# We all knew this before we voted



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

This is long, but well worth it. Look especially at the VAT (Value added tax). A product could be taxed multiple times on the way to the consumer. Bread would be taxed as grain when it's sold at the elevator, taxed again when ground into flour, taxed again when baked into bread, taxed again when it is shipped, and taxed again when it is sold. This could double or more the price of a loaf of bread. 
We are becoming a two class society. If you don't make a couple of hundred thousand a year you can count on being poor and on welfare for the rest of your life. Your children will be doomed to the same.



> Income tax day, April 15, 2010, now divides Americans into two almost equal classes: those who pay for the services provided by government and the freeloaders. The percentage of Americans who will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009 has risen to 47 percent.
> 
> That isn't the worst of it. The bottom 40 percent not only pay no income tax, but the government sends them cash or benefits financed by the taxes dutifully paid by those who do pay income tax.
> 
> ...


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> Obama's promise not to raise taxes on middle-Americans is already down the drain. Obama brought former Federal Reserve Board Chairman Paul Volcker out of obscurity to serve as chairman of an Economic Recovery Advisory Board and announce that we need to raise taxes.


This does not take rocket science to figure this out. With all the spending they are doing they need to raise revenue some how. The only way they can make money is to TAX. But yet with only about 50% of the population paying federal taxes this will be very hard.

I have been saying this for awhile....back when the first "recovery" legislation was being rammed down our throat....the cash for clunkers (which again did not do a thing for long term auto sales....auto sales have not risen in the first 1/4 this year), now with the end of the Home Buyer Credit....which will slow sales of homes....etc. The only way they could pay for anything is to RAISE TAXES.

We are not out of the woods yet with the economic recovery at all..... I just read (can't remember what agency stated this) but it will be at least another year of economic down turn before things start to look better......Hmmm I thought these bills were going to jump start the economy? This november it is time to clean house....ON BOTH PARTIES.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

> Obama's promise not to raise taxes on middle-Americans is already down the drain.


 Anyone should have been able to see this coming. You cannot have the trade deficit that we have, the outsourcing that we have, and the amount of people sheltering their incomes overseas. The funny thing about these studies is that they never show how many of the top 1% and large corporations that are not paying taxes. Either they don't know or they don't want us to know, I think that it is the latter.

No matter who was elected we are going to be footing more of the bill. Whether it is tax increases or other things like assessments or fees or program cuts that make the individual pay for it instead of the government. Either way we are paying more out of pocket.


> Obama now wants to use the judiciary, too. The retirement of Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens gives him this opportunity.


How? Stevens was a liberal justice, there will be very little change between him and Thomas. I am hoping that he nominates Thomas. This is another scare tactic that lacks substance.


> The one way to save ourselves and our country is to elect a Congress in November pledged to stop the spending.


And a congress that will stop handouts to the upper class and corporation. The special interests and the like are just as big of freeloaders on our system as the welfare cases. Some welfare is from pure laziness and the handouts and tax breaks are just plain greed.


> We are becoming a two class society.


This has been happening for several years now. Tucker Carlson warned of this back when he was still at FOX. The outsourcing, the tax breaks, the offshore banking, the lack of concern of the middle class.

Why should I have to pay a 15% self employment tax when corporations get tax breaks? Why is the IRS the #1 cause of small business failure? Why should one business get a TIF and another one doesn't? Why should big corporations get a bailout and main street get nothing? All about the lobbyists. Everyone is so dead set on the effect but no one ever wants to look at the cause, instead we repeat it.


> This november it is time to clean house....ON BOTH PARTIES.


 :thumb: 
I would like to see the house and senate go to one 6 year term, end lobbying, limit contributions, and limit the amount of staff they can have. Another lesson the rest of the country can learn from ND is the lack of political sesssions. I think DC should go to shorter sessions. That would limit the opportunity for pork, limit the amount of legislation passed, and increase the amount of time politicians spend in their constituencies.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> How? Stevens was a liberal justice, there will be very little change between him and Thomas. I am hoping that he nominates Thomas. This is another scare tactic that lacks substance.


It sounds to me like your falling back into the same thought process that made you vote for Obama.



> And a congress that will stop handouts to the upper class and corporation. The special interests and the like are just as big of freeloaders on our system as the welfare cases. Some welfare is from pure laziness and the handouts and tax breaks are just plain greed.


There may be a few rich evading taxes, but for every one of them there are hundreds not paying any taxes, or getting refunds and never paid in. I worked for a salary all of my life, but I know that all those rich people that so many hate are the ones that generate jobs for the guys on salaries. Condemning them is sort of biting the hand that feeds you.

The democrats want fewer rich people and more poor people because they always sucker the poor into voting for them. The poor have been voting for democrats as long as I can remember and they are still poor. Hows that work? Anyway, I wish there was ten times as many rich people. More revenue, more jobs, fewer poor. Just because I'm not rich I'm not going to begrudge it to someone else.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

> t sounds to me like your falling back into the same thought process that made you vote for Obama.


 :rollin: HAAH!. The point is this, everyone thinks that one new justice is going to collapse, one liberal is going to be replaced by another, if it is Thomas, he is probably not even as liberal as Stevens. Once again it lacks no substance. If the scenarios of these writers had any merit by now we should all have an O on our chest, no guns, gov't funded abortions, complete communism, and total chaos. None of this has happened. Now we are a few short months away from the mid terms.


> There may be a few rich evading taxes, but for every one of them there are hundreds not paying any taxes, or getting refunds and never paid in. I worked for a salary all of my life, but I know that all those rich people that so many hate are the ones that generate jobs for the guys on salaries. Condemning them is sort of biting the hand that feeds you.


True to a point. Corporations do employ a lot of people, a lot of them are ethical and good for the economy but some of the unsavory ones are dodging or just not paying taxes. All the complaining about the welfare cases freeloading (some of these people were laid off by these corporations and their jobs sent overseas while a few execs and board members get the multi million dollar bonuses) and not one word said about the billions of dollars that is owed to Uncle Sam by billion dollar corporations and billionaires. Not paying your fair share is not a conservative value is it? 8) Furthermore if giving corrupt businesses billions, some of which gets returned to politicians is ok, then tax breaks for people who need it most in an attempt to spur the economy seems only right. It doesn't work out on paper mathematically and like the both bailouts it is not a good practice. Bottom line the money is waaaaaay better off in the hands of the middle and lower class than in the hands of the top 1%.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I would like to see it changed so only individuals could give to political campaigns. Right now the unions are pushing millions to the liberals. Corporations if you look are giving to both so they have a buddy no matter which way it goes.



> HAAH!. The point is this, everyone thinks that one new justice is going to collapse, one liberal is going to be replaced by another, if it is Thomas, he is probably not even as liberal as Stevens. Once again it lacks no substance.


One liberal is one to many because they try to legislate from the bench. Judges should not be liberal or conservative, and the constitution is not a living document. Judges should be interpreting the constitution as closely as they can to the original intent.



> If the scenarios of these writers had any merit by now we should all have an O on our chest, no guns, gov't funded abortions, complete communism, and total chaos. None of this has happened. Now we are a few short months away from the mid terms


.

They have already tried some back door maneuvers on our guns, and you can bet they have more waiting. We also have government funded abortions, where have you been hiding. As far as communism, we are well on our way. Currently we are a socialist nation, and if you have been listening much of our new health care is modeled after Cuba's. It's going to be a long few months to the mid terms, and if there are to many thinking like you we are still in trouble.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> All the complaining about the welfare cases freeloading (some of these people were laid off by these corporations and their jobs sent overseas while a few execs and board members get the multi million dollar bonuses)


What do you think of the goverment extending again the benefits to people out of work?

I am a little divided on this subject. One I am for it because it will keep people for losing homes and diving deeper into poverty. But on the other hand.....Why would you go look for a job when you can keep getting your benefits. How many people are sucking off the goverment teet while a spouse is working. So someone is sitting at home, not working and pulling in money while our goverment is going deeper into debt. It is a double edge sword on this issue.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

> What do you think of the goverment extending again the benefits to people out of work?


They (we) almost have to. If we can afford bailouts,TIF's, and other forms of welfare for business we can afford to extend unemployment benefits. This, like several other (not all though) social programs are necessary, otherwise you see things like crime and demand for other welfare programs go up. Prisons are expensive to build and maintain, I would rather see tax dollars spent on unemployment benefits than spent and building and running more prisons.


> They have already tried some back door maneuvers on our guns, and you can bet they have more waiting


Yes a few people have tried back door tactics and they have failed. Vigilance is key but there have been no changes at all to date.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> What do you think of the goverment extending again the benefits to people out of work?
> 
> They (we) almost have to. If we can afford bailouts,TIF's, and other forms of welfare for business we can afford to extend unemployment benefits. This, like several other (not all though) social programs are necessary, otherwise you see things like crime and demand for other welfare programs go up. Prisons are expensive to build and maintain, I would rather see tax dollars spent on unemployment benefits than spent and building and running more prisons.


I agree. But also with this is what incentive does it give someone who is out of work to go find work? Especially when you keep extending the benefits. If you can keep down grading the benefits for time every month you are with out work and keep dwindling it down. But what I have been told by people out of work is that this is not happening. They keep getting the same benefits. So they are not looking too hard to find a job.

The system is needed.....but it could be revamped to help save $$$ and also to make people go look for jobs instead of just sitting by and waiting for the perfect job. IMO.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

First off, there have to be jobs to go to. Personally I would think that unemployment benefits should follow a curve that matches unemployment rates, the higher the unemployment the longer benefits should last.

Second, you live in MN and the unemployment payments there are way higher than ND. Therefore I doubt that people who are looking for the perfect job can actually afford to maintain their lifestyle on unemployment. Here in ND it is just not feasible.

Third, there are obviously caps on how long you can draw. I am thinking that the chronic welfare cases that you thinking of are not drawing from other programs and not unemployment. I could be wrong on that. Since we are now so afraid to call a leech a leech or a mooch a mooch because it lacks PC there is almost no way to stop it. I agree that the system needs some tweaking but as long as there are people like pelosi around it isn't going to happen. Gotta change it at the state level.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

True on the MN benefits and payments. But that is all I have knowledge of.

Now on the job market front. There are tons of jobs out there....."Welcome to Walmart may I help you" or "do you want fries with that" jobs out there or janitorial, custodial, etc. I have a friend that is working two jobs to make up for the one he got laid off from. Yet I know of three other people who are just sitting at home sucking at the goverment teet thinking these jobs available are not good enough for them. That is what I have a problem with.

But off subject again.

Now back on the tax cuts or taxing issues. The "Bush" tax cuts that will now be thrown out the window only helped 5% of the wealthy in this nation. But yet 95% of the rest (mid-upper, mid, mid-lower class) who this will truly effect the most will get nailed. That 95% is people who invest in the US (not over seas or off shore accounts like you are pointing too), they spend in the US, the create businesses which in turn creates jobs, etc. They will get pounded. Then you have 50% that don't pay taxes. So where does all this tax burden fall on.....MIDDLE CLASS. But didn't the our elected president say it would not hurt the middle class. Pure BS! But the majority in washington (both party's) spew straight BS.

Now I am not afraid to pay taxes. But when one state (i heard on radio i think it was Mass...but not 100% sure) after these tax cuts are gone 65% of a persons income will go towards taxes. Why would you want to work harder if you are in that tax bracket?

The goverment needs to cut spending. But yet all the bills that have been passed (bail outs, health care, cash for clunkers, etc) all are spending bills.

I have a question.... What about the states that don't have State Tax. Do they get extra funding from the Federal Gov.? Or do they have to tax another way....ie sale taxes or real estate taxes to gain revenue? This is just crossing my mind since the Broncos traded WR Marshall to Miami and on ESPN they said that he got an "extra" bonus since that state does not charge state tax.

Because if these states do get extra funding from the Fed.....that should stop. IMO.


----------



## MOB (Mar 10, 2005)

TK33 said:


> Why should I have to pay a 15% self employment tax when corporations get tax breaks? Why is the IRS the #1 cause of small business failure? Why should one business get a TIF and another one doesn't? Why should big corporations get a bailout and main street get nothing? All about the lobbyists. Everyone is so dead set on the effect but no one ever wants to look at the cause, instead we repeat it.


Your 15.3% self employment tax is for social security and medicare. An employer withholds 7.65% from your paycheck and matches that for 15.3%. A corporation doesn't pay the 15.3% SET on dividends paid to shareholders, but the sahreholders do pay income tax on the dividends they recieve. The democrats cries of the big bad corporations not paying taxes and getting all the tax breaks is BS. I'm self-employed and incorporated 20 some years ago.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

True statement, until money goes offshore, or some other scheme or loophole:


> Today, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report showing that between 1998 and 2005 "about two-thirds of corporations operating in the United States did not pay taxes." Corporations have a "variety of reasons" for not paying, including "the cost of producing their goods, salary expenses and interest payments on their debt."


I dislike paying taxes as much as the next guy but something does have to be paid in, obvioulsy. The problem that I have is that small business and small corporations pay way more of their funds than the large corporations do. Flat tax rates across the board is something that needs to be done.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> I dislike paying taxes as much as the next guy but something does have to be paid in, obvioulsy. The problem that I have is that small business and small corporations pay way more of their funds than the large corporations do. Flat tax rates across the board is something that needs to be done.


Who do you think will be hammered the hardest for all this new legislation that got passed....health care, bail outs, etc. Who is going to be paying if for all of this? I will give the answers... middle class and small business owners.


----------

