He compares America to Europe and says we are the same welfare state as they are. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/24/opinion/brooks-america-is-europe.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha212
The only difference is how our politicians have learned to hide the expenditures by manipulating the tax code so the people never see it then brag about how they have cut taxes.
Since half the people in American don't pay any direct taxes (i.e. by filling out the 1040) plus get free handouts and with the economy improving, I am sure Obama is going to win this next election. That will be unfortunate but what can I do. He already is raising millions of dollars from donations under $200.00 each.
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/265D41D7C6BC4AA3A9BFAE322268AE40@dual
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Half of Americans don't pay any Federal income tax
90% of Americans have no idea how dire the deficit spending is.
We are borrowing 40% of the budget now, over 1 trillion a year. 3 billion a days.
________________________________
From: Nicholas Geti <ngeti@optonline.net>
To: profox@leafe.com
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 11:51 AM
Subject: [OT] Now David Brookes is talking
He compares America to Europe and says we are the same welfare state as they are. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/24/opinion/brooks-america-is-europe.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha212
The only difference is how our politicians have learned to hide the expenditures by manipulating the tax code so the people never see it then brag about how they have cut taxes.
Since half the people in American don't pay any direct taxes (i.e. by filling out the 1040) plus get free handouts and with the economy improving, I am sure Obama is going to win this next election. That will be unfortunate but what can I do. He already is raising millions of dollars from donations under $200.00 each.
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/265D41D7C6BC4AA3A9BFAE322268AE40@dual
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1330112467.58230.YahooMailNeo@web125605.mail.ne1.yahoo.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Michael Madigan <mmadi10699@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Half of Americans don't pay any Federal income tax
----------------
I have heard this chant a lot lately but I don't find enough
supporting documentation for it.
Some sites say that is the # 47% and I can find in some reports that
same value. Only the value is just part of the entire picture that is
not represented at all.
47% of the taxpayer class "Single" are not paying tax. Reasons sited
were 1. Jobless, 2. Senior Citizen / elderly, 3. Students
The other class was married with filing married or filing jointly.
Past Fox news, or CBS, are there real facts to drive this probable
fiction? I am sure there is a lot of bias in this news.
--
Stephen Russell
901.246-0159 cell
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAJidMYLWq-xmUL6ZPC=V2bPZEY2DGN_rr3tAamTXTArqfxHs5Q@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
On Feb 24, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> Past Fox news, or CBS, are there real facts to drive this probable
> fiction? I am sure there is a lot of bias in this news.
The focus on *income* tax is largely accurate: there is a minimum income level for each family size under which you do not owe taxes. However, these people pay a lot of federal taxes, just not as income tax. The numbers that I have seen show that the lower your income, the larger the percentage of it goes to the federal government when you count all forms of taxes, fees, etc.
-- Ed Leafe
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/76AC2D2C-EC74-4B75-B887-497E68D8635A@leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Those additional fees are gas tax; FICA, which is huge and stops above an
income of $52,000 (I think that is right); house prices falling; graft and
corruption; and on and on.
One additional point is that companies pass all of their tax bills onto the
public through higher prices. No one stops to think about this and I haven't
heard many comments from the politicians on this topic. I think Gingrich
mentioned it once. It should be pounded into people's heads that this
occurs. Maybe someday they will get the point.
In my opinion corporations should never pay any taxes. It is only the final
consumer, meaning you and me, who should pay a tax. That way, every dollar
taken by the government will be obvious to each of us where the money is
going. Politicians will no longer be able to hide behind a cloud while
taking your money. But I am sure even under that system the crooks will
figure out a way to disguise what they are doing.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Leafe" <ed@leafe.com>
To: "ProFox Email List" <profox@leafe.com>
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] Now David Brookes is talking
> On Feb 24, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
>
>> Past Fox news, or CBS, are there real facts to drive this probable
>> fiction? I am sure there is a lot of bias in this news.
>
> The focus on *income* tax is largely accurate: there is a minimum income
> level for each family size under which you do not owe taxes. However,
> these people pay a lot of federal taxes, just not as income tax. The
> numbers that I have seen show that the lower your income, the larger the
> percentage of it goes to the federal government when you count all forms
> of taxes, fees, etc.
>
>
>
> -- Ed Leafe
>
>
>
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/FE5BCE89D40148DF93878968C689ED78@dual
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
So, if I earn $10 a year and pay $10 to go to a federal park, that means I
pay 100% of my income in taxes? Wow!
As for the feds cutting taxes. Suppose they cut 200 from a program that
would have increased by 1,000. So, it was "cut" by 20%. Wow again.
Carl Lindner
-----Original Message-----
From: profox-bounces@leafe.com [mailto:profox-bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf
Of Ed Leafe
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 3:45 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] Now David Brookes is talking
On Feb 24, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> Past Fox news, or CBS, are there real facts to drive this probable
> fiction? I am sure there is a lot of bias in this news.
The focus on *income* tax is largely accurate: there is a minimum
income level for each family size under which you do not owe taxes. However,
these people pay a lot of federal taxes, just not as income tax. The numbers
that I have seen show that the lower your income, the larger the percentage
of it goes to the federal government when you count all forms of taxes,
fees, etc.
-- Ed Leafe
[excessive quoting removed by server]
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Now you are starting to get it. Lies, damn lies, statistics, politicians,
republocrats, Obama.
John Harvey
-----Original Message-----
From: profox-bounces@leafe.com [mailto:profox-bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf
Of Carl Lindner
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 3:25 PM
To: 'ProFox Email List'
Subject: RE: [OT] Now David Brookes is talking
So, if I earn $10 a year and pay $10 to go to a federal park, that means I
pay 100% of my income in taxes? Wow!
As for the feds cutting taxes. Suppose they cut 200 from a program that
would have increased by 1,000. So, it was "cut" by 20%. Wow again.
Carl Lindner
-----Original Message-----
From: profox-bounces@leafe.com [mailto:profox-bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf
Of Ed Leafe
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 3:45 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] Now David Brookes is talking
On Feb 24, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> Past Fox news, or CBS, are there real facts to drive this probable
> fiction? I am sure there is a lot of bias in this news.
The focus on *income* tax is largely accurate: there is a minimum
income level for each family size under which you do not owe taxes. However,
these people pay a lot of federal taxes, just not as income tax. The numbers
that I have seen show that the lower your income, the larger the percentage
of it goes to the federal government when you count all forms of taxes,
fees, etc.
-- Ed Leafe
[excessive quoting removed by server]
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/01d301ccf33d$459b6bf0$d0d243d0$@shelbynet.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
I've known this for a great many years. In the very early 70's 10,000 was a
reasonable salary. If there was a 500 increase you got a 5% raise.
If a guy was making 15,000 and he received a 700 increase they got a 4.67
per cent increase. So, the guy getting the 700 raise got less of an
increase than the guy getting 500.
As to the government programs... I understand all the words and am quite
competent in the math. But, to me, a cut today needs to be referenced in
what we are spending today - not what we project spending to be 10 years
from now.
Let me close - our current leader makes wonderful spending cuts. But, to
achieve them we need to spend more while he is in office. The cuts only
take effect in years 7-10 when someone else has to deal with them.
Wow, again
Carl Lindner
-----Original Message-----
From: profox-bounces@leafe.com [mailto:profox-bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf
Of john harvey
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 4:43 PM
To: 'ProFox Email List'
Subject: RE: [OT] Now David Brookes is talking
Now you are starting to get it. Lies, damn lies, statistics, politicians,
republocrats, Obama.
John Harvey
-----Original Message-----
From: profox-bounces@leafe.com [mailto:profox-bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf
Of Carl Lindner
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 3:25 PM
To: 'ProFox Email List'
Subject: RE: [OT] Now David Brookes is talking
So, if I earn $10 a year and pay $10 to go to a federal park, that means I
pay 100% of my income in taxes? Wow!
As for the feds cutting taxes. Suppose they cut 200 from a program that
would have increased by 1,000. So, it was "cut" by 20%. Wow again.
Carl Lindner
-----Original Message-----
From: profox-bounces@leafe.com [mailto:profox-bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf
Of Ed Leafe
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 3:45 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] Now David Brookes is talking
On Feb 24, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> Past Fox news, or CBS, are there real facts to drive this probable
> fiction? I am sure there is a lot of bias in this news.
The focus on *income* tax is largely accurate: there is a minimum
income level for each family size under which you do not owe taxes. However,
these people pay a lot of federal taxes, just not as income tax. The numbers
that I have seen show that the lower your income, the larger the percentage
of it goes to the federal government when you count all forms of taxes,
fees, etc.
-- Ed Leafe
[excessive quoting removed by server]
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Many of the 2010 Congress Freshman Class have already been corrupted.
________________________________
From: Carl Lindner <carl@bdos.com>
To: 'ProFox Email List' <profox@leafe.com>
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 5:05 PM
Subject: RE: [OT] Now David Brookes is talking
I've known this for a great many years. In the very early 70's 10,000 was a
reasonable salary. If there was a 500 increase you got a 5% raise.
If a guy was making 15,000 and he received a 700 increase they got a 4.67
per cent increase. So, the guy getting the 700 raise got less of an
increase than the guy getting 500.
As to the government programs... I understand all the words and am quite
competent in the math. But, to me, a cut today needs to be referenced in
what we are spending today - not what we project spending to be 10 years
from now.
Let me close - our current leader makes wonderful spending cuts. But, to
achieve them we need to spend more while he is in office. The cuts only
take effect in years 7-10 when someone else has to deal with them.
Wow, again
Carl Lindner
-----Original Message-----
From: profox-bounces@leafe.com [mailto:profox-bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf
Of john harvey
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 4:43 PM
To: 'ProFox Email List'
Subject: RE: [OT] Now David Brookes is talking
Now you are starting to get it. Lies, damn lies, statistics, politicians,
republocrats, Obama.
John Harvey
-----Original Message-----
From: profox-bounces@leafe.com [mailto:profox-bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf
Of Carl Lindner
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 3:25 PM
To: 'ProFox Email List'
Subject: RE: [OT] Now David Brookes is talking
So, if I earn $10 a year and pay $10 to go to a federal park, that means I
pay 100% of my income in taxes? Wow!
As for the feds cutting taxes. Suppose they cut 200 from a program that
would have increased by 1,000. So, it was "cut" by 20%. Wow again.
Carl Lindner
-----Original Message-----
From: profox-bounces@leafe.com [mailto:profox-bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf
Of Ed Leafe
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 3:45 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] Now David Brookes is talking
On Feb 24, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> Past Fox news, or CBS, are there real facts to drive this probable
> fiction? I am sure there is a lot of bias in this news.
The focus on *income* tax is largely accurate: there is a minimum
income level for each family size under which you do not owe taxes. However,
these people pay a lot of federal taxes, just not as income tax. The numbers
that I have seen show that the lower your income, the larger the percentage
of it goes to the federal government when you count all forms of taxes,
fees, etc.
-- Ed Leafe
[excessive quoting removed by server]
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1330122522.274.YahooMailNeo@web125606.mail.ne1.yahoo.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
El 24/02/12 17:40, Stephen Russell escribió:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Michael Madigan <mmadi10699@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Half of Americans don't pay any Federal income tax
> ----------------
>
> I have heard this chant a lot lately but I don't find enough
> supporting documentation for it.
>
> Some sites say that is the # 47% and I can find in some reports that
> same value. Only the value is just part of the entire picture that is
> not represented at all.
>
> 47% of the taxpayer class "Single" are not paying tax. Reasons sited
> were 1. Jobless, 2. Senior Citizen / elderly, 3. Students
>
> The other class was married with filing married or filing jointly.
>
> Past Fox news, or CBS, are there real facts to drive this probable
> fiction? I am sure there is a lot of bias in this news.
>
Well actually, I can assure you that 100% of the taxpayer class are
paying taxes.
...
..
.
Don't need any data, just by definition ;c)
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4F48C594.9070306@gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.