PDA

View Full Version : Where is the list?



M&K's Retrievers
02-28-2010, 10:39 AM
I'm looking for the list of Dems who gave back the evil tax reductions that Bush passed all by himself. I've Goolged it but came up empty. All I can find is articles about the Dems wanting to increase taxes or allow the Bush reductions expire but no list of those who refused to take the reduction or pay more than they owe. I guess you could make a list starting with Wrangle, Daschle, Brainard, Killefer, Marshall and oh yeah Geithner...:rolleyes:

dnf777
02-28-2010, 10:46 AM
Where's the list of frogs with wings?
What's the point?
Once a budge and tax code is passed, its LAW.

M&K's Retrievers
02-28-2010, 11:09 AM
Where's the list of frogs with wings?
What's the point?
Once a budge and tax code is passed, its LAW.

Ooh. A little touchy this morning. Must have hit a nerve.:p

There is no law I know of that prevents anyone from sending the government as much money as they want. There must be a list. Are you on the list? Oprah? Alec Baldwin? Streisand? Letterman? Algore? Reid? Boxer? Pelosi? Franks? I can't believe I can't find the list.

My point is that if the Dems felt so strongly about the tax cut, nobody kept them from paying more. Some Dems felt the cuts were not enough and they should even pay less.

Uncle Bill
02-28-2010, 12:25 PM
Ooh. A little touchy this morning. Must have hit a nerve.:p

There is no law I know of that prevents anyone from sending the government as much money as they want. There must be a list. Are you on the list? Oprah? Alec Baldwin? Streisand? Letterman? Algore? Reid? Boxer? Pelosi? Franks? I can't believe I can't find the list.

My point is that if the Dems felt so strongly about the tax cut, nobody kept them from paying more. Some Dems felt the cuts were not enough and they should even pay less.


And according to that omniscient lefty, Yardley...MOST Americans opposed that Bush tax cut.

It will be interesting to see if he falls into that category when those cuts expire at the end of this year. But then, for all I know he may be like MOST of the SFNC that doesn't have to pay any taxes, which would fit right in to the socialists class envy beliefs.

UB

dnf777
02-28-2010, 12:25 PM
Hey! Don't put me on a list with B. Frank, and I won't put you on a list with Larry Craig! :-x

I get your point, but isn't voluntarily paying more taxes by a democrat who thinks taxes are ok, kind of like a republican who thinks that gov't entitlements are wrong voluntarily forfeiting medicare benefits, and just paying all those hospital bills out of pocket? While we're making lists....

YardleyLabs
02-28-2010, 12:32 PM
I would assume that anyone concerned about the growing deficit would object to continuing tax cuts that will do nothing except make the deficit even bigger. Alternatively, of course, I am sure there must be a ground swell among Republicans to insist on spending cuts that are at least as great as the long term cost of extending the cuts..:rolleyes:

M&K's Retrievers
02-28-2010, 01:12 PM
Hey! Don't put me on a list with B. Frank, and I won't put you on a list with Larry Craig! :-x


I get your point, but isn't voluntarily paying more taxes by a democrat who thinks taxes are ok, kind of like a republican who thinks that gov't entitlements are wrong voluntarily forfeiting medicare benefits, and just paying all those hospital bills out of pocket? While we're making lists....

Lists? I didn't make a list. I only looking for one that doesn't exist.

As far as Medicare benefits are concerned, folks are just trying to get back a portion of what they paid in on their own behalf. Different deal.

dnf777
02-28-2010, 01:20 PM
As far as Medicare benefits are concerned, folks are just trying to get back a portion of what they paid in on their own behalf. Different deal.

Not even close! An 80 year old getting Folfox with Avastin chemo will spend more in one month than they, and 10 of their friends paid in over their entire lives! (or some equally ridiculous amount)

And we all reap benefits of paying taxes, ie firemen, police, roads, schools, etc... What bothers me about taxes, is when it goes to Halliburton in astronomical amounts for substandard service, and to put million dollar 'gratuities' in the hands of politicians with relevant legislation before them. Duke Cunningham, and a fair share of democrats also, to be sure, as examples.

ducknwork
02-28-2010, 02:11 PM
Not even close! An 80 year old getting Folfox with Avastin chemo will spend more in one month than they, and 10 of their friends paid in over their entire lives! (or some equally ridiculous amount)



:idea::idea::D

Well, hey, now that you mention it, I really think that some sort of health care reform to bring those costs down is necessary. I wonder if anyone in Washington has considered that...I think I'll write an email to my representatives.

dnf777
02-28-2010, 07:32 PM
:idea::idea::D

Well, hey, now that you mention it, I really think that some sort of health care reform to bring those costs down is necessary. I wonder if anyone in Washington has considered that...I think I'll write an email to my representatives.

What?? And deny those rich pharma execs their due profits?? No way! This is America! Better to have the common folk die wanting for treatment, than to deny corporate America the profits from those few who can afford it!!

Gee, maybe with some reasonable reform we can have it both ways, albiet with a little compromise from both sides??

ducknwork
03-01-2010, 07:45 AM
Gee, maybe with some reasonable reform we can have it both ways, albiet with a little compromise from both sides??

That would make far too much sense.

I almost vomited when I saw this today:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100228/wl_afp/uspoliticshealth_20100228165706

Why the HELL is there such a rush? Wouldn't it make more sense to get it right than to just get anything passed?!

Buzz
03-01-2010, 09:38 AM
The first year of the tax cut, I went and bought a $4000 TV with mine.

YardleyLabs
03-01-2010, 10:04 AM
Lists? I didn't make a list. I only looking for one that doesn't exist.

As far as Medicare benefits are concerned, folks are just trying to get back a portion of what they paid in on their own behalf. Different deal.
In fact, the biggest issue with Medicare now is that the benefits paid out far exceed the value of taxes paid in reagrdless of the income level of the beneficiary (see, for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_%28United_States%29#Estimated_net_Medicar e_benefits_for_different_worker_categories)

Obviously, any true opponent of socialized medicine would be first in lone to refuse Medicare. As Reagan said, if you don't stop Medicare, "one of these days you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it once was like in America when men were free." Reagan was one of those who helped defeat Medicare at the beginning of the 60's only to see it adopted in 1965. Of course, after seeing how popular Medicare had become, Reagan disavowed his early opposition to it during his 1984 campaign and acted as if he had supported it all along. I guess socialism tastes better when it is popular.

road kill
03-01-2010, 10:20 AM
I would assume that anyone concerned about the growing deficit would object to continuing tax cuts that will do nothing except make the deficit even bigger. Alternatively, of course, I am sure there must be a ground swell among Republicans to insist on spending cuts that are at least as great as the long term cost of extending the cuts..:rolleyes:
Excuse me, maybe I am wrong on this.

It's not tax cuts that cause overspending.........it's over spending that causes over spending!!:D





rk

EdA
03-02-2010, 09:20 AM
Not even close! An 80 year old getting Folfox with Avastin chemo will spend more in one month than they, and 10 of their friends paid in over their entire lives! (or some equally ridiculous amount)

and what about the scores of people who were forced to pay into Medicare for 40 years but did not live long enough to reap the benefits

just because someone views an entitlement as bad policy does not
mean they should be deprived of it's benefits

precisionlabradors
03-02-2010, 09:31 AM
just because someone views an entitlement as bad policy does not
mean they should be deprived of it's benefits


i think that is the EXACT point dnf was trying to make.
________
HAWAII DISPENSARY (http://hawaii.dispensaries.org/)

dnf777
03-02-2010, 09:32 AM
and what about the scores of people who were forced to pay into Medicare for 40 years but did not live long enough to reap the benefits

just because someone views an entitlement as bad policy does not
mean they should be deprived of it's benefits

I'm not saying they should be. I'm just employing the logic used on this forum by most. And those people who didn't reap the benefits, helped pay for those who far outstripped what they put it. Its risk sharing, and the basis of the entire insurance industry. But you know that.

And many do more than "view as bad policy". They want to cut entitlements, except those which they benefit from. ;-)

road kill
03-02-2010, 09:44 AM
I'm not saying they should be. I'm just employing the logic used on this forum by most. And those people who didn't reap the benefits, helped pay for those who far outstripped what they put it. Its risk sharing, and the basis of the entire insurance industry. But you know that.

And many do more than "view as bad policy". They want to cut entitlements, except those which they benefit from. ;-)
You can not repair bankrupted entitlements and over spending by creating new entitlements and more spending!!



rk

M&K's Retrievers
03-02-2010, 10:42 AM
Not even close! An 80 year old getting Folfox with Avastin chemo will spend more in one month than they, and 10 of their friends paid in over their entire lives! (or some equally ridiculous amount)

And we all reap benefits of paying taxes, ie firemen, police, roads, schools, etc... What bothers me about taxes, is when it goes to Halliburton in astronomical amounts for substandard service, and to put million dollar 'gratuities' in the hands of politicians with relevant legislation before them. Duke Cunningham, and a fair share of democrats also, to be sure, as examples.

That breeze you felt in your face was from my point going over your head. Forced retirement protection. Funds paid in to SS by individuals and their employers are for that only and hopefully should be protected by the law of large numbers. Contributions are the same for all but of course the returns are not. Income tax on the other hand can go to crap as you pointed out.