New Ledgie saying hi to all!

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

You make us sound so evil.

and just when we were holding hands

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by bushesandbriars

. . . (I also have a vague crush on him, but that's neither here nor there. )

as much as I am loathe to admit it, I had one on Margaret Thatcher

[amber]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

SEE - what did I tell ya

Amber - AND BTW - if we exclude any income earners under $30,000 how is that such a bad thing?

Ah, I misread that. mea culpa - JUST THIS ONCE, THOUGH!

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

A flat tax is regressive taxation and makes no sense. Again, are you advocating what Shrub tried to pass off to the public back in August? Get rid of income taxes and simply institute a flat federal sales tax? Go tell someone making $12,000 a year with three kids that the next time they purchase toothpaste, they're going to pay a 20-25% tax on each dollar spent.

You boob - I excluded anyone making under $30,000 a year in my model for a flat tax - NEXT

On edit - GOTCHA

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Ah - great minds think alike - but wait till Dissy has a hissy in here about this

Flat tax = regressive taxation. I told you that when Shrub first tried to foist his flat federal sales tax bull**** on the public back in August, it still hasn't sunken in, eh?

[bushesandbriars]

Originally Posted by amber

Flat taxes are still regressive.

I don't get how a system wherein people pay according to what they make, and no more and no less, that exempts people who are struggling to get by and assigns the brunt of the tax burden onto the rich, who are the most able to pay and who pay virtually squat right now, is regressive, but okay. You probably pay more taxes than Bill Gates does, but I suppose as long as politicians can get the middle and working classes to keep arguing over the regressiveness of the flat tax, no one will have to worry about it being passed. I, for one, don't care if an idea is liberal or conservative in origin as long as it helps the people who need help. I don't care if Steve Forbes cries every other year on April 15th if it means a poor kid gets a decent education. Just my opinion.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

You boob - I excluded anyone making under $30,000 a year in my model for a flat tax - NEXT

On edit - GOTCHA

I know, I posted that before I read what you said. But I still think it's ****

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

Flat tax = regressive taxation. I told you that when Shrub first tried to foist his flat federal sales tax bull**** on the public back in August, it still hasn't sunken in, eh?

Blah Blah Blah - BTW I LOVE that I caught your deleted post - though I admit it is unfair because you at least had the sense to delete it

Again, I am talking about a flat federal INCOME tax - you boob

[dissention]

Originally Posted by bushesandbriars

You probably pay more taxes than Bill Gates does, but

Most definitely. Didn't you hear what Shrub said back in September? It doesn't matter what the tax laws are, the rich get out of paying them regardless.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by bushesandbriars

I don't get how a system wherein people pay according to what they make, and no more and no less, that exempts people who are struggling to get by and assigns the brunt of the tax burden onto the rich, who are the most able to pay and who pay virtually squat right now, is regressive, but okay. You probably pay more taxes than Bill Gates does, but I suppose as long as politicians can get the middle and working classes to keep arguing over the regressiveness of the flat tax, no one will have to worry about it being passed. I, for one, don't care if an idea is liberal or conservative in origin as long as it helps the people who need help. I don't care if Steve Forbes cries every other year on April 15th if it means a poor kid gets a decent education. Just my opinion.

I just think that punishing someone for striving to do better is wrong and that is what a progressive income tax does. I also will forever this it is assinine that anyone pays over maybe 15 to 20 % of what they make to the Fed. Govt. just so the govt. can line some companies pockets. And when I say that I mean from Halliburton on down to some minority company getting a contract with an outrageous bid just because they are a minority company. The Fed. Govt. is one big pork pie and I HATE having to pay for it

[cliffdweller]

Sorry I'm coming in late on this thread; welcome Ledgie newbies!

Strand and Diss:
You boys play nice! This is supposed to be a welcoming thread and here you two go off on flat taxes! It's enough to put me in snooze land

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

Most definitely. Didn't you hear what Shrub said back in September? It doesn't matter what the tax laws are, the rich get out of paying them regardless.

which is exactly why the flat income tax with no deductions I mentioned would be better for all. BTW - the alternative minimum tax (which I also hate ) pretty much ensures no one falls below a certain rate though some can and do. Here is a site on that tax http://www.smartmoney.com/tax/filing....cfm?story=amt

I think many are loathe to accept that someone making $200,000 or more a year (that is their benchmark not mine) deserves anything but a 50% tax rate. I mean scream them - they are rich so they deserve it

[bushesandbriars]

Originally Posted by dissention

Most definitely. Didn't you hear what Shrub said back in September? It doesn't matter what the tax laws are, the rich get out of paying them regardless.

Yes, but I am talking about an actual flat income tax, not the ravings of Dubya's deranged mind. Nothing he says he says in worth paying attention to. (Oops, there's one of those blankets statements. ) I'm just pointing out that a flat income tax assigned according to who could pay it, with the only--and I mean--ONLY--exemptions being those who simply cannot pay it, the people who are struggling right now to make ends meet, and the people who are failing to make ends meet. With no tricks or mumbo jumbo, would be the most progressive course possible in any nation: It would take the burden of the poor, the working, and the middle class people, and put it on the people who it should be on anyway: Rich people, who can pay it. I also know that there is about as much chance of this happening as I have of becoming Queen of England (a damn shame, too, because I look great in a tiara and I think I could get used to the purse, and Prince Philip is cute in a charming-old-English-gent sort of way, though I'm not sure if I could endure Charles.)

Anyway, my two cents.

Oh, and Dissention? I don't think you're scary at all. (I assume you're being kind since it's my first time and all. )

[Miss Vicky]

Originally Posted by bushesandbriars

I followed the link and read "Innocent and Unknowing" because you said that was your favorite of the ones posted. I liked it a lot; I thought the drama of the story was really immediate, and the pace was right. You moved things along really well, which I thought suited the overall atmosphere and mood of the action, especially Darren's frenetic, unhappy state of mind. (God, I sound like someone's high school creative writing teacher; I mean what I say, though.) What's your novel about, if that's not too personal and won't mess up your writing karma? (I find if I go on about an idea, sometimes I lose it.)

Hmm... my high school teacher told me to rewrite the ending because he "didn't get it." I smiled, told him "I'll think about it," and then did nothing of the sort.
My novel... started out as a challenge to write a simple love story with a happy ending (something I NEVER do). I couldn't get started so I changed the idea to a simple gay love story with a happy ending... the premise now bears absolutely no resemblance to the original idea and was never intended to be a novel but it kind of ended up that way. Now it's about an 18 year old boy who find himself homeless and out of desperation becomes a male escort. But don't get the wrong impression, it is not erotica. I've tried to keep the sexual aspect to a minimum and only include erotic scenes that are pertinent to the plot or to character development. The protagonist, Jordan, is an extremely insecure young man who finds himself involved with four love interests. One is a wealthy and kind hearted middle-aged man who has an almost paternal relationship with Jordan. Another is a young man - in his twenties - who is extremely possesive and ultimately abusive. Third is a woman in her late twenties who offers a relationship based on equality. The fourth is an insecure virginal girl about the same age as Jordan who looks to him for support. Initially, only the middle-aged man knows that Jordan is a prostitute. I have decided how the story will end, and it's not really happy, but I won't reveal the details right now.

Originally Posted by bushesandbriars

You sound precisely like me; I have several things I'm working on, and have been for several years, but I tend to get a few ideas and write on them in bursts, then reach an impasse, or life interferes. Dratted real life! If I ever come up with a cure for writer's block, I'm bottling and selling it and making my fortune.

Do you ever read Anne Lamott? I'm not much on her novels, but she wrote this book about writing called Bird by Bird, and I find bits of it preachy, but some of her actual advice is good. She suggests that every day before you write, you work up a little ritual to tell your brain it's time to get in writer mode, like lighting a candle and taking a few deep breaths and taking a moment to just relax and get focused, and I find that pretty valuable, so that may help you, if you don't already have a ritual worked out. Actually ritual sounds a little dramatic; maybe routine is a better word. And keep at it, which I'm sure you don't need me to tell you, if you've been writing this long already. I firmly believe writing is a calling of sorts, and if you have it, and it sure looks like you do, it'll be with you all the time. That's the thing that keeps me going when I feel frustrated and miserable with it.

Okay, enough rambling on from me

You'd make a killing selling that.

As for Anne Lamott, I am one of those really bad writers who almost NEVER reads anything - though really cheesy period romance novels are a guilty pleasure. I write because I hate reading; I only rarely ever find anything that can get and keep my interest so I usually don't even bother to look.

[bushesandbriars]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I just think that punishing someone for striving to do better is wrong and that is what a progressive income tax does. I also will forever this it is assinine that anyone pays over maybe 15 to 20 % of what they make to the Fed. Govt. just so the govt. can line some companies pockets. And when I say that I mean from Halliburton on down to some minority company getting a contract with an outrageous bid just because they are a minority company. The Fed. Govt. is one big pork pie and I HATE having to pay for it

Maybe, but you have to understand that this is where it all starts: One group of people of people does not like having to help another group of people, and the people who have the wherewithal can then turn around and pay politicians to endorse their opinions, while the little squirt gets hosed; that's what I hate. Money's not everything, and the richest one percent of this country should have to help everyone; they're the ones with the means to do it. So when you start getting into, but this and but that, then you're right back to square one: The people in the middle getting stuck, because they have no way to buy people to make policy for them. The rich people buy their way out of it and into more money, and the poor people simply cannot pay--the government can try, but these people do not have it to give, and they need the help. And I'm all for help being given where it's needed, not paid for.

Just my opinion--we're going to start fighting, are we? 'Cuz that was a short damn honeymoon, if we are! I see your point, I'm just not sure I agree.