• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Republicans think you don't pay enough tax.

BenBurch said:
To clarify, I mean those in the upper 10% of income earners. (Which just barely includes me, so I am not recommending anything I am not subject to.)
Click to expand...

I know what you meant, but that's not what's going to happen.
 
mikeyx said:
The Republicans have proven themselves to be the enemy of the American people and slaves to partisan politics.
Click to expand...

To be honest, some of this extends to Democrats as well at this point. The politicians are too busy trying to get reelected to actually do their jobs.
 
BenBurch said:
daredelvis and Unabogie; Thanks for pointing that out!
Click to expand...
Unabogie pointed it out. I just pointed out his pointing it out. Apparently it is still beyond the reading comprehension of some forum members

Daredelvis
 
To the extent that the title of this thread is not simply another mindless anti-the side that isn't my side silliness, the Republicans are correct.

My name is sarge, and I am a 2%er*. I don't pay enough taxes. I don't pay enough taxes on my capital gains, and I certainly do not pay enough Social Security taxes on my income.

I do pay a higher share of my wages to income taxes than I should have to, however.




*a fairly recent occurance - and I am not likely to soon make the elite 1%. Of course, it is true for quite a number of folks as well. A University of Michigan study showed that most of the working people who were in the bottom 20 percent of income earners in 1975 were also in the top 40 percent at some point by 1991. Only 5 percent of those in the bottom quintile in 1975 were still there in 1991, while 29 percent of them were now in the top quintile.
That's why it's stupid to talk about income brackets rather than the people that populate those brackets.
 
daredelvis said:
Unabogie pointed it out. I just pointed out his pointing it out. Apparently it is still beyond the reading comprehension of some forum members

Daredelvis
Click to expand...

And we're still waiting for a single one them to respond because it blows their talking point right out of the water. They thought they were being clever pointing out how the payroll tax cut would hurt a liberal sacred cow, but since they were relying on right wing talking points (also known as fabrications), what could their opposition possibly be based on? Tax cuts for everyone? Paid for with an offset? In which universe is this something Republicans would be against if they weren't trying to hurt the economy on purpose?
 
Ziggurat said:
And I'm guessing you didn't actually read it either.
Click to expand...
I did. It was an oversimplification of a complex issues punctuated with fifteen year old mullet-wearing pop culture references and no real substance or insight and a lot of assumptions. Exactly what one would expect from Pajamas Media.
 
Last edited:
Upchurch said:
I did. It was an oversimplification of a complex issues punctuated with fifteen year old mullet-wearing pop culture references and no real substance or insight and a lot of assumptions. Exactly what one would expect from Pajamas Media.
Click to expand...

Wow. You took it seriously, didn't you? That says more about you than it does about Frank J. Flemming, the author.
 
Ziggurat said:
Wow. You took it seriously, didn't you? That says more about you than it does about Frank J. Flemming, the author.
Click to expand...
Oh, you were ironically linking to it and chastising me for not reading it :rolleyes:

That must be why you referred to the "article's" conclusion in this post:
Ziggurat said:
I know what you meant, but that's not what's going to happen.
Click to expand...


Of course, I didn't take it seriously. That's why I asked "Really?" and said it was kinda sad.
 
Upchurch said:
Oh, you were ironically linking to it and chastising me for not reading it :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The article itself isn't serious. Did you not pick up on that? Because if you did, your entire response makes no sense.
 
Jeez, it's like pulling teeth. The Republican claim that this undercuts Social Security is a lie. Does anyone dispute this basic fact? After you answer this question, we can discuss whether or not asking the very rich to finance the tax cut is appropriate.
 
Upchurch said:
Crazy blogger is crazy. Call it a Poe, if you like.
Click to expand...

That's the thing: it's not Poe. You confuse it for an example of Poe because it matches your conception of conservatives, but it's actually quite obvious as parody for those who haven't constructed crude caricatures as their working model for their opponents. In fact, the real parody isn't even of conservatives, the real parody is of the conception that people like you have about conservatives.

Like I said, that confusion says more about you than about Frank Flemming.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom