Posted on 09/15/2015 9:59:37 PM PDT by entropy12
So the tax policy incentive is to not earn more, stay on welfare.
Calling a "tax on income" an income tax is semantics? OK.
Have you ever had to pay “self employment tax” or have you ever had an employee. The employer absolutely pays an equal amount of taxes. At least the IRS made ME do that. And I know I am not special.
No, the employer is not paying the tax. The employer is just collecting and remitting the tax. Every penny of what it costs an employer to hire an employee is employee wages. What do you suppose the market would do to wage and employment rates if FICA were abolished and employers suddenly had 14% more budget to spend?
The government requires the employer to report half of the FICA tax as tax paid by the employee and half as "employer matching". But that is just a labeling trick to fool the employee about the rate he's paying.
Sharp is not really a an adjective I would use when describing your logic.
No, I would not call FICA “income tax” because that’s not the same thing.
If you cannot understand that, then you must always think when you get a bonus it “kicks you into a new bracket.”
Yet you cite no flaw in my logic. Are we down to insults now? No arguments left?
No, I would not call FICA “income tax” because that’s not the same thing.
Yet FICA is an income tax. You can call it what you like.
If you cannot understand that, then you must always think when you get a bonus it “kicks you into a new bracket.”
And now you're just making things up.
Sorry Jane, but I can’t bend anymore on my candidates.
He should have known better about Kim, or kept quiet. She was following the law, and her conscience in what she did. I’m in KY, and we have a Constitutional Amendment that covers her for both issues, and the Supreme Court can NOT make law.
As far as the Taxes, no matter how you paint that it still punishes success by making successful people pay higher taxes, to me that’s wrong, and I can not support it.
I’ve been bothered ethically for years about having to choose the lesser of 2 evils because “he can get elected, and once he gets there we know he’ll do the right thing”.
Never again. I will not ever sacrifice my conservative values, even if it means losing.
By the way, on PP he only wants to defund the bad parts. How he doesn’t know PP is an abortion mill, and is all bad is beyond me. Not one dime of my taxes should go to those butchers ever again.
You can support him if you like, and you’ll never catch a seconds criticism from me. I refuse to roam around posts and attack other peoples candidates. I read most of them though, and the way to convince people your candidate is better is not by calling non supporters commies, or GOPe. I know of very few on FR.
All that does is make us who feel we are standing true to our principles angry, and resentful of Trump supporters, and less likely to listen to any argument in favor of the guy.
His continued friendship with Cruz, is the one thing that keeps my hopes up about Trump. If that continues, I’ll probably vote for the guy in the general election, and since I’m in KY, my vote in the primaries is worth the same as air.
Amazing, and mind boggling is what that is.
Wow $2200, on $650,000, and look where we are today.
Last check, all in, Fed, State, Local, etc. we pay 60% of our income in some form of a Tax.
Anybody believe Socialism isn’t here already?
Are you saying that someone is 1913 would have had to made 653,315.69 to pay 2,177.72 in taxes?
You are confused! Read my posts again!
Plug in the numbers yourself. The entire form and and instructions is in the pdf
No worries, I admire greatly, posters who are willing to apologize for any errors, which we all make sometimes.
At the end of day, a rising tide lifts all boats. Tax policy which encourages formation of new businesses and expansion of existing ones in paramount.
But a 70,000 page tax code is crazy. It is all the result of pandering by career politicians to lobbyists.
Thanks for the historical trip down despot lane - I saved the pdf as a curiosity.
Are you saying that someone is 1913 would have had to made 653,315.69 to pay 2,177.72 in taxes?
Here's what I actually sad. I think it's pretty clear.
Back in 1913, there were 6 tax brackets.Those making under $20,000 per year paid no tax. According to this inflation calculator, $20,000 in 1913 was equivalent to $435,543.79 in 2010. This first $20k was subtracted from your income so even if you made $30,000, you were only taxed on the last $10,000 of it. The rate was a whopping 1%. So, let's take that hypothetical person who made $30,000 in 1913. He would have paid $100 in taxes on it. If you run that through the above inflation calculator, you'll see that it would be equivalent to $2177.72 today. Well, that sounds like a lot of money until you consider that what that really means is that in today's dollars, someone would have to make $653,315.69 per year to pay that $2177.72 in income tax.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.