| There are 49 comments on this blog. This blog is locked and no further comments are permitted. |
|
|
You should skinny dip at the La Brea Tar Pits.
That much. I do know. And while you're there have a dystopian Mai Tai.
|
|
|
Butt out Buttz
We got mental defectives in these parts and gotta root 'em out
MA really should just STFU
Waiting now to hear how I don't have a clue and he doesn't have time to help the helpless, so he won't be coming back again. 
|
|
|
So many good old adages that you youngsters have forgotten.
"The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
"I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
"Don't worry, checks in the mail and I won't come in your mouth."
|
|
|
Better yet, it's the end of HX. The Dems will show us the way. LOL 
Dumb and Dumber! Woke and Broke!
|
|
|
Goebbels your conception was a waste of perfectly good sperm.
|
|
|
mildlyamusing stated
Most of the wealthy people I know pay almost nothing in taxes. The effective tax rate for the top 5 richest people is less than 3%.
I know a real estate billionaire who hadn’t paid taxes in the past 20 years (according to his accountant).
Give us some actual examples. A person can be extremely 'wealthy' but has limited taxable income. So tell me how much taxable income the person has who pays almost nothing in taxes?
That real estate billionaire could have had some significant losses that he has been claiming for years. He might have gotten crushed in 2008 (and the dumb shit Democrats are going to take us right back there...LOL) and has been writing off his losses for a decade or more. Again, he may have NO or little taxable income.....income from municipal bonds, Roth IRAs, life insurance proceeds, etc. Of course, when someone says they pay almost nothing in taxes, I trust that like asking a fisherman how big his fish was....and the Las Vegas gambler will never tell you how much he LOST to get that big win.
And maybe that one billionaire skated on taxes....one person out of 340 million. Yep, let's dictate policy based upon a handful of examples.
|
|
|
^^^^
There is a reason the government taxes things differently.
There are incentives for investment, R&D, depreciation, etc, etc.......
GOVERNMENT does this through the tax code to Encourage economic growth.
Remove those tax incentives, be wary of the consequences that will result.
For what it's worth, individuals have many, many tax breaks and ways to reduce their taxable income.
Those tax breaks are there for the same reason, to encourage economic growth.
Buy a house, buy a rental property, pay educational expenses, contribute to accounts that lower taxable income (such as a retirement account) All things the government wants you to do.
Fact is, the "rich" are doing what the government wants them to do, namely, create an economy that employs people and spreads economic prosperity to as many people as possible.
|
|
|
@Goebbels wrote:
"Biggest contributor to the 2008 crisis?
Congress, several Presidents and FNMA
Technically, 9/11 and Osama bin Laden caused the 2008 crisis. But ultimately, banks lending to sub-prime borrowers caused the crisis.
This is how I remember it:
After 9/11, everyone was worried that the terrorist attack would tank the American economy. Understandably, instability caused by a major terrorist attack that destroyed a symbol of American ingenuity and strength (the Twin Towers) rocked the public's collective confidence.
Bush came out and encouraged Americans to spend money and reassured everyone that the economy was solid. Car companies reduced interest rates to zero to encourage car sales, and the Fed reduced interest rates to encourage economic activity. That spilled over into the housing market, where low interest rates and relaxed guidelines for taking out loans encouraged people to buy real estate. That drove up real estate prices. People felt that wealth can easily be created by buying more and more real estate which was supported by the rising real estate values.
Because of this loose lending environment and encouraged by rising property values, banks lent money to people who shouldn't have qualified for a loan (sub-prime). Those loans were sold by the originating banks and were bundled together and resold to other banks at a discount. The banks that originated the bad loans already had made their money.
When foreclosures started to occur (people stopped making payments), that resulted in a fire sale of real estate that resulted in home prices dropping quickly. When people had less equity in a home than what they owed, they often would walk away from a property than continue making payments. That caused a spiraling effect where the real estate values plummeted, causing even more foreclosures.
So yes, there were many "causes" of the crisis, but the primary problem was the sub-prime lending.
|
|
|
@Jazz
Just do a google search for "billionaires effective tax rate" and you'll see many articles on it. I think their effective tax rate is around 3.4%.
I've learned a few things over the years. Here's how they do it:
If you make most of your money on the appreciation of your assets, whether it be stocks or real estate, you should take out loans on the asset and use that money to pay for your living expenses. In doing so, you get to keep the asset (that continues to appreciate in value over time) and you write off the interest expense. This is how the wealthy avoid realizing capital gains or income because they aren't actually selling their stock or property.
You also hold all of your assets in LLCs, where you can write off most of your expenses as well. This is especially true when you own real estate. Each LLC is technically a company (even though it is just "holding" real estate), and companies have expenses, so funneling all of your expenses through them reduces the taxable income that is created by each of those properties.
If there are expenses that you can't write off and you have too much money where you need to make a distribution by law, you can actually send money back and forth between your LLCs where it never lands as income. If it's never characterized as income, it's never taxed.
Of course there are other advantageous tax laws for property owners that help avoid taxes, such as a 1031 exchange.
All of this is perfectly legal and it works. That's how the wealthy get away with paying almost nothing in taxes. And when you keep more money, the money you keep helps you make even more money, and it just continues to snowball.
|
|
|
You should also notice that CEOs are often paid a low salary but make most of their compensation through stock options. Again, that is meant to avoid paying taxes.
If you run a company and you're only making $200k a year as a salary but are getting $8 million in stock options, you only pay taxes on the $200k. They can still borrow against the stock options through their brokerage accounts by using the stock as collateral and the interest they pay is tax deductible.
|
|
|
Ok, devil's advocate time here.
So, you take away the stock options.
You take away the ability to write off some things - that "billionaires" enjoy.
(if you aren't worth a million by about age 40, you are doing something wrong)
Then what?
Might sound good on paper (such as a flat tax).
But what's gunna happen?
Money is fungible & it will flow where it is appreciated and leave where it is not.
Government won't employ everyone - that's the private sector, take away the incentives, tank the economy.
I realize progressives like people being poor and dependent on the government, but it's not in the best interest for the average Joe.
|
|
|
Maybe you should be asking why you pay 10 times the tax rate of the wealthy. They can afford to pay more but don’t, so the rest of society is left supporting the disproportionate increases in their wealth. Is that fair?
There will always be loopholes that the wealthy will exploit. They are much more powerful than the poor. Maybe having higher taxes on transactions they make, such as an added tax on real estate transactions above $5 million, and on luxury goods, would force them to contribute more.
But again, this country’s financial system and laws are rigged in their favor. They’ll likely just make it a business expense and write off everything as well. Most Ferraris are not owned by individuals, they are owned by their companies and the payments are deducted as expenses. It is easy to avoid paying taxes if you know what you’re doing.
|
|
|
Factually you are just WRONG.
The "rich" pay most of the tax burden.
Even though the numbers are VERY few.
The poor pay next to nothing of taxes leived.
Even though their numbers are far greater.
Google is your friend. Look it up.
|
|
|
Spoken like a true Republican who is fed complete bullshit by the wealthy.
If you know anything about math, they pay a very small percentage of what they make each year, but that small amount is a large number. If they paid their proportionate share of what they make, it would be 10 times more that what they are paying.
You look it up. You don’t know what you’re talking about. All of my examples are from personal experience and firsthand knowledge.
|
|
|
come on...STOP IT
they pay a shit load...i think i would know more than anyone on the matter
what do we we want to start with? stock options? handled a FEW over the years...by FEW, i mean a lot 
|
|
|
What exactly do you mean by a shitload?
Bezos paid just under a billion dollars in income tax, a huge amount. But he paid that amount on his net worth that had increased by $99 billion.
Remo…you’re good at math. What is that percentage?
Hint: Less than 1%.
Of course a billion dollars is a lot to pay in taxes, but it is far less than what should have been paid for the benefit received.
|
|
|
Um, you do realize that different types of income are taxed differently right?
if you are a wage earner, you are taxed on the first dollar.
If you are a corporation, basically, you are taxed on the last (on profit)
Corporations are taxed at multiple levels, on profit, on dividends, etc.
I know the democrats hate the poor and will do everything to keep them poor just to get the votes, but quote biden:
'come on man!'
The wealthy pay more than their fair share, you can argue semantics, but facts are facts.
You tax corporations, at a higher rate, you end up hurting the poor.
After all, corporations will pass along the cost of doing business to their customers, you know - the people the democrats claim to care about.
Republicans, they want everyone to raise their living standard.
Democrats, they want everyone poor with only government holding the power.
