Republicans: I WARNED YOU.

Protectionist · Dec 29, 2012

Over a year ago, I wrote a post telling Republicans that nobody is buying the trickle down economics BS anymore. If you push tax cuts for the rich, in November you'll be toast.

Frankly, with the awful economics policies that you have, I'm surprised Romney won as many states as he did. Well, I warned you. As long as you keep going against the tide (67-85% of Americans support tax raises on the rich), you're going to keep on losing.

So now, because of your lamebrain Reaganist tax policies (instead of the REAL Conservative Eisenhower policies), we've got the Muslim Brotherhood guy in the White House for another 4 years. Four more years of support for affirmative action, for immigration, for gun control. Thanks a lot ! Dummies.

Jobs Bills - Republicans Are Committing Political Suicide.

andrew320 · Jan 3, 2013

Of course tax cuts work. However, they'll only work if you cut spending. If the government is spending more than it is taking in, then it has to find efficiencies and stop the increases in spending. What the general public has to understand is that the U.S. has lived way beyond its means for too long and has to start making cuts not taxing everyone to oblivion.

David · Jan 3, 2013

andrew320 said:
Of course tax cuts work. However, they'll only work if you cut spending. If the government is spending more than it is taking in, then it has to find efficiencies and stop the increases in spending. What the general public has to understand is that the U.S. has lived way beyond its means for too long and has to start making cuts not taxing everyone to oblivion.

Taxing everyone into oblivion? Even our middle class would be upper class most places, we can afford to raise taxes and the folks who can't wouldn't be taxed at all (Romney's 47%).

chris7375 · Jan 4, 2013

David said:
Taxing everyone into oblivion? Even our middle class would be upper class most places, we can afford to raise taxes and the folks who can't wouldn't be taxed at all (Romney's 47%).

Though is raising taxes on the upper class and business going to create jobs or lose jobs? Why not a flat set tax for all that is tiered based on income? Why can't that work?

Protectionist · Jan 5, 2013

andrew320 said:
Of course tax cuts work. However, they'll only work if you cut spending. If the government is spending more than it is taking in, then it has to find efficiencies and stop the increases in spending. What the general public has to understand is that the U.S. has lived way beyond its means for too long and has to start making cuts not taxing everyone to oblivion.

There is not anything in this post to show that spending cuts is a better route to economic stability than tax increases. The post only shows a preference for spending cuts rather than tax increases. 10-4.

Protectionist · Jan 5, 2013

chris7375 said:
Though is raising taxes on the upper class and business going to create jobs or lose jobs? Why not a flat set tax for all that is tiered based on income? Why can't that work?

1. Raising taxes on the rich certainly CAN create jobs, if it's done right. The added revenue can be spent to hire govt workers, who then take their Paycheck $$$ to the stores (AKA the economy) and spend them, boosting the economy. Also, if the workers hired are in the cause of fighting illegal immigration (ICE agents, CBP officers, build the fence, etc) then illegal aliens & illegal employers could be caught and Billion$$$ could be kept in the Us economy, instead of being lost to remittances and going to illegal alien families in welfare via the anchor baby racket.

2. "flat set tax for all that is tiered based on income?" This sounds like a contradiction of itself. Can you clarify, please ?

chris7375 · Jan 6, 2013

Protectionist said:
1. Raising taxes on the rich certainly CAN create jobs, if it's done right. The added revenue can be spent to hire govt workers, who then take their Paycheck $$$ to the stores (AKA the economy) and spend them, boosting the economy. Also, if the workers hired are in the cause of fighting illegal immigration (ICE agents, CBP officers, build the fence, etc) then illegal aliens & illegal employers could be caught and Billion$$$ could be kept in the Us economy, instead of being lost to remittances and going to illegal alien families in welfare via the anchor baby racket.

2. "flat set tax for all that is tiered based on income?" This sounds like a contradiction of itself. Can you clarify, please ?

That's just what we need more government union employees. Please those Government employees you are talking about employing make more money then your average person. We should not be adding to the Government machine by employing more. The Government is already to big to begin with. You need budget cuts Plain and simple.
Do you know the average starting salary of a Government employee? I do the average starting salary is around 68,000 dollars. Do you know the average starting salary of the average person not employed by the government around 35,000 dollars. So you are telling me creating more government jobs is better then having less government. Let me catch my breath because I am laughing to hard.
The Federal Government was created not for the purpose of being a large entity which is what it has become. It was created as the last resort for states and there issues. Cutting unneeded Departments from the Fed is better then adding unneeded jobs to the Government. So more Government spending is not the way to go.
I may not be an economic wiz but I understand the basics and I am trying to teach myself more. I do understand that a flat tiered tax is far from contradictory. It works quite simple you have an income tax that starts at says 2% if you make 18 thousand a year, anyone below 18 thousand has no tax. You cap the tax at around 28% for whatever the highest income is. You do away with the IRS or downsize it because it would be a flat tax with no refund at the end of the year simple. The only exemptions to the tax are Social Security recipients and the working poor.
In doing away with tax returns money stays and does not come out and back to the people. More money is lost in tax returns then really should be, it is a stupid system that we would be better without.

redwood · Jan 6, 2013

Protectionist said:
Over a year ago, I wrote a post telling Republicans that nobody is buying the trickle down economics BS anymore. If you push tax cuts for the rich, in November you'll be toast.

Frankly, with the awful economics policies that you have, I'm surprised Romney won as many states as he did. Well, I warned you. As long as you keep going against the tide (67-85% of Americans support tax raises on the rich), you're going to keep on losing.

So now, because of your lamebrain Reaganist tax policies (instead of the REAL Conservative Eisenhower policies), we've got the Muslim Brotherhood guy in the White House for another 4 years. Four more years of support for affirmative action, for immigration, for gun control. Thanks a lot ! Dummies.

Quite true the Repubs are mostly fingerpuppets manipulated by a few tycoons with an agenda where "Class Warfare" is the top priority.

The Gun Cult, the Televangelists/Pro-Lifers,various bigots are pretty much cannon fodder and foot soldiers since Billionaires are a tiny % of the votes but a BIG part of political money.

The Dems really COULD have made it a bit clearer just what + WHO was behind the Tea Party,behind Mitt,Rove,Norquist,etc. However...Mitt accidently let the secret out with his 47% speech. The folks running the GOP now think about HALF of American are garbage...they just don't know how to get rid of them. Of the rest...they are seen as tools,hired hands. but there to be exploited, not respected.

Calling the President " Muslim Brotherhood is tacky and ignorant. If a person is Muslim...he's bound to abide by the RULES to PRACTICE the faith. Going to a Christian church...not okay. Letting his wife NOT wear a scarf..not okay,missing daily prayers..eating pork,drinking beer...not okay. Clearly you know NOTHING about the Muslim Brotherhood...or Muslims.

If anything...there is LESS Affirmative Action than 4 yr ago and we slipped so much in "Gun Control" that I could do a Newtown next week...but with triple the body count. Nobody of either side has really done anything about "immigration " in over a decade. Years ago the INS used to raid workplaces where there were illegals. Years ago...Green Cards were issued actually to get CHEAP labor but with the claim that was temporary. Now? It's EASY to get a fake Green card...even a fake DL.

Repubs want to drive wages lowere and lower. Dems don't want to offend a voting bloc It is what it is.

redwood · Jan 6, 2013

chris7375 said:
That's just what we need more government union employees. Please those Government employees you are talking about employing make more money then your average person. We should not be adding to the Government machine by employing more. The Government is already to big to begin with. You need budget cuts Plain and simple.
Do you know the average starting salary of a Government employee? I do the average starting salary is around 68,000 dollars. Do you know the average starting salary of the average person not employed by the government around 35,000 dollars. So you are telling me creating more government jobs is better then having less government. Let me catch my breath because I am laughing to hard.
The Federal Government was created not for the purpose of being a large entity which is what it has become. It was created as the last resort for states and there issues. Cutting unneeded Departments from the Fed is better then adding unneeded jobs to the Government. So more Government spending is not the way to go.
I may not be an economic wiz but I understand the basics and I am trying to teach myself more. I do understand that a flat tiered tax is far from contradictory. It works quite simple you have an income tax that starts at says 2% if you make 18 thousand a year, anyone below 18 thousand has no tax. You cap the tax at around 28% for whatever the highest income is. You do away with the IRS or downsize it because it would be a flat tax with no refund at the end of the year simple. The only exemptions to the tax are Social Security recipients and the working poor.
In doing away with tax returns money stays and does not come out and back to the people. More money is lost in tax returns then really should be, it is a stupid system that we would be better without.

