Your tax dollars at work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flackt

I knew I should never have gotten into this discussion, I have other boards, to discuss politics. I come here to get away from it.

Theres seems to be no turning back now.

I know about sales tax, and other use taxes.

I also know there is very little a president can do about the economy. He can only propose to raise or lower taxes. Maybe you can explain how exactly raising taxes helps the economy? What else can he do? Besides proposing more government give away programs.

The economy went south because of Clinton's tax increases, which took a little longer to take effect, because of the Web Craze in the stock market. Then the Web bubble burst, then someone came along and crashed some airplanes, and killed a bunch of people. It sure wasn't tax cuts.

I believe strongly that it is in recovery now, and there is allot of evidence to support that.

You keep trying to convince everyone that you are some kind of political neutral on this thread, but I think different.

As for me I claim no neutrality! I am a Conservative Republican, that refuses to buy into the Liberal Class Envy Trap.

---

NOTICE how few answered the question:
Do you approve of this..etc,etc. that is post is about.
I think that shows who really cares about what.
Once again for the reading impaired. I asked if this is ok for both Democrats and Republicans. Are people so at war with each other in this country that they refuse to acknowledge any wrong if it is done on behalf of their candidate or ideology?
I have never seen this country so partisan or divided.



As to the economy fortunately most people disagree with you as a new Newsweek poll indicates 55 percent disapprove of the presidents handling of the economy.
btw class warfare is a really good topic. I know that I believe the wealthiest in this country have gotten wealthier at the expense of the working class the last 3 years. The "world economy" is on its way to reducing wages to the lowest denominator. Capitalism would say that the work goes to those who will do it the most cheaply. So therefore it stands to reason if you look at the US workforce maybe 30 percent can be done overseas more cheaply? I am just guessing. We may reach a point in the next five years when this country is reduced to economic basket case.

Patriots Unite! Take back our country from the Corporations.
I guess I feel a little rabble rousery today.

And btw it would probably be a good idea if the wealthy and the corporations realize the anger and resentment they are causing.

The winners are at war with the losers and the fix is in. The prospects for peace are terrible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by techs

NOTICE how few answered the question:
Do you approve of this..etc,etc. that is post is about.
I think that shows who really cares about what.
Once again for the reading impaired. I asked if this is ok for both Democrats and Republicans. Are people so at war with each other in this country that they refuse to acknowledge any wrong if it is done on behalf of their candidate or ideology?
I have never seen this country so partisan or divided.



As to the economy fortunately most people disagree with you as a new Newsweek poll indicates 55 percent disapprove of the presidents handling of the economy.
btw class warfare is a really good topic. I know that I believe the wealthiest in this country have gotten wealthier at the expense of the working class the last 3 years. The "world economy" is on its way to reducing wages to the lowest denominator. Capitalism would say that the work goes to those who will do it the most cheaply. So therefore it stands to reason if you look at the US workforce maybe 30 percent can be done overseas more cheaply? I am just guessing. We may reach a point in the next five years when this country is reduced to economic basket case.

Patriots Unite! Take back our country from the Corporations.
I guess I feel a little rabble rousery today.

And btw it would probably be a good idea if the wealthy and the corporations realize the anger and resentment they are causing.

The winners are at war with the losers and the fix is in. The prospects for peace are terrible.

---

I did not answer your question on the IRS Statement, because I hold your motive for asking it suspect.

This may come as a surprise to you, but Large Corporations do not exist so people can have good jobs. They exist to make money.

Economics is not an overnight have it your way thing. It can take months, and even years for things to affect it.

For instance the Blazing economy presided over By Bill Clinton, I am convinced was the result of Reagan Tax policies. I am also convinced that Clinton Tax policy had a big part in The recent Recession that is now over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flackt

I knew I should never have gotten into this discussion, I have other boards, to discuss politics. I come here to get away from it.

Theres seems to be no turning back now.

---

There is one very simple way of avoiding the political threads flackt. You simply add Techs to you ignore list. https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2007/09/1.gif

oh btw

Quote:

---

Can anyone tell me where to find a Socket A board, with an ISA slot, USB 2.0, and DDR ?

