There's just so much about which to rant. I guess I'll start where I am in the transcript.
Why are we discussing this payroll tax holiday?? When President Bush proposed letting people invest 2% of their payroll tax (right?) it was called irresponsible. We don't have the money to fund Social Security past what... 2020? And a payroll tax holiday is a good idea??? How so?
Next - fine, you want to stop subsidizing millionaires, great. Stop subsidizing farmers too. And how about people who get back not only what they paid in taxes during the year, but more over and above that amount? Stop subsidizing ANYTHING. School loans, crops, failing businesses....
I HATE the comment that "the country can't afford" a tax cut for the wealthy. It was their money to begin with!! The government TOOK IT!!!
I actually agree with the no insider trading by members of Congress. That's a duh.
Banks making "huge bets with other people's money" - well, then you shouldn't have bailed them out!!!
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Hate Crime?
Hubby came across this story today and asked an interesting question: "will these guys be charged with a hate crime?" The murdered man was white, his attackers were all Hispanic. Switch the races and ask yourself, "how quickly would these men not only be charged with murder, but with a hate crime?"
Friday, January 20, 2012
Capital Gains Tax
Since Romney is "only" paying a 15% income tax rate (SHOCKING!), and it's mostly because a lot of his income is from capital gains, I had to rant.
I've heard the comments (and actually made some) that say that capital gains come from money that's already been taxed. I meant that you pay taxes, then take after-tax dollars, invest them, then have to pay income tax on the returns. While true, that isn't quite as accurate as it should be.
I was listening to Rush this week and he made a comment about the corporations paying the capital gains pay dividends with after-tax dollars. I didn't believe him (why, Erin, WHY?!) and went to go look it up. Turns out it's true. Corporations earn money, pay taxes on that money, pay dividends to us (or whoever happens to invest in their company), and then that money is taxed AGAIN.
Egads....how many times should it be taxed? And how is that Romney's fault? He didn't write the tax code. If there was a flat tax, there wouldn't be "loopholes" (another word for "laws") that he or other "rich" people could "find" ("follow the law"), and then everyone would pay their "fair share" (equal percentage).
I've heard the comments (and actually made some) that say that capital gains come from money that's already been taxed. I meant that you pay taxes, then take after-tax dollars, invest them, then have to pay income tax on the returns. While true, that isn't quite as accurate as it should be.
I was listening to Rush this week and he made a comment about the corporations paying the capital gains pay dividends with after-tax dollars. I didn't believe him (why, Erin, WHY?!) and went to go look it up. Turns out it's true. Corporations earn money, pay taxes on that money, pay dividends to us (or whoever happens to invest in their company), and then that money is taxed AGAIN.
Egads....how many times should it be taxed? And how is that Romney's fault? He didn't write the tax code. If there was a flat tax, there wouldn't be "loopholes" (another word for "laws") that he or other "rich" people could "find" ("follow the law"), and then everyone would pay their "fair share" (equal percentage).
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Compassion or Class Warfare?
Last week on our local station, Chris Plante was asking how you can tell whether someone actually cares about the "poor" or whether it's class warfare.
I had to sit and think for a few minutes, because I never really considered the difference. I KNEW there was a difference, but I couldn't articulate it. It finally came to me.
If the goal is to lift up the "poor", then it's compassion. If the goal is to drag down the "rich", it's class warfare. Tearing down those that make money, create jobs, and spend "frivolously" does nothing to help the condition of those who are "down-trodden".
If someone really cared about the "lower class", they would create a job, find an internship, teach them to garden, help them fix their house to lower their bills, watch their kids, donate clothes, etc., etc.
I can also see how this ties into the difference between liberals and conservatives and how much they donate. Liberals prefer to donate YOUR money. Conservatives will donate THEIRS. Although, I will say, the study I found said it really seems to have more to do with faith than politics, and since conservatives are more "religious" than liberals.....
http://www.gordon.edu/ace/pdf/Spr07BRGrinols.pdf
I had to sit and think for a few minutes, because I never really considered the difference. I KNEW there was a difference, but I couldn't articulate it. It finally came to me.
If the goal is to lift up the "poor", then it's compassion. If the goal is to drag down the "rich", it's class warfare. Tearing down those that make money, create jobs, and spend "frivolously" does nothing to help the condition of those who are "down-trodden".
If someone really cared about the "lower class", they would create a job, find an internship, teach them to garden, help them fix their house to lower their bills, watch their kids, donate clothes, etc., etc.
I can also see how this ties into the difference between liberals and conservatives and how much they donate. Liberals prefer to donate YOUR money. Conservatives will donate THEIRS. Although, I will say, the study I found said it really seems to have more to do with faith than politics, and since conservatives are more "religious" than liberals.....
http://www.gordon.edu/ace/pdf/Spr07BRGrinols.pdf
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Military cuts
As we are all aware, there have to be "across-the-board" cuts made because, surprise, surprise, the Super Committee couldn't decide on specific cuts. Half is to come from the military, and half apparently from Medicare.
I have a few different ideas and would love to hear your opinions.
First, you should not receive more back in a tax refund than you paid out in taxes. I speak from experience on this one. My hubby often has combat pay, and add that to deductions for our mortgage, charitable giving, and kids, we often get back more than we paid into the system. That makes no sense whatsoever. None. I appreciate the money, but not at the real cost.
Second, specific military cuts. There are several airplanes, ships, etc., that the DoD has specifically said they don't want, but Congress pushed through. The F-35 is one example, as is the C-17. The F-22 and C-130, respectively would work FINE if avionics were updated. I have no examples for the Army or Marines, as I haven't had real conversations with military friends of those services.
Third, Congress gets way too much for what they do. Pensions no matter how long you work? Automatic pay raises?
Fourth, well, pretty much anything that isn't specifically mentioned in the Constitution (see the 10th amendment).
That's a good start for me. However, I know that these are complete pipe dreams....unless we get rid of every single person in Congress. I am ALL FOR term limits. That's one area where I agree with liberals that people are just too stupid to take care of themselves. <kidding, kidding>
I have a few different ideas and would love to hear your opinions.
First, you should not receive more back in a tax refund than you paid out in taxes. I speak from experience on this one. My hubby often has combat pay, and add that to deductions for our mortgage, charitable giving, and kids, we often get back more than we paid into the system. That makes no sense whatsoever. None. I appreciate the money, but not at the real cost.
Second, specific military cuts. There are several airplanes, ships, etc., that the DoD has specifically said they don't want, but Congress pushed through. The F-35 is one example, as is the C-17. The F-22 and C-130, respectively would work FINE if avionics were updated. I have no examples for the Army or Marines, as I haven't had real conversations with military friends of those services.
Third, Congress gets way too much for what they do. Pensions no matter how long you work? Automatic pay raises?
Fourth, well, pretty much anything that isn't specifically mentioned in the Constitution (see the 10th amendment).
That's a good start for me. However, I know that these are complete pipe dreams....unless we get rid of every single person in Congress. I am ALL FOR term limits. That's one area where I agree with liberals that people are just too stupid to take care of themselves. <kidding, kidding>
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Health Insurance and Pre-Existing Conditions
I saw a post today about Rick Santorum and his "Top 10 Most Outrageous Campaign Statements". It was from a liberal "friend", so they were obviously shocked and appalled. I, however, didn't mind it so much - go figure!
Here's the list:
1) Annul all same-sex marriages. I really have no problem with that, EXCEPT that I don't think the federal government should be intruding into states' laws. I can see that the DOMA would probably allow the federal government to do that, though....thoughts??
2) He's for income inequality. Here's where I'm confused. He apparently said that some people should make more than other people because they have better ideas and work harder. Why would ANYONE have a problem with that??
3) He would repeal all federal funding for birth control and allow states to outlaw birth control. I personally understand where he's coming from (people do things they wouldn't otherwise if they have a "safety net" of contraception), HOWEVER, I don't like it. So I can agree with those who say this is outrageous.
4) He supported DADT. I agree. We don't allow men and women to share rooms in the military for obvious reasons. Why would we allow homosexuals to share rooms with "potential hook-ups"? Now, to be clear, homosexuals shouldn't be beaten up or hazed or anything like that in the military. But I understand the reason for them to keep their mouths shut about their sexuality.
5) Obama should oppose abortion because he's black. Hello....what color babies get aborted more?? Blacks. I agree with Santorum on this one.
6) We don't need food stamps because obesity rates are so high. As far as I know, you can only buy "good" food with food stamps, so I don't see the correlation there.
7) He doesn't like the exceptions to abortion for the life or health of the mom, calling them phony. I personally think that the only reason these exceptions are included is to try to make people think that abortion in cases of the mother's health are much higher than they really are. However, I don't see how abortion, which is legal, could be without those exceptions, because they do happen.
8) He said that socialized medicine would have been bad for his daughter, who was born with a genetic abnormality. Well, let's see. We've all heard the stories about waiting for health care and rationing of health care in societies that have a single-payer system. What's the problem with this one?
9) He apparently told a woman complaining about high prescription drug costs to lower her cable and cell phone bills. He also compared health insurance to cars, saying it's a luxury resource. Now this gets sticky, because no one wants to be the one to say to a really sick person, we're not paying for your care. However, I do agree that it's not the federal government's job to pay for your health care. We COULD do without things to pay for our own care, and I DO believe health care costs will never go down or at least stabilize as long as we don't pay for our own care. I know it's unpopular, and people will be mad at me for saying this. But that's why we're here - because no one will say no. You wouldn't go knocking on stranger's doors asking for money for health care, but we're okay with asking the government to pay. Let me also add that you WOULD ask friends, if it was bad (and you should), and they would help you (and they should).
10) He defended insurers that refused people with pre-existing conditions and said that those who had pre-existing conditions should pay more for insurance because they cost more. Sounds like what we do with auto insurance....what's the problem?
Here's the list:
1) Annul all same-sex marriages. I really have no problem with that, EXCEPT that I don't think the federal government should be intruding into states' laws. I can see that the DOMA would probably allow the federal government to do that, though....thoughts??
2) He's for income inequality. Here's where I'm confused. He apparently said that some people should make more than other people because they have better ideas and work harder. Why would ANYONE have a problem with that??
3) He would repeal all federal funding for birth control and allow states to outlaw birth control. I personally understand where he's coming from (people do things they wouldn't otherwise if they have a "safety net" of contraception), HOWEVER, I don't like it. So I can agree with those who say this is outrageous.
4) He supported DADT. I agree. We don't allow men and women to share rooms in the military for obvious reasons. Why would we allow homosexuals to share rooms with "potential hook-ups"? Now, to be clear, homosexuals shouldn't be beaten up or hazed or anything like that in the military. But I understand the reason for them to keep their mouths shut about their sexuality.
5) Obama should oppose abortion because he's black. Hello....what color babies get aborted more?? Blacks. I agree with Santorum on this one.
6) We don't need food stamps because obesity rates are so high. As far as I know, you can only buy "good" food with food stamps, so I don't see the correlation there.
7) He doesn't like the exceptions to abortion for the life or health of the mom, calling them phony. I personally think that the only reason these exceptions are included is to try to make people think that abortion in cases of the mother's health are much higher than they really are. However, I don't see how abortion, which is legal, could be without those exceptions, because they do happen.
8) He said that socialized medicine would have been bad for his daughter, who was born with a genetic abnormality. Well, let's see. We've all heard the stories about waiting for health care and rationing of health care in societies that have a single-payer system. What's the problem with this one?
9) He apparently told a woman complaining about high prescription drug costs to lower her cable and cell phone bills. He also compared health insurance to cars, saying it's a luxury resource. Now this gets sticky, because no one wants to be the one to say to a really sick person, we're not paying for your care. However, I do agree that it's not the federal government's job to pay for your health care. We COULD do without things to pay for our own care, and I DO believe health care costs will never go down or at least stabilize as long as we don't pay for our own care. I know it's unpopular, and people will be mad at me for saying this. But that's why we're here - because no one will say no. You wouldn't go knocking on stranger's doors asking for money for health care, but we're okay with asking the government to pay. Let me also add that you WOULD ask friends, if it was bad (and you should), and they would help you (and they should).
10) He defended insurers that refused people with pre-existing conditions and said that those who had pre-existing conditions should pay more for insurance because they cost more. Sounds like what we do with auto insurance....what's the problem?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)