Obama ‘Abruptly’ Walks Out of Debt Talks

[rlg94086]

No, and of that %. you clam they do not pay taxes,** it is not so**, as I said I class myself as lower middle and as such I pay taxes, Tell me how much income qualifies a widow without dependents , in your estimation, to be called lower middle class?

It is so, as the discussion is about federal income tax burden. Everyone pays taxes in some form, but when discussing the federal tax burden and federal debt, the other taxes don’t apply.

 

[CMatt25]

I am sorry,but I just can’t believe how many Catholics on this board can be so selfish and irresponsible as to begrudge paying a fair share of tax to take care of our country’s commitments.
Go ahead and continue down the same road of denial, and then see what the pay off will be.
You will not have anyone to blame then but yourselves. Do you think we will be able pull it off out of thin air?
Where is the God given common sense?
Peace, Carlan

Carlan, I remember when we first encountered each other. And I wasn’t sure if honey or vinegar was in your cup of tea. And I know we are yet to always agree on a few specific faith belief details. But I must tip my :tiphat: to you here. Sometimes for someone like me it appears when looking for what the Catholic answers are to these issues, the answer here is conservative Republican politics. So it is truly refreshing and reassuring for me to see you, a devout and faithful Catholic, painting an entirely diffferent portrait. And I thank you for that. God bless you always Carlan. Peace be with you.

 

[CMatt25]

. I can’t believe how many Catholics on this board believe they can actually fulfill their obligation to help the poor by voting for a politician who promise to take other people’s money to do it for them.

The government is incapable of charity in that they have no money of their own. voting for a politician who promises to raise taxes to care for the poor is morally neutral as far as your personal obligation to care for the needy goes.

I’ve seen no Catholic here saying any such of a thing **fufills **their obligation. I likewise haven’t seen any of us who do not identify as Catholic saying such a thing either.

 

[estesbob]

No, it means we’re broke.

I’m not.

 

[estesbob]

I’ve seen no Catholic here saying any such of a thing **fufills **their obligation. I likewise haven’t seen any of us who do not identify as Catholic saying such a thing either.

So why would"Progressive" catholics tell us that it is immoral to vote to cut social programs or not to raise taxes on the rich if that is not what they believe? And didnt you tell us that supporting increased social spending was as much a pro-life postion as opposing abortion?

 

[Carlan]

It is so, as the discussion is about federal income tax burden. Everyone pays taxes in some form, but when discussing the federal tax burden and federal debt, the other taxes don’t apply.

I may be old and feeble but not feeble of mind ,Yet!
You tell me, I believe I am lower middle class, how much federal taxable income qualifies me for that status?

 

[rlg94086]

I may be old and feeble but not feeble of mind ,Yet!
You tell me, I believe I am lower middle class, how much federal taxable income qualifies me for that status?

I’ll defer to Bob…he’s the tax professional. My guess is that your question is not so black and white. “Taxable income” is after all deductions.

 

[bbarrick8383]

I may be old and feeble but not feeble of mind ,Yet!
You tell me, I believe I am lower middle class, how much federal taxable income qualifies me for that status?

Your down here with me, I have a stay at home wife and three kids. I could afford a little bit, not much, but instead I get paid to file my taxes. I reckon if I can afford some, there has got to be millions more people out there who could afford some as well. There are a lot more of us than there are rich, and it would definitely add up.

 

[Carlan]

I’ll defer to Bob…he’s the tax professional. My guess is that your question is not so black and white. “Taxable income” is after all deductions.

Well, then anyone on the board, I am just looking for a ball park #.

Seems to me, the claimed 50% of the population who do not pay federal income tax amounts up to like100 million Americans.
Someone here claimed the poor and the ***lower middle class ***are the ones included in that 50%. Since I believe I am in the lower middle class category I would like to know what ***you all think ***my federal taxable income would be to classify me as such.???
In other words please tell me, since I do pay income tax every year, what makes you all think folk in that 50% lot do not pay taxes.

Peace, Carlan

5

5
Remember, I am single without dependents.

5

 

[rlg94086]

Remember, I am single without dependents.

Right, so you may very well be in the upper 50% regarding taxable income, but many people who make the same amount may be in the lower 50% because of their deductions.

 

[Suudy]

Seems to me, the claimed 50% of the population who do not pay federal income tax amounts up to like100 million Americans.

I never said population, though I do see how that I was unclear. I was only saying that about 50% of all taxpayers (i.e. those that are required to file tax returns) pay no income tax (or even get more back than they had withheld).

Someone here claimed the poor and the ***lower middle class ***are the ones included in that 50%

Right. Let’s look at the distribution of income in the US. From the US Census (source) the median income is $49777. Now, let’s define the lower class and lower middle class as all those with an income of less than $49777, and the upper middle class and upper class as those with an income of $49777 or more.

So, now, let’s compare these numbers with people who file tax returns. According to the Tax Policy Center (source) 46% of those with an AGI of $50000 or less pay no income tax.

Seems pretty consistent.

Since I believe I am in the lower middle class category I would like to know what ***you all think ***my federal taxable income would be to classify me as such.???

Now, let’s factor in the federal poverty level. According to HHS, the poverty level for a single person is $10,890 (for the sake of conversation, let’s round that up to $12k). So let’s say the poorest of the poor (the lower lower class) is those at $12k or lower. That means anyone between $12k and $50k is either upper lower class or lower middle class. Now, let’s divide that in half ($50k - $12k)/2 + $12k, or $31k. So, the divisions are:

Lower lower class: < $12k
Upper lower class: Between $12k and $31k
Lower middle class: Between $31k and $50k

So, if you think you are lower middle class, I would say your AGI is between $31k and $50k. And if you are, you should be paying no income tax.

In other words please tell me, since I do pay income tax every year, what makes you all think folk in that 50% lot do not pay taxes.

I would say then that your AGI is $50k or greater. According to the tax numbers, nearly 50% of those with an AGI of less than $50k pay no taxes. Are you saying your AGI is between $31k and $50k and you pay income tax each year?

If your AGI is between $31k and $50k, I suggest you PM estesbob and get a consultation. You need an accountant.

 

[Carlan]

I never said population, though I do see how that I was unclear. I was only saying that about 50% of all taxpayers (i.e. those that are required to file tax returns) pay no income tax (or even get more back than they had withheld).

Right. Let’s look at the distribution of income in the US. From the US Census (source) the median income is $49777. Now, let’s define the lower class and lower middle class as all those with an income of less than $49777, and the upper middle class and upper class as those with an income of $49777 or more.

So, now, let’s compare these numbers with people who file tax returns. According to the Tax Policy Center (source) 46% of those with an AGI of $50000 or less pay no income tax.

Seems pretty consistent.

Now, let’s factor in the federal poverty level. According to HHS, the poverty level for a single person is $10,890 (for the sake of conversation, let’s round that up to $12k). So let’s say the poorest of the poor (the lower lower class) is those at $12k or lower. That means anyone between $12k and $50k is either upper lower class or lower middle class. Now, let’s divide that in half ($50k - $12k)/2 + $12k, or $31k. So, the divisions are:

Lower lower class: < $12k
Upper lower class: Between $12k and $31k
Lower middle class: Between $31k and $50k

So, if you think you are lower middle class, I would say your AGI is between $31k and $50k. And if you are, you should be paying no income tax.

I would say then that your AGI is $50k or greater. According to the tax numbers, nearly 50% of those with an AGI of less than $50k pay no taxes. Are you saying your AGI is between $31k and $50k and you pay income tax each year?

If your AGI is between $31k and $50k, I suggest you PM estesbob and get a consultation. You need an accountant.

Thank you for this.
I have always done my own taxes since widowed. Short form pretty basic…I am at the lower end of your figures, I simply do all my deductions calculate and pay up, nothing complicated, I still always have what I consider my fair share to pay every year.Like you and everyone I deduct what I can and what is legal. I believe I do all I can to do it right, Can’t see the need for an accountant. Peace, Carlan

 

[CMatt25]

Thank you for this.
I have always done my own taxes since widowed. Short form pretty basic…I am at the lower end of your figures, I simply do all my deductions calculate and pay up, nothing complicated, I still always have what I consider my fair share to pay every year.Like you and everyone I deduct what I can and what is legal. I believe I do all I can to do it right, Can’t see the need for an accountant. Peace, Carlan

Nah Carlan, no need to add to Estesbob’s or any other accountant’s wealth if you can do the basic short form for yourself. That might only put them in a higher tax bracket and you wouldn’t want that! Peace.

(That was a joke Bob. Feel free to charge your other clients whatever rightfully you feel you should and what the mkt will bear. Afterall that’s the American way!)

 

[Arkadin]

( afterall that’s the american way!)

Hooooah!

 

[CMatt25]

So why would"Progressive" catholics tell us that it is immoral to vote to cut social programs or not to raise taxes on the rich if that is not what they believe? And didnt you tell us that supporting increased social spending was as much a pro-life postion as opposing abortion?

“Progressive” Catholics can identify as Catholics? In any case Bob, I can’t speak for all “Progressive” Catholics but lets say even if some might believe it is immoral. That in no way is saying though they believe voting for candidates who support social programs and favor raising taxes on merely the top few percent of incomes **“fulfills” ** their obligations as you said. You don’t think some of these people also give to the Church and in other ways in order to more fully fulfill? I do.

 

[CMatt25]

Hooooah!

Arkadin, and you want a revolution? :bigyikes:

 

[rlg94086]

investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/578331/201107141838/Regime-Change-May-Be-Needed-To-Cut-Deficit.htm

President Obama is demanding a big long-term budget deal. He won’t sign anything less, he warns, asking, “If not now, when?”

How about last December, when he ignored his own debt commission’s recommendations? How about February, when he presented a budget that increases debt by $10 trillion over the next decade? How about April, when he sought a debt-ceiling increase with zero debt reduction attached?

All of a sudden he’s a born-again budget balancer prepared to bravely take on his own party by making deep cuts in entitlements. Really? Name one. He’s been saying forever that he’s prepared to discuss, engage, converse about entitlement cuts. But never once has he publicly proposed a single structural change to any entitlement.

Hasn’t the White House leaked that he’s prepared to raise the Medicare age or change the cost-of-living calculation? Anonymous talk is cheap. Leaks are designed to manipulate. Offers are floated and disappear. Say it, Mr. President. Give us one single structural change in entitlements. In public.

As part of the pose as the forward-looking grown-up rising above all the others who play politics, Obama insists upon a long-term deal. And what is Obama’s definition of long-term? Surprise: An agreement that gets him past Nov. 6, 2012.

Nothing could be more political. It’s like his Afghan surge wind-down date. September 2012 has no relation to any military reality on the ground. It is designed solely to position Obama favorably going into the last weeks of his re-election campaign.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Nah Carlan, no need to add to Estesbob’s or any other accountant’s wealth if you can do the basic short form for yourself. That might only put them in a higher tax bracket and you wouldn’t want that! Peace.

(That was a joke Bob. Feel free to charge your other clients whatever rightfully you feel you should and what the mkt will bear. Afterall that’s the American way!)

I think its sad that lower-middle class income people NEED an accountant who specializes in taxes just to figure the tax code out. Not to avoid paying their fair share of taxes, but to make sure they pay enough or the IRS comes knocking on the door.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/578331/201107141838/Regime-Change-May-Be-Needed-To-Cut-Deficit.htm

President Obama is demanding a big long-term budget deal. He won’t sign anything less, he warns, asking, “If not now, when?”

How about last December, when he ignored his own debt commission’s recommendations? How about February, when he presented a budget that increases debt by $10 trillion over the next decade? How about April, when he sought a debt-ceiling increase with zero debt reduction attached?

All of a sudden he’s a born-again budget balancer prepared to bravely take on his own party by making deep cuts in entitlements. Really? Name one. He’s been saying forever that he’s prepared to discuss, engage, converse about entitlement cuts. But never once has he publicly proposed a single structural change to any entitlement.

Hasn’t the White House leaked that he’s prepared to raise the Medicare age or change the cost-of-living calculation? Anonymous talk is cheap. Leaks are designed to manipulate. Offers are floated and disappear. Say it, Mr. President. Give us one single structural change in entitlements. In public.

As part of the pose as the forward-looking grown-up rising above all the others who play politics, Obama insists upon a long-term deal. And what is Obama’s definition of long-term? Surprise: An agreement that gets him past Nov. 6, 2012.

Nothing could be more political. It’s like his Afghan surge wind-down date. September 2012 has no relation to any military reality on the ground. It is designed solely to position Obama favorably going into the last weeks of his re-election campaign.

I have said for the last 36 months, Obama likes to campaign for the Presidency. Doing the actual job of President…not so much. Unfortunately, this time, he doesn’t have the boogieman Bush to play Don Quixote with. He has become Bush’s third term, something he vociferously campaigned against.

 

[mary_bobo]

investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/578331/201107141838/Regime-Change-May-Be-Needed-To-Cut-Deficit.htm

President Obama is demanding a big long-term budget deal. He won’t sign anything less, he warns, asking, “If not now, when?”

How about last December, when he ignored his own debt commission’s recommendations? How about February, when he presented a budget that increases debt by $10 trillion over the next decade? How about April, when he sought a debt-ceiling increase with zero debt reduction attached?

All of a sudden he’s a born-again budget balancer prepared to bravely take on his own party by making deep cuts in entitlements. Really? Name one. He’s been saying forever that he’s prepared to discuss, engage, converse about entitlement cuts. But never once has he publicly proposed a single structural change to any entitlement.

Hasn’t the White House leaked that he’s prepared to raise the Medicare age or change the cost-of-living calculation? Anonymous talk is cheap. Leaks are designed to manipulate. Offers are floated and disappear. Say it, Mr. President. Give us one single structural change in entitlements. In public.

As part of the pose as the forward-looking grown-up rising above all the others who play politics, Obama insists upon a long-term deal. And what is Obama’s definition of long-term? Surprise: An agreement that gets him past Nov. 6, 2012.

Nothing could be more political. It’s like his Afghan surge wind-down date. September 2012 has no relation to any military reality on the ground. It is designed solely to position Obama favorably going into the last weeks of his re-election campaign.

Excellent.