[shooz]

An honest comparative chart for John.
Do you really think this is fair?

Attached Images

 

[shooz]

John said he NEVER listens to Rush.
Honesty John?

[Nesster]

Seems you get it wrong. We feel that there are certain things that need to be done by a central authority. Roads, defense come to mind. And we have no problem paying taxes for that and the personnel to administer them. What we have problems with is the constant waste of money by both sides. And truthfully the Republicans that we sent to DC are starting to piss me off. How dare they compromise like they have. Sending cuts that yield only a few measly million? That's not what we sent them up there for.

However Obama did say he didn't need the tax cut. Well he inferred it anyway. So why didn't he stroke the check? It's perfectly allright for Pharaoh to do it after all. And what about all you others? When are you sending in your checks? Better yet when are the 48% of the population that pays no taxes going to start paying their fair share? Why does 5% of the population have to cover over 50% of it?

So, I take it you are a freeloader like the rest of us, with your self-arranged $1 income cuteness to dodge taxes. Living on your company expense account is a nice way to go.

My point about tea partiers not refusing to avail themselves of government services, or even for the women the health services provided by Planned Parenthood, is perhaps more hypocritical than a liberal not voluntarily paying more in income tax.

After all, our obligation as citizens is to obey the laws, and as Benjamin Franklin (I think it was him, this memory goes back to high school) said, while we can't avoid taxes, we can arrange our affairs so as to minimize our taxes legally.

However, for all the 45% of Americans who don't pay income tax at all - and it seems John you're one of them - the rest of us are paying. Whatever the marginal rate changes are, and people's minimizing their tax liabilities, the money does add up.

There's the idea of fairness to all. Because I'm no longer a sole proprietor I can't avail myself of the tax dodge you have. John, get your hand out of my pocket! Stop confiscating MY income so you can enjoy the roads, police protection and so forth.

[stevewig]

So, I take it you are a freeloader like the rest of us, with your self-arranged $1 income cuteness to dodge taxes. Living on your company expense account is a nice way to go.

My point about tea partiers not refusing to avail themselves of government services, or even for the women the health services provided by Planned Parenthood, is perhaps more hypocritical than a liberal not voluntarily paying more in income tax.

After all, our obligation as citizens is to obey the laws, and as Benjamin Franklin (I think it was him, this memory goes back to high school) said, while we can't avoid taxes, we can arrange our affairs so as to minimize our taxes legally.

However, for all the 45% of Americans who don't pay income tax at all - and it seems John you're one of them - the rest of us are paying. Whatever the marginal rate changes are, and people's minimizing their tax liabilities, the money does add up.

There's the idea of fairness to all. Because I'm no longer a sole proprietor I can't avail myself of the tax dodge you have. John, get your hand out of my pocket! Stop confiscating MY income so you can enjoy the roads, police protection and so forth.

Yes, Nesster, all valid points, but John wasn't really complaining about his own manipulation of the tax system for his own benefit - he was more concerned with other peoples manipulations and he did appear to be very disgusted by them!

For instance he wanted to know "......when are the 48% of the population that pays no taxes going to start paying their fair share? ".

[shooz]

I would say to John, perhaps when they find a job paying more than minimum wages.

[JohnInIndy]

So, I take it you are a freeloader like the rest of us, with your self-arranged $1 income cuteness to dodge taxes. Living on your company expense account is a nice way to go.

No I am most assuredly not a freeloader. I didn't dodge any taxes at all. I also didn't take a paycheck for all of 2010. I lived entirely off of what I earned and paid taxes dearly on in 2009. I have my reasons for not taking a salary and it has nothing to do with taxes.

RML you may want to actually check your "facts" before you post:

Obama gave *46 percent* directly to charity.

The Obamas donated $245,075 — 14.2 percent of their income before tax deductions and exemptions — to 36 charities. According to the White House, more than half went to the couple’s favorite charity, the Fisher House Foundation, which benefits families of fallen and disabled soldiers; it gets all proceeds from Mr. Obama’s children’s book, “Of Thee I Sing: A Letter to My Daughters,” which was published late last year.

But the real cheapskate award goes to our Veep

Together, they reported an adjusted gross income of $379,178.The Bidens paid $86,626 in total federal taxes for 2010. They paid $14,479 in Delaware income taxes and $3,515 in Virginia income taxes. The Bidens contributed $5,350 to charity, in both monetary and in-kind donations.

