Visit the Active Site for U.S. Politics Online -- U.S. Politics Online . com















Well, is this because those folks no longer make enough income to be taxed? I would imagine with offshoring this number has risen as the displaced manufacturing workers are now doing lower paid service jobs, if they are lucky!
Frankly I am sick of the Cons screaming about this group who are too damn poor to afford the taxes, like income tax. They do contribute to SS though. And every other tax. It's only the income tax they don't have to pay. We tax those who actually make enough not to starve, if you takes income taxes from them.



That's quite a specious question, because you tried to slip in a false premise that the people who don't pay taxes USED to do so but are now poorer. Do you know that to be the case? If so, I'd like to know how.
The people who don't pay federal taxes are the poor. That is by design by liberals. Anything else you wish to infer should be backed up.



And I am sick of the Libs trying to redistribute the wealth of half the country to the other half of the country that they exempt from taxes while screaming about "paying your fair share" and hilariously portraying tax cuts that allow people to keep more of their own money as "being greedy."
ahoy Wooyarn,
i see payroll tax as a tax. i see all tax, actually, as just plain 'ol tax....government or state or local, me own bank account doesn't really discern between the taxes that be levied on me.
i think the conservative position be this;
since more folks ought to pay thar fair share, the taxes that ordinary americans pay ought to go up. the wealthy, as imma so often told, are already doin' thar bit.
as yer link states -
that means that ye can't just hand out more corporate loopholes or lower the income tax on the wealthiest americans if ye don't make up the difference somewhar.That worries Rep. David Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, and a member of the House-Senate supercommittee tasked with finding new deficit cuts. Tax reductions, "no matter how well-intended," will push the deficit higher, making the panel's task that much harder, Camp's office said.
the wealthiest americans be our "job creators", which means that if possible, they ought to get more tax cuts, not less. well, if ye want more tax cuts fer the wealthy, then someone has to be taxed more to provide fer them cuts. raisin' taxes on the rest 'o the country (whilst cuttin' social services) be the conservative way to prosperity fer us all.
eventually, then the wealth shall trickle down too all the swabbys on deck.
...and, from i can gather, conservatives are for proposal 'o raisin' the payroll tax 'o ordinary workin americans.
YARRR!
- MeadHallPirate




This redistribution would not be needed, except for a few, if the elites had not made it damn near impossible for working folks to make a living in 2011 America. There are more folks today being redistributed to than ever before, and this is due to the Con trickle down theory, free trade, offshoring, outsourcing that occurred because business once again could call the economic shots.
But some Cons would rather ignore what the new economic model has done to working Americans, and would rather just call em lazy, no account bums.
Hell, I am old and can recall much different times. Before the Cons got some clout back in D.C. and fucked up America, almost beyond repair. Yet the elites are doing quite well, quite well indeed.The distribution of income tells that story quite well.





If you receive a pay-check EVERYONE pays payroll taxes--(social security/medicare)---what they're talking about is that the Bush tax cuts enabled millions of Americans to pay no federal income tax--because with the deductions they had--they fell under the bar.
So I imagine that's gone--and it should be--there is absolutely no reason--that 47% of the working in this country doesn't contribute a penny to the expenses of it.
Expanding the tax base means that everyone pays taxes, and everyone cares how those taxes are spent, or as President Obama would say, shared sacrifice.
Of course what Obama really means is he wants to shrink the tax base until he has a permanent majority that pays no taxes, and receives public assistance of some kind.
He knows that if rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on the support of Paul.
[CENTER][URL="http://www.rickperry.org/"][IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e3/Rick_Perry_for_President_Logo.png[/IMG][/URL]
Want to see real greed?
See [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=661pi6K-8WQ&feature=player_embedded"]Eat the Rich.[/URL][/CENTER]
Bookmarks