[jlisenbe]

. Sure your median income stat makes you feel better, shows progress right?

It has nothing to do with me feeling better. It has everything to do with my original statement which was that we are better off now than thirty years ago. That statement is entirely correct.

Only in your weird math world do we enrich the already rich at the expense of everybody else who ain't rich. I mean duh! Can't you see how that hollows out the middle class?

Are you talking about the weird math that continues to show you that the wealthy are already paying nearly all of the income tax? At least you have dropped your ridiculous argument that the tax code favors the wealthy.

I mean in our consumer driven economy buying stuff moves it along, and circulates the money, and no matter how much you give rich folks they don't do either. They don't build roads, schools, or bridges! The hoard the money they get for NOT working and hide it for their kids or foundations and cry my taxes are to high give me a cut!

Tal, that is a completely false comment. Rich people do not "hoard" money. They invest money which produces jobs for others, and they spend money which produces jobs for others. They don't build roads and bridges??? Who do you think pays an enormous share of income and prop taxes that are used to build roads and bridges? You need to start reading more and get out of your liberal bubble in which you live.

I don't live in that top 20% and never have. I have nothing personal to protect here other than standing up for the truth. What you are saying is simply not true. You might as well say the moon is made of cheese. You have no data to back up your position and never have.

So are you admitting the tax cuts made permanent were not a good idea since the middle class tax cuts are set to expire very soon? All on the credit card I might add.

No. I am saying that "there is no conceivable level of taxation that will raise an extra tril of revenue without wrecking the economy." So we must put the fed government on a diet. A 10% across the board cut on spending other than Soc. Security would be a good start. Let those incompetent fed program administrators learn how to cut spending without significantly cutting services. It can be done.

[talaniman]

It has nothing to do with me feeling better. It has everything to do with my original statement which was that we are better off now than thirty years ago. That statement is entirely correct.

Well duh! If we weren't in some way better off than we were 30 years ago then we would be in big trouble now wouldn't we and that is through repubs and dems work, liberals and conservatives. That's more a testament of we were and always have been a great country that deals with whatever challenges we face. I would say we are better of now than when we started this experiment more than 200 years ago.

Are you talking about the weird math that continues to show you that the wealthy are already paying nearly all of the income tax? At least you have dropped your ridiculous argument that the tax code favors the wealthy.

Any math seems weird to you that's exactly why you have no clue what you're talking about. What's the old saying: You show how dumb you are when you open your mouth! Not only does the tax code HEAVILY favor the rich, it gives them full control to keep it that way. Job creation is a by product of them getting richer because they can't do it without people for those jobs and the cheaper wages the better. Let's go back to the Walmart business model. Big employer that uses cheap labor to sell cheap stuff and employs a cheap labor pool here to sell stuff, and that's after getting locked in to a huge tax break from the state and locals and subsidized labor costs since the cheap workers have to be on public assistance still, all of that to bank billions for the family business. They all do it and have for centuries. So yeah, who has the weird math that ignores reality? YOU DO! Or your wife is the financial genius in your house.

Tal, that is a completely ignorant comment. Rich people do not "hoard" money. They invest money which produces jobs for others, and they spend money which produces jobs for others. They don't build roads and bridges??? Who do you think pays an enormous share of income and prop taxes that are used to build roads and bridges? You need to start reading more and get out of your liberal bubble in which you live.

See above rebuttal to your lunacy.

I don't live in that top 20% and never have. I have nothing personal to protect here other than standing up for the truth. What you are saying is simply not true. You might as well say the moon is made of cheese. You have no data to back up your position and never have.

TRUTH, EVIDENCE, FACTS, AND REALITY ARE NOT YOUR STRONG SUITES! You could learn if you wanted too, but listening ain't in your tool box either it seems.

No. I am saying that "there is no conceivable level of taxation that will raise an extra tril of revenue without wrecking the economy." So we must put the fed government on a diet. A 10% across the board cut on spending other than Soc. Security would be a good start. Let those incompetent fed program administrators learn how to cut spending without significantly cutting services. It can be done.

Actually we have tried that, but repubs have come along and done away with those sequester cuts with a vengeance! Repubs NEVER cut the rich and their Big Biz MO'Money machine. Ain't gonna happen with a repub in the WH and congressional majorities. Now a balance between supply and demand through the tax code may be a step in the right direction of a LONG term plan. Until then get use to debts on YOUR credit card.

[jlisenbe]

Any math seems weird to you that's exactly why you have no clue what you're talking about. What's the old saying: You show how dumb you are when you open your mouth! Not only does the tax code HEAVILY favor the rich,

In what way does the tax code favor the wealthy when they are paying 85% of the income taxes?

