2004 Politics Thread: Are you going to VOTE??

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 7/30/2004 6:52:47 PM Icicles wrote:

I actually know of quite a few ways since my uncle worked for the IRS, and it's not always related to properties. !!----------------

Operative word here is *worked*. And, if you know of any still "legal" please enlighten me.

Big difference between being agressive & taking advantage of Loopholes. Some things are very *marginal* in their legality. I choose to not participate in those.

I still maintain that the wealthy *do indeed* pay a disproportionate amount of tax. Our accountant sees alot of returns. I tend to believe the people in the field.

 

[Rank Amateur]

I escaped Federal Tax the old fashioned way. 4 kids, lots of other taxes, and generous charatible contributions. We just did avoid the ghastly AMT.

 

[Rank Amateur]

----------------
On 7/24/2004 11:01:27 AM AGBF wrote:

I think George W. Bush is a puppet who is not intelligent enough to do anything unless he is instructed to do so by his advisors, principally Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld. Karl Rove knows Bush's constituency and what it wants and he tries to advise 'W' to take actions most likely to make that constituency happy without offending any other segments of his constituency.

I have not yet seen 'Fahrenheit 9/11' and the infamous seven minutes after 'W' learns of the attack on the World Trade Center, yet sits there posing for photos with school children to whom he is pretending to read a book. I believed, until I heard about that episode, that 'W' really wanted to wage a war on terrorism. His affect, when he delivered his speech to Congress after the attacks, convinced me that he felt he had found a cause.

Of course, now we know what he did with that cause. We know (courtesy of the 9/11 Commission) that first, he didn't pay attention to intelligence about the attacks before they took place. We know that he is very friendly with many wealthy Saudi Arabians and that he helped the family of Osama bin Laden to leave the US (although NOT when all other air flights were grounded as was originally charged). We know that he not only attacked Afghanistan, which housed the Taliban (put into power by the US when it was fighting the Soviet Union), but also IRAQ. Why he attacked Iraq, one of only TWO secular Arab countries in a sea of Islamic fundamentalism, is something at which we can only guess. We DO know that Dick Cheney's company, Halliburton, got some lucrative contracts there to rebuild Iraq...even before it was destroyed and without competitive bidding.

I could go on and on, but if one reads the papers one need not read about all this here on a diamond forum. I am disappointed that the level of discourse here is so uninformed, however. The people who read Pricescope are generally intelligent and well-read. If no one here is well-informed about Mr. Bush's record, I have little hope that the rest of the country is.

I always vote, as many of you do. However, like some of you, I do wonder what the use of voting is, if one remains totally uninformed.

Deborah----------------

I suppose that this is the post I was ducking, right? The one where you *think* GWB is a puppet. Of course if you are sympathetic you believe that is it SMART to surround oneself with strong and experienced people and to draw from their influence. If you are NOT sympathetic, and I'm going way out on a limb in saying that AGBF is not sympathetic to this prez., you call the man a "puppet". A rather cynical slithering and slandering accusation, yet you look down your nose on the "uninformed". Of course you also think the NYT is without bias.

As for your point about the seven minutes at the grade school...what is it again? What about his conduct was inappropriate?

Now you say he missed the signs, as everyone did. Seven months with the Clinton FBI working under him and it's his fault? But you don't really say that it's his fault, do you? More slithering. Saudi Oil? Big business profits during reconstruction? We helped the Taliban 20 years ago? Iraq was secular? I'm reading a lot of blither but I don't see any real points emerging. Sort of wink and nudge arguments. Haliburton (Cheney's FORMER company by the way)? Insinuation. Innuendo.

Spit it out. Was is your point? Is bush corrupt? Too quick to act? To slow to act? Too much conviction? Too influenced by the blowing winds? Not enough soul? Not enough pandering to friends in Hollywood?

What is it?

Besides sour grapes.

 

[AGBF]

----------------
On 7/31/2004 11:28:26 PM Rank Amateur wrote:

----------------


"I suppose that this is the post I was ducking, right? The one where you *think* GWB is a puppet. Of course if you are sympathetic you believe that is it SMART to surround oneself with strong and experienced people and to draw from their influence. If you are NOT sympathetic, and I'm going way out on a limb in saying that AGBF is not sympathetic to this prez., you call the man a 'puppet'. A rather cynical slithering and slandering accusation, yet you look down your nose on the 'uninformed'. Of course you also think the NYT is without bias.

As for your point about the seven minutes at the grade school...what is it again? What about his conduct was inappropriate?

Now you say he missed the signs, as everyone did. Seven months with the Clinton FBI working under him and it's his fault? But you don't really say that it's his fault, do you? More slithering. Saudi Oil? Big business profits during reconstruction? We helped the Taliban 20 years ago? Iraq was secular? I'm reading a lot of blither but I don't see any real points emerging. Sort of wink and nudge arguments. Haliburton (Cheney's FORMER company by the way)? Insinuation. Innuendo.

Spit it out. Was is your point? Is bush corrupt? Too quick to act? To slow to act? Too much conviction? Too influenced by the blowing winds? Not enough soul? Not enough pandering to friends in Hollywood?

What is it?

Besides sour grapes."
----------------

What, exactly, have I not said...and clearly? You want it clearer? Fine.

George W. Bush is stupid and immature, neither of which is a good quality in a president. He also has a right wing political base which is stupid and controlling, trying to force its personal views down the throats of others.

Morons *SHOULD* have advisers, as you point out, but when they pick evil ones as Bush does, they become evil presidents, as Bush is.

Have I said what I think yet?

Deb

 

[AGBF]

PS-"The New York Times" is a damn fine paper! In MY opinion, though, it doesn't come CLOSE to being liberal!

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 8/1/2004 6:59:52 PM AGBF wrote:

PS-'The New York Times' is a damn fine paper! In MY opinion, though, it doesn't come CLOSE to being liberal! ----------------

R/A I believe a housewarming gift of the National Review or the Washington Times is in order for AGBF!

Afta all, I'm jus tryin to be hospitable.

Really though, Michael Grahmn bordered on National Treasuer here in the Commonwealth before he left for big time in talk radio in DC. Funny, he was actually on the Today show as one of the pundints. I don't know too much about what he does up there; but, he was nail on here. Not politically correct - but followed the letter of the constitution. I was infuriated at first - but the guy made sense after a while...

 

[Rank Amateur]

OK AGBF. Your feelings are clear. Of course these are feelings, not exactly iron clad arguments which I have "ducked".

I find it humorous how the same people who whine about how they feel Bush has "divided" or "polarized" the country end up doing the nastiest of name calling.

Fortunately for the Dems, name calling works. That is, it will get them votes from those whom they are courting. Name calling and pandering to the base. "Unite behind me instead of being divided behind those who oppose me and I will give you a middle class tax cut, free health care, and balance the budget. Ice cream bars for everybody!"

 

[Rank Amateur]

----------------
On 8/1/2004 7:45:45 PM fire&ice wrote:

----------------
On 8/1/2004 6:59:52 PM AGBF wrote:

PS-'The New York Times' is a damn fine paper! In MY opinion, though, it doesn't come CLOSE to being liberal! ----------------

R/A I believe a housewarming gift of the National Review or the Washington Times is in order for AGBF!

----------------

Good idea, but it would probably go the same way of Newsweek at my house. (La poubelle!)

I like how Newsweek has a big smiling picture of John and John on the cover along with a teaser of why the Republicans want to get rid of Cheney.

Quite balanced. Damn fine magazine!

 

[AGBF]

----------------
On 8/1/2004 7:47:52 PM Rank Amateur wrote:


"I find it humorous how the same people who whine about how they feel Bush has 'divided' or 'polarized' the country end up doing the nastiest of name calling."




