Will Obama Default?

posted by jhende3

"Seems like these guys got a legitimate grip here! Their all independently wealthy. I don't blame you guys now Obama wants to take your money shame on him. If I made half of what you guys say you make I'll be mad too. Make 1.5 million only to take home a mire 250k huh I'll be in Washington myself screaming. We poor people should get off the welfare and start paying more now. The tax code should be set up so that the less you make the more you pay! If your to dumb to get a good education you should be supporting the rest of us."

No, take home on 1.5 million is only 150,00 after taxes.

No, the tax code should not be set up so that the less you make the more you pay. It should be set up on what you spend, not what you make. What if you could earn your money and put it in savings instead of spending it and thus not pay taxes on it right now. Maybe people would save their money, develop a nest egg to use for buying a house with payments they could afford, or start their own business in their quest for the American Dream, or reach 60 years of age and be able to retire comfortably on the tax free money they saved. Maybe we would not be so dependant on SS in our old age.

No. If you are two dumb to get a good education, you can't help support the rest of us because you will probably never have a job that makes enough money to help pay your fair share of taxes. But I believe most people are not too dumb, just not motivated.

Some of the posters here have no idea what it takes to run a business, how much hard work is required. Small business companies employ by far more people than big companies in the US. Owning your own business is one way to have a chance at the American Dream....which is becoming harder to do with current politics and the what can the government do for me attitude.

No "reasonable" person can argue that the "rich" (whoever the fuck they are) shouldn't agree to pay a tad bit more to help offset the problem "WE" have created.! * But in the face of those numbers above... no "reasonable" person can argue that the rich are paying "too little"!!

"? Originally Posted by MrGiz

Speaking of reasonable....would any reasonable person think it a good idea to pass out tax cuts in the face of two wars?

That is what happened. The Bush tax cuts should never have happened....they did, water under the bridge but now those tax cuts should expire for everyone.

I am a Single Employee Small Business owner in the 33% bracket, supporting two adults and a young teenager.... how much more of my money do you bleeding hearts want? * How much more would be "FAIR"? Originally Posted by MrGiz

It is not a matter of bleeding hearts... it is a matter of paying wtf you bought. We bought two wars. How do you suggest we pay for them?

Another thing, poor folks pay state and local and sales tax. They are regressive taxes, there is now way in hell they can pay the same rate as a rich person does in the Federal Tax system. They would have no money to eat. Unless of course you want for sales and state and local taxes tied to income. A speeding ticket is equal to 1% o your income. DriverLicence , 1% of everyones income. You see how distorted you are being when you do not take all taxes in consideration? The problem is that 99% of the people haven't a clue as to how and whom pays for what in our present system. You are not helping the situtation with this slight of hand poor pitiful me type post.

I don't know where you get 3,000 taxes on each additional 100,000 income over 250,000. The tax rate above 250,000 is about 33-35% which would be an additional (approximately 33,000 to 35,000 in taxes to pay per 100,000. So if you made 200,000 more you would pay at least 66,000 in more taxes. Not 6,000.00 Maybe you put your decimal point in the wrong place. see tax tables at
. Originally Posted by Jdriller

First , you acted as if Obama tax increase was going to make you pay an extra 66k in taxes on an additional 200k in income.

When I point out that you would already be paying 60k and his proposed tax increase would only cost 6k....just as Munchmaster said:

Hot Damn where did you Repub's go to freaking school?

You already are paying taxes. If they increase by 3%, you are only paying an extra 6k on 200k in income!

Shoot jdriller, you need to run on the Tea Party ticket with that fuuzzy math of yours! Originally Posted by WTF

You then disagree with me....

Wrong. You must subtract 35% of the extra 200.000 or 70,000, netting after taxes only an additional 140,000 and then pay an additional 6,000 out of the 140,000. You don't have 200,000 because the tax man already took 70,000 away. So you are really paying 6k extra on 140,000, not on 200,000. Of course, since were "rich" what difference does another 6k matter. Originally Posted by Jdriller

but still say that you are paying only 6k extra. Exactly as I correctly pointed out to you.

To recap, you cried about Obama making you pay an extra 66,000 in taxes.

When I pointed out that in fact was correct you would only pay an extra 6k in taxes....

You proclaim me wrong , ''No you say, I in fact will pay , (drumroll please) 6k more in taxes.''

Not 66k like you first said but 6k more just like myself and Munchmaster said.

The only way you get something like 3,000 in taxes on 100,000 on income of more than 250,000 is if you ignore the 33,000 already paid on that 100,000 Originally Posted by Jdriller

Ding ding ding ding. Hope you didn't spend too much time on that pretty involved posting of yours simply because you didn't understand the very simple point that we're talking about how much extra you'd pay with the proposed tax increase.

To recap, you cried about Obama making you pay an extra 66,000 in taxes.

When I pointed out that in fact was correct you would only pay an extra 6k in taxes....

You proclaim me wrong , ''No you say, I in fact will pay , (drumroll please) 6k more in taxes.''

Not 66k like you first said but 6k more just like myself and Munchmaster said. Originally Posted by WTF

Don't bother, WTF. This is the same Jdriller who said this in a previous thread:

"I had a dream once. If I work hard, and smart, get an education I could make a lot of money and live the good life. Little did I know that my taxes would be 35% or so for income tax, almost 13% more for self employment tax, plus probably 25% more for real estate taxes on my properties and home. Add it up, that’s about 75% of my income that goes to the tax man. So if I make 275,000 before taxes, about 206,000 goes for taxes and leaves me about 70,00.00 spendable money. 75.00 out of every 100.00 I earn goes to some form of tax payment. The so called rich do pay 85% of the taxes paid to the IRS each year. "

In other words, he claimed he was paying 35% on the first $200,000 of his income. And he also doesn't seem to realize that real estate taxes on his home are tax deductible. Dude seriously needs to hire an accountant.

WTF. . . .
- First... I didn't order any fucking war , much less two, three, four... however many we have going now! Please point out "ONE" post I have ever made that paints me as a Bush supporter! * Can I assume you believe all "rich" people are war mongers? You've just offended all of Hollywood!

- Second... as usual, you didn't answer my question! I pay the same "poor sales taxes" as the poor do.... only more, because I am able to spend more. How much more of my money do you want? I held my points to federal income tax.... trust me, I spend a lot too. Too much! But not more than I have!

- Third... "Poor Pitiful Me" ?.... GTF outa here!! I have been very fortunate... but NOTHING has ever been GIVEN to me!! And don't give me your usual bullshit about the privileges I was born with... you have proven many times over that you know NOTHING about me... other than I'm a Poon Hound! * Slight of Hand , My Ass!

I notice you chose to ignore the part where I said "No reasonable person can argue that the "rich" (whoever the fuck they are) shouldn't agree to pay a tad bit more to help offset the problem "WE" have created."

A "tad bit more" for "the rich" will AGAIN, be a HELL of a lot more than 80% of the population! Again , I ask.... HOW MUCH MORE?

After you squeeze more out of "The Rich".... are you naive enough to think you have "fixxed" anything? Curb spending, or the whole game will be over soon!

Are the rich (whoever the fuck they are) "entitled" to pay for the whole party?
Who sent out the invitations?

WTF. . . .
- First... I didn't order any fucking war , much less two, three, four... however many we have going now! Please point out "ONE" post I have ever made that paints me as a Bush supporter! * Can I assume you believe all "rich" people are war mongers? You've just offended all of Hollywood!
My point was that if you got a tax break during a time of war and now have the audacity to bitch about deficits, you need to go back and take a simple math course

- Second... as usual, you didn't answer my question! I pay the same "poor sales taxes" as the poor do.... only more, because I am able to spend more. How much more of my money do you want? I held my points to federal income tax.... trust me, I spend a lot too. Too much! But not more than I have!

