The gist of this article is:

1. Taxes are "good" (I disagree).

2. Liberals should quit being dishonest, quit trying to "disguise" taxes and just admit that they love high taxation and then argue to justify said taxation based upon merits (I agree).

Also, from the article:

it becomes clear that the necessary revenue cannot be found exclusively through efforts to soak the rich. [ No shit ]...Higher taxes on the rich are arguably more egalitarian, but they can only raise a limited amount of revenue. This is especially true when you consider that the extremely wealthy are a very small proportion of the population...While the United States as a whole is lightly taxed compared to other developed countries, our wealthiest citizens are already paying a pretty high share of the tab. As Clive Crook points out in a recent Financial Times column, "The U.S. income tax collects 45 per cent of its revenues from the highest-income decile," substantially above the 32 percent average in other developed countries. Part of the reason for this is that the richest Americans earn an unusually large portion of the total pie. But it seems unwise to count on ever-growing inequality as the key to financing the progressive agenda.

I posted the stuff about soaking the rich for a reason...

Obama is going to have to raise taxes accross the board if he has any hope of even remotely keeping deficits at sustainable levels. It will happen - and when it does happen I am going to be calling out each and every one of you who bought into his campaign rhetoric hook-line-and-sinker when he promised to increase taxes only on the top 5%. People like Danni claim to love tax increases - we'll see how much she loves it when her taxes go up.

Also, when Cap and Trade passes, do NOT buy into the bullshit that it isn't a tax on all of us. I can see it now, when energy costs more than double as a result of cap and trade, some of you clowns are going to buy into the Dem congress' bleating that these evil energy companies are price-gouging. Due to a combination of incompetence, ignorance and bias, the MSM won't accurately report on the cause and effect of cap and trade either. A HUMUNGOUS 'hidden-tax' and a scary number of people won't see what is before their very eyes.

I posted the stuff about soaking the rich for a reason...

LOL!

The RICH never ever ever in the history of the entire world ever ever get soaked and the fact you idiots keep pandering the bullshit shows just how much of a shill the rich have made in you.

The rich pay by your post 45% of the revenue while they take home 70% of all wages in this country. You are either stupidly ignorant or just blind.

Reverse robbin hood at its best.....and you are advicating this as the way it should be.....feudalism of lord and peasant is thy wish.

Looks like Moneywar (aptly named)is just ANOTHER mewling neer-do-well that wants people to work long and hard so that they can pay for HIS existence. I expect he considers anyone with more than he has as being "rich." Stop worryin' ya' little maggot, the Obamessiah is going to see to it that you get lots o' "free" shit.

Energy is going to double no matter what happens, regardless of cap and trade. Why can't you see that, it is our own government that is doing it.

The government should just take over all energy so profits would not have to be had, for the good of the nation. That's a little extreme but there is no reason energy should have a continued profit rise because those companies have too because they trade on wall street...it bullshit.

We either begin putting our nation back to work for living wages or your wish for the 1700's lord and peasant will be the path.

Cars are not selling because people don't make enough to qualify for the loan.......wake up!

"just ANOTHER mewling neer-do-well that wants people to work long and hard so that they can pay for HIS existence" is, really, a silly (and that's being kind) line to take when someone suggests those who have more money assume a greater share of paying the costs of maintaining and perhaps even imporiving the metaphoric health of a society in which they have prospered.

Sorry JGA,

But I fall into the taxes obama is going to take, but I am smart enough to understand that our nation depends on getting money back into the hands that consume, and that ain't the rich.

The difference between you and I is you are thinking about your wishing self and I am thinking about the future of our nation.

Wages is the key to revenue and reducing those wages every year making the rich richer is not in one bit favorable to this nation.

mewling neer-do-well that wants people to work long and hard so that they can pay for HIS existence.

Sadly, these people could have retired long ago so no one understands this work long and hard bullshit because if that's the case it is by stupid CHOICE.

First Jeff, how much to they pay you per post?

Second, it mentions that in other countries the average taxpayers pay a higher percentage of the overall tax revenue but fails to mention that in most of those countries they also receive medical benefits, sick day benefits, lots of other benefits funded by the government so though they pay in more they also take back out of the system much more too.
If we were to convert health care premiums to income tax revenue we could not only supply health care to all but also make a big dent in the deficit.

"...those who have more money assume a greater share of paying the costs of maintaining and perhaps even imporiving the metaphoric health of a society in which they have prospered."

I have no problem with helping others. However, when almost half the population (and growing) is paying no taxes and the other half is pulling the entire load, something is wrong here. Ask Geithner and some of the others in the administration about how they have no compunction with taxing the "other" guys to garner votes while not meeting their own obligations.

"Sadly, these people could have retired long ago so no one understands this work long and hard bullshit because if that's the case it is by stupid CHOICE."

