[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

The Victims of Benny Hinn: 30 Years of Spiritual Deception. Trump Is Planning to Send Kill Teams to Mexico to Take Out Cartel Leaders The Great Falling Away in the Church is Here | Tim Dilena How Ridiculous? Blade-Less Swiss Army Knife Debuts As Weapon Laws Tighten Jewish students beaten with sticks at University of Amsterdam Terrorists shut down Park Avenue. Police begin arresting democrats outside Met Gala. The minute the total solar eclipse appeared over US Three Types Of People To Mark And Avoid In The Church Today Are The 4 Horsemen Of The Apocalypse About To Appear? France sends combat troops to Ukraine battlefront Facts you may not have heard about Muslims in England. George Washington University raises the Hamas flag. American Flag has been removed. Alabama students chant Take A Shower to the Hamas terrorists on campus. In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne Deadly Saltwater and Deadly Fresh Water to Increase Deadly Cancers to soon Become Thing of the Past? Plague of deadly New Diseases Continues [FULL VIDEO] Police release bodycam footage of Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley traffi Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests) What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic? War in Ukraine Turns on Russia what happened during total solar eclipse Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage Earth is Scorched with Heat Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman Vibe Shift A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound. Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks Questioning the Big Bang James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go Early humans had sex with chimps O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp. Biblical Contradictions (Alleged) Catholic Church Praising Lucifer Raising the Knife One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make.. Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship) Status: Not Logged In; Sign In The Establishments war on Donald Trump See other The Establishments war on Donald Trump Articles Title: Club for Growth Action to Trump: You Sue Us, We'll Sue You Back Source: National Review URL Source: http://www.nationalreview.com/corne ... well-sue-you-back-jim-geraghty Published: Sep 26, 2015 Author: Jim Geraghty Post Date: 2015-09-26 08:54:45 by Tooconservative Keywords: None Views: 16266 Comments: 92 Attorneys for Club for Growth Action, a political arm of the Club for Growth, sent a letter to the Trump Organization’s General Counsel Thursday threatening a counter-suit if Trump sues their organization. “If Mr. Trump brought suit on the baseless grounds stated in your letter, Club Action would not hesitate to seek sanctions for abusive litigation under Federal Rule 11 or equivalent rules and, depending upon the forum, under statutes that deter Strategic Litigation against Public Participation (anti-SLAPP statutes),” the letter states. “Stripped of its purple adjectives, your letter makes two complaints against Club Action. Both complaints are untrue, and neither comes close to the type of knowing and malicious falsehood the First Amendment requires a public figure such as Mr. Trump to establish.” At the heart of the issue is the Club for Growth Action ad stating that Trump “supports higher taxes.” Trump’s lawyers say he no longer holds the position the ad refers to, and will soon be unveiling a plan to lower taxes. (Trump has said, however, he intends to target the “hedge fund guys” who he feels aren’t paying their fair share.) Perhaps the more interesting contention from the Club is this: You accuse the Club for Growth of trying to “extort” a million dollars from Mr. Trump in return for its political support. Nonsense. Club Action reports it was Mr. Trump who, last spring, asked to meet with the Club. During the meeting requestsed by Mr. Trump, as reflected in the attached letter to Mr. Trump, the Club’s Mr. [David] McIntosh made clear that the Club and Mr. Trump had important areas of policy disagreement. However, some areas of policy agreement also were identified. Mr. Trump asked how he could support the Club and, upon being informed that a donation would be appreciated, invited Mr. McIntosh to send a follow-up letter through Mr. Lewandowski, who also attended. Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 89. #6. To: TooConservative (#0) The answer to all of this is not to engage these people directly. Ignore them. Use your own money to get elected. And then, when in power, press a directly populist message that the wealthy will pay the same percentage of their total wealth, from all sources including current income, that the middle middle class and working class do - the people who are above the level of the earned income tax credit, but below the level of the Social Security cutout. Make sure that the wealthy pay the identical taxes on capital gains, including unrealized capital gains, that the middle middle class does. The middle middle class earns wages, and all of them are taxed by social security, medicare and income tax. Therefore, ALL sources of income will be taxed by those same three taxes: capital gains and dividends also, and ALL at the same rate. And unrealized capital gain? That is also taxed to the middle class as well, in the form of property tax on homes (about 1.4% average). So, the middle middle class holds its wealth in homes, and pay 1.4% every year on that wealth. And the super rich hold their wealth as securities, and they shall be taxed at 1.4% of the value of their wealth too, every year, just like the middle middle class are. The second source of middle middle class wealth is automobiles, and they pay a sales tax when they buy them. Let the wealthy pay the same sales tax on the purchase of securities as well. Simply target the different methods by which the rich hold and exchange wealth with the identical taxes, at the same rates, the the middle class pay. That will redistribute about 30% of the wealth of the rich, just as it does the middle class. It is just. It will be popular with everybody but the rich (and they deserve no special breaks or favors), it will make the rich no different from everybody else, strip them of their secret privileges, and force them to compete in just exactly the same ways. And as their wealth concentrations ebb, their power will ebb also. Focus on the middle and working class, and propose tax reform that doesn't make the rich pay MORE taxes, but simply makes the rich pay the same LEVEL of taxes, on all their wealth, that the middle class pay. Do not allow the rich to make special categories of wealth that don't get hit by taxes. Stocks are not different than houses and cars. They're just wealth. But we TAX middle class wealth, every year. Not the wealth of the rich. There is a nice "right across the plate" pitch here that is so obviously just and fair that the only people who will scream are the rich who want to keep their privileges and shift the burden of government to the middle class, as they have done. Spread the burden evenly, and the rich will be brought in line. And then name and shame and nail every special interest group that lobbies for its own tax breaks. No tax breaks, for anybody. Starting at the top, because moves at the top generate greater revenue. Set the tax burden at the level needed to pay the government without a deficit, and as the debt is gradually retired over time, use the excess to pay it faster. Stop the accounting legerdemain. Fair, even and straightforward. No? Then refuse to compromise, let everything shut down, and let it all go to pieces. By doing so, Andrew Johnson turned what would have been the complete rape of the American South into a merely oppressive, tiresome and ultimately ineffective burden of occupation and annoyance. Sometimes you have to know when to draw the line and not budge, and accept that its better to let everything go to pieces than to let the bad guys win. If the choice is to thrown your own child out of the lifeboat to drown, so that the rest in the boat have a better chance of making it, you say that no, we will ALL risk drowning together, and maybe we will all drown together, but we're not throwing my child overboard. Because your lives are no more valuable than his, and it is better that we all die and go to God clean, than they we be murderers, live a few more years, and then all be thrown into hell. And then, when somebody disagrees, you throw HIM out of the boat, and your problem is solved, and he deserves it. That's how you fight. Vicomte13  posted on  2015-09-26   10:03:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #10. To: Vicomte13 (#6) Use your own money to get elected. But Trump gives no indications he is going to cough up that moldy money he's got. His annual cash flow apparently is on the order of $400M. Assuming he'll blow off $100M on immediate expenses for the extended family and such, he'd have $300M in cash. After that, he has to start selling off golf courses and resorts and casinos and hotels. Or borrow money (at a favorable interest rate). You imagine Trump pulling out a big wallet with $1 billion of his own money to run. I would almost bet my own cash money that that will never happen. Recall Perot, another tycoon self-funder. And how much did he spend? AFAIK, even in his first run (when he had to cover the costs of getting the Reform party on all the state ballots), he spent under $60 million. And I'm not sure Trump will even spend $100M. Just think how much Trump has enhanced his name brand all over the world in the last few months. He could quit now, having spent nothing and gotten hundreds of millions of dollars worth of free publicity for his name brand. And Trump, in recent years, is all about putting his brand name (not his own money) into big projects. I know I'm crushing your sweet dreams of the Republican tycoon you can finally love with all your heart and soul but there it is.     : ) Tooconservative  posted on  2015-09-26   12:26:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #25. To: TooConservative (#10) (Edited) I know I'm crushing your sweet dreams of the Republican tycoon you can finally love with all your heart and soul but there it is. : ) Well, I was trying to find something to like that had an "R" behind its name., but I can see myself from the partisan Republicans on this board that they'll never accept Trump. So I'm building Biden or Hillary into my models for the future now, because the only guy with a prayer of beating the Democrats is Trump, and it's obvious to me, just from this board and talking to other Republicans at work (in the NYC finance world) that Trump is not their guy. Some of them voted for Obama (the first time) because Palin was off the reservation of acceptable to them. They're not going to vote outside of their bandwidth. They are the "GOPe". I can vote with the GOP on a Trump, but they and you are all telling me that it won't be him, that you'll never accept him, and I'm beginning to be pretty sure that is true. It's like :Palin. I loved her. The degree of hatred others showed for her, and still do when I mention her, moves them into a certain cadre in my mind. The Republican right is dominated by that sort, and I think of them about the same that they think of Sarah and Trump. So I was hoping I'd have somebody to support, but you Republicans look destined to knock out Trump. I won't vote for him, but I'd rather see Hillary win than let you guys win. Whoever wins the next election puts two butts on the Supreme Court. I'd rather Hillary do that than Runio or Jeb or Fiorina. So now it's just watching a baseball game between two teams I don't care about, but one team I really hate. The Republicans vis-a-vis Trump are like that team that hired Tebow but refused to play him: jackasses that I want to see lose. Vicomte13  posted on  2015-09-26   15:04:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #27. To: Vicomte13 (#25) I can vote with the GOP on a Trump, but they and you are all telling me that it won't be him, that you'll never accept him, and I'm beginning to be pretty sure that is true. I don't hang out with the super elite like you do. Unless I'm doing a job for them. I can assure you that there are more regular folk then upper class snobs who vote for Obama. Almost everyone I talk to loves Trump and will vote for him. I'm just a regular dude. So I know what regular dudes think like. Also I know some regular gals who like him too. A couple who voted for the child murderer Obama. A K A Stone  posted on  2015-09-26   15:08:48 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #32. To: A K A Stone (#27) Well, to be clear, I think Trump is great, and I'll vote for him. I thought Sarah was great, and I voted for HER, not McCain - he was just at the top of the ticket. I vomited in my mouth when I voted for Romney, and that is the last time I'm going to pull the R lever unless I SUPPORT the person I'm voting for. The last three Republicans I actually SUPPORTED were: Palin, W on his RE-ELECTION (hated him in his first election), and Dole. I'll support Trump if your Republican buddies let him get the nomination, but they're not going to. I will not vote for any of the other Republican candidates EXCEPT for Carson, or Cruz, or Huckabee, but none of them will be the nominee. Trump's the only one who could be. And I see just how evil Republicans are - they'll stop at NOTHING in order to stop him. And when they do, I would rather have Hillary Clinton than Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio. The difference between this time and other times is that ever since 1969 the Republicans have controlled the Supreme Court, so no matter what they always had the final say. But the next President will put two Justices on that court: Ginsburg's replacement, and Kennedy's. If Trump isn't the nominee, Biden or Hillary will put the next two justices on the court, and that will mean that the Court moves rapidly, with its full power, to sweep aside the political resistance to the full Democrat agenda. The winner this time wins it all. Which means its Trump or bust. And then the question - if it's not Trump - is what the bust looks like. Is it a Republican bust, where everybody gets screwed but the super rich escape? Or is it a Democrat bust, where everybody gets screwed and the rich get gutted and strung up. If I'm going to go down, I want