Build Back Better

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,704
Reaction score
5,592
Points
113
then why tax them more than anyone else? How would it change your life in the least?
I want to live in a country that pays it bills. I want the country to maintain its status and to always be in a position to respond to crisis.

Not worried about my life, I am fine, its my kids and possible grandkids.

I am not concerned about if someone can buy their third home or not.
 


KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
21,792
Reaction score
3,874
Points
113
Nearly is subjective. But I disagree with Biden.
Look at you defend a big Biden lie.

“Nearly nothing” is just about 40% now?

If the top 1% paying 40% of all income taxes is nearly nothing, I’d hate to see what you think ‘a lot’ is.
 


Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,704
Reaction score
5,592
Points
113
Look at you defend a big Biden lie.

“Nearly nothing” is just about 40% now?

If the top 1% paying 40% of all income taxes is nearly nothing, I’d hate to see what you think ‘a lot’ is.

Today, the top 1% of earners in the United States account for about 20% of the country's total income annually. Meanwhile, the lowest-earning quarter of Americans account for just 3.7% of income every year.

You can't tax people that make nothing. Lets tear down the government and see how well the top 1% do in anarchy.

Lot's of crying, you poor baby, you have it so so hard. Pathetic.
 


MonikerSchmoniker45

Active member
Joined
Dec 11, 2020
Messages
467
Reaction score
251
Points
43
Today, the top 1% of earners in the United States account for about 20% of the country's total income annually. Meanwhile, the lowest-earning quarter of Americans account for just 3.7% of income every year.

You can't tax people that make nothing. Lets tear down the government and see how well the top 1% do in anarchy.

Lot's of crying, you poor baby, you have it so so hard. Pathetic.
Maybe if we didn't give incentives not to work, people would get better jobs and earn more money?
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
50,792
Reaction score
4,676
Points
113
Policing likes at $400/hour.
Honest persons options here:
1)Dial it back on the “fool2 absolutist!!!” Posts
2)admit your hypocrisy and try to do better

complaining to me is only an option for a DHB
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,704
Reaction score
5,592
Points
113
Maybe if we didn't give incentives not to work, people would get better jobs and earn more money?
Then who will make my double cheeseburger at McDonalds?

I have an idea who, but I bet you won't like it...
🤣🤣🤣
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
21,792
Reaction score
3,874
Points
113
Today, the top 1% of earners in the United States account for about 20% of the country's total income annually. Meanwhile, the lowest-earning quarter of Americans account for just 3.7% of income every year.

You can't tax people that make nothing. Lets tear down the government and see how well the top 1% do in anarchy.

Lot's of crying, you poor baby, you have it so so hard. Pathetic.
“Income” does NOT include the subsidies that they get from redistribution of wealth, like unemployment payments, welfare, medicaid, food stamps, or ANY government subsidy, including Biden “tax credits” (checks from the government) for taxes that they don’t pay.

Low income earners can make as much a low-middle income earner living off government wealth redistribution.

No, we don’t have it hard. We worked our ass off, got and used our education that we paid for, and succeeded. That’s the opportunity of America that is available to all…if they make good decisions and have good fortune, and we have had better fortune that most could hope to have. But this isn’t about our good fortune. This is about what makes a successful society.

The prospect of success is what motivates people to work hard. The redistribution of wealth motivates some people to just exist and live off of subsidies. Redistribution of wealth de-motivates middle income earners to work hard when their standard of living is no different than someone who, by choice, doesn’t work hard or make good decisions.
 



Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,704
Reaction score
5,592
Points
113
“Income” does NOT include the subsidies that they get from redistribution of wealth, like unemployment payments, welfare, medicaid, food stamps, or ANY government subsidy, including Biden “tax credits” (checks from the government) for taxes that they don’t pay.

Low income earners can make as much a low-middle income earner living off government wealth redistribution.

No, we don’t have it hard. We worked our ass off, got and used our education that we paid for, and succeeded. That’s the opportunity of America that is available to all…if they make good decisions and have good fortune, and we have had better fortune that most could hope to have. But this isn’t about our good fortune. This is about what makes a successful society.

