(full site)
Fark.com

Try out our new mobile site!


Back To Main
   Now that I know exactly what the "fiscal cliff" will cost me personally, I'm suddenly much more interested

13 Nov 2012 10:17 AM   |   12743 clicks   |   New Jersey 101.5
Showing 1-50 of 170 comments
Refresh Page 2
View Comments:
Matthew Keene     
This country is in the tank, and everyone knows it!

13 Nov 2012 10:20 AM
Trashy     
What a "Physical" Cliff may look like..
3.bp.blogspot.comView Full Size

13 Nov 2012 10:20 AM
Trashy     
Got nothing....

13 Nov 2012 10:21 AM
The Muthaship     
No more than $505k. Got it.

13 Nov 2012 10:21 AM
ajgeek    [TotalFark]  
I'm okay with this.

13 Nov 2012 10:25 AM
TofuTheAlmighty     

Let's get this out of the way right now since Republicans are going to the mat to block higher taxes on the wealthy:

Extending all expiring tax provisions other than the cut in the payroll tax and indexing the AMT for inflation- except for allowing the expiration of lower tax rates on income above $250,000 for couples and $200,000 for single taxpayers-would boost real GDP by about 1¼ percent by the end of 2013. That effect is nearly as large as the effect of making all of those changes in law and extending the lower tax rates on higher incomes as well (which CBO estimates to be a little less than 1½ percent)

Extending all of Bush's tax cuts = 1.5% growth in GDP
Extending rate cuts on income

13 Nov 2012 10:25 AM
HAMMERTOE     
The 47% have no problem with it, I suppose.

13 Nov 2012 10:26 AM
MindStalker     
This will save us more money than closing a million planned parenthood's.

13 Nov 2012 10:26 AM
spentmiles     
From my perspective, we need to let the fiscal cliff play out. Then again, I do bio-hazard clean up after suicides, so I might be biased.

13 Nov 2012 10:27 AM
TofuTheAlmighty     
Huh, some of my post disappeared:

Extending all of Bush's tax cuts = 1.5% growth in GDP
Extending rate cuts on income under $250K= 1.25% growth in GDP

13 Nov 2012 10:28 AM
Amos Quito     

Matthew Keene: This country is in the tank, and everyone knows it!


www.richgibson.comView Full Size



No it isn't.

13 Nov 2012 10:28 AM
gweilo8888     
FTFA: "Top 1% ($506,210 and above) 120,537

Unless, of course, you're fiddling it so that you're not actually paying the tax rate you're supposed to, or for that matter, any at all.

/I'm looking at you, Mittens

13 Nov 2012 10:29 AM
Basily Gourt     
Make your own tax cut.

Barter.

That is all.

13 Nov 2012 10:30 AM
Znuh     
Do it. The Bush tax-cut programs have been proven not to work. I'm very OK with going back to Clinton-era tax rates. The Repubs are again blowing their own weird brand of unreality:

The tax rate under Nixon was 70% for the highest bracket; you did not come under 39% until you made less than $28,000 as a couple or $14,000 individually. Here's some history:

Eisenhower 91%
Kennedy 91%
Johnson 70%
Nixon 70%
Ford 70%
Carter 70%
Reagan 28%
Bush, G.H.W. 31%
Clinton 39.6%
Bush, G.W. 35%

A whopping 4.6% raise. Fark the House for its fear and doom.

/do_it.jpg

13 Nov 2012 10:31 AM
madgonad     

HAMMERTOE: The 47% have no problem with it, I suppose.


I suppose you are too dumb to realize that the fiscal cliff DOES impact the working poor which pay a higher percentage of their income in payroll taxes than I do.

13 Nov 2012 10:31 AM
TheStag     
Who is this 'Fiscal Cliff' and why does he have so much control of my taxes? Can't we just find him and kick his a$$ or something?

13 Nov 2012 10:31 AM
sycraft     
Ya I'm ok with this. While paying higher taxes isn't fun, it is needed. We need to increase the amount we pay. In fact, as in indicated by the temporary nature, we paid this amount not too long ago. I'm fine with my taxes going up.

