Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Damn those evil rich people!!!!Follow

#27 Apr 07 2010 at 9:49 PM Rating: Default
**
739 posts
Quote:
I'm not sure what you think is special here. Does it occur to you that I paid sales tax on my car and taxes on my gas and a fee for license and registration and tax on maintenance services and taxes on the goods I carry in my car?

I do pretty much everything he does, but he does more of it, hence he pays more.


And when are you going to explain how he doesn't pay his fair share? That's what you libs have always told us about the evil rich.
#28 Apr 07 2010 at 9:50 PM Rating: Decent
*****
10,601 posts
ThiefX wrote:
Translation: I can't answer a simple question so I will insult you and hope nobody notices I couldn't answer the question.
the fact that you have yet to address any of the posts anyone has made, this is exceptionally amusing.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#29ThiefX, Posted: Apr 07 2010 at 9:55 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Actually I've answered a few posts on this thread maybe you would like to scroll up a bit and see for yourself and when your done with that maybe you could take a shot an answering how the rich don't pay their fair share.
#30 Apr 07 2010 at 10:05 PM Rating: Decent
Keeper of the Shroud
*****
13,632 posts
ThiefX wrote:


Translation: I can't answer a simple question so I will insult you and hope nobody notices I couldn't answer the question.


You've gotten your answer several times, now you're just being a whiny ***** about it. If you're going to post stupid sh*t like this it would help if you could at least be amusing when you do it.
#31 Apr 07 2010 at 10:09 PM Rating: Decent
*****
10,601 posts
ThiefX wrote:
Quote:
the fact that you have yet to address any of the posts anyone has made, this is exceptionally amusing.


Actually I've answered a few posts on this thread maybe you would like to scroll up a bit and see for yourself and when your done with that maybe you could take a shot an answering how the rich don't pay their fair share.
Smiley: laugh No you haven't. But it's funny that you think you have. As to your question when have I ever said the rich don't pay their fair share?

Edited, Apr 7th 2010 11:14pm by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#32 Apr 07 2010 at 10:14 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
15,952 posts
ThiefX wrote:
Ah yes liberal logic.......

Did it ever cross your mind that the evil owner of the company (I'm sure he's evil because libs tell us they are) pays taxes on those trucks and taxes on the gas that goes into the truck and taxes on each employee driving those trucks and taxes on upkeep of those trucks and taxes on the goods in the back of the truck...........

I'm sure it did.


Nations have been adding and subtracting to their tax systems until they are a snarled mess of taxes, deductions and rebates. This is why the rich use accountants. Theoretically company tax is 30% in Aus. In practise, it is on record that our biggest companies pay 6-9% tax per year. Theoretically our top personal tax rate is something like 45%. In practise all the wealthy feed their incomes through family trusts or private companies, and pay no more than 20-30% tax tops.

Now, I'm not saying wealthy people and wealthy businesses are automatically evil. In fact, I'm very fond of money myself. I think everyone has the right to legally minimise the tax they pay, with or without accountant help, with the emphasis on legally.

What I am saying is that life isn't black or white. Most small businesses struggle but it's the nature of starting up, and getting trapped in a niche. Capitalism is designed to have winners and losers, and keep cost down by setting parties fighting to the financial death against each other, so everything is always being pared down to the bone as much as possible, unless you are in the upper eschelon of the winners circle.

Basically it's a myth that business is taxed to death. Capitalism makes business and workers suffer when they are pitted against each other. Consumers are supposed to be the beneficiaries of that suffering. It's just a problem that the consumers are also the workers and the business owners/shareholders.

Ditto it's a myth that the rich are taxed to death. It feels horrible when you get a nice fat paycheck/dividend and then you realise that nice big number is actually 40% smaller because you have to pay tax. I really know that feeling. Half that lovely figure just dissappeared! But the alternative to losing that 40% is living in a country where 80% of the places you walk have raw sewerage running in the gutters and you walk beside mounds of stinking, rotting garbage, waving flies out of the way of your face. That really is the alternative.

(Take your pick of municipality dysfunctions. They all run in a circles of catch-22s, until a monumental institution intervenes with a lot of money to build infrastructure that supports each other. And all the nations where there IS no government and tax system large enough to put in the basics of monumental infrastructure that a modern western nation needs to run on... they all demonstrate that individual private businesses can't or won't do the job themselves. Individuals in those nations can get rich and live in enclaves of decency, but 80-90% of the country will be left to rot, with almost no opportunities to better their situation. The exceptions are nations where warlord families own massively profitable resources like crude oil. These families turn around and personally pay for the infrastucture of everyone else in the nation. Nationally most people in these small minority of countries live fairly well off, but they live in oligarchies that amount to dictatorships. The entire wealth of the nation is privately owned by individuals of a few extended families.)
#33 Apr 07 2010 at 10:21 PM Rating: Good
*****
15,512 posts
I don't see why you bother writing a long post to him, as he's obviously incapable of digesting it. It would be about as pleasant as drinking a bucket of Olestra.
#34 Apr 08 2010 at 6:04 AM Rating: Decent
*****
15,952 posts
I know. /facepalm.

But I have to admit, after 4 years I gave up reading gbaji posts. Turnabout is fair play. I guess I'm just Compulsive sometimes about writing into the wind.
#35 Apr 08 2010 at 8:30 AM Rating: Decent
Aripyanfar wrote:
Not to mention, if this was in Australia, the cost of the fuel and the trucks get written off as a business expense, and deducted from the income of the business, BEFORE the tax the business has to pay on its profit is calculated.

IE, in Aus business costs like trucks and fuel aren't in effect in the long run paid for by the business at all.

Edited, Apr 7th 2010 11:09pm by Aripyanfar


Since nobody addressed this, it's the same here in the States, Ari. As a matter of fact, the number of things that businesses try to write off is often very, very long, and doesn't always make a whole lot of sense. But so long as they aren't audited, they'll get away with it.
#36 Apr 08 2010 at 9:52 AM Rating: Good
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
Not to mention, if this was in Australia, the cost of the fuel and the trucks get written off as a business expense, and deducted from the income of the business, BEFORE the tax the business has to pay on its profit is calculated.

IE, in Aus business costs like trucks and fuel aren't in effect in the long run paid for by the business at all.

Edited, Apr 7th 2010 11:09pm by Aripyanfar


Since nobody addressed this, it's the same here in the States, Ari. As a matter of fact, the number of things that businesses try to write off is often very, very long, and doesn't always make a whole lot of sense. But so long as they aren't audited, they'll get away with it.


But...

75%!!! Smiley: mad
#37 Apr 08 2010 at 9:54 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,512 posts
Assassin Nadenu wrote:
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
Not to mention, if this was in Australia, the cost of the fuel and the trucks get written off as a business expense, and deducted from the income of the business, BEFORE the tax the business has to pay on its profit is calculated.

IE, in Aus business costs like trucks and fuel aren't in effect in the long run paid for by the business at all.

Edited, Apr 7th 2010 11:09pm by Aripyanfar


Since nobody addressed this, it's the same here in the States, Ari. As a matter of fact, the number of things that businesses try to write off is often very, very long, and doesn't always make a whole lot of sense. But so long as they aren't audited, they'll get away with it.


But...

75%!!! Smiley: mad
YOU ARE EDUCATED STUPID
#38 Apr 08 2010 at 9:57 AM Rating: Good
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
Sweetums wrote:
Assassin Nadenu wrote:
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
Not to mention, if this was in Australia, the cost of the fuel and the trucks get written off as a business expense, and deducted from the income of the business, BEFORE the tax the business has to pay on its profit is calculated.

IE, in Aus business costs like trucks and fuel aren't in effect in the long run paid for by the business at all.

Edited, Apr 7th 2010 11:09pm by Aripyanfar


Since nobody addressed this, it's the same here in the States, Ari. As a matter of fact, the number of things that businesses try to write off is often very, very long, and doesn't always make a whole lot of sense. But so long as they aren't audited, they'll get away with it.


But...

75%!!! Smiley: mad
YOU ARE EDUCATED STUPID


Smiley: flowers
#39 Apr 08 2010 at 10:19 AM Rating: Decent
Aripya,

Quote:
Basically it's a myth that business is taxed to death. Capitalism makes business and workers suffer when they are pitted against each other.



Sorry it's not a myth it's a reality. Small/medium/large business owners aren't hiring right now based on the actions of the federal govn. This isn't imaginary it's real.

Quote:
Consumers are supposed to be the beneficiaries of that suffering. It's just a problem that the consumers are also the workers and the business owners/shareholders.


The problem is you think businesses pay taxes. Everytime a business is faced with higher taxes that cost is passed directly to the consumer. Then the moranic left get to whine about how big business is taking advantage of average ordinary citizens.

If you're really interested in an equitable tax system try researching, and supporting, the fair tax plan.



#40 Apr 08 2010 at 10:21 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Expense accounts: Writing off private expenses as public costs since 1803.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#41 Apr 08 2010 at 10:23 AM Rating: Good
If my husband and I made a combined income of $250,000, I would not mind paying taxes one iota.

