Do you know the Willie Sutton Rule?? He was a bank robber. Asked why he robbed banks, that was his answer.
So Dems take over, you all get to throng into the Oval, and you demand Raise Tax On The Rich!
The president says, how much? How much should a millionaire in California pay in Fed Income tax? What percent?
What say you?
@AverageJoe1 saidFocus on the spending not the taxes. Republicans do not spend less tax dollars, they borrow it against the next generation.
Do you know the Willie Sutton Rule?? He was a bank robber. Asked why he robbed banks, that was his answer.
So Dems take over, you all get to throng into the Oval, and you demand Raise Tax On The Rich!
The president says, how much? How much should a millionaire in California pay in Fed Income tax? What percent?
What say you?
If the budget were balanced, this could be a discussion. Until then, the percentage of taxes should be whatever it takes to balance the spending.
It's only Republicans who insist on cutting taxes without cutting spending.
@AverageJoe1 saidAsk the wealthy in California if they can live without all their lavish government subsidies. If they say they can live without them, then eliminate the government expense which would lower their taxes.
Do you know the Willie Sutton Rule?? He was a bank robber. Asked why he robbed banks, that was his answer.
So Dems take over, you all get to throng into the Oval, and you demand Raise Tax On The Rich!
The president says, how much? How much should a millionaire in California pay in Fed Income tax? What percent?
What say you?
If they still want their rich guy subsidies, they should pay more in taxes.
@wildgrass saidI asked this one a question. How much should a rich person in CA pay in income taxes. Please write me, AvJoe, with your interpretation of his answer.
Focus on the spending not the taxes. Republicans do not spend less tax dollars, they borrow it against the next generation.
If the budget were balanced, this could be a discussion. Until then, the percentage of taxes should be whatever it takes to balance the spending.
It's only Republicans who insist on cutting taxes without cutting spending.
My grandson is taking economics in high school, the question is posed by him. His question did not mention ‘if the budget were balanced ‘. Does this WGrass person attempt to qualify the question.?
@wildgrass saidTruly pitiful faerie
Ask the wealthy in California if they can live without all their lavish government subsidies. If they say they can live without them, then eliminate the government expense which would lower their taxes.
If they still want their rich guy subsidies, they should pay more in taxes.
@wildgrass saidsocialism
Ask the wealthy in California if they can live without all their lavish government subsidies. If they say they can live without them, then eliminate the government expense which would lower their taxes.
If they still want their rich guy subsidies, they should pay more in taxes.
@wildgrass saidDoes he know socialism has never worked in history? Do libs chew on their pillows ?
Ask the wealthy in California if they can live without all their lavish government subsidies. If they say they can live without them, then eliminate the government expense which would lower their taxes.
If they still want their rich guy subsidies, they should pay more in taxes.
@AverageJoe1 saidI gave a very simple answer too. The rich people need to pay enough to cover the bill.
I asked this one a question. How much should a rich person in CA pay in income taxes. Please write me, AvJoe, with your interpretation of his answer.
My grandson is taking economics in high school, the question is posed by him. His question did not mention ‘if the budget were balanced ‘. Does this WGrass person attempt to qualify the question.?
Putting debt on your grandchildren is the worst of all options.
@wildgrass saidWhat percent of their income? Don’t be a faerie. If your logic were sound, then that would already be the formula. It is a set, fixed, percentage today, and, the budget was NOT balanced.
I gave a very simple answer too. The rich people need to pay enough to cover the bill.
Putting debt on your grandchildren is the worst of all options.
You will not answer the question,but request my answers all the time.
@wildgrass saidHere he mentions future debt while avoiding the question .
I gave a very simple answer too. The rich people need to pay enough to cover the bill.
Putting debt on your grandchildren is the worst of all options.
@AverageJoe1 saidFor the last freaking time: The percentage depends on the politicians spending.
What percent of their income? Don’t be a faerie. If your logic were sound, then that would already be the formula. It is a set, fixed, percentage today, and, the budget was NOT balanced.
You will not answer the question,but request my answers all the time.
@wildgrass saidOK. If federal spending is such that the highest taxes paid are 37%…., follow me here,…Is that enough for millionaires to pay in fed income taxes? Please say yes or no, so I can report to Suzianne. Thankyou for your answer
For the last freaking time: The percentage depends on the politicians spending.
@AverageJoe1 saidIf a politician wants to pass a spending bill, he or she must collect enough taxes to pay for it.
OK. If federal spending is such that the highest taxes paid are 37%…., follow me here,…Is that enough for millionaires to pay in fed income taxes? Please say yes or no, so I can report to Suzianne. Thankyou for your answer
That's how tax percentages should be calculated.
Border patrol spending goes up by $140 billion and taxes go down? They are just adding more debt.
2 edits
@wildgrass saidYou are cart before the horse. You speak primarily of the programs themselves. I am speaking of the human being. How much money should you take from a human being of their hard earned income. That is decided, and then to your point, they see how much money that is, and create programs that will cost no more money than that collected.
For the last freaking time: The percentage depends on the politicians spending.
It is very difficult to impress common sense on the liberals in this forum. You are a pure socialist, to think that legislators could dream up every program under the sun, and then turn to the population and say ‘we need for you all to pay all of this money to cover our programs.’ I see it exactly opposite of that.
You remind me of sun house. He thinks that the federal government should have something to do with providing food at grade schools all over the country. The federal government should have nothing to do with that, this is a state matter, just like abortions. It is amazing that adults can think so differently. I think my way is correct especially when you apply the constitution.