I'm done talking to a brick wall.
|
|
|
don't keep mixing someones net worth to the income percentage they are paying on stock options
maybe go over the mechanics of stock options and why they are used...for someone like you? it's only to get away with taxes and fuck the less fortunate blacks/gays
BUT there are plenty of other reasons. BTW, most people and shareholders want to throw up sometimes...until the shareholders look at their own accts and are pretty happy...sure tesla shareholders were pretty fucking happy before the stock tanked. the stock was going to tank anyway before the twitter thing...just ask bill gates
but there are other reasons also
|
|
|
So you two didn't read the article I liked, did you?
And you both ignored what I wrote earlier.
How you characterize the money you earn and accumulate determines your taxable income. And you then pay a percentage of that income as taxes.
Remo writes:
I know the democrats hate the poor and will do everything to keep them poor just to get the votes,
Remo, are you insane? Gaslighting people so blatantly makes you look completely disingenuous.
Democrats are always trying to provide social services and other benefits to help the poor and middle classes. Republicans do everything they can to cut or eliminate those services and you obviously know that. Point to where the poor have benefits from Republican policies.
|
|
|
"All of my examples are from personal experience and firsthand knowledge.
In other words....anecdotal.
Just look this shit up on the guvmint sites, whether Fed or State
"The top 10 percent of earners paid 74 percent of all income taxes and the top 25 percent paid 89 percent. Altogether, the top fifty percent of filers earned 89 percent of all income and were responsible for 97.7 percent of all income taxes paid in 2020."
It's that fucking simple. MA, stop with the sleight-of-hand anecdotal bullshit.
The aggregate numbers do not lie.......unlike you.
I can easily call you a liar because EVERYBODY with half a brain acknowledges that we have a "Progressive Tax System" in both the US and CA.
So, I've made this easy for a guy like you that only understands pictures.
You're welcome!
|
|
|
"This is how I remember it:"
Exactly, nothing worse than a moron with a faulty memory, lol.
You didn't even look at the non-partisan websites I provided.
Government programs intended to assist low-income people buy homes have been around forever. Bush did not invent them, but he sure as fuck goosed them.
That was AFTER Clinton, FNMA, and Congress had already started the ball rolling....let's not forget Barney Frank (Board member of the recently belly-up bank, lol).
AND, that was AFTER George H W Bush provided the ball to get started.
Not to mention the securitization of mortgage derivatives during this process.
And, YES...there were bad players (mostly non-bank lenders) who tried to take advantage of the environment set up by the Federal government. Half a dozen were based here in Irvine, all BK'ed now and gone.
NOW, this mental defective Biden wants to go down the same road again.
MA, you're an idiot masquerading as a know-it-all.
Wouldn't it be better for all if you simply put YOU out of OUR misery....... please sooner than later.
PS. Read the links,they're really helpful.
|
|
|
One last addition here.
The non-bank lenders were mostly dicks and deserved their BK's, but even the large bank lenders felt the pressure.
When Congress and government-sponsored lenders knock on your door and tell you "lend to low-income borrowers or feel our wrath"........guess what happens.
You can Google this also, I'm not gonna keep providing links to a guy who refuses to learn, or even try.
|
|
|
Shouldn't Cali be included?
Let's get granular.......from the LA Times, no less
Like MA, brain damaged and incoherent
They post this info, then scream from the OpEd that the rich don't pay their fair share
Also, somehow confusing the difference between "wealth" and "income"
Like all Progressives, life is just a fantasy world where delusions are somehow real and observable facts are bent into pretzels.........if acknowledged at all.
|
|
|
@goebbels, I've always thought of you as the most fucked up person on this site based on your twisted logic. Thank you for confirming it once again.
You claim that I am a simple idiot, but on that scale, your intellect would be that of a half-empty glass of warm water. And I'm being generous.
Because of your rants against what I've written here, I finally read the article that you linked earlier, which I am linking again now. Is it not EXACTLY what I wrote earlier about the cause of 2008 crisis? It was subprime lending practices and the subprime loans were bundled together and sold to investors. There is a reason why I ignore essentially everything that you post.
Concerning my comments regarding the wealthy paying nearly nothing in taxes, the guy I worked for owned 3 private jets, a 200-foot yacht, several homes (including one that would be the most expensive house in the country), and his accountant (the named partner of a mid-sized accounting firm) told me directly that he had not paid taxes in 20 years. That is my direct knowledge.
