PDA

View Full Version : Want to cut the deficit?



Qtec
03-09-2011, 09:47 PM
How we can convince Tea Partiers* to raise taxes on rich people/

link (http://crooksandliars.com/brad-reed/how-we-can-convince-tea-partiers-raise-t)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You can see where this is going, can't you? And once you get into the gory details, things get really ugly:

Actor Tom Cruise owns five parcels of land on a scenic mesa northwest of Telluride that has become an enclave of high-end vacation homes. Sheep graze around the mansions for brief periods each year, according to the assessor's office. Cruise pays just more than $400 in taxes for 248 acres for which he paid nearly $18 million between 1994 and 2002. He pays $11,380 in residential property taxes for the land where his $9.7 million home is located.

Yes, this is how poorly our tax systems across the country are designed: Tom Bleeping Cruise can get away with paying $400 a year in taxes for property that's worth around $18 million, all <u>because he occasionally allows sheep to walk through it.</u>

Want another ugly detail? Check out this one:

David Tresemer, an astrologer and Harvard-educated psychologist, owns 191 acres and four structures that are listed as farm buildings or residences in the foothills west of Boulder where he operates the StarHouse. It is advertised as a spiritual and cultural space for celebrations of the seasons, the lunar cycles and rituals from ancient and indigenous cultures.

He pays $11.48 in taxes for 38 of the vacant acres and $3,699 for the remainder of the land with the buildings.

OK, even if Ma and Pa Tea Party are still Tom Cruise fans, there ain't no way they're happy that a Harvard-educated astrologer is paying just over $11 in taxes for 38 vacant acres of land. And remember, these are only two examples that demonstrate how the rich and their accountants have completely gamed the tax code to their advantage. A more thorough audit of other rich people in other states would no doubt unveil countless other horrors. </div></div>

Q

Gayle in MD
03-10-2011, 07:09 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> How we can convince Tea Partiers* to raise taxes on rich people/

link (http://crooksandliars.com/brad-reed/how-we-can-convince-tea-partiers-raise-t)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You can see where this is going, can't you? And once you get into the gory details, things get really ugly:

Actor Tom Cruise owns five parcels of land on a scenic mesa northwest of Telluride that has become an enclave of high-end vacation homes. Sheep graze around the mansions for brief periods each year, according to the assessor's office. Cruise pays just more than $400 in taxes for 248 acres for which he paid nearly $18 million between 1994 and 2002. He pays $11,380 in residential property taxes for the land where his $9.7 million home is located.

Yes, this is how poorly our tax systems across the country are designed: Tom Bleeping Cruise can get away with paying $400 a year in taxes for property that's worth around $18 million, all <u>because he occasionally allows sheep to walk through it.</u>

Want another ugly detail? Check out this one:

David Tresemer, an astrologer and Harvard-educated psychologist, owns 191 acres and four structures that are listed as farm buildings or residences in the foothills west of Boulder where he operates the StarHouse. It is advertised as a spiritual and cultural space for celebrations of the seasons, the lunar cycles and rituals from ancient and indigenous cultures.

He pays $11.48 in taxes for 38 of the vacant acres and $3,699 for the remainder of the land with the buildings.

OK, even if Ma and Pa Tea Party are still Tom Cruise fans, there ain't no way they're happy that a Harvard-educated astrologer is paying just over $11 in taxes for 38 vacant acres of land. And remember, these are only two examples that demonstrate how the rich and their accountants have completely gamed the tax code to their advantage. A more thorough audit of other rich people in other states would no doubt unveil countless other horrors. </div></div>

Q </div></div>


Reagan's VOODOO econoomics, on crack, when we see the extreme disparity between the wealthy top four hundred, and the rest.

The Republicans have completely destroyed the Middle Class.

"Only the little people pay taxes" Truer words were never spoken.
It's truly disgusting, isn't it?

pooltchr
03-10-2011, 08:09 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
How we can convince Tea Partiers* to raise taxes on rich people/

Q </div></div>

How can we convince the left that we can't keep spending/wasting money we don't have?

How can we convince the left that stealing from the highest producers in the country and giving it to the non-producers is counter productive, de-motivational, and just wrong?

Do you really think the "rich" don't pay their fair share? Care to comment on on of the wealthiest men in the world (Bill Gates) giving away HALF of his fortune to CHARITY???????????

