Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: How much are you willing to give Washington of your income....

Posted 1 year ago on Oct. 17, 2012, 12:43 a.m. EST by TheRazor (-329)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Traditionally, the budget is about 18% of GDP. Would you be OK with Washington taking 30%?

89 Comments

89 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by ZenDog (20565) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

the neocons launched us into war on two fronts - and never paid for it.

Pay up, fools

[-] 1 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

And your progressive kept us there and bombed a few more countries to be safe, don't be a hypocrite.

[-] 0 points by zewa55 (-6) 1 year ago

The wars are paid for. Welfare isn't.

[-] 1 points by Shule (1548) 1 year ago

The wars are the single biggest reason our economy is in the shambles it is in today. The problem is the wars have sucked more money out of our economy than anything else; like taking air out of a balloon.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

The wars are NOT paid for. They were put the national credit card.

And welfare costs hardly nothing.

[-] 1 points by zewa55 (-6) 1 year ago

Try again. www.usconstitution.net

Get familiar with it, lackey.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

"lackey"? name calling? Are you in 5th grade?

I guess I win.

[-] 1 points by zewa55 (-6) 1 year ago

You "win"?

You're down to third grade without a job. The time you waste here day in and day out tells me you're a loser. Hurray for post counts and wasted time, professional LACKEY.

BTW, where did you ever get the idea that your opinion matters?

Zewa55 autobot (.0000305 cpu seconds)

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Are you gonna cry now?

LMFAO!

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (20565) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

nice

I don't see where that site indicates that the wars in Afghanistan and in Iraq have been paid for.

nothing. nada. zilch

you fukin air head

[-] -2 points by zewa55 (-6) 1 year ago

Article 1, Section 8, you dipschit.

You really are stupid. Have to have everything spelled out for you.

That's why you're occupy. You're useless as tits on a bull for anything else.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (20565) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.


.

Nope, nothing there about actually having collected the money to pay for the war(s). Congress certainly has the authority - but there is nothing here indicating they have actually exercised that authority -

In fact - I bet I can google up some articles indicating they have not - thanks to Repelicans

should I?

Should I Google?

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (21783) 1 year ago

You might have to. It's looking like this is an attempt to flip the argument over to "where do you get the authority?" rather than answer the question directly.

[-] 3 points by ZenDog (20565) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

amazing isn't it? repelicans

they're so silly

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (21783) 1 year ago

Yeah, it is a plus one for silliness AND hijacking.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (20565) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

I'm sure he/she/it's aware the current debt is over 16,000,000,000,000 and therefore it is perfectly reasonable to presume war spending is a significant portion of that debt.

LoL

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (21783) 1 year ago

Yep.

[-] 0 points by zewa55 (-6) 1 year ago

1.4 trillion. http://costofwar.com/

"To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;"

PAID.

[-] -2 points by WeThePeop (-259) 1 year ago

And welfare costs hardly nothing.?????? hahahha what a joke it is exceeding 1 trillion right now

[-] 3 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Nope. This year it is estimated at $104B, next year $99B.

And Welfare increases are a result of conservative policy that created the economic crash!

remember?

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (21783) 1 year ago

This is a social contract. What benefit do we the people get with the 30%?

[-] -1 points by TheRazor (-329) 1 year ago

Well, do you know better how you want to spend your money or do you think Washington does?

It really is a very simple qusetion.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (21783) 1 year ago

No, it isn't a very simple question. In fact, it is a vague question that desires a run of the mill lap dog response. When you are ready to get down to what this really means, let me know.

[-] 1 points by Shule (1548) 1 year ago

I have no problem giving a share of my money to the government. What I'm really concerned about is what the government is doing with the money.

[-] 1 points by NVPHIL (667) 1 year ago

For the current corporate controlled two party gov. No

For a gov representing the people, publicly funded campaigns, and strict laws against bribery, including working for a company you used to oversee. Yes

[-] -2 points by TheRazor (-329) 1 year ago

Just curious. Why do you think the state knows better how to spend your money than you? Are you not the captain of your own fate?

[-] 1 points by NVPHIL (667) 1 year ago

Sure. But I want the best ship possible. We need to upgrade our communications, transportation network, education system, we need to invest in research to stay the place everyone wants to go. We've been using what our father's built and it's time for us to modernize it.

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 1 year ago

I'm willing to commit all of it indefinitely, absolutely.

[-] -1 points by Grimreaper2 (-318) 1 year ago

"willing to give"? I wonder , if left up to the individual citizen, how much would each person be willing to pay in taxes?

[-] -2 points by Grimreaper2 (-318) 1 year ago

10% across the board. Period.

[-] -2 points by yobstreet (-575) 1 year ago

Hell no.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Income tax rate of 90% on income over $1 million.

[-] 2 points by yobstreet (-575) 1 year ago

haha... good luck selling that one.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

"We did it before And we can do it again"

[-] -1 points by WeThePeop (-259) 1 year ago

VQkag2 your mama wants ya to get off the pc and take the trash out

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

My mom died 14 years ago at the age off 55.

Please refrain from personal attacks.

Grow up.

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 1 year ago

You're kidding right? Congress is the 1%; it'll never happen in any significant way.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Too bad. It would be right & fair!

Soak the rich!

[-] 1 points by yobstreet (-575) 1 year ago

All in love and war is fair... the problem is that we are neither at war or in love with Congress; we need to work on that.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Riiiiiiiight!

[-] 0 points by yobstreet (-575) 1 year ago

It's just bullshit, and everything in life is bullshit.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20565) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago
  • Tax rate reductions

  • Following World War II tax increases, top marginal individual tax rates stayed near or above 90% until 1964 when the top marginal tax rate was lowered to 70%. Kennedy explicitly called for a top rate of 65 percent, but added that it should be set at 70 percent if certain deductions weren't phased out at the top of the income scale.[22] The top marginal tax rate was lowered to 50% in 1982 and eventually to 28% in 1988

.

Neocons launched war on two fronts and never did pay for it.

  • pay up boys
[-] 1 points by yobstreet (-575) 1 year ago

This is an entirely new approach, one that has little concern for whatever reason. They are obviously all privy to information concerning government finance that the rest of us are not; there is no way to explain Congressional spending on the backs of the people even in light of extremely low interest rates.

Where is the rationale here, that's what I'm asking; if it exists, I want to hear it. The problem is that it does not exist; these are self serving, corrupt politicians.

This Congress will never, ever, impose such rates on themselves.

[-] 0 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

How about 90% of what you make , yea that is much better idea you give 90% of what you make. If your not ready to do that your a hypocrit.

[-] 3 points by WSmith (5271) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

In times of war EVERYBODY must sacrifice. The 99% has done their part, but the 1% has exploited and hoarded. Time's UP!

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

That's kind of a vague unprovable thin to say.w

[-] 2 points by WSmith (5271) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

OPEN your eyes!

[-] -1 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

And see what exactly?

[-] 2 points by WSmith (5271) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

Well let's break it down:

The 99% has done their part sacrificing!

But the 1% has exploited and hoarded instead of sacrificing!

The fraud, corruption and redistribution to the top1% is proven and audacious!

Time's UP!

[-] -1 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

All this site is, is an Obama re-election site. That wants to continue the status quo so forgive me if I don't drink the koolaid.

[-] 1 points by WSmith (5271) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

It appears to be TOO LATE!

[-] -1 points by WeThePeop (-259) 1 year ago

You are correct and it does appear to be TOO LATE so sorry for the Obama admin losing the election but on the bright side, we will finally have a leader again after a four year absence

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

He doesn't deserve to be re-elected for sure, I just don't have much faith that Romney will do much better. The two parties know you have to chose one of them I wish there wee more options so the two main parties would actually have to server.

[-] 1 points by WSmith (5271) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

Improvement requires involvement 100%

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

True involvement would require more than same old two choices.

[-] 1 points by WSmith (5271) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

OK, then check out the Down Ballot races: Voter 411 Voting Guide: http://www.vote411.org/ballot#.UIDh8mfWrU5

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Bob Hope was taxed over 90%.

He was getting paid so much he didn't give a phlying phukk.

[-] 0 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

And?

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

And, that was the time of abundance in America, a time when The Brady Bunch was indicative of the middle class, and not a forgotten dream.

Next question?

