It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Hey "Liberals", you want to use government force to take my money?

page: 8
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 23 2017 @ 09:00 AM

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: whywhynot

Clinton never did that, and it was because of him repealing Glass Stegall, and everyone gets a home regardless if they could pay for it or not.

Don't know why liberals love touting a sexual predator as being righteous.

But whywhynot has a valid point, Bill Clinton didn’t do it without the help of Congress.

After all, it was a Congress led by none other than Newt Gingrich who insisted on the repeal of the Glass-Stegall Act, the enactment of NAFTA and awarding China with Permanent Most Favored Trading Status.

Those three things are what led to the financial crisis of 2008, it just took a while for their effects to metastasize.

Enacting NAFTA and awarding China with PMFTS were the two “guarantees” that the corporate world was waiting on before they initiated their plan to outsource and/or totally move all laborious activities associated with manufacturing their products out of the USA.

They needed a guarantee that their products would still be welcome in the USA, even if manufactured abroad, before they could initiate their long term plan to relocate all manufacturing to countries with low cost labor and little or no worker safety and/or environmental protections or regulations.

Free trade agreements like NAFTA and China’s PMFTS were just what the doctor ordered.

It was the impetus for that “huge sucking sound,” a term coined by Ross Perot during his presidential bid, that describes the sound generated by the mass exodus of American manufacturing jobs.

Couple that job loss with the massive amount of fraud that engulfed the financial markets after the repeal of Glass-Stegall, allow those policies to metastasize for 8 to 10 years, add an unfunded war or two into the mix and you end up with the 2008 meltdown.

When Obama took office, our nation was on the brink of another historic depression. Our financial markets were in total collapse and we were hemorrhaging 700,000+ jobs a month.

Yes he doubled our debt in 8 years, but that’s what it took to correct the affects of those years when Bill Clinton signed into law, policies promoted by Newt Gingrich and his republican Congress.

I used to have a bumper sticker on my truck that read; “No Newt Is Good Newt” and my Republican father-in-law hated it.
edit on 23-12-2017 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2017 @ 11:44 AM
a reply to: kelbtalfenek

None of those things are bad. The American people shouldn't be forced to pay for any of those things against their will. Those interested in those issues can and will provide personal funding. Presently, though, it is impossible to do with ~40% of your lifetime income being taken by the Fed.

posted on Dec, 23 2017 @ 11:49 AM
a reply to: Flatfish

Yes, and Obama did some decent things economically I'll give you that. However, none of that means anything if we default on our ridiculous national debt OR expect the Citizens to work day-in day-out to pay it back.

I don't like someone taking out debt in my name (that I'm expected to pay back) without asking me directly. If obtaining approval from each Citizen is too difficult, then perhaps we need to revert to pre-18xx days when there was no tax at the federal level.

The government only needs to be about 1/1,000,000th the size it is now. Time to restore the Republic to its Constitutional origins. I love our armed forces, but only a handful of those organizations are authorized by the Constitution. So in that sense, yes, reduce military funding significantly (thanks to nuclear weapons, conventional war is obsolete). The fact remains that standing armies are historically the tools of tyrants.

IMO, none of the wars we've engaged in since WWII have been worth fighting. If something isn't worth launching nuclear weapons over, it isn't worth sending in conventional assets either. Can't drones, prompt global strike and sub-kiloton DEPW fill this niche for much less money?
edit on 12/23/2017 by JBurns because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2017 @ 12:03 PM
a reply to: VVV88

When a person works full time, and yet the pay is so low that the person's income is still well below the poverty line, the "tax" they are paying is their labor that is essentially unpaid for. Take a Walmart worker, average pay $9/hour (from the single richest family on Earth, the family itself made $12 billion in one single day last year), cannot afford to live in this nation if they have a child (keep in mind, this person is working full-time, contributing to the economy), and thus is entitled to Medicaid and food stamps.

The "lazy welfare recipient" in that scenario is the Walton family and Walmart shareholders. They won't pay their employees enough to live in a civilized society, and therefore, we pick up the tab - paying their health insurance for their kids and paying to feed their kids - because Walmart won't. Why doesn't Walmart do it? Because then maybe the family will only be worth $60 billion instead of $200 billion.

As for the "lower end working poor" that falls into the middle class, they ALREADY pay a higher tax rate than the Waltons (big Republican dupporters), it's called the carried interest rate and you ought to maybe educate yourself. People who live on investment income are taxed at a lower level than those that WORK for wages. In essence, this country devalues an individuals work more than living off the work of others, which is all carried interest is, living off the effort of others.

This tax scam is a massive giveaway to the rich (how is repealing the estate tax going to help the economy?) that will exponentially increase the deficit which Obama had dropping during the last 3 years of his tenure. As soon as the deficit explodes out of control, Paul Ryan and company will be there to cut medicare, medicaid and social security.

If you're of the type that says "it's the employees fault, they should go to school and better themselves, lift themselves up by the bootstraps, then you are nothing but a greed driven self-righteous fool. By definition, 1 out of 5 people is going to be in the bottom 20% of intelligence and drive. The bottom 20% in intelligence are not capable of going to school and becoming engineers. But they ARE capable of living a good life, working hard, following the rules and being productive citizens. You still want them to live in poverty? All so that your cheap stuff is even cheaper?

posted on Dec, 23 2017 @ 12:49 PM
a reply to: JBurns

IMO, government needs to be big enough to efficiently perform the functions required of it and nuclear weapons need to be eliminated, not banked upon.

When it comes to incurring debt, I tend to blame those whose policies led to the debt and not so much those who had the reality of those policies dumped in their laps.

With all the economic indicators, (unemployment rate, stock market rally, etc...) in record territory and all due to Trump’s brilliant policies according to him and his supporters, there was no viable reason to add 1.5 trillion to our national debt just to give tax cuts to the wealthy.

Unless of course, you’re just paying off campaign promises to your wealth donor base.

posted on Dec, 23 2017 @ 12:50 PM

originally posted by: neo96
Well if they want less infant mortality then why the hell do they support abortion?

Actually, we'd rather have federally funded birth control. But everyone seems to be against that.

posted on Dec, 23 2017 @ 01:01 PM

originally posted by: toysforadults
This about somes up the entire sjw, Democractic and "liberal" movement in a single snapshot.

Get it right lefties! We have a free market, you want to donate more of your money to support the things you wish to see, go get it!

Actually, this isn't a free market. It's a regulated market, though you might not have noticed it. In the past, free market economy in America led to monpolies and price fixing and collusion. Hence, this is already a regulated market.

You have no right to take my money and force me to pay for things I don't care about!

Just as our money goes to pay for things that we don't care about - or things that we disapprove of. It's part of living in any country with a government. And frankly, I don't want our waterways looking like the ones in countries with no pollution regulations. Like the ones in Vietnam

Maybe you want that, with the resulting disease and illness. I sure don't. You see pollution like that in areas where there's no money and no regulations. Our waterways are pretty trashy already but I sure don't want that level of mess.

So done with virtue signaling and this new socialist/ communist ideology taking over the loudest minority in American politics. You want something create it yourself using the free market like everyone else. Get out of my business.

I don't think you understand what a free market is.

Also, when you donate more than you have to to support the programs you want to support to the IRS during tax seasons because of your good nature. Please update us with a picture here in the thread. Don't reveal any personal info (PII) just let us know you have followed through with your idea and helped create a large government!

I already do.

Like many people, my W2 has no deductions on it - so the government actually has extra money from us to play with all year and to invest with. We file standard deductions during tax season and get a refund (though not the interest, of course.)

I also volunteer with some social organizations, including Audubon, and I am volunteering with one local politician who has done quite a bit for the poor in our community. I also buy lunches for all the seniors at a local senior center (in the poorest part of town) several times a year.

So what have you done for America lately?
edit on 23-12-2017 by Byrd because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2017 @ 01:16 PM

originally posted by: Eshel
a reply to: dothedew

If you think for one second that you are entitled to take other people's money to pay for YOUR stuff, you need to sit down and reevaluate your thinking process.

They take MY money to pay for MY stuff. They take YOUR money to pay for YOUR stuff. Do you not use any infrastructure? Are you not protected by our military? The list goes on and on.

If you don't want your taxes to go to any of this, then all you have to do is "exempt" yourself. But keep in mind, you will also not be able to claim any government benefits.

If you claim exemption from withholding, your employer will not withhold federal income tax from your wages. The exemption applies only to income tax, not to Social Security or Medicare tax.

IRS Link

What a strange comment.

First of all, you have to qualify to declare yourself exempt from withholding. Secondly, doing so does not mean you won't owe income taxes at the end of the year.

Your comment makes it sound like you can just choose to not pay income taxes and not face consequences.

