Why does the 1% ***** about the 99% using what they pay for?

[tinydancer]

Do the 99% actually live with their parents? and in their basements?

Are you guys or gals making this crap up?

Actually....92% of the 99% are at work and making money to support their lifestyles.

But a bunch of kids with nothing do do decided they wanted to speak on their behalf...even though they were never really asked to.

92% eh...

is this possible?

OMG



All be warned.

 

[Big Fitz]

Do the 99% actually live with their parents? and in their basements?

Are you guys or gals making this crap up?

Actually....92% of the 99% are at work and making money to support their lifestyles.

But a bunch of kids with nothing do do decided they wanted to speak on their behalf...even though they were never really asked to.

Well, when I was doing daily observances of the Occupados in Minneapolis, the numbers started at maybe 400-600 people. It was like a giant hippie potluck. Grandma and grandpa too the grandkids to see what 'real democracy' was like. Catch up with old friends from the commune they lived at in the 60's or 70's and pretend to be socially active and important

That lasted one friday. Come that October Monday after it began, you were down to 200-400 with only 20 portapotties.

By the beginning of November, the city demanded the homeless clear out and ended overnight camping. Tables outnumbered people as only maybe 50 on a good day were left.

When Portapotties outnumbered the Occupados after the first freeze, it dwindled to a skeleton crew of 8 to 12 die hard radicals obviously being paid and supported somehow. Then they hauled all but 4 portapotties away.

Yeah, the Occupados were forced to face the reality of their own delusion. They could freeze their asses off out there, and fewer and fewer of the 99% sided with their 1%, while a greater number thought they were shitballs and scum

 

[merrill]

Do the 99% actually live with their parents? and in their basements?

Are you guys or gals making this crap up?

Actually....92% of the 99% are at work and making money to support their lifestyles.

But a bunch of kids with nothing do do decided they wanted to speak on their behalf...even though they were never really asked to.

Well, when I was doing daily observances of the Occupados in Minneapolis, the numbers started at maybe 400-600 people. It was like a giant hippie potluck. Grandma and grandpa too the grandkids to see what 'real democracy' was like. Catch up with old friends from the commune they lived at in the 60's or 70's and pretend to be socially active and important

That lasted one friday. Come that October Monday after it began, you were down to 200-400 with only 20 portapotties.

By the beginning of November, the city demanded the homeless clear out and ended overnight camping. Tables outnumbered people as only maybe 50 on a good day were left.

When Portapotties outnumbered the Occupados after the first freeze, it dwindled to a skeleton crew of 8 to 12 die hard radicals obviously being paid and supported somehow. Then they hauled all but 4 portapotties away.

Yeah, the Occupados were forced to face the reality of their own delusion. They could freeze their asses off out there, and fewer and fewer of the 99% sided with their 1%, while a greater number thought they were shitballs and scum

Speculation and personal perception.....

Maybe some were from the 11 million unemployed by Bush/Cheney and were making the best of unemployment insurance and food stamps. Paid for by the users.

 

[Big Fitz]

Actually....92% of the 99% are at work and making money to support their lifestyles.

But a bunch of kids with nothing do do decided they wanted to speak on their behalf...even though they were never really asked to.

Well, when I was doing daily observances of the Occupados in Minneapolis, the numbers started at maybe 400-600 people. It was like a giant hippie potluck. Grandma and grandpa too the grandkids to see what 'real democracy' was like. Catch up with old friends from the commune they lived at in the 60's or 70's and pretend to be socially active and important

That lasted one friday. Come that October Monday after it began, you were down to 200-400 with only 20 portapotties.

By the beginning of November, the city demanded the homeless clear out and ended overnight camping. Tables outnumbered people as only maybe 50 on a good day were left.

When Portapotties outnumbered the Occupados after the first freeze, it dwindled to a skeleton crew of 8 to 12 die hard radicals obviously being paid and supported somehow. Then they hauled all but 4 portapotties away.

Yeah, the Occupados were forced to face the reality of their own delusion. They could freeze their asses off out there, and fewer and fewer of the 99% sided with their 1%, while a greater number thought they were shitballs and scum

Speculation and personal perception.....

Maybe some were from the 11 million unemployed by Bush/Cheney and were making the best of unemployment insurance and food stamps. Paid for by the users.

Once again, who're you gonna believe, me or your own damn lying eyes?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mb45tJhzmcI]The Man Behind the Curtain.wmv - YouTube[/ame]

Every day I watched them dwindle. I listened to discontent as they made the lives of my commuters worse from those they pretended to be for.

