-
[QUOTE=kygorski;504968]when and where does welfare start and stop? Are you saying that only poor folks get welfare? Wake up[/QUOTE]
I'm asking the same thing. How long are we gonna continue this? I don't think I said just poor people did I?? My point is this....the liberal elite of this country wanna be loved by everyone. Give away other people's money and gain allegiance by those recipients. At some point this sellout attitude has to end. Show me where the idiots in congress made great strides in cutting anything significant. How can they?? If they take to much away they get scolded. You can join in and give away more and more if you like it so much. I'm sure some illegal, lazy unemployed loser or gubment baby would appreciate it. Take note of what I said.....never said everyone said some.
I know several able/capable men who played the system for more time on unemployment. It happens and the more gubment programs the more corruption. You might want to realize that not all people are kind with strong morals. Lots and lots of losers out there looking for handouts. It's time to start restricting this junk.
-
[QUOTE=GeoFisher;504966]Progressive flat tax, and ZERO deductions.
No housing deduction.
No kid deduction
No earned income credit
No college deduction
NONE.
Anyone making under 20k NO taxes
Anyone making 20k - 40k 10% taxes
Anyone making 40k - 100k 20%taxes
Anyone making 100k - 500k 25% taxes
Anyone making 500k and above 30% taxes.....
And then maybe a 10% consumption tax on all goods except for food.........
NO TAX on anything else......PERIOD.
Later,
Geo[/QUOTE]
--
Doesn't this look a lot like what we have now?.. I'm surprised you would advocate a larger percentage tax rate for folks at the top... Would your proposal also include folks whose income is primarily capital gains as that would seem to double their tax rate... I have never given any consideration to a flat tax proposal because everybody wants to get rid of the irs totally and collect the taxes as a national sales tax of some kind and that just seems wrong to me to put more of the tax burden on folks who can least afford it... I never did understand the 'earned income credit' it seems to me it is mostly wasted tax dollars.
-
how many
You said you knew folks who played the system for thier own gain. How about the bankers who watched un ethical brokers and aided them in almost destroying the housing market. Playing the system, when I got out of the service, my seniority stayed with me[gov.law], I was laid off, and with my time, and a union contract, was making more than the guys who were working 4 day weeks,was that greed or common sense?No! 2 years of unemployment pay is too much, but in the 60s you had job retraining programs, not anymore. Why train when you ship employment over seas.Big goverment YES its big,did you ever stop and think about cronie hiring, places for the brother in law, or friend at tax payer expense? Thats why I'm against the present system, that keeps people in elected positions for more than two terms. Dave Williams was a great example, watching three supervisors watching one man work,or watching 15 latinos doing road work, with the contractor probably knowingly using illegal workers.EVERYONE plays the system, thats a sad fact, but its human nature. I'd rather give a bum a dollar, than watch a politician take bread out of a kids mouth.
-
[QUOTE=Hlleonard;504976]--
Doesn't this look a lot like what we have now?.. I'm surprised you would advocate a larger percentage tax rate for folks at the top... Would your proposal also include folks whose income is primarily capital gains as that would seem to double their tax rate... I have never given any consideration to a flat tax proposal because everybody wants to get rid of the irs totally and collect the taxes as a national sales tax of some kind and that just seems wrong to me to put more of the tax burden on folks who can least afford it... I never did understand the 'earned income credit' it seems to me it is mostly wasted tax dollars.[/QUOTE]
the rates of tax are not as important as the progressive nature of the tax and the ELIMINATION of deductions.
I'm not advocating paying more, I used this as an example of a fair, progressive tax. I don't think someone making 10,000 and someone making 10,000,000 have the same ability of paying tax. A 30% hit of 10,000 is nearly impossible to deal with ........a 30% hit of 10,000,000 is not so tough. I UNDERSTAND that.
For capital gains, I'd have a required minimum to be taxed as income.....I don't know what that would be but it would be a specific number......
I still believe that folks at the top of the food chain spend a crap ton of money on services, and product that significantly help support everyone else. THEY still need to to have significant incentives to invest their money versus hoarding it. Imagine if the warren buffets of the works said SCREW it and took their trillions out of the market and SAT on it instead of investing it.
People need to get over the fact that some people are filthy rich.....once you GET OVER THAT, and work on your own house, and work on your OWN issues, it is amazing what will get accomplished. I don't dwell on what anyone makes....I dwell on what I MAKE and how I will make a better life.
Finally, your point of shifting the burden to folks that cannot pay it is CRAP.....if they can afford a cell phone and pay 100 bucks/month for that service, they can pay 100 bucks/month for TAXES.......Every American should be required to pay federal income, medicare, and ssi taxes...PERIOD.
Later,
Geo
-
[QUOTE=kygorski;504978]You said you knew folks who played the system for thier own gain. How about the bankers who watched un ethical brokers and aided them in almost destroying the housing market. Playing the system, when I got out of the service, my seniority stayed with me[gov.law], I was laid off, and with my time, and a union contract, was making more than the guys who were working 4 day weeks,was that greed or common sense?No! 2 years of unemployment pay is too much, but in the 60s you had job retraining programs, not anymore. Why train when you ship employment over seas.Big goverment YES its big,did you ever stop and think about cronie hiring, places for the brother in law, or friend at tax payer expense? Thats why I'm against the present system, that keeps people in elected positions for more than two terms. Dave Williams was a great example, watching three supervisors watching one man work,or watching 15 latinos doing road work, with the contractor probably knowingly using illegal workers.EVERYONE plays the system, thats a sad fact, but its human nature. I'd rather give a bum a dollar, than watch a politician take bread out of a kids mouth.[/QUOTE]
Yep get rid of the lifelong politicians. Who do you think pushed for subprime lending? You think a banker decided hmmm I'm gonna take a huge risk on some idiot who I know can not make this mortgage.
-
[QUOTE=GeoFisher;504981]
Finally, your point of shifting the burden to folks that cannot pay it is CRAP.....if they can afford a cell phone and pay 100 bucks/month for that service, they can pay 100 bucks/month for TAXES.......Every American should be required to pay federal income, medicare, and ssi taxes...PERIOD.
Later,
Geo[/QUOTE]
--
It does seem the majority of folks at the bottom do indeed have toys that they shouldn't be able to afford... A lot of these folks have these because of the refund winfall at tax time... My son worked a while in an apartment complex as maintenance and some of his duties were sitting folks out who didn't pay their rent, I remember him telling me about this lady who had to be evicted just before Xmas and he said she was on her cell the whole time whining to somebody about it while her kids just stood and watched their xmas presents being sat out in the yard... Most of my opinions have to do with the kids such as these, if we could separate the losers from their kids I would have a totally different opinion in these matters but unfortunately they go hand in hand.
-
dj
The banker knew his money was coming back, because of uncle sugar, he had no incentive to do the RIGHT thing. Not all those loans went into forclosure, dead beats dont care about thier actions, take those folks in florida involved with the general, owed thousands, and just ignored it. yet they were socialites. Anyone with a sense of resposibility, or morals would know that these were very risky people, but they knew they could shift the risk, and still make money.We are the same in some respects, I got mine years, and am not worried about others getting thiers, You want to keep all of yours for yourself, which is normal. I can still admit to a modicom of compassion toward my fellow man, not much but some.
-
[QUOTE=Hlleonard;504985]--
It does seem the majority of folks at the bottom do indeed have toys that they shouldn't be able to afford... A lot of these folks have these because of the refund winfall at tax time... My son worked a while in an apartment complex as maintenance and some of his duties were sitting folks out who didn't pay their rent, I remember him telling me about this lady who had to be evicted just before Xmas and he said she was on her cell the whole time whining to somebody about it while her kids just stood and watched their xmas presents being sat out in the yard... Most of my opinions have to do with the kids such as these, if we could separate the losers from their kids I would have a totally different opinion in these matters but unfortunately they go hand in hand.[/QUOTE]
If the kids saw some more of that growing up, maybe they'd learn to NEVER want to live like that.......
We're SOFT......and that softness is leading to a bunch of whiny crybabies who simply don't know how to provide.
Later,
Geo
-
[QUOTE=kygorski;504988]The banker knew his money was coming back, because of uncle sugar, he had no incentive to do the RIGHT thing. Not all those loans went into forclosure, dead beats dont care about thier actions, take those folks in florida involved with the general, owed thousands, and just ignored it. yet they were socialites. Anyone with a sense of resposibility, or morals would know that these were very risky people, but they knew they could shift the risk, and still make money.We are the same in some respects, I got mine years, and am not worried about others getting thiers, You want to keep all of yours for yourself, which is normal. I can still admit to a modicom of compassion toward my fellow man, not much but some.[/QUOTE]
That is because or silly ASS system allows them to.
Personally, I'd love to see Debtor prisons again.......People run up hundreds of thousands in debts, knowing nothing will be done to them........NOTHING. Wouldn't it be great to send in a few storm troopers and lock up some of these silly ass folks. I'd love to see the look on mrs priss, as the sheriff takes her away to be locked up with common criminals, drug dealers, street prostitutes, etc, etc.......I guaran **** tee you she will think twice the next time about pulling this ****.
Later,
Geo
-
[QUOTE=DJD;504982]Yep get rid of the lifelong politicians. Who do you think pushed for subprime lending? You think a banker decided hmmm I'm gonna take a huge risk on some idiot who I know can not make this mortgage.[/QUOTE]
Yes!!......A banker/CEO in Louisville Kentucky based Providian Financial saw that he could charge over 30% interest issuing subprime credit cards. I attended the meeting when this plan was anounced. All of the projections were based on how much interest would be charged. I thought that day that this was a high risk gamble. 18 months latter bankrupcy.
They forgot one basic rule. Its not how much you charge, it's how much you collect.
The Big Mortgage brokers followed this model. Subprime loans with high rates (and fees, poinst etc.) but they added the fact that they would not retain the risks and sell these mortgages as securities, thus the great resession and financial meltdown of 2008.
Politicians did not push subprime lending (they did not stop it either). It was the major mortgage companies Countrywide, BOA, etc. They made their money in the fees and origination then they sold them to AIG, Leman Bros, Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac. There were no regulations to oversee bundling mortgages as securities.
So YES!!!!! More than one banker decided to put investors money at risk to boost their bonusess, heck it was only play money anyway.
-
[QUOTE=kydonky;504996]Yes!!......A banker/CEO in Louisville Kentucky based Providian Financial saw that he could charge over 30% interest issuing subprime credit cards. I attended the meeting when this plan was anounced. All of the projections were based on how much interest would be charged. I thought that day that this was a high risk gamble. 18 months latter bankrupcy.
They forgot one basic rule. Its not how much you charge, it's how much you collect.
The Big Mortgage brokers followed this model. Subprime loans with high rates (and fees, poinst etc.) but they added the fact that they would not retain the risks and sell these mortgages as securities, thus the great resession and financial meltdown of 2008.
Politicians did not push subprime lending (they did not stop it either). It was the major mortgage companies Countrywide, BOA, etc. They made their money in the fees and origination then they sold them to AIG, Leman Bros, Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac. There were no regulations to oversee bundling mortgages as securities.
So YES!!!!! More than one banker decided to put investors money at risk to boost their bonusess, heck it was only play money anyway.[/QUOTE]
Wrong as usual.
Barney Frank and affirmative action were huge factors. Read the whole article. Mr. Frank insisted Fannie and Freddie were in groovy shape back when the Bush admin was trying for tighter regulations.
[url=http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/09/28/franks_fingerprints_are_all_over_the_financial_fiasco/]Frank's fingerprints are all over the financial fiasco - The Boston Globe[/url]
-
[QUOTE=Devils Horse;505024]Wrong as usual.
Barney Frank and affirmative action were huge factors. Read the whole article. Mr. Frank insisted Fannie and Freddie were in groovy shape back when the Bush admin was trying for tighter regulations.
[URL="http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/09/28/franks_fingerprints_are_all_over_the_financial_fiasco/"]Frank's fingerprints are all over the financial fiasco - The Boston Globe[/URL][/QUOTE]
My wife was a mortgage loan underwriter for a large bank in Lexington during the housing boom. She came home one day and told me that the feds had visited the bank's management and slapped them around for not making what they considered to be an acceptable number of mortgage loans to low-income and minority borrowers. They threatened all sorts of dire implications unless the bank relaxed its lending guidelines. The rest is history.
