Enough Chirping

Categories:

I hate birds when they chirp. It’s the government’s fault.

I am sitting by an open door, with a nice spring breeze, the sun shining, the birds chirping. But I cannot enjoy this beautiful day.

I am surrounded by a sea of receipts, you see — receipts of every kind. I keep every receipt for every transaction that I make all year long because my government says I must.

irs taxes tax code
Cartoon by David Fitzsimmons – The Arizona Star (click to purchase)

I have spent the last few days organizing the massive pile of paper. I must organize each receipt into its appropriate folder and then tally those receipts with great precision — not easy for an English major — into numbers that my CPA can then transform into a long return, which we send to the government along with a big fat check.

My CPA has the more difficult job. He must keep up with the massive tax code so he can determine what I can and cannot deduct and how I must go about it. Considering the tax code is some 70,000 pages long, I have no idea how he does this. I suspect alcohol is involved.

I’m running way behind this year. And so, as the weather has broken and the birds have begun singing, I sit here in the middle of a sea of paper, overcome by powerlessness and wondering what the heck has happened to America.

America is supposed to be the land of the free, after all. It’s supposed to be a dynamic, bureaucracy-free place where any fellow can easily start his own business — any fellow can chase his own dream, unburdened by regulations and an incredibly burdensome tax code.

Yet, as our tax code grows ever more complex, a new narrative is forming: that our country is so in debt and our spending so egregious that the only way to keep things afloat is lots more taxes.

It’s maddening for a fellow drowning in a sea of paper to contemplate this when, as we move toward European-style, economic-growth-killing policies, former communist countries have moved in the opposite direction.

Come check out our collection of Tax Form cartoons!
Come check out our collection of Tax Form cartoons!

Russia, Slovakia, Poland, Estonia and Serbia all have ditched their “progressive” income-tax systems for a much lower flat tax — one that makes compliance simple as it spurs economic growth.

Slovakia, says BusinessWeek, “swept away 21 categories of personal income taxes, five tax brackets, and scores of exemptions and deductions, replacing them with a flat 19 percent rate.”

That action led Hyundai Corp. to locate a Kia plant there. How about that: Low taxes result in investment and growth. Only the former communist nations understand that concept now.

Sure, here in America, the FairTax people have the right idea. They want to repeal our incredibly complex income tax (the 16th Amendment) and replace it with a simple, progressive national sales tax.

It makes so much sense it will never be embraced by the birds running our country now.

Sure, they love the idea of a national sales tax — a national value-added tax is suddenly being bandied about — but only if they can keep, and raise, our income taxes, too.

It’s more than a fellow surrounded by a sea of receipts can bear.

And so, as our country embarks on an insane course — more spending, more regulations, more bureaucracy, higher taxes, more complexity — I am filled with dread.

I have come to loathe the spring breeze, the blooming flowers and, most of all, the annoying chirping birds.

—–

©2010 Tom Purcell. Tom Purcell, a humor columnist for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, is nationally syndicated exclusively by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate. For more info contact Cari Dawson Bartley at 800 696 7561 or email [email protected]. Visit Tom on the web at www.TomPurcell.com or e-mail him at [email protected].


Comments

46 responses to “Enough Chirping”

  1. Syncopation Avatar
    Syncopation

    I dunno about chirping, but when I think of Tom Purcell and the republicans, a lame duck comes to mind.

  2. Carl JD Avatar
    Carl JD

    I dunno about braying, but when I read stuff by Sycophant, a dumb ass comes to mind.

    The donkey can't help it, I guess neither can Sycophant.

  3. Glen Avatar
    Glen

    Our complicated tax system exists for one reason…to give a break to the special interests (which includes the wealthy). Nobody making a LOT of money pays their fair share. There is almost no such thing in the United States as a 'progressive tax system' to begin with. Around half of all American corporations pay no taxes at all. Back in the day when Nelson Rockefeller was running for President of the United States, I paid more taxes that he did. I was making maybe $7,000 a year and he was flying about in a private plane.

    The complicated regulations that Tom Purcell is moaning about were largely put in the tax code by Republicans to help themselves out. He must have been standing behind the door when the goodies were doled out. Poor Tom.

  4. Rugly Avatar
    Rugly

    For Mr. Purcell, the solution is obvious. Move to Slovakia.

  5. cate Avatar
    cate

    If we didn't have your WMD-inspired fake Iraq war to pay for, we'd be in much better financial shape. Your misdirection to blame the tax code on deomocrats does not work.

    You're just miffed no one shared the inside information with you on when to buy the GOP-pumped Halliburton stock.

  6. Diogenes-in-OR Avatar
    Diogenes-in-OR

    Purcell is right about one thing – our tax code is far too complex. Glen is also correct in that much of that (needless) complexity arises from pandering to special interests. And while the tax code is replete with loopholes that benefit specific interests, with the most egregious examples designed for one particular company or individual, we are all members of special interest groups, and we all benefit from tax loopholes of one sort or another.

    The question is which loopholes benefit society as a whole, and which just make the rich and/or powerful more so. Regardless of what any fan of the various flat tax proposals says, flat taxes are by their very nature regressive, unless they are tweaked significantly with exemptions and – yes – loopholes … hello complexity, which will grow and grow and grow as more and more special interests lobby for their day in the loophole limelight.

    As for Slovakia nailing the Hyundai bid, while Business Week may trumpet the 'simplification' of the personal income tax code as key, I fail to see the causality of the relationship. Although a 19% flat tax would probably allow senior management and other high wage earners to pay less in personal taxes, as far as the business is concerned other factors would likely weigh much more heavily. Such things as corporate taxes on property and/or profits, and tax breaks reducing or eliminating same, environmental regulations and how stringently they are enforced, and the cost of labor would have been much more important factors in the final decision to site the plant in Slovakia. It is disingenuous and intellectually dishonest to claim otherwise.

  7. Phil Avatar
    Phil

    Cate,

    Why dont you read the below links and make the decision for yourself?

    http://securitydilemmas.blogspot.com/2007/01/anal

    http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/

    Remember such things happen when you are trying to keep the country safe.

    Just because the intelligence failed once does not mean that you run around blaming their intentions.

    The intentions were clear and noble, To protect ourselves from future attacks.

    So what was wrong there?

    When you are biased people gonna grow up?

  8. ellis Avatar
    ellis

    only the wealthy would like a sales tax or a value-added tax. it is always the poor that suffer from this kind of unfair tax. when you have little and you have to pay what the wealthy pay just to provide your basic needs, then you have a lot less for anything else. the wealthy never care becauser the extra cost means little to them. tom purcell is one of the wealthy, with a newspaper outlet, so he does not give a damn.

    one thing is certain, the right always has been able to coinvince their foillowers to vote against their own self-interest, and the leading lighs are in full cry again running to the next election. it is so sad to watch.

  9. Jim Avatar
    Jim

    In 2007 the top 1% of income earners paid 40.42% of income taxes, the bottom 50% paid 2.89%. And I suspect the 2.89% was probably paid by less than 10% of that 50%.

    Now I'm not going to say that one group should pay less or more, but I am tired of all the carping about the wealthy not paying their share of income taxes.

  10. Elliott D. Avatar
    Elliott D.

    Tom, your anger is misplaced. The IRS only administers the tax laws written by Congress, often at the behest of special interest lobbyists. Other tax laws are actually written with the good intentions of helping low and middle income families. The results is the crazy tax forms that your obsessing over. As usual, the anger is directed toward the messenger and not the perpetrators.

    The "flat taxes" are not necessarily easier for businesses or revenue agencies to administer.

  11. click1947 Avatar
    click1947

    Hey, Tom P, the government does not say you must keep all those receipts–only if you're taking advantage of all those juicy deductions the well-heeled get to take.

    Now a couple of things, Tom, listen up. If you'd had a system and kept to it throughout the year, you'd not have spent all that time chirping up your stress levels and your blood pressure. The same goes to all the idiots who wait until April 10 to get their records in order and who wait until 11:59PM to line up at the post-office to mail their returns. To Tom and to all of you who sit and bitch and moan and wait around, get a grip! Get it done and shut up about it.

    And, Tom, you chirp on about the lad of the free without regulations: Gee, isn't DEregulation what hammered this country into the economic poop pile where we now find ourselves? Without regulations, Tom, I'm afraid we'd be living in an honest-to-goodness-literal poop pile (like in New Jersey).

    The problems we all face has to do with W's pandering to those pals of his in the oil bidness–and the health insurance bidness, and the finance bidness–while the rest of us got to pay for their excesses Now I'm not one of W's pals nor did I get any bonuses, nor hang out at exclusive golf clubs so I'm not privy to knowing but, if indeed the top 1% of income earners paid 40.42% of all income taxes (where indeed do you get your figures?), I can only imagine what their disposable income might have been and that is the crux of the matter. Statistics are like bikinis: they reveal an awful lot but what they hide can be critical.

    But now, Purcell looks to Russia, Slovakia, etc, etal, as examples of much better economic systems. Sure, just watch how the standard of living improves (look at Russia now), how the "freedom" increases, how the infrastructure is improved. Just look at China where with all this unregulated unchained "capitalism" you find one millionaire on a heap of tens of thousands of Chinese who can barely feed themselves and their families, cannot see a doctor–talk about non-socialist health care–and cannot see their children educated.

    Yes, sure, Tom, bring in da noise, bring in da funk of all those car factories and watch your wages (actually, not yours, Tom) go down. And keep in mind that the streets through which you drove to work, the school bus that took your kids to school, the working fire department you passed last night, and the police precinct on which you called to help you find Buffy the cat, were all paid for by taxes. Then go to Russia, Tom and ask how many of those services are available to all–not just the ones who can pay. Better yet, Tom, start a new party–the On To Russia Movement–get all similar thinkers to go there like Rush Limburgher is going to Costa Rica.

    Oh, and Tom, for your information, income taxes are called "progressive" while sales taxes are called "regressive.

  12. Phil Avatar
    Phil

    Hmmm 1947, good comment, but could you please help me understand the what you actually want to convey?

    I do not want to misunderstand the content of your comment.

    Thanks

  13. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Syncopation: "I dunno about chirping, but when I think of Tom Purcell and the republicans, a lame duck comes to mind."

    That's funny. When I think of Obama and the Democrats . . . higher taxes come to mind.

  14. EASTTEXASREDNECK Avatar
    EASTTEXASREDNECK

    SCRAP THE ENTIRE TAX CODE AND REPLACE IT WITH A 10% FLAT TAX. – NO EXEMPTIONS AND NO EXCEPTIONS. LET'S HAVE A BALANCED BUDGET AMMENDMENT. LET'S PULL ALL OUR SOLDIERS OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST AND PUT THEM ON OUR SOUTHERN BORDER. ROUND UP ALL ILLEGAL ALIENS AND SEND THEM BACK WHERE THEY CAME FROM. CUT WELFARE PROGRAMS FOR ABLE-BODIED PEOPLE.

    OR…SPLIT THE COUNTRY IN HALF. LIBERAL SOCIALISTS (DEMOCRATS) CAN HAVE THE EAST AND WEST COASTS. + ILLINOIS AND MICHIGAN. CONSERVATIVES KEEP THE SOUTH AND THE FLY-OVER ZONE. SEE WHO MAKES IT!

  15. Phil Avatar
    Phil

    Come on TRedNeck,

    Stop this Insanity.

    Nobody here wants to split the country.

    Irrespective of the difference in opinion, everybody except for Geoff, here has the best interests of the country on their mind.

    So let us respect that and discuss.

    Such comments do not help.

    Let us also change ourselves and our mindsets to remove the negativity.

    As for the tax code, I think I believe what you say, but it needs some more understanding of the effect it will have on the current infrastructure to get this implemented.

  16. Terry Avatar

    Get a Fujitsu ScanSnap, scan all your receipts into QuickBooks once a week… then throw them away. It couldn't be any easier. Scans business cards too.

  17. Brett Avatar
    Brett

    Tom: You're acting like a crazed canary. In search of a cage!!!

  18. Cal Avatar
    Cal

    click1947: Now a couple of things, listen up.

    If we had a flat tax or a fair tax, we wouldn’t need a "system." We could reduce the entire tax code to a page or two, eliminate of a large number of IRS personnel from the government dole, and reduce the frustration of millions of Americans who DO have to keep huge amounts of receipts to claim the deductions allowed in the massive legal morass known as the tax code. Those folks tend to be the more productive members of society who work incredibly long hours, travel extensively, and spend time away from home so they can grow their business and keep working Americans employed. Rather than “well heeled” I would call them “properly compensated” for the amount of work they put in but then I believe we all should keep as much of what we earn as possible by reducing government to the smallest size possible because it has a proven track record of being inefficient and incompetent at every single thing it touches.

    I must admit I’d be very interested in seeing any sort of objective information that supports your strongly held opinion of: ”The problems we all face has to do with W’s pandering to those pals of his in the oil bidness–and the health insurance bidness, and the finance bidness–while the rest of us got to pay for their excesses.” Just a link or two putting this rather interesting, somewhat subjective claim in a little bit of perspective would be most helpful. It would two-fold: First show objective support for what you claim and then demonstrate how your claims negatively impacted the economy. I know liberals all "just know stuff" the rest of us don't as we're stuck reading articles, comparing charts and graphs, and sifting through data. But please humor we knuckledraggers with something stronger than "click1947 says so." Thanks in advance. I hate to be critical your rant almost sounds as whiny as cate’s "well-worded" opinion about wars and WMD. Just a quick follow up if I may. Did all that awful stuff you allege happen before or after the 52 straight months of job growth when GWB was president and before the Democrats took control of congress in January of 2007? Thanks again.

    When you say, “But now, Purcell looks to Russia, Slovakia, etc, etal, as examples of much better economic systems.” I have to wonder if you even bothered to read the article or if it’s just a comprehension problem. I tend to lean toward the latter as Purcell neither stated nor implied those were “better economic systems.” The implication was clearly that “low taxes result in investment and growth.” Therefore, your conclusion was as faulty as the inference you drew. That happens when one doesn’t read well or reads only to find what one already believes. (I see that a LOT around here.) The rest of your rant about China and millionaires was also part and parcel of the erroneous conclusion you drew so any thinking person will ignore it as whiny drivel or perhaps get a chuckle out of it.

    I’m certain Mr. Purcell fully understands why we have police departments and who funds them as well as the process by which they are funded. That would include roads, public schools, and even hospitals, Herr klickmeister. But he, unlike you, also understands that raising taxes drives the “well-heeled” out of America to places that are more business friendly. I think it’s fair to say that the current president and congressional majority don’t understand that either. But look at this way, clickster, you’re in good company. You can all sit around and share your ignorance with them while the producers continue looking for better ways to do business. And yes, when necessary due to poor economic choices as we've seen the past 15 months, better places in which to conduct it. On second thought, that wouldn’t work. Those guys are all very well-heeled. In fact, most are millionaires. You wouldn’t have much in common with them after all, I’m afraid. But I’m sure they’d take your campaign contribution and promise to take more from the evil rich to give to you in the future! (They’re swell like that. You see, they all live in the MUCH nicer version of John Edwards’s “two Americas.”)

    dr. ellis. It’s good to see you’re well. I’m not sure how paying no federal tax at all (not even one single solitary dollar) is somehow fair or how asking them to actually pay a little something is _unfair_. But then I’m a heartless conservative who’s only interested in starving children and taking medicine from the elderly. Or is it taking medicine from children and… I get so confused after listening to you “smart folk” here.

    I guess I’ll be leading the charge to (how did you so eloquently put it?) Oh, right! To vote against my own self interest. Well, if that’ll get rid of Pelosi, Reid, and Obama, I’m gonna try and vote many times as I can the way Democrats do in Chicago. Great idea!

  19. Syncopation Avatar
    Syncopation

    Not sure what all the fuss is about. I currently make a little under 100k, and all through my life I've never had a problem with tax time, and I always get a return, except for one year when I sold my home and bought a new one and had some property tax confusion. But even then it wasn't that much.

    I usually get my return in early February, and by April, taxes are but a distant memory to me.

    I've never been rich, but I don't really understand why people wait until the last minute to do them or how they get into the position of owing the IRS thousands or tens of thousands (or more) dollars. Am I the odd man out on this?

  20. Cal Avatar
    Cal

    Syncopation. A reasonable post! I like it.

    The fuss is the frustration with having a tax code that is enormous in size and so difficult companies (and many people) need attorneys or accountants to do their taxes. It’s called "progressive" because it taxes wealthier Americans more than those who earn less. But to me it seems fundamentally unfair that 53% of us pay 100% of the tax bill while 47% pay nothing.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100407/ap_on_bi_ge/u

    If “fairness” is really the issue, a flat tax or a fair tax seems a much better idea. It could literally reduce the tax code to a few pages and eliminate most of the frustration with filing. It would boost revenue to the treasury and stimulate the economy. Of course, we’d have to stop the current level of spending which is anathema to those who feel spending is somehow “helping.”

    As to how people can end up owing or waiting I chalk it up to human nature. I became an “attention to detail” fanatic after I became an officer in the Marine Corps. My desk, my closet, and my home are clean, neat, and orderly. So is my fitness and nutrition plan. But we all know people who work and live in chaos. They can somehow still find nearly anything in the mess and the mess doesn’t seem to bother them at all. Some are “drifty” and easily distracted. They’re the ones who don’t even keep receipts let alone being able to find and organize them by April 15th. I can’t live like that but they would find my life too “regimented” while I see it as organized and scheduled. Different strokes, you know?

    But that's the fuss. Part of it, at least.

  21. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    How can you have a flat tax on a business? Sounds simple for those with paychecks, but then the current system is simple for those with paychecks. For those with paychecks all a flat tax would do is lower tax for the rich and take food and shelter from the poor. But that's only fair as we all believe in the "survival of the financially fittest". Darwinism at it's best. (Amazing how those that argue against biological Darwinism see no conflict in saying finances make one person more fit than another.)

    But what about a business? Are you going to tax the gross? Most businesses don't clear 20%. So the problem is "what is an expense?". That is what is defined in those thousands of pages of the tax code and what would have to be defined in thousands of pages in a flat tax code. So the problem isn't solved. All that is solved is the taxes are further shifted from the rich to the poor.

    I did my children's taxes. They get paychecks. Took about an hour each. They took in about $1000 refund for each hour I spent. (I would rather have to pay in than get a refund, but that's another issue) Then I did my business taxes. That took about 25 hours. I received about $30 per hour for the effort. So for the majority the current system is no big deal and they get a good return on their investment of time. For those that are in a small business (that can't afford professional financial help) the pay is OK but not great. But I certainly couldn't pay 20% of my gross. So I needed those thousands of pages of laws and millions of pages of regulations, and 10 different forms to figure out what was my fair share. I would still have to wade through all of those pages and fill out all of those forms to find my net with a "flat, fair? tax". How could it possibly be different? How could there possibly be less paperwork? There would still have to be a definition of the word "expense". It is the definition of that word that changes an hour filling in a 1040 into 25 hours filling in 10 forms.

  22. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    "But to me it seems fundamentally unfair that 53% of us pay 100% of the tax bill while 47% pay nothing. "

    Like all "talking points" it may be the truth, but it certainly isn't "The Whole Truth". It is selectively choosing which taxes to count and which taxes to exclude. It only takes into consideration "income tax" that has been cut by the stimulus package. (How come it's evil to cut taxes when a Democrat does it?) It doesn't take into account for example that the poor pay a larger percent into social security.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/business/econom

  23. Rob Avatar
    Rob

    1. Americans spend $36,000,000 at Wal-Mart every hour of every day.

    2. This works out to $20,928 profit every minute!

    3. Wal-Mart will sell more from January 1 to St. Patrick's Day (March17th) than Target sells all year.

    4. Wal-Mart is bigger than Home Depot + Kroger + Target + Sears + Costco + K-Mart combined.

    5. Wal-Mart employs 1.6 million people and is the largest private employer, and most speak English.

    6. Wal-Mart is the largest company in the history of the World.

    7. Wal-Mart now sells more food than Kroger & Safeway combined, and keep in mind they did this in

    only 15 years.

    8. During this same period, 31 supermarket chains sought bankruptcy.

    9. Wal-Mart now sells more food than any other store in the world.

    10.Wal-Mart has approx 3,900 stores in the USA of which 1,906 are Super Centers; this is 1,000 more than it

    had 5 Years ago.

    11. This year 7.2 billion different purchasing experiences will occur at a Wal-Mart store. (Earth's population

    is approximately 6.5 Billion.)

    12. 90% of all Americans live within 15 miles of a Wal-Mart.

    You may think that I am complaining, but I am really laying the ground work for suggesting that MAYBE we

    should hire the guys who run Wal-Mart to fix the economy.

    This should be read and understood by all Americans: Democrats, Republicans, EVERYONE!!

    To: Our President and all 535 voting members of the Congress:

    The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775.

    You have had 234 years to get it right, but it is BROKE.

    Social Security was established in 1935.

    You have had 74 years to get it right, but it is BROKE.

    Fannie Mae was established in 1938.

    You have had 71 years to get it right, but it is BROKE.

    War on Poverty started in 1964. You have had 45 years

    to get it right; 1$ trillion of our money is confiscated

    each year and transferred to "the poor," and they only want more.

    Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965.

    You have had 44 years to get it right, but they are BROKE.

    Freddie Mac was established in 1970.

    You have had 39 years to get it right, but it is BROKE.

    Department of Energy was created in 1977, to lessen our dependence

    on foreign oil. It has ballooned to 16,000 employees with a budget of

    $24 billion a year, and we import more oil than ever before. You had 32

    years to get it right, but it is an abysmal FAILURE.

    You have FAILED in every "government service" you have shoved down our

    throats while overspending our tax dollars.

    AUTHOR UNKNOWN

  24. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    Rob

    The Hudson Bay Co was the largest in the world–bankrupt

    Carnegie Steel was the largest company—bankrupt

    Montgomery Ward was the largest company—bankrupt

    Sears was the largest company—bankrupt

    K-Mart was the largest company–bankrupt

    GM was the largest car maker–bankrupt

    CITI, Chase, Bank of America, the largest banks—failed (bailed out to keep from bankrupt)

    What is the future of Wal-mart? Who knows? I could point out the total fallacy of the idea of comparing a government to a profit corporation, but I doubt if you think deep enough to comprehend such differences. But even at this level, it is obvious that just because a business is at the top for a season doesn't mean they will be there 230 years from now. Let's hope the government is still in business. I'll bet Wal-mart won't be.

  25. Cal Avatar
    Cal

    Good Life laments:

    “For those with paychecks all a flat tax would do is lower tax for the rich and take food and shelter from the poor.” That would be called fairness, Good Life. We have 53% of Americans paying 100% of the federal tax burden which means 43% pay nothing. Not one dollar. Nearly every plan still allows for some amount to be earned “tax free.” Here’s a paragraph from the link. “Family-Friendly. All flat tax proposals have one "loophole." Households receive a generous exemp¬tion based on family size. For instance, a family of four would not begin to pay tax until its annual income reached more than $30,000.

    Here’s the answer to how it would work for a business:

    “Like the individual postcard form, the business postcard form is very simple. (See Form 2 in Figure 1.) All businesses, from Microsoft to a hot dog stand, would play by the same rules. There no longer would be separate tax rules for partnerships, sole proprietorships, S corporations and regular corporations. All business operations in America, whether owned by a U.S. company or owned by a foreign company, would pay tax on the income that they earn in the United States.

    All business taxpayers would put their total receipts on Line 1. They would then add together their labor costs, their input costs, and their invest¬ment costs on Lines 2 and 3. These costs are sub-tracted from gross receipts to determine taxable income on Line 4. Line 5 is the amount of tax that is due. Lines 6-10 exist in case a company either had losses from previous years and now has an opportunity to offset taxable income or has losses this year and needs to "carry them forward" to the next tax year.

    http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2005/07/

    Oh, no, look! It’s from the mean, evil Heritage Foundation so we can ignore it outright and condemn it based solely on its source of origin!

    Wouldn’t if have been great to spend ten minutes on each child and another ten on your business? Just like the census form. Quick, simple, easy, and less IRS bureaucrats siphoning off federal tax dollars. That’s called a “win-win.”

    But since we can’t agree on the meaning of the word “fair” something tells me this won’t persuade you!

  26. Cal Avatar
    Cal

    Speaking of "fair" how is it "fair" that nearly half of all American workers pay zero in federal income tax? Not one dollar. I think anyone making over $10,000 should have a minimum of $1.00 in tax and no more people getting welfare payments in the form of refunds larger than the tax they paid. If you paid $250 in taxes, you can get a $249 refund, but not more. Everyone needs to be invested in America to some degree. That, to me, is fair.

  27. Jack Sprat Avatar
    Jack Sprat

    Good Life

    "I did my children’s taxes."

    Hey could you drop a line to Tim Geithner and help him with his? Well, maybe not, it would appear that the ambiguous “they” really need to be able to "cheat the poor out of your fair share of those "patriotic" taxes we're now paying for. I'm guessing you're all done learning the Democrat secret of "raising the dead" for voting, can't take long can it, now that Farrakhan’s Mess-iah is 'at the helm"?

    I noticed that the "new, new" presidential spiritual advisor is another "socialist liberation theologist", how do they fit into your "theory on fundamentalists" not knowing the Bible, since they set their whole theology on the "mega-church" Sermon on the Mount? That really is fundamentalism at a "fundamental" level.

    “That is defined in those thousands of pages of the tax code”

    Oddly, I’m with you on this one I mean, the gang that couldn’t shoot straight couldn’t get 3,000 pages of Health Care bill right that they rewrote several times, how could they get the part were you just pay a percentage of your “net, net”? After all anyone making 20% is stealing from the poor workers of the world uniting, most have a 6%-8% net-net after all the costs have been taken out and that is their real profit, I personally think the patriotic metric today is to just send in all of your profit and pay yourself the “same salary” that you pay your workers, JUST LIKE CONGRESS DOES. And those stalwart passers of the Comrade Care because they knew how many there were who couldn’t get, so they with no little “humility”, excluded themselves from the Comrade Care bill and they have to go to the “pools” which aren’t set up yet.

    So if the Dem’s didn’t have time to read the 3000 page bill, I think we can see why they don’t bother to read the reputed 8000 pages of tax code, so come on, give them a hand.

    “It is selectively choosing which taxes to count and which taxes to exclude. It only takes into consideration “income tax” that has been cut by the stimulus package.”

    It’s strange that one time or temporary “tax credits” will be more than offset if the full range of socialist programs are put into place. Cap n Tax “which will necessarily skyrocket your electricity bill”, VAT estimated to adding 20% to 25% to every thing you buy, increased health care costs so far the failed Romeny care concoction has announced as much as a 38% increase to the already highest premiums in the nation. Oddly we used to call that “Priming the pump”.

    When I look at the list of those who are found not paying their taxes in really large dollar amounts, they’re rich liberals, like the nontaxpaying patriots of Hollyweird.

    While I know I should “trust” the economic policies of the newest “Jayson Blair” at the NYT, I think here’s a bit better place to do any studing.

    “Why Permanent Tax Cuts Are the Best Stimulus

    Short-term fiscal policies fail to promote long-term growth.”
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12275714915795472

    Here’s the Stumulating no one credit’s

    ■Making Work Pay: For 2009 and 2010, $400 per person tax credit for AGI under $75,000; phased out to $95,000 (double everything for married filing jointly).

    ■One-time $250 payment to Social Security and other fixed income recipients.

    ■AMT patch for 2009: increase AMT exemption amount from 2008 levels by $500 per person or $1,000 per couple.

    ■First-time homebuyer tax credit: If you never owned a home in the last three years and your AGI is under $75,000/$150,000 (phaseout to $95,000/$170,000), and you buy a primary residence between JAN. 1 AND NOV. 30, 2009, you get an $8,000 refundable tax credit, which does NOT have to be repaid if you hold the home for three years. SORRY FOR FOLKS WHO BOUGHT IN 2008.

    ■Tax deduction for buying a new car: If your AGI is under $125k/$250k (phaseout to $135k/$260k), and you buy a new car (not used car) under $49,500 after the law is signed UNTIL THE END OF 2009, you get a tax deduction for the sales tax. No deduction for car loan interest. Non-itemizers are also eligible for this deduction.

    ■Expanded HOPE credit for education and renamed to American Opportunity Tax Credit.”

    Gee, some mighty fine needle’s eyes to get through, while you could, odd that you don’t mention that we have over a trillion dollar’s unspent from TARP and Stimulus I money that is borrowed and just accruing interest payments.

    Boy, thanks for the “tax cuts”, especially extending the Bush Tax cuts, well the one’s you did, certainly the state does have a right to your dead parents money after all they ……… well they just do.

  28. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    net-net after all the costs have been taken out —-So how do you define "costs"? I could define it as every penny I spend. I already can take off more than a wage earner, if you don't limit me I'll take off everything.

    VAT—Another name for sales tax which is just a way to transfer more tax from the rich to taking food clothing and shelter from the poor. OK because that is pure Darwinism.

  29. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    $250 in taxes, you can get a $249 refund, but not more.—-You're thinking like a wage earner that hasn't adjusted the deductions. When I earned a wage I would claim at least three more than were in my family so I didn't pay in anything until April. Why let them use your money interest free? You can claim as many as you want as long as you don't have to pay in much. Always aim to break even in April.

    If we followed your plan that would be reversed. One would claim nothing so they would take out more so you could get even more back.

  30. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    right to your dead parents money—-I'll bet your parents don't have enough wealth to be effected by federal inheritance tax. They would have to be some of the richest of the rich. The whole point is to encourage the wealthy to transfer funds from their warehouse and get it back into circulation before the tax kicks in. And if they are that rich they have people that figure that out. Hence, almost no one pays that tax.

  31. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    American Opportunity Tax Credit—-I got back over $6000 on this one.

    One needs to think beyond today. "Investment" is foreign to wage earners but it works something like this. You put in money today in hopes that by spending today you get more back tomorrow. The more education people have the odds are the more productive they will be in the future which will help the national economy. The better the national economy, the more money people make, the more money people make the more taxes they pay. So, by educating people the nation has a more productive future and the government gets the money back with interest.

  32. Cal Avatar
    Cal

    Good Life misunderstands in his first swipe at logic after a short break when he writes, “If we followed your plan that would be reversed. One would claim nothing so they would take out more so you could get even more back.” No, my friend. That isn’t my “plan.” I have no such thing in mind. I’m saying whether you tried to break even or not there would be no more receiving more money back than the total you paid in. If you owed $800 in federal tax and paid in $850 you could only get $49 back. As it is now, some people would get back well over a thousand (or two or three) and that’s a welfare payment.