to be sure that the rich go down with me. So, in a bust scenario, in a Revolution, I'm definitely on the side of the Reds against the Whites. If it's Hitler v. Stalin, I'm with Stalin, because Stalin will always win - he has bigger armies - and in a Game of Thrones, I'm interested in living through the end of the game. The Right wing always loses popular revolutions. We don't have to have one at all, but we will if the Republicans keep winning with their economic agenda. It is France 1770 all over again. The pieces on the table are all the same, and they're being moved in the same tired, stupid old ways. A Trump can forestall that. A Lafayette - an aristocrat who GETS IT that the nobility can only rule the people if it doesn't IMPOVERISH the people. People will follow wealthy leaders, but they will kill them instead if the wealthy become SO greedy that they take away more and more of what the common people have. The wealthy have to keep on reasonably redistributing what they have amassed, as poverty relief and encouragement of the guilds, and as entertainment. If instead they compete with each other to try to run the table, the middle class and civil servants and workers become poor, the poor become destitute, and eventually they all march on Versailles and cut off the heads of the rich and take all of their shit. Then the rich are dead, or in America (or Chile or Russia). We have seen this game play out across three centuries. The American rich are just the current bone-headed aristocracy headed for the guillotine, UNLESS a Lafayette can garner the support of the people and clip the wings of the rich ENOUGH to keep it all going along well. You can concentrate 50% of the wealth in the top 10%, because that leaves enough for the rest to live decently, if frugally. But when you start concentrating 85%, as we have, going to 90%, in 5% of the hands, well, those FEMA camps and coffins are likely to end up housing and burying Rockefellers, not Smiths and Lopez', when all is said and done. The rich need a Trump to raise their taxes more than they imagine. But they don't imagine. So, I'm still hoping he wins, but I just don't think that the Republican crapweasels are going to let it happen. Vicomte13  posted on  2015-09-26   15:29:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #35. To: Vicomte13 (#32) Which means its Trump or bust. And then the question - if it's not Trump - is what the bust looks like. Is it a Republican bust, where everybody gets screwed but the super rich escape? Or is it a Democrat bust, where everybody gets screwed and the rich get gutted and strung up. If I'm going to go down, I want to be sure that the rich go down with me. So, in a bust scenario, in a Revolution, I'm definitely on the side of the Reds against the Whites. Like a commie you want to get rid of the rich. If there are no rich who can oppose the government? A K A Stone  posted on  2015-09-26   15:34:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #42. To: A K A Stone (#35) I am not interested in "getting rid of the rich". There will always be rich and poor, because men have different talents. I am interested in rooting out every law that is favorable to the rich, every tax loophole, to make them pay the same rates, with only the same deductions, as everybody else. That the middle class wealth, in houses, is taxed every year, but upper class wealth, in securities, is not, is why the middle class cannot accumulated wealth, while the already-rich do quite easiily. The middle class have 30% of their gain in wealth taken in taxes. The rich have very little taken, only the liquid portion they take as wages. It's systematic robbery, with the rich having the benefit of government, but having corruptly shifted the burden of paying for the government, and bleeding for it, over to the middle class and poor. And the accumulation of wealth in fewer and fewer hands has become so rapid, and so brazen, that the ability to maintain the political fist to do it is diminishing. Trump gets it. He's a rich guy who understands the need to tax the rich more and to take away their loopholes. Middle class people do not get it, because they don't understand how rigged the system is (because they are not exposed to it). They merely feel the effects of being beggared, without understanding why it is happening. It's why only a Trump can actually lead such a reform. But the party of the rich - the Republicans - well and truly hate him, because he's going to break their rice bowl. He's certainly not going to take all they have, nor do I advocate that. He's going to take what needs to be taken to make the system fairer, to adjust it, to make it viable. The other alternative is the Democrats. They will nationalize a lot more wealth, and be more socialistic in their approach, though this will be masked by taking the wealth and markets of SOME rich and handing it over to OTHER rich, who are their cronies. The Democrat approach will harness up the grievances of the poor and whip it up, but instead of aiming for fairness and reason, like a Trump would, they will whip people into a fury on racial lines, and get a mob that will let them do more than is fair or prudent. You seem to be resisting doing what is fair and prudent. The endpojnt of what you think you advocate will be a revolution that will kill the rich. I don't like revolutions. They are destructive. People must be reasonable,. Part of being reasonable with food is to eat enough to be satisfied, then stop. And if that amount makes you fat, eat as much as you NEED, then stop. Being reasonable with money means accumulating enough to be well off, comfortable and control your enterprise. Then stop. If you're so greedy for more that you're putting your own countrymen out of work by the millions, and seeking to take away their retirement benefits and leave them without health care, you are fitting your own neck for a noose. That's stupid. Trump is the sort of guy who can walk the right path. He's talking about these things. The Democrats will be more brutal and less fair, but will avoid a revolution. Let the Republicans continue on their path, and things will end in fire and blood in our lifetimes. We don't need to repeat history, if we're smart. If we refuse to be smart, well, the Red side wins almost all of the Revolutions, in the end. Because demographics is destiny. The best answer is to reasonably redistribute wealth on an ongoing basis, so that it never comes to that. Vicomte13  posted on  2015-09-26   15:48:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #44. To: Vicomte13 (#42) I am interested in rooting out every law that is favorable to the rich, every tax loophole, to make them pay the same rates, with only the same deductions, as everybody else. The top 2 percent pay what percent? A K A Stone  posted on  2015-09-26   15:49:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #53. To: A K A Stone (#44) (Edited) The top 2 percent pay what percent? Do you really want to understand how the tax code works, and favors them? Or are you simply going to favor them NO MATTER WHAT the truth is? If you can be swayed by what you learn, it is worth the exercise. Otherwise, my telling you how things really are, how the tax system actually works to so massively favor them, will not do anything but make you angrier at me than you already are, and what good will that serve? So, you tell me - do you really want to know the truth about the tax code? Vicomte13  posted on  2015-09-26   17:32:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #56. To: Vicomte13, tooconservative, tomder55, sneakypete (#53) Do you really want to understand how the tax code works, and favors them? Or are you simply going to favor them NO MATTER WHAT the truth is? If you can be swayed by what you learn, it is worth the exercise. Otherwise, my telling you how things really are, how the tax system actually works to so massively favor them, will not do anything but make you angrier at me than you already are, and what good will that serve? So, you tell me - do you really want to know the truth about the tax code? First I'm not angry with you, or others. I just tend to go for the throat when you disagree with me. I'm usually right, so that would mean you are wrong if you disagree with me. I suspect you have a similar belief about yourself. So when I say some nasty stuff to you, that is just me letting off some steam so to speak. Nothing personal. I react to comments on threads and not so much the individual. So I may be harsh on one thread and complimentry on another. Hope that clears that up. Now back to the topic at hand. The rich have advantages in the tax code. Sure I agree with that. The poor also have advantages in the tax code. Like paying zero. Or paying zero and still getting money back. I think the rich should pay more. That they should pay a higher percentage. That is negotiable in my mind. But in principal they should pay the most and a higher percentage. Remember in the Bible when a poor lady put in a tiny bit of money and the rich put in a lot. Jesus I believe said that she put in more money then they did because they contributed out of their abundence and she out what she needed to live. So yes I think the rich should pay a higher share then the poor. I don't agree with so called loopholes that allow them to pay nothing. Lets expand this. I don't agree when cities make special tax rules to entice a business to move to thier town. I've hear it said that corporations don't pay any taxes, that they just pass it on in their costs. So maybe we should have no income tax and only tax corporations since they don't pay any taxes anyway. A K A Stone  posted on  2015-09-26   18:35:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #58. To: A K A Stone (#56) The poor also have advantages in the tax code. Like paying zero. The poor pay plenty of taxes. Everybody pays sales taxes, even the homeless when they buy their Mad Dog 20/20. Sales taxes are not trivial either. Leaving aside the very high taxes on alcohol and cigarettes, which are avoidable expenses, clothes are taxed, as is prepared food of whatever sort (such as cafeteria food, or the gas station sandwich). Gasoline, of course, is taxed. So are telecoms. There are a handful of low population states that have no sales tax, but the LOW sales tax states have an average sales tax of 5.5% (when state AND LOCAL sales taxes are counted: a tax is a tax), and the average of the top-5 highest sales tax states (which are mostly Southern), is over 9%. The average overall US sales tax is in the 6.5% range. If weighted by state populations, it would be higher than that. Everybody pays that. Likewise, everybody with a wage of any kind from an employer pays Social Security tax and Medicare tax on the first dollar, and self-employed people pay double. Social Security and Medicare tax combine to 7.65%, and that is paid on the very first dollar earned. Social Security and Medicare tax is not trivial. It is 34% of Federal revenue. And remember, the rich only pay the Social Security tax on the bottom $106,000 or so of their pay and bonuses, but middle and lower class Americans pay that tax on every penny they earn. There is no tax deduction for any of that. So, the poorest of the poor who have a job at all, pay a combined total of about 14.5% of their first dollar in taxes. Because they are so poor, their combined incomes, and the taxes they pay, barely move the needle when it comes to national aggregate taxes collected, but even the poorest of the poor DO pay substantial taxes. And that's assuming they don't smoke or drink. And let's be clear, sales taxes are not a "trivial" portion of government revenues: 34% of state government revenue comes as sales tax, and these taxes fall quite heavily on the poor, proportionately speaking. This is why I get angry when Republicans use that very deceitful argument that the rich pay "70% of the income taxes". Considering that the rich have 85% of the wealth, the fact that they pay 70% of the income taxes indicates that they UNDERPAY by 15%. But let's not lose sight of the ball here. The poor do tend to do both more, out of depression perhaps, and those taxes are sky high. One may grouse that they should not consume these products, and that may be completely true from a health or life perspective, but the fact is that they pay a lot of money in cigarette and booze taxes. "Sin" taxes amount to 3.8% of ALL revenue collected in America, and they skew very heavily to the low end of the socio-economic spectrum. The poor pay taxes. They pay Social Security and Medicare: 7.65%. They pay sales taxes for clothing, shoes, haircuts and prepared foods of whatever type. Some places tax food generally. It is true that very poor people qualify for an Earned Income Tax Credit - they get a certain amount of money back as a credit. But the income threshold is very low. For a single person, the threshold above which he cannot go is $14,820. Now, remember that he is going to spend $1092.42 of that on Social Security and Medicare Tax. leaving him with $13,727.58. And he's going to spend on average somewhere around 6.5% of his income on sales taxes, so lop off another $963,30. So, the guy at the top of that threshold, just sneaking under the wire to get his EITC, spent $2055.72 on taxes. The standard deduction and personal exemption for federal income tax amounts to $10,300, so this guy IS paying the Federal Income Tax, at a rate of 15%, on $4520 of his income. That's another $675. So now, add that to his Social Security and Sales Taxes, and he's paid $2730.72 of his income on taxes. That's about 18,43% of a very small income. What does he have left to live on? $12,089.30, or about $1007.44 per month. Think of the cost of four things: food, bus tickets, rent and washing clothes. Good thing he doesn't smoke. The median gross rent in the United States is $905 per month. Obviosuly he can't do that. The HUD's "Extremely low income" rent calculation - what somebody in a tenement in Hell pays, is about $294,25 per month. This is the average, it skews quite a bit higher in urban areas (where the poor people live) and quite a bit lower in rural areas. Of course, in rural areas, transport is needed. Oh, and the Earned Income Tax Credit this guy earns? $503 per year maximum. He DOES pay income taxes, even to the Feds. Single guys and women are not being paid to live. They pay taxes. Oh, and EITC doesn't kick in until age 25. The bottom end here is threadbare. When