Zero2Cool
10 years ago

I wouldn't ever agree to a maximum wage for anybody, because that would be very UnAmerican. All they need to do is correct the tax code: no more capital gains taxes - income is income and you pay in the top rate for all your income exceeding X amounts of dollars. No more cap on the Social Security tax, which is currently at $125,000. Wealthy people pay SS tax on all of their income not just the first $125K. And in times of financial crisis the top rate is adjusted to make up the difference. I guarantee you that those politicians will keep their spending in check.

Being born an American shouldn't just be a privilege to some and leave out those that were born in poverty.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



Yeppers, agreed.

I will admit, at first I thought cap those bastards, but how justifiable is that? Think of Bill Gates, he donates BILLIONS of dollars to help others. If we had capped him, would those same billions have gone to help people? If so, would it be more, would it be less?

Regardless, you should be able to earn as much as you can. I just disagree with screwing people over for financial gain.
UserPostedImage
sschind
10 years ago

You don't think that tax code is extremely complicated for the average people do you? Funny how we never get into the nuts and bolts of taxation when we are electing our corrupted leaders. Well, we kind of did with Mittens in '12, but it was dropped suddenly for some reason.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



The tax code is extremely complicated that is why some people don't pay their full share, because of the "complications." Pick something and make everyone follow it. I really don't care what numbers we pick, Some people would think 25% is too high. Others think 35% is too low, that is why I said it was subjective. whatever number we choose someone will think it is unfair. What we need to do is agree on a number and use that number. My guess is that if we picked a number that was even lower than the top rate today and made everyone pay that amount we would have a hell of a lot more money in the treasury. That is what I mean by paying their FULL share. Not "OK I'm in the top bracket, I pay x amount on my income, except this, this is tax free. Oh and that over there, that's only taxable at a much lower rate. Oh, and that big pile in the corner, no one knows I even have that. Seems FAIR to me"

It really shouldn't be that difficult. Maybe not quite as easy as

A) how much did you make
B) send it in.

but income up to a certain amount tax free
between that number and another number 15%
then 25 %
then 33%

I really don't even think it matters what you set the limits at, the key is making everyone pay the full amount that their income level says they should pay.
DakotaT
10 years ago
Graduated tax rates are the most fair, and they are designed in a manner in which you start out life earning a lower salary and as progress through the years and start earning more, you start paying more income taxes. These graduated tax rates are to help a person raise himself up by the bootstraps.

But in our system, since politicians (lawmakers) are now all for sale and this process is technically legal; the wealthy get them to create credits, deductions, and loopholes to avoid taxation. So the people that should be paying the most tax are avoiding it, which is the basis of my 2 year rant with the usual dillholes in this forum that slurp everything the wealthy Republicans spew at them.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
10 years ago

Graduated tax rates are the most fair, and they are designed in a manner in which you start out life earning a lower salary and as progress through the years and start earning more, you start paying more income taxes. These graduated tax rates are to help a person raise himself up by the bootstraps.

But in our system, since politicians (lawmakers) are now all for sale and this process is technically legal; the wealthy get them to create credits, deductions, and loopholes to avoid taxation. So the people that should be paying the most tax are avoiding it, which is the basis of my 2 year rant with the usual dillholes in this forum that slurp everything the wealthy Republicans spew at them.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



It is still amazing that you are so gullible as to think that there is not 1 single wealthy Democrat who doesn't take advantage of the current tax laws. It is equally amazing that you are so gullible as to think there there is not Democratic support for the current tax laws. That even when the Democrats had majority representation that somehow the Republicans magically passed a bill to change the tax code. Keep believing that all that is wrong with America is because of the Republicans. It is what makes you so cute.
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
10 years ago

It is still amazing that you are so gullible as to think that there is not 1 single wealthy Democrat who doesn't take advantage of the current tax laws. It is equally amazing that you are so gullible as to think there there is not Democratic support for the current tax laws. That even when the Democrats had majority representation that somehow the Republicans magically passed a bill to change the tax code. Keep believing that all that is wrong with America is because of the Republicans. It is what makes you so cute.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



I'm not gullible to anything. Every time Republicans take control of Washington they lower taxes for the wealthy and screw the people needing social programs. I am so sick of this country's hypocrisy of claiming to be Christian nation and then doing the exact fucking opposite in the name of greed. Yes Wayne, there are wealthy Democrats, but at least they pretend to give a shit and throw the needy a bone once in a while.

And what does it matter to you anyway if I chastise the Republicans - you don't claim to be one, right?
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
10 years ago
all I ask is that you not be a hypocrite and blame both parties equally.

The Republicans could not change the tax codes without help of the Democrats.

From 1955 through 1995 and 2007-2011 the Democrats controlled the House. The Senate from 1955-1981, 87-95, 01-03 and 07-14.

The Republicans have controlled both chambers very little of the time.

You're still cute with your railing.
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
10 years ago

all I ask is that you not be a hypocrite and blame both parties equally.

The Republicans could not change the tax codes without help of the Democrats.

From 1955 through 1995 and 2007-2011 the Democrats controlled the House. The Senate from 1955-1981, 87-95, 01-03 and 07-14.

The Republicans have controlled both chambers very little of the time.

You're still cute with your railing.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



That's why they were called the Bush tax cuts right? Then we went to war on a credit card. Own the shit once.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
10 years ago

That's why they were called the Bush tax cuts right? Then we went to war on a credit card. Own the shit once.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



You are pissing and moaning about a tax bill that happened 13 years ago? In the past 50 years do you realize how many times there has been "tax reform"? Probably 1000 times. You are cute when you get upset. It does make it hard for you to see straight.

edit- just out of curiosity I went to look and see who voted for the bill in 2001. 12 Democrats voted in favor of the bill including Feinstein. Only 58 Senators voted for it so it would not have passed without bi partition support. The same for the House. 29 Dems votes for it which allowed it to pass. Your beloved people are just as responsible for your hated law.
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
10 years ago

You are pissing and moaning about a tax bill that happened 13 years ago? In the past 50 years do you realize how many times there has been "tax reform"? Probably 1000 times. You are cute when you get upset. It does make it hard for you to see straight.

edit- just out of curiosity I went to look and see who voted for the bill in 2001. 12 Democrats voted in favor of the bill including Feinstein. Only 58 Senators voted for it so it would not have passed without bi partition support. The same for the House. 29 Dems votes for it which allowed it to pass. Your beloved people are just as responsible for your hated law.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



And now your beloved Republicans do nothing but block legislation at their country's peril, just to obstruct Count Chocula. And why was there a surplus that allowed those Bush tax cuts in the first place? Because Clinton raised the top rates, just like Obama did a couple years ago. There is a fundamental difference between the two parties when it comes to taxation and social programs. I'll never again vote for the party that values the war machine over social programs that help lower end Americans. And those that do are heartless doucebags. Associate yourself with that shit if you must.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
10 years ago
You are so cute when you get confused. You remind me of Mateo in the "Listen Linda Honey" video. You don't even know what you are talking about and you change the conversation when you get stuck in a corner.





You blame the wealthy Republicans for all the woes that ever happened to all mankind since the beginning of the world ignoring the fact that there are just as many wealthy Democrats cutting deals and lining their pockets too. You seem to enjoy the line they give out that they want to help the little guy while they stuff their pockets.

You try and point to the Bush 2001 tax cut as your "proof" how evil the Republicans are and I show you that there was very strong support from the Democrats in the Senate and that the bill would not have been passed without their support including Dianne Feinstein who is considered by some as one of the more liberal Democrats. (In the Senate, 48% of those who voted in favor of the bill were Dems.)

As I have said before but you don't listen, I do not associate myself with any political party. I am sure you still do not understand it because you are so busy stammering, "Listen Linda Honey" to comprehend something as simple as that.

Continue on Dear.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (7h) : Ravens release Justin Tucker, err D. Watson Jr?
Zero2Cool (7h) : Cardinals have signed TE Josiah Deguara.
Zero2Cool (15h) : If I were to "Google" it, then I wouldn't read it in your words.
Martha Careful (16h) : Yes, in the military S2’s work on IPB, PERCEC, PHYSEC and IO
dfosterf (4-May) : FYI civilian companies swipe the S2 designation from the military. S2 is the intelligence branch up to brigade level. G2 is division level.
dfosterf (4-May) : Google it. Make sure to tack NFL on it or you will get the military meaning
Zero2Cool (4-May) : S2?
beast (4-May) : Seems like the S2 has a love/hate relationship with professional scouts.
beast (4-May) : In theory, the S2 test how quickly a QBs brain can solve game like issues and how quickly they can do it.
dfosterf (4-May) : Are you gentlemen and at least one lady familiar with the S2 cognition
Zero2Cool (4-May) : Maybe there isn't an issue.
beast (4-May) : NFL really needs to fix their position labeling issue, but I don't think they care
Zero2Cool (1-May) : Packers did not activate the fifth-year options for linebacker Quay Walker, with the goal of signing him to a contract extension.
Zero2Cool (1-May) : Matthew Golden spoke with Randall Cobb before draft. Looked like chance encounter.
packerfanoutwest (1-May) : from a head left turn?
packerfanoutwest (1-May) : someone drunk?
Zero2Cool (1-May) : Unlikely.
dfosterf (30-Apr) : How long until Jeff Sperbeck's family sues John Elway ?
Zero2Cool (30-Apr) : Packers are exercising the fifth-year option on DT Devonte Wyatt, locking in a guaranteed $12.9M for the 2026 season.
beast (30-Apr) : Sounds like P Luke Elzinga has a rookie try out opportunity from the Titans
dfosterf (30-Apr) : Luke Elzinga Punter Oklahoma stil unsigned. Green Bay has been mentioned as good fit
beast (30-Apr) : The Packers re-signed three exclusive rights free agents WR Melton, P Whelan and RB Wilson.
Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : February 5, 2002 (age 23) ok no. packers.com is wrong
Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : Micah Robinson is only 19??
Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : 6 first rounders on Packers defense now
Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : LB Isaiah Simmons. Signed. Called it!!! Oh yeah!
Martha Careful (29-Apr) : ty bboystyle...fat fingers
bboystyle (29-Apr) : Tom*
Martha Careful (28-Apr) : RIP Packer Safety Tim Brown
beast (27-Apr) : Yeah, but also some of the wording suggestions Jax only pranked called the QB, not the others... and if he had an open spreadsheet & 3 calls
beast (27-Apr) : Thank goodness he's not leaving the Turtle in the Red Tide
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : Cowboys 1st round pick Tyler Booker will indeed be bringing his pet turtle to Dallas with him
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : that contained all prospects info and contact
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : beast, according the Falcons statement Jax came across it on an ipad. If I had to guess, probably an open spread sheet or something
Zero2Cool (27-Apr) : Simmons put up an emoji with cheese.
beast (27-Apr) : Not sure anyone is interested in Isaiah Simmons... Collin Oliver might of taken his potential slot
beast (27-Apr) : I'm going with Jax Ulbrich is not telling the whole truth... he accidentally came across it? Why would a defensive coordinator have a QB #?
Zero2Cool (27-Apr) : He's not that great, but final piece of the script.\
Zero2Cool (27-Apr) : If we add Isaiah Simmons, book your Super Bowl tickets
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : Colts 1st round TE Tyler Warren also got prank called, was that Jax Ulbrich as well?
Zero2Cool (27-Apr) : Jax Ulbrich, Jeff Ulbrich’s son, released an apology for his role in the Shedeur Sanders prank call.
Martha Careful (27-Apr) : apparently he did not participate in practice or play on the east west shrine game nor the NFL combine. The kid was a mediocre spoiled brat
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : Yeah that one that was a super wounded duck that Sanders supporters are highlighting to prove a point
Zero2Cool (27-Apr) : Shough is the guy who missed guys at combine isn't he?
beast (27-Apr) : It's not official until I'm dead! I have a chance still! (Not really)
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : I could feel my body decomposing in real time when I read that
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : @MIKEYSAINRISTIL Tyler Shough will officially be the last person drafted to the NFL born in the 1900’s
Mucky Tundra (26-Apr) : saw the tweet, he meant the city
Mucky Tundra (26-Apr) : Was that for the team or the city?
Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : Adam Schefter @AdamSchefter · 3m Draft grade is in: Green Bay gets an A. The people, the city, the venue were all superb. NFL Draft’s next
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

4-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

3-May / Packers Draft Threads / Martha Careful

3-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

3-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

3-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

3-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

2-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2-May / Random Babble / wpr

1-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.