Page 2542 of 2648 FirstFirst ... 1542204224422492253225402541254225432544255225922642 ... LastLast
Results 25,411 to 25,420 of 26475

Thread: Politics Thread

  1. #25411
    Supporting Member bobbiemcgee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    11,892
    CFPB cost 800 million returms
    21 billion
    2023 Sweet 16

  2. #25412
    Supporting Member Strange Brew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denver, Co
    Posts
    6,886
    Quote Originally Posted by bjf123 View Post
    I remember an article a number of years ago by an economist at either George Mason or George Washington University who ran the numbers on wealth tax. I don’t remember the exact figures, but it was something like if the government took the wealth of all the billionaires and taxed all income over $500,000 at 100%, it only funded the government for less than 6 months. We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.
    No Diggity, No Doubt.
    Official XUHoops Resident Legal Scholar.
    (Do not take this seriously)

  3. #25413
    Supporting Member Strange Brew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denver, Co
    Posts
    6,886
    Quote Originally Posted by bobbiemcgee View Post
    CFPB cost 800 million returms
    21 billion
    Um, what does this mean?

    I know what the CFPB is however could you add more info around the numbers?
    Official XUHoops Resident Legal Scholar.
    (Do not take this seriously)

  4. #25414
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,197
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange Brew View Post
    Assets vs. income.

    Are you saying the Gov’t should seize the assets of select people for the “common good”?
    Am I saying the Gov’t should seize the assets of select peoplefor the “common good”?

    The select people “billionaires” should be paying their fair share of federal taxes including their businesses. I’d like to think it would go towards the common good but highly doubt it with how our government functions.

  5. #25415
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,197
    Quote Originally Posted by bjf123 View Post
    I remember an article a number of years ago by an economist at either George Mason or George Washington University who ran the numbers on wealth tax. I don’t remember the exact figures, but it was something like if the government took the wealth of all the billionaires and taxed all income over $500,000 at 100%, it only funded the government for less than 6 months. We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.
    We have a spending problem and a revenue problem.

  6. #25416
    Junior
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    2,598
    Quote Originally Posted by xuphan View Post
    We have a spending problem and a revenue problem.
    No, we don't. Categorically, we have a spending problem (period).

    See chart 5: https://yardeni.com/charts/us-federal-outlays-receipts/
    When they say, “We must protect our democracy,” switch the word “democracy” to “bureaucracy”, and it will all make sense.

  7. #25417
    Junior
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    2,598
    Quote Originally Posted by xuphan View Post
    We have a spending problem and a revenue problem.
    It's the spending...

    Marco Rubio:

    People who worked their entire lives - they retire and get $800 or $900 or $1,000 dollars in Social Security. THEN SOMEONE WHO JUST GOT HERE - DOESN'T WORK AND IS GIVEN $1,500 DOLLARS A MONTH IN BENEFITS BY OUR GOVERNMENT!

    https://x.com/5dme81/status/1888408833669865597
    When they say, “We must protect our democracy,” switch the word “democracy” to “bureaucracy”, and it will all make sense.

  8. #25418
    Supporting Member Strange Brew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denver, Co
    Posts
    6,886
    Quote Originally Posted by xuphan View Post
    Am I saying the Gov’t should seize the assets of select peoplefor the “common good”?

    The select people “billionaires” should be paying their fair share of federal taxes including their businesses. I’d like to think it would go towards the common good but highly doubt it with how our government functions.
    They are according to the law.

    “Fair share” is an arbitrary term/slogan. It’s meaningless and lacks logic.
    Official XUHoops Resident Legal Scholar.
    (Do not take this seriously)

  9. #25419
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,197
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange Brew View Post
    They are according to the law.

    Fair share” is an arbitrary term/slogan. It’s meaningless and lacks logic.
    You are right. There should be a percentage number that everyone pays on their income with no loopholes to exploit.

  10. #25420
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,197
    Quote Originally Posted by XU_Lou View Post
    It's the spending...

    Marco Rubio:

    People who worked their entire lives - they retire and get $800 or $900 or $1,000 dollars in Social Security. THEN SOMEONE WHO JUST GOT HERE - DOESN'T WORK AND IS GIVEN $1,500 DOLLARS A MONTH IN BENEFITS BY OUR GOVERNMENT!

    https://x.com/5dme81/status/1888408833669865597
    It’s both….

    The bottom game the system isn’t new and sadly has become a life style for some. Collecting the government check in the mail is an occupation for some. My favorite two stories is one lady who quit her job because she made to much for low income housing and the other is a dad who would only do scheduled meetings with his son if he received a gas card and check for doing so at JFS. The kicker is he never did see his son as he left right away after getting his handouts. Then you have the people who can’t afford one child but decide to have 2-3 more children.

    Then you have the ultra elite who hold stupid amount of wealth. Why do these rich people need the government to fund projects that they themselves have the wealth to do themselves? I believe the Cleveland Browns and Cincinnati Bengals are both want to either renovate or build new stadiums. Both are owned by Billionaires yet need the tax payers to fund their projects though they have the funds to do it themselves. Seems like a waste of government money if you ask me.

    I’d say they both exploit the government at the expense of the tax payer.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •