If Obama withhold SocSec check, will he be impeached?

[kaz]

How much did their employees pay?

irrelevant. you think corporate profits should be exempt while working people pay? they don't make enough profits here to contribute?

No Julian, I am all in favor of closing corporate loopholes.

Like what? Are corporations deducting their expenses "loopholes," or do you have more?

 

[kaz]

The President agrees to reductions in SS & Medicare, something Bush couldn't get done in 2005. Something he referred to as "his greatest failure."

Fast forward 6 yrs- Obama GIVES the right something that up until now, they could only dream of. He agrees in spite of the fact his own supporters are so angry 50,000 people have signed a petition saying they won't support his reelection campaign if he does.

It's apparent that a leader who is ready to eviscerate one of the core principles of his own party, despite the great dissent among his supporters, is doing so in hopes of averting economic disaster for our country. It is also apparent to anyone who is intellectually honest that the GOPT have been negotiating in bad faith all along.

He's offering to swat an elephant with a fly swatter. In this case, no, the principle is not enough. We have a 1.4 trillion deficit. The Republicans are trying to cut it to 1.3 trillion. They should be working on a zero deficit deal.

 

[SFC Ollie]

irrelevant. you think corporate profits should be exempt while working people pay? they don't make enough profits here to contribute?

No Julian, I am all in favor of closing corporate loopholes.

Like what? Are corporations deducting their expenses "loopholes," or do you have more?

I am by far no tax attorney nor an expert on corporate taxes in any way shape or form. But I am smart enough to accept the fact that there are loopholes which can and should be closed.

I'm also smart enough to know that all the taxes in the USA cannot pay off the debt. We spend too much, and we need to stop.

Basic and simple.

 

[Sunshine]

No Julian, I am all in favor of closing corporate loopholes.

Like what? Are corporations deducting their expenses "loopholes," or do you have more?

I am by far no tax attorney nor an expert on corporate taxes in any way shape or form. But I am smart enough to accept the fact that there are loopholes which can and should be closed.

I'm also smart enough to know that all the taxes in the USA cannot pay off the debt. We spend too much, and we need to stop.

Basic and simple.

Where would you start? With aid to our own people? Or aid to foreign countries?

I'm not sure whe SPEND too much. I think we GIVE AWAY too much.

 

[Lovebears65]

everytime this crybaby of a president doesnt get his way he tries to scare the public.. If he shuts it down 2012 wont come soon enough for the country

Here's a civics lesson.

Congress has the power to raise the debt ceiling, not the president.

You need to read a little more.

Ok what about the 14 admendment. He can raise it without congress..

 

[Mr. Shaman]

If Obama withhold SocSec checks as he threatened, he should be immediately removed from office -- by force if necessary.

Our Seniors have paid into the "Trust Fund" their entire lives and the vast majority of them have come to depend on that check, some for their very survival. A short while ago, Obama made an outrageous, stunning threat that he will withhold delivery of the checks unless he gets his way with Congress. Obama's demands have NOTHING to do with delivering funds to our seniors.

NOTHING!

Bernie Madoff is in prison for abusing funds entrusted to him and if Obama makes good on his threat to starve our elderly, he should be cellmates with Bernie.

I'm going to pay into it until the program officially crashes, I won't see a ******* dime.

I wonder if any of the older people actually give a shit about that??

In the end I'll probably end up paying anywhere between 100,000 - 300,000 to the program - I'll get nothing.

At least the boomers will get theirs..

At 31 I gotta worry about me when I'm 60 now...

Thats something none of the boomers had to do when they were my age - plan for their future.

Whatta ya' know about it, Skippy?

When we were in our mid-to-late-teens, we saw no future.

*
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3EgC7PfL6A&playnext=1&list=PL45B19BA34BFAAFB9]‪Vietnam A Television History 10, Homefront 1‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

*

When I was 15-years-old, in '65, I had to start thinkin'-about whether-or-not I was prepared to "die, for my Country"....whether I wanted-to, or not.

What were you thinkin'-about, when you were 15?​

 

[shintao]

The President agrees to reductions in SS & Medicare, something Bush couldn't get done in 2005. Something he referred to as "his greatest failure."

Fast forward 6 yrs- Obama GIVES the right something that up until now, they could only dream of. He agrees in spite of the fact his own supporters are so angry 50,000 people have signed a petition saying they won't support his reelection campaign if he does.

It's apparent that a leader who is ready to eviscerate one of the core principles of his own party, despite the great dissent among his supporters, is doing so in hopes of averting economic disaster for our country. It is also apparent to anyone who is intellectually honest that the GOPT have been negotiating in bad faith all along.

He's offering to swat an elephant with a fly swatter. In this case, no, the principle is not enough. We have a 1.4 trillion deficit. The Republicans are trying to cut it to 1.3 trillion. They should be working on a zero deficit deal.

Obama will cut 4.4 trillion & the retards balked.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Holy fuckin' shit, are you an idiot!

Only an idiot would think he'd get a better investment return on Social Security taxes than if he invested his own money in stocks and bonds.

Yeah.....it's a slam-dunk.

That's the point genius! Madoff only scammed some people, Obama has scammed every American citizen! Madoff is a patzer compared to Obama!

 

[SFC Ollie]

The President agrees to reductions in SS & Medicare, something Bush couldn't get done in 2005. Something he referred to as "his greatest failure."

Fast forward 6 yrs- Obama GIVES the right something that up until now, they could only dream of. He agrees in spite of the fact his own supporters are so angry 50,000 people have signed a petition saying they won't support his reelection campaign if he does.

It's apparent that a leader who is ready to eviscerate one of the core principles of his own party, despite the great dissent among his supporters, is doing so in hopes of averting economic disaster for our country. It is also apparent to anyone who is intellectually honest that the GOPT have been negotiating in bad faith all along.

He's offering to swat an elephant with a fly swatter. In this case, no, the principle is not enough. We have a 1.4 trillion deficit. The Republicans are trying to cut it to 1.3 trillion. They should be working on a zero deficit deal.

Obama will cut 4.4 trillion & the retards balked.

4.4 trillion over 10 years does not fix the deficit. BTW at the same time he asked for an increase of 380 billion (or more) in revenue. (that means more taxes)

 

[kaz]

No Julian, I am all in favor of closing corporate loopholes.

Like what? Are corporations deducting their expenses "loopholes," or do you have more?

I am by far no tax attorney nor an expert on corporate taxes in any way shape or form. But I am smart enough to accept the fact that there are loopholes which can and should be closed.

I'm also smart enough to know that all the taxes in the USA cannot pay off the debt. We spend too much, and we need to stop.

Basic and simple.

I agree on that the problem is we spend too much. But my question was a serious one. Every time Corporations can write off a business expense the Democrats call it a "loophole." I don't agree that writing off expenses are loopholes and none of them seem to be able to explain what loopholes are other then business deductions. Since you made the point, I asked. But I understand you're saying you're opposed to them in theory. Do you agree though that writing off their expenses isn't a "loophole?"

 

[shintao]

Like what? Are corporations deducting their expenses "loopholes," or do you have more?

I am by far no tax attorney nor an expert on corporate taxes in any way shape or form. But I am smart enough to accept the fact that there are loopholes which can and should be closed.

I'm also smart enough to know that all the taxes in the USA cannot pay off the debt. We spend too much, and we need to stop.

Basic and simple.

I agree on that the problem is we spend too much. But my question was a serious one. Every time Corporations can write off a business expense the Democrats call it a "loophole." I don't agree that writing off expenses are loopholes and none of them seem to be able to explain what loopholes are other then business deductions. Since you made the point, I asked. But I understand you're saying you're opposed to them in theory. Do you agree though that writing off their expenses isn't a "loophole?"

Notice the difference between deduction and loophole.

Cultural Dictionary

tax loophole definition


A provision in the laws governing taxation that allows people to reduce their taxes. The term has the connotation of an unintentional omission or obscurity in the law that allows the reduction of tax liability to a point below that intended by the framers of the law.

EXAMPLES:

1. Bank of America took $336 billion in bailouts in 2009, but in 2010, flush with $4.4 billion in profits, it paid no taxes. Even Forbes magazine asked, how is that possible? Probably thanks to their 115 offshore tax havens.

2. Boeing just received $35 billion from our government to build 179 airborne tankers, but despite nearly $10 billion in profits from 2008 to 2010, it too paid no taxes, again thanks to foreign tax havens.

3. Citicorp took $476 billion from the bailout and then made monster profits in 2010, yet it paid no taxes, thanks to 427 subsidiaries in tax havens like the Cayman Islands and Hong Kong.

4. Exxon/Mobil, received huge oil subsidies from the government and earned $45 billion in 2009 but paid no taxes, again thanks to stashing profits in places like the Bahamas and Singapore.

