Clinton: Bush should raise taxes to pay for recovery - Page 10

markolas · #**136** 09-20-2005, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sparky

No one deserves 40% of my income. If I work my ass off, have a great idea that makes it big, or just make smart financial decisions, why should I have 40% taken from me ? That's absurd. One of the most enormous problems that exists is the loss of the concept of personal responsibility. The majority of people that I know who have financial problems are either young and just starting out, or are suffering from making stupid decisions they regret. I am not saying this is the root cause of poverty, but I have seen a lot of people who struggle financially who have literally soiled their own beds. Me throwing money at them isn't going to teach them how to make smart decisions.

I need to introduce you to my ex-boyfriend.

markolas · #**137** 09-20-2005, 05:44 PM

I'm not going to argue about the flat tax. This is one of those issues where I just kind of "shut down" on people. Like I said, I could live quite comfortably on about $700 a month. I have no use for half the things I have now, why the hell would I want more?

Internet message boards are interesting things. I get to safely interact with people that I probably wouldn't let in my house.

strandinthewind · #**138** 09-20-2005, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

He is?!

Now I've heard it all.

His stats are accurate there

strandinthewind · #**139** 09-20-2005, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reebokandlace

I believe you may be right. That may have been one of the changes that was made last year. Although, I am not sure about the every two years theory. I know you must reside in the residence for at least two years before selling to be eligible for the $250,000 single or $500,000 couple waiver. It used to be a once in a lifetime waiver, but you may be right and they are now allowing a waiver every two years.

I do know from personal recent experience that you must use a 1031 exchange if you plan to re-invest the gains in non personal residence.

It has been in effect since like 1996 - I know because I have taken advantage of it - at which time I went like this

Also, I am not talking about non personal residences, only personal residences

strandinthewind · #**140** 09-20-2005, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markolas

I'm not going to argue about the flat tax. This is one of those issues where I just kind of "shut down" on people. Like I said, I could live quite comfortably on about $700 a month. I have no use for half the things I have now, why the hell would I want more?
. . . .

But, the question is many could not and even if they could, why should they be held to your standard. which is what you are asserting

strandinthewind · #**141** 09-20-2005, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

I think I have heard some of that! Many media outlets do that with statistics. That's why its important that everyone understand stats. I didn't like that class but I learned a lot! Like if someone says, "poverty is down 3%". Well, three percent of what?

His point was accurate that 12.7 is very good in the context of the last 15 or so years and the Bush Admin. has given more money than any other, which even media matters admitted when it said "the Bush 2006 budget allots a record-shattering $368 billion for poverty entitlements, 14.6 percent of the entire budget, a huge increase over Clinton's spending on poverty entitlements." I mean how is that incorrect or how does it not support BO's premise that the assertion that the Bush Admin. has massive neglect for the poor is wrong

I do not like W, but facts are facts and the facts here demonstrate W has given a lot of money to the poor and his highest rate of 12.7 is comparatively very good, esp. in a recession

markolas · #**142** 09-20-2005, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

But, the question is many could not and even if they could, why should they be held to your standard. which is what you are asserting

I just have major problems with people who live and/or think like they're the only ones on the planet, or who will ever be on the planet. It's one of my little "pet issues," and I end up not having much to do with people who have that kind of worldview.

gldstwmn · #**143** 09-20-2005, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Anyway and to change the topic a little, but still stay on point about the poor - let's open this up for discussion:

More Unbelievable Propaganda in Katrina's Wake

Tuesday, September 20, 2005

By Bill O'Reilly

I wonder if being a fact checker for O'Really includes having to carry a loofah?

strandinthewind · #**144** 09-20-2005, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markolas

I just have major problems with people who live and/or think like they're the only ones on the planet, or who will ever be on the planet. It's one of my little "pet issues," and I end up not having much to do with people who have that kind of worldview.

On edit - I agree with you on this point.

But, you are ignoring my point that many of the people you sometimes are faulting and then sometimes are not are the very ones who give enormous amounts to charity.

Interestingly, your point that you could live on $700 a month implies everyone could or should which sort of makes you look as if you are acting like you are the only one on the planet in that everyone should adhere to your standards

I mean everyone is different in their needs and in America, unless you change the law, your tax dollars go to support the welfare state and what you give over that is kindness and the stats indicate many American's are very, very kind, which you seem like you are loathe to admit

In the end, I say live your life the way you want to live and be as nice as you can to your fellow planet mate and things will hopefully be fine.

tone - friendly as always

strandinthewind · #**145** 09-20-2005, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

I wonder if being a fact checker for O'Really includes having to carry a loofah?

No, you just have to remove the hair from it

sparky · #**146** 09-20-2005, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markolas

I need to introduce you to my ex-boyfriend.

The one who yelled at you in the car ? Methinks not.

I doubt he'd survive half my deal breaker list.

irishgrl · #**147** 09-20-2005, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, just about all of Southern Lousisna as I know many who have made fortunes off of the oil there just as I know more than one have refused to drill for various reasons and the govt. never compelled them to do so

So, while I agree with you that property has always been subject to just compensation for public use, I know of no incident where the govt. has taken away private mineral rights. Do you?

the fine print on your deed should guide you. generally, the fine pring says that the State reserves the right to mineral/water rights...at least in CA.

What is the situation in OK? I thot much of it was reservation? Maybe those people you are referring to are on rez land? Indian reservations are exempt from Federal laws. It might be interesting to find out.......

markolas · #**148** 09-20-2005, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

But, you are ignoring my point that many of the people you sometimes are faulting and then sometimes are not are the very ones who give enormous amounts to charity.

I'm not ignoring your point. It's nice to give enormous amounts to charity, but that doesn't, by itself, necessarily impress me.

Quote:

Interestingly, your point that you could live on $700 a month implies everyone could or should which sort of makes you look as if you are acting like you are the only one on the planet in that everyone should adhere to your standards

I think that's a stretch.

I don't think everyone should live on $700 a month. I do think that most people have very bloated ideas of what "comfortable living" is.

Quote:

I mean everyone is different in their needs and in America, unless you change the law, your tax dollars go to support the welfare state and what you give over that is kindness and the stats indicate many American's are very, very kind, which you seem like you are loathe to admit

I'm not touching the welfare state comment.

Hmm...maybe you'd like my ex-boyfriend, too.

There's more to being kind than giving money to charities, and I'm not convinced that giving money to charities is necessarily always done out of kindness.

Many Americans are also not very kind. Like my psychotic ex-roommate (may he roast in hell for a thousand years) who once took some stuff to Goodwill thinking they were going to *pay* him for it. And he didn't think that because he was stupid. He thought that because he literally could not wrap his brain around the idea of giving something to somebody without expecting to get something back. It was beyond his ability to comprehend. Truly. I didn't think people like that existed, but they really do.

Quote:

In the end, I say live your life the way you want to live and be as nice as you can to your fellow planet mate and things will hopefully be fine.

tone - friendly as always

Anybody can do whatever the hell they want. I'm not trying to make everybody bow down to me.

I just have a couple of "deal-breaker" issues when it comes to having anything more than a casual acquaintance-type relationship with people, and this is one of them.

markolas · #**149** 09-20-2005, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sparky

The one who yelled at you in the car ? Methinks not.

I doubt he'd survive half my deal breaker list.

Well, he didn't yell. But he is a drama queen.

strandinthewind · #**150** 09-20-2005, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markolas

. . . I just have a couple of "deal-breaker" issues when it comes to having anything more than a casual acquaintance-type relationship with people, and this is one of them.

Being rich (however defined) is a deal breaker or being selfish is the deal breaker. The two are mutually exclusive in their propensity to exist though they can coexist at all levels of society.