Thoughts on democrats and republicans.

[medicineman]

Just a word about Social Security funding: Remove the 106,000 deduction cap and the system will be funded forever. I wonder why no-one ever talks about this?? Could it be that the top earners are in control of the government, My My, what a surprise.

 

[NoDrama]

Just a word about Social Security funding: Remove the 106,000 deduction cap and the system will be funded forever. I wonder why no-one ever talks about this?? Could it be that the top earners are in control of the government, My My, what a surprise.

I think the reason no one talks about this is because its just not possible. Just how many people do you think make over 106K a year in the usa? about 14%. So if you think 14% can support the other 86% you are dreaming.

 

[medicineman]

I think the reason no one talks about this is because its just not possible. Just how many people do you think make over 106K a year in the usa? about 14%. So if you think 14% can support the other 86% you are dreaming.

I may be dreaming but the top 2% make as much as the bottom 58%, so keeping the SS deduction on may suprise you. What is 15% of a million, 150,000, that's like a thousand peoples SS witholdings, do the math and I'm pretty sure you can see that it certainly would make a difference. The sad part is, trhe rich that control this country will never allow this. Think about it. They put this cap on when hardly anyone made over 106,000. Now many do and many make a shitload over 106,000, this is preferential treatment for the rich that can most afford this tax, pretty fucked I'd say.

 

[MrDank007]

That chart basically vindicates the "tax the rick and feed the poor" method of taxation. Did you notice the the national debt growth explodes immediately following Bush Jr's massive tax cut to the top tax bracket.

Unless nobody cares about debt/balancing the budget and just wants to do "whats right".

"Whats right" in this case meaning let the rich use the infrastructure to conduct their commerce (roads, ports, water, electricity, police, firefighters, the legal system, education) but not pay for it because they have more money so they have earned the right not to.

Does anybody really think that entitlement programs like welfare and medicaid are "bankrupting" the country or the rich?



p.s- Canada's top tax rate is around 40%, much much higher than in America. In addition, they have a 12-15% sales tax on every commercial purchase. Oh yeah, and a totally socialized medical system. AND a semi-socialized post-secondary education system.

So how come they didn't get hit by the recession? Conservative economics fails to explain this.

"Whats right" in this case meaning let the rich use the infrastructure to conduct their commerce (roads, ports, water, electricity, police, firefighters, the legal system, education) but not pay for it because they have more money so they have earned the right not to.

Look at the chart: None of those are in the top expenses. Entitlement programs are bankrupting the country along with wasteful spending. Medicaid and SS have unfunded liablitlies almost doubling GDP. SS was supposed to be a trust, but it has been raided and is broken. My statement eludes to in being caput 20 years before I am eligble to withdraw so I am essentially throwing money into a fireplace. Paying interest is money evaporated.

 

[Carthoris]

That chart basically vindicates the "tax the rick and feed the poor" method of taxation. Did you notice the the national debt growth explodes immediately following Bush Jr's massive tax cut to the top tax bracket.

Unless nobody cares about debt/balancing the budget and just wants to do "whats right".

"Whats right" in this case meaning let the rich use the infrastructure to conduct their commerce (roads, ports, water, electricity, police, firefighters, the legal system, education) but not pay for it because they have more money so they have earned the right not to.

Does anybody really think that entitlement programs like welfare and medicaid are "bankrupting" the country or the rich?



p.s- Canada's top tax rate is around 40%, much much higher than in America. In addition, they have a 12-15% sales tax on every commercial purchase. Oh yeah, and a totally socialized medical system. AND a semi-socialized post-secondary education system.

So how come they didn't get hit by the recession? Conservative economics fails to explain this.

The rich pay almost all of the taxes - anyone who says otherwise is lying.

You know who else wasn't hit by the recession? People who live in the jungles of south america. Point? Canada's corporate tax rate is lower than the United States, maybe thats why they weathered the recession better? Oh, so conservative economics do explain that - charge the businesses less to operate and they won't leave and go somewhere else. Canada's personal tax is only a little higher - maybe they just don't have as much welfare or maybe they don't have to spend more than 50 dollars for their military - horse feed is cheap, what is there, 3 of them? If we weren't here Canada might have to protect itself. There are a lot of welfare states in Europe with everyone getting health care - where is their trouble free recession period? Maybe we should pinpoint why healthcare costs so much? Do you need to go the ER and then spend 10k dollars and 10 hours there because your kid has the flu? A nurse could take care of that in 5 minutes with a prescription that costs about 4 bucks. Wouldn't creating jobs for everyone to work at and get money from be more helpful that stealing from one person to give to another?

 

[Carthoris]

I think the reason no one talks about this is because its just not possible. Just how many people do you think make over 106K a year in the usa? about 14%. So if you think 14% can support the other 86% you are dreaming.

That is exactly what the left thinks. Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream.

 

[Carthoris]

I may be dreaming but the top 2% make as much as the bottom 58%, so keeping the SS deduction on may suprise you. What is 15% of a million, 150,000, that's like a thousand peoples SS witholdings, do the math and I'm pretty sure you can see that it certainly would make a difference. The sad part is, trhe rich that control this country will never allow this. Think about it. They put this cap on when hardly anyone made over 106,000. Now many do and many make a shitload over 106,000, this is preferential treatment for the rich that can most afford this tax, pretty fucked I'd say.

There is also a cap on how much you can get from SSI. Its Social Security Insurance - not Social Security Unpaid. The top 2% pay more taxes than the bottom 58%. You are supposed to pay into it to get out of it. Social Security is broken because of how it is administered - not how much rich people are paying.

 

[redivider]

The rich pay almost all of the taxes - anyone who says otherwise is lying.

You know who else wasn't hit by the recession? People who live in the jungles of south america. Point? Canada's corporate tax rate is lower than the United States, maybe thats why they weathered the recession better? Oh, so conservative economics do explain that - charge the businesses less to operate and they won't leave and go somewhere else. Canada's personal tax is only a little higher - maybe they just don't have as much welfare or maybe they don't have to spend more than 50 dollars for their military - horse feed is cheap, what is there, 3 of them? If we weren't here Canada might have to protect itself. There are a lot of welfare states in Europe with everyone getting health care - where is their trouble free recession period? Maybe we should pinpoint why healthcare costs so much? Do you need to go the ER and then spend 10k dollars and 10 hours there because your kid has the flu? A nurse could take care of that in 5 minutes with a prescription that costs about 4 bucks. Wouldn't creating jobs for everyone to work at and get money from be more helpful that stealing from one person to give to another?

in europe they might be suffering through a hell of a recession but guess what??

they might not have a job, but they have health care.


there's plenty of ppl here who have neither.

that's a fact RIGHTIES CHOOSE TO IGNORE.

boom!!!!

 

[don2009]

Democrats The Northern New Yorkers freedom to everybody, Republicans SLAVE OWNERS Confideret Fuck everybody else hang em high BITCHES! IMO

 

[Carthoris]

That chart basically vindicates the "tax the rick and feed the poor" method of taxation. Did you notice the the national debt growth explodes immediately following Bush Jr's massive tax cut to the top tax bracket.

Unless nobody cares about debt/balancing the budget and just wants to do "whats right".

"Whats right" in this case meaning let the rich use the infrastructure to conduct their commerce (roads, ports, water, electricity, police, firefighters, the legal system, education) but not pay for it because they have more money so they have earned the right not to.

Does anybody really think that entitlement programs like welfare and medicaid are "bankrupting" the country or the rich?



p.s- Canada's top tax rate is around 40%, much much higher than in America. In addition, they have a 12-15% sales tax on every commercial purchase. Oh yeah, and a totally socialized medical system. AND a semi-socialized post-secondary education system.

So how come they didn't get hit by the recession? Conservative economics fails to explain this.

Mostly rich people pay for most of the infrastructure. Poor people use those same infrastructure without paying. Id say by already carrying the weight of the country on their shoulders by paying all the taxes they are paying their share - why aren't the people making less than 50k? Why should anyone be disproportionately charged? They don't charge rich people more for bread at the store, why should being alive cost more? I just don't understand how people can think the tax structure is fair. How is not paying taxes because you had kids fair - yet taking up a bigger portion of the benefits? Why should having kids get you a $5k check at the end of the year? Everyone should pay the same tax, either a flat rate income tax or a sales tax.

 

[Carthoris]

in europe they might be suffering through a hell of a recession but guess what??

they might not have a job, but they have health care.


there's plenty of ppl here who have neither.

that's a fact RIGHTIES CHOOSE TO IGNORE.

boom!!!!

That's not even an argument. "Well the liquor store owner might be dead, but at least I have freckles"

 

[Carthoris]

Democrats The Northern New Yorkers freedom to everybody, Republicans SLAVE OWNERS Confideret Fuck everybody else hang em high BITCHES! IMO

You probably never went to school and learned that the Republican party was the Anti-Slavery party, and that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican. We will forgive you, I know they don't teach history in school anymore.

The Republican party was established with the specific goal of preventing slavery from spreading to the newest US territories, in 1854. The Republican ideology at the time heavily empahasised personal enterprise ahttp://www.blurtit.com/q702494.html#nd self-sufficiency; it was a very "Yankee"/northerner creation. It specifically opposed the wealth made by southern plantation owners on the back of slave labor.

