Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by baldrick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storekeeper
Please read the entire article and then think about what you read prior to picking out bits and pieces to reinforce a personal bias.Quote:
Originally Posted by Storekeeper
Sure, sure I support the idea of individual rights ... just not the notion that other people bear the burden of financing those rights.
The 2016 presidential campaign is an unusual one, full of constant controversy and races that are still competitive on both sides (despite the comments of both front-runners). With the collective campaign noise, it can be difficult to sort out the candidate's real stand on issues that affect you. Help is available, at least with respect to taxes.
The Tax Policy Center (TPC) has gone the extra mile to help you compare each candidate's likely effect on your tax bill. Not only has TPC summarized the candidate's tax policies Opens a New Window. , they created an interactive model that allows you to estimate the effect using only three pieces of information: your household income, marital status, and number of children. TPC's calculator takes into account the effect of income taxes, corporate income taxes, payroll taxes, and excise taxes.
Let's start with a middle-class family of four with $60,000 in income. With your income adjusted to reflect 2017 values (the first tax year of the new presidency), you would be paying an estimated $10,960 in federal taxes under current law. According to the TPC calculator, you would come out the best under Donald Trump, paying $4,020 less (7.6% rate). The Cruz administration would save you $2,220 (12% rate). Under President Clinton, you come out close to the same with only $40 added to your tax bill, and President Sanders will cost you $7,520 more in taxes (20.2%).
Raise that same families' income to $300,000 and President Cruz becomes the winner, saving you $28,080 off an estimated $98,290 tax bill. Trump saves you $23,530. This shows why a flat tax is popular among the wealthy — if placed low enough, it becomes a better deal than the tax advantages/loopholes Opens a New Window. that currently exist. An extra $1,870 awaits you under President Clinton, but President Sanders will cost you an extra $31,190.
Now cut the income to $30,000 and your tax bill would be an estimated $830. President Cruz saves you the most at $530. President Trump saves you $440. President Clinton adds a measly $10 to your tax bill, but under President Sanders, your tax bill will more than quadruple with an extra $3,110 in taxes.
Single with kids and poor? Let's look at an income of $15,000 for a single mother of two. President Cruz saves you the most money by far. You would receive $3,600 back under current tax law, but under President Cruz, you would get another $1,190 back. President Trump offers you an extra $100, but President Sanders' plan would reduce your refund by $1,760. Under President Clinton, you would break even.
Try the calculator Opens a New Window. yourself and see what the predicted impact will be for your family.
Image for the news result
Tax Calculator Based on Presidential Candidate Plans
Fox Business - 17 hours ago
But it doesn't take into account Cruz's unspecified spending on the military, which would undoubtedly end up getting paid by the middle class and not by Cruz's rich backers.Quote:
TPC's calculator takes into account the effect of income taxes, corporate income taxes, payroll taxes, and excise taxes.
More bullshit.
And why is there no link?
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
Not sure what you are talking about, this is based on the tax plans each candidate has proposed, are you saying it would change because of Cruz' plans for the military or are you just complaining about Cruz' military plans.
What do you think about the added tax burdens of Sanders plan?
Sanders, Trump, and Cruz all want dramatic changes to the US government. Clinton doesn?t. - Vox
Put my numbers in. For me best deal on taxation is Cruz. Worst is Sanders. Clinton about the same. Trump I pay less but not as much as Cruz.
Interesting. Not sure how accurate the tax calculator is though.
Of course it would change because of his plans to expand the military and expand military action.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPETER65Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
Not sure what you are talking about, this is based on the tax plans each candidate has proposed, are you saying it would change because of Cruz' plans for the military or are you just complaining about Cruz' military plans.
What do you think about the added tax burdens of Sanders plan?
Where is the link?
As for Bernie, he obviously wants to tax the rich, he's a socialist.
Quote:
Bernie Sanders’ plan to soak the rich
In sharp contrast to Trump, Sanders is proposing significant tax increases and new taxes — hitting most people modestly but the wealthy and corporations hard — to pay for an array of new government programs, from universal health care to infrastructure revitalization.
These hikes would add trillions to federal revenues over the next 10 years, but whether that’s enough to fund all of Sanders’ programs is up for debate. Here are some of Sanders’ main proposals:
• Replace the top three income brackets with four brackets, taxing households making over $250,000 at 37, 43, 48 and 52 percent;
• Create a 2.2 percent health care premium tax for households and a 6.2 percent payroll tax for employers to fund single-payer health care; a 0.2 percent payroll tax on employers and employees to fund paid family leave; and a tax on Wall Street speculation to fund free college tuition;
• Replace the top estate tax bracket of 40 percent with four brackets, taxing estates worth more than $3.5 million at 45, 50, and 55 and 65 percent; tax capital gains and dividends as ordinary income for households making over $250,000;
• Eliminate the alternative minimum tax and the cap on payroll taxes for incomes over $250,000 to expand Social Security.
Under Sanders’ plan, the top 1 percent of taxpayers would pay $525,000 more on average or about 34 percent in after-tax income, while the top 0.1 percent would dole out $3.1 million or 45 percent more in 2017, according to the Tax Policy Center.
Middle-income households would see their taxes rise by about $4,700, equal to a 10 percent increase in after-tax income. Those in the lowest-income bracket would pay an additional $165, a 1.3 percent increase.
Despite these hikes, the Sanders campaign argues that ordinary Americans would still save money since universal health care means employers and employees would no longer have to pay insurance premiums. This is bolstered by analysis from Citizens for Tax Justice, but other experts are more doubtful that the plan is actuarially sound.
Similar to Trump, Sanders is proposing to tax foreign profits earned by U.S. companies and to raise the cost of moving abroad. Sanders is unique in his calls to tax "Wall Street speculation" to pay for free college tuition and on carbon dioxide emissions.
Sanders’ proposals would bring in $10 trillion to $15 trillion in federal revenue, earmarked to finance various new programs, and could reduce incentives to save and invest, and raise costs for businesses.
There is debate over whether the package of new taxes would curb economic growth or stimulate it. And it’s unclear how Sanders would get policies that are more liberal than President Barack Obama’s through Congress.
As for Cruz, he's just another shithead Republican who says government spending is awful unless he's the one spending it fighting wars or subsiding big business, and who loves giving money to his rich paymasters:
PolitiFact's guide to the 2016 presidential candidate tax plans | PolitiFactQuote:
In 2017, the top 1 percent would see an average cut of around $408,000 or about 26 percent more in after-tax income, and the top 0.1 percent would save $2 million, 29 percent of after-tax income, according to the Tax Policy Center.
In contrast, the tax break for middle-income households would average $1,800 or about 3 percent of after-tax income. The lowest-income households would pay $46 less, a 0.4 percent reduction.
Given that it's based on politicians' promises, it's essentially worthless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norton
You could go to this site and plug in your own numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracudaOf course it would change because of his plans to expand the military and expand military action.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPETER65Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
Not sure what you are talking about, this is based on the tax plans each candidate has proposed, are you saying it would change because of Cruz' plans for the military or are you just complaining about Cruz' military plans.
What do you think about the added tax burdens of Sanders plan?
Where is the link?
As for Bernie, he obviously wants to tax the rich, he's a socialist.
Quote:
Bernie Sanders’ plan to soak the rich
In sharp contrast to Trump, Sanders is proposing significant tax increases and new taxes — hitting most people modestly but the wealthy and corporations hard — to pay for an array of new government programs, from universal health care to infrastructure revitalization.
These hikes would add trillions to federal revenues over the next 10 years, but whether that’s enough to fund all of Sanders’ programs is up for debate. Here are some of Sanders’ main proposals:
• Replace the top three income brackets with four brackets, taxing households making over $250,000 at 37, 43, 48 and 52 percent;
• Create a 2.2 percent health care premium tax for households and a 6.2 percent payroll tax for employers to fund single-payer health care; a 0.2 percent payroll tax on employers and employees to fund paid family leave; and a tax on Wall Street speculation to fund free college tuition;
• Replace the top estate tax bracket of 40 percent with four brackets, taxing estates worth more than $3.5 million at 45, 50, and 55 and 65 percent; tax capital gains and dividends as ordinary income for households making over $250,000;
• Eliminate the alternative minimum tax and the cap on payroll taxes for incomes over $250,000 to expand Social Security.
Under Sanders’ plan, the top 1 percent of taxpayers would pay $525,000 more on average or about 34 percent in after-tax income, while the top 0.1 percent would dole out $3.1 million or 45 percent more in 2017, according to the Tax Policy Center.
Middle-income households would see their taxes rise by about $4,700, equal to a 10 percent increase in after-tax income. Those in the lowest-income bracket would pay an additional $165, a 1.3 percent increase.
Despite these hikes, the Sanders campaign argues that ordinary Americans would still save money since universal health care means employers and employees would no longer have to pay insurance premiums. This is bolstered by analysis from Citizens for Tax Justice, but other experts are more doubtful that the plan is actuarially sound.
Similar to Trump, Sanders is proposing to tax foreign profits earned by U.S. companies and to raise the cost of moving abroad. Sanders is unique in his calls to tax "Wall Street speculation" to pay for free college tuition and on carbon dioxide emissions.
Sanders’ proposals would bring in $10 trillion to $15 trillion in federal revenue, earmarked to finance various new programs, and could reduce incentives to save and invest, and raise costs for businesses.
There is debate over whether the package of new taxes would curb economic growth or stimulate it. And it’s unclear how Sanders would get policies that are more liberal than President Barack Obama’s through Congress.
As for Cruz, he's just another shithead Republican who says government spending is awful unless he's the one spending it fighting wars or subsiding big business, and who loves giving money to his rich paymasters:
PolitiFact's guide to the 2016 presidential candidate tax plans | PolitiFactQuote:
In 2017, the top 1 percent would see an average cut of around $408,000 or about 26 percent more in after-tax income, and the top 0.1 percent would save $2 million, 29 percent of after-tax income, according to the Tax Policy Center.
In contrast, the tax break for middle-income households would average $1,800 or about 3 percent of after-tax income. The lowest-income households would pay $46 less, a 0.4 percent reduction.
A friend took my post from Fox News therefore I only have Fox News as the source, I plugged in my numbers at the Vox site they are very close to the same as what Fox News had.
If you really cared to check Sanders plan not only affects the wealthy, I am far from wealthy and I would pay almost $6,000 more this year, and there is no bracket with a zero percent pay, as in really low earners.
This simple calculator tells you how each presidential candidate's tax plan affects you - Vox
Vox.com | Explain the news › policy-and-politics › tax...
These tax calculators and candidates promises concerning tax rates do mean nothing as the congress has everything to say about what the tax rates are. The president certainly can and does say a lot about what he wants, but unless he has a sympathetic congress he can have a tough time of it. Example Obama and immigration.Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracudaGiven that it's based on politicians' promises, it's essentially worthless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norton
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPETER65
For the love of your fictional supreme being....
:rofl:
Thank you for the 4th grade lesson on the US political system; I don't suppose it occurred to you that pretty well every here, even non-Americans, knows how it works.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPETER65
Or is this you pitching it at the level at which you understand it?
Fuck worrying about taxation, think about the future as a big picture. Your last pair of trousers will have no pockets. And if you don't spend it - your kids will.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norton
Suppose they gave an election and no one showed up....?
:rolleyes:
Might benefit all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracudaThank you for the 4th grade lesson on the US political system; I don't suppose it occurred to you that pretty well every here, even non-Americans, knows how it works.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPETER65
Or is this you pitching it at the level at which you understand it?
As usual you being a tit. First American civics is not taught in primary school I thought you might know that.
Now, I posted this fact to show all this talk about this candidate this and the other candidate that is somewhat meaningless, sure it makes for good arguments on meaningless internet sights but in reality as far as taxes and many other things what a candidate promises is somewhat meaningless.
That explains why you've only just learned about it then.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPETER65Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracudaThank you for the 4th grade lesson on the US political system; I don't suppose it occurred to you that pretty well every here, even non-Americans, knows how it works.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPETER65
Or is this you pitching it at the level at which you understand it?
As usual you being a tit. First American civics is not taught in primary school I thought you might know that.
Trump and Cruz's tax plans both would explode the debt and benefit the rich. Trumps tax plan could tack on as much as $10 trillion in debt and Cruz is not far behind with around $9 trillion in new debt. Just what America needs.
Bernie's tax plan on the other hand would raise almost $16 trillion in new revenue. The additional tax's that the middle and lower classes would pay would be offset by the fact that they would no longer have to pay for health insurance due to single payer healthcare, nor would they have to pay to send their kids to college. Ultimately they would save thousand a year.
Donald Trump?s Tax Plan Could Tack $10 Trillion onto America?s Debt - Fortune
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...only-to-trump/
Study: Sanders's tax plan would raise $15.3 trillion | TheHill
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...tes-tax-plans/
It's amazing how many people are recoiling in horror over Sander's tax plan. The same people who want to "Make America Great Again" need to realize their idea of great happened at a time (50's and 60's) when the tax rate was 91% on individuals making over $200,000 per year. That beautiful interstate highway system was built with the revenue. Kennedy came along and lowered the top rate to 65%. There were still rich people and the middle class grew like mad.
Exactly the same with the exception would add that for me tax increases under the Bolshevik would be HUGE!Quote:
Originally Posted by Norton
The Pope seeks a meeting with Bernie Sanders.
The next set of Primaries:
Wyoming -- Democratic Presidential Caucus April 9, 2016
New York -- Presidential Primary Election Day April 19, 2016
Connecticut -- Presidential Primary Election Day April 26, 2016
Delaware -- Presidential Primary Election: Polls open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Only registered voters from participating parties may vote. April 26, 2016
Maryland -- Presidential Primary and State Primary Elections April 26, 2016
Pennsylvania -- Presidential Primary Election Day April 26, 2016
Pennsylvania -- primary election Day April 26, 2016
Rhode Island -- Presidential Preference Primary Election April 26, 2016
Bernie Sanders boasted on Friday that he was invited to a conference at the Vatican, but an official there said he forgot to mention who extended the invitation — himself.Quote:
Originally Posted by billy the kid
Margaret Archer, president of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, said it was clear Sanders wanted to exploit the group’s gathering for political purposes.
“Sanders made the first move, for the obvious reasons,” she told Bloomberg News.
“I think in a sense he may be going for the Catholic vote, but this is not the Catholic vote and he should remember that and act accordingly — not that he will.”
Another goof by Bernie?
Bernie Sanders invited himself to the Vatican | New York Post
Why is he trying to cozy up to the kiddie fiddlers? They hate blue suede shoes.
So if Bernie wins these two, will he be a serious contender?Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
I'm not up on US politics, but some articles I've read over the last few days say Bernie is favourite for Wyoming (not sure if this is true).
But, New York? Does he have any chance there at all; presumably, there's lots of points to be scored there?
Any chance of him winning both and starting to scare the shite out of Shilary?
What's amazing is that no matter how many times that historical, well demonstrated fact is put forward it is just ignored.Quote:
Originally Posted by misskit
Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders Bring Their Battle to Brooklyn
In Brooklyn Heights, on the 11th floor of an office building, Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign headquarters was humming on Monday. Staff members and volunteers were working the phones in spacious offices with windows that look out on the Manhattan skyline. Photos of supporters, an array of campaign buttons and a hanging gong, with the names of states she has won scribbled onto it in marker, adorned the sleekly designed space. A retired New York police officer stood guard.
Two miles away, in a gritty open-floor office space in Gowanus, Brooklyn, that smelled of fresh paint, an army of mostly young Bernie Sanders supporters began gathering two weeks ago to spread his message. Last weekend, they nibbled on orange slices, perched on plastic folding chairs and sifted through mountains of newly delivered cardboard boxes filled with Bernie for President pamphlets. Visitors walked up a driveway and through a half-open side door to enter.
Brooklyn, where Mr. Sanders grew up and where Mrs. Clinton established her campaign headquarters a year ago, is the center of the next political contest: the New York Democratic primary on April 19. It is a crucial one in a race — and an election year — that has been full of surprises.
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2016/04/450.jpg
The state has 291 delegates, including 247 pledged delegates up for grabs. (There are also 44 superdelegates.) Even with his recent wins in Washington, Alaska, Idaho, Utah, Hawaii and Wisconsin, Mr. Sanders would need an estimated 56 percent of the remaining pledged delegates nationwide to overtake Mrs. Clinton, who maintains a lead of 219. A win for Mr. Sanders in New York would not only buoy his candidacy, but it would also be an embarrassment to the former senator from New York.
Of the three million people registered to vote as Democrats in New York City, about 945,600 live in Brooklyn, meaning the borough — the most populous in the city — is home to a significant portion of the 5.8 million Democrats registered across the state. Drawing even more attention to the borough, the two campaigns, after weeks of squabbling, have agreed to a televised debate between the candidates on April 14 to be held at the Brooklyn Navy Yard.
The styles, staffs and settings of the two campaigns are telling, both of the Democratic race and of Brooklyn itself, a rapidly changing amalgam of affluent Park Slope professionals, newly arrived Williamsburg hipsters, longtime owners of Fort Greene brownstones, diverse Caribbean-American residents of Crown Heights and members of tight-knit Orthodox Jewish communities in Borough Park. Million-dollar condominiums are rising next door to blocks of decaying public-housing complexes; shiny new coffee shops and high-priced gyms are appearing on formerly blighted streets.
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2016/04/451.jpg
While most polls show Mrs. Clinton, 68, leading in New York, the contest is proving to be emblematic of the same issues that are driving the Democratic race nationally. Mr. Sanders, the 74-year-old senator of Vermont, where he has based his campaign headquarters, hopes to make gains among voters by arguing that he formed his core ideas about income inequality while growing up the son of a Polish immigrant in Brooklyn.
Yet the location of his Brooklyn field office — a far leaner operation than Mrs. Clinton’s headquarters — in a gentrifying neighborhood serves as a vivid reminder that his base of support is likely to come from new residents of the borough, many of whom are unfamiliar with the Brooklyn of his boyhood but are eager to back a more left-leaning figure. Mrs. Clinton’s connections to Brooklyn are more recent, and with her two terms as a senator from New York, they run deep. She has backing from a long list of elected officials, including, somewhat recently, Mayor Bill de Blasio, and has a network of community leaders powering her get-out-the-vote efforts, as she has in many cities. She has already begun touring Brooklyn, visiting churches and making her case as a hometown politician.
“She has all the advantage,” said Hank Sheinkopf, a longtime political operative who is not affiliated with either campaign, but who has worked with Michael R. Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor; Eliot Spitzer, the former New York governor; and President Bill Clinton. “Bernie’s chances are tough. Could he win it? Yes. Is it likely? No.”
....
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/10/ny...klyn.html?_r=0
Interesting contrast in offices....Apple vs HP ?