Deficit up 17%

#627
#627
McDad said:
Another way we could take the abstract and make it real is by asking Luther how much above his tax liability does he send to the IRS. Assuming he lives in a HOA community in BUford, Ga, has a daughter who just graduated Georgia Tech with an engineering degree, and he and Mrs Luther make $120,000 combined per year. The median household income in Buford is $56,000.

Should Luther pay double the average tax paid in Buford because his Median household income is double?
Should it be triple or more if his daughter moves back home while making 75,000 in her first job after college thus taking his household income to $195,000?
Should he be assessed a fee since he has extra money to spare by living in an HOA community?
Click to expand...
I obviously share to much personal information. (The household income is a little off)
I pay no more in taxes than required. If my tax bracket went up, I would pay more. If my tax bracket went down, I would pay less.
I should pay more than double what a household making $56 k pays.
My daughter will file separately, luckily she can remain in her current townhouse.
I think the HOA angle is covered through property taxes, which need to go up around here by the way.
 
#628
#628
McDad said:
This forum is built on can formelry housing worms. Im not being argumentative. Just how your fertile and fetid mind works. If hypothetically those who have more skin should have more weight in voting, it seems consistent that those who have less skiin are given less weight. and those who have no skin (if such a person exists) would have no weight in elections.

It seems we would need to have these discussions if people of means are forced to pay more because it is fair. We have a concept of no taxation without representation in our founding documents. If we have increased taxation, shouldn't we therefore afford those paying more increased representation?
Click to expand...

How many times do I have to answer this?

Yes. I agree. Show me where I haven’t.
 
#629
#629
C-south said:
How about you should just have to pay taxes to have skin in the game?
Click to expand...

I don’t see anything wrong with that either.

Who is not paying any tax of any sort? I get some don’t pay federal income tax. I’m thinking maybe a homeless guy with absolutely nothing, or those living completely off grid. But I doubt they are voting anyway.
 
#630
#630
luthervol said:
I obviously share to much personal information. (The household income is a little off)
I pay no more in taxes than required. If my tax bracket went up, I would pay more. If my tax bracket went down, I would pay less.
I should pay more than double what a household making $56 k pays.
My daughter will file separately, luckily she can remain in her current townhouse.
I think the HOA angle is covered through property taxes, which need to go up around here by the way.
Click to expand...
IF you SHOULD pay more but do not, are you the child in my analogy who must be forced to give his candy to others?
Where is your moral code? Where is your integrity? Uncle same is up to his top hat in red ink and you should pay more but do not. All the while you are resolute those with more means should pay more. Outrageous!!! A pox on thee.
 
#631
#631
rjd970 said:
I don’t see anything wrong with that either.

Who is not paying any tax of any sort? I get some don’t pay federal income tax. I’m thinking maybe a homeless guy with absolutely nothing, or those living completely off grid. But I doubt they are voting anyway.
Click to expand...

Swing by your local H&R Block
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#635
#635
hog88 said:
More skin in the game, more say in the game.

Crazy concept.
Click to expand...
Another way to look at is that maybe the people who are unable to play the game successfully should have more say in any possible rule changes.
 
#636
#636
McDad said:
As many as it takes for you to formulate a clear and cogent statement, i suppose.
Click to expand...

I agree with all these statements, which ones do you have issue with:

Those that don’t pay income tax are net takers.

Those that pay the highest are net givers.

If the country were to have a total collapse for any reason from economic to militarily, those that are paying the most would lose the most.

When taking into account public consumption, the difference between the net givers and net takers isn’t as big, but it is still there and those at the top are still paying more.

In a perfect system, those paying more should have more say. Those paying less should have less say.


Where is your issue? Because that is all I have said.

If you still don’t understand I don’t know how else to say it short of breaking out crayons and pictures.
 
#637
#637
McDad said:
IF you SHOULD pay more but do not, are you the child in my analogy who must be forced to give his candy to others?
Where is your moral code? Where is your integrity? Uncle same is up to his top hat in red ink and you should pay more but do not. All the while you are resolute those with more means should pay more. Outrageous!!! A pox on thee.
Click to expand...

It is interesting - a demand that people pay their "fair share" but only if mandated by law and enforced by criminal code.

It's almost as if those demanding people pay their "fair share" are afraid if it's not codified there would be the dreaded "free loaders"...
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and hog88
#639
#639
volinbham said:
It is interesting - a demand that people pay their "fair share" but only if mandated by law and enforced by criminal code.

It's almost as if those demanding people pay their "fair share" are afraid if it's not codified there would be the dreaded "free loaders"...
Click to expand...
As a Christian, i get called a hypocrite if i behave similarly.
 
#640
#640
rjd970 said:
I agree with all these statements, which ones do you have issue with:

Those that don’t pay income tax are net takers.

Those that pay the highest are net givers.

If the country were to have a total collapse for any reason from economic to militarily, those that are paying the most would lose the most.

When taking into account public consumption, the difference between the net givers and net takers isn’t as big, but it is still there and those at the top are still paying more.

In a perfect system, those paying more should have more say. Those paying less should have less say.


Where is your issue? Because that is all I have said.

If you still don’t understand I don’t know how else to say it short of breaking out crayons and pictures.
Click to expand...

I dont have an issue. Why do you keep accusing me of having an issue? It hurts my feelings.
 
#641
#641
McDad said:
IF you SHOULD pay more but do not, are you the child in my analogy who must be forced to give his candy to others?
Where is your moral code? Where is your integrity? Uncle same is up to his top hat in red ink and you should pay more but do not. All the while you are resolute those with more means should pay more. Outrageous!!! A pox on thee.
Click to expand...
I think I do pay more than twice as much as the household with a $56 k income......as I should.
 
#642
#642
volfanhill said:
Excise taxes, public land sales, and tariffs I believe
Click to expand...
Yes sir.

Also: Section 8
1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

I think this demonstrates the original tax was a head tax. An equal (uniform) amount paid by each free [adult] person.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#646
#646
volinbham said:
It is interesting - a demand that people pay their "fair share" but only if mandated by law and enforced by criminal code.

It's almost as if those demanding people pay their "fair share" are afraid if it's not codified there would be the dreaded "free loaders"...
Click to expand...
What do you mean it's almost as if, that is certainly and undeniably why. To many would selfishly choose to not shoulder their equitable share of the burden.
 
#647
#647
McDad said:
Yes sir.

Also: Section 8
1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

I think this demonstrates the original tax was a head tax. An equal (uniform) amount paid by each free [adult] person.
Click to expand...
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#650
#650
a modest proposal for more revenue:

individuals can contribute (beyond their legal tax obligation) directly to departments or programs.

Righties can Go Fund the "Wall" and Lefties can Go Fund the EPA
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top