You can't tell me what I experienced and saw did not occur. I listened to their childish behavior at city council meetings demanding the rules be ignored and bent or broken for their 'noble' cause. They're bags of shit, and people caught on and became embarrassed to be associated with when they woke the **** up.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

It's not what the 1% have or don't have. It is the preferential treatment that sucks.

The 1% cannot pay the bills, fill the military needs nor provide the health care this country demands.

If any group should receive preferential treatment it is the 99 % that do pay the bills, fill the military needs and spend tons and tons of money that which keeps the USA
in what jobs are left. The 99% are the primary stakeholders of the USA!

When it comes to funding Social Service needs in this country it is the 99% so why does the 1% ***** about the 99% using what they pay for?

The 1% are bitching about Social Security? Where?
And the last time I checked, the 1% paid over 35% of all Federal Income taxes.

How much did they pay?

I think you were just told... how thick are you?

 

[Inthemiddle]

be that as it may Syrenn... why should the 1% get that preferential treatment?

Why should the bottom 47% get preferential treatment? How are they making this country better?

I can assure you, I am in the bottom 47%, yet I pay plenty in taxes. I receive no "preferential" treatment of any kind. In fact, if anything, I am on the opposite side, watching preferential treatment going out to other people besides myself.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

It's not what the 1% have or don't have. It is the preferential treatment that sucks.

The 1% cannot pay the bills, fill the military needs nor provide the health care this country demands.

If any group should receive preferential treatment it is the 99 % that do pay the bills, fill the military needs and spend tons and tons of money that which keeps the USA
in what jobs are left. The 99% are the primary stakeholders of the USA!

When it comes to funding Social Service needs in this country it is the 99% so why does the 1% ***** about the 99% using what they pay for?

only 50% of the 99% pay the bills..

Except for the bills paid for with local sales tax revenues.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Over 35% of all Federal Income taxes.

35% is no indication that they paid anything near in taxes what the 99% shell out.

35% does not represent dollars or sense.

Sure it is. 1% paid more than one third of all income taxes.

The other 99% paid less than two thirds.

If the top 1% paid the bottom 50% decent wages we could probably do without that share of income tax.

 

[BillyV]

be that as it may Syrenn... why should the 1% get that preferential treatment?

Why should the bottom 47% get preferential treatment? How are they making this country better?

I can assure you, I am in the bottom 47%, yet I pay plenty in taxes. I receive no "preferential" treatment of any kind. In fact, if anything, I am on the opposite side, watching preferential treatment going out to other people besides myself.

The percentages that are often cited (53%-47%) do not necessarily indicate a "bottom" 47% income level; it is just an indication of the percent of total tax returns that are non-taxable. Included in that 47% are 2.8 million that earned $50-75,000, 361,000 that earned between $100-200,000, and 4,000 that earned over $1 million. Included in the taxable returns are 157,000 that made less than $10,000 and 5.4 million that made less than $20,000.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/Content/PDF/T11-0226.pdf

It's mainly about your unique tax situation. For instance, a family of four that made $50,000 in 2010 could have this situation:

The family got a standard deduction of $11,400 and four personal exemptions of $3,650, leaving a taxable income of $24,000. The income tax on $24,000 was $2,769.
The two children younger than 17 qualified for two $1,000 child tax credits. The Making Work Pay credit was $800 because the parents were married filing jointly. The $2,800 in credits is more than the $2,769 in taxes, so they paid nothing.

But you know, these "loopholes" (I really dislike that word) were institututed to help families with children and people who work, two things that don't seem too subversive, and are provided to probably the largest "special interest" group in the country - working families. Most tax deductions and credits are to encourage behavior that most people would agree are worth supporting. So saying 47% are slackers that don't pay taxes on average is like having one hand in the oven and the other hand in the freezer but, on average, the temperature is moderate. There is often a different story behind the simple statistics.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Why should the bottom 47% get preferential treatment? How are they making this country better?

I can assure you, I am in the bottom 47%, yet I pay plenty in taxes. I receive no "preferential" treatment of any kind. In fact, if anything, I am on the opposite side, watching preferential treatment going out to other people besides myself.

The percentages that are often cited (53%-47%) do not necessarily indicate a "bottom" 47% income level; it is just an indication of the percent of total tax returns that are non-taxable. Included in that 47% are 2.8 million that earned $50-75,000, 361,000 that earned between $100-200,000, and 4,000 that earned over $1 million. Included in the taxable returns are 157,000 that made less than $10,000 and 5.4 million that made less than $20,000.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/Content/PDF/T11-0226.pdf

It's mainly about your unique tax situation. For instance, a family of four that made $50,000 in 2010 could have this situation:

The family got a standard deduction of $11,400 and four personal exemptions of $3,650, leaving a taxable income of $24,000. The income tax on $24,000 was $2,769.
The two children younger than 17 qualified for two $1,000 child tax credits. The Making Work Pay credit was $800 because the parents were married filing jointly. The $2,800 in credits is more than the $2,769 in taxes, so they paid nothing.

But you know, these "loopholes" (I really dislike that word) were institututed to help families with children and people who work, two things that don't seem too subversive, and are provided to probably the largest "special interest" group in the country - working families. Most tax deductions and credits are to encourage behavior that most people would agree are worth supporting. So saying 47% are slackers that don't pay taxes on average is like having one hand in the oven and the other hand in the freezer but, on average, the temperature is moderate. There is often a different story behind the simple statistics.

That's exactly my point. For all the times people ramble about the "bottom" X%, they haven't the slightest idea what they are talking about. A good many of the people who don't pay taxes are people who make a very solid living while people making much less are footing the bill. Quite contrary to the wing-nut talking point.

 

[Full-Auto]

I can assure you, I am in the bottom 47%, yet I pay plenty in taxes. I receive no "preferential" treatment of any kind. In fact, if anything, I am on the opposite side, watching preferential treatment going out to other people besides myself.

The percentages that are often cited (53%-47%) do not necessarily indicate a "bottom" 47% income level; it is just an indication of the percent of total tax returns that are non-taxable. Included in that 47% are 2.8 million that earned $50-75,000, 361,000 that earned between $100-200,000, and 4,000 that earned over $1 million. Included in the taxable returns are 157,000 that made less than $10,000 and 5.4 million that made less than $20,000.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/Content/PDF/T11-0226.pdf

It's mainly about your unique tax situation. For instance, a family of four that made $50,000 in 2010 could have this situation:

The family got a standard deduction of $11,400 and four personal exemptions of $3,650, leaving a taxable income of $24,000. The income tax on $24,000 was $2,769.
The two children younger than 17 qualified for two $1,000 child tax credits. The Making Work Pay credit was $800 because the parents were married filing jointly. The $2,800 in credits is more than the $2,769 in taxes, so they paid nothing.

But you know, these "loopholes" (I really dislike that word) were institututed to help families with children and people who work, two things that don't seem too subversive, and are provided to probably the largest "special interest" group in the country - working families. Most tax deductions and credits are to encourage behavior that most people would agree are worth supporting. So saying 47% are slackers that don't pay taxes on average is like having one hand in the oven and the other hand in the freezer but, on average, the temperature is moderate. There is often a different story behind the simple statistics.

That's exactly my point. For all the times people ramble about the "bottom" X%, they haven't the slightest idea what they are talking about. A good many of the people who don't pay taxes are people who make a very solid living while people making much less are footing the bill. Quite contrary to the wing-nut talking point.

Then that should be easily proven.


Should we wait long?

 

[Inthemiddle]

The percentages that are often cited (53%-47%) do not necessarily indicate a "bottom" 47% income level; it is just an indication of the percent of total tax returns that are non-taxable. Included in that 47% are 2.8 million that earned $50-75,000, 361,000 that earned between $100-200,000, and 4,000 that earned over $1 million. Included in the taxable returns are 157,000 that made less than $10,000 and 5.4 million that made less than $20,000.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/Content/PDF/T11-0226.pdf

It's mainly about your unique tax situation. For instance, a family of four that made $50,000 in 2010 could have this situation:

The family got a standard deduction of $11,400 and four personal exemptions of $3,650, leaving a taxable income of $24,000. The income tax on $24,000 was $2,769.
The two children younger than 17 qualified for two $1,000 child tax credits. The Making Work Pay credit was $800 because the parents were married filing jointly. The $2,800 in credits is more than the $2,769 in taxes, so they paid nothing.

But you know, these "loopholes" (I really dislike that word) were institututed to help families with children and people who work, two things that don't seem too subversive, and are provided to probably the largest "special interest" group in the country - working families. Most tax deductions and credits are to encourage behavior that most people would agree are worth supporting. So saying 47% are slackers that don't pay taxes on average is like having one hand in the oven and the other hand in the freezer but, on average, the temperature is moderate. There is often a different story behind the simple statistics.

That's exactly my point. For all the times people ramble about the "bottom" X%, they haven't the slightest idea what they are talking about. A good many of the people who don't pay taxes are people who make a very solid living while people making much less are footing the bill. Quite contrary to the wing-nut talking point.

Then that should be easily proven.


Should we wait long?

You tell me how long you're going to wait to click the damn link that's already been provided. If you do, you'll see that having no income tax liability is spread across all income brackets, with the $50k-$75k range having the smallest percentage of non-tax paying members, after which the percentages increase again. This talk of the "bottom X%" is without merit.

 

[Full-Auto]

That's exactly my point. For all the times people ramble about the "bottom" X%, they haven't the slightest idea what they are talking about. A good many of the people who don't pay taxes are people who make a very solid living while people making much less are footing the bill. Quite contrary to the wing-nut talking point.

Then that should be easily proven.


Should we wait long?

You tell me how long you're going to wait to click the damn link that's already been provided. If you do, you'll see that having no income tax liability is spread across all income brackets, with the $50k-$75k range having the smallest percentage of non-tax paying members, after which the percentages increase again. This talk of the "bottom X%" is without merit.

Ive never questioned anomalies. But to say this group is footing the bill is pure BS.

Now try harder if you can.........

 

[Inthemiddle]

Ive never questioned anomalies. But to say this group is footing the bill is pure BS.

Now try harder if you can.........

It's BS to say that those of us who pay taxes are footing the bill for those who don't pay taxes?

 

[Full-Auto]

Ive never questioned anomalies. But to say this group is footing the bill is pure BS.

Now try harder if you can.........

It's BS to say that those of us who pay taxes are footing the bill for those who don't pay taxes?

How? if they are not paying, how are they covering their end?

 

[WillowTree]

It's not what the 1% have or don't have. It is the preferential treatment that sucks.

The 1% cannot pay the bills, fill the military needs nor provide the health care this country demands.

If any group should receive preferential treatment it is the 99 % that do pay the bills, fill the military needs and spend tons and tons of money that which keeps the USA
in what jobs are left. The 99% are the primary stakeholders of the USA!

When it comes to funding Social Service needs in this country it is the 99% so why does the 1% ***** about the 99% using what they pay for?

only 50% of the 99% pay the bills..

Except for the bills paid for with local sales tax revenues.

focus asswipe, focus..

 

[Inthemiddle]

Ive never questioned anomalies. But to say this group is footing the bill is pure BS.

Now try harder if you can.........

It's BS to say that those of us who pay taxes are footing the bill for those who don't pay taxes?

How? if they are not paying, how are they covering their end?

*facepalm* Go back and re-read. Comprehension fail.

 

[Big Fitz]

be that as it may Syrenn... why should the 1% get that preferential treatment?

Why should the bottom 47% get preferential treatment? How are they making this country better?

I can assure you, I am in the bottom 47%, yet I pay plenty in taxes. I receive no "preferential" treatment of any kind. In fact, if anything, I am on the opposite side, watching preferential treatment going out to other people besides myself.

I must be in the 48th percentile.

 

[BillyV]

That's exactly my point. For all the times people ramble about the "bottom" X%, they haven't the slightest idea what they are talking about. A good many of the people who don't pay taxes are people who make a very solid living while people making much less are footing the bill. Quite contrary to the wing-nut talking point.

Then that should be easily proven.


Should we wait long?

You tell me how long you're going to wait to click the damn link that's already been provided. If you do, you'll see that having no income tax liability is spread across all income brackets, with the $50k-$75k range having the smallest percentage of non-tax paying members, after which the percentages increase again. This talk of the "bottom X%" is without merit.

You're looking at the wrong column; the percentage of taxable returns increases quite steadily with income levels. The $50-75K range is 85.6% taxable; all of the incomes above that are in mid to upper 90% range.

The point is, the tax code is largely as it should be, and the government takes in enough revenue. What we have is a spending problem, not a revenue problem. Revenues from 2007 have fallen about $400 billion, but that is to be expected given the weak economy. It is projected to return to 2007 levels in 2012. Spending, on the other hand, has increased $800 billion since 2007 and is projected to keep rising. Focus on the real villain; it's not the poor schmuck with a wife and two kids making $50K a year; it's the government programs that are driving us to the brink of bankruptcy.

 

[Skull Pilot]

It's not what the 1% have or don't have. It is the preferential treatment that sucks.

The 1% cannot pay the bills, fill the military needs nor provide the health care this country demands.

If any group should receive preferential treatment it is the 99 % that do pay the bills, fill the military needs and spend tons and tons of money that which keeps the USA
in what jobs are left. The 99% are the primary stakeholders of the USA!

When it comes to funding Social Service needs in this country it is the 99% so why does the 1% ***** about the 99% using what they pay for?

Actually the 99% ***** about the 1% who use the roads that "They paid for" to make money

Remember the Elizabeth Warren rant?

[youtube]htX2usfqMEs[/youtube]

But you ignorant sheep don't realize that the people who use roads for business actually pay far more in taxes and fees to use the roads than the rest of you do.