You heard it here first

[Sarah G]

"Steps have to be taken so that we can get control."

Exactly the problem. You want control of MY money so you can do what YOU feel is right. What a bunch of horse shit. How about this. Instead of me giving money i don't want to give, why don't you just give my portion to the government out of your paycheck? That would make me happy with a system like that. Then I would be free enough to invest, maybe start a business, and be successful so that in the end of my life I wouldn't have to worry about SS. You could take your measley paycheck from them and I could live off of the fruit of my hard work and labor.

That seems fair to me

That isn't what is going to happen. Your proposal was soundly rejected. It was deemed horse shit.

 

[Sarah G]

when social security began, the average life expectancy was 62 years old. the average life expectancy now is well above 70. if you raise the age at which you can collect social security by 3 years, you save a fortune....particularly with retiring baby boomers sucking up all the air now.

no one is telling you when you can retire. you can retire any time your little heart desires. but if you want to collect social security, then you have to wait til you ask 'mother may i'.

how's that for being responsible for yourself?

Imo, the answer is job creation. Get everyone you can contributing.

Precisely: Everyone needs to be given a sickle, and a hammer, and they need to get to work so that a centralised authority can determine for them where their production should go!!

So, scrap everything and start over? You have to be realistic, you don't just say the entire system is weighing us down so we have to stop collecting taxes and start completely over. Or maybe more tax cuts? Other bandaid fixes maybe?

It is not going to happen.

 

[FrankieGA]

Imo, the answer is job creation. Get everyone you can contributing.

Precisely: Everyone needs to be given a sickle, and a hammer, and they need to get to work so that a centralised authority can determine for them where their production should go!!

So, scrap everything and start over? You have to be realistic, you don't just say the entire system is weighing us down so we have to stop collecting taxes and start completely over. Or maybe more tax cuts? Other bandaid fixes maybe?

It is not going to happen.

Why can't it "Just start over". Isn't that how we started this country in the first place. Vote everyone of them out, and lets start from scratch.

Oh and thanks for the rejection, I expected nothing less

 

[Thinman]

Any tax revolt would have to be organized and include a majority of previous taxpayers. It would also require a great deal of trust that your fellow taxpayer would not pay his taxes, thus leaving you holding the bag. If you haven't already, you should re-do your W4 claiming several dependants.

I think it's obvious that we must resist any legislation that adds to our tax burden. Frequent, large scale, peaceful demonstrations are effective methods. If we can make enough noise, they will hear us and we can force that in November.

 

[Vanquish]

I'm sorry for not reading all 6 pages...has anyone confirmed that Obama is in favor of this? If it's just a proposal that's one thing...if it's more...I'm not voting for him in 2012.

 

[CMike]

What a twit. You would think they would know that raising taxes in a bad economy would be disastarous.

 

[Thinman]

I'm sorry for not reading all 6 pages...has anyone confirmed that Obama is in favor of this? If it's just a proposal that's one thing...if it's more...I'm not voting for him in 2012.

I don't think Obama has mentioned this, but if it increases revenues, he is going to love the idea.

 

[FrankieGA]

I do not believe he has confirmed or denied anything yet. The story was just released yesterday

 

[CMike]

I'm sorry for not reading all 6 pages...has anyone confirmed that Obama is in favor of this? If it's just a proposal that's one thing...if it's more...I'm not voting for him in 2012.

It's his economic advisor that has publically proposed it. It seems that they are floating it.

 

[CMike]

I'm sorry for not reading all 6 pages...has anyone confirmed that Obama is in favor of this? If it's just a proposal that's one thing...if it's more...I'm not voting for him in 2012.

I don't think Obama has mentioned this, but if it increases revenues, he is going to love the idea.

The ironic part is that it will lower revenue as sales go down.

 

[Thinman]

I'm sorry for not reading all 6 pages...has anyone confirmed that Obama is in favor of this? If it's just a proposal that's one thing...if it's more...I'm not voting for him in 2012.

I don't think Obama has mentioned this, but if it increases revenues, he is going to love the idea.

The ironic part is that it will lower revenue as sales go down.

That's true and people will purchase less because they have lost purchasing power so companies that produce products will cut back on production and possibly layoff employees, who will signup for unemployment requiring government to raise taxes.

Damn, we are right back where we started.

 

[Sarah G]

Precisely: Everyone needs to be given a sickle, and a hammer, and they need to get to work so that a centralised authority can determine for them where their production should go!!

So, scrap everything and start over? You have to be realistic, you don't just say the entire system is weighing us down so we have to stop collecting taxes and start completely over. Or maybe more tax cuts? Other bandaid fixes maybe?

It is not going to happen.

Why can't it "Just start over". Isn't that how we started this country in the first place. Vote everyone of them out, and lets start from scratch.

Oh and thanks for the rejection, I expected nothing less

A lot of them could conceivably be voted out this time. Are you sure things will turn out the way you want them to?

 

[FrankieGA]

Well much like the Free Market System, You have to take a risk in order to get a payoff. The system was never set up to be used by politicians like it is now. Now they make a career out of it, rarely come home to hear from the local level people that voted them there in the first place.

Without Risk there will be no Reward

 

[Thinman]

So, scrap everything and start over? You have to be realistic, you don't just say the entire system is weighing us down so we have to stop collecting taxes and start completely over. Or maybe more tax cuts? Other bandaid fixes maybe?

It is not going to happen.

Why can't it "Just start over". Isn't that how we started this country in the first place. Vote everyone of them out, and lets start from scratch.

Oh and thanks for the rejection, I expected nothing less

A lot of them could conceivably be voted out this time. Are you sure things will turn out the way you want them to?

Unfortunately we can never be sure of anything when politics is involved, but this 'spend and tax' method has put us in a very difficult position. If more jobs are lost, due to increased taxes, and federal revenues decline, will the Democrat administration try to make up the decline by increasing taxes again?

 

[Samson]

Imo, the answer is job creation. Get everyone you can contributing.

Precisely: Everyone needs to be given a sickle, and a hammer, and they need to get to work so that a centralised authority can determine for them where their production should go!!

So, scrap everything and start over? You have to be realistic, you don't just say the entire system is weighing us down so we have to stop collecting taxes and start completely over. Or maybe more tax cuts? Other bandaid fixes maybe?

It is not going to happen.

Actually, I was being facetious: "Get everyone you can contibuting," sounds positively Marxist.

How does an Amendment to the constitution that limits the Federal Budget to the population of the USA X the average per capita income X 10%?

300,000,000 X $40,000 X 10% seems to be a pretty damn reasonable budget.

$1,200,000,000,000

 

[FrankieGA]

Problem is that is not where it stops. It would be nice in a fantasy world to think that the gov't only needed, according to your calculations, $44,000 a year to "take care" of us. Is that what you are inferring?

 

[amrchaos]

I have been saying the Dems will try for a VAT tax since Barry took office.

Now he's sending out his stooges to begin spreading that word:

Volcker: Taxes likely to rise eventually to tame deficit | Reuters

Volcker: Taxes likely to rise eventually to tame deficit
NEW YORK

Tue Apr 6, 2010 7:57pm EDTNEW YORK (Reuters) - The United States should consider raising taxes to help bring deficits under control and may need to consider a European-style value-added tax, White House adviser Paul Volcker said on Tuesday.

A VAT tax is a tax on EVERYTHING AND EVERYBODY.

This is how they intended to pay for Barrycare all along, the frauds.

Do any of you Obama ass lickers want to again defend that lying shit POTUS who PROMISED that people under the $250,000 mark would not have higher taxes?

Actually, we had large deficits since the Bush era

Also, the VAT tax is one possible option, there are other options that can be used inclduing spending cuts.

In any case, this does not indicate a method of paying for ObamaCare, and if you really want to examine the issue a little more, we were paying for NoObamacare already.


Its budget managing time, and cuts will hit research and science first. That is where cuts must begin since this has the ability to be funded privately and results need not be pertinent to todays society. That is why NASA does not have funding as of yet.

 

[The Rabbi]

But I thought Obamacare was supposed to save money?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I have been saying the Dems will try for a VAT tax since Barry took office.

Now he's sending out his stooges to begin spreading that word:

Volcker: Taxes likely to rise eventually to tame deficit | Reuters

Volcker: Taxes likely to rise eventually to tame deficit
NEW YORK

Tue Apr 6, 2010 7:57pm EDTNEW YORK (Reuters) - The United States should consider raising taxes to help bring deficits under control and may need to consider a European-style value-added tax, White House adviser Paul Volcker said on Tuesday.

A VAT tax is a tax on EVERYTHING AND EVERYBODY.

This is how they intended to pay for Barrycare all along, the frauds.

Do any of you Obama ass lickers want to again defend that lying shit POTUS who PROMISED that people under the $250,000 mark would not have higher taxes?

I guess I shouldn't even be surprised that despite what the OP says, there is nothing in the link that says Obama is proposing a VAT tax.

 

[NYcarbineer]

But I thought Obamacare was supposed to save money?

I didn't see 'Obamacare' mentioned.