Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 07/19/11 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    The President is merely calling for the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, so the 33% bracket would go to 36%, and the 35% bracket would go to 39.6%. These are still low by historical standards, and unlikely to seriously affect high income folks. After all, we're only talking about the marginal income tax rate. A married couple making $250,000 would pay an additional $1,131 in taxes based on the current tax brackets if the Bush tax cuts were eliminated. And that's not even taking into account exemptions that reduce taxable income. Only those couples making over $379,150 would pay the 39.6% marginal rate. Eliminating these tax cuts would raise about $700B over the next decade and help balance the budget - something Bush didn't take into account when he passed the tax cuts without appropriate spending cuts.
  2. 1 point
    I do agree that the tax code is a problem, and would love to see it simplified and bereft of loopholes and exemptions. A simpler system like what Red proposed might allow a massive reduction in the IRS and personal and corporate accountants, eliminating a lot of overhead and inefficiency spent managing our inefficient loophole-ridden tax system. But I don't know about animosity towards those earning $250,000…the angst seems to be aimed at vastly increasing income gap of the top 1%. For example, the average S&P 500 CEO is expected to make $11.4M in 2011, about 279 times more than the national average wage index, which has actually been falling in recent years. I don't suggest that the tax system should be used to punish people for their income or success, but it's common sense that those making $11.4M can afford to pay a higher marginal tax rate than those making $40K. The vast majority of American economists, regardless of their political leanings, support a progressive tax system where the wealthy pay a greater share at the higher income brackets and where essential fixed cost of living expenses are accounted for at the lower income brackets. At the $250,000 level, a married couple is only paying at the 33% rate for the last $37,700 of their income, so the extra 5% tax on the final 15% of their income should not be a major burden. I don't see how it's unfair if everyone pays the same rate for equivalent income, but the exemptions and loopholes do open the door for unfairness and I think they should be eliminated.
  3. 1 point
    Likewise some people have worked very hard to get to an upper level while some choose not to work at all. Is it fair they should have to support someone with little or no ambition?
  4. 1 point
    So, you're saying the poor have it made, and yet you feel sorry for those struggling to get by on $250,000 because they can't afford a private jet? I guess the family of four living on less than $22,350 just doesn't understand how lucky they are. Perhaps it's really just a fun adventure to live on $15/day or less per person.
  5. 1 point
  6. 1 point
    My internet connection is almost dead so I can't look at the video but it looks like possibly cypress
  7. 1 point
    I saw a rendering on the elevator for a renovated food court at Allen Center 1. Looks like they are taking out the fountains (it's been dry for awhile now) and adding in what looks like translucent white screens in their place.
  8. 1 point
    Oh joy, more EIFS clad, faux-mediterranean, red tile roofed, turreted "luxury apartments" just west of downtown.
  9. 1 point
    maybe it got a good prescription.
  10. -1 points
    The heights east and west recieved the support needed to get a historic district. Those who wanted to get rid of the districts had a chance to do so by a majority vote. They failed miserably and now are falsely claiming that there isn't majority support just because the process did not require a complete re-petitioning or re-vote on the district. I will not forget those who have made fortunes off of the Heights who stuffed mailboxes with bull about property values falling, paint color restrictions and other fiction in order to try to defeat a grass roots movement to have real historic preservation in the Heights. And by not forgetting who was against the ordinance, I meant that they will not get my business and will not get recommended to anyone who asks. That is called the free market at work. I will vote with my dollars. I am planning an addition and it is very obvious who will not get my business. It is a free country. I am allowed to express my opinion about those who did not support the ordinance just as much as they had the right to fill mail boxes with all of their misinformation. And you need to take a remedial civics class. We do not live in a democracy. We have a representative form of government, from the municipality on up. We do not vote on every issue that affects our property and community. In fact, you would probably be very much against putting major land use issues that affected the community up for a vote instead of being handled by ordinance and the Mayor's administration. Walmart and a six story condo building would not happen if the community got to vote on those issues. If people are taking photos of houses in order to be prepared to enforce the law, then that is fine with me. A good neighbor follows the law. A bad neighbor breaks the law and expects everyone to keep their mouths shut and let them get away with it. Being vindictive is breaking the law because you did not support it, not taking measures to make sure the law is followed.
  11. -1 points
    wow... now THAT'S cool!
  12. -1 points
    You truly have awful taste. Just completely awful. Please don't quit your day job. Thanks.
This leaderboard is set to Chicago/GMT-05:00
  • Create New...