Puerto Rico... 51st state?

[ellis]

Maybe I'm blind and can't find it... but I could've sworn we had a thread about this topic from the 2012 election.

So to anyone that doesn't know, Puerto Rico had a referendum on their ballot about statehood. It passed with 61% support.

Here's the latest, as of today.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/05/politics/ ... index.html

White House weighs in on Puerto Rican statehood vote

After more than 800,000 Puerto Rican voters said they want the island to become the 51st U.S. state, the White House is calling on lawmakers to take action.

"Congress should now study the results closely, and provide the people of Puerto Rico with a clear path forward that lays out the means by which Puerto Ricans themselves can determine their own status," White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters this week.

[LJF]

no thanks.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/27/busin ... ted=1&_r=0

[Hype]

Texas should just pay for Puerto Rico's pensions.

[LJF]

Texas should just pay for Puerto Rico's pensions.

sure just add that onto all of the other debt this country has. You know just tax the rich they don't pay enough.

[ellis]

here we go...

[Hype]

Yeah fuck those people on an island! They're different than the rest of Americans, for some reason, and everything's just fine the way it is, even if it's not, and even if my own beliefs would entail changing things the way those fucktards I think I'm supposed to disagree with say we should!

[creep]

Texas should just pay for Puerto Rico's pensions.

why don't you guys take them? it will be like your "hawaii" but a lot shittier. you canadians could use some warm waether and sun. it will be good for you.

[Hype]

Texas should just pay for Puerto Rico's pensions.

why don't you guys take them? it will be like your "hawaii" but a lot shittier. you canadians could use some warm waether and sun. it will be good for you.

We already have Cuba.

There are DIRECT flights from Prince Edward Island to Cuba... PEI only has like 100,000 people, and their airport looks like a farm. So... just like Cuba.

[SR]

Texas should just pay for Puerto Rico's pensions.

sure just add that onto all of the other debt this country has. You know just tax the rich they don't pay enough.

No, they do not....

http://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/1972----.htm

[LJF]

Texas should just pay for Puerto Rico's pensions.

sure just add that onto all of the other debt this country has. You know just tax the rich they don't pay enough.

No, they do not....

http://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/1972----.htm

so you think it would be a good idea to add more to this countries already fucked up situation. We can tax people 100% but if the government out spends the revenue coming in where does that leave us.

So great increase taxes on the "rich" which earning $250k really isn't "rich" in a lot of areas of this country and at the same time increase our spending. To me that doesn't seem smart.

Move the top bracket to 39%, which Obama says he wants to do to bring it back to the Clinton era. Well what about the 3.8% they will pay for obamacare? That will bring them to above Clinton era taxes. Also add in state tax, property tax and whatever else. I'd say they are paying their fair amount. But clearly I'm in minority here.

I just don't see how adding PR as the 51 state helps anything.

[Hype]

Dude, LJF, I don't know how you've managed to stay so brainwashed, but you say some really silly stuff.

So great increase taxes on the "rich" which earning $250k really isn't "rich" in a lot of areas of this country

That's simply false. $250,000 a year is more money than nearly anyone on this board, in the United States, and on this planet generally, will ever make.

Your perspective seems really fucked up, like maybe you're one of those trust fund kids who doesn't understand money but has more of it than they know what to do with. It's really weird.

And you don't seem to understand that raising the highest bracket doesn't affect high income earners very much at all.

[LJF]

Dude, LJF, I don't know how you've managed to stay so brainwashed, but you say some really silly stuff.

So great increase taxes on the "rich" which earning $250k really isn't "rich" in a lot of areas of this country

That's simply false. $250,000 a year is more money than nearly anyone on this board, in the United States, and on this planet generally, will ever make.

Your perspective seems really fucked up, like maybe you're one of those trust fund kids who doesn't understand money but has more of it than they know what to do with. It's really weird.

And you don't seem to understand that raising the highest bracket doesn't affect high income earners very much at all.