[-] -1 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

Where do you get your info on bob hopes tax rate?

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

I remember him making jokes about it.

He was offered non-cash incentives to perform, but the IRS made new laws to prevent that from happening. Bob made it a part of his stage show.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I'm not wealthy. The 99% has already sacrificed and therefore contributed in the effort to recover the economy of the nation.

We (the 99%) have been victimized by the 1%. It's timethe1% who have done better and better in the great recession to share in the burden of recovering the economy.

It's only fair. They share by willing to contribute. Anything else is just greedy, selfish, & unpatriotic.

Your advocacy of the1% is betrayal of your class. Have you no patriotic honor.?

[-] -1 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

Your wealth is not the issue, when they run out of the riches money and still need more where do you think it will come from? For you to think that it is ok for gov to take 90% of what a person earns so a level of bitterness and anger that borders on criminal. You think it's fair, well I thinks it's faire gov take 90% of what you make. Betrayal of my class? Lol I'm not a thief so I will never be on your class; you seem to think everyone who is rich stole it. That is a very uneducated thing to assume and just because you failed at life doesn't mean you can drag everyone else down with you.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I ain't failed, And I don't think all rich stole their money.

I just recognize the the 99% have been victimized by the 1% plutocrats who have bought our govt, rigged the system against us, crashed the world economy, took trillions in bailouts, held down our wages, raised our health premiums, moved our jobs over seas, busted our unions, destroyed our pensions, and gave themselves underserved, obscenely, high salary/bonuses.

They have not contributed in the recovery. It is unfair and unpatriotic. Why should the 99% conribute but not the 1%?

Why would you protect them while they continue to prey on your family?

[-] 0 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

So you admit not all rich stole the money but you still want to take 90% you should love in the old Soviet Union (before it collapsed). Why do you get to decided what's fair for everyone? It's beyond arrogant for you to pretend you know what anyone has contributed. The only one I protect is me, this may supprise you but i refuse to play the role of victim. I'm doing very well inspire of te gov not because of the gov. It sounds like you have never really known freedom, and I feel sorry for you.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

My personal life is not your business. It reflects the impotence of your argument that you continue to try and deflect to that.

The 1% ain't contributed to the solution! They contributed to the problem!! AND the 1% DID benefit.

The 99% are the only ones who have suffered as a result of irresponsible 1% wall st banksters behavior.

This is why it is unfair for the 99% (you too!!) to be the only ones contributing to the recovery.

And this is what makes it traitorous that the 1% continue to resist doing their fair share!

[-] 0 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

I'm pointing out how your personal life has contributed to your misguided anger, I have not asked you for any personal info nor do i want it. It does however backup my assertions to your irrational behavior. The only role you seem comfortable with is being the victim, poor little VQ's always the victim not everyone thinks that way.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

"irrational behavior"? how so?

"victim"? When did I say I'm a victim?

Make some sense. I ain't talkin about me personally.

I stated the 99% have been victimized, yet have contributed to the recovery. Further that the 1% created the crash, benefited, & have resisted contributing to the recovery.

Absolutely rational, fair, & overdue.

I stand with the decent hard working American families, you stand with the wall st banksters who continueto prey on our families.

[-] 0 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

Not everyone thinks they are a victim but you try to put them there. You don't stand with hard working families you want it keep them right where they are with no chance of bettering their life. Progressives want two classes working class and the elite, the elite will always make sure they have plenty and that the working class stay right where they are. I stand for/with myself I am confident in my ability to provide for myself , you are not capable of taking care of yourself. The big problem with your way is it drags me down with you and that's not going to happen.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

No one takes care of me!! And again please stay out of my personal business.

And you ain't a progressive so you don't speak for them.

Progressives say "we're in this together" They support equal/fair/level playing field to provide opportunity for all. No progressive supports people stay dependent on govt.

You said "I stand for/with myself" Is that conservative?

Conservatives say "you're on your own". Is that right.? Fuck everyone else, I got mine?

Obviously I prefer progressive approach. How could you supportthe conservative approach.? Isn't that kinda selfish, greedy, and careless?

We never would've left the caves dude. It's not Human. It's more like survival ofthe fittest jungle living. Some of us are betterthan that.

Not you?