I thought you and your little friends were BIG on CHOICE. I guess not. And, because they CHOOSE to earn more it's your belief it should be taken away and given to YOU...right?

i'm no economic genius, but my opinion is that both sides miss the boat. it is the INTEREST that keeps everyone enslaved. i don't see anyone currently trying to limit that-- it is so ingrained in society like its normal, but that is where slavery is started.

money is not the root of all evil, interest is.

#3 | Posted by moneywar

My point was that soaking the rich is insufficient to pay for all of the things Obama (and you and Danni) want to pay for. Increased taxes accross the board are coming. It'll be interesting to see how you two react to your taxes being raised.

Second, it mentions that in other countries the average taxpayers pay a higher percentage of the overall tax revenue but fails to mention that in most of those countries they also receive medical benefits, sick day benefits, lots of other benefits funded by the government so though they pay in more they also take back out of the system much more too.

Actually, the article makes the very point you are making - it is this very point that serves as his justification for telling liberals "to quit worrying and love taxes (stealing from Dr. Strangelove in the process).

Methinks Danni commented on the article itself without actually reading it. Again.

"However, when almost half the population (and growing) is paying no taxes and the other half is pulling the entire load, something is wrong here."

You ever consider that the reason almost half pays no taxes is because wages have been suppressed for thirty years??? Pay them more and then they'll be paying taxes.

Jeff, I read it quickly, as I am at work, but I did not see where it made that point, perhaps you could point it out???

"However, when almost half the population (and growing) is paying no taxes

Another lie perpetuated by the billionaire apologists.

This makes perfect sense. Tax the hell out of business owners so they can't take the profits to invest in new technolgies, machinery, pay the higher cost of employee healthcare etc. Economic geniuses like Moneywar should stick to greeting customers and offering them a cart.

"Tax the hell out of business owners so they can't take the profits to invest in new technolgies, machinery, pay the higher cost of employee healthcare etc."

Well actually higher taxes cause them to invest more in all of those things to avoid paying it out in taxes. We built our economy with much higher taxes, if we had had the low taxes of today during the 50s and 60s we would never have built the largest middle class in the world. Notice please, that when we lowered taxes we COINCIDENTALLY started to decline.

Well actually higher taxes cause them to invest more in all of those things to avoid paying it out in taxes.
Posted by danni

Bullshit. They are also trying to maintain a profit for themselves. It's going to be either one or the other. And I know you lefties think it's a sin to keep a profit for themselves, but that's why they tend to start and own a business.

"Another lie perpetuated by the billionaire apologists."

Right...

"With the April 17th deadline for federal tax returns looming, Americans are sharply aware of their federal income tax liabilities. However, one aspect of federal income taxes they may not be aware of is the growing number of Americans who pay zero federal income tax after taking advantage of deductions and credits.

During 2006, Tax Foundation economists estimate that roughly 43.4 million tax returns, representing 91 million individuals, will face a zero or negative tax liability. That's out of a total of 136 million federal tax returns that will be filed. Adding to this figure the 15 million households and individuals who file no tax return at all, roughly 121 million Americansor 41 percent of the U.S. populationwill be completely outside the federal income tax system in 2006.1 This total includes those who pay no tax, and those who pay some tax upfront and are later refunded the full amount of the tax paid or more."
From The Tax Foundation

And...

WISGOD it's called a business deduction. Anything they invest into the business reduces their reported net profit and thus the amount they pay taxes on and is the reason in years past there was alway a great deal of purchasing of new equipment at years end. That is just a simple fact of business and you can deny it all you want but you look foolish doing so.

Danni,

You seem to operate under the presumption that if corporate income taxes were raised to 90% the economy would boom beyond belief. I mean, it's just that much more money these companies would invest in wages and growth in lieu of padding the pockets of the wealthiest - right?

726,

Another lie perpetuated by the billionaire apologists.

When talking about federal income taxes, the statement is spot-on.

They are also trying to maintain a profit for themselves. It's going to be either one or the other. And I know you lefties think it's a sin to keep a profit for themselves, but that's why they tend to start and own a business.
#19 | Posted by wisgod

There's profit and then there's profit.

""Wages and Benefits: Real Wages (1964-2004)""

WISGOD it's called a business deduction. Anything they invest into the business reduces their reported net profit and thus the amount they pay taxes on and is the reason in years past there was alway a great deal of purchasing of new equipment at years end. That is just a simple fact of business and you can deny it all you want but you look foolish doing so.

#21 | Posted by danni

Of course their investors, the shareholders, don't give a rat's ass about growth in share value, which is tied to profits.

There's profit and then there's profit.

Precisely - and which entity can greater afford and operate with a higher corporate tax rate:

Profit

-or-

Profit

"You seem to operate under the presumption that if corporate income taxes were raised to 90% the economy would boom beyond belief."

You go search for a post of mine where I ever said that Jeff. You won't find it.
Raising the tax rates for the highest brackets is a necessary thing to do but I never suggested 90% as the top rate. Clinton balanced the budget with the top rate at 39%. My first change would be to make capital gains rates exactly the same as for any other tax payer. There is no reason my income from labor should be taxed double what a rich person makes on capital gains.

It's easy to spot the people who have never ran a small business.

"Of course their investors, the shareholders, don't give a rat's ass about growth in share value, which is tied to profits."

It's not only tied to profits, it's tied to the vaue of the corporation. Investment into the corporation to avoid taxes increases the overall value and increases stock value.
I might add, that is exactly why American industry is on its back, changes to tax codes encouraged short term profit taking instead of long term investment in the United STates while other nations operated exactly opposite of that model and built manufacturing bases for their economies.

"It's easy to spot the people who have never ran a small business."

Ran one successfully for 10 years Wisgod.

You might think about why people like me aren't not running them....clue here....part of it is access to affordable health care. If you have a family it is almost impossible to afford to insure your kids while operating a mom and pop business.
A real national health care system would be the biggest impetus to entrepreneurs in decades and big corporations know it and thus are against it. They don't want the competition.

When talking about federal income taxes, the statement is spot-on.

But you did not say federal income taxes.

But you did not say federal income taxes.

I didn't make the claim and you knew damn well what Jest was talking about when he made the claim.

Ran one successfully for 10 years Wisgod.

#30 | Posted by danni at 2009-06-18 09:05 AM | Reply

Really? You just gave up on a succesful small business?

Me my my partner split up and I couldn't run it by myself. Plus the health insurance was just too unaffordable so I went and got a job with benefits.
We shut it down, paid the creditors, sold the equipment and I bought a Pontiac convertible. Great car, drove it for about 250,000 miles with hardly any repairs.

But you did not say federal income taxes.

I didn't make the claim and you knew damn well what Jest was talking about when he made the claim.

#33 | Posted by JeffJ

No you didn't. Why are you defending it?

And no, Jest said "no taxes" not no income taxes. Words have meaning. Spewing blind partisan rhetoric does little to promote debate.

If you feel confident in reading other people's minds kudos to you. However, the right wing moonbat talking point is "they pay no taxes" to make it seem that 45% of the population gets a free ride. Saying they pay no income taxes lessens the lie that they are freeloaders.

I have clients that have $20,000,000 net worth that pay no income taxes. You care to lump them in with the rest of the dreggs of society that the right so quickly points fingers at?

Plus the health insurance was just too unaffordable

America health care inc. is the best in the world!

We shut it down, paid the creditors, sold the equipment and I bought a Pontiac convertible. Great car, drove it for about 250,000 miles with hardly any repairs.

#35 | Posted by danni

You ended up with a car after running your successfull business for 10 years?

"You ended up with a car after running your successfull business for 10 years?"

I don't need to defend myself to you. I raised a family with that business, bought a house (which my former partner still lives in) etc.
The point was I ran a business successfully, have you????

The point was I ran a business successfully, have you????

#39 | Posted by danni

Yes, still am.

"Liberals should quit being dishonest, quit trying to "disguise" taxes and just admit that they love high taxation and then argue to justify said taxation based upon merits (I agree)."
#1 | Posted by JeffJ

I disagree. A large portion of liberals are looking at taxes as getting something for "free" without having to work for it.

"A large portion of liberals are looking at taxes as getting something for "free" without having to work for it."

Riiight. Actually, it is those who favor keeping our tax code as it is...full of loop holes for the rich who want something for free.

"It's easy to spot the people who have never ran a small business."

I love this line. What, exactly, is a "small business"? And what does running one qualify one to do, other than run a small business? It's so ridiculously reminiscent of the old GOP mantric to deluded sophistry that people who run businesses automatically know how to run a government.

And what does running one qualify one to do, other than run a small business?
Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Knowing the impact of Federal and State policies as they relate to the impact on your business. Is that too complicated for you?

The government should just take over all energy ....

#5 | Posted by moneywar at 2009-06-18 08:06 AM | Reply |

The government should just take over the auto companies for the good of the nation .... (done)

The government should just take over health care for the good of the nation ... (coming)

The government should just take over all agriculture for the good of the nation .... (in process)

And just look what that did for the Soviet Union and North Korea! Moneywar paradise!

WISGOD I will tell you one thing, I've known many other small business owners, as a group they are no different than any other group as far as real knowledge about what our government is doing or not doing. Most are so busy networking, running the business, etc. that they have little time for anything else. I can honestly say I know more about current events, taxes,etc. than I did when we had the business because I have much more time now to read and learn.

But I fall into the taxes obama is going to take,

#7 | Posted by moneywar at 2009-06-18 08:12 AM | Reply

So, since you are so stinky rich, when was the last time you cut a check payable to the U.S. Treasury?

They accept voluntary donations, you know.

If you really believe this is a good thing, then you should be first in line to put up some money.

"And just look what that did for the Soviet Union and North Korea!"

Now there is a valid comparison for you. No exaggeration there, no sir, that Vernon tells it like it really is....in his crazy mind.

When all else fails just call them Commies!!!

Or even better...Godless Commies!!!!

What, exactly, is a "small business"? And what does running one qualify one to do, other than run a small business?

#43 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-06-18 09:55 AM | Reply

The average business in the United States has 7 employees.

Running such a business requires risk taking and developing a knowledge of: personnel, finance, insurance, marketing, budgeting, forecasting, and dozens of other skills.

(Many of which Obama has never learned)

In short, a small business owner is qualified to do many complicated things, simultaneously.

When all else fails just call them Commies!!!

Or even better...Godless Commies!!!!

#48 | Posted by danni at 2009-06-18 10:07 AM | Reply

OK Danni, what do you want to call it when the government takes over manufacturing, energy, health care and other vital industries?

You have a more accurate term? You have a better example? Maybe Venezuela?

BTW, Godless Communist is redundant.

"Is that too complicated for you?"

Understanding you're a prisoner to your worm's eye view No, I fully understand that. Thanks anyway.

#49 | Posted by vernon

Good points.

"OK Danni, what do you want to call it when the government takes over manufacturing, energy, health care and other vital industries?"

An attempt to recover from 30 years of Reaganomics.

if you really and truly want to send a message to deecee, on july first up your withholding to the maximum or zero - each week, put that money into an account - don't touch it until it's time to pay or not - this they will notice long about the third week of july. leave your state taxes the same or at a higher rate so you don't short your own state.

oops! i didn't mean "zero" - that would give them extra money!

-what do you want to call it when the government takes over manufacturing, energy, health care and other vital industries?

The mean ol' evil ol' gub'mint currently controls about .21 percent of corporate assets.

Here's a pie chart of what "US Socialism" looks like.

Understanding you're a prisoner to your worm's eye view No, I fully understand that. Thanks anyway.

#51 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

If you would have thrown in some caps, you could be BL2's sidekick.

And if you'd made sense the first time around you wouldn't sound like such an ass.

#54 | Posted by nanc at 2009-06-18 10:26 AM | Reply | Flag

Any smart investor already knows to do this. If you withhold as little as possible and put enough in an interest bearing account over the year, you come out a winner. You can be a little more aggressive if you like. I have not had a refund in years - I refuse to let the government make interest off my money when I can do better for myself.

Next time I'll dumb it down just for you.

Taxes are "good" (I disagree).

The gist of the article is that if people want services from their government, people should pay taxes to fund them, and the Democrats are the only party that might follow this simple rule.

The GOP's long-term policy of expanding services, denigrating taxes, and borrowing to pay for it is a disaster.

#59 | Posted by taxman

we only get refunds because nearly half my husband's income is in per diem and he works more than 35 miles away from the home office - we also maintain two homes. next year will be the last year for refunds as our oldest turns 18 this year and we'll be closing on our residence here. i don't know why more people can't see that they hold the strings if they so wish.

that people who run businesses automatically know how to run a government.

Well our first MBA POTUS reinforced that arguement now didn't he?

rcade - do you seriously believe our tax dollars should be used to fund EVERYTHING on this chart?:

july first up your withholding to the maximum or zero - each week, put that money into an account - don't touch it until it's time to pay or not

Then you can pay underpayment penalty when you file.

Brilliant!

#54 | Posted by nanc at 2009-06-18 10:26 AM | Reply | Flag

Any smart investor already knows to do this

Tax, I believe that Nanc is advocating underpaying or paying 0 tax each pay period then pay it all when you file on 4/15/09.

While I already advise your plan, to withhold or pay in enough to avoid underpayment penalty, Nanc's plan would short a taxpayer since undepayment penalties are higher than what you would earn in a saving account.

Nanc... I say go for it...all you teabaggers should too... that way we can reduce the deficit through underpayment penalties.

4/15/09 s/b 4/15/10.

There is a famous saying in CA, that many of you do not know about, because honestly, these libs on here don't read anything, just base everything off emotion.

The democrats in CA, there is a study out on their time used over the last 18 months.

And its comedy.

to quote the study:

"Democrats cannot pass all the taxes they want legitimately, so what they do in every waking moment of every session is consult with each other, and their huge staff of lawyers, to find loopholes and methods to get around the rules for passing taxes"

In other words, all democrats do is attempt to break the law in order to pass taxes.

They did it in CA, calling the taxes "fees". And they actually voted on that and passed it KNOWING it was illegal.

That failed.

Then they pass 50B in taxes in Feb. Then they want more Billions in taxes this month.

The refuse to give any Union workers tax cuts, and they have laid off 0 people. BUT they have hired thousands of new workers THIS YEAR.

LOL Democrats LOVE taxes.

And its funny, democrats are so stupid. THey come on here and say they don't like paying taxes, but yet they vote in people that live and breath to break the law even, to pass more taxes.

And the funny thing is, these democrats on here can't even account to the improvement in their life from these higher taxes...

because THERE IS NONE, it all goes to Union Pension funds, and higher state worker salaries.

Democrats are truly stupid animals, descended from howler monkeys.

And I kick them in the TEETH with my Texas BOOT if I could. But I feel sorry for them, so I leave them alone.

Kuma

Wages are the key to revenue and reducing those wages every year making the rich richer, is not in one bit favorable to this nation.

#7 | POSTED BY MONEYWAR

Agreed.

KUMA needs to get some meds. Every post is just like a rant from a crazy person. Once in a while everyone goes off but every post...it gets boring Kuma, unreadable, makes you seem like a clown. Try expressing yourself intelligently, you might find people take you more seriously.

An attempt to recover from 30 years of Reaganomics.

#53 | Posted by danni at 2009-06-18 10:25 AM | Reply

So, you are saying that the antidote for Reaganomics is ....... Communism?

Danni, you are trying to dodge the question that you, yourself, raised .......

Again ....

What is the word to describe when the government takes over vital industries 'for the good of the people?'

It's OK to say you reacted half-cocked, or stupid, but at least be honest ....... or answer the question.

But you won't, of course. You were just talking trash and did not expect someone to ask you for clarification.

Trash talk only. Garbage falling out of your face

#70 | Posted by danni at 2009-06-18 11:36 AM | Reply | Flag:

I have to agree with Danni this time. Kuma posts are so confusing and disjointed that I almost think they are made by Celery's evil twin (in this case the opposite of evil is extra stupid).

If there were a dozen "FUKERS" in there (spelled wrong in all caps) I would be sure

"What is the word to describe when the government takes over vital industries 'for the good of the people?'"

It would be called socialism but the government hasn't taken over vital industries. They haven't taken over transportation, agriculture, energy production, health care, etc. They have bailed out the banking system and taken over two car manufacturers, one of which is already back in the hands of private investors and the other will hopefully be there soon too.
YOu make a straw man argument.
Even health care reform is not taking over the industry, it is a system of paying private health care providers.
All of our capitalist competitors (who are kicking our ass BTW) have more government involvement in industries than we do.

The taxes are bad enough, but "loopholes" are often government management in desguise: i.e. if you spend the money the way we order, you get a deduction. Zieg heil!
I am always amazed by the far left. They point out government abuses all over the place and raise hell about them (good), but then turn around and want the government to run everything and tax more (huh?).
Doesn't matter if it's Bush, Obama, Lincoln or Washington. If there's too much power in the federal government we have problems.

Wages are the key to revenue and reducing those wages every year making the rich richer, is not in one bit favorable to this nation.

#7 | POSTED BY MONEYWAR

You godless communist. :-)

If you righties do a little research you will find that american corporations only pay 13% in actual taxes after deductions.

The lowest tax rate in first world countries. Why do you think they are still headquartered here? For the food?

What is the word to describe when the government takes over vital industries 'for the good of the people?'

#71 | Posted by vernon

I would call it democratic regulated economy. Just like in the old days, when oligarchs and monopolies were not tolerated. I know you remember those days Vern.

You can call it whatever you want.

"Next time I'll dumb it down just for you."

Now, there's an oxymoronic statement if ever there was one. Wissy, your best effort is a piss-poor effort, and, unless you're even more of a sad sack than I take you for, even you're aware of that.

Well actually higher taxes cause them to invest more in all of those things to avoid paying it out in taxes.
#18 | Posted by danni
* * * * *

Negative. You can't avoid taxes by buying new equipment and machinery. Investments are after-tax. When your boss goes out and buys a new building or computer or capital equipment, he doesn't just deduct it from his taxes--it is depreciated very slowly, over time. Do you really believe that if you hiked the corporate tax rate, say, 20%, that would create a boom in CAPEX spending?

Godalmighty. This, boys and girls, is how libtards win elections. They keep people stupid when it comes to economics, then pretend that only they are smart enough to solve the problems of their own creation.

The gist of the article is that if people want services from their government, people should pay taxes to fund them, and the Democrats are the only party that might follow this simple rule.

The GOP's long-term policy of expanding services, denigrating taxes, and borrowing to pay for it is a disaster.

#61 | Posted by rcade
* * * *

I'm sorry. I read the first sentence and blacked out. Are you aware that Obama is proposing nearly $2 trillion in deficit spending FOR THIS YEAR ALONE?

LMAO. That's the kind of post I would have expected out of TaxboydUnitarkanian. Yes! Those Dems are deficit hawks now, boy! Borrow-and-spend will lead to a disaster, dontya know!

Tax havens like Delaware have long attracted corporate HQs and with that evidence before us we should consider applying a zero tax rate at the federal level. I think most would realize that such a benefit would be a fair trade for diminishing corporate personhood, and strict compliance with "best practices" to reduce the environmental footprint. The savings in accounting and legal fees would trim expenses, and make affordable employee benefits.

Replace the personal income tax with a transaction fee of one percent. You get 100% of your wages, salary, etc., but when you spend it you pay a fee of 1%. This could start as supplemental to get an indication of revenue, and the initial windfall could be targeted for debt relief.

Banks engaged in arbitrage oppose this because they may trade a currency several times in a day. The fees would wipe out or diminish their profits, but it would also stabilize the market by reducing transactions.

Instead the ObamaMamas give us more of the same. I knew it when he brought in Summers and Geithner. The whole banking committee should resign.

The states should begin coining silver.

To answer a question that wasn't posted to me? Socialism isn't the right answer... cause that implies a direct ownership.

What we have is a rapid slide into Fascism. Gov't only controls a small portion directly, but through manipulation of tax structures and silly laws they actually "control" a much larger portion.

Small example: The recent credit card changes that congress passed and the prez signed include such protections as mandating not just the SIZE of the font used, but the actual font itself. MUST be 10.5 Arial or something like that. Can't decide you like Helvecia better.

How retarded is it for the gov't to determine the font size and type on a document from a private business to their customer? Now dozens of companies have to retool their statement processing centers, invest in new equipment, waste hundreds of hours of programming, etc. All cause some senator gets his rocks off by picking a new font.

How retarded is it for the gov't to determine the font size and type on a document from a private business to their customer?

Font size to be able to read and simple english,not to much to ask from the userers

It was already in english (or spanish) as needed. It was in 9.5 pitch (in the case of my particular bank) and fit nicely within the margins. Making the text larger and in a different font (and requiring that the entire text box be on the front page) requires buying new printers, using longer and wider pages, shrinking the margins, and a HUGE amount of work for the banks that already have economic problems caused by the housing bubble going pffffttttt.

But, and this is the center issue... why the HELL should some bunch of senators decide for this bank, or any other bank, what size font and which particular font, your bank statement should be printed in?

If you don't like the statement, get an electronic version (you can make the text HUGE if you want), change to a different card company, stop using credit cards, or any of a number of things.

WHY should congress be involved? Why would they get involved? So they can go back and tell the citizens "I put those evil businesses under my boot heal to protect you... now reelect me so I can go trash some other business".

And, idiots will reelect the same people that are so corrupt we would NEVER, under any circumstances, leave our children with them for a week while we went on vacation.

These dumb motherfuckers need to have a spending revolt. Once the money is spent, taxes are necessary.

the other night while watching cspan. I heard mccain on the senate floor say this and even though it was sort of just a little aside, he may be right

paraphrase....real soon the american tax payer is not going to take this anymore..

right on BRO.......
at this rate,its only a matter of time and democrats led by barry will be in the crosshairs...

POlitically speaking of course

I have no problem with helping others. However, when almost half the population (and growing) is paying no taxes and the other half is pulling the entire load, something is wrong here. Ask Geithner and some of the others in the administration about how they have no compunction with taxing the "other" guys to garner votes while not meeting their own obligations.

#10 | Posted by jestgettinalong

STOP RIGHT THERE!!!

half the population pays no taxes

ER WRONG!

go back to yor rant

Well actually higher taxes cause them to invest more in all of those things to avoid paying it out in taxes.
Posted by danni

Bullshit. They are also trying to maintain a profit for themselves. It's going to be either one or the other. And I know you lefties think it's a sin to keep a profit for themselves, but that's why they tend to start and own a business.

#19 | Posted by wisgod at

WRONG

raising taxes

businesses raise prices right

OR

they put the money in tax exempt areas to hide the profits from taxes

OR

they make less profit

OR

they pay the taxes.

"With the April 17th deadline for federal tax returns looming, Americans are sharply aware of their federal income tax liabilities. However, one aspect of federal income taxes they may not be aware of is the growing number of Americans who pay zero federal income tax after taking advantage of deductions and credits.

During 2006, Tax Foundation economists estimate that roughly 43.4 million tax returns, representing 91 million individuals, will face a zero or negative tax liability. That's out of a total of 136 million federal tax returns that will be filed. Adding to this figure the 15 million households and individuals who file no tax return at all, roughly 121 million Americansor 41 percent of the U.S. populationwill be completely outside the federal income tax system in 2006.1 This total includes those who pay no tax, and those who pay some tax upfront and are later refunded the full amount of the tax paid or more."
From The Tax Foundation

And...

www.american.com

#20 | Posted by jestgettinalong at

WRONG

FICA
Sales Tax
Tolls
Taxes on Utilities
Property and School taxes

to name a few

YOU ARE WRONG.

