Tax cuts for the rich, why?

[AzogtheDefiler]

Which can go belly up.
And what have you earned and not received from your parents?

Actually my mutual funds / IRA's are almost entirely based off of my earnings at my old jobs.

As a laborer?

What's wrong with being a laborer, exactly?

Because no one outside of family is going to pay you that much.

So, you haven't looked into how much people charge to mow a lawn??????????

100 dollars is often the going rate, depending on where & how big of a lawn you mow.

Laborers can do oretty good, (Sometimes)

$45 every two weeks in Boston. $100 is insane.

 

[Indeependent]

Which can go belly up.
And what have you earned and not received from your parents?

Actually my mutual funds / IRA's are almost entirely based off of my earnings at my old jobs.

As a laborer?

What's wrong with being a laborer, exactly?

Because no one outside of family is going to pay you that much.

So, you haven't looked into how much people charge to mow a lawn??????????

100 dollars is often the going rate, depending on where & how big of a lawn you mow.

Laborers can do oretty good, (Sometimes)

Sounds reasonable.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Actually my mutual funds / IRA's are almost entirely based off of my earnings at my old jobs.

As a laborer?

What's wrong with being a laborer, exactly?

Because no one outside of family is going to pay you that much.

So, you haven't looked into how much people charge to mow a lawn??????????

100 dollars is often the going rate, depending on where & how big of a lawn you mow.

Laborers can do oretty good, (Sometimes)

$45 every two weeks in Boston. $100 is insane.

A typical lawn maintenance visit costs $50-$75 for an 8,000 square foot lawn. Although services vary depending on providers, they typically include mowing, edging, trimming, and debris removal. Most providers charge a flat fee per service instead of charging by the hour; however, if work is over the typical threshold, some providers charge an hourly rate of $65 on average.

Cost to Maintain and Mow the Lawn - Estimates and Prices at Fixr

If the lawn is bigger, and in Westchester, County, obviously things can change a lot.

 

[Indeependent]

As a laborer?

What's wrong with being a laborer, exactly?

Because no one outside of family is going to pay you that much.

So, you haven't looked into how much people charge to mow a lawn??????????

100 dollars is often the going rate, depending on where & how big of a lawn you mow.

Laborers can do oretty good, (Sometimes)

$45 every two weeks in Boston. $100 is insane.

A typical lawn maintenance visit costs $50-$75 for an 8,000 square foot lawn. Although services vary depending on providers, they typically include mowing, edging, trimming, and debris removal. Most providers charge a flat fee per service instead of charging by the hour; however, if work is over the typical threshold, some providers charge an hourly rate of $65 on average.

Cost to Maintain and Mow the Lawn - Estimates and Prices at Fixr

If the lawn is bigger, and in Westchester, County, obviously things can change a lot.

And you have done hundreds of lawns?
How old were you when you started?

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

What's wrong with being a laborer, exactly?

Because no one outside of family is going to pay you that much.

So, you haven't looked into how much people charge to mow a lawn??????????

100 dollars is often the going rate, depending on where & how big of a lawn you mow.

Laborers can do oretty good, (Sometimes)

$45 every two weeks in Boston. $100 is insane.

A typical lawn maintenance visit costs $50-$75 for an 8,000 square foot lawn. Although services vary depending on providers, they typically include mowing, edging, trimming, and debris removal. Most providers charge a flat fee per service instead of charging by the hour; however, if work is over the typical threshold, some providers charge an hourly rate of $65 on average.

Cost to Maintain and Mow the Lawn - Estimates and Prices at Fixr

If the lawn is bigger, and in Westchester, County, obviously things can change a lot.

And you have done hundreds of lawns?
How old were you when you started?

I saved up about 40 thousand dollars working at a Pet Store.

I fail to see what this has to do with the discussion.

Typical Chosen hook nosen dirtbags always tend to reffrain from the discussion at hand & go nuts with ad hominem, off topic & flaming insults.

 

[Indeependent]

Because no one outside of family is going to pay you that much.

So, you haven't looked into how much people charge to mow a lawn??????????

100 dollars is often the going rate, depending on where & how big of a lawn you mow.

Laborers can do oretty good, (Sometimes)

$45 every two weeks in Boston. $100 is insane.

A typical lawn maintenance visit costs $50-$75 for an 8,000 square foot lawn. Although services vary depending on providers, they typically include mowing, edging, trimming, and debris removal. Most providers charge a flat fee per service instead of charging by the hour; however, if work is over the typical threshold, some providers charge an hourly rate of $65 on average.

Cost to Maintain and Mow the Lawn - Estimates and Prices at Fixr

If the lawn is bigger, and in Westchester, County, obviously things can change a lot.

And you have done hundreds of lawns?
How old were you when you started?

I saved up about 40 thousand dollars working at a Pet Store.

I fail to see what this has to do with the discussion.

Typical Chosen hook nosen dirtbags always tend to reffrain from the discussion at hand & go nuts with ad hominem, off topic & flaming insults.

You’re the one who wants to tax those more successful than yourself.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

So, you haven't looked into how much people charge to mow a lawn??????????

100 dollars is often the going rate, depending on where & how big of a lawn you mow.

Laborers can do oretty good, (Sometimes)

$45 every two weeks in Boston. $100 is insane.

A typical lawn maintenance visit costs $50-$75 for an 8,000 square foot lawn. Although services vary depending on providers, they typically include mowing, edging, trimming, and debris removal. Most providers charge a flat fee per service instead of charging by the hour; however, if work is over the typical threshold, some providers charge an hourly rate of $65 on average.

Cost to Maintain and Mow the Lawn - Estimates and Prices at Fixr

If the lawn is bigger, and in Westchester, County, obviously things can change a lot.

And you have done hundreds of lawns?
How old were you when you started?

I saved up about 40 thousand dollars working at a Pet Store.

I fail to see what this has to do with the discussion.

Typical Chosen hook nosen dirtbags always tend to reffrain from the discussion at hand & go nuts with ad hominem, off topic & flaming insults.

You’re the one who wants to tax those more successful than yourself.

What's wrong with that?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Because no one outside of family is going to pay you that much.

So, you haven't looked into how much people charge to mow a lawn??????????

100 dollars is often the going rate, depending on where & how big of a lawn you mow.

Laborers can do oretty good, (Sometimes)

$45 every two weeks in Boston. $100 is insane.

A typical lawn maintenance visit costs $50-$75 for an 8,000 square foot lawn. Although services vary depending on providers, they typically include mowing, edging, trimming, and debris removal. Most providers charge a flat fee per service instead of charging by the hour; however, if work is over the typical threshold, some providers charge an hourly rate of $65 on average.

Cost to Maintain and Mow the Lawn - Estimates and Prices at Fixr

If the lawn is bigger, and in Westchester, County, obviously things can change a lot.

And you have done hundreds of lawns?
How old were you when you started?

I saved up about 40 thousand dollars working at a Pet Store.

I fail to see what this has to do with the discussion.

Typical Chosen hook nosen dirtbags always tend to reffrain from the discussion at hand & go nuts with ad hominem, off topic & flaming insults.

Thats because you don't have any expenses. Good for you.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

$45 every two weeks in Boston. $100 is insane.

A typical lawn maintenance visit costs $50-$75 for an 8,000 square foot lawn. Although services vary depending on providers, they typically include mowing, edging, trimming, and debris removal. Most providers charge a flat fee per service instead of charging by the hour; however, if work is over the typical threshold, some providers charge an hourly rate of $65 on average.

Cost to Maintain and Mow the Lawn - Estimates and Prices at Fixr

If the lawn is bigger, and in Westchester, County, obviously things can change a lot.

And you have done hundreds of lawns?
How old were you when you started?

I saved up about 40 thousand dollars working at a Pet Store.

I fail to see what this has to do with the discussion.

Typical Chosen hook nosen dirtbags always tend to reffrain from the discussion at hand & go nuts with ad hominem, off topic & flaming insults.

You’re the one who wants to tax those more successful than yourself.

What's wrong with that?

It doesn't make any logical sense.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

A typical lawn maintenance visit costs $50-$75 for an 8,000 square foot lawn. Although services vary depending on providers, they typically include mowing, edging, trimming, and debris removal. Most providers charge a flat fee per service instead of charging by the hour; however, if work is over the typical threshold, some providers charge an hourly rate of $65 on average.

