skiandsurf
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2006
- Posts
- 1,066
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hard to imagine anything worse than the last four years. Actually, make that the last eight years.
Hard to imagine anything worse than the last four years. Actually, make that the last eight years.
"What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there. ... So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted." --
Barack Obama in January in an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle -- the Chronicle spiked this part of the interview ++ "Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I'm capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it -- whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers."
And pilots who just HAD to have the boat, the new car, the beach house, the city house, the BIGGEST house...oh, and two alimony payments.Which was the fault of the democrats forcing companies to loan mortgages out to po' people.
except for the war, things were just fine until the mortgage mess of only about 1.5 yrs ago. Which was the fault of the democrats forcing companies to loan mortgages out to po' people.
Do you really know what you're talking about or are you just regurgitating what you heard from right wing pundits? The majority of the sub-prime lenders were completely private companies, not Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.
Do you really know what you're talking about or are you just regurgitating what you heard from right wing pundits? The majority of the sub-prime lenders were completely private companies, not Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.
.oh, and two alimony payments.
Great sense of humor...I appreciate hearing that!I have just one.. that's enough thank you very much!
And its worth every single dime!![]()
I saw this coming at least 10 years ago. SS will collapse and the people who saved will have these accounts raided.Are our 401ks at risk of governent takeover? No one in the media talked about this.
http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/25/83/58.php
Sparse said: "No one in the media talked about this."
And you link to a story <wait for it> from a publication -- i.e. the media. Anyway, the story says that the committee is merely looking at ways to overhaul the system. Nothing has been proposed at this time. Let's leave it at that and stop the rampant speculation.
Gunfyter: The last sentence above applies to you, too.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics, University of Georgia
Question for the Christian right: if Jesus were with us today, which system would he be promoting? If the moral majority wants to talk the talk, then they better be prepared to walk the walk, too.
Rettofly,
"The Fair Tax" is fair in name only. It's actually a regressive tax because the poor would actually be in a higher tax bracket (by tax paid in relation to what they earn) than the middle or upper class. A progressive tax system lowers the tax burden for the poor and places more on the rich.
Question for the Christian right: if Jesus were with us today, which system would he be promoting? If the moral majority wants to talk the talk, then they better be prepared to walk the walk, too.
Rettofly,
"The Fair Tax" is fair in name only. It's actually a regressive tax because the poor would actually be in a higher tax bracket (by tax paid in relation to what they earn) than the middle or upper class. A progressive tax system lowers the tax burden for the poor and places more on the rich.
Question for the Christian right: if Jesus were with us today, which system would he be promoting? If the moral majority wants to talk the talk, then they better be prepared to walk the walk, too.
Rettofly,
" A progressive tax system lowers the tax burden for the poor and places more on the rich.
Question for the Christian right: if Jesus were with us today, which system would he be promoting? If the moral majority wants to talk the talk, then they better be prepared to walk the walk, too.
Rettofly,
"The Fair Tax" is fair in name only. It's actually a regressive tax because the poor would actually be in a higher tax bracket (by tax paid in relation to what they earn) than the middle or upper class. A progressive tax system lowers the tax burden for the poor and places more on the rich.
Question for the Christian right: if Jesus were with us today, which system would he be promoting? If the moral majority wants to talk the talk, then they better be prepared to walk the walk, too.
Rettofly,
"The Fair Tax" is fair in name only. It's actually a regressive tax because the poor would actually be in a higher tax bracket (by tax paid in relation to what they earn) than the middle or upper class. A progressive tax system lowers the tax burden for the poor and places more on the rich.
Question for the Christian right: if Jesus were with us today, which system would he be promoting? If the moral majority wants to talk the talk, then they better be prepared to walk the walk, too.
Which of the men were pilots???Our Tax System Explained: Bar Stool Economics
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.
But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
'I only got a dollar out of the $20,'declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'
'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I got'. 'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'
'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia
The ones complaining and/or the ones trying to drink for free.Isn't this how your tax system works??
Which of the men were pilots???![]()