That's only if you earn more money than you are allowed to make.slideman » 20 Jan 2023, 11:25 am » wrote: ↑ Some people do pay tax on their social security it depends on your situation.
https://www.ssa.gov/benefits/retirement ... taxes.html
That's correct. There are a complex set of factors involved in when one should take social security. You get more money if you wait till you're 70 but then on the other hand you might die. You are taxed on the social security if you continue to work but if you don't work you make less money.Justthetruth » 20 Jan 2023, 11:28 am » wrote: ↑ That's only if you earn more money than you are allowed to make.
slideman » 20 Jan 2023, 11:26 am » wrote: ↑ These rich people do not give a good goddamn about the country.
Justthetruth » 20 Jan 2023, 11:33 am » wrote: ↑ they can leave at any time.
The working folks can't buy citizenship in other countries like the rich do.
Justthetruth » 20 Jan 2023, 11:09 am » wrote: ↑Sure sure.
Juat keep lying.
And raising taxes on the working poor.Huey » 20 Jan 2023, 11:36 am » wrote: ↑ For those unfamiliar with the idea, the tax proposal is a doozy, even by GOP standards. The plan, championed by Republican Rep. Buddy Carter of Georgia, calls for scrapping effectively all federal taxes — income taxes, corporate taxes, Social Security payroll taxes, estate taxes, et al. — and permanently shuttering the Internal Revenue Services.
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-sho ... -rcna66693
Here is the rest of that story.Huey » 20 Jan 2023, 11:36 am » wrote: ↑ For those unfamiliar with the idea, the tax proposal is a doozy, even by GOP standards. The plan, championed by Republican Rep. Buddy Carter of Georgia, calls for scrapping effectively all federal taxes — income taxes, corporate taxes, Social Security payroll taxes, estate taxes, et al. — and permanently shuttering the Internal Revenue Services.
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-sho ... -rcna66693
So it takes the social security away.Huey » 20 Jan 2023, 11:40 am » wrote: ↑ Possibly....
Need to see some numbers. But I was addressing you calling another poster a liar about what is in the proposal.
So it take Medicare and social security out.Huey » 20 Jan 2023, 11:40 am » wrote: ↑ Possibly....
Need to see some numbers. But I was addressing you calling another poster a liar about what is in the proposal.
The bottom 50% pay NO income tax now.Justthetruth » 20 Jan 2023, 10:56 am » wrote: ↑ So now the Republicans want to make billionaires pay even less in taxes. Even though billionaires pay less in taxes on the dollar than the bottom 50%.
Exactly.Beekeeper » 20 Jan 2023, 11:43 am » wrote: ↑ The bottom 50% pay NO income tax now.
Next.
Thread Fail.
So is it 30 or 23? Try to keep your lies straight.
There is a balance to be struck. We did not experience a flight of millionaires during the 1950s and '60s when the top marginal tax rate was 91%. We might now and so it might be wise to balance high taxes on the wealthy with the possibility that they will flee the country.
That's also a lie.Justthetruth » 20 Jan 2023, 11:21 am » wrote: ↑ As of right now retired people pay no federal income taxes on their social security benefits.
But after this passes they will have to pay at least 23% on all goods.
It's more like almost all seniors. Members of the middle class who are figuring out their retirement count their social security income as a major part of the mix. We paid into it all our lives.Justthetruth » 20 Jan 2023, 11:42 am » wrote: ↑ So it take Medicare and social security out.
Something that poor seniors rely on daily.
Wonder if the Republicans will waken.slideman » 20 Jan 2023, 11:53 am » wrote: ↑ It's more like almost all seniors. Members of the middle class who are figuring out their retirement count their social security income as a major part of the mix. We paid into it all our lives.
slideman » 20 Jan 2023, 11:51 am » wrote: ↑ There is a balance to be struck. We did not experience a flight of millionaires during the 1950s and '60s when the top marginal tax rate was 91%. We might now and so it might be wise to balance high taxes on the wealthy with the possibility that they will flee the country.
You have a point
In the 1950s and 1960s the 91% tax was to pay for world war 2 and the national highway system it wasn't that high because we really wanted them that high.FJB » 20 Jan 2023, 11:56 am » wrote: ↑ who would want to stay in this Country if the government is going to tax someone 91% of their income?