Reply With Quote
Yes it is time to get the wallets out
gas is gonna hit 2.70+ a gallon now that the election is over
Howard Dean guaranteed that taxes would not be increased for the middle class on CNN this Sunday... He wouldn't comment on taxing the rich or the poor...
Yes it is time to get the wallets out
gas is gonna hit 2.70+ a gallon now that the election is over
Bush won't get to keep his tax cuts, so taxes will go back to where they were. Running the deficits eventually got the economy rolling after 9/11, and you should want to stop deficits at that point rather than mooching off the future.
Wont stop them, guaranteed. They will find a way. Like new fees. New
Medicare taxes. New SOC taxes. Oh, they have a million ways to get
into your back pocket. dumb !
Get a friggin life manny. Pick on a man's family. At least his family has
a business. A little jealous are you?
So 1% of the population won't see an increase?
TRUE ANALYSIS!!!!!!
Exactly. Cry a deep river for the ruling elite, wont you?
Eh, I don't know. While I do think that everyone should pay their fair share, I don't think that the current system is structured fairly. Granted, I'm no economist of accountant type, but I think an across the board "flat tax" would be more equitable.
I also agree, but exactly who does that benefit? Im no economist either, but there has to be a reason that a simple system of flat tax hasnt been adopted already. I cant believe the sole reason is because IRS employees will have to be cut by like 80%.
The following from a womans point of view:
Is A Speaker Pelosi A Victory for Women?
By Carrie Lukas
Wednesday, November 8, 2006
They say it’s a historic moment for women–Nancy Pelosi, the first female Speaker of the House! Not only will Madame Speaker be in charge of the ”people’s house” of Congress, she will be third in line for the presidency. In the weeks to come, no doubt, breathless pundits will explore whether Pelosi’s ascension is a harbinger of another, more profound turning point: A President Hillary Clinton.
Many female voters may feel vindicated. For two decades, women have consistently voted for more liberal candidates than men. If only women voted, America would have had a President Gore in 2000, a President Kerry in 2004 and a Democratic-controlled Congress. This voting trend sends the apparent message: Women want caring, nurturing, “feel your pain” Democrats running the show on Capitol Hill.
American women should be careful what they wish for. Over the next two years, they will witness some of the consequences of having liberals in charge, as Democrats push for bigger government, higher taxes, and more regulation—none of which benefit women.
Consider taxes. Democrats have derided the Bush tax cuts as solely rewarding the rich. Yet when the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire, middle class families will learn how much these tax laws have benefited them. In four years, the child tax credits will be cut in half, the marriage penalty will return, and the bottom income tax bracket will rise from ten percent to fifteen percent. Middle class families may be surprised that the Democrat’s agenda of repealing Bush’s “tax cuts for the rich” will put a serious squeeze on their family budget.
American women will also learn how higher taxes hurt the economy. Many of us don’t feel directly affected by investor tax cuts on dividends and capital gains. Yet these cuts have a significant, positive impact on the economy, and their elimination will have the opposite effect. Increased taxes on investment make capital more expensive, which makes it harder for businesses to expand and create jobs. That means slower economic growth and higher unemployment.
One of the few specific items in the Democratic agenda for 2007 is a minimum wage increase. Like most Americans who don’t look closely at the policy, many women see this as economic common sense. The reality is, like all regulations, a higher mandated wage comes with hidden costs like unemployment and higher consumer prices. Liberals portray employers as having an endless supply of money that they could give to employees were they not so coldhearted. The truth is companies forced to increase wages must find ways to cut costs or to increase revenue. This means reducing other salaries, firing workers, hiring less, or raising prices.
Democrats champion numerous, [B]feel-good spending initiatives.{/B] They want more government funding for healthcare and welfare programs, and greater subsidies for student loans and daycare. Sounds appealing, but these “giveaways” come with significant costs. They increase taxpayers’ burden, short circuit economic growth, change people’s decisions, and usually result in greater government control over important areas of our lives. Consider if Washington further subsidizes ins utional daycare facilities. Many women may find their private daycare providers struggling to compete and closing their doors, leaving women fewer (and often less appealing) options. Similarly, government provision of healthcare invariably means lower quality and less choice.
These domestic policies are only the beginning. Democrats have different priorities for fighting the War on Terror. The incoming Speaker of the House voted against the Patriot Act, opposed the NSA’s Terrorist Surveillance program, and—while a big spender in just about every other area—has supported cutting funds for intelligence programs. Many American women are frustrated by the course of the war in Iraq, but will they feel comfortable with Speaker Pelosi’s tactics of reigning in our intelligence and national security community’s effort to defend our homeland? Intelligence is our only alternative to military campaigns abroad.
Many women may celebrate Speaker Pelosi’s ascension to one of the highest offices in the land as a milestone reached for women. Yet this could be a turning point of another kind. Over the next two years, American women will become reacquainted with the consequences of Democratic policies and may begin rethinking their support of liberal politicians, regardless of their gender. Republicans were far from perfect in their running of Congress, but sadly, all indications are that Speaker Pelosi will fare worse.
Carrie Lukas is the vice president for policy and economics at the Independent Women’s Forum and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Women, Sex, and Feminism.
Copyright © 2006 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.
Just thought you might like to see what one woman's thoughts are.
"there has to be a reason that a simple system of flat tax hasnt been adopted already."
the tax lawyer/accountancy/tax adviser industry is huge and very well connected.
Simplifying the tax code would people put too many tax industry parasites out of $Bs in business.
The entire system is gamed for entrenched groups to over and bleed other groups.
Tpark, if not for your family I think you'd be at a ing Burger King fliping one burger while you ate another. What the have you ever done besides the family business? What skills do you have?
OWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWNED
omg
tpark's blockhead just got chode BLOADED!!!!
I haven't seen Manny own someone this bad since back in the day yo.
Sig.Worthy.
I just cant believe it. This pushes the envelope, sets the benchmark for all future ownings. I just can't get over it.
I disagree.
Manny is just an ugly, monkey looking bag that seems to be jealous of damn near half the people on this site.
If you look at it from that perspective, Tpark (although absurdly fat) hardly got "OWWWWWWWWWWNED", or "Pwned", or "owned", or whatever the you nerds are calling it nowadays.
So you think TPark had to work his ass off to get to this point in his life? I'm gonna work hard too so that my family hands me a company. Then i'll vote republican!
If only women voted, America would have had a President Gore in 2000, a President Kerry in 2004
So us women smartened up and didn't re-elect PRESIDENT GORE in 2004?
I don't know Tpark outside of the photos I've seen of him on here as well as the photo's I've seen of Amy while on this site.
But it's not Tpark's fault that your parents are worthless.
johnsmith is semi-new, so I'm going to assume he doesn't know the tons of history on this site having to do with
a)Tpark's lies. Zombie Tparks Girlfriend anyone? Harry Potter anyone?
b)Tpark's political takes where he bashes people and speaks with great ignorance. People that earn minimum wage are there because they don't work hard now. Its ironic as all to see him bash people for not working hard, as if he's some kind of self made man.
Its kinda funny that I get known as an asshole when I don't do half the Tpark does. I guess thats one reason I'm jealous of him.
Anyhow, I'll leave it at that. I was pretty drunk last night, or else I woudln't have harassed him all that much. Maybe.
Well I am still waiting for that check that I was told I would get with the republicans in the office for the last 6 six years.Can't wait for my taxes to go way way up.
Oh joyus day
Wait, you're an asshole?
Of course taxes are gonna go up...somebody has to pay for the ridiculous spending the republicans have done since they've been in office.
This is why I like you. Even if you love a she man.
Manny, where do you play and what level? We must have a poker tourney when I come to SA in Jan.
As for the taxes, your country has MASSIVE unfunded debt - govt. debt is 50% of GDP and rising, you have medicare, medicaid and superannuation debts out your arse at Federal and State level, and private debt levels are about 4x the next country in the world (over $2000 per capita).
Basically, the US has been living beyong it's means for about 15 years now, and one day your nation will have to pay the piper. It doesn't matter who's in power, over the next decade your taxes are going up significantly or your country will go under.
Flat taxes are clearly NOT more EQUITABLE. Scott, who is an economics lecturer, should explain that one. I could, but he'll do a better job.
The wealth gap in the US, that is the % of wealth owned at the top and bottom of the economic spectrum, is increasing more rapidly now than at any time in the last century. Flat taxes would only exacerbate the problem.
The stock market has been hitting new highs for the last 4-5 years - any idea why? Record profitmaking, which is basically the means by which income is transferred from poor to rich since only those with discretionary wealth can invest in stocks (although most workers have some investment in the market through superannuation).
Increasing the minimum wage is a way to switch some of that wealth back to the poor, however more likely businesses will raise their prices in line with new costs in order to preserve their record profit margins.
Money is a .
Mandating a minimum wage to business owners only hurts the workers. You have to let the market set the rate for labor. In 1998 you had McDs and other Fast Food chains offering upwards of $9 per hour plus BENEFITS for 30 hours of work because the labor pool was extremely thin.
Retireees were working at MCds for the benefits. They offered that because the MARKET dicatated that price to attract employees. If you artificially inflate the wage, a business owner will decide to employe fewer to control his costs.
For example, if I employ 10 people at $5.25 an hour my cost is 52.50 per hour....All of a sudden I have to pay $6.25 an hour, I will simply lay off 1.5 employees to keep my cost the same, and the other employees will have to become more productive
. I can get away with that in times of high unemployment because there is a large labor pool to pull from.
In times of low unemployment, I will not have 10 people willing to work for minimum wage because the compe ion for labor services will drive their price upwards.
It's especially wrong when there are superior options.
The earned income tax credit gets money to working poor folks without creating the disincentives that go with higher minimum wages. I have been
told by some of these pople that they can only work a set # of hours, because it they make a certain amount, than they will lose their EIC
How about a tax subsidy for firms that hire low-wage workers.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
