Why we are screwed, in one chart




Subject: CHARLIE REESE'S FINAL COLUMN A GREAT READ!!!!!
?

Charley Reese's Final column!
A very interesting column.. COMPLETELY NEUTRAL
Be sure to Read the Poem at the end.

Charley Reese's final column for the Orlando Sentinel...
He has been a journalist for 49 years.
He is retiring and this is HIS LAST COLUMN.

Be sure to read the Tax List at the end.

This is about as clear and easy to understand as it can be. The article below is completely neutral, neither anti-republican or democrat. Charlie Reese, a retired reporter for the Orlando Sentinel, has hit the nail directly on the head, defining clearly who it is that in the final analysis must assume responsibility for the judgments made that impact each one of us every day. It's a short but good read. Worth the time. Worth remembering!

545 vs. 300,000,000 People
-By Charlie Reese

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? John Boehner. He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.

If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan ...

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.

Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees...

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.

What you do with this article now that you have read it... is up to you.
This might be funny if it weren't so true.
Be sure to read all the way to the end:

Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table,
At which he's fed.

Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.

Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for
peanuts anyway!

Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.

Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.

Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.

Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries
Tax his tears.

Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.

When he screams and hollers;
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.

Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid...

Put these words
Upon his tomb,
'Taxes drove me
to my doom...'

When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.

Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge Tax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Sales Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax


STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world.
We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

What in the heck happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'

I hope this goes around THE USA at least 545 times!!! YOU can help it get there!!!

GO AHEAD. . . BE AN AMERICAN!!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So simple, yet so sad.

click-through-for-original.jpg
Makes you question the lefts talking point about how the congress has the lowest rating of all branches of governement, doesn't it?

the poll that shows 11% approval for Congress is flawed to start with.

Take a poll of each Congressional District across the Nation, add them together and divide by the number of Congressional Districts and you'll have an approval number that is real.

I like my Congressman, voted for him, it's your's I don't like.
 
I have been against term limits for a variety of reasons. What if we actually did get a good man in office? How long is the learning curve?

I always believed in term limits via the ballot box but I am starting to have my doubts. As g5000 said we don't vote OUR representative out. After Obama said that if the economy didn't improve, and it really did not, he should be a one term president and won anyway I am thinking there is no hope. Term limits are apparently the answer, now all we have to do is convince those who have everything to lose by passing term limits, good luck with that.

No plan is perfect, no system is without flaws or weaknesses.

What I care about is the net result, and I really don't think it's even close.

.

I have been won over, but I don't think it is going to happen in our life time. So let's start grass roots organizations that can fight these guys. Like a group against taxation and debt, you know like the Tea Party. Yeah start a group that wants fiscal responsibility so both sides of the aisle can dump on them. We're screwed.


You sure nailed that one right! The TEA Party is the best thing that's happened to this Country since the first Tea Party, but, remember, Christ came to save us and we hung him.
 
I want them ALL out! Anyone on their second term (or more), OUT!

in other words they have to leave as soon as they learn anything about governing?

No: in other words, they leave when they get entrenched in Washington and start ladling the pork! Offhand, nobody in his district would recognize Ed Markey to save their lives! He has lived in Maryland for 20+ years!
 
I have been against term limits for a variety of reasons. What if we actually did get a good man in office? How long is the learning curve?

I always believed in term limits via the ballot box but I am starting to have my doubts. As g5000 said we don't vote OUR representative out. After Obama said that if the economy didn't improve, and it really did not, he should be a one term president and won anyway I am thinking there is no hope. Term limits are apparently the answer, now all we have to do is convince those who have everything to lose by passing term limits, good luck with that.

The lack of term limits permits parties (Boehner et al are only the latest example) to obstruct government. Term limits would greatly limit the effects of the extremes, e.g., socialists or tea party or libertarians. Term limits would stop politicians and their feeders from feathering their nests at the taxpayers' expense.

A not so funny thing, you didn't mention Reid or Pelosi and how both block bills from votes. Another funny thing is when I think of you I think of Specter.

Term limits would stop politicians and their feeders from feathering their nests at the taxpayers' expense. Your comments are pointless. Tough to be you. TPM is so 2010. :lol:
 
How about John Conyers?
Fifty fucking years in office.

How about Don Young – 40 years in office.

If you and other partisan rightists are going to be consistent and credible, you have to be just as upset about long-term republicans as democrats, which of course you’re not.

Yet again: I want them ALL out! I do not want the Democrat Party out, I do not want the Republican Party out. I want the INCUMBENT PARTY out!
 
No plan is perfect, no system is without flaws or weaknesses.

What I care about is the net result, and I really don't think it's even close.

.

I have been won over, but I don't think it is going to happen in our life time. So let's start grass roots organizations that can fight these guys. Like a group against taxation and debt, you know like the Tea Party. Yeah start a group that wants fiscal responsibility so both sides of the aisle can dump on them. We're screwed.


You sure nailed that one right! The TEA Party is the best thing that's happened to this Country since the first Tea Party, but, remember, Christ came to save us and we hung him.

Think about it, any group that opposes the government is instantly vilified. OWS, Tea Party all of them. And what was it that was so bad about the Tea Party? Don't you want a government that shows some fiscal responsibility?
 
The lack of term limits permits parties (Boehner et al are only the latest example) to obstruct government. Term limits would greatly limit the effects of the extremes, e.g., socialists or tea party or libertarians. Term limits would stop politicians and their feeders from feathering their nests at the taxpayers' expense.

A not so funny thing, you didn't mention Reid or Pelosi and how both block bills from votes. Another funny thing is when I think of you I think of Specter.

Term limits would stop politicians and their feeders from feathering their nests at the taxpayers' expense. Your comments are pointless. Tough to be you. TPM is so 2010. :lol:

Not pointless at all, the point being is you are about as mainstream Republican as was Specter. A real Republican would have named Dirty Harry first because he stops bills just like Boehner.
 
I have been against term limits for a variety of reasons. What if we actually did get a good man in office? How long is the learning curve?

I always believed in term limits via the ballot box but I am starting to have my doubts. As g5000 said we don't vote OUR representative out. After Obama said that if the economy didn't improve, and it really did not, he should be a one term president and won anyway I am thinking there is no hope. Term limits are apparently the answer, now all we have to do is convince those who have everything to lose by passing term limits, good luck with that.

Limiting terms is addressing a symptom of profuse bleeding with a band-aid.
The answer lay in a demand for a fair and simple tax code.​




If we remove from congress the power to customize the tax obligations of friends and political donors, much of the moneyed political corruption in this country will disappear.
:dunno: Who in their right mind would give million$ to a politician or a party if they couldn't obtain tax breaks in return?​


`

l disagree, and I think you're putting the cart before the horse. This is just my opinion, no big study or anything to back it up, but I don't see why legislators are incentivized to change the tax code when the way the code is benefits them, and will go on benefiting them for potentially decades depending on how long they hold their seat.

I'm falling back on rhetoric, but this country was designed to be a democratic republic, governed by citizen-legislators. Some peeps in this thread keep saying that we need to let legislators get experience, and that's not nothing, but isn't some of the best experience for running the country actually living and working in it? You get some ideas about change, you get elected and serve a stint in the legislature, and you get back to being a citizen. That's how it should be.
 
So you don't think that incumbents have a significant advantage?

Really?

.

Yes, it's called experience and I like that. Term limits are crap.

Term limits and California: Have they really done much good?


So you can't come up with any electoral advantage an incumbent has.

Incredible.

.

I didn't try. Rich people have an electoral advantage. White men have an electoral advantage. Incumbents have an electoral advantage. In the end, they still get voted on and if they aren't doing their jobs to the satisfaction of their constituents, they get voted out.
 
I have been against term limits for a variety of reasons. What if we actually did get a good man in office? How long is the learning curve?

I always believed in term limits via the ballot box but I am starting to have my doubts. As g5000 said we don't vote OUR representative out. After Obama said that if the economy didn't improve, and it really did not, he should be a one term president and won anyway I am thinking there is no hope. Term limits are apparently the answer, now all we have to do is convince those who have everything to lose by passing term limits, good luck with that.

The thing about term limits that concerns me is if it were done without some sort of real lobby reform the savvy political lobbyists would descend on all the new congressmen like locusts and corrupt them entirely. It would be even worse than it is now. I feel that real lobby reform would solve many of the problems that those seeking term limits are concerned with. A dirty backroom deal can be made with an old timer career politician or freshman newb and there is no difference, change the lobbyists for real change in Washington.
 
So simple, yet so sad.

click-through-for-original.jpg

Yes.

Incumbents have a massive advantage over challengers.

I don't know why this isn't painfully obvious to all.

Term limits, stat. Before it's too fucking late.

.

Term limits do nothing to address the real problem here. It has little to do with the fact that a specific politician holds an office for a long time. The party holding the office is no better than one of its cronies and the politicians are all cut from the same cloth.

You accomplish nothing by treating the symptoms.

What would term limits do? Would it shake the party control over a specific seat? Unlikely. Just because it is not an incumbent does not mean that the next party sock is not going to take his place.

the core problem is not that we have too many legislators that stick around. The core problem is that we have apathetic and ignorant electorate. You don't fix that with term limits and you cant make a representative government work with an electorate like that.
 

Forum List

Back
Top