Taxes and Deficits and Citizenship

November 12, 2010

PhysioWife and I are in the income bracket that will pay a substantially greater federal tax bill if the Bush tax cut for the > $250,000 income level is allowed to lapse. And we *want* that motherfucker to lapse. We are financially comfortable, and it is more important to us that we live in a decent fucken nation where everyone has the chance for a decent life than to shovel more fucken cash into our own maw.

It is disgusting that this is not the attitude of the vast majority of well-off americans.


34 Responses to “Taxes and Deficits and Citizenship”

  1. Physician scientist Says:

    The AMT makes this irrelevant anyway. There was no Bush tax cut for a great number of people in this income bracket anyway. This is all just marketing and political bs. Let’s see if politicians have the guts to do what the recent deficit reduction committee recommended. It made both sides very angry so must be on target.

  2. Hear hear! We’re not yet at that income level but we’re doing pretty darn well.

  3. physiobabe Says:

    We’re on the same page as you and PhysioWife.

  4. vegofish Says:

    Then donate to charity you fucking asswipe. Assuage your liberal guilt without your hand in my fucking pocket.

  5. BikeMonkey Says:

    Yeah but how does PhysioCat feel about it? Those weekly shipments of catnip don’t pay for themselves, you know.

  6. Vegodouche, just out of curiosity, what state do you live in?

  7. Katharine Says:

    How much fucking money does one need to live comfortably?

    My parents do okay on $150,000 a year combined.

  8. Stickypaws Says:

    See, Vegofish prefers charities – this way, the poor, sick and needy people are reminded that they only get help if beg for it. Because they don’t deserve it. And they had better be fucking grateful. So get your hands off his stuff, because that’s stealing – whereas donating to a charity makes him feel munificent, not robbed.

  9. Vegodouche, we’re still waiting for you to tell us what state you live in.

  10. Karla Says:


  11. Vegodouche is from Fuckwitterville, North Vagina.

  12. Vegodouche is from Fucknutterville, West Vagina.

  13. Physician scientist Says:

    My God…don’t you people get it. This argument is stupid. If both spouses work and the combined income is over $250K, they are 90% sure to be subject to the Alternative Minimum Tax. There was no Bush tax cut in the first place for these people as they were subject to the AMT.

  14. zoubl Says:

    CPP, it doesn’t matter where vegadouche is from. I am only guessing, but I think a majority of the top 2% would agree with you. It’s only a few people (the Koch brothers, for example) who fund right wingies, tea parties, etc, as an attempt to get out of paying taxes. They get to benefit because it’s the ignorant masses that follow and listen to people such as Palin, Glen Beck, Dubya..

  15. zoubl Says:

    wait. my bad, I misread your post. You say the top 2% majority are the other way. I guess it irritates me more that the “ignorant masses” that I mention above do not have the attitude you’re talking about.

  16. Isabel Says:

    What an ugly, sexist, bigoted remark!

  17. Funky Fresh Says:

    Yeah. There are plenty of people in West Vagina who make more than $250,000/year.

  18. vegofish Says:

    Washington, Alaska and Hawaii. I have residences in those three states. My current drivers license is Wa. I produce things, my profits go into producing more things and hiring more people to assist in the production of those things. My income relies solely on production of these things, and ceases entirely when production stops. No bailouts, no tenure, no
    entitlements. I donate heavily to local communities
    where my employees live, with both time and money.
    I believe in helping my family and my neighbor. I also believe that I am far better qualified to gauge the effects and necessity of my personal largess than an overpaid bureaucratic lackey, such as yourself.


    Alaska receives $1.84 in federal government largesse for every $1.00 in federal taxes paid. Hawaii receives $1.44 in federal government largesse for every $1.00 in federal taxes paid. (These states are in the top dozen for sucking on the federal teat much more than they produce in federal tax revenues.) Washington, on the other hand, is a producer state, receiving $0.88 in federal government largesse for every $1.00 in federal taxes paid.

    As the state in which I engage the vast majority of my economic activity receives even less return than Washington, it looks like *you* are a greedy fucken freeloader with your filthy fucken parasite hands in *my* pocket.

  20. vegofish Says:

    It was not any funnier as North Vagina, Should have just stuck with the single “West” Vagina post. Or does pushing buttons confuse you perhaps?

  21. vegofish Says:

    Perhaps you could finds statistics and logic that is more skewed and senseless to attempt to bolster your argument, but I doubt it. The funny part is, I am sure you understand this, but chose to use statistics that, in reality, represent nothing anyway. Which I have found is typical with the progressive argument.

  22. My federal taxes subsidize the infrastructure that you rely on–yet don’t come close to paying for–to engage in your own economic activity. Pay for your own roads, schools, police, public transportation, border security, air traffic control, food safety, etc, you fucken freeloading parasite.

  23. vegofish Says:

    You know full well sir that vast majority of those expenditures go directly into the entitlement programs
    that you so vociferously defend. So in reality you use
    skewed and misleading statistics to complain about exactly the kind of spending you favor. Once again, a great example of the circular logic of the progressive.

  24. Interesting how the loudest shouters about “entitlements” suck hardest from the federal teat. Greedy fucks like you choose to live in states that starve the living shit out of their own state governments and the services that must be provided and thus force the federal government to spend *my* fucken tax dollars keeping your fucken greedy asses from descending into third-world squalor. You’re a fucken greedy parasitic liar.

  25. vegofish Says:

    Progressive logic goes something like this.
    I, because of geography, am a “fucken greedy parasitic liar”. Irrelevant that I, nor any of my immediate family, has thankfully never had any need of the type of welfare you promote. The difference being the kind of assistance I promote in almost all cases goes to those who truly are in need of assistance while the kind you promote in most cases does not.
    While you, the typical progressive elitist piece of shit, leach, like many other typical progressive elitist pieces of shit, from the public solely on some form of gov’t hand out.
    In fact, my interaction with the gov’t has consistently increased my contribution to you and your fellow leaches, irrelevant to geography,Through continually increasing regulations, fees and taxes.

  26. Physician scientist Says:

    Perhaps if Comrade Physioprof did his own taxes, he’d realize that his tax rate was the exact same with our without the Bush Tax cuts. This is because of the Alternative Minimum Tax. I paste the article below because he still doesn’t seem to get that his taxes will be the same regardless of the outcome of the tax debate. Jesus, get a clue.

    How Do the Bush Tax Cuts Interact with the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)?

    The federal individual income tax is really two tax systems: the ordinary individual income tax and the much-maligned alternative minimum tax (AMT) system. Individuals are required to calculate their tax liability under both systems and then pay the higher tax.

    Over the past decade, the AMT has been in the news because the so-called Bush tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003 altered the ordinary system while leaving the AMT largely unchanged. For low- and middle-income people, the AMT was almost always irrelevant. They got their tax cuts as advertised. For upper-income people, the AMT made things more complicated.

    During the 1990s, many upper-income people had financial arrangements that resulted in their owing more under the AMT each year than they owed under the regular system. For those people — roughly two percent of taxpayers nationwide — the regular tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003 had little effect. They still had to pay the higher of the two calculations, and that was still the AMT.

    A much more common situtation was that upper-income people (say, between $150,000 and $1 million) had always owed more under the regular system than they did under AMT, and so they were hardly aware of the AMT. But then, during the 2001-2003 period, they got sufficient tax cuts that suddenly their AMT liability was higher than their regular liability. In effect, the AMT “took back” some of their tax cut, usually a fairly small fraction. In no case did anyone owe more under the Bush tax cuts than they would have in their absence, but because many taxpayers were suddenly discovering the AMT, many people who should have known better talked as if their taxes had been raised, that they had been “victimized” or “trapped” by the AMT.

  27. Katharine Says:

    Most business people have marginally better ethics than Pol Pot.

  28. Physician scientist Says:

    This article doesn’t take into account the AMT. My point is simply that this is a silly discussion to have as i) if you and your spouse both work and earn between $250K and $400K, your taxes are likely the same with or without the bush tax cut as you are paying the AMT anyway and ii) the number of people earning over $400K are low enough that raising their taxes won’t make a dent in the deficit.

    I would prefer we ran the government using return on equity. It can be clearly shown that certain government programs have a higher ROE than others and contribute more to the economy than others. For instance, investing in NIH generally returns 5X the investment while increasing unemployment benefits from 60 weeks to 90 weeks has little ROE. This is the sort of discussion our country needs to have…what do we need to invest in from a humanitarian perspective (health care, welfare, etc) and what useful programs can we get a high ROE on?

  29. the number of people earning over $400K are low enough that raising their taxes won’t make a dent in the deficit.

    Dude, you are seriously fucken delusional.

  30. Physician scientist Says:

    If you don’t realize that $700 billion over 10 YEARS ($70 billion a year) is a drop in the bucket when looking at $413 billion per year in interest on a $13.7 trillion dollar deficit, then I’m not the one who’s delusional my friend.

    Its pretty clear that taxes need to be raised and spending reigned in pretty substantially.

  31. BikeMonkey Says:

    ahahaha, dipshit dummefucke selfish assholes always conveniently define who “deserves” taxpayer largesse and who does not, thus justifying their own advantages whilst decrying any expenditures that do not accrue to their own personal benefit. Selfishassism is a poor excuse for a philosophy, my friend.

  32. vegofish Says:

    I don’t have the problems of ambiguity between right and wrong and good and evil like you folks do.

  33. scramton Says:

    people that earn alot of money know how to hide their money so they don’t get taxed, it doesn’t matter if the people earning over a large amount like $400,000/year get their rates raised

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: