entitlement

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Again, tell me who should have money taken from them (at the point of a gun) to make up for the property tax that the senior down the street no longer has to pay?

Then you agree that there should be no home mortgage interest deduction, because it taxes renters more than buyers?

Do you agree that there should be no per-person standard deduction on income tax? If some guy has 5 kids then why is it my problem? Why should I have to pay more so he can slide? I didn't force him to have 5 kids.

Ditto on all the other deductions and credits. Why should I pay more than some cancer victim, just because he has thousands in medical bills? I didn't make him get cancer.

If there is a property tax on anyone that owns property, there must be a property tax on everyone that owns property. ANYTHING less is socialism. My neighbor is not entitled to the money I earn, regardless of his age.

Yes that is probably the way it will stay. Got no beef with it. Prop tax is a wealth tax sustainable when wealth is augmented by steady income. In retirement a wealth tax will gradually sap stored wealth until it is gone. And then the evil seniors will mass-vote themselves more of your hard-earned money so they can pay the property tax without having to cut back on their daily champagne and caviar.

Still not sure why anyone thinks stealing from me to give to someone else is somehow noble or right. I don't care about what they 'need', it's not the government's place to forcibly take what I earned in order to give it to someone who didn't.

Yep, the argument applies to all taxes and gov services. I studiously pay every penny for the sociopathic reason that otherwise I might go to jail. Am not smart enough to cheat and get away with it.

It is basically mob rule in any gov with democratic features. If they want yer stuff they will take it. In a monarchy, theocracy, or dictatorship then fearless leader will take what he wants. Death and Taxes regardless.

Some of the mob which confiscates yer money think that it is noble to save the helpless from starving. They want to be charitable with everybody's money. Plus the value judgement of "needy" voters who do not want to starve. For at least 80 years those two groups have added up to more than 50 percent of the voters.

My personal justification for somewhat-cheerfully paying SOME tax on social programs is different than "forced charity" though I approve charity and routinely donate to charity.

The War on Poverty started up shortly after a string of nasty expensive urban riots. There were noble justifications for the War on Poverty, but the basic effect was to give the unproductive "just enough" to keep them from rioting. Just enough that most will forget to go vote for full-blown communism.

If we make em too uncomfortable then they will rush to the polls in un-defeatable numbers and make it worse than it already is.

Ever visit Mexican border towns? I did years ago and couldn't stand it. Too many destitute miserable people out in plain view. Only a hard-ass could walk the streets and avoid getting bummed out.

They could confiscate money from the haves to hire lots of police to keep the have-nots off the streets to starve out of plain view. Alternately confiscate money from the haves to pay the have-nots a small stipend so they will stay out of view and not be such a bummer.

Am also willing to pay some taxes so the have-nots will be just comfy enough that maybe I don't have to shoot intruders looking for food. Or maybe they would shoot me and clean out the pantry.

Just my reasoning. Ain't saying anyone else should think the same.

All ya got to do to change the setup is to get more than 50 percent to vote libertarian come hell or high water.

[Guest nicemac]

Then you agree that there should be no home mortgage interest deduction, because it taxes renters more than buyers?

Do you agree that there should be no per-person standard deduction on income tax? If some guy has 5 kids then why is it my problem? Why should I have to pay more so he can slide? I didn't force him to have 5 kids.

Ditto on all the other deductions and credits. Why should I pay more than some cancer victim, just because he has thousands in medical bills? I didn't make him get cancer.

Yes, I agree there should be no deductions. The entire tax structure should be re-worked to eliminate them. A flat (or fair) tax based on a percentage (either income or on purchases–that is debatable and both have strong points) is the most fair way to tax. People who make/ spend more pay more, but the percentage for everyone is the same. As it is now, a small percentage pays most all of the taxes, and a large percentage pays almost nothing.

I actually do have five kids. I should not pay less than my neighbor that has no kids because I chose to have kids.

Ditto on medical. Sorry you have high bills, but that gives you no right to my earnings.

I am not anti-tax at all. We have shared expenses and should have shared responsibilities. I give to charity. I tithe at least 10% every year, sometimes more. I am more than happy to give to my neighbor who is struggling with his bills because of illness (and have done so on many occasions). But the government should not be in the business of charity. Period. It makes the system corrupt at best and is theft at worst.

And as a side note, I do not think seniors are evil. I think AARP is, but not seniors.

[Guest mikedwood]

They held a gun to your head with social security to get this "Debt Deal" passed and now we have a Super Congress and that's not a good thing. A council of 12 with supreme powers.

Look for more to come from them hold you hostage over your social secuirty.

[BigK]

You're darn right social security is an entitlement and it always was! Let me tell you a lil' story...

Once upon a time, "Generation A" was poor & broke due to their own poor decisions, like electing crappy politicians. Facing hunger and homelessness, they did what they always did...make more bad decisions. They send representatives to Washington that enact legislation that will take money from Generation B and give it to their constituents in Generation A.

Despite warnings about the direction they headed and the unsustainable scope of the system, they continue to elect representatives to change the rules, replace funds with IOU's, and get more people hooked on big government to bolster their numbers.

Now that there are more folks riding in the wagon than there are pulling. Those of us pulling are finally sick of the system. The ones who are now riding, had ample time/warning to keep the wagon from crashing. Instead of recognizing there's a problem, they're now justifying our sweat by complaining that if getting hosed was good enough for them all those years, it's good enough for their kids and grand-kids too.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

They held a gun to your head with social security to get this "Debt Deal" passed and now we have a Super Congress and that's not a good thing. A council of 12 with supreme powers.

Look for more to come from them hold you hostage over your social secuirty.

I don't receive SS and was hoping maybe there would be a better solution. Wouldn't have minded a partial shutdown.

It is lucky that SS is the only thing they threatened. It would have been really bad if they had also held hostage military pay, gov employees, interest rates and the stock market. Luckily the SS recipients were the only sheep panicked by the situation.

Looks like the stock market sheep are still running scared.

[mav]

Some people choose to rent, I have no problem with that and they shouldn't be excluded based on that decision.

+1

Since we pay federal income taxes now (unlike in the 1850's), what it should be is this - if you want to vote in federal elections, you must pay federal income taxes. No federal income taxes = no vote.

IMO, the country would be in far better shape if the freeloaders had no say in the elections - nearly half this country pays ZERO federal income taxes yet they have the right to vote on how MY tax dollars are spent for their benefit...

My frustration agrees with you. However, the downside I can see with this is you will eliminate quite a few conservatives as well.

I think a better approach to the you can't vote if you don't own property or pay federal income taxes is a requirement to pass an intelligence test before being allowed to vote. The test I have in mind would be a basic citizenship and basic economic type test.

If an individual doesn't have a basic understanding of how their government works, or is supposed to work, and they do not understand basic economic principles, then they have absolutely no business voting. When I see commentators do a "man on the street" segment, I am amazed at the ignorance (in some cases downright stupidity) of a lot of the american public. What I find more amazing is people have no shame in being made to look like a dumba$$. Instead, they laugh off their own ignorance.

[G27]

My frustration agrees with you. However, the downside I can see with this is you will eliminate quite a few conservatives as well.

Yah, there's a downside to any approach - one that allows folks who don't agree with you to vote. hehe

That said, I've thought long and hard about this for years and feel the idea I mentioned above (which I by no means came up with) is the best way to handle it.

[Oh Shoot]

In England, you have to own property in order to be able to vote....

Absolutely not true.

That's the way is was here until the 1850's.

Yeah, and was similar in England until 1867. But of course, not now.

Should mention that the UK prime minister is NOT elected by the people however, and that would be a damn good policy here, too.

- OS

Edited August 5, 2011 by OhShoot

[Garufa]

Should mention that the UK prime minister is NOT elected by the people however, and that would be a damn good policy here, too.

- OS

And Senators in this country were once not elected but appointed by the states they represent. Another damn fine idea.

[Oh Shoot]

And Senators in this country were once not elected but appointed by the states they represent. Another damn fine idea.

Totally agree. If folks could just concentrate on holding their most local reps' feet to the fire, the will of the people would be much better served.

And a man spending a billion dollars to get a 400K/year job really sticks in my American craw.

- OS

[mav]

And Senators in this country were once not elected but appointed by the states they represent. Another damn fine idea.

Why should we ever go back to that? That makes too much sense.

[enfield]

Fight Organized Crime - never re-elect anyone!

[Guest mikedwood]

I don't receive SS and was hoping maybe there would be a better solution. Wouldn't have minded a partial shutdown.

It is lucky that SS is the only thing they threatened. It would have been really bad if they had also held hostage military pay, gov employees, interest rates and the stock market. Luckily the SS recipients were the only sheep panicked by the situation.

Looks like the stock market sheep are still running scared.

I don't know if you are being sarcastic or not but they did also threaten military pay, gov employees, interest rates and the stock market. Everyone fell for it hook line and sinker. Now they have what the wanted, a Super Congress. you really think the money is why they threw this huge dog and pony show? 14.2 trillion, who cares about another 2 trillion, 4 trillion, the Republicans know full freaking well we can't cut cut cut in the middle of three wars. They wanted the Super Congress and they got it, no one has even noticed it.

I don't expect any of you to read them but I'm posting links anyway cause this is important. I'll try to find some with video.

Ron Paul | Debt Deal | Super Congress | The Daily Caller

Super Congress Getting Even More Super Powers In Debt Deal

You have Ron Paul and the Huffington Post agreeing that it's probably not a good thing. I haven't even heard Rush mention it. This is scary as anything ever right here, right now. They just SHREADED the Constitution in and made us glad they did it. Wait. Laugh now and whatever, but in a few months you will see what the power of this Super Congress is.

Plus if you voted against the Debt Ceiling bill you are not allowed to be considered for the Super Congress. Cementing the "play ball our way or else".

Make no mistake the REpublicans and Democrats at the top worked TOGETHER to put this on us. Both parties are presenting one thing to our faces and working together on something totally different behind our backs.

As for the stock market running scared I swear that is cause of this Analysis: Obama, Bernanke out of ammo to boost jobs, growth | Reuters the Wall Street guys were just throwning a tantrum like a 6 year old at Walmart crying for a new toy. They want, are fully expecting and going to force QE3. Once again they will scare us of armagedon and here it comes again and we will give them a few trillion more and cheer them on.

I really wonder how many times people are going to fall for it?

Edited August 5, 2011 by mikedwood

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I don't know if you are being sarcastic or not but they did also threaten military pay, gov employees, interest rates and the stock market. Everyone fell for it hook line and sinker. Now they have what the wanted, a Super Congress. you really think the money is why they threw this huge dog and pony show? 14.2 trillion, who cares about another 2 trillion, 4 trillion, the Republicans know full freaking well we can't cut cut cut in the middle of three wars. They wanted the Super Congress and they got it, no one has even noticed it.

I don't expect any of you to read them but I'm posting links anyway cause this is important. I'll try to find some with video.

Ron Paul | Debt Deal | Super Congress | The Daily Caller

Super Congress Getting Even More Super Powers In Debt Deal

You have Ron Paul and the Huffington Post agreeing that it's probably not a good thing. I haven't even heard Rush mention it. This is scary as anything ever right here, right now. They just SHREADED the Constitution in and made us glad they did it. Wait. Laugh now and whatever, but in a few months you will see what the power of this Super Congress is.

Plus if you voted against the Debt Ceiling bill you are not allowed to be considered for the Super Congress. Cementing the "play ball our way or else".

Make no mistake the REpublicans and Democrats at the top worked TOGETHER to put this on us. Both parties are presenting one thing to our faces and working together on something totally different behind our backs.

As for the stock market running scared I swear that is cause of this Analysis: Obama, Bernanke out of ammo to boost jobs, growth | Reuters the Wall Street guys were just throwning a tantrum like a 6 year old at Walmart crying for a new toy. They want, are fully expecting and going to force QE3. Once again they will scare us of armagedon and here it comes again and we will give them a few trillion more and cheer them on.

I really wonder how many times people are going to fall for it?

Thanks Mike

I was trying to be funny. Most of my messages try to be humorous but I'm not very good at it and ought to quit trying.

You are right. Sometimes if both sides are unhappy then it is a sign of a fair compromise. This seems different. The freepers and democratic underground both hate the compromise because the compromise just sucks.

Some indicators show little inflation, but I've been thinking since 2009 that both a high stock market and high commodities are only a sign of a devalued dollar. There is nothing there to make most stocks look especially valuable. If you dump a few trillion into a stalled economy then even a dead cat will bounce. All that money had to go somewhere and a lot of it went into inflated stock prices.

I think you are correct that the fed reserve and gov are out of keynsian bullets. Even a tax cut won't help. Tax cuts are only another flavor of keysian stimulus. The 2002 tax cut only created a 5 year bubble. Then when it stalled in the final Bush years they spent billions on multiple one-shot tax rebates with absolutely no effect. Seems doubtful that yet another tax cut would give positive results.

The economy has developed "drug tolerance" to stimulus. Cold turkey is about the only viable option. We are gonna crash and its gonna hurt. The longer they keep avoiding the crash then the more it is gonna hurt.

[gregintenn]

This turned out to be one of the best discussions I've read in quite some time.

[Guest mikedwood]

Thanks Mike

I was trying to be funny. Most of my messages try to be humorous but I'm not very good at it and ought to quit trying.

You are right. Sometimes if both sides are unhappy then it is a sign of a fair compromise. This seems different. The freepers and democratic underground both hate the compromise because the compromise just sucks.

Some indicators show little inflation, but I've been thinking since 2009 that both a high stock market and high commodities are only a sign of a devalued dollar. There is nothing there to make most stocks look especially valuable. If you dump a few trillion into a stalled economy then even a dead cat will bounce. All that money had to go somewhere and a lot of it went into inflated stock prices.

I think you are correct that the fed reserve and gov are out of keynsian bullets. Even a tax cut won't help. Tax cuts are only another flavor of keysian stimulus. The 2002 tax cut only created a 5 year bubble. Then when it stalled in the final Bush years they spent billions on multiple one-shot tax rebates with absolutely no effect. Seems doubtful that yet another tax cut would give positive results.

The economy has developed "drug tolerance" to stimulus. Cold turkey is about the only viable option. We are gonna crash and its gonna hurt. The longer they keep avoiding the crash then the more it is gonna hurt.

Don't sell yourself short Lester. I enjoy your posts. I get the humor in that one now (Not as funny as the Etrade baby loses everything (I cried), but what is?). You even had a smilely face in there. I was so busy thinking "Super Congress, must warn them of Super Congress! Super Congress is bad.... must WARN!" That I just missed it. Sorry. I suppose my tinfoil is wrapped to tight. But after Super Congress I think if you don't have a roll or 10 of some good foil you are blind to the truth of this Super Congress and what it can do.

I agree that the economy is mostly immune to the pushes but it won't stop them from another one. I don't think the plan is for you or I to think the economy is doing great, it's about turning money, obscene amounts of money. I think they are going to hit us with another ARMAGEDDON if you DON'T scenerio and that won't work either. Then the only way we will ever be able to eat again, is join the EU or some new system set up like it. They aren't going to just let it reset or fix itself cause that would be a waste of all this usable fear. They create a problem and then get us to beg them to solve it at any cost, that cost being our freedoms lately.

Bottom line they will threaten Social Security again and again cause it makes such a great hostage.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I think the "super congress" will be challenged

and found to unconstitutional. That portion breaks

too many rules in congress alone. The people's

house would not stand for anything if it is allowed

to exist. Just like Obamacare can't be allowed to

force you to buy insurance, it's wrong.

As far as the welfare issue, that is curing

itself by killing our country, if you consider

that slavery is the end result of welfare. I

doubt anyone can really call it nobility,

except a liberal, to pick our pockets for

someone else's benefit.

Income tax is nothing more than theft.

The government loves it because it requires

an IRS to keep us in our places. Until it is

replaced with Fair Tax, we're screwed.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest mikedwood]

I think the "super congress" will be challenged

and found to unconstitutional. That portion breaks

too many rules in congress alone. The people's

house would not stand for anything if it is allowed

to exist. Just like Obamacare can't be allowed to

force you to buy insurance, it's wrong.

As far as the welfare issue, that is curing

itself by killing our country, if you consider

that slavery is the end result of welfare. I

doubt anyone can really call it nobility,

except a liberal, to pick our pockets for

someone else's benefit.

Income tax is nothing more than theft.

The government loves it because it requires

an IRS to keep us in our places. Until it is

replaced with Fair Tax, we're screwed.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with all that. This current tax structure is for no other purpose than control.

[Oh Shoot]

I agree with all that. This current tax structure is for no other purpose than control.

Unless it becomes totally proportionally uniform and anonymous ala the Fair Tax, it will always be so.

- OS

[Armed Aviator]

I doubt SS will even exist when I retire. It is one of the reasons I max out the contribution to my 401-K every year.

And Obama's Chronies are talking about confisating 401k's also!!!! Welcome to Amerika