Run Hillary Run- bumper sticker thread

[borzoimom]

At last, a bumper sticker for both parties.


FINALLY, someone has come out with a 100% bipartisