Skip to comments.Republicans vote to destroy marriage (vanity)
Posted on 12/31/2012 7:25:58 AM PST by GreaterSwiss
Per drudge the tax deal would be 400k for Indiv and 450k for family. So why get married? Two single taxpayers would in theory have 800k limit ala Andrew cuomo and his gf. Obama's base is single people.
Also in France they overturned their tax law for this very reason!
Good point, but they have done this all the time. They always have a slightly higher level for married couples.
Bush tax cuts aimed to fix this. It is now completely out of whack. The savings by not marrying for two individuals will add up
Also with inflation rich at 400k won’t be for long
There is no tax benefit.. There is a tax penalty!
Don’t forget the penalty when you try to get OUT of a marriage!! It’s more lucrative (and fun) to stay single!!
Ultimately the goal is to destroy marriage and the natural family and replace it with the state.
Breathe breathe there buddy, that hype’s gonna make you pass out.
Smoke some doobie and say 20 Ron Pauls.
The Libertarian party is never going to be the dominant party in America.
Sarcasm is not consistent with conservative principles.
Say 10 Our Bushes and write 10 emails demanding the death penalty for 1oz of pot.
But not best for society in the long term.
So why are homosexuals fighting for the “right” to get married? Let them, they have the money—let them pay higher taxes.
Per drudge the tax deal would be 400k for Indiv and 450k for family.See, there's no difference between the parties. /s
Social acceptance mostly. And making employers extend benefits to their friends with benefits.
Check the ROTH IRA rules....very similar.
Its a disadvantage to me be married.
Married people can file separately. No tax advantage for being single.
you are not consideringing diffent means of tax filings.
the 450 is for only one person working. This is the housewife credit.
If you have a housewife you get a 50k bump.
I hope they go with the republican 550 proposal.
In order to punish Bible-believing Christians who don’t agree with them.
Lord getting married has tons of benefits but taxes should NOT be one of them. I say flat tax for all and that is a married guy with four kids speaking. I don’t know why I should get tax breaks for having kids as well. Let’s bring in a 20 percent flat tax and watch our economy thrive like never before.
I think a big part of the reason why so many are buying into state recognized ‘gay marriage’ is that they have been conditioned to think the institution is simply a collection of benefits and strictures from the state that can be broken and resumed between any parties as the state deems fit. Which pleases the statists no end, the more folks rely on the state, the more control they have.
Homosexualists want ‘gay marriage’ recognized by the state so they have way to punish those who are never going to buy into it.
Easy answer is that homosexuality is a mental illness so it’s only illogical for them to get married to somebody or something, or whatever.
Let's say the fundamental organizing principle among humans is the family.
Designate a family. Add up its profits. Divide by the number of members. Tax each one on that.
Let's say humans have no fundamental organizing principle ~ a theory currently popular with leftists. In that case it does not matter how you allocate income or taxes ~ just collect what you can get and run with it.
Or, let's say society does not need any fundamental principles ~ best bet is to forget about taxes and go find some firearms and ammunition to see you through the coming dark ages.
It gives homosexuals the chance to be real patriots, get married, and share in the tax system’s marriage penalty
Nice that the second partner’s income in a marriage is only worth $50K for tax favor
I like your tax scheme, though with a flat tax it wouldn’t work. One raising the next generation of society is contributing to the perpetuation of society—those who deliberately avoid contributing ought to contribute some other way, or those who do contribute in this way ought to be exempted or reduced in their contributions in some other way, which amounts to pretty well the same thing.
As much as I agree with you, that time is over as the takers are now in control.
“deliberately avoid contributing ought...”
With the flat tax, at least the one I would propose, there is no avoidance. Everybody pays something. Even if they have to take a loan.
There is contributing money now and there is also contributing well-raised individuals who will contribute in the future. Many people manage to avoid raising descendents who will amount to anything. A flat tax would need to be tweaked to encourage people to do anything about that.
I dont know why I should get tax breaks for having kids as well.
Because you are being responsible and raising up the next generation. Don’t think of it as you getting a tax break, it’s more a case of your children getting first dibs on your income until they become producers as well.