Republicans stunned to learn voters understand exactly what their tax cut did

[Dashinka 23,355]

15 minutes ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

Is it odd.. or is it the reason why we have a progressive federal tax in the first place? 

 

 

However it sounds like you would rather have a tax based on income (i.e. take more and more from the rich and the upper middle class).  To be fair, all taxpayers should receive tax cuts when they come about.  There should not be added penalties for being successful.

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

15 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

However it sounds like you would rather have a tax based on income (i.e. take more and more from the rich and the upper middle class).  To be fair, all taxpayers should receive tax cuts when they come about.  There should not be added penalties for being successful.

Federal does have a tax system based on income.. the rest are flat fee which disprortiatly affect low income. 

 

Rich people get their money from the middle and low class workers.. without highly educated/trained workers the rich would simple cease to exist. 

 

The rich also have more equity, which would be access to reach more wealth. The poor/middle class do not have these same opperrtunities Hence the reason why income mobility is scarce. 

 

Why middle class and low class citizens continue to fight for the rich while they work 2 jobs to support a family..  who knows. 

[Dashinka 23,355]

36 minutes ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

Federal does have a tax system based on income.. the rest are flat fee which disprortiatly affect low income. 

 

Rich people get their money from the middle and low class workers.. without highly educated/trained workers the rich would simple cease to exist. 

 

The rich also have more equity, which would be access to reach more wealth. The poor/middle class do not have these same opperrtunities Hence the reason why income mobility is scarce. 

 

Why middle class and low class citizens continue to fight for the rich while they work 2 jobs to support a family..  who knows. 

Did all rich people start out rich?  I believe there are many examples of rich people that started with very little which suggests that poor people do have opportunities to succeed.  Regardless, it is their money, it does not belong to the government to spend for them.

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

26 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Did all rich people start out rich?  I believe there are many examples of rich people that started with very little which suggests that poor people do have opportunities to succeed.  Regardless, it is their money, it does not belong to the government to spend for them.

So???

 

Why would someone base a whole economic system off of Statistical outliers. 

Edited September 28, 2018 by Keith & Arileidi

[Dashinka 23,355]

59 minutes ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

So???

 

Why would someone base a whole economic system off of Statistical outliers. 

What is a statistical outlier?  Why not just say what you want, all rich people (people earning above $100k per year) should be taxed at 100% to pay for social programs that would still be financially unsustainable.

[Póg mo 1,749]

3 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

What is a statistical outlier?  Why not just say what you want, all rich people (people earning above $100k per year) should be taxed at 100% to pay for social programs that would still be financially unsustainable.

I thought you said that you studied science at University level? 

[Dashinka 23,355]

33 minutes ago, Póg mo said:

I thought you said that you studied science at University level? 

And it would have been nice if a statistical outlier was actually identified.  The implication is that someone succeeding from a poor position is an outlier and the majority of folks that are rich start out rich.  Please provide the actual statistics.

[Póg mo 1,749]

4 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

And it would have been nice if a statistical outlier was actually identified.  The implication is that someone succeeding from a poor position is an outlier and the majority of folks that are rich start out rich.  Please provide the actual statistics.

I reacting to your question. Word your questions better, so there will be less chance of confusion.

 

Anyway from the socialist economist magazine:

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/02/14/americans-overestimate-social-mobility-in-their-country

 

Americans seem over estimate the chance of the chance of moving from the bottom to the top quintile of earnings. A US born poor person has about a 7.8 % chance, compared to the perception among Americans that it is 11.5%. Not absolutely terrible, but compared to Britain, France, Italy, and Sweden not that great. The probability of remaining in the bottom quintile of earnings is higher in the US. 

[Dashinka 23,355]

8 minutes ago, Póg mo said:

I reacting to your question. Word your questions better, so there will be less chance of confusion.

 

Anyway from the socialist economist magazine:

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/02/14/americans-overestimate-social-mobility-in-their-country

 

Americans seem over estimate the chance of the chance of moving from the bottom to the top quintile of earnings. A US born poor person has about a 7.8 % chance, compared to the perception among Americans that it is 11.5%. Not absolutely terrible, but compared to Britain, France, Italy, and Sweden not that great. The probability of remaining in the bottom quintile of earnings is higher in the US. 

So it is not an outlier.  7% is still a big number consider the population of the US.

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

6 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

So it is not an outlier.  7% is still a big number consider the population of the US.

I shouldn't have to point out what a statistical outlier is.. you've been alive long enough to know that "rags to riches" is rare event. A person can work all their lives and still not escape poverty. 

 

And 7% is pretty bad for a country that Call's itself " the land of opportunity" .

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

On 9/27/2018 at 10:44 AM, Keith & Arileidi said:

I never said that they didnt pay taxes.. the point is they should. And they do pay relatively less than middle class and the working poor.

The number you are quoting are just federal income.  

 

Republicans have literally been waging war on the poor for the longest. So no politician is innocent of this "class warfare" idea.

Keith, you must have overlooked my question about what you said, because what you wrote is patently false.

 

How can a group of people earning more, and paying a higher percentage of taxes, be said to pay relatively less taxes than "the poor", who pay zero or not very much tax?

 

Explain your math, please?

[Dashinka 23,355]

52 minutes ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

I shouldn't have to point out what a statistical outlier is.. you've been alive long enough to know that "rags to riches" is rare event. A person can work all their lives and still not escape poverty. 

 

And 7% is pretty bad for a country that Call's itself " the land of opportunity" .

You should point out the statistics you are referencing when the comment is made.  I never made any reference to statistics, I only made a comment that people do come out of poverty and succeed.  Does everyone do it, no, but the opportunity exists for all.  Those that don’t may have other factors such as risk decisions, or other responsibilities that do not allow them to take advantage of the opportunities.  Regardless, what is the best solution, equalize everyone’s income by having the government confiscate all wealth?

[Póg mo 1,749]

4 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

 government confiscate all wealth?

Who is suggesting that? Names and exact quotes or it never happened.

[Dashinka 23,355]

Just now, Póg mo said:

Who is suggesting that? Names and exact quotes or it never happened.

What is the alternative when Socialism is promoted?

[Póg mo 1,749]

31 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

What is the alternative when Socialism is promoted?

Just as I thought, nobody is suggesting anything of the sort.