Support Your Local Tax Hike!

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1285394' date='May 31 2007, 08:16 PM']If you are self-employed, you pay it all - if you are only an employee, you only pay half. Given the same income, the self-employed guy pays more. Do the math.[/quote]
in both instances 15.3 percent of the income goes to SSA/Medicare.

For the employee, the employer pays half and the employee pays half. So yeah, the employee pays only half ... but the half that the employer is paying is still part of the overall amount the employer pays for the employee's services.

For the self-employed, the employer and the employee are the same person. The exact same percentage must be paid -- in other words, the employer ends up paying the same overall amount for the employee's services, the difference being that the employer and the employee are the same person so the check comes from the same source rather than two separate sources.

It is totally logical, and totally fair, that the self-employed person, as both employer and employee, should be required to pay both halves of SSA/Medicare, and whining about it is ridiculous.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Terra Firma' post='1285407' date='May 31 2007, 08:33 PM']in both instances 15.3 percent of the income goes to SSA/Medicare.

For the employee, the employer pays half and the employee pays half. So yeah, the employee pays only half ... but the half that the employer is paying is still part of the overall amount the employer pays for the employee's services.

For the self-employed, the employer and the employee are the same person. The exact same percentage must be paid -- in other words, the employer ends up paying the same overall amount for the employee's services, the difference being that the employer and the employee are the same person so the check comes from the same source rather than two separate sources.

It is totally logical, and totally fair, that the self-employed person, as both employer and employee, should be required to pay both halves of SSA/Medicare, and whining about it is ridiculous.[/quote]
It makes it harder for someone going into business for himself, as if he stays an employee of another, his employer picks up part of the tax burden.
Thus it discourages small business.

[GodChaser]

[quote name='The Joey-O' post='1285335' date='May 31 2007, 07:02 PM']What are you guys' limits on income tax? 10%, 25% 50% or whatever gets the job done?[/quote]
Considering where Income Tax goes, can I vote 0 per cent.

I can't wait to see my share of the Rothschild fortune.

Afterall, 600 trillion dollars divided by the number of the people on earth would be about 100,000 dollars a piece, and that family is so wicked, God's judgement will be swift and powerful against them soon.

That will pay off my student loans, and all my debts. I can't wait!

[1337 k4th0l1x0r]

Is the government the best entity to take care of social problems?
Who spends money in a more efficient manner, charitable organizations or government?
If a charity needs more money to accomplish its goals as it determines, should it be allowed to steal to get said money?
What types of problems should the government take care of? Where should it stop?
Should government programs be implemented nationwide or as each state sees fit?

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='GodChaser' post='1285412' date='May 31 2007, 09:40 PM']Considering where Income Tax goes, can I vote 0 per cent.

I can't wait to see my share of the Rothschild fortune.

Afterall, 600 trillion dollars divided by the number of the people on earth would be about 100,000 dollars a piece, and that family is so wicked, God's judgement will be swift and powerful against them soon.

That will pay off my student loans, and all my debts. I can't wait![/quote]

[Paddington]

[quote name='GodChaser' post='1285412' date='Jun 1 2007, 12:10 AM']I can't wait to see my share of the Rothschild fortune.

Afterall, 600 trillion dollars divided by the number of the people on earth would be about 100,000 dollars a piece, and that family is so wicked, God's judgement will be swift and powerful against them soon.[/quote]

Is this something to do with a Satanic conspiracy that only you and a few others believe in?

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1285410' date='May 31 2007, 08:39 PM']It makes it harder for someone going into business for himself, as if he stays an employee of another, his employer picks up part of the tax burden.
Thus it discourages small business.[/quote]
Or, it evens the playing field by not giving preference to some employers over others.

[Groo the Wanderer]

[quote name='GodChaser' post='1285412' date='May 31 2007, 09:40 PM']Considering where Income Tax goes, can I vote 0 per cent.

I can't wait to see my share of the Rothschild fortune.

Afterall, 600 trillion dollars divided by the number of the people on earth would be about 100,000 dollars a piece, and that family is so wicked, God's judgement will be swift and powerful against them soon.

That will pay off my student loans, and all my debts. I can't wait![/quote]


Whatchoo talkin 'bout, Willis?

[Norseman82]

Unless there is a war or other massive public safety need (and even then we need to be watchful), I say that before we raise taxes we cut the waste that already exists. We need a line-item veto and more William Proxmires (who was a pro-life Democrat, by the way) who ferret out waste, abuse, and mismanagement.

The only taxes I see no problem raising are the tobacco taxes. Raising the gas tax to help subsidize mass transit sounds fine on paper, but I still would like to see more efficiencies in the mass transit system management first.

[Mercy me]

I tend to favor a mnimalist government on the federal level. The federal government needs to handle things that really can't be handles by the states themselves like the major infrastructure, highways and transportation, defense, security, defense.

I really think that the states should handle the rest like education, etc.

Government wastes huge amounts of money. It takes the government twice as much money to do something as it does the private sector. Just look at the schools. Walk into a Catholic school and see the office staff. Then look at a public school's staff of many. It really is amazing. And where is the education better? It isn't at the public school. It is just one example but there are many more.

[The Joey-O]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1285359' date='May 31 2007, 08:47 PM']True.
Most of the time taxpayers have no clue what all their tax money is being spent on.

This is another reason for less central federal government and taxation. Taxpayers should pay directly for things in their own local area/town, etc., where they can see where their money is going, and whether it is being used effectively, rather than sucking everybody's federal tax dollars. Pork barrel spending is a major contributor to federal bloat.[/quote]

I agree that the federal government needs to be lessened. However, many things, such as healthcare, often need to be initiated in some way on the federal level. Of course it's aweful that abortions would be publically funded. But, should we continue to allow 40 million Americans to be without healthcare? That's men, women, children, the elderly, many of which cannot afford to get treatment for basic ailments and their lives jeopardized because they have no healthcare.

[The Joey-O]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1285394' date='May 31 2007, 09:16 PM']If you are self-employed, you pay it all - if you are only an employee, you only pay half. Given the same income, the self-employed guy pays more. Do the math.[/quote]

Do the math? Don't you know about deductions? Unless my accountant (who's been my family's accountant for 20 years) is totally unethical, deductions enable businesses to exist while very little in taxes. In fact, if I remember correctly, I haven't had to pay in for taxes for the past three years. I own a small business and the way I see it, the tax laws might be a little too easy on businesses. I make sure at least one meal a day is a business meeting (except on the weekends), I right off donations to church and other charitable organizations. Plus, part of my overhead and business-related-travel is deducted.

[Groo the Wanderer]

[quote name='The Joey-O' post='1285782' date='Jun 1 2007, 10:55 AM']But, should we continue to allow 40 million Americans to be without healthcare? That's men, women, children, the elderly, many of which cannot afford to get treatment for basic ailments and their lives jeopardized because they have no healthcare.[/quote]


Owie! You fell for it.

This is a fallacy. NOBODY in America is without healthcare. Anyone (even illegal visitors) can walk into any county hospital or clinic and get free healthcare if they need it. The law says they cannot be refused, even if they cannot pay a single penny.

If ya wanna debate the quality or the wait times, be my guest, but don't throw out the nonsense that XX millions have no access to healthcare.

[The Joey-O]

[quote name='Groo the Wanderer' post='1285833' date='Jun 1 2007, 12:03 PM']Owie! You fell for it.

This is a fallacy. NOBODY in America is without healthcare. Anyone (even illegal visitors) can walk into any county hospital or clinic and get free healthcare if they need it. The law says they cannot be refused, even if they cannot pay a single penny.

If ya wanna debate the quality or the wait times, be my guest, but don't throw out the nonsense that XX millions have no access to healthcare.

[/quote]

THAT's only in the case of emergencies. It would be FAR cheaper to allow these people to see a doctor for preventative care. I have a friends and family who are doctors, anesthesists (don't know if that's the right spelling). A friend of mine's dad used to own a hospital in a poor town with a LOT of illegal imagrants. He said that the hospital spent way too much money on emergency medical care for things that should've been handled by a normal doctor before a simple things like a cough or strep or the flu got out of hand. He's even seen people die from these simple conditions.

Edited June 1, 2007 by The Joey-O

[Groo the Wanderer]

No it isn't. It is this free use of ERs that is driving hospitals out of business and contributing to the rising costs of healthcare btw. Dunno the solution myself, other than capping lawsuits...diff debate in any case.

But I gotts gig you one one last thing....'preventative' is not a word. It's 'preventive'. Sorry - word nerd here....