Tax Tsunami Coming to you!!!!

[WuDrWu]

Let me ask you this:

Which is a bigger problem? (These numbers are made up, but I would suspect are fairly representative).


Approximately 360 billionaires that are giving between 0-50% of their wealth (assuming that if they haven't pledged then they are giving less than this group) to charity and 38%+ to the federal government.....

or 1,000,000+ citizens that have so mismanaged their lives that they are either incapable of doing the most basic job or unwilling to do them because they know someone will be there to pick up the pieces for them, AND don't give anything to anyone and pay NO income taxes?

Fixed for substantive facts.

[1979Shocker]

Your continued insinuations that "these people" don't do enough is a little embarrassing, imo.

You'll have to show me where I said "these people" don't do enough. Otherwise, you're reading a little too much into it.

When I gave the link about the pledge by billionaires and said we need more people like this, I said that because earlier in this thread I had said that the way to get the government to spend less on social programs is to have the rich and churches do more.

Also, I don't want to leave the impression that I think only the rich and churches should be doing this since anyone, no matter their income level, can help those less fortunate. For example, the poor widow mentioned in the Bible, who gave all she had.

[SubGod22]

But their giving, and others, isn't going to get the gov't to stop all the entitlement programs they love so much.

[1979Shocker]

But their giving, and others, isn't going to get the gov't to stop all the entitlement programs they love so much.

Unfortunately, that's probably true.

[shockmonster]

SG-I agree with you that the majority of people want the government to stop spending money that we don't have such as stimulus money and Obama care. However, the reason that the government won't stop the entitlement programs that they have now is that the majority of people want to keep them in some form even though they have to be cut back in some way (social security, medicare, etc.). There may be a minority of people who want all or some of these programs stopped but certainly not a majority.

[ISASO]

That's the problem with the creeping soft tyranny we have going on. It turns into a vicious cycle. Bleeding heart liberals believe that "someone" needs to fix every little thing and when they have free reign over taxpayer money they abuse it to make their dreams come true. But then, taxpayers feel the crunch and reduce their charitable giving which drives even more nanny-state spending, new bureaucracies and agencies which waste a lot of the money that used to go directly to needy people when it was given by individuals and organizations.

At some point, this cycle has to stop and all this wasteful utopian infrastructure must be deconstructed. The government can't make everyone's lives painless on the backs of taxpayers.

[Maggie]

The government can't make everyone's lives painless ....

Period.

[shockmonster]

I agree with what each of you are saying about people depending on governement. However, if our government doesn't get about the business of working together to solve problems such as social security, medi-care, etc., we are destined for bankruptcy such as was Greece etc.

These problems can be solved if both sides work together. If not, it will just continue until it's too late which will be bad for everyone. The problem that I have with the democrats is that they just made the problem worse by bringing in another entitlement program (Obama care) which muddled things more and made existing problems worse.

At some point, the government has to become more moderate and work together or disaster is waiting for everyone.

[ISASO]

Here's a crazy idea - why not cash everyone out right now - no matter your age or amount "invested" in the government's party fund. Then put that money back in people's paychecks. OK, maybe they can keep some of it to take care of people on disability.

Is this another "too simple" simple solution to be seriously considered? Who among us couldn't get a better return with that money - our money?

At least if you have it back if you wind up with nothing it's your fault and the ridiculously foolish, wasteful politicians can't continue pissing it away for you.

[shockmonster]

Isaso-You need to have your political friends propose it. Sounds like a winner.

[Maggie]

Here's a crazy idea - why not cash everyone out right now - no matter your age or amount "invested" in the government's party fund. Then put that money back in people's paychecks. OK, maybe they can keep some of it to take care of people on disability.

Is this another "too simple" simple solution to be seriously considered? Who among us couldn't get a better return with that money - our money?

At least if you have it back if you wind up with nothing it's your fault and the ridiculously foolish, wasteful politicians can't continue pissing it away for you.

I assume you are talking about Social Security, if so; the money is not there – nothing has been “invested”. The money that everyone contributes to S.S. has already been spent by the government. There is no “lock-box”.

Paul Ryan's plan to make S.S. solvent is the only serious proposal out there I have seen.

[ISASO]

So as you may remember, I've been watching the price of a certain stock in order to exercise my legal right to avoid paying capital gains tax before King Obama raises taxes on the middle class.

I was ready to pull the trigger after my price target was hit a couple of days ago. But then, Duchess Pelosi calls back the House members from recess to pass the bill that allows the Teachers Union to funnel millions of taxpayers dollars to Democratic candidates.

Bam! The market tanks, wiping away all the gains I had so patiently waited for.

This morning I heard that over the past 100 years, the stock market has racked up an uncanny amount of gains during the periods when Congress is not in session. It all made sense to me and hit me on a personal level.

Given that...PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE NANCY...KEEP YOUR WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION ON RECESS UNTIL DECEMBER 31!!!!!

She really is the Wicked Witch of the West.

[ISASO]

I hear today that if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire, it will cost a family of four making $50K about $2,900.

What happened to "not a single dime", Mr. President?

[ShockBand]

That would be if all the tax cuts were allowed to expire. Obama's plan would only expire the cuts on $200k single/$250k married, so the family making $50k would have tax rates staying the same.

[SB Shock]

That would be if all the tax cuts were allowed to expire. Obama's plan would only expire the cuts on $200k single/$250k married, so the family making $50k would have tax rates staying the same.

It looks to me like the tax cuts (all) will expire since neither the house or the senate have even drafted up legislation (they just talk about it). And there are hints that the democrats do draft up legislation will put poison pills in it that will likely drive away any bipartisan support (which it will needed to get it passed).

What is really mind boggling is the opponents who don't want the tax cuts to be extended so they can use the money to fund expansion of some of Obama programs on unemployment.

Does anybody get it that to solve the unemployment and poverty issues you have to create jobs. And to create jobs you have to create an environment where people with money want to invest in business? You don't grow wealth by government handouts (which they don't even have).

Does anybody get that if you actually quite spending more than you bring in and pay off the debt you eventually will have much more money available for great society programs? (of course their is going to be some pain - but the alternative ...)

But if you continue to spend like drunken sailors the only thing will be left is to hit the bottle.