It is currently Sun Feb 23, 2025 2:49 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 951 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 ... 32  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 2:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:55 pm
Posts: 33243
Location: Wrigley
pizza_Place: Warren Buffet of Cock
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Hatchetman wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
[
JUAN is getting his money one way or another. Either Walmart pays him, or we pay him via taxes. Many people prefer the latter for some reason.


Have you people gone totally insane?? You want to pay 100% of JUAN's salary so he can sit around and feel like shit and become an opiod addict rather than subsidizing 25% of his income and letting Wal-Mart pay the other 75% and maybe JUAN gains some additional work skills.

People. COME ON NOW.
We want Wal-Mart to pay for 100% of the costs of their workers. Why is that so hard to understand? They need to have employees. They would have to pay them enough to not be homeless and starving.


Rick, I know you bring this up all the time, and I am in general agreement with you.

However, advocates from both sides of the aisle largely agree that the EIT (earned income tax credit) is a good idea. It is effectively a negative tax rate. First, it is an incentive to get people on government assistance to take jobs. Often low paying jobs are not paying that much above government benefits. The EIT makes the job more attractive. Second, even if the job is low paying, it allows the individual to work their way up into presumably a better position that pays more. The program is mainly helping single mothers and considered a direct benefit to poor people.

I suspect if they really dug into it, you may be right that we are subsidizing Wal Mart's payroll. On the front end, Wal Mart is going to pay what they pay regardless of the EIT. I don't think they purposely pay less knowing that the EIT is out there.

Again, I agree with you though. Just stating the rationale behind the program.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 3:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93636
Location: To the left of my post
denisdman wrote:
Rick, I know you bring this up all the time, and I am in general agreement with you.

However, advocates from both sides of the aisle largely agree that the EIT (earned income tax credit) is a good idea. It is effectively a negative tax rate. First, it is an incentive to get people on government assistance to take jobs. Often low paying jobs are not paying that much above government benefits. The EIT makes the job more attractive. Second, even if the job is low paying, it allows the individual to work their way up into presumably a better position that pays more. The program is mainly helping single mothers and considered a direct benefit to poor people.

I suspect if they really dug into it, you may be right that we are subsidizing Wal Mart's payroll. On the front end, Wal Mart is going to pay what they pay regardless of the EIT. I don't think they purposely pay less knowing that the EIT is out there.

Again, I agree with you though. Just stating the rationale behind the program.
I'm not really talking about the EIT. I'm talking about welfare and food stamps and housing assistance.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 3:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 8:22 am
Posts: 15198
pizza_Place: Wha Happen?
rogers park bryan wrote:
Hatchetman wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
[
Not to mention, it's not fair. Every business should get the gov't to pay half their payroll!


Every company is free to do so. If you can find someone for $8/hr that adds profit to the business go for it. This stuff is simple ECON 101. Remember the X on the paper....one line is demand, the other supply.

No, its the wrong application of ECON 101 that is way more common than ACTUAL Econ 101.


So wait, now JUAN adds profit? I thought they could just cut his job?

Walmart has the least amount of employees they can get away with right now. THAT is ECON 101.

They dont employ extra people that will be fired if we raise minimum wage.

If your company depends on slave lavor, your company sucks and deserves to go out of business. (paraphrasing FDR)

Walmart has the least amount of employees they can get away with right now, until their profit model changes (ie raise in wages) and then they will get more out of their minimum employees or find ones willing to work even harder to "justify" their increase in wages.

_________________
Ба́бушка гада́ла, да на́двое сказа́ла—то ли до́ждик, то ли снег, то ли бу́дет, то ли нет.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 3:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
City of Fools wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Hatchetman wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
[
Not to mention, it's not fair. Every business should get the gov't to pay half their payroll!


Every company is free to do so. If you can find someone for $8/hr that adds profit to the business go for it. This stuff is simple ECON 101. Remember the X on the paper....one line is demand, the other supply.

No, its the wrong application of ECON 101 that is way more common than ACTUAL Econ 101.


So wait, now JUAN adds profit? I thought they could just cut his job?

Walmart has the least amount of employees they can get away with right now. THAT is ECON 101.

They dont employ extra people that will be fired if we raise minimum wage.

If your company depends on slave lavor, your company sucks and deserves to go out of business. (paraphrasing FDR)

Walmart has the least amount of employees they can get away with right now, until their profit model changes (ie raise in wages) and then they will get more out of their minimum employees or find ones willing to work even harder to "justify" their increase in wages.

Sounds good.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 3:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 8:22 am
Posts: 15198
pizza_Place: Wha Happen?
rogers park bryan wrote:
City of Fools wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Hatchetman wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
[
Not to mention, it's not fair. Every business should get the gov't to pay half their payroll!


Every company is free to do so. If you can find someone for $8/hr that adds profit to the business go for it. This stuff is simple ECON 101. Remember the X on the paper....one line is demand, the other supply.

No, its the wrong application of ECON 101 that is way more common than ACTUAL Econ 101.


So wait, now JUAN adds profit? I thought they could just cut his job?

Walmart has the least amount of employees they can get away with right now. THAT is ECON 101.

They dont employ extra people that will be fired if we raise minimum wage.

If your company depends on slave lavor, your company sucks and deserves to go out of business. (paraphrasing FDR)

Walmart has the least amount of employees they can get away with right now, until their profit model changes (ie raise in wages) and then they will get more out of their minimum employees or find ones willing to work even harder to "justify" their increase in wages.

Sounds good.

:lol: no, it sounds very bad. It's this unending thing...I watched Norma Rae a while back with Sally Fields. People working in the textiles down South. Terrible work. They unionized, made life better for themselves...and then at some point, the industries were all gone to cheaper work. So do you push for unions because people matter? Or do you push for corporations because people matter? In the end, everybody's out for themselves.

_________________
Ба́бушка гада́ла, да на́двое сказа́ла—то ли до́ждик, то ли снег, то ли бу́дет, то ли нет.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 3:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:13 am
Posts: 17583
Location: BLM Lake Forest Chapter
pizza_Place: Quonset
You push for living wages and people making enough to live comfortably and keep the economy churning.

Industry is going to roll forward whether workers are subsisting or thriving...so in the long run, people gotta make it while they can.

_________________
Don Tiny wrote:
Don't be such a fucking chump.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:24 pm
Posts: 17331
pizza_Place: Pequods
One Post wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
I'm looking to buy a house next year and this plan really doesn't impact that in a negative way. My mortgage will be $200-210k and there is no way my property taxes where I live will even approach $10k per year. I'll still get all of the deductions out of it.


You won't itemize under the new plan dipshit, you'll take the standard deduction.

I'm self employed with my home as my business, pretty sure I still get more doing individual deductions than even the new higher standard deduction. My father in law does my taxes so he'll run it both ways, but most likely I'll still be doing itemized deductions.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 5:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
Kirkwood wrote:
pittmike wrote:
Well, it is nearly time for me to clock off for the weekend and go get a couple beverages on the way home. I guess we just are not going to be able to solve the US economic problem this afternoon.

It is good to see that no one changed their mind at all and we are all still securely safe in our political bunkers. Bunkers built largely by the political direction we received from our parents in most cases. The two party system of us versus them is strongly thriving. (Maybe Dark side in the headphones later?)

Anyway, enjoy all and come back to class Monday ready to work. Try to read something opposite of what you believe.

Peace and Love.

Ya, it's weird. This tax thing is a mess. Though, I can't really remember when this started or why.


RPB started a new meme today. This has potential.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 5:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
rogers park bryan wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Hatchetman wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Quote:
We could pay the bottom a livable wage, but hey that's such a terrible concept that you literally think it's worth making fun of!



Look, if we as a society want people to have enough money to live on then it is society as a whole to ensure that. It is not Pizza Hut's responsibility to make sure JUAN has enough to live on. If it costs Pizza Hut $700/week to hire Juan and it results in a $200 reduction in profits, why in the hell would they hire him?
The problem is that minimum wage workers are often already on government assistance of some kind. Some companies actually help them get their benefits from the government!

This is why my alternate solution is to not let any company with over 500(or whatever number you want to set) employees from employing someone who is on any type of government benefits. If you want to play the "Pizza Hut can't afford to pay them a livable wage!" then the government shouldn't be helping pay for it. Let them try and run their business without those workers and let the free market work itself out. This actually is the most fair to taxpayers and workers and companies. My company doesn't get to supplement my pay with checks from the government. Why should Wal-Mart?

Yup.

Arguing against higher minimum wage is effectively arguing for higher or against any lowering of taxes.


JUAN is getting his money one way or another. Either Walmart pays him, or we pay him via taxes. Many people prefer the latter for some reason.


What does Juan Bad Hombre think of all of this?

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 5:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
Hatchetman wrote:
Wal-Mart is totally amoral. They will hire people if they are worth the cost. The higher the cost the fewer they hire. Technology is taking MANY jobs. Just visited a company in Ohio looking to consolidate their product line so they can replace a bunch of people with robots.


I thought Trump was bringing jobs back to the Rust Belt.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 2:47 pm
Posts: 13380
Location: The far western part of south east North Dakota
pizza_Place: Boboli
Chus wrote:
Kirkwood wrote:
pittmike wrote:
Well, it is nearly time for me to clock off for the weekend and go get a couple beverages on the way home. I guess we just are not going to be able to solve the US economic problem this afternoon.

It is good to see that no one changed their mind at all and we are all still securely safe in our political bunkers. Bunkers built largely by the political direction we received from our parents in most cases. The two party system of us versus them is strongly thriving. (Maybe Dark side in the headphones later?)

Anyway, enjoy all and come back to class Monday ready to work. Try to read something opposite of what you believe.

Peace and Love.

Ya, it's weird. This tax thing is a mess. Though, I can't really remember when this started or why.


RPB started a new meme today. This has potential.


Credit where it's due to Pitt Mike, though I don't remember when this started or why.

_________________
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
I smell a bit....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 11:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 10:28 am
Posts: 4137
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
One Post wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
I'm looking to buy a house next year and this plan really doesn't impact that in a negative way. My mortgage will be $200-210k and there is no way my property taxes where I live will even approach $10k per year. I'll still get all of the deductions out of it.


You won't itemize under the new plan dipshit, you'll take the standard deduction.

I'm self employed with my home as my business, pretty sure I still get more doing individual deductions than even the new higher standard deduction. My father in law does my taxes so he'll run it both ways, but most likely I'll still be doing itemized deductions.


Your deductions related to your business have nothing to do with itemizing deductions dipshit. If you knew even 10% of the bullshit you spew you would be worth something.

I'm pretty sure you are clueless about this and most other things you post about.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 7:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 2:47 pm
Posts: 13380
Location: The far western part of south east North Dakota
pizza_Place: Boboli
They just keep making this thing better!

Quote:
WASHINGTON — House Republicans grappled Friday with the difficulty of turning their new tax plan into law, making a change that would make the proposal’s tax cuts for individuals less generous and entertaining a controversial proposal from President Trump to use the tax bill to repeal a central element of the Affordable Care Act.

Republicans changed the tax overhaul, which was announced Thursday, to cut $81 billion from the tax breaks it would provide to individual taxpayers. The move was made as lawmakers realized their initial effort would run up against the $1.5 trillion in total borrowing over a decade that Congress had authorized to finance the tax cut plan.

Party leaders also took a preliminary step to study Trump’s proposal to include language in the tax bill that would scrap the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate, a change nonpartisan analysts say would save the government more than $400 billion over a decade but would also leave 15 million more Americans without health insurance.

Republicans released their proposal overhaul of the personal and corporate tax code on Thursday after months of negotiations, but Friday’s last-minute changes showed how challenging it would be to finalize the law by year’s end.

The decision to reduce benefits for individual taxpayers threatens to reinforce perceptions the bill is tilted toward helping the wealthy and corporations at the expense of middle-class Americans.


Republicans plan to save the $81 billion over a decade by changing the way the bill measures inflation, a shift that would move taxpayers into higher-tax brackets more quickly and probably hit middle-class taxpayers harder than the very wealthy.

Advertisement
Undermining the Affordable Care Act through a tax overhaul, meanwhile, would probably draw the same type of opposition that earlier efforts did in the Senate, dooming several such attempts to repeal Obamacare earlier this year. Many in Congress say such an effort would destroy Republicans’ chance of passing major legislation this year.

Still, under heavy pressure from Trump, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady, R-Texas, said he would ask the Congressional Budget Office to assess the implications of repealing the individual mandate as part of tax reform, the first step toward including the proposal in the bill.

“The president feels very strongly about including this at some step before the final process,” Brady said at a Friday event hosted by Politico. “He’s told me that twice by phone and once in person.”

Brady also suggested he was unlikely to ultimately adopt the change Trump had personally pushed him to make, noting the possibility such a change would sink the bill’s hopes in the Senate.

“Importing health care into the tax reform debate has consequences, especially when the Senate has yet to produce 50 votes on anything related to health care that I’m aware of,” he said. “Clearly you’re bringing a whole new element into pro-growth tax reform.”

Trump remains enamored with the idea, driven by conversations with Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who are aggressively promoting it.

Advertisement
House conservatives are pushing – gently, for the moment – to include the mandate’s repeal in the tax legislation.

“It’s good policy. It’s the right thing to do,” Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, a leader of the Republicans’ hard-right bloc, said Friday. “I don’t know why we wouldn’t.”

Brady said other additional, “more substantive” changes to the bill are coming Monday.

Broadly, the Republican tax bill would sharply lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent and cut income tax rates on all levels of income below $1 million. It would also expand some targeted tax benefits, particularly for corporations. To offset the revenue lost because of those cuts, the bill would also eliminate deductions individuals and businesses have relied on for decades – changes that promise to spark both internal tumult in the Republican Party and intense lobbying pressure from powerful industries and interest groups.

Some changes were immediately controversial, especially a plan to limit a provision in current tax law that allows homeowners to deduct interest payments made on their mortgages.

But there were indications Friday the sharp internal divisions over a separate proposal to scale back an existing break that allows individuals to deduct tax payments made to state and local governments from their federal tax liability could be easing. The bill would still let taxpayers deduct up to $10,000 in property taxes, though it would eliminate the ability to deduct any state income tax paid.

That compromise appears to have appeased many of the initial holdouts. While a handful of Republican members from New York and New Jersey said they would oppose the bill as written, one key member who had negotiated a compromise with leadership declared Friday that he was satisfied.


http://www.pressherald.com/2017/11/03/r ... -tax-plan/

_________________
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
I smell a bit....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 8:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:05 pm
Posts: 68612
pizza_Place: Lina's Pizza
Sentimental hogwash.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
There is not a damned thing wrong with people who are bull shitters.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 8:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93636
Location: To the left of my post
Going after pro and college sports funding. I'm out. This thing sucks.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 9:18 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 56746
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Going after pro and college sports funding. I'm out. This thing sucks.


This owns:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN1D302P
Quote:
Some wealthy owners of U.S. major-league sports teams may have to put up more of their own money to fund stadium construction under a tax bill proposed by U.S. House of Representatives Republicans, but the overall impact could be slight, sports economists said.

The legislation unveiled on Thursday could mean just a modest scaling-back of grand plans for new stadiums, with one expert suggesting team owners could help offset any lost federal subsidies, for example, by pouring concrete flooring instead of terrazzo.

...

Under the Republican plan, local governments could no longer fund the building or renovating of professional sports stadiums by issuing tax-exempt public-purpose bonds, the sort of bonds typically used to fund things like schools, libraries and public transit.

U.S. President Donald Trump has called for an end to the subsidy, at least for the National Football League after some of its players angered the Republican president by kneeling during the national anthem to protest racial bias in the criminal justice system. His Democratic predecessor, Barack Obama, also proposed ending the tax break for stadiums in 2015.


After the Democrats fought sports subsidies for years, now the Republicans will see to it that the Buffalo Bills won't get to stick New York State with the bill for some Calatrava abomination that looks like a fanged vagina, all because of Colin Kaepernick. What a topsy-turvy world we live in now.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 9:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93636
Location: To the left of my post
What a spiteful President we have.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 9:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93636
Location: To the left of my post
They should do the same for state subsidies to attract companies.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 9:23 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 56746
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Don't worry, there will be a loophole that sports venues can indulge in ugly extravagance as long as the building says TRUMP on the side.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 10:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 8:10 pm
Posts: 38609
Location: "Across 110th Street"
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Going after pro and college sports funding. I'm out. This thing sucks.


In 13 years around here I've never seen a logical poster like Brick reduced to that kind of response, damn.

Cheetolini strikes again...

_________________
There are only two examples of infinity: The universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the universe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 10:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:24 pm
Posts: 17331
pizza_Place: Pequods
One Post wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
One Post wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
I'm looking to buy a house next year and this plan really doesn't impact that in a negative way. My mortgage will be $200-210k and there is no way my property taxes where I live will even approach $10k per year. I'll still get all of the deductions out of it.


You won't itemize under the new plan dipshit, you'll take the standard deduction.

I'm self employed with my home as my business, pretty sure I still get more doing individual deductions than even the new higher standard deduction. My father in law does my taxes so he'll run it both ways, but most likely I'll still be doing itemized deductions.


Your deductions related to your business have nothing to do with itemizing deductions dipshit. If you knew even 10% of the bullshit you spew you would be worth something.

I'm pretty sure you are clueless about this and most other things you post about.

There is a reason I don't do my own taxes. I never said I was a CPA.

Now go back to your shit hole flood zone. Try not to suck any cock on the way there.

If you want to be a belligerent twat every time you post, then I'll gladly be one back to you.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 2:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 10:28 am
Posts: 4137
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
One Post wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
One Post wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
I'm looking to buy a house next year and this plan really doesn't impact that in a negative way. My mortgage will be $200-210k and there is no way my property taxes where I live will even approach $10k per year. I'll still get all of the deductions out of it.


You won't itemize under the new plan dipshit, you'll take the standard deduction.

I'm self employed with my home as my business, pretty sure I still get more doing individual deductions than even the new higher standard deduction. My father in law does my taxes so he'll run it both ways, but most likely I'll still be doing itemized deductions.


Your deductions related to your business have nothing to do with itemizing deductions dipshit. If you knew even 10% of the bullshit you spew you would be worth something.

I'm pretty sure you are clueless about this and most other things you post about.

There is a reason I don't do my own taxes. I never said I was a CPA.

Now go back to your shit hole flood zone. Try not to suck any cock on the way there.

If you want to be a belligerent twat every time you post, then I'll gladly be one back to you.


If you want to continue to post your misinformed bullshit, don't be upset when it gets shoved up your ass.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 4:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:24 pm
Posts: 17331
pizza_Place: Pequods
One Post wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
One Post wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
One Post wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
I'm looking to buy a house next year and this plan really doesn't impact that in a negative way. My mortgage will be $200-210k and there is no way my property taxes where I live will even approach $10k per year. I'll still get all of the deductions out of it.


You won't itemize under the new plan dipshit, you'll take the standard deduction.

I'm self employed with my home as my business, pretty sure I still get more doing individual deductions than even the new higher standard deduction. My father in law does my taxes so he'll run it both ways, but most likely I'll still be doing itemized deductions.


Your deductions related to your business have nothing to do with itemizing deductions dipshit. If you knew even 10% of the bullshit you spew you would be worth something.

I'm pretty sure you are clueless about this and most other things you post about.

There is a reason I don't do my own taxes. I never said I was a CPA.

Now go back to your shit hole flood zone. Try not to suck any cock on the way there.

If you want to be a belligerent twat every time you post, then I'll gladly be one back to you.


If you want to continue to post your misinformed bullshit, don't be upset when it gets shoved up your ass.

meh, go fuck yourself.

You bring literally nothing to this board other than your asshole attitude.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 5:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 10:28 am
Posts: 4137
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:


meh, go fuck yourself.

You bring literally nothing to this board other than your asshole attitude.


If you would drop your know it all attitude you might have learned something today.

You could color me unsurprised if you told me that on a consistent basis Ogie obstinately misses opportunities to gain real knowledge because he thinks he has all the answers on all issues.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 5:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:24 pm
Posts: 17331
pizza_Place: Pequods
One Post wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:


meh, go fuck yourself.

You bring literally nothing to this board other than your asshole attitude.


If you would drop your know it all attitude you might have learned something today.

You could color me unsurprised if you told me that on a consistent basis Ogie obstinately misses opportunities to gain real knowledge because he thinks he has all the answers on all issues.

As per usual, you have once again added nothing to the thread. Now kindly go back to fucking yourself

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 9:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:18 pm
Posts: 19494
pizza_Place: Phils' on 35th all you need to know
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
One Post wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:


meh, go fuck yourself.

You bring literally nothing to this board other than your asshole attitude.


If you would drop your know it all attitude you might have learned something today.

You could color me unsurprised if you told me that on a consistent basis Ogie obstinately misses opportunities to gain real knowledge because he thinks he has all the answers on all issues.

As per usual, you have once again added nothing to the thread. Now kindly go back to fucking yourself

Well to be honest you do come across as as a know it all dickhead.

_________________
When I am stuck and need to figure something out I always remember the Immortal words of Socrates when he said:"I just drank what?"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
Bend over, America.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-gop- ... over-time/

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OYxEBxmZEUo

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:03 pm
Posts: 43866
Chus wrote:
Bend over, America.

MANY are saying that's why he moved to France.

_________________
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
I am not a legal expert, how many times do I have to say it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 1:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 1:30 am
Posts: 4113
pizza_Place: Palermo's 95th
The rare good Matthew Yglesias article: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... porate-cut


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 951 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 ... 32  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group