The prospect of success is what motivates people to work hard. The redistribution of wealth motivates some people to just exist and live off of subsidies. Redistribution of wealth de-motivates middle income earners to work hard when their standard of living is no different than someone who, by choice, doesn’t work hard or make good decisions.
Why didn't the country fall apart in the 1950's when there was MUCH less inequality?
Why did anyone even work then?

You have been brainwashed by continuous bullshit from the right since Nixon, that greed is good. Its really sickening.
 







KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
21,792
Reaction score
3,874
Points
113
Why didn't the country fall apart in the 1950's when there was MUCH less inequality?
Why did anyone even work then?

You have been brainwashed by continuous bullshit from the right since Nixon, that greed is good. Its really sickening.
I voted for Jimmy Carter with my first vote…idiot.

It’s not “greed” to earn a higher income, especially if you contribute a significant percentage of it to charitable causes as we do for those less fortunate, yet don’t believe in more disproportionate taxation.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,704
Reaction score
5,592
Points
113
It’s not “greed” to earn a higher income

No its not. The greed is not realizing that if you weren't in this country, in this system you probably wouldn't earn shit. The greed speak pervades everything on the right.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
11,624
Reaction score
3,393
Points
113
The prospect of success is what motivates people to work hard. The redistribution of wealth motivates some people to just exist and live off of subsidies. Redistribution of wealth de-motivates middle income earners to work hard when their standard of living is no different than someone who, by choice, doesn’t work hard or make good decisions.
This is pretty much it in a nutshell for me. This sums up where we are right now
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,704
Reaction score
5,592
Points
113
Redistribution of wealth de-motivates middle income earners to work hard when their standard of living is no different than someone who, by choice, doesn’t work hard or make good decisions.

Surely you must have some examples, like real people middle income people who are demotivated.

And an example of someone on welfare who lives as well as someone making $50k, which is lower middle income.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
11,624
Reaction score
3,393
Points
113
Surely you must have some examples, like real people middle income people who are demotivated.
This just might be the most stupid and ignorant take we have seen on this board in quite a while, and that's a helluva bar to meet.

Wally sees millions of Americans who would rather be paid to sit at home and do nothing right now than get a job and doesn't know what he's looking at.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,704
Reaction score
5,592
Points
113
This just might be the most stupid and ignorant take we have seen on this board in quite a while, and that's a helluva bar to meet.

Wally sees millions of Americans who would rather be paid to sit at home and do nothing right now than get a job and doesn't know what he's looking at.
Why do I work?
I don't need to. My wife even said I could quit if I want.🤷🏼‍♂️
 



Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,704
Reaction score
5,592
Points
113
You think you have a wife.......LMAO
She still puts up with me and it would probably be quite expensive for her to get rid of me, so hopefully I'm safe.
😎😎😎
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
21,792
Reaction score
3,874
Points
113
Americans are soooo concerned about climate change, that the vast majority of them aren’t willing to pay to mitigate it.

Boy, if that’s a mandate for Build Back Better, nothing is. Guess what? There is no mandate for BBB.

New CEI Poll: Four in Ten Americans Unwilling to Spend $1 Annually on Higher Gas and Electricity Prices to Mitigate the Effects of Climate Change

WASHINGTON – The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) released a new poll today, gauging the public’s views on energy issues and climate change as Congress considers new climate regulations and mandates, on top of trillions of dollars in new federal spending. The poll, conducted by CRC Research, is an online survey of 1,200 registered voters nationwide September 23-27, 2021 with a ±2.83 percent overall margin of error.

While a strong majority of respondents said they are either somewhat or very concerned about climate change (71 percent, up from 67 percent in a poll conducted in April 2021), respondents sent a strong message that they are unwilling to pay for climate change mitigation policies out of pocket. Thirty-nine percent said they would not spend one dollar more than they already spend annually on gas or electricity to mitigate the effects of climate change. A further nine percent said they would spend as much as $10 more per year on gas and electricity on account of policies to mitigate climate change.

Other key findings in the poll include:

  • A clear majority of 56 percent said they were unlikely to “spend extra money to replace your gas-powered car with an electric vehicle,” with 41 percent “very unlikely” and 15 percent “somewhat unlikely” to do so.
  • Asked how much of their savings for education or retirement savings they would be willing to divert toward “immediate climate change spending,” 40 percent of respondents said “none” and 24 percent said “a limited amount.” Only two percent said “all” and seven percent said “a lot.”
  • Asked who should make the decision of what type of car to buy, in light of Biden-Harris Administration proposals to phase out the production of gas-and diesel-powered cars and trucks so drivers would be limited to buying Electric Vehicles, 73 percent said “You,” 13 percent said “The federal government,” and seven percent said “automakers.”
  • Asked to agree or disagree with the statement “The United States should only increase funding for climate change initiatives if other nations such as China, India, and Russia agree to enforce the same regulations and laws that the United States follows,” 47 percent responded they agree and 30 percent disagreed.
  • When asked to rate the mean importance of climate change on a spectrum compared to other issues it rated 11th on a list of 13. Climate change trailed other issues, including jobs and the economy, immigration and border security, crime, and rising energy prices…
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,704
Reaction score
5,592
Points
113
Americans are soooo concerned about climate change, that the vast majority of them aren’t willing to pay to mitigate it.

Boy, if that’s a mandate for Build Back Better, nothing is. Guess what? There is no mandate for BBB.

New CEI Poll: Four in Ten Americans Unwilling to Spend $1 Annually on Higher Gas and Electricity Prices to Mitigate the Effects of Climate Change

WASHINGTON – The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) released a new poll today, gauging the public’s views on energy issues and climate change as Congress considers new climate regulations and mandates, on top of trillions of dollars in new federal spending. The poll, conducted by CRC Research, is an online survey of 1,200 registered voters nationwide September 23-27, 2021 with a ±2.83 percent overall margin of error.

While a strong majority of respondents said they are either somewhat or very concerned about climate change (71 percent, up from 67 percent in a poll conducted in April 2021), respondents sent a strong message that they are unwilling to pay for climate change mitigation policies out of pocket. Thirty-nine percent said they would not spend one dollar more than they already spend annually on gas or electricity to mitigate the effects of climate change. A further nine percent said they would spend as much as $10 more per year on gas and electricity on account of policies to mitigate climate change.

Other key findings in the poll include:


  • A clear majority of 56 percent said they were unlikely to “spend extra money to replace your gas-powered car with an electric vehicle,” with 41 percent “very unlikely” and 15 percent “somewhat unlikely” to do so.
  • Asked how much of their savings for education or retirement savings they would be willing to divert toward “immediate climate change spending,” 40 percent of respondents said “none” and 24 percent said “a limited amount.” Only two percent said “all” and seven percent said “a lot.”
  • Asked who should make the decision of what type of car to buy, in light of Biden-Harris Administration proposals to phase out the production of gas-and diesel-powered cars and trucks so drivers would be limited to buying Electric Vehicles, 73 percent said “You,” 13 percent said “The federal government,” and seven percent said “automakers.”
  • Asked to agree or disagree with the statement “The United States should only increase funding for climate change initiatives if other nations such as China, India, and Russia agree to enforce the same regulations and laws that the United States follows,” 47 percent responded they agree and 30 percent disagreed.
  • When asked to rate the mean importance of climate change on a spectrum compared to other issues it rated 11th on a list of 13. Climate change trailed other issues, including jobs and the economy, immigration and border security, crime, and rising energy prices…
40% means everyone now.
🙄
 


MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
31,509
Reaction score
8,178
Points
113
The Competitive Enterprise Institute

:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

Stopped reading at that point
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,704
Reaction score
5,592
Points
113
Try reading the article
To lazy.

How about a refundable Carbon Tax. This is the young Republicans climate plan. If you use less carbon than average you get paid in the form of a refund every year. It's perfect, all the rich lefties you guys cry about will pay out the ass for their private jets and big houses. The righty chopping wood will bank. It's perfect.
 


MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
31,509
Reaction score
8,178
Points
113
The Competitive Enterprise Institute

Guaranteed they rigged it, to say whatever the people who paid for it wanted it to say. Cyber Ninjas
 




Top Bottom