doddpower
11 years ago
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
11 years ago

Once again, why? How much money does government need? How much of our money does it need?

Where in my post did I say anything about not providing for those who actually need assistance? The problem with people like you is, you don't have the ability to comprehend the difference between reduce and eliminate. reducing and getting those off the government dollar, that don't NEED to be on it, only makes it easier for those who actually do need it.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



I'm really getting sick and tired of being called stupid by you assholes. I worked in taxation for twenty years and still do it part time. When I say the wealthy have circumvented the tax code for their own personal gain at the expense of the middle class and poor, just accept that I know what the fuck I'm talking about.

We differ in ideology. Any person that says human kindness can replace taxation is fucking mook. I believe the time has come to gut the wealthy, not only because they deserve it, but also because it is necessary because that is where the money is.
UserPostedImage
zombieslayer
11 years ago

UserPostedImage

Originally Posted by: doddpower 



And this is why I can't stand either of them.

So it comes down to this - you're voting pretty much on whether or not you agree with abortion and slightly higher or slightly lower taxes. But then again, the Republicans are pro-choice as well, but they have to pretend to be anti-abortion for votes. Watch what happens when they go into office - they'll make some obscure anti-abortion law that pretty much affects no one, and then the pro-lifers will claim victory, then disappear, but abortion will stay legal.

Everyone knows that if abortion becomes illegal, the Republican party will cease to exist immediately. Anyone ever heard of Lee Atwater? He said this before he died, but said it behind closed doors and it has stuck with the tops of the Republican party ever since.

Now on real issues - The Wars, the War on Drugs, the Fed, Corporate welfare, the police state, they're exactly the same.

Dakota - I don't think you're stupid. I actually think you're quite bright, but you're playing victim here. You got caught up in the name calling. I'm not saying who started it because it's a moot point. You just got caught up in it.

The truth is there's only one fair tax, and that's a consumption tax. The true rich, not some doctor who makes $300k a year but has $250k in expenses (not including rent and food) and barely stays above water every year, but the guy who makes $10k a year and gets way more than that doctor gets from untaxed trusts. I'm talking about that guy. It's NOT about income and it never has been. Those guys don't pay taxes. People like Paris Hilton. Her "income" comes from modeling and that gets taxed heavily, but she has a spending account from her daddy that's untaxed. And that money can pay for her lear jet/Gucci bag/cocaine habit. And is untaxed.

See, you set up a consumption tax and the doctor pays LESS tax and Paris Hilton actually pays taxes besides that joke of a modeling career.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
dhazer
11 years ago
I have a question for everyone, Seeing they are going to be raising my taxes between 2500 and 4000 bucks a year to cover this bullshit Obamacare, Does this mean I can claim like 3 or 4 people on my taxes seeing I am paying for them? And for all you people that like this Obamacare take a good look at our neighbors to the north. If you have cancer and are in your 40's you don't get any help because it can go to someone else that is younger.

Once again I want to welcome everyone to the United Socialist States of America run by King Obama

Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)
UserPostedImage
doddpower
11 years ago

The truth is there's only one fair tax, and that's a consumption tax. The true rich, not some doctor who makes $300k a year but has $250k in expenses (not including rent and food) and barely stays above water every year, but the guy who makes $10k a year and gets way more than that doctor gets from untaxed trusts. I'm talking about that guy. It's NOT about income and it never has been. Those guys don't pay taxes. People like Paris Hilton. Her "income" comes from modeling and that gets taxed heavily, but she has a spending account from her daddy that's untaxed. And that money can pay for her lear jet/Gucci bag/cocaine habit. And is untaxed.

See, you set up a consumption tax and the doctor pays LESS tax and Paris Hilton actually pays taxes besides that joke of a modeling career.

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer 



This is similar in nature to what some people bitched about Mitt Romney's tax rate. From my understanding of his situation (I am NOT an expert), he doesn't even have an income at the moment, just returns on his investments. Therefore, he pays a much lower rate than you or I, despite making millions and millions and being in the top 0.01% of earners. Adjusting the tax code and "closing loop holes" as they speak of could address this. However, the truly rich will always find ways to manipulate the tax code, because no major changes to truly stop them will happen. If the tax code is altered a bit, they'll simply alter their strategy all the same. It's understandable how many Americans would get irritated that a larger percentage of their money goes to the Government than some of the wealthy, but it's just how it is. I wouldn't expect that to change regardless of what changes Obama, Romney, or any other politician would make. Approximately 60% of Americans said that they favor some tax increases from the exit polling. Whether it's ultimately 'good' or 'bad,' majority wins in a Democracy.

Also, I read somewhere that even if the tax rates are increased on those making over $250,000/year, it would only be on that portion of money OVER $250 k that would be taxed at a higher rate. For example, if one makes $500,000 a year, the first $249,000 would be taxed at the 'lower' rate, and the remainder of the money would be taxed at the few percentage points higher rate (what is it, 37%?). Once again, I'm not tax expert, nor do I pretend to be, but I did find that interesting.

Either way, as the graphic I posted earlier said, ultimately, either major party would have slight differences. Both sides are currently agreeing that that an approach of increased revenue and spending cuts must occur. It seems like that will happen, although perhaps not at the magnitude that some want. If the Government severely cuts multiple programs to cut spending, many people will be affected by that, including people being put out of work. That will raise unemployment and take money out of the economy. Raising taxes on the wealthy may take some money out of the economy as well, but I don't think the effects would be as bad as dismantling entire agencies which many, many people have built their careers around and raise their family on (in addition to often doing really good and important work). It's almost a damned if they do, damned if they don't type plan. Certainly neither option is good for the economy in the short term, and the long term effects are debatable, as well.

I acknowledge that the needed investment isn't going to happen, but I still stand by the principles I made in an earlier post. If America could become significantly more energy independent, it would not only create many more jobs, but also tremendously reduce the power of the "energy countries." Yes, that involves much, much more than drilling for more oil, fracking for natural gas, and burning coal in the long run, but that is certainly a PART of the solution. I have no idea what a revolutionary type of technology might be, but if it could be invented, the World as we know it would change. Sure, many new problems would arise as a result, but it would substantially solve many of the current issues. Unfortunately, the oil companies and those that are slaves to their money don't want that to happen yet.

Yes, companies such as Solyndra are embarrassing and unacceptable, but of the money that was invested in renewable technology recent by the Obama administration, only 8% of them failed. It's a great talking point, but that's obviously not bad, relatively speaking. It's certainly better than many of the other subsidies given to the oil industry and things such as ethanol production, etc. Talk about "picking and choosing winners and losers." It doesn't get much worse than that. Nothing is going to work 100% of the time, including a space program, infrastructure and defense contracts, research programs, etc. etc. What's important is that there is a high success rate and mistakes are investigated and every action possible is taken to prevent those same mistakes from repeating in the future.

If America can't generate some type of novel commodity that the rest of the world can't live without, this debt battle will never end. Hopefully this new "high tech manufacturing" I've heard a lot about in the past year or so will help.

doddpower
11 years ago

I have a question for everyone, Seeing they are going to be raising my taxes between 2500 and 4000 bucks a year to cover this bullshit Obamacare, Does this mean I can claim like 3 or 4 people on my taxes seeing I am paying for them? And for all you people that like this Obamacare take a good look at our neighbors to the north. If you have cancer and are in your 40's you don't get any help because it can go to someone else that is younger.

Once again I want to welcome everyone to the United Socialist States of America run by King Obama

Originally Posted by: dhazer 




I'm not doubting you, but I would LOVE to see some type of source covering the facts of your income taxes being raised $4,000, and especially the issue you speak of in Canada. I have some friends in Canada and they would definitely beg to differ. I'd love to educate myself on that matter. So anyone that is ~40'ish years old doesn't get any medical treatment? That is definitely news to me. If nothing else, Canada's patent system for prescription drugs destroys that of the United States. Medications that can only be bought as name brands here in the States and cost $200-500+ monthly are readily available as generics in Canada. Add to that the common "doughnut holes" that exist in many health insurance plans and that is incredibly detrimental to many Americans daily lives. It's not uncommon for insurance plans here in the States to have an approximately $2,000 annual cap on name brand drugs. After that limit is met, payment is completely up to the individual. I know this for a fact because it's something I deal with. I take something that costs ~$500 monthly, and there is no generic available in the U.S. Therefore, I have to ration four months worth across a whole year or pay $500 for one months worth out of pocket (despite already paying $220/month for insurance). Generic drugs are unlimited, but many specialized medications have multiple patents on them in the U.S. that don't expire for years and years. If one searches around online they can find multiple forums discussing ordering/buying drugs from Canada to get by, despite the legal gray areas of doing so. Obviously, that is just one example of the health care system being designed to maximize shareholder profits, NOT to help anyone achieve the elusive "American Dream." I really wish there was more being done to address this particular issue, in addition to many many similar things. Unfortunately, I don't see much happening on that front and it really hurts many thousands of Americans daily.
doddpower
11 years ago
One additional thing that comes to mind in a public system such as Canada: There are still many options  to purchase private health insurance to cover things  that the public plan doesn't. There are supplementary type plans and other things such as vision, dental, etc. Even in a public system, if people have money they are willing to spend on health insurance, there will be a market for it. The general goal of the public plan is to at least offer a minimal level of care to everyone. Private insurance can be purchase if one would not like to share a hospital room with 2-3 other people and would prefer a private room, or perhaps even receive additional tests or more individual care. I really don't buy the whole 'people with cancer in their 40's would be left to die thing', especially no more (and likely much less) than currently happens in the U.S. for people who can't afford their treatment due to not having health insurance.

