cinque said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

This article says no. How about your own businesses?
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-the-tax-windfall-that-wasnt-20181101-story.html

---

Sure. They're working for rich people.

---

Just curious......

How much income per year for a family of 4 ( Husband and Wife both working ) meets your definition of rich .

---

Irrelevant to me point about the tax cut working for rich people.

---

I mean anyone making over $45k is rich according to you socialists, so your take on it working for the rich is subjective.

yes he would

Waco1947 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

This article says no. How about your own businesses?
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-the-tax-windfall-that-wasnt-20181101-story.html

---

Sure. They're working for rich people.

---

Just curious......

How much income per year for a family of 4 ( Husband and Wife both working ) meets your definition of rich .

---

Irrelevant to me point about the tax cut working for rich people.

---

Just curious what you think is 'rich' for a family of 4 ?

There is no right or wrong answer .

---

. Enough is the answer. For many the money is never enough. 10% to God 10% to self and live on 80%. But it depends on the size of house and car and the costs of healthcare. We can control house and car. Healthcare only somewhat.

---

Yours is an 'answer'.....but to a different question.

The question 'cingue' keeps avoiding......how much income does a family of 4 have to earn per year to be 'rich ' ?

Canada2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

This article says no. How about your own businesses?
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-the-tax-windfall-that-wasnt-20181101-story.html

---

Sure. They're working for rich people.

---

Just curious......

How much income per year for a family of 4 ( Husband and Wife both working ) meets your definition of rich .

---

Irrelevant to me point about the tax cut working for rich people.

---

Just curious what you think is 'rich' for a family of 4 ?

There is no right or wrong answer .

---

. Enough is the answer. For many the money is never enough. 10% to God 10% to self and live on 80%. But it depends on the size of house and car and the costs of healthcare. We can control house and car. Healthcare only somewhat.

---

Yours is an 'answer'.....but to a different question.

The question 'cingue' keeps avoiding......how much income does a family of 4 have to earn per year to be 'rich ' ?

---

Well I stand by answer. We all control "what is enough?"
10% to God%
10% to self
8% to Health Care ( Hell who knows?)
2% to children's Education
But you control your house payment and adult toys and car size.
If one started with an AGI then what?
$125,000
12 k God
12 K Self
10 K Health
2.5 K Child Ed
= 36.5 K?
Live 88.5 K ?
I could do it but it takes careful moral, Christian and economic planning.
Probably wildly depending on circumstances and legitimacy of my figures but I would think of my self as rich.
Does that help?

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/15/trump-economy-federal-reserve-tax-cuts-deficit-trade-967501
The sugar high of tax cuts?

Waco1947 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

This article says no. How about your own businesses?
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-the-tax-windfall-that-wasnt-20181101-story.html

---

Sure. They're working for rich people.

---

Just curious......

How much income per year for a family of 4 ( Husband and Wife both working ) meets your definition of rich .

---

Irrelevant to me point about the tax cut working for rich people.

---

Just curious what you think is 'rich' for a family of 4 ?

There is no right or wrong answer .

---

. Enough is the answer. For many the money is never enough. 10% to God 10% to self and live on 80%. But it depends on the size of house and car and the costs of healthcare. We can control house and car. Healthcare only somewhat.

---

Yours is an 'answer'.....but to a different question.

The question 'cingue' keeps avoiding......how much income does a family of 4 have to earn per year to be 'rich ' ?

---

Well I stand by answer. We all control "what is enough?"
10% to God%
10% to self
8% to Health Care ( Hell who knows?)
2% to children's Education
But you control your house payment and adult toys and car size.
If one started with an AGI then what?
$125,000
12 k God
12 K Self
10 K Health
2.5 K Child Ed
= 36.5 K?
Live 88.5 K ?
I could do it but it takes careful moral, Christian and economic planning.
Probably wildly depending on circumstances and legitimacy of my figures but I would think of my self as rich.
Does that help?

---

No...it does not 'help'.

Since your 'buddy' won't answer my simple question....and you seem to be confused by it....3rd try.

How much annual income does a family of 4 ( both husband and wife working full time - 2 kids ) have to make in total...

to quality for cingue's description as 'rich' ?

$ 900,000 per year

$600,000

$200,000

$75,000


or any sum you wish .

Really a straight forward question. No need for hyperbole or silliness .

Merely want to know where the 'rich' tag takes affect since 'cingue' like to use the description.

I answered $125,000 AGI. That was clear. You did not read.

Waco1947 said:

---

I answered $125,000 AGI. That was clear. You did not read.

---

You stated 125K was 'enough'.

Enough does not equate to 'rich'.

So yeah....someone sure as hell cant read.

Canada2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

I answered $125,000 AGI. That was clear. You did not read.

---

You stated 125K was 'enough'.

Enough does not equate to 'rich'.

So yeah....someone sure as hell cant read.

---

In my world "enough" is rich. I am rich.

Waco1947 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

I answered $125,000 AGI. That was clear. You did not read.

---

You stated 125K was 'enough'.

Enough does not equate to 'rich'.

So yeah....someone sure as hell cant read.

---

In my world "enough" is rich. I am rich.

---

That's fine and dandy, but the democrats always tell me I need to hate the rich. So I need to know who to hate and attack with more aggressive tax policy. Does that mean we need to attack a family of 4 making $125K per year because they are "rich"? Because in most circles and in most parts of the country, that is squarely middle class, which I've been told that's who we are trying to protect. So I'm confused.

I never heard a Democrat say to "hate" the rich. In fact we love them. We want to tax them. We need them.

Waco1947 said:

---

I never heard a Democrat say to "hate" the rich. In fact we love them. We want to tax them. We need them.

---

Maybe we have different definitions of hate, but unfairly confiscating people's money would qualify as an act of hate to me.

So beyond semantics and back to the point, is a family of 4 that makes $125K a year "rich" in your mind? Per the democrat party model, does that mean we need to attack them with more aggressive tax policy?

I used to work in public finance with tax exempt interest on bonds.The money saved by a taxpayer who owned a tax exempt bond was referred to by Treasury employees at a seminar as a loss to the U.S. treasury.So,the dollars we get to keep are viewed in Washington D.C.as a loss to the government.

Waco1947 said:

---

I never heard a Democrat say to "hate" the rich. In fact we love them. We want to tax them. We need them.

---

taxing the rich... interesting idea, lets play out a senario. You tax a rich land owner, he raises the rent on real estate, tenants pay the increases or the business passes the increased fees to consumers or reduces employees hired to compensate... ATT passes thru all those regulatory fees and taxes to the end consumer, read your bill. Did that rich stock holder pay the taxes or did you?

It's not a straight line from tax the rich to pass along to the poor.

Waco1947 said:

---

It's not a straight line from tax the rich to pass along to the poor.

---

please elaborate...

Waco1947 said:

---

I never heard a Democrat say to "hate" the rich. In fact we love them. We want to tax them. We need them.

---

We don't YOU pony up the same amount in taxes as you so clearly demand of working families ?

What? I pay my taxes according to law. The 1% - 10% have rigged the system to funnel more to themselves so they need to pay more

Waco1947 said:

---

What? I pay my taxes according to law. The 1% - 10% have rigged the system to funnel more to themselves so they need to pay more

---

Taxation is theft.

Waco1947 said:

---

What? I pay my taxes according to law. The 1% - 10% have rigged the system to funnel more to themselves so they need to pay more

---

Define more. The top 20% of earners currently pay 87% of the total federal income tax. What percentage does that need to be to qualify as "more" in your mind?

contrario said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

What? I pay my taxes according to law. The 1% - 10% have rigged the system to funnel more to themselves so they need to pay more

---

Define more. The top 20% of earners currently pay 87% of the total federal income tax. What percentage does that need to be to qualify as "more" in your mind?

---

Due to a mixture of envy and laziness ....taxes paid by the top 20% will never be 'enough' for such hypocritical people like 47.

Never had the guts, work ethic or discipline to succeed.

But oh howdy they sure want others to provide for them.

Get a grip. Full of venom and little fact. Try again. Breathe. Be nice. Love your enemies. Even the Gentiles love those who love them.

Waco1947 said:

---

Get a grip. Full of venom and little fact. Try again. Breathe. Be nice. Love your enemies. Even the Gentiles love those who love them.

---

Define more. The top 20% of earners currently pay 87% of the total federal income tax. What percentage does that need to be to qualify as "more" in your mind?

Waco1947 said:

---

It's not a straight line from tax the rich to pass along to the poor.

---

so... describe the line as you see it?

Waco1947 said:

---

What? I pay my taxes according to law. The 1% - 10% have rigged the system to funnel more to themselves so they need to pay more

---

it is your right to believe that but you will find those you claim to have rigged the system will give the same answer as yours- i pay my taxes according to the law.

Waco1947 said:

---

What? I pay my taxes according to law. The 1% - 10% have rigged the system to funnel more to themselves so they need to pay more

---

The top 1% want increased taxes and regulations because they have their greedy hands and dicks so far in the government's vagina and special interests that they get wealthy through extorting the process of centralizing government.

You need to start asking why all the top mega corps are all pro democrat and wake up.

If you're truly a preacher then you should understand that the most evil people on the planet seem like the most angelic.

Canada2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Get a grip. Full of venom and little fact. Try again. Breathe. Be nice. Love your enemies. Even the Gentiles love those who love them.

---

Meaningless deflection.

You are a user and a hypocrite.

You couldn't 'cut it ' so you want others to pay your way.

Worse you want to punish those who did succeed via taxes.

Put your own money up equal to what you demand of others . Or shut up .

---

. No it's not deflection. "Put up or shut up." Is really silly. I follow the law. I don't the rich. I do believe that they have unfairly poured money into HOP campaigns and get the tax cuts they want.

Waco1947 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Get a grip. Full of venom and little fact. Try again. Breathe. Be nice. Love your enemies. Even the Gentiles love those who love them.

---

Meaningless deflection.

You are a user and a hypocrite.

You couldn't 'cut it ' so you want others to pay your way.

Worse you want to punish those who did succeed via taxes.

Put your own money up equal to what you demand of others . Or shut up .

---

. No it's not deflection. "Put up or shut up." Is really silly. I follow the law. I don't the rich. I do believe that they have unfairly poured money into HOP campaigns and get the tax cuts they want.

---

Not silly in the least . It's ridiculous to demand more of others that you are willing to do yourself. Hypocritical in the extreme .

' I don't the rich ' ?

"I don't Hate the rich. They need to pay to educate their workers, The postal service, the highways their goods travel on, the airports they fly, make sure their workers are healthy.

Waco1947 said:

---

"I don't Hate the rich. They need to pay to educate their workers, The postal service, the highways their goods travel on, the airports they fly, make sure their workers are healthy.

---

So do YOU...at the exact same amount you demand of others.

So get off dead center and make more money.

Then you can enjoy the 'privilege' of paying more taxes .

No excuses now......get moving .

Waco1947 said:

---

"I don't Hate the rich. They need to pay to educate their workers, The postal service, the highways their goods travel on, the airports they fly, make sure their workers are healthy.

---

Define more. The top 20% of earners currently pay 87% of the total federal income tax. What percentage does that need to be to qualify as "more" in your mind?