New Tax plan: why no cap in FICA earnings
Feb 19, 2018 20:12:37 #
LWW
Loc: Banana Republic of America
Back where the air is thick and the truth is told:
"America IS the 1%: You need just $34,000 annual income to be in the global elite... and HALF the world's richest people live in the U.S.
Global median salary is $1,225 ...
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082385/We-1--You-need-34k-income-global-elite--half-worlds-richest-live-U-S.html#ixzz57bfCXMqj
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
So practice what you preach my friend?
What's that?
You don't want YOU to pay for being the top 1%, you want SOMEONE ELSE to pay.
Leftist ideology cannot survive without the triad of greed, dishonesty and class warfare.
Thanks for making my point.
"America IS the 1%: You need just $34,000 annual income to be in the global elite... and HALF the world's richest people live in the U.S.
Global median salary is $1,225 ...
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082385/We-1--You-need-34k-income-global-elite--half-worlds-richest-live-U-S.html#ixzz57bfCXMqj
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
So practice what you preach my friend?
What's that?
You don't want YOU to pay for being the top 1%, you want SOMEONE ELSE to pay.
Leftist ideology cannot survive without the triad of greed, dishonesty and class warfare.
Thanks for making my point.
Feb 19, 2018 20:43:24 #
LWW wrote:
So should we increase their benefits which are also capped?
Or are you just preaching class warfare?
Or are you just preaching class warfare?
No to 1
Yes to 2
FICA is a regressive tax; make it a flat tax.
Benefits are capped. If you exceed the current max income, you are well off enough to save the big bucks for retirement.
Feb 19, 2018 20:47:46 #
thom w
Loc: San Jose, CA
LWW wrote:
Back where the air is thick and the truth is told:... (show quote)
That might make sense if I were in one of those areas of the globe. My income must be looked at in the context of the cost of living where I am.
I didn't make your point. I think your hat may have been covering it earlier.
Feb 19, 2018 20:55:38 #
LWW
Loc: Banana Republic of America
thom w wrote:
That might make sense if I were in one of those areas of the globe. My income must be looked at in the context of the cost of living where I am.
I didn't make your point. I think your hat may have been covering it earlier.
I didn't make your point. I think your hat may have been covering it earlier.
Balderdash and poppycock!
I pointed out your hypocrisy with the facts, deal with it.
BYW I assume you are on planet Earth.
Feb 19, 2018 20:58:10 #
thom w
Loc: San Jose, CA
LWW wrote:
Balderdash and poppycock!
I pointed out your hypocrisy with the facts, deal with it.
I pointed out your hypocrisy with the facts, deal with it.
You'll be gone in a while and someone else will take your place. They may be better. They are unlikely to be worse.
Feb 19, 2018 21:00:30 #
LWW
Loc: Banana Republic of America
thom w wrote:
You'll be gone in a while and someone else will take your place. They may be better. They are unlikely to be worse.
OK, don’t deal with it ... nobody really thought you could be honest on the topic.
Feb 20, 2018 00:21:38 #
LWW wrote:
Based upon what?
You are aware that if you have a household income of $40K/yr you are a 1%er?
You are aware that if you have a household income of $40K/yr you are a 1%er?
LoL
Way to go LightWeightWarbler!
Did you maybe misplace a decimal?
Intentional obtuseness?
Feb 20, 2018 00:38:15 #
LWW
Loc: Banana Republic of America
mwalsh wrote:
LoL
Way to go LightWeightWarbler!
Did you maybe misplace a decimal?
Intentional obtuseness?
Way to go LightWeightWarbler!
Did you maybe misplace a decimal?
Intentional obtuseness?
Nope, intentional honesty ... perhaps that’s what confused you since there is so precious little of it on the left.
Feb 20, 2018 08:47:10 #
LWW wrote:
Nope, intentional honesty ... perhaps that’s what confused you since there is so precious little of it on the left.
Alternative facts.
Feb 20, 2018 09:17:12 #
LWW
Loc: Banana Republic of America
Frosty wrote:
Alternative facts.
Then you should be able to prove it wrong ... yet you cant.
Feb 20, 2018 11:01:28 #
LWW wrote:
Then you should be able to prove it wrong ... yet you cant.
You haven't provided any evidence to demonstrate that a person making $40,000/year in the US is a 1% er. It is up you to prove it is more than your opinion.
Feb 20, 2018 12:09:47 #
KGOldWolf wrote:
2017 wages’ earning cap is $127,200 at 7.65%. For... (show quote)
FICA Taxes were from the inception designed to be different than income tax, your protests of the "rich" not paying their fairshare is a bit misplaced... It is the government that has destroyed the integrity of the SS program.
Feb 20, 2018 12:26:08 #
LWW wrote:
Based upon what?
You are aware that if you have a household income of $40K/yr you are a 1%er?
You are aware that if you have a household income of $40K/yr you are a 1%er?
Actually the 1% is not based only on income, but net worth is the prime consideration. The liberals talk about millionairs and billionaires. Nobody earns 1 billion a year, and a very small percentage earn 1 million. Furthermore if you were to confiscate ALL of the millionaires and billionaires net worth, you would only ba able to run the government for about 5 months,
Feb 20, 2018 18:08:03 #
LWW
Loc: Banana Republic of America
Frosty wrote:
You haven't provided any evidence to demonstrate that a person making $40,000/year in the US is a 1% er. It is up you to prove it is more than your opinion.
I never said in the US.
Stop lying.
Feb 20, 2018 18:10:28 #
LWW wrote:
I never said in the US.
Stop lying.
Stop lying.
You are really starting to sound an awful lot like Eyesore alter ego in drag.....
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.