Obama??

I am not just blaming Obama. I am blaming Barney Franks, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, George W Bush and all the incumbents that were in office. All those in the senate and house for way to long need to be fired. Obama has been Bush on steroids!

Why do we let all the Wall Street a-holes, who likely share the same Rolodex as Bernie Madoff, off the hook, while we consistently bash organizations like Fannie Mae that were at least created to serve the greater good and give individuals an opportunity to afford the American Dream. Fannie Mae wasn't even the real instigator, let alone folks like Barney Frank. It was an out of control banking and finance system, that included Wall street firms that killed the economy of this nation, plain and simple.

Then, when someone in government steps into try and get a reign around it, everyone cries "Big Government" and socialism, and over-spending. Our economy is in the shit-hole because of lack of oversight. Whether it's lack of regulation, or lack of enforcement, I'm not certain.

I'm an independent (fiscally conservative, and socially liberal) and I say we make all the far right-wingers happy; dump big brother. Get rid of the FCC, the FDC, the SEC, and every other agency responsible for regulating some form of industry. After all, we don't want even a hint of socialism in our country.

Next, we will hire the same private firms responsible for bankrupting our economy to take care of it all. It will ALL be privatized, capitalism at it's finest. Then, the top 1% of the wealthy in this country can finally have their wish. They will be the only folks that will be able to afford food (gov't subsidies to farmers go away without some form of socialism), fuel (no price control), and pretty much any commodity (again no oversight on monopolies, price gouging, etc...).

Similarly, few will be able to afford healthcare, since the supply of Dr's continues to dwindle due to rising costs of education and better paying opportunities in fields like peddling the latest ED treatment.

Now if we really want to streamline gov't, we just privatize our whole DoD. Then the same companies that profit off of our wars (I.e. Halliburton), can now be more than just a lobbyist persuading our government to get involved. Capitalism at it's finest. Just an entire military of mercenariness. Then, when they get too expensive or try to form a union, I'm sure they could just outsource our military to China or India. Heck, I'm sure even N. Korea would get in on that. God knows they have enough souls to fight.

At the end of the day I am a patriot and veteran, and will put my faith and trust in our Government and Commander in Chief, before I will trust Goldman Sachs, Halliburton, any company in the oil industry, etc...

I give props to those who at least attempt, for better or worse, to try and do the right thing. As much as I despised Bush, I never once thought he had some personal agenda to ruin our country.

Barney Frank LITERALLY sucking the diseased cock of a Fannie Mae VP and pushing the agenda that, if you can fog a mirror, you qualify for a mortgage.

Faggot thinking has ruined Western civilization. Why did they need to come out of the closet? We should have left them in, too late to beat them back in where they belong.

Points coming, I guess..... Originally Posted by saj1000

Well at least you got his name right.

But where on earth do you come up with an analysis like:"Faggot thinking has ruined Western civilization?"
\
That's just wrong on so many levels... to my mind.

However, if you'd care to cite instances of this deadly phenomenon, I'd gladly listen.

Why do we let all the Wall Street a-holes, who likely share the same Rolodex as Bernie Madoff, off the hook, while we consistently bash organizations like Fannie Mae that were at least created to serve the greater good and give individuals an opportunity to afford the American Dream. Fannie Mae wasn't even the real instigator, let alone folks like Barney Frank. It was an out of control banking and finance system, that included Wall street firms that killed the economy of this nation, plain and simple. Originally Posted by absorbed

It is almost comical to watch the right wing mouthpieces spew their venom toward agencies such as Fannie Mae and Planned Parenthood. There is a common denominator! Agencies such as those mentioned offer much needed assistance to lower income citizens.

It is little wonder that FOX, Rush and Beck do not like them!

just watch this if you think Barney Frank had nothing to do with Fannie Mae ...
perhaps not directly but his party blocked efforts to revise long before it collapsed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

Fox is the only conservative television programming period. The liberals have all the rest of them.

Those Government run agencies waste money and do very little in helping the poor. Planned parent hood is supposed to do mammograms and every location they called said they did not provide that service. Fannie Mae is a joke they put incentives on subprime loans. That was done by the democrats.

The problem with the banks is there never was supposed to be national or a world banking system. They should shrink down back to a local level. Then this too big to fail shit would not be here.

Free market system and capitalism works if there is not government interference. The good ones succeed and the bad ones fail and go away.

Bernie Madoff is a saint compared to the amount the government is stealing. The only difference is that the government passes laws to be able to do it on a much larger level. 14 trillion dollars is what Obama has done more spending than all the past administrations combined to date.

These big companies can afford to hire tax lawyers to get out of paying taxes. I agree they need to pay there share, but truth be told all these guys that have money to hire a team of accountants and tax lawyers including people like Obama. I am all for a 10% flat tax and everyone pays it no loop holes and just one sheet of paper to file.

