Total Posts:31|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Hahaha, Libs Reaction To Obama's New Taxes!

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 1:21:38 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Obama supporters shocked, angry at new tax increases

"What happened that my Social Security withholding"s in my paycheck just went up?" a poster wrote on the liberal site DemocraticUnderground.com. "My paycheck just went down by an amount that I don"t feel comfortable with. I guarantee this decrease is gonna" hurt me more than the increase in income taxes will hurt those making over 400 grand. What happened?"

"I know to expect between $93 and $94 less in my paycheck on the 15th," wrote the ironically named "RomneyLies."

"My boyfriend has had a lot of expenses and is feeling squeezed right now, and having his paycheck shrink really didn"t help," wrote "DemocratToTheEnd."

"BlueIndyBlue" added: "Many of my friends didn"t realize it, either. Our payroll department didn"t do a good job of explaining the coming changes."

"Really, how am I ever supposed to pay off my student loans if my already small paycheck keeps getting smaller? Help a sister out, Obama," wrote "Meet Virginia." "Nancy Thongkham" was much more furious. "F***ing Obama! F*** you! This taking out more taxes s*** better f***ing help me out!! Very upset to see my paycheck less today!"

http://www.washingtontimes.com...
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 1:24:00 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
"Every country has the government it deserves."
-- Joseph de Maistre
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 1:26:31 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 1:21:38 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Obama supporters shocked, angry at new tax increases

"What happened that my Social Security withholding"s in my paycheck just went up?" a poster wrote on the liberal site DemocraticUnderground.com. "My paycheck just went down by an amount that I don"t feel comfortable with. I guarantee this decrease is gonna" hurt me more than the increase in income taxes will hurt those making over 400 grand. What happened?"

"I know to expect between $93 and $94 less in my paycheck on the 15th," wrote the ironically named "RomneyLies."

"My boyfriend has had a lot of expenses and is feeling squeezed right now, and having his paycheck shrink really didn"t help," wrote "DemocratToTheEnd."

"BlueIndyBlue" added: "Many of my friends didn"t realize it, either. Our payroll department didn"t do a good job of explaining the coming changes."

"Really, how am I ever supposed to pay off my student loans if my already small paycheck keeps getting smaller? Help a sister out, Obama," wrote "Meet Virginia." "Nancy Thongkham" was much more furious. "F***ing Obama! F*** you! This taking out more taxes s*** better f***ing help me out!! Very upset to see my paycheck less today!"

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

Given their outrage, perhaps sequestration of $100 billion (2.6% cut) really was too much...
My work here is, finally, done.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 2:21:11 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
As funny as this is, this may have been a fatal mistake on Obama's part. Maybe the Democrats will finally get it and start gradually flooding to the Libertarians and fiscal Conservatives.

Or it could be too little too late. Especially since Obama's officially going for a 3rd term in Office as President.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 2:50:24 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Those are the same liberals who brayed over Obama not letting full Bush tax cuts expire last term, so I can't say I feel much pity for them.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 3:44:59 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 2:21:11 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
As funny as this is, this may have been a fatal mistake on Obama's part. Maybe the Democrats will finally get it and start gradually flooding to the Libertarians and fiscal Conservatives.

Or it could be too little too late. Especially since Obama's officially going for a 3rd term in Office as President.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this is bullsh!t.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 4:10:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 1:21:38 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Obama supporters shocked, angry at new tax increases

"What happened that my Social Security withholding"s in my paycheck just went up?" a poster wrote on the liberal site DemocraticUnderground.com. "My paycheck just went down by an amount that I don"t feel comfortable with. I guarantee this decrease is gonna" hurt me more than the increase in income taxes will hurt those making over 400 grand. What happened?"

"I know to expect between $93 and $94 less in my paycheck on the 15th," wrote the ironically named "RomneyLies."

"My boyfriend has had a lot of expenses and is feeling squeezed right now, and having his paycheck shrink really didn"t help," wrote "DemocratToTheEnd."

"BlueIndyBlue" added: "Many of my friends didn"t realize it, either. Our payroll department didn"t do a good job of explaining the coming changes."

"Really, how am I ever supposed to pay off my student loans if my already small paycheck keeps getting smaller? Help a sister out, Obama," wrote "Meet Virginia." "Nancy Thongkham" was much more furious. "F***ing Obama! F*** you! This taking out more taxes s*** better f***ing help me out!! Very upset to see my paycheck less today!"

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

They're just being greedy.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 6:22:44 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I think people who make less than 1 million should be in a separate tax category than the really wealthy people. Depending on where you live, once you deduct local and state taxes in addition to federal taxes, you probably could end up losing at least 50% of your paycheck.
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 6:46:29 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'd be more in favor of a system that taxes them on what their income would be AFTER mortgages/taxes/ect.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 7:01:29 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 6:46:29 AM, OberHerr wrote:
I'd be more in favor of a system that taxes them on what their income would be AFTER mortgages/taxes/ect.

I assume you meant after expenses, because it doesn't make sense to tax people on income after taxes are applied.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 10:34:24 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 3:44:59 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 1/7/2013 2:21:11 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Or it could be too little too late. Especially since Obama's officially going for a 3rd term in Office as President.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this is bullsh!t.

http://www.govtrack.us...

It's gonna be Barack Obama vs. Rand Paul in 2016.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 11:35:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 4:10:32 AM, innomen wrote:
They're just being greedy.

WAIT! Poor people can't be greedy, only RICH people can be greedy...

badah- kadunk
CarefulNow
Posts: 780
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 12:04:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 10:34:24 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
http://www.govtrack.us...

Your source gives the bill literally 0 chance of getting past committee. It has no cosponsors. People like me who want to repeal term limits, who recognize their fundamentally undemocratic nature, don't particularly like forefather-lovers like Obama anyway.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 12:39:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 6:22:44 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
I think people who make less than 1 million should be in a separate tax category than the really wealthy people. Depending on where you live, once you deduct local and state taxes in addition to federal taxes, you probably could end up losing at least 50% of your paycheck.

Not likely, unless you are self-employed, spent money you don't have, and/or make lots of high tax decisions (like spend instead of savings, or have a huge house, thus higher property taxes).

For example, someone making 40K as an employee and owns a house paying $3K in property taxes will pay (using 2011 tax rates and no holiday):
Fed: 10.4% (4154)
Payroll: 7.65%
State: 4.4% (1761)
Property: 7.5% (3000)
Sales tax to apply on 35% of income: 2.4% (962.50)
Total: 32.35%

Now, for someone who makes $250,000
Fed: 25.7% (64262)
Payroll: 3.05% (6621.6 SS)
State: 7.2% (18071)
Property: 1.2% (3000)
Sales tax to apply on 60% of income: 4.1% (10312.50)
Total: 41.25%

For someone making $1 million, their rate is 45.2%.
Now, for the last two, since they would itemize, their rates would be lowered by at least, 2.7% for the million and 2.5% for the $250K.

Now, I used MN tax rates, so there could be about a 3% increase in taxes owed (used 7.85%), plus any local taxes, which I doubt would ever be higher than 3%, plus any higher sales taxes, which I doubt would be more than a 2% difference (used 6.875%). Adding all of these hypotheticals together, which I doubt would ever happen, there is an increase of less than 8%, which means the only person who would be taxed at 50% is the millionare, and just barely.
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 12:46:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 6:23:31 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
Like, I think even a 30% federal tax rate on people who make less than 1 million is ridiculous.

Marginal =/= effective.
For 2012, a million dollar salary will have an effective rate of 32.3% federally, without any deductions, which they would have. They would need about $70,000 in deductions to have an effective rate of less than 30%, the state tax deduction alone should be close to this amount. (Keep in mind the top rate is 35%)
My work here is, finally, done.
CarefulNow
Posts: 780
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 1:46:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 6:46:29 AM, OberHerr wrote:
I'd be more in favor of a system that taxes them on what their income would be AFTER mortgages/taxes/ect.

So you want to turn proper shelter into tax shelter? How exactly would that help?
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 4:40:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 10:34:24 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/7/2013 3:44:59 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 1/7/2013 2:21:11 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Or it could be too little too late. Especially since Obama's officially going for a 3rd term in Office as President.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this is bullsh!t.

http://www.govtrack.us...

It's gonna be Barack Obama vs. Rand Paul in 2016.

From your source:

0% chance of getting past committee.
0% chance of being enacted or passed.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 11:23:46 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 10:34:24 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/7/2013 3:44:59 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 1/7/2013 2:21:11 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Or it could be too little too late. Especially since Obama's officially going for a 3rd term in Office as President.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this is bullsh!t.

http://www.govtrack.us...

It's gonna be Barack Obama vs. Rand Paul in 2016.

BTW, Sarrano has proposed this bill 9 times since 1997, regardless of who was in office (4 times during Bush's administration!) And he isn't the only one.

Hardly constitutes an "official" run for a 3rd term, unless you think they were REALLLLY burying the lead here.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 11:49:38 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 10:34:24 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/7/2013 3:44:59 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 1/7/2013 2:21:11 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Or it could be too little too late. Especially since Obama's officially going for a 3rd term in Office as President.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this is bullsh!t.

http://www.govtrack.us...

It's gonna be Barack Obama vs. Rand Paul in 2016.

Thats worse than Romney vs Obama... Good thing you are delusional.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Buddamoose
Posts: 19,448
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 11:52:56 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'm not surprised taxes are increasing at all. Tax increases to redistribute income has and always will be the #1 liberal agenda. Its too bad they're not doing so well on the "redistribution" part. But hey, at least they've got the "raising taxes" part down now right?

1 out of 2 is better than 0 out of 2, i always say.

But then again, 50% is still a failing grade in school sooo
"Reality is an illusion created due to a lack of alcohol"
-Airmax1227

"You were the moon all this time, and he was always there to make you shine."

"Was he the sun?"

"No honey, he was the darkness"

-Kazekirion
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 11:53:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/14/2013 11:49:38 AM, DanT wrote:
At 1/7/2013 10:34:24 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/7/2013 3:44:59 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 1/7/2013 2:21:11 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Or it could be too little too late. Especially since Obama's officially going for a 3rd term in Office as President.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this is bullsh!t.

http://www.govtrack.us...

It's gonna be Barack Obama vs. Rand Paul in 2016.

Thats worse than Romney vs Obama... Good thing you are delusional.

If you happen to see this DanT, who would you support as your first choice in 2016?
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 12:01:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 2:50:24 AM, Wnope wrote:
Those are the same liberals who brayed over Obama not letting full Bush tax cuts expire last term, so I can't say I feel much pity for them.

He renewed them in full. And now, they're not the Bush Tax cuts ay longer. The Bush Tax Cuts had an expiration date. The Obama Tax Cuts do not.

Someone has to put forth a law which eliminates them...no more letting the expire - they have no more expiration date built in.

Viva Obama!
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 12:05:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 10:34:24 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/7/2013 3:44:59 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 1/7/2013 2:21:11 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Or it could be too little too late. Especially since Obama's officially going for a 3rd term in Office as President.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this is bullsh!t.

http://www.govtrack.us...

It's gonna be Barack Obama vs. Rand Paul in 2016.

Except for that pesky 0% chance of getting out of committee.

This gets proposed all the time. Until one party gets a super-majority in both houses of congress...not gonna happen.
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 12:10:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 12:39:05 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 1/7/2013 6:22:44 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
I think people who make less than 1 million should be in a separate tax category than the really wealthy people. Depending on where you live, once you deduct local and state taxes in addition to federal taxes, you probably could end up losing at least 50% of your paycheck.

Not likely, unless you are self-employed, spent money you don't have, and/or make lots of high tax decisions (like spend instead of savings, or have a huge house, thus higher property taxes).

For example, someone making 40K as an employee and owns a house paying $3K in property taxes will pay (using 2011 tax rates and no holiday):
Fed: 10.4% (4154)
Payroll: 7.65%
State: 4.4% (1761)
Property: 7.5% (3000)
Sales tax to apply on 35% of income: 2.4% (962.50)
Total: 32.35%

Now, for someone who makes $250,000
Fed: 25.7% (64262)
Payroll: 3.05% (6621.6 SS)
State: 7.2% (18071)
Property: 1.2% (3000)
Sales tax to apply on 60% of income: 4.1% (10312.50)
Total: 41.25%

For someone making $1 million, their rate is 45.2%.
Now, for the last two, since they would itemize, their rates would be lowered by at least, 2.7% for the million and 2.5% for the $250K.

Now, I used MN tax rates, so there could be about a 3% increase in taxes owed (used 7.85%), plus any local taxes, which I doubt would ever be higher than 3%, plus any higher sales taxes, which I doubt would be more than a 2% difference (used 6.875%). Adding all of these hypotheticals together, which I doubt would ever happen, there is an increase of less than 8%, which means the only person who would be taxed at 50% is the millionare, and just barely.

A. people who make $1 million only pay federal taxes up to $400,000

B. people who make $250,000 spend a lesser percentage of income on things which have sales tax added, not a greater percentage

C. your numbers area jumbly mess of sh!t and are about as useful as someone who made them up (which you, or the person you copied them from, did)
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
Buddamoose
Posts: 19,448
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 12:16:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/14/2013 12:05:29 PM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 1/7/2013 10:34:24 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/7/2013 3:44:59 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 1/7/2013 2:21:11 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Or it could be too little too late. Especially since Obama's officially going for a 3rd term in Office as President.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this is bullsh!t.

http://www.govtrack.us...

It's gonna be Barack Obama vs. Rand Paul in 2016.

Except for that pesky 0% chance of getting out of committee.

This gets proposed all the time. Until one party gets a super-majority in both houses of congress...not gonna happen.

And then supporters of said president who the gov wants to see serve three terms, get dissapointed once SCOTUS shoots that whole idea down
"Reality is an illusion created due to a lack of alcohol"
-Airmax1227

"You were the moon all this time, and he was always there to make you shine."

"Was he the sun?"

"No honey, he was the darkness"

-Kazekirion
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 12:23:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The SJC doesn't have to shoot the idea down, and anyway, they wouldn't if it passed.

Executive term limits are part of the 25th amendment, and violate no other part of the constitution.

If they are repealed (which they won't be), that repealing amendment would stand.
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...