Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: angelsandair on March 12, 2008, 07:09:18 PM
-
> Sent by a financial advisor: "Regardless of your political
> affiliation, the chart below may enlighten you a bit as it did me."
>
> The Truth of Taxation:
>
> Like so many things in life, in the end, it's all about
> perception ...
> Can you handle The Truth of Taxation?
>
> While watching the democratic debate the other day in
> Vegas, all of them bashed Bush over and over again on how he is out for
> his millionaire friends and the big oil companies and he has totally
> forgotten or disregarded the little guy. So being an ex-IRS employee, I
> decided to look back on the tax tables to see if there is any truth to
> what they said and the media keeps stating as fact, "Bush is only out
> for the rich in this country."
>
> Based on using the actual tax tables (see link below),
> here are some examples on what the taxes were/are on various amounts of
> income for both singles and married couples. so let's see if the Bush
> tax cuts only helped the rich.
>
> Source:
> http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html
> <http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html>
>
> Taxes under Clinton 1999 Taxes
> under Bush 2008
> Single making 30K - tax $8,400 Single
> making 30K - tax $4,500
>
> Single making 50K - tax $14,000 Single
> making 50K - tax $12,500
>
> Single making 75K - tax $23,250 Single
> making 75K - tax $18,750
>
> Married making 60K - tax $16,800 Married
> making 60K - tax $9,000
>
> Married making 75K - tax $21,000 Married
> making 75K - tax $18,750
>
> Married making 125K - tax $38,750 Married
> making 125K - tax $31,250
>
> If you want to know just how effective the mainstream
> media is (at duping us), it is amazing how many people that fall into
> the categories above think Bush is screwing them and Bill Clinton was
> the greatest President ever.
>
> If any democrat is elected, ALL of them say they will
> repeal the Bush tax cuts, and a good portion of the people that fall
> into the categories above can't wait for it to happen. This is like the
> movie: "The Sting" with Paul Newman, you scam somebody out of some money
> and they don't even know what happened.
And people want the wife of the man who gave us these taxes.... sad....
-
Perhaps a more telling story would be the nation debt under each President.
-
I learned not to trust the media years ago. Thanks for the post.
-
RPM, did Clinton go to war while he was in office? Did Clinton jump at the opportunity when the Middle East offered him Osama Bin Laden?
-
Perhaps a more telling story would be the nation debt under each President.
acualy we had a presedent that gots out of debt for one year
-
Denholm, did Bush capture OBL?
-
acualy we had a presedent that gots out of debt for one year
Nice perception.
but is it true?
How'd he do it?
Particularly with a republican controled congress.
Whatever our dept is. Both sides had a hand in it.
The president is only the president. Not an absolute emporer.
-
Perhaps a more telling story would be the nation debt under each President.
Is this a typical example of distraction response? Don't like the statement made by someone else, don't respond to it, since it isn't what someone may want to hear or a truth someone doesn't want to face, they change the subject while completely ignoring the original statement?
I think before changing the subject, answer the original, then and only then move on.
To ignore it is weak.
-
Is this a typical example of distraction response? Don't like the statement made by someone else, don't respond to it, since it isn't what someone may want to hear or a truth someone doesn't want to face, they change the subject while completely ignoring the original statement?
I think before changing the subject, answer the original, then and only then move on.
To ignore it is weak.
Actually your post fits that example better. RPM was on subject and pointing at a flaw. You merely whined that he wasn't ... and not much else after that. :D
-
Don't pay attention to Arlo. He gets like that when he runs out of booze.
-
Nice perception.
but is it true?
How'd he do it?
Particularly with a republican controled congress.
Whatever our dept is. Both sides had a hand in it.
The president is only the president. Not an absolute emporer.
i forgot the guys name but it was back in the early -middle 1800
-
See for a squeaker, i find stuff. But I cant understand why people want Hillary to be president. Bush kept taxes down AND went to war. Not only that but he took down a viscious tyrant. Everyone wants them out but we will be under attack again if we do an immediate withdrawl. But hey, I just put what I find. "YOU DECIDE!!"
-
Angelsandair...he reports...You Decide.....Fair and Balanced
-
Angelsandair...he reports...You Decide.....Fair and Balanced
CRUD I STILL CANT GET IT RIGHT!! CURSE MA SQUEAKER LANGWAGE!!
