| Author | Message | ||
     Glitch |
Then protest them. I do. I'm not saying the government doesn't have a role to play, it's just they are playing too big a role. Have you ever read the Constitution? The Bill of Rights? The Federalist Papers? My guess is you have not. Or maybe you're one of those people that feel the Constitution doesn't mean anything, and therefore don't feel the need to read or understand any of the above. | ||
| Glitch |
Fair tax? That sounds like an oxymoron. Read the link I posted to the Fair Tax. Is is perfect? No. But it sure beats the hell out of the sea of paper work that is the tax code now. Bottom line there is they still need the same amount of $$ to do things the same way. Read the link I posted to the Fair Tax, it's revenue neutral. | ||
| Froggy |
Glitch, some good info, I am doing some research now. I know that for my job, you can work for the local county government and make a starting $48k, and the same position at IBM starts you at $55k. Both jobs have similar benefits. | ||
| Andymnelson |
I did read through it, and have looked at it before. The good thing is the money that the "system" would save is substantial. As far as a tax based system goes, it would be good. But it's still taking MY money to pay for the governments doings! Why can't they do things to actually EARN money like you and I? | ||
| Glitch |
Why can't they do things to actually EARN money like you and I? What do you suggest? I'm not sure I understand. | ||
| Andymnelson |
All I'm saying is that our current system is set up to fund the government by using yours and my money (taxes). If government were in business, doing things for profit and making money, they would not need to take ours! | ||
| Glitch |
Froggy, that's the average, I'm sure there are other jobs that make less than private jobs, overall the balance is tipping the wrong direction. IMHO, they should be equal to private sector jobs. Yes, that means if we the private sector has to take a pay cut so should the government. | ||
| Glitch |
If government were in business, doing things for profit and making money, they would not need to take ours! The government doesn't produce anything. | ||
| Andymnelson |
that's the problem! Lol | ||
| Nevrenuf |
they tend to produce a lot of B.S. and bureaucratic red tape | ||
| Spiderman |
what he said! | ||
| Sifo |
All I'm saying is that our current system is set up to fund the government by using yours and my money (taxes). If government were in business, doing things for profit and making money, they would not need to take ours! What you are describing, depending on the details would be some mix of socialism, communism, and or fascism. None of it would be constitutional. I guess some folks just don't have a problem with any of those details though. | ||
| Blake |
Rocco, You leap to the extreme. The question is not government or no government, but how much government. Freedom versus nanny state. I prefer freedom. I don't see America as a free country any more. Too much extortion and big government telling us what we cannot do and to give it our hard earned income so they can give it to others since they think they know better what to do with our hard earned income than do we. I resent it very much. I'd prefer they mandate that we all give 10% of our income to charity or our choosing. Ditch Social Security. Ditch Medicare and Medicaid. Ditch the Dept of Education. Ditch the Endowment for the Arts. Ditch the Dept of housing and urban development or whatever it's called now. States rights have been trampled. Restore them. I agree, the Wall Street should have been allowed to fail as well. Andy is perhaps unknowingly proposing staunch libertarianism. Get the federal government out of it all. Let parents pay the private schools for educating their children. Let people who use the roads pay to private contractors to build and maintain them, etc, etc. We already do that in some cases and when we do the results are almost always very successful. What about the law of natural selection, survival of the fittest don't you find true Rocco? That is what the free market is, albeit I agree that protections against usury, monopoly, basically greed and criminality are necessary. That's it. So what is it that you find so funny about the free market Rocco?  | ||
| Sifo |
I agree, the Wall Street should have been allowed to fail as well. The only problem there is that when the Government steps in and says that Wall Street is bound by law to make loans available to those that clearly will not be able to pay back those loans, is it then fair to allow the lenders to fail? This is the problem with getting the Government "just a little" involved in business decisions. Right now Government is getting way past just a little involved in many businesses. There will be dire consequences far into the future from all of this. | ||
| Iamike |
So it looks like they paid back the bailout with more bailout money. Man, what a country! | ||
| Cityxslicker |
You forgot the Office of Resilence (yep, you cant make this shiate up) Under charter superverion of the National Security Council (and a cabinet seat position at that) is in charge of.... wait for it.... Resistence, Absorption, Restoration... with respect to community development, information gathering modal systems and disaster preparedness.... For those of you paying attention and having read the works of Hegel, Engles and Marx.... the proverbial horse is out of the barn. | ||
| Glitch |
I'd also bet Rocco's only dealing with taxes had to do with a W-2. Everyone that never has should have to deal with being 10-99, I'd being will to bet that having to deal with actually doing taxes would change the minds of most everyone. | ||
| Blake |
That's when it started to hit home for me Glitch. Being self employed and having a rent house is a real eye-opener. Brian (CityX) "the proverbial horse is out of the barn." I agree. Unfortunately there are a lot of voters who think the farmer is our messiah and so his horse looks to them like just another of their flock of sheep. NewsWeek cracks me up. Last year they pronounced on their cover that "We're All Socialists Now." Recently they took to lambasting commentators who characterized Obama as a socialist. Some Socialists are braver than others. I appreciate those who are at least willing to be honest about their ideology. Obama is one of the most dishonest politicians I've ever seen. Lie after lie after lie. | ||
| Sifo |
Ripping off the mask of socialism... What community organizing group was BO working with again??? | ||
| Reindog |
"The Tea Party is a Bowel Movement" m2me is in good company with these lovely people. It is incomprehensible to me that one could throw their lot in with Socialism and the likes of these ACORN lunatics but we are finally getting a taste of what the Soviet Union transformed itself into. (Message edited by reindog on April 23, 2010) | ||
| Glitch |
That's when it started to hit home for me Glitch. Yeah, it makes me cringe when people talk about "take home pay" Withholding was/is merely wool to cover the eyes. If everyone had to do their own taxes every year, the wool would be lifted. By "having to do their own taxes" I mean having to make sure and save through out the year an estimate of what they'll be paying April 15th instead of depending on their employer to withhold, so they can do a 1040-EZ form, to find out how much they're "getting back". The Communist Party USA love Obama. Don't believe me? http://www.cpusa.org/ http://peoplesworld.org/national/tag/obama See for yourself. I'd much rather have a president in the White House that the communist hate. | ||
| Rocketsprink |
"Have you ever read the Constitution? The Bill of Rights? The Federalist Papers? My guess is you have not." Sorry. You are very mistaken. | ||
| Swordsman |
All I'm saying is that our current system is set up to fund the government by using yours and my money (taxes). If government were in business, doing things for profit and making money, they would not need to take ours! They're SUPPOSED to take our money because WE'RE paying for OUR national defense. I have no problem with that. But then they got a little carried away with their "responsibilities". And when the guys that make the laws become direct competition for other non-govt. companies, who do you think is going to wind up in the lead? And don't even start with the "they'll only make as much $$$ as they need" argument. We already know how that works out. ~SM (Message edited by Swordsman on April 23, 2010) | ||
| Rocketsprink |
 seems no one liked this guy. | ||
| Blake |
So your point is that Socialism is okay since President Bush was unpopular? Ohhhhh Kayyyyy. Can't debate that. | ||
| Froggy |
I want to see Obama's chart, I am pretty sure he got Bush's low approval beat in less than a year! | ||
| Blake |
Repeating... Rocco, You leap to the extreme. The question is not government or no government, but how much government. Freedom versus nanny state. I prefer freedom. I don't see America as a free country any more. Too much extortion and big government telling us what we cannot do and forcing us to hand over too much of our hard earned income so they can give it to others as they think they know better what to do with our hard earned income than do we. I resent it very much. I'd prefer they mandate that we all give 10% of our income to charity of our choosing. Ditch Social Security. Ditch Medicare and Medicaid. Ditch the Dept of Education. Ditch the Endowment for the Arts. Ditch the Dept of housing and urban development or whatever it's called now. States rights have been trampled. Restore them. I agree, the Wall Street should have been allowed to fail as well. I also agree that had congress never subsidized and promoted zero down mortages to those who couldn't normally qualify for them was the root cause of the whole mess. In a free market, it would not have happened. The vast majority of all those irresponsible home loans would never have happened. What about the law of natural selection aka survival of the fittest don't you find true Rocco? That is what the free market is, albeit I agree that protections against usury, monopoly, basically greed and criminality are necessary. That's it. Basic law enforcement. So what is it that you find so funny about the free market Rocco? Please explain. | ||
| Glitch |
Sorry. You are very mistaken. I'm saddened at your lack of understanding of what this great nation is founded on and stands for. Either that or your reading comprehension is very poor, which gives me yet another argument against the Federal Government being involved in education. Or, as I suspected you're one of those people that think the stated reading material means nothing. seems no one liked this guy. If you're saying you didn't/don't like George W Bush, we have something in common.   Looks like fewer and fewer are liking this guy. | ||
| Blake |
If the lamestream media were as biased against Obama and his socialist pals like they were against the Bush administration, his ratings would absolutely be in the tank around 30%. Too many people are uninformed. Thankfully some are not. As it stands, Obama's approval rating is running just under 50%. Strange, since the approval ratings for his socialist policies are quite dismal. | ||
| Glitch |
Took Bush 4 years to get to the point Obama is now. |
