Obama & mitt
-
Trafik Jamz;327518 wrote:
I find it ironic that the republican's are pissed that the bottom half of the population don't pay any (income) taxes at all when they are striving for the same for the top halfNice speech, too bad its not accurate. They do NOT strive, they live off the system.
-
Not everyone in the lower 50% live off the system (though around 50% do receive a direct benefit from the government.... including most farmers http://farm.ewg.org/region.php). To say they ALL do is quite the stretch.... and to say that all of them strive to stay on these benefits is even more asinine. But I will concede that about 1/2 of the population receives a benefits.
I agree, for some people they feel they are better off not working rather than take a lower income job. For example, I think we've all heard stories of people who make less money taking a job than if they continue with unemployment. It SUCKS that this is the case, but I don't know if I can blame someone who has a family for staying on the system and maintaining their health benefits for themselves and their children instead of going to work at a job that won't be able to pay their bills (that they accumulated when they were working at a decent job before the economy started crashing in 2008). Ultimately we all do what is best for ourselves and our families, even if sometimes it isn't our ideal situation.
Now they are stuck in a perpetual spiral, they can't get a better job because their credit scores have dropped and they can't get out of debt because they can't get a job (my company won't allow us to hire anyone with a credit score lower than 600 for example)... so they can't get a job to get out of debt and they can't pay off their debt to get a better job.
Three-quarters of entitlement benefits written into law in the United States go toward the elderly or disabled. That’s according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. And a big chunk of the rest goes to working households. Only about 9 percent of all entitlement benefits go toward non-elderly, non-disabled households without jobs (and much of that involves health care and unemployment insurance)
I found the charts above interesting and I am posting them for a point of discussion more than anything.
-
Trafik Jamz;327537 wrote:
I found the charts above interesting and I am posting them for a point of discussion more than anything.
Holy misleading charts batman. Did you read the fine print at the bottom of the chart?
"The bottom 20% means the 20% of tax units with the lowest incomes; the same is true for the other income categories"
DaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
DaveH;327538 wrote:
Holy misleading charts batman. Did you read the fine print at the bottom of the chart?"The bottom 20% means the 20% of tax units with the lowest incomes; the same is true for the other income categories"
I did miss that Dave. Good catch.
-
Never have voted for the guy. So not sure how I could be.
I vote for the people I like and think would do a good job. Neither party has a lock on the core values of Chuck Schwan and likely none ever will. I do like to debate/argue though, I can't deny that... and since most of my friends lean waaaaaay to the right I tend to pick the debates from the left side of the aisle. Some of my blood relatives are from the far left, I argue with them all the time as well. On here the board (or those willing to engage in debate) are typically of the far right, so you see the left argument/debates from me.
I haven't picked the winning president in an election since Clinton in 1996... and I've only voted democrat once since then. Figure that one out and tell me that I'm an obamabot.
As for the charts, like I said, I posted them online for a point of discussion. Dave found a flaw in one of them. Fair enough... but if the writing IS on the chart, is it REALLY intentionally misleading? I mean, it clearly states how they came up with the numbers for the chart. And, it is for tax expenditures which are defined as "Revenue a government foregoes through the provisions of tax laws that allow (1) deductions, exclusions, or exemptions from the taxpayers' taxable expenditure, income, or investment, (2) deferral of tax liability, or (3) preferential tax rates.
Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/tax-expenditure.html#ixzz2Bz7Kfmsv"
As I understand the fine print (and someone please correct me if I am incorrect) they looked at the bottom 20% who actually paid income taxes and then figured out the average amount of expenditures that they received as a whole. Again, if I am misinterpreting that correct me. I AM human. I do make mistakes and try to learn from them.
-
Trafik Jamz;327542 wrote:
As for the charts, like I said, I posted them online for a point of discussion. Dave found a flaw in one of them. Fair enough... but if the writing IS on the chart, is it REALLY intentionally misleading?Whenever I see charts like that, I always go back to the source and research them a little to see where they are coming from. It was pretty obvious from looking at their web site that they are left leaning. As for your question, yes I still think it is misleading, even thought there is a disclaimer on the bottom. I'd venture to bet that the majority of people who see those charts don't bother to read the fine print, and the people who make the charts are banking on that.
DaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
The point is that it still isn't all that inaccurate really. Yes, only those that pay into taxes at all are going to have major tax expenditures. Honestly, if you are below the poverty level you probably aren't going to have any of those expenditures... That is my take on the chart.
