Food Stamps

thenumber is the number, bottom line and its going down,.

every president had the same number viewed with the same stat.
7.7 is 7.7

Lets see if I can rephrase my stance so it suits everyone.

I will not rest until all people (rich, poor and everyone in between) pay their fair share in taxes and are not a burden on society. No dead beats and no tax evaders. Originally Posted by GP

GP,

Sounds like a simple flat tax.
Set a simple tax rate on each sale, purchase, and income. There are no deductions.
Makes no difference if you are a business or individual there is a rate you will pay.

Or am I over simplifying it?

is there some outcome other than the usual nothing thatll come from it?

if then than sure, it would be a change of pace Originally Posted by JONBALLS

I made a claim regarding the tone of certain threads in the UNY section of this board. People can determine from their own experience in reading the board just how accurate my comment was or wasn't. Links are not necessary. It's not as if i claimed that every time i filled my gas tank i saw people on food stamps buying lottery tickets and pop or something.

Now...

restructure the tax code,

no shortage of tax dollars collected


people waste money thts just handed to them, human nature. simple as that , these fools want to make something complicated when its not

justa has it right Originally Posted by JONBALLS

Links?

Lets see if I can rephrase my stance so it suits everyone.

I will not rest until all people (rich, poor and everyone in between) pay their fair share in taxes and are not a burden on society. No dead beats and no tax evaders. Originally Posted by GP

Frankly, this sounds more like communism than capitalism.

Frankly, this sounds more like communism than capitalism. Originally Posted by Doove

The question is, who gets to define "fair share"?

It should be a piece of cake to enact once we manage to fight off the housing lobby, the philanthropy lobby, the capital gains lobby, the farming lobby, the oil and gas lobby, and the lobbyists for zillions of other special-interest tax credits and deductions.

If all I care is my own tax burden, I should welcome a flat tax, even though I know who will be shafted.

the solar lobby

I would suggest that people who advocate a flat tax pull out their last 3 or 4 tax returns and do the math on what percentage of their income they actually pay.

Then compare that to the proposed flat tax percentages which typically get bandied about.

the big corporations lobby..GE

unions lobby

I would suggest that people who advocate a flat tax pull out their last 3 or 4 tax returns and do the math on what percentage of their income they actually pay.

Then compare that to the proposed flat tax percentages which typically get bandied about. Originally Posted by Doove

To be honest, I go deaf every time the topic comes up because I know there is not a chance in hell of it ever happening. But if you would not mind, could you humor me and fill me in on what the percentage rate that is bandied about actually is?

3 sides Taint lobby is the most expensive to everyday ordinary taxpayers



whered everyone go?

all argued out?

honestly..there will be folks that really dont need the assistance yet will partake because they found a loophole that enables them to receive it...
and then..

you'll come across certain folks that will not partake in the assistance programs that they completely qualify for..and not just one..but all of them...
and they will not apply for it.. nor any of them...

why you might wonder...

they dont want their children to see that as the way to live here in america..even though the government has failed us..doesnt mean we have to fail our children and teach them to follow suit as opposed to getting out there and work hard to make that money..

it has to be instilled in a child for that child to grow up and partake or grow up and know
they can make it without taking something that doesnt belong to them..or teach them there are other ways to make it without going down that road...

being proud and standing up and doing the right thing....well if its not taught..how will they know...
sometimes taking the road less traveled is more full filling than taking the most traveled roads..

Not really. The actual number that gets reported each month has been calculated consistently going back to, i believe, shortly after WWII. And at no time has the number of people receiving unemployment benefits been part of that equation. Number of people working, and number of people who aren't working but are actively seeking employment, whether they are receiving benefits or not. That's it.

What gets spun is all the other stuff. Quality of the jobs, whether the number goes up or down because of dormant people becoming active job seekers (or active job seekers just giving up and going dormant)...those sorts of items. Originally Posted by Doove

You are 100% correct again! I thought that it was basic knowledge of the way the unemployment rate is determined. I guess some of our more low information posters, who may be going postal as week speak, should spend a little less time shooting from the hip and a little more time researching things , this board and our country would be a better place!

Families and neighbors, several of us have hit upon it. The more that gets taken care of locally, the less taxes/assistance needed.

Locally! These big, 'efficient' corporations, the better they get at maximizing profits, the less people are employed. Not enough local work to most places. Corporate 'efficiency' is the opposite of efficiency, it is leading to demise. Like curing breast cancer with a bullet to the head. Dead lady, but no more cancer!

bj speaks of neighborly assistance and that's great. But I don't agree with his assessment of the economy. It's a fraudulent, flawed, broken system that is soon to shit the bed. Maybe not for a hundred years, but it will. More persons than not will take the happy ignorant route, but eventually the bill will come due.

That is also why I disagree with the last idea in post 62 of this thread. Responsible government can't cost so much because nearly everyone should be at least part involved. If we have to pay government officials enough to keep up with private greed, we're behind the 8-ball from the start. It's a bad business model with too much overhead.

Of course, merry Christmas. I have some giving to do. And bah humbug. Joy, gratitude, and passionate discussions should be year round.

To be honest, I go deaf every time the topic comes up because I know there is not a chance in hell of it ever happening. But if you would not mind, could you humor me and fill me in on what the percentage rate that is bandied about actually is? Originally Posted by GP

I've seen rates of anywhere from 15% to 25% thrown around, with additional details including various sorts of deductions depending on the rate used.

Just a flat 15% rate would be a pretty sizable tax increase for me (as a tax payer who has only mortgage interest, state/local taxes, and charitable contributions as deductions). I don't mind the concept of my paying more, but not so that people who make substantially more than me can pay less.