You wrongly used term "anecdotal" to mean what I know is just my experience and would therefore lack merit. I have 100% direct knowledge of what this billionaire was doing because he and his account told me what he was doing. And it was also described in the article I linked that showed that the richest people in this country, including Warren Buffett, Elon Musk, Bill Gates, and Jeff Bezos paid an average of 3.4% income tax, which is much less of a rate than a teach or fireman would pay. Buffett paid 0.10% of the actual growth of his wealth, the lowest of all of the billionaires in that article.
I'll repeat one concept to you again because you appear to be quite dense. If I make $50 million a year in income and I reduce my "taxable income" down to $3 million and I pay income tax on that amount, people like you would claim "see, that millionaire paid income tax on $3 million dollars," rather than "wait, he should have paid income tax on a much higher amount because he actually made $50 million in income." The guy I worked for was making over $20 million a month in income and he paid nothing in taxes.
When it comes to the super wealthy in this country, it's all about smoke and mirrors. And the IRS is too scared to go after them because their attorneys and accountants know more about the tax code (and how to circumvent it) than the IRS agents who audit them. They almost never get audited.
Even your boy Trump paid $750 in taxes in 2016, 2017, and claimed a refund for 2020, as disclosed in his tax returns that were recently made public after years of fighting to prevent their disclosure. How much fucking evidence do you need to understand what I'm saying is true?
I even laid out how they do it earlier in this blog, but you're too dumb to understand what I wrote.
|
|
|
Thay finna fight!
Thay finna fight!
|
|
|
mildly....yes I bet there are billionaires who pay a small percentage of taxes. But a handful.
But when they get those stock options, eventually they will sell and THEN they get to pay the capital gains tax. So it isn't like they generate that wealth tax free.
And what happened to the American Dream. Seems like the left and people like you want to kick people who are successful in the balls. Maybe it is you are fucking jealous.....
I always thought we encouraged people to get a good education, come up with innovation, take risk and become hugely successful.
Now we encourage people to take out loans for college and have the rest of us pay them off.
We courage people not to work and collect government benefits.
We tell people who have amazing credit, oh by the way, your mortgage will be higher now to pay for worse credit risk people.
We make people who earn more pay more for their electricity.
And the list goes on and on.
No one still has said what is a fair share. I am waiting.....
|
|
|
"Earlier, in order to meet federally mandated goals to increase homeownership, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had issued debt to fund purchases of subprime mortgage-backed securities, which later fell in value. In addition, the two government enterprises suffered losses on failing prime mortgages, which they had earlier bought, insured, and then bundled into prime mortgage-backed securities that were sold to investors."
Yes, you're an idiot MA. You can't even get past the first paragraph of your own link, to get to the actual root cause. Guvmint set the stage for the meltdown starting 20 years earlier, aided and abetted by pressuring both the government-sponsored lenders and thru them, the originators of the loans.........FEDERALLY MANDATED GOALS......you miss that part, Mr. Ideologue?
At least, I have the good graces to point out that there were a number of bad players amongst the sub-prime lenders and mortgage securitizers. You seem mentally incapable of understanding how the "playing field" was skewed by the Feds for the outcome of the meltdown.....abetted by executives employed by the very same entities, whose compensation was based on taking outsized risks with tax-payer funds.
It's so fucking simple that even you should be able to understand the point that Congress and some Presidents wanted to look like the good guy by lowering standards to help the "little guy" and thereby raise home ownership rates. Unscrupulous execs at FNMA, MAC, etc. Plus a bunch of dipshits like you were all too happy to go along to make their millions while the American taxpayer took all the risk.
If FNMA didn't benefit from and wasn't forced by Fed mandates to buy these bad loans from sub-primes......they could've and should've said NO, fuck you originator......this is a shit loan, you eat it.
As for your so-called billionaire buddy, this is the very definition of "anecdotal" evidence and in no way refutes the overall aggregation of the results of the "Progressive Tax System". It is what it is and you just look stupider every time you make up some new storyline.
I will add that these billionaire taxpayers are simply utilizing the tax code as its structured by our Congress......the same as you or I would and do.
"Anyone may so arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the Treasury; there is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes."
|
|
|
"When it comes to the super wealthy in this country, it's all about smoke and mirrors. And the IRS is too scared to go after them because their attorneys and accountants know more about the tax code (and how to circumvent it) than the IRS agents who audit them. They almost never get audited."
More make believe stupidity, statements made with no evidence.
The IRS isn't scared, they're just dumber than the high earners' CPA.
Seriously, you think a smart CPA is gonna work as a GS when they can make 5 times that in private practice???
GTFOH ).gif)
I see those dummies lose all the time in Tax Court.
Trust me, even the Biden admin admitted that they had no choice but to go after the middle income earners, mostly small business pass-throughs.....cause that's where the money is! Even if they took ALL the assets from EVERY billionaire in the US.......it's a rounding error in the Fed budget for one year.
Yep, you're dumb alright.
|
|
|
I'll address @Goebbels first. You quoted:
"Earlier, in order to meet federally mandated goals to increase homeownership, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had issued debt to fund purchases of subprime mortgage-backed securities, which later fell in value. In addition, the two government enterprises suffered losses on failing prime mortgages, which they had earlier bought, insured, and then bundled into prime mortgage-backed securities that were sold to investors."
Yes, this is what I'm talking about all along. You are looking at it from a mortgage broker's perspective (which I believe you said you are), I am looking at it from an home owner's perspective. Yes, there was an incentive given to banks from President G.W. Bush and regulators to make sub-prime loans, as I am sure you did. But mortgage brokers and banks that originated those loans took it too far.
If you saw the movie The Big Short, strippers were buying 4 or 5 homes with no verifiable income. I knew mortgage brokers who were making up documents at the time to make sure people qualified for subprime loans. Although the government certainly wanted loans to be made to those who would not normally qualify for loans, they didn't want what happened to occur. That's why the Dodd-Frank Act was enacted.
I am intimately familiar with the subprime mortgage-backed securities you referenced. I believe Goldman Sachs was the first to created them to bail out GS from holding onto the subprime loans that they could see were increasingly defaulting and new would tank the real estate market. Which, coincidentally, is the reason why Blackrock's offices in Paris were trashed because a similar (not identical) situation is occurring where they are trying to force pension funds to buy bad securities so that the people of France hold the bag while they take the bad investments off their books.
@Goebbels, I can't boil this down for you any further.
|
|
|
@Jazz
"And what happened to the American Dream. Seems like the left and people like you want to kick people who are successful in the balls. Maybe it is you are fucking jealous...."
Wow. Do you really think I didn't learn a thing or two (or made a good amount of money) from working with billionaires? I am not hurting for money.
I just don't like unbridled greed. The two billionaires I worked with would have stolen money from a toddler if given the opportunity. They were despicable people. Billionaires wouldn't have amassed that amount of wealth without screwing over a lot of people. That is a general rule based on my experience and what I've read countless times, but I am sure there are exceptions.
Of course I am not against people getting rich in this country. If anything, I encourage everyone to make as much money as possible without fucking over people in the process, and that includes screwing over the public when they pay next to nothing in taxes in comparison to what a teacher and fireman pay.
What is fair? I don't know, but a lot more than what they are paying now. The likelihood is that billionaires won't ever feel a reasonable tax because they can't spend the money they have in their lifetime anyway. But one billionaire I know treats this as a game. He wants to accumulate more wealth than anyone else.
Conversely, I do feel bad for those saddled with student loans because it makes it very difficult to be successful when they have a heavy burden. If we gave them the financial perks that we give to the super wealthy, their debt would be forgiven.
|
|
|
"I see those dummies lose all the time in Tax Court.
Trust me, even the Biden admin admitted that they had no choice but to go after the middle income earners, mostly small business pass-throughs.....cause that's where the money is! Even if they took ALL the assets from EVERY billionaire in the US.......it's a rounding error in the Fed budget for one year."
Seriously, @Goebbels, you're disturbingly dumb. In one long run-on sentence, you supported what I wrote then you contradicted yourself.
Get back on your meds.
|
|
|
mildly
I just don't like unbridled greed.
Then get over it. Move to a communist country....oh that's right, there is unbridled greed there also.....
There are assholes at every income level. But I don't want the government dictating morality, since most of the politicians are the biggest assholes, greedy for power, and getting rich from lobbyists, book deals and under the table payments.
I don't like our government telling me everything I can and can't do. Wear a mask, pay extra for a mortgage just because I have good credit, pay more for electricity based upon my earnings, pay for the college loan debt of people who made bad choices in college.
|
|
|
Of course, some of what I posted agrees partially with what you posted.
I've said 3 times now that originators took it too far, and no I'm not looking at it from a mortgage brokers POV.
For whatever reason your brain is incapable of functioning, you can't seem to understand the playing field set by the Feds that all these players found themselves on. FNMA could and should have simply refused to back those shitty mortgages, if they had.....it would've been game over. But, people like Franklin Raines who ran FNMA were incentivized thru compensation to keep the game going. Guys like Bush Jr. and Barney Frank said "don't worry, be happy".....wtf is wrong with you that you can't simply admit when guvmint folk fuck up? They do it all the time, what's so surprising about that?
Here's the other puzzling thing about your absurd "I just don't like greed" bullshit.
Guess what, I don't like it either.
But, I'm not surprised when some portion of the human population takes advantage of the rules to break something.........but, it's the idiots running guvmint that make up these shit rules to begin with, they set the field and some humans will be, well......human. What a fucking shock.
A perfect example is the student loan debacle, another field set up by guvmint to explode and trash the taxpayer again. Since you don't really understand the underlying reasons why the mortgage market imploded, I doubt you'll be able to connect the dots on the parallels between these two issues.
C'est la vie, I suppose, you're human too........but best not try to explain something you clearly don't have a grasp of yourself. Better to STFU and be thought a fool, than post something thereby removing all doubt.
|
|
|
@jazz
I'm not going to go back and forth with you because we have differing opinions and that's fine. But the purpose of government is to provide services to its citizens. Roads and bridges needs to get fixed, police and fire departments need to be funded, etc.
Money is collected via taxes to pay for those services. If billionaires are weaseling their way out of contributing, who do you think has to make up the difference? The rest of us.
So you couch it as freedom from government dictating morality, which doesn't make any sense. It's about fairness.
If Kim Kardashian is wasting hundreds of thousands of gallons of water to ensure that her acres of grounds at her mansions don't die during a drought, it is fair for her to pay a penalty for that water that she's consuming. That is fair.
A certain amount of taxes need be collected to ensure that our services are provided by the government, and we all are being fucked by the billionaires and multimillionaires who are avoiding their fair contributions to society's piggy bank. We all have to make up the difference for the shortfall.
By the way, you want freedom from the government from dictating morality, yet you support a party that is using the government to dictate what a woman does to her body, or what can be taught in schools and universities, or who is provided medical services. Funny how you have a double standard when it suits you.
|
|
|
I hate to burst your bubble but the top 5% of taxpayers pay 62% of all income taxes while the bottom 50% pay 2.3%. The article below shows the breakdown and it seems the top 1% have a tax rate of 26%.
Having volunteered preparing tax returns I can tell you in CA a single person can earn $30,000 and pay $0 in income tax. And with CA Earned Income Credit you can get back more than you paid in.
.
|
|
|
This doesn't seem to be the crowd to be taking government subsidized loans from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but Fox News has tricked you all to care about them doing what they do -- providing more for the at-risk community.
People whine about education today, but considering the average age on this site is probably 50, it looks like media literacy and education was crap for the entire century.
Look at what Fox News did: A sensational headline, a baiting first paragraph so that you don't really know what it's saying until you scroll half way down. You all fell for it and it's pathetic a Russian propagandist site today passes as news.
|
|
|
^
Somebody open the gates to the psych ward?
Appreciate your input talldude, but MA is completely deaf and blind when facts appear
Personally, I don't bitch about the taxes I pay......and it's a lot
My complaint is about the pitiful ROI we all get and the rampant duplicity of our elected leaders
For every billionaire buying access, there's a union doing the same
It's unimaginable that anybody would desire these inept, bumbling bureaucrats be given more power over our lives......blindly as most Progs would like........to do the bidding of a teachers union or a Jeff Bezos, or whomever.
CA legislature is now requiring you pay your utility bill based on income rather than usage.
They've long required auto reg be based on car value, not miles driven....as if you hadn't already paid a higher $ figure in sales tax.
CA income tax system is highly progressive and highest in the country and heavily dependent on a small number of multi-millionaires.
The list is endless, yet they can't be bothered to fill a pot-hole in the street?
Choo Choo to nowhere is all you need to know, FFS.
At what point does a Progressive finally lose some confidence that more guvmint bureaucracy is the answer? It appears to be never.
Bottom line, guvmint set the stage for the biggest economic downturn since the Great Depression......because they wanted to help people, who can't afford it, own a home. Now, we're doing it again.
SMDH
|
|
|
No one is saying we don’t need government. But we don’t need government butting in and spending money needlessly. How many billions have we now spent on a bullet train that will go from Bakersfield to Merced?
You still have not said what is a fair share? As was stated and very well known to everyone but amusing, top 1% pays the lions share of taxes….read the data, not talk about your billionaire friend who screws the system…and I would like to see his actual tax return since I bet some of what he says is bravado.
Now about abortion. Most civilized nations allow for up to 15-16 weeks. Folks on your side of the fence are fine with all the way to 9 months….
|
|
|
Back on topic: despite the insistence of the board Progs, the issue isn't about caring for those less fortunate. It's about the government levying a tax against those with a good credit score in order to benefit those with a poor one. How is that justice?
There was a time when I was deeply in debt. And the credit card companies didn't make it easier by jacking up my interest rates. Even when my accounts were current, they refused to lower my rates back to there original values.
Yet my debt was my own doing. Nobody made me max out my cards, and it was my responsibility to pay on time. Did the credit card companies screw me over on top of that? Sure. But my revenge was to eventually pay off my debt and cancel my account with the usurious Citibank. Now they don't get any more of my money, I rarely use my remaining credit cards any more, and I pay them off at the end of the month when I do. Also, my credit score is now flyyyyyyyyy, for those of you who remember that commercial. Why should I now have to get screwed over again, this time for being responsible?
|
|
|
As I recall my undergraduate course in Federal Taxation, the tax laws are written for
businesses, not for employees. So I'm in agreement with much of what MA has stated.
But when you have the government protecting the wealthy and trying to control the
masses by violating their constitutional rights, we are moving from a market economy
to a command economy with the government becoming a dictatorship.
More misery to come for many in the future. 
|
|
|
It’s funny how MA1 uses women as an argument as if he really cares.
He supports a Party that voted against keeping biological males out of women sports.
He supports a party that worships drag queens. He supports a Party that sides with deadbeats and punishes hardworking Americans.
He supports a Party that voted to expand the IRS and regulate online payment apps. He supports a Party that loves to tax and spend on useless garbage. He supports a party that elects retards like Fetterman to the senate. He supports a party that has fucked the country upside down.
Seriously MA1 get a grip it’s not cool being a stupid closeted democrat. Because of you guys this country is close to its collapse. Wake the fuck up and start owning up for the fuck ups your stupid party is doing. Stop trying so hard to justify stupidity.
It’s like a dumbass trying to justify the effectiveness of working from home or advocating for common core math. Pathetic and sickening
|
|
|
He supports a party that cannot, will not, and is captivated with confusion when told to define what a woman is.
That's how you know these Progressive Democrat activists are a fucking cult of idiots.
|
|
|
Just so you know my actual position on things:
- the ultra wealthy should be paying a fair income tax rate. While many of you point out that they pay a large amount of all taxes collected, if you compare it to how much they are actually making (both in salary and wealth accumulation), they are paying a much lower percentage than you think they are. It should be fair.
- I DO NOT support people with better credit scores should be penalized by paying more. They should be rewarded with lower interest rates, which is what the current systems does. That is fair because interest rates are based on risk. The lower the risk (higher credit scores), the lower the interest rates and fees that they should pay.
Also...
- I do not support biological males that switch genders should be allowed to compete in female sports. They obviously have a biological advantage over people who were born as women.
- I do not support discrimination against transgendered people. Live and let live is my philosophy. They are being targeted simply as a distraction by the Republicans (a distraction of having essentially no policies about anything). If they want to target groomers or abusers, they should be focused on priests and other conservatives that argue against the so-called groomers but consistently end up being discovered as groomers/abusers themselves.
|
|
|
At least he got two and a half out of four correct
Better than I would've guessed
|
|
|
"They should be rewarded with lower interest rates, which is what the current systems does."
Not anymore, that's the whole point of this blog.
|
|
|
It’s just a proposal and it will never pass. It was stupid for the Democrats for even suggesting it.
|
|
|
it's a start
|
|
|
Well, the CA utility cost share is already a done deal
Creeping socialism coming to doorstep
|
|
|
really seems to be picking up speed on all this stuff...like they only have a couple years to get it done
|
| There are 49 comments on this blog. This blog is locked and no further comments are permitted. |