Cost to Maintain and Mow the Lawn - Estimates and Prices at Fixr

If the lawn is bigger, and in Westchester, County, obviously things can change a lot.

And you have done hundreds of lawns?
How old were you when you started?

I saved up about 40 thousand dollars working at a Pet Store.

I fail to see what this has to do with the discussion.

Typical Chosen hook nosen dirtbags always tend to reffrain from the discussion at hand & go nuts with ad hominem, off topic & flaming insults.

You’re the one who wants to tax those more successful than yourself.

What's wrong with that?

It doesn't make any logical sense.

So, it makes sense to keep missing the budget, because dumb, dumb Republicans keep missing an opportunity to increase tax revenues by taxing the rich more?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

And you have done hundreds of lawns?
How old were you when you started?

I saved up about 40 thousand dollars working at a Pet Store.

I fail to see what this has to do with the discussion.

Typical Chosen hook nosen dirtbags always tend to reffrain from the discussion at hand & go nuts with ad hominem, off topic & flaming insults.

You’re the one who wants to tax those more successful than yourself.

What's wrong with that?

It doesn't make any logical sense.

So, it makes sense to keep missing the budget, because dumb, dumb Republicans keep missing an opportunity to increase tax revenues by taxing the rich more?

To meet budget you can raise revenues but what else can you do?

 

[hadit]

even when it becomes obvious your prescription won't do what you claim it will do.

No its obvious that lowering taxes will generate more federal revenues to combat the debt.

Now that's an ignorant prescription.

Show how much additional revenue you could generate by taxing the super wealthy more. If you would at least do that, I might believe you've actually thought this through instead of relying on feelz.

This article supports taxing the wealthy more will increase revenues.

What Could Raising Taxes on the 1% Do? Surprising Amounts

Yeah thats just feelings.

You're clueless.

At least you tried. You found an article from 2015 that gives some numbers. That's a start. Your problem, however, is that the richest group they address only makes 9M/year. That's a far cry from the billionaires you touted, and attacking that group doesn't generate anywhere near enough revenue to eliminate the deficit, much less the debt itself. Keep trying.

If we had a 91% top tax bracket like in the 1950s we could start eliminating the debt year by year.

Only if you can show that it would generate more revenue than the annual deficit and you can convince me that Congress would not simply spend even more. You have not done so.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No its obvious that lowering taxes will generate more federal revenues to combat the debt.

Now that's an ignorant prescription.

Show how much additional revenue you could generate by taxing the super wealthy more. If you would at least do that, I might believe you've actually thought this through instead of relying on feelz.

This article supports taxing the wealthy more will increase revenues.

What Could Raising Taxes on the 1% Do? Surprising Amounts

Yeah thats just feelings.

You're clueless.

At least you tried. You found an article from 2015 that gives some numbers. That's a start. Your problem, however, is that the richest group they address only makes 9M/year. That's a far cry from the billionaires you touted, and attacking that group doesn't generate anywhere near enough revenue to eliminate the deficit, much less the debt itself. Keep trying.

If we had a 91% top tax bracket like in the 1950s we could start eliminating the debt year by year.

Only if you can show that it would generate more revenue than the annual deficit and you can convince me that Congress would not simply spend even more. You have not done so.

His "proof" is that a 91% top rate will reduce the deficit.
Even though the deficit was higher after the 91% rate was implemented than it was when the rate was 63% or when it was 25%.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Show how much additional revenue you could generate by taxing the super wealthy more. If you would at least do that, I might believe you've actually thought this through instead of relying on feelz.

This article supports taxing the wealthy more will increase revenues.

What Could Raising Taxes on the 1% Do? Surprising Amounts

Yeah thats just feelings.

You're clueless.

At least you tried. You found an article from 2015 that gives some numbers. That's a start. Your problem, however, is that the richest group they address only makes 9M/year. That's a far cry from the billionaires you touted, and attacking that group doesn't generate anywhere near enough revenue to eliminate the deficit, much less the debt itself. Keep trying.

If we had a 91% top tax bracket like in the 1950s we could start eliminating the debt year by year.

Only if you can show that it would generate more revenue than the annual deficit and you can convince me that Congress would not simply spend even more. You have not done so.

