Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Eagler on July 25, 2001, 10:12:00 AM
-
Gephardt hints at increase in taxes
"Let me tell you something. I'm glad we did what was right in 1993, and I'll do it again because I believe in being fiscally responsible with the taxpayers' money," he (House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt) said.
------------------------------------
And then they lost power in 1994 through a Republican landslide victory.
If you don't want your money, give it to your favorite charity before you let these morons in Washington blow it. Unless you are a recipient of a government handout (most of which don't pay taxes in the first place), can't see the sense in voting in goofballs who openly tell you they are going to take more of your money through increased taxes...
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20010724-98885729.htm (http://www.washtimes.com/national/20010724-98885729.htm)
-
Dems=Big Gov't, Big brother, tax and spend, unfortunately, they target the young, the college students and the poor, uneducated, and draw them in with 'feel good' politics. Once these folks hit 30 and start earning good money or start having children, they realize they're in the wrong party. :)
(Strictyly my opinion, and, I might add, I still continue to vote the issues, lately none have fallen on DEM side of the voting ballet)
-
Hmmmm! "You take Mary, I'll take Sue. Ain't no difference, 'tween the two".
Its like a restaurant menu with one entree.
"Would you like your Catfish fried in butter or pork fat?".
The amazing thing is that each party has gotten people to believe that what they say about the other one is true :)
- Yoj
-
Let's see... last week two items on the news, at the same time
a) tax checks were printed and send out to people
b) government report stated that Social Security will collape with huge sucking sound in 2023 ( don't remember the exact year )
b is nothing more then attempt to work up the paranoia and get people to rally around the idea of putting YOUR tax money into hands of wall street bankers and brokers. But, how does that reconsile with the fact that we now have too much money ?
Last time i checked my math, if i have 5 $ and need $5 tomorrow, it's not a good idea to give 4$ to anyone else today.....
-
I wish I knew more about this Social Security thing.
I got this nice cool "newsletter" from Social Security that showed me all the $$ I've been putting out for them. It also included all kinds of assurances that Social Security is in fine shape and will not have any problems. Although the baby boomers will be drawing soon, this newsletter makes it sounds like I won't have a problem getting my money.
Then I hear on NPR about how Social Security will run dry in 2038 (whaddya know, my 76th birthday) and though it's pretty stable right now, something needs to be done OR ELSE.
So which is it?
-
You're going to see some things change about SS, age being foremost of them. Unfortunately nobody wants to upset AARP, but the fact is people are more than doubling their retirement time based on SS's origins, and that's the foremost factor in breaking the bank, so to speak..
On the other hand, using FDSki's example...giving money to someone known for wasting it does not equate to fiscal responsibility. Quite the opposite.
-
"So which is it?"
If everything stays status quo, it's the latter. More is going to come out of SS than is going in. I think the return on SS is < 3%. Problem is our lovely gov keeps dipping into the fund for everything, putting little IOU's which they can't pay back.
fd ski, I think the poor stock market performance is playing against privatization of SS. As the typical american memory is shorter than his wahzoo, they forget the long haul return possible through proper investment in the market. The average citizen is just too damn dumb to trust himself with his own money :)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort:
Dems=Big Gov't, Big brother, tax and spend, unfortunately, they target the young, the college students and the poor, uneducated, and draw them in with 'feel good' politics. Once these folks hit 30 and start earning good money or start having children, they realize they're in the wrong party. :)
(Strictyly my opinion, and, I might add, I still continue to vote the issues, lately none have fallen on DEM side of the voting ballet)
Right... So why is Dubya hellbent on giving government money to "faith-based organizations?"
-
Keep in mind that Clinton wanted to take what was in SS fund and invest it, while Bush wants you to have the option to control what you invest in future SS taxation. Its called "Choice".
-
Social Security was meant to save poor little old widow ladies from starvation. It is a welfare program, not a savings account. Current contributions are used to pay for current expenses. Problem is that everyone feels entitled to "their" SS "investments", even if they just use it for an extra couple of weeks of vacation in the islands.
Just reduce the amount paid to the wealthy, who don't really need it, and the problem goes away. Do we really want to tax our grand children for that extra vacation?
-
Well Eagler, then why not throw it in TBills ? You know, the world wide known SAFEST security you can buy, paying something around 7% now or so ?
But wait, that's giving money to the government !!! :)
I don't believe in the total superiority of private company over that of government running. It is a myth propagated by those with vested interest.
Those who don't believe me, i invite you to look at history of WWI, WWII and periods in between, you'll find that it was a government planning and policing that brought about the most efficient performance out of the economy.
America of 1918 was more true to the communist thought in that aspect then USSR ever was :)
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM:
Right... So why is Dubya hellbent on giving government money to "faith-based organizations?"
He realizes they can use the $$ more efficently helping people than some fat porked gov program run with your typical "I don't give a rats bellybutton about my job" gov employee..
-
Originally posted by Yoj:
Hmmmm! "You take Mary, I'll take Sue. Ain't no difference, 'tween the two".
Its like a restaurant menu with one entree.
"Would you like your Catfish fried in butter or pork fat?".
The amazing thing is that each party has gotten people to believe that what they say about the other one is true :)
- Yoj
Yoj see's it too, I agree 100%.
Dems=Big Gov't, Big brother, tax and spend, unfortunately, they target the young, the college students and the poor, uneducated, and draw them in with 'feel good' politics.
That should read:
Politicians =Big Gov't, Big brother, tax and spend,
Term limits and campaign finance reform would go a long ways to correct this.
Jack Ryan for President in 2004!
-
Social Security is a scam. If anybody but the government tried something like that, they would be arrested. Tell ya what, let me keep my own whoopee money. I'll invest it wisely, and when I'm 65 I'll give the feds back what I would have paid in social security taxes, adjusted for inflation and whatever miserable rate of return they would have achieved with it. I'll keep the rest for myself, and retire fat and happy. If everybody did that, this country would be a hell of a lot richer.
But nope, we aren't that smart. We need Big Brother to take care of the money for us because we are too stupid. I'm so grateful I have them around to make decisions for me. Money is so confusing!
And I can't figure out how fast to drive on a perfectly flat and smooth road with 5 mile visibility and no cars on it. Please Uncle Sam tell me how fast is safe! I'm so scared!
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrghhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhh
Memo Gidley
Memo Gidley
Memo Gidley
@#$#$!^%#&*#%^*$^&*$^&*#^%&#
:D
[ 07-25-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]
-
i invite you to look at history of WWI, WWII and periods in between, you'll find that it was a government planning and policing that brought about the most efficient performance out of the economy.
ROFL
You can take the commie out of the evil empire, but you can't take the evil empire out of the commie. :D
Seriously, I've worked for federal government, county government, huge company, medium company, and small company. Do that and it becomes pretty clear which organizations are most efficient.
[ 07-25-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]
-
OH man I just saw Jack Ryan for President ROFL WTG
-
Originally posted by jihad:
That should read:
Politicians =Big Gov't, Big brother, tax and spend,
Last time I checked, I had taxes coming BACK to me Jihad...there is a difference between paying, and receiving, Bro!
-
Geezerhood running amok here :)
Fury wrote:
"Then I hear on NPR about how Social Security will run dry in 2038 (whaddya know, my 76th birthday) and though it's pretty stable right now, something needs to be done OR ELSE."
Well when I began paying in to SSI the full retirement age was 56 (assuming I remember right) Now you can get partial (or reduced) SSI at 62. Anyone wanna guess what the age may be 38 years from now? ;)
Funkedup wrote:
"Social Security is a scam. If anybody but the government tried something like that, they would be arrested."
Why do you suppose the Govt. passed the potzi scheme ban after the SSI act? hehehe.
Ripsnort wrote:
"Last time I checked, I had taxes coming BACK to me Jihad...there is a difference between paying, and receiving, Bro!"
Be serious, Bro! ;) If you have money coming back you let the Govt. use "YOUR" money interest free. Always underpay, invest it, draw 10% to 20% (depending on your comfort level) and then pay the 3% penalty for under-paying and pocket the difference. Or better yet donate the 3% penalty and write it off.
Just my opinion I could be mistaken :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by funkedup:
... and when I'm 65 I'll give the feds back what I would have paid in social security taxes, adjusted for inflation and whatever miserable rate of return they would have achieved with it
And why would you do that? It's your money, all of it.
-
Originally posted by fd ski:
Last time i checked my math, if i have 5 $ and need $5 tomorrow, it's not a good idea to give 4$ to anyone else today.....
The $5 does not belong to you. It's stolen, and you are giving it (a miniscule part of it) to the rightful owner.
Math has nothing to do with it.
-
More like:
If I stole $5, and I promised to give back $4 to the rightful owner tomorrow, I'd better not spend more than $1 today. :)
[ 07-25-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]
-
Your numbers are screwy too. The retuned portion is more like a $0.28 not $4.00.
-
LOL
-
I'm a registered American.
Some nitwit decided we had to be in 'parties' so, my voter card sez I'm a "democrat".
Frankly; I don't believe mosta the crap pumped out by any party; the system that produces candidates does not produce leaders and like 'ol Rip.. I try and vote issues.
The choices suck, frankly.. catfish fried in grease or butter made me laff... that's politics.
My current politicl stance boils down to simplistic issues..
..alternative energy source development, INCLUDING nuclear.
..a one page flat percentage tax code
..universal free access to quality health care and medical benefits
..the most competent and powerful military orgainization on the planet.
..an unabridged right of the citizenry to keep and bear arms
..freedom of choice and economic equality for women
..equal voting rights and access to the polls for ALL citizens regardless of where they live.
..commercial access to and co-development of space
..Foregin aid and support based on merit; not corruption and greed.
The current crop of political puppets and puppeteers is dismaying.. time we got back to basic issues.
-
Truest words in the campaign of 2000:
"If you send it, they will spend it."
Note that the "they" is generic and avoids party lines. Because BOTH parties want to spend as much of YOUR money as they can lay their grubby mits on.
Pretty simple. Congresspersons "live" by spending... not THEIR money (always seems to be an "out" for them in every onerous law)... they spend YOUR money. Because YOU can't be trusted with your own money.
BTW, how long ago was the last compromise/law passed in Congress that was touted as "fixing Social Security"?
Anyone want to wager? :)
-
So, Hangtime - are you a Demican or a Republicrat?
Almost makes me admire the old farmer who said "I never vote - it only encourages 'em."
- Yoj
-
LOL Yoj nice quote. :)
-
Sad part is.. regardless of how bad a pack of rats they trot out each year for our 'approval' NOT voting always produces worse results than voting. If you can't vote FOR something or somebody; then dammit vote AGAINST it.
Go ahead.. stick yer head in the sand and 'don't vote'. Give 'em no feedback. Don't 'encourage' them.
Pretty soon; the rats won't bother to check the popular opinion.. because it won't count.
I urge you all to exercise the franchise... NOT voting is a slap in the face to all those who put their lives on the line SO YOU CAN. Go ahead, tell me; tell THEM their sacrafice was without point, the franchise is worthless and the future is not ours.
You want things changed.. find somebody on the list that has an agenda that at least has SOME of what you want.. and fediddlein VOTE!
Be an American. Use YOUR mind, YOUR vote.. not some party hacks.
-
Ok POLITICS 101
1. The democrats want to take most of your money and give it to the poor.
2. The republicans want to take all your money.
Or you can look at this non-partisan like.
Politicians: one who engages in politics.
Politic= (poly-tick)
poly= many
tick= a blood sucking parasite.
You do the math
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy:
Ok POLITICS 101
1. The democrats want to take most of your money and give it to the poor.
LOL...Yeah that Poor Lawyer Lobby!
Cobra
-
Originally posted by Hangtime:
Go ahead.. stick yer head in the sand and 'don't vote'. Give 'em no feedback. Don't 'encourage' them.
Hey, lighten up - I said "almost"! You sound like a dang Republicrat to me :)
- Yoj
-
Originally posted by fd ski:
Well Eagler, then why not throw it in TBills ? You know, the world wide known SAFEST security you can buy, paying something around 7% now or so ?
But wait, that's giving money to the government !!! :)
I don't believe in the total superiority of private company over that of government running. It is a myth propagated by those with vested interest.
Those who don't believe me, i invite you to look at history of WWI, WWII and periods in between, you'll find that it was a government planning and policing that brought about the most efficient performance out of the economy.
America of 1918 was more true to the communist thought in that aspect then USSR ever was :)
uhmm, show me where I have the option of investing my social security into TBills (even at a 5% return, that's still about 20% as much as current social security "returns". If I started at 7% now, it'd be double the soc sec return)
Privatization works. Chilé has been doing it since 1980 (or 81) and it's successful there.
If given the choice, my soc sec money would go into the safe TBills. I've got a 401(k) that I can invest at a higher risk for greater returns (I'm 26, I can do that now.) I can't remember the website that's got the the CATO studies on it... duh... it's Social Security Privatization (http://www.socialsecurity.org)
-
Originally posted by funkedup:
More like:
If I stole $5, and I promised to give back $4 to the rightful owner tomorrow, I'd better not spend more than $1 today. :)
[ 07-25-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]
If its the federal government your talking about, later that night they'd be saying "I can't believe I spent $100 today, Guess we'll have to take more from the slaves tomarow"
udie
PS. Rip,
Isn't it funny how the last thing the dems did when they had congresional power was raise taxes (largest increase in US history) and within 3 or 4 months of them getting power back in the senate they've already suggested it again.
Just let me know when it's time to revolt, I'm about ready to whack some tax-n-spend MOFO"S!!!!! F*ckin thieves, both parties....
Udie
[ 07-27-2001: Message edited by: Udie ]