dingbat. Of course regressive taxes can rise and be cut on the rich. See payroll taxes, which Reagan hiked, and many others.

Regressive taxes aren't cut for any particular group of people. They're applied uniformly. By simply being regressive, they affect the poor more than they affect the rich because the overall tax constitutes a greater portion of low-income earners.

There are significantly less damaging ways of sounding uninformed without sounding completely clueless.

Yup, and there are more of them, and state income taxes have risen, and fees have gone HUGE to make up for cuts in Fed aid, ALL OF WHICH hit the nonrich DUH. Engage your brain, dupe.

See, you are capable of learning. But that doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the United States having the most progressive income tax system in the industrialized world.

Irrelevant, only in theory. And I've been saying the same truth for pages now, dupe.

so in your twisted sister libcommie way it fair for the top 1% to pay 29% of taxes rather than 1% of taxes??

 

[francoHFW]

SEE bottom 99% paying the same as the top 1%. Add in fees and they pay more. Great for the richest, bad for the rest and the country. And 1 in 4 giant corps pay nothing. Great job, GOP.

Read the stats, double talking dingbat. Of course regressive taxes can rise and be cut on the rich. See payroll taxes, which Reagan hiked, and many others.

Regressive taxes aren't cut for any particular group of people. They're applied uniformly. By simply being regressive, they affect the poor more than they affect the rich because the overall tax constitutes a greater portion of low-income earners.

There are significantly less damaging ways of sounding uninformed without sounding completely clueless.

Yup, and there are more of them, and state income taxes have risen, and fees have gone HUGE to make up for cuts in Fed aid, ALL OF WHICH hit the nonrich DUH. Engage your brain, dupe.

See, you are capable of learning. But that doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the United States having the most progressive income tax system in the industrialized world.

Irrelevant, only in theory. And I've been saying the same truth for pages now, dupe.

Dozens of Economist already pointed out the U.S. Tax system is more progressive, so it's more than just a theory, sorry for you.

And you keep adding regressive taxes with progressive taxes, somehow believing your argument makes sense.

Idiot.

 

[francoHFW]

SEE bottom 99% paying the same as the top 1%. Add in fees and they pay more. Great for the richest, bad for the rest and the country. And 1 in 4 giant corps pay nothing. Great job, GOP.

Read the stats, double talking dingbat. Of course regressive taxes can rise and be cut on the rich. See payroll taxes, which Reagan hiked, and many others.

Regressive taxes aren't cut for any particular group of people. They're applied uniformly. By simply being regressive, they affect the poor more than they affect the rich because the overall tax constitutes a greater portion of low-income earners.

There are significantly less damaging ways of sounding uninformed without sounding completely clueless.

Yup, and there are more of them, and state income taxes have risen, and fees have gone HUGE to make up for cuts in Fed aid, ALL OF WHICH hit the nonrich DUH. Engage your brain, dupe.

See, you are capable of learning. But that doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the United States having the most progressive income tax system in the industrialized world.

Irrelevant, only in theory. And I've been saying the same truth for pages now, dupe.

so in your twisted sister libcommie way it fair for the top 1% to pay 29% of taxes rather than 1% of taxes??

Add our new gigantic Reaganist fees and everyone pays 20-30% and the rich and giant corps laugh all the way to the bank, and thru lack of demand and investment the country goes to hell.

 

[francoHFW]

SEE bottom 99% paying the same as the top 1%. Add in fees and they pay more. Great for the richest, bad for the rest and the country. And 1 in 4 giant corps pay nothing. Great job, GOP.

Read the stats, double talking dingbat. Of course regressive taxes can rise and be cut on the rich. See payroll taxes, which Reagan hiked, and many others.

Regressive taxes aren't cut for any particular group of people. They're applied uniformly. By simply being regressive, they affect the poor more than they affect the rich because the overall tax constitutes a greater portion of low-income earners.

There are significantly less damaging ways of sounding uninformed without sounding completely clueless.

Yup, and there are more of them, and state income taxes have risen, and fees have gone HUGE to make up for cuts in Fed aid, ALL OF WHICH hit the nonrich DUH. Engage your brain, dupe.

See, you are capable of learning. But that doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the United States having the most progressive income tax system in the industrialized world.

Irrelevant, only in theory. And I've been saying the same truth for pages now, dupe.

Dozens of Economist already pointed out the U.S. Tax system is more progressive, so it's more than just a theory, sorry for you.

And you keep adding regressive taxes with progressive taxes, somehow believing your argument makes sense.

They're all taxes, and now in effect we have flat tax wrecking the nonrich and the country. DUH.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

SEE bottom 99% paying the same as the top 1%. Add in fees and they pay more. Great for the richest, bad for the rest and the country. And 1 in 4 giant corps pay nothing. Great job, GOP.

Regressive taxes aren't cut for any particular group of people. They're applied uniformly. By simply being regressive, they affect the poor more than they affect the rich because the overall tax constitutes a greater portion of low-income earners.

There are significantly less damaging ways of sounding uninformed without sounding completely clueless.

Yup, and there are more of them, and state income taxes have risen, and fees have gone HUGE to make up for cuts in Fed aid, ALL OF WHICH hit the nonrich DUH. Engage your brain, dupe.

See, you are capable of learning. But that doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the United States having the most progressive income tax system in the industrialized world.

Irrelevant, only in theory. And I've been saying the same truth for pages now, dupe.

Dozens of Economist already pointed out the U.S. Tax system is more progressive, so it's more than just a theory, sorry for you.

And you keep adding regressive taxes with progressive taxes, somehow believing your argument makes sense.

Idiot.

dear, your own chart says the top 1% pay 30% of all taxes .Is that fair??? do they get 30% of all the entitlements and 30% of all the national defense???

Why would we want to punish our best by taking $2 trillion from them to create moral hazard among the lower classes? Its anti-science and anti-evolution.

 

[Timmy]

SEE bottom 99% paying the same as the top 1%. Add in fees and they pay more. Great for the richest, bad for the rest and the country. And 1 in 4 giant corps pay nothing. Great job, GOP.

Yup, and there are more of them, and state income taxes have risen, and fees have gone HUGE to make up for cuts in Fed aid, ALL OF WHICH hit the nonrich DUH. Engage your brain, dupe.

See, you are capable of learning. But that doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the United States having the most progressive income tax system in the industrialized world.

Irrelevant, only in theory. And I've been saying the same truth for pages now, dupe.

Dozens of Economist already pointed out the U.S. Tax system is more progressive, so it's more than just a theory, sorry for you.

And you keep adding regressive taxes with progressive taxes, somehow believing your argument makes sense.

Idiot.

dear, your own chart says the top 1% pay 30% of all taxes .Is that fair??? do they get 30% of all the entitlements and 30% of all the national defense???

Why would we want to punish our best by taking $2 trillion from them to create moral hazard among the lower classes? Its anti-science and anti-evolution.

Is say the top 1% do get far more gov protection/services .

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Is say the top 1% do get far more gov protection/services .

is say???????????????

 

[Timmy]

Is say the top 1% do get far more gov protection/services .

is say???????????????

I say ! Alright . Geeze , a ******* a typo.

An example you ask ?

I'm an avg guy . Maybe fly 2x a year . Top 1% fly all the time. Benefiting from faa and public airports all over . Why should I be paying for the faa???

 

[Rozman]

I'd say that it's out there ....
Many reports today out from Wall street types feel we are headed for a recession....
The start of 2016 on Wall street is horrific...
And most of them say that our economy has been in trouble for years now.....
Years they say...

And who has been our Supreme leader during that time....
And of course the Obama defenders will say that Obama has nothing to do with it...

 

[froggy]

I am going to find out first hand if OCare is all the Libs say it is.
I will see if i get the same coverage or will I pay $600 a month with a $6,000 a year deductible
with OCare....

I found Get Covered | Covered California™

if you age 60 with $60K income and live in Santa Clara you pay $550 on the cheap one. $800 upper.

I just lost my job so I am picking up the Cobra for $600 a month.
My option is to pick up my coverage so I need to shop around....
I will see for myself if OCare is everything the Libs say it is.

I know a guy that got denied Obamacare because he didn't have any income

 

[francoHFW]

SEE bottom 99% paying the same as the top 1%. Add in fees and they pay more. Great for the richest, bad for the rest and the country. And 1 in 4 giant corps pay nothing. Great job, GOP.

Yup, and there are more of them, and state income taxes have risen, and fees have gone HUGE to make up for cuts in Fed aid, ALL OF WHICH hit the nonrich DUH. Engage your brain, dupe.

See, you are capable of learning. But that doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the United States having the most progressive income tax system in the industrialized world.

Irrelevant, only in theory. And I've been saying the same truth for pages now, dupe.

Dozens of Economist already pointed out the U.S. Tax system is more progressive, so it's more than just a theory, sorry for you.

And you keep adding regressive taxes with progressive taxes, somehow believing your argument makes sense.

Idiot.

dear, your own chart says the top 1% pay 30% of all taxes .Is that fair??? do they get 30% of all the entitlements and 30% of all the national defense???

Why would we want to punish our best by taking $2 trillion from them to create moral hazard among the lower classes? Its anti-science and anti-evolution.

No. That's the percentage of income. So we have basically a flat tax system now.