Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ahhaha who wrote (160381)	10/26/2008 10:41:36 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

This claim can't be defended because it's incoherent. It says, "poor people pay 15% more than some unknown quantity and the quantity is the one I have in mind". That's your "simple point"? Uh?? The claims about what the poor pay for taxes are simply that many people look at income tax and don't consider FICA. What is so complex about that. Geez... What directly relates to FICA? Your unknown quantity? You on drugs? Go back and read what we were talking about. She made the claim that the lower half of households in the USA (that is the 50%) pay only 5% of the total FICA tax. None of this has anything to do with unknown quantities, other than she was not able to produce any data backing up this claim. This is incoherent double talk. I should have read to the end and I would not have bothered responding. You are truly clueless. How old are? Actually, don't bother, I don't want to know, and don't bother posting to me in the future.