Any person earning less than $57,490/yr
Posted By: Falls into the lower 40% of...sm on 2008-09-09
In Reply to: i don't care what the individual income is - florida
income earners in the US. We are not taling about skid row bums and deadbeats. Ever heard of the concept of the shrinking middle class? Is that a good thing for the nation? The lower 40% of the ENTIRE POPULATION of the US owns LESS THAN 1% of the total national wealth. This includes a very, very sizeable chunk of the entire middle class. MTs are always complaining about how they are not paid what they are worth. Does it make sense that all persons combined making less than $57,490/yr own less than 1% of the national wealth? Do these people do less than 1% of the work? Does this seem like an equitable distribution of wealth to you? Please answer these questions directly. Yes or no?
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
so those earning more
should just hand it over to someone else? Sorry but I don't work this hard to put money in someone else's pockets. I contribute to the charities I believe in. I do volunteer work with autistic children. I do believe in helping others.......if they CANNOT help themselves but I do not believe in free ride for anyone who can work but chooses not to do so or chooses not make strides to improve their own situation and just thinks those with more money owe it to them, and I do not and will not work so that someone else doesn't have to. I will then sit back, stop earning, and let YOU keep working and share with me!
Agreed about earning except
that is on a more personal level. People who come to our country need to respect us because they are our guests. As hosts, we do deserve respect. Anyone who disrespects their host is not welcome again, right? If you can't respect your host, then you need to excuse yourself and LEAVE.
As for our leaders, my personal opinion of Billie Bob C. is very low, in fact so low that it probably could not get any further down there and for reasons that should be self-evident. However, when he was my president I did respect his office, his right to govern, and his decisions in governmental matters. Though he was sadly lacking in integrity, he was the president, had more education than I do, and certainly more knowledge of foreign affairs. I gave him benefit of the doubt because he was the elected president of my country. I did not vote for him. I did not like him. I did not use him for a role model for young people. I was ashamed of him. I did respect his office and that is something that liberals could take a good hard look at in themselves. Do you really believe that everything that our government and president does should have full disclosure in the here and now? Do they need to run everything they do by YOU? That is pretty funny. The posts I see let me know that you believe you should have the final word on everything and that your way is the only way and that you are a one-person catalyst to change. That is admirable, but in order to be effective you need to take a look and investigate things more clearly and quit falling for the BS at the Kos and all those other pathetic sites. Do you ever look further? Do you believe everything everyone tells you? After you research more you may find that you will change a few of your beliefs. Seriously.
"Senator Obama's Four Tax Increases for People Earning Under $250k"...
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/senator_obamas_four_tax_increa.html
I confess. Senator Obama's two tax promises: to limit tax increases to only those making over $250,000 a year, and to not raise taxes on 95% of "working Americans," intrigued me. As a hard-working small business owner, over the past ten years I've earned from $50,000 to $100,000 per year. If Senator Obama is shooting straight with us, under his presidency I could look forward to paying no additional Federal taxes -- I might even get a break -- and as I struggle to support a family and pay for two boys in college, a reliable tax freeze is nearly as welcome as further tax cuts.
However, Senator Obama's dual claims seemed implausible, especially when it came to my Federal income taxes. Those implausible promises made me look at what I'd been paying before President Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, as well as what I paid after those tax cuts became law. I chose the 2000 tax tables as my baseline -- they reflect the tax rates that Senator Obama will restore by letting the "Bush Tax Cuts" lapse. I wanted to see what that meant from my tax bill.
I've worked as the state level media and strategy director on three Presidential election campaigns -- I know how "promises" work -- so I analyzed Senator Obama's promises by looking for loopholes.
The first loophole was easy to find: Senator Obama doesn't "count" allowing the Bush tax cuts to lapse as a tax increase. Unless the cuts are re-enacted, rates will automatically return to the 2000 level. Senator Obama claims that letting a tax cut lapse -- allowing the rates to return to a higher levels -- is not actually a "tax increase." It's just the lapsing of a tax cut.
See the difference?
Neither do I.
When those cuts lapse, my taxes are going up -- a lot -- but by parsing words, Senator Obama justifies his claim that he won't actively raise taxes on 95 percent of working Americans, even while he's passively allowing tax rates to go up for 100% of Americans who actually pay Federal income taxes.
Making this personal, my Federal Income Tax will increase by $3,824 when those tax cuts lapse. That not-insignificant sum would cover a couple of house payments or help my two boys through another month or two of college.
No matter what Senator Obama calls it, requiring us to pay more taxes amounts to a tax increase. This got me wondering what other Americans will have to pay when the tax cuts lapse.
For a married family, filing jointly and earning $75,000 a year, this increase will be $3,074. For those making just $50,000, this increase will be $1,512. Despite Senator Obama's claim, even struggling American families making just $25,000 a year will see a tax increase -- they'll pay $715 more in 2010 than they did in 2007. Across the board, when the tax cuts lapse, working Americans will see significant increases in their taxes, even if their household income is as low as $25,000. See the tables at the end of this article.
Check this for yourself. Go to http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/ and pull up the 1040 instructions for 2000 and 2007 and go to the tax tables. Based on your 2007 income, check your taxes rates for 2000 and 2007, and apply them to your taxable income for 2007. In 2000 -- Senator Obama's benchmark year -- you would have paid significantly more taxes for the income you earned in 2007. The Bush Tax Cuts, which Senator Obama has said he will allow to lapse, saved you money, and without those cuts, your taxes will go back up to the 2000 level. Senator Obama doesn't call it a "tax increase," but your taxes under "President" Obama will increase -- significantly.
Senator Obama is willfully deceiving you and me when he says that no one making under $250,000 will see an increase in their taxes. If I were keeping score, I'd call that Tax Lie #1.
The next loophole involves the payroll tax that you pay to support the Social Security system. Currently, there is an inflation-adjusted cap, and according to the non-profit Tax Foundation, in 2006 -- the most recent year for which tax data is available -- only the first $94,700 of an unmarried individual's earnings were subject to the 12.4 percent payroll tax. However, Senator Obama has proposed lifting that cap, adding an additional 12.4 percent tax on every dollar earned above that cap -- and in spite of his promise, impacting all those who earn between $94,700 and $249,999.
By doing this, he plans to raise an additional $1 trillion dollars (another $662.50 out of my pocket -- and how much out of yours?) to help fund Social Security. Half of this tax would be paid by employees and half by employers -- but employers will either cut the payroll or pass along this tax to their customers through higher prices. Either way, some individual will pay the price for the employer's share of the tax increase.
However, when challenged to explain how he could eliminate the cap AND not raise taxes on Americans earning under $250,000, Senator Obama suggested on his website that he "might" create a "donut" -- an exemption from this payroll tax for wages between $94,700 and $250,000. But that donut would mean he couldn't raise anywhere near that $1 trillion dollars for Social Security. When this was pointed out, Senator Obama's "donut plan" was quietly removed from his website.
This "explanation" sounds like another one of those loopholes. If I were keeping score, I'd call this Tax Lie #2.
(updated) Senator Obama has also said that he will raise capital gains taxes from 15 percent to 20 percent. He says he's aiming at "fat cats" who make above $250,000. However, while only 1 percent of Americans make a quarter-million dollars, roughly 50 percent of all Americans own stock – and while investments that are through IRAs, 401Ks and in pension plans are not subject to capital gains, those stocks in personal portfolios are subject to capital gains, no matter what the owner’s income is. However, according to the US Congress’s Joint Economic Committee Study, “Recent data released by the Federal Reserve shows that nearly half of all U.S. households are stockholders. In the last decade alone, the number of stockholders has jumped by over fifty percent.” This is clear – a significant number of all Americans who earn well under $250,000 a year will feel this rise in their capital gains taxes.
Under "President" Obama, if you sell off stock and earn a $100,000 gain -- perhaps to help put your children through college -- instead of paying $15,000 in capital gains taxes today, you'll pay $20,000 under Obama's plan. That's a full one-third more, and it applies no matter how much you earn.
No question -- for about 50 percent of all Americans, this is Tax Lie #3.