You people want to deamonize and punish the very people who actually keep the economic wheels turning.

Steve

eg8r
03-10-2011, 10:54 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How we can convince Tea Partiers* to raise taxes on rich people/

</div></div>Raising taxes on rich does not cut budget. That is only half the equation. The problem with the other half is that there are no real budget cuts so all we have is the government stealing more money so that they can fund even more expenditures.


eg8r

llotter
03-10-2011, 11:18 AM
The budget would more than come into balance and the economy would boom again when there is a clear and certain path to dismantling the Nanny State, including entitlements.

Sev
03-10-2011, 11:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> How we can convince Tea Partiers* to raise taxes on rich people/

link (http://crooksandliars.com/brad-reed/how-we-can-convince-tea-partiers-raise-t)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You can see where this is going, can't you? And once you get into the gory details, things get really ugly:

Actor Tom Cruise owns five parcels of land on a scenic mesa northwest of Telluride that has become an enclave of high-end vacation homes. Sheep graze around the mansions for brief periods each year, according to the assessor's office. Cruise pays just more than $400 in taxes for 248 acres for which he paid nearly $18 million between 1994 and 2002. He pays $11,380 in residential property taxes for the land where his $9.7 million home is located.

Yes, this is how poorly our tax systems across the country are designed: Tom Bleeping Cruise can get away with paying $400 a year in taxes for property that's worth around $18 million, all <u>because he occasionally allows sheep to walk through it.</u>

Want another ugly detail? Check out this one:

David Tresemer, an astrologer and Harvard-educated psychologist, owns 191 acres and four structures that are listed as farm buildings or residences in the foothills west of Boulder where he operates the StarHouse. It is advertised as a spiritual and cultural space for celebrations of the seasons, the lunar cycles and rituals from ancient and indigenous cultures.

He pays $11.48 in taxes for 38 of the vacant acres and $3,699 for the remainder of the land with the buildings.

OK, even if Ma and Pa Tea Party are still Tom Cruise fans, there ain't no way they're happy that a Harvard-educated astrologer is paying just over $11 in taxes for 38 vacant acres of land. And remember, these are only two examples that demonstrate how the rich and their accountants have completely gamed the tax code to their advantage. A more thorough audit of other rich people in other states would no doubt unveil countless other horrors. </div></div>

Q </div></div>

Those are state property taxes. CA needs to and is addressing who is consider to be recognized as farmstead.

LWW
03-10-2011, 06:43 PM
You bring up a very good point.

Across this land we have hospitals ... libraries ... stadia ... concert halls ... parks ... universities ...laboratories ... and much more build by the benevolence of the <span style='font-size: 11pt'>EEEVILLL</span> rich.

Qtec
03-11-2011, 01:35 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How we can convince Tea Partiers* to raise taxes on rich people/

</div></div>Raising taxes on rich does not cut budget. <span style="color: #990000"> I never said it did but it will cut the deficit...and that's the bottom line for you guys, isn't it?</span> That is only half the equation. The problem with the other half is that there are no real budget cuts so all we have is the <u>government stealing more money</u> so that they can fund even more expenditures.


eg8r </div></div>

Taxation is not stealing. You might think it is but that's not what the USCON says.

Q

LWW
03-11-2011, 04:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How we can convince Tea Partiers* to raise taxes on rich people/

</div></div>Raising taxes on rich does not cut budget. That is only half the equation. The problem with the other half is that there are no real budget cuts so all we have is the government stealing more money so that they can fund even more expenditures.


eg8r </div></div>

What's amazing is the number of dolts who spout off about the COTUS even though they have no clue what it says.
Although it grants congress the power to tax, it also guarantees equal protection under the law.

When tax money goes to provide defense, roads, schools, libraries and such ... we all benefit.

When it goes to subjugate a class of warehoused voters and teach them they simply cannot survive without "BIG BROTHER" to protect them from "THE MAN" ... both groups of citizens are victimized, but the state is empowered.

eg8r
03-11-2011, 08:51 AM
Just because you say it is not does not make your opinion correct.

eg8r

LWW
03-11-2011, 03:34 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just because you say it is not does not make your opinion correct.

eg8r </div></div>

In fact, it increases the odds of it being wrong.