Stop allowing republicans to play with our toys!

[sicksubie]

Originally Posted by WGJ

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]

Originally Posted by drivemusicnow

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]

Originally Posted by 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]

Originally Posted by WGJ

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.

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=WGJ]

Originally Posted by 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]

Originally Posted by sicksubie

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]

Originally Posted by Landshark

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.

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

[Noir]

Originally Posted by mohrds

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.