---

I think I can help you out here https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2006/04/1.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NooNoo

There is one very simple way of avoiding the political threads flackt. You simply add Techs to you ignore list. https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2007/09/1.gif

oh btw
I think I can help you out here https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2006/04/1.gif

---

No he's kind of fun.

I wrote that into my signature as a joke, do you really have one.

I updated my signature.

I did not answer your question on the IRS Statement, because I hold your motive for asking it suspect.

This may come as a surprise to you, but Large Corporations do not exist so people can have good jobs. They exist to make money.

Yes, that proves my point. We are so divided we cannot agree on the things that Conservative Republicans have consistently supported.

Yes, large corporations exist to make money (so do small ones) which is why THEIR GOALS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THE GOALS OF AMERICAN CITIZENS. Giving them carte blanche is a recipe for disaster.

Quote:

---

Can anyone tell me where to find a Socket A board, with an ISA slot, USB 2.0, and DDR ?



I think I can help you out here

---

I looked too. I couldn't find any. I figured there were none.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by techs

I did not answer your question on the IRS Statement, because I hold your motive for asking it suspect.

This may come as a surprise to you, but Large Corporations do not exist so people can have good jobs. They exist to make money.

Yes, that proves my point. We are so divided we cannot agree on the things that Conservative Republicans have consistently supported.

Yes, large corporations exist to make money (so do small ones) which is why THEIR GOALS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THE GOALS OF AMERICAN CITIZENS. Giving them carte blanche is a recipe for disaster.


I looked too. I couldn't find any. I figured there were none.

---

THEIR GOALS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THE GOALS OF AMERICAN CITIZENS.



Speak for yourself, Corporations making lots of money is good for the economy. https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2005/03/1.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flackt

Economics is not an overnight have it your way thing. It can take months, and even years for things to affect it.

For instance the Blazing economy presided over By Bill Clinton, I am convinced was the result of Reagan Tax policies. I am also convinced that Clinton Tax policy had a big part in The recent Recession that is now over.

---

Rather convenient outlook you have there.

the blazing economy was the result of tax policies from the Regan era which *ended* 4 years prior.

yet when the economy is in the crapper it's partly because "someone came along and crashed some airplanes, and killed a bunch of people" which would seem to imply an immediate effect.

then you say that "I also know there is very little a president can do about the economy." yet celebrate Regan for the blazing economy of the 90's and damn Clinton for Taxing us all into recession.

Quote:

---

For instance the Blazing economy presided over By Bill Clinton, I am convinced was the result of Reagan Tax policies. I am also convinced that Clinton Tax policy had a big part in The recent Recession that is now over

---

I'll grant you that dubbya was handed a crappy economy, and we seem to be starting a recovery, but you just seem to contradict yourself. Maybe I'm reading something wrong or something is a lost in translation sorta thing, but I'm confused.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NooNoo

There is one very simple way of avoiding the political threads flackt. You simply add Techs to you ignore list. https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2007/09/1.gif

oh btw
I think I can help you out here https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2006/04/1.gif

---

Done and done. :D

Craig, do you see the difference between long term economic policy vs a terrorist attack? Do you not understand the different effects those two causes would produce?

A more intelligent approach would consider long term economic effects and how they affect the average Americans TAXES.

Consider this. All the recent hype is about how Bush Jr. has lowered taxes and how it has positively effected the economy. Liberal television puts a fair amount of spin on this situation at this time in order to throw a negative light on Bush but, anyone with any financial holdings or intimate interest in the economy can see through the partison rhetoric. BUT, dig even a little deeper and the real truth that you'll discover is that state and local taxes have gone up enough to compensate for any federal tax cut.

So, what you have is an economic curve ball. The dumbest people see it as an inside pitch because that's what the announcer is telling you that it is. Smarter peopler see it as a curve ball because they use their own eyes to see it. Then there's another set of people who are drinking a beer and smoking a cigar in section 23 isle 9 because they know that this game is already over.

I'd like to thank you all for your conscionable banter but Elvis has left the building.

Why don't we just outlaw corporations. Then instead of expensive medicine and goods, we just won't have any and therefore nothing to complain about. It's just so simple! :D

I don't know that I agree with the note or not. Here is a thought though. Hasn't the IRS been biased and making somewhat of a political statement in support of the current administration for quite some time? For all the U.S tax payers here, remember the line that asks if you want to contribute part of your refund to the Presidents re-election fund? May be its just the state taxes I am thinking of now...not sure. Either way, isn't that somewhat biased against the party not in office. In fairness, wouldn't they give that option to other major party as well. Then you get in to minor parties...so why not have that line removed. Isn't that technically using a government agency to help a political candidate or his party rather?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sandman72

I don't know that I agree with the note or not. Here is a thought though. Hasn't the IRS been biased and making somewhat of a political statement in support of the current administration for quite some time? For all the U.S tax payers here, remember the line that asks if you want to contribute part of your refund to the Presidents re-election fund? May be its just the state taxes I am thinking of now...not sure. Either way, isn't that somewhat biased against the party not in office. In fairness, wouldn't they give that option to other major party as well. Then you get in to minor parties...so why not have that line removed. Isn't that technically using a government agency to help a political candidate or his party rather?

---

The checkoff for the Presidential election goes to all parties who qualify, I think you had to have 5 percent of the vote in the previous election to qualify. It is non partisan. At the time it was enacted it was thought that this would somewhat eliminate the power of the corporations, the rich and labor unions from controlling politicians thru their need for donations.

As to corporations not having the same goals per se as the American people just ask yourself this:
If xyz corp saw a way to produce its product with 1 employee at a cost of 1.00 versus using 10,000 employees and producing the goods at 1.01 then they would fire 9,999 people.
If a corporation faces 1 million in fines for not stopping their pollution but a cost of 1 million and one dollar to fix the pollution than they will pay the fine. The pollution will then kill 10,000 people.
Now while there is public relations, political concerns you can see how the corporations goals are not necessarily in the public interest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gollo

Shouldn't the government agency support the head of said government?

---

As is so in the military, you don't have to support the man, but, you do have to support the office. When biased political partisanship becomes involved it demeans the office of the president to the American people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NooNoo

Techs you country allows TV advertising that goes something like this

Company B is rubbish, they don't do a good job, their product is unreliable.

We at Company A are much better at it, so you can dump your company B stuff and buy from us instead.

Are you really surprised that when that kind of advertising is allowed - and I use it in the broadest sense here, not just commercial companies marketing campaigns - that your political system of campaigning reflects that?

---

The government may be run by any one political party, however, the government as a whole is apolitical and beholding to the the office not to the political party. To push the "political" mantra of any one party is not ethical. Even by Washingtons' standards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jitBob

The government may be run by any one political party, however, the government as a whole is apolitical and beholding to the the office not to the political party. To push the "political" mantra of any one party is not ethical. Even by Washingtons' standards.

---

This is an interesting conundrum..the separation of powers is held to be of primary importance in the constitution in order to avoid the tyranny of one person or political entity gaining control over the entire government..but..and this is what makes it interesting to me..the IRS is part of the executive branch, as is the President. I wonder if there are current regulations or constitutional decisions which make it improper for any of the executive branch members to function in a political manner? Ethically, i would say that it is very obvious..but then I would have said that it was obvious that the primary supplier of electronic voting machines shouldn't be a company whose head has said his aim is to re-elect GWB in a'any way possible' either..and yet that happened as well.

Hell, the Constitution hasn't mattered to anyone in career politics in a LOOONG time. Look how the Fed undermines the intent of the 10 Amendment, and delegates power to itself thru legislation....and the recent decision by the 5th (I think) Circuit regarding the basic anullment of rights under the 4th.

And don't get me started on the 16th, it still looks to me that it wasn't ratified properly, but yet lo and behold, we have an "income tax" supported by the US Tax Code and IRS in which neither can firmly state that, BY LAW, an individual citizen has to pay Federal Income Tax.

All you get from the IRS is the usual "pay your fair share" BS, but they absolutely refuse to say which part of the tax code applies, saying it's a frivolus arguement. Why can't they just answer the question?