How we voted in 2018

[URedskin54]

Don't want to have a faith based conversation right now. Maybe later.

It's not a faith based conversation. it's just a matter of you getting your facts wrong. Your ridiculous assertion that the people you disagree with do good things and care for people only to get into heaven is totally contradicted by what many of them actually believe. Your argument here is the clearest representation I've seen of a person starting at position because they don't like people, and then constructing your reasoning from there. In situations where the actions of conservatives(giving to charity in your scenario) don't line up with your beliefs, you construct reasoning that allows you keep holding onto the beliefs about the people you don't like.

As I've said before, there's more than one way to care about people and make the world a better place. Most people grow up and understand this before they're 25.

 

[lawpoke87]

Yes, but Dem's haven't won every age group outside of 65 over the past few cycles.

True...but since the median income of Seniors is substantially lower than the national average your age argument as to why the divergence between education and income makes zero sense. The old people voting Pub aren't the ones running those income numbers up on their side.

 

[astonmartin708]

I'm not offended one bit. I'm about as moderate as they come. It hurts me as a member of our society that people actually think that way about half our citizens. It's not healthy or beneficial to anyone. Not just those who harbor those beliefs and not those who those beliefs are about. Just saddens me.

It saddens you that I think both beliefs can be good in moderation and with balance?

If you look at the platforms of the two parties and look from a community vs. sovereignty (self preservation) standpoint... the parties tend to fit rather well in most areas.

 

[astonmartin708]

It's not a faith based conversation. it's just a matter of you getting your facts wrong. Your ridiculous assertion that the people you disagree with do good things and care for people only to get into heaven is totally contradicted by what many of them actually believe. Your argument here is the clearest representation I've seen of a person starting at position because they don't like people, and then constructing your reasoning from there. In situations where the actions of conservatives(giving to charity in your scenario) don't line up with your beliefs, you construct reasoning that allows you keep holding onto the beliefs about the people you don't like.

As I've said before, there's more than one way to care about people and make the world a better place. Most people grow up and understand this before they're 25.

The quote is that good acts alone won't get you into heaven. (Paraphrasing) It doesn't say that good acts won't help your cause if you've accepted Jesus. That's the way most protestants, who have repented and accepted Jesus...., tend to operate. If that wasn't the case then churches wouldn't keep asking for donations because as soon as you repented you would be guaranteed a spot in heaven. The way you live your life does matter in judgment (at least according to most religions) and people know that (or at least they believe that if they believe in the certain religions' teachings and their version of judgement / heaven)

 

[astonmartin708]

I'm not offended one bit. I'm about as moderate as they come. It hurts me as a member of our society that people actually think that way about half our citizens. It's not healthy or beneficial to anyone. To those who harbor those beliefs as well as those who those beliefs are about. Just saddens me.

BTW.....those beliefs are not those of a moderate. They are those of an ultra left wing member of our society who sees the world through a partisan prism. I hope you at some time during you life will go back an realize that the right is not how you view them nor is the left. Neither are evil. Just different.

The problem is that many people fail to see their selfish nature. Or they fail to see how weak their empathy has made them. I'm not left wing.

 

[maverickfp]

The quote is that good acts alone won't get you into heaven. (Paraphrasing) It doesn't say that good acts won't help your cause if you've accepted Jesus. That's the way most protestants, who have repented and accepted Jesus...., tend to operate. If that wasn't the case then churches wouldn't keep asking for donations because as soon as you repented you would be guaranteed a spot in heaven. The way you live your life does matter in judgment (at least according to most religions) and people know that.

I give my 10% tithe because Jesus asks me to. Not because the church did. And even though I give, that doesn't get me into heaven. Giving allows my church to feed the homeless, create low cost preschool programs, create marriage reconciliation programs, go to Houston to help repair hurricane damage, and tons of other charity work. And to you aston, that's all self serving... Maybe you should give church a try.

 

[URedskin54]

The quote is that good acts alone won't get you into heaven. (Paraphrasing) It doesn't say that good acts won't help your cause if you've accepted Jesus. That's the way most protestants, who have repented and accepted Jesus...., tend to operate. If that wasn't the case then churches wouldn't keep asking for donations because as soon as you repented you would be guaranteed a spot in heaven. The way you live your life does matter and people know that.

LOL I can see why you wouldn't want to discuss faith. The actual belief is that good works do nothing for you. Sola fide literally means faith alone and this is one of the main disagreements between protestants and the catholic church.

Seriously, why is it so hard to just say "the people I disagree with are caring people with good intentions, but I believe the policies they prefer are harmful."

 

[astonmartin708]

I give my 10% tithe because Jesus asks me to. Not because the church did. And even though I give, that doesn't get me into heaven. Giving allows my church to feed the homeless, create low cost preschool programs, create marriage reconciliation programs, go to Houston to help repair hurricane damage, and tons of other charity work. And to you aston, that's all self serving... Maybe you should give church a try.

And you believe in Jesus why?

So. You. Can. Get. Into. Heaven.

In the end it's always self serving. You proved my point. Thank you.

Giving 10% not because jesus told you to, but because it's the right thing to do. That's not self serving.

 

[maverickfp]

True chirstians give because the holy spirit changes them to be less selfish and more giving, not to pay for entry to heaven. I've accepted Jesus, I am going to heaven, there is no doubt. I don't give to make sure he let's me in, I give to help others through my churches charity programs.

 

[astonmartin708]

True chirstians give because the holy spirit changes them to be less selfish and more giving, not to pay for entry to heaven. I've accepted Jesus, I am going to heaven, there is no doubt. I don't give to make sure he let's me in, I give to help others through my churches charity programs.

You just said you do it because Jesus told you to.That makes it self serving.

 

[URedskin54]

True chirstians give because the holy spirit changes them to be less selfish and more giving, not to pay for entry to heaven. I've accepted Jesus, I am going to heaven, there is no doubt. I don't give to make sure he let's me in, I give to help others through my churches charity programs.

A perfectly succinct summary of faith and giving that aston will no doubt fail to understand

 

[URedskin54]

And like clockwork

 

[astonmartin708]

A perfectly succinct summary of faith and giving that aston will no doubt fail to understand

I understand the flaws in the description of that faith. I also understand its merits.

 

[maverickfp]

And you believe in Jesus why?

So. You. Can. Get. Into. Heaven.

In the end it's always self serving. You proved my point. Thank you.

Giving 10% not because jesus told you to, but because it's the right thing to do. That's not self serving.

I believe in Jesus because I believe what he says in scripture is true...I suppose if believing in Christ, repenting of sin, giving to others so they can see the love of Christ is self serving in your worldview so be it.

 

[URedskin54]

I understand the flaws in the description of that faith. I also understand its merits.

Your response to his statement was the exact opposite of what he said. You don't understand

 

[URedskin54]

Again, I know you'll probably fail to understand this, but under most protestant faiths we don't even get to take credit for our good works(plenty obviously screw this part up), let alone use them as a conduit to heaven.

 

[aTUfan]

University is only good for maybe 10 degrees, after that it's just wasted money.

Ethnic Studies should get you a good job.

 

[astonmartin708]

Again, I know you'll probably fail to understand this, but under most protestant faiths we don't even get to take credit for our good works, let alone use them as a conduit to heaven.

1) Not all people are protestant. There are quite a few Catholic Conservatives.
2) Assuming that your version of the bible is aptly described by....
You are asked to believe in Jesus and his teachings, and to attempt to live by his word in order to get into heaven.

If you were not a believer in Christ, would you still be motivated to give, or to live morally? That is a true test of morality. I'm sure some people would, but I'm also sure there are a large number who never consider the following:

If there were no reward at the end... if when you breathed your last breath you saw nothing but blackness infinitely.... would you still give? Have you ever even considered that idea? Selflessness is the idea that there is no reward for actions or your beliefs other than the simple pleasure of knowing others have benefited.

I believe in Christ too, but I believe there are far too many who twist and stretch his teachings to take advantage of others. I give and volunteer, not because I believe in him but because it's the right thing to do for my neighbors.

3) Finally, I don't even think that people who tend to act selfishly are bad. I just think that selfishness needs to be moderated.

 

[lawpoke87]

It saddens you that I think both beliefs can be good in moderation and with balance?

If you look at the platforms of the two parties and look from a community vs. sovereignty (self preservation) standpoint... the parties tend to fit rather well in most areas.

You only have compassion for those who believe as you believe. You loath and don't attempt to understand those who don't. Those people are part of the community as well. They pay their taxes which in turn provides for the community. They give more on a per person basis to help said community that those who you claim actually care. The following view is absolutely diluted to me:

I think the older one gets, the less they think (or care) about improving the rest of the world or even the rest of their community, and the more they focus on getting and keeping "what's theirs". They become greedy and self serving. That's the Republican Party to me. They might make some feigned efforts to give at church, but in the end it's just so they can get into heaven. It's still self serving. They lack empathy.

By contrast, dems (at least the ones at the bottom) tend to lack the same degree of self interest and self preservation that the Republicans have which is why they're viewed as weaker and they tend to lose more.

Funny enough I saw a study the other day that said men who had firstborn daughters tended to have much higher propensity to be Democrats than men who had sons first. I think it has to do with what people perceive as being important for their families, the importance of their place in the community or the importance of their children to be self sustaining.

The best way to help your community is to provide for your children and raise them to be productive adults. As they in turn become said community. Give your time and effort to your kids. That is selfless. Self-serving is abandoning our next generation as children. If you don't have compassion for your own children you can't have compassion for others. I look at actions not lip service.

Your above statement does explain a number of your posts and attitude towards those you politically disagree with. Explains the hate we currently see from the left. Might I suggest you look for the good in people as well as the bad? Pubs aren't evil. They aren't selfish. They give their time to their family and others. They work and provide for their children as well as the community.

 

[astonmartin708]

You only have compassion for those who believe as you believe. You loath and don't attempt to understand those who don't. Those people are part of the community as well. They pay their taxes which in turn provides for the community. They give more on a per person basis to help said community that those who you claim actually care. The following view is absolutely diluted to me:

I think the older one gets, the less they think (or care) about improving the rest of the world or even the rest of their community, and the more they focus on getting and keeping "what's theirs". They become greedy and self serving. That's the Republican Party to me. They might make some feigned efforts to give at church, but in the end it's just so they can get into heaven. It's still self serving. They lack empathy.

By contrast, dems (at least the ones at the bottom) tend to lack the same degree of self interest and self preservation that the Republicans have which is why they're viewed as weaker and they tend to lose more.

Funny enough I saw a study the other day that said men who had firstborn daughters tended to have much higher propensity to be Democrats than men who had sons first. I think it has to do with what people perceive as being important for their families, the importance of their place in the community or the importance of their children to be self sustaining.

The best way to help your community is to provide for your children and raise them to be productive adults. As they in turn become said community. Give your time and effort to your kids. That is selfless. Self-serving is abandoning our next generation as children. If you don't have compassion for your own children you can't have compassion for others. I look at actions not lip service.

Your above statement does explain a number of your posts and attitude towards those you politically disagree with. Explains the hate we currently see from the left. Might I suggest you look for the good in people as well as the bad? Pubs aren't evil. They aren't selfish. They give their time to their family and others. They work and provide for their children as well as the community.

I appreciate your viewpoint, but if you advocate that the best way to provide for the community is to raise children who become good tax payers (as that is the biggest method of providing for the community in your mind - and it is.) Then you defend decreasing the level at which we require everyone to pay to unsubstantial levels - I'm not saying you specifically on that last point Lawpoke moreso some others in the Republican party - and we also defend people who dodge their tax obligations via loopholes (like Trump or others). we're not really supporting a communal view. We're supporting our children growing up to be people that pay the bare minimum they can finagle, not what they truly should.

I think you're right that supporting your household is important but so is maintaing a level of mandatory donation to the community that is both reasonable and beneficial. I think the first point is where the Republican party achieves and the second point is where the Democratic party does.

 

[URedskin54]

1) Not all people are protestant. There are quite a few Catholic Conservatives.
2) Assuming that your version of the bible is aptly described by....
You are asked to believe in Jesus and his teachings, and to attempt to live by his word in order to get into heaven.

If you were not a believer in Christ, would you still be motivated to give, or to live morally? That is a true test of morality. I'm sure some people would, but I'm also sure there are a large number who never consider the following:

If there were no reward at the end... if when you breathed your last breath you saw nothing but blackness infinitely.... would you still give? Have you ever even considered that idea? Selflessness is the idea that there is no reward for actions or your beliefs other than the simple pleasure of knowing others have benefited.

My God. So much ignorance in one post. It is very revealing how little you know about people different from you though.

Yeah I'm aware there are catholic conservatives (my mother's entire side of the family for example), and even they would tell you they give because it's right and not to get into heaven. The point about protestants is that they're part of the group you described and their faith explicitly tells them the opposite of your assertion.

As far as the rest goes, have you not understood a single thing that you've read so far? There is no reward for me when I give to charity except for me feeling good about myself...which then leads me to feeling guilty for feeling good about it because that's sinful. In terms of believing in Jesus in order to get into heaven, I've never met anyone who considers their faith transactional, or anyone who would consider a transactional faith to be one worth having.

Everyone considers the possibility that there's nothing in the end. I was once atheist. The fact that you assume I haven't considered it shows again how little you think of people different than you.

 

[maverickfp]

This could go down a fun rabbit hole. Maybe I should just post a William lane Craig vs. Sam Harris debate.

But to answer your question...I don't expect anything for me giving. In fact Jesus tells us to give without wanting anything back. That literally is selflessness...I don't understand how your mind works. I don't give to get to heaven, I give to help others. I'm going to heaven because I I accepted Jesus as savior. Not because I gave. My wife and I gave a friend $2000 for an ambulance bill he couldn't afford. We never expect anything back, we gave because we felt we had the means to help so we did. We have been blessed to bless others. Doing that isn't getting me to heaven, or a pat on the back or anything. I'm not saying it here for any accolades, just giving an example. Jesus teaches us to give selflessly, and so we did, and do. I don't understand why this is hard to understand.

 

[astonmartin708]

My God. So much ignorance in one post. It is very revealing how little you know about people different from you though.

Yeah I'm aware there are catholic conservatives, and even they would tell you they give because it's right and not to get into heaven. The point about protestants is that they're part of the group you described and their faith explicitly tells them the opposite of your assertion.

As far as the rest goes, have you not understood a single thing that you've read so far? There is no reward for me when I give to charity except for me feeling good about myself...which then leads me to feeling guilty for feeling good about it because that's sinful. In terms of believing in Jesus in order to get into heaven, I've never met anyone who considers their faith transactional, or anyone who would consider a transactional faith to be one worth having.

Everyone considers the possibility that there's nothing in the end. I was once atheist. The fact that you assume I haven't considered it shows again how little you think of people different than you.

This is the most important line here. People don't realize they're living their faith transactionally... but for many of them... that's exactly what they're doing. They were taught as kids that the only way to go to the good place when they're gone is to believe in Jesus so that's what they adopt. It's a transaction. They don't tend to choose christ when they're older because he lines up with their moral philosophy of giving for selfless reasons, being respectful etc... Maybe as a former atheist, that's how you see things... but I can tell you that's not the way the majority of Christians begin in the church. They begin as kids before they are taught morality for morality's sake.

Essentially, the order of operations isn't occurring correctly.

 

[lawpoke87]

I appreciate your viewpoint, but if you advocate that the best way to provide for the community is to raise children who become good tax payers (as that is the biggest method of providing for the community in your mind - and it is.) Then you defend decreasing the level at which we require everyone to pay to unsubstantial levels - I'm not saying you specifically on that last point Lawpoke moreso some others in the Republican party - and we also defend people who dodge their tax obligations via loopholes (like Trump or others). we're not really supporting a communal view. We're supporting our children growing up to be people that pay the minimum they can finagle, not what they truly should.

No....I'm saying the best way to support your community is to raise children who become productive members of society. So they can in turn support those in the community who needs support. Such is the ultimate selfless act. Those who fail their children are in turn failing the community as those children grow up and become dependent on the state. Such is the ultimate selfish act.....as well as harmful to said community. We have a completely different interpretation on selfishness and what benefits the community long-term. I contend I'm right.

I have no issue with people who utilize the tax code to pay what the law requires them to pay in taxes. I'm a CPA in my old life so I assume that has a major influence over my line of thinking. Following the tax code when one filed their return is not dodging one's tax obligations.

I along with my business gave well over $50k last year to charities, our local schools, and other community programs btw. Not one of those charities in that figure was a church or church related fwiw.

 

[URedskin54]

I began in the church, left, and then came back. I can promise you the prevailing view is that a transactional faith is a dead faith.

And that's the last I have to say on this.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

1) Not all people are protestant. There are quite a few Catholic Conservatives.
2) Assuming that your version of the bible is aptly described by....
You are asked to believe in Jesus and his teachings, and to attempt to live by his word in order to get into heaven.

If you were not a believer in Christ, would you still be motivated to give, or to live morally? That is a true test of morality. I'm sure some people would, but I'm also sure there are a large number who never consider the following:

If there were no reward at the end... if when you breathed your last breath you saw nothing but blackness infinitely.... would you still give? Have you ever even considered that idea? Selflessness is the idea that there is no reward for actions or your beliefs other than the simple pleasure of knowing others have benefited.

I believe in Christ too, but I believe there are far too many who twist and stretch his teachings to take advantage of others. I give and volunteer, not because I believe in him but because it's the right thing to do for my neighbors.

3) Finally, I don't even think that people who tend to act selfishly are bad. I just think that selfishness needs to be moderated.

Humans are all selfish, that is not a Democratic or Republican trait. A larger percentage of Democrats actions or beliefs are to convince themselves that they are not selfish than those of Republicans, but that doesn't change the fact that they are all selfish. Restated there are a more navel gazers who can't see their belly button in the Democratic party. It doesn't matter if you are far left, far right, somewhere in between, a parent, or not a parent, if you are a human you are selfish. How selfish you are, and how you exhibit it, is the only room for variability. Doing something for others is usually because you want to feel good about yourself and that is the motivation for "the simple pleasure of knowing others have benefited." Existentially humans cannot be selfless. Trying to lay that generalization on one party or the other exhibits someone operating with blinders.

separate note: Your beliefs don't place you on the far left but your positions and beliefs sound like you are at the least left of the left wing, not moderate. All this seems to have been clarified by your last few posts.

 

[noble cane]

Easy juxtaposition.

No.. seems like a Freudian slip to me... perhaps you’re hiding feelings?

 

[cmullinsTU]

The Dems on the bottom are more selfless than the Rs that make money??? Both are SELFISH.

Now time for another anecdote, the wealthiest person I know is a Catholic Conservative and uses every tax loophole available to limit his effective tax rate. He grew up in a poor family of 12 kids, was in seminary to become a priest but then met the love of his life. Dropped out and got married, had 10 kids of his own. Ended up running a VERY successful company. He is now retired and gives more to charity per year than most people give in their lifetimes. He doesn't give to get to heaven, he gives because God tells him to use the talents he has to improve the life of others. In his eyes, the best way to do that is to donate to charities and not give so much money to the government. Note, I am agnostic at best and atheist at best, I don't believe God told him to donate his money... but guess what the reason he gives isn't important. At least it isn't to me.

One of the biggest differences between the left and right is their view of government efficiency vs private sector efficiency.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

No.. seems like a Freudian slip to me... perhaps you’re hiding feelings?

I'm not hiding feelings, it was just the most socialist candidate running, and there has been a socialist bent to the arguments in discussing Hitler comments. It was an easy joke. I did not mean it seriously, nor believe you intended to imply that.(unless you were joking in the same vein as me)

 

[astonmartin708]

No....I'm saying the best way to support your community is to raise children who become productive members of society. So they can in turn support those in the community who needs support. Such is the ultimate selfless act. Those who fail their children are in turn failing the community as those children grow up and become dependent on the state. Such is the ultimate selfish act.....as well as harmful to said community. We have a completely different interpretation on selfishness and what benefits the community long-term. I contend I'm right.

I have no issue with people who utilize the tax code to pay what the law requires them to pay in taxes. I'm a CPA in my old life so I assume that has a major influence over my line of thinking. Following the tax code when one filed their return is not dodging one's tax obligations.

I along with my business gave well over $50k last year to charities, our schools, and other community programs btw. Not one of those charities in that figure was a church or church related fwiw.

I don't disagree with you that raising your children correctly is an important way to benefit society, but I think there is also a responsibility to maintain certain requirements as to minimum levels of societal contribution that are necessary to keep society functioning and "well regulated". I think there are quite a few powerful people who have already subverted the needs of society to save themselves money via installing tax loopholes or lobbying for tax cuts when we know our society is already in debt and that debt is growing. They argue that the savings they garner will trickle down but we never see that and the debt keeps going up.

I don't think everyone pays their fair share given the natural gifts they have been given.

I appreciate your contributions. I will ask, and not accuse mind you, was any of that made for tax purposes?

 

[astonmartin708]

Humans are all selfish, that is not a Democratic or Republican trait. A larger percentage of Democrats actions or beliefs are to convince themselves that they are not selfish than those of Republicans, but that doesn't change the fact that they are all selfish. Restated there are a more navel gazers who can't see their belly button in the Democratic party. It doesn't matter if you are far left, far right, somewhere in between, a parent, or not a parent, if you are a human you are selfish. How selfish you are, and how you exhibit it, is the only room for variability. Doing something for others is usually because you want to feel good about yourself and that is the motivation for "the simple pleasure of knowing others have benefited." Existentially humans cannot be selfless. Trying to lay that generalization on one party or the other exhibits someone operating with blinders.

separate note: Your beliefs don't place you on the far left but your positions and beliefs sound like you are at the least left of the left wing, not moderate. All this seems to have been clarified by your last few posts.

I completely agree with some of your points, although the platforms of the parties suggest one party as being more self involved than the other. Not that that's a bad thing. Just that it's my observation, and like I said... a balance between the two is good. Also, I think there is currently an imbalance.

I also disagree completely that humans can not sometimes act selflessly.

 

[astonmartin708]

I began in the church, left, and then came back. I can promise you the prevailing view is that a transactional faith is a dead faith.

And that's the last I have to say on this.

That can be the prevailing view... and it might be true.... but it's also evident that secularism is growing globally. So maybe more people are starting to see it the way I am as an ultimate transaction.

 

[astonmartin708]

The Dems on the bottom are more selfless than the Rs that make money??? Both are SELFISH.

Now time for another anecdote, the wealthiest person I know is a Catholic Conservative and uses every tax loophole available to limit his effective tax rate. He grew up in a poor family of 12 kids, was in seminary to become a priest but then met the love of his life. Dropped out and got married, had 10 kids of his own. Ended up running a VERY successful company. He is now retired and gives more to charity per year than most people give in their lifetimes. He doesn't give to get to heaven, he gives because God tells him to use the talents he has to improve the life of others. In his eyes, the best way to do that is to donate to charities and not give so much money to the government. Note, I am agnostic at best and atheist at best, I don't believe God told him to donate his money... but guess what the reason he gives isn't important. At least it isn't to me.

One of the biggest differences between the left and right is their view of government efficiency vs private sector efficiency.

I think this gets off on a different tangent but an interesting one that is up for debate perpetually. ,

 

[lawpoke87]

I don't disagree with you that raising your children correctly is an important way to benefit society, but I think there is also a responsibility to maintain certain requirements as to minimum levels of societal contribution that are necessary to keep society functioning and "well regulated". I think there are quite a few powerful people who have already subverted the needs of society to save themselves money via installing tax loopholes or lobbying for tax cuts when we know our society is already in debt and that debt is growing. They argue that the savings they garner will trickle down but we never see that and the debt keeps going up.

I don't think everyone pays their fair share given the natural gifts they have been given.

I appreciate your contributions. I will ask, and not accuse mind you, was any of that made for tax purposes?

I contend there is no better way to maintain a minimum societal contribution than to put effort into properly raising your children so they contribute to society and subsequently set that example for them and their kids. The poverty cycle is well known. There's also a success cycle which parents are often the most important factor.

Most the successful people I know have been given very few natural gifts. They work hard long hours and earn most those gifts. They take risks and make sacrifices. 9 in 10 at least have earned everything they have.

There are very few people who actually lobby for tax cuts or who play a part in the drafting of the tax code. Less than 1/10 of 1% of even the top 10% of tax payers. I don't personally know a single person.

I had $465 in donations (goodwill) listed on my 2017 personal return. I believe I was allowed to use about half of that.
None of the remaining qualified although my company's name is associated with a number of those programs....so I might have benefited with some goodwill. Maybe I need to call Trump's accountant

 

[URedskin54]

I held the door open for someone today. I believe that earned me 5 heaven points. Unfortunately I cursed at her under my breath after she didn't say thank you. -10 heaven points

 

[astonmartin708]

I contend there is no better way to maintain a minimum societal contribution than to put effort into properly raising your children so they contribute to society and subsequently set that example for them and their kids. The poverty cycle is well known. There's also a success cycle which parents are often the most important factor.

Most the successful people I know have been given very few natural gifts. They work hard long hours and earn most those gifts. They take risks and make sacrifices. 9 in 10 at least have earned everything they have.

There are very few people who actually lobby for tax cuts or who play a part in the drafting of the tax code. Less than 1/10 of 1% of even the top 10% of tax payers. I don't personally know a single person.

I had $465 in donations (goodwill) listed on my 2017 personal return. I believe I was allowed to use about half of that.
None of the remaining qualified although my company's name is associated with a number of those programs....so I might have benefited with some goodwill. Maybe I need to call Trump's accountant

I think a couple really greedy people (dem or pub) can ruin it for everybody. The rich buy the votes they need to alter the tax code how they desire.

 

[astonmartin708]

I held the door open for someone today. I believe that earned me 5 heaven points. Unfortunately I cursed at her under my breath after she didn't say thank you. -10 heaven points

You should check out The Good Place, if you haven’t already.

 

[lawpoke87]

I think a couple really greedy people (dem or pub) can ruin it for everybody. The rich buy the votes they need to alter the tax code how they desire.

Unless you’re talking about the ultra-rich (top 1000 or so) most of the top 1% simply pay their taxes. To be in the top 1% you need to earn $390k per year. There are 1.4M of those taxpayer. Those people pay more in taxes than the bottoms 90% combined. They aren’t in a position to take advantage of the specific loopholes available to the 1000 is so ultra rich. If you’re upset because their not paying all you think they should then that’s one thing. However, the effect of those loopholes on total federal tax receipts is very very small and have almost no bearing in our debt.

In short...I don’t understand how that few people are ruining anything for anybody. The numbers don’t bear out to a significant difference imo.

 

[astonmartin708]

Unless you’re talking about the ultra-rich (top 1000 or so) most of the top 1% simply pay their taxes. To be in the top 1% you need to earn $390k per year. There are 1.4M of those taxpayer. Those people pay more in taxes than the bottoms 90% combined. They aren’t in a position to take advantage of the specific loopholes available to the 1000 is so ultra rich. If you’re upset because their not paying all you think they should then that’s one thing. However, the effect of those loopholes on total federal tax receipts is very very small and have almost no bearing in our debt.

In short...I don’t understand how that few people are ruining anything for anybody. The numbers don’t bear out to a significant difference imo.

They may pay more in taxes but like you said, they probably aren't paying enough. How much do they earn compared to the bottom 90% per year?

 

[lawpoke87]

They may pay more in taxes but like you said, they probably aren't paying enough. How much do they earn compared to the bottom 90% per year?

The top 1% paid an effective tax rate of 27.1%. The bottom half of taxpayers paid a 3.5% tax rate. (These are people who actually paid taxes). The bottom 90% paid an average effective rate of less than 10%.

The top 50% of taxpayers paid over 97% of all income taxes.