Affordable Health Care for America Act

jeffchr

jeffchr

Well-Known Member
iivan740 said:
I think you should check again. The tax rate for unearned (ex. interest, dividends, investments <1yr., rental property, daytrading, etc...) income over 373000.00 for 2010 is 35%. That puts the taxes on 500000 at 175000, and that is just federal taxes.

A lot of us make our money in the so called "unearned" bracket. :wall:

http://www.smbiz.com/sbrl001.html#pis10
Click to expand...
we don't have a flat tax in this country. the income tax rates are bracketed and everyone pays tax at the lower rates for the amount of their taxable income residing in those lower brackets. so you don't just multiply taxable income by the highest tax bracket a person is in.

and beyond that, there are deductions. and the more you make, chances are, the more your deductions.

so to say someone made 500,000 and his tax is 35% of that is nonsense.
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
Having never made 500,000, or anything close, it is hard to feel sympathetic for those that do. I do not believe they are superior, just luckier. They'll yell and scream about how hard they worked to get there, but believe me, my life has not been a bowl of cherries. It all depends on who your parents were in most cases. If you had successful parents (Financially) your odds of being a success are greatly increased. One cannot choose their parents and must make the best of the cards they are dealt. I am not complaning, just stating facts. I've done much better (Financially) then my parents, but my parents were dirt poor. There are always those that beat the odds, but for most parts, the more successful the parents, the more successful the offspring.
 
RickWhite

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
$500K per year is doing quite well but far from wealthy. The average value of the yachts kept at the Ft Lauderdale marina at Las Olas is $10M and it costs 10% per year to keep up - that is $1M per year. There are lakefront homes all around me worth a good $5m. Try to buy a $3m home bringing home $300K. Nope, that is far from wealthy.

And people in this income range don't get greater benefit from the Government. But, they sure do contribute a hell of a lot more to society than do the poor. And don't think they get all these deductions, that is largely a myth. Chances are, they pay astronomical property taxes on their homes and business property as well as everything they buy.

Although just about anyone with a cash business is going to hide a lot of it.

If they are going to tax anyone to pay for health care it ought to be the tobacco companies and the manufacturers of all these semi toxic "foods" that are killing people unbeknown to them. Cigarettes, tax the shit out of them - McDonnell's, Burger King, Wendy's - tax them all into the dirt as far as I'm concerned.

Of course, in the end, it is wrong to steal money from one person to give to another just because you think it is "fair."
 
dukeofbaja

dukeofbaja

New Member
RickWhite said:
If they are going to tax anyone to pay for health care it ought to be the tobacco companies and the manufacturers of all these semi toxic "foods" that are killing people unbeknown to them. Cigarettes, tax the shit out of them - McDonnell's, Burger King, Wendy's - tax them all into the dirt as far as I'm concerned.

Of course, in the end, it is wrong to steal money from one person to give to another just because you think it is "fair."
Click to expand...

Fuck yeah dude! We already tax the shit out of cigarettes (as a smoker, I can attest to this) but they do not tax the shit out of other equally harmful shit (shit is my new favorite adjective after watching several seasons of Trailer Park Boys). Even though, as a smoker, I pay twice as much for a pack of smokes now than I did in 2000, I am glad to pay the tax as my habit is costing scoiety BIG. I am with you, let's go after the shit that costs society with exorbitant 'sin taxes' (I hate to use the word sin, this usage is only for convenience).

As for the second line, is it really wrong to steal from one to give to another if indeed the cause truly is fair? Would it be wrong to steal a loaf of bread to give it to your starving family? Don't strike down your own idea of penalizing folks for doing shit that costs us because of this line of thought, we live in a society and all need to be responsible for our own actions, especially when they cost society in the end. You are the king of preaching this message!
 
abe23

abe23

Active Member
Rob Roy said:
You assume chaos ensues when government shrinks. What happens is productivity is increased when government shrinks. Besides, who starts and forcibly funds wars? Governments. Who incarcerates people for victimless crimes? Governments. That isn't providing security, that is a jobs prgram for enforcing the welfare / warfare state.

Roads are built by private contractors, they would exist with or without an all encompassing government. Security is one thing...policing the world is quite another.

Do you have any idea what the cost of our empire is?

Those who benefit most should pay the most? That makes sense sort of...how about "those who produce the most should reap the benefits of their production"?
It's called incentive. To not produce and reap a benefit...is rewarding parasitic behavior and stifles incentive.

