mnealtx 0 #26 July 12, 2011 QuoteYour right, It was for 2011 and he is trying to extend it. Social security is a tax, we now pay less then we did under Bush and so we pay lower taxes under Obama. We did get an 800 dollar per per couple personal income tax credit in 2009 and 2010, once again, lower taxes under Obama. And again, you hear only what you want to hear. Your own quote, post 10: "Personal income tax for 98% of us is lower under Obama than it was for Bush" SS tax != income taxMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mirage62 0 #27 July 12, 2011 Quote You heard wrong, Obama lowered the payroll tax by 2% for 2010, saving the average family a thousand dollars a year. You do realize that to save the "average family" THOUSANDS of dollar a year (2%) That family would have to MAKE $100,000 a year- do you think that's average? Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #28 July 12, 2011 Quote Quote the tax rates are not lower, the income is lower causing a reduction in tax revenue. Last I heard congress extended the bush tax cuts, they didn't lower them. You heard wrong, Obama lowered the payroll tax by 2% for 2010, saving the average family a thousand dollars a year. The tax bill for Americans is lower under Obama than it was under Bush. Obama is trying to extend this tax cut for 2011. Keep hearing what you only want to hear. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/01/obama-team-touts-payroll-tax-cuts/1 Ah, that is just part of what he wants to do. Is there honesty in omission?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #29 July 12, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuote Quote the tax rates are not lower, the income is lower causing a reduction in tax revenue. Last I heard congress extended the bush tax cuts, they didn't lower them. You heard wrong, Obama lowered the payroll tax by 2% for 2010, saving the average family a thousand dollars a year. The tax bill for Americans is lower under Obama than it was under Bush. Obama is trying to extend this tax cut for 2011. Keep hearing what you only want to hear. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/01/obama-team-touts-payroll-tax-cuts/1 QuoteSpeaking of hearing only what you want to hear, you *do* realize that the Bush tax cuts were regarding INCOME tax and not Social Security tax, right? Regardless, your info is wrong. The Social Security Tax rate was lowered for 2011, not 2010 - I haven't heard anything about an extension for 2012. Great job shooting down Shah's argument, though. Your right, It was for 2011 and he is trying to extend it. Social security is a tax, we now pay less then we did under Bush and so we pay lower taxes under Obama. We did get an 800 dollar per per couple personal income tax credit in 2009 and 2010, once again, lower taxes under Obama. I agree with Shaw, the Dems are fucking spineless. Obama is a great disappointment on many levels and he needs to grow a pair. The Republicans however have exactly zero incentive to see the economy get better. That cunt Bachmann just said that a higher unemployment rate would really help her become the next President. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/08/992474/-Michele-Bachmann:-I-hope-higher-unemployment-helps-my-campaign What he did do in 2009 and 2010 was this: $116 billion: New payroll tax credit of $400 per worker and $800 per couple in 2009 and 2010. Phaseout begins at $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for joint filers.[28] $70 billion: Alternative minimum tax: a one year increase in AMT floor to $70,950 for joint filers for 2009.[28] $15 billion: Expansion of child tax credit: A $1,000 credit to more families (even those that do not make enough money to pay income taxes). $14 billion: Expanded college credit to provide a $2,500 expanded tax credit for college tuition and related expenses for 2009 and 2010. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $160,000. $6.6 billion: Homebuyer credit: $8,000 refundable credit for all homes bought between 1/1/2009 and 12/1/2009 and repayment provision repealed for homes purchased in 2009 and held more than three years. This only applies to first-time homebuyers.[40] $4.7 billion: Excluding from taxation the first $2,400 a person receives in unemployment compensation benefits in 2009. $4.7 billion: Expanded earned income tax credit to increase the earned income tax credit — which provides money to low income workers — for families with at least three children. $4.3 billion: Home energy credit to provide an expanded credit to homeowners who make their homes more energy-efficient in 2009 and 2010. Homeowners could recoup 30 percent of the cost up to $1,500 of numerous projects, such as installing energy-efficient windows, doors, furnaces and air conditioners. $1.7 billion: for deduction of sales tax from car purchases, not interest payments phased out for incomes above $250,000. Bush had $400 tax rebates and other tax deductions including stuff like business discounts for buying cars and trucks and energy efficient home upgrades. they all do that to make you feel good and vote for them. What they needed to do was balance the budget and spend within their limits. Do all these tax breaks make you feel good all under and make you want to vote for them? because that is what these were for, not to actually do what is right. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,108 #30 July 12, 2011 QuoteQuoteYour right, It was for 2011 and he is trying to extend it. Social security is a tax, we now pay less then we did under Bush and so we pay lower taxes under Obama. We did get an 800 dollar per per couple personal income tax credit in 2009 and 2010, once again, lower taxes under Obama. And again, you hear only what you want to hear. Your own quote, post 10: "Personal income tax for 98% of us is lower under Obama than it was for Bush" SS tax != income tax Correct - it's a tax on income, not an income tax.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #31 July 12, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteYour right, It was for 2011 and he is trying to extend it. Social security is a tax, we now pay less then we did under Bush and so we pay lower taxes under Obama. We did get an 800 dollar per per couple personal income tax credit in 2009 and 2010, once again, lower taxes under Obama. And again, you hear only what you want to hear. Your own quote, post 10: "Personal income tax for 98% of us is lower under Obama than it was for Bush" SS tax != income tax Correct - it's a tax on income, not an income tax. He was responding to a post about the Bush *INCOME* tax cuts, and SS tax is not part of general revenue. Nice try, but no kewpie doll for you (or him).Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydave114 0 #32 July 14, 2011 QuoteThe overwhelming majority of Americans ( left and right)are in favor of taxing the top 2% of Americans more, but once again, the right will never tell you this. Of course 98% will out vote 2%, But it's much worse than that! I fear we've reached the tipping point where 51% are voting to seize the wealth and liberty of the other 49%. We've been warned about this since 1776. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #33 July 14, 2011 QuoteQuoteThe overwhelming majority of Americans ( left and right)are in favor of taxing the top 2% of Americans more, but once again, the right will never tell you this. Of course 98% will out vote 2%, But it's much worse than that! I fear we've reached the tipping point where 51% are voting to seize the wealth and liberty of the other 49%. We've been warned about this since 1776. Not to worry little buddy.. the 2% have bought and paid for everyone you thought you were electing... and they do after all have Xe to cover them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,079 #34 July 14, 2011 >But it's much worse than that! I fear we've reached the tipping point where >51% are voting to seize the wealth and liberty of the other 49%. And the other 49% is voting to seize the liberty and voting rights of the 51%. And trying to get that other 2%. Welcome to democracy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #35 July 15, 2011 Quote>But it's much worse than that! I fear we've reached the tipping point where >51% are voting to seize the wealth and liberty of the other 49%. And the other 49% is voting to seize the liberty and voting rights of the 51%. And trying to get that other 2%. Welcome to democracy. We're a representative republic.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites