Stop allowing republicans to play with our toys!

[Electrophil]

So..... This is the gibberish this republican puke is spewing:

http://www.house.gov/upton/press/press-03-30-06a.html


And here's what they are really doing.

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/US_Congress_drafting_bill_that_may_affect_Internet _freedoms

Anything to make a buck, huh?

The democrats threw up an amendment to strengthen the network neutrality portion, and the republicans shot it down. Why? AT&T didn't like it.

By the time these flakes get thrown out of office, it may just be too late. We will truly be a police state. It's truly time we stop allowing them to play with our toys.

[Noir]

So..... This is the gibberish this republican puke is spewing:

http://www.house.gov/upton/press/press-03-30-06a.html


And here's what they are really doing.

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/US_Congress_drafting_bill_that_may_affect_Internet _freedoms

Anything to make a buck, huh?

The democrats threw up an amendment to strengthen the network neutrality portion, and the republicans shot it down. Why? AT&T didn't like it.

By the time these flakes get thrown out of office, it may just be too late. We will truly be a police state. It's truly time we stop allowing them to play with our toys.

time to move. :p

[Electrophil]

Sweden did just add "W" to their alphabet. It's a start. :)

[Manarius]

It's a shame. This administration has proved and continues to prove that it's big business' personal ***** (lapdog).

[Electrophil]

Exactly.

If they get to the internet, it will be the last freedom they haven't touched. The last one..... I'm sure they'll give it a friendly sounding name like the "Patriot act", but they will hand it over to big business, and we will be at their mercy.

What bothers me the most, is if that particular business in control doesn't like a particular group....or gets political pressure against a group, they will be able to bottleneck the site down to unusable at the flick of a switch. The freedom of the internet will just turn into another propaganda tool.

For most of us, the abortion thing really doesn't matter, but it's a done deal.. It's just going to take a few years to reach the supreme court from South Dakota. The inheritance tax.. oops "death tax", well... that just increases our debt, and raises normal American's taxes a little, no huge problem, and something that doesn't really affect our day to day lives in the middle class.

But the patriot act? The alienation of the world we've experienced? These mysterious phone tappings? And now control of the internet? These things hit us Americans at the core of our basic principals, and the bad news is, we haven't even felt the punch of it all yet.

The republicans have screwed up too much to survive the next election. That means we will no doubt end up with a democratic house and a democratic administration. That's not going to be good either. We have to get back to a balance somehow, and I really feel sorry for the next groups up to bat, because they are going to have to fix all of this.

The tax cuts? Stand by.... We have to pay that loan back along with huge interest payments in a few years.... and that's regardless of who is sitting in the power seats.... we can't keep up with these huge deficits for too many years, for the ratio with our GDP is going to end up on the wrong side. The extremely bad news is, over half of the cuts went to wealth, and they never give it back. Way too many loopholes to hide in if you are wealthy. Middle class doesn't have that option.... So open those wallets! We'll survive it.

But if the corporations gain control of the internet, we are over. Our new found frontier of information is lost worldwide. No one will be able to reverse it like they can on other screw ups. History shows if you lose a freedom, you never gain it back without complete revolution.

I am just so ticked off. These guys give me a couple of weeks to cool off from their last antics, and they come up with something new to screw us with.

[lhopp77]

The democrats threw up an amendment to strengthen the network neutrality portion, and the republicans shot it down. Why? AT&T didn't like it.

By the time these flakes get thrown out of office, it may just be too late. We will truly be a police state. It's truly time we stop allowing them to play with our toys.

Just to set the record straight. I think you need to get your feelings out of the way and report it like it really is.

The amendment was defeated by a vote of 28 to 8. That is hardly a Republican strong armed vote. It is very obvious that nearly half of the Democrats disagreed with the proposed amendment.

Lee

[mohrds]

Back in the early 90's when I started in the Internet business, providers would block certain types of traffic they deemed to be contradictory to their business model and to reduce bandwith consumption. As the years went by, customers migrated away from these companies and went to providers that didn't restrict access. By the late 90's no provider was blocking anything, the market and the consumers set the standards.

Today is a little different. Dumb people are on the Internet. Dumb people who still think AOL is the same thing as the internet. Dumb people who are allowed to vote. People who don't understand what blocking is and how or if it affects them. People who have never adjusted a MTU setting or even ran a ping.

What this bill is doing to the Internet is allowing wireline providers to do what they have always been able to do; Choose what they carry and what they don't. Net Neutrality is a market effect. Those who want to have it will give their money to providers that offer it. The market will settle out.

What no one talks about on this bill is the side effect it will have on the network infrastructure. You will see companies actually invest real money into building a private infrastructure that is better than anyone else's. Remember back 15 years ago when you had to be on your own cell phone provider's network or else you got nothing? Now you can roam from provider to provider without fear of being charged access fees imposed by the host network. Consumers demanded it and it is here.

ATM fees are slowly going to go by the wayside too. Consumer backlash is already changing the way that ATM networks run. Mergers and reciprocation agreements allow for a credit union member to use almost any credit union's ATM without any fees. Banks will follow suit in the next few years to remain competitive.

If we really want to talk about government screwing the consumer through catering to corporations, we need to look no further than the media industry. Corporate payments to campaign funds brought us the Sonny Bono Copyright
Term Extension Act. Signed into law by the "consumer's guardian", Bill Clinton in 1998 and passed by a majority democratic presence in the 105th congress. True that the congress was overwhelmingly Republican, but most Republicans were not present for those votes :confused: (lazy ass bastards) :mad:

[Electrophil]

Just to set the record straight. I think you need to get your feelings out of the way and report it like it really is.

The amendment was defeated by a vote of 28 to 8. That is hardly a Republican strong armed vote. It is very obvious that nearly half of the Democrats disagreed with the proposed amendment.

Lee


The vote was held at 1:45am. 36 people voted out of 100 which includes 55 republicans, 44 democrats, and one independant. No, the democrats did not disagree, most didn't even know the vote happened until the next day. It's a little trick Delay started with the early morning votes. This is far from the first time.

[Manarius]

Dude, my parents are about middle class (a little above). 1 out of every 10 of their dollars went to the federal government. JUST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT! Where are these tax breaks at as I'm sure as hell not seeing them. I don't know how George W. passed math at Yale, because he obviously didn't learn math. Even a 2nd grader knows that you can't spend more money then you have coming in. It just simply doesn't work like that.

[sicksubie]

Too bad that you didn't pass government class. Congress controlls spending. Blast Bush all you want, but it is the house's fault (and I know that you will now proceed to blast the Republican controlled house) So... go ahead.:rolleyes:

[Phast SVX]

Dude, my parents are about middle class (a little above). 1 out of every 10 of their dollars went to the federal government. JUST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT! Where are these tax breaks at as I'm sure as hell not seeing them. I don't know how George W. passed math at Yale, because he obviously didn't learn math. Even a 2nd grader knows that you can't spend more money then you have coming in. It just simply doesn't work like that.

You obviously dont know what your talking about, as the marginal tax bracket for a middle class citizen will send well more then 1/10th(10%) of your money to them. At the very least tehy are in the 27% bracket.

Also, fiscal policy is passed by congress, suggestions from the presidential office are passed to congress where they are then changed and ratified.. If you are not familiar with monetizing the debt effects the economy im not even going to get into an argument with you about deficit spending, just know yuo have no idea what your talking about. I suggest taking a civics or economics class so that you dont make yourself look like your puking out what some pissed off, uninformed liberal told you is the cause of the debt and/or deficit. If you want to start reducing the debt, then dont complain about how much you or your parents are paying in taxes, then you can start by writing a check; you know you can personally write off as much as you wish at any time ;)
phil

[Manarius]

Dude, I saw the money they paid in Fed taxes on the Fafsa form, it's about 1/10th of their income.

And just so you know, I did pass Government class and I know congress controls spending. However, the Republicans in congress are Bush's personal lapdogs and the Senate Budget Committee is Republican controlled, so all he has to do is propose a budget and they ram it through congress.

[sicksubie]

Oh ok... I see now. On the FAFSA;) . That great little packet that somehow legalizes stealing from one person to pay for another persons college. I love how the Constitution was thrown out the window when they came up with the FAFSA.

[sicksubie]

Dude, I saw the money they paid in Fed taxes on the Fafsa form, it's about 1/10th of their income.

And just so you know, I did pass Government class and I know congress controls spending. However, the Republicans in congress are Bush's personal lapdogs and the Senate Budget Committee is Republican controlled, so all he has to do is propose a budget and they ram it through congress.
Told ya' he would

[Manarius]

Told ya' he would
*sits on the blue side of the bench and is damn proud of it*

[sicksubie]

*sits on the blue side of the bench and is damn proud of it*
First true thing you have said tonight. Congratulations.

[WGJ]

if you are among those whose average income over the last three years was 10 MILLION per year, Bush's tax cuts for the rich SAVED you $500,000 a year! (A little sumptin', sumptin' so you can keep the Land Rover in gas.)
Or 1.5 MILLION IN TAX SAVINGS in just three years!
(A reasonable person could comfortably RETIRE on 1.5 million.)
Those making do with a mere 26 million in annual income actually paid the SAME AMOUNT OF TAX as someone earning as little as $200,000!
Those stats are taken from the GAO's report on the effectiveness (or total lack thereof) of Bush's tax 'breaks'.

On the subject of the 'Great Decider', would someone be kind enough to explain:
1. How Big Oil made a cool TRILLION IN PROFIT last year but I'm still payin' $3.00 a gallon.
2. Why are the prop taxes on a $220k house in Dallas $6500 a year and prop taxes on a $500k house in San Diego less than a third of that?
(And yes it does have something to do with Bush being the former Gov. of Tex)
WGJ
When you've answered these questions I've got lots more.

[Electrophil]

You obviously dont know what your talking about, as the marginal tax bracket for a middle class citizen will send well more then 1/10th(10%) of your money to them. At the very least tehy are in the 27% bracket.

phil


They itemize. That 27% is on taxable income.... which probably works out to about 10% if they are homeowners with a mortgage and less than 80k a year.

[Electrophil]

if you are among those whose average income over the last three years was 10 MILLION per year, Bush's tax cuts for the rich SAVED you $500,000 a year! (A little sumptin', sumptin' so you can keep the Land Rover in gas.)
Or 1.5 MILLION IN TAX SAVINGS in just three years!
(A reasonable person could comfortably RETIRE on 1.5 million.)
Those making do with a mere 26 million in annual income actually paid the SAME AMOUNT OF TAX as someone earning as little as $200,000!
Those stats are taken from the GAO's report on the effectiveness (or total lack thereof) of Bush's tax 'breaks'.

On the subject of the 'Great Decider', would someone be kind enough to explain:
1. How Big Oil made a cool TRILLION IN PROFIT last year but I'm still payin' $3.00 a gallon.
2. Why are the prop taxes on a $220k house in Dallas $6500 a year and prop taxes on a $500k house in San Diego less than a third of that?
(And yes it does have something to do with Bush being the former Gov. of Tex)
WGJ
When you've answered these questions I've got lots more.

I just liked this post so much, I wanted it repeated.

[YellowBird]

I just liked this post so much, I wanted it repeated.

LOFL!

Geesh....I need ten characters to make a post?

[Landshark]

On the subject of the 'Great Decider', would someone be kind enough to explain:
1. How Big Oil made a cool TRILLION IN PROFIT last year but I'm still payin' $3.00 a gallon.
2. Why are the prop taxes on a $220k house in Dallas $6500 a year and prop taxes on a $500k house in San Diego less than a third of that?
(And yes it does have something to do with Bush being the former Gov. of Tex)
WGJ
When you've answered these questions I've got lots more.

1. they are charging $3/gal for gasoline and people are buying it. not too difficult to understand, really. if you don't want to contribute to their profit, don't buy gas. its not your God-given right to be entitled to cheap gasoline. buy an electric car, ride a bike, or take a bus. simple supply and demand.

2. property taxes vary greatly by location. they even vary greatly by community in the same area. why do 1 bedroom apartments in New York City cost more than a big house in Montana? Bush's fault i guess. :rolleyes:

[sicksubie]

1. they are charging $3/gal for gasoline and people are buying it. not too difficult to understand, really. if you don't want to contribute to their profit, don't buy gas. its not your God-given right to be entitled to cheap gasoline. buy an electric car, ride a bike, or take a bus. simple supply and demand.

2. property taxes vary greatly by location. they even vary greatly by community in the same area. why do 1 bedroom apartments in New York City cost more than a big house in Montana? Bush's fault i guess. :rolleyes:
Exactly. Come on Landshark, haven't you figgered it out yet? Everything is Bush's fault:rolleyes:

[WGJ]

1. they are charging $3/gal for gasoline and people are buying it. not too difficult to understand, really. if you don't want to contribute to their profit, don't buy gas. its not your God-given right to be entitled to cheap gasoline. buy an electric car, ride a bike, or take a bus. simple supply and demand.

RESPONSE:1. OK then can we get the 12 BILLION DOLLAR SUBSIDY Bush and congress gave BIG OIL back?
Folks in Lousiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida could really use it.
As far as the GOD given right to cheap gas- I never claimed such a right. I questioned the relationship of record prices to (proportionately greater) RECORD BIG OIL profits, particularly at a time of war. Additionally, if we had the gas tax the Republicans refused to enact we would have been paying more all along - it just wouldn't have gone to RECORD BIG OIL profits... some of the TRILLION would have gone to our Gov't. And God has nothing to do with it...I'm secular.
Oh, yeah, whille you've got all these simple answers, could you please try to explain the $400 MILLION RETIREMENT package for the retiring oil exec?

2. property taxes vary greatly by location. they even vary greatly by community in the same area. why do 1 bedroom apartments in New York City cost more than a big house in Montana? Bush's fault i guess.

RESPONSE:2. When GW became Gov of Texas they had the largest surplus in state history...when Bush left they had the BIGGEST DEFICIT IN HISTORY! No state income tax, hence onerous prop tax increases.
The price of the property is irrelevant. Your example reflects SIMPLE SUPPLY AND DEMAND...which has nothing to do with the TAX RATE. Property tax increases in Texas are directly atributable to Bush's stupid and blind adherence to pseudo Reagan voodoo economics. We're just getting a larger scale screwing than the good folks of Texas. A macro-economic hosing, if you will.

Personally, if I were making 26 MILLION a yr. and paying the same taxes as someone only making 200 thousand...I'd be ashamed. How can you possilbly rationalize that huge discrepancy?

Do you think it's OK to NOT PAY ANY TAXES on 25.8 MILLION in INCOME?

WGJ

[MigraSVX]

Hah, not paying taxes on 25.8mil... Really hard to refute that point.
You have to ask yourself, regardless of your partisanship, because that's not going to change, do the rich deserve to not pay as much in taxes by % of income as the rest of us? As I see it, the case could be made that it is discrimination against the poor. Let's have the rich paying the same 10~27% income tax (As we're not going to agree which it is) that the rest of us are paying. Yeah, 25% of 26million is more than I'll see in a lifetime. Why should the government get it? Because they live in our country. I get the feeling if the same question were asked to our forefathers, that the idea of all men being created equal might be brought up. If you can see the forefathers being opposed to these tax regulations, one could further make the argument that it is unconstitutional, and therefore the Supreme Court's job to overrule it.

Not that I haven't picked sides on each of these issues, but I just wish we didn't have democrats and republicans. Both sides tend to vote along party lines, and are even influenced before their vote based on what side they've signed onto. Sounds like we're not able to pick our leaders by what is most important to us, but by what the party says we should do. Sucks :(

[Manarius]

1. they are charging $3/gal for gasoline and people are buying it. not too difficult to understand, really. if you don't want to contribute to their profit, don't buy gas. its not your God-given right to be entitled to cheap gasoline. buy an electric car, ride a bike, or take a bus. simple supply and demand.
d00d. This is simple supply and demand. Monopolistic competition, when demand is very inelastic, if you raise the price, but keep the same output, people will pay. Gas is an inelastic item, and big oil is milking it for all it's worth.

[mohrds]

When GW became Gov of Texas they had the largest surplus in state history...when Bush left they had the BIGGEST DEFICIT IN HISTORY! No state income tax, hence onerous prop tax increases.
The price of the property is irrelevant. Your example reflects SIMPLE SUPPLY AND DEMAND...which has nothing to do with the TAX RATE. Property tax increases in Texas are directly atributable to Bush's stupid and blind adherence to pseudo Reagan voodoo economics. We're just getting a larger scale screwing than the good folks of Texas. A macro-economic hosing, if you will.

That is the same thing that happend in almost every state. In Wisconsin under a Democratic Governor and Democratic state assembly, we also went from a record surplus to a record deficit.

Plus our property taxes are already the second highest in the nation. Plus we have a state income tax.

[mohrds]

Hah, not paying taxes on 25.8mil... Really hard to refute that point.
Actually it is quite easy. Taxes are based on your adjusted gross income, not gross income. The Kerry's and the Kennedy's only pay taxes on a small fraction of their income. The tax code has loop holes made by the same politicians and their supporters that benefit from it. They create foundations, holding companies, etc. and sell and move assets and income around to keep their adjusted gross income down. Its not affiliated with one party, but with a wealthy class that is politicians and political contributors on both sides of the isles. No political party is any more fair to the common folk than the other party.

For instance, I own 100% of my company. For myself I pay Federal tax, State tax, double FICA and Medicare (half from my check and matching from the company), State Unemployment tax, Federal unemployment tax. Property tax and my favorite tax, Business equipment tax! When you add them all up, 72.56% of what I bill a client goes to those taxes.


You have to ask yourself, regardless of your partisanship, because that's not going to change, do the rich deserve to not pay as much in taxes by % of income as the rest of us? As I see it, the case could be made that it is discrimination against the poor. Let's have the rich paying the same 10~27% income tax (As we're not going to agree which it is) that the rest of us are paying. Yeah, 25% of 26million is more than I'll see in a lifetime. Why should the government get it? Because they live in our country. I get the feeling if the same question were asked to our forefathers, that the idea of all men being created equal might be brought up. If you can see the forefathers being opposed to these tax regulations, one could further make the argument that it is unconstitutional, and therefore the Supreme Court's job to overrule it.

This is why income tax needs to be abolished and replaced with a federal sales tax. The less you spend, the less you pay. The poor buy a used Honda, the rich buy a new Mercedes. Non-prepared groceries would remain untaxed and utilities would become non-taxable.

There would be no need for IRA's 401Ks etc because there is no income tax to deal with. You just invest your retirement money how you see fit and withdraw it whenever you like.

http://www.fairtax.org

[lhopp77]

Those stats are taken from the GAO's report on the effectiveness (or total lack thereof) of Bush's tax 'breaks'.

Would you please provide a link to this important report you reference. I would love to read it. Believe it or not I am open minded and realistic about things even though somewhat pragmatic.

As another thought though, I could give you a few examples of how GAO looks at things. It might be a bit of an eye opener to realize that many of their supposed "savings" are pie in the sky and not real savings.

Lee

[drivemusicnow]

Actually it is quite easy. Taxes are based on your adjusted gross income, not gross income. The Kerry's and the Kennedy's only pay taxes on a small fraction of their income. The tax code has loop holes made by the same politicians and their supporters that benefit from it. They create foundations, holding companies, etc. and sell and move assets and income around to keep their adjusted gross income down. Its not affiliated with one party, but with a wealthy class that is politicians and political contributors on both sides of the isles. No political party is any more fair to the common folk than the other party.

For instance, I own 100% of my company. For myself I pay Federal tax, State tax, double FICA and Medicare (half from my check and matching from the company), State Unemployment tax, Federal unemployment tax. Property tax and my favorite tax, Business equipment tax! When you add them all up, 72.56% of what I bill a client goes to those taxes.

Holy crap! That is rediculous.



This is why income tax needs to be abolished and replaced with a federal sales tax. The less you spend, the less you pay. The poor buy a used Honda, the rich buy a new Mercedes. Non-prepared groceries would remain untaxed and utilities would become non-taxable.

There would be no need for IRA's 401Ks etc because there is no income tax to deal with. You just invest your retirement money how you see fit and withdraw it whenever you like.

http://www.fairtax.org

I AGREE!!!!

I've been asking people why a straight sales tax isn't used for a while.. It would probably save several hundred trees a year as well. (just for those hippies...)

I think it really comes down to all the accountants that would lose their jobs...

[lhopp77]

I would also strongly support a consumption tax (sales tax) as indicated with the basic needs tax exempt. It is the ONLY fair and equitable system.

Lee

[sicksubie]

Property tax increases in Texas are directly atributable to Bush's stupid and blind adherence to pseudo Reagan voodoo economics. We're just getting a larger scale screwing than the good folks of Texas. A macro-economic hosing, if you will.

Personally, if I were making 26 MILLION a yr. and paying the same taxes as someone only making 200 thousand...I'd be ashamed. How can you possilbly rationalize that huge discrepancy?

Do you think it's OK to NOT PAY ANY TAXES on 25.8 MILLION in INCOME?

WGJ
#1 The whole Reagan comment is so moronic that it does not even warrant me wearing out my keyboard getting into it with someone who is already closed minded and cannot be convinced of anything than what they already believe.
#2 I'm embarrassed by people who think that because someone is rich that somehow entitles them to steal a higher percentage from them. Whether you make 10,000 or 1,000,000 or even 10,000,000 the percentages should be the same. Just because someone lucked out in life does not entitle the government to more $$$ from them. What is this, freaking Nottingham? Two of the bigger issues with our tax system is this:
A. The IRS in and of itself is entirely unconsitutional and should be abolished (that alone would save huge $$$). Anybody who has studied this area will understand where I am coming from with that comment. If you don't now is a good time to expand your herizon and learn some stuff about our governmental history.
B. The format of social security. Show me where in the constitution that it says, "And the government shall provide retirement for all" You can look all you want, but I can save you the time and tell you that it's not there. LET ME KEEP MY OWN STINKING MONEY. I can invest it better than they can. Social security was created only to cause dependency on the government and they have been very successful with that. If you screw up and don't save during our life for your retirement will shame on you. I shouldn't have to pay for you to live in Florida.

[mohrds]

Holy crap! That is rediculous.


That's what I say every month when I write out the checks.

[lhopp77]

I would also strongly support a consumption tax (sales tax) as indicated with the basic needs tax exempt. It is the ONLY fair and equitable system.

Lee

[WGJ]

[QUOTE=sicksubie]#1 The whole Reagan comment is so moronic that it does not even warrant me wearing out my keyboard getting into it with someone who is already closed minded and cannot be convinced of anything than what they already believe.

In logic this is known as an ad hominem arguement, calling someone names or questioning intellectual capacity rather than addressing the issue. Used to incredibly good effect by Republicans:
The 'Swiftboat' BS about Kerry. They even used it on their own, John McCain, in N. Carolina. There are numerous odious examples.
As for beinng closed minded, based on what? Another example of ad hominem argueing also known as sophistry. We now call the extreme version of sophistry, "spin". Hard for me to have a reason to change my mind if you can't provide any evidence for your position. If you go to any college in the country and take a course on 'Macro Economics' you will find that almost without exception, Reagan's "trickle down" also called supply-side economic policies, are considered 'moronic' because they DIDN'T WORK.
WGJ

[lhopp77]

Would you please provide a link to this important report you reference. I would love to read it. Believe it or not I am open minded and realistic about things even though somewhat pragmatic.

As another thought though, I could give you a few examples of how GAO looks at things. It might be a bit of an eye opener to realize that many of their supposed "savings" are pie in the sky and not real savings.

Lee


WGJ------STILL LOOKING FOR THAT LINK TO THE "GAO REPORT" THAT YOU ERRONEOUSLY REPORTED AND QUOTED.

You don't have it, do you?????

Lee

[lhopp77]

In logic this is known as an ad hominem arguement, calling someone names or questioning intellectual capacity rather than address the issue. Used to incredibly good effect by Republicans:
The 'Swiftboat' BS about Kerry. WGJ


As I recall, Kerry tried to run on his military record and accomplishments and was called on this by HIS FELLOW SOLDIERS AND COMPATRIOTS--not by the Republican Party. They paid for the ads themselves. Sure, it benefitted the Republican Party, but they did not prepare or run the campaign. Get your facts straight.

Waiting for the GAO Report link. :rolleyes:

Lee

[WGJ]

The economic figures were widely reported in the press from the Wall Street Journal to the Republican San Diego Union, but if you want to read the GAO report don't let me stop you.
The Swift Boat 'crew' was a Republican show from the word go. That's a fact.
There was no substance to any of their allegations. At the very least Kerry sure as hell wasn't AWOL...like Bush. Where was Bush? Certainly not in Viet Nam, Bush has never been in combat of any kind.
I notice you choose to ignore what the REPUBLICAN PARTY did to John McCain in N. Carolina. So by omission are you admitting Republicans occasionally eat their own?
WGJ

[WGJ]

. "The IRS in and of itself is entirely unconsitutional and should be abolished (that alone would save huge $$$). Anybody who has studied this area will understand where I am coming from with that comment. If you don't now is a good time to expand your herizon and learn some stuff about our governmental history."

I haven't done the research to determine if you're correct that, "The IRS in and of itself is entirely unconsitutional" although I think there must be a pretty good arguement there...otherwise why would people go to prison over the issue? Nuts?

But I TOTALLY AGREE that the IRS " should be abolished (that alone would save huge $$$)". For one thing the IRS is the only branch of our Gov't where you are considered GUILTY until YOU PROVE yourself innocent. You have to prove to the IRS that YOU DON'T OWE THE MONEY!

I'm not positive about these figures but they're pretty damned close:

1. The TAX CODE is 60,000 pages long (?)!
2. It costs $140 BILLION in lost productivity for us to PREPARE our tax returns(?)!

That's a hell of alot of money to be pissed away...
THAT'S JUST WRONG!
WGJ

[sicksubie]

[QUOTE=sicksubie]#1 The whole Reagan comment is so moronic that it does not even warrant me wearing out my keyboard getting into it with someone who is already closed minded and cannot be convinced of anything than what they already believe.

In logic this is known as an ad hominem arguement, calling someone names or questioning intellectual capacity rather than addressING the issue. Used to incredibly good effect by Republicans:
The 'Swiftboat' BS about Kerry. They even used it on their own, John McCain, in N. Carolina. There are numerous odious examples.
As for beinng closed minded, based on what? Another example of ad hominem argueing also known as sophistry. We now call the extreme version of sophistry, "spin". Hard for me to have a reason to change my mind if you can't provide any evidence for your position. If you go to any college in the country and take a course on 'Macro Economics' you will find that almost without exception, Reagan's "trickle down" also called supply-side economic policies, are considered 'moronic' because they DIDN'T WORK.
WGJ
Ah, yeah. I am currently taking secondary macroeconomics and will graduate with a double major in Economics and Finance. If I must expound on the Reagan issue fine. I am going to say something that will tick you off, but shoot I think that I have done that already anyway. The Reagan tax-cuts are what fueled the economic boom in the mid 90's. It was the Clinton tax-hikes that stagnated the economy. These are pretty much undebatable questions among economists. There are some extremists though who will do anything to discredit Reagan. My microeconomics prof was extremely liberal and even he said that it was because of Reagan that we had the boom. As you look back over the nations history it is a proven fact that a presidential administration reaps the good and/or the bad of the prior's administration. Or in the case that a president serves 2 terms you are usually seeing some effects by the end of his second term (e.g. the faltering economy over the last 6-8 months or so of the Clinton administration)

[WGJ]

"#2 I'm embarrassed by people who think that because someone is rich that somehow entitles them to steal a higher percentage from them. Whether you make 10,000 or 1,000,000 or even 10,000,000 the percentages should be the same. Just because someone lucked out in life does not entitle the government to more $$$ from them. What is this, freaking Nottingham?"

It's definitely not Nottingham, however, I see a huge difference in someone who makes $26k a yr. paying 10-20% of his income in taxes and someone who makes 26 MILLION paying the same as someone who made $200,000. Even in San Diego I can get by on 25.8 MILLION IN TAX FREE INCOME. How much freakin' income does one need in order to be comfortable? People in the highest income brackets an afford to pay more taxes on their income. Meanwhile Joe Sixpac hourly wage earner pays a disproportionately larger part of his income in taxes reducing the already limited capital he has to do the things necessary to get ahead...like buying a home. Joe Millionaire meanwhile has several homes and taxes have little or no effect on him or his lifestlye. Why? BECAUSE HE'S STILL GOT MILLIONS TO SCRAPE BY ON!!!
Perhaps more of the working poor who could not get out of New Orleans before Katrina hit because they didn't own cars could afford them if they didn't have to pay TAXES!

"Just because someone lucked out in life does not entitle the government to more $$$ from them..."
All the richest people, from Gates to Walton, disagree with the Republican party's burning desire to repeal the estate tax.

"Whether you make 10,000 or 1,000,000 or even 10,000,000 the percentages should be the same."
Bill Gates shouldn't pay a higher perentage in taxes than you?

Taxes need to be on an equitable sliding scale. For starters, if you make less than $30k yr you should be tax exempt.

Now what about the $12 BILLION subsidy BIG OIL got?
How about proper taxation of BIG BUSINESS?

Good night and good luck,
WGJ

[sicksubie]

So, punish the wealthy for becoming wealthy?

[Electrophil]

So, punish the wealthy for becoming wealthy?

No, make the wealthy pay for the most use of our excellent capitilistic system. It's only fair. Pay the maintenance on a Bicycle versus paying maintenance on a Farrari. Luxury should.... automatically... cost more.

If that makes them not want to be wealthy, and they feel punished, they can put out an ad in the paper for someone to take their place. :)

[WGJ]

But it's punishing when you're a wage earner. Do the math...what's 10% of 30K?
Now what's 10% of 26 MILLION?
Who's getting punished?
WGJ

[Noir]

1. they are charging $3/gal for gasoline and people are buying it. not too difficult to understand, really. if you don't want to contribute to their profit, don't buy gas. its not your God-given right to be entitled to cheap gasoline. buy an electric car, ride a bike, or take a bus. simple supply and demand.

2. property taxes vary greatly by location. they even vary greatly by community in the same area. why do 1 bedroom apartments in New York City cost more than a big house in Montana? Bush's fault i guess. :rolleyes:

stop it alan. :mad: your horse logic is making my tiny head hurt. :mad: :cry:

[Noir]

This is why income tax needs to be abolished and replaced with a federal sales tax.

I wouldn't have a problem with taxation if we got something in return for the money we put in.

[drivemusicnow]

So, punish the wealthy for becoming wealthy?


So you don't agree with the current tax structure (which is a sliding scale, with the rich paying a higher percentage than the poor)

You also wouldn't agree with a sales tax based taxation, as that would mean the people who buy million dollar homes pay more in taxes than people who buy hundred thousand dollar homes. (percentage wise)

You're not going to get a "straight" tax of 12% to everyone. That isn't fair, nor logical. Are you going to tax someone who barely makes enough to live off of ($15k a year lets say) the same percentage of their income as you are someone who earns 30 million a year? No, because the cost of living is similar in both cases.

The problem with a sales tax, is that it would probably make people spend less in general. This is bad for the economy, as you would directly see the tax on all of your purchases, rather than just "not getting" money from their paycheck.

Either way, the current tax system is retarded, but the IRS isn't going to make themselves go away. The ability for change in this nation has become so stagnant that the only people who can incur changes are extremists on both ends of the scale. Common sense loses out to screaming retards.

[WGJ]

"Either way, the current tax system is retarded, but the IRS isn't going to make themselves go away. The ability for change in this nation has become so stagnant that the only people who can incur changes are extremists on both ends of the scale. Common sense loses out to screaming retards."

The truth of this comment makes my heart ache. You may have read in my previous post of the enormity of the tax code...it's actually only 30,000 not 60,000 pages. So what? We're the ADD society. So busy trying to make a good living, take care of our families, be good parents, etc etc. Who the hell has time to do all that and read the tax code?
More important, why do our representatives in the Republican Congress pass tax laws that give Big Oil a $12 BILLION tax break or that allows people making $26 MILLION a yr. a break of $500,000 a yr for the last three years? Buy a Hummer for your business and write half of the price off first year of ownership! Who is standing up for the middle class? What will it take to get a simplified, rational tax code?
WGJ

[WGJ]

of an extremely accurate article on the Tax, this will save you the time it would take to read and analyze all the GAO reports:

The Corporate Tax Dodge

by Cassandra Q. Butts
April 10, 2004


The news that more than 60 percent of U.S. corporations failed to pay
any federal taxes from 1996 through 2000 when corporate profits were
soaring and that corporate tax receipts had fallen to just 7.4 percent of overall federal tax revenue in 2003 – the lowest since 1983 and the
second-lowest rate since 1934 – is an outrage. But it should come as no surprise to anyone who has been paying attention to national tax policy over the past few years. The General Accounting Office (GAO) report also found that an astonishing 94 percent of corporations reported tax liability of less
than 5 percent of their total income during the same time period. Corporate
tax dodging has gone on for far too long. But the policies of the Bush
administration have exacerbated the problem by furthering the culture
of tax avoidance by big corporations and creating a pervasive unfairness in
our tax code.

WGJ

[WGJ]

read it and weep...especially if you voted for Bush. That means you did this to yourself...

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=45142

You have my sympathy...Bush fooled a lot of people.
WGJ

[lhopp77]

read it and weep...especially if you voted for Bush. That means you did this to yourself...

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=45142

You have my sympathy...Bush fooled a lot of people.
WGJ

Talk about an extreme far left liberal site. I don't know how you have the nerve to quote this site as an authority on things and yet disparage FOX for being slanted when they are in fact pretty fair and balanced.

I will say it again---I would like a link to the GAO REPORT---not some far left liberals interpretation of excerpts taken out of context.

YOU have MY sympathy for being so easily fooled.

Lee

[WGJ]

Like I said the GAO report was NATIONAL NEWS. If you'd ever even seen a GAO report you'd know better than to ask to see it...hundreds of pages long. And obviously these people LIED LIKE HELL with all those easily verified facts. Perhaps you could find a "right wing" rebuttal, if there was one but there isn't. Sorry you were subjected to having to read what a monumental screw up your boy Bush is but the organisation that wrote the report is progressive in that they advocate a new equitable tax code. How about disputting some FACTS instead of the usual Replublican "attack the messenger" crap. Show me that the Gov's collecting taxes from big business, show me we weren't 311 plus BILLION short collecting from big business. The list of Bush gov't screwups is as long as my arm, the underfunding of tax collection is just one of the lesser known aspects of Bush gov't ineptitude and incompetence.
Get real, do some homework and try to rebutt this 2 yr. old report:

While the more recent corporate tax shortfalls may reflect a weaker economy at the beginning of 21st century, much of it can be attributed to both the Bush administration's corporate tax cuts enacted in 2002 and 2003 and the loopholes in the tax code that have allowed corporations to shelter income offshore. The 2002 and 2003, tax bills cost $177 billion in corporate tax breaks in fiscal years 2002 through 2005, $44 billion in 2002, $53 billion in 2003, $64 billion in 2004 and $16 billion in 2005 (all figures estimated by the Joint Committee on Taxation). Estimates of the cost of corporate tax loopholes have been projected at upwards of $50 billion a year, according to Citizens for Tax Justice.

Obviously Citizens for Tax Justice is a bunch left wing loonies. How would one ever verify these figures? They just made them up to make Bush look bad!

OK so explain this, (Of course we may be waiting some time for a rebuttal based on facts, because this is accurate, LOOK UP THE REFERENCES YOURSELF!):

The Bush administration's responsibility for furthering corporate tax avoidance also extends to its underfunding of tax enforcement at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). In 2003, an underfunded IRS pursued only 18 percent of the abusive tax shelter cases uncovered by IRS agents. As recently as March 30, the IRS Oversight Board released a special report imploring Congress to go beyond the president's 2005 budget request of a 4.6 percent increase in funding for IRS and detailing what it identified as a consistent underfunding of tax enforcement activities during the Bush administration. Despite the 4.6 percent increase, the report found that IRS's enforcement capability would still continue to decrease for the fourth year in a row because the increase inexplicably ignored $230 million in expected cost increases related to pay raises and other required expenses. The report also found that the Bush budget for the IRS would lead to about a half-million unresolved delinquent tax cases and create a national tax gap of $311 billion or 65 percent of the projected 2004 budget deficit.

From the web site of the California Franhisce Tax Board:
As noted above, experts define the tax gap as the difference between what taxpayers owe and what they voluntarily pay. As of 2001, the IRS estimates the national tax gap to be over $310 billion.

I know, the California Franchise Tax Board is also a radical left wing group...

And last but not least, from those crazy lefties over at the IRS, taken directly from the IRS web site:

New IRS Study Provides Preliminary Tax Gap Estimate

IR-2005-38, March 29, 2005
WASHINGTON – The Internal Revenue Service released preliminary results today from a major research project assessing compliance with the tax laws. The study reveals the vast majority of American taxpayers pay their taxes timely and accurately, but the nation still has a significant tax gap.
The preliminary findings show the gross tax gap — which is the difference between what taxpayers should pay and what they actually pay on a timely basis — exceeds $300 billion per year. The results indicate the nation’s tax gap increased slightly to between $312 billion and $353 billion in tax year 2001. This compares to the old tax gap estimate for 2001 of $311 billion based on earlier studies.
(Gosh, what studies were those?)


The people that got fooled voted for Bush, but we're all getting ripped off.
Thank you and goodnight,
WGJ

[Electrophil]

Talk about an extreme far left liberal site. I don't know how you have the nerve to quote this site as an authority on things and yet disparage FOX for being slanted when they are in fact pretty fair and balanced.

I will say it again---I would like a link to the GAO REPORT---not some far left liberals interpretation of excerpts taken out of context.

YOU have MY sympathy for being so easily fooled.

Lee

Lee, you crack me up. I really enjoy your threads. I think you are completely full of shinola, and don't believe a word of your crap, but I sure do enjoy it. :D

Fox is about as fair and balanced as the present administration. It's a puppet mouthpiece, and you know it is. You know it!!

[lhopp77]

Like I said the GAO report was NATIONAL NEWS. If you'd ever even seen a GAO report you'd know better than to ask to see it...hundreds of pages long.

LOL--you did not read my post earlier when I asked for the report. Have I ever seen one??? Well, have you ever been in an agency that was the SUBJECT of one of these GAO investigative actions? I have been in several and am very much aware of how convoluted they are, how they go about doing the investigation, what their motivations are, and how misleading some of the findings can be because of the preceding factors. I am not saying that they are always wrong, but you need to fully understand the area they are looking at before you make a final judgement on the credibilty of the findings. They JUSTIFY their very existence and staffing levels by FINDING supposed problems. I do not even attempt to say that their data is incorrect. The figures will normally be accurate, but the relationships are not necessarily true or a result of cause and effect. If I feel like getting into a long drawn out explanation, I will give you a specific example of first hand experience.

A real short example is the $700 pliers that the Air Force purchased quite a few years ago. They did a scathing report on excessive costs based on materials and manufacturing process costs. Seems ok---right?? And that was all that was reported. What was not mentioned was how the budget system really worked relating to items purchased and research and development costs. The Air Force had to have pliers that were TOTALLY non sparking from either friction sparks or static electricity sparks to be used in refueling aircraft with potential lethal results from ANY sparks. Materials had to be researched and pliers specifically designed for the needs. Needless to say R&D is not free. After the research was done and design was complete--only a few (less than 100) were needed for the 5 year budget cycle. Law requires the military to amortize R&D costs over the first production runs--normally the 5 year cycle. The pliers actually cost less than $100 (which seems expensive but the alloy used was very special and expensive) while the R&D costs were spread over the small production run making the cost appear to be $700. So GAO investigator (inexperienced and lacking total knowledge of the laws and R&D/production system) wrote the AF up for "wasting" $600 for every pair purchased.

I could give you several first hand knowledge examples of the same thing.

Lee

[lhopp77]

Fox is about as fair and balanced as the present administration. It's a puppet mouthpiece, and you know it is. You know it!!

Robert, I challenge you to the same thing as I did WGJ. Do a survey of say 3 hours of any station you choose on hard news reporting and compare it with FOX. (I don't consider Greta hard reporting or even important topics presented on her show) Show the topic AND who the guests were representing both sides of the issue. Fox WILL have both sides represented---the other station will RARELY have both sides represented.

Like I said--give this task to any 12 year old and you will be surprised at the results--no I take that back--you will not be surprised--you already know it but will not admit it. :D

You crack me up to that you totally deny reality. I argue with you here because you are so hard head and blatantly blind liberal. I am actually much more realistic and openminded than you assume me to be.

Lee

[WGJ]

Fox even comes anywhere near "balanced". Hello? Who's the new White House Press Secretary? WERE'D HE USED TO WORK?
Still awaiting for rebuttal of tax gap...
WGJ

[lhopp77]

of an extremely accurate article on the Tax, this will save you the time it would take to read and analyze all the GAO reports:

The Corporate Tax Dodge

by Cassandra Q. Butts
April 10, 2004


The news that more than 60 percent of U.S. corporations failed to pay
any federal taxes from 1996 through 2000 when corporate profits were
soaring and that corporate tax receipts had fallen to just 7.4 percent of overall federal tax revenue in 2003 – the lowest since 1983 and the
second-lowest rate since 1934 – is an outrage. But it should come as no surprise to anyone who has been paying attention to national tax policy over the past few years. The General Accounting Office (GAO) report also found that an astonishing 94 percent of corporations reported tax liability of less
than 5 percent of their total income during the same time period. Corporate
tax dodging has gone on for far too long. But the policies of the Bush
administration have exacerbated the problem by furthering the culture
of tax avoidance by big corporations and creating a pervasive unfairness in
our tax code.

WGJ


In the first place---weren't 1996-2000 Clinton years??

Do some research and see how many corporations fold the first two years of their existence and NEVER make any profits or pay taxes, of course.

Does the 94 percent encompass all corporations INCLUDING the ones that fold or is it only the ongoing profitable corporations. It can be meaningless unless we know what the 94 percent represents.

7.4 percent of total tax revenue by 2003---give us the actual percentages by all years so we can truly see if this is a significant figure.

Tax liabilities of less than 5 percent of revenues? Is this surprising? The IRS can audit them at any time to determine validity of the taxes---it does not necessarily mean that they are not paying all taxes due

Remember that IRS is a huge agency that is NOT controlled by the President.
In my opinion it should be abolished and a consumption tax instituted.

For a current example---are you aware that with the "HUGE PROFITS" currently reported by Exxon that it is only 10 percent of total revenues. Not a huge profit margin--would you agree?

Just what is the proof of the writers "huge tax avoidance" statement other than her own opinion.

Get real WGJ----HOW IN THE HELL IS THIS "AN EXTREMELY ACCURATE" tax report. I agree that the figures might be very accurate, but the result and cause and effect are total speculation and based on opinion--not fact.

Lee

[WGJ]

"But the policies of the Bush administration have exacerbated the problem by furthering the culture of tax avoidance by big corporations and creating a pervasive unfairness in our tax code."

Now for validation from those "dummies" at the IRS who amazingly use the SAME figures:

The results indicate the nation’s tax gap increased slightly to between $312 billion and $353 billion in tax year 2001. This compares to the old tax gap estimate for 2001 of $311 billion based on earlier studies.

Your "Dummy" was "Preznit" in 2001 wasn't he? And, unfortunately still is, right?

WGJ

[lhopp77]

"But the policies of the Bush administration have exacerbated the problem by furthering the culture of tax avoidance by big corporations and creating a pervasive unfairness in our tax code."

Now for validation from those "dummies" at the IRS who amazingly use the SAME figures:

The results indicate the nation’s tax gap increased slightly to between $312 billion and $353 billion in tax year 2001. This compares to the old tax gap estimate for 2001 of $311 billion based on earlier studies.

Your "Dummy" was "Preznit" in 2001 wasn't he? And, unfortunately still is, right?

WGJ

Cheez---you have to think what was going on for tax year 2001.

For the record--yes, Bush was elected in 2000, sworn in-Jan 2001, 9/11 catastrophy 9/11/01.

Remember the DOT.com bubble burst in 2000. The national economic boom of the 90s came to a halt in 2000 and 2001. Six of the eight quarters for those two years saw a real GDP growth of less than three percent with three of the six quarters showing negative growth. The economy began slowly to improve in November 2001 forward.

Also remember that nearly 300,000 jobs were lost in New York due to 9/11 and nearly 2 million nationwide as a result of 9/11. None of this can be blamed on Bush, but IT DEFINITELY HAD A MAJOR IMPACT ON CORPORATE EARNINGS AND TAXES PAID as shown in your article.

Think man-----don't just take some liberals opinion and figures (even though correct) as gospel. Cause and effect----not as the liberal author implies.

Lee

[Electrophil]

Robert, I challenge you to the same thing as I did WGJ. Do a survey of say 3 hours of any station you choose on hard news reporting and compare it with FOX. (I don't consider Greta hard reporting or even important topics presented on her show) Show the topic AND who the guests were representing both sides of the issue. Fox WILL have both sides represented---the other station will RARELY have both sides represented.

Like I said--give this task to any 12 year old and you will be surprised at the results--no I take that back--you will not be surprised--you already know it but will not admit it. :D

You crack me up to that you totally deny reality. I argue with you here because you are so hard head and blatantly blind liberal. I am actually much more realistic and openminded than you assume me to be.

Lee

I'm going to take you up on your challenge, and if wrong, I will openly admit it. It will take some time, for I have a lot of honey-do's I have to get done, work, etc... but if this thread is dead by then, I'll start another or ..(heh.. hijack one :D )

Even though I'm fully sure of the outcome, I will still be totally objective and document with facts, and let the chips fall where they are.

It still doesn't change the fact that Bush IS responsible for his failures, and should be held accountable. That monkey needs to go to jail.

[WGJ]

lhopp77 et al,
Your position that 2001 is an exceptional year because of 9/11 does not hold up to scrutiny. Here is a direct quote from the IRS abstract Titled:

Actions*GAO-06-453T**February 15, 2006
Highlights-PDF PDF Accessible Text

"The Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) most recent estimate of the difference between what taxpayers timely and accurately paid in taxes and what they owed was $345 billion.
Underreporting of income by businesses and individuals accounted for most of the estimated $345 billion tax gap for 2001, with individual income tax underreporting alone accounting for $197 billion, or over half of the total gap. Corporate income tax and employment tax underreporting accounted for an additional $84 billion of the gap. Reducing the tax gap would help improve fiscal sustainability."

Intrestingly, there is no mention of an economic impact on taxes because of 9/11. I thought it a good point but nowhere in anything I've read ( numerous GAO and IRS reports) is 9/11 mentioned. That's just a red herring. Please note the term used is 'underreporting' and nothing about lost income due to 9/11.

HERE IS THE LINK TO THE GAO WEBSITE AND TAX GAP ABSTRACT:

http://www.gao.gov/docdblite/summary.php?rptno=GAO-06-453T&accno=A46959

So Bush is leaving BILLIONS uncollected and apparently is only now starting to increase the IRS's budget so they can enforce the (insane) tax code. There is more than one mention in both the GAO and IRS reports that a simplified code would improve compliance.

In addition to the red herring fallacy please try avoid these in future:

Plurium interrogationum / Many questions
This fallacy occurs when someone demands a simple (or simplistic)
answer to a complex question.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc:
The fallacy of Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc occurs when something is
assumed to be the cause of an event merely because it happened before that event.
For example: The position that 9/11 was a factor in the 2001 tax gap
study. This was also a red herring.

WGJ

[Electrophil]

lhopp77 et al,


Actions*GAO-06-453T**February 15, 2006
Highlights-PDF PDF Accessible Text

WGJ


This is good info, I didn't know this.

[lhopp77]

lhopp77 et al,
Your position that 2001 is an exceptional year because of 9/11 does not hold up to scrutiny. Here is a direct quote from the IRS abstract Titled:

Actions*GAO-06-453T**February 15, 2006
Highlights-PDF PDF Accessible Text

"The Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) most recent estimate of the difference between what taxpayers timely and accurately paid in taxes and what they owed was $345 billion.
Underreporting of income by businesses and individuals accounted for most of the estimated $345 billion tax gap for 2001, with individual income tax underreporting alone accounting for $197 billion, or over half of the total gap. Corporate income tax and employment tax underreporting accounted for an additional $84 billion of the gap. Reducing the tax gap would help improve fiscal sustainability."

Intrestingly, there is no mention of an economic impact on taxes because of 9/11. I thought it a good point but nowhere in anything I've read ( numerous GAO and IRS reports) is 9/11 mentioned. That's just a red herring. Please note the term used is 'underreporting' and nothing about lost income due to 9/11.

HERE IS THE LINK TO THE GAO WEBSITE AND TAX GAP ABSTRACT:

http://www.gao.gov/docdblite/summary.php?rptno=GAO-06-453T&accno=A46959

So Bush is leaving BILLIONS uncollected and apparently is only now starting to increase the IRS's budget so they can enforce the (insane) tax code. There is more than one mention in both the GAO and IRS reports that a simplified code would improve compliance.

In addition to the red herring fallacy please try avoid these in future:

Plurium interrogationum / Many questions
This fallacy occurs when someone demands a simple (or simplistic)
answer to a complex question.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc:
The fallacy of Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc occurs when something is
assumed to be the cause of an event merely because it happened before that event.
For example: The position that 9/11 was a factor in the 2001 tax gap
study. This was also a red herring.

WGJ

You need to read and think---not just let your hatred for Bush lead you into erroneous conclusions just like the article you quoted by CG Butts. You both blame BUSH for the shortfalls and blame it on his "strong pro corporation/big business leaning"

In the first place lets look at the identified shortfall of $345B for year 2001, I SAY AGAIN 2001. This is Bush's FIRST year in office and no new tax laws were in effect for that year. The laws and IRS regulations were from the Clinton years, but I am not sitting here and blaming it on him. Then lets look at the breakout of that $345B. That figure includes both under reporting AND underpaying. Out of the total figure only $32B is from corporations. The remainder is individuals, employment, estate and excise. Again we DO NOT KNOW how this compares with any prior years. HARDLY AN INDICTMENT AGAINST BUSH FOR HIS "PRO BIG BUSINESS" SUPPORT.

You want an example of more erroneous conclusions or statements from the CQ Butts article--well consider this--"Both the GAO study and the historical record support the conclusion that any benefit working families have received from the Bush tax cuts has been more than offset by the additional tax burden they must bear because corporations no longer pay their fair share of taxes."

Any dummy knows that individuals pay taxes based SOLELY on laws applicable to them and whether or not corporations pay less has no bearing on the individual tax liability. DUMB AND ERRONEOUS STATEMENT.

Again, I agree that the tax code needs to be simplified AND even support a consumption tax versus the current system.

WHAT YOU REALLY SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN OUT OF THE GAO REPORT WAS NOT THE REASON FOR THE REPORT, BUT IT IS THE MOST FRIGHTENING!!!!!

I will quote "GAOs long term simulations illustrate the magnitude of the fiscal challenges associated with an aging society and the significance of the related challenges the government will be called upon to address. Indeed, the nation's long term fiscal outlook is daunting under many different policy scenerios and assumptions. For instance, under a fiscally restrained scenario, if DISCRETIONARY spending grew only with inflation over the next 10 years and ALL EXISTING tax cuts EXPIRE when scheduled under the current law, spending for SOCIAL SECURITY and health care programs would grow to CONSUME OVER 80 percent of total federal revenue by 2040."

NOW THAT IS SCARY--and IF your recall Bush tried to do something about it with Social Security reform but was stonewalled and blocked by the DEMOCRATS.

Go back and read the total GAO report and THEN come to some more realistic conclusions other than that the tax code needs to be rewritten--which I agree with.

Lee

[lhopp77]

As a area of interest, you might just compare taxes paid for the most recent years by the Bush family and the Kerry family. You will find that the Bush family paid much more in taxes for far less income than the Kerry family. Most of the Kerry family income is protected and hidden, much of it offshore like the Kennedy assests under LAWS passed LONG BEFORE Bush became President.

Lee

[WGJ]

When the studies were done and what Clinton did are TOTALLY irrelevant. Bush has CHRONICALLY UNDERFUNDED the IRS so they can't enforce the laws. Costing the Fed Gov't HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS in revenue directly because the laws have gone unenforced (just like the immigration laws). Combine the 300 BILLION not collected every year since Bush has been in office w/the tax breaks given the wealthiest citizens and you've got HUNDREDS of BILLIONS less income than Bush's gov't is spending.

I REPEAT:
Watched Bush on TV last night laughing at himself. He has lots to laugh at...and even more to cry about. I don't think Bush having a sense of humor brings much comfort to our people in Iraq or Louisiana,Alabama,Mississippi, Florida or New England.

Bush is Commander in Chief. There is a very long list of major f**kups that have happened on his watch, from Iraq to Katrina. If he were the Captain of a ship and ran into a sub or ran aground he would be immediately relieved of command. He should relieve himself of command. He should apologize to the
country and resign, taking Cheney and Rummy with him. I do not know of anyone in a position of authority anywhere in this country that has screwed up a fraction as much and as often as Bush and his admin. and still has their job. Actually many are either in jail or on their way...DeLay et al.
The Enron jerks are going to jail just for stealing money...how many PEOPLE has Bush gotten KILLED and how many BILLIONS pissed away?
Justify his existence...tell me SOMETHING he's done right.

lhopp77,
Respectfully awaiting your response. But try to stay in THIS CENTURY. No more straw man and red herring arguements. And please stop asking me to "think!" If you really want to facilitate a dialogue, present some verifiable facts supporting your position. Show me ANYTHING Bush's has got right and don't bother with his ludicrous attempt at Social Security reform...he shot himself in the foot while trying to shot himself in the head on that one.

WHERE'S OUR NATIONAL HEALTH CARE PROGRAM? At least 45 million people in this country with no health insurance. Medical catastrophe is the #1 reason for personal bankruptcy. How many citizens could you get insured with $300-500 BILLION in taxes uncollected by Bush?
WHY HASN'T BUSH RESIGNED and WHY ISN'T HE BEING IMPEACHED?
WGJ

[Speedklix]

As a area of interest, you might just compare taxes paid for the most recent years by the Bush family and the Kerry family. You will find that the Bush family paid much more in taxes for far less income than the Kerry family. Most of the Kerry family income is protected and hidden, much of it offshore like the Kennedy assests under LAWS passed LONG BEFORE Bush became President.

Lee

I happen to know for a fact that a certain member of the kerry family employees a large number of people and doesn't make unemployment tax payments and such... I'm not sure of how you would go about determining the value of this persons property, but $100 million would be a good place to start. :eek:

I haven't read this thread as I try to avoid all this political junk... but when it takes up soo many lines on the "new posts" screen... Any way. Socialized health care isn't something the republicans are interested in. That was the biggest difference I always saw between the two parties. So I'm not sure why you seem to be saying bush needs to be impeached for a lack of it. Really though it just seems to have been the same message since he won the first election, the reason just sounds different every time. I don't get why everyone has to bicker constantly. Instead of putting soo much effort into complaining at cramming the reasons why they are right and bush is soo wrong down the throats of people that really just don't give ***t and further dividing us.... why not come up with solutions? This is why Kerry wasn't going to get a vote from me. There were no solutions, and the democrat party isn't coming up with any. I'm sorry, but "bush is a lying total loser criminal" just doesn't cut it for me. Want my vote? give me something to vote for. Not reasons why some other guy is wrong.

[Landshark]

WHERE'S OUR NATIONAL HEALTH CARE PROGRAM? At least 45 million people in this country with no health insurance. Medical catastrophe is the #1 reason for personal bankruptcy. How many citizens could you get insured with $300-500 BILLION in taxes uncollected by Bush?
WHY HASN'T BUSH RESIGNED and WHY ISN'T HE BEING IMPEACHED?
WGJ

WHERE WAS OUR NATIONAL HEALTH CARE PROGRAM 10 YEARS AGO? 20 YEARS AGO? 100 YEARS AGO? oh yeah, Bush's fault. :rolleyes:

[Speedklix]

WHERE WAS OUR NATIONAL HEALTH CARE PROGRAM 10 YEARS AGO? 20 YEARS AGO? 100 YEARS AGO? oh yeah, Bush's fault. :rolleyes:

I still clearly remember clinton holding up that card on national television... Guess he should have been impeacehed for the same reason?

[Landshark]

I still clearly remember clinton holding up that card on national television... Guess he should have been impeacehed for the same reason?

its frickin' amazing - people will blame Bush for ANYTHING and EVERYTHING. :D :D :D


my lower back is hurting a bit.........i blame GW.

[Electrophil]

Well, there are reasons why dubya has a 60% disapproval rating. Maybe he inherited that from Clinton also. Of course Fox keeps saying he will be "vindicated in History". No... more stuff will come out in history.

A couple of you guys can hold out as long as you want, and say Clinton caused this, and Bush inherited that if you want. But it's not working anymore. It's all flowing down the tubes. He's made way too many horrendous mistakes. The opposing party is just biding time until closer to the election.

This is going to be THE most mud slinging election cycle in the history of our country, and 32% (and dropping) of you will be screaming and crying on how ugly it all is, and how detestable the opposing party is. Of course, the opposing party will be thinking "Flip flop? Swift boat? Fonda shots?" and they will continue as planned, for they have so much ammunition this time around, it's going to be "pick and choose".

The republicans have had since 1994. I'm ashamed to say I was one of those on the band wagon waving that republican flag for change. They blew it. They spent their time battling Clinton over anything they could find, putting out idiotic documentaries on how many administrators have died during Clinton's term, and wasting time over oral sex lies like this really mattered in the scheme of our world. They then went straight into worshipping an idiot and an Industrial crook, sticking straight to the party line instead of using common sense. They blew it.

The country is about to kick them out. For better or worse? Who knows? It's going to take 6 or 7 years just to straighten out the budget now. It's going to hurt extremely bad, and we will all hate them. But is there a choice at this point? Since the debt....not the deficit... but the debt has doubled during Bush's 5 years, we are past the GDP threshold now. It has to be fixed.

When the country kicks them out with an overwhelming majority, we promise to just shrug when the few remaining scream at us that we are soooooooo far left. :) Pardon us as we say "Fight fire with fire", cause we certainly don't want to be. Being moderate and passive is how our country allowed all this to happen.

Remember the far right and the far left have always went to the extremes, the problem now is the republicans have ticked off the moderates so badly, they've slung them to the far left.

[Antigenus]

.............

[Antigenus]

The funny thing is, a democrat/liberal cant prove anything they believe in works or makes common sense. You basically play on fears of morons, cater to the uneducated and poor and misguide those who are backing your party based on a lifelong affiliation with the democrats party (when the democratic party had conservative views I.E. JFK) just to put yourself in office then you get nothing done and complain republicans are ruining the country and stopping you from saving our country over night with some silver bullet that will solve all the problems of the country. No thanks for me, I enjoy tax cuts, a strong military, CUTTING OF ALL SOCIAL PROGRAMS, hopefully a social security overhaul and shutting down of the borders. I hope today (May 1st=Illegals Walkout Day) results in the firing of 1000's of illegals who refuse to show to work, and hopefully the arrest of more than that. PLEASE KICK THESE LEECHES OUT OF MY COUNTRY. 12 million people cleaning up on every social program we offer = the largest slice of our tax pie in about 5-10 years. If you vote democrat or are a democrat you are simply a fool, you are uneducated and yes you have been used to solely put dems in power that will never do anything for you. I didn't even bother reading half of the mindless blabber and b*tching from the lib(s) above, just enough to annoy me, but this schooling on the basics and most important items is enough to show you whats really important, and if you still don't get it then please just don't vote and cancel the vote of people who make better decisions for you...right? just like the democrats make your decisions? Let me do it for you, I swear you'll thank me.
What is this? Do I see blame on Bush for the gas prices? Please, PLEASE don't tell me youre that stupid. The federal gov't taxes 16 cents on unleaded, and 24 cents on diesel. Subtract that from your local gas price and you will notice that its still OUTRAGEOUS. That because we don't control the price of oil!!! Wow, we barely handle any of our own oil, but we name our own price and then mark it waaay up to hurt our own people and make Bush rich right? Just do some reseach and quit babbling out of your a$$ especially in areas where you are completely misinformed.
Bush isnt my role model either. He spends like one of you liberals. He is too liberal and isn't stiff about the border problem and illegals already here. He is at best a moderate, where o where is my Ronald Reagan when we need him.:D

[Speedklix]

He is too liberal and isn't stiff about the border problem and illegals already here. He is at best a moderate, where o where is my Ronald Reagan when we need him

He does have some pretty libral moments, and he isn't my role model either. I generally agree with you on the way it seems that the majority of libral voters are just used for the intrest of the few and at the cost of the majority. I really wish you wouldn't say their opinion doesn't count though, because I feel like that is what they scream all day at everyone that doesn't back them 100%.

To be fair though, we all think it at some point... regaurdless of how we vote.
I really think the big diff between the two really comes down to socialization... all this other stuff everyone complains about everyday, it doesn't matter. It is all just a bunch of nonsense. People selling bs to reach their ends, and others buying into it.

[Antigenus]

I have a hard time listening to the voice of people who want handouts and try and force a society that acts as Robin Hood and trys and spread the wealth of others whethers its through hardwork or family fortune, its YOUR MONEY; no one deserves to touch that, under any circumstance unless its for the following BARE MINIMUMS: 1.) military 2.) public schools (bare operating cost)

Everything else should be privatized. This fosters the proper operating cost, because it makes the enviroment a supply/demand enviroment. This will cut frivolous spending and outrageous misuse of our tax money which is MINE and YOURS, people never see the money and can part with it easily. Imagine actually paying out the hard cash to all these idiots who dont support their kids (save me the crying about they can't succeed) properly so I have to pay for their lunch, I have to pay for your healthcare and my own, I pay for your foodstamps, your afterschool care, then I have a teacher who *****es when shes paid $40,000 after a few years, full health/dental, and works 9 months at most out of an entire year. Seriously F off. I can on and on and on about the travisty the democrats did to this country, and our society only needs the government for protection. The private hardworks will always flurish, will always beat the suppression the liberals enact on them, and hopefully extinct this disease we call liberalism.

FYI - I heard a rancher talking about having a hardtime hiring illegals in texas to do construction labor for $15 an hour fulltime. If illegals can find a job for $15/hr and you cant support your kid, you are pathetic and should be neutered.

[Speedklix]

Funny. While reading your post I started recalling how this country grew.

BTW, you wouldn't want to know how much some teachers I know make here. (it is a little more)

[lhopp77]

Noncollection and nonpayment of taxes IS a problem. But, I am sure that nearly everyone on here that itemizes or has any type of cash income has over reported deductions and under reported income.

HOW IS BUSH TO BLAME FOR THAT??

Again we do not know by comparison to other years the significance of this 2001 since a study like this has not been done since 1988. Below is another finding included in the GAO reports and congressioanl testimony that indicates that it has been a growing problem over the years and not attributable to the much hated and maligned GW Bush.

"Enforcement. The IRS should dedicate more resources to enforcement, including auditing and collecting taxes that are owed. IRS audits of high-income individuals have dropped dramatically over the past decade. The audit rate for face-to-face audits fell from 2.9 percent of high-income tax filers in fiscal year 1992 to 0.38 percent in fiscal year 2001 and then drifted down to 0.35 percent in fiscal year 2004. At the same time, less in depth correspondence audits have rebounded since fiscal year 2001."

Hardly an indictment on Bush. Note the reductions during the Clinton years.

It might be worth it to note here that $55B of the "estimated" $345B shortfall has already been collected and collections continue.

An interest statement concerning the problem included in the IRS report.

"The largest source of the tax gap is the “cash economy,” taxable payments that are not required to be reported to the IRS by third parties. Employers, for example, send W2 forms to the IRS to report the wages paid to their employees, and banks and financial institutions send 1099s to report interest, dividends, and proceeds from the sale of financial assets. But payments to contractors and tips, for example, only need to be reported by the recipient of the payment. As Olson explains, “Where taxable payments are reported to the IRS by third parties, the IRS generally collects well over 90 percent of the tax due. Where taxable payments are not reported to the IRS by third parties, compliance drops precipitously to a range from about 20 percent to about 68 percent, depending on the type of transaction.”[3] In particular, the noncompliance rate ranges from 1 percent for wages, salaries and tips to 57 percent for small business income and 72 percent for farm income."

Again, we are primarily talking about individuals, small companies and farms owned by individuals or small partnerships. Not big business.

Now quit blaming Bush for every ill or perceived ill in our great country. Stand up and tell me---that you have never cheated by a dollar on reporting your deductions or income? How many of you have made cash money and not reported it????

Lee

[WGJ]

If you use the same criteria that was used to try to impeach Clinton shouldn't Bush be gone already?

Bush is Commander in Chief. There is a very long list of major f**kups that have happened on his watch, from Iraq to Katrina. If he were the Captain of a ship and ran into a sub or ran aground he would be immediately relieved of command. He should relieve himself of command. He should apologize to the
country and resign, taking Cheney and Rummy with him. I do not know of anyone in a position of authority anywhere in this country that has screwed up a fraction as much and as often as Bush and his admin. and still has their job. Actually many are either in jail or on their way...DeLay et al.
The Enron jerks are going to jail just for stealing money...how many PEOPLE has Bush gotten KILLED and how many BILLIONS pissed away?

Justify his existence...tell me SOMETHING he's done right.

WGJ

[Speedklix]

The above post is EXACTLY what I am talking about. We've already read this. Word for word in fact.

How about the tax cut. I know a lot of SMALL businesses that managed to raise their employee's salary and offer healthcare as a direct result. But that is fup apparently because some rich people got ahead too. :rolleyes: The same people who dump more cash into the economy and privately fund new small startup businesses.

Oh, look! Now you have me defending him too.

[Electrophil]

This thread is going in about 6 different directions. Given' me a headache.

No. I have never cheated on my taxes. What am I going to cheat on? Throw $400 worth of bogus medical expenses at the top of a schedule A? That should decrease my taxes by a whopping $12. I can't take mileage. No justification. I don't make that much anyway. I'm an electrical engineer, not a construction worker hanging out in a union. Supply and demand.... and all our demand is now with US companies in India. Nobody told me I'd make more money drinking beer and slinging a hammer... but that's a different gripe.

No, the bottom line is, most Americans don't make enough to cheat properly. That's left to the corporations with their headquarters down in Bermuda. Back to the original concern. It's a lot easier to cheat if you're pulling in a few million a year.

As for Matt's comments, I agree with most of it, especially the free-loaders. But teachers? Come on Matt, you didn't think that one out before your fingers went slamming on the keyboard. Leave em' alone. If they have a master's, they should be earning alot more than $40k. Nobody handed them that degree, regardless of the major. How much does a union electrician make? I'd say better than 40k regardless of where they are in this country.

Heck, a good 70% of my property taxes go to the schools, and I haven't any kids. Doesn't bother me. It falls under that "good cause" category. edgumakashun is kewl!

[Electrophil]

If you use the same criteria that was used to try to impeach Clinton shouldn't Bush be gone already?

Bush is Commander in Chief. There is a very long list of major f**kups that have happened on his watch, from Iraq to Katrina. If he were the Captain of a ship and ran into a sub or ran aground he would be immediately relieved of command. He should relieve himself of command. He should apologize to the
country and resign, taking Cheney and Rummy with him. I do not know of anyone in a position of authority anywhere in this country that has screwed up a fraction as much and as often as Bush and his admin. and still has their job. Actually many are either in jail or on their way...DeLay et al.
The Enron jerks are going to jail just for stealing money...how many PEOPLE has Bush gotten KILLED and how many BILLIONS pissed away?

Justify his existence...tell me SOMETHING he's done right.

WGJ

I like this post so much, I want Speedklix to read it a third time. :D

[WGJ]

A driver is stuck in a traffic jam on the highway and nothing is moving. Suddenly a man knocks on the window. The driver rolls down his window and asks "What happened?"
"Muslims have kidnapped Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and George Bush! They are asking for a $10 million ransom, otherwise they are going to douse them with gasoline and set them on fire! We are going from car to car, taking up a collection!"
The driver asks "How much is everyone giving, on average?"
"Oh, about a gallon."

WGJ

[Electrophil]

The driver asks "How much is everyone giving, on average?"
"Oh, about a gallon."

WGJ

There is no way to convey just how hard I'm laughing. :D :D

[Speedklix]

I like this post so much, I want Speedklix to read it a third time. :D

Good luck with your movement, I'll see ya when your party comes up with some plan for the country that isn't simply blame someone and boil them. I actually am a middle of the road guy unlike people on here that claim they are. I look for good solid ideas that help people, not bickering and Monday morning quarterbacks.

I'll leave you with this though... lets say you did impeach Bush... Who exactly did you think was going to replace him? Are you familiar at all with the presidential succession?

[WGJ]

that Bush and his administrators have screwed the pooch. In the order I happen to think of them. Hard to keep track... And while I'm thinking of it, since I still have not gotten a cogent response to my previous question, "Why does Bush still have a job?" I've been meaning to ask those who keep referring to Moore's evil 9/11 movie this question:
If the movie is a preverification of the rankest sort, chock full o' lies, how is it no law suit was or has EVER even been FILED against Moore for libel, slander or defamation of character etc etc? It's not like there's a lack of Republican lawyers.

The List - I encourage additions...1 can't keep track of all the f**kups. Here's a few:

1. Insufficient IRS budget- 100's of BILLIONS uncollected.
2. Rich people shouldn't have to pay taxes - Big cuts for everyone making millions! Yay! Someone making $26M pays the same as people making $200K.
3. No child left behind- No white child left behind, little funding left anywhere.
4. Unilateral start of Iraq war - Daddy told him not to do it.
5. No post invasion occupation plan/Insufficient troops according to Powell and Zinni.
5. Bremmer- disbanding Iraqi army etc etc
6. Brown - "Hurricane, what hurricane? How's my new suit look?"
7. Chertoff - "What do you mean I need to send food and stuff to New Orleans?"
8. Port security - What port security? "Ya mean, actually look inside the containers?"
9. Immigration - "Papers? Papers! We don' need no stinkin' papers!" Lax immigration enforcement anyone? "OK, all you all millions of illegal Mexicans go home!"
10. Outing CIA operatives and their cover business - Valerie Plame got off easy, the over seas operatives are mostly DEAD!
11. BILLIONS pissed away unaccounted for in Iraq. Thanks Dick!
12. Abu Graihb - a national disgrace and the only senior officer punished, a woman who had no authority.
13. Illegal wiretapping - subversion of our Constitutional rights. Neo facsism anyone? Another national disgrace.
14. Bill Gates showing the leader of the country, China, that we now owe a TRILLION dollars, a more state-like and respectful dinner than Bush. (More national embarrassment)
15. No discussion with China about human rights - see 13. A large helping of hypocrisy gentlemen? Such diplomacy.
16. Condi and Rummy in Iraq - Cute couple. Too bad, they don't talk to each other in private but argue in public. (More national embarrassment.)
17. Darfur - Genocide is painless...'specially when it's on the other side of the world and it's darkies!
18. Bush to Powell - "What did you say Colin? I wasn't paying attention."
19. Bush to Zinni - "We don't need more troops, we need you to retire."
20. France - "That's the ticket, we'll take our immigration advice from France!"
21. 45 MILLION without health insurance...Think some of those 100's of BILLIONS in uncollected taxes could be used for a national health program?
22. Medicare - Why use the power of the gov't's buying power to lower drug costs so old people can AFFORD MEDICINE? "F**K 'EM! Big pharma needs the money!"
23. No gas tax - What would we do with all that extra money? Besides we can't afford a gas tax! Better it should go to Big Oil.
24. After we blow up Nevada we can move on to Iran?
25. Alright!!! A $100 gas rebate! WOW! I can be bought for 2 tanks of gas! Who do I see about joinin' this outfit?
26. "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED", "BRING IT ON" etc,etc and more malaprops (ad infinitum, ad nauseum) than in Professor Irwin Corey's entire career!
27. Why's Cheney's office exempt from reporting what they've classified like every other part of the gov't?
28. Libby - Can you hear the sound of dominoes falling? Fitzgerald smells conspiracy! (sound of Jaw's sound track).
29. Niger - "Uranium? We ain't got no stinkin' uranium!" Cheny and Libby are full of (sh)it. What's new?
30.Tom DeLay - Another national disgrace. The gerrymandering wasn't enough. "More power, Scotty!"
31.Claude Allen - "Money? I don't need no stinkin' money! Except for this mechandise I stold and now want to return for cash."
32. Endless use of the straw man arguement - It's enough to make a Sophist spin in his grave. Just another example of Bush's endless BS. Example:"Some say that if you're Muslim, you can't be free."
33. Haliburton - "What conflict of interest?" - Dick Cheney
34. Republican Ron Paul - Predicts Bush impeachment months ago. What on earth is he thinkin'?
35. Karl Rove - still THE subject in the investigation of outing Plame. Soon to be indicted? (Que Jaws soundtrack)
36. ILLEGAL TORTURE!
37. NEW ORLEANS
38. FLORIDA
39. NEW ENGLAND
40. Sneaking provisions to open up Alaska's Artic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling, in a defense spending bill. Like that'll make a difference.
41. Illegal spying!
42. Terri Schiavo - Talk about shameless exploitation...
43. Phasing out the $2000 tax credit for hybrids but leaving in place the $25000 tax write off for a Hummer.
44. Jack Abramoff - The Indians friend! Those "morons" and "troglodytes" get the LAST LAUGH.
45. Bush's signing statement on the TORTURE BILL.
46. "War Costs Poised To Reach $500B" - CBS NEWS HEADLINE 05 01 06
47. "Nobel Laureate Joeseph E. Stiglitz and Harvard budget expert Linda Bilmes plan to present this week a paper estimating the cost of the Iraq War at between $1-2 TRILLION" - 01 06 06
48. Failure to sign the KYOTO TREATY - "Global warming? What global warming?" More embarrassment.
49. Failure to fund the Army Corps of Engineers levee repairs in New Orleans.
50. Another 1400 plus American troops who will die in IRAQ THIS YEAR, and thousands of Iraqis.

"Other than telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, now, die, I think the Republicans have done a fine job of getting government out of our personal lives."

"WOULD SOMEONE PLEASE GIVE HIM A BLOWJOB SO WE CAN HAVE HIM IMPEACHED?!"
I didn't say this, I just wish I had...
Good night and good luck,
WGJ

[lhopp77]

"WOULD SOMEONE PLEASE GIVE HIM A BLOWJOB SO WE CAN HAVE HIM IMPEACHED?!"WGJ

You are elected to do the deed. You will probably enjoy it and I am sure you will fit right in. :rolleyes:

BUT---of course it takes a little more than that. Bush would have to lie about it under oath to federal investigators. :D

Lee

[WGJ]

WHAT A PATHETIC RESPONSE. Pretty sad when you can't come up with anything better than that...this from the guy who's constantly urging me to "think!"
Your man Bush and his administration are so bad you still can't come up with a SINGLE COUNTER to any of ONLY 50 Bush F**K UPS! I'm still waiting, for some time now, for an answer to what, if anything, Bush has done right.
You've managed to miss the point of every position I've posited.
Your positions, if presented in a freshman college class in logic, would be laughed out of class! You'd recieve an F! You've broken every rule of RATIONAL arguement.
No facts, just opinion.
And what arguments you put forth are so sophist, fallacious, illogical, irredeemable and bereft of cognition and evidence that the best you can come up with is a crude insult that only a complete WANKER would make.
It takes a man to admit his mistakes...but rather than carefully consider that there's a hell of a lot of evidence that Bush is an inept buffoon, you resort to making rude comments. Not one single shred of evidence, not a single counter to 50 well documented examples of the stupidity of Bush and the boys. Just a pathetic, emotional and juvenile rejoinder.
Don't you realize that when you're pointing your finger at me and urging me to "think!" that there are three of your fingers pointing BACK AT YOU!

Congratulations! God loves you...(can you guess why?)
Don't waste my time with anymore of your weak BS,
WGJ

[mohrds]

A driver is stuck in a traffic jam on the highway and nothing is moving. Suddenly a man knocks on the window. The driver rolls down his window and asks "What happened?"
"Muslims have kidnapped Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and George Bush! They are asking for a $10 million ransom, otherwise they are going to douse them with gasoline and set them on fire! We are going from car to car, taking up a collection!"
The driver asks "How much is everyone giving, on average?"
"Oh, about a gallon."

WGJ

Yeah, like that joke hasn't been used on every president since Carter :rolleyes:

Lets try a joke that is less than 20 years old...

[mohrds]

I've been meaning to ask those who keep referring to Moore's evil 9/11 movie this question:
If the movie is a prevarication of the rankest sort, chock full o' lies, how is it no law suit was or has EVER even been FILED against Moore for libel, slander or defamation of character etc etc? It's not like there's a lack of Republican lawyers. WGJ

Please. Its the same way that Oliver Stone wasn't jailed for his JFK movie. "Artistic license" is a protected form of free speech for some stupid reason. If it wasn't we wouldn't be forced to watch all these damn junk science global warming BS movie trailers.

"Why does Bush still have a job?"
Simple. He is doing a better job than Gore or Kerry could ever have dreamed of.

A better question is if the Democratic party is so amazing, why can't they come up with a candidate that us independents will support?

Now if we get Feingold running in '08, then the dems will actually get some independent votes back that they have lost over the last decade.

[WGJ]

Couldn't Get Any Dumber!

"Yeah, like that joke hasn't been used on every president since Carter"

"Please. Its the same way that Oliver Stone wasn't jailed for his JFK movie. "Artistic license" is a protected form of free speech for some stupid reason. If it wasn't we wouldn't be forced to watch all these damn junk science global warming BS movie trailer."

WGJ

[Electrophil]

Good luck with your movement, I'll see ya when your party comes up with some plan for the country that isn't simply blame someone and boil them. I actually am a middle of the road guy unlike people on here that claim they are.

Hey! Look!! An innuendo!! Wow!!

I look for good solid ideas that help people, not bickering and Monday morning quarterbacks.

Another one!! Incredible!! :eek:

I'll leave you with this though... lets say you did impeach Bush... Who exactly did you think was going to replace him? Are you familiar at all with the presidential succession?


Seriously, impeaching Bush on this scenario is automatically going to land Cheney in jail. After all, Bush is merely a smirking puppet. There will be an automatic domino effect, I'm just hoping it starts with him. Look up "Watergate".

This puts Condi in charge. I've got no problems with her. Well educated, thinks things through, just hitched her buggy up to the wrong team. Kind of like Powell.

[Electrophil]

You are elected to do the deed. You will probably enjoy it and I am sure you will fit right in. :rolleyes:

BUT---of course it takes a little more than that. Bush would have to lie about it under oath to federal investigators. :D

Lee

Oh, don't worry... He would. You think he would admit that to Laura? She almost kicked him out for being a drunk.

WGJ:

#24. Yeah... I caught that. We ain't got no WMD's! I swear it! Our Mayor in Vegas is a retired mafia attorney... That's pretty close to dictator. :D
(We love em' though, he's a funny guy! )

[lhopp77]

The major difference between Bush and Clinton is that Bush is having problems with his Generals and Clinton had a problem with his Privates. :p

Lee

[Bipa]

The major difference between Bush and Clinton is that Bush is having problems with his Generals and Clinton had a problem with his Privates. :p

Lee

Ooooh.... I like that one! :cool:

[WGJ]

were Republicans. They pissed away over $40 MILLION in taxpayer money desperately trying to nail Clinton for SOMETHING and they got...DICK!

Meanwhile back at the ranch Iraq has become the predicted quagmire, the middle east is destabilized and the Three Stooges, George, Dick and Rummy, still don't have a plan or a clue. THOUSANDS DEAD AND WOUNDED, BILLIONS PISSED AWAY, AND NO END IN SIGHT.
But that bastard CLINTON...HAD HIS WINKY SUCKED IN THE WHITE HOUSE!!! OH MY GOD! THE HUMANITY...(and the dry cleaning!)
Yeah, put those offenses on the Scales of Justice and see how they weigh out!
TALK ABOUT AN INVIDIOUS COMPARISON.

Instead of a reasoned response from lhopp77 to my 50 BUSH F**K UPS, I get inane jokes. Trivializing the mounting death toll of Americans and innocent civilians in Iraq by comparing the fact that:
Clinton got a hummer outside of marrige to Bush and his administration's inability, much to their disgrace, to listen to their Generals advice, and correctly prosecute the war. PATHETIC!

IHOPP77 - Still waiting to hear something besides inane drivel in defense of Bush. What's wrong, can't find one REASONABLE explanation for ANY OF BUSH's 50 F**K UPS?
IHOPP77 - Still waiting to hear ONE THING BUSH'S DONE RIGHT.
Still waiting...
WGJ

[lhopp77]

Your list of 50 copied from other sources are not even worthy of comment.

Good things--how about the economy and millions of people voting for the first time in Iraq and Afghanistan even though admittedly there are still unresolved problems in both places.

If you are so blinded that you cannot see and admit the good things--there is no need for me to list them for you.

Lee

[Electrophil]

Your list of 50 copied from other sources are not even worthy of comment.

Good things--how about the economy and millions of people voting for the first time in Iraq and Afghanistan even though admittedly there are still unresolved problems in both places.

If you are so blinded that you cannot see and admit the good things--there is no need for me to list them for you.

Lee

I'm having a real hard time finding anything positive myself. The stock market is back up to 1990 levels..... finally.

We've even got new horrors coming up. Forget Iran for a second. The Russian government is now hinting at a second cold war due to Cheney's mouth a few days back. Anybody out there know how close we are to oil deals over there? The administration just keeps blowing it. Bush has slipped to 31% approval ratings according to the latest Gallop poll. And the gallop poll leans right.:eek:

Bad news is, we are going to run out of people to debate with here. :D

Fox even reported today that the republicans are in trouble, and will probably lose house control unless something drastic or miraculous happens. They also mentioned the absolute certainty that if the Republicans lose the house, there "WILL" be investigations on our buddy Bush up there. Guaranteed. If the democrats take control, he will be impeached. The writing is on the wall. And due to that dress thing, I don't think they'll show much sympathy.

Yep... (While snapping his suspenders) I truly am a happy puppy. It's good to hear of good news on the horizon... It's been a few years.

[Electrophil]

Afterthought. Cheney didn't bungle at the mouth, a new cold war plays right into his hand. He's going back to the helm at Halliburton once his time is up. I just realized that. He didn't "slip". The jerk had it planned out.

[Noir]

Afterthought. Cheney didn't bungle at the mouth, a new cold war plays right into his hand. He's going back to the helm at Halliburton once his time is up. I just realized that. He didn't "slip". The jerk had it planned out.

Cheney's my hero!

[Landshark]

yee-haw! the Evil Dance!

http://www.subaru-svx.net/photos/files/Landshark/35790.gif

[WGJ]

Originally Posted by lhopp77
Your list of 50 copied from other sources are not even worthy of comment.

Good things--how about the economy and millions of people voting for the first time in Iraq and Afghanistan even though admittedly there are still unresolved problems in both places.

If you are so blinded that you cannot see and admit the good things--there is no need for me to list them for you.

Lee

1. "Your list of 50 copied from other sources are not even worthy of comment."
Where do you come up with this inane crap? I didn't copy a damned thing...I'm actually intelligent enough to gather info, analyse it and reach a rational conclusion. Something every college freshman that passes logic is able to do but evidently something a holder of a master's degree can't do. Freshman logic/philosophy also requires cogent responses to inquirey, something I'm still waiting for from you.
You've got 50 factually correct examples of what a complete cluster f**k the Bush admin is and now that you're faced with the overwhelming evidence we have FOOLS running the gov't this is your pathetic response? THINK MAN! Surely there is some defense for this endless littany of Bush and the gang's stupidity.

2."Good things--how about the economy and millions of people voting for the first time in Iraq and Afghanistan even though admittedly there are still unresolved problems in both places."

And the only possible way to achieve this was to unilaterally attack Iraq and then wait to be greeted as "liberators"? The UNCOUNTED DEAD and MAIMED and the TRILLION DOLLARS that this war will cost us seems an awfully high price for the chance to vote. As for the "unresolved problems", we'll be dealing with those for years, probably decades,and definately OVER HERE!

3. "If you are so blinded that you cannot see and admit the good things--there is no need for me to list them for you."

This is the stupidist thing you've uttered yet. You're the guy shooting off his mouth about what a fine leader we have in Bush and it's all the fault of liberals. But when your ill considered position is overwhelmingly trashed by facts and evidence, your response is this pathetic ad hominem arguement that I'm "blinded". One again, one finger pointing at me, three back at the true blind person, you.

Don't list all of Bush's wonderful accomplishments for me...list them for everyone reading this who's rapidly reaching the conclusion you have no idea what you're talking about, that your living in the same opium den as Bush and hallucinating your titties off.

Your homework is to read "Plato's Allegory of the Cave".
You may actually have a masters degree, but you get an F in this course.

You've been schooled,
WGJ

[lhopp77]

I will sit up in my grave and laugh my butt off when you realize that you are paying a huge percentage of your income to support the retirement of millions of others that are beyond working age or are to lazy to work.

And I will do it again when you reach retirement age and there is no money in the fund for you.

One thing that Bush tried to do was to pass laws that would add a touch of reality to the Social Security system. A system that is going broke rapidly and that will end up a huge tax burden on our younger generations.

You should have been smart enough to even see this same assessment in the IRS and GAO study that you were so proud to use in your "Bush blame game".

He faced the realities and wanted to start, I say again, START, working on the problem now instead of when it is in full crisis. The demos put the label of "privatization" on it simply because he proposed permitting a small percentage of the contribution to be managed (not spent) AND OWNED by the contributors. STRANGE NEW CONCEPT TO DEMOCRATS---individuals being able to control something and own it instead of it being taken by the government.

Lee

[WGJ]

"I will sit up in my grave and laugh my butt off when you realize that you are paying a huge percentage of your income to support the retirement of millions of others that are beyond working age or are to lazy to work."
"to lazy to work."? - Check your spelling

Proof positive your hallucitatin'. When you're in your grave you'll be DEAD! I guarantee you won't be sitting up.

Bush's so called Social Security "plan" was a transparent ploy to make stock brokerages richer...(talk about being "blind"). So now you're trying to flunk economics?

I'm WAY TOO SMART to depend on Soc Sec for retirement. I'm already semi-retired. But I enjoy what I do and make too much money at it to stop. People that are TOO lazy to work are not my problem.

Next you'll be telling me how effective Reagan and Bush's tax cuts are at reducing gov't spending! Ha! What a sick joke!

Your new avatar should be "The Fool on the Hill". But you do have a terrific view from your house.
WGJ

[lhopp77]

"I will sit up in my grave and laugh my butt off when you realize that you are paying a huge percentage of your income to support the retirement of millions of others that are beyond working age or are to lazy to work."
"to lazy to work."? - Check your spelling

Proof positive your hallucitatin. When you're in your grave you'll be DEAD! I guarantee you won't be sitting up. WGJ

You question my spelling and then use your fancy (non)word in the next sentence????????? :eek: :rolleyes: :confused: :confused: :D

Of course I would be dead, but I would still sit up to laugh at the situation you got yourself into.

I would not depend on Social Security as a retirement either, but unfortunately that is all millions of Americans have because they have been sold the idea throughout their life by the Democrats. Instead of being told to save and plan for their retirement. It is just another "social" program that is either going broke or will break future generations to fund it if not changed as proposed by Bush.

You bad mouth Bush's tax cuts and his "failure to collect taxes". You need to actually analyze what has REALLY happened. More are working now than have ever worked before and total tax revenues are actually setting records. Proof positive that the tax cuts did spur investment and in turn generated MORE revenue for the federal government.

Lee

[Landshark]

You question my spelling and then use your fancy (non)word in the next sentence????????? :eek: :rolleyes: :confused: :confused: :D

Of course I would be dead, but I would still sit up to laugh at the situation you got yourself into.

I would not depend on Social Security as a retirement either, but unfortunately that is all millions of Americans have because they have been sold the idea throughout their life by the Democrats. Instead of being told to save and plan for their retirement. It is just another "social" program that is either going broke or will break future generations to fund it if not changed as proposed by Bush.

You bad mouth Bush's tax cuts and his "failure to collect taxes". You need to actually analyze what has REALLY happened. More are working now than have ever worked before and total tax revenues are actually setting records. Proof positive that the tax cuts did spur investment and in turn generated MORE revenue for the federal government.

Lee

awww man, yer just hallustinaticotin. :D

[WGJ]

I was trying to make light of the fact that you seem to be completely divorced from reality...being drunk and high is likely to make one slur one's words. It's not that funny if I have to explain it...
One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result:

Lee:
"You bad mouth Bush's tax cuts and his "failure to collect taxes". You need to actually analyze what has REALLY happened. More are working now than have ever worked before and total tax revenues are actually setting records. Proof positive that the tax cuts did spur investment and in turn generated MORE revenue for the federal government."

My response:
"Everybody knows that the Reagan tax cuts did not actually cause spending to come down in the 1980s; most people have surely noticed that the Bush I and Clinton tax hikes were followed by spending constraint in the 1990s; and the Bush II tax cuts certainly have not stopped Congress from spending like a drunken sailor recently. But then the plural of anecdote is not data, and until the starve-the-beast theory is conclusively discredited, tax cutters won't stop hiding behind it.

Well, now it has been discredited. Rauch cites William Niskanen, an economist who worked in the Reagan White House and now chairs the Cato Institute. Niskanen has crunched the numbers between 1981 and 2005, testing for a relationship between tax cuts and government spending, and controlling for levels of unemployment, since these affect spending and taxes independently. Niskanen's result punctures his own party's dogma. Tax cuts are associated with increases in government spending. The best strategy for forcing cuts in government is actually to raise taxes."
Sebastian Mallaby
Washington Post 05.09.06

You must get tired of being wrong:

1. "More are working now"...yes, attributable to population increase. Yeah, all those $7 an hour illegal aliens are doing wonders for the tax base.

2. "total tax revenues are actually setting records"...show me the money. Where'd you get this data? And even if that's valid, your boys, BUSH and THE CHIMPS are spending more than is coming in. Again, "and the Bush II tax cuts certainly have not stopped Congress from spending like a drunken sailor recently."

3. "Proof positive that the tax cuts did spur investment and in turn generated MORE revenue for the federal government."... PROOF POSITIVE! WHERE? Yet another of your endless litany of completely unsubstantiated assertions. You haven't proven your position on anything. Not once! SHOW ME THE "PROOF POSITIVE'.

I'M STILL WAITING for you to substantiate ANYTHING YOU ASSERT with something other than YOUR OPINION.

One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. This 'dialogue' is rapidly approaching insanity, because I keep coming up with positions based on facts and all I get from you is the stereotypical Republian rant, with no credible documentation or substantiation from anywhere. You've shown me nothing but a profound ignorance of the issues. You refuse to do your "homework" or due diligence and provide something besides half baked opinions. Don't waste any more of my time if you are unwilling or unable to document your position.
For a guy with a masters you're doing very poorly at this school, with yet another failing grade. Your report card so far:
Logic...........F
Civics..........F
Humor.........D-
Economics....F
You're already on double secret probation, I don't think you are going to graduate.
WGJ

Lee, here's a chance to flunk History too:
The Roman Empire was destroyed from where, by what?

Remember what the doormouse said, "Feed your head, feed your head."
-Jefferson Airplane