|
GOP's SALT cap may speed exodus from high-tax states, report says
|
|
Topic Started: Apr 26 2018, 09:00 AM (169 Views)
|
|
W A Mozart
|
Apr 26 2018, 09:00 AM
Post #1
|
|
- Posts:
- 3,658
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #26
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- Quote:
-
Over the past decade, about 3.5 million Americans have relocated from high-tax blue states like California and those in the Northeast, to low-tax red states like Texas and Arizona -- and the change is likely to accelerate.
So say Arthur Laffer and Stephen Moore, co-authors of a report from the American Legislative Exchange Council, in a Wall Street Journal essay.They say that the Republican Party tax bill’s cap on the deduction for state and local taxes (SALT) could ramp up the pace by which Americans relocate in their own economic interest.
Laffer and Moore estimate that both California and New York will lose on net about 800,000 over the next three years, roughly double from the previous three years, while Connecticut, New Jersey and Minnesota combined with lose around 500,000 people in the same period.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/26/gops-salt-cap-may-speed-exodus-from-high-tax-states-report-says.html
|
|
|
| |
|
W A Mozart
|
Apr 26 2018, 09:27 AM
Post #2
|
|
- Posts:
- 3,658
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #26
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
THAT tax cut bill from last year will have enormous implications for all of us. By capping the deductions for state and local taxes in THAT bill, the Republicans have pulled open the curtain from the Wizard of Oz and exposed the liberal game. Higher and higher taxes, more and more money to Democrat constituent groups, resulting in more and more power to Democrats. New York, California and Illinois are headed for a major reality check. Why the hell should I live in the filth of Los Angeles, or the killings in Chicago, or the communist-inspired government of New York city? The insanity will be exposed. They will flee in every direction, ....poof!.....gone. It's happening, ....right now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9epIc6ipBIg
Mozart
|
|
|
| |
|
thoughtless
|
Apr 26 2018, 09:39 AM
Post #3
|
|
- Posts:
- 1,684
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #22
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
Sounds like a personal problem Mozart.
I mean, you enjoy sticking it to folks that pay more taxes than you?
|
|
Without geometry, life is pointless.
|
| |
|
PATruth
|
Apr 26 2018, 12:00 PM
Post #4
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,211
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #271
- Joined:
- Jul 6, 2016
|
- thoughtless
- Apr 26 2018, 09:39 AM
Sounds like a personal problem Mozart.
I mean, you enjoy sticking it to folks that pay more taxes than you? I don't see it as sticking it to anyone. The question is, why should high tax states pay a lower share of their income to the federal government than low tax states? That sounds like discrimination to me?
|
"No. No he won't. We'll stop it."
|
| |
|
Opinionated
|
Apr 26 2018, 12:22 PM
Post #5
|
|
- Posts:
- 11,398
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #10
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:00 PM
- thoughtless
- Apr 26 2018, 09:39 AM
Sounds like a personal problem Mozart.
I mean, you enjoy sticking it to folks that pay more taxes than you?
I don't see it as sticking it to anyone. The question is, why should high tax states pay a lower share of their income to the federal government than low tax states? That sounds like discrimination to me? And yet, those states you disparage for having their high income residents paying a "lower percentage" than low tax states, pretty much pick up the lion's share of the federal budget, year in and year out.
Low tax red states receive more in federal subsidies then they pay in federal taxes, and you're pissed because they don't pay even less.
|
|
|
| |
|
PATruth
|
Apr 26 2018, 12:25 PM
Post #6
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,211
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #271
- Joined:
- Jul 6, 2016
|
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:22 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:00 PM
- thoughtless
- Apr 26 2018, 09:39 AM
Sounds like a personal problem Mozart.
I mean, you enjoy sticking it to folks that pay more taxes than you?
I don't see it as sticking it to anyone. The question is, why should high tax states pay a lower share of their income to the federal government than low tax states? That sounds like discrimination to me?
And yet, those states you disparage for having their high income residents paying a "lower percentage" than low tax states, pretty much pick up the lion's share of the federal budget, year in and year out. Low tax red states receive more in federal subsidies then they pay in federal taxes, and you're pissed because they don't pay even less. Actually they don't receive more than low tax states in the form of subsidies, the disparity usually is accounted for in federal monies spend on R&D, military bases and federal offices, ect.. That's on old myth, research, I have. CA has 1/3 of the welfare population.
|
"No. No he won't. We'll stop it."
|
| |
|
Opinionated
|
Apr 26 2018, 12:38 PM
Post #7
|
|
- Posts:
- 11,398
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #10
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:25 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:22 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:00 PM
- thoughtless
- Apr 26 2018, 09:39 AM
Sounds like a personal problem Mozart.
I mean, you enjoy sticking it to folks that pay more taxes than you?
I don't see it as sticking it to anyone. The question is, why should high tax states pay a lower share of their income to the federal government than low tax states? That sounds like discrimination to me?
And yet, those states you disparage for having their high income residents paying a "lower percentage" than low tax states, pretty much pick up the lion's share of the federal budget, year in and year out. Low tax red states receive more in federal subsidies then they pay in federal taxes, and you're pissed because they don't pay even less.
Actually they don't receive more than low tax states in the form of subsidies, the disparity usually is accounted for in federal monies spend on R&D, military bases and federal offices, ect.. That's on old myth, research, I have. CA has 1/3 of the welfare population. Allow me to provide some actual support for what I'm claiming, rather than just making a claim and expecting you to do the research to support that claim:
https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/
You'll notice that these states:
New Mexico - Blue State Kentucky - Red State Mississippi - Red State Alabama - Red State West Virginia - Red State South Carolina - Red State Arizona - Red State Alaska - Red State Montana - Red State Louisiana - Red State
Are the 10 most "federally dependent" states. And of those 10, only New Mexico can be argued to be a "blue state".
|
|
|
| |
|
PATruth
|
Apr 26 2018, 12:47 PM
Post #8
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,211
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #271
- Joined:
- Jul 6, 2016
|
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:38 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:25 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:22 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:00 PM
- thoughtless
- Apr 26 2018, 09:39 AM
Sounds like a personal problem Mozart.
I mean, you enjoy sticking it to folks that pay more taxes than you?
I don't see it as sticking it to anyone. The question is, why should high tax states pay a lower share of their income to the federal government than low tax states? That sounds like discrimination to me?
And yet, those states you disparage for having their high income residents paying a "lower percentage" than low tax states, pretty much pick up the lion's share of the federal budget, year in and year out. Low tax red states receive more in federal subsidies then they pay in federal taxes, and you're pissed because they don't pay even less.
Actually they don't receive more than low tax states in the form of subsidies, the disparity usually is accounted for in federal monies spend on R&D, military bases and federal offices, ect.. That's on old myth, research, I have. CA has 1/3 of the welfare population.
Allow me to provide some actual support for what I'm claiming, rather than just making a claim and expecting you to do the research to support that claim: https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/You'll notice that these states: New Mexico - Blue State Kentucky - Red State Mississippi - Red State Alabama - Red State West Virginia - Red State South Carolina - Red State Arizona - Red State Alaska - Red State Montana - Red State Louisiana - Red State Are the 10 most "federally dependent" states. And of those 10, only New Mexico can be argued to be a "blue state". Wallethub? Come again...
|
"No. No he won't. We'll stop it."
|
| |
|
Opinionated
|
Apr 26 2018, 12:49 PM
Post #9
|
|
- Posts:
- 11,398
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #10
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:47 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:38 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:25 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:22 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:00 PM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
And yet, those states you disparage for having their high income residents paying a "lower percentage" than low tax states, pretty much pick up the lion's share of the federal budget, year in and year out. Low tax red states receive more in federal subsidies then they pay in federal taxes, and you're pissed because they don't pay even less.
Actually they don't receive more than low tax states in the form of subsidies, the disparity usually is accounted for in federal monies spend on R&D, military bases and federal offices, ect.. That's on old myth, research, I have. CA has 1/3 of the welfare population.
Allow me to provide some actual support for what I'm claiming, rather than just making a claim and expecting you to do the research to support that claim: https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/You'll notice that these states: New Mexico - Blue State Kentucky - Red State Mississippi - Red State Alabama - Red State West Virginia - Red State South Carolina - Red State Arizona - Red State Alaska - Red State Montana - Red State Louisiana - Red State Are the 10 most "federally dependent" states. And of those 10, only New Mexico can be argued to be a "blue state".
Wallethub? Come again... Do you have anything that would support it being unreliable information?
No, of course you don't. You're just going to dismiss it because you don't want to believe it.
|
|
|
| |
|
Harambe4Trump
|
Apr 26 2018, 12:55 PM
Post #10
|
|
- Posts:
- 17,324
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #42
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:38 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:25 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:22 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:00 PM
- thoughtless
- Apr 26 2018, 09:39 AM
Sounds like a personal problem Mozart.
I mean, you enjoy sticking it to folks that pay more taxes than you?
I don't see it as sticking it to anyone. The question is, why should high tax states pay a lower share of their income to the federal government than low tax states? That sounds like discrimination to me?
And yet, those states you disparage for having their high income residents paying a "lower percentage" than low tax states, pretty much pick up the lion's share of the federal budget, year in and year out. Low tax red states receive more in federal subsidies then they pay in federal taxes, and you're pissed because they don't pay even less.
Actually they don't receive more than low tax states in the form of subsidies, the disparity usually is accounted for in federal monies spend on R&D, military bases and federal offices, ect.. That's on old myth, research, I have. CA has 1/3 of the welfare population.
Allow me to provide some actual support for what I'm claiming, rather than just making a claim and expecting you to do the research to support that claim: https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/You'll notice that these states: New Mexico - Blue State Kentucky - Red State Mississippi - Red State Alabama - Red State West Virginia - Red State South Carolina - Red State Arizona - Red State Alaska - Red State Montana - Red State Louisiana - Red State Are the 10 most "federally dependent" states. And of those 10, only New Mexico can be argued to be a "blue state". The blue states don’t pay their fair share
|
Skipping leg day is the equivalent of a woman having an abortion. You're ashamed of it, and it was probably unnecessary. #MAGA #wallsnotwars
|
| |
|
PATruth
|
Apr 26 2018, 01:09 PM
Post #11
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,211
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #271
- Joined:
- Jul 6, 2016
|
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:49 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:47 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:38 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:25 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:22 PM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
Actually they don't receive more than low tax states in the form of subsidies, the disparity usually is accounted for in federal monies spend on R&D, military bases and federal offices, ect.. That's on old myth, research, I have. CA has 1/3 of the welfare population.
Allow me to provide some actual support for what I'm claiming, rather than just making a claim and expecting you to do the research to support that claim: https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/You'll notice that these states: New Mexico - Blue State Kentucky - Red State Mississippi - Red State Alabama - Red State West Virginia - Red State South Carolina - Red State Arizona - Red State Alaska - Red State Montana - Red State Louisiana - Red State Are the 10 most "federally dependent" states. And of those 10, only New Mexico can be argued to be a "blue state".
Wallethub? Come again...
Do you have anything that would support it being unreliable information? No, of course you don't. You're just going to dismiss it because you don't want to believe it. Do you have any idea how they calculate red/blue state funding? Obviously you don't. All you do is a quick search, find a left leaning publication that skews the numbers and think you're making a salient point.
http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/17/red-states-tax-takers-blue-states-tax-makers/
Look at HOW those numbers are compiled.
|
"No. No he won't. We'll stop it."
|
| |
|
Skeptic1
|
Apr 26 2018, 01:17 PM
Post #12
|
|
- Posts:
- 361
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #119
- Joined:
- Mar 22, 2016
|
- Harambe4Trump
- Apr 26 2018, 12:55 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:38 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:25 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:22 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:00 PM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
And yet, those states you disparage for having their high income residents paying a "lower percentage" than low tax states, pretty much pick up the lion's share of the federal budget, year in and year out. Low tax red states receive more in federal subsidies then they pay in federal taxes, and you're pissed because they don't pay even less.
Actually they don't receive more than low tax states in the form of subsidies, the disparity usually is accounted for in federal monies spend on R&D, military bases and federal offices, ect.. That's on old myth, research, I have. CA has 1/3 of the welfare population.
Allow me to provide some actual support for what I'm claiming, rather than just making a claim and expecting you to do the research to support that claim: https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/You'll notice that these states: New Mexico - Blue State Kentucky - Red State Mississippi - Red State Alabama - Red State West Virginia - Red State South Carolina - Red State Arizona - Red State Alaska - Red State Montana - Red State Louisiana - Red State Are the 10 most "federally dependent" states. And of those 10, only New Mexico can be argued to be a "blue state".
The blue states don’t pay their fair share https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/democrat-shooters-list/
Edited by Skeptic1, Apr 26 2018, 01:19 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
Skeptic1
|
Apr 26 2018, 01:20 PM
Post #13
|
|
- Posts:
- 361
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #119
- Joined:
- Mar 22, 2016
|
Sorry, double post.
Edited by Skeptic1, Apr 26 2018, 01:21 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
Opinionated
|
Apr 26 2018, 01:21 PM
Post #14
|
|
- Posts:
- 11,398
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #10
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 01:09 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:49 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:47 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:38 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:25 PM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
Allow me to provide some actual support for what I'm claiming, rather than just making a claim and expecting you to do the research to support that claim: https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/You'll notice that these states: New Mexico - Blue State Kentucky - Red State Mississippi - Red State Alabama - Red State West Virginia - Red State South Carolina - Red State Arizona - Red State Alaska - Red State Montana - Red State Louisiana - Red State Are the 10 most "federally dependent" states. And of those 10, only New Mexico can be argued to be a "blue state".
Wallethub? Come again...
Do you have anything that would support it being unreliable information? No, of course you don't. You're just going to dismiss it because you don't want to believe it.
Do you have any idea how they calculate red/blue state funding? Obviously you don't. All you do is a quick search, find a left leaning publication that skews the numbers and think you're making a salient point. http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/17/red-states-tax-takers-blue-states-tax-makers/Look at HOW those numbers are compiled. And The Federalist is an unbiased source?
|
|
|
| |
|
PATruth
|
Apr 26 2018, 01:33 PM
Post #15
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,211
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #271
- Joined:
- Jul 6, 2016
|
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 01:21 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 01:09 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:49 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:47 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:38 PM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/You'll notice that these states: New Mexico - Blue State Kentucky - Red State Mississippi - Red State Alabama - Red State West Virginia - Red State South Carolina - Red State Arizona - Red State Alaska - Red State Montana - Red State Louisiana - Red State Are the 10 most "federally dependent" states. And of those 10, only New Mexico can be argued to be a "blue state".
Wallethub? Come again...
Do you have anything that would support it being unreliable information? No, of course you don't. You're just going to dismiss it because you don't want to believe it.
Do you have any idea how they calculate red/blue state funding? Obviously you don't. All you do is a quick search, find a left leaning publication that skews the numbers and think you're making a salient point. http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/17/red-states-tax-takers-blue-states-tax-makers/Look at HOW those numbers are compiled.
And The Federalist is an unbiased source? Wallethub? Face it, you have no idea how they are doing those calculation, do you?
Here's something that's really simple to understand, if blue state taxpayers deduct a higher percent of their income because of higher state taxes they are by definition paying less in federal taxes, because of a lower tax base, than a low tax state.
Easy to understand.
Edited by PATruth, Apr 26 2018, 01:34 PM.
|
"No. No he won't. We'll stop it."
|
| |
|
Opinionated
|
Apr 26 2018, 01:55 PM
Post #16
|
|
- Posts:
- 11,398
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #10
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 01:33 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 01:21 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 01:09 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 12:49 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 12:47 PM
Do you have anything that would support it being unreliable information? No, of course you don't. You're just going to dismiss it because you don't want to believe it.
Do you have any idea how they calculate red/blue state funding? Obviously you don't. All you do is a quick search, find a left leaning publication that skews the numbers and think you're making a salient point. http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/17/red-states-tax-takers-blue-states-tax-makers/Look at HOW those numbers are compiled.
And The Federalist is an unbiased source?
Wallethub? Face it, you have no idea how they are doing those calculation, do you? Here's something that's really simple to understand, if blue state taxpayers deduct a higher percent of their income because of higher state taxes they are by definition paying less in federal taxes, because of a lower tax base, than a low tax state. Easy to understand. If that were true then if I made $300k a year and you made $50k a year, and I paid 10% in federal taxes while you paid 15% in federal taxes, I would be paying less then you.
But we know that's not the case and instead I'm paying $30k to your $7.5k Your argument is fundamentally flawed.
|
|
|
| |
|
PATruth
|
Apr 26 2018, 02:01 PM
Post #17
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,211
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #271
- Joined:
- Jul 6, 2016
|
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 01:55 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 01:33 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 01:21 PM
Wallethub? Face it, you have no idea how they are doing those calculation, do you? Here's something that's really simple to understand, if blue state taxpayers deduct a higher percent of their income because of higher state taxes they are by definition paying less in federal taxes, because of a lower tax base, than a low tax state. Easy to understand.
If that were true then if I made $300k a year and you made $50k a year, and I paid 10% in federal taxes while you paid 15% in federal taxes, I would be paying less then you. But we know that's not the case and instead I'm paying $30k to your $7.5k Your argument is fundamentally flawed. Given the same income, an apples to apples comparison, a blue tax taxpayer would pay less. Sweet Baby Jesus, try common sense, it won't hurt.
Edited by PATruth, Apr 26 2018, 02:01 PM.
|
"No. No he won't. We'll stop it."
|
| |
|
Opinionated
|
Apr 26 2018, 02:23 PM
Post #18
|
|
- Posts:
- 11,398
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #10
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 02:01 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 01:55 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 01:33 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 01:21 PM
Wallethub? Face it, you have no idea how they are doing those calculation, do you? Here's something that's really simple to understand, if blue state taxpayers deduct a higher percent of their income because of higher state taxes they are by definition paying less in federal taxes, because of a lower tax base, than a low tax state. Easy to understand.
If that were true then if I made $300k a year and you made $50k a year, and I paid 10% in federal taxes while you paid 15% in federal taxes, I would be paying less then you. But we know that's not the case and instead I'm paying $30k to your $7.5k Your argument is fundamentally flawed.
Given the same income, an apples to apples comparison, a blue tax taxpayer would pay less. Sweet Baby Jesus, try common sense, it won't hurt. Yes, but it's not an "apples to apples" comparison, is it? Incomes tend to be higher in blue states, which means that blue states tend to pay more taxes, even if they pay a small percentage on an individual "equal income to equal income" basis.
Why should blue states be expected to pay even more to subsidize red states? It makes no freaking sense.
|
|
|
| |
|
PATruth
|
Apr 26 2018, 02:28 PM
Post #19
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,211
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #271
- Joined:
- Jul 6, 2016
|
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 02:23 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 02:01 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 01:55 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 01:33 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 01:21 PM
Wallethub? Face it, you have no idea how they are doing those calculation, do you? Here's something that's really simple to understand, if blue state taxpayers deduct a higher percent of their income because of higher state taxes they are by definition paying less in federal taxes, because of a lower tax base, than a low tax state. Easy to understand.
If that were true then if I made $300k a year and you made $50k a year, and I paid 10% in federal taxes while you paid 15% in federal taxes, I would be paying less then you. But we know that's not the case and instead I'm paying $30k to your $7.5k Your argument is fundamentally flawed.
Given the same income, an apples to apples comparison, a blue tax taxpayer would pay less. Sweet Baby Jesus, try common sense, it won't hurt.
Yes, but it's not an "apples to apples" comparison, is it? Incomes tend to be higher in blue states, which means that blue states tend to pay more taxes, even if they pay a small percentage on an individual "equal income to equal income" basis. Why should blue states be expected to pay even more to subsidize red states? It makes no freaking sense. High Tax State A: Wages: 150,000 - 15,000 prop tax - 10,000 income tax = 125,000 X federal tax rate 25% = $31,250.
Lower Tax State B: Wages: 150,000 - 5,000 prop tax - 5,000 income tax = 140,000 X federal tax rate 25% = $35,000.
If this is still confusing I suggest you sue your third grade teacher.
|
"No. No he won't. We'll stop it."
|
| |
|
clone
|
Apr 26 2018, 02:46 PM
Post #20
|
|
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
- Posts:
- 26,334
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #155
- Joined:
- Apr 4, 2016
|
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 02:28 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 02:23 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 02:01 PM
- Opinionated
- Apr 26 2018, 01:55 PM
- PATruth
- Apr 26 2018, 01:33 PM
If that were true then if I made $300k a year and you made $50k a year, and I paid 10% in federal taxes while you paid 15% in federal taxes, I would be paying less then you. But we know that's not the case and instead I'm paying $30k to your $7.5k Your argument is fundamentally flawed.
Given the same income, an apples to apples comparison, a blue tax taxpayer would pay less. Sweet Baby Jesus, try common sense, it won't hurt.
Yes, but it's not an "apples to apples" comparison, is it? Incomes tend to be higher in blue states, which means that blue states tend to pay more taxes, even if they pay a small percentage on an individual "equal income to equal income" basis. Why should blue states be expected to pay even more to subsidize red states? It makes no freaking sense.
High Tax State A: Wages: 150,000 - 15,000 prop tax - 10,000 income tax = 125,000 X federal tax rate 25% = $31,250. Lower Tax State B: Wages: 150,000 - 5,000 prop tax - 5,000 income tax = 140,000 X federal tax rate 25% = $35,000. If this is still confusing I suggest you sue your third grade teacher.
|
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|