Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Staff Contacts | Affiliates | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Progress in the fight against tax abuses

April 9, 2013

WASHINGTON — In March, the Senate passed a budget resolution....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




May-10-13 6:30 PM

More Work, Less Pay:

Happy Mother's Day !

This week, House Republicans voted for an early Mother's Day Gift:

the “More Work, Less Pay” Act.

They misnamed their bill the

“Working Family Flexibility Act”

– but it only offers greater flexibility to bosses, companies and lower wages to workers.


Good for the country courtesy of your republican friends?

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-10-13 6:29 PM

Here’s what this misnamed bill really means:

Workers will not get paid for hours that exceed 40 hours per week.

That compensation will instead go into a pot that will be controlled by their employer.

An employer can refuse to allow a worker to take time off to deal with a family member or attend a parent-teacher conference.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-10-13 6:28 PM

This is not real flexibility for workers.

Employers get what amounts to an interest-free loan, paid for by the workers’ wages since unused comp time will be paid back at the end of the year.

When workers succeed, our country succeeds.


Even in your myopic eyes,

You most certainly could NOT fail to agree to this small, eight (8) word statement:

“When wage-earning workers succeed, our country succeeds?

Bravesrock ? ?

This new republican legislation is good for wage earning Americans?

Bravesrock ? ?

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-10-13 6:16 PM


Your ‘argument’ for the rich, their business and corporations

doesn’t hold much WATER let alone value,

and with government statistics on overall tax rates, proves that what you say is bogus.

While the top marginal tax rate on ordinary income is 39.6 percent, average rates that a household in the upper income bracket pays is less.

Much of the earnings of those in the top income bracket come from capital gains, interest and dividends, which are taxed at a maximum of 15 percent.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-10-13 6:14 PM

Also because only income up to $106,800 is subject to payroll taxes of 15.3%, which are paid by the employer and employee,

individuals in the upper income bracket pay on average an effective rate not much different than that of other income brackets.

The effective tax rate paid by an individual in the upper income bracket is dependent on the ratio of income they earn from capital gains, interest and dividends.

Wonder why Romney stood firm in refusing to make his tax returns public, but followed through on an earlier promise to release his 2011 return?

It showed he paid $1.9 million in taxes on more than $13 million in income – an effective tax rate of 14.1 percent…

MUCH LESS, than the ‘announced IRS top tax rate of 39%,

you do comprehend this?


14.1% ISN'T 39%.


2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


May-10-13 6:12 PM

For the top 400 income earners in the U.S. the average tax rate is just 18%.

* In federal fiscal year 2011 (October 1, 2010 to September 30, 2011), the federal government collected $2.30 trillion in revenues, which were comprised of

47% individual income taxes,

36% social insurance taxes,

08% corporate income taxes,

03% excise taxes,

01% custom duties,

0.3% estate and gift taxes, and

04% miscellaneous receipts.

* In 2011, state and local governments collected $1.38 trillion in taxes, which were comprised of

33% sales taxes,

32% property taxes,

21% individual income taxes,

03% corporate income taxes, and

01% social insurance taxes.

Bravesock, keep up the bogus thinking, you’re batting a 1000%.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-09-13 11:54 PM

Well, the 47% who pay no federal income tax have been heard from, so now a comment from a member of the 53% who do. Yes, there are corporate loopholes, but there are huge problems with the tax code for individuals and families. Not only do people with low incomes pay no taxes, many actually collect thousands of dollars in “refunds.” Check out the Earned Income Tax Credit, for example. A single parent with 2 kids making $12,750 to $16,700 gets a tax credit of $5,112; with 3 kids, $5,751. So if this person makes $16,000, and has 5% withheld for taxes, they will not only get their $800 back, they’ll get a check for over $5,000 more. And then there are other credits they can qualify for. I agree you can’t support yourself and a couple of kids on that income, but if that’s all you make you probably get other types of assistance. I can see not paying any taxes, but to get a check for thousands of dollars for being low-income is wrong.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-09-13 11:53 PM

Those of us who work our way up, earn more money, and pay more taxes, don’t see our money go to Uncle Sam to pay off the debt, maintain a park here or there, or even buy some military hardware for our troops. No, every time someone gets a $5,000+ Earned Income credit, it’s money that I or someone like me paid in. How is that right? I may lean Republican, but I am far from rich, and if I must pay taxes I would sure like it to go to something worthwhile rather than create a disincentive for someone to try to get a better job. If you make $16,000 but get $5,000 or more from the IRS every year, and you’re offered a job making $20,000 (that’s a 25% raise, by the way), many would say you’d be a fool to take it, since you’d actually lose money. Cheesy, Whiz, or Froggy, maybe you can explain how this is good for our country.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-09-13 5:51 PM

Excessive spending?

What pray tell could that include and to what end.

Of course, for republicans and the rich, the means justify the ends.

The only thing that annoys a republican more,

is to see large sums of money being spent and they can’t get a piece of it diverted to their pockets.

To that end, they will justify any means to get at that money,

even if it means spending huge sums of money to buy

legislators and regulators, campaigns and elections…

But, that’s all short-run economics,

they’re in it for the long-haul,

to amass great family fortunes and massive entitlements for their

prodigal heirloom children.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-09-13 5:49 PM

It takes congress but a few hours in a couple of days, to open loop-holes for the rich and their corporations.

It takes the rest of us years and years to find them,

and another generation to close them.

Meanwhile republicans just write new loopholes into the tax code.

Where are working men and women in the food chain?

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-09-13 5:35 PM

I may not be alone,

but I for one would have less of an issue, if indeed, some whould hold their breathe...

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-09-13 1:28 PM

Where was the balance portion of this little memo?

All I saw was increase revenue. Mind you I'm find with eliminating to loopholes. My question is to what end?

If we continue to spend the way we do it won't matter what loopholes we close. We don't have enough revenue because we keep increasing spending and entitlements. Every year these entitlements become a larger and larger percentage of the federal budget.

I may be alone but I for one would have less of an issue with more taxes to help with the deficit if I saw some inclination that excessive spending and entitlements were being eliminated. So far not so good in that department and I'm not holding my breath.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 12 of 12 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web