His "proof" is that a 91% top rate will reduce the deficit.
Even though the deficit was higher after the 91% rate was implemented than it was when the rate was 63% or when it was 25%.

Clinton did better for the debt, by increasing taxes on the rich, than have the buffoons since Clinton.

Such an assertion, but yet this graph points to a decline in USA debt in the 1950's.

https://specials-images.forbesimg.com/imageserve/5d639faffead280008921f89/960x0.jpg?fit=scale

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

This article supports taxing the wealthy more will increase revenues.

What Could Raising Taxes on the 1% Do? Surprising Amounts

Yeah thats just feelings.

You're clueless.

At least you tried. You found an article from 2015 that gives some numbers. That's a start. Your problem, however, is that the richest group they address only makes 9M/year. That's a far cry from the billionaires you touted, and attacking that group doesn't generate anywhere near enough revenue to eliminate the deficit, much less the debt itself. Keep trying.

If we had a 91% top tax bracket like in the 1950s we could start eliminating the debt year by year.

Only if you can show that it would generate more revenue than the annual deficit and you can convince me that Congress would not simply spend even more. You have not done so.

His "proof" is that a 91% top rate will reduce the deficit.
Even though the deficit was higher after the 91% rate was implemented than it was when the rate was 63% or when it was 25%.

Clinton did better for the debt, by increasing taxes on the rich, than have the buffoons since Clinton.

Such an assertion, but yet this graph points to a decline in USA debt in the 1950's.

https://specials-images.forbesimg.com/imageserve/5d639faffead280008921f89/960x0.jpg?fit=scale

WJC benefitted from the .com boom and he wasn’t dumb enough to spend trillions on endless wars. He was too busy banging his interns.

 

[Indeependent]

This article supports taxing the wealthy more will increase revenues.

What Could Raising Taxes on the 1% Do? Surprising Amounts

Yeah thats just feelings.

You're clueless.

At least you tried. You found an article from 2015 that gives some numbers. That's a start. Your problem, however, is that the richest group they address only makes 9M/year. That's a far cry from the billionaires you touted, and attacking that group doesn't generate anywhere near enough revenue to eliminate the deficit, much less the debt itself. Keep trying.

If we had a 91% top tax bracket like in the 1950s we could start eliminating the debt year by year.

Only if you can show that it would generate more revenue than the annual deficit and you can convince me that Congress would not simply spend even more. You have not done so.

His "proof" is that a 91% top rate will reduce the deficit.
Even though the deficit was higher after the 91% rate was implemented than it was when the rate was 63% or when it was 25%.

Clinton did better for the debt, by increasing taxes on the rich, than have the buffoons since Clinton.

Such an assertion, but yet this graph points to a decline in USA debt in the 1950's.

https://specials-images.forbesimg.com/imageserve/5d639faffead280008921f89/960x0.jpg?fit=scale

I presume you reported your lawn income to NYS and the IRS.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

This article supports taxing the wealthy more will increase revenues.

What Could Raising Taxes on the 1% Do? Surprising Amounts

Yeah thats just feelings.

You're clueless.

At least you tried. You found an article from 2015 that gives some numbers. That's a start. Your problem, however, is that the richest group they address only makes 9M/year. That's a far cry from the billionaires you touted, and attacking that group doesn't generate anywhere near enough revenue to eliminate the deficit, much less the debt itself. Keep trying.

If we had a 91% top tax bracket like in the 1950s we could start eliminating the debt year by year.

Only if you can show that it would generate more revenue than the annual deficit and you can convince me that Congress would not simply spend even more. You have not done so.

His "proof" is that a 91% top rate will reduce the deficit.
Even though the deficit was higher after the 91% rate was implemented than it was when the rate was 63% or when it was 25%.

Clinton did better for the debt, by increasing taxes on the rich, than have the buffoons since Clinton.

Such an assertion, but yet this graph points to a decline in USA debt in the 1950's.

https://specials-images.forbesimg.com/imageserve/5d639faffead280008921f89/960x0.jpg?fit=scale

Clinton did better for the debt

Gingrich limited the Bent One's spending

Now, what was the debt level when the top rate was 25%?
What was it when the top rate was hiked to 92%?