Sorry not a trust fund kid at all. You really seem to enjoy talking down to people. Like your view point is the only one that matters and all things AS are right. Take a step down from your perch. I think I would know what "rich" is where I live and it isn't "rich". I'm not saying it isn't a lot of money to make, but in certain areas it really isn't. Warren Buffet seems to be someone that the president likes to hold up as someone to listen to and even he said it should be $500,000 because $250,000 really isn't rich.

You talk like you know everything, but you really don't. Come live in the NY metro area or around parts of California and you will see that making $250k doesn't make you rich. Not saying you can't survive or do well, but it sure isn't rich.

Who are you to say that raising someone's tax won't affect them? If someone is making $250k and not able to save anything, if you raise their taxes well what does that do to them? Trust me I deal with this every day and would know a lot better what this will do people. I see people's cash flow and it isn't pretty, so adding anymore taxes will hurt them.

I'm not saying that this country doesn't need to bring in more revenue, but $250,000 isn't the mark. I'd say it is closer to $500k.

So no I don't think making PR the 51 state is a smart move. Unless Texas wants to leave and form it's own country with PR. Let them at it.

[kv]

i don't care where you live 250k is rich and i live in so cal

[Hype]

i don't care where you live 250k is rich and i live in so cal

$250,000 a year is more money than nearly anyone on this board, in the United States, and on this planet generally, will ever make.

LJF is basically just protecting his own interests again. I don't begrudge him that, so long as he isn't saying things that are false, but here he's just willfully demanding that we change the meaning of "rich" to suit his interests.

Under [Obama's] plan, Americans who make more than $250,000 a year — the top 2 percent of taxpayers — would see their tax rates go back up next year to the levels from the Clinton years

Explain to me: A) how the top 2% aren't rich; and B) how raising the highest marginal rate by 3% would have any significant effect on their ability to pay for their holiday home and their BMW?

Also, note the following:

A law passed in 1917 made Puerto Ricans U.S. citizens. But the Caribbean island's roughly 4 million residents cannot vote for president
Under its status as a commonwealth, Puerto Rico is subject to U.S. federal laws, though island residents are exempt from some federal taxes. Puerto Rico has a nonvoting representative in Congress.

First of all, it seems absurd that some American citizens aren't being afforded full rights. Second, LJF seems not to have noticed that if they got Statehood, my joke about Texas paying for their pensions would be moot, since they wouldn't be exempt from some federal taxes anymore and may be forced to pay for more stuff themselves. I used Texas in what I said because Texas is already a net provider of revenue to the Federal Government. Ironically, Texas probably IS already subsidizing Puerto Rico.

[SR]

Texas should just pay for Puerto Rico's pensions.

sure just add that onto all of the other debt this country has. You know just tax the rich they don't pay enough.

No, they do not....

http://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/1972----.htm

so you think it would be a good idea to add more to this countries already fucked up situation. We can tax people 100% but if the government out spends the revenue coming in where does that leave us.

So great increase taxes on the "rich" which earning $250k really isn't "rich" in a lot of areas of this country and at the same time increase our spending. To me that doesn't seem smart.

Move the top bracket to 39%, which Obama says he wants to do to bring it back to the Clinton era. Well what about the 3.8% they will pay for obamacare? That will bring them to above Clinton era taxes. Also add in state tax, property tax and whatever else. I'd say they are paying their fair amount. But clearly I'm in minority here.

I just don't see how adding PR as the 51 state helps anything.

It's a MARGIN tax on 250K and above....I hope you know what that means. It means that only everything over 250k is taxed at an advanced rate. Oh, and I have a lurking suspicion you didn't even read my favorite Singer essay of all time.

[Essence_Smith]

I'm just gonna say if you're making quarter of a million a year and you aren't saving a dime of that, then let me know where the party is...

Most people I know and yes I do know a good number of people who make that and beyond just through work alone, are fairly responsible with their money to where the proposed increases are not irking them like they seem to irk the politicians, etc...its become a bullshit way for people to justify a lot of other bullshit imo...I'm not saying that if they raise taxes for the "rich" its going to help the little guy...but I can't see a tax increase for a guy making 30 grand a year helping out very much...

I also live in NY...a good number of my friends live on the Upper East side of Manhattan...they make 6 figures, yadda yadda...I don't know if they're rich, but around 50% of this country is around 30-40 grand a year no? If you're making a few times that then I dunno what you call rich LJ, but that is FAR FAR FAR from broke...

[LJF]

Never said a family making $250k is broke, but they aren't living a super lavish lifestyle. They can live well, but in certain areas it isn't that much. Cost of living is ver different.

Yes I know how the taxes work and no SR I haven't had a chance to read it yet.

[LJF]

I think I'm going to start my own country. I already live in my own world, so I started from the top now I need to work backwards.

[Hype]

Call me when you start that country so I can get my house ready for you to seek asylum at the outset of the first invasion.

[Hype]

Never said a family making $250k is broke, but they aren't living a super lavish lifestyle. They can live well, but in certain areas it isn't that much. Cost of living is ver different.

A family making $250,000 is not what we are talking about. Those are incomes of $125,000 each, and since couples can file either jointly or individually... there's no problem here.

And by the way, even a family making $250,000 is upper class, though you would be right that they are not subject to these "tax the rich" concerns, and so your point is moot.

And yes, they would be living a very nice lifestyle indeed. I should know. most professor couples I know make somewhere close to, but less than, that, and they live very comfortable, well-off lifestyles.

Like I said, I think your idea of "rich", and now "super lavish" is seriously tweaked... I don't know who your friends are, but seriously... it ain't the norm.

[mockbee]

The word 'rich' doesn't mean anything if it only encompasses less than 1% of the population. Maybe if you were in some third world country that makes sense but not in America.

LJF, what is wrong with the tax rates we had under Clinton when the economy was humming? Income taxes have been uncommonly low for well over ten years now and squat has happened. The rates have little to do with business development, they only have to do, very marginally, with the lifestyles of the rich, that's it. When you say that shit about individuals earning over $250,000 cutting back, it just makes my skin crawl.

Are we going to deal with the deficit or not????

I'd say lets go off the cliff if Republicans can't concede a dime on tax rates. Go to Clinton era rates, let them buy BMWs, no more Rolls Royces.......

[Hype]

Hey, you know who's rich? The top 20%. Quintile disparity's been fucked up worse than ever since the 80s.

[LJF]

I already said we need more revenue, but we also need to cut spending. Correct me if I'm wrong and I might have missed something but Obama is talking about raising taxes and then more spending. If they are serious about this they have to do both. Also raising the taxes on the top 2% alone isn't going to do shit for the deficit.

They can tax people at 100% flat tax, but if they spend more than they bring in it doesn't solve the issue. Why pin this all on the republicans. They have started to agree to raise taxes, but the dems don't want to cut spending. You can't just tax, tax and tax some more.

A family of 4-5 making $250,000 living were I live isn't rich. You would live well but you would still need to watch what you spend. To me "rich" means you don't really have to think about what you spend. Look $250k is great don't get me wrong, but it doesn't go as far as you think around where I live. You aren't living the country club lifestyle.

All I hear is tax, tax tax, where is the cut the spending?

If you want to go back to Clinton taxes move top bracket to 36 from 35, add in the 3.8 for obamacare and you have the Clinton tax rate.

[Hype]

I don't understand how I can have a post in which I point out that:

A family making $250,000 is not what we are talking about. Those are incomes of $125,000 each, and since couples can file either jointly or individually... there's no problem here.

And by the way, even a family making $250,000 is upper class, though you would be right that they are not subject to these "tax the rich" concerns, and so your point is moot.

And your response either doesn't understand what I'm saying there, or you didn't see my post, or you're stupid... I don't know which it is, though I'd prefer, given how our conversations go, to refrain from attributing this lapse to the latter.

Why are you still talking about families of five making $250,000?

If you want to go back to Clinton taxes move top bracket to 36 from 35, add in the 3.8 for obamacare and you have the Clinton tax rate.

But the Affordable Care Act is a new thing. They didn't have it in the Clinton era. We need more money, not the same amount of money and more services.

[LJF]

Obama says he wants to raise the tax on households making $250k or more.