Anti-tax movement holds 'Tea Party' to protest Obama policies

reply to post by projectvxn


Taxes are theft? Okay. Quit driving on roads; don't go to public parks, state parks, or national parks; forget about using any business that exists due to subsidies (that includes flying); don't try calling 911 when your house gets broken into; and don't forget about our military.

You live in that country, I'll live in this one.

reply to post by Irish M1ck


We're talking about federal taxes which have no Constitutional authority. This is a matter that should be dealt with by the states. Instead we get taxed twice for the same things from the State and the Fed.

Tax policy is a sham. I recommend you read the Tax Code in your state and compare that to the Federal Tax Code. Then break out that trusty Constitution and see if it fits together. Let me know what you come up with.

[edit on 2-3-2009 by projectvxn]

reply to post by projectvxn


I don't think people had to bother to lie about their income or go from bank to bank. There's a word for it but I can't remember it, for financing housing that the buyer could not pay for. They didn't even have to show how they would pay for it. It was this big move to get people into "their own homes". Even people who had income and decent credit history were allowed--encouraged--to buy with no down payment. I remember hearing a former realtor talk about his shock to hear people discuss 80/20. That used to mean finance 80%, put 20% cash down. Then it became finance 80% with one loan and the other 20% with the other. All on the assumption that the house would continue to increase in value and built equity.

Ninja loans. that's what they were alled. No Inome No Job No Assets

AIG sold insurance policies on these loans so banks were "covered", and used this coverage in place of cash to loan out to others.

I don't think the Tea Party is the same as the original one in Boston, but I think that it appeals to people to participate in a historic process of protest against unfair government policies.

Originally posted by Hx3_1963
From all information I see, we need to repeal the current 13th Amendment, fix and re-instate the original, discard the 14th as it was never ratified and is unconstitutional.
Go over every single one amended after those, to merit their legality based on the original 13th...

Between the "new" 13th and 14th we got royally screwed...

Capitol protest assails Obama, big spending
www.lansingstatejournal.com...

A spirited crowd of unhappy Michiganders gathered at noon Friday outside the state Capitol to express their displeasure with President Barack Obama, the federal stimulus package, federal bailouts and assorted other grievances as part of a national Tea Party Protest.

So...you would re-instate slavery?

Isn't that what the Illuminati want now?

reply to post by projectvxn


That's what Westley Snipes thought, too.

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by projectvxn

 

That's what Westley Snipes thought, too.

Brilliant M1ck....


Just Brilliant!


It's funny how people forget about reality sometimes, and where things come from. Lots of folks tend to think that everything would be just peachy keen if they didn't pay those darned federal taxes.

Well, these are the same folks who wanted deregulation of the markets... and look what that got us!

It's funny how everyone wants to talk about how unfettered capitalism is so great because everything acquires a value on the market... which I agree to mostly, but they forget about the objective value of capitalism itself, when it's stock goes down, the government has to step in and help it back up on its feet again.

This stimulus bill isn't anymore anti-capitalist, this is Government giving unregulated capitalism a shot, and placing regulations back on it again so it can grow in a sustainable and "ACTUAL" way.

You see, none of this would have happened if we had simply regulated that all sub prime's be exposed to the scrutiny of accredited and independent third parties, with stiff penalties for multiple rejections.

So many people just don't understand what has just happened to them. They want to live in some sort of narrative as if it's TPTB which are intentionally messing with them. When in reality, this is all very easy to understand when seen through an economic lens.

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by projectvxn

 

That's what Westley Snipes thought, too.

Brilliant M1ck....


Just Brilliant!


It's funny how people forget about reality sometimes, and where things come from. Lots of folks tend to think that everything would be just peachy keen if they didn't pay those darned federal taxes.

Well, these are the same folks who wanted deregulation of the markets... and look what that got us!

It's funny how everyone wants to talk about how unfettered capitalism is so great because everything acquires a value on the market... which I agree to mostly, but they forget about the objective value of capitalism itself, when it's stock goes down, the government has to step in and help it back up on its feet again.

This stimulus bill isn't anymore anti-capitalist, this is Government giving unregulated capitalism a shot, and placing regulations back on it again so it can grow in a sustainable and "ACTUAL" way.

You see, none of this would have happened if we had simply regulated that all sub prime's be exposed to the scrutiny of accredited and independent third parties, with stiff penalties for multiple rejections.

So many people just don't understand what has just happened to them. They want to live in some sort of narrative as if it's TPTB which are intentionally messing with them. When in reality, this is all very easy to understand when seen through an economic lens.

AMEN 2 you and M1CK

People forget that HOVER balanced the budget pre great depression.
That worked really well now didn't it?

The reason it didn't work is because all the investor waited to reinvest, and waited and waited and waited

until the market worth 10% 0f it original value.

THE PROBLEM is LACK of capital people WAKE up or put your money where your mouth is invest or wait for the bread line.

DD I usually agree with you - but a majority of the people protesting are people who are trying reinstate GWB policies and GOP control again.

NEVER MIND BUSH - NEVER MIND the sheer brilliance of DRAINING THE BEAST via spending - while letting the PRIVATE sector bone anyone and anything....

YOUR applause are motivated attempting to rewrite GWB era works, in may cases ALA RUSH and GLEN PECK.

WHY don't people protest the stinking BANKS???

VIVA LA GOP!

We can vote politicians out, you can vote out GREEDY CORPORATE mindsets...

reply to post by HunkaHunka


I recommend you read the history of government intervention in the markets and then come back and tell me that more government intervention is necessary. We've dumped 11 trillion thus far, where's the recovery? We've seen nothing but loses. Clinton's intervention in the housing market was supposed to be a shot in the arm to the economy and now look where we are. Subprime and Option Arm lending are his baby, and that intervention left loophole open for massive fraud and market manipulation. You all seem to think that everyone on Wall St. is a crook. You seem to think that we've ever had deregulated markets. It's a good strategy really, regulate the markets in totalitarian ways, wait for it to fail, and then blame the system and beg for more regulation. Until the government has full control of everything you buy and sell. I love all of these original thoughts, but this is incremental communism.

I'm not Republican and I'm not a Democrat, I'm a true freemarket capitalist, and if Bush had been a true, freemarket capitalist none of this would have ever happened. Those loopholes would have been closed. You seem to think that the President is also the commander in chief of the economy and this is not the case. Every time a president steps into the economy it has nothing to do with you and me and everything to do with whoever lobbied the White House. When the government steps in to fix the freemarket it spends OUR money to prop up fail business models because their friends are running these ghost ships. True free markets are like Evolutionary theory. Where one fails another rises to takes it's place. If we don't allow them to fail then they don't learn from mistakes. And the ones waiting to find a niche in the market are forced out in favor of government subsidized corporate consolidation, which further corners markets, stifles wages, kills competition, and basically NAFTA's us to death.

But yeah, government should step in.

If you can SHOW me how this intervention would work, and how arbitrarily moving taxes around in classist fashion is a good idea.

[edit on 3-3-2009 by projectvxn]

[edit on 3-3-2009 by projectvxn]

[edit on 3-3-2009 by projectvxn]

I'll bet not a one of them are making $250,000.00 or more per year. How dumb is that - protesting against a cut in their taxes?

Originally posted by Lilitu
I'll bet not a one of them are making $250,000.00 or more per year. How dumb is that - protesting against a cut in their taxes?

Again taxes are not being cut they're being moved. You will still pay for this in products and services when the cost of doing business goes up.

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

Originally posted by DimensionalDetective


NOW we're talking people!!!

THIS is what needs to be done on a MASS BASIS to stop this endless thievery and misallocation of our tax-dollars!

Actually, DD, It really doesn't do their cause any benefit given the organizers of this have no sense of history.

The Boston Tea Party was not because they were being taxed. It was because they were being taxed on all goods which came into and out of their port, but had no say in anything. You know... Taxation without Representation.


It's all a non-original and vain attempt at seeming relevant.

So, how exactly is "taxed on all goods which came into and out of their port, but had no say in anything. You know... Taxation without Representation." different than what is happening today? With Pelosi and Reid pushing their so-called progressive agenda when poll after poll and even obama at times seem to be against doing so.

Really, your constant defense of anything obama or liberal is starting to sound a bit shrill.

[edit on 3/3/2009 by centurion1211]

reply to post by projectvxn


And therein lies the problem. You can't tax these money hogs. They just pass the tax down to the consumer by raising prices.

They are the problem. Wish I could pass my taxes on to someone too.

[edit on 3/3/2009 by Irish M1ck]

I love it. Obamanomics are a joke. These taxes are not right.
We need more people to stand up for themselves in this country.

[edit on 3/3/2009 by Irish M1ck]

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by projectvxn

 

And therein lies the problem. You can't tax these money hogs. They just pass the tax down to the consumer by raising prices.

They are the problem. Wish I could pass my taxes on to someone too.

[edit on 3/3/2009 by Irish M1ck]

That's called Economics 101, where a business's costs of doing business are reflected in the price of its goods and services. What are they supposed to do, operate at a loss if the government keeps raising taxes?

Oh, and tell us all that YOU would be the only one who wouldn't pass on your taxes to the consumers if YOU owned a business. Please ...

reply to post by centurion1211


No, see, businesses are levied extra taxes for a reason. Instead, what usually happens depends on the elasticity of the product they sell, and how much they can AFFORD to screw us.

Yes, I understand business quite well, and I enjoy practicing it. I just think it should be done ethically.

*Edit:

And they aren't operating at a loss, which is generally why the tax is increased. If the industry was operating at a loss, it would be subsidized, not taxed.

[edit on 3/3/2009 by Irish M1ck]

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by projectvxn

 

And therein lies the problem. You can't tax these money hogs. They just pass the tax down to the consumer by raising prices.

They are the problem. Wish I could pass my taxes on to someone too.

[edit on 3/3/2009 by Irish M1ck]

No, that is basic economics. Supply and Demand. Now you're talking price controls. That KILLS business and fuels the inflation fire. What we need is control of the government. Oversee the government. They are the ones making monetary and fiscal policy. They are the ones that inflate the dollar, tax the people and the corporations, that in turn fuel higher prices. It is their actions that affect the market in adverse ways. They don't enforce Anti-Trust monopoly laws, the SEC is a joke they covered up Madoff AND Stanford for years. And they're supposed to be a regulatory entity. Oversee the government.

People seem to think that free markets are devoid of regulation. Regional monopolies and national monopolies are anti-free market. These huge conglomerates, and top heavy financial institution are a product of government intervention, and fascist collusion. And both the left and the right don't seem to understand that ANY incursion of one onto the other is a BAD THING. You don't trust the government, that's why you're here, you don't trust corporations either, so why the hell would you want the government to involve itself in the freemarket? Why would you want huge illegal conglomerates to involve themselves in public policy?

Please don't assume that because I believe in the free-market that I don't believe in enforcing fraud and exploitation regulations. Please don't assume that because I'm not against the rich, that somehow it means I'm against the poor. The fact of the matter is this:

Taxes are moved as I've said several times. Republicans and Democrats have NEVER cut taxes. How else can you explain the rate of growth in the government regardless of administration? It's class warfare at the government level, and it wouldn't surprise me if they did this on purpose. We're all in this together, rich and poor. Without the working class the rich would not be rich, without the rich the working class would have no jobs and the poor would not have opportunity to rise from poverty. Take it from a guy whose been homeless in the streets of Las Vegas, I've never been hired by a poor man, but a rich man hired my poor ass and now I'm not poor anymore.

This doesn't mean that there aren't injustices, but if we expect the government to be everything to us, then it can ask everything of us. And that is NOT freedom. It's slavery.

reply to post by projectvxn


The free market is a joke. The bailout put it on full display, when companies begged for money, and then spent in on superfluous junk. Unbelievable. But these are the people who can't afford a tax hike? These are the people who can't afford to pay decent salaries?

I don't buy it. I can read income statements. I can read statements of owners equity, and I can read cash flow charts. I know they have money, I know what they do with their money, and I don't buy into this garbage that paying decent wages and/or eating taxes levied UPON THEM will automatically cause them to reach the shut down point.

That's garbage.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by HunkaHunka

 

I recommend you read the history of government intervention in the markets and then come back and tell me that more government intervention is necessary. We've dumped 11 trillion thus far, where's the recovery?

[edit on 3-3-2009 by projectvxn]

Things are bad enough... Do you want to take your figure back or clarify?

to late


12/31/1977 CARTER $ 718,943,000,000 10% $2,030,900,000,000 35.4%
12/31/1978 CARTER $ 789,207,000,000 10% $2,294,700,000,000 34.4%
12/31/1979 CARTER $ 845,116,000,000 7% $2,563,300,000,000 33.0%
12/31/1980 CARTER $ 930,210,000,000 10% 42% 10.6% $2,789,500,000,000 33.3%
12/31/1981 REAGAN $ 1,028,729,000,000 11% $3,128,400,000,000 32.9%
12/31/1982 REAGAN $ 1,197,073,000,000 16% $3,255,000,000,000 36.8%
12/31/1983 REAGAN $ 1,410,702,000,000 18% $3,536,700,000,000 39.9%
12/31/1984 REAGAN $ 1,662,966,000,000 18% $3,933,200,000,000 42.3%
12/31/1985 REAGAN $ 1,945,912,000,000 17% $4,220,300,000,000 46.1%
12/31/1986 REAGAN $ 2,214,835,000,000 14% $4,462,800,000,000 49.6%
12/31/1987 REAGAN $ 2,431,715,000,000 10% $4,739,500,000,000 51.3%
12/31/1988 REAGAN $ 2,684,392,000,000 10% 189% 23.6% $5,103,800,000,000 52.6%
12/31/1989 BUSH $ 2,952,994,000,000 10% $5,484,400,000,000 53.8%
12/31/1990 BUSH $ 3,364,820,000,000 14% $5,803,100,000,000 58.0%
12/31/1991 BUSH $ 3,801,800,000,000 13% $5,995,900,000,000 63.4%
12/31/1992 BUSH $ 4,177,009,000,000 10% 55.6% 13.9% $6,337,700,000,000 65.9%
12/31/1993 CLINTON $ 4,535,687,054,406 9% $6,657,400,000,000 68.1%
12/31/1994 CLINTON $ 4,800,149,946,143 6% $7,072,200,000,000 67.9%
12/31/1995 CLINTON $ 4,988,664,979,014 4% $7,397,700,000,000 67.4%
12/31/1996 CLINTON $ 5,323,171,750,783 7% $7,816,900,000,000 68.1%
12/31/1997 CLINTON $ 5,502,388,012,375 3% $8,304,300,000,000 66.3%
12/31/1998 CLINTON $ 5,614,217,021,195 2% $8,747,000,000,000 64.2%
12/31/1999 CLINTON $ 5,776,091,314,225 3% $9,268,400,000,000 62.3%
12/31/2000 CLINTON $ 5,662,216,013,697 -2% 36% 4.4% $9,817,000,000,000 57.7%
12/31/2001 BUSH $ 5,943,438,563,436 5% $10,128,000,000,000 58.7%
12/31/2002 BUSH $ 6,405,707,456,847 8% $10,469,600,000,000 61.2%
12/31/2003 BUSH $ 7,001,312,247,818 9% $10,960,800,000,000 63.9%
12/31/2004 BUSH $ 7,596,165,867,424 8% $11,685,900,000,000 65.0%
12/30/2005 BUSH $ 8,170,424,541,313 8% $12,433,900,000,000 65.0%
12/29/2006 BUSH $ 8,680,224,380,086 6% $13,194,700,000,000 65.7%
12/28/2007 BUSH $ 9,229,172,659,218 6% $13,927,000,000,000 66.3%
12/31/2008 BUSH $ 10,699,804,864,612 16% 89% 11.1% $13,692,160,000,000 78.1%



Here in you have the success of Reaganomics and current Conservative ideology at work....

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by projectvxn

 

The free market is a joke. The bailout put it on full display, when companies begged for money, and then spent in on superfluous junk. Unbelievable. But these are the people who can't afford a tax hike? These are the people who can't afford to pay decent salaries?

I don't buy it. I can read income statements. I can read statements of owners equity, and I can read cash flow charts. I know they have money, I know what they do with their money, and I don't buy into this garbage that paying decent wages and/or eating taxes levied UPON THEM will automatically cause them to reach the shut down point.

That's garbage.

Here you go assuming most rich people go around looking for ways to screw other, and this isn't the case. Many have made their fortunes ethically and legally. Apple anyone? Steve Jobs' history is quite well documented, we know of his humble beginnings, and Apple is now the most marketable company in technology. And we all benefit from it. No one should have to subsidize crime. And that's that we're doing.

I recommend you look into how the market works. Not how the news or the political pundits say they work, but how it actually works, before you say the free-market is a joke. You obviously ignored the entire part of my post where I addressed these sort of issues. I said specifically that there should be NO collusion with government and big business and VICE VERSA.

"A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have."