What a :asshat2:
here how I see it your expenses rise to meet your income if you make $200,000 a year you have a $200,000 a year life style, if you mae $30,000 a $30,000 life style..........
I read this different to me he said after I feed my family which (to me) is........take care of his personal expenses the $400,000 is re-invested into his busisnesses he owns he owns Subway and UPS stores and employees 500 people to employ these 500 people he pays taxes, buys equipment, and opens NEW STORES which employs MORE PEOPLE do we really want to tax him into not growing his busisness, it seems to me that we would want him to grow his busisness to give people more jobs, he doesnt only employ his 500 people there are truck drivers bringing products, manufactures making food products, tomato people picking tomatos, lettuce people picking lettuce, michanics fixing broken ovens and walk ins not to mension opening new locations he pays rent and remodels which means more jobs please let the man prosper becouse if he prospers a bunch of people feed their familys (ps I read the yahoo article which is different from the link above)
:shesaid:They are not talking about increasing his corporate tax, they are talking about raising his personal income tax (which I can assure you if he owns businesses is WAY less than $400K declared after expenses are written off).
This guy is just being a baby.
So that is $226.92 per week per employee for employee pay, benefits, training, etc.
QUOTE]
\
ok I re-read the article for the 4th time still go with my origional opinion but Ive figured out the problem alot of people want somone to work 100 hours a week to make the same money as somone who works 20
I do not have a problem paying people minimum wage as a fast food resturant manager I hired people all the time for minimum wage.........as a matter of fact didnt even phase me that they wernt full time and went offered benifits becouse........... when I was an 'employee' and not managment I wasnt offered benifits and I made minimum wage.....as a matter of fact I got my kid a job at Wendys with one of my old employees whos now a store manager so he could see how making minimum wage and not getting benifits sucked, if you make certain choices in life you make less money becouse your options in life arnt as good
why does everyone dislike people that are going well.......why would he pay someone $15 an hour to make subs if he did they would cost too much and the store would go out of busisness and then the person who shoulda been making minimum wage will be unemployed
I saw it all the time back when minimum wage was $5.25 we paid our employees $6.25 which was pretty good and wed give them 35 hours the place across the street would offer them $6.75 so theyd quit go over yonder and ole steak and shake would give them 15 hours then the single mom of 3 would come crying for her job back and wed say NOPE see ya in reality their raise cost 'em bout $100 a week
ps alot of them wernt even worth the $6.25 an hour
So that is $226.92 per week per employee for employee pay, benefits, training, etc.
QUOTE]
\
ok I re-read the article for the 4th time still go with my origional opinion but Ive figured out the problem alot of people want somone to work 100 hours a week to make the same money as somone who works 20
huh? who are these people?
I do not have a problem paying people minimum wage as a fast food resturant manager I hired people all the time for minimum wage.........as a matter of fact didnt even phase me that they wernt full time and went offered benifits becouse........... when I was an 'employee' and not managment I wasnt offered benifits and I made minimum wage.....as a matter of fact I got my kid a job at Wendys with one of my old employees whos now a store manager so he could see how making minimum wage and not getting benifits sucked, if you make certain choices in life you make less money becouse your options in life arnt as good
again I say huh? first who said minimum wage was a problem at fast food, second benefits are a part of all jobs, it is in the form of unemployment, social security match, etc. What are you talking about?
why does everyone dislike people that are going well.......why would he pay someone $15 an hour to make subs if he did they would cost too much and the store would go out of busisness and then the person who shoulda been making minimum wage will be unemployed
What are you talking about, if you got this out of what I wrote then maybe this is why you can't add and subtract the article either
I saw it all the time back when minimum wage was $5.25 we paid our employees $6.25 which was pretty good and wed give them 35 hours the place across the street would offer them $6.75 so theyd quit go over yonder and ole steak and shake would give them 15 hours then the single mom of 3 would come crying for her job back and wed say NOPE see ya in reality their raise cost 'em bout $100 a week
ps alot of them wernt even worth the $6.25 an hour
what are you talking about? His numbers are impossible to be truthful, that is all that I said. I have no idea what you are talking about with $15 an hour this or that or even $5.25 an hour. I know that facts are hard to understand, but I was simply doing basic elementary math there and unless 2+2 is no longer 4, I am confused beyond belief by what you are saying.
Sick of people saying the rich can afford to be taxed more when 50% of Americans don't pay taxes. And when the so called "poor" in this country can afford cell phones and iPods and Blackberries then they are not all that poor and I think they can afford to pay some taxes too.
And you're never going to get a job from a homeless guy, just saying
can you share where you found/learned the statistic of the 50 % of Americans not paying taxes? Just interested in what Americans this would include?
But rich people and big organizations are providing jobs and stimulating the economy.
Don't quote me on this but isn't it the top 1% wealthiest pay 30% of income tax. These are people that work hard for their money, invest it, ect. Wht do you have the right to tell them they need to give the government more of THEIR money that THEY earned.
Why not have everyone pay a percentage of what they earn--bottom line. Makes sense to me. You make more, you pay more. But I don't think the top should have to carry the bottom. Sorry
Percentage wise, any middle class people would have paid higher income tax than this guy, and Warren Buffet! All this "If I have to pay more taxes I would not be able to hire more people" crap are just what rich people want us to believe. The markets for luxury items are doing pretty well because the wealthy people aren't really affected by the recession. Many American corporations are doing well and hoarding a lot of cash but are not hiring because they figured out they could have their current workers work harder without extra helps and wage increments.
Here is just one example found online from msnbc http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3622644...finance/t/half-us-pays-no-federal-income-tax/
It talks about federal income tax statistics from 2010
The idea about rich people being taxed less because they create jobs really hasn't worked out so well over the last few decades...the deficit has skyrocketed, the economy is crap, and where exactly are these jobs that the rich people are supposedly creating? Are they in the U.S.? Mexico? India? I know there are a lot of elements to all these things, but the same rich people who are not paying taxes but supposedly creating jobs are also partly responsible for the current state of things - they own the companies sending jobs overseas, they own the companies that made too many bad loans and destroyed the housing market, etc. They do their part to drive things into the crapper, and then they want to sit back, not pay taxes, and promise to help by creating more jobs? How does this make sense?
A place to debate everything and anything!