Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...

“Registered Conservative”

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#20560 Aug 2, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>Hudgens? He wouldn't be a right wing wacko by chance, now would he. And the "weekly standard", would that be a bipartisan newsletter without a specific agenda, just curious.
No, you're not curious, you're baiting.

“Registered Conservative”

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#20561 Aug 2, 2013
When wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry General but I'm against the fairtax proposal. It's just another way to put all tax revenue on the individual.
Their 23% tax proposal would kill the average working man and woman.
Plus the plan won't work because governments will always get more money through other type of taxes, fees, licenses, etc.
A family making $30k would pay $6900 a year under the fair tax proposal.
Have you read the books?

“Registered Conservative”

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#20562 Aug 2, 2013
When wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry General but I'm against the fairtax proposal. It's just another way to put all tax revenue on the individual.
Their 23% tax proposal would kill the average working man and woman.
Plus the plan won't work because governments will always get more money through other type of taxes, fees, licenses, etc.
A family making $30k would pay $6900 a year under the fair tax proposal.
here's a starting point for you.

Is the 23% FairTax revenue-neutral rate higher or lower when compared to income and Social Security taxes people pay today?

Most people are paying that much or more today -- much of it is just hidden from view. The income tax bracket most people fall into is 15 percent, and all wage earners pay 7.65 percent in payroll taxes. That’s 23 percent right there, without taking into account the 7.65 percent employer matching! On top of that, you have to add in the business taxes and associated compliance costs passed on to consumers in higher prices.

Effective tax rates vs. stated tax rates
Because the 23-percent FairTax rate of $0.23 on every dollar spent is not imposed on necessities, an individual spending $30,000 pays an effective tax rate of only 15.5 percent, not 23 percent. That same individual will pay 17.3 percent of his or her income to federal taxes under current law.

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer...
jeb stuart

Cordele, GA

#20563 Aug 2, 2013
When wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry General but I'm against the fairtax proposal. It's just another way to put all tax revenue on the individual.
Their 23% tax proposal would kill the average working man and woman.
Plus the plan won't work because governments will always get more money through other type of taxes, fees, licenses, etc.
A family making $30k would pay $6900 a year under the fair tax proposal.
Damn, you may not be as stupid as I originally thought- naw, jus kiddin'!

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#20565 Aug 2, 2013
CNN Exclusive: Dozens of CIA Operatives on the ground during Benghazi attack
==========
"CNN has uncovered exclusive new information about what is allegedly happening at the CIA, in the wake of the deadly Benghazi terror attack.

Sources now tell CNN dozens of people working for the CIA were on the ground that night, and that the agency is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret.

CNN has learned the CIA is involved in what one source calls an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency's Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.

Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency's missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency's workings.

The goal of the questioning, according to sources, is to find out if anyone is talking to the media or Congress.
It is being described as pure intimidation, with the threat that any unauthorized CIA employee who leaks information could face the end of his or her career."
....
"Among the many secrets still yet to be told about the Benghazi mission, is just how many Americans were there the night of the attack.
A source now tells CNN that number was 35, with as many as seven wounded, some seriously."

http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/01/exclu...

==========
Programming note: Was there a political cover up surrounding the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans? Watch a CNN special investigation — The Truth About Benghazi, Tuesday at 10 p.m. ET.
====
====
That sure is a lot of effort to hide a "phony scandal".

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#20566 Aug 2, 2013
When wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry General but I'm against the fairtax proposal. It's just another way to put all tax revenue on the individual.
Their 23% tax proposal would kill the average working man and woman.
Plus the plan won't work because governments will always get more money through other type of taxes, fees, licenses, etc.
A family making $30k would pay $6900 a year under the fair tax proposal.
Sorry to "butt in", but you're mistaken about a few things...

As I've said many times before, if you're not for the FairTax, you likely don't understand it.

"It's just another way to put all tax revenue on the individual."

Isn't that where it is now? Corporate taxes are a very low % of what the government collects, and one could argue that since people own corporations, the taxes that corporations pay, because they result in low dividends or a lower return to shareholders, come from people.

"Their 23% tax proposal would kill the average working man and woman."

The embedded (or is it imbedded?) taxes we already pay on goods approximates the 23% FairTax. Prices are not expected to change much.

"A family making $30k would pay $6900 a year under the fair tax proposal."

1. Actually, the amount someone makes is irrelevant under the FairTax, it's what you spend. But, I get your point. It's addressed in #2. below.

2. There's a prebate that would be paid to all households, insuring (or is it ensuring?), via the monthly prebate check, that there is no "FairTax" paid up to the top of the poverty level.
So, a family of 4, making $30K a year wouldn't be paying anywhere near $6,900 per year.

Please review the page at the link:

http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/2009FairTaxPrebate...

The graph at the bottom of the page shows that the FairTax is actually progressive...

"Plus the plan won't work because governments will always get more money through other type of taxes, fees, licenses, etc."

And?

The plan is not intended to eliminate property taxes, etc., it's intended to replace our ludicrous FEDERAL INCOME TAX "system".

Just imagine the amount of unreported wages (people being paid "under the table") that would be "taxed" as people spend the $ and how long it takes to prepare income tax returns each year. Oh yeah, all these US companies that have a LOT of $ in banks offshore (you might want to check and see how many billions Apple has in foreign banks), would be able to use that cash in the US without it being taxed.

I could go on and on, but it would be better (and more educational) for you to do the research.

www.fairtax.org

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#20567 Aug 2, 2013
General Robert E Lee wrote:
<quoted text>
here's a starting point for you.
Is the 23% FairTax revenue-neutral rate higher or lower when compared to income and Social Security taxes people pay today?
Most people are paying that much or more today -- much of it is just hidden from view. The income tax bracket most people fall into is 15 percent, and all wage earners pay 7.65 percent in payroll taxes. That’s 23 percent right there, without taking into account the 7.65 percent employer matching! On top of that, you have to add in the business taxes and associated compliance costs passed on to consumers in higher prices.
Effective tax rates vs. stated tax rates
Because the 23-percent FairTax rate of $0.23 on every dollar spent is not imposed on necessities, an individual spending $30,000 pays an effective tax rate of only 15.5 percent, not 23 percent. That same individual will pay 17.3 percent of his or her income to federal taxes under current law.
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer...
Apologies, General, sir, I didn't see your response before I posted.

:)
OMTE

Moultrie, GA

#20568 Aug 2, 2013
All Rep. of Congress, that can be bought by lobbyist, to destroy this country. Needs to be ousted at election time. America is not for sale. These politicians like Lindsey Graham, Rubio, and Jeb Bush are not interested in what's best for the poor American people. They are only interested in profit for Big Business buddies. People like Karl Rove never learn that money doesn't buy everything. If they give amnesty to illegal criminal aliens, the American Dream will die for Americans. We will become second class citizens in our own country. Impeach Obama and Boehner Today. Boycott all supporters of the amnesty.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/...
OMTE

Moultrie, GA

#20569 Aug 2, 2013
We are paying Congress to do nothing. They have done nothing to better the lives of the average American. They don't work but three days a week. How can they expect to get anything accomplished. They all need ousted at election time.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/01/politics/congre...
OMTE

Moultrie, GA

#20570 Aug 2, 2013
Trey Gowdy for President 2016.
http://www.citizen-times.com/article/BS/20130...
jeb stuart

Cordele, GA

#20571 Aug 2, 2013
Bill in Dville wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry to "butt in", but you're mistaken about a few things...
As I've said many times before, if you're not for the FairTax, you likely don't understand it.
"It's just another way to put all tax revenue on the individual."
Isn't that where it is now? Corporate taxes are a very low % of what the government collects, and one could argue that since people own corporations, the taxes that corporations pay, because they result in low dividends or a lower return to shareholders, come from people.
"Their 23% tax proposal would kill the average working man and woman."
The embedded (or is it imbedded?) taxes we already pay on goods approximates the 23% FairTax. Prices are not expected to change much.
"A family making $30k would pay $6900 a year under the fair tax proposal."
1. Actually, the amount someone makes is irrelevant under the FairTax, it's what you spend. But, I get your point. It's addressed in #2. below.
2. There's a prebate that would be paid to all households, insuring (or is it ensuring?), via the monthly prebate check, that there is no "FairTax" paid up to the top of the poverty level.
So, a family of 4, making $30K a year wouldn't be paying anywhere near $6,900 per year.
Please review the page at the link:
http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/2009FairTaxPrebate...
The graph at the bottom of the page shows that the FairTax is actually progressive...
"Plus the plan won't work because governments will always get more money through other type of taxes, fees, licenses, etc."
And?
The plan is not intended to eliminate property taxes, etc., it's intended to replace our ludicrous FEDERAL INCOME TAX "system".
Just imagine the amount of unreported wages (people being paid "under the table") that would be "taxed" as people spend the $ and how long it takes to prepare income tax returns each year. Oh yeah, all these US companies that have a LOT of $ in banks offshore (you might want to check and see how many billions Apple has in foreign banks), would be able to use that cash in the US without it being taxed.
I could go on and on, but it would be better (and more educational) for you to do the research.
www.fairtax.org
Ut-Oh! Looks like someone just untethered (or is it unteetered) Mr. Bill from his umbilical (or is it imbecile) cord!
danger zone

Moultrie, GA

#20572 Aug 2, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
CNN Exclusive: Dozens of CIA Operatives on the ground during Benghazi attack
==========
"CNN has uncovered exclusive new information about what is allegedly happening at the CIA, in the wake of the deadly Benghazi terror attack.
Sources now tell CNN dozens of people working for the CIA were on the ground that night, and that the agency is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret.
CNN has learned the CIA is involved in what one source calls an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency's Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.
Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency's missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency's workings.
The goal of the questioning, according to sources, is to find out if anyone is talking to the media or Congress.
It is being described as pure intimidation, with the threat that any unauthorized CIA employee who leaks information could face the end of his or her career."
....
"Among the many secrets still yet to be told about the Benghazi mission, is just how many Americans were there the night of the attack.
A source now tells CNN that number was 35, with as many as seven wounded, some seriously."
http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/01/exclu...
==========
Programming note: Was there a political cover up surrounding the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans? Watch a CNN special investigation — The Truth About Benghazi, Tuesday at 10 p.m. ET.
====
====
That sure is a lot of effort to hide a "phony scandal".
Obama , Hillary, Holder, Patreus, all those CIA operatives know the story. Intelligent Americans want the WHOLE story as all the dumbocrats & Obama worshippers mumble "phony scandal" & "witchhunt."
When

Commerce, GA

#20573 Aug 2, 2013
General Robert E Lee wrote:
<quoted text>
here's a starting point for you.
Is the 23% FairTax revenue-neutral rate higher or lower when compared to income and Social Security taxes people pay today?
Most people are paying that much or more today -- much of it is just hidden from view. The income tax bracket most people fall into is 15 percent, and all wage earners pay 7.65 percent in payroll taxes. That’s 23 percent right there, without taking into account the 7.65 percent employer matching! On top of that, you have to add in the business taxes and associated compliance costs passed on to consumers in higher prices.
Effective tax rates vs. stated tax rates
Because the 23-percent FairTax rate of $0.23 on every dollar spent is not imposed on necessities, an individual spending $30,000 pays an effective tax rate of only 15.5 percent, not 23 percent. That same individual will pay 17.3 percent of his or her income to federal taxes under current law.
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer...

I sure I don’t know everything, but I do know some.
I don’t see where you get this from,“Because the 23-percent FairTax rate of $0.23 on every dollar spent is not imposed on necessities.”
I do see a chart with an annual consumption allowance, is this what you are referring too?

I see no other data that shows the poor will not pay the tax. Can you provide a link?
If you are referring to the chart for annual consumption, I read the chart as applying to every income level.

And my opinion of the chart is that it does not provide a rebate anywhere equal to the cost of food, clothing, shelter, transportation, medical care, etc.

My understanding is everyone would pay the 23% tax as they spend their money on any and all items, including food, shelter, clothing, etc. If I am wrong please correct me with a link that shows I’m wrong.
Informed Opinion

United States

#20575 Aug 2, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>‘Limited Benefit’ Plans Are No Real Bargain
by WENDELL POTTER on APRIL 15TH, 2013
http://wendellpotter.com/2013/04/limited-bene...

Insurers warn of premium hikes, but modest plans theyÂ’re pitching now donÂ’t provide much coverage.

Among insurance executives, Aetna CEO Mark Bertolini has been among the most vocal in warning of “premium rate shock” when major provisions of Obamacare kick in on January 1.

...One of the reasons Bertolini mentioned “premium rate shock” to his company’s investors undoubtedly is that Aetna won’t be able to continue selling some of its most profitable health plans next year—the ones that have relatively low premiums but such limited benefits that they’ll actually be banned next year.

Since 2005, when it bought a firm that specializes in limited benefit plans, Aetna has been a major marketer of policies that provide such coverage — coverage so skimpy that former Connecticut Attorney General —and now U.S. Senator— Richard Blumenthal once called an Aetna limited benefit policy “virtually worthless.” Blumenthal was concerned that folks who had bought the policies “were led to believe they had significantly more coverage than they actually had.”

Often called ‘junk insurance’ by consumer advocates, limited benefit plans typically have an annual cap of $1,000 to $15,000 and have significant restrictions on specific types of care, especially hospitalizations. But the marketing materials for these plans seldom draw attention to what is not covered.

As a consequence, many people have been shocked to find that they are on the hook for hundreds of thousands of dollars in hospital care they thought would be covered by their insurance policy.

...Beginning January 1, Aetna and other companies that have made millions of dollars in profits from such plans, including Cigna, where I used to work, will no longer be able to sell them, thanks to the consumer protections in Affordable Care Act. Policies will have to provide decent coverage for hospitalization and other “essential benefits,” and the annual and lifetime caps will be banned. Insurers will also have to provide information in plain language about what is covered and in a format that will enable consumers to make apples-to-apples comparisons among plans.

Aetna CEO Bertolini probably was thinking of the thousands of people who are currently enrolled in limited benefit plans when he warned of premium rate shock. And he has a point. The premiums for such plans are low compared to policies that actually cover medical care doctors and nurses provide to cure you once you’ve been hospitalized. It’s not unreasonable to think that Aetna would charge its existing limited benefit customers more for real insurance—maybe even twice as much. But because insurers market limited benefit plans to low income workers, most likely will qualify for subsidies to help them pay the premiums.

Indeed those people might be shocked when Aetna tells them how much they’ll have to pay for a plan that is not “virtually worthless.” But at least they will be saved from the kind of shock that Lawrence Yurdin experienced when he realized that the money he had been paying Aetna in premiums—some of which went to pay Mark Bertolini’s salary—was not enough to keep him out of bankruptcy court.
And the Right Wing Wackos joined hands and read from the book of Profits:

It's every multinational, multi-billion dollar medical insurance companies God-given right to take the maximum amount of health care money available, and divert it to profit, as opposed to actually providing health care.

It's every American morons right to help them steal as much money as possible from medical care, to be slurped up as profit.

And it's every American taxpayers' duty to help this lunacy continue as long as possible.

Thus sayeth the Right Wing Wackos.
When

Commerce, GA

#20576 Aug 2, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
CNN Exclusive: Dozens of CIA Operatives on the ground during Benghazi attack
==========
"CNN has uncovered exclusive new information about what is allegedly happening at the CIA, in the wake of the deadly Benghazi terror attack.
Sources now tell CNN dozens of people working for the CIA were on the ground that night, and that the agency is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret.
CNN has learned the CIA is involved in what one source calls an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency's Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.
Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency's missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency's workings.
The goal of the questioning, according to sources, is to find out if anyone is talking to the media or Congress.
It is being described as pure intimidation, with the threat that any unauthorized CIA employee who leaks information could face the end of his or her career."
....
"Among the many secrets still yet to be told about the Benghazi mission, is just how many Americans were there the night of the attack.
A source now tells CNN that number was 35, with as many as seven wounded, some seriously."
http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/01/exclu...
==========
Programming note: Was there a political cover up surrounding the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans? Watch a CNN special investigation — The Truth About Benghazi, Tuesday at 10 p.m. ET.
====
====
That sure is a lot of effort to hide a "phony scandal".

And is this another wagging of Obamas tail?


"US to temporarily shut down embassies around the world Sunday amid security concern"

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/02/us...


When

Commerce, GA

#20577 Aug 2, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
My my. Such hatred. That open mindedness you all pat yourselves on the back for having doesn't exist. Thanks for proving it.

Actually he's just telling the truth about himself.
Informed Opinion

Sarasota, FL

#20578 Aug 2, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>You have "exposed" yourself. You are a freak.
"Synergy" is here !

Run for your lives !

Protect your children, your money, your deceased relatives, and your less than agile feathered friends.

Stay away from us Decent Normal Americans you .... you.... monster !

First you reveal yourself to be in league with communist, bird-watching, pedophiles.

Then it's discovered you're associated with the Necrophile Supporters of America.

You admit sharing beliefs we these depraved, twisted, brethren of yours.

Is there no depth to which you cannot sink.

Communists,
Pedophiles,
Necrophiles,
and
Bird Watchers.

All endorse things you too accept - and endorse, damn you, endorse.

Get away with you !

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#20579 Aug 2, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>Hudgens? He wouldn't be a right wing wacko by chance, now would he. And the "weekly standard", would that be a bipartisan newsletter without a specific agenda, just curious.
But what if it's true? Article after article has been posted in regard to this. Just what if.....
You refuse to even consider the possibity. Astounding.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#20580 Aug 2, 2013
General Robert E Lee wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you're not curious, you're baiting.
Absolutely 100% correct.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#20581 Aug 2, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>Ut-Oh! Looks like someone just untethered (or is it unteetered) Mr. Bill from his umbilical (or is it imbecile) cord!
You would do well to pay attention to his explanaition. You MIGHT learn something.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Brunswick Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Anti-Gay Pastor Found Guilty Of Molesting Teena... Apr 17 Here is what I 7
What McIntosh/Darien does not want you to know (May '13) Apr 14 Showtime 35
Speed Trap along the I-95 corridor in Mcintosh ... (Nov '15) Apr 14 Showtime 32
News Melvin Shares Life Story in Young Stranger Apr 12 Greg B 1
Creative Landscaping Mar 31 Stole from me 1
Part 12 Guy Heinze Jr. (May '10) Mar 28 Meme 1,227
ex sheriff bennett Mar 28 in the know 1

Brunswick Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Brunswick Mortgages