|
Post by osha on Dec 19, 2017 16:28:34 GMT -7
Fact: Joe needs to move to a state with lower taxes. My effective tax rate on my pay check is 22.5% because my 401K and HSA contributions are deducted before taxes. Fact: Joe needs to fix his family problems and sleep with his wife instead of on his friends couch. Fact: If Joe has a crappy job he needs to develop a marketable talent that pays better. Minimum wage is a starting point, not a career. Fact: Social security was created to help widows and orphans of WW-II. It was never intended as a retirement plan. Fact: The left loves taking other peoples money by force and calling it taxes then redistributing it with a made up flourish. Pay out "programs" are almost exclusively from the left and sometimes called "subsidies", creating a culture of entitlement. It's not just taxes. It could be insurance cost which are needed deductions. Joe chooses to sleep on a friends couch because Joe can help his family the best that way. Why do we always suggest a move? I am "poor" but not real "poor" but poor enough to get assistance. If I were to move, it would be a huge and expensive undertaking and if you look at someone who makes crap wages and tell them to save for a move, not going to happen. Not to even mention that Joe has friends and many of his friends are college graduates stuck in the same crap he himself is stuck in. So why would Joe want to take risks knowing those risks might not pay off? And chances are, those risks won't pay off at all. Hey, the right loves to force me and take my money to fight wars I don't support. The right wants to take my money and provide welfare to the rich I don't support. It works a bit both ways here. Social Security has become a promise and they should keep that promise or else it is simply theft. Low wage jobs are simply a result of the wealthy buying up more. Who cares about how happy an employee is when said employee can be replaced in a matter of minutes with another low wage worker? It's a circle that many cannot escape and sadly no options. And instead of fixing a problem, we look at a population and seclude them by whatever name while the problem remains. We could offer tax breaks based on amount of pay. So whatever the company does to help reduce the tax burden on others, they get a tax break. This could reduce the need for food stamps and such. And the tax break could make up for costs due to the increase. But no, the rich create a need for programs and they get tax breaks. The right cuts programs that the rich created out of greed and that greed costs the tax payer. So, who do we blame? Do we blame the people who need assistance to survive or do we blame the people who create that need?
|
|
|
Post by ranger06 on Dec 19, 2017 18:19:22 GMT -7
Ah gee whiz. Poor ol' Joe doesn't want to take the risk to move and better his situation. Poor baby.
In my minority I moved every one to two years, three times overseas. Only once I was in a place for three years! In 12 years of primary education, I was in 9 schools, 10 if kindergarten is counted. I also did a bit of research to ensure I majored with a money making degree, and guaranteed it in the Army. Of 12 years active duty I moved 8 times - twice overseas. Of 12 years in the reserve components I made 10 deployments - one to a combat zone. Move to better my situation is the name of the game.
Also, speaking of taxes, Joe should have got off his lazy butt and done a bit of research. My military retirement is not state taxed in Alabama. There are a bunch of states that don't either. When I finally retire from the university, that teacher's retirement pension is state exempt also.
Mine is an easy story. Hoofie took the big risks of a businessman. Apparently his investments are panning out. BTW, he moved recently to another state to better his situation. Not all that long ago my dad's Scottish ancestors left the mother country rather than being hung, drawn and quartered by the British after one of the Jacobite revolts. My mother's Irish side left rather than starve during the potato famine. Both were too poor to move and take risks knowing those risks might not pay off. Failure meant death.
Cry me a river!
|
|
|
Post by osha on Dec 19, 2017 18:29:43 GMT -7
Ah gee whiz. Poor ol' Joe doesn't want to take the risk to move and better his situation. Poor baby. In my minority I moved every one to two years, three times overseas. Only once I was in a place for three years! In 12 years of primary education, I was in 9 schools, 10 if kindergarten is counted. I also did a bit of research to ensure I majored with a money making degree, and guaranteed it in the Army. Of 12 years active duty I moved 8 times - twice overseas. Of 12 years in the reserve components I made 10 deployments - one to a combat zone. Move to better my situation is the name of the game. Also, speaking of taxes, Joe should have got off his lazy butt and done a bit of research. My military retirement is not state taxed in Alabama. There are a bunch of states that don't either. When I finally retire from the university, that teacher's retirement pension is state exempt also. Mine is an easy story. Hoofie took the big risks of a businessman. Apparently his investments are panning out. BTW, he moved recently to another state to better his situation. Not all that long ago my dad's Scottish ancestors left the mother country rather than being hung, drawn and quartered by the British after one of the Jacobite revolts. My mother's Irish side left rather than starve during the potato famine. Both were too poor to move and take risks knowing those risks might not pay off. Failure meant death. Cry me a river! And let me guess, you are close to sixty and grew up in a booming economy and had job opportunities as far as the eye could see? And you are even perhaps a baby boomer? And this might even pertain to Hoofie as well. Your very own "poor baby" crap is the result of the Republican idea that "I did and so can everyone else". You did it in a much cheaper world, you done it in a world that had endless opportunists, you did it in a world where the land of opportunity was real and you did it in a time where the taxes on the rich was much higher and people were able to see the top of the economic ladder. So my reply? The older generations are dwindling little by little every single year. This means that you will be replaced by people who have to live in this reality today. At that time we will see fixes because the people of today understand the issues while the boomers have wet dreams about the 60s. The future looks bright.
|
|
|
Post by ranger06 on Dec 19, 2017 21:52:44 GMT -7
And let me guess, you are close to sixty and grew up in a booming economy and had job opportunities as far as the eye could see? And you are even perhaps a baby boomer? And this might even pertain to Hoofie as well. Your very own "poor baby" crap is the result of the Republican idea that "I did and so can everyone else". You did it in a much cheaper world, you done it in a world that had endless opportunists, you did it in a world where the land of opportunity was real and you did it in a time where the taxes on the rich was much higher and people were able to see the top of the economic ladder. So my reply? The older generations are dwindling little by little every single year. This means that you will be replaced by people who have to live in this reality today. At that time we will see fixes because the people of today understand the issues while the boomers have wet dreams about the 60s. The future looks bright. I've lived the American dream - and it wasn't from fear of moving or taking risks. Crying won't help anybody. Maybe with a bit more maturity you will realize this. Yes, "I did and so can everyone else" as did the other 7 sibs of my lower class family. Four of them are flaming Democrats. All have at least a bachelor's degree, two of those have master's, one a J.D., one a PhD, and one a ParmD. Not bad showing for those born just above the poverty level. My wife, from a poor small farm in Pickens Co, has her masters. She's the only one of her generation or the one before to go to collage. My children have opportunities not even dreamed about in my generation, but they also have the same freedom their parents had to squander them. Yes, you poor baby, until you get off your lazy butt you'll stay in that life you've earned but complain bitterly about. "When you make your bed, you must lie in it."
|
|
|
Post by osha on Dec 19, 2017 22:33:05 GMT -7
I've lived the American dream - and it wasn't from fear of moving or taking risks. Crying won't help anybody. Maybe with a bit more maturity you will realize this. Yes, "I did and so can everyone else" as did the other 7 sibs of my lower class family. Four of them are flaming Democrats. All have at least a bachelor's degree, two of those have master's, one a J.D., one a PhD, and one a ParmD. Not bad showing for those born just above the poverty level. My wife, from a poor small farm in Pickens Co, has her masters. She's the only one of her generation or the one before to go to collage. My children have opportunities not even dreamed about in my generation, but they also have the same freedom their parents had to squander them. Yes, you poor baby, until you get off your lazy butt you'll stay in that life you've earned but complain bitterly about. "When you make your bed, you must lie in it." I sure hope that as I get older I keep my compassion. The other day a fourth stage cancer woman asked a republican about healthcare and was ejected from the town hall: thinkprogress.org/dean-heller-laura-packard-health-care-29b7e4649631/If I get to the point I care about people so little, I want took out behind the barn and shot. And the other day when reading a letter to Santa from a young girl online who needed a blanket and to find out one in five children live in extreme poverty. That is crazy and it is a reality in our world. And while one party would shrug their shoulders and say "oh well, should have worked harder". I will say "I am here to help and if I have to pay more taxes to help, so be it. Then you have inflation and inflation not following wages. So in 1960 if you loaned someone 20 bucks and they were to pay you back today, they would owe you $166. Where are we compared to 1960? www.usinflationcalculator.com/Far as I can tell, the minimum wage should be a little north of ten bucks an hour. But it is not and the right complains when things ain't like the good ole days.So in reality, in 1960, your buying power was much higher. So of course, owning a home and such was much easier. Today, not so much. I'm glad there is a piece of humanity that took advantage of a system in a time when the system worked. Now the system don't work and to expect the same today is nuts. This is a large reason I don't buy into statistics. The stock market being up? Of course the rich investors are excited about the prospect of tax cuts and why wouldn't they be? That is not the gauge of the average Joe here. www.cbpp.org/blog/jct-millions-of-households-face-tax-increase-or-no-tax-benefit-under-republican-tax-billAnd isn't it sick how much of the work force makes under $30k a year? If you're making that much in this society you are broke. But who cares? All while the same set in humanity will vote against their own best interests and usually it is to save the fetus or whatever. And the funny thing is the want to force a hardship and at the same time take no responsibility for the hardship/ But George Carlin said it best when he said they only want obedient workers. They know every child born is a benefit to the rich so why not force children into birth even when it creates a hardship. Sure, they will grow into to slaves after all while the people who follow religion cheer them on because they saved the fetus. Wow, hard concept.
|
|