Even if we paid 75% of that in taxes (which is NOT what the article is saying at all, and if you think it does, you have a reading comprehension failure beyond my ability to repair), we'd still have more leftover money than we have right now.

As it is, we got $9,000 back this year because of the first time home buyer credit. We pulled a foreclosed house off the market, gave our local Home Depot enough business to put them in the black for the month (seriously, we were the talk of the store), and got a massive housing upgrade in the process.
#42 Apr 08 2010 at 10:37 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
catwho wrote:
If my husband and I made a combined income of $250,000, I would not mind paying taxes one iota.

Even if we paid 75% of that in taxes (which is NOT what the article is saying at all, and if you think it does, you have a reading comprehension failure beyond my ability to repair), we'd still have more leftover money than we have right now.

As it is, we got $9,000 back this year because of the first time home buyer credit. We pulled a foreclosed house off the market, gave our local Home Depot enough business to put them in the black for the month (seriously, we were the talk of the store), and got a massive housing upgrade in the process.


That would only be like 32k/person. That's even below the dead zone if taken singularly; ergo pretty bad.

I don't think your maths are working the way you want them to be, or I am horribly misrepresenting something.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#43 Apr 08 2010 at 10:42 AM Rating: Good
Timelordwho wrote:
catwho wrote:
If my husband and I made a combined income of $250,000, I would not mind paying taxes one iota.

Even if we paid 75% of that in taxes (which is NOT what the article is saying at all, and if you think it does, you have a reading comprehension failure beyond my ability to repair), we'd still have more leftover money than we have right now.

As it is, we got $9,000 back this year because of the first time home buyer credit. We pulled a foreclosed house off the market, gave our local Home Depot enough business to put them in the black for the month (seriously, we were the talk of the store), and got a massive housing upgrade in the process.


That would only be like 32k/person. That's even below the dead zone if taken singularly; ergo pretty bad.

I don't think your maths are working the way you want them to be, or I am horribly misrepresenting something.

$31,250. No wonder liberals suck at governing. They can't even do maths.
#44 Apr 08 2010 at 10:45 AM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
I think her point is that they have a combined income of less than $62,500...?

If I was making $4800 a week, damn right I wouldn't mind paying taxes.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#45 Apr 08 2010 at 10:57 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Quote:
$31,250. No wonder liberals suck at governing. They can't even do maths.


I see what you did thar.

Edited, Apr 8th 2010 12:57pm by Timelordwho
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#46 Apr 08 2010 at 10:58 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
bsphil wrote:
I think her point is that they have a combined income of less than $62,500...?

If I was making $4800 a week, damn right I wouldn't mind paying taxes.


Yes you would.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#47 Apr 08 2010 at 11:08 AM Rating: Good
Timelordwho wrote:
bsphil wrote:
I think her point is that they have a combined income of less than $62,500...?

If I was making $4800 a week, damn right I wouldn't mind paying taxes.


Yes you would.


You can't tell me how to feel. You're not even my real dad.
#48 Apr 08 2010 at 11:11 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Kavekk the Ludicrous wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
bsphil wrote:
I think her point is that they have a combined income of less than $62,500...?

If I was making $4800 a week, damn right I wouldn't mind paying taxes.


Yes you would.


You can't tell me how to feel. You're not even my real dad.


So that's how it's gonna be, Son.

Time for another beating.

It's for your own good.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#49ThiefX, Posted: Apr 08 2010 at 11:23 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Thank you for recomending trickle down economics :-) Regan would be proud.
#50 Apr 08 2010 at 11:26 AM Rating: Decent
ThiefX wrote:
Quote:
As it is, we got $9,000 back this year because of the first time home buyer credit. We pulled a foreclosed house off the market, gave our local Home Depot enough business to put them in the black for the month (seriously, we were the talk of the store), and got a massive housing upgrade in the process.


Thank you for recomending trickle down economics :-) Regan would be proud.


Every time you speak, the only response that comes to mind is "You can't really be that stupid". It's a rhetorical statement, I know.
#51 Apr 08 2010 at 11:29 AM Rating: Default
**
739 posts
Quote:
Since nobody addressed this, it's the same here in the States, Ari. As a matter of fact, the number of things that businesses try to write off is often very, very long, and doesn't always make a whole lot of sense. But so long as they aren't audited, they'll get away with it.


Ah yes the liberal myth of the evil corporation who cheats and doesn't pay their taxes.

Did it ever occur to you that writing off business expenses is perfectly legal? That for every expenses they write off they are hit with and equal amount of taxes they cannot?
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 240 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (240)