At nearly any level of Govt the bulk of the jobs actually don't start out paying a lot...I'd cooked at the County Juvie,and at a State University and got about $12-13 hr (started lower) There's quite a few jobs that are well below $15-20 hr. $68,000??? Yeah...if you have special skills,a degree,a big resume and such. Administrative and Technical jobs in the private sector pay as much.

Elsewhere I saw recently a similar claim about healthcare where the guy claimed everyone working at Hospitals made $50,000->90,000...except doctors made a lot more. Not so. His numbers almost invariably referred to supervisory position,specialists in various areas. The Head Nurse...may make a LOT more than most nurses and they make more than the Nursing assistants. A top surgical nurse may make a lot,but had a lot of schooling and probably then needed 15 yr to work up to that level. Administration includes low paid clerks and high paid executive types. You don't just walk in,off the street and start at $60,000.

David · Jan 6, 2013

redwood said:
At nearly any level of Govt the bulk of the jobs actually don't start out paying a lot...I'd cooked at the County Juvie,and at a State University and got about $12-13 hr (started lower) There's quite a few jobs that are well below $15-20 hr. $68,000??? Yeah...if you have special skills,a degree,a big resume and such. Administrative and Technical jobs in the private sector pay as much.

Elsewhere I saw recently a similar claim about healthcare where the guy claimed everyone working at Hospitals made $50,000->90,000...except doctors made a lot more. Not so. His numbers almost invariably referred to supervisory position,specialists in various areas. The Head Nurse...may make a LOT more than most nurses and they make more than the Nursing assistants. A top surgical nurse may make a lot,but had a lot of schooling and probably then needed 15 yr to work up to that level. Administration includes low paid clerks and high paid executive types. You don't just walk in,off the street and start at $60,000.

I think the problem is they look at the funding and number of employees and average it out as if everyone was payed the same.

Protectionist · Jan 7, 2013

chris7375 said:
That's just what we need more government union employees. Please those Government employees you are talking about employing make more money then your average person. We should not be adding to the Government machine by employing more. The Government is already to big to begin with. You need budget cuts Plain and simple.
Do you know the average starting salary of a Government employee? I do the average starting salary is around 68,000 dollars. Do you know the average starting salary of the average person not employed by the government around 35,000 dollars. So you are telling me creating more government jobs is better then having less government. Let me catch my breath because I am laughing to hard.
The Federal Government was created not for the purpose of being a large entity which is what it has become. It was created as the last resort for states and there issues. Cutting unneeded Departments from the Fed is better then adding unneeded jobs to the Government. So more Government spending is not the way to go.
I may not be an economic wiz but I understand the basics and I am trying to teach myself more. I do understand that a flat tiered tax is far from contradictory. It works quite simple you have an income tax that starts at says 2% if you make 18 thousand a year, anyone below 18 thousand has no tax. You cap the tax at around 28% for whatever the highest income is. You do away with the IRS or downsize it because it would be a flat tax with no refund at the end of the year simple. The only exemptions to the tax are Social Security recipients and the working poor.
In doing away with tax returns money stays and does not come out and back to the people. More money is lost in tax returns then really should be, it is a stupid system that we would be better without.

"Unneeded jobs" ? Obviously, you are clueless on this, and especially guilty since I've already informed you of one issue (illegal immigration) where govt jobs are critically needed. In addition to that, govt jobs are badly needed to fix infrastructure problems **, and lots of other things.

You talk like a programmed robot Republican, who just shoots off "Cut Spending" without any examination of the issue.

Your so-called flat tiered tax is a contradiction. If it's "tiered" on different levels, it's not flat. Also, why should the highest tax be so ABNORMALLY LOW at 28% ? (equivalent to Ronald Reagan's movie star tax) That deprives the American people of revenue for very needed services, and for what. SO movie stars like Johnny Depp ($100 Million/year) can reap $72 Million/year. Gee, that really important that Depp should stuff his greedy pockets with $72 Million/yr, isn't it ?

Somehow I think I'd rather see a large portion of that go to babies born with birth defects, victims of natural disasters (like Hurricane Sandy), infrastructure problems that threaten to kill hundreds of thousands of people and cut off water supply to half the state of California, illegal immigration, etc, etc.

What an absurd position to set the top tax at 28%. Yeah, the highly paid movie stars like Reagan and Depp would like it. And everybody else shouid be screwed, just to suit them ? Sheeeeeeeshhh !!!

** http://www.politicalfray.com/showthread.php?t=3564

** http://www.politicalfray.com/showthread.php?t=3565

Protectionist · Jan 7, 2013

redwood said:
Quite true the Repubs are mostly fingerpuppets manipulated by a few tycoons with an agenda where "Class Warfare" is the top priority.

The Gun Cult, the Televangelists/Pro-Lifers,various bigots are pretty much cannon fodder and foot soldiers since Billionaires are a tiny % of the votes but a BIG part of political money.

The Dems really COULD have made it a bit clearer just what + WHO was behind the Tea Party,behind Mitt,Rove,Norquist,etc. However...Mitt accidently let the secret out with his 47% speech. The folks running the GOP now think about HALF of American are garbage...they just don't know how to get rid of them. Of the rest...they are seen as tools,hired hands. but there to be exploited, not respected.

Calling the President " Muslim Brotherhood is tacky and ignorant. If a person is Muslim...he's bound to abide by the RULES to PRACTICE the faith. Going to a Christian church...not okay. Letting his wife NOT wear a scarf..not okay,missing daily prayers..eating pork,drinking beer...not okay. Clearly you know NOTHING about the Muslim Brotherhood...or Muslims.

If anything...there is LESS Affirmative Action than 4 yr ago and we slipped so much in "Gun Control" that I could do a Newtown next week...but with triple the body count. Nobody of either side has really done anything about "immigration " in over a decade. Years ago the INS used to raid workplaces where there were illegals. Years ago...Green Cards were issued actually to get CHEAP labor but with the claim that was temporary. Now? It's EASY to get a fake Green card...even a fake DL.

Repubs want to drive wages lowere and lower. Dems don't want to offend a voting bloc It is what it is.

I know NOTHING about the Muslim Brotherhood ? LOL. I know plenty about them, and I'll put my knowledge of them up against your lack of knowledge of them any day. The US Muslim Brotherhood is the engine of Islamization in America. And I know quite a bit about their Islamization. I've studied them in 25 well-researched books (and thousands of their footnoted sources) for 12 years.

You think I know "NOTHING" about the Muslim Brotherhood ? Here's a sample of what I know about them and their stealth jihad (AKA Islamization): Think you can identify any of these ? I can identify ALL of them.

Names associated with Stealth Jihad (AKA Islamization)