You keep criticizing my math, but you don't say in what way it is wrong, and you certainly have no math/data of your own. You keep making reference to WMart, but they do not pay minimum wage. Starting pay is around nine or ten dollars an hour, and goes up from there. You won't get rich at that salary, but you are wrong if you are suggesting they pay min wage. BTW, I worked there part time when I was a teacher. It was not a demanding job.

TRUTH, EVIDENCE, FACTS, AND REALITY ARE NOT YOUR STRONG SUITES!

I'm the only one presenting evidence, data, math, or facts, so if you want to contend that my data is wrong, then present your own. Just being insulting and bombastic does not prove anything other than your own poverty of data.

Actually we have tried that, but repubs have come along and done away with those sequester cuts with a vengeance! Repubs NEVER cut the rich and their Big Biz MO'Money machine. Ain't gonna happen with a repub in the WH and congressional majorities. Now a balance between supply and demand through the tax code may be a step in the right direction of a LONG term plan. Until then get use to debts on YOUR credit card.

We did try sequestration. It was a repub idea and shot down by your beloved Mr. Obama and the lib media. Learn your history before you try to post about it. Honestly, I have no hope for a balanced budget. We have become such a stupid and lazy nation that it will keep going like this until the wheels fall off the cart. Look at Greece and Venezuela.

Becoming angry and insulting does not prove your points. Why don't you try making a logical presentation of your case, complete with data, and absent any appeal to me to do the math and research for you.

[talaniman]

I don't get angry and if my growing opinion of your posts is insulting then you only have yourself to blame starting here.

[jlisenbe]

So where in your link to nowhere, which is typical, does it say that, "Actually we have tried that, but repubs have come along and done away with those sequester cuts with a vengeance?" The dems have the House now. Other than the kangaroo impeachment court, could you show us where they have proposed any cuts in spending?

As to my math, I'll call you out on that one. Show me where my math is wrong. Either that, or find something else to complain about. It really gets kind of old. This business of trying to present yourself as some sort of expert on data and math when you had no idea what median income was and NEVER present any data yourself. Don't talk the talk if you can't walk the walk.

[talaniman]

Did you miss the part about the sequester is still in effect until 2021, or the repubs repealed the sequester on military stuff. So show me the balanced budget repubs have produced. You got no math, so we can dismiss the lunatic attempts at insults. Let me know when you stop being stuck on just rich guy taxes and median incomes, and are ready for more advanced calculations with a wider range of factors that tells a more accurate picture of the realities of real people.

.

[jlisenbe]

Did you miss the part about the sequester is still in effect until 2021

So the House is in the hands of the dems right now. Are they enforcing that?

Let me know when you stop being stuck on just rich guy taxes and median incomes, and are ready for more advanced calculations with a wider range of factors that tells a more accurate picture of the realities of real people.

As I figured, you are not able to point to any errors in my math. But by all means, I'm ready now for "a wider range of factors that tell a more accurate picture of the realities of people." Fire away. Let's hear it. Just be aware that your opinions matter nothing. Your stories matter nothing. Hit us with the data. I am ready to listen.

[talaniman]

So the House is in the hands of the dems right now. Are they enforcing that

Best answered by review the bills that Moscow Mitch is sitting on from the current House since they were seated last January.

As I figured, you are not able to point to any errors in my math. But by all means, I'm ready now for "a wider range of factors that tell a more accurate picture of the realities of people." Fire away. Let's hear it. Just be aware that your opinions matter nothing. Your stories matter nothing. Hit us with the data. I am ready to listen.

All the links and comments have already been presented. You must have missed it in your lunatic rantings, but you have plenty of time to catch up! No hurry! Go for it. Or perhaps you should stick with more social issues like having your 15 week abortion laws, and the heartbeat laws struck down as unconstitutional. Have heart though, Moscow Mitch intends to hold a vote on abortion to keep you prolifer's engaged and ready to vote for him and the other dufus sycophants very soon. You're on better ground than monetary policy where you are amazingly primitive almost backward.

TRUTH, EVIDENCE, FACTS, AND REALITY ARE NOT YOUR STRONG SUITES!

Add data gathering for analysis to the list. I know, just my opinion, but gleaned from your own postings.

[Vacuum7]

jlisenbe: Effectively, for the past several years, I have made the same income, not even keeping up with rises in the Cost Of Living.....In all the years up to last year, I never had to pay any tax due by April 15th. LAST YEAR, after Trump's Tax Plan kicked in, I had to PAY TAXES OWED TO THE FEDS BY APRIL 15th: I have never done this but once in way over 35 years work experience. The TRUMP TAX PLAN hurt me. I could really care less about how much the UPPER 1% of income earners pay in taxes: Right now, I am talking about how I have been affected.

[jlisenbe]

All the links and comments have already been presented. You must have missed it in your lunatic rantings, but you have plenty of time to catch up! No hurry

Completely untrue. If you had anything, you'd show it. You've been called out and you came up with zip. It is now clear to all that you have nothing. I have unemployment record figures, median income, GDP growth, and income tax figures to back up my statements. You've got absolutely nothing other than temper tantrums and name calling.

jlisenbe: Effectively, for the past several years, I have made the same income, not even keeping up with rises in the Cost Of Living.....In all the years up to last year, I never had to pay any tax due by April 15th. LAST YEAR, after Trump's Tax Plan kicked in, I had to PAY TAXES OWED TO THE FEDS BY APRIL 15th: I have never done this but once in way over 35 years work experience. The TRUMP TAX PLAN hurt me. I could really care less about how much the UPPER 1% of income earners pay in taxes: Right now, I am talking about how I have been affected.

Vac, I get what you are saying, but we're not just talking about you. The nation as a whole, and that would mean most people, are doing better. Unemployment is down, wages are up, and the wealthy continue to carry the greater part by far of the income tax burden.

[paraclete]

jl, why do you object to those with the greater ability bearing the greater burden, tax is in effect the licence fee for making money

[Vacuum7]

jlisenbe: I go no doubt that "MOST" may be benefitting in some way or another from Trump's Presidency.....its just that I am not seeing ANY benefit from his Presidency: The company made record profits each of the past three years but did not pass any fruits of this off to me and those at my level....and, then, to add insult to injury, my taxes went up as did my insurance...so my take home pay is less this year than it was last year: Just not getting much out of TRUMP in my house.

[jlisenbe]

jl, why do you object to those with the greater ability bearing the greater burden, tax is in effect the licence fee for making money

I have no problem with the wealthy paying a higher share. I have a big problem when someone makes ridiculous statements like the tax code favors the rich or the poor are being taxed to death.

jlisenbe: I go no doubt that "MOST" may be benefitting in some way or another from Trump's Presidency.....its just that I am not seeing ANY benefit from his Presidency: The company made record profits each of the past three years but did not pass any fruits of this off to me and those at my level....and, then, to add insult to injury, my taxes went up as did my insurance...so my take home pay is less this year than it was last year: Just not getting much out of TRUMP in my house.

Why not work for someone else? It's a workers market out there now. Really sounds like your problem is with your employer and not really with Trump. What do you do?

[paraclete]

I have no problem with the wealthy paying a higher share. I have a big problem when someone makes ridiculous statements like the tax code favors the rich or the poor are being taxed to death.

but you are operating with a half truth, the rich can avail themselves of loopholes and deductions that the poor cannot or these are of little or no advantage to them. The tax code is not a level playing field

[jlisenbe]

but you are operating with a half truth, the rich can avail themselves of loopholes and deductions that the poor cannot or these are of little or no advantage to them. The tax code is not a level playing field

I don't know what to say. The top 20% pay over 85% of the taxes. The top 1% pays about 40% of the taxes. The bottom 50% pay basically nothing, so yeah, I'd say the tax code is not on a level playing field.

[paraclete]

I don't know what to say. The top 20% pay over 85% of the taxes. The top 1% pays about 40% of the taxes. The bottom 50% pay basically nothing, so yeah, I'd say the tax code is not on a level playing field.

Yes you keep repeating these statistics but the rich can reduce the effective rate of tax through structuring their affairs. The rich pay more tax because they have more income, that is the way the tax rates work. The low income people pay less because they earn less . What would happen if you reversed the situation and the low income people paid a high percentage of their income, there would be less incentive to work

[jlisenbe]

I keep repeating those stats because they refute your contention that the tax code is not on a level playing field. I am not suggesting we reverse anything. I am suggesting we stop this false narrative of tax inequities. It is not true. A person can argue about tax deductions and that can be a legit discussion, but not tax unfairness.

Income Level	Top 1%	Top 5%	Top 10%	Top 25%	Top 50%	Bottom 50%
Percentage of Total Tax Revenue	39.40%	59.90%	70.80%	86.70%	97.20%	2.70%
Average Tax Rate	27.10%	23.60%	21.20%	17.80%	15.50%	3.40%

[talaniman]

You keep repeating those stats because that's as far as your ability takes you. You think that's the whole picture to determine the whole story. Stats though show the rate of growth in median income, barring a recession, only applies to the country as a whole, but does not represent the parts of the country that lags woefully behind that figure which suggests that some have gained more than others, which is a lot of people who aren't as well off as you have claimed. The flaw in your analysis is you do not parse the numbers enough to reflect that though some places have bigger gains than others MOST do not, and those living in those areas of no growth or very little see no changes in their lives over the last few years. My conclusion recognizes this fact, and says the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer and that FACT resonates over the past decades.

As Clete says your median income stat is a reflection of my conclusion more than yours, and is a perfect example of how a broad stand alone stat cannot paint an accurate picture, though you claim it does. Sure the rich pay more in taxes, another fallacy of yours though the real story there is how inadequate that is in the bigger economic picture when prices are rising, as is the COST OF LIVING, and government spending is through the roof creating even more debt than we have ever seen.

At least at the bare minimum you must recognize that the wealth at the top has elevated your medium income stat, and while good for rich guys not so good for the rest of us. Here are my stats to back my position on median income. A far more accurate one than yours by far. Please note how far below the average median income your state is and tell me again how the rich getting richer, and the poor getting poorer affects YOU.

The country is not even doing as good as you claim, because you ignore totally the other factors that go beyond median income, because you don't look deeper. Much like reading a headline and not the whole article. Once you understand the nuance of those economic dynamics we can get to those other factors that go into those broad numbers like rich guy deductions and actual ways those rich guys manipulate the tax code that they themselves have written to steal money legally.

Not my opinion but analysis of data. I only gave you one link, but there are numerous others that say the same but for fact you don't do so good at multiple links, research or even fact checking so no wonder you cannot find data supplied you BEFORE and keep regurgitating the same stuff repeatedly. Stubborn or stuck? I don't know, nor care frankly, we still have the same outcome, we cannot prove facts to you, and you will never prove fallacy to us. It is what it is I suppose.

You keep repeating those stats because that's as far as your ability takes you. You think that's the whole picture to determine the whole story. Stats though show the rate of growth in median income, barring a recession, only applies to the country as a whole, but does not represent the parts of the country that lags woefully behind that figure which suggests that some have gained more than others, which is a lot of people who aren't as well off as you have claimed. The flaw in your analysis is you do not parse the numbers enough to reflect that though some places have bigger gains than others MOST do not, and those living in those areas of no growth or very little see no changes in their lives over the last few years. My conclusion recognizes this fact, and says the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer and that FACT resonates over the past decades.

As Clete says your median income stat is a reflection of my conclusion more than yours, and is a perfect example of how a broad stand alone stat cannot paint an accurate picture, though you claim it does. Sure the rich pay more in taxes, another fallacy of yours though the real story there is how inadequate that is in the bigger economic picture when prices are rising, as is the COST OF LIVING, and government spending is through the roof creating even more debt than we have ever seen.

At least at the bare minimum you must recognize that the wealth at the top has elevated your medium income stat, and while good for rich guys not so good for the rest of us. Here are my stats to back my position on median income. A far more accurate one than yours by far. Please note how far below the average median income your state is and tell me again how the rich getting richer, and the poor getting poorer affects YOU.

The country is not even doing as good as you claim, because you ignore totally the other factors that go beyond median income, because you don't look deeper. Much like reading a headline and not the whole article. Once you understand the nuance of those economic dynamics we can get to those other factors that go into those broad numbers like rich guy deductions and actual ways those rich guys manipulate the tax code that they themselves have written to steal money legally.

Not my opinion but analysis of data. I only gave you one link, but there are numerous others that say the same but for fact you don't do so good at multiple links, research or even fact checking so no wonder you cannot find data supplied you BEFORE and keep regurgitating the same stuff repeatedly. Stubborn or stuck? I don't know, nor care frankly, we still have the same outcome, we cannot prove facts to you, and you will never prove fallacy to us. It is what it is I suppose.

[jlisenbe]

us. Here are my stats to back my position on median income. A far more accurate

I hope you realize that you have twice given a link to the Crimean invasion as "stats to back up my position on median income" which would be funny if it wasn't so ridiculous. I can only assume that's a careless mistake of some sort even though you did it twice. Well, I rest my case. You have no data. Lots of meaningless words, but no data.

At least at the bare minimum you must recognize that the wealth at the top has elevated your medium income stat,

And yet again you show that you don't understand median income statistics. I don't recognize that since it is untrue and doesn't reflect how the median income stat works. That has already been explained to you, but you are too eaten up with TDS to be willing to understand.

Not my opinion but analysis of data.

You do realize that you presented no data and thus have no data to analyze?

[talaniman]

Waiting for coffee but have corrected the error on my part. Blows the spin about my perfection though! 8D

Your median income stat is but the headline dude, you have to read the whole paper to understand what the headline means. Your refusal to do so is perplexing for whatever reason. Just saying!