| Posted By |
Message |
| Pages: << 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 |
LoriH
There's no place like home
Member since 8/07 4110 total posts
Name:
Lori
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by dm24angel
Posted by LoriH
Posted by dm24angel
Posted by LoriH
Posted by mrsej
Posted by VirginiaDeb
Posted by mrsej
Posted by VirginiaDeb
Posted by mrsej
Posted by lipglossjunky73
Posted by SweetestOfPeas
Posted by mrsej
palin won't be president unless mccain dies, which i sincerely doubt will happen. Obama is going to be president - that freaks the crap out of me.
i know  
Seriously, we cannot tell the future. They both can be great or they both can suck. Do we really know what the future will hold?
You are absolutely right, except with Obama I will be paying alot of money for that happiness or sadness. If his economic policy wasn't so radical and insane, I would at least listen to his other ideas, but I can't get past the taxes. i can't - he calls it fair, but how is it fair to me and my DH who are busting our azzes everyday, have student loans larger than some people's mortgages and went to school forever.
I have student loans. I don't make a lot of money, neither does DH (Teacher and a case manager for those who have special needs). But to me it's just not fair that I have kids who can't afford school supplies, whose parents work 2 and 3 jobs to feed them. Overall I believe in capitalism... but at this rate we're going to have 2 classes... the haves and the have nots.
And frankly, with our two post-graduate degrees, we'll probably be a have not under mccain's plan.
But do you think that 250,000 is the right cutoff? I will be that 5% facing the highest tax increase in history. We are not making $500,00 or a million. So are we supposed to support the whole country? Am I supposed to be penalized b/c you chose to be teachers and case managers?
you chose to rack up $100,000 in loans...
I'll keep my poor career choice in mind when I watch the HS students in my area drive to school in the BMW's bought by their parents that make $300k a year.
they probably make more than 300K a year - i drive a ford and my DH a 2001 honda - you are exactly right, we chose to rack up loans, we chose to work long hours, we chose to further our education. People chose not to further their education, people chose what hours to work, people chose their jobs. Point is, people make choices, but why will I be penalized and people that make other choices not penalized.
I do not think that most people if given the choice would decide not to further their education. Not everyone has the opportunity to make this choice. Furthering your education also does not always lead to a bigger paycheck.
Someone WILL always have to be the dishwasher or who will wash the dishes.
Nto everyone CAN become a Dr. Its simply not possible...so lets switch it around and say....with great reward comes great sacrifice...means the same thing no?
I am not really sure what you are trying to say here. Maybe you misunderstood my statement. I was not talking about those that do not have the capacity to achieve a higher level of education. I was referring to people who through circumstances in their life do not have the option of getting a higher level education right out of high school. Some may choose to get a formal education after while working and going to night school It is a very long difficult road for some. My point was that it is not as clear cut as making a right or wrong choice.
I was agreeing with you.....
That the opportunities are not just willing and waiting...
Gotcha! Sorry it's late. 
|
Posted 10/15/08 11:39 PM  |
| |
|
Long Island Weddings
Long Island's Largest Bridal Resource |
dm24angel
Happiness
Member since 5/05 34581 total posts
Name:
Donna
|
Re: Debate '08
I think the bottom line is how there will always be two sides to this debate....
So what do we choose collectively?
TO become the have and have not's or to unite and accept more money means more responsibility? ( as well as more rewards!) And to make each other's lives better even if it includes some sacrifice on our own parts.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:39 PM |
| |
|
mrsej
The cutest!
Member since 1/07 2495 total posts
Name:
Mommy
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by dm24angel
I think the bottom line is how there will always be two sides to this debate....
So what do we choose collectively?
TO become the have and have not's or to unite and accept more money means more responsibility? ( as well as more rewards!) And to make each other's lives better even if it includes some sacrifice on our own parts.
I just think it is bizarre that I will be bunched in with the likes of Oprah and Warren Buffet under Obama's plan.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:41 PM |
| |
|
dm24angel
Happiness
Member since 5/05 34581 total posts
Name:
Donna
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by mrsej
Posted by dm24angel
I think the bottom line is how there will always be two sides to this debate....
So what do we choose collectively?
TO become the have and have not's or to unite and accept more money means more responsibility? ( as well as more rewards!) And to make each other's lives better even if it includes some sacrifice on our own parts.
I just think it is bizarre that I will be bunched in with the likes of Oprah and Warren Buffet under Obama's plan.
You wont be......they donate millions to charity a year.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:42 PM |
| |
|
stickydust
Now a mommy of 2!!!
Member since 4/06 3164 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by Palebride
Posted by stickydust
I don't think Mrsej was saying this at all. I think what she was saying is that it is all a CHOICE. For better or for worse that choice is yours (the general you) and you take all the good and the bad that come with making that choice. It is about personal responsibility and not being penalized for your choice. If Obama said he was going to tax all scientists more - you would be outraged that you are being singled out after all of your sacrifices. I feel that he is effectively decreeing that all lawyers, doctors etc. will be taxed more because tend to fall into that income bracket. This may serve as a disincentive for some.
I do not believe it is the role of the government to penalize any choice in profession or to make that profession less appealing by creating a greater tax burden. That, to me, goes against the fundamentals of our society.
Of course ..and the good is making money - the bad is paying higher taxes.
I don't think any specific profession is being singled out to be taxed....an amount of money has to be chosen somewhere....and $250,000 is a substantial amount of money!
Yes, and by definition that is how a percentage works. 35% of 250K is more than 35% of 50K - that is fair. It becomes unfair when people are being disproportionally taxed and when under Obama's plan over 40% of the population will not pay into taxes at all. A combined salary of 250K in the NY metro area is comfortable but hardly wealthy and does not put one in the same category as Warren Buffet - it is a question of different degrees of taxation and shouldering the burden when you are not so far from the cut-off.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:44 PM |
| |
|
Beth
The Key to your new home....
Member since 2/06 24849 total posts
Name:
Beth
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by mrsej
I just think it is bizarre that I will be bunched in with the likes of Oprah and Warren Buffet under Obama's plan.
do you know what the median salary is american is?
what the mediam salary for a family in this country?
I think the answer will shock you
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:44 PM |
| |
|
VirginiaDeb
Don't eat me, hippo!
Member since 5/05 9252 total posts
Name:
Deb
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by mrsej
Posted by dm24angel
I think the bottom line is how there will always be two sides to this debate....
So what do we choose collectively?
TO become the have and have not's or to unite and accept more money means more responsibility? ( as well as more rewards!) And to make each other's lives better even if it includes some sacrifice on our own parts.
I just think it is bizarre that I will be bunched in with the likes of Oprah and Warren Buffet under Obama's plan.
Then, what do you think the cut off should be?
Don't you think that whoever is just over the cut off will be complaining?
All I know is if DH and I ever make over $250 - I will gladly fork over the extra taxes.
Maybe once he can do private practice and retest all the rich kids that don't qualify for GT services from the school 
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:45 PM |
| |
|
stickydust
Now a mommy of 2!!!
Member since 4/06 3164 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by dm24angel
Posted by mrsej
Posted by dm24angel
I think the bottom line is how there will always be two sides to this debate....
So what do we choose collectively?
TO become the have and have not's or to unite and accept more money means more responsibility? ( as well as more rewards!) And to make each other's lives better even if it includes some sacrifice on our own parts.
I just think it is bizarre that I will be bunched in with the likes of Oprah and Warren Buffet under Obama's plan.
You wont be......they donate millions to charity a year.
and get a HUGE tax deduction for it. I donate a little bit - which is proportional to my level of affordability.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:45 PM |
| |
|
seaside
LIF Adult
Member since 6/08 3101 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Debate '08
Tell me if I'm wrong, because I'm not sure my understanding is correct. doesn't everyone pay the same taxes on the first $$xx that they make---graduated taxes, so if you make over the threshhold amount, you pay the same rate as everyone else until that point and then you pay a greater percentage on the remainder? Is that even right? 
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:46 PM |
| |
|
mrsej
The cutest!
Member since 1/07 2495 total posts
Name:
Mommy
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by stickydust
Posted by Palebride
Posted by stickydust
I don't think Mrsej was saying this at all. I think what she was saying is that it is all a CHOICE. For better or for worse that choice is yours (the general you) and you take all the good and the bad that come with making that choice. It is about personal responsibility and not being penalized for your choice. If Obama said he was going to tax all scientists more - you would be outraged that you are being singled out after all of your sacrifices. I feel that he is effectively decreeing that all lawyers, doctors etc. will be taxed more because tend to fall into that income bracket. This may serve as a disincentive for some.
I do not believe it is the role of the government to penalize any choice in profession or to make that profession less appealing by creating a greater tax burden. That, to me, goes against the fundamentals of our society.
Of course ..and the good is making money - the bad is paying higher taxes.
I don't think any specific profession is being singled out to be taxed....an amount of money has to be chosen somewhere....and $250,000 is a substantial amount of money!
Yes, and by definition that is how a percentage works. 35% of 250K is more than 35% of 50K - that is fair. It becomes unfair when people are being disproportionally taxed and when under Obama's plan over 40% of the population will not pay into taxes at all. A combined salary of 250K in the NY metro area is comfortable but hardly wealthy and does not put one in the same category as Warren Buffet - it is a question of different degrees of taxation and shouldering the burden when you are not so far from the cut-off.
If I made 1 million a year, I would say bring on Obama's plan, but I don't even come close and I will be put in the same category as those people.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:47 PM |
| |
|
stickydust
Now a mommy of 2!!!
Member since 4/06 3164 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by seaside
Tell me if I'm wrong, because I'm not sure my understanding is correct. doesn't everyone pay the same taxes on the first $$xx that they make---graduated taxes, so if you make over the threshhold amount, you pay the same rate as everyone else until that point and then you pay a greater percentage on the remainder? Is that even right?
That is correct. People in higher income brackets already have a higher tax rate.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:48 PM |
| |
|
dm24angel
Happiness
Member since 5/05 34581 total posts
Name:
Donna
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by stickydust
Posted by dm24angel
Posted by mrsej
Posted by dm24angel
I think the bottom line is how there will always be two sides to this debate....
So what do we choose collectively?
TO become the have and have not's or to unite and accept more money means more responsibility? ( as well as more rewards!) And to make each other's lives better even if it includes some sacrifice on our own parts.
I just think it is bizarre that I will be bunched in with the likes of Oprah and Warren Buffet under Obama's plan.
You wont be......they donate millions to charity a year.
and get a HUGE tax deduction for it. I donate a little bit - which is proportional to my level of affordability.
I think your being very jaded. They dont donate for the tax deduction ....and any deduction is a LOT less then what they are giving out.
I donate a little too and its very misproportionate to my income. Technically we should not donate anything, as there is no money for it.
Buffet has also taken home as little as 100K as his salary for a yrs work ....his wealth comes from other areas.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:48 PM |
| |
|
VirginiaDeb
Don't eat me, hippo!
Member since 5/05 9252 total posts
Name:
Deb
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by mrsej
Posted by stickydust
Posted by Palebride
Posted by stickydust
I don't think Mrsej was saying this at all. I think what she was saying is that it is all a CHOICE. For better or for worse that choice is yours (the general you) and you take all the good and the bad that come with making that choice. It is about personal responsibility and not being penalized for your choice. If Obama said he was going to tax all scientists more - you would be outraged that you are being singled out after all of your sacrifices. I feel that he is effectively decreeing that all lawyers, doctors etc. will be taxed more because tend to fall into that income bracket. This may serve as a disincentive for some.
I do not believe it is the role of the government to penalize any choice in profession or to make that profession less appealing by creating a greater tax burden. That, to me, goes against the fundamentals of our society.
Of course ..and the good is making money - the bad is paying higher taxes.
I don't think any specific profession is being singled out to be taxed....an amount of money has to be chosen somewhere....and $250,000 is a substantial amount of money!
Yes, and by definition that is how a percentage works. 35% of 250K is more than 35% of 50K - that is fair. It becomes unfair when people are being disproportionally taxed and when under Obama's plan over 40% of the population will not pay into taxes at all. A combined salary of 250K in the NY metro area is comfortable but hardly wealthy and does not put one in the same category as Warren Buffet - it is a question of different degrees of taxation and shouldering the burden when you are not so far from the cut-off.
If I made 1 million a year, I would say bring on Obama's plan, but I don't even come close and I will be put in the same category as those people.
See, for me, if I made $250k a year I would say bring on the plan!
It's all relative.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:48 PM |
| |
|
Palebride
I am an amazing bakist
Member since 5/05 13673 total posts
Name:
Lori
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by mrsej
Posted by stickydust
Posted by Palebride
Posted by stickydust
I don't think Mrsej was saying this at all. I think what she was saying is that it is all a CHOICE. For better or for worse that choice is yours (the general you) and you take all the good and the bad that come with making that choice. It is about personal responsibility and not being penalized for your choice. If Obama said he was going to tax all scientists more - you would be outraged that you are being singled out after all of your sacrifices. I feel that he is effectively decreeing that all lawyers, doctors etc. will be taxed more because tend to fall into that income bracket. This may serve as a disincentive for some.
I do not believe it is the role of the government to penalize any choice in profession or to make that profession less appealing by creating a greater tax burden. That, to me, goes against the fundamentals of our society.
Of course ..and the good is making money - the bad is paying higher taxes.
I don't think any specific profession is being singled out to be taxed....an amount of money has to be chosen somewhere....and $250,000 is a substantial amount of money!
Yes, and by definition that is how a percentage works. 35% of 250K is more than 35% of 50K - that is fair. It becomes unfair when people are being disproportionally taxed and when under Obama's plan over 40% of the population will not pay into taxes at all. A combined salary of 250K in the NY metro area is comfortable but hardly wealthy and does not put one in the same category as Warren Buffet - it is a question of different degrees of taxation and shouldering the burden when you are not so far from the cut-off.
If I made 1 million a year, I would say bring on Obama's plan, but I don't even come close and I will be put in the same category as those people.
I apologize, but I just can't feel sorry for someone that makes more than double my household income. To me, you are in a similar category....
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:49 PM |
| |
|
Beth
The Key to your new home....
Member since 2/06 24849 total posts
Name:
Beth
|
Re: Debate '08
tax comparison chart
according to this chart from CNN- if you make less then $600K you are pretty safe under Obama's plan
of course you are better off under McCains plan
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:49 PM |
| |
|
LittleBlueBug
Happy Mommy
Member since 9/06 4074 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by Beth1210
Posted by LittleBlueBug
I don't think it's that really. I think that some just assume that people making that amount are living in a large house on a hill or something and do not realize that they may have debt too.
Look, EVERYONE'S taxes are going up...EVERYONE. It would be foolish to believe otherwise. I honestly feel that there should a flat tax and the small businesses should be exempt.
so b/c you have debt- you think you should pay less taxes???
what about people that have debt paying for medical bills, people that have debt b/c they can't afford to heat their homes, put gas in there cars etc
school was a choice!
Okay, maybe I need to make myself a little more clear...
1) I do not make $100,000 per year COMBINED w/ DH's salary, let alone $250k. So if you were thinking I was saying woe-is-me, I have all this money I roll around naked in, you are plain wrong as we have a hard time paying our rent every month, which will be even harder if my DH gets laid off.
2) As far as school being a choice, let me just tell you were I come from. Before I was an SLP, I was an administrative assistant making $14 per hour. I worked through school and paid for school myself though out-of-pocket funds, student loans, and scholarships that I worked my butt off to get. By going to school I was able to increase my salary much more than what I was making before. If I had not done so DH and I would not be able to survive. It was not a choice. It was a necessity for the well-being of myself and my husband. It isn't always a choice. Now a days you need a college education to pick up garbage.
Again, it's not an attack. If it were just about me and what I made, I would be kicking back and drinking a martini, since hey, I make less than $250k, so who cares about anyone else, right? It isn't just about me though and I am aware of the trickle-down-effect of this plan.
As far as the $5,000 return for health ins., that isn't a deductable. My father's current health plan covers everything he needs. The $5,000 would just be a return on what he is already paying for health insurance.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:50 PM |
| |
|
mrsej
The cutest!
Member since 1/07 2495 total posts
Name:
Mommy
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by Palebride
Posted by mrsej
Posted by stickydust
Posted by Palebride
Posted by stickydust
I don't think Mrsej was saying this at all. I think what she was saying is that it is all a CHOICE. For better or for worse that choice is yours (the general you) and you take all the good and the bad that come with making that choice. It is about personal responsibility and not being penalized for your choice. If Obama said he was going to tax all scientists more - you would be outraged that you are being singled out after all of your sacrifices. I feel that he is effectively decreeing that all lawyers, doctors etc. will be taxed more because tend to fall into that income bracket. This may serve as a disincentive for some.
I do not believe it is the role of the government to penalize any choice in profession or to make that profession less appealing by creating a greater tax burden. That, to me, goes against the fundamentals of our society.
Of course ..and the good is making money - the bad is paying higher taxes.
I don't think any specific profession is being singled out to be taxed....an amount of money has to be chosen somewhere....and $250,000 is a substantial amount of money!
Yes, and by definition that is how a percentage works. 35% of 250K is more than 35% of 50K - that is fair. It becomes unfair when people are being disproportionally taxed and when under Obama's plan over 40% of the population will not pay into taxes at all. A combined salary of 250K in the NY metro area is comfortable but hardly wealthy and does not put one in the same category as Warren Buffet - it is a question of different degrees of taxation and shouldering the burden when you are not so far from the cut-off.
If I made 1 million a year, I would say bring on Obama's plan, but I don't even come close and I will be put in the same category as those people.
I apologize, but I just can't feel sorry for someone that makes more than double my household income. To me, you are in a similar category....
wow - 1 million is similar to 250K. If only that were true.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:50 PM |
| |
|
dm24angel
Happiness
Member since 5/05 34581 total posts
Name:
Donna
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by Beth1210
of course you are better off under McCains plan
unless of course you get sick and need health care...
I agree with what Beth is saying here...Its relative .
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:51 PM |
| |
|
dm24angel
Happiness
Member since 5/05 34581 total posts
Name:
Donna
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by LittleBlueBug
-down-effect of this plan.
As far as the $5,000 return for health ins., that isn't a deductable. My father's current health plan covers everything he needs. The $5,000 would just be a return on what he is already paying for health insurance.
Under the plan, your fathers company might drop his coverage completly. Its estimated many companies will have to elimintae all helath care coverage to their employees .
eta- and his taxes would also be increased. HE would be taxed on any insurance his company provided him.
Message edited 10/15/2008 11:55:01 PM.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:54 PM |
| |
|
stickydust
Now a mommy of 2!!!
Member since 4/06 3164 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by dm24angel
I think your being very jaded. They dont donate for the tax deduction ....and any deduction is a LOT less then what they are giving out.
I donate a little too and its very misproportionate to my income. Technically we should not donate anything, as there is no money for it.
Buffet has also taken home as little as 100K as his salary for a yrs work ....his wealth comes from other areas.
You know what - I am jaded. I am jaded because I believe in capitalist theory and this goes against it. I am jaded because my parents came from a country where a someone came in and also wanted to "redistribute the wealth" and the catastrophe that resulted has been in place since 1959.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:54 PM |
| |
|
LittleBlueBug
Happy Mommy
Member since 9/06 4074 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by dm24angel
Posted by LittleBlueBug
-down-effect of this plan.
As far as the $5,000 return for health ins., that isn't a deductable. My father's current health plan covers everything he needs. The $5,000 would just be a return on what he is already paying for health insurance.
Under the plan, your fathers company might drop his coverage completly. Its estimated many companies will have to elimintae all helath care coverage to their employees .
eta- and his taxes would also be increased. HE would be taxed on any insurance his company provided him.
He won't drop his own health coverage...he owns a small business
ETA: taxes he would have to pay for the health insurance would be far less since the whole amount would be less.
Would you rather be taxed on $12k or $250k? Which would be the larger amount? Plus he would get $5,000 of that back AND be able to keep his business up and running.
Message edited 10/15/2008 11:59:34 PM.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:56 PM |
| |
|
dm24angel
Happiness
Member since 5/05 34581 total posts
Name:
Donna
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by LittleBlueBug
Posted by dm24angel
Posted by LittleBlueBug
-down-effect of this plan.
As far as the $5,000 return for health ins., that isn't a deductable. My father's current health plan covers everything he needs. The $5,000 would just be a return on what he is already paying for health insurance.
Under the plan, your fathers company might drop his coverage completly. Its estimated many companies will have to elimintae all helath care coverage to their employees .
eta- and his taxes would also be increased. HE would be taxed on any insurance his company provided him.
He won't drop his own health coverage...he own a small business
Well then his taxes will go up...
Message edited 10/16/2008 12:00:33 AM.
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:58 PM |
| |
|
seaside
LIF Adult
Member since 6/08 3101 total posts
Name:
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by stickydust
Posted by seaside
Tell me if I'm wrong, because I'm not sure my understanding is correct. doesn't everyone pay the same taxes on the first $$xx that they make---graduated taxes, so if you make over the threshhold amount, you pay the same rate as everyone else until that point and then you pay a greater percentage on the remainder? Is that even right?
That is correct. People in higher income brackets already have a higher tax rate.
But they only have a higher rate on the amout over the bracket--right? Like if, for example, $30,000 is a "cutoff" then the person making $300,000 and the person making $30,000 pay the same percentage on the first $30,000, and then the rate goes up after that--and so on...is that right? It's not like the rich pay a higher rate on all of the money....
|
| Posted 10/15/08 11:59 PM |
| |
|
Blu-ize
Plan B is Now Plan A
Member since 7/05 32475 total posts
Name:
Susan
|
Re: Debate '08
I think they are both screwed. There is no way that either of them will cut taxes on anybody.
Our deficit is astounding.
I think they are both ful of sh!t.
And that passive/aggressive crap with McCain? Grow up..I can see that happening across the table with our allies when he disagrees on something.
Worse, with our enemies.
I agree, Obama looks tired..tired of the BS.
|
| Posted 10/16/08 12:29 AM |
| |
|
mrsej
The cutest!
Member since 1/07 2495 total posts
Name:
Mommy
|
Re: Debate '08
Posted by seaside
Posted by stickydust
Posted by seaside
Tell me if I'm wrong, because I'm not sure my understanding is correct. doesn't everyone pay the same taxes on the first $$xx that they make---graduated taxes, so if you make over the threshhold amount, you pay the same rate as everyone else until that point and then you pay a greater percentage on the remainder? Is that even right?
That is correct. People in higher income brackets already have a higher tax rate.
But they only have a higher rate on the amout over the bracket--right? Like if, for example, $30,000 is a "cutoff" then the person making $300,000 and the person making $30,000 pay the same percentage on the first $30,000, and then the rate goes up after that--and so on...is that right? It's not like the rich pay a higher rate on all of the money....
No - I believe if someone makes 200,000 they would pay no additional payroll taxes. If someone makes 250,000 they would pay taxes on their whole income, no longer just the 102,000. That is the main issue for alot of people.
|
| Posted 10/16/08 1:09 AM |
| |
|
| Pages: << 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 |
