NOTE: I am not saying that any particular politician is a great guy or that Mitt is worse than them as a person. Just that he's exactly the guy you'd expect to see show up in a sitcom to make fun of rich guys.
"there are a bunch of ppl with INCOME that don't pay TAXES."
If someone works and doesn't pay income taxes then it is because they aren't paid enough to warrant it. A sane person would be asking why they are paid so little rather than suggesting that we should tax the working poor but republicans are hateful lunatics so that is what we are left with.
"Basically every major city that exists today was built without a Federal income tax.
There were local, state, and federal governments prior to the Federal income tax."
you should more clearly specify which type of tax you means.
now it reads like you mean all taxes.
and most of those cities back then did not have a extensive network of highways, rail, water and electric connections like they do today.
you can't run a country today like its the early 1800's.
The only fair way is to tax Wealth and not Income. Income and Sales tax both create deadweight loss, and deter growth. A Wealth tax adds pressure to keep money productive. These people own 40% of the wealth, and yet they have pay 0% Wealth tax, and an effective income tax that is only 14%! That they pay a higher percentage of the overall income tax revenue is a reflection of this unhealthy concentration of capital.
This creates a collusive environment for trading and investing, resulting in financial outcomes like Enron, Iraq War (yes that was an "investment") and 2007's multiple crashes. A whole lot of wealth these days is non-productive (sorry, but cash holdings is not productive, might as well be in a mattress).
What you don't seem to understand is that you are focusing on the bouncing ball of Reported Taxable Income, when the real economy and the mechanisms for its taxation are under a lot of pressure to support the existing class structure. That is the OPPOSITE of why capitalism was idealized. Capitalism allowed small entrepreneurs to use their ingenuity to create goods that consumers want and need by employing capital and labor for production. It was in response to Aristocratic and Royal political control over the economy. It was a way for common people to own land, and determine their livelihoods.
Today, capitalism is bolshevik, it presupposes a class of deserving individuals and is willing to incite political unrest in order to intensify the powers of that class. We can call these people the 1% or whatever, but just take a step back and see:
njdoo7Jan 24, 2012Buried
"Americans continue to elect these rich ****s****rs that don't give a f**k about them." -George Carlin
dsmeek36Jan 24, 2012Buried
but he knows what Middle Class people want and how they feel; he's unemployed, too!
hediggmeJan 24, 2012Buried
Warren Buffett should give Romney's tax guy a call. Buffett paid 17% on $39M.
linuxpersonJan 24, 2012Buried
He's talking about their overall effective Federal income tax rate, it's not rocket science.
miklkitJan 24, 2012Buried
And Buffet's secretary paid 32%.
njdoo7Jan 24, 2012Buried
Oddly, Romney's largest campaign contributors are banks, many of whom got bailouts.
Another oddity, is some of his largest contributors match those of Obama and Bush.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/guess-politician-and-follow-money
The big banks don't see much of a difference between Romney and Obama, as evidenced by their contributions, why should you?
njdoo7Jan 24, 2012Buried
Wait, you don't need a PhD in math and law to compare to two overall tax rates?
13.9% versus 17%...
Seems far too complicated for anyone without a PhD to grasp to me...
/s (if it was needed)
salbatrossJan 24, 2012Buried
Mitt Romney is the epitome of the slimy rich guy.
NOTE: I am not saying that any particular politician is a great guy or that Mitt is worse than them as a person. Just that he's exactly the guy you'd expect to see show up in a sitcom to make fun of rich guys.
NeosopheusJan 24, 2012Buried
"Corporations are people, my friend." - Mitt Romney
ponyponiponeJan 24, 2012Buried
the 1% = own 40% of the wealth, pay 14% of the taxes
njdoo7Jan 24, 2012Buried
I would use a calculator to figure it out, but my calculator hasn't finished it's PhD dissertation so I cannot rely on it for the correct answer.
njdoo7Jan 24, 2012Buried
Are you retarded?
They compared the effective tax rates...that's it!
Nothing more nothing less.
jrstinkfishJan 24, 2012Buried
They pay 0 taxes? You want to maybe amend that statement so you don't look like you're mangling a Republican talking point?
chilidogsJan 24, 2012Buried
"there are a bunch of ppl with INCOME that don't pay TAXES."
If someone works and doesn't pay income taxes then it is because they aren't paid enough to warrant it. A sane person would be asking why they are paid so little rather than suggesting that we should tax the working poor but republicans are hateful lunatics so that is what we are left with.
norman619Jan 24, 2012Buried
Please show us a politician that is actually middle class.
chilidogsJan 24, 2012Buried
That is a really specific claim that we are going to have to assume that you made up.
amaoicanJan 24, 2012Buried
Cut the crap. You are a manipulative scumbag.
countess666Jan 24, 2012Buried
"Basically every major city that exists today was built without a Federal income tax.
There were local, state, and federal governments prior to the Federal income tax."
you should more clearly specify which type of tax you means.
now it reads like you mean all taxes.
and most of those cities back then did not have a extensive network of highways, rail, water and electric connections like they do today.
you can't run a country today like its the early 1800's.
salbatrossJan 24, 2012Buried
INCOME taxes
ponyponiponeJan 24, 2012Buried
The only fair way is to tax Wealth and not Income. Income and Sales tax both create deadweight loss, and deter growth. A Wealth tax adds pressure to keep money productive. These people own 40% of the wealth, and yet they have pay 0% Wealth tax, and an effective income tax that is only 14%! That they pay a higher percentage of the overall income tax revenue is a reflection of this unhealthy concentration of capital.
This creates a collusive environment for trading and investing, resulting in financial outcomes like Enron, Iraq War (yes that was an "investment") and 2007's multiple crashes. A whole lot of wealth these days is non-productive (sorry, but cash holdings is not productive, might as well be in a mattress).
What you don't seem to understand is that you are focusing on the bouncing ball of Reported Taxable Income, when the real economy and the mechanisms for its taxation are under a lot of pressure to support the existing class structure. That is the OPPOSITE of why capitalism was idealized. Capitalism allowed small entrepreneurs to use their ingenuity to create goods that consumers want and need by employing capital and labor for production. It was in response to Aristocratic and Royal political control over the economy. It was a way for common people to own land, and determine their livelihoods.
Today, capitalism is bolshevik, it presupposes a class of deserving individuals and is willing to incite political unrest in order to intensify the powers of that class. We can call these people the 1% or whatever, but just take a step back and see:
1% = Own 40% of Wealth, pay 14% in income tax.