Murph Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 I know (years of being married taught me how to answer) that' date=' this is why I am glad I do not have to make this decision. All things considered the first loan or bailout was a huge waste of money; it went straight to the execs. With foreclosures up 80% from the previous year 07 to 08, even congress is asking where the cash went. I think with the new Prez it will be happy days till around November then we are going to drop real fast into a serious depression. I just have this gut feeling, and I hope and pray I am wrong. [/quote'] My worries are when the bonds go "unbought". China and Russia are asking for a more reliable "World" currency, whereas oil prices, ect. are tied. The words "perfect storm" have been spoken. The poll was too simple for discussion Homz, and I know you hate shutting up. I don't care if it's your job, my job, or whatever. It was Yep, or Nope to tax money bailing out a private business, be it G.M., or Pizza Hut. It's simply NOT the business of Government, to bail out a business. It is taxation without representation. Hell, it's worse than that. I'm looking at 20/3 against in a freakin' guitar forum. (as of the time of this post). Thanks for voting. Murph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 A little research provides some insight into why libs don't mind tax payer bailouts... 4 of Obama's picks for top executive posts don't pay their taxes like the rest of us...Treasury' date=' Labor, HHS and his pick for chief compliance officer. The following are the 10 wealthiest US Senators (all are multi-millionaires), since they already have their money they are largely unaffected by income tax. 40 of the 100 current US Senators are millionaires. 1 John Kerry (D-Mass) 2 Mark Warner (D-Va) 3 Herb Kohl (D-Wis) 4 Edward M. Kennedy 5 Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa) 6 Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) 7 Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif) 8 James E. Risch (R-Idaho) 7 Gordon H. Smith (R-Ore) 9 Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) 10 Claire McCaskill (D-Mo) These are the wealthiest US House members (all are multi-millionaires) and are largely unaffected by income taxes: 1 Jane Harman (D-Calif) 2 Darrell Issa (R-Calif) [b']Voted against bailouts and tax hikes[/b] 3 Jared Polis (D-Colo) 3 Robin Hayes (R-NC) Voted against bailouts and tax hikes 4 Vernon Buchanan (R-Fla) Voted against bailouts and tax hikes 5 Michael McCaul (R-Texas) Voted against bailouts and tax hikes 6 Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) 7 Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY) 8 Cynthia Marie Lummis (R-Wyo) Voted against bailouts and tax hikes 9 Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ) Voted for bailouts and against tax hikes 10 Alan Mark Grayson (D-Fla) Honorable mention goes to Charlie Rangel (D-NY) who has failed to pay over $239,000 dollars in taxes because he said that he didn't understand the rules that he helped to write. And your source for this information? The income part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
callen3615 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Hey, yall voted for change...here it is. I love to say I TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 My worries are when the bonds go "unbought". China and Russia are asking for a more reliable "World" currency' date=' whereas oil prices, ect. are tied. The words "perfect storm" have been spoken. The poll was too simple for discussion Homz, and I know you hate shutting up. I don't care if it's your job, my job, or whatever. It was Yep, or Nope to tax money bailing out a private business, be it G.M., or Pizza Hut. It's simply NOT the business of Government, to bail out a business. It is taxation without representation. Hell, it's worse than that. I'm looking at 20/3 against in a freakin' guitar forum. (as of the time of this post). Thanks for voting. Murph.[/quote'] I did not vote because it was such a poorly framed question. If you read my posts you would have seen that I am not entirely for it either. The job stuff was unrelated for the most part. If you want say I hijacked then fine. As for me shutting up; how about you and your cohorts from the dumber then sh1t right make a point on occasion that isn't straight from the Drudge report, Heritage Foundation or Rush Limbaugh web sites. BTW you got sh1tty first. My points earlier were well mannered and the other stuff wasn't aimed at you or anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 How is it a poorly framed question? Do you think the Government has any business bailing out a business? Yes or no. Your problem is a yes or no question. Murph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 How is it a poorly framed question? Do you think the Government has any business bailing out a business? Yes or no. Your problem is a yes or no question. Murph. It's not a bail out. So how can you say bail out? How about this for a question: Do you feel the insensitive program in it's current form is a legitimate means of reversing the faltering economy and providing a sufficient and significant number of jobs for out of work Americans. I would have voted no to this question as of the last version of the bill I had seen at about 1 pm today. BTW Taxation without representation. Huh...your elected officials are voting. You do have senators and House reps. from IL don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 And your source for this information? The income part. http://www.opensecrets.org/ - Check out who runs the site and who funds them and who thier board is. This site also shows who supports which politicians, where thier income is from and what liabilities they have, it's all public information. The votes for all congressmen and senators are listed on: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/crecord/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 http://www.opensecrets.org/ - Check out who runs the site and who funds them and who thier board is. This site also shows who supports which politicians' date=' where thier income is from and what liabilities they have, it's all public information. The votes for all congressmen and senators are listed on: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/crecord/[/quote'] I noticed John McCane isn't on there, but Kerry is. Since the Kerry fortune is actually his wife's. Is it that your not counting the wife's income on McCain. Just an observation off the cuff. I will look at your source and make a personal observation. I will have to do it tomorrow. No time tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 I believe that any use of taxpayer/public money to "prop up"/"bailout"/insert your term here, private business, is unconstitutional and will eventually be reviewed by the supreme court and ruled as such. Many of FDR's depression era programs were eventually ruled unconstitutional, some while he was president and some after he died. Remember that he tried to "Stack" the court after they began ruling against him. History shows that his programs (i.e., socializing businesses and industry, government spending and government price controls) failed to bring the US out of the depression. That it was in fact WWII that ended the depression for the U.S. I may be wrong, one day we will find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 John and Cindy McCain are rich, but thier net worth does not put them in the top 10. Remember that 40 of the 100 senators are millionaires. Some are self made millionaires, some married into wealth and some are generationally wealthy (Ted Kennedy and Rockefeller come to mind). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Income taxes only effect people that are trying to become wealthy, not people that are already wealthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 It's not a bail out. So how can you say bail out? How about this for a question: Do you feel the insensitive program in it's current form is a legitimate means of reversing the faltering economy and providing a sufficient and significant number of jobs for out of work Americans. I would have voted no to this question as of the last version of the bill I had seen at about 1 pm today. BTW Taxation without representation. Huh...your elected officials are voting. You do have senators and House reps. from IL don't you? If the Treasury Secretary (who doesn't pay taxes until he's caught) bails out a business, with taxpayer (my) money, with his own power, no vote, zip, I have not been represented. A TARP IS SOMETHING YOU PUT OVER A LEAKY ROOF. I'm not talking about this idiotic bill. I'm talking about GOVERNMENT BAILOUTS. This bill is just stealing the final remnants of a worthless dollar. Murph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Tim Geithner (our new Treasury Secretary) was one of the prinicpal architects of TARP, even though it occurred under Bush's watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Another bit of interesting information...which party has controlled government. Note, when the Repubs controlled the Senate, they never had a filibuster proof majority. They had to compromise with the dems even when they had a majority. Most of the laws that we live with today are a result of Democrat lawmakers. http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/l/bl_party_division_2.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Just for the sake of argument so what if your list is correct. The only reason the republicans are against this current bill is because they want more tax cuts for the wealthy and big business. Also keeping in mind the Bush tax cuts are still in effect and the top tax bracket is currently 36% which btw is a far cry from the 50% it was during Reagan or even the 39% it was under Clinton. I guess I don't understand why it matters how much money they make. What matters is their integrity. We could agree on that right. As for republicans saving us from the evil government what were they doing for the last 8 years or at least 6 of the last 8. As for the democrats I say the same for the last two years. This current bill is an attempt to do something to help us. It may work it may not. Like I said I was not for the version that was being talked about at 1 pm. I may be in favor now. I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 The current bill will NOT create a single job. NET. It'll make some for abortion Dr.'s, take some from oil workers, make some for ****** lawyers, take some from hog farmers. Man, I like bacon. And it will ruin the dollar. What's left of it. I'm tellin' ya Homz. China ain't gonna pay for this porker. Murph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Another bit of interesting information...which party has controlled government. Note' date=' when the Repubs controlled the Senate, they never had a filibuster proof majority. They had to compromise with the dems even when they had a majority. Most of the laws that we live with today are a result of Democrat lawmakers. http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/l/bl_party_division_2.htm[/quote'] what does that mean. the job of enforcing law was the republicans for the last 8 years. You can have all the regulations on books you want, but if the SEC refused to enforce them they mean nothing. This is true across the board. This sort of thing happens when all top positions are appointees and are cronies. And yes I would say the same thing if it were democrats. I am about results not people. If Obama screws up then I wont stick up for him. He's been in office for 16 days. His cabinet posts so far suck in many ways. I do; however, hold out some hope because a cabinet sec. does not make policy. We shall see. TTFN. Peace out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 I repeat. China ain't gonna pay for this porker. Buckle up..... Murph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Who's wealthy In America? Where is all of the wealth in the world? If there is such a thing as a "middle class" is there a "lower class" or an "upper class"? What is poverty? If you gross $100,000.00 and live in California are you wealthy? How about if you live in Cheyenne Wyoming, or Denver, or Corpus Christi? Wealth is a hard thing to pin down isn't it? Different places to live have different costs of living don't they? How much money should a person have to pay in taxes? 30%, 40%, 50% or more? What right does the goverment have to take that much of a person's earnings? Income taxes DO NOT tax the rich, only those people that are trying to get rich. http://www.treas.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.shtml The Tax Reform Act of 1986, which brought the top statutory tax rate down from 50 percent to 28 percent while the corporate tax rate was reduced from 50 percent to 35 percent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 The current bill will NOT create a single job. NET. It'll make some for abortion Dr.'s' date=' take some from oil workers, make some for ****** lawyers, take some from hog farmers. Man, I like bacon. And it will ruin the dollar. What's left of it. I'm tellin' ya Homz. China ain't gonna pay for this porker. Murph.[/quote'] Guns [ ] Gays [X] God [X] Only one box unchecked in that short post. I like bacon too. BTW I'd just like point out that in the last 8 years the private hog farm has virtually disappeared. Corporations were able to lobby your favorite folks in the Congress to alter inport/export laws reducing the value of the hogs until the private farmer had to sell to the corporations. After this occurs the protections are put back in place and the prices go back up. Leaving the control in the hands of the corporations not the private farmers. You wouldn't know the difference in many cases the farmer gets a salary to stay on his farm, but he no longer owns it. This happened in many farming industries over the last 8 years. More so then at any other time since the dust bowl era. Most people in the world would identify corporate control to the levels we see today as fascism. I call it the GOP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.