Yes you do but as a % of income, it is way less. That is why it is a regressive tax. You do not drive more than many poor people......


- Third... "Poor Pitiful Me" ?.... GTF outa here!! I have been very fortunate... but NOTHING has ever been GIVEN to me!! And don't give me your usual bullshit about the privileges I was born with... you have proven many times over that you know NOTHING about me... other than I'm a Poon Hound! * Slight of Hand , My Ass!


I said slight of hand not ass, I stand by wtf I said. Poor people are not the reason we are in this mess. Rich folks buying politicians to implement their transfer of wealth from the middle class in this country to the top 1% are.

I notice you chose to ignore the part where I said "No reasonable person can argue that the "rich" (whoever the fuck they are) shouldn't agree to pay a tad bit more to help offset the problem "WE" have created."

A "tad bit more" for "the rich" will AGAIN, be a HELL of a lot more than 80% of the population! Again , I ask.... HOW MUCH MORE?

After you squeeze more out of "The Rich".... are you naive enough to think you have "fixxed" anything? Curb spending, or the whole game will be over soon!

You do understand that all the programs that the GOP wants to cut are running a surplus at the moment? SS and Medicade are two of the three largest outlays, the third is Defense. Defense spending has run up this huge deficit that the Republican Party said we did not need to pay for. Remember Dick Cheney, he said deficits do not matter. Now that deficits matter, we need to cut funding to social programs? Programs that have , to date paid for themselves!

So my answer is wtf ever it takes, the Defense department ran up a huge IOU to make you feel safe, now it is time to pay the piper and you cry like a baby! Unfucking believable.



Are the rich (whoever the fuck they are) "entitled" to pay for the whole party?
Who sent out the invitations?

I said all the Bush tax cuts should be rescinded. All. Not just the ones on the so called rich. I also think all loop holes should be closed. Not just the so called ones on oil companies. We need to act like adults and quit thinking that we can go to war and cut taxes. If you think I am for any of this extension of the Bush Doctrine you are crazy. All it proves is that the military runs this country.
Originally Posted by MrGiz

There, I will be happy to explain any further misunderstandings you may have on the tax code

There, I will be happy to explain any further misunderstandings you may have on the tax code Originally Posted by WTF

I have no misunderstandings of tax code, as you have opined.... we simply disagree that we have more of a spending problem, than we do a revenue problem!

I haven't argued about defense spending... nor have I tried to defend any of our misguided war efforts.... that is YOUR soapbox!

Spending is spending.... whether it is waste thru social entitlement programs , or FAILED Department of Education efforts , or the TOTALLY USELESS Department of Energy , or war costs, or defense contracts to your favorite rich fat cat targets! Cheney is not my Buddy... fuck him and his ignorant quotes... he is your favorite excuse!

We simply cannot continue to spend money that doesn't exist!
Defend that!

I have no misunderstandings of tax code, as you have opined.... we simply disagree that we have more of a spending problem, than we do a revenue problem!

I haven't argued about defense spending... nor have I tried to defend any of our misguided war efforts.... that is YOUR soapbox!

Spending is spending.... whether it is waste thru social entitlement programs , or FAILED Department of Education efforts , or the TOTALLY USELESS Department of Energy , or war costs, or defense contracts to your favorite rich fat cat targets! Cheney is not my Buddy... fuck him and his ignorant quotes... he is your favorite excuse!

We simply cannot continue to spend money that doesn't exist!
Defend that! Originally Posted by MrGiz

Yes we need to slowly cut spending and raise taxes.

We do not need to cut social programs willy nilly.

The biggest cost is Medicare....the biggest cost there is end of life care.

On average the taxpayer pays in 120k into that program and takes out 300k. 60% of which is spent in the last few months of their life.

That is a math problem but if you try and fix that math problem you get a bunch of idiots screaming 'Death Panels'.


There defend our countries propensity to want shit for free. On BOTH sides of the political slugfest.

My problem with the rich is that they should not be stupid enough to understand the problem....yet they are at every turn. Or act like it. Yes we have a spending problem but it ain't from the poor, it is from the rich. They cut taxes, pocketed the loot and now do not want to pay their bills.

Bush bribed you with a tax cut to make you forget about a war he was charging up on your credit card. Quit blaming the poor for that!

But consider that in a small business, it might be the determining factor on whether the business owner can take on one additional employee. It might mean the difference between offering a job no one will take at $18,000 as compared to offering an attractive job paying above the poverty level at $24,000 - of course, it could also be used to offset the costs for the FICA, SS, insurance, etc., that and employer must pay. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

All of those costs are paid pre-tax as they are operating expenses. That $6000 is paid on the profit the individual made after all employee salaries, benefits, overhead, operating costs, etc. $6000 is $6000. I understand that. Since an employee is supposed to generate revenue for a business, if there was $18,000 available to hire someone and that person was going to generate revenue, you would hire him part-time, and take the revenue that a part-time employee would bring to the company.

Remember these people are business people. Most if not all are in it to make money for themselves. If their business helps employ others that's great, but that isn't why they are in business. You only hire the necessary people to do the work. As a matter of fact, the easiest way to increase profits for a small business is for the owner to perform as many of the tasks needed so he need not pay more of the costs you mentioned. He also gets to keep more of the generated revenue.

Again, the $6000 is the extra tax on a profit of $450,000 to be paid above what that person pays now. All of the items you mentioned are paid before there is any profit.

No, take home on 1.5 million is only 150,00 after taxes.
Taxable income is POST business costs. If you have 1.5 million in taxable income and only keep $150,000 of it, you should pay someone to do your taxes.
Your business can bring in 5.8 Billion dollars but if operating expenses are $5,799,850,000, you pay taxes on $150,000. You know, just like GE. You need their tax guy.


No. If you are two dumb to get a good education, you can't help support the rest of us because you will probably never have a job that makes enough money to help pay your fair share of taxes. But I believe most people are not too dumb, just not motivated.
"No. If you are two dumb to get a good education"
???

Some of the posters here have no idea what it takes to run a business, how much hard work is required. Small business companies employ by far more people than big companies in the US. Owning your own business is one way to have a chance at the American Dream....which is becoming harder to do with current politics and the what can the government do for me attitude. Originally Posted by Jdriller

The main issue is that a difference of 3% on taxable income above $250,000 does not keep someone from starting a business or hiring people that will increase the taxable income you have to tax.
If you are making a taxable income of $100,000 in salary and benefits, you don't say "I wanted to start a business but I can't afford the extra $3000 I'll have to pay on $350,000 of taxable income".

The extra 3% kicks in at all taxable income above $250,000. I have been using the number $100,000 for easy figuring.

The amount of tax due on a taxable income of $350,000 is X.
If the Bush tax cut expires, the tax due on a taxable income of $350,000 is X+$3000.

Anyone who actually owns a small business knows the above.

Anyone who doesn't and says they own a business, needs an accountant.

Remember: Taxable Income. Taxable Income. Taxable Income. That is what you pay taxes on. You don't pay taxes on revenue.

Remember: Taxable Income. Taxable Income. Taxable Income. That is what you pay taxes on. You don't pay taxes on revenue.
Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Evidently jdriller and I. B. do.

No damn wonder they hate taxes!

I'd hate'em too if I paid income tax on all my revenue!

I am starting to understand these guys rage.....they been overpaying their taxes by a shitload!

That really isn't Obama's fault guys. Pull your head outcha ya ass and pay someone to explain the tax code to ya!

We need to open a new forum around here...
Narcicists And Their Co-Dependent Idiots

I have never gotten a blowjob from a toothless woman.

Neither one of those statements have anything to do with people who have taxable income above $250,000. For each $100,000 above $250,000 they pay an extra $3000.

They have talked you into believing they will create jobs if only they can keep the $6000 from the extra $200,000 (a total of $450,000) they made.

They have you believing an extra $6000 makes them poor.

WAAAAAAAA Poor them

What kind of job comes from $6000? Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

But consider that in a small business, it might be the determining factor on whether the business owner can take on one additional employee. It might mean the difference between offering a job no one will take at $18,000 as compared to offering an attractive job paying above the poverty level at $24,000 - of course, it could also be used to offset the costs for the FICA, SS, insurance, etc., that and employer must pay. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

If Munchmasterman is referring to personal income, I don’t believe in tax breaks on personal income. There’s no guarantee the individual will invest the money in wealth (something that employees people and pays suppliers and indirect costs) creation investments. If the individual does invest back in his small business, rental properties, etc., then he should receive tax incentives to do so. If he invests in Exxon/Mobil stock or gold that goes into a safe deposit box, then he should receive no tax incentive because his investments are simply investments to create more wealth for the investor.

.............................How difficult is it to understand that money that doesn't exist cannot continue to be spent, into eternity?
THAT is MATH that doesn't work!

.............................

No "reasonable" person can argue that the "rich" (whoever the fuck they are) shouldn't agree to pay a tad bit more to help offset the problem "WE" have created.! * But in the face of those numbers above... no "reasonable" person can argue that the rich are paying "too little"!!

.............................. ........
I'll finish my own little rant with something TOTALLY ABSURD , INSENSITIVE , and DISGRACEFUL....
If you have no skin in the game... you have no place on the "Rules Commitee"!!

Create and pass a simplified consumption based tax code.... it gives EVERYONE skin in the game!! Originally Posted by MrGiz

I just quoted some of the highlights. What you call your rant, I call brilliant. There is no big pile of real money to backup the fake money we fictitiously created through out the 1990’s and 2000’s. There just isn’t, and that’s the problem that must be overcome. Well that and we need to stop shipping our jobs overseas.

Remember: Taxable Income. Taxable Income. Taxable Income. That is what you pay taxes on. You don't pay taxes on revenue. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

I understand what you are saying. My knowledge is mostly second hand; gained from the "civy" jobs I 've had working for small businesses like those Giz and Jdriller appear to run. The owners were personal friends, and I know they worked hard and had millions invested in equipment. Once, some friends and I set up an S-Corporation while we were in college, but that was to limit our personal liability for a service we were providing (no, not that type of "service" WTF - so don't go there).

As a concerned citizen, I do not see Congress husbanding my tax dollars well. Congress is like an addict, it always promises to get squared away right after one more fix - but, like an addict, it always seems to need that "one more fix".

If Munchmasterman is referring to personal income, I don’t believe in tax breaks on personal income. There’s no guarantee the individual will invest the money in wealth (something that employees people and pays suppliers and indirect costs) creation investments. Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

True enough. But if the government takes it, you are guaranteeing the small businessman won't reinvest it. And the government certainly cannot be trusted to spend it more wisely.

This is a tangential anecdote, but someone here, somewhere recently, did mention a $10,000 toilet seat purchased by DOD. I’ll admit one thing that really perturbed me in 2001 was when General Shinseki decided to make the black beret standard Army headgear in lieu of a perfectly functional patrol cap. Most of the guys I served with, btw we were not Special Forces, hated the beret. The beret was hot and uncomfortable to wear while one performed fatigue duties. Plus, it didn't shield the sun from your eyes or your face from the rain. All in all, it was a high maintenance ornament for your head. The real kicker is DOL bought 618,000 berets from Communist China. Each Chinese made beret cost 3¢ more than an American made beret. Overall it was a big and unnecessary expense. Shinseki’s decision cost the Army $30 million. We needed better body armor, not a head ornament. One benefit we did garner from going to Afghanistan. We did not have to wear that damn beret while we were there. Also of note, the beret is now out as of a couple of weeks ago, and a new patrol cap has been adopted for field and fatigue wear.