How does it feel to be ignorant?

 

[redivider]

That's not even an argument. "Well the liquor store owner might be dead, but at least I have freckles"

it was as much an argument as the jumble of 'facts' you point out every day.

 

[redivider]

You probably never went to school and learned that the Republican party was the Anti-Slavery party, and that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican. We will forgive you, I know they don't teach history in school anymore.

The Republican party was established with the specific goalof preventing slavery from spreading to the newest US territories, in 1854. The Republican ideology at the time heavily empahasised personal enterprise and self-sufficiency; it was a very "Yankee"/northerner creation. It specifically opposed the wealth made by southern plantation owners on the back of slave labor.

How does it feel to be ignorant?

first of all. how dare YOU call somebody else ignorant??? the republican party of abraham lincoln would piss on republicans today FYI.

do you think Sharon Angle, George W. Bush, Sarah Palin and Boehner belong in this sentence along with Abraham Lincoln???

if you do, that explains A LOT.

 

[Carthoris]

first of all. how dare YOU call somebody else ignorant??? the republican party of abraham lincoln would piss on republicans today FYI.

do you think Sharon Angle, George W. Bush, Sarah Palin and Boehner belong in this sentence along with Abraham Lincoln???

if you do, that explains A LOT.

I dare to call someone ignorant because they said Republicans were confederate slave owners, and Democrats were northerners. Which is completely ignorant.
Definition of IGNORANT

1 a : destitute of knowledge or education <an ignorant society>; also : lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified
b : resulting from or showing lack of knowledge or intelligence

2: unaware, uninformed


"Originally Posted by don2009 Democrats The Northern New Yorkers freedom to everybody, Republicans SLAVE OWNERS Confideret Fuck everybody else hang em high BITCHES! IMO"


If that isn't ignorant, then what is? Is this what the left teaches their base?

If the Republican party of 1860 was here right now, you know, they would either become Libertarians or Join the Tea Party depending on how religious they were. Hell, they may even opt for 2nd Amendment solutions. In fact, Im willing to bet the democrats of that time would be too - you know, aside from being in the KKK.

Did I ever mention Sharon Angle, George Bush, Palin, or Boehner? I don't believe I did.

 

[redivider]

I dare to call someone ignorant because they said Republicans were confederate slave owners, and Democrats were northerners. Which is completely ignorant.
Definition of IGNORANT

1 a : destitute of knowledge or education <an ignorant society>; also : lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified
b : resulting from or showing lack of knowledge or intelligence

2: unaware, uninformed


"Originally Posted by don2009 Democrats The Northern New Yorkers freedom to everybody, Republicans SLAVE OWNERS Confideret Fuck everybody else hang em high BITCHES! IMO"


If that isn't ignorant, then what is? Is this what the left teaches their base?

If the Republican party of 1860 was here right now, you know, they would either become Libertarians or Join the Tea Party depending on how religious they were. Hell, they may even opt for 2nd Amendment solutions. In fact, Im willing to bet the democrats of that time would be too - you know, aside from being in the KKK.

Did I ever mention Sharon Angle, George Bush, Palin, or Boehner? I don't believe I did.

well you're glamorizing the republican party by bringing in Abraham Lincoln.... i just wanted to bring you back to reality...

 

[NoDrama]

If you don't have an Avatar, your posts have no value.

 

[Carthoris]

well you're glamorizing the republican party by bringing in Abraham Lincoln.... i just wanted to bring you back to reality...

I was responding to the era that the poster was referring to with pertinent historical information relevant to his comment, nothing more.

 

[UncleBuck]

If you don't have a GIF Avatar, your posts have no value.

fixed it for you!

 

[medicineman]

There is also a cap on how much you can get from SSI. Its Social Security Insurance - not Social Security Unpaid. The top 2% pay more taxes than the bottom 58%. You are supposed to pay into it to get out of it. Social Security is broken because of how it is administered - not how much rich people are paying.

Social security was intended to support those in their old age that had not made a pile of money in their lifetime and would be destitute without it. It was never intended to supplement rich retirees. Why should someone be rewarded with a tax exemption once they reach an income level where they could more afford the deduction that those on the bottom? This is subsidizing the rich. If the cap on deductions were to go away, I'm pretty sure Social Security would be solvent for a long time.. And speaking of another way to address the solvency, if one recieves a certain amount for their retirement, let's say 100K, just for drill, then they would be ineligeble for SS. The pittance of 10-12K to millionaires would not affect them at all. It is time for the rich to come to the table and divvy up some of their excess millions.