children are involved, the benefits are more generous. Essentially, they make sure that the taxes to the parent/guardian are reimbursed by the amount that it costs to house, clothe and feed a child at a basic level. In 2014, about $55.4 billion was paid out in total EITC, of which $12.6 billion was improperly paid, so the real cost of the actual poverty relief program, which offsets the cost of taxes to people with children (the childless do not have their full tax burdens reimbursed) , is $42.8 billion, which is 1.1% of the budget. God lays aside 10% for the poor in his Law (and Jesus demanded a great deal more than that!), so American Christians have nothing to grouse about at the lower end. Single people are paying taxes, even with the Earned Income Tax Credit. Homeless derelicts who live off of begging and sleep in shelters are paying taxes: for booze and cigarettes. In fact, given the very high rates of taxation on those, derelicts may be paying 20- 30% of their total begging income in excise taxes on those products. The only people really not paying taxes are poor people with many children, but that is because the allowances for up to three children, which are basically enough to eat, house and clothe a child, do exceed the total taxes paid, by a married couple filing jointly with 3 or more kids, earning income down in the levels we are talking about. And even they DO pay taxes, they just get something back. What is the alternative? Let the children. Always remember: God's poverty relief tax was 10%. We spend a tenth of that on this tax relief for the poor. Other poverty relief programs: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, etc., spend more than this. But when one considers what a real pittance is spent on poverty relief through the tax code, and one looks at the MASSIVE loopholes for the rich, that allow hundreds of billions of dollars that WOULD be paid by the poor or middle class, were those revenue streams and wealth reservoirs taxed at the top they way they are for everybody downscale, it bothers me when people pretend that poverty relief through tax credits is breaking the budget. It REALLY bothers me when Christians do it. We should know better. Vicomte13  posted on  2015-09-26   21:07:10 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #85. To: Vicomte13 (#58) "Now, remember that he is going to spend $1092.42 of that on Social Security and Medicare Tax." While the rest of us are contributing over $9,000. "And he's going to spend on average somewhere around 6.5% of his income on sales taxes, so lop off another $963,30." While the rest of us are paying over $7,000. "so this guy IS paying the Federal Income Tax, at a rate of 15%, on $4520 of his income. That's another $675." While "the rich" are paying 39.5% of their income amounting to tens of thousands of dollars. Plus they're being taxed on their investments via capital gains tax and an inheritance (death) tax. misterwhite  posted on  2015-09-27   11:47:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #86. To: misterwhite (#85) While the rest of us are contributing over $9,000. You are contributing 7.65% of your wages, just as he is. It is not unfair that the gross amount of money he gives is less, because he is paying the IDENTICAL percentage that you do. And his eventual payout of SS will be based on what he paid in. What IS unfair is that once people start earning a LOT of money, over $106k or so, then THEY start paying a smaller and smaller percentage, until finally the guy who earns $10 million a year from various sources the same $9000 you do. The cap is what is unfair. That it only hits wages, and not stocks and capital gains is what is unfair. Not the fact that a guy paying the same percentage as you pays less because he earns less. The fact that a guy earning a lot MORE than you pays a vanishingly small percentage while you pay 7.65% on everything THAT is where you should be focusing your eyes - upward, at the rich who have made unfair and uneven deals for themselves. Instead, you are focused firmly downward, full of contempt for the poor. You should stop that. It is not Christian. Contempt for the rich for their cheating IS Christian. Vicomte13  posted on  2015-09-27   13:27:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #89. To: Vicomte13 (#86) "The cap is what is unfair." Given that there is a cap on what you receive from Social Security, it's only fair to have a cap on what you pay in. You want to eliminate both caps, that's fine with me. misterwhite  posted on  2015-09-27   15:07:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   Replies to Comment # 89.         There are no replies to Comment # 89. End Trace Mode for Comment # 89. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]  Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com