I typically stay out of these political debates on a SHMB but what I find funny is that Obama and his liberal following all tell us that the rich should pay more because they can afford it. Well our beloved leader took every tax deductions available to him. If it is unfair for the rich to be paying less in taxes why does he not lead by example and pay in the amount he thinks is fair?

I typically stay out of these political debates on a SHMB but what I find funny is that Obama and his liberal following all tell us that the rich should pay more because they can afford it. Well our beloved leader took every tax deductions available to him. If it is unfair for the rich to be paying less in taxes why does he not lead by example and pay in the amount he thinks is fair? Originally Posted by Budman

So what you're saying is that President Obama should just give a bunch of money to the IRS because he has a bunch of money?

That's just ludicrous, Budman. I think the president should follow the law of the land, the law made by the government over which he presides. And to the letter of the law.

Do you pay more tax than the next guy because you can afford it, or do you take every deduction you are entitled to? I'm not talking about charity or giving to nonprofits, etc., but income tax. If the IRS says you get a deduction for whatever, do you take it or not? Do you pay taxes you don't owe?

I don't think this is about the rich paying more "because they can afford it," which in and of itself is a mantra of lot of the so-called conservative commentators use in order to try and justify defending the wealthy right right wingers and war profiteers in the eyes of their fed up tea party listeners, who don't have a pot to piss in and are rightfully pissed off.

This is about EVERYBODY paying the SAME percentage of their income. The problem we have is that the people who make 99% of the money don't pay shit because of all the loopholes in the tax code.

Why should they get away without paying their fair share and you and I shouldn't?

How about the corporations that pay nothing because of tax abatements that drive local and state governments to the brink of bankruptcy and forces them to run to DC for assistance?

And how about the biggest source of untaxed income in this country, the churches?

Don't even get me started on the oil companies.

And, btw, when you submitted your return, how many deductions did you leave on the table?

It is real simple if you over tax the Rich they will leave just like they are doing right now in Illinois. The tax code is over 8000 pages that no one really can understand unless you are someone like Warren Buffet who has a team of tax lawyers and accountants. Make it simple one page form that everyone has to pay a 10% tax on and that is it.

Why these debates are usually pointless is because instead of debating logically most debate emotionally.

So what you're saying is that President Obama should just give a bunch of money to the IRS because he has a bunch of money?

I'm saying practice what you preach. How many times has he told us that the rich don't pay enough? There is nothing preventing him from paying his "fair" share.

That's just ludicrous, Budman. I think the president should follow the law of the land, the law made by the government over which he presides. And to the letter of the law.

Do you pay more tax than the next guy because you can afford it, or do you take every deduction you are entitled to? I'm not talking about charity or giving to nonprofits, etc., but income tax. If the IRS says you get a deduction for whatever, do you take it or not? Do you pay taxes you don't owe?

Hell no. As a matter of fact I believe we pay to much in taxes. I take every deductions I can find but I'm not out there telling everyone that they should pay more.

I don't think this is about the rich paying more "because they can afford it," which in and of itself is a mantra of lot of the so-called conservative commentators use in order to try and justify defending the wealthy right right wingers and war profiteers in the eyes of their fed up tea party listeners, who don't have a pot to piss in and are rightfully pissed off.

This is about EVERYBODY paying the SAME percentage of their income. The problem we have is that the people who make 99% of the money don't pay shit because of all the loopholes in the tax code.

Everybody paying the same percentage. What the fuck are you smoking? I'm all for a flat tax or a consumption tax. That would truly be a fair tax but our current tax code is not and has never been a equal or fair tax code.

Why should they get away without paying their fair share and you and I shouldn't?

See above.

How about the corporations that pay nothing because of tax abatements that drive local and state governments to the brink of bankruptcy and forces them to run to DC for assistance?

That's impossible to answer because there are to many variables that come into play. Let's take the new Cowboy stadium. IMO cities should not finance new stadiums for major league sports but I understand why they do it. If you as an owner are offered a tax abatement or some other special finance package from a city you would be foolish not to take advantage of it. On the other hand if you take advantage of it you would be a hypocrite to be telling everyone else how they should not be able to have the same type of deal.

And how about the biggest source of untaxed income in this country, the churches?

Tax them.

Don't even get me started on the oil companies.

OK.


And, btw, when you submitted your return, how many deductions did you leave on the table? Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

If my accountant did his job not a single fucking one.

Deporting the illegals and taking the subhumans off of welfare would solve a majority of America's problems.

Boner -- WTF man? Your patter is beginning to smack of racism and xenophobia, the likes of which we haven't seen in... er, weeks! Seems like all of your posts have something to do with "subhumans" "leeches" "parasites" "filth" etc.

If I didn't know better, I'd say we've seen you before.

Budman -- I DO practice what I preach. I pay my fair share according to the law of the land. So did the President. So do a lot of people. However, the loopholes out there -- the overwhelming majority of which predate the Obama administration -- favor the wealthiest 1% of citizen. Lot of these fuckers don't pay ANY taxes, so I can't really call them taxpayers. That said, I will opine that it's pretty damned hard for ANYBODY in DC to say ANYTHING without raising the eyebrows, backs or ire of somebody. So what's the point there? That DC politicians are full of chit? Agreed.

Butt -- Why shouldn't everybody pay the same tax rate? Why should a self-employed businessman have to pay more than one who works for a company and still has to pay higher rates for health insurance.

I ain't been smokin' chit. (I know you're trying not to agree with me but we're more aligned on this than you want to admit) You asked that question and in the next sentence went on to talk about supporting a flat tax or "user fees," which aren't remotely similar. One (flat tax) is a regressive tax that penalizes those who can't afford to pay (and rewards those who can afford much more) while funding the government on the backs of the poor. If EVERYBODY paid a flat tax, I'd have no problem with it. But you know who'd find a way out of it. The other, the consumption fee - which I favor for a wide range of funding solutions - just can't work, though it does level the playing field. Honestly, you can't really budget a government based on fluctuations in the price of bananas or put up toll booths on MoPac ... er, wait, they've already done that.

Stadiums are funded very creatively. In many cities they're tacked onto the hotel-motel tax, which are paid for by business travelers and tourists. Don't you just love that extra 15-20% they tack onto your rent car bill? Sometimes they're funded by a temporary increase in transit authority taxes. (That's how they funded the Alamodome, and paid for it in full in just a couple of years; then the tax went away. Very cool and a model for the rest of the country.)

I'm not talking about funding a stadium for the Cowboys (they should burn in hell). I'm talking about fair share taxation for large employers like Samsung and Nissan, who don't pay jackshit to the local school districts or local governments. Lots of these guys get 10-20 year tax abatements but put tremendous drains on the local infrastructures, paid for by everybody else. I agree, you'd be foolish not to take advantage of a deal like that. That's why companies move to new communities. However, the revenue they generate for their employees and communities seem to be disproportionate to the revenue they generate for themselves. Nothing wrong with making as much profit as you can - that's the goal - but you should pay your fair share of taxes.

Again, I think we agree on most of this Budman.

I guess I don't understand why, with everything else for which you can (and no doubt will) burn the President in effigy, you picked this issue? Because from your perspective, he's no different than you when it comes to paying taxes!

But at least we're engaging in civil verbal intercourse! Thanks.

Sup,
You're probably right that were not far apart on the taxes in this country. You made a statement that everybody should pay the same percentage. That has never been the case and will never be the case. Their are so many people that pay zero dollars in fed. tax. The vast majority of the taxes are paid by the top 10% of earners. As far as the flat tax or the consumption tax goes I know there would be issues that would have to be dealt with for each one but I believe it could be tweaked in a way to be a lot more "Fair" than our current system. You claim that you can't run a goverment on the fluctuations of the price of bananas. But if everyone got to keep their entire paycheck and then spend it on what they felt they needed or wanted then it would get everybody contributing to the tax base. I don't want to get into a revamping of the tax code with you or anybody else.

The reason I picked on the idiot-in-chief for his tax return is there is nothing stopping him from paying what he considers a "Fair" tax to the goverment. I'm sick of hearing how we are not paying enough in taxes. The fucking problem is not revenue it's spending. If these scumbag politicians would quit spending like there is an endless supply of money then we could get this under control. Raising taxes hurts the economy and therefore hurts the working class of the country. It seems that everything that he wants to do will ultimately hurt the working stiff under the guise of were doing this to help you.

I've always been civil but I don't have a problem pointing out what I consider idiotic statements or blatant hypocrisy. Take it or leave it but I try not to be misunderstood.

Deporting the illegals and taking the subhumans off of welfare would solve a majority of America's problems. Originally Posted by BonerJams03

WTF? Who would do the work if you deported the illegals? Take a drive by a construction site and tell me how many Caucasian and African-Americans you see working?

I hear you, Budman.

But you're wrong about the "idiot in chief" or anyone else paying what they believe is a "fair" tax. The IRS isn't a charity. He/I/you/we all pay what we're supposed to pay. I guess that's what's stopping him from making donations to the IRS.

As far as spending being the problem, you're right. Because you can't spend what you don't have. Problem is that the American way of life -- the greatest everyfuckingthing on earth -- isn't available to everybody. And the people whining the loudest about keeping it unavailable to everybody seem to be the people who have it, not those who don't.

But class warfare and the way that a handful of wealthy and powerful individuals have convinced half of this population to vote against their self interest is certainly the subject for another discussion.

BTW -- this is MY opinion, as I'm sure your quest to point out "idiotic statements or blatant hypocrisy" is yours. Neither of us should be misunderstood.

Bu-u-ddy!