    “The whole point is to encourage the wealthy to transfer funds from their warehouse and get it back into circulation before the tax kicks in.” Warehouse? Wow. That speaks volumes on view other people's property. If a man builds up a net worth of $10,000 or $100,000 million it is his right and his alone to determine where that money goes. Remember, Good Life, not one penny of that person’s money belongs to you or anyone else. It is his until he dies and then it is the property of his or her family. NOT the federal government so it can “spread it back around.” That is more legalized thievery. Who are you or anyone else to set a limit on prosperity? Again, give all of YOUR money away you want, but keep your hands off of other people’s property. Thou shalt not steal doesn’t just apply to taking your neighbor’s ass…

    ““Investment” is foreign to wage earners but it works something like this. You put in money today in hopes that by spending today you get more back tomorrow.” I agree. But we aren’t “investing.” We’re throwing good money away after bad on much of public education. And the “education” they’re receiving is very heavily slanted toward secular humanism, self-gratification, a hatred of all things God and religion, and a disdain for our country’s founding and rich heritage. I don’t call that much of a return on my “investment.” How many trillions have we poured into public education to date? And where are we in terms of deficits, the national debt, and unfunded liabilities on entitlement programs? When does this "repayment on investment" supposed to take place? Are you trying to tell me the NEXT trillion will get the job done? Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice…

  33. geoff Avatar

    Cal: it's very clear. “The whole point is to encourage the wealthy to transfer funds from their warehouse and get it back into circulation before the tax kicks in.” Investment would be getting money out of the "warehouse" (i.e. bank or offshore or wherever), since investment is circulation. Whereas if money is simply sitting offshore somewhere, it doesn't help anyone, does it? It doesn't pay someone to do a job, doesn't create more wealth, just sits there, safe and secure, in Switzerland, the Cayman Islands, etc.

    Reading comprehension, Cal.

    "A hatred of all things God and religion." Well, it's not as though the Catholic church is actually helping, right now, is it? well, and then there was Jim & Tammy Fae, and all them other horrible televangelists and their lurid scandals.

    "Rich heritage." Yes. Which you don't want kids to learn? Or do you want them to learn the sanitized, revisionist version, where lots of happy "Negroes" were kind enough to sit at the back of the bus?

  34. Jack Sprat Avatar
    Jack Sprat

    "net-net after all the costs have been taken out —-So how do you define “costs”? I could define it as every penny I spend. I already can take off more than a wage earner, if you don’t limit me I’ll take off everything."

    As a Democrat, I would certainly expect nothing less of you that that, but as defined by the IRS is the way most conservatives do it. You do follow their "rules" I presume, although they're apparently not meant for Dem's/liberals, ask Charlie Rangel. So you going to help out Geithner this year, that would be swell?

    Glad to see that you "barons of industry" are able to cheat the people out of so much needed "hand out money",

    "right to your dead parents money—-I’ll bet your parents don’t have enough wealth to be effected by federal inheritance tax."

    Wow, GL, quite the manic rich oppressor of the working poor, first you cheat the poor out of several thousands of dollars and then don't admit that "all conservatives are filthy rich" as you have so often portrayed "us". But yes, when my mother died last year I did have to pay taxes on my third of her vast estate, oddly it seemed a bit petty for the kinder, gentler IRS/Obama Health Care Collector thugs for $186 my “net-net”.

    I'm guessing that you have most of your "costs" included in the general "generous" allowance and your net-net would factor at that range at a "profit" of 20%. I've worked for multi-million dollar companies and multi-billion dollar companies and small companies and all of their net-net profits fall into that range, still the smartest guy in the room, GL? So far you're 0 for 2.

    Have a great day, 'cuz BO has set aside a real pot of emergency infusion of cash, as needed, as promised, an almost unlimited source of help for Small Business who provides 75%-80% of the jobs in America, of which you are apparently one, my brother and Sister-in-law also can take advantage of the whopping $21 million dollars in emergency loans to a credit starved business economy. There would be more, but the government has borrowed up all the rest of the available credit market funding.

    And you say everyone in KC is racist, mmmm, who knew.

  35. Cal Avatar
    Cal

    Mid-monthly reminder to geoff. I don’t intentionally read anything you write. Please don’t waste your time addressing responses to me as they go unread.

    If you ever care to have any genuine dialogue that will require a believable apology and an attempt to engage in direct responses to direct questions. I'm sure that's forthcoming. Thank you.

  36. geoff Avatar

    Cal: "I don’t intentionally read anything you write." BS.

    "If you ever care to have any genuine dialogue that will require a believable apology and an attempt to engage in direct responses to direct questions." LOL.

    What do I have to apologise for. And yeah: any expectations of getting "genuine dialogue" and/or "direct responses to direct questions" out of you is like expecting Cheney to willingly surrender for trial in the Hague.

  37. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    but as defined by the IRS ——That was my point that you totally missed. Net-net has to be defined and in an economy as complex as the US it takes thousands of pages to define what is net in each business.

    You paid "inheritance tax" or some other kind of tax? Was it state or federal? Right now there is no federal inheritance tax. When there was the estate had to be worth more than 3.5 million for an individual or 7 million for a couple. This of course could and usually was avoided by transferring funds to others before death. My grandparents had 10 sections of land (that's 10 square miles for you city people) From the time my grandmother was in her 70's she transferred wealth to her children while still collecting the rent and keeping control of everything. She transferred just enough each year so no one paid gift or any other tax. By the time she died in her 90's her children had their name on all of her property and there was no tax paid. All it took was a good lawyer and some forward thinking to avoid taxes.

    Cal–From a national economy view, wealth needs to move. One of the reasons Britain fell from being the premier world economy was because the wealth stagnated. A few people cornered the wealth and it set (and still sets) there without moving. Much as has happened with the transfer of wealth from the middle class to the super wealthy over the last 30 years. This is a major cause of the present economic problems. For the economy to grow money must move. The poor and middle move the money the rich spend what they want and warehouse the rest. Inheritance tax encourages them to move the wealth to their children, charity, or where ever they would have it go. (Just as long as it moves) The government doesn't tell them what to do with it, it just encourages movement.

  38. Jack Sprat Avatar
    Jack Sprat

    "My grandparents had 10 sections of land "

    Thank you, but this "city folk" was a surveyor also.

    I believe that “net” is after taxes. Net-net has no meaning in IRS speak, business men use that as a gauge of after tax profit as calculated, and after expenses and all tax related deductions and those expenses that are not directly related to anything but the maintenance of the business, i.e. non-deductible business expenses required for the maintenance of the business. It is the actual profit produced by doing business, for the oil companies its 3% to 4%, for insurance companies its 2% to 3% and for grocery store chains it may be 1% to 2%. Because of the shear volume the dollars of profit are large looking, it is almost always deceptive to the lazy and ignorant. Again I would be surprised that you made more that 7% to 8% net-net at a 20% profit, if you were working on a "markup" you would have to have a markup of 25%.

    "there was no tax paid. All it took was a good lawyer and some forward thinking to avoid taxes."

    This is perhaps your most telling statement to date. I have actually always tried to pay a maximum of taxes, feeling it a privilege to be able to, except when the prevailing thought was to “take my money”, rather than let me choose to be generous, such as now. That is one of many problems I have with liberalism, the idea that you have a “more worthwhile use” for my money than I do, screw you (generic) and any democrat tax cheat we know. I paid almost twice the percentage of my income to charities than our socialist leader, yet he’s going to be the arbiter of whose wealth is shared and who to? Communist ideology yes, American, no.

    As for the “$186” of my “mother’s estate”, that was also as you said “That was my point that you totally missed”. It was simply ‘income” both state and federal.

    I didn’t “miss” anything, apparently you didn’t, because your team seems to flaunt the tax laws, not just misinterpret them, while I understand why your grandmother did what she did, it has always been unconscionable to me, to do something like that. it seems a little too slick, I would prefer a fairer tax code way so that people wouldn’t have to feel “devious” about just leaving their children what they, not the government, worked so hard to make and/or maintain. My mother actually had a license type plate on her car that read, “I am driving my kids inheritance”.

    So long story short, I don’t think you “steal from the poor” just because you are an owner of a business, I don’t think your grandmother “cheated the government” out of their “greedy share” of what the government didn’t work to build, buy or maintain, and I don’t think the government has the right to take what ever you have to make life less expensive for someone else. Now our apparent difference seems to be that I don’t have a fiscal top to that statement, but I find those that do and those that are just over that “top” always seem to have a way to slime around the law they made, that is why the Democrats (primarily) have written a tax code so disgustingly complex that even their own employees can’t read it. It was written “provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare”, not the other way around and certainly not “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need”, there is no justice in the latter, social or otherwise. Americans have always shown great compassion and shared the wealth of blessing that God has showered our country with, willingly, but it has fought every would be and active dictator when forced. Apparently 20% of us have forgotten that, of which we have unfortunately populated the “peoples house” at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the guy who actually calls it “his house” reveals his heart and soul.

  39. Jack Sprat Avatar
    Jack Sprat

    "out of you is like expecting Cheney to willingly surrender for trial in the Hague."

    I know you aren't from this country, but I believe our former Vice President would be waiting for the former President Clinton, Madeleine Albright, General Clark and several other member of his administration since the incursion into Bosnia/Serbia, which not only cost actual innocent lives, but resulted in nothing being accomplished for those lives lost. All in all former Vice President Cheney certainly could go “for trial” as I recall a truly evil dictator and brutal murder, or potentially in your viewpoint “hero of the cause” died of old age before he could be convicted. Now, I’ve seen the charges of war crimes against Clinton, et al, but have never seen any credible charges against Cheney, other than your what not of socialist idiots and euro-trash that feel America more of a threat than Islamic terrorists are, which is normal for the insane Europeans who were on the side of such luminaries as Adolph Hitler and Uncle Joe Stalin as people “we could work with” right up to the invasion of each inbred country, hello Islam, boy you non-religious “free thinkers” are sure in for a culture shock.

  40. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    Small Business —-I have to agree that the biggest mistake of the last 30 years has been the starving of small business for the sake of paying back campaign contributions an lobbyists of the rich. And yes this has been magnified the last 2 years. I have written and questioned in person my senators and representative. They assure me that something is coming, but I haven't seen anything yet. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court just ruled that big business has a constitutional right to buy elections. I have read the constitution and I can't seem to find where a business is a "person" with the rights of a "person". But that is the ruling of those that "rule by an exact reading of the intent of the writers".

    It also seems to be the intent of those that don't want to have any limits on businesses that are "too big to fail". I wonder which party is defending those businesses against even the slightest regulation?

  41. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    a hatred of all things God and religion—–I don't know of any public school that teaches a hatred or a love of God and religion. All of the public schools I am knowledgeable of simply ignore religion. Which of course is what Jesus taught about the association of government and religion.

  42. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    Jack–Using the tax laws to avoid paying taxes isn't devious or immoral. The tax laws are written to encourage people to do things that avoid taxes. Tax laws aren't just a stick, they are also a carrot. The government wants my business to be efficient so it pays me through deductions called depreciation to continue to update equipment. I pay little taxes since everything goes into "net worth" rather than "income". I only have "income" to the point of survival while "net worth" continues to grow (well most years). If I have extra money at the end of the year I buy something. Which in turn helps the national economy as someone has to make what I buy. And they have to buy parts from others and the others have to buy raw materials, etc. It is that movement of wealth that creates the national economy. Tax laws give me a break, but those I buy from have employees that pay more because I bought the product. And those they buy parts from have employees, etc. So the government invests in me but gets a return on that investment as the money moves. If the money doesn't move no one makes money and the government doesn't get taxes from income so it is a benefit to the nation as a whole and all of the people to encourage money to move. Even if someone isn't in my direct supply chain, some of the people that are paid to be in my supply chain will spend money on a product in another supply chain and that supply chain will also have employees getting paid.

    The government finds it to be a benefit to everyone when people prepare for death so they make it profitable to prepare for death. It is better for the national economy if money moves so they encourage money to move. That movement can be putting money into a business or giving it to your children or giving it to a charity or using it in any other way. What the use is is relatively unimportant as long as there is movement. So the laws make it cheaper to move money than to warehouse it. They make it cheaper to make your wishes after death known than to have a judge decide what you would have wanted done as he empties the warehouse when you are buried and silent.

    I faced a problem like this lately. I'm on the county library board and a woman willed us $100,000. The board wanted to do something with it that the woman would approve of. No children or other relatives that we could find. None of the library employees or ex-employees remembered her. The lawyer said he was just assigned to get rid of the money based on the will (which said in effect "split it among these charities") so he didn't care what we did with it as long as we cashed the check so it was off of the books. After some debate among the board we decided to buy some needed furniture since that is rather permanent yet can be moved if we lose a lease on a building. Since there wasn't enough we needed that would use all of the money we put the majority in a cd @ about 1%. It really would have helped everyone if there would have been more direction as to the use of wealth after death. Or if she would have donated it while alive so she could give direction. It is encouraging that communication that some tax laws are for.

  43. Phil Avatar
    Phil

    This country is in piles of debt. Projections for how much more we could load on in the coming decades are downright nightmarish. You think it's bad now? Just wait.

