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: neolib who wrote (160387)	10/26/2008 11:44:45 PM
From: ahhaha	Respond to of 306849

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... Nothing complex about it. It's just incoherent. You have two danglers which are syntactically and semantically unconnected. The sentence says, "claims are that people don't consider FICA". Claims are what? Are you saying that people make false claims? What directly relates to FICA? Your unknown quantity? You on drugs? Go back and read what we were talking about. I have. You're confused and you've unsuccessfully tried to obfuscate the fact that you've been wrong. In the beginning you didn't know what you were arguing, and then you tried to defend what was, in fact, false. Eventually you owned up to that. 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. I think the figure is more like 1% max, but I don't want to add yet another level. None of this has anything to do with unknown quantities, The unknown quantities were merely taken from the vague way you described what you had in mind. You can't argue effectively and hand wave. You have to seek transparency. other than she was not able to produce any data backing up this claim. I think it's around 1% and I don't know that i can find formal data to support that hunch. I should have read to the end and I would not have bothered responding. You are truly clueless. The only confusion throughout your statements has been your own. How old are? Actually, don't bother, I don't want to know, and don't bother posting to me in the future. This is your final obfuscation. As I've told people on my thread, liars and deceivers like you have to be hunted down, to show others that bs shuts up when forcibly confronted.