Forget the Fiscal Cliff

otisptoadwater wrote: The majority of American's voted for this mess; give them what they want and when they whine ram it down their throats.

[youtube:34414e1e][/youtube:34414e1e]

Amen brother, amen.

Some lawmakers are backing off the "cliff" analogy, calling it a "slope."

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-n ... et-problem

LadyJazzer wrote:

Jekyll wrote: Doesn't matter that those of us that are TRULY legal and have always paid our share of things haven't ADDED to the debt,

"those of us that are TRULY legal"?? What year did you crack up? ... Too bad there wasn't some sort of counseling or therapy around for you... Maybe that was the year they cut the budgets for mental-health care.

Gee, I've been "truly legal" since I was born... I've always paid my "share of things"...In fact, I've probably paid more of my "share" than you, since you spend a helluva lot more of your energy trying to get out of paying ANYTHING, while I am more than happy to pay my fair share. I've never "added to the debt", (assuming by that you mean "welfare", "food stamps", whatever...). And I tell you that the idea of being compared to the dregs of conservative society, such as yourself, still makes me want to puke....

I don't know what planet you dropped off of where you think being "TRULY legal", "paying your share", and not "adding to the debt" makes you some sort of "superior being", but I still rate it somewhere between anthrax and pond-scum.

The report (that the GOP attempted to suppress) that raising the marginal tax-rates 4.6% on the 2% would have ZERO effect on job-creation and/or capital markets is still out there. The one thing we know is that it will be conveniently ignored, while the usual folks do their insanity-dance about the unfairness.

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory...GOP Suppresses Study


...Oh, and here:

From the group, "MediaMatters":

Joint Committee On Taxation: "Three Percent Of All Taxpayers With Net Positive Business Income" Would See A Marginal Rate Increase. A July 12, 2010, analysis of Obama's FY2011 Budget Proposals -- which also called for the expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 -- by the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) stated that "three percent of all taxpayers with net positive business income" would see higher taxes under Obama's plan, adding that "[t]hese figures for net positive business income do not imply that all of the income is from entities that might be considered 'small.' ":

The proposal provides tax relief to a large percentage of taxpayers, which will provide incentives for these taxpayers to work, to save, and to invest and, thereby, will have a positive effect on the long-term health of the economy. The proposal also results in increased marginal tax rates on upper income taxpayers (as is provided for by the present-law sunset of EGTRRA), which will correspondingly reduce incentives for these taxpayers to work, to save, and to invest. Opponents of this latter aspect of the proposal often note that many small businesses, and a large fraction of small business income, will be adversely impacted by an increase in the top two tax rates. The staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that in 2011 just under 750,000 taxpayers with net positive business income (three percent of all taxpayers with net positive business income) will have marginal rates of 36 or 39.6 percent under the President's proposal, and that 50 percent of the approximately $1 trillion of aggregate net positive business income will be reported on returns that have a marginal rate of 36 or 39.6 percent. These figures for net positive business income do not imply that all of the income is from entities that might be considered "small." For example, in 2005, 12,862 S corporations and 6,658 partnerships had receipts of more than $50 million. [Joint Committee on Taxation, 7/14/10]

Tax Policy Center: Only 1.5 Percent Of Tax Filers Reporting Business Income Were In Top Two Tax Brackets. Data from the Tax Policy Center show that in 2007, only 1.5 percent of tax filers that reported business income were in the top two tax brackets, the same brackets that would be affected by the expiring tax cuts. [Tax Policy Center, 4/27/07]

Center On Budget And Policy Priorities: "Only 2.5 Percent Of Small Business Owners Who Are Taxed At The Individual Rate ... Are In The Top Two Income-Tax Brackets." Citing a recent Treasury report, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that very few small business owners are taxed in the top two tax brackets:

The claim that raising marginal tax rates at the top of the income distribution would severely harm small businesses has little empirical basis. Few small business owners pay taxes at the top rates. According to a recent Treasury analysis, only 2.5 percent of small business owners who are taxed at the individual rather than corporate rates are in the top two income-tax brackets.[48]

Further, claims that about half of "pass-through" business income (i.e., income that firms pass through to their owners, who pay income taxes on these profits) is taxed at the top two tax rates [49] are also misleading. These claims rely on an extremely broad definition of "business" that treats any filer with any business income as a business owner. Under that definition, professors who occasionally get paid for giving a speech or doing some consulting on the side, lawyers and accountants whose firms are organized as partnerships, and corporate executives who get paid to sit on other firms' boards of directors are treated as small business owners.

http://mediamatters.org/mobile/research ... r-w/187037

Spare me your faux-outrage about the "harmful effects of raising the marginal rates 4.6% on the top-2%"...and the so-called "job-creators"... It's garbage...and no wonder the GOP wanted to suppress the non-partisan report. It doesn't fit with their b.s. "the sky is falling" narrative.

[Edited to correct "3.6%" to "4.6%" before someone has a coronary....]

A dimwitted fool to the end. You believe every piece of liberal garbage you read and then post is as fact and call everyone else out on sh**. Taxing the rich to meet your ends makes you a lazy p.o.s. Run around the mulberry bush all you like dummy, taking from those that are better than you will eventually have harmfull effects. You and all the other moochin' bastards, white ones included.

Edit: I've also said on Pinecam that there should be a "flat tax." Long time ago, but it's there somewhere. Course, there's a whiney excuse against that idea too.

Yes, there is a documented, peer-reviewed reason why a flat-tax screws-the-middle and poor while guaranteeing the top-2% even greater savings, at the middle-and poor-class's expense...

And save your 4th-grade insults for somebody who gives a sh*t.... The facts are the facts, and the garbage about the "harmful effects" of the top-2% paying 4.6% more is sooooo much b.s.

If you don't want to believe the

Joint Committee On Taxation
Tax Policy Center
Center On Budget And Policy Priorities
Congressional Research Service, the completely non-partisan arm of the Library of Congress

...you obviously have me confused with someone who gives a sh*t....

LadyJazzer wrote: Yes, there is a documented, peer-reviewed reason why a flat-tax screws-the-middle and poor while guaranteeing the top-2% even greater savings, at the middle-and poor-class's expense...

And save your 4th-grade insults for somebody who gives a sh*t....

Yea, cause most of the middle and poor are demographics that don't want or have a way to better themselves, so they stay a bunch of thugish moochin lowlifes and convince themselves they are worthless, that society thinks they're worthless, that their parents abused them, etc. I'll give a bum money once in a while, but the fact remains that he's probably useless for the rest of his life, unless you want to devise a way to capture his body heat as an energy source or something. I'm sure the O Admin would be more than happy to give you a grant for that study. 4th grade kiddie.

Off topic: You still need to tell me what business you run so that I can boycott the hell out of it.

I already have in another thread... You can't boycott it... But thanks for playing...

Like I said, I don't know what planet you dropped off of where you think being "TRULY legal", "paying your share", and not "adding to the debt" makes you some sort of "superior being", but I still rate it somewhere between anthrax and pond-scum.

Jekyll wrote: ....Yea, cause most of the middle and poor are demographics that don't want or have a way to better themselves.....

And so the rest of us are punished by people like you. Greeeeeaaaaat.

Jekyll wrote: Off topic: You still need to tell me what business you run so that I can boycott the hell out of it.

Pssst, Jekyll. It's a Papa John's.

Raees wrote:

Jekyll wrote: Off topic: You still need to tell me what business you run so that I can boycott the hell out of it.

Pssst, Jekyll. It's a Papa John's.

rofllol

...or a Chick-Fil-A...I can never remember which....