Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Under Ryan's Budget Plan, Willard Would Pay 0.82%

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Sal

Sal
And the bottom 30% of earners would see a tax increase. Wow.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/08/mitt-romney-would-pay-082-percent-in-taxes-under-paul-ryans-plan/261027/

Guest


Guest
From 0% to .82%, I sure hope it doesn't break him.. I pay 33% so I'm kinda pissed about these Crooks.

Sal

Sal
Lurch wrote: I'm kinda pissed about these Crooks.

Me too.

Ryan attended a closed meeting with congressional leaders, Bush's Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on September 18, 2008. The purpose of the meeting was to disclose the coming economic meltdown and beg Congress to pass legislation to help collapsing banks.

Instead of doing anything to help, Ryan left the meeting and on that very same day Paul Ryan sold shares of stock he owned in several troubled banks and reinvested the proceeds in Goldman Sachs, a bank that the meeting had disclosed was not in trouble.

http://www.the-richmonder.com/2012/08/paul-ryan-traded-on-insider-information.html

othershoe1030

othershoe1030
salinsky wrote:
Lurch wrote: I'm kinda pissed about these Crooks.

Me too.

Ryan attended a closed meeting with congressional leaders, Bush's Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on September 18, 2008. The purpose of the meeting was to disclose the coming economic meltdown and beg Congress to pass legislation to help collapsing banks.

Instead of doing anything to help, Ryan left the meeting and on that very same day Paul Ryan sold shares of stock he owned in several troubled banks and reinvested the proceeds in Goldman Sachs, a bank that the meeting had disclosed was not in trouble.

http://www.the-richmonder.com/2012/08/paul-ryan-traded-on-insider-information.html
Since members of congress are not held to the same insider trading regulations as other people his move was most likely not illegal. Just another example of what I'm saying in my argument re what government is supposed to do when it works correctly, namely to create equality of opportunity and rules. This is just another example of how the deck is stacked against the common "we the people" citizen. good post.

Sal

Sal
But just think of all of the jobs that will be created if we slash the richies' tax rates from 13.9% to 0.82%. Happy times will be here again!

WILLARD - RYAN 2012
A car elevator in every garage and a dancing horse in every pot.

Guest


Guest
othershoe1030 wrote:
salinsky wrote:
Lurch wrote: I'm kinda pissed about these Crooks.

Me too.

Ryan attended a closed meeting with congressional leaders, Bush's Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on September 18, 2008. The purpose of the meeting was to disclose the coming economic meltdown and beg Congress to pass legislation to help collapsing banks.

Instead of doing anything to help, Ryan left the meeting and on that very same day Paul Ryan sold shares of stock he owned in several troubled banks and reinvested the proceeds in Goldman Sachs, a bank that the meeting had disclosed was not in trouble.

http://www.the-richmonder.com/2012/08/paul-ryan-traded-on-insider-information.html
Since members of congress are not held to the same insider trading regulations as other people his move was most likely not illegal. Just another example of what I'm saying in my argument re what government is supposed to do when it works correctly, namely to create equality of opportunity and rules. This is just another example of how the deck is stacked against the common "we the people" citizen. good post.

agreed... the mentality that this could be a privilege is completely contrary to public service. if we won't insist on integrity... we won't ever have it... but it can't be right or left.

Guest


Guest
Lurch wrote:From 0% to .82%, I sure hope it doesn't break him.. I pay 33% so I'm kinda pissed about these Crooks.

Romney: "What! .82%! What do you mean, Paul, I'm not accustomed to paying this much! Go refigure."

Ryan: It'll be okay,Chief, look how much the average dudes will be paying."

Romney: "Well, I suppose you are right, but I don't like paying taxes."

Markle

Markle
Lurch wrote:From 0% to .82%, I sure hope it doesn't break him.. I pay 33% so I'm kinda pissed about these Crooks.

Highly unlikely.

Markle

Markle
salinsky wrote:And the bottom 30% of earners would see a tax increase. Wow.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/08/mitt-romney-would-pay-082-percent-in-taxes-under-paul-ryans-plan/261027/

Please show us the "Obama Plan".

polecat

polecat
Here it is, plain and simple. Paul Ryan is a fervent believer in killing social insurance by privatizing it for profit. To that end, his budget proposal ends Medicare. It ends it. Period. There is no "choice." involved. It ends Medicare and shifts the burden for medical costs onto senior citizens. Similarly, his scheme for Social Security ends it. Period. It takes our retirement funds and gives them to Wall Street, where all the risk then shifts over to the retiree and all the profit heads into Wall Street's pocket.

Wall Street and health insurers benefit from Paul Ryan's plan, but people don't. They can paint that pig with all kinds of different shades of lipstick but everyone needs to know that Paul Ryan aims to destroy the social safety nets by shifting all costs and risks from the government to individuals, terminating the agreement that has worked so well for so many years, and handing our retirement to profit-driven enterprise.

Spread the word.

Guest


Guest
salinsky wrote:And the bottom 30% of earners would see a tax increase. Wow.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/08/mitt-romney-would-pay-082-percent-in-taxes-under-paul-ryans-plan/261027/

In other words the bottom 30% might get a smaller tax refund check. How it that paying more in taxes? Liberal logic?

NaNook

NaNook
If Mitt is totally invested in Muni Bonds then he would owe no taxes.

Anyone can buy them, call your broker. Tax free interest is available to everyone. Pick up a phone and buy them. I would suggest you stay away from the CA Muni Bonds. Their cities are falling and defaulting....go figure, a welfare state....

Markle

Markle
polecat wrote:Here it is, plain and simple. Paul Ryan is a fervent believer in killing social insurance by privatizing it for profit. To that end, his budget proposal ends Medicare. It ends it. Period. There is no "choice." involved. It ends Medicare and shifts the burden for medical costs onto senior citizens. Similarly, his scheme for Social Security ends it. Period. It takes our retirement funds and gives them to Wall Street, where all the risk then shifts over to the retiree and all the profit heads into Wall Street's pocket.

Wall Street and health insurers benefit from Paul Ryan's plan, but people don't. They can paint that pig with all kinds of different shades of lipstick but everyone needs to know that Paul Ryan aims to destroy the social safety nets by shifting all costs and risks from the government to individuals, terminating the agreement that has worked so well for so many years, and handing our retirement to profit-driven enterprise.
Spread the word.

Since you don't like those solutions, please show us yours for this:

Where will this money come from? Please don't say the "RICH", they don't have anywhere NEAR this much money.

Current Debt . . . $15.3+ TRILLION Plus the $1.3 TRILLION proposed by President Barack Hussein Obama for 2013. (No budget approved)

Unfunded Liabilities (money we have PROMISED, do not have, nor do we have it coming in)

Social Security. . . . $15.4 TRILLION (10,000 Baby Boomers RETIRE EVERY DAY) (How many workers are entering the job market daily?)

Prescription Drugs .$20.4 TRILLION

Medicare. . . . . . . . $81.0 TRILLION

Total Unfunded Liabilities $116.8 TRILLION!

Number of Households in 2010 = 112,611,029

Unfunded Liability Per household $1,037,198.00

PLUS ObamaCare and Untold TRILLIONS more in TAXES

Since far left radical House Speaker Nancy Pelosi took office in January 1, 2007 our debt has increased by $6+ TRILLION.

FIVE+ TRILLION since President Barack Hussein Obama took office. With Obama promise of ANOTHER $1.3 TRILLION DEBT FOR 2013.

Why do Liberals DEMAND a far lower standard of living for our children and their children? What makes you so superior, so selfish that you think you deserve far more of what they will earn?

Saddling our children and their children with this massive debt is immoral, indefensible and, as we have seen, the lefties here don’t even try.

Shameful and immoral!

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum