POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
The reason I give him such a hard time. That and he basically said that there is really not much you can do about fraud so, deal with it.
Ah, the telltale "shartface".
Another we need taxes at the current rates because our government steals from SS to cover other programs. I say get rid of the status quo.
Not only that, but we cannot let Americans keep their own money, because the government needs it to fund that waste.
Went to a beach house last week for vacation in Tybee Island with our kids and in-laws. Had a good time. On the last night before we were to leave, we noticed some new tenants coming in because it was impossible to not feel the vibrations and hear their music and listen to how loud they were speaking.
Later that day, we are getting some wine and beers for dinner that night to take back home and see two big guys tatted up in wife beaters and a really nice sports car in the same spot. We make one more errand and go back to the house and see that car is in the parking lot of the bottom part of the beach house and they are outside smoking weed with two girls as we walk our toddlers up the steps.
Wife gets inside and tells her parents they should be careful because the situation downstairs set off the alarm bells. Gets a small lecture about "judging" because obviously you have to turn off your brain because it might not be PC.
Guess what happens? We leave that next morning and a couple of days later father in-law gets a phone call from the realtor that the two flat screen TVs were missing. Haha. Their genius plan was to leave the ones in the first floor.
We got a laugh about it and he knows he'll never live it down. Although he's not liberal, that stance was a perfect representation of the lib mindset where they refuse to use common sense out of fear that it may be perceived as "racist."
Later that day, we are getting some wine and beers for dinner that night to take back home and see two big guys tatted up in wife beaters and a really nice sports car in the same spot. We make one more errand and go back to the house and see that car is in the parking lot of the bottom part of the beach house and they are outside smoking weed with two girls as we walk our toddlers up the steps.
Wife gets inside and tells her parents they should be careful because the situation downstairs set off the alarm bells. Gets a small lecture about "judging" because obviously you have to turn off your brain because it might not be PC.
Guess what happens? We leave that next morning and a couple of days later father in-law gets a phone call from the realtor that the two flat screen TVs were missing. Haha. Their genius plan was to leave the ones in the first floor.
We got a laugh about it and he knows he'll never live it down. Although he's not liberal, that stance was a perfect representation of the lib mindset where they refuse to use common sense out of fear that it may be perceived as "racist."
His attitude has always been that you should have a cutoff of how much you can make ($5mil) and then the rest goes to the government to redistribute to the needy. However, in his post above he admits that there is a lot of fraud in the government. Very telling about his character or that he really does not get it.
![[laughing]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/laugh.r191677.gif "Laughing [laughing]")
9 word sentenceOnce again you demonstrate your inability to comprehend.
Never suggested limits on income, only inheritance.
The example I gave above is from private business, not government. Obviously it is you that does not get it.
Does not matter where the money comes from, if your family earned it then it should yours. Long term my point is still valid. THE MONEY WOULD STILL GO TO A CORRUPT GOVERNMENT.
Oh, and by the way, inheritance is income. Some one in that family earned it.
Bill, how much waste exists in your business?
In your opinion, is there any organization on earth larger than 10 people that does contain waste?
"SS can/could well sustain itself if the money in the trust fund wasn't pilfered and used for the general fund. Cutting taxes, thus cutting revenues only increases the strain on SS as lawmakers will dip into SS to help make up for deficits in revenues. This is why I have always called on agreeing to spending cuts BEFORE you cut taxes. We already have decades of proof that simply cutting revenues doesn't force any cuts in spending."
Nothing about private business in that quote.
Nothing about private business in that quote.
In my opinion, a shitload.
However, I'm not yet an owner, and therefore don't make the calls on eliminating departments or people to save the company money. As long as they're paying me a market rate for my services, they're free to do what they want with their money.
What's your point?
Funny how the left doesn't like inheritance until it's their money or possessions. They're real cutthroat and generous with other people's money.
Today, if you're a Democrat, you're either dumb or evil scum or both.
To protect myself from mods. You all know the race without me having to mention it.
Tell the UN to look at Syria and get back to us or **** off.
The point is every organization has waste so to expect a standard that is impossible for ANY organization to meet is dishonest.
When/If you are ever an owner waste will continue to exist. 100% sure of it.
Sorry, if you are going to lie about the intent of your post, this is a waste of time.
You'll have to point to where I have ever said anything differently.
You can't because I have not.
You should be sorry for being dishonest to yourself and trying to imply false narratives upon others. Accepting truth is the first step.
I waste my money on plenty of shit. Wasted a bunch recently at Keeneland. Waste it fairly frequently doing stuff I probably shouldn't do. But you know what? It's my goddam money.
The federal government takes a large percentage of my money, because people like you think the government can spend it better. So no, there shouldn't be waste. And no, it's not dishonest to hold the people that take the money from the earners to a higher standard.
You fundamentally do not understand the difference between people earning money and spending it how they see fit, and people taking money at gun point from those who earn it and blowing it on fraud and waste.
The shareholders of the company I work for can spend their money as they see fit. If they want to buy $10,000 hammers, that's up to them. They'll go out of business.
You're arguing that it's fine the government spends $10,000 hammers, they just need to confiscate more money from the earners to pay for those. And by god, we can't let the earners keep more of their money, because we can't cut those $10,000 hammers out of the budget.
We will never agree on this topic.
I earn my money and think I can spend it better than the government. I'm happy to pay tax for essential, minimal, defined services.
You view money as the governments. Through the grace of Congress, I'm allowed to keep a percentage of each dollar I work for. The government needs to grow and expand as much as possible, and that just means I get to keep less of the government's money.
What's your point? So because there is waste in companies, individuals shouldn't be able to pass on their built up wealth to family members?
Globalist = Hydra. Copied from Marvel wiki.
Hydra is a world-wide criminal organization dedicated to global domination, with the intended goal of establishing a totalitarian fascist "New World Order". Over the years, Hydra secretly infiltrated S.H.I.E.L.D. and used the agency to their advantage in many ways. They subverted a large proportion of its agents, and silently killed off anyone who got in their way.
Hydra is a world-wide criminal organization dedicated to global domination, with the intended goal of establishing a totalitarian fascist "New World Order". Over the years, Hydra secretly infiltrated S.H.I.E.L.D. and used the agency to their advantage in many ways. They subverted a large proportion of its agents, and silently killed off anyone who got in their way.
I didn't ask what you did with your money, I asked about your employer.
You don't think your employer cares about "their money"? You claim there is a shitload of waste.
Again, for the billionth time you're trying to make arguments for me that I have never made. I acknowledge that waste exists in government just as it exists in every aspect of every organization. 100% efficiency exists nowhere. Add that what you may consider "waste" is simply your opinion and is in fact an intended spend. Because you don't like clean water doesn't make all EPA spending directed at keeping water clean, waste.
Government has legitimate functions that require funding. Exactly what those legitimate functions consist of is fodder for debate. Government as well as all organizations should be diligent in operating as efficiently as possible. But if the representatives we elect appropriate funding for a mission, we should be taxed to fund that mission. The total of those appropriations equates to the total tax bill. My point has always been that it is dishonest to approve $4.1T of spending but only $3.5T of taxing. That only adds to our debt and is no different than making minimum payments on your credit card while continuing to add to the balance. I have always advocated requiring congress to approve the appropriate level of taxation to balance the budget...whatever that budget may be.
Think about it...is it easier for Congress to approve spending or taxation?
Want tax cuts? It requires spending cuts.
Want spending hikes? It requires tax hikes if other offsets cannot be found.
Taxes and spending are peas and carrots. I'm not arguing to what level either should be...only that they should be tied together so they balance.
Perhaps the answer is to elect people who are better at overseeing the functions of government
Try to keep up Phatty. You're tying together two separate threads that aren't related.
There is one thread. you're the idiot who replied with that. Your takes are so idiotic that nothing you say surprises me.
We get it, there's always corruption so bend over and take it! Amirite? Also, we see that you probably won't be leaving a decent estate. If you ever worked for anything, you would be vehemently opposed to death tax.
OK. Fine. So do you think the Obama administration did an effective job of this?
.2% of all estates are required to pay inheritance taxes. At current projections my estate will be in the $10M-$12M range...most people would consider that pretty decent. And even at $10M with the simplest of planning I can pass that along to my children tax free and that is with today's laws.
It's amazing the whining that goes on about a tax that 1 out of every 500 pay.
In my lifetime (goes back to Eisenhower) there has only been one (actually two, Nixion ran a small surplus one year) POTUS who has effectively balanced the budget.
You'll have to remind me where I ever said Obama did so.
Fuzz is set to pass on Millions $$$ but couldn't pay a $1000 bet that would've ended up going to charity. 
...and if one single, red cent of your estate goes to taxes, that is nothing short of theft and theft is wrong. Taking anything from anyone's inheritance is wrong. The money has already been taxed.
Fuzz is set to pass on Millions $$$ but couldn't pay a $1000 bet that would've ended up going to charity.
That's the logic. Don't know why y'all continue to debate him. Just like the government. You bet your money with politicians and bureaucrats don't get mad when you don't get paid. Nicky from Casino. I win. Pay up. I lose. F U.
Hasn't ever dollar been taxed at one point or another?
It's a circular argument you're trying to make. We generally tax when money changes hands. I earn income, it's taxed. I spend that income, it's taxed. The merchant that receives the money I am spending is taxed. I hope I am blessed enough to leave my children a large enough estate that it requires that they pay estate tax. They will be blessed to have received more than 99% of everyone else. If they must take a haircut off the top of the last $$$, I'd prefer they have to pay it than to pass that burden on to others who are less fortunate. After all, they did nothing to earn what they received just as I did nothing to earn what I received from my parents.
BTW, our POTUS has said on multiple occasions that the wealthy should pay more in taxes.
For the billionth time...all taxes are part of a system to raise $X amount of revenue. It's all part of the same pie. If they don't take it from the top 0.2% of estates (the only ones that pay estate taxes) then that means that they must take more somewhere else. If they don't take it today but spend it, then they just taxed the future.
I've given plenty to charity and continue to do so. I also don't pay bets I didn't make. You idiots think that "RQ" and myself are the same person...you're wrong. But if it entertains you to think it...have at it.Fuzz is set to pass on Millions $$$ but couldn't pay a $1000 bet that would've ended up going to charity.
