Americans choose Democrats

[Sheriff Uling 3]

I actually thought it was a good read and I'd be interesting in reading more on his views. Thanks for sharing...

[kaydee457 13]

Well, I for one am elated that the dems are in power. I was particularly relieved when Nacy Pelosi explained to me today that we are not at war but rather we have a "situation" that needs to be resolved.

Well, that clears it all up for me!

[kaydee457 13]

Oh, and I forgot to add that she said "we cannot win, anyway"....

This woman knows absolutley nothing about military strategies evidenced by the fact that she refuses to acknowledge that we are at war!

It's going to be an interseting 2 years.....

[Libersolis 0]

One of the problems I have with how politicians and the public in general look at income ( and taxes ) is that there is never any clear understanding that 40,000 dollars can get you quite a bit in certain areas of the United States, while in others you would struggle. There needs to be a greater effort to understand the differences in regional economics and not just apply some blanket tax cut ( or tax hikes as we will probably see shortly ) without regards to how it might affect different areas of the country.

Edited November 9, 2006 by Libersolis

[garya505 2]

Well, I for one am elated that the dems are in power. I was particularly relieved when Nacy Pelosi explained to me today that we are not at war but rather we have a "situation" that needs to be resolved.

Well, that clears it all up for me!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

This woman knows absolutley nothing about military strategies evidenced by the fact that she refuses to acknowledge that we are at war!

Yeah, there's just nothing quite like like the Yahoo at 1600 Penn Ave and his cronies with their firm grasp on military strategies - the lean, mean fighting machine (ala George Foreman) or somesuch. All they can muster are Bush's strategeries which is what destabilized an entire region and put Iraq into a civil war rather than leaving it better off. Great strategery indeed. Really great.

[Joel Halfwassen 0]

The nightmare is just beginning!

Why? What can the Democrats possibly do that's worse than the Bush administration?

One thing I can think of (which will affect me directly) is a rollback of Bush's tax

cuts for people making more than $200,000 p.a.

Other than that, they can't make things any worse than they already are.

So you are saying that you didn't cash that $300.00 check that came in the mail from the US Treasury after that Bush tax cut? And you volunteered to pay the pre-cut amount on your taxes? I doubt it. I don't make much money, but even *I* benefited from that tax break. And during this Visa process I can use all of the money I can hold onto.

Joel

One of the problems I have with how politicians and the public in general look at income ( and taxes ) is that there is never any clear understanding that 40,000 dollars can get you quite a bit in certain areas of the United States, while in others you would struggle. There needs to be a greater effort to understand the differences in regional economics and not just apply some blanket tax cut ( or tax hikes as we will probably see shortly ) without regards to how it might affect different areas of the country.

Ugh...NO! This is taken care of through simple supply and demand job ecomonics. If you get paid 40,000 in one area you might only get paid 28,000 in another. Every business competes for workers in an area on that same playing field. We don't need to spend tax dollars figuring out how to make the US tax code even MORE complex!

Joel

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

This woman knows absolutley nothing about military strategies evidenced by the fact that she refuses to acknowledge that we are at war!

Yeah, there's just nothing quite like like the Yahoo at 1600 Penn Ave and his cronies with their firm grasp on military strategies - the lean, mean fighting machine (ala George Foreman) or somesuch. All they can muster are Bush's strategeries which is what destabilized an entire region and put Iraq into a civil war rather than leaving it better off. Great strategery indeed. Really great.

well said. well said.

Daniel

:energetic:

[mawilson 2,133]

Ugh...NO! This is taken care of through simple supply and demand job ecomonics. If you get paid 40,000 in one area you might only get paid 28,000 in another. Every business competes for workers in an area on that same playing field. We don't need to spend tax dollars figuring out how to make the US tax code even MORE complex!

I think libersolis is trying to say that a person who makes $100,000 in Wazoo County,

Alabama, should probably be taxed at a higher rate than someone who makes

$100,000 in New York city. I don't necessarily disagree with that.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

So you are saying that you didn't cash that $300.00 check that came in the mail from the US Treasury after that Bush tax cut?

Oh yeah, that one. An advance payment on the return I had coming my way already. I remember putting that 300.00 down on my 1040 the following spring as return already received. It's not like people actually paid those 300.00 less in taxes.

But the trick seems to have worked on some...

Edited November 9, 2006 by ET-US2004

[dalegg 143]

Ugh...NO! This is taken care of through simple supply and demand job ecomonics. If you get paid 40,000 in one area you might only get paid 28,000 in another. Every business competes for workers in an area on that same playing field. We don't need to spend tax dollars figuring out how to make the US tax code even MORE complex!

I think libersolis is trying to say that a person who makes $100,000 in Wazoo County,

Alabama, should probably be taxed at a higher rate than someone who makes

$100,000 in New York city. I don't necessarily disagree with that.

If they both have mortages then the guy in Alabama would be taxed at a higher rate due to the interest payments the guy in New York would be writing off.

[mawilson 2,133]

If they both have mortgages then the guy in Alabama would be taxed at a higher rate due to the interest payments the guy in New York would be writing off.

You're probably right.

[Joel Halfwassen 0]

Ugh...NO! This is taken care of through simple supply and demand job ecomonics. If you get paid 40,000 in one area you might only get paid 28,000 in another. Every business competes for workers in an area on that same playing field. We don't need to spend tax dollars figuring out how to make the US tax code even MORE complex!

I think libersolis is trying to say that a person who makes $100,000 in Wazoo County,

Alabama, should probably be taxed at a higher rate than someone who makes

$100,000 in New York city. I don't necessarily disagree with that.

So...for example...someone has a business based on the internet. They move from NY to Alabama to get away from the INSANE costs in the Socialist Republic of New York. And then STILL makes the same $100,000.00 should get taxed MORE for because s/he POCKETS more money per year?

Joel

[mawilson 2,133]

So...for example...someone has a business based on the internet. They move from NY to Alabama to get away from the INSANE costs in the Socialist Republic of New York. And then STILL makes the same $100,000.00 should get taxed MORE for because s/he POCKETS more money per year?

Correct.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

So...for example...someone has a business based on the internet. They move from NY to Alabama to get away from the INSANE costs in the Socialist Republic of New York. And then STILL makes the same $100,000.00 should get taxed MORE for because s/he POCKETS more money per year?

Correct.

Agreed. The entire tax code is based on the premise that those that make more contribute more. Obviously, making 100K in Buttfuck, AL is a heck of a lot more than making 100K in NYC or LA. There should be a some cost-of-living adjustment factor when calculating taxable income. That would hardly be rocket science to figure out and/or administer.