[shooz]

Proving what?

You're still being evasive John.

[stevewig]

No I am most assuredly not a freeloader. I didn't dodge any taxes at all. I also didn't take a paycheck for all of 2010. I lived entirely off of what I earned and paid taxes dearly on in 2009. I have my reasons for not taking a salary and it has nothing to do with taxes......

John,
I am sure that none of us on this forum really care about your tax problems. We all have other interests and problems to work with - as do you yourself.

However, you started this topic about "freeloaders" and your obvious disdain for "freeloaders" and I personally also have disdain for freeloaders who take from society but do their best to minimize or avoid giving back to society.

Throughout my life I have diligently paid my taxes and whereas I don't try to pay too much taxes I have also never tried to avoid paying taxes. I know that this money is needed to run a modern, civilized and humane society and it is required that every citizen should pay his fair share.

It is also true that for a wage earner there are very few openings to legally avoid payment and that it how it should be.

The larger a Company is and the better the lawyers and tax experts that that company can afford to use will inevitably result in more and more legal tax avoidance - example GE.

For instance you have, I assume, only a small company but nonetheless you have tax avoidance possibilities that your employees do not have. Some of them are justified and necessary - others are strictly tax avoidance.

Because you, as the owner of your company, claim that you took no salary last year that can only be a tax avoidance stratagem - otherwise why would you do it?

We can only pay attention to you on this subject if you explain yourself and, like I said earlier none of us really give a damn any way. You raised the topic we responded!

[causey]

Maybe this is of some relevance in the context of this discussion:
ThinkProgress VIDEO: Paul Ryan Booed At Town Hall For Defending Tax Breaks For The Wealthy

[JohnInIndy]

John,

However, you started this topic about "freeloaders" and your obvious disdain for "freeloaders" and I personally also have disdain for freeloaders who take from society but do their best to minimize or avoid giving back to society.

Actually I started this topic about how Obama talked about tax breaks for the wealthy in his (campaign) speech last Wednesday and how he could have talked the talk and walked the walk yet he more than likely took every deduction he was entitled to and got a $12,000 refund. If he meant what he said why didn't he let the IRS have the 12 large? Or why didn't he stroke a check for more? That's what this thread was originally about.

[stevewig]

Actually I started this topic about how Obama talked about tax breaks for the wealthy in his (campaign) speech last Wednesday and how he could have talked the talk and walked the walk yet he more than likely took every deduction he was entitled to and got a $12,000 refund. If he meant what he said why didn't he let the IRS have the 12 large? Or why didn't he stroke a check for more? That's what this thread was originally about.

Yes John but you went on to make this wise pronouncement in your first response:

"Better yet when are the 48% of the population that pays no taxes going to start paying their fair share? Why does 5% of the population have to cover over 50% of it?"

Clearly this was something that was bothering you and you dumped it on us as your first response and then later on you admitted that you too would not be paying taxes this year

[JohnInIndy]

Yes John but you went on to make this wise pronouncement in your first response:

"Better yet when are the 48% of the population that pays no taxes going to start paying their fair share? Why does 5% of the population have to cover over 50% of it?"

Clearly this was something that was bothering you and you dumped it on us as your first response.

pronouncement [prəˈnaʊnsmənt]n1. an official or authoritative statement or announcement

I asked a question. I did not make a statement. You know the difference, correct?
How does my question fit the description of a pronouncement?

[stevewig]

If we have now sunk to grammar lessons, your question was rhetorical (meant for effect not intended to be answered - because you know there is no correct answer).

Therefore it was a pronouncement.

I've finished with this topic because as far as I am concerned there is nothing useful left to say.

[JohnInIndy]

If we have now sunk to grammar lessons, your question was rhetorical (meant for effect not intended to be answered - because you know there is no correct answer).

Therefore it was a pronouncement.

I've finished with this topic because as far as I am concerned there is nothing useful left to say.

Well now there you go making an assumption that was false. It was simply a question.

[gnaztee]

Well now there you go making an assumption that was false. It was simply a question.

This is disingenuous, and you know it. Or, to make the point another way:

"When is JohnInIndy going to quit starting such ridiculous political threads, and using grade school-level, non-clever nicknames for the President?"

This is simply a question, not a statement about JohnInIndy, and if you're reading it any other way you're making an assumption.