# State of the union address



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

I read this and happen to agree 100% with it and I rarely agree 100% with anything :wink: Thought it might get you thinking :roll:

"Tonight will be George Bush's 6th State of the Union speech. He'll have the platform, all alone, before the entire congress, cabinet members, the Joint Chiefs, the Supreme Court (probably including Samuel Alito) and millions of Americans, and he'll say very little. I'm not expecting to hear anything other than "the state of the union is strong" and a few ideas for expanded government programs, some additional spending on this, that or the other thing, how we're going to continue working to make America safe and secure. New ideas? Don't look for them. An earnest attempt to reduce the size and the influence of the Imperial Federal Government of the United States in our lives? Don't hold your breath.

It's no secret that I would like to hear something about tax reform. The current tax code in this country is killing us. No, those words aren't too strong. Our American economy is slowly collapsing under the burden of an onerous tax system that punishes the very activities our economy needs. In just the past few weeks we've heard several warnings and items of bad news. Warren Buffet, a man who some would say knows a thing or two about finance and our economy, is warning that the biggest danger facing our financial well-being isn't the huge federal deficit or the price of oil. The biggest danger is our trade deficit. Just yesterday the news arrived that our savings rate is at its lowest point since the great depression. You want a reason? As for the trade deficit, blame our tax code. The simple and brutal fact of the matter is that there is no major economic power in the world that places the tax burden on its business and industry that the United States does. You do realize, don't you, that these corporate taxes are a simple fraud. They're all a device to convince the American people that our wonderful elected officials have chosen to relieve us of a portion of our personal tax burden by transferring that burden to evil and greedy corporations. Our pathetic inept system of government non-education sets up Americans to believe such nonsense. As for personal savings, the tax code punishes us there also. You have to pay taxes on all the money you save, and then you have to pay taxes on all the interest you earn! Wow! What an incentive! Besides, why save anyway? Could it be that Americans are saving less and less because they are embracing the idea that when politicians are so eager to provide with our every want and need in exchange for our votes, why save? Every year we see more and more ideas floated for government-paid this, that and the other thing .... what's the point? :eyeroll:

I hear a lot of pundits telling us that the Democrats just don't have an agenda for 2006. Oh, and the Republicans do?   And would someone please tell me what that agenda is? Fighting Islamic terrorism? That's great! But that's been the agenda for five years. This is a short attention span house the Republicans are playing to, and this "fighting terror" thing isn't going to go anywhere. Ending our dependence on oil? The same party that can't even get drilling started on that portion of the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge that was set aside for that purpose is going to sell us a bill of goods on energy independence? :eyeroll: Old hat. Old subject.

Look at the list of issues. Trade deficit. Disappearing manufacturing jobs. Low savings rate. Tax reform is the answer to all of these problems. Sure, I favor the FairTax. It is the only tax reform proposal I've seen that addresses so many of the issues we are dealing with. Our current tax code is one that was designed by and for the benefit of politicians and lobbyists. It punishes achievement and rewards laziness. It punishes the voting blocks unimportant to politicians, and rewards voting blocks who keep them in office. Above all, the tax codes gives thousands of high-income Beltway lobbyists their fertile territory for exchanging campaign donations for changes in the tax code to benefit their clients.

The president appointed a tax reform commission. I don't know how much money they spent, but whatever it was, it was a waste. This failure of a commission merely recommended a repeat of 1986. Get rid of more deductions, set up a few flat tax rates, and let 'er rip. That's the 1986 tax reform act all over again, *and as soon as it was passed the lobbyists went to work. That bill has now been amended and changed around 10,000 times, and nothing is better. * :sniper:

OK, I know I've been hammering this, but about 11 days ago there was a story in the Washington Post about the lack of Republican agenda. The story said that Republican congressmen were hearing from their constituents on gas prices and on the FairTax. One congressman, Zach Wamp from Tennessee, even "lamented" the fact that people are more interested in the FairTax than they are in changing Washington. Can it truly be that these politicians don't understand that the FairTax is all about changing Washington? *Of course they realize it, that's why they're not on board! They know that passage of the FairTax would constitute a massive transfer of power from the inside to outside of the Beltway.* These politicians want you to be taxed when they decide you should be taxed, not when you chose to be taxed. :******: They want the control, and the FairTax takes that control away. They want to tell you how much you can save tax-free, not leave that decision up to you.

There is good news. I've been reading literally hundreds of letters from hundreds of members of congress. These letters were sent to me by people across the country who received them as responses to their inquiries about their representatives stance on the FairTax. The politicians write back with excuses as to why they don't support the idea. The excuses belie a growing fear that the people of this country may have come across an issue that could do irreparable harm to the balance of power between the political class and the citizen class. The less these politicians hear about the FairTax, the better they like it. When they do address the issue, they find it necessary to misrepresent the FairTax in order to critique it. We have the vote, and that puts the advantage with us. All we have to do is use it. Sadly, that's a very tall order.

In the meantime ... don't expect any real news from tonight's speech."


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

well did anyone watch it?
MY observations

1)Did you see the stern look on Hillarys face when bush cracked the joke about he and bill clinton turning 60, she is a humorless ***** although she probably doesn't care for Bill anymore than she does George. God help this country if she gets elected.
2) it will be interesting to see if the parties can really initiate some real effort to get off of oil. Nuclear and solar get my vote, I think we should have nuclear supplied power for electric short range commuters ( which would include the bulk of fuel consumption) if every parking lot had a hookup that would allow commuters to recharge for free ( I know nothing is really free but nuclear power comes closer than most other forms that are currently practical) it would clean up the air and could be done in just a couple years. I bet the anti nuke crowd derails that one one the left and the oil industry lobbies on the right will work against it. I don't believe
ethanol is doable based on what I've read on this site but new technologies could sure change that.

3) Iran is heating up, thats good we have to face up to them quick or one of our cities will go up in smoke. Iran is run by a small bunch of lunatic jihadists that wont hesitate to give a nuke to terrorists, hopefully the will be overthrown but I doubt it.

4) most of those democrat sure don't like us haveing tax cuts, if it wasn't so serious it would of been funny watching them pout. I hope the republicans have the swing to make them permanent the fair tax has litle chance with the ignorance of the public.

5) otherwise as predicted more govt this and that and continued expansion of the feds influence on our lives so much for the republican revolution :eyeroll:

6) I liked the democrat rebuttal comment about excess oil profits :eyeroll: once again our wondeful country has shown its inability to understand basic economics and gross profit vs profit margins. Another typical politicians play to the ignorance of our public


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

I have to agree with you Bobm, nuclear is the way to go. I was disapointed you said nothing about Cindy.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

Nuclear has been the way to go for eighty years already, I often wonder what the world would be like if we hadn't spent the last 100 years fighting over energy. It's a sick sad situation.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

I saw George Bush the "Great Unifier" sitting in front of a very divided nation spouting about going to war with anyone and everybody and how there are so many things that need to get done but while he has a full majority in every branch of the government including the judicial branch it is still is not getting done. Seems to me he was going to fix social security, health care, the education system and the federal deficit when he was elected the first term. Progress? It seemed like he was searching for answers instead of leading us to the promised land. The United States has slowly gone from the leader of the free world to the "bully" of the free world. We don't have leadership in Washington but a bunch of politiicans a few of whom are corrupt and have been caught and the rest of them, well... I think that what happened post Katrina is not just a Katrina problem but a reflection on the state of our leadership in Washington. Do I blame George W and the republican party? Well yes I do for most of it because they don't seem to be able to do much with the majority they sent to Washington to help the American people. Could the democratic party do better? Well they could not do much worse. The best scenario would be if the American political system could find some common ground to unify our country again but does anyone see that in the crystal ball?????? I wish Johnny Carson the "Great Swami" could read his envelopes and see into the future because George W's 38% approval rating just isn't cutting it. As I listened to the State of the Union address last night I thought geez there is a lot of "stuff" going on but where are we headed? [/i]


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

In addition I'm offended by PBush saying we as Americans are addicted to foreign oil. He is full of crap we have no choice what form of energy the government is going to authorize for our use. Hell they have even let the insurance companies in on the game by letting them give us the shaft if we want to burn wood to heat our homes. Like I wrote above here it is a sick sad government we have let run out of control, maybe it is our fault for not demanding better from the people we elect to represent 'us' not the government. :evil:


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

I did have to chuckle when George W talked about his science and math initiative and how he was going to attract highly educated people who have expertise in these fields into education to increase our leadership role in these fields of study. I suppose our North Dakota teaching salaries will have them drooling over coming to the "prarie ghetto" and leave their present salaries for our entry level teaching salary or the opportunity to work 30 years with an advanced degree and earn $40,000 and a half of a medical benefit. Let the stampede begin!


----------



## MSG Rude (Oct 6, 2003)

Here's to pretty much everything above my post:

uke:

A wise Old Sergeant once told me, "You'll have two great First Sergeant's in your career, the one that just left and the one that will be coming in."

Most of the above brings this to mind.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

SFC...Is there any way you could enlighten us with your opinion other than puke?


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

> SFC...Is there any way you could enlighten us with your opinion other than puke?


No explanation needed here....... I understood it.

Bob I watched it and like you I didn't hear much that hadn't already be spoken. Starting up nuclear and more technology in coal fired plants was good to hear. I don't see how ethanol could ever be a workable solution, but who knows. One question for you, if the President can't get congress to give up control of even 5% of the tax base, how do you expect anyone to convince them to give up 100% control. That is what would be required and I don't think it will ever happen.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

> No explanation needed here....... I understood it.


It takes one to know one... how about the rest of us dummys tell us.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

> One question for you, if the President can't get congress to give up control of even 5% of the tax base, how do you expect anyone to convince them to give up 100% control. That is what would be required and I don't think it will ever happen.


I agree, It won't happen unless the public demands it, and the public is far too ignorant and disinterested to even educate themselves on the issue.
The sad thing is our politicians know full well most of the public is ignorant, they are an elite class that probably sits in meeting rooms laughing about it as they continue to come up with programs to keep the stupid dependent on them. I doubt we will see any meaningful change in our lifetime, the country marches toward socialism....and many on this site support it.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> the country marches toward socialism....and many on this site support it.


I think that is true, but most who support it do it without realizing it. I think it is going to require a great deal of patients and the presentation of one concept at a time. Not that people are slow to learn, but they need to digest each concept slowly to decide if it is true, and if they agree.

That being said lets talk about the percent of a persons income that goes to the government directly, or indirectly. Both are taxes, but one is more clandestine. I currently don't have specific numbers, but perhaps someone can help me find them, so the following is strictly an example.

Direct Tax approximately an average of 25%
Bob How much are businesses taxed? for now lets say 20% 
If that business is petroleum what do you pay in taxes at the pump 30%? Perhaps this would be 5% of your income, I don't know.
Property tax you may or may not have.
You think you don't pay taxes on food in some states, but the producers are taxed, and they raise their price to pay for that.

I can't even begin to name all the taxes, and not all pertain to everyone, but it would be safe to say that you pay more than half you income in tax.

I'm not pushing the fair tax, I just want people to see how the system is ripping you off. Not everyone, some need government support, but an even greater number are ripping off the government, and you know who is paying for it??????????????????????????????????????????


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

*The good news is:* 
The long-run burden of federal taxation will not climb above its historical average of 18 percent because of the Bush tax rate reductions. 
The double-tax on dividends and capital gains--15 percent--is lower than at any time since World War II. 
America's overall tax burden is much lower than most industrialized nations, which helps explain why our economy grows faster and creates more jobs. 
*The bad news is:* 
America's top personal income tax rate is 25 percent higher than it was when Ronald Reagan left office. If the tax cuts are allowed to expire, the top tax rate will climb to 39.6 percent--more than 41 percent higher than the top rate when Reagan was President. 
America's corporate income tax of 35 percent (40 percent if state taxes are included) is higher than the corporate tax rates in every European nation--even socialist welfare states like France and Germany. 
Failure to make the Bush tax cuts permanent will push the overall tax burden to above 20 percent of GDP, higher than it was in every year of the Carter administration and higher than it was in seven of the eight years Bill Clinton was President. 
Since the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts passed: 
The unemployment rate has steadily declined. 
After the 2003 tax bill reduced taxes on capital and business investment, business investment has responded positively, reversing three straight quarters of decline. 
GDP growth skyrocketed in the third quarter of 2003, achieving the best quarterly increase in 20 years. Ruling out any possibility of a "fluke," the following quarter's growth rate showed the continued strength of an expanding economy. 
*Unless the tax cuts are made permanent:* 
Income tax rates will climb back to Clinton-era levels. 
The double-tax on dividends will climb back to a maximum of nearly 40 percent. 
The double tax on capital gains will climb back to 20 percent. 
New capital purchases by small and medium-sized businesses will be subject to higher taxes. 
The federal death taxes, scheduled to die a long deserved death in 2010, would survive. 
The child tax credit will fall by $300. 
Many of the worst "marriage penalties" in the old tax code will come back to life. 
The expanded 10 percent tax rate which cuts taxes on all taxpayers (rich and poor) would be lost.

read more
http://www.heritage.org/research/featur ... /taxes.cfm


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

or try this test

http://www.fairtaxrevolution.com/federal_tax_quiz.asp

then ask yourself why we shouldn't change it


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Well, Bob, I got 13 out of 14. A little bit of optimism snuck in on the question , how many people need professional help preparing their taxes, and dampened my logic. Anyone should have known all the pessimistic answers are correct.

Thanks for the perspective on business tax. Do you think I am far off in estimating that in the end the government gets half our income?


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Yes, if you include state and federal thats probably a conservative estimate


----------



## sevendogs (Sep 19, 2003)

Nuclear power is good. It is very clean, indeed. Even in case of an explosion or leak, it is less harmpless to wildlife then to humans. It happened about 30 years ago; I traveled in a car across land, where nucelar accodent took place; land stretch about 60 miles was polluted. It was not allowed to stop the veihicle there, but I could watch hawks in the skies, thick prairie grass, groundsquirrels teaming and big fish was sen in creeks, under the bridgle. The lant was still not good for farming, but already OK for wildlife. You see, most animals breed and mature sexually faster then we do. Rdiation wiptes out some of them, but reproduction rate is gigh enough to compensate loses. This is much worse on us, humans.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

There is no such thing as fallout. When a nuclear explosion happens it happens in it's entirety. Here is an example of radiation, when you heat a cup of water in the microwave does it retain radiation. A microwave was invented to simulate natural radioactivity produced by uranium and plutonium.

I wish I could live long enough to see every ones fears of nuclear energy overcome, but until the big oil and feds quit putting out so much propaganda concerning the safety and stability of nuclear energy none of us will see it's true and full benefits.

Only NASA and the Navy, in this country, have seen the real benefits so far.


----------



## jacksbrat (Feb 12, 2006)

> Unless the tax cuts are made permanent:
> Income tax rates will climb back to Clinton-era levels.
> The double-tax on dividends will climb back to a maximum of nearly 40 percent.
> The double tax on capital gains will climb back to 20 percent.
> ...


Oh No. Please don't let that happen. It would be just terrible to go back to those terrible days of Bill Clinton. How could we ever live without all this war and fearand killing? How could we ever put up with a balenced budget, and gas under a dollar. The stock market going up instead of down, all those help wanted signs and crowded malls, and english spoken at construction sights where illegals now do the work "Americans won't do(for nothing). Wouldn't that be hell?.


----------



## DecoyDummy (May 25, 2005)

jacksbrat ... that's just plain DUMB ...

do some reseach and get back to us ... have you heard of the term "NUMBSKULL?"


----------

