Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
I'm rich! I'm rich!
Author Message
Rt1Rebel Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 491
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #1
 
<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,49908,00.html" target="_blank">http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,49908,00.html</a>

------------------------------------------------

A curious thing happened when I filed my income taxes this year. I discovered that I'm filthy rich.

How do I know? Because the deduction I’m supposed to get for the interest I pay on my student loans phases out for "top earners." This year, under former President Clinton’s tax code, that deduction began phasing out for me. This means I’m rich.

I'm rich! My first inclination was to call up every ex-girlfriend I've ever had and let her know she missed her chance...

...The income cutoff for the richest 5 percent is just over $120,000. In a good-sized city, a college graduate in his late twenties could probably expect to make about $60,000 per year. If two people making this much money get married, they'd find themselves in the top 5 percent of income earners — the filthy rich. These aren't trust fund babies. They’re Gen-Xers from the suburbs with a bachelor's degree.

The top 25 percent of income earners (and this would include those same two Gen-Xers if they didn't get married) pay a whopping 83.5 percent of U.S. taxes. In contrast, the bottom half of income earners — that's 50 percent of all taxpayers — bear just 4 percent of the tax burden, while earning 13 percent of the income.

Anyway you slice it, rich Americans are paying far more than their share.

So when Democrats say that the latest Republican tax cut "only benefits the wealthy," we need to do two things. First, we need to remember just who the wealthy really are. Wealthy no longer necessarily means the aristocratic Louis Winthorpe III, Dan Akroyd’s riches-to-rags blueblood in Trading Places. Today, wealthy, as defined by the IRS, probably means the 28-year-old public relations account executive sitting next to you on the subway.
04-10-2002 08:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


rickheel Offline
The Old Bastard
*

Posts: 8,468
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 11
I Root For: Heels
Location:

Donators
Post: #2
 
Could you slide me a $20?
04-10-2002 09:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BuddyLee Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 211
Joined: Mar 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #3
 
You're right on with this post.

The sad thing is, people don't care about that statistic. I don't know why, but they don't. People who fall into that over $120,000 a year bracket still will vote democratic, and they point to this fallacy:

"The richest 1% of people, under the Bush (or whatever republican) plan, will receive 80% of the tax cut."

Remember that crock of sh*t Gore and the like were spitting out last election? It's a simple statistical "lie." True, their mathematics are correct, but the message they send is that the filthy rich are going to get all the money, the normal people are still screwed. That's completely wrong. Here's the math that shows why:

Let's say Bob earns $1,000,000 per year.
Let's say JimBob earns $30,000 per year.

Now they pay taxes, 50% for Bob since he's rich, and 20% for JimBob since he's not.

Bob taxes: $500,000
Jimbob taxes: $6,000

Now what if there was a tax cut of 5% across the board (similar to what Bush planned.)?

Bob's new taxes: 45% ==> $450,000
JimBob's new taxes: 15% ==> $4,500

Bob's savings: $50,000
Jimbob's savings: $1,500

Oh my! That's Criminal! Bob is already rich, yet because of the tax cut he's saved $50,000 compared to JimBob's measley $1,500!!! OH lawwwwd! (just a little sarcasm)

When the democrats use their "richest 1%" lie, er, statistic, what they're doing is complaining that Bob "got back" 33 and 1/3 times as much money as JimBob. The problem with that complaint is that Bob is still paying $445,500 MORE than JimBob in taxes.

So, basically, after all this, we're back to the simple fact that Democrats don't want rich people, or even mildly successful people (income > $60,000 each for a married couple) to keep their money and be able to use it. They want it to pay for those "less fortunate" who decided to lay bricks or sit on their arses and collect welfare. Nevermind putting yourself through college and trying to succeed in life, if the Democrats have their way you'll end up in the same spot as the bus driver financially... sounds a little like the FAILED Communist Russia doesn't it?
04-10-2002 09:19 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
rickheel Offline
The Old Bastard
*

Posts: 8,468
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 11
I Root For: Heels
Location:

Donators
Post: #4
 
So, basically, after all this, we're back to the simple fact that Democrats don't want rich people, or even mildly successful people (income > $60,000 each for a married couple) to keep their money and be able to use it. They want it to pay for those "less fortunate" who decided to lay bricks or sit on their arses and collect welfare. Nevermind putting yourself through college and trying to succeed in life, if the Democrats have their way you'll end up in the same spot as the bus driver financially... sounds a little like the FAILED Communist Russia doesn't it?

BOOM! LK should comment on this one. I can tell you one thing, the Gov. does not want the small business man to do well. I employ about 45 people and the frikin taxes and insurance eat us alive! Let us keep our money, and we will expand and hire more freakin people! Simplistic, sure. True? YES!
04-10-2002 09:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BLAKESGIRL Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,711
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 7
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #5
 
I plan on getting rich by winning the big game. Hmm if I have a $100 mil in cash, think I can pay Wilcox to spend two more years at Maryland?
04-10-2002 09:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PoohTerp Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 916
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #6
 
damn... i thought my husband hit the lottery or something.
04-10-2002 09:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


BuddyLee Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 211
Joined: Mar 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #7
 
Actually Blakesgirl I think it's over 200 mil this week.
04-10-2002 09:35 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BLAKESGIRL Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,711
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 7
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #8
 
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by BuddyLee:
Actually Blakesgirl I think it's over 200 mil this week.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yea I know that, but that's annuity, personally, If I win I'm taking the cash in running! One of my #'s is 25!
04-10-2002 09:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
admin Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 561
Joined: May 2007
Reputation: 0
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #9
 
so does this mean i should stop getting raises now? and stay away from getting married? cause i'm already ahead of the curve on this getting rich thing.
04-10-2002 09:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
apocalypse dude Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 401
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #10
 
Funny thing is that $120,000 sounds like a lot of $$. But try to raise a family in New York City on $120,000 a year. You will be lucky to scrape by.
04-10-2002 09:47 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Liquid Karma Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,397
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #11
 
Here is my simple take on this.

I support our present taxation system and I also believe that the rich should in fact get the biggest tax break because they are the ones who pay the most money.

Makes sense right?
04-10-2002 09:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Liquid Karma Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,397
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #12
 
I wish I had more time today to have a good discussion on this.

Don't make the blanket statement that all democrats like taxes. To reduce a voting decision to one issue such as taxation is erroneous.

Not liking taxes and voting democrat are not mutually exclusive.
04-10-2002 09:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BuddyLee Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 211
Joined: Mar 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #13
 
LK, I apologize, you're right. I hate such blanket statements and there I go making them.

I guess where I was coming from was the traditionally "blue collar" nature of the Democratic "public welfare" paradigm. In other words, giving more breaks to lower income individuals, providing public healthcare, providing welfare, paying for abortions, social security, all of those things tie in to the tax issue because in fact, it's the people who make the most money who effectively have the largest chunk of their incomes go to those programs.

You're still right though, that's only one section of the issues, not an entire platform. There's plenty of other things that make a good flaming Democrat like spineless foreign policy, ridiculous gun control laws, restrictive laws on freedom of speech (AKA prayer,) etc.

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="smile.gif" />
04-10-2002 10:24 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BLAKESGIRL Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,711
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 7
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #14
 
Who cares about taxes? I just want to win the big game!
04-10-2002 10:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Liquid Karma Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,397
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #15
 
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by BuddyLee:
it's the people who make the most money who effectively have the largest chunk of their incomes go to those programs.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And consequently those folks deserve to get more of their money back when spending is actually cut.

I am curious how you think free speech is being stifled in the area of prayer?
04-10-2002 10:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Terpy Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,394
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 22
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #16
 
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by BLAKESGIRL:
I plan on getting rich by winning the big game. Hmm if I have a $100 mil in cash, think I can pay Wilcox to spend two more years at Maryland?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Not unless you want him to end up in the big pile of doodoo that Chris Webber and his booster buddy are in right now. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
04-10-2002 10:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


BuddyLee Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 211
Joined: Mar 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #17
 
I was just ranting LK :-)

A while ago there was a big debate on how coaches couldn't say the Our Father before football games because it might offend some non Christian players. I think it's his right to say whatever the hell he wants to and tell his team to shut the f**k up while he says it.
04-10-2002 11:09 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Liquid Karma Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,397
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #18
 
As long as the coach doesn't force his players to listen to it there is no issue.
04-10-2002 11:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
admin Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 561
Joined: May 2007
Reputation: 0
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #19
 
if someone gets offended because someone else is saying a prayer, the person who's offended should be locked up, not the person praying.
04-10-2002 11:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rt1Rebel Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 491
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #20
 
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by drunkterp:
if someone gets offended because someone else is saying a prayer, the person who's offended should be locked up, not the person praying.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion.
04-10-2002 11:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.