    It's obvious that big changes are in store, but progress (or even the hope of it) is painfully absent. Eventually, Stein's law — if something can't go on forever, it won't — will prevail, and we'll be forced to fix the problem.

    How we'll do so is the trillion-dollar question. There are only three ways to end runaway deficits: cut spending, raise taxes, or allow deliberate inflation.

    The easy way out

    The third option is often cited as the "tried and true" method, and not in a good way. Indebted countries habitually ask their reserve banks to run the printing presses at full bore. Governments can then pay their bills with the newly printed money, at the cost of inflation. This eliminates debt without forcing politicians to make unpopular decisions on spending and taxation, which is why it's so prevalent.

    But the idea also has a growing chorus of nonpolitical supporters. As an MSN Money article published on Wednesday titled, "Why Inflation Would Be Good For Us," declares:

    … a quick bout of higher-than-normal inflation would lower the nation's debt in real dollars, bailing the government out of the debt threat. That means we could avoid Draconian tax increases or big spending cuts, both of which would be politically unpopular and could scuttle the economic recovery.

    Sounds neat! Too bad it's fantasy thinking.

    The timing of this article was unfortunate. Just 18 hours after it was published, Fed chairman Ben Bernanke sat before the Joint Economic Committee, which asked him point blank about inflating away debt. His answer gets to the heart of the matter: "Given the structure of our debt, [inflation] wouldn't even help reduce the debt … given that so many of our obligations are indexed."

    Bingo. Inflating away debt only works when the obligations are in fixed dollar amounts, like a mortgage. But essentially, all of our long-term fiscal problems are entitlement commitments that grow (are "indexed") with inflation. When inflation rises, spending on Social Security and Medicare rise at the same rate. So the debt-inflation relationship is the opposite of the get-out-of-jail-free card some envision. Debt still goes up in real dollar terms, creating even more of a death spiral.

    Problems that won't go away

    And I really do mean that "essentially all" of our problems are entitlement commitments. This chart, from the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) 2008 Budget and Economic Outlook, tells the story (the y-axis is spending as a percentage of GDP):

    These projections are more than two years old, and they've undoubtedly grown uglier since. In a more recent report, the CBO notes, "Almost all of the projected growth in federal spending other than interest payments on the debt comes from growth in spending on the three largest entitlement programs — Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security."

    And all three of these programs grow with (or cause) inflation. Inflation in medical costs, in fact, has historically been one of the big drivers of overall inflation. That largely explains Medicare's surging burden, not to mention why premiums at much-maligned megainsurers WellPoint (NYSE: WLP) and Cigna (NYSE: CI) have plowed skyward. For Social Security, inflation measured by the consumer price index (where medical costs are also a component) fuels so-called cost-of-living adjustments, which push entitled benefits higher. When Ida May Fuller received the first Social Security check in 1940, she got $22.54. Today, the average disbursement is $1,066.60. Ponder why this inflation has yet to solve our debt problems, and you'll see how faulty the inflate-ourselves-to-freedom argument is.

    What now?

    If inflation isn't the answer, then cutting spending and raising taxes are. But doing this scares the everliving mess out of politicians, because it rankles the people who vote for them. Even those who talk tough about spending cuts ultimately cave. A good example came in January, when President Obama proposed creating a deficit reduction committee. The Senate immediately voted 97-0 (a rare show of unanimity) that the commission would be banned from touching Social Security benefits. We've become a morbidly obese country on a mission to outlaw diet and exercise. Good luck with that.

    Overhauling entitlement spending is the way out of our long-term debt mess. I just wonder how feasible that is, especially in a proactive way. For now, we'll just wait for Stein's law to kick in.

  44. Phil Avatar
    Phil

    References for the previous post

    http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2010/04/16/

    http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Mu

    Goes to show how dumb msnbc is.

  45. Cal Avatar
    Cal

    Good Life. “One of the reasons Britain fell from being the premier world economy was because the wealth stagnated.” Have you ever listened to the British parliament member named Hanon or O’Hanlon? Great chap. He makes the case that Great Britain (and much of Europe) is on the verge of bankruptcy because of its outrageous levels of spending on cradle-to-grave social programs. You’re the first and only person I’ve heard make the claim that a concentration of wealth is some major part of the problem. Do you have anything to support that claim? It may be true, it's just not something I've heard. Regardless, what role do you think the massive entitlement spending pays? You know they have huge VATs in Europe and yet they still have huge deficits. Why? The short answer is spending. Their unemployment tends to be high, their productivity low and their economies sluggish. That’s exactly where we’re headed because of our own excessive spending.

    This so-called “debt commission” is going to come back and recommend what is already a foregone conclusion. “We need to raise taxes.” Okay, fine, but we also need to reduce spending. A LOT. But as long as the bleeding hearts are running congress there will be NO reductions in spending. Only increases that add to the mountain of debt we’ve racked up as a nation (Republican and Democrat) and the interest we owe on it each year.

    Yes, money must move. But it MUST be moved voluntarily by the people who own it–NOT by the government in some redistribution scheme designed to punish the producers or their families and show them a thing or two.

    “Which of course is what Jesus taught about the association of government and religion.” Where did you get this from? I don’t recall Christ ever using the term “religion” or “government.” And if you’re unaware of the open hostility to religion in many public schools then you are simply not aware of what is going on. Teachers have great latitude to denigrate God and people of faith in the classroom. And at the college level (taxpayer funded state universities) they pull no punches. The ridicule and derision are direct as is the arrogant condescension toward anyone who takes a stand for their faith. That I’ve seen with my own eyes and that was over 30 years ago. “God” only knows how bad it is today.

    I saw Cal and BS in the opening line of gooff post. I’m sure it was a good one. Maybe another post featuring “liar” and “coward”?

    Phil, you’re talking to the wind here. Spending and debt have zero meaning to our liberal friends unless the debt came from Reagan or Bush in which case it’s “bad.” We are in fiscal peril and yet congress is continuing to _increase_ spending at a time it needs to be drastically reduced. When the house of cards collapses the Democrats will still be blaming Republicans. In the mean time all we can do is elect some responsible adults to congress to try and slow down the madness.

  46. Stug Avatar
    Stug

    “When the house of cards collapses the Democrats will still be blaming Republicans.”

    – The house of cards that the Republicans built collapsed in 2008. The question now is why are the Democrats building a duplex on top of the old foundation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *