Progressives and Conservatives PLEASE! Stop the insanity!

[Care4all]

Willow

90% of education is paid through property taxes, so ALL americans pay for education, whether through their own tax bill or through the rent they pay the owner....

those that earn about 20k as a couple do not pay income tax due to our standard deductions....

even if you make 50k a year, or a million a year or 10 million a year, NO couple PAYS TAXES on the first =/-$20k they earn....so if you are going to tax the poorest for their first 20k then you are going to tax the $50k-er etc, for their first 20k earned as well and make every single person paying taxes, have a higher tax burden than they do now.... is that what you want?

most all that do not pay income taxes, do pay social security taxes, which have been used to pay for what income taxes should have paid for....so these folks ARE supporting the budget expenses...

most all that do not pay income taxes pay the majority of cigarette taxes collected, gas taxes collected...they pay as well, and they pay corporate income taxes on what they purchase from the corporations because as most repubs say, corporate taxes are just put in to the price of the product....and as said, they pay for schools through property taxes which the poor pay through rent or the tax...

they also pay State income taxes in most cases and they pay state sales taxes on what they buy, and they pay state gas taxes, plus they buy more lottery tickets than anyone, and this pays for government expenses.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

most all that do not pay income taxes, do pay social security taxes, which have been used to pay for what income taxes should have paid for....so these folks ARE supporting the budget expenses...

And this is why the SSA is in the situation it's in today...with huge unfunded mandates that will break the country if not checked.

 

[Foxfyre]

Let me put it this way.. obie wan and his stupid health care has already stolen 960 billion dollars from the seniors. Again, the seniors worked their entire lives putting money into that system and he just reached in and took it. Now she has the audacity to say they should work a little longer? NO, the answer is to make more people work and pay taxes. We are fast approaching a society where the givers (Federal taxpayerrs) are way less than the takers (those who don't pay Federal Taxes) but still reap all the benefits. Why keep insisting that benefits be stricken from those who have actually earned them?

So, translating this a bit, let's look at it as if we are the ones responsible to fix it.

Social Security was implemented on the theory that most folks wouldn't live very long after they started collecting it. It was not anticipated that subsequent Congresses would add on myriad benefits to be paid out of social security in addition to a tiny pension for seniors. It was not anticipated that Social Security would ever SUPPORT anybody. It was not anticipated that any worker would ever pay more than 1% of their earnings into social security. It was expected there would be 50 workers for every beneficiary. So all that is now out the window.

Seniors are living decades past their retirement age.
Many younger people are drawing significant benefits from Social Security.
And subsequent Congresses are adding on COLAs year after year because too many Seniors now look at social security as providing a living wage.
And as the number of workers is now fast approaching 2 people for every retiree.

So how do we fix it? For one small part of the fix, is it really unreasonable for Seniors to continue working a bit longer before eligibility to draw social security? Sixty these days is the old 40. And there are many many 70 and 75 year olds who are perfectly capable of holding down a job if they choose to do so.

Is it unreasonable for us to expect the other half of the Americans who live in America and benefit from those services provided to them their entire lifetimes to PAY FEDERAL INCOME TAX? If you expect SENIORS to work til they drop for what little they get why wouldn't you expect it of everybody? why should 50% of Americans get free educations, medical care, highways military protection and representation in congress off the backs of the other 50%

But I don't expect seniors to work until they drop, Willow. I just don't see a problem with extending social security age eligibility a bit considering how much longer life expectancy is now than it was when social security went into effect. I would like for social security to be privatized actually and then folks could retire any darn time they were ready and the money would be theirs to use or to bequeath to others as they saw fit.

I am personally opposed to ALL entitlements and all benevolence of any kind provided by the Federal Government EXCEPT those as part of a compensation package for NECESSARY and high risk service to the government. A secretary working in a government office should expect no more benefits or perks than one working in the private sector.

But you and I are absolutely on the same page that EVERYBODY, rich and poor alike, should be contributing to the process.

It is an extremely unhealthy and highly corrupting situation when half the population incurs no consequences whatsoever for what happens to the tax burden borne by the other half.

 

[Care4all]

most all that do not pay income taxes, do pay social security taxes, which have been used to pay for what income taxes should have paid for....so these folks ARE supporting the budget expenses...

And this is why the SSA is in the situation it's in today...with huge unfunded mandates that will break the country if not checked.

agree.

because eventually, we will have to use income taxes to pay for the money we had borrowed from SS, when SS starts to draw on it.

 

[Gatekeeper]

We need to stop the madness....reducing the size of the government workforce makes more sense. You cannot compete with the private sector for quality employees by offering shit compensation packages.

I was just thinking, I know, don't say it, we need our government to use the same business practices of the fast food and restaurant industry does in the USA.

Shit wages, little or no benefits and what restaurants do, shit wages, and the rest on tips, for performance! and efficiency Most of the government employees at ALL levels would starve. I was trying to be serious, but I have little self control, sorry.

Funny you mention "performance". The new personnel system does exactly that. Civil Service employees who are subjected to this new program are given raises and benefits based on their performance evaluations.

Wow, am I seeing logical decisions being made? I am impressed, there IS hope after all! However they may be an increase in the printing of food stamps and affordable housing . NOW, let's make this mandatory right up to and including the White House!

 

[Care4all]

Everyone pays taxes in this country....NO ONE gets by without paying some , taxes...whether it is sales taxes or property taxes or cigarette taxes or medicare taxes or gas taxes or income taxes or social security taxes, let alone all of the gvt fees for licenses etc etc etc....

everyone has something at stake!!!

 

[Care4all]

oh, and does this mean all corporations should pay income taxes as well? no free rides for exxon mobile on income taxes?

 

[Avatar4321]

I completely agree.

So how best to do that?

Support the Tea Partiers, tax protest groups, 9/12ers?

Get behind the GOP in masse? (They haven't been very fiscally conservative until just lately, so can we trust them?)

Raise up a third party that is fiscally conservative?

Storm Washington DC?

What?

Replace everyone in Congress and the Whitehouse with us.

 

[Foxfyre]

Everyone pays taxes in this country....NO ONE gets by without paying some , taxes...whether it is sales taxes or property taxes or cigarette taxes or medicare taxes or gas taxes or income taxes or social security taxes, let alone all of the gvt fees for licenses etc etc etc....

everyone has something at stake!!!

But if I am not paying federal income tax, I have every reason to keep voting people into office who will make sure I pay no federal income tax no matter how badly that screws you!! And if an increase in entitlements helps me but increases the burden on you, why should I care? I have strong incentive to keep voting in Nanny and Santa Clause and incentive to do so no matter what else they might be using your money for. After all, it's your money, not mine. And when the burden finally breaks you, that will probably be much later on and not something I should worry my pretty little head about now.

If everybody has a proportional stake, however, any change in tax policy affects everybody and there is more incentive for everybody to care about that. If an increase in entitlements affects my bottom line like it does yours, then we both have an interest in whether that is a good idea. When everybody has a proportional stake in the process, everybody has a stronger incentive to care about the process and whether they are getting their money's worth out of it.

 

[Care4all]

Everyone pays taxes in this country....NO ONE gets by without paying some , taxes...whether it is sales taxes or property taxes or cigarette taxes or medicare taxes or gas taxes or income taxes or social security taxes, let alone all of the gvt fees for licenses etc etc etc....

everyone has something at stake!!!

But if I am not paying federal income tax, I have every reason to keep voting people into office who will make sure I pay no federal income tax no matter how badly that screws you!! And if an increase in entitlements helps me but increases the burden on you, why should I care? I have strong incentive to keep voting in Nanny and Santa Clause and incentive to do so no matter what else they might be using your money for. After all, it's your money, not mine. And when the burden finally breaks you, that will probably be much later on and not something I should worry my pretty little head about now.

If everybody has a proportional stake, however, any change in tax policy affects everybody and there is more incentive for everybody to care about that. If an increase in entitlements affects my bottom line like it does yours, then we both have an interest in whether that is a good idea. When everybody has a proportional stake in the process, everybody has a stronger incentive to care about the process and whether they are getting their money's worth out of it.

you have plenty at stake, no matter who you are or what you pay in income taxes....

the us gvt has used all of their social security surplus taxes for goodness sakes....

these people have PLENTY at stake to keep spending down.

those that are wealthy are not some superior citizen, they are an EQUAL citizen to those that are not getting income taxed and to put them as people worthy of a vote or something at stake is simply elitist imo.

you didn't pay crud in taxes when you first started out in the work force either, because you made so little income....most people go through a state of a few years without paying anything when starting out....are these people less worthy than the wealthiest? My answer is no....

we are all created equal....

if the system gives standard deductions that eliminates the first 20k from income taxes, NO ONE GETS a special break...the wealthiest ALSO DO NOT pay income taxes on their first 20k as well...

I seriously doubt the poorest among us will not take the opportunity to find a job that pays $40k instead of the 20k, just because they will have to pay 10%-15% in income taxes on the extra $20 k they earned...the first 20k for the couple is still income tax free.

congress does not just pay the bills, they make all kinds of laws that affect every single citizen...to deny a citizen of their vote because they are poor is unconscionable imho and does not meet equal treatment under the law....it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL....as with poll taxes.

 

[Foxfyre]

Everyone pays taxes in this country....NO ONE gets by without paying some , taxes...whether it is sales taxes or property taxes or cigarette taxes or medicare taxes or gas taxes or income taxes or social security taxes, let alone all of the gvt fees for licenses etc etc etc....

everyone has something at stake!!!

But if I am not paying federal income tax, I have every reason to keep voting people into office who will make sure I pay no federal income tax no matter how badly that screws you!! And if an increase in entitlements helps me but increases the burden on you, why should I care? I have strong incentive to keep voting in Nanny and Santa Clause and incentive to do so no matter what else they might be using your money for. After all, it's your money, not mine. And when the burden finally breaks you, that will probably be much later on and not something I should worry my pretty little head about now.

If everybody has a proportional stake, however, any change in tax policy affects everybody and there is more incentive for everybody to care about that. If an increase in entitlements affects my bottom line like it does yours, then we both have an interest in whether that is a good idea. When everybody has a proportional stake in the process, everybody has a stronger incentive to care about the process and whether they are getting their money's worth out of it.

you have plenty at stake, no matter who you are or what you pay in income taxes....

the us gvt has used all of their social security surplus taxes for goodness sakes....

these people have PLENTY at stake to keep spending down.

those that are wealthy are not some superior citizen, they are an EQUAL citizen to those that are not getting income taxed and to put them as people worthy of a vote or something at stake is simply elitist imo.

you didn't pay crud in taxes when you first started out in the work force either, because you made so little income....most people go through a state of a few years without paying anything when starting out....are these people less worthy than the wealthiest? My answer is no....

we are all created equal....

if the system gives standard deductions that eliminates the first 20k from income taxes, NO ONE GETS a special break...the wealthiest ALSO DO NOT pay income taxes on their first 20k as well...

I seriously doubt the poorest among us will not take the opportunity to find a job that pays $40k instead of the 20k, just because they will have to pay 10%-15% in income taxes on the extra $20 k they earned...the first 20k for the couple is still income tax free.

congress does not just pay the bills, they make all kinds of laws that affect every single citizen...to deny a citizen of their vote because they are poor is unconscionable imho and does not meet equal treatment under the law....it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL....as with poll taxes.

Who said anything about denying somebody the vote? I sure didn't.

But I did have income tax withheld from my very first bonafide paycheck. At the tender age of 16 on a part time job at $1.00/hour. It didn't hurt me in the least. And I grew up without any sense of entitlement or that the world owed me a single dime but that I was a citizen just like everybody else even when I was quite poor and quite financially challenged for quite a few years early on.

That is one difference that sometimes exists between Progressives and Conservatives I think though. Progressives seem to think some people deserve a free ride because they are poor and it is somehow demeaning to expect them to pay for their share of citizenship.

Conservatives are more likely to see it as recognizing the worth of all, enobling, character building, and inspiring for the poor to feel that they are just like everybody else with the same opportunities, the same responsibilities, and owning the same blessings of liberty.

 

[Samson]

My father gave 22 years to the USAF, he joined at 17 and retired at 39 years old and began receiving his USAF retirement at 39.....there is absolutely NO PRIVATE INDUSTRY, even putting in 22 years with them, that would pay their employee their retirement, untill they hit the age of 62 for the most part....some at 55 but very few...yet the usaf HAS paid my father his retirement earned since he was 39, and in just a couple of years he will be 79...

......

Ok, Ok.......I got my calculator out......


He joined in 1950

He retired in 1972

That makes Care4all .......about 50 years old.....probably at her sexual prime.....

But I digress.....He was in the USAF through Korea and Vietnam.....he deserves an early retirement with benefits.