5. GE – see last week’s column for the stats and facts on this corporation’s tax dodge.

6. Google utilizes a technique that moves most of its income through Ireland and Netherlands to Bermuda, making its tax rate 2.3 percent.

7. Mega Pharmaceuticals Merck earned $9 billion in profits and paid no taxes in 2010, while Pfizer (largest drug maker) owed $10 billion in taxes but found the necessary loopholes to pay no taxes, thanks to its offshore subsidiaries in places like Luxembourg and the Isle of Jersey.

8. News Corporation, Rupert Murdoch’s media monolith that owns Fox News avoids paying American taxes through its 152 subsidiaries in tax havens from the British Virgin Islands to Hong Kong.

9. Verizon, despite making $24.2 billion in pre-tax US income, paid no taxes and actually claimed a federal refund of $1.3 billion for the last two years, again all thanks to those offshore subsidiaries.

10. Wells Fargo, the fourth largest bank in the US, which took $107 billion in bailouts, wrote off all its losses by acquiring Wachovia, thus paying no taxes. Yet its CEO earned $5.6 million in cash for his salary and $13 million in stock.
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/ad-lib/2011/apr/10/tax-evaders-wall-shame/

 

[SFC Ollie]

Like what? Are corporations deducting their expenses "loopholes," or do you have more?

I am by far no tax attorney nor an expert on corporate taxes in any way shape or form. But I am smart enough to accept the fact that there are loopholes which can and should be closed.

I'm also smart enough to know that all the taxes in the USA cannot pay off the debt. We spend too much, and we need to stop.

Basic and simple.

I agree on that the problem is we spend too much. But my question was a serious one. Every time Corporations can write off a business expense the Democrats call it a "loophole." I don't agree that writing off expenses are loopholes and none of them seem to be able to explain what loopholes are other then business deductions. Since you made the point, I asked. But I understand you're saying you're opposed to them in theory. Do you agree though that writing off their expenses isn't a "loophole?"

I believe there would be a major difference in Loopholes and expenses.

 

[Political Junky]

Sure, impeachment worked out so well for cons when they impeached Clinton.

 

[EriktheRed]

Bush's was lambasted for wanting to partially privatize the systems because there was a "trust fund" and Wall Street was a "Gamble"

Well I will take a chance on Wall Street any day when the alternative is 100% loss at the First Bank of Obama.

Privatize it all!

Holy fuckin' shit, are you an idiot!

Only an idiot would think he'd get a better investment return on Social Security taxes than if he invested his own money in stocks and bonds.

Were you ASLEEP the about 3 years ago???

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Holy fuckin' shit, are you an idiot!

Only an idiot would think he'd get a better investment return on Social Security taxes than if he invested his own money in stocks and bonds.

Were you ASLEEP the about 3 years ago???

Social Security = 100% loss of principal.

Oops

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

If Obama withhold SocSec checks as he threatened, he should be immediately removed from office -- by force if necessary.

It's not an impeachable offense.

 

[Chris]

Only an idiot would think he'd get a better investment return on Social Security taxes than if he invested his own money in stocks and bonds.

Were you ASLEEP the about 3 years ago???

Social Security = 100% loss of principal.

Oops

Only if you vote Republican!

 

[Rinata]

1. His $38,500 per person fund raiser / birthday party in Chicago on August 3rd.

Now, that's a priority!

Because you hate him, these things are an issue. He is not doing anything wrong in attending fund raisers or celebratinbg his birthday. I'm sure Roosevelt, Truman, Nixon, and Bush did the same thing during their time as prez. Remember World War II, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Watergate??? Their their lives did not come to a screeching halt. But this president is different in your clouded vision.

You people are absolutely pathetic.

Those presidents didn't go to 40K/person fund raisers immediately after threatening the nation's elderly people with starvation.

Good Lord!!! Knock off the drama. You don't even do it well.

 

[Stephanie]

Just threatening it was a very pissant thing to do. The man should be ashamed of himself. If he does withhold SS Checks,Impeachment should be on the table.

No it ain't.

******* Conservatives have been trying to shut down government for decades.

That's really what you assholes are up too.

LOl, for DECADES huh?

 

[Stephanie]

man these people just swim in hate

Do you deny that your fearsome leader made the threat?

I do. You people do not know the difference between a threat and a fact. He was just telling it like it is. Why would he threaten the citizens??? None of us are at the negotiations, now are we??? It's so ridiculous.

So? what were his reasons for using SS checks INSTEAD OF WELFARE CHECKS.