<quoted text>anyway,kinfolk said,jeb,move away from there.....oh,wrong jeb..that was jeb clampett.you were asking about jeb stuart at gettysburg.well,it's true jeb was 'awol' at that battle,but as gen. ewell said after the war,"there were enough mistakes made at that battle to go around,and God knows that i made more than my share"(more or less a quote).and he was right.a.p.hill,stuart,ewell and even lonstreet(lee's 'old warhorse')all let gen.lee down.even lee did'nt seem to have brought his'a' game.it was almost like a 'perfect storm' of errors,misjudgements,misunders tandings,etc.or,who knows,maybe just a little 'devine intervention'.on one final thought,some historians/physicians have suggested that gen. lee suffered a mild heart attack on the eve of the battle,and there is some evidence to support this.

<quoted text>They pay the same tax rates on the same type of income as do all taxpayers.Less in terms of percentages? LMAO, when about half the country doesn't pay ANY federal income tax.Your wealth envy and lack of knowledge is showing again...

Technically correct, EXCEPT withholding tax is levied against the first $117,000 of gross EARNED - operative word - income and that tax ALONE accounts for 32% of everything the government takes in. If your income comes from stock dividends, annuities, tax shelters, off-shore accounts (assuming they're reported), etc. then you don't have to pay anything on withholding.

So, even the 47% pay through the nose so the super-rich don't have to.

<quoted text>Technically correct, EXCEPT withholding tax is levied against the first $117,000 of gross EARNED - operative word - income and that tax ALONE accounts for 32% of everything the government takes in. If your income comes from stock dividends, annuities, tax shelters, off-shore accounts (assuming they're reported), etc. then you don't have to pay anything on withholding.So, even the 47% pay through the nose so the super-rich don't have to.Bet you don't like that math lesson. ;o)

<quoted text>Definately not this Republican or any others.Even if you are a Democrat, Jeb, I am surprised by your response.Besides, why did you leave General Lee in the dark about Federal troop positions at a critical time just before the battle at Gettysburg?.

just one other thing,the real"Gen.Lee",was very apolitical,unlike me,stuart and some others.

Yes. It was intended to pay for Social Security and Medicare but Congress couldn't keep their hands off it. Today, they've taken $2.73 TRILLION from the trust fund and each year dip into it to the tune of over $90 billion - and are now saying the system is about to go broke. Go figure.

<quoted text>They pay the same tax rates on the same type of income as do all taxpayers.Less in terms of percentages? LMAO, when about half the country doesn't pay ANY federal income tax.Your wealth envy and lack of knowledge is showing again...

wow!you repugs really just don't get it,do you.you accuse half of americans of being freeloaders and deadbeats.no wonder you're losing grounds so fast!

<quoted text>Technically correct, EXCEPT withholding tax is levied against the first $117,000 of gross EARNED - operative word - income and that tax ALONE accounts for 32% of everything the government takes in. If your income comes from stock dividends, annuities, tax shelters, off-shore accounts (assuming they're reported), etc. then you don't have to pay anything on withholding.So, even the 47% pay through the nose so the super-rich don't have to.Bet you don't like that math lesson. ;o)

You really need to quit typing when you don't know what you're talking about. It's really kind of funny, you're so misinformed...

I know this is a waste of time...

Withholding tax is NOT limited to $117K, I ASSUME you're talking about FICA, but the number is NOT $117K.

Withholding tax is/are taxes WITHHELD from earnings like salaries, wages, bonuses, etc. based upon the period earnings and witholding and deductions. IMAGINE THAT.

PARTIALLY correct, in practice, 100% WRONG. The entities making those payments are not employers, so there's no requirement for them to make payments (unless it's something like a lottery winning, in which case tax will be withheld, but there's no payroll taxes, etc.). An individual likely will make interim tax payments (Form 1040 ES) to make sure they haven't underpaid when filing their tax return. That serves the same purpose as withholding an employer processes.

<quoted text>Yes. It was intended to pay for Social Security and Medicare but Congress couldn't keep their hands off it. Today, they've taken $2.73 TRILLION from the trust fund and each year dip into it to the tune of over $90 billion - and are now saying the system is about to go broke. Go figure.

figure this,by "congress",exactly who do you refer to dems,reps,or both!

<quoted text>anyway,kinfolk said,jeb,move away from there.....oh,wrong jeb..that was jeb clampett.you were asking about jeb stuart at gettysburg.well,it's true jeb was 'awol' at that battle,but as gen. ewell said after the war,"there were enough mistakes made at that battle to go around,and God knows that i made more than my share"(more or less a quote).and he was right.a.p.hill,stuart,ewell and even lonstreet(lee's 'old warhorse')all let gen.lee down.even lee did'nt seem to have brought his'a' game.it was almost like a 'perfect storm' of errors,misjudgements,misunders tandings,etc.or,who knows,maybe just a little 'devine intervention'.on one final thought,some historians/physicians have suggested that gen. lee suffered a mild heart attack on the eve of the battle,and there is some evidence to support this.

Thanks for bringing back the memory of Elly May.

If Grannie knew what my brothers and I were thinking watching the Beverly Hillbillies, she'd of been blasting both barrels of that shotgun before asking any questions.

<quoted text>They pay the same tax rates on the same type of income as do all taxpayers.

Less in terms of percentages? LMAO, when about half the country doesn't pay ANY federal income tax.

Your wealth envy and lack of knowledge is showing again...

That post is now on the running for most incorrect post of the day.

Here's just an obvious example that took 1:18 to document.

From Business Insider:

Jim Cramer just went on a great Twitter tirade about the outrageousness of the tax loophole that allows hedge-fund and private-equity managers to pay 15% "capital gains" taxes while you and I pay much-higher "ordinary income" rates.

This loophole, which some think is one reason GOP front-runner Mitt Romney is scared to release his tax returns, is absurd.

To be clear:

There is no theoretical justification for it.

None.

The fact that the loophole exists is merely a function of the enormous power the financial industry has over Washington.

<quoted text>You really need to quit typing when you don't know what you're talking about. It's really kind of funny, you're so misinformed...I know this is a waste of time...Withholding tax is NOT limited to $117K, I ASSUME you're talking about FICA, but the number is NOT $117K.Withholding tax is/are taxes WITHHELD from earnings like salaries, wages, bonuses, etc. based upon the period earnings and witholding and deductions. IMAGINE THAT."If your income comes from stock dividends, annuities, tax shelters, off-shore accounts (assuming they're reported), etc. then you don't have to pay anything on withholding."PARTIALLY correct, in practice, 100% WRONG. The entities making those payments are not employers, so there's no requirement for them to make payments (unless it's something like a lottery winning, in which case tax will be withheld, but there's no payroll taxes, etc.). An individual likely will make interim tax payments (Form 1040 ES) to make sure they haven't underpaid when filing their tax return. That serves the same purpose as withholding an employer processes.Your wealth envy, as well as your lack of knowledge, is quite sad..."BM said: "how'd I do Bill of Douglasville?"You did well, grasshopper.

Wealth envy? Not hardly. I'm peddling as hard as I can to get there, and I'm going to! Already, 80% of my annual income is legally sheltered. In FY 2013, that should increase to 83% simply by taking full advantage of the law.

<quoted text>That post is now on the running for most incorrect post of the day.Here's just an obvious example that took 1:18 to document.From Business Insider:Jim Cramer just went on a great Twitter tirade about the outrageousness of the tax loophole that allows hedge-fund and private-equity managers to pay 15% "capital gains" taxes while you and I pay much-higher "ordinary income" rates.This loophole, which some think is one reason GOP front-runner Mitt Romney is scared to release his tax returns, is absurd.To be clear:There is no theoretical justification for it.None.The fact that the loophole exists is merely a function of the enormous power the financial industry has over Washington.

another uninformed post...

It's one thing to know the facts, it's another thing to know the facts and the whole story. You only got part correct...unless you know what you're talking about, your "facts are as usueful as a $3 bill.

There is a "reason" why capital gains rate is at 15%. Do you know why and what the rationale is?

Why don't you check to see what the impact on carried interest is? Do you understand what it is and how it works?

"You and I" pay the same tax rates as other people.

Your last statement is the only one that makes sense, our tax system is absolutely ridiculous, but we all play by the same rules. Romney's capital gains rate is the same rate as mine (his taxable numbers are a helluva lot higher than mine) and yours (if you have any) and we all pay ordinary income tax rates from the same tax tables.

<quoted text>No shit, Sherlock! WAGES (FICA) is the operative word, and it's $113,700.00 - my mistake there. So sue me.http://www1.umn.edu/ohr/payroll/tax/wagelimit...Wealth envy? Not hardly. I'm peddling as hard as I can to get there, and I'm going to! Already, 80% of my annual income is legally sheltered. In FY 2013, that should increase to 83% simply by taking full advantage of the law.

<quoted text>Actually, Mr. or Ms. BM is using a line (and a fact) I'm quite fond of.Where, exactly, in what he or she said, does it say someone is accusing half of Americans to be freeloaders? I don't think the % is anywhere near that high, but it's certainly more than 0%.BTW, since when is stating an actual fact equivalent to being accused of calling somebody something? Getting a little defensive?Seems to me your really making a rash assumption about a fact someone posted. Can you dispute the fact? No, you can't. Change the story and accuse somebody of something? Yeah, that'll work...

honestly,if i could make sense of your reply,then i would reply to it.but because i can not,i will not.it may be due to my lack of understanding of exactly how this system works,meantime,please excuse my ignorance and accept my apoligies.best wishs.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.