It's easy to spot the people who have never ran a small business.

#28 | Posted by wisgod

aint talking about me, run several of them all very profitable thank you very much.

Taxes are "good" (I disagree).

The gist of the article is that if people want services from their government, people should pay taxes to fund them, and the Democrats are the only party that might follow this simple rule.

The GOP's long-term policy of expanding services, denigrating taxes, and borrowing to pay for it is a disaster.

#61 | Posted by rcade at

Republicans are children who want something for nothing.

aint talking about me, run several of them all very profitable thank you very much.

I kicked ass with a lemonade stand once too.

good for you little boy, for me it results in a slightly higher rate of return, pushing me up to the top 5% of wage earners, and I dont mind paying taxes either.

FICA
Sales Tax
Tolls
Taxes on Utilities
Property and School taxes

to name a few

don't forget the lottery, alcohol and tobacco taxes as well.

WE all know this. It all goes without saying it so why say it? Tax policy spoken about from the Federal level addresses income tax rates.

virtually all of the tax data posted by both sides here regarding deficits, budgets etc..relate to income taxes and who pays them.

I agree with that those taxes are paid by everybody but so does everybody else.

I think everybody should pay at a 50% tax rate.

and I dont mind paying taxes either.

I don't get too upset about it either.

But Rasta is on your side of the fence.

I think everybody should pay at a 50% tax rate.

including minimum wage workers trying to support a family?

But Rasta is on your side of the fence.

Now we know which side of the fence is the zoo

Yes because they would get govt housing real cheap and govt health care.

Goat is jealous of me. He'll come crawling to me asking for union work when he gets laid off.

Yes because they would get govt housing real cheap and govt health care.

Posted by rastaninja

Like I said earlier, Obama would love to have you on his staff with ideas like this.
:-(

"virtually all of the tax data posted by both sides here regarding deficits, budgets etc..relate to income taxes and who pays them. "

Of course...because once you include ALL taxes, the argument falls apart.

When the entire picture is viewed, the results become clear: all five quintiles pay about 17%-21% of their income in taxes.

Goat is jealous of me. He'll come crawling to me asking for union work when he gets laid off.

Do you ever get tired of repeating that same tired line? I mean, it's not funny, it's a pointless statement, and nothing could be further from the truth. Exactly what is it about that line that amuses your simple mind so much, ratsa?

notice how the left will always bring up all of the other taxes when this comes up and makes it seem like they arent really that big of deal until they need to use them

ONE MORE TIME...when we are talking about the federal government taxing the shit out of us and when the FACT is used about the large number people who are set to get all sorts of benefits from those taxes THEY DONT PAY....that is a seperate issue from the list of taxes that some of you here bring up all the time.
WE KNOW those other taxes are there...that "AINT" what we are talking about....

geesh...I thought you libs were SMART sunsabitches...

Goat if you get laid off what would you choose making cakes or working in the union?

Goat I speak the truth. You can either be hardheaded and stupid or get with the program? Your choice.

"notice how the left will always bring up all of the other taxes"

And if you look closely, you'll note the highest tax rate most people pay is FICA taxes.

"when the FACT is used about the large number people who are set to get all sorts of benefits from those taxes THEY DONT PAY....that is a seperate issue from the list of taxes that some of you here bring up all the time."

No, it's not. A tax is a tax is a tax is a tax. The conceit is, fools like you get to pretend the only real tax is income tax.

"WE KNOW those other taxes are there...that "AINT" what we are talking about...."

Of course not. Your point is worthless if we do.

"ONE MORE TIME...when we are talking about the federal government taxing the shit out of us and when the FACT is used about the large number people who are set to get all sorts of benefits from those taxes THEY DONT PAY...."

How is that worse than having the government blow our entire treasury in Iraq when NO AMERICANS benefited from that, save a very small minority in the defense industry? And people had to die in order to support that farce. That is by far the worst kind of spending.....

Don't get me wrong... I don't like Obama's kind of spending either. It is just not the worse kind of spending. And I just can't take the complaining coming from people who supported Bush's spending, which was far worse (not in dollars but in what the money was going to and how many people had to die in the process).

How is that worse than having the government blow our entire treasury in Iraq when NO AMERICANS benefited from that

Except we didn't "blow our entire treasury" in Iraq.

And Iraq is on its way to becoming a stable, democratic U.S. ally in a strategically critical part of the world.

So to say "NO AMERICANS" benefited from it is either incredibly naive or incredibly stupid.

but you cant just dismiss the millions of people who are now free of the bastard called hussein..

THE OTHER ONE>...yuk yuk....get it..get it

and I firmly believe that one reason you are seeing democracy MAYBE rearing its head in iran, is because of the democracy being worked on in iraq.
the KILLING and torture chambers of sadaam being gone should never be discounted for political reasons

DAN

MY point is EXACTLY correct

when we say people who dont pay taxes ..SHIT>.every one pays sales taxes...except alaska...and other taxes...we wouldnt have politicians if there were no taxes.

HEY...I may have stumbled on the ANSWER here...LOL

"when we say people who dont pay taxes ..SHIT>.every one pays sales taxes.."

Thanks for admitting you were wrong all along.

It will not change until the whole house of cards falls, unfortunately. Even then government will blame anyone but itself.

you are wrong when you say that DAN

I have always made that distinction...you just havent wanted to admit it.

and besides

WHEN politicians tell us that people who DONT PAY those federal taxes are going to get a refund...then you see...THE LITTLE GAME Is that you say

"NO they DO pay taxes" when all along we are talking about two seperate taxes...

"WHEN politicians tell us that people who DONT PAY those federal taxes are going to get a refund"

Payroll taxes are Federal Taxes. Your argument fails, again.

"when all along we are talking about two seperate taxes"

Again, a tax is a tax is a tax. The only distinction is your pretense.

oh please....

FACT....we both pay too much in taxes and I dont know about you..

BUT I deserve to get all the free shit I can and not have to pay anything..
just like those obamamaniacs who were heard to say that now they wouldnt have to worry about thier house notes and gas...

"Except we didn't "blow our entire treasury" in Iraq."

We wasted a huge sum of money that we didn't have in the first place that will require an increase in taxes and the people who supported it have no right to complain about higher taxes now.

"And Iraq is on its way to becoming a stable, democratic U.S. ally in a strategically critical part of the world."

Says you. There is no evidence of this at all. We have no idea what will happen when our army leaves and for you to claim otherwise betrays the fact that you allow your ideological preferences to skew your take on reality.

And Iraq was stable before we invaded and Saddam was easy to buy off. We could had him as an "ally" for much cheaper than it cost us with no loss of life and no uncertainty involved.

"So to say "NO AMERICANS" benefited from it is either incredibly naive or incredibly stupid."

I acknowledged that certain people with a huge financial stake in the defense industry made money. But regular Americans did not benefit by losing some of our best people and paying a huge amount of money to mitigate a threat that never existed. Nor was it a good precedent for a US president to lie us into a war without a plan and to change his justification halfway through without being strung up for it. We've lowered the bar tremendously and will pay for that for decades.

Call me stupid all you want but your entire arguement is based on an overly optimistic assumption about the future, Polly Anna.

oh sully.........(sigh)

we send you to school
we buy you books

and what do you do

you rip the pages out./...

AFK - People who think they can remake the Middle East because they read a few books written by fools are the problems. And its funny how the same people never put their own asses on the line when testing their newly learned theories......

Your mealy-mouthed speaches about Saddam's torture chambers may impress someone, but the reality is that torture chambers weren't part of the sales pitch for that war and the American public would have never agreed to invade Iraq simply because Saddam was a meanie. What Saddam did to his own people was none of our business and the flowers and chocolates delusions over Iraqi's appreciation for our actions were disproven long ago.

"FACT....we both pay too much in taxes"

Huh? We're running the largest deficits known to man.

We're running the largest deficits known to man.

because we spend too much deflectionforth

"FACT....we both pay too much in taxes"

"Huh? We're running the largest deficits known to man."

Both statements could be true and used as an argument against current spending levels.

"an argument against current spending levels"

Agreed. They were awful under Bush, and they're worse under Obama.

Goat if you get laid off what would you choose making cakes or working in the union?

???

What an ignorant question. I'd choose the one that paid more. However, I've never been able to find a union job that pays more than what I make now, so if my personal history is an indicator, it would probably be a non-union.

You can either be hardheaded and stupid or get with the program? Your choice.

OK. I'll be hardheaded and stupid and stay with my better paying non-union job. You showed me what a union ET makes. No thanks. I prefer the extra $25k+ a year working for a non-union company. If that makes me stupid and hardheaded, the extra money will help me forget how fucked up I am for making such a silly choice.

I prefer the extra $25k+ a year working for a non-union company. If that makes me stupid and hardheaded, the extra money will help me forget how fucked up I am for making such a silly choice.

Posted by goatman

I just got a 5% raise and I get a 15% shift diff for working nights You have no idea what your talking about. I tried to help you but you choose to remain stupid. Good luck collecting unemployment and using foodstamps.

I just got a 5% raise" - RASTA

Wow, one whole nickel on the dollar!

I'm impressed, Rasta.

I think you just crossed over to the "big time."

Hang in there. Another 50 years and you'll be in Goatman's bracket.

5% comes out to like 1.75 an hour raise. that isn't too bad if you ask me.

5% comes out to like 1.75 an hour raise. that isn't too bad if you ask me.

It's a good thing you are pleased, ratsa