Finally, Senator Obama has promised to raise taxes on businesses -- and to raise taxes a lot on oil companies. I still remember Econ-101 -- and I own a small business. From both theory and practice, I know what businesses do when taxes are raised. Corporations don't "pay" taxes -- they collect taxes from customers and pass them along to the government. When you buy a hot dog from a 7/11, you can see the clerk add the sales tax, but when a corporation's own taxes go up, you don't see it -- its automatic -- but they do the same thing. They build this tax into their product's price. Senator Obama knows this. He knows that even people who earn less than $250,000 will pay higher prices -- those pass-through taxes -- when corporate taxes go up.
No question: this is Tax Lie #4.
There's not a politician alive who hasn't be caught telling some minor truth-bender. However, when it comes to raising taxes, there are no small lies. When George H.W. Bush's "Read my lips -- no new taxes" proved false, he lost the support of his base -- and ultimately lost his re-election bid.
This year, however, we don't have to wait for the proof: Senator Obama has already promised to raise taxes, and we can believe him. However, while making that promise, he's also lied, in at least four significant ways, about who will pay those taxes. If Senator Obama becomes President Obama, when the tax man comes calling, we will all pay the price. And that's the truth.
Tax Rates - and the Obama Increase - $50,000/year Taxable Income
|
2000 Tax Tables
|
2003 Tax Tables
|
2004 Tax Tables
|
2010 Tax Tables - (Bush Tax Cuts have Expired)
|
Increase with Obama Tax Increase*
|
Taxable Income
|
$50,000
|
$50,000
|
$50,000
|
$50,000
|
$50,000
|
Tax: Single
|
$10,581
|
$9,304
|
$9,231
|
$10,581
|
$1,350
|
Tax: Married - Filing Joint
|
$8,293
|
$6,796
|
$6,781
|
$8,293
|
$1,512
|
Tax: Married - Filing Separate
|
$11,143
|
$9,304
|
$9,231
|
$11,143
|
$1,912
|
Tax: Head of Household
|
$9,424
|
$8,189
|
$8,094
|
$9,424
|
$1,330
|
Tax Rates - and the Obama Increase - $75,000/year Taxable Income
|
2000 Tax Tables
|
2003 Tax Tables
|
2004 Tax Tables
|
2010 Tax Tables - (Bush Tax Cuts have Expired)
|
Increase with Obama Tax Increase*
|
Taxable Income
|
$75,000
|
$75,000
|
$75,000
|
$75,000
|
$75,000
|
Tax: Single
|
$17,923
|
$15,739
|
$15,620
|
$17,923
|
$2,303
|
Tax: Married - Filing Joint
|
$15,293
|
$12,364
|
$12,219
|
$15,293
|
$3,074
|
Tax: Married - Filing Separate
|
$18,803
|
$16,083
|
$15,972
|
$18,803
|
$2,831
|
Tax: Head of Household
|
$16,424
|
$14,439
|
$14,344
|
$16,424
|
$2,080
|
Tax Rates - and the Obama Increase - $100,000/year Taxable Income
|
2000 Tax Tables
|
2003 Tax Tables
|
2004 Tax Tables
|
2010 Tax Tables - (Bush Tax Cuts have Expired)
|
Increase with Obama Tax Increase*
|
Taxable Income
|
$100,000
|
$100,000
|
$100,000
|
$100,000
|
$100,000
|
Tax: Single
|
$25,673
|
$22,739
|
$22,620
|
$25,673
|
$3,053
|
Tax: Married - Filing Joint
|
$22,293
|
$18,614
|
$18,469
|
$22,293
|
$3,824
|
Tax: Married - Filing Separate
|
$27,515
|
$23,715
|
$23,504
|
$27,515
|
$4,011
|
Tax: Head of Household
|
$23,699
|
$20,741
|
$20,594
|
$23,699
|
$3,015
|
* When "President" Obama allows President Bush's tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 to expire, this will amount to a DE facto tax increase
yes, the first person did....the person replying to that post...
was talking about the founding fathers...who came along a long time after the witch trials. You replied to the second post, not the first one. I was replying to you based on that. Purtianism came first...Christianity was the religion practiced by the founding fathers. It is evident in their writings and in most of our original documents.
I think we can stop whipping this dead horse now.
Whoops....A person....not I person.
.
No, we are not the same person....
Americangirl is a Republican I believe, and I am an independent (who changed my registration to Repub so I could vote in the primary, but will be changing back), but yes, we are both conservative. In some ways she more so than I, in some ways I more so than she. If you look at our posts, we are very different in how we post and we certainly don't agree with each other all the time.