-
Bush was interviewed on the Public Television show "Nightly Business Report" this evening.
Here is a link to the transcript. You be the judge of his man!
http://www.pbs.org/nbr/site/onair/transcripts/080312a/
P.S. - I rarely meet people who think that Bush is "bad". A more common perception is that he is a bungling Fool.
_____________________________ ______________________
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Denholm, did Bush capture OBL?
No, But Clinton let him go.
-
the tax rate is all that matters to us as individuals...
Now, you can get rid of the debt in one fell swoop.. one year.. there are two ways to do it.
You can disband the military and sell off everything it owns.. or.. you can cease all social welfare programs.
Both have an equal share of the spending pie.. something less than about half each.
Wars get paid for tho and... some money is made off the military industrial complex... social programs only grow and grow and grow and grow..... and never get paid for and never show any results other than to make people more dependent.. it is "bread and circus's" all over again. only now it is welfare and reality shows.
lazs
-
No, But Clinton let him go.
So did Bush.
-
No, But Clinton let him go.
Not true.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200406220008
-
so I did not bring him here
him here because we had no basis on which to hold him,
though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.
kind of implies that he had the option to bring him here, or not. He chose not.
-
Speaking of government finances during an administration...
seems almost everyone has forgotten
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government_shutdown_of_1995
-
Let's see, Reagan ends cold war, Bush sr. gets in office begins shutting down military bases, cuts troop strengths across the board, forces Iraq into a fight, kicks butt, contiues to decrease the military strength. Clinton gets in, now military cut to minimum, but were we paying less taxes to support the smaller military? No! Thus a surplus of money was used to pay down the debt. Personally i have no love for any of the politicians as you'll never see your taxes go down with either party. Try this with your boss. "Hey boss i really blew my budget this year, yea lots of gambling and just throwing it away. Anyway i'm going to have to make you pay me 50k this year instead ot 40k next year." Think you'd still have a job?
-
and you won't see taxes or debt really go down with either party.. they are both in the big government business.
One party grows the military with the money they save on worthless and harmful social programs and the other party grows the worthless and harmful social welfare programs with the money they save by staying out of worthless wars and then cutting defense to the bone.
lazs
-
Wrongwayric,
Do you think you'd still have a house after ignoring repayament of the loan?
-
Perhaps a more telling story would be the nation debt under each President.
I have posted on this some many Fracking times I'm tired. Go do you homework.
(http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj311/therealJBA/National-Debt-GDP.gif)You never measure any Govt spending , that is not normalized to a common denominators, that being the GDP. If you look only at whole dollars then your not truthful, i.e. Democrats and the mainstream media.
-
See Rules #4, #5
For the thread or the post?
-
Gov't. spending is now the least of our problems, though. Spiraling inflation, the recession, rising price of oil,the credit crisis...These things' all have to be addressed more immediately, IMO.
-
I have posted on this some many Fracking times I'm tired. Go do you homework.
(http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj311/therealJBA/National-Debt-GDP.gif)You never measure any Govt spending , that is not normalized to a common denominators, that being the GDP. If you look only at whole dollars then your not truthful, i.e. Democrats and the mainstream media.
Well dang... looks like its going the wrong way there bud.
How is that the dems are at fault so far?
SHAMUS
-
About the Bush tax cut...
From Section 8 of the Constitution
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
The original house bill had 314 co-sponsors, the original Senate bill had 56 co-sponsors, and yet its the Bush Tax cut.
it's the CONGRESS people, change the CONGRESS
-
About the Bush tax cut...
The original house bill had 314 co-sponsors, the original Senate bill had 56 co-sponsors, and yet its the Bush Tax cut.
it's the CONGRESS people, change the CONGRESS
Why didn't our fearless leader wield the veto pen? we know he is capable.
After all the president has nothing to do with spending
shamus
-
About the Bush tax cut...
The original house bill had 314 co-sponsors, the original Senate bill had 56 co-sponsors, and yet its the Bush Tax cut.
it's the CONGRESS people, change the CONGRESS
Who first proposed it?
-
Who first proposed it?
I believe it was Stanley H Johnson, a Blockbuster stockboy in Ottumwa Iowa. He has as much consitutional power over taxes as does the President.
Section 7. All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills.
Nope, after further looking, looks like Rep Bill Thomas, R CA was the start.
The 2001 EGTRRA was passed by a 230 to 198 vote. 10 D's broke ranks. Sanford Bishop, Bob Clement, Gary Condit, Bud Cramer, Bart Gordon, Ralph Hall, Ken Lucas, Mike McIntyre, Collin Peterson, and Jim Traficant
-
After all the president has nothing to do with spending
According to the constitution,
Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
So the congress pays the debts... that sounds like they are the branch that spends. The Executive branch does not have the power to do that, the President has the power to:
Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.
He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.
He administers the laws Congress passes, and he can veto. He did not veto because he agreed with the 230 Reps and the majority of the Senate who also agreed with the bill.
-
Since when has Bush let the Constitution stop him from doing what he wants?
-
Since when has Bush let the Constitution stop him from doing what he wants?
Had Congress not sent him a tax cut to sign, he couldn't have signed it.
Had Congress not given him the authority to invade Iraq, he couldn't have done it.
-
Yep, China owns us now. There. I said it. Now watch it disappear.
-
See Rule #2
-
I don't think I've seen a non-skuzzified post from Moray in the last 3 days. :confused:
No kidding. It's laughable. Although, I personally have always thought censorship is never laughable. I digress.... continue.
-
No kidding. It's laughable. Although, I personally have always thought censorship is never laughable. I digress.... continue.
If you do not want to be censored, or banned from this board, then I strongly suggest you follow the posting rules. If you are not willing to deal with the consequences of your own choices, then you might want to consider going to another board. Posts, like the one quoted, are getting tiresome as they have nothing to do with the subject.
-
If you do not want to be censored, or banned from this board, then I strongly suggest you follow the posting rules. If you are not willing to deal with the consequences of your own choices, then you might want to consider going to another board.
:rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Since when has Bush let the Constitution stop him from doing what he wants?
Since when has it stopped the clintons?
-
Nice perception.
but is it true?
How'd he do it?
Particularly with a republican controled congress.
Whatever our dept is. Both sides had a hand in it.
The president is only the president. Not an absolute emporer.
short term notes helped clinton pay down the debt, knowing that it would come due during the next administration!
he didn't think gore would win, but it would not have mattered, he would still be the one who paid it down setting the stage for hillary and helping to sell that part of his legacy!
-
No, But Clinton let him go.
Absolutely not true. Check your facts. That is just rightwing propoganda. If you say it enough the repsheep will believe it.
-
(http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/images/right_wing_1.jpg)
Right Wing.
-
From the shading, it looks as though we are looking up at a left wing.
-
Chit who knows anymore...
Just don't try to look up!
Mac
-
Absolutely not true. Check your facts. That is just rightwing propoganda. If you say it enough the repsheep will believe it.
That all depends on your point of view. Clinton did have several opportunities to either kill him or capture him. Clinton chose not to take action each time.
And Clinton never paid off our debt and made us debt free, he did balance the budget (on paper) for one year though.
-
I have posted on this some many Fracking times I'm tired. Go do you homework.
(http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj311/therealJBA/National-Debt-GDP.gif)You never measure any Govt spending , that is not normalized to a common denominators, that being the GDP. If you look only at whole dollars then your not truthful, i.e. Democrats and the mainstream media.
Your graph is misleading. And your cherry picking what you base it on. I prefer simple arithmetic.
How about % increase in total debt? (36.56%)
National Debt 02/01/1993 4,176,491,860,224.29 (Clinton Takes Office)
National Debt 02/01/2001 5,703,346,472,448.65 (Bush Takes Office)
Check it yourself at: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway
-
Your graph is misleading. And your cherry picking what you base it on. I prefer simple arithmetic.
How about % increase in total debt? (36.56%)
National Debt 02/01/1993 4,176,491,860,224.29 (Clinton Takes Office)
National Debt 02/01/2001 5,703,346,472,448.65 (Bush Takes Office)
Well... this increase in the dept is accpetable as the overall economy improved to such a point that although the nation dept increased, it was becoming a smaller pecentage in reation to america's economy.
oh and by the way...
02/01/2001 - $5,703,346,472,448.65
03/21/2008 - $9,392,558,361,529.10
add the fact that our economy is in a bit of a slowdown (possible understatement)...