thanks for being respectfully skeet.

I really can't compare socialism to communism. One is an economic system and the other is a political system.
communism incorporates socialism.
It would be possible to have a democratic government with a socialist economy.
I am 100% for democracy. I think too many people vote republican against their own (everyone's) economic interest. I think if people would actually sit down and look openly at what the democratic party offers, they might not change their mind but perhaps they would be less hatefull.
As for 90% taxes - let's be realistic. That's not going to happen. I'm certainly open to raising taxes to pay for things society can benifit from --- free undergrad college for instance. It may also be time to start implementing public works projects if the economy does not improve --- of course that will probably include greencard workers :rolleyes:

Yes, we definatly need to deport illegals. Both parties have too much invested in them. But we are getting to a dangerous job market in which something absolutly needs to be done.

But on social and economic issues, I certainly follow the FDR path. His policies (which are still in use today) help a lot of people.

Healthcare - I have talked to a few canadians on the internet over the last couple years on this issue.
It's funny that canadians like their healthcare. I think it's actually the US citizens criticizing something they don't know much about.

Welfare to me is really not an issue. People complain about people feeding off it like worms. It's just not the case. The number of people on welfare is actually very small. Most people who qualify for it don't even take it.

Have good evening

I'm talking a flat federal income tax

If you're talking about including everything in one lump sum, it definatly needs to be more than 10%

As far as health care, we pay a large amount in premiums anyway. I pay close to 1000 dollars for myself. Whether or not I pay it to private parties or the government, I don't care.

And you know, in both issues it's going to be roughly the same for the vast magority of us.

Well
 

It may be possible to have a socialist democratic society but there really isn't one in the world today. There are a couple countries that are socialist but not really democratic. Democracy is different than you may think. We have a republic here It's not working the way it was envisioned. There were no provisions for the social reforms that have been enacted. The constitution did not envision social security and welfare but we have found a way to incorporate those ideas into our very governed way of life. I think there are more people on welfare than you may believe and to be very honest I know of too many people that need the welfare programs and really didn't know how to get approved for them. Many of the people that you think that don't get welfare aren't able to get past the screening process. Talk about a beaurocracy. Hate to break the news to so many people but a repulican(not repub party) government with socialism at it's core will not long endure. At least not in the manner in which this country was designed by our founders. BTW I have talked to many people from Canada and quite a few really were not happy with the health care provided. As far as countries that have flat taxes...I think Sweden comes closest to your ideals...cradle to grave care by the government and the tax rates there are horrendous 70% or so plus I think they have a VAT too

I didn't see anything about balancing the budget, getting rid of the national debt, and bringing back manufacturing jobs to the US, but I guess those aren't important either.

Now, if we all of a sudden go to a flat tax, what do you tell the person that bought a residential rental property with the intention of depreciating it over 27.5 years. How about the person that buys a larger house because he is currently subject to the AMT and home mortgage interest is almost always deductible under the AMT. How about the corporation that just spent $1,000,000 on new equipment because they can depreciate it?

Yes, I agree that the rich shouldn't receive the benefit of a 15% capital gain rate, but that could easily be taken care of by increasing the rate to 25% for those in the higher income tax brackets.

As far as the rich not paying any taxes, that is almost impossible with the AMT. AMT stands for Alternative Minimum Tax, and it was enacted because some genius rich guy in 1960 something started bragging about how he made a ton of money and paid absolutely nothing in federal income tax. Congress got wind of this and they passed the AMT which was targeted toward the rich to make sure they paid their fair share. The AMT was not adjusted for inflation over the years, so now it is hitting more and more people. My wife and I were hit with it this year, and if it wasn't for the temporary AMT patch that Congress passed in the 11th hour, we would have had to pay an additional $1,500 in taxes and we are far from rich. The AMT was geared to apply to people earning 6 figures back in the 1960's. Guess what, 6 figures was a heck of a lot more in the 1960's than it is today. Anyway, the patch they passed in late December 2007 only applies to the 2007 tax year because they have no idea how to recoup the lost revenue.

What do you tell the poor married couple with two kids making $30,000 a year right, barely getting by, but not having to pay any taxes because of the standard deduction, personal exemptions, and very low tax rate. According to my calculations, based upon the scenario above, and taking into account the child tax credit, the couple wouldn't have to pay anything in taxes until they exceeded $43,000 in income. What do you tell them when they have to pay $4,300 in federal taxes at a 10% tax rate? What do you tell them when they have to pay $6,450 at a 15% flat tax rate.

Everybody wants to cry about taxes, but it really isn't that bad right now. These are some of the best tax rates we have seen in quite a while, and EVERYBODY is enjoying them. Don't just tell me that the rich are enjoying them. By the way, I forgot to mention that in the above scenario, if the couple only makes $25,000, they get nearly $2,000 back from the government for the EIC, Earned Income Credit, and that is without them paying a single dollar in taxes. How do you break the flat tax news to them?

Being in the middle class and paying close to $15,000 in taxes, I'm all for a 10% flat tax because we would pay $3,000 less. Now, go break that flat tax to the rich and the poor. Something tells me that the rich won't mind it all that much. They probably wouldn't mind a 15% flat tax either. However, remember to keep this thing flat, with no deductions, credits, exemptions, etc. or other special treatment for anybody.

Yep, the flat tax sounds like a great idea until you really get down to it. The democrats talk about it, but do you really think they would pass a true flat tax. Their supporters would hang them.

I could go on for quite a while about the rest of this stuff, but you can just take a gander at my "The Senate is Killing Me" post. They cannot even get the economic stimulus bill passed without adding more pork to it. Do you really think they could get a flat tax passed? Now you are kidding yourself.

Social Security. Can you believe that the government is not earning a decent rate of return on the money put in that fund, because the money is actually being borrowed by the government itself. The SS trust fund is solvent, but it has no money in it because the US government has borrowed it all, and it doesn't pay much other than a minimal interest rate on it. If the money were invested by a decent fund manager, then social security would be able to stand a chance. Also, if a 3% increase were made to the FICA tax, the fund would be solvent well toward the end of this century. Now, try selling that 3% increase and a 10% flat tax to the poor.

Health care. I think I've said this before, but I'll say it again. The federal government cannot even administer Medicare and the state governments cannot even administer Medicaid, yet you want to put them in charge of the entire health care system. Yep, I see that being run just as well as social security. By the way, what would be the additional tax for this. We would just add that to the 3% hike for social security and the 10% flat tax. Do you think 5% could cover it. Okay, lets go with 5%. Now, go break it to the poor that they have to pay a flat tax of 18% so that we can make sure this county runs smoothly.

Does the 10% flat tax take care of the budget deficit and the national debt. Maybe we need a little more. So, tack on another 2%. Now, we have an even 20% flat tax. I'm sure the couple I mentioned above with two kids, making $25,000 a year, usually getting close to $2,000 in free money from the government each year will be jumping for joy knowing that instead of netting $27,000 a year because of the EIC, they will actually be netting $20,000, because 20% of $25,000 is $5,000 that they will have to fork over to Uncle Sam. Please, go tell them that, and make sure you tell them that we are putting this flat tax in place to make sure everybody pays their fair share, the rich included. If they own a gun, they will probably shoot you with it.

Everything sounds great in theory.

Fabs, I agree that the flat tax idea is one of those simple things that sound great, but is unworkable.
Just for the record, I've never heard a Democratic party candidate advocate the flat tax- it's been raised in Republican primary races, to my knowledge. Steve Forbes made it a cornerstone of his campaign platform a few years back, and now Mike Huckabee's talking about it.
In my earlier post about the flat tax, the 17% and 33-34 % figure I quoted were only for federal income tax, not all the other local and state taxes we pay. Sorry I wasn't clear about that.

Fabs my friend
 

Those points you were making is exactly what I was saying. The government can't even run to the bathroom in a straighteorward manner. I can't see them running anything else. All the flat rate thing and the health care thing sound good in theory. What PBR and others that support these ideas don't see is who will be paying for it. It won't be the rich or the poor..it'll be the guys in the middle just like themselves. Anyone who thinks the rich pay no taxes is foolish. Of course some get away with less some years...and then the next they pay more. The poor pay no taxes and in fact we help the poor along in this country with our taxes paid to the government. Those tax moneys are mismanaged(PBR and Tennessee both alluded to that...and then they want to give the government even more irresponsibly managed money to spend. Sheesh. I can't believe they would be so blind. Personally I would like to make a clean sweep of the whole executive branch or the government and start over with citizen legislators as it was meant to be. The aristocracy we have in place now is unresponsive to the needs of this country...but not to their own "needs". You know...the "need" to be re-elected:rolleyes: And then we have the non-thinking group such as PBR and TEM who want to elect people who will take more from them and give them less than they feel they deserve.

Oh and another little known fact.. In the countries where the govenment cares for you cradle to grave you MUSt be accepted in to most everything you want to do. Wanna go to college and get a degree?? Gotta take tests and beat out a certain amount of people to get a place in one of the universities. All that sounds good to some but again..where does the personal responsibility come into play??

I'd like to make a note on personal responsibility iffin I may...

I'm a FIRM believer in..."Iffin you made yer bed then sleep in it."
MY and YOUR money...are bailin the friggin idgits out of the hole they dug themselves. I aint rich...and I NEED my friggin money!
I wont stupid...I went with a mortage I could actually afford.
Not my problem.
How many folks do you see at Wally World sittin in the the motor wheelchair/cart thingy that really need it? How many times have you seen a old timer with a walker barely walkin round the wal-mart cause all the carts are took by some 20 yr old?
TOO many times. Same with welfare. God ferbid iffin I ever needed help, I'd never git it. Here's a concept...dont ask fer no dam help and git up off yer ass and go to work at mcDonalds er somthin. Really...how many trailers did the taxpayer buy fer Katrina "victims" and how many are still livin in the friggin things??

Democrats are pushin "fer the people....we're ALL about the people"...well...I'm sick of payin fer the "people" and I say that we are once again in 1776....taxation without representation.
Solutions...nobody, dem er pub will actually have the guts to do what needs to be done....cause there's too many Americans relyin on the government to bail em out of mortages, gittin a job and findin their own place to live where they actually have to pay fer it.

Dont git me wrong, people somtimes fall on hard times and need a lil help...I am more than willin to pay my fair share fer that...but...give an inch take a mile...and the mile done went to lightyears. Candidates can promise all they want...but they aint gonna do crap about it. That goes fer the illegals too.

At least that's how I see it.

Hey Lilred
 

Whyncha tell us haow ya really feel. I feel the same way kiddo:D

Lil Red, I couldnt have said it better. :cool:

With the mortage thing, I know alot of folks that got caught, my mother included. A good democrat I might add. It didnt take a rocket scientist to see it coming. When you get a champagne house on a beer budget with a ARM or intrest only loan, when it comes time to pay the piper, your up shirts creek without a paddle.

I love my mother, but I told her it was a bad deal. Anyone that got caught in that mess, well, its not the governments fault and its damned sure not my fault and we shouldnt have to pay for it. Plain and simple. Ive made plenty of mistakes in my life and paid for every single one. Never got a penny from the government for anything and wont.

As for healthcare, get a damned job that has a group plan or at least one member of your household get one. Hell, thats the only reason my wife is working. She makes good money, but the main reason is so we have healthcare. Again, not rocket science. And damned sure not the government or my place to make sure you got free or cheap healthcare. If you want something get it from the lawyers pockets. They are the reason its so damned high to begin with. My wife works for a doctor and its a crying shame what people will hire an attorney and try to sue for to get something for nothing.

PBR, I can see you havent gone up any IQ numbers. Your too far gone to even discuss things with. However, guns are a big deal to some of us. Even the black guns that annoy you when your on the range.

Im done for now. :)

skeet...
 

I do my best ;) :D

Andy,

Good post, but of course I'm going to disagree with you about attorneys being the ONLY reason that health care costs have gone up. How about the drug companies spending $19 billion on advertising a couple of years ago? I don't know what the most recent numbers are, but I can guarantee you that I haven't seen any less commercials from the drug companies.

How about the sophistication of today's medicine. MRI, Cat Scans, X-Rays, brain surgery, etc. 100 years ago, if you got something like cancer you were SOL. Now, they can operate and do a million other things to try and save you. Guess what, those million things cost a bunch.

Yes, attorneys are approached by clients too often to sue over stupid stuff, but sometimes the lawsuits are actually for real. If something bad were to happen to you in a hospital because of a careless doctor or nurse, I'm sure you would want to be compensated too.

Now, I will admit that attorneys do drive up the cost of health care to a degree, but we aren't the only reason for it. I'm all for tort reform. Put a cap on pain and suffering and allow economic damages to the extent they are incurred. Plain and simple.

Could this be the solution to the problem?
Paul B.


THE 545 PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE FOR AMERICA

BY CHARLEY REESE


Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don't write the tax code. Congress does. You and I don't set fiscal policy. Congress does. You and I don't control monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices - 545 human beings out of the 300 million - are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but private central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman or a president to do one cotton- picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it.

No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.


A CONFIDENCE CONSPIRACY

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a SPEAKER, who stood up and criticized G.W. BUSH for creating deficits.

The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it. The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes.

Who is the speaker of the House? She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow Democrats, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto.


REPLACE THE SCOUNDRELS


It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts - of incompetence and irresponsibility.

I can't think of a single domestic problem, from an unfair tax code to defense overruns that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.

When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red. If the Marines are in IRAQ, it's because they want them in IRAQ.

There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exist disembodied mystical forces like 'the economy,' 'inflation' or 'politics' that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power. They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses - provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees. We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess.

I can see you haven't gone up in IQ either.

It's funny, you're the only one who has been unreasonable to me both last year in a thread as well as now.

Everyone else has been very reasonable and respectfull.

Learn a little manners

Fabs,
I know lawyers arent totally responsible. I know some doctors that abuse the system as well. Still if the system wasnt abused, whether by patients, doctors or lawyers, there would still be plenty of room for research, ect... and healthcare would be more affordable.

PBR,
I have a hard time being civil to someone who supports socialistic views. I wont do it. If others want to tolerate you, thats their decision. Mine is to not.

You and others that think like you serve no other purpose than to undermine our way of life. You do this so you and others can have, without earning it, what others have worked hard for.

I remember your argument that someone annoyed you with an "assualt rifle" at a shooting range. That was your excuse for jumping on the "ban wagon". Your arguments dont hold water and its a typical democrat/socialist view. And people like you are going to be the death of the greatest country that has ever existed on the face of the planet.

No, I wont be civil.

Well Andy
 

I guess I just have to say:D ...somebody annoyed me with an original assault weapon one time. Ya know..it was a rock. I even decided I would get me one of those assault weapons so I went out and dug up an assault rock that ya put on a stick. Indians used to call 'em tomahawks. I don't know whether PBR is a socialist or whatever...but to be honest. Maybe he just hasn't thought the whole process through. Then again maybe he has. I really don't know so I ain't accusing anybody of anything. But you are correct. Socialists and communists are going to be the death of this FREE country. The people who exist and breed while living on the teat of this country should actually have no say in the running of it. It used to be that the only ones who could vote in this country were what they called free men and landholders. Not advocating slavery understand...but I do advocate the idea that if you do not have an earned income..you shouldn't be able to vote. The people that earn an income are the ones paying for the ones not working. If they(the ones not working) have the vote then they can perpetuate a system that gives to the non working to the detriment of the ones that do. I would ask PBR what he feels about that idea. Just to tell ya something. There aren't all that many people here in Wyoming. The unemployment rate is supposedly just under 2%... and as someone told me those are the ones who just don't want to work or the few who can't physically work. Pay is not high here but the living is just as expensive. People live here for the freedom that they have compared to many states farther east(and west). Now I know there are many places where the unemployment rate is much higher. Also a question for PBR... do you feel that people that are on either welfare or unemployment should do some kind of work for the common good if they receive government handouts...if they are able to work?? Even FDR had the CCC and other programs that did much for the common good. My father worked for the CCC way back when. Of course that was when people really wanted to pay their own way. And a final question for PBR ..what allows you to keep the freedoms you have always enjoyed in this country..ie. is there any specific amendment to the constitution that has always guaranteed that freedom? And another question for anyone ..should we seal our southern borders and deport all illegals from this country? I ask this just for my general knowledge.

Oh and Andy...you know that attorneys are the single biggest problem we have in this country. Don't quibble with Fabs...just cause he is a good guy even if he is an attorney!!!:D :D Oh...wait a minute. Maybe i was wrong. I'll quibble a bit too. Ya know...he might just sue me if I ain't careful:confused: :eek: :D

Just dont paint your rock black, Skeet. Some liberal bozo will wet their panites and they will have to get Pelosi and company to ban black rocks. :rolleyes: :D

Oh, and stay away from semi auto rocks. Obama says hes going to ban them. Make sure you have a bolt action or single shot rock. Those cant harm people. Those evil black semi auto rocks are good for nothing and a danger to society.

See how ignorant the liberal cry sounds when you replace one word? :rolleyes:

Re: Well Andy
 

Amen and preach on. I'll probably be flamed for saying it, but the whole concept of "universal suffrage" will lead to the eventual downfall of any form of representative government.

I agree. If you dont have a stake in things and contribute, then your a leech on society. Why should leeches be making any decisions?

Voting age needs to be looked at too. What the hell do 18-22 yr olds know about how the world works? All they know is what a bunch of liberal teachers and professors have washed their brains with. Thats a big problem this time around. There is a huge movement of liberal youths shouting for change. If you sat them down alone, dollars to doughnuts not a damn one could say what or why they acutally want something changed.

I live in rural Missouri. This is a heavy republican county. Farming and ranching are the main source of income. Farm and ranch life and activities are the norm. All this said, I cannot believe what the teachers tell our kids. They are almost all extreme left wing. Anti gun, anti hunting, social healthcare, ect... you name a secular progressive movement and they are for it. If its that bad here, I cant imagine what the bigger cities are going through with these clowns. Im not real sure I want my kids taught in a college that teaches this manure either.

Im glad my kids pay enough attention to see through it and even have a little fun at the clowns expense at times.

Thank you skeet, I'll try to address all of your questions

The idea of socialism is not feeding off of someone else. It's an economic principle that provides a more equal distribution of wealth and it provides incentives for the lower class to pull their weight more. I'm by no means calling for a soviet union style of government where everyone lives in a white house of the exact same design. That's ridiculas.
I would create a "living wage" for those who work full time. You know, ditch diggers and fast food workers benifit everyone and I think their hard work (regardless of those people's past) deserve more than 6 dollars an hour. Likewise, I don't think someone who has a luxury office and plays golf all day deserves 50 million dollars. I would want to put a cap on salary. And you know what, when you have more money than God, you're not going to miss a couple million.
Even Warren Buffett thinks the rich needs to pay more taxes.

If you look at primitve tribes in the middle east, africa, or the amazon - there is a equal distribution of wealth. Sure, there is a hierarchy. However, everyone from a high priest to a berry picker is highly valued. That's what we need here - everyone needs to be appreciated for their contribution to society. In turn, individuals have a higher self worth, low crime, etc.

Well this is a democracy (ok, a democratic republic...) and the people decide through their reps what direction and laws they want passed. And the government is designed to move slow to make sure laws are not passed too quickly without a lot of thought.
But with a majority rule (specifically the law making process), I think the people can make whatever laws or changes they wish (with some exceptions). If the working class is feeling financial pressure, with enough votes in congress they can somewhat alter the burden. Likewise, it works the opposite way. The republicans were able to get enough votes to pass the bush tax cut in favor of the rich. That's just the way things work with a 2 party system --- you win some, you lose some. Quick changes are pretty minor and large ones are a long time comming (national health care for example).

Welfare
When union workers get laid off, many times they have to go to the union hall and wait for charity work to be assigned to them. I would like to see something like this for welfare recipiants - whether it be at varouis locations in cities or towns, county seats, etc. I would like to see reform in the job search requirements. Jobs are out there - they might suck - but they are out there. And that is why I think a living wage and a more equal distribution of wealth will help. When you feel positive about the job you're doing and you can make living off it - your situation appears in a different light. There's no factory workers that like their jobs - but it gives their family what they need (or at least it used to).

The constitution actually is a pretty meaningless document when you consider that ammendments can be ammended. Now don't all jump me - because I'm not bashing the constitution (I'm sure it will still be interpreted that way). It's symbolic factor is very high and it does represent the current laws. The fact is that the constitution and amendments can be changed - Prohibition for example. The fact is it's easier to pass laws in other ways - and that's what happens today though --- Abortion for example. Some states have a amendment stating their constituation can not be ammended. To my knowledge, the US does not. Therefore there is really nothing concrete about the federal law.
Think about that for a minute - whether you agree with me or not.

Have a good night

Well it appears the Republican race for Prez is over untill 2011. Unless there is a miracle at the convention, McGrumpy will get his fanny handed to him in November.

I'll be voting independant. He just turns me off totally. The only thing he has going for him as far as I'm concerned is his Vietnam Service.

Bill

In a nutshell, I hit it on the noggin right off the bat. Your just like the other clowns, PBR. You want your cut to be the same as everyone elses without having to work for it.

So, if someone goes to school for 20+ yrs of their life, takes the risk of opening a business and is successful, there should be a cap on how much money they can make so some worthless POS that partied the first 25+ yrs of their life can sober up and get a sizeable cut. Thats exactly what your saying. Not?

The USA was founded on hard work and self reliance. Not suckingn off the government teat and relying on others that work harder and are smarter than yourself.

Get a life.

Thats exactly why the republicans will lose this time. There are enough of the right wing that do stupid stuff like this to hand it to the commies.

I dont like McCain very well myself. But hes a damned sight better than the alternative, no matter which one it is. Voting independent is nothing more than tossing your vote in the trash. You might as well save the gas money and stay home.

Well now, help me pick a trash pile. Should I choose the Hitlery/Osamama trash pile, The Mcain trash pile or the possible Paul or whoever trash pile?

No way in HE!! I'd vote for the first option. I don't like the second a whole lot more, he's anti against everything I'm for.

I have voted in every election since 1960 and theres no way that I will not vote. Do we still have write ins? I've never done that.

I don't have to worry about gas expence. I live a block and a half from a precinct. :(

Bill

Well PBR
 

I hate to just agree with the bluntness of Andy but he hit it on the head. You are talking redistribution of wealth. Hate to say it but That is not socialism at all. That is basically communism. I agree that the somewhat primitive tribes in those locales do share and share alike although you really didn't go far enough looking at them. They do that mainly for one reason..survival as a group. Also another thing you don't state although i am sure you know it but everyone works that can work. Even the ones who cannot do much still contribute what they can. I don't mind helping those who are unable to work..but giving the able even a living "wage" for doing nothing goes against the grain. I feel anyone who tries to make something of themselves by going to school and learning something to make a better living should NOT have his income taxed to take care of thos who don't even try. Evidently you have a business of your own..If you have an employee do you share the profits of the business with him equally? Even if he doesn't work as hard as you? I doubt it but if you do I commend you. If not then I feel I. should say this..according to your statements you are saying you should. As you didn't answer the question about welfare trying to confuse the issue by talking of a living wage I would still like to see your feelings on that. Should people that are able to work be made to work on projects for the common good to earn their welfare? Now when it comes to the Constitution the Bill of Rights are inviolable in my opinion. The liberals pass laws to get around them but that is our fault for not watching who we elect. Why should we have to give up rights just because people think it is best for us? Now do you feel that people who contribute nothing and just live off the dole (the ones able to work) should be able to vote? If so tell me why. Please don't confuse this issue with living wage ideas etc. I don't feel that a living wage for everyone is the same amount. I also don't think you do although you seem to want to do as Robin Hood did and take from the rich and give to the poor. Possibly a commendable idea given the circumstances of that story. But is that the scenario we are living in this country? I really don't think so

The answer is yes, skeet. I dont care iffin it cost the US and it's taxpayers 5 mill week to operate, I'm sure it's very close if not cheaper than what we pay fer illegals now and it's simply the GP of the whole thing that's worth every dollar spent. (GP= general principle)

I also believe that people on welfare should not have the right to vote, however, many people these days vote fer their own lil agendas that dont mean crap. Like women votin fer Hillary, cause she's a woman. :rolleyes:
The best way to git people on welfare to git offa welfare is just to take away the dam check...lol Helluva lt cheaper too.
I also think the votin age should be raised..2 er 3 generations ago, when you turned 18...you actually acted like a man instead of it just bein a legal age. That time has come and gone and I see folks in their 20's actin like teenagers with no sense of direction.
Hell, my bro in law is 30 and all he does is sit around and play video games livin offa my sisters money.

I think I'm gonna join the army, take out some of my aggressions on some terroist somewhere in Arabville lol

There has to be a middle ground for immigration. We cannot just seal up the southern border and deport every illegal immigrant out there. First, both are monumental tasks. So, why not start by allowing the illegal immigrants to become legal. I'm not talking about all of them, but how about the ones that contribute to society? How about the ones that have not committed any felonies in this country? I know a couple of them that are here working on expired green cards, and what is really surprising is that they actually pay their taxes. How about we charge them a "back tax" to become legal, and then we go from there.

Then, we require law enforcement to crack down on the rest of the illegals. Most criminals will get caught again. So, how about requiring local law enforcement to communicate with INS. In the county I live in, it is local law enforcement's policy not to look into whether or not somebody taken into custody is an illegal immigrant. Heck, I know a guy that has been arrested twice, once for a DUI and another time for driving without a license, and after both trials they let him loose even though he is illegal.

I have a better idea, how about keeping all the hard working, law abiding illegals here and shipping the welfare recipients and criminally motivated illegals to South America. We can take care of two problems using an express lane.

Fabs
 

I am going to ask you too . What part of illegal isn't understandable? I have no problem with immigration but the illegal part is a real problem. Those people broke our laws to come here. It really doesn't matter if they are contributing or not. He!! a drug dealer could argue that he contributes to society. In fact a lot of the illegal Mexicans came here with the tacit approval of their government. They send an awful lot of money back to Mexico to the detriment of our country while bringing in moneys that help the Mexican economy. Why do you think Mexico's Fox wrote the manual on how to come across to this country? There have been wars fought over less my friends. This is for all intents and purposes an invasion approved by the Mexican government. You think what I say is extreme?? Seriously think about it. Those illegals are in some cases a real drag on our economy. I also saw the illegals in Md get turned loose after being repeatedly caught driving without a license, uninsured and illegally tagged vehicles. You would have been jailed for the same infractions. We cannot afford the illegals any longer no matter what work they do. PBR even in what I consider convoluted thinking is right about a living wage....and illegals just make it easier for companies to not have to pay a living wage. I still say seal the border and collect up all the illegals and send them back to where they came...or even better seal the border and put them all on the other side and let Mexico have to deal with them. That country helped them get here in some cases.:mad: And yes, that does make me mad. It should do the same for y'all, too! I have compassion for those people...but I have more for the people that are citizens of this country...especially the ones who came here LEGALLY!

Middle ground?? I feel we passed the middle ground long ago!

I don't know if you can't read or if you choose to read what you want to.

Never once did I say anything about feeding off the government, not working hard --- but you knew that.

It's hatefull, closeminded people like you that drove dozens of people off this fine site over the years. Anyone not exactly like you is dead wrong - democrats, moderate republicans, independants, apoliticals, or those that just don't want to read hatefull retoric
What a way to go through life.


As far as immigration goes, we absolutly need to take care of the problem as soon as we can.
1. A wall is not needed. The fact is that US employers knowingly hiring illegals is the problem. The crackdown needs to start there. Without jobs, there is no reason for illegals to be here. So I think we need to audit all the registered businesses in the US and look for employment verification. If we catch illegals while at work, we deport them. Likely, they will jump ship at the news and be back in mexico long before that happens. From then on, we fine the holy hell out of employers who engage in this activity when the government does yearly verification audits. And if the employers are repeat offenders, the government force closes their business and they are never allowed to open one in the US again.
That will be the end of the immigration problem.
As John McCain said a month ago in Michigan I believe, "We can't bring back the lost jobs, but we can create new ones".
And that might be what is best. We may have to chalk up the losses to mexico and china.

I'm all for small business - I think that's wonderfull. However, when a small business in the US has to send work to mexico for 5 dollars a day to make a profit, then they have no business being in business. It's better to merge companies or close up shop and work for someone else. Not all businesses can succeed and certain sectors need the benifits and stability of the numbers game that corporations provide.
To paraphrase Donald Trump, "There's not a thing wrong with working for someone else, raising a beautiful family, and retiring comfortably."

PBR,

They are getting tougher on employees, but they just aren't enforcing it enough. Honestly, I think the IRS and INS should get tougher.

Way too many people cheat on their tax returns, which really kills me. The IRS should audit anybody that keeps switching tax return preparers. I cannot tell you how many people shop around for preparers that are willing to take inappropriate deductions. With a tax gap of $240 billion, they should really work on being the nasty IRS of the 1980's and not the newer, friendlier IRS of the 2000's. That is also changing, but not as quickly as I would like.

Regarding illegal immigrants, I agree with you completely. If penalties were actually enforced against employers, this entire subject would be a moot point. The current penalty is $25,000 per illegal employee, and the IRS and state audit teams are linking their data together whenever they find a violation. A way that employers try to get around this problem is by hiring illegals as independent contractors. Then, withholding doesn't have to be done until the 3rd year the employee works for them. Essentially, an IRS notice is sent to the employer the first year the "independent contractor's" tax ID information does not match SSA and/or IRS records. To prevent withholding, the "independent contractor" merely has to sign a SS-9 form. After the 2nd 1099 does not match SSA and/or IRS records within a 3 year period, the "independent contractor" must get a certified form from SSA regarding his tax ID number or the employer is required to do backup withholding. At that point, the employer could merely give the "independent contractor" a 28% raise and everything would remain status quo for the employee.

There should be a special task force that looks for these trends in businesses and then does a surprise raid and/or an audit of the worker's status to determine if they were improperly classified as an independent contractor instead of as an employee.

By the way, the fine for employee somebody that is illegal is $25,000.

Oh yeah, an employer can also register with the SSA so that they can look up the validity of tax ID numbers. Guess how many willingly do that. There really is no excuse for employers hiring illegals, so I say enforce and fine away. Maybe a couple of businesses need to be put out of business to get the message across.

The next problem is how do we catch businesses that pay illegals with cash? That might be a little tougher.

Oh that's going to be incredibly difficult and expensive because someone would have to do a complete audit on the company. Then when money comes up missing, the gov would have to prove it went to illegals. Very very difficult.


Any leads would have to come from within (whistleblowers) and then it might be doable when the feds go waltzing through the front door one day after a long investigation. But you're walking a fine line of harrassment and discrimination - particularlly if an employee hates minorities and thinks they all work there illegally and he keeps calling the gov.

That's going to be tough

But yes, we need strict enforcement of the law


Oh and the tax writeoffs are ridiculas. Mortgage interest, children, IRA, education, etc are fine worthwhile writeoffs.
But when you have millionares declaring less than 10,000 dollars in taxable income (someone like K Fed that was in the news a couple months ago), something has to change.

PBR said, "As far as immigration goes, we absolutly need to take care of the problem as soon as we can.
1. A wall is not needed. The fact is that US employers knowingly hiring illegals is the problem. The crackdown needs to start there. Without jobs, there is no reason for illegals to be here. So I think we need to audit all the registered businesses in the US and look for employment verification. If we catch illegals while at work, we deport them. Likely, they will jump ship at the news and be back in mexico long before that happens. From then on, we fine the holy hell out of employers who engage in this activity when the government does yearly verification audits. And if the employers are repeat offenders, the government force closes their business and they are never allowed to open one in the US again.
That will be the end of the immigration problem.
As John McCain said a month ago in Michigan I believe, "We can't bring back the lost jobs, but we can create new ones".
And that might be what is best. We may have to chalk up the losses to mexico and china."

FINALLY! Something we can agree on. Arizona passed a law which went into effect January 1, 2008 which basically sez, "If you hire an illegal alien and afre cought, your business license is suspended for ten (10) days. If you comit a second offense, your license is permanently revoked."
The end result of this legislation is the departure of thousands of illegal aliens either to other states or back to Mexico. And yes, AZ is enforcing that law.
You don't need a federal law to get rid of them. Just have all the states pass similar legislation and enforce it.So far, it's working for us.

Paul B.

I wish I felt better about our government, but I don't and I don't feel that I'm in the minority on this. I voted for G W Bush and honestly I feel swindled. I'm ready for a change in President but I am not having good feelings about any candidate out there. I remember what my grandpa used to say about politics. " You can send an honest man to Washington, but he won't come back honest. No truer words have ever been spoken.

I fervently supported Bush up until the last 18 months or so and now I feel he has been an ineffectual buffoon of a president.. I fear he may go down in history as the WORST leader of this country ever. He has opened a can of worms that will have repercusions for no telling how long. One thing however will be certain, no child of G W Bush will be serving this country militarily and that you can take to the bank.

I even bristle at the thought of his "tax rebate" to spur the downward spiralling economy. I would gladly forfeit mine if some government official what have the cajones to stand up to big oil and say all right Mother Fers no more gouging the American public. You will charge a fair price for your product and nothing more. These god d!#n oil companies plead poverty and record record profits quarter after quarter.

Big oil runs this country and we as citizens can whine and complain all we want but in the end we have to roll over and take it like the weenies we are. You wanna go to work? Your gonna have to pump some gas and get raped in the process.

Makes my blood boil. Sorry for the rant but I've lost faith in my government

Billy,

I think the oil companies should be investigated for price fixing, but otherwise, I think they should be able to set whatever price they want. With competition, they shouldn't be able to price gouge. Something tells me that there is some price fixing going on.

Telling the oil companies what they can charge is just like communism. Next, we'll be telling the doctors, attorneys, CPA, construction contractors, plumbers, etc. what they can charge.

If you don't want to drive too far to work, move closer. Problem is that most people bought their nice house with a nice yard over an hour away from work because they couldn't afford the same thing in the city. I had a client move over an hour away from work because he could get a house for 1/4 to 1/5 of what the same house cost by his work. At first, everything was fine. Then, he started complaining that the hour drive was getting longer and longer because the traffic was getting worse. Everybody had the same idea he had. So instead of spending 2 hours on the road, he was spending 4+ a day on the road. Because he was always late, he was always speeding. He got a ton of tickets, lost his license, got busted twice for driving with a suspended license, was sentenced to a month in jail, and lost his job.

I work from home, but my wife is currently driving 40 minutes each way to the job she just started 5 months ago, which is less than the hour plus she used to drive each way before that. We are looking to buy a house now, and we will be buying it in a more expensive area, closer to her work, just so she can cut down on her drive time, the mileage on the car, and the gas bill. I'll also be closer to my parents so they can help with baby sitting. It will probably cost us $100K more than buying it further away, but it will be worth it over 30 years.

Everybody wants the big house and the big yard for cheap. The thing is, the price paid for the house remains the same over 30+ years. The price of gas, cars, and vehicle service escalates.

High gas prices also helps prevent pollution because less people are willing to drive around just for the heck of it.

I could really get started on the number of trucks and SUV's that I see with a single person in them, but that would be a long tirade too. I figured out that at today's gas prices, it would probably be cheaper for a person to buy a second small car like a Ford Focus that gets 35 miles to the gallon, versus driving a truck or SUV that gets 15 or less miles to the gallon. At $3 per gallon and driving 15,000 miles a year, the gas savings between the two is $1,800. In 8 years or 120,000 miles, the Ford Focus will have paid for itself, not to mention the fact that the more expensive truck/SUV wouldn't be destroyed being driven on miles that its size/towing/hauling capacity are not needed on.

As you can probably tell, I'm not very sympathetic toward people crying over the price of gas. Those are usually the same people that have bought houses on the farms that I used to hunt on.

You guys act like Oil and Gasoline belongs to you. You haven’t done any thing to find an oil producing area or lease the right to drill or invest your money in a venture that might produce oil. You don’t build oil storage facilities or provide infrastructure to support oil production. You don’t produce, you don’t refine, you don’t transport you probably don’t even invest. You don’t even understand how that gasoline in your tank got there. But let the price of gasoline go up 10 cents and it’s the fault of the people who do. It’s been a long time since the major oil producers had any thing to do with the pricing of a Bbl of oil.

Hey dog if the big companies have nothing to do with fixing the prices then explain this to me. Back in the late 70's when my brothers private owned station could not buy any gas, he was forced to close his doors. ...Due to lack of gasoline for sale to private owners..the little guy. Boron at that time bought his station from him and used his tanks to store their gasoline..yes filled them all up with excess gasoline. ... All this while we were sitting in a line because of a gasoline shortage????????..They closed every little guy around here. Now the last private owned station just closed this fall. It had came up for sale and the person that was leasing it at the time could not buy it. He wanted to but they demanded a Million dollar tank change. (just did that when he took over about 5 yrs ago) also demanded he post a million dollar fee of some sort to cover any future problems he might have and all this on top of the asking price of property. A large company now owns the property. The little guy moved out....is still closed.

Fabs is right
 

Telling the companies what they can charge is like communism. There is a little fly in the ointment though. The price of gasoline or whatever is set by the marketplace. They will continue to raise the price because the marketplace needs the gasoline. Remember the gasoline price wars. That was ehn the companies were in competition with each other. Now they seem to have the prices somewhat fixed with each other. Hate to even make the suggestion that we put a cap on the profit that a private company can make but that is what it seems may be necessary. personally I feel the big oil companies are in collusion with each other rather than competition. I also remember the 70's with the gas rationing etc. There wer oil tankers sitting in the Chesapeake bay loaded with oil. Pretty easy to tell if you've ever been on the water. They sat there for weeks with their loads of oil because there was not enough storage capacity on shore. Oil shortage??? I know better..Price gouging?? False shortage?? Yep. But in and of themselves..not illegal. Immoral I am sure...but not illegal. And as far as any party in the presidency I can guarantee ya that the big oil companies are not going to be bothered in the least.

Now quoting Fabs post. "I had a client move over an hour away from work because he could get a house for 1/4 to 1/5 of what the same house cost by his work. At first, everything was fine. Then, he started complaining that the hour drive was getting longer and longer because the traffic was getting worse. Everybody had the same idea he had. So instead of spending 2 hours on the road, he was spending 4+ a day on the road. Because he was always late, he was always speeding. He got a ton of tickets, lost his license, got busted twice for driving with a suspended license, was sentenced to a month in jail, and lost his job."

Well Fabs it was no ones fault but his own. He had to have known he had to go to work. All he had to do was leave a little earlier. He could have gotten to his job in a fair amount of time and without the tickets. He like a lot of others just wanted his cake and to be able to eat it too. I lived an hour...no let me rephrase that..60 miles from work. Drove it for 29 yrs and got no tickets and was always on time for work...even driving in snow fog and hurricanes. Soem of the people that lived 10 minutes from work were quite often late. Matter of responsibility my friend!
:D

Skeet,

I don't disagree that it is a matter of responsibility. I'm just trying to show how these people want their cake and they want to eat it too. They want to live in a nice big home on a couple of acres, but they want it cheap, they want to drive a big SUV, but they want the gas for it to be cheap. They want to live an hour away from work and they don't want any traffic. Then, after they make their decisions and market circumstances change, they complain. Of course, I didn't hear him complainting when he miore than doubled his money when he sold his house in western Maryland and moved to Arizona.

As far as the oil companies are concerned, if they aren't price fixing, I say leave them alone. If they are price fixing, I say nail them to the wall. By the way, collusion in the market place by price fixing is illegal.

Hi Fabs
 

I know collusion with price fixing is illegal.. I just mean there is no way to prove such a thing. If it were done there would be nothing on paper or on tape so it would go like this. Another attorney to Fabs. "Hey bud..lets fix the price of a no fault divorce at 500 bucks" Fabs says ok..ad nauseum to all the other attorneys ergo..the price is 500 bucks and nothing on paper to prove it. Is there anything to say they did it? Of course not. Oh one guy might get pissed off and say it happened..but there is nothing but heresay to "prove" it. And you and I both know that heresay ain't admissible.

Now as far as BIG OIL you and I both know what happened to Standard Oil many years ago. Now there are companies buying other companies and the government doesn't stop it. The oil companies are making beaucoup amounts of francs bucks Euros pesos etc. Record amounts. If they are making record amounts it isn't because of our fuel appetites alone. They are making much larger percentages of profits and now that the independant stations are mostly gone they can pretty much set their own prices. Not saying that the people themselves can't do something to make prices drop(just quit buying) but you know it ain't gonna happen in the ME generation. People are too into what they can get..have ...keep... before the other guy rather than the qualitiy of their lives. And it seems at the same time I keep seeing people that are perpetually unhappy ...and blaming how they feel on someone else.:rolleyes: Always saying..it ain't MY fault....Yeah, sure...it ain't their fault!:rolleyes:

What most people don't understand is what hearsay actually is. Hearsay is getting up on the stand and saying "Johnny told me, that Jim told him that there was price fixing going on." Hearsay is not "I made an agreement with Jim to fix prices."

So, if somebody were to come forward to testify regarding price fixing, it would be admissible if he were privy to the negotiations. Then, it would come down to the he said, she said part of the matter. Kind of like Clemens and his trainer about all this steroid/HGH BS. Like Congress has nothing better to do than to hold hearings on this BS. At least they passed the economic stimulus plan before they had this hearing.

As far as people buying gas is concerned, I know that a lot of people think about it. They have to. When they cannot afford their house payment, they have to start squeezing things, and it might eventually mean that they get rid of the SUV for a more economical vehicle. Time will tell how everything plays out with my generation.

I can tell you Huckabee is my family name....and he is family...think my vote has been cast...