The same could be said for many of the liberal posters. There is one for sure that posts under different monikers, but you can always tell...when one comes under attack the other swoops to defend. Americangirl and I do not post like that.
Thanks for asking.
Actually, you are the person who needs (sm)
to relax. I really do not know why you keep insisting that someone was smeared. It is rather bizarre. She posted an article that mentioned his middle name, you created a huge post about his middle name and why it is used to attack him, I mention that you are creating issues over nothing, then you insist that someone is being smeared? Very strange...
if one person somewhere
said that one time, we must take it completely seriously and mention it at every opportunity. Fight fire with fire.
Person like this is beyond help.
nm
The person who said this was not....
a commentator for Fox News. She is Caroline Baum and she works for Bloomberg News. She was being interviewed on the Fox Morning Show and was giving her opinion. Just that, her opinion. Why should there be outrage?
I'm the same person
Don't know how I got the two separated but just so you know I'm the same person. Don't want to appear misleading. Sometimes on the gab board I will put Kaydie and on the political board I put me, but every once inawhile the two get backwards. Not sure I can reset that so only one name will come up. Like I say, not being misleading I just don't know how to reset. PS, still been coming to the board here this morning since I last posted (I think I need some counseling to get un-addicted to this board ha ha), but still haven't had a chance to read your post. Still, thank you for the time you took to reseach and I will read with an open mind. After all I could be wrong. I usually tell people. I may not always be right, but I am never wrong. HA HA HA. Will read your post later - promise.
I think that each person needs to do what his ....sm
conscience tells him to do and not be criticized by us for doing so. Let the chips fall where they may.
Now I know this person is not an MT
"The fees for doing this are not cheap, but you are MTs and make high paying salaries, so $20,000 to $30,000 should not be a problem here." Made me laugh my butt off.
I don't see where this person is
racist at all. This person is merely pointing out that there is racism out there on BOTH sides and this is what it could potentially lead to.
No, this person's sig is also clearly sm as well
check it out, it's everywhere on here.
any person who
uses Hitler to compare anyone to, be it Obama or Bush, deserves to be ignored. There is no comparison to be made in this country to that era. To use his name for shock value shows extreme ignorance of history and inability to grasp basic facts, let alone nuances, relying instead on the worst of the worst. Shameful and ignorant.
I think it's down to $400/person now......sm
another cut courtesy of our esteemed politicians. That's only about $8.25 a week or a couple gallons of milk, at least at current prices.
And not one person gives him
a freebie just because of his skin color either....Sheesh.
I'll admit there are some people who are going to hate Obama just because he is black or mixed or whatever the heck he really is. But there are several people following him blindly for the exact same reason. So if you are going to post about racism....please do so fairly and consider both sides of the spectrum.
And not one person gives him
a freebie just because of his skin color either....Sheesh.
I'll admit there are some people who are going to hate Obama just because he is black or mixed or whatever the heck he really is. But there are several people following him blindly for the exact same reason. So if you are going to post about racism....please do so fairly and consider both sides of the spectrum.
I see a person as
either male or female. If that person decides to describe himself as a sin, that's how I will see them, based on the description they have given of themselves. And that description is sinful. Very simple. I hate the description because God tells me to hate it.
You're a very wise person.
There is a definite tendency for some posters on these boards (not so much this one) to very negatively judge a post based on who posted instead of what was contained in the post. And you're right. That just detracts from the entire value of the post when they do that. (Anyone who doesn't believe me can visit the Conservative and see how they chew up and spit out those who don't assign nicknames to themselves.)
Thanks for posting and thanks for the link.
Do you always speak of yourself in the third person? sm
I see no difference in your writing style. Same old stuff.
I probably have used third person at times....
Why is it so important to you?
And if you cannot see the obvious differences in writing, well, you appear to be quite ignorant or unobservant or else you are not telling the truth. But that is your problem and I am not going to make it mine!!!
Obviously, this person was not attacking. sm
The underlined part just goes to prove that they are NOT attacking liberals. I am unsure of your rationalization on this one.
Obviously, this person does not wish to debate. TI
We are wasting our time here.
