I do not understand, why do Democrats want to pay more taxes

Such a swindler that I will be smiling come February when I get to keep more of my own money out of the hands of those kind and caring democrats.

 

I just ran some numbers and I'm confused.

I found an online calculator for a simple tax form and inputted $75K income...married...2 children for the year 2016 and it showed a $5100 tax liability
I did the same with a Trump tax calculator and got a tax liability of $5600.

Did I do it wrong or is it a tax increase in that circumstance?

 

I have talked to a great many Democrats who want those 14 year old girls taught sex, but they want the girls to enjoy sex. Maybe you are one of the different ones. I hope so.

 

Fake money is what Obama printed, Trump is printing jobs for real Americans

 

A witch with Parkinson's...

That exactly what the Russian Fake News industry was pushing

 

WTF are you blabbering about?

Teaching sex education is not "teaching 14 yr old girls to enjoy sex".

What is wrong with you?

 

Not sure what this has to do with grown men in their 30s disrobing 14 yr old girls.
Not even a good try at deflection.

 

RW. That is what is wrong. I think they were all home schooled.

 

You might have a point someday, when you can read a chart.
Your post doesn't add up to 100%.

 

<Rule 2/3>

 

Looks like Clinton was the only one that leveled off the debt

 

At the expense of the poor, not the rich

 

Prove it

 

This doesn't add up to 100%. LOL.
But it does show Reagan and bush I had the largest % increase in the history of the USA.
Over 400% increase just from those 2 alone.
1M to 4M $$$$

 

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/02/welfare-reform-bill-hillary-clinton-tanf-poverty-dlc

How a Democrat Killed Welfare
By
Premilla Nadasen
Bill Clinton gutted welfare and criminalized the poor, all while funneling more money into the carceral state.

ill Clinton’s 1992 election was meant to be a turning point in American politics. Liberals breathed a sigh of relief, believing him to be a much-needed break from the Reagan-Bush era of “small government” and social welfare cuts.

But the optimism surrounding Clinton’s election — and favorable assessments of his time in office since — ignore the destruction his administration brought to poor and working people, especially African Americans, and mask not only the continuation but intensification of anti-poor policies. Rather than offering a reprieve from punitive austerity, Clinton took the Reagan-Bush agenda a step further. If his administration was a turning point, it turned us in the wrong direction.

In 1994, Clinton signed the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, the largest crime bill in history, which allocated $10 billion for prison construction, expanded the death penalty, and eliminated federal funding for inmate education. The act intensified police surveillance and racial profiling, and locked up millions for nonviolent offenses such as drug possession. It helped usher in the era of mass incarceration that devastated communities of color (for which Clinton himself has recently apologized).

Clinton’s simultaneous expansion of federal law enforcement and shrinking of the federal workforce to its lowest level in thirty years reallocated taxpayer dollars from employing people in social service jobs to putting more cops on the streets.

The starkest example of the many racist and anti-poor measures directed at African Americans and passed during his administration was the 1996 welfare reform bill, which transformed welfare from an exclusive and unequal cash assistance system that stigmatized its recipients into one that actually criminalized them.

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act ended traditional welfare by turning a federal entitlement, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), into block grants, or Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). TANF established tougher mandates on poor single mothers and gave states more flexibility in how they spent welfare dollars (opening the door for increased discrimination against minorities).

It prohibits anyone from receiving assistance for more than two consecutive years or for more than five years over the course of their life. The act also requires aid recipients to be employed, in most cases, at least thirty hours a week to get their welfare checks, amounting to an hourly wage well below the legal minimum.

 

Never mind, I thought you were someone else

 

Democrats want higher taxes on everybody but themselves.

 

Every time liberals engage in the above argument you can tell for sure they haven't thought through how their policies and arguments actually affect the people they intend to help.

Liberal: Republicans are stupid because they vote against tax increases despite the fact that they use welfare programs the most.

Conservative: You're saying poor people are stupid?

Liberal: How dare you suggest that poor people are stupid! Poverty is caused by institutional corruption.

Conservative: But aren't you saying that the poor are stupid for voting against their own interest by voting against wealth redistribution? If poverty is institutional, isn't it smart for the poor vote to change the welfare institutions that are keeping them oppressed?

Liberal: No No NO! I don't mean government institutional corruption. I mean societal institutional corruption. Republicans are despicable because they hate poor people and want to steal their money to give to the rich.

Conservative: Wait wait, I thought the Republicans were the poor people? Do you hate poor people?

Liberal: RACIST!

 

Actually as usual democrats dont want to pay more taxes, they want everyone else to pay more taxes.

 

Exactly, very, very rich people, like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates (who actually want to pay more taxes) and the Kochs and even George Soros, all of them should pay more. They can, they should and it will help our economy. It will even help THEM, though many are too short-sighted to see that, (So much for the rich being smart)

What I want to know is why conservatives want a tiny tax cut now, which will be canceled in a decade, and then to be compelled to pump even more money to super rich jerks who treat them with utter contempt and act like they're all stupid and will believe anything they say, (which most Republicans dutifully DO)

 

Hillary doesn't have Parkinson's Disease any more than Trump has AIDS from all the whores he's screwed

 

If they want to pay more, why don't they? If Bill Gates thought the government could spend his money better than he can, why doesn't he lock the doors on his charity, and give the money to the government?

According to Wikipedia:

Why didn't Bill give the money right to the IRS? Isn't that the premise of higher taxation? Or is it better for Bill to have some direct control over how that money is spent?

 

Either we all pay more taxes or we pull a Trump and walk away from our debts - there is no other viable alternative at this point.

 

I suppose when you make that comment, it is very fair for me to speak of Obama walking away from the Auto makers debts by forcing them into bankruptcy.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ep/21/carly-fiorina/trumps-four-bankruptcies/

 

how?
They won't add up to 100% like you think charts should do.