I recently injured my knee and was basically given two treatment options: go home and rest and deal with it, or do what was best for me and get an MRI, have surgery, and a few months of physical therapy. Had I not had insurance, I undoubtedly would have been pushed into the first option and would have felt the effects of this injury for the rest of my life (even with the treatment I still will to some extent). It would have been impossible for me to afford the treatment I needed without my Coverage. I'm fortunate enough to have the coverage, but many are not or were simply not wise enough to be paying for it beforehand. Individuals like that either don't get the proper treatment and suffer enormously (or worse), or try to find some way to get a charity or Government program to assist them, thereby increasing health care prices across the board for everyone. This obviously happens every minute of every day with emergency room visits in which hospitals often to not receive payment for. So once again, either the quality of life for an individual goes way down, the financial burden falls on us all, and most commonly, both. Obviously no one has figured out how to best deal with this, but hopefully countries will keep trying, evaluating, and modifying in hopes of finding the best solution. It has to start somewhere.
vikesrule
11 years ago

I have a question for everyone, Seeing they are going to be raising my taxes between 2500 and 4000 bucks a year to cover this bullshit Obamacare, Does this mean I can claim like 3 or 4 people on my taxes seeing I am paying for them? And for all you people that like this Obamacare take a good look at our neighbors to the north. If you have cancer and are in your 40's you don't get any help because it can go to someone else that is younger.

Once again I want to welcome everyone to the United Socialist States of America run by King Obama

Originally Posted by: dhazer 



Oh hazer, I see that you stopped by the Rush Limbaugh Kool Aid stand again.


That would be some seriously funny shit, were it not so sad that some people actually believe that crap.

DakotaT
11 years ago

Oh hazer, I see that you stopped by the Rush Limbaugh Kool Aid stand again.


That would be some seriously funny shit, were it not so sad that some people actually believe that crap.

Originally Posted by: vikesrule 



How can I love people like Haze and Cheesey, but want to take a 2X4 upside their head at the same time?
UserPostedImage
PackFanWithTwins
11 years ago

I'm really getting sick and tired of being called stupid by you assholes. I worked in taxation for twenty years and still do it part time. When I say the wealthy have circumvented the tax code for their own personal gain at the expense of the middle class and poor, just accept that I know what the fuck I'm talking about.

We differ in ideology. Any person that says human kindness can replace taxation is fucking mook. I believe the time has come to gut the wealthy, not only because they deserve it, but also because it is necessary because that is where the money is.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



Funny, I didn't call you stupid, but you obviously feel you are by your guilty conscience.

You simply can't justify taxing more because you have no idea how much tax is actually needed. You just have a hatred for those who have been successful for some odd reason. Probably because you know if you could get to where they are, you would not do anything different than they do.

It makes zero sense to raise tax when you admit there is waste in what is being spent now.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    dfosterf (9h) : Maybe
    Mucky Tundra (9h) : Yes
    Zero2Cool (10h) : No.
    Mucky Tundra (12h) : End of a Degu-era
    dhazer (13h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
    Zero2Cool (16h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
    Zero2Cool (17h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
    dfosterf (28-Mar) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Haha
    Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
    beast (27-Mar) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
    buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
    buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
    Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
    Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
    beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2023 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Falcons
    Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
    SAINTS
    Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
    LIONS
    Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
    Raiders
    Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
    RAMS
    Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
    Steelers
    Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
    CHARGERS
    Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
    CHIEFS
    Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
    Giants
    Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
    BUCCANEERS
    Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
    Panthers
    Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
    Cowboys
    Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
    49ers
    Recent Topics
    4h / Around The NFL / beast

    9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

    28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.