Who said a person should be president because
My point is that we should be glad there are women in elections and holding high-profile positions in this country instead of attacking their mothering skills or parenting choices. There are plenty of women who think ANY mother that works outside the home in any form is making a poor parenting choice. It should be to each his or her own, please do not try to twist my words to fit your agenda. I never, EVER said I would vote for someone solely to have a woman in office. I said I hailed Hillary's accomplishment, not that I would vote for her (in fact, I said I didn't care for her) and I never said I agree with everything Palin says or does, just that her family is her own business.
On the contrary, I don't vote gender, family, public opinion, or party affiliation, I vote based on the person's abilities and whether I feel they are qualified for the position. Period.
Sally, you really are a mean person.
nm
I person of faith
who pubically ridiculed the Bible in a speech. A man who has sketchy associations. A man who attended a school in Indonesia were his school records list his religion as muslim and yet he denies ever being a muslim. A man who allowed his children to be baptized and attend a church where the pastor preached hate messages. A man who supports partial birth abortions......
Please excuse me while I vomit!
I don't think any one person, President or not, can do much - sm
to change the stock market. It seems to have a life of its own, albeit a rather shady one. I don't feel too bad seeing the insurance companies take a hit - they're all crooks and they deserve what they get for being so dishonest. But banks, 401Ks, money market, etc. There has to be someplace left, other than under a mattress, where our savings/rainy-day/retirement money is at least somewhat safe, without earning 0 interest. And forget about buying real-estate! That bubble has burst, as well. Goodbye to any kind of financial security (or even a place to live) for lots of us in our so-called 'Golden Years'.
Well, see, that person that posted obviously has it in...sm
for sam. I know it. You know it. Everbody who sees it knows it....sooooo there's nothing to say because this person says it all about herself.
This person and her buddies play games with her all the time, and really act childish.
And, I, well....really.....unless I resort to name calling, I really have nothing to say, because this person has waayyyyyyyy too much time on their hands and has a personal vendetta against sam.
And by the way, I'm not on the board very often. I don't respond to every single post I see. I don't know who you have me confused with.
But really, all you're doing is being kind of condescending in your response here to me, so why should I bother?
You have me labeled a certain way, and frankly my dear, as one of your cohorts has said recently.....well, just frankly.....
You have too much time on your hands too, if you think you have to post to everybody's post....get a life....while you're at it, get me one too. I work too much and come here and find too much crap posted to try to sift through in a day....so I rarely bother.....just like you rarely to bother to know who I am......
oh, I must be ranting again.....sorry.....you probably think I had nothing to say anyway......
lolololol....................
At least I can laugh at myself, which some on this board don't know how to do anymore.
This is not conviction but a person who has been
xx
That "unskilled" person could have been my
DH 25 years ago. The first and only company he has worked for sent him to school and now he is at over 200K a year, not too bad for unskilled.
As a godless person myself....
who used to call herself an atheist, until I discovered that in itself was a type of warped-ass "religion," I think it is totally rude, distateful, and smacks of looking for a fight. Why can't we all just be good to one another? It's so much easier to do and makes ya feel good inside. 
Why are you so concerned about this person?
//
Tell me the last election that a person who is not
a natural born citizen ran for president. I was born in 1960 so maybe there were some before my time, but I thought every election the candidate was a natural born citizen.
This coming from the very person
who didn't know what sm and NM meant and thought every person using sm was the same person.
At least I'm not blinded by the promise of change from a man who has no experience running anything but his mouth.
This is the sort of person
who should be put in front of "our boys" should there ever be an attach on our soil!
No, but that is certainly where this person's mind
There is an audio out of Harlem showing citizens there who didn't have a clue who was even running for office. This was black and white based, so the only racist person here is the one letting their minds go there. The "black lady" you're referring to has made racist remarks all over this board and funny how none of us have screamed for the moderator. She can dish it out but she lets her mind go where she wants to if she doesn't like something said.
To 'm' or 'sm' same person...s/m
You are most probably a woman who is unable to conceive. Or who chickened out on an abortion and regrets not having had an abortion.
Whatever it is you are jealous of women who can get pregnant and opt for an abortion.
We, women, who can conceive, have the right to abort a child till the 120th day of pregnancy, and I hope this law will be kept up.