When my able bodied kids didn't pick up their room, was I wrong to withhold their allowance? Did they "deserve" it, simply because I had the money and could afford to give it to them? Well I can tell you, if they didn't perform their chores, they were not rewarded. They learned from that experience.

The value of Currency is DESTROYED by the government, not provided.

If you make more than 500K and you didn't make it through deceit, you have EVERY RIGHT to do what you wish with it.
Click to expand...
Rob...as usual, you are consistent, well-spoken and totally off the mark.

I'm not in favor of tax money being spent on the drug war or what you call empire, but there are services that the free market cannot or will not provide without government skewing things a bit. There is no economic incentive for anyone to maintain roads or provide broadband internet in rural communities for example. The market has no direct incentive to preserve our national parks or make sure that toxins don't end up in our drinking water. The free market has absolutely no incentive to provide many essential services, so unless someone is willing to provide them out of goodwill, the government is the only alternative....and yes, it does this on an involuntary basis. I think we can have a discussion about what specifically those common goods would be, but to say that they don't exist is crazy. I'm a firm believer in free markets and individual freedoms, but I don't think they can exist without some form of minimal government.

And to bring this back to what the discussion was originally about...there is no economic incentive for the private market to provide healthcare to people when they need it most. In fact, the free market has every incentive to collect people's premiums and then drag it's feet and do everything it can to avoid paying for things. It's called an insurance company and it's why we needed this kind of legislation...
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
abe23 said:
Rob...as usual, you are consistent, well-spoken and totally off the mark.

I'm not in favor of tax money being spent on the drug war or what you call empire, but there are services that the free market cannot or will not provide without government skewing things a bit. There is no economic incentive for anyone to maintain roads or provide broadband internet in rural communities for example. The market has no direct incentive to preserve our national parks or make sure that toxins don't end up in our drinking water. The free market has absolutely no incentive to provide many essential services, so unless someone is willing to provide them out of goodwill, the government is the only alternative....and yes, it does this on an involuntary basis. I think we can have a discussion about what specifically those common goods would be, but to say that they don't exist is crazy. I'm a firm believer in free markets and individual freedoms, but I don't think they can exist without some form of minimal government.

And to bring this back to what the discussion was originally about...there is no economic incentive for the private market to provide healthcare to people when they need it most. In fact, the free market has every incentive to collect people's premiums and then drag it's feet and do everything it can to avoid paying for things. It's called an insurance company and it's why we needed this kind of legislation...
Click to expand...
Still haven't read "Market for Liberty" yet have you? :mrgreen:
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
dukeofbaja said:
Fuck yeah dude! We already tax the shit out of cigarettes (as a smoker, I can attest to this) but they do not tax the shit out of other equally harmful shit (shit is my new favorite adjective after watching several seasons of Trailer Park Boys). Even though, as a smoker, I pay twice as much for a pack of smokes now than I did in 2000, I am glad to pay the tax as my habit is costing scoiety BIG. I am with you, let's go after the shit that costs society with exorbitant 'sin taxes' (I hate to use the word sin, this usage is only for convenience).

As for the second line, is it really wrong to steal from one to give to another if indeed the cause truly is fair? Would it be wrong to steal a loaf of bread to give it to your starving family? Don't strike down your own idea of penalizing folks for doing shit that costs us because of this line of thought, we live in a society and all need to be responsible for our own actions, especially when they cost society in the end. You are the king of preaching this message!
Click to expand...
You gotta love those Trailer Park boys!
 
S

seagoinghead1

Member


"BAIL'EM OUT!!! ????






Hell, back in 1990, the Government seized the Mustang Ranch brothel in Nevada for tax evasion and, as required by law, tried to run it. They failed and it closed. Now, we are trusting the economy of our country, our banking system, our auto industry and possibly our health plans to the same nit-wits who couldn't make money running a whore house and selling whiskey?!"
"What the Hell are we thinking??"

 
abe23

abe23

Active Member
Rob Roy said:
Still haven't read "Market for Liberty" yet have you? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...
I did actually read parts of it and I would rather move to haiti than live in the kind of society that it's advocating. I like mad max, but as movie. So other than looney political theory from the 60s, do you have any other arguments against taxes or universal healthcare?
 
RickWhite

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
abe23 said:
Rob...as usual, you are consistent, well-spoken and totally off the mark.

I'm not in favor of tax money being spent on the drug war or what you call empire, but there are services that the free market cannot or will not provide without government skewing things a bit. There is no economic incentive for anyone to maintain roads or provide broadband internet in rural communities for example. The market has no direct incentive to preserve our national parks or make sure that toxins don't end up in our drinking water. The free market has absolutely no incentive to provide many essential services, so unless someone is willing to provide them out of goodwill, the government is the only alternative....and yes, it does this on an involuntary basis. I think we can have a discussion about what specifically those common goods would be, but to say that they don't exist is crazy. I'm a firm believer in free markets and individual freedoms, but I don't think they can exist without some form of minimal government.

And to bring this back to what the discussion was originally about...there is no economic incentive for the private market to provide healthcare to people when they need it most. In fact, the free market has every incentive to collect people's premiums and then drag it's feet and do everything it can to avoid paying for things. It's called an insurance company and it's why we needed this kind of legislation...
Click to expand...
You are correct in everything you are saying here - that is why I can not identify with being "Libertarian" in the strict sense.

And I agree that we should get rid of the unfair laws that only exist due to insurance company lobbying and back room deals. By making the laws fair, we could give everyone an opportunity to have decent coverage at affordable rates.

But, I am against stealing (and that is what it is) money from people to pay for others to have a free ride. If people are so unable to support themselves, there should be Government programs that put them to work in exchange for their subsistence. It works elsewhere.
 
ChChoda

ChChoda

Well-Known Member
doc111 said:
Can anybody say "Rationed care"????;-)
Click to expand...
Except the care the IRS will pay to you, individually, will be much greater.

"For those who love and appreciate the income tax, you’re going to love the new healthcare reform bill signed by President Obama this morning. For those who have no idea what I’m talking about, you’re in for a big surprise.

This bill calls for an expansion of the Internal Revenue Service—with its legality and constitutionality already highly suspect— in both money and personnel. Before the bill passed the IRS posted its intent to purchase Remington Police 12 gauge pump-action shotguns for their combat trained agents. They wanted to be prepared for the future, we can suppose. The recently passed healthcare reform allocates $10 billion for the 16,500 new IRS agents needed to enforce the legislation."


http://www.johndennis2010.com/blog/2010/march/healthcare-16500-new-irs-agents
 
doc111

doc111

Well-Known Member
ChChoda said:
Except the care the IRS will pay to you, individually, will be much greater.

"For those who love and appreciate the income tax, you’re going to love the new healthcare reform bill signed by President Obama this morning. For those who have no idea what I’m talking about, you’re in for a big surprise.

This bill calls for an expansion of the Internal Revenue Service—with its legality and constitutionality already highly suspect— in both money and personnel. Before the bill passed the IRS posted its intent to purchase Remington Police 12 gauge pump-action shotguns for their combat trained agents. They wanted to be prepared for the future, we can suppose. The recently passed healthcare reform allocates $10 billion for the 16,500 new IRS agents needed to enforce the legislation."


http://www.johndennis2010.com/blog/2010/march/healthcare-16500-new-irs-agents
Click to expand...
The libs here seem to think this is ok but if it were DEA kicking their door in it would be a problem. This is the same govt. that has kept cannabis illegal for almost 80 years. I keep saying it wouldn't surprise me if they start requiring drug testing in order to get coverage. :o
 
ChChoda

ChChoda

Well-Known Member
doc111 said:
I keep saying it wouldn't surprise me if they start requiring drug testing in order to get coverage. :o
Click to expand...
:clap:

I've heard ignorance is bliss. Only as long as you don't run the show, I say. They're going to create their own personal hell, if they keep it up. Me, I'm buying a sail boat...
 
doc111

doc111

Well-Known Member
ChChoda said:
:clap:

I've heard ignorance is bliss. Only as long as you don't run the show, I say. They're going to create their own personal hell, if they keep it up. Me, I'm buying a sail boat...
Click to expand...
Don't worry, a boot to the throat will only hurt for a minute or two. Welcome to the new Utopia!!!:eyesmoke:
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
seagoinghead1 said:


"BAIL'EM OUT!!! ????






Hell, back in 1990, the Government seized the Mustang Ranch brothel in Nevada for tax evasion and, as required by law, tried to run it. They failed and it closed. Now, we are trusting the economy of our country, our banking system, our auto industry and possibly our health plans to the same nit-wits who couldn't make money running a whore house and selling whiskey?!"

"What the Hell are we thinking??"

Click to expand...


The only reason the Mustang Ranch closed is because Med 'O-Mao couldn't get it up anymore. :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top