Ibin Taamiyah, the Madhi, Sheik Ahmed Yassin, Sami al-Arian, Ramadan Abdallah Shallah, Mazen al-Najjar, Richard A. Clarke, Imam Muzzamil Siddiqui, Susan Douglas, Peter DiGangi, William Bennetta, Gilbert Sewall , Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, al-Hajj Talib'Abur, Rashid Sahmsi Ali, Khalid Latif, Omar Mohammedi, Joe Kaufman, Chantal Carnes, Hasan al-Banna (creator of the Muslim Brotherhood-I'll give you that one), Tariq Ramadan, Siraj Wahhaj, Mozen Mokhtar, Nouman Ali Khan, Abdul Malik , Imam Jamal Badawi, Br. Jawad Ahmad, Hassan Abbas, Mullah Abdul Rashid Ghazi, Sheik Mjed 'Abd al-Rahman al-Firian, Prince Sultan Ibn Abd al-'Aziz, Ali al-Ahmed, Itamar Marcus, Barbara Cook, Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, Mohammed Osman Idris, Mohammed el-Yacoubi, Abu Abdullah, Baitullah Mehsud, Yunis al-Astal, Zeyno Baran, Aaron Klein, Muhammad Abdel-El, Sheik Yasser Hamad, Nur Mohammad, Ahmed Yassin (deceased), Sheik Abdel Rahman, Sheik Mohammed bin Rashid AL Maktoum, Abdullah Azzam, Fazlur Rehman Khalil , Mohammad Elachmi Hamdi, Bat Ye'or, Max Steenberghe, Anders Fogh Ramussen, Paul Jeeves, Yusuf al-Qarodawi, Bashar al-Assad, Robert S. Leiken, Theo Van Gogh, Michel Gurfinkel, Imam Ahmed Salam, Piet Hein Donner, Miguel Angel Toma , Salah Yassin, Hassan Nasrallah, Ahmed Assad Barakat, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, Bashar al-Assad, Adolpho Aguilar Zinser, Joseph Farah, Nabil al-Marabh, Raed Hijazi, David Harris, Syed Mumtaz Ali, Omar Ahmad, Ibrahim Hooper, Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani, Dr. Paul Williams , Hassan al Turabi, Clement Rodney Hampton-El, Kevin James, Warner MacKenzie, Sayeed Abdul A'la Maududi, Abdullah Yusef Ali, Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, Nessim Joseph Dawood, Mohammed Habib Shakir, Arthur John Arberry, Aqsa Parvez, Atefeh Rajabi, Francis Bok, Michael Coren, Homaidan Ali Al-Turki, Sheik Saleh Al-Fawzan, Paul Marshall, Koenraad Elst, Tom Clancy, Phil Alden Robinson, Michael Graham, Thomas Klocek, Stephen Coughlin, Hasham Islam, Steven Emerson, Mordechai Nisan, Abduraman Alamoudi, Ramadan Abdallah Shallah, Musa Abu Marzook, Keith Ellison, Abdullah al-Arian, ,Jamal-al-Din al-Afghani, James Woolsey, Walid Phares, Guy Rodgers, Brigitte Gabriel, Robert Spencer, Paul Sperry, P.David Gaubatz, Chris Gaubatz, Stefanie Creswell, Charety Zhe, Adnan el-Shukrijumah, Jaffar the Pilot, Mohammad Weiss Rasool, Brian P. Fairchild, Peter M. Leitner, Sergeant Naveed I. Butt, Bill Bratton, William Taylor, Youssef Aboul-Enein, Jamal Barzinji, Ingrid Mattson, Safaa Zarzour, Khalid Iqbal, James "Yousef" Yee, Ahmed Alwani, Taja Alwani, Warith Deen Umar, Tom Harrington, John Guandolo, Patrick Sookhdeo, Gaddoor Saidi, Muhammad Usmani, Mahdi Bray, Ali al-Timimi, Maulana Abdul Ala Maududi, Sayyid Quth, Zaid Shakir, Hamdan al-Shalawi, Muhammed al-Qudhaieen, Omar Shain, Hani Hanjour, Kenneth Williams, Edward Sloan, Ismail Elbarasse, Sheik Omar Abdul-Rahman, George Sadler, Mohammed Akram Adlouni, Zeid al-Noman, Shukri Aby Baker, Mohammad El-Mezain, Ghassan Elashi, Sayyid Syeed, Bassem Osman, Ahmed Elkadi, Mahboob Khan, Suhail Khan, Mufid Abdulgader, Abdelhaleem Ashqar, Frank Gaffney, Sue Myrick, Abuhena Saifulislam, Ali "the American" Mohamed, Juan Zarate, Hisham Altalib, Mohammed Shamma, Ahmad Sakr, Abdullah bin Laden, Mohamed Jamal Khalifah, Ahmad Mohamed Ali, Joey Musmar, Lina Morales, Donald Lavey, Sibel Dinez Edmonds, Khalid Duran, Muhammad Hishm Kabbani, Ali Ahmed, Agha Jafri, Michael Rolince, John M. Cole, Dr. Ziad Asali, James Margolin, Foria Younis, John B. Vincent, John O'Neill, Ivien C. Smith, Salam al-Marayati, Tom Reynolds, Khaled Saffuri, Agha Saeed, Mohammed al-Hanooti, Sue VanBaalen, Sister Sue, Michael Scheuer, Michael Waller, David Forte, Sheikh Mamza Yusuf, Ihsan Bagby, Abd al-Rahman al-Rashed, Serge Trifkovic, Irshad Manji, Imam Mohamad Adam el-Sheikh, Yvonne Haddad, Warith Deen Umar, Taha al-Alwani, Ali al-Timimi, J.M. Rodwell, Dr. Ali Sina, John Esposito, Karen Armstrong, Saad al-Sharani, Suleiman Alwan, Farid Esack, Sheikh Faysal Mawlawi, Ali Abd al Rahman al-Faqasi al-Ghamdi, Saul al-Rashid, Abderraouf Jdey, Faruq al-Tunisi, Adam Gadahn, Andre Carson, Issa al-Britani, Aafia Siddiqui, Kamran Akhtar, Gary Harter, Iyman Faris, Hesham Hadayet, Hala Mohammed Sadeq El-Awadly, Anwar al-Awlaki, Pamela L. Rhames, Michael S. Tutko, David C. Kane, Nick Pindulic, Suzanne E. Spaulding, Sen. Patrick Leahy, Sen. John Kyl, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Sen. Paul Sarbanes, Bill Baker, Rep. David Bonior, Rep. John Conyers, Rep. John Dingell, Robert M. Blitzer, Louis Freeh, Thomas Pickard, Carol Motyka, Marsha Parrish, Yola Haber, Doug Balin, Rep. Anthony Weiner, Roderick L. Beverly, Caroline Glick, Shelomo Alfassa, Hadia Roberts, Margaret Gulotta, Emanuel "Manny" Johnson Jr.

Protectionist · Jan 7, 2013

redwood said:
Quite true the Repubs are mostly fingerpuppets manipulated by a few tycoons with an agenda where "Class Warfare" is the top priority.

The Gun Cult, the Televangelists/Pro-Lifers,various bigots are pretty much cannon fodder and foot soldiers since Billionaires are a tiny % of the votes but a BIG part of political money.

The Dems really COULD have made it a bit clearer just what + WHO was behind the Tea Party,behind Mitt,Rove,Norquist,etc. However...Mitt accidently let the secret out with his 47% speech. The folks running the GOP now think about HALF of American are garbage...they just don't know how to get rid of them. Of the rest...they are seen as tools,hired hands. but there to be exploited, not respected.

Calling the President " Muslim Brotherhood is tacky and ignorant. If a person is Muslim...he's bound to abide by the RULES to PRACTICE the faith. Going to a Christian church...not okay. Letting his wife NOT wear a scarf..not okay,missing daily prayers..eating pork,drinking beer...not okay. Clearly you know NOTHING about the Muslim Brotherhood...or Muslims.

If anything...there is LESS Affirmative Action than 4 yr ago and we slipped so much in "Gun Control" that I could do a Newtown next week...but with triple the body count. Nobody of either side has really done anything about "immigration " in over a decade. Years ago the INS used to raid workplaces where there were illegals. Years ago...Green Cards were issued actually to get CHEAP labor but with the claim that was temporary. Now? It's EASY to get a fake Green card...even a fake DL.

Repubs want to drive wages lowere and lower. Dems don't want to offend a voting bloc It is what it is.

Regarding Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood, he has been extremely friendly to the Muslim Brotherhood. He has invited them to the White House (and these are seditionists sworn to destroy America, did you know that ?) He also supported the Arab Spring, which he knew would oust Mubarek who kept the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, illegal for 30 years.

Here's a list of a few Muslim Brotherhood members who Obama currently has working in his administration:

1. Huma Abedin (Hillary Clinton's deputy chief of staff)

2. Rashad Hussain (White House Chief Counsel)

3. Dalia Mogahed (appointed in April 2009 to the White House Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.)

4. Mohammad Magid (used his “relationship” with the FBI to get Director Robert Mueller to capitulate to demands by the ISNA (Islamic Society of North America) and other Muslim Brotherhood fronts, that the Bureau’s files be reviewed for documents and briefing materials offensive to Islamists. On February 8, 2012, Mueller announced to a group that included Magid, that 700 such documents and 300 briefings had been purged. Magid also has taught courses in the CIA, while being the head of ISNA, the "nucleus" of the Muslim Brotherhood in America)

chris7375 · Jan 7, 2013

Protectionist said:
"Unneeded jobs" ? Obviously, you are clueless on this, and especially guilty since I've already informed you of one issue (illegal immigration) where govt jobs are critically needed. In addition to that, govt jobs are badly needed to fix infrastructure problems **, and lots of other things.

You talk like a programmed robot Republican, who just shoots off "Cut Spending" without any examination of the issue.

Your so-called flat tiered tax is a contradiction. If it's "tiered" on different levels, it's not flat. Also, why should the highest tax be so ABNORMALLY LOW at 28% ? (equivalent to Ronald Reagan's movie star tax) That deprives the American people of revenue for very needed services, and for what. SO movie stars like Johnny Depp ($100 Million/year) can reap $72 Million/year. Gee, that really important that Depp should stuff his greedy pockets with $72 Million/yr, isn't it ?

Somehow I think I'd rather see a large portion of that go to babies born with birth defects, victims of natural disasters (like Hurricane Sandy), infrastructure problems that threaten to kill hundreds of thousands of people and cut off water supply to half the state of California, illegal immigration, etc, etc.

What an absurd position to set the top tax at 28%. Yeah, the highly paid movie stars like Reagan and Depp would like it. And everybody else shouid be screwed, just to suit them ? Sheeeeeeeshhh !!!

** http://www.politicalfray.com/showthread.php?t=3564

** http://www.politicalfray.com/showthread.php?t=3565

Did you ask where I find the unneeded jobs at? I don't believe you did as far as clueless far from it.

Yes it is a flat tiered tax now you are just not thinking. It is flat for that particular bracket. No it is not a contradiction. The contradiction is you not think about the current tax system. I used 28% as an example nothing more. Though it should not need to be that high if you do away with the tax return filing each year. You do away with tax refunds now who seems clueless?

Oh I am far from Republican I have not voted Republican ever. If you do away with the current tax system and keep it so the tax money stays in the system, you would not need a high tax rate. A high tax rate is needed now because money leaves the system via tax refunds yearly. If you do away with that the money does not leave but stays. Do you know how many billions of dollars are lost due to the tax return system yearly? This is an investigation in one state but it is known to happen in all states watch it. By doing away with the filing of tax returns you close those loop holes I have seen you complain about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Exptf9--5nA

Your failure is not think it through and attacking it. As far as adding Immigration agents I am all for that adding more ICE agents.

Protectionist · Jan 7, 2013

chris7375 said:
Did you ask where I find the unneeded jobs at? I don't believe you did as far as clueless far from it.

Yes it is a flat tiered tax now you are just not thinking. It is flat for that particular bracket. No it is not a contradiction. The contradiction is you not think about the current tax system. I used 28% as an example nothing more. Though it should not need to be that high if you do away with the tax return filing each year. You do away with tax refunds now who seems clueless?

Oh I am far from Republican I have not voted Republican ever. If you do away with the current tax system and keep it so the tax money stays in the system, you would not need a high tax rate. A high tax rate is needed now because money leaves the system via tax refunds yearly. If you do away with that the money does not leave but stays. Do you know how many billions of dollars are lost due to the tax return system yearly? This is an investigation in one state but it is known to happen in all states watch it. By doing away with the filing of tax returns you close those loop holes I have seen you complain about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Exptf9--5nA

Your failure is not think it through and attacking it. As far as adding Immigration agents I am all for that adding more ICE agents.

1. EARTH TO CHRIS: A "flat tax" is one where there is ONE tax rate for everyone. If you have tiers (different tax rates), It's NOT a flat tax.

2. Why don't you tell us (with sources) how "many billions of dollars are lost due to the tax return system yearly" ?

3. Glad to see you agree about the ICE agents, but the money needed for the immigration problem which is perhaps the biggest hole in our economy, is for more than just that. Also needed are far more CBP officers, more immigration courts & jails, and the building of the Mexican border double fence mandated in the 2006 Secure Fence Act (which should have been done 6 years ago). Another thing needed is the abolition of birthright citizenship (feeding the anchor baby racket), and a long moratorium on legal immigration. Over 100,000 work visas are issued each month to foreigners, when there are millions of unemployed Americans who can do those jobs. They should get the first shot at them. No one else. And the work visa foreigners wire out remittnaces$$$$$ to their home countries just as much as the illegal alien workers do, causing more loss of $$ from the US economy, further weakening it.

chris7375 · Jan 7, 2013

Protectionist said:
1. EARTH TO CHRIS: A "flat tax" is one where there is ONE tax rate for everyone. If you have tiers (different tax rates), It's NOT a flat tax.

