Why The GOP Is Advocating A Tax Increase On The Middle Class

[mawilson 2,133]

I knew you would. We could also consider making the interest the rich collect on the debt of the poor tax free. Of course, that interest would not be tax deductible for the poor.

Keep going... I'm getting all tingly inside!

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I have an idea. We need to implement a tax on the people in the bottom 14%. That will fix the problem!

1 out of 7 US households struggle to feed everyone

At some point last year, about 17 million U.S. households had some difficulty feeding everyone in their family.

That amounts to 14.5 percent of U.S. households, according to a report released last month by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The percentage of households who experienced food insecurity in 2010 was virtually unchanged from 2009. But it has risen by about 3 percentage points since 2007, the year the country officially went into recession.

The report classifies people as food insecure if they've had trouble feeding their family at some point during the year.

A subset of that group, comprised of about 6.4 million households, were classified as having very low food security. That means that at some point during the year someone in the house went hungry.

The report found that about 16.2 million children were living in food-insecure households. Still, the report noted that children are often shielded from hunger by the adults in the home.

http://lifeinc.today...os-going-hungry

i have an idea. so-called people in "poverty" shouldn't breed. Problem solved.

[mawilson 2,133]

I have an idea. We need to implement a tax on the people in the bottom 14%. That will fix the problem!

1 out of 7 US households struggle to feed everyone

I can see that, what with the disproportionate rates of obesity among the poor.

[Danno 1,228]

I have an idea. We need to implement a tax on the people in the bottom 14%. That will fix the problem!

1 out of 7 US households struggle to feed everyone

At some point last year, about 17 million U.S. households had some difficulty feeding everyone in their family.

That amounts to 14.5 percent of U.S. households, according to a report released last month by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The percentage of households who experienced food insecurity in 2010 was virtually unchanged from 2009. But it has risen by about 3 percentage points since 2007, the year the country officially went into recession.

The report classifies people as food insecure if they've had trouble feeding their family at some point during the year.

A subset of that group, comprised of about 6.4 million households, were classified as having very low food security. That means that at some point during the year someone in the house went hungry.

The report found that about 16.2 million children were living in food-insecure households. Still, the report noted that children are often shielded from hunger by the adults in the home.

http://lifeinc.today...os-going-hungry

You must admit that only in America would the most overweight demographic also be considered the -food insecure.

Edited October 14, 2011 by Danno

[Kang 22]

Tax the obese!

[Dan J 277]

How do you tax someone that has no money?

We have a poverty problem. Not a tax problem.

That's true. The simplest way to get people to pay more in taxes is pay them more. I wonder how much the average worker was paid at Godfather's Pizza when Herman Cain was CEO.

[mawilson 2,133]

That's true. The simplest way to get people to pay more in taxes is pay them more.

Why would you pay them more than they are worth?

[Dan J 277]

Why would you pay them more than they are worth?

If you look at a microeconomic scale, you are right, there is no reason to pay someone more than they are worth.

But if you look at a larger macroeconomic scale, paying someone really low wages often costs the government much more than that person will ever pay in taxes. The business owner is indirectly making up the wage difference for that worker through the less efficient tax system.

[Danno 1,228]

If you look at a microeconomic scale, you are right, there is no reason to pay someone more than they are worth.

But if you look at a larger macroeconomic scale, paying someone really low wages often costs the government much more than that person will ever pay in taxes. The business owner is indirectly making up the wage difference for that worker through the less efficient tax system.

Why would anyone go to College or learn a trade if they could get well paid for something right out of high school?

[Dan J 277]

Why would anyone go to College or learn a trade if they could get well paid for something right out of high school?

We probably have a different idea of well paid. Increasing wages even 5-10% would push more people in to tax paying brackets and less reliant on government assistance. Although its a bit more complicated than that since doing so across the board would have an inflationary effect.

But on the other hand, the only trades that are keeping strong wages are either those that are high skilled/high demand or have a strong union presence. There are many people people going to collage and getting out and having a hard time finding a job that pays more than $30k a year.

Edited October 14, 2011 by Dan J

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Obama wants every one to pay their fair share. Currently the lower 47% of the income bracket pay -0-. That is not a fair share.

9-9-9 or the FAIR TAX does that and addresses our broken system.

It also eliminates class warfare and social engineering using a tax code that is supposed to provide revenue for the government, eliminates "loopholes" for rich people.

[웃 910]

Obama wants every one to pay their fair share. Currently the lower 47% of the income bracket pay -0-. That is not a fair share.

9-9-9 or the FAIR TAX does that and addresses our broken system.

It also eliminates class warfare and social engineering using a tax code that is supposed to provide revenue for the government, eliminates "loopholes" for rich people.

We need to copy the style of government from the below countries. Doing what all the other prosperous nations do WILL NOT WORK. We need to change strategies.

SIERRA LEONE:

NIGER:

CONGO:

LIBERIA (those are bullet holes btw):

[mawilson 2,133]

Looks like the Bronx.

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

NIGER:

well they do have public transportation.

[scandal 951]

CONGO:

Private transportation, too!