-
Trafik Jamz;327544 wrote:
The point is that it still isn't all that inaccurate really. Yes, only those that pay into taxes at all are going to have major tax expenditures. Honestly, if you are below the poverty level you probably aren't going to have any of those expenditures... That is my take on the chart.My take on the chart is that someone with an easily seen agenda made it, so I don't put any stock in it's validity.
DaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
Trafik Jamz;327544 wrote:
The point is that it still isn't all that inaccurate really. Yes, only those that pay into taxes at all are going to have major tax expenditures. Honestly, if you are below the poverty level you probably aren't going to have any of those expenditures... That is my take on the chart.You see what you want to see. No more, no less. It's the progressive mindset.
-
63vette;327547 wrote:
You see what you want to see. No more, no less. It's the progressive mindset.Calling someone who votes republican/libertarian on most issues progressive is kinda crazy. I want my taxes to go down, I want WAAAAY less government involvement/spending, I don't want to pay for anyone else's problems/laziness, etc.... However, I'm on pace to earn more money this year than I have at any other point in my life and my taxable income will be lower than it was a decade ago due to investments, write offs, and other expenditures. Yes, I'm using the hell out of the system to make sure that I get every damn penny I paid in back.... but it seems the more I earn, the more expenditures I have.... if I play my cards right this year, I will pay in virtually no federal income tax ($1000 tops) according to my accountant.
Am I bitching about getting my money back? No, but I am pointing out that there are flaws in our tax code. Some of those problems are that the poor don't pay enough (any) some are that there are provisions in the tax code that say a guy (me) that can afford a $350,000 house, 2 new cars and 2 vacations per year can get by paying ~$1000 in income tax when some of my friends w/ half of what I have earned are paying in more than that.
Same story with my parents. They have been farmers for 42 years now, they weren't "big" farmers but I never went without anything as a child and we were probably around the average for our area of the state on income in hindsight. My dad had his first year of actually paying any income tax was 2002. It was also as he started buying/investing again to offset his income.
Point being it is hard for someone making $40k/year household income w/ a family to really invest in the same things that I as a business owner and insurance agent can invest in to get my taxes down because they need that money just to live and provide a decent life for their family.
If you want to label me a liberal/progressive/conservative/libertarian/etc... so be it. The fact is I'm somewhere in the middle of all of those things. There isn't a party of Chuck Schwan.... therefore I vote for who I think is most likely to have an influence on the things that matter most to me at any particular time. I don't/won't vote 100% by party lines. Never have.
-
63vette;327550 wrote:
I am surprised that you are so offended. I figured calling you progressive was a complement. Why you so mad bro?
Mostly because the title does not fit, but still I'm not overly offended. I've been called worse, but like those things I don't feel that the title fits perfectly. I prefer being called Chuck.... or tjamz... or asshole, those titles fit me much better.
Are some of my beliefs progressive? Perhaps. Are some conservative? Yes. I truly believe that there are some ideas worth looking at from both sides of the aisle. Libertarian fits me most closely, but even then not 100%.
-
How old do you think I am? I'm more curious than anything.... I'm probably older than you suspect.
But you are right about one thing, the older I get and the more active I become in things the more I realize that neither party has all the answers.
The republican party is fiscally a superior platform.
I don't think either of the two parties is right socially.
Culturally I think the conservative platform is best, however that all goes out the window once they start talking about religions role in politicsIn doing some research I'd say that "Classical Liberalism" might most closely match my belief system. It is defined as:
"Classical liberalism is a political philosophy that supports individual rights as pre-existing the state, a government that exists to protect those moral rights, ensured by a constitution that protects individual autonomy from other individuals and governmental power, private property, and a laissez-faire economic policy. The "normative core" of classical liberalism is the idea that in an environment of laissez-faire, a spontaneous order of cooperation in exchanging goods and services emerges that satisfies human wants."
Basically the approximate same beliefs as modern libertarians.
-
The modern liberal's mindset is so fucking ass-backwards its comical. They claim they are pro business, pro free enterprise, pro liberty, but their actions speak otherwise. They press their agenda forward with equality in mind before liberty. An old Friedman quote "A society that aims for equality before liberty will end up with neither equality, nor liberty. A society that aims first for liberty will not end up with equality, but will end up with a closer approach to equality than any other kind of system that has ever been developed. You can only aim at equality by giving some the right to take things from others. What ultimately happens when you aim at equality is that A and B decide what C shall do for D. Accept that they take a little bit of a commission of the top on the way."
I love capitalism. I love free trade. I love free individuals perusing their own self interests. I love corporations and profits (GASPS!!). I love the constitution.
If you haven't seen this, do press play. This man was beyond brilliant. He had a way of articulating and making his points so crystal clear.
[video=youtube;RWsx1X8PV_A]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A[/video]
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login