- 70,049
- 24,223
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2004
this chart is funny..... makin 80k a year and having no health insurance?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Didn't you say in another thread that you were most likely (or your husband) going to receive a sizable inheritance? Without proper estateplanning, that vehicle will be lifted upside down and shaken out for damn near all its money.Originally Posted by Nawth21
I'm supporting 2 people on 30K and never plan on making 6 figures. I get it, it all trickles down. But being in the top 1% just isn't in my future. It's tongue in cheek, in other words.Originally Posted by JustScoreda100
at the people in here acting like they are not gonna be next. It'll start with the rich but, don't act brand new when you realize that the cost of heating your home, filling your tank and buying groceries increases.
The majority of people who make over 250k a year own small business and where the government cuts income by taxing, small business owners in hard times will save income by firing employees.
at you people saying the rich deserve to be taxed more. I don't plan to be broke all my life and plan to work hard as hell to make a 6 figure salary. Why should anyone get taxed more just because they worked harder/smarter than the average individual?
Originally Posted by Nawth21
Not something I'll ever have to worry about.
Originally Posted by Nawth21
I'm supporting 2 people on 30K and never plan on making 6 figures. I get it, it all trickles down. But being in the top 1% just isn't in my future.
Originally Posted by Joseph Camel Jr
Why dude? It's not enough to say "well they can afford it, etc." The government should never be entitled to half of someone's income, not even close.Originally Posted by I Be John Mayer
I'm all for the top 1% paying for everything.
Obviously if you're only making 350k a year you're not top 1%, so I do disagree with how steep the terms seem to be.
But if you're in that top 1%, I would not shed a single tear for you to pay 1.5 billion a year in tax if you make 3 billion, or even 150 million a year if you make 300 million.
Originally Posted by ProduccionFrescos
[color= rgb(255, 0, 0)]Wow. Are you happy with what you do?[/color]Originally Posted by Nawth21
I'm supporting 2 people on 30K and never plan on making 6 figures. I get it, it all trickles down. But being in the top 1% just isn't in my future.Originally Posted by JustScoreda100
Didn't you say in another thread that you were most likely (or your husband) going to receive a sizable inheritance? Without proper estate planning, that vehicle will be lifted upside down and shaken out for damn near all its money.
It's a possibility, yes, but I'm speaking solely about income from a job.
To each his own, but people who don't strive to be as successful as possible boggle me. Yea, I hear all that "there's more to life then money" but that's really just %##%@++%. My parents came to this country broke went to school, supported 6 kids, and because of their hard work make well over 6 figures combined. There are just too many opportunities in this country to be content with not being financially secure.
That's fine, but success doesn't always equate to 6 figure jobs. I'm not content with not being financially secure, who would be? But I won't regret the life I live if I don't hit 6 figures.
What are you talking about.Originally Posted by I Be John Mayer
Originally Posted by Joseph Camel Jr
Why dude? It's not enough to say "well they can afford it, etc." The government should never be entitled to half of someone's income, not even close.Originally Posted by I Be John Mayer
I'm all for the top 1% paying for everything.
Obviously if you're only making 350k a year you're not top 1%, so I do disagree with how steep the terms seem to be.
But if you're in that top 1%, I would not shed a single tear for you to pay 1.5 billion a year in tax if you make 3 billion, or even 150 million a year if you make 300 million.
Because the top 1% owns about half the country. If they don't at least lead the way for the rest of the top 20% who own about 90% of the country to be willing to pay more than their subjects (yes, sujects, 80% of the country basically works for and owes their living to them) then how else would these things such as helathcare, childcare, education, food and clothing for those who can't afford it, etc. get paid for?
The problem is that the top 20% simply doesn't care about how those things would be paid for because (here's what you don't wanna hear) they can afford it. The question of education of healthcare does not affect them because they can get a good doctor and send their child to a good school. Why do you think so many conservatives think that punishing public schools for poor performance is a good idea? It's actually the worst idea possible becaue you're only punishing kids who have no alternative. If a school is doing poorly in academics or graduation rates, wouldn't you think they need MORE funding? Wouldn't they need MORE resources and a change in faculty, as opposed LESS funding and a fear of teaching unions? This goes for both dems and reps as well.
Bottom line is this: Does the ruling class want to be a benevolent body or an apathetic one? Sooner or later republicans will not be able to convince regular people that they are part of the group that they are representing, and this will be the final blow. I'm no socialist, becaue that would entail alot more than a single payer healthcare system. But c'mon. I can't speak for Obama but for me it's bigger than healthcare, which should be a standard like law enforcement, mail delivery, and education.
Aw congrats! If she goes Bridezilla, just smile and nod. It'll pass. Yeah I know what you're saying with the deductions, I'd be muchbetter off that way, I'm terrible with rebates/refunds. I just want to blow it on silly crap but you live with the good and bad. I'm just thankful Ican pay the bills and have food on the table and we have health insurance. One day it will get better, but until then you take it as it comesOriginally Posted by LazyJ10
Since I'm in the midst of planning my wedding with my fiance, yes, I do agree.
I'm familiar w/ MN for the most part since one our clients is based out there. You can get the house for cheap, but you still are out of pocket on the property tax until you get refunded.
I'd rather have the ability to deduct it on my fed/state income tax forms if I'm going to be out of pocket. Then I keep more income per paycheck.
Plus, through prop 13 I like knowing that for the most part, 1% of my purchase price is going to be my basis of property tax. This constant assessment crap is silly.
Originally Posted by wawaweewa
What are you talking about.Originally Posted by I Be John Mayer
Originally Posted by Joseph Camel Jr
Why dude? It's not enough to say "well they can afford it, etc." The government should never be entitled to half of someone's income, not even close.Originally Posted by I Be John Mayer
I'm all for the top 1% paying for everything.
Obviously if you're only making 350k a year you're not top 1%, so I do disagree with how steep the terms seem to be.
But if you're in that top 1%, I would not shed a single tear for you to pay 1.5 billion a year in tax if you make 3 billion, or even 150 million a year if you make 300 million.
Because the top 1% owns about half the country. If they don't at least lead the way for the rest of the top 20% who own about 90% of the country to be willing to pay more than their subjects (yes, sujects, 80% of the country basically works for and owes their living to them) then how else would these things such as helathcare, childcare, education, food and clothing for those who can't afford it, etc. get paid for?
The problem is that the top 20% simply doesn't care about how those things would be paid for because (here's what you don't wanna hear) they can afford it. The question of education of healthcare does not affect them because they can get a good doctor and send their child to a good school. Why do you think so many conservatives think that punishing public schools for poor performance is a good idea? It's actually the worst idea possible becaue you're only punishing kids who have no alternative. If a school is doing poorly in academics or graduation rates, wouldn't you think they need MORE funding? Wouldn't they need MORE resources and a change in faculty, as opposed LESS funding and a fear of teaching unions? This goes for both dems and reps as well.
Bottom line is this: Does the ruling class want to be a benevolent body or an apathetic one? Sooner or later republicans will not be able to convince regular people that they are part of the group that they are representing, and this will be the final blow. I'm no socialist, becaue that would entail alot more than a single payer healthcare system. But c'mon. I can't speak for Obama but for me it's bigger than healthcare, which should be a standard like law enforcement, mail delivery, and education.
The greatest problem with health care in the US is the massive fraud within the system. That massive fraud occurs mainly because of Medicare/Medicaid; a government program.
If the Feds tackled the problem of fraud, the system would be more than fine as it is. Instead they're trying to pump more money into the system to facilitate the fraud.
It's truly funny and yet disgusting at the same time. There is such massive fraud in the current system but the Feds never talk about it.
I wonder why.
Thanks. I just want to be on the honeymoon.Originally Posted by Nawth21
Aw congrats! If she goes Bridezilla, just smile and nod. It'll pass. Yeah I know what you're saying with the deductions, I'd be much better off that way, I'm terrible with rebates/refunds. I just want to blow it on silly crap but you live with the good and bad. I'm just thankful I can pay the bills and have food on the table and we have health insurance. One day it will get better, but until then you take it as it comesOriginally Posted by LazyJ10
Since I'm in the midst of planning my wedding with my fiance, yes, I do agree.
I'm familiar w/ MN for the most part since one our clients is based out there. You can get the house for cheap, but you still are out of pocket on the property tax until you get refunded.
I'd rather have the ability to deduct it on my fed/state income tax forms if I'm going to be out of pocket. Then I keep more income per paycheck.
Plus, through prop 13 I like knowing that for the most part, 1% of my purchase price is going to be my basis of property tax. This constant assessment crap is silly.
Originally Posted by swizzc
Wait.... but.... you're rich so you need to pay for our healthcare!!!! You have to keep working because if you don't and stop spending all your hard earned money on us, there is no way this plan will work!
You have to stop thinking that people owe you something. The rich people of this country don't owe anybody jack **@+. I swear that's a lotof peoples problem. If you want something you have to go out and get it. If you stick your hand out waiting for someone to give you a hand out 9/10 your justgoing to get a high five.Originally Posted by I Be John Mayer
Originally Posted by Joseph Camel Jr
Why dude? It's not enough to say "well they can afford it, etc." The government should never be entitled to half of someone's income, not even close.Originally Posted by I Be John Mayer
I'm all for the top 1% paying for everything.
Obviously if you're only making 350k a year you're not top 1%, so I do disagree with how steep the terms seem to be.
But if you're in that top 1%, I would not shed a single tear for you to pay 1.5 billion a year in tax if you make 3 billion, or even 150 million a year if you make 300 million.
Because the top 1% owns about half the country. If they don't at least lead the way for the rest of the top 20% who own about 90% of the country to be willing to pay more than their subjects (yes, sujects, 80% of the country basically works for and owes their living to them) then how else would these things such as helathcare, childcare, education, food and clothing for those who can't afford it, etc. get paid for?
The problem is that the top 20% simply doesn't care about how those things would be paid for because (here's what you don't wanna hear) they can afford it. The question of education of healthcare does not affect them because they can get a good doctor and send their child to a good school. Why do you think so many conservatives think that punishing public schools for poor performance is a good idea? It's actually the worst idea possible becaue you're only punishing kids who have no alternative. If a school is doing poorly in academics or graduation rates, wouldn't you think they need MORE funding? Wouldn't they need MORE resources and a change in faculty, as opposed LESS funding and a fear of teaching unions? This goes for both dems and reps as well.
Bottom line is this: Does the ruling class want to be a benevolent body or an apathetic one? Sooner or later republicans will not be able to convince regular people that they are part of the group that they are representing, and this will be the final blow. I'm no socialist, becaue that would entail alot more than a single payer healthcare system. But c'mon. I can't speak for Obama but for me it's bigger than healthcare, which should be a standard like law enforcement, mail delivery, and education.