[-] 0 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

I'm not in your personal bus. Anymore than you are in mine so stop being a hypocrite. Look you are simple enough to think someone else will take care of you fine you will get exactly what you deserve but you are not dragging me down with you. Progressives love to say how they will take care of everyone and supporters are shocked when they realize that in a time of crisis they are sold down the river. I will never allow my wants/needs to allocated out to me by gov. You advocate slavery disguised as compassion. I believe in a hand-up not hand-outs your hand-outs make people slaves, that beg for scraps from their masters table.

[-] 3 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Your opinions about progressives are absolutely incorrect.

They do not pander for votes with table scraps,

They do want people to responsibility for themselves. of course!

They do not need victims, & there is no need for a victim class.

And they do not keep people down

All untrue. just your slanted opinions not based in facts which is why you haven't offered any facts. Just republican talking points.

And what lie are you accusing me of? Or is that scurrilous accusation also not based on facts?

[-] -1 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

All you put up are slanted opinions, you are closed minded to anything other than progressive approved opinions.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

What lie are you accusing me of? Or is that scurrilous accusation also not based on facts?

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

You are wrong about what progressives want!

They do not want hand outs, they want equal opportunity.

"you are simple enough to think someone else will take care of you..." Whaaaaat? Where did you get that from? Are your opinions so impotent you have to resort to lying about what I personally believe?

Please refrain from telling me my personal beliefs. LOL. You speak for yourself and your conservative ideology, I'll speak for me and progressive ideology.

Whatta joke. LMFAO

[-] -1 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

Progressives pander for votes with table scraps and to keep those enslaved they make it impossible to improve thier situation. Progressives don't want people who take responsibility for their own lives they need victims. You lie all the time and why is that ok? For your system to work there has to be a constant victim class. Which is why progressives keep people down.

[-] -3 points by WeThePeop (-259) 1 year ago

They (the republicans) have not contributed in the recovery? Only because the obummer admin is blocking them from doing so. Obama hates America and wants to see it collapse

[-] 2 points by Buttercup (1067) 1 year ago

Crickets.

What are the Republican policy plans for improving the economy. Name them. Name one. Give us a little detail. What Republican 'recovery' or job creation plan(s) do you think will be helpful for the economy.

And what has Pres. Obama blocked them from doing exactly?

chirp chirp.

[-] 2 points by Buttercup (1067) 1 year ago

Oh this I must hear. What are the Republican policy plans for improving the economy. Name them. Name one. Give us a little detail. What Republican 'recovery' or job creation plan(s) do you think will be helpful for the economy.

And what has Pres. Obama blocked them from doing exactly?

[-] 1 points by shooz (26733) 1 year ago

Bush already collapsed it.

Did you sleep through all 8 years of it, or were not of age yet?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

The repubs in congress conspired from day one to obstruct any effort by Pres Obama because they wanted to make him a one term Pres.

That is anti American, treasonous.

  • Repubs should rehire the million+ public workers they have fired during this unemployment crises,

  • Repubs should pass the jobsbill/infrastructure bill that would create at least 2 million jobs,

  • Repubs should pass the veterans jobs bill that would create a million jobs.

  • Repubs should allow the expansion of green tech investment and that would create 2 million jobs.

Unemployment will drop to below 6 %.

Traitorous republicans should be prosecuted.

[-] -1 points by WeThePeop (-259) 1 year ago

Obama has created a "welfare Nation" with spending topping the 1 trillion mark. Welfare has risen 30% under obama

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Welfare is no where near 1 trillion. That's ridiculous.

Any increase in food stamps & other pgms for the poor are a result of the repub created economic crash. Any improvement through recovery has been slowed by republican obstruction in congress.

Get it?

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by WeThePeop (-259) 1 year ago

VQkag2 is only on the forum until around 4;00 or whatever time the library closes

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

no ive seen him on late at night. i think he realized people are tired of him pushing down certain ideals. He has laid off the posting i know he doesn't use his multiple accounts anymore.

[-] 0 points by podman73 (-652) 1 year ago

Lol pathic.

[-] -3 points by ronniepaul2012 (214) 1 year ago

I ask only that everyone pay their 'FAIR SHARE". What's that? Ask our IslamoFascist-in Chief