It is safe to say if you are paying more you are rich. And again, I think this tax bill is bull shit. This FIFO provision on small investors, complete bull shit. But you people would cut off your nose to smite someone paying more taxes than you.
I don't. I'd rather have a massive public infrastructure project that builds intercity and intracity rail, and lays down a network of fiber-optic cables to provide the country with high-speed internet access.
If I could pay $1,200 a year and be certain that my kids wouldn't be burdened with the national debt and all the problems that will be coming down the line I'd do it. Don't think of it as a tax, call it an investment in the future.
I'm OK with it since I used Pell Grants at uni mixed in with a scholarship. If it wasn't for Pell Grants I would have been a line cook in Louisville Ky and just finishing my bachelors. Use an @ cause I can't tell who this is directed to. If directed at me, I was in Central America until early 2010. I'm not going to lie... I didn't witness the economic meltdown firsthand so it didn't affect me. Having written that, I didn't see a better way to stop the economic fire. What was your idea? And the budget idea is rather silly. NOAA, and agencies in general, constantly make decisions having to prove themselves and their value. Tomorrow I am sitting in a meeting regarding project at AOML. Because if we get projects wrong, money can and will be taken away. Heck, agencies even write reports on justifying our worth. https://www.commerce.gov/news/blog/2014/09/value-government-weather-and-climate-data http://www.noaa.gov/media-release/report-american-fisheries-remain-strong-economic-driver https://coast.noaa.gov/data/digitalcoast/pdf/econ-report.pdf Some parts of agencies are "squishier" than others, making it hard to put "value" on it. or example, USF&WS fighting illegal wildlife trade is harder to put a price tag than a NPS park fee entrance. So defining "value" is going ot be uneven.
tbh the debt isn't a big problem. We are still gonna pay our bills. It's the narrowing of the tax base due to income inequality that is the problem.
I'm a Hilltopper. I could have been a line cook anywhere. I just choose Louisville. My HS friend Alvin Sims played on their bball team
But you are not paying more... you are paying less. You are upset because you think my cut might be bigger than yours.
Geez, I have never been to those places. |rolleyes| Why should I pay for those fabulous systems? And how is that high-speed train going in California?
You should pay for them because industrialized economies have mass transit for their populations. All of them. Have you ever asked why?
Huh? No, I'm paying 12% more. And i'm not griping about it, but merely pointing out your assertions on who is going to pay more are simply incorrect.
I am all for local mass transit. I love it. Now explain California's high speed train and why I should have to pay for it?
Given that California contributes more federally than it receives in return, it seems odd to isolate just one infrastructure project.
It has turned into a boondoggle. If it was just California tax payers that were getting the shaft I wouldn't care, but federal tax dollars are also being wasted. Perhaps you can make a case for Jerry's pet project?
California is a perfect size and population for high speed rail to work. I don't consider it a boondoggle at all. And, back to my point, isolating one individual infrastructure project when California is a net donor to federal funds is dubious, at best.
Right now, about one third of all flights at Bay Area airports (SFO, OAK, SJC) are to Southern California airports. About 20% of flights from all Southern California airports (LAX, BUR, SNA, ONT, LGB and SAN) are to Northern California. Building high speed rail will reduce the number of flights required between Northern and Southern California. Reducing those flights will free up airport landing slots for more flights to places like New York or Frankfurt or Tokyo or Hong Kong or Sao Paolo or Mumbai or Abu Dhabi. This will allow California businesses to do more business, and make more money, and pay more taxes, and support more moochers in red states.
Sez the man who is more full of shit than Tony Meola's colon 3 hours after Thanksgiving dinner. Not being able to deduct mortgage interest nor state and local taxes will raise a lot of people's bills right there. Not to mention other expenses that are not directly related to taxes, like insurance costs going up with the end of the individual mandate. But some rich guy can buy another yacht! Yaaaay! I mean what good is having just one yacht?