2. Why don't you tell us (with sources) how "many billions of dollars are lost due to the tax return system yearly" ?

3. Glad to see you agree about the ICE agents, but the money needed for the immigration problem which is perhaps the biggest hole in our economy, is for more than just that. Also needed are far more CBP officers, more immigration courts & jails, and the building of the Mexican border double fence mandated in the 2006 Secure Fence Act (which should have been done 6 years ago)

Again tiered based on wealth it would be flat rate for that bracket.

Ok to answer your question there are many ways that people can take advantage of the tax system. One is identity theft. around about 5.2 billion in 2010 alone was taken from filing false tax returns.

You want a source how about a treasury department report. Is forbes ok?
http://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2012reports/201242080fr.pdf
http://www.forbes.com/sites/leonard...-tax-refund-fraud-and-how-to-stop-most-of-it/
What do they do about it? Not a thing because the report gets lost in the shuffle or is pushed aside.

Around 4.2 billion to illegal Immigrants is lost due to the current system.

http://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2011reports/201141061fr.pdf
http://www.cis.org/child-tax-credits-2011

I hope these are creditable source for you since I ma a program Republican :giggle:.

Yet it still happens a new report will be issued this year and new numbers will come out about how wasteful the tax return system truly is.

If you stop the filing or returns and call it what ever you like. Though if you teir the Flat tax based again on income. Again it is flat rate for that bracket (I don't know why that is so hard to understand)you shut these loopholes.

The money stays in the system rather then going in and coming out.

Oh I am all for increasing certain area's of the Government though I would like to see a decrease in certain areas also.

Protectionist · Jan 7, 2013

chris7375 said:
Again tiered based on wealth it would be flat rate for that bracket.

Ok to answer your question there are many ways that people can take advantage of the tax system. One is identity theft. around about 5.2 billion in 2010 alone was taken from filing false tax returns.

You want a source how about a treasury department report. Is forbes ok?
http://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2012reports/201242080fr.pdf
http://www.forbes.com/sites/leonard...-tax-refund-fraud-and-how-to-stop-most-of-it/
What do they do about it? Not a thing because the report gets lost in the shuffle or is pushed aside.

Around 4.2 billion to illegal Immigrants is lost due to the current system.

http://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2011reports/201141061fr.pdf
http://www.cis.org/child-tax-credits-2011

I hope these are creditable source for you since I ma a program Republican :giggle:.

Yet it still happens a new report will be issued this year and new numbers will come out about how wasteful the tax return system truly is.

If you stop the filing or returns and call it what ever you like. Though if you teir the Flat tax based again on income. Again it is flat rate for that bracket (I don't know why that is so hard to understand)you shut these loopholes.

The money stays in the system rather then going in and coming out.

Oh I am all for increasing certain area's of the Government though I would like to see a decrease in certain areas also.

LOL. It's so hard to understand because a flat tax is FLAT. It has no tiers. That's why it's called a flat tax. Get it ?

chris7375 · Jan 7, 2013

Protectionist said:
LOL. It's so hard to understand because a flat tax is FLAT. It has no tiers. That's why it's called a flat tax. Get it ?

Yet it can be a flat tax for a particular income bracket. The go up to a different percentage for another bracket and be a set flat percentage tax rate for that bracket. What is so hard to understand

you make 18 thousand to 24 thousand your flat tax rate would be say 3% as an example.
Then you bump up to the next bracket let us sat 24,001 to 40 thousand and you flat tax would be a set 4%.

You do away with filing income taxes and no one owes taxes at the end of the year nor does any one get tax returns at the end of the year.

myp · Jan 7, 2013

Protectionist said:
LOL. It's so hard to understand because a flat tax is FLAT. It has no tiers. That's why it's called a flat tax. Get it ?

No need for the snark...

Protectionist · Jan 7, 2013

myp said:
No need for the snark...

What snark ? where ?

Republicans: I WARNED YOU.

Similar threads