California restaurants are reportedly laying off staff and reducing hours for other team members in an effort to cut costs ahead of a California state law taking effect on April 1 that will raise f…
That’s a demented definition of “fair share.” The rich make thousands of times more money than the average American but they only account for 2x more than us? Go back to elementary school.
How about staying on topic? Why should I pay significantly more in taxes but receive less from those taxes? The bottom 50% should pick up the slack and pay their way.
This is a bad faith argument I’m ending here. Claiming that people that are dodging their less-than-fair-share percentages are paying more than they ought to is asinine. It’s not pro-america, it’s not pro-conservative, it’s not anti-liberal, it’s bootlicking.
In Monday’s White House press briefing, Huckabee Sanders said:
"The numbers are not exact and I’m not encouraging any drinking. That’s mostly for my parents. I think you will enjoy it. Suppose that every day 10 people for our purposes go out for beer. The bill for all 10 comes to $100. If the 10 reporters paid their tab every night the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this. The poorest would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The 6th would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The ninth would pay $18, the richest would pay $59. That’s what they decided to do. The 10 reporters drank in the bar every day and seemed happy with the arrangements until one day the bar owner threw them a carve ball.
"Since you are good customers, I will reduce the cost by $20. Drinks would now cost just $80. They wanted to pay the bill the way we pay our taxes. The first four still drink for free. What about the other six? How could they divide the $20 windfall so everyone gets their fair share. These were reports and they are concerned with fairness. They realize that $20 divided by six is $3.33. If they subtracted that from everybody’s share, the fifth and the 6th reporter which would each end up being paid to drink beer. The bar owner suggested raising by a higher percentage. He explained they continue following the principle of the tax system they have been using.
"He proceeded to work out the amounts that each should pay. The fifth reporter like the first four now paid nothing. He got a 100% savings. The 6th now paid $2 instead of $3. The seventh paid $5 instead of $7. The 8th paid $9 instead of $12. The tenth now paid $49 instead of 52. The first four continued to drink for free. Once outside the bar, they began to compare their savings. I only got $1 declared the 6th and she pointed to the tenth reporter. She got ten. …
“The next night, the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks and the had their beers without him. When it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They no longer had enough money to even cover half of the bill. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how our tax system works. People who pay the highest taxes will benefit from a tax reduction. Taxing them and attack them and they might drink overseas where the atmosphere is friendlier.”
What is a bad faith argument is claiming that paying more than double isn’t their fair share. In Europe, the McDonald’s worker would still be paying a large portion of that in taxes. In America, they would pay next to zero.
Pro-America means everyone would pay their fair share, and 90% of Americans do not pay their fair share. Conservatives are about paying your fair share and not being a leech on society. Liberals think everyone else should pay their way.
That’s a demented definition of “fair share.” The rich make thousands of times more money than the average American but they only account for 2x more than us? Go back to elementary school.
They pay double their income, which is over their fair share. At the same time, the bottom 50% pay less than their fair share.
It doesn’t matter that they make more; they pay more in taxes and receive less for their taxes.
You must have a strange version of fair share if you think paying double isn’t fair.
Keep drinking the Kool aid, man. There’s no saving you.
How about staying on topic? Why should I pay significantly more in taxes but receive less from those taxes? The bottom 50% should pick up the slack and pay their way.
I pay my fair share.
This is a bad faith argument I’m ending here. Claiming that people that are dodging their less-than-fair-share percentages are paying more than they ought to is asinine. It’s not pro-america, it’s not pro-conservative, it’s not anti-liberal, it’s bootlicking.
In Monday’s White House press briefing, Huckabee Sanders said:
"The numbers are not exact and I’m not encouraging any drinking. That’s mostly for my parents. I think you will enjoy it. Suppose that every day 10 people for our purposes go out for beer. The bill for all 10 comes to $100. If the 10 reporters paid their tab every night the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this. The poorest would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The 6th would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The ninth would pay $18, the richest would pay $59. That’s what they decided to do. The 10 reporters drank in the bar every day and seemed happy with the arrangements until one day the bar owner threw them a carve ball.
"Since you are good customers, I will reduce the cost by $20. Drinks would now cost just $80. They wanted to pay the bill the way we pay our taxes. The first four still drink for free. What about the other six? How could they divide the $20 windfall so everyone gets their fair share. These were reports and they are concerned with fairness. They realize that $20 divided by six is $3.33. If they subtracted that from everybody’s share, the fifth and the 6th reporter which would each end up being paid to drink beer. The bar owner suggested raising by a higher percentage. He explained they continue following the principle of the tax system they have been using.
"He proceeded to work out the amounts that each should pay. The fifth reporter like the first four now paid nothing. He got a 100% savings. The 6th now paid $2 instead of $3. The seventh paid $5 instead of $7. The 8th paid $9 instead of $12. The tenth now paid $49 instead of 52. The first four continued to drink for free. Once outside the bar, they began to compare their savings. I only got $1 declared the 6th and she pointed to the tenth reporter. She got ten. …
“The next night, the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks and the had their beers without him. When it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They no longer had enough money to even cover half of the bill. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how our tax system works. People who pay the highest taxes will benefit from a tax reduction. Taxing them and attack them and they might drink overseas where the atmosphere is friendlier.”
You mix absolutes and relatives like you know what you’re talking about but it’s clear to the rest of us that you don’t know a damn thing.
Says the person who doesn’t understand what a fair share is. Read what Sanders says. It may slowly make sense to you.
You need a New Perspective
You can’t ban me in any way that matters
What is a bad faith argument is claiming that paying more than double isn’t their fair share. In Europe, the McDonald’s worker would still be paying a large portion of that in taxes. In America, they would pay next to zero. Pro-America means everyone would pay their fair share, and 90% of Americans do not pay their fair share. Conservatives are about paying your fair share and not being a leech on society. Liberals think everyone else should pay their way.