You are one talented person..... sm
A mind reader AND a comedian. You really should get your own show, ya know! 
Here again we have an instance of not looking at things the way they are. Any SC justices appointed by Obama would not be in his pocket but in the pockets of those who put him in power in the first place. Obama is nothing more than a puppet with some very wealthy puppeteers. Do you not undestand that?
you seem like a nice person.
NM
they did not lose one person
They lost an entire generation and their children too probably. Can you say 529 no more?
What an egotistical person.......
Somebody needs to remind Obama that the founding fathers already DID lay a foundation for our country; we sure as heck don't need him to do that. He had the audacity to say the government needs to lay a foundation for our country......pleeeeze! That was done a looong time ago; sorry to tell him but we don't need him to lay any foundations. The foundation was laid and has worked when left alone; the only problems are had when federal government interferes with private lives and nothing will EVER change about that. He somehow also believes he is everyone's answer to their problems. Leave this economy alone and it will come back just like the other downs that we have had to deal with. Of course, he knows this and in a couple of years when things are going much better, he will no doubt strut around like a rooster telling everyone how HE made this happen and for those lamebrains out there who think government is the answer to all their woes, they will actually believe it. How sad!!!
How wrong can one person be?....sm
 Well, for years I only posted on company or word board because I would see the postings popping up here and although I love political science and care about the country/world/planet, I thought so many of the posts were ugly, vicious personal attacks over nothing, childish vendettas against certain posters, etc., and I personally have enough crap to deal with in my own life, don't need to look for more. But I cautiously stepped in. I stupidly thought you could speak your mind, be honest, and have adult discussions that were fair and based on the issues, not personal attacks, not popurarity contests, etc. HOW WRONG I WAS . I have tried to be fair, have supported both sides and in the middle whenever I believed in a point, as I thought everyone else was, wrong again. Well, when a "diversion" like this is no longer enjoyable, a learning process, etc., it's time to sign off. I have loved "speaking" with many of you, and thanks for that. But wow, I will go back to concentrating on my job and family and leave this board to the very brave, and also those who love to attack, ridicule, make everything personal, etc. God bless those of you who remain, and I sincerely mean that. And also realize that my leaving or staying does not mean a thing, no I do know that I am not important, just liked joining in for a while.
Each person is entitled to their own
opinion whether it is for or against abortion. I think your reply was uncalled for and rather childish. You can disagree with someone's opinion without being like this.
Any person with intelligence would
see that this is a facetious post. No one really wants this to happen. This was just trying to prove a point and obviously the dems have twisted it around to be treason. I can't help but laugh at the idiocy on this board. It is so much better to call people names and cry about the last 8 years than to take a good look at what is going on in the world now. No worries though. When Obama runs this country into the ground, you will still blame Bush and live in your happy little demented bubble drinking kool-aid.
Wake up people. Bush is out of office. It is Obama's turn now. So let's pay attention to what he is doing....shall we?
What a weird person this is
Why are you so preoccupied with slutty women? Who cares! You have some underlying phobia regarding women and sex. Weird!
Just for the record....I am not a far right person.
Secondly....what in the world does your post have anything to do with mine. I want to know why we aren't doing something and you give me this huge lecture about how Bush is evil and to blame for every single thing, etc. Truthfully, I am tired of you and your far-left rantings. I'm tired of people refusing to see that this crisis has been coming on for a long time. You people refuse to see that Clinton had any hand in this issue either even though he was the one who forced banks to give everyone loans whether they could pay for them or not. I'm tired of the right vs left BS. They are all guilty in my opinion, some more than others. I personally wanna puke every time I see Pelosi, Dodd, Frank, Reid, etc.
I know things are bad....trust me....I know. You don't have to preach to me about tent cities, etc. Also, Bush is gone and I know Obama got a mess when he stepped into the White House, but he is the commander in chief now and blaming Bush for everything doesn't change the fact that I don't agree with what Obama is doing now. We are spending money where we shouldn't and we should definitely be looking into more energy resources as that will create jobs as well as stop sending money out of the country for as much foreign oil.
why are you such an angry person (and mean)?
xx
Why not just punish the person because...sm
he/she assaulted another person?
He's a hateful person if ever I saw one......
-
|
