Bush wants to raise taxes
-
the topic here is : "Bush wants to raise taxes" your quote, while informative, does not contradict the topic: Bush reportedly does want to do the things mentioned in the WaPo article. the fact things might change from now until final approval of his latest tax bill is, again, interesting, but it does not contradict what i quoted. Software | Cleek
How does "the administration is considering eliminating the deduction of state and local taxes on federal income tax returns and scrapping the business tax deduction for employer-provided health insurance" conflict with the statement "They [the panel] will be asked to review all options, to seek input from members of Congress, to hold public hearings and then provide advice to the Treasury secretary, who will provide recommendations to the president"? Considering and wanting to do something are two different things. I also failed to read that Bush wants to raise taxes, just that he is considering changing the US tax code, something that he said he was going to do when he was campaigning. Nice troll though. Uptight Ex-Military Republican married to a Commie Lib - How weird is that?
-
the topic here is : "Bush wants to raise taxes" your quote, while informative, does not contradict the topic: Bush reportedly does want to do the things mentioned in the WaPo article. the fact things might change from now until final approval of his latest tax bill is, again, interesting, but it does not contradict what i quoted. Software | Cleek
Chris Losinger wrote: "Bush wants to raise taxes" I'll wait until I see it in the Washington Times or the Wall Street Journal as fact. If in the W'Post, NYT or LA T then I read it as propaganda. Just the way I filter I guess. By the way, I didnt' mean to imply dishonesty on your part. Sorry if it came across that way. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me
-
How does "the administration is considering eliminating the deduction of state and local taxes on federal income tax returns and scrapping the business tax deduction for employer-provided health insurance" conflict with the statement "They [the panel] will be asked to review all options, to seek input from members of Congress, to hold public hearings and then provide advice to the Treasury secretary, who will provide recommendations to the president"? Considering and wanting to do something are two different things. I also failed to read that Bush wants to raise taxes, just that he is considering changing the US tax code, something that he said he was going to do when he was campaigning. Nice troll though. Uptight Ex-Military Republican married to a Commie Lib - How weird is that?
Doug Goulden wrote: Considering and wanting to do something are two different things true. but in everyday use of the words, considering something implies that you want to do it, to some degree. and if you really don't want something, you don't consider it at all, and you certainly don't go telling reporters about it - unless you want to freak people out. would you say "i'm considering nuking the State Department because Pat Robertson thought it would be a good idea" if you didn't think there was some merit in the idea? Doug Goulden wrote: I also failed to read that Bush wants to raise taxes eliminating a deduction that everyone uses (excluding local and state taxes) is equivalent to raising taxes. Software | Cleek
-
Doug Goulden wrote: Considering and wanting to do something are two different things true. but in everyday use of the words, considering something implies that you want to do it, to some degree. and if you really don't want something, you don't consider it at all, and you certainly don't go telling reporters about it - unless you want to freak people out. would you say "i'm considering nuking the State Department because Pat Robertson thought it would be a good idea" if you didn't think there was some merit in the idea? Doug Goulden wrote: I also failed to read that Bush wants to raise taxes eliminating a deduction that everyone uses (excluding local and state taxes) is equivalent to raising taxes. Software | Cleek
Chris Losinger wrote: would you say "i'm considering nuking the State Department because Pat Robertson thought it would be a good idea" if you didn't think there was some merit in the idea? Nah I like Condaleeza Rice :laugh:. But I see your point. Chris Losinger wrote: eliminating a deduction that everyone uses (excluding local and state taxes) is equivalent to raising taxes. It would depend on whether there was a corresponding change in the tax rate though. Its concievable that they could lower the tax rate enough that it offset the elimination of the deduction. The problem with the tax code that I see is two fold. One its written by lawyers, and only bean counters really understand it (to varying degrees). I would like to see the code changed to put 'em all out of business, but I doubt it will happen. :~ Uptight Ex-Military Republican married to a Commie Lib - How weird is that?
-
Chris Losinger wrote: would you say "i'm considering nuking the State Department because Pat Robertson thought it would be a good idea" if you didn't think there was some merit in the idea? Nah I like Condaleeza Rice :laugh:. But I see your point. Chris Losinger wrote: eliminating a deduction that everyone uses (excluding local and state taxes) is equivalent to raising taxes. It would depend on whether there was a corresponding change in the tax rate though. Its concievable that they could lower the tax rate enough that it offset the elimination of the deduction. The problem with the tax code that I see is two fold. One its written by lawyers, and only bean counters really understand it (to varying degrees). I would like to see the code changed to put 'em all out of business, but I doubt it will happen. :~ Uptight Ex-Military Republican married to a Commie Lib - How weird is that?
Doug Goulden wrote: It would depend on whether there was a corresponding change in the tax rate though. Its concievable that they could lower the tax rate enough that it offset the elimination of the deduction. true. but the person they were quoting said these deduction eliminations (+$) were being considered as a way to offset the dividend rate cuts (-$); they wanted to make the whole package "revenue neutral". so, there can't be a cut in the rate. i kinda think these things are just a bargaining chips. some lucky naive comittee member is going to walk out of some meeting feeling all proud that he talked Bush out of these things, and Bush will walk away glad that he doesn't have to defend them to the public. Doug Goulden wrote: I would like to see the code changed to put 'em all out of business, but I doubt it will happen yup and yup Software | Cleek
-
the topic here is : "Bush wants to raise taxes" your quote, while informative, does not contradict the topic: Bush reportedly does want to do the things mentioned in the WaPo article. the fact things might change from now until final approval of his latest tax bill is, again, interesting, but it does not contradict what i quoted. Software | Cleek
Thats your ( as usual WRONG ) opinion. The article further states: "But already, the contours of a tax plan are taking shape: lower individual and corporate tax rates and steps to broaden the base of taxation and promote growth by cutting taxes on investment. " (1) Why should those of us that live ina a state with no state income tax subsidize you idiots that have one. We are paying for your stuff - so pay up. (2) Get some investments going . Save a little money for your old age. Quit being bitter and enjoy. (3) Nothing was said about the interest deduction for home mortgages. (4) Most of the so called "tax increase" will be on the business side ( his big cronies - remember ) and not on the individual ( thats you Chris ) side. (5) I could rant on but why - you are gonna bitch about anything GWB does anyway ( 4 more years L) :) :) Richard "Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer --Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
-
Thats your ( as usual WRONG ) opinion. The article further states: "But already, the contours of a tax plan are taking shape: lower individual and corporate tax rates and steps to broaden the base of taxation and promote growth by cutting taxes on investment. " (1) Why should those of us that live ina a state with no state income tax subsidize you idiots that have one. We are paying for your stuff - so pay up. (2) Get some investments going . Save a little money for your old age. Quit being bitter and enjoy. (3) Nothing was said about the interest deduction for home mortgages. (4) Most of the so called "tax increase" will be on the business side ( his big cronies - remember ) and not on the individual ( thats you Chris ) side. (5) I could rant on but why - you are gonna bitch about anything GWB does anyway ( 4 more years L) :) :) Richard "Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer --Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
Richard Stringer wrote: (1) Why should those of us that live ina a state with no state income tax subsidize you idiots that have one. We are paying for your stuff - so pay up. Great point. Something I forgot after I moved to Indiana (state and local income tax, sales tax, property tax) from Texas (sales tax, propery tax albeit extremely high). Richard Stringer wrote: (5) I could rant on but why - you are gonna bitch about anything GWB does anyway ( 4 more years L) Nailed that one. Here's an advertisement for the new Presidential Library, courtesy of Rush.[^] Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me
-
Richard Stringer wrote: (1) Why should those of us that live ina a state with no state income tax subsidize you idiots that have one. We are paying for your stuff - so pay up. Great point. Something I forgot after I moved to Indiana (state and local income tax, sales tax, property tax) from Texas (sales tax, propery tax albeit extremely high). Richard Stringer wrote: (5) I could rant on but why - you are gonna bitch about anything GWB does anyway ( 4 more years L) Nailed that one. Here's an advertisement for the new Presidential Library, courtesy of Rush.[^] Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me
-
Presidential Library :laugh: Does it contain a Monica wing complete with dress and cigars? ed The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Ed K wrote: Does it contain a Monica wing complete with dress and cigars? from what I understand, it does devote space to the impeachment but casts it as the politics of persecution - ie., a personal mistake, yaddy, yaddy. this is unlike the Nixon Library that more honestly (or honestly) presents Watergate. The commercial from Rush is funny, a bit over the edge though, even for me. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me
-
Richard Stringer wrote: (1) Why should those of us that live ina a state with no state income tax subsidize you idiots that have one. We are paying for your stuff - so pay up. Great point. Something I forgot after I moved to Indiana (state and local income tax, sales tax, property tax) from Texas (sales tax, propery tax albeit extremely high). Richard Stringer wrote: (5) I could rant on but why - you are gonna bitch about anything GWB does anyway ( 4 more years L) Nailed that one. Here's an advertisement for the new Presidential Library, courtesy of Rush.[^] Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me
Mike Gaskey wrote: from Texas (sales tax, propery tax albeit extremely high). My taxes on my house in Dallas ( appraised tax value 165,000) this year is 4360.00. That is not a typo :). Richard "Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer --Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
-
Thats your ( as usual WRONG ) opinion. The article further states: "But already, the contours of a tax plan are taking shape: lower individual and corporate tax rates and steps to broaden the base of taxation and promote growth by cutting taxes on investment. " (1) Why should those of us that live ina a state with no state income tax subsidize you idiots that have one. We are paying for your stuff - so pay up. (2) Get some investments going . Save a little money for your old age. Quit being bitter and enjoy. (3) Nothing was said about the interest deduction for home mortgages. (4) Most of the so called "tax increase" will be on the business side ( his big cronies - remember ) and not on the individual ( thats you Chris ) side. (5) I could rant on but why - you are gonna bitch about anything GWB does anyway ( 4 more years L) :) :) Richard "Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer --Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
-->(2) Get some investments going . Save a little money for your old age. Quit being bitter and enjoy. We'll see about that in a decade,see how much return you're going to have on the $50k you invested.How naive of people to think the average person has anything to gain from investing in the stock market. With all the yapping about the benefit of individual investments, i'd like to see the return rate given that a lot of people already invest. Looking for me in cyberspace? I am the electron with the red hat, occupying 3rd sit on the left of the data bus. by the way, perl stinks. "I believe god invented man, because he was disappointed in the monkey" Mark Twain
-
-->(2) Get some investments going . Save a little money for your old age. Quit being bitter and enjoy. We'll see about that in a decade,see how much return you're going to have on the $50k you invested.How naive of people to think the average person has anything to gain from investing in the stock market. With all the yapping about the benefit of individual investments, i'd like to see the return rate given that a lot of people already invest. Looking for me in cyberspace? I am the electron with the red hat, occupying 3rd sit on the left of the data bus. by the way, perl stinks. "I believe god invented man, because he was disappointed in the monkey" Mark Twain
Over the past 30 years or so the stock market has averaged a 10% gain per annum... last year I made a 48% gain in my 401K, this year maybe 5%. Of course I manage it (move funds between Stocks & bonds, etc.) but I sure am not a stock market wizzard. Patience and common sense are enough. The social Security Trust fund has an average rate of return of 2% over its history. I only wish that 12.4% of my income had been going to the 401K. You should give it a try. Just put away a little each month in a mutual fund or three. You'd be surprised at how much it grows it 5 yrs. Why would anyone waste time arguing with an accountant about anything? Their sole function is to record what happenned, and any higher aspirations are mere delusions of grandeur. On the ladder of productive contributions they are the little rubber pads at the bottom that keep the thing from sliding out from under you. - Roger Wright
-
-->(2) Get some investments going . Save a little money for your old age. Quit being bitter and enjoy. We'll see about that in a decade,see how much return you're going to have on the $50k you invested.How naive of people to think the average person has anything to gain from investing in the stock market. With all the yapping about the benefit of individual investments, i'd like to see the return rate given that a lot of people already invest. Looking for me in cyberspace? I am the electron with the red hat, occupying 3rd sit on the left of the data bus. by the way, perl stinks. "I believe god invented man, because he was disappointed in the monkey" Mark Twain
Yep - one of the fools who spend every cent they get and then bitch about the "rich". I invest in both the stock market and in mutual funds. I could name you at least two funds that gave me a bit over 14% returns this year - both energy funds. The average of my little portfolio this year was 7.2% apr. The bank I keep my savings in thinks it is being generous at 1.25%. I am an "average" investor - not one putting 50000.00 into a stock or a fund for a quick profit. I try to put away 20 -30 K a year plus what I put into my SEP account. I have been doing thisn for over 10 years (not at the level I do now however ). If I can continue at my present rate until I reach 62 I will be damn near a millionaire. I don't spend my money on useless stuff - I save it and use itv to make more money. Thats one of the reasons I am a Republican - I want to keep and spend my own damn money without help from the Government. I save or invest almost 50% of my after tax income because I want to have a future. And I damn sure don't want to support people such as yourself who have already decided that the "average" guy can't play the game and just sit with their hand out waiting for the politicians to pander to them. Richard PS: There is a "Investing For Dummys" series of books out. "Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer --Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
-
Ed K wrote: Does it contain a Monica wing complete with dress and cigars? from what I understand, it does devote space to the impeachment but casts it as the politics of persecution - ie., a personal mistake, yaddy, yaddy. this is unlike the Nixon Library that more honestly (or honestly) presents Watergate. The commercial from Rush is funny, a bit over the edge though, even for me. Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me
Mike Gaskey wrote: from what I understand, it does devote space to the impeachment but casts it as the politics of persecution - ie., a personal mistake, yaddy, yaddy. this is unlike the Nixon Library that more honestly (or honestly) presents Watergate. So - let me see if I understand this, now - you're saying that the 8 year investigation of just about everything the Clintons did - failed business dealings, personnel management issues, and baseless sexual harassment charges - which eventually uncovered nothing more than a lie about a consensual sexual relationship - you're saying that none of that had anything to do with political persecution? I cannot comprehend how someone so gullible can function in the real world.
-
Yep - one of the fools who spend every cent they get and then bitch about the "rich". I invest in both the stock market and in mutual funds. I could name you at least two funds that gave me a bit over 14% returns this year - both energy funds. The average of my little portfolio this year was 7.2% apr. The bank I keep my savings in thinks it is being generous at 1.25%. I am an "average" investor - not one putting 50000.00 into a stock or a fund for a quick profit. I try to put away 20 -30 K a year plus what I put into my SEP account. I have been doing thisn for over 10 years (not at the level I do now however ). If I can continue at my present rate until I reach 62 I will be damn near a millionaire. I don't spend my money on useless stuff - I save it and use itv to make more money. Thats one of the reasons I am a Republican - I want to keep and spend my own damn money without help from the Government. I save or invest almost 50% of my after tax income because I want to have a future. And I damn sure don't want to support people such as yourself who have already decided that the "average" guy can't play the game and just sit with their hand out waiting for the politicians to pander to them. Richard PS: There is a "Investing For Dummys" series of books out. "Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer --Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
you're certainly free to make up whatever you want about your incredible imaginary returns. Looking for me in cyberspace? I am the electron with the red hat, occupying 3rd sit on the left of the data bus. by the way, perl stinks. "I believe god invented man, because he was disappointed in the monkey" Mark Twain
-
Doug Goulden wrote: Considering and wanting to do something are two different things true. but in everyday use of the words, considering something implies that you want to do it, to some degree. and if you really don't want something, you don't consider it at all, and you certainly don't go telling reporters about it - unless you want to freak people out. would you say "i'm considering nuking the State Department because Pat Robertson thought it would be a good idea" if you didn't think there was some merit in the idea? Doug Goulden wrote: I also failed to read that Bush wants to raise taxes eliminating a deduction that everyone uses (excluding local and state taxes) is equivalent to raising taxes. Software | Cleek
No, in everyday use considering implys that you are willing to do something if the pros and cons come out right. If something is not being considered, than you refuse to do it no matter what. You may or may not want to at the start, but you are open to the suggestion. Last time I was looking for a job I considered moving to a different state. I really don't want to move, as I like the area I'm in, but I'm open to the idea if the offer is right.