OCinBuffalo Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Considering I don't support either presidential nominee, this choice is easy. Yep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemhoff Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Not tricky at all. Been waiting a lifetime for a Super Bowl win, we can get a new politician in 4 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
profile Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Honestly, is there an easier poll to answer? Bills SuperBowl win, hands down, priorities have nothing to do with a presidential election, they last only 4 years in office if they suck, but a Bills championship will last my entire lifetime. No brainer, GO BILLS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 I can't believe 36 people voted for politicians??? WTF... A Bills SB victory would rank up there with my wedding and the birth of my son as one of the greatest feelings of my life (I imagine). How often I have lived and died with this team??? As a Yankee fan, I felt a little bit of this especially after the 96 World Series win. But my depth of love for the Bills is far deeper and greater...might actually be the only time in my life that I was reduced to tears... I've often said...ONCE we win, I can die in peace. That sentiment has not changed. There will be another politician in 4 years to make a bunch of promises and line his own pocket at taxpayer expense. It truly does not matter all that much. Go Bills! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murra Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 A Bills SB victory would rank up there with my wedding and the birth of my son as one of the greatest feelings of my life (I imagine). Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Really? Third on that list...but yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murra Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Third on that list...but yeah. Ok good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB27 Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Well, I was against Obama because he is going to raise my taxes. For the record I do not make more than 250k, actually I make about 100k less than that, and it me and my wifes income not just mine. I am smart enough to know that Obama is going to raise my taxes even though he says he won't. I know this because he is a politician, and all politicians are liars..... And, now that they passed the pork bail bail out plan it doesn't matter who gets in, taxes are going up to pay for it. Additionally, only about 50% of Americans pay taxes (rich people are getting loopholes, poor people don't have any money). So, the people like me, and my wife end up paying for it all................... I'm venting now...... They both suck as candidates....... I voted for BILLS WIN, BILLS WIN, BILLS WIN!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 I go to Cornell. Hoist by my own pitard, perhaps? Anyway, that is a good point, and I'm man enough to admit when somebody has properly called me out. But I'm being honest when I say that I go here because I think it gives me the best chance to pursue what I'm going after in a career, not because I'd like to make more money. Well, it's a good thing money isn't important to you. There are few things easier in this world than making a commitment to give away money you don't have. You may well turn out to be Mr. Philanthropist. But when you get your first paycheck, look at the area where they show how much was taken out in taxes. Let's say you get a job earning $50,000 per year. That's great coming out of college. Look at your net income. It's about $25,000, depending on where you live. Now, that works out to be approximately $2083 a month net income. Not bad right out of college. However, you have commited 70% of that to go to charity. So now you are netting $625 per month. So here we are. You're helping your fellow man, and have $625/month to spend on rent, utilities, food, and, assuming you own your car free and clear, gasoline. You're already in trouble if you try to stay in Ithaca, where the average rent on a studio apartment is $625-$695. The good news is some of them include utitilities. The bad news is, none of them include food. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Well, it's a good thing money isn't important to you. There are few things easier in this world than making a commitment to give away money you don't have. You may well turn out to be Mr. Philanthropist. But when you get your first paycheck, look at the area where they show how much was taken out in taxes. Let's say you get a job earning $50,000 per year. That's great coming out of college. Look at your net income. It's about $25,000, depending on where you live. Now, that works out to be approximately $2083 a month net income. Not bad right out of college. However, you have commited 70% of that to go to charity. So now you are netting $625 per month. So here we are. You're helping your fellow man, and have $625/month to spend on rent, utilities, food, and, assuming you own your car free and clear, gasoline. You're already in trouble if you try to stay in Ithaca, where the average rent on a studio apartment is $625-$695. The good news is some of them include utitilities. The bad news is, none of them include food. I tell you what. Back when I made a good buck, and the gov't took a big percentage, I never looked to protect my $$ from taxation. Never found a shelter, never looked for a loophole. I took the standard deduction, and gave the gov't the rest. The only exception was, when I worked for a company I would usually participate in the 401K. But, after I left, I always ended up cashing the whole thing in, paying the taxes AND the penalties. So, I'm pretty damn sure I paid a higher % of my income in taxes, than almost any millionaire. I have no guilt in my belief that the wealthy should pay more taxes than the poor, or middle class, as they enjoy the fruits of the taxes more than anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 So, I'm pretty damn sure I paid a higher % of my income in taxes, than almost any millionaire. I have no guilt in my belief that the wealthy should pay more taxes than the poor, or middle class, as they enjoy the fruits of the taxes more than anyone. Hint...They already do pay more...much more. Also, define "wealthy." I thinkw e can all agree Warren Buffet falls within the group, but bring it down a few dozen levels. Where do you draw the line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Hint...They already do pay more...much more. Also, define "wealthy." I thinkw e can all agree Warren Buffet falls within the group, but bring it down a few dozen levels. Where do you draw the line? I think most very wealthy people (let's say incomes of $500k or more, per year, for the sake of argument here, but it probably works with lower incomes, as well) find ways to lessen their tax burdens. I seriously doubt that most of these individuals pay the top % on income on every dollar they make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 I think most very wealthy people (let's say incomes of $500k or more, per year, for the sake of argument here, but it probably works with lower incomes, as well) find ways to lessen their tax burdens. I seriously doubt that most of these individuals pay the top % on income on every dollar they make. Perhaps. But is purchasing a home to get the tax benefit (vs. renting) within the scope of the discussion? What about 401(k) or Roth contributions saving for retirement? I don't really think it is necessarily to lessen the tax burden, more to save for retirement and rely less on an uncertain Social Security. But you say "wealthy" people should bear a more significant tax burden than they already do. Define the term "wealthy", because it really does matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Perhaps. But is purchasing a home to get the tax benefit (vs. renting) within the scope of the discussion? What about 401(k) or Roth contributions saving for retirement? I don't really think it is necessarily to lessen the tax burden, more to save for retirement and rely less on an uncertain Social Security. But you say "wealthy" people should bear a more significant tax burden than they already do. Define the term "wealthy", because it really does matter. For the sake of the tax cut discussions, I think Obama's line of $250k per year, is very workable. While you may debate whether or not they are wealthy, I think it's clear that they enjoy the fruits of our society more so than those who make considerably less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 I tell you what. Back when I made a good buck, and the gov't took a big percentage, I never looked to protect my $$ from taxation. Never found a shelter, never looked for a loophole. I took the standard deduction, and gave the gov't the rest. The only exception was, when I worked for a company I would usually participate in the 401K. But, after I left, I always ended up cashing the whole thing in, paying the taxes AND the penalties. So, I'm pretty damn sure I paid a higher % of my income in taxes, than almost any millionaire. I have no guilt in my belief that the wealthy should pay more taxes than the poor, or middle class, as they enjoy the fruits of the taxes more than anyone. If you paid a higher percentage of taxes than a millionaire, who's fault is that? The millionaire's? No. It's yours, because as you said, you never found a shelter, you cashed out your 401Ks, and you never took write offs, or what you call loopholes. But what loopholes really exist? Is buying a house a loophole? It's essentially the only thing the average taxpayer can write off any more. You mismanaged your income when you could have done what many other people do to lower the amount of taxes they pay. In fact, did you know that in many cases, you can actually cash out your 401K to use it as a down payment on a house, without penalty? Did you try that loophole, or is it only for the super rich? But please don't say the rich should pay a higher tax than you simply because you had no clue how to lower your percentage. That's just lazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 [quote name='LABillzFan' date='Oct 21 2008, 06:00 PM' post='1178807' But please don't say the rich should pay a higher tax than you simply because you had no clue how to lower your percentage. That's just lazy. Why do you think I had no clue on how to lower my tax burden? I know how to read, and I know many tax accountants and financial advisers. I didn't simply pay more taxes out of ignorance or because I am lazy. I believe in paying our full load, if we can afford to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lets_go_bills Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Most political thread ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 For the sake of the tax cut discussions, I think Obama's line of $250k per year, is very workable. While you may debate whether or not they are wealthy, I think it's clear that they enjoy the fruits of our society more so than those who make considerably less. I disagree. I think that $250k a year is a very different numebr if the individual lives in NYC/SF/other high cost areas vs. Buffalo/Pitts/Cleveland/other medium cost areas vs. rural America. I think a blanket one-size-fits-all number is not the way to go. I'd argue that 250k in a high cost area = 150k in a medium cost area = 100k in a low cost area. Why tax everyone based on a blanket number? Personally, I'd lower tax rates for everyone, eliminate all deductions except for charitable contributions and state/local taxes and ensure that every single American paid at least some taxes to incentivize everyone to watch government spending. To me, thats a good start on a fair system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 We've had to deal with Dems and Reps screwing up the country for years an they've never made me smile....now the Bills winning a Super Bowl!?!?! That would make me smile for ETERNITY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 [quote name='LABillzFan' date='Oct 21 2008, 06:00 PM' post='1178807' But please don't say the rich should pay a higher tax than you simply because you had no clue how to lower your percentage. That's just lazy. Why do you think I had no clue on how to lower my tax burden? I know how to read, and I know many tax accountants and financial advisers. I didn't simply pay more taxes out of ignorance or because I am lazy. I believe in paying our full load, if we can afford to. You gave them more money on purpose?? Sorry for the misinterpretation. But I'll take my chances with my handling of my own money. I've seen what the government does with it. Giving them more on purpose just seems downright bizarre to me. If nothing else, maybe you should give more to charities you believe in and less to them. But if you trust them, that's cool. I guess. More power to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts