what the hell are you blabbering about? is english your first language or is this a translation because you make no sense
first off, you are the one who said by not saying anything about X, its "implied" that they are REALLY talking about X. in your head maybe, but you cant hold someone accountable for what you ASSUME someone elses words, or lack of them mean
sadly, verizon service (cell service) is the only one worth a damn in most places Im at. sprint never works, att works about 40% of the places im in. this is true for many people i know
the difference is that verizon cant really do anything to harm me, the NSA can. sure verizon (and pretty much all telcos are evil) but without the NSA they cant hurt you, you dont have to do business with them
no, its not. stop being disengenious. Romney care was a single state issue, which makes it constitutional according to the 10th. This is not the same thing at all.
now, if another state implemented it (not the fed) you could still call it romney care
just because YOU feel that someone is implying something does not mean they are. In other words, you dont have the right to be offended, and you dont have the right to assume someone things X because they didnt say anything about X
what is the point of that though? he STILL pays more in a year in taxes than me or you will in our lifetimes, why do you feel he needs to be punished for simply having money? its wrong
fair enough points. but it all boils down to choice. you always could have bought a mac. you always could have bought netscape (back in the day) if business didnt base its builds on active x (and now silverlight) it wouldnt be browser specific. the people who made the tools always could have stayed strictly HTML compliant, they chose not to. I cant fault microsoft for bad business practices of others.
If anything one could argue the exact opposite, due to M$ policy, it caused others to get outraged and make competing products better.
i get your points, I know I hated that time when IE dominated the landscape as much as anyone else and was so happy when mozilla came to the rescue. but I would hardly call any of that "harm". I mean they could just not exist at all, and we wouldnt have a lot of what we do have today. you can make the same complains against any big company, ma bell, the railroads, electricity. while it may not be perfect, its STILL orders of magnitude better than the previous generation
Technically, a payroll tax is a tax paid by the employer based on its payroll. An example would be the employer portion of U.S. Social Security (Old Age and Survivor’s Insurance or OASI) or unemployment insurance (FUTA, for Federal Unemployment Tax Act). There may be all sorts of variations, such as limits on the level of wages on which the Social Security tax is applied. Colloquially, I’ve heard the term used for the entire Social Security program, including the employee portion, as you suggest. The income tax comes from the employee based on their income and, from a theoretical or policy (but perhaps not from a psychological) standpoint, is considered distinct. The money isn’t earmarked the same way as OASI or FUTA money. You can read about these topics in standard textbooks or dictionaries of economic or public policy terminology.
just because they can doesnt mean they should. the top 50% of americans already pay just shy of 100% of the taxes in this country, top 1% pays almost 40%!
Let me phrase it this way "how much of ones own money do YOU think they deserve to keep, and how much do you feel the government "deserves" to take away from those who earned it??
we are talking about total dollars, not percentages. you said you want them to pay their fair share, well they are as this article shows. being that that top 1% give the governement 38% of ALL money the government gets and the top 50% pay 97% of the total. meaning the bottom 50% share paying 3% of all taxes
long story short the "rich dont pay their fair share" is a myth created by bleeding hearts to get votes, thats it
Slashdot Mirror
This times 1000
if you want to be techincal hillary started all this mess when bill was president. or did you forget hillarycare??
talk to teachers. this isnt D vs R, every last teacher I know (and I know quite a few in NY) HATES common core with a passion
this is tiring, you are not paying attenton to the words I am saying. Have a nice day, its like talking to a brick wall
what the hell are you blabbering about? is english your first language or is this a translation because you make no sense
first off, you are the one who said by not saying anything about X, its "implied" that they are REALLY talking about X. in your head maybe, but you cant hold someone accountable for what you ASSUME someone elses words, or lack of them mean
you read the article?!?!?! you are aware this is slashdot right?
ads??? i havent seen ads on youtube in forever. granted i know what adblockplus is
"No, they spend great care to insult without saying anything" It's very important to not say anything when implying that women are dumb
I didnt lie, i left a word out
you get your FICA back though (in some form or another) you dont get your "taxes" back though
Ill ceed that point to a degree. but any state taxes should not be included.
sadly, verizon service (cell service) is the only one worth a damn in most places Im at. sprint never works, att works about 40% of the places im in. this is true for many people i know
the difference is that verizon cant really do anything to harm me, the NSA can. sure verizon (and pretty much all telcos are evil) but without the NSA they cant hurt you, you dont have to do business with them
no, its not. stop being disengenious. Romney care was a single state issue, which makes it constitutional according to the 10th. This is not the same thing at all.
now, if another state implemented it (not the fed) you could still call it romney care
do they? I had no idea bill clinton was a woman... or obama... or harry reid...
do you not remember all the sarah palin hate? why do democrats hate women???
the rand hate above, why all the women hate???
long story short, just stop. you sound like an idiot when you make disingenuous statements to try and prove your point
a libertarian state would never do such a think. you have libertarian and totalitarian mixed up
and cold is no libertarian, he is an authoritarian
how can obama be the messiah AND the koch brothers??? I
just because YOU feel that someone is implying something does not mean they are. In other words, you dont have the right to be offended, and you dont have the right to assume someone things X because they didnt say anything about X
why would you bring state sales taxes into the topic of federal taxes? as for FICA, I would argue its not a tax per se but more like insurance
ahh, so "you didnt build that!"
got it.... sigh
what is the point of that though? he STILL pays more in a year in taxes than me or you will in our lifetimes, why do you feel he needs to be punished for simply having money? its wrong
fair enough points. but it all boils down to choice. you always could have bought a mac. you always could have bought netscape (back in the day) if business didnt base its builds on active x (and now silverlight) it wouldnt be browser specific. the people who made the tools always could have stayed strictly HTML compliant, they chose not to. I cant fault microsoft for bad business practices of others.
If anything one could argue the exact opposite, due to M$ policy, it caused others to get outraged and make competing products better.
i get your points, I know I hated that time when IE dominated the landscape as much as anyone else and was so happy when mozilla came to the rescue. but I would hardly call any of that "harm". I mean they could just not exist at all, and we wouldnt have a lot of what we do have today. you can make the same complains against any big company, ma bell, the railroads, electricity. while it may not be perfect, its STILL orders of magnitude better than the previous generation
Technically, a payroll tax is a tax paid by the employer based on its payroll. An example would be the employer portion of U.S. Social Security (Old Age and Survivor’s Insurance or OASI) or unemployment insurance (FUTA, for Federal Unemployment Tax Act). There may be all sorts of variations, such as limits on the level of wages on which the Social Security tax is applied. Colloquially, I’ve heard the term used for the entire Social Security program, including the employee portion, as you suggest. The income tax comes from the employee based on their income and, from a theoretical or policy (but perhaps not from a psychological) standpoint, is considered distinct. The money isn’t earmarked the same way as OASI or FUTA money. You can read about these topics in standard textbooks or dictionaries of economic or public policy terminology.
http://blogs.library.duke.edu/...
if im reading this correctly, it looks like the payroll tax is paid by the business, not the employee while the income tax is paid by the employee.
just because they can doesnt mean they should. the top 50% of americans already pay just shy of 100% of the taxes in this country, top 1% pays almost 40%!
Let me phrase it this way "how much of ones own money do YOU think they deserve to keep, and how much do you feel the government "deserves" to take away from those who earned it??
ok, ill bite. explain to me how something M$ or bill gates has done that directly affected me??? (in a negative way)
we are talking about total dollars, not percentages. you said you want them to pay their fair share, well they are as this article shows. being that that top 1% give the governement 38% of ALL money the government gets and the top 50% pay 97% of the total. meaning the bottom 50% share paying 3% of all taxes
long story short the "rich dont pay their fair share" is a myth created by bleeding hearts to get votes, thats it