Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Elizabeth Warren proposes 'wealth tax' on Americans with more than $50 million in assets
Comments
-
2001400ex said:
I have a residence and a business in Montana. How is that tax fraud? Axing for a fren.MikeDamone said:Hondo and HDoog are now on record admitting to tax fraud. Why am I not suprised.
Hondo lying again. Said he had a business in Montana for a year and then transferred it to wa. Now his business in Montana. -
I never said I transferred a business to WA. I live in Spokane. Have a job here. Part owner of a business in Montana and have another residence there. Reading hard for you?MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
I have a residence and a business in Montana. How is that tax fraud? Axing for a fren.MikeDamone said:Hondo and HDoog are now on record admitting to tax fraud. Why am I not suprised.
Hondo lying again. Said he had a business in Montana for a year and then transferred it to wa. Now his business in Montana. -
Then stop being a bitch and explain it.MikeDamone said:
So what are the policies I am advocating? What policies do a advocate with consumption tax? You seem to know since you know the consequences. So let everyone know the policies I advocate for. You’ve “outlined” nothing.2001400ex said:
So you want no income tax and a VAT instead. Welcome to the last page of this thread. And I've outlined the consequences of that twice, to which you disagree.MikeDamone said:
You’re the one who was so sure of the policies I want and you even know the consequences of the policies you say I want. Lay them out.2001400ex said:
Well if you think the tax on productivity is stupid and a VAT is the only one that is tolerable..... You tell me what that means.MikeDamone said:
You’re a fucking simple mind. And a dumbfuck. Explain to me the “policies” I want. In detail.2001400ex said:
That's what switching to a VAT would do. Or do you not even know the consequences of the policies you want?MikeDamone said:
No I don’t. Lying asswipe.2001400ex said:
Damoan wants a tax increase on the poor and middle class to give the wealthy a huge tax cut. The rich have suffered enough.MikeDamone said:
It’s the only tax I find somewhat tolerable. A tax on income (productivity) is fucking stupid.PurpleThrobber said:
You pay the VAT tax when you buy the goods. Collection is super easy.HHusky said:
I'm not saying it couldn't work, but it seems like evasion would be an ongoing problem. Much more so than with treating investment income as ordinary income.PurpleThrobber said:
Would be better off with a VAT approach plus a flat tax on earned income (say, somewhere between 17 and 34%, rather easily). High end consumers would pay through the nose. Poor people wouldn't.HHusky said:
I think the bigger problem with the 70% marginal tax rate is that it wouldn't raise that much money. I've already said I'd stop fetishizing investment income. Much simpler than taxing you rich guys 70% on your declared income exceeding $10 million.RaceBannon said:HHusky said:
You driving a tank these days, Race?RaceBannon said:Ike sold the interstate freeway system as national defense
Like a wall
Shit the government is supposed to do
Do we need a 70% tax rate to run interstate roads
Problem solved.
Next.
Is an tax on income a tax on a preson’s productivity? Only a dumbass would think otherwise. -
Was that where you lied about the amount paid by the rich in income taxes now compared to the 1950s Hondo?2001400ex said:
So you want no income tax and a VAT instead. Welcome to the last page of this thread. And I've outlined the consequences of that twice, to which you disagree.MikeDamone said:
You’re the one who was so sure of the policies I want and you even know the consequences of the policies you say I want. Lay them out.2001400ex said:
Well if you think the tax on productivity is stupid and a VAT is the only one that is tolerable..... You tell me what that means.MikeDamone said:
You’re a fucking simple mind. And a dumbfuck. Explain to me the “policies” I want. In detail.2001400ex said:
That's what switching to a VAT would do. Or do you not even know the consequences of the policies you want?MikeDamone said:
No I don’t. Lying asswipe.2001400ex said:
Damoan wants a tax increase on the poor and middle class to give the wealthy a huge tax cut. The rich have suffered enough.MikeDamone said:
It’s the only tax I find somewhat tolerable. A tax on income (productivity) is fucking stupid.PurpleThrobber said:
You pay the VAT tax when you buy the goods. Collection is super easy.HHusky said:
I'm not saying it couldn't work, but it seems like evasion would be an ongoing problem. Much more so than with treating investment income as ordinary income.PurpleThrobber said:
Would be better off with a VAT approach plus a flat tax on earned income (say, somewhere between 17 and 34%, rather easily). High end consumers would pay through the nose. Poor people wouldn't.HHusky said:
I think the bigger problem with the 70% marginal tax rate is that it wouldn't raise that much money. I've already said I'd stop fetishizing investment income. Much simpler than taxing you rich guys 70% on your declared income exceeding $10 million.RaceBannon said:HHusky said:
You driving a tank these days, Race?RaceBannon said:Ike sold the interstate freeway system as national defense
Like a wall
Shit the government is supposed to do
Do we need a 70% tax rate to run interstate roads
Problem solved.
Next.
Is an tax on income a tax on a preson’s productivity? Only a dumbass would think otherwise.
-
STFU Bob. Because you can't comprehend it, doesn't make it a lie.SFGbob said:
Was that where you lied about the amount paid by the rich in income taxes now compared to the 1950s Hondo?2001400ex said:
So you want no income tax and a VAT instead. Welcome to the last page of this thread. And I've outlined the consequences of that twice, to which you disagree.MikeDamone said:
You’re the one who was so sure of the policies I want and you even know the consequences of the policies you say I want. Lay them out.2001400ex said:
Well if you think the tax on productivity is stupid and a VAT is the only one that is tolerable..... You tell me what that means.MikeDamone said:
You’re a fucking simple mind. And a dumbfuck. Explain to me the “policies” I want. In detail.2001400ex said:
That's what switching to a VAT would do. Or do you not even know the consequences of the policies you want?MikeDamone said:
No I don’t. Lying asswipe.2001400ex said:
Damoan wants a tax increase on the poor and middle class to give the wealthy a huge tax cut. The rich have suffered enough.MikeDamone said:
It’s the only tax I find somewhat tolerable. A tax on income (productivity) is fucking stupid.PurpleThrobber said:
You pay the VAT tax when you buy the goods. Collection is super easy.HHusky said:
I'm not saying it couldn't work, but it seems like evasion would be an ongoing problem. Much more so than with treating investment income as ordinary income.PurpleThrobber said:
Would be better off with a VAT approach plus a flat tax on earned income (say, somewhere between 17 and 34%, rather easily). High end consumers would pay through the nose. Poor people wouldn't.HHusky said:
I think the bigger problem with the 70% marginal tax rate is that it wouldn't raise that much money. I've already said I'd stop fetishizing investment income. Much simpler than taxing you rich guys 70% on your declared income exceeding $10 million.RaceBannon said:HHusky said:
You driving a tank these days, Race?RaceBannon said:Ike sold the interstate freeway system as national defense
Like a wall
Shit the government is supposed to do
Do we need a 70% tax rate to run interstate roads
Problem solved.
Next.
Is an tax on income a tax on a preson’s productivity? Only a dumbass would think otherwise. -
Oh I comprehend just fine Hondo. Your both a liar and moron.2001400ex said:
STFU Bob. Because you can't comprehend it, doesn't make it a lie.SFGbob said:
Was that where you lied about the amount paid by the rich in income taxes now compared to the 1950s Hondo?2001400ex said:
So you want no income tax and a VAT instead. Welcome to the last page of this thread. And I've outlined the consequences of that twice, to which you disagree.MikeDamone said:
You’re the one who was so sure of the policies I want and you even know the consequences of the policies you say I want. Lay them out.2001400ex said:
Well if you think the tax on productivity is stupid and a VAT is the only one that is tolerable..... You tell me what that means.MikeDamone said:
You’re a fucking simple mind. And a dumbfuck. Explain to me the “policies” I want. In detail.2001400ex said:
That's what switching to a VAT would do. Or do you not even know the consequences of the policies you want?MikeDamone said:
No I don’t. Lying asswipe.2001400ex said:
Damoan wants a tax increase on the poor and middle class to give the wealthy a huge tax cut. The rich have suffered enough.MikeDamone said:
It’s the only tax I find somewhat tolerable. A tax on income (productivity) is fucking stupid.PurpleThrobber said:
You pay the VAT tax when you buy the goods. Collection is super easy.HHusky said:
I'm not saying it couldn't work, but it seems like evasion would be an ongoing problem. Much more so than with treating investment income as ordinary income.PurpleThrobber said:
Would be better off with a VAT approach plus a flat tax on earned income (say, somewhere between 17 and 34%, rather easily). High end consumers would pay through the nose. Poor people wouldn't.HHusky said:
I think the bigger problem with the 70% marginal tax rate is that it wouldn't raise that much money. I've already said I'd stop fetishizing investment income. Much simpler than taxing you rich guys 70% on your declared income exceeding $10 million.RaceBannon said:HHusky said:
You driving a tank these days, Race?RaceBannon said:Ike sold the interstate freeway system as national defense
Like a wall
Shit the government is supposed to do
Do we need a 70% tax rate to run interstate roads
Problem solved.
Next.
Is an tax on income a tax on a preson’s productivity? Only a dumbass would think otherwise.