I have never in my life whined, although I have frequently shouted and made sarcastic comments. Did you think I cared if the country were polarized? Why would you think so? I thank God that some people have gained the sense to break away from the right wing morons who have run this country for over 20 years (Clinton with his welfare cuts being high on the list of morons). I wish the country got so polarized that the right wing was forced out of power!

I thought you knew me after all these years, R/A!!!

 

[Rank Amateur]

I known for a long time that you are a liberal weenie!

I guess that makes me the right-wing nutjob.

 

[AGBF]

----------------
I guess that makes me the right-wing nutjob.

----------------

Most definitely, but one who makes very beautiful babies .

Deb

 

[AGBF]

"The Washington Times". Now here's a link!

http://www.realjournalism.net/times.htm

 

[Icicles]

----------------
On 7/31/2004 9:23:39 AM fire&ice wrote:

----------------
On 7/30/2004 6:52:47 PM Icicles wrote:

I actually know of quite a few ways since my uncle worked for the IRS, and it's not always related to properties. !!----------------

Operative word here is *worked*. And, if you know of any still 'legal' please enlighten me.
----------------

Of course it's "worked"... he has since retired.

Trust me, there's always a way.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 8/1/2004 8:17:14 PM Rank Amateur wrote:

I known for a long time that you are a liberal weenie!

I guess that makes me the right-wing nutjob.

----------------

Now who's doing the name calling?

Unlucky is an observation not name calling.

Of course Rush seems to think that all moderates are closet liberals. And here I always thought I was a closet conservative.

AGBF - you will get a different geschault (sp?) all together near our Capital City, especially with Republicans in office.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 8/1/2004 10:48:17 PM Icicles wrote:

----------------
On 7/31/2004 9:23:39 AM fire&ice wrote:

----------------
On 7/30/2004 6:52:47 PM Icicles wrote:

I actually know of quite a few ways since my uncle worked for the IRS, and it's not always related to properties. !!----------------

Operative word here is *worked*. And, if you know of any still 'legal' please enlighten me.
----------------

Of course it's 'worked'... he has since retired.

Trust me, there's always a way.
----------------

You made a claim. One in which I take insult to. Describe the many loopholes you say exist.

I still maintain that top wage earner pay the lions share of this country taxes.

 

[Icicles]

I never said that high wage earners didn't pay the bulk of the taxes. I said that the very rich-- top 1%/those who are making millions/year-- are the ones who are getting away with highway tax robbery. And if you'd go back and read my posts on page 2, you can see I specified that I don't consider families who make under $150K/yr upper-class. I consider them average middle class, and therefore do pay the bulk of the taxes. (which is also stated previously.)

I know you probably pay a ton of taxes. So do I. Sucks being middle class. Point is, the top 1% are getting away with a lot, and we're the ones suffering. What's so insulting about that?

And I'd be crazy to describe the loopholes here. Do you really want more people to take advantage of it? This is a public forum, you know.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 8/2/2004 11:51:20 AM Icicles wrote:

I never said that high wage earners didn't pay the bulk of the taxes. I said that the very rich-- top 1%/those who are making millions/year-- are the ones who are getting away with highway tax robbery. -------------

Clearly, I am not going to debunk the myth that the wealthy don't pay their share of taxes.

Fact - top 1% (which includes those making well under 500K) pay over 30% of *all* income tax collected. So, clearly the government is getting the lions share from this top 1%.

Fact - the more you make the more disproportionate a share one pays. I forget what it is this year; but, the top Fed tax paid is about 35% - of all money earned over a 310K is taxed. And, it's 33% rate for all monies earned over 175K. That's 1/3 of all money gone to the government when one makes over 175K. Not to mention the capping of personal exemptions as well as limitations on personal deductions which end up driving your AGI.

Enough all ready. Facts are facts. And, I can not imagine why this myth perpetuates. This also applies to the top 1% of the top 1%. Sure, the weathly can take advantage of more tax shelters by the very nature they have the money to spend on those shelters. But, they are still paying taxes. And, most of those shelters *help* the economy in general. For example, a private museum which, preserves antiquities, employee many staff members plus putting money into the stream.

The numbers don't lie. These "mysterious" loopholes simply do not exist in today's IRS.

 

[Icicles]

I know people who are getting away with this, and my uncle has personally audited many others. He only retired last year, so I'm pretty sure the same people are still getting away with these loopholes.

You are probably a very honest person with very high integrity, which is why you don't believe that these things happen. However, there are many who don't hold the same values, and they are the ones who are costing us a lot of money. You can quote facts till you're blue in the face, but I have witnessed it first hand on more than one occasion. And if I have witnessed it, it's not a myth to me. Sorry.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 8/2/2004 1:22:22 PM Icicles wrote:

You can quote facts till you're blue in the face---------------

Silly me. Imagine that - relying on facts.

AGBF - It may be different in the "burbs" but when ever we attend a function of a friend that lives in the City proper - it's not unusual to have a few political animals connected to the Admin. My point - only to be a fly on the wall if you are in attendence w/ said people. And, you will have to pay State Income Tax. I think the current rate is 5.75%. Our state Sales tax is raising to 5% in September. But, the kicker is the "Personal Property Tax" (which has been reduced). Most people only pay on their automobiles - so, think twice before filling out the form for your personal property

. Though, boats need to be listed (anything that requires a license). Also, you have the "Right to Hunt" in VA - written in our Constitution a few years back. I always ask "Where is my Right to Shop?"

 

[Icicles]

You're really quite innocent, aren't you? These "facts" that you quote are merely guidelines that people are supposed to go by. There are always exceptions to the rules, and there's always a way to go around it. Or maybe people in L.A. are just more evil than others...

(no offense to the honest people here, of course)

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 8/3/2004 12:40:51 PM Icicles wrote:

You're really quite innocent, aren't you? These 'facts' that you quote are merely guidelines that people are supposed to go by. There are always exceptions to the rules, and there's always a way to go around it. Or maybe people in L.A. are just more evil than others...

(no offense to the honest people here, of course)----------------

Guidelines? That's laughable because these are facts as a matter of public record audited by many people. It's called statistics. Fact - The top 1% of income earners are defined as making well under 500K. Fact - those top 1% pays 30% of the total income tax collected in the USA. What do you not understand about that?

Innocent - nope just informed. I'm done with this conversation.

 

[Icicles]

Since you're so informed, you should know that practically *everything* constitutes as an expense if you own a business. That means pre-tax. Suppose I make a million a year, and i write off 20% of it as expenses. I have just saved a bunch of money on taxes!!

The top 1% may pay 30% of income taxes collected, but you are forgetting that they also own 95% of the wealth. If 95% of the wealth only accounts for 30% of the taxes, who's picking up the rest?

Honestly, I don't think we are taxed all that much. It could be worse, gas prices could go higher(thank goodness it's down for now), and real estate can get more ridiculous.

Who would have thought that one day half a mil would barely buy you a condo?!? oh well.

 

[questionsRus]

I don't know about anyone else that's reading this thread, but I would like to see sources for all of your facts. Especially Icicles, because his tone is crappy "since you're so informed, blah blah blah". Did you ever think that the only people that get audited and caught getting out of taxes are the ones that make loads of money - the ones that will actually get the govt. money if they are indeed caught? Just because they don't pay as much as perhaps they should, doesn't mean the same thing isn't happening in the lower classes. And really, where did the fact that the top 1% of incomes account for 95% of wealth come from?

 

[Icicles]

I'm actually a she.

I obtained that info from Sociology classes I had to take back in college a couple years ago. I didn't want to believe it at first, but my professors did have several reputable sources, and it did confirm what my uncle has been griping about for years. Then I met people whose parents actually fell into that category. I love my friends, but you have no idea how much i despise their parents. I don't have access to the documents now, but if you like I can message you my professors' contact information, and you can call them yourself.

And no, i don't believe that the top 1% are the only ones who are getting away with taxes, but I do know that it's easier to do so if you have more resources. You have more options. You also get away with a lot more.

I didn't mean to come across as snooty, but Fire&Ice was adamant about how this stuff never happens, and it's frustrating to me because I know it happens a lot.

I feel rather strongly about these things, but I am pretty fair. I dislike all types of *legal* fraud. Don't even get me started on welfare...

 

[Icicles]

I have to apologize. Apparently I've made a mistake in quoting the wealth distribution of the U.S. (once you pass 25 your memory tends to fail

) "1% owning 95% of the wealth" is the statistics for the World, not the U.S. In the States, the top 1% own about 50% of the nation's wealth. Significatly less, but significant nonetheless.

The bottom 90% own less than 30%, and the bottom-most 20% own nothing. This information is readily available online if you search for wealth distribution.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 8/4/2004 8:36:44 PM questionsRus wrote:

I don't know about anyone else that's reading this thread, but I would like to see sources for all of your facts.

QuestionsRus, my facts about what the IRS constitutes as the top 1% & that the top 1% pays 30% of all income tax collected are a matter of IRS public record. The statitical data should be available on-line w/ several audit reviews by various people, etc.

And, you are also correct in the assumption that the "wealthy" aren't the only ones guilty of tax evasion. I had a friend who made about 50K a year and never even filed a 1040 for years. The IRS never caught up w/ him until his death. And, there exists a big distinction between managing your money wisey to limit your tax liablity & tax evasion.

Icicles, please don't lecture me anymore about your infinite tax wisdom. I am fully aware of what I can deduct & what I can not deduct for my own business as I file a Schedule C. If you owned your own business, you would understand *why* these things are deductible. Perfectly legitimate business expenses even though they may appear personal.

 

[Hest88]

Some of you know that I try not to get involved on political threads on my gem boards. So, just two quickies because I'm bored at work.

1) Yes I'm going to vote.

2) Check out back issues of Pat Buchanan's "The American Conservative," which this past year has had some of the most cogent critiques of the current administration.

 

[AGBF]

----------------
On 8/3/2004 11:17:45 AM fire&ice wrote:

----------------

"Also, you have the 'Right to Hunt' in VA - written in our Constitution a few years back."

----------------

Yes, well I read that somewhere in Fairfax County (Reston? Vienna?) young professional people have started to wear unconcealed weapons (which is legal there). They seem to be ready for a "High Noon" shootout that might come at anytime...in a Starbucks (where the pistol-packing caused a stir) or maybe in Neiman Marcus .

 

[Icicles]

Fire&Ice-- I have a genuine question for you since I do not own a business. For one of my high school friends, their parents were able to claim Mercedes for all 3 of their under-age kids as expenses. These kids never even worked at the store, so to me, it appears to be completely personal. They also claim numerous things that they use in their house as business expenses. I understand this is all legitimate as well?

Again, this is not meant to offend you in any way. I am starting to think that i just know bad people.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 8/5/2004 11:46:22 PM AGBF wrote:

----------------
On 8/3/2004 11:17:45 AM fire&ice wrote:

----------------

'Also, you have the 'Right to Hunt' in VA - written in our Constitution a few years back.'

----------------

Yes, well I read that somewhere in Fairfax County (Reston? Vienna?) young professional people have started to wear unconcealed weapons (which is legal there). They seem to be ready for a 'High Noon' shootout that might come at anytime...in a Starbucks (where the pistol-packing caused a stir) or maybe in Neiman Marcus .

----------------

Don't know; but one must be prepared in case Starbucks runs out of latte's.

Seriously though, it could be a reaction to the sniper thing. Also, things can be pretty tense w/ these terror alerts.