Phil, this is why no one wants to do what you call debating. I addressed each point in your previous post. You respond by ignoring most of it and taking one sentence to go on a leftist rant worthy of Alinsky's hand puppet. But I have time to kill so I'll take a swing again
Quote:
|
The bulk of the cited 47% are working Americans. These are not bums living on the government dime.
|
The true unemployment rate is 16%. All of those people are in the no income tax category, so that has to be 34% of your 47%. Add in handicapped, disabled, elderly, etc and your "bulk" comment is bullshit.
Quote:
These are the people that make your meals, clean your house, work on your car and maintain your lawn. These are the hard working Americans that bust their ass so you and I can live comfortable lives. These are the people who you just said "contribute nothing to the country".
So what would you have the guy making minimum wage contribute to national defense? What would you tell the MILLIONS of Americans making $7.25 an hour that they need to contribute? How much more of the $290.00 per week do they owe? And really his take home is going to be closer to $260 after FICA and any state taxes, so how much more is this guy that takes home about $1,000 a month to live on supposed to pay?
|
Spoken like a true organizer, the "nobility of the laborer." These jobs are done by people who either a) want to and are willing to accept lower wages to do it or b) do not have skills to offer to the marketplace that are more valuable than the ones they are using. Like anything else, labor is subject to the laws of supply and demand. When there are a lot of people who can do the same job you do, the value of your skillset diminishes and so do your wages.
I employ roughly 85 people, the lowest salaried of which received $30,200 last year plus benefits. I bet, even given that, 2/3 of them fall in the "no income taxes" category. Your argument is complete shit.
To give you an example that you can relate to, the equivalent of telling me I need to pay people more than they are worth would be for you to toss in an extra $30,000 to the purchase price of the boat you just ordered for the sole purpose of distributing it to the people who actually built it. Bet that didn't happen.
Quote:
|
What would you then have the seniors living on SS contribute?
|
I am not in favor of the circular logic involved in taking back money that has already been handled, and therefore reduced, by the government just so they can reduce it again.
Quote:
|
Exactly why are you so eager to take from those with the least to give while excusing 15% capital gains taxes on billionaires?
|
To encourage investment which generates jobs and creates a rising tide which lifts all ships instead of shooting holes in their hulls for the benefit of the Marxists who tell them how bad they are being treated.