When I stated accurately the rich today pay a greater percentage of all the income taxes paid. You responded:
Only one tiny problem there dumbfuck. The "quote" I provided didn't say they paid 42% of all income taxes.
No. They. Don't. And yes I discussed that.... Back Then they paid 42% per your fucking quote. And now they pay 34%.
It said:
How could it be that the tax code of the 1950s had a top marginal tax rate of 91 percent, but resulted in an effective tax rate of only 42 percent on the wealthiest taxpayers? In fact, the situation is even stranger. The 42.0 percent tax rate on the top 1 percent takes into account all taxes levied by federal, state, and local governments, including: income, payroll, corporate, excise, property, and estate taxes.
So are you a liar or a dumbfuck or both Hondo? -
Do traveling burger flippers get paid well?2001400ex said:
I never said I transferred a business to WA. I live in Spokane. Have a job here. Part owner of a business in Montana and have another residence there. Reading hard for you?MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
I have a residence and a business in Montana. How is that tax fraud? Axing for a fren.MikeDamone said:Hondo and HDoog are now on record admitting to tax fraud. Why am I not suprised.
Hondo lying again. Said he had a business in Montana for a year and then transferred it to wa. Now his business in Montana. -
Only one tiny problem there dumbfuck. The "quote" I provided didn't say they paid 42% of all income taxes.SFGbob said:
Oh I comprehend just fine Hondo. Your both a liar and moron.2001400ex said:
STFU Bob. Because you can't comprehend it, doesn't make it a lie.SFGbob said:
Was that where you lied about the amount paid by the rich in income taxes now compared to the 1950s Hondo?2001400ex said:
So you want no income tax and a VAT instead. Welcome to the last page of this thread. And I've outlined the consequences of that twice, to which you disagree.MikeDamone said:
You’re the one who was so sure of the policies I want and you even know the consequences of the policies you say I want. Lay them out.2001400ex said:
Well if you think the tax on productivity is stupid and a VAT is the only one that is tolerable..... You tell me what that means.MikeDamone said:
You’re a fucking simple mind. And a dumbfuck. Explain to me the “policies” I want. In detail.2001400ex said:
That's what switching to a VAT would do. Or do you not even know the consequences of the policies you want?MikeDamone said:
No I don’t. Lying asswipe.2001400ex said:
Damoan wants a tax increase on the poor and middle class to give the wealthy a huge tax cut. The rich have suffered enough.MikeDamone said:
It’s the only tax I find somewhat tolerable. A tax on income (productivity) is fucking stupid.PurpleThrobber said:
You pay the VAT tax when you buy the goods. Collection is super easy.HHusky said:
I'm not saying it couldn't work, but it seems like evasion would be an ongoing problem. Much more so than with treating investment income as ordinary income.PurpleThrobber said:
Would be better off with a VAT approach plus a flat tax on earned income (say, somewhere between 17 and 34%, rather easily). High end consumers would pay through the nose. Poor people wouldn't.HHusky said:
I think the bigger problem with the 70% marginal tax rate is that it wouldn't raise that much money. I've already said I'd stop fetishizing investment income. Much simpler than taxing you rich guys 70% on your declared income exceeding $10 million.RaceBannon said:HHusky said:
You driving a tank these days, Race?RaceBannon said:Ike sold the interstate freeway system as national defense
Like a wall
Shit the government is supposed to do
Do we need a 70% tax rate to run interstate roads
Problem solved.
Next.
Is an tax on income a tax on a preson’s productivity? Only a dumbass would think otherwise.
When I stated accurately the rich today pay a greater percentage of all the income taxes paid. You responded:
No. They. Don't. And yes I discussed that.... Back Then they paid 42% per your fucking quote. And now they pay 34%.
It said:
How could it be that the tax code of the 1950s had a top marginal tax rate of 91 percent, but resulted in an effective tax rate of only 42 percent on the wealthiest taxpayers? In fact, the situation is even stranger. The 42.0 percent tax rate on the top 1 percent takes into account all taxes levied by federal, state, and local governments, including: income, payroll, corporate, excise, property, and estate taxes.
So are you a liar or a dumbfuck or both Hondo?
What the fuck do you think this means? From your quote. Which is the same comparable to the 34% paid in 2017. Fuck man, embarrassing.
The 42.0 percent tax rate on the top 1 percent takes into account all taxes levied by federal, state, and local governments, including: income, payroll, corporate, excise, property, and estate taxes. -
Hondo goes with the gibberish defense.
The rich pay a greater percentage of all income taxes today then they did back in the 1950s when the top marginal rate was over 70%. The only liar here is you Hondo. -
Hondo can't comprehend the difference between an income tax and a overall tax rate.