ETA: And I don't mean 'not getting government benefits' as a consequence. More like tax evasion charges and prison.

edit on 12/23/2017 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2017 @ 05:18 PM

originally posted by: Eshel
a reply to: dothedew

cool, then just opt out like I suggested. It's super simple. On your W4, you just write "exempt" on line 7. It's much easier than bitching and moaning.

(my bet: you just want something to scream and yell about) doesn't work like that. You can't opt out of paying federal income taxes. Not if you don't want to go to prison. I don't know where you got the idea that you can.

You MIGHT be able to declare yourself exempt from withholding income taxes from your paycheck (if you qualify, that is)...but if you owe taxes on your income at the end of the year, you have to pay them.

You are doling out horrible misinformation and it's frankly idiotic.

And in light of how ridiculously stupid & wrong the advice you are giving should save your snark.

I have to old are you???


(And, btw, I can't believe there were people stupid enough to star those comments!)

edit on 12/23/2017 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2017 @ 08:04 PM
I don't mind taxes for lots of things (schools, snow plows, police, air traffic control, defense etc). What I don't like is paying is subsidies to GE (General Electric), big oil companies and mega farm corporate owners who are all way more profitable than me. People who oppose taxes ought to go to some island where the "Lord of the Fies" mentality can sort out the social order and you can enjoy a society that has no organization, protections, courts or services.

posted on Dec, 26 2017 @ 12:01 PM
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

I agree 100%. Way too much money goes to the military, which is unnecessarily huge. Much of that could be redirected to education or health care and things that help us all, but people would still whine about it because any government program is automatically considered socialism by them, but not the military. They never complain about a military capable of world conquest stationed in countries all over the world for no reason.
edit on 12 26 17 by Barcs because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 26 2017 @ 12:03 PM

originally posted by: VVV88

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: DBCowboy

You’re really not listening to me or others who are questioning this tax bill.

First of all, I'm not against tax cuts for MC or poor people, or even tax cuts for the rich if there modest.

What most people don’t like is the humongous tax cuts for the rich.

“Poor” people don’t pay federal income tax, therefore they don’t get a tax cut.

They don't? I'm sorry but when I was poor I paid taxes just like anybody else. Just because they pay a smaller percentage than rich people and sometimes get government assistance, doesn't mean they don't pay taxes.
edit on 12 26 17 by Barcs because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 26 2017 @ 12:06 PM

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: kelbtalfenek

None of those things are bad. The American people shouldn't be forced to pay for any of those things against their will. Those interested in those issues can and will provide personal funding. Presently, though, it is impossible to do with ~40% of your lifetime income being taken by the Fed.

That's not how it works, though. If everyone was given the option of funding things with their own money, nobody would pay for it. Who would donate to fix the roads or willingly donate 90% of their taxes to the military. Taxes are a necessary evil in a capitalistic society. I don't agree with how our money is spent, but that is something we have no control over anyway, so I don't get why people get so uptight about it like the OP. I would personally gladly pay a little bit more in taxes to improve our education / healthcare.
edit on 12 26 17 by Barcs because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 26 2017 @ 05:40 PM
The problem is government is the least efficient appropriation of money there is to get things done. The private sector is more efficient in everything from space, science, education, construction, medicine, and even defense.

My water bill has doubled in four years to build a new water treatment plant currently over budget and weeks behind in construction. I would have rather kept paying for bottled drinking water, it was cheaper.

Maintainance to National Parks is worth spending tax money on.

If people truely demanded renewable energy then they will be putting up solar panels or build windmills. RE is crossing the threshold of being cheaper than fossil fuels in the long run so demand for power plants will be on the decline. Market forces will dictate when it is the right time to make the switch.

I wish I never had to pay anything into Social Security and the program was scrapped. Since I have been paying in for a couple decades I now do expect something in return on my money. My private investments have grown 1000's% faster than my S.S. contributions. If I had my S.S. money to invest I would have been as rich as I ever wanted to be.

The government should only cover infrastructure, schools, safety standards, protecting economic freedoms, and national defense. Government should never be a part of forcing retirement planning or health care on you.

The ultimate solution unfortunately involves resetting the Federal Reserve. The compounding interest keeps slowly squeezing everybody tighter and tighter, government included. In a different system we could probably afford all the democratic/liberal programs with just a small tax burden. Just paying the finance charge on the Nat'l Debt is getting harder all the time.

new topics

top topics

<< 5  6  7   >>

log in