13 Nov 2012 10:32 AM
The Muthaship     
Is Obama still going to lower the corporate tax rate?

13 Nov 2012 10:32 AM
Prevailing Wind     
Upper Middle 20%er here. I'm ok with this. If I wanted to live in a third-world hell hole, I would expatriate. Since I don't, I'm willing to pay what we need to pay in order to keep this collective enterprise we call America on sound financial footing and still providing the protections, services, and opportunities that make this a pretty kick ass place to live.

The surreal degree of hypocrisy exhibited by you conservative aholes who constantly want something (a safe and decent country to live in) for nothing (no taxes) just boggles my farking mind.

Where's your farking bootstraps people?

13 Nov 2012 10:35 AM
Thunderpipes     

sycraft: Ya I'm ok with this. While paying higher taxes isn't fun, it is needed. We need to increase the amount we pay. In fact, as in indicated by the temporary nature, we paid this amount not too long ago. I'm fine with my taxes going up.


Take all the bush tax custs away, we are still not even close to tackling the debt, and all we do is stall growth.

13 Nov 2012 10:35 AM
Zeb Hesselgresser     
Let it happen, Captain

13 Nov 2012 10:36 AM
thurstonxhowell     
How did you find out exactly what it would cost you subby? I can see what it would cost the average person in my income quintile, but that's quite a bit different than exactly what it would cost me.

13 Nov 2012 10:36 AM
ausfahrk     
So $110K is the top of "upper middle class"? I'd better go wake up the slaves so they can carry me and my solid-gold Lamborghini to the country club.

13 Nov 2012 10:36 AM
MadHatter500     
I love the way that they bias the top quintile (108k and up). Having gone through my records in no way did I "gain" 14k of cashflow from the bush tax cuts being implemented. I remember being unimpressed with how much extra money I got in my paycheck each month - about $250 if I am doing my simple math correctly. Let's just say I felt about the same impact from the change in FICA the last two years. What whould have been much more useful is a "range" statement showing how it varies over each quintile. But then I'm interested in understanding, while TFA is interested in generating rage clicks.

13 Nov 2012 10:37 AM
HAMMERTOE     

madgonad: I suppose you are too dumb to realize that the fiscal cliff DOES impact the working poor which pay a higher percentage of their income in payroll taxes than I do.


The amount that the "working poor" pay is totally negated by the Earned Income Credit, which only the "working poor" are typically able to take advantage of.

13 Nov 2012 10:37 AM
smitty04     
Higher taxes on income below $250,000=$279,000,000,000
Higher taxes on income above $250,000=$52,000,000,000

Tax on the middle class really adds up.

13 Nov 2012 10:37 AM
Thunderpipes     

Prevailing Wind: Upper Middle 20%er here. I'm ok with this. If I wanted to live in a third-world hell hole, I would expatriate. Since I don't, I'm willing to pay what we need to pay in order to keep this collective enterprise we call America on sound financial footing and still providing the protections, services, and opportunities that make this a pretty kick ass place to live.

The surreal degree of hypocrisy exhibited by you conservative aholes who constantly want something (a safe and decent country to live in) for nothing (no taxes) just boggles my farking mind.

Where's your farking bootstraps people?


Successful people already pay almost all the taxes. What you want, is no more successful people. Nothing but envy and dumbassery. How stupid is it of you to imply conservatives don't want to pay any taxes? We just don't want to pay crippling taxes so you and yours get free stuff and sit around.

13 Nov 2012 10:37 AM
DingleberryMoose     

sycraft: Ya I'm ok with this. While paying higher taxes isn't fun, it is needed. We need to increase the amount we pay. In fact, as in indicated by the temporary nature, we paid this amount not too long ago. I'm fine with my taxes going up.


I'm not. Trim the spending. Government will spend more than it taxes in through taxation either way, so limit taxation and limit the amount of bullshiat money spent by the government.

13 Nov 2012 10:38 AM
madgonad     
I also don't think Americans want unemployment to go down.

No, seriously, the country is just fine with unemployment this high. We could drop unemployment to 2-3% if we all collectively decided to actually buy shiat made in this country.

13 Nov 2012 10:38 AM
Amos Quito     

Znuh: Do it. The Bush tax-cut programs have been proven not to work. I'm very OK with going back to Clinton-era tax rates. The Repubs are again blowing their own weird brand of unreality:

The tax rate under Nixon was 70% for the highest bracket; you did not come under 39% until you made less than $28,000 as a couple or $14,000 individually. Here's some history:

Eisenhower 91%
Kennedy 91%
Johnson 70%
Nixon 70%
Ford 70%
Carter 70%
Reagan 28%
Bush, G.H.W. 31%
Clinton 39.6%
Bush, G.W. 35%

A whopping 4.6% raise. Fark the House for its fear and doom.

/do_it.jpg



I say we impose a 100% tax on everyone and everything, and then create a caring, compassionate government bureaucracy that will fairly distribute to each according to his need.

It's the only reasonable solution.

13 Nov 2012 10:39 AM
tkwasny     

sycraft: Ya I'm ok with this. While paying higher taxes isn't fun, it is needed. We need to increase the amount we pay. In fact, as in indicated by the temporary nature, we paid this amount not too long ago. I'm fine with my taxes going up.


If the fedgov confiscated every penny made over $250K, by everyone making over $250K, it runs the govt for about 93 days. The problem is spending (bleeding) not taxes (big enough bandaid).

13 Nov 2012 10:40 AM
madgonad     

Thunderpipes: sycraft: Ya I'm ok with this. While paying higher taxes isn't fun, it is needed. We need to increase the amount we pay. In fact, as in indicated by the temporary nature, we paid this amount not too long ago. I'm fine with my taxes going up.

Take all the bush tax custs away, we are still not even close to tackling the debt, and all we do is stall growth.


You mean 'borrow growth', which is perhaps the dumbest idea ever. Currently, about 7% of our GDP is borrowed, which means if we balanced the budget our GDP would shrink by AT LEAST that much.

13 Nov 2012 10:40 AM
fireclown     
I suppose it is now time to throw out my challenge. Any meaningful cuts will have to be significant, and painful. Instead of complaints and snark (our stock in trade, I know), what would we suggest as solutions? I'll start:

- Reduce defense spending by 3% across the board.
- Move the social security tax cap from 100K to 250K
- Allow the Bush Tax Cuts to expire
- Decrease the payback rate of SS by 2% for individuals with net worth of over 5M

13 Nov 2012 10:40 AM
Amos Quito     

gweilo8888: FTFA: "Top 1% ($506,210 and above) 120,537

Unless, of course, you're fiddling it so that you're not actually paying the tax rate you're supposed to, or for that matter, any at all.

/I'm looking at you, Mittens



Tax laws are written by politicians.

Politicians are wholly owned by rich farks.

Who do you suppose tax laws would favor?

13 Nov 2012 10:41 AM
Nightsweat     
I'm more concerned about the cuts in Pentagon spending. I mean, we're only spending the GDP of Switzerland every year on defense. If we reduce our spending to the level of the entire GDP of Saudi Arabia or Sweden, then the terrorists have won.

13 Nov 2012 10:43 AM
Amos Quito     

madgonad: Thunderpipes: sycraft: Ya I'm ok with this. While paying higher taxes isn't fun, it is needed. We need to increase the amount we pay. In fact, as in indicated by the temporary nature, we paid this amount not too long ago. I'm fine with my taxes going up.

Take all the bush tax custs away, we are still not even close to tackling the debt, and all we do is stall growth.

You mean 'borrow growth', which is perhaps the dumbest idea ever. Currently, about 7% of our GDP is borrowed, which means if we balanced the budget our GDP would shrink by AT LEAST that much.



The good news is that most of that is "borrowed" from the Federal Reserve", which means we're just procrastinating hyperinflation.

13 Nov 2012 10:43 AM
ImpendingCynic     

Thunderpipes: Take all the bush tax custs away, we are still not even close to tackling the debt, and all we do is stall growth.


So you're saying America was never prosperous until George W. Bush came along?

Or are you saying if we can't fix a problem 100% let's not do anything?

I guess you could just be saying "I'm a whiny partisan hack."

13 Nov 2012 10:43 AM
Abe Vigoda's Ghost    [TotalFark]  

gweilo8888: FTFA: "Top 1% ($506,210 and above) 120,537

Unless, of course, you're fiddling it so that you're not actually paying the tax rate you're supposed to, or for that matter, any at all.

/I'm looking at you, Mittens


Don't like the tax laws? Then vote people in that will change them.
While Romney may have payed around a 15% tax rate, it was not illegal.

Get over it. He lost.

13 Nov 2012 10:43 AM
Phelon Hardtimes     
Middle 20%.

Let's do this.

13 Nov 2012 10:44 AM
Day_Old_Dutchie     

TheStag: Who is this 'Fiscal Cliff' and why does he have so much control of my taxes? Can't we just find him and kick his a$$ or something?


img826.imageshack.usView Full Size


Well, you see, Norm, it's like this. A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it's the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members.In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Now, as we know, excessive intake of alcohol kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine.

And that, Norm, is why you always feel smarter after a few beers.

13 Nov 2012 10:44 AM
Amos Quito     

Nightsweat: I'm more concerned about the cuts in Pentagon spending. I mean, we're only spending the GDP of Switzerland every year on defense



The Swiss must be pissed!

13 Nov 2012 10:45 AM
The Irresponsible Captain     
toyotachinook.files.wordpress.comView Full Size


OH NO!

... But really,
img115.imageshack.usView Full Size

13 Nov 2012 10:46 AM
smitty04     

Amos Quito: I say we impose a 100% tax on everyone and everything, and then create a caring, compassionate government bureaucracy that will fairly distribute to each according to his need.

It's the only reasonable solution.


Soon you have no one working. What would be the point. Forced labor camps would be the only solution, it worked in the USSR.

13 Nov 2012 10:46 AM
JackieRabbit     
Bullshiat. Here we go with a new media hype-blitz. There's no way my tax is going up $14,173 next year.

This is all just political theater, folks. They're gonna strike a back-room deal, the nasty details of which we will not know until it is too late.

13 Nov 2012 10:49 AM
PunGent     

fireclown: I suppose it is now time to throw out my challenge. Any meaningful cuts will have to be significant, and painful. Instead of complaints and snark (our stock in trade, I know), what would we suggest as solutions? I'll start:

- Reduce defense spending by 3% across the board.
- Move the social security tax cap from 100K to 250K
- Allow the Bush Tax Cuts to expire
- Decrease the payback rate of SS by 2% for individuals with net worth of over 5M


Solid start.

Legalize and tax marijuana, and we're golden.

13 Nov 2012 10:49 AM
Snort     
Congress cannot not spend money. There is no reward for not spending money.

For the last 30 years, they have been unteathered from the reality of not spending more than you take in.

They put in all these limits and cliffs in an attempt to discipline themselves and then move them when they get there.

And Ryan is just as bad. He pretends to do something that, in reality, is doing nothing.

13 Nov 2012 10:50 AM
GORDON     
Some people knew about that before that article made FARK.

Some people knew all of that a long time ago.

13 Nov 2012 10:52 AM
thurstonxhowell     

JackieRabbit: Bullshiat. Here we go with a new media hype-blitz. There's no way my tax is going up $14,173 next year.

This is all just political theater, folks. They're gonna strike a back-room deal, the nasty details of which we will not know until it is too late.


The whole point of this information is that it is what happens if they don't strike a deal. They probably will make some kind of deal, but that has exactly zero effect on these numbers.

13 Nov 2012 10:55 AM
dennysgod     
Middle 20%, $38 a week. Not much of a cliff, more like an uneven step.

13 Nov 2012 10:57 AM
meat0918     
I'd love if they said If you fall in this tax bracket this is how you'll be affected instead of saying "The average increase in your taxes is $3,500+, but the majority of people will pay much less than that."

It's bullshiat designed to do one thing, make Joe Schmo think his tax bill is gonna go up that full $3,500.

13 Nov 2012 10:57 AM
Showing 1-50 of 170 comments
Refresh Page 2
View Comments:
This thread is closed to new comments.


Back To Main

More Headlines:
Main | Sports | Business | Geek | Entertainment | Politics | Video | FarkUs | Contests | Fark Party | Combined