"Especially when it's Israelis saying it. They use the same slogan, is it anymore "inclusive' coming from them?"

Nope.

Israel's long-term problem, once it has solved the "from the river to the sea" problem, is getting rid of the extremists within their own country. At the moment, they seem to revere the Haredim.

For those that want to occupy Palestine, I recommend they try and Occupy Palestine, TX. See how well that works out, given that the Haredi refuse military service and generally lack the balls for any sort of wetwork.

It would appear that it's not a lot different on the left.

"From the river to the sea" is not exactly a call for inclusivity.

#22 I'm hearing that even the TSA Pre-Check at ATL is hours long. Clear has been shut down.

I was supposed to have been travelling from LAS to FRA tomorrow AM. Global events altered my travel plans.

I got lucky, I suppose.

#11

Are you familiar with a drummer named Paul Leim?

BTW, Europe is chock full of different healthcare policies. It's not like the US has to start from scratch.

"THAT's who'd suddenly turn against the idea, and join a coordinated effort among a whole bunch of wealthy interests: Insurance, Pharma, Hospitals, etc."

That would be me. I might be the only person here who has been subject to a government-operated healthcare system.

I don't remember it being that bad before COVID, but from spring of 2020 until I retired in August of 2023, the US military healthcare service was almost useless. Appointments for non-flyers were non-existent. You would just go to the ER at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center. Even for me as a flyer, appointments had to be made weeks in advance.

Then I retired, getting a private plan through Cigna Global. On the Tuesday after I retired, I called the general provider I had chosen. They asked if I could come in Thursday. I started laughing because it seemed so crazy.

I'm not against a government plan for those who want it, any more than I am against people who want to fly Spirit Air because it is cheap. But don't expect First Class service unless you're willing to pay first class prices. And that seems to be a big rub. That the quality and timeliness of the person buying the first-class ticket should be the same as that of the person buying the Spirit Air ticket.

"Hell, I can create a situation where someone is bringing in $46,000,000 and paying NO income tax. But if I represent that as routine...well, I've left out the salient part, haven't I?"

That's why the reported numbers are averages.

I've also noticed you're making no attempt to argue the data presented, why?

"His claim is off by almost 200%. That's one big-effing hair!"

Do you disagree with the Tax Foundation's data? Cool. Refute it.

And Eberly is right, you are getting emotional about this. Why?

"Read his statement; nothing about a spouse or kids. Just regurgitated crap, based on a table he didn't understand."

The enlighten me.

Does Table 1 not say that the average tax rate for the bottom 50% of taxpayers, or those making less than $46,637, is 3.3%?

Yes or no?

"And you're welcome to challenge his version with your version."

It's not my version, it's the IRS's version. It's the Tax Foundation's version.

I can't honestly take credit for their work or bear any responsibility for mistakes they have made.

But I have yet to see Danforth present a contradiction to any data provided in the study.

...Other than he may think it is unfair. What I must assume he is doing is providing a "critical" assessment of tax policy, where the study is not to present a picture of what the tax structure is, but to provide a subjective analysis on what it should be. That's fine. Just don't conflate subjectivity with objectivity.

"I'm not hurt; I'm insulted by the stupidity. Especially from someone who claims to have training on the subject."

Are you saying that you're smarter than the group from the Tax Foundation that penned the article?

Isn't your background in art or theater or something?

"Back to the issue at hand: The standard deduction for a single 40 yr old is $15,750. Any taxable income above that number pays income tax. Claiming people who make $46,000 pay no income tax is insulting..."

Maybe I wasn't clear. They do pat taxes. The average tax rate for the bottom 50% of income earners is 3.3%. Obviously, that excludes FICA. Those are unavoidable. So, including FICA, the minimum average tax rate for the bottom 50% could not be less than 9.5% for federal taxes. For someone sitting at the cut line for the top 10%, it would be 29.15%.

FICA taxes end at $184k, so those above 10% see a diminishing effect of FICA taxes.

"Not to me; to the readers. Like any publisher making a mistake."

I didn't publish the article. The Tax Foundation did. Any issues you have with the data is with them and them alone. And if you think it is wrong, show something that contradicts it.

So what data in this article do you think is inaccurate?

How normal is this? Two weeks ago, it happened near where I live in Germany, damaging some houses. Then it happened a few days later in Cleveland or something.

Is this a common occurrence? Like every week?

"retract and apologize" is required by someone who can't process a disagreement. That's why they have the audacity to request an apology."

As much as I'd like to say it's my data, that I did the legwork, it's not. The data comes from the IRS. This is almost like a moon-landing denier demanding that NASA retract their position that they put on a man on the moon, and then apologize for it.

And if the data is wrong, cool. It happens. Correct it.

I'm looking for an explanation of how anyone without valid entry credentials could enter the US via air. They check your passport before they let you on the plane at point of embarkation. At least that has always been the case for me.

And why couldn't CBP just as easily detain them at Passport Control?

I did hear that ICE is now assisting TSA agents at airports with long lines and high wait times.

"Because the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classifies the refundable part of tax credits as spending, the IRS does not include it in tax share figures. The result overstates the tax burden of the bottom half of taxpayers."

"Because the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classifies the refundable part of tax credits as spending, the IRS does not include it in tax share figures. The result overstates the tax burden of the bottom half of taxpayers."

"He owes a retraction. His statement was demonstrably false. His response was, proof is on a different page. It wasn't."

A retraction of what? It's not my data. I'm simply providing the information provided by the Tax Foundation, which they pull from the IRS.

Let's do this. You can provide some IRS data that paints a different picture. How about that?

"OK ... in that case, table one doesn't say what you're saying. Not even close."

Table 1. Look at Income Split Point. $46,637. I rounded up. Is that really a problem?

"Are you going to Retract and apologize?"

Apologize? Like I wronged you or something.

I'll acknowledge I was incorrect if you can show me that I was.

"What do you do, monitor the DR until a thread about income inequality gets posted and you jump in to cheerleader for the wealthy?"

I don't know why you are so desperate to make the rich poorer. It's not like you're going to get anything out of it, other than maybe the satisfaction of making someone poorer.

"Sorry MB, I looked at both things you posted and saw nothing about folks making $47,000 and not paying income taxes."

Yeah...I posted the wrong thing. Table 1.

"Unrealized capital gains should be taxed, past some extreme high threshold that most of us will never surpass."

Out of sheer envy?

Would you stop taxing realized capital gains?

Would the government reimburse people for unrealized capital losses?

Real-World example. I bought Peloton in 2020 at $48 per share. It peaked at $151 per share. Some kid got sucked under a Peloton treadmill, and the share prices plummeted. I sold at $38. Today it trade at $3.84 per share.

Had I bought a million shares at $48 ($48M), in December of 2020 I would have held $151M is what you would refer to as unrealized capital gains. Had I been taxed, let's say 10%, my tax bill would have been $10.3 million. So I pay it. A few months later, the value of my investment is worth $38 million, and I sell. Would I get that $10.3 million I paid in unrealized capital gains back?

And the bill for billionaires would be much larger than advertised. Billionaires don't have billions sitting in a checking account, which means they would have to sell off some of their assets, presumably having to pay taxes on that, since they would now be realized capital gains.

"What "news" outlet told you income taxes don't start until after $47,000?"

'Tis all in the article I posted.

I hear the Russians are bringing oil into Cuba. Buy it from them.