If your for taxing the higher class more than should you not be for giving people without out kids or with less kids tax breaks as opposed to those with a bunch of hoodlums?
OT: Tax Reform
- Thread starter CarolsBabyDaddy
- Start date
Why? A 1% household without kids might own more resources but a impoverished family with 10 kids might be wasting more resources and could potentially be contributing more to global warming.
Too many people on this board try to be PFT Commenter and none of them are actually good at it.
I have definitely been drinking whiskey out the bottle but do not understand why I am getting hell for using liberal logic...you can't have it both ways.
Aphther duh phifth reiding, I fine dis pose to be incomprensibull
OP you actually have a point. If people with more kids use more services, shouldn't they pay more taxes?
Thank you. Just bc I am belligerent drunk doesn't mean I shouldn't be right. Just like if someone is an illegal immigrant doesn't mean they shouldn't have rights.
Bringing in two debaters from the left and the right that are equally respected from their respective groups.
@Ron Munson @johnhugh
@Ron Munson @johnhugh
Have to agree with OP on this one. People in poverty use up much more resources than the wealthy
I'm actually down with the rich paying more OP, so I'd be open to dropping the exemption on kids. You make sense there. However, @Ron Munson 's statement above is so crazy that I think it's 50/50 that it's a troll. If so, sorry Ron.
But if not. You have GOT to be kidding me. Let's look at this from a practical perspective. Let's downgrade me to poverty/level, lower middle class. And let's pick someone very rich... say our own glorious leader DT. Who uses up more resources, me or him?
Well, I own a house, so I heat and cool it, requiring power/gas. I also need police protection/city services/fire/police. However, since I'm just a single home owner, a vol fire/ambulance service would be fine by me and the county Sheriff works as well. TD on the other hand, owns businesses and homes all over the country and world. EACH of these need the same basic services AT LEAST. Some of the buildings in big cities need professional fire/medical services. Can you see the local FD handling a fire in a high rise? It's not even close.
So what are we doing this weekend? I'll do some yard work and maybe catch the game on Sunday. Maybe hit a restaurant or bar on Friday or Saturday night. DT is headed out to (insert exotic destination here). He's flying in his private jet with his support staff and family. He needs the use of airports, blah, blah, blah... You get the picture. EVERYTHING he does uses more resources (both natural and government) than any poor person. I suppose you could say that he doesn't use public school for his kids or government health plans, but he surely does depend on those services providing the basics for every one of his employees.
Again, I'm thinking this is a troll post and the more I type, the surer I am of it. Ron usually has good sense.
But if not. You have GOT to be kidding me. Let's look at this from a practical perspective. Let's downgrade me to poverty/level, lower middle class. And let's pick someone very rich... say our own glorious leader DT. Who uses up more resources, me or him?
Well, I own a house, so I heat and cool it, requiring power/gas. I also need police protection/city services/fire/police. However, since I'm just a single home owner, a vol fire/ambulance service would be fine by me and the county Sheriff works as well. TD on the other hand, owns businesses and homes all over the country and world. EACH of these need the same basic services AT LEAST. Some of the buildings in big cities need professional fire/medical services. Can you see the local FD handling a fire in a high rise? It's not even close.
So what are we doing this weekend? I'll do some yard work and maybe catch the game on Sunday. Maybe hit a restaurant or bar on Friday or Saturday night. DT is headed out to (insert exotic destination here). He's flying in his private jet with his support staff and family. He needs the use of airports, blah, blah, blah... You get the picture. EVERYTHING he does uses more resources (both natural and government) than any poor person. I suppose you could say that he doesn't use public school for his kids or government health plans, but he surely does depend on those services providing the basics for every one of his employees.
Again, I'm thinking this is a troll post and the more I type, the surer I am of it. Ron usually has good sense.
So you are comparing one of the richest people in the country, to the average consumer....someone in the .00012%?
You are buying into the demonetization of the rich perfectly.
I am talking about the average upper class consumer, making 250-400k, paying 25%+ in income taxes alone, compared to the 45% that pay no income taxes. that bottom tier is going to consumer far more in resources from medicaid, food stamps, EIC, etc....and that is not even getting into police resources, court costs, etc, since it is statistically proven those in poverty are much more likely to commit crimes.
Of course I did, it was the easiest way to simply prove your point was not true. You said that the poor use more resources than the wealthy. Period. I gave an example that showed that your blanket statement wasn't true.
NOW, you are saying "Oh I didn't really mean wealthy, I meant average upper class" and I really didn't mean resources, I really meant programs that were designed to help poor people. I will freely admit that the upper middle class do not use as many programs designed to help the poor as the poor do.
But to be clear, the group you mentioned isn't the group that I'm talking about. Nor is it the group that getting the most out of the Tax Reform. If you recall, Trump's budget guy (I forget his name) couldn't even promise that the middle class (including this group as the upper part of that) wouldn't be paying MORE. It's the truly wealthy that are getting the tax breaks at the expense of the poor people's health care.
Look, One thing is clear and has been since the 80s. The rich in this country are getting richer. They are owning a greater and greater share of the country's total wealth. Some folks in the upper middle class are making that jump into the rich class (and that's good). The poor in this country are also getting poorer and are owning a smaller and smaller percentage of the country's total wealth. Some folks in the lower middle class are falling back into that poorer class (and that's bad). In other words, the middle class (on whom this country depends to continue to be great) is shrinking.
Given the above, WHY do you make changes that helps the group that doesn't need the help? We are in debt and need to balance the budget. Why give a group of people that already rich that is already increasing their wealth and share of America MORE? Why not work to help the group that ISN'T paying taxes become more productive? We can talk about how to do that, and I'll admit that the programs you mentioned above don't seem to be getting it done. But I'm not seeing that helping out the rich will solve that problem either.
And what I'm saying above isn't in my own interest. I'm not a part of that group you mentioned above, but my wife and I are pretty close. Obamacare doesn't effect me at all. My rates didn't change when it came in (or no more than they did in the 2000s anyway). If Obamacare goes away, it won't matter to me all. Blue Cross for the win. Tax reform under Trump will probably help us pay less in taxes, but I'm willing to pay the taxes if it means that a lot of poor folks can have decent medical care.
And I'm not demonizing the rich. If you are rich, more power to you! What I'm saying is that right now, the rich are doing JUST FINE. I see no reason that we as a country should be helping out a group that is quite capable of helping themselves, at the expense of the poor.
Last edited by a moderator:
No one is talking about George soros, Warren buffet, or the famous celebrities of the world. They will never pay their fair share unless trump is able to successfully drain the swamp. We are talking about the people who are actually impacted by laws
You DO realize that it's Trump's plan that gives these rich folks the huge tax breaks right? Trump is going to look after himself and his friends. Always has, always will. Again, if that (looking after himself), helps America, great. If it doesn't, great. Trump works for Trump.
And I'm not giving Libs a break here either. Money spends and a lot of these really wealthy folks donate to both parties so that they have access no matter who wins. Still wondering why conservatives are supporting giving all these wealthy folks the tax breaks. It's not as if you have to give the rich a huge tax break just so you can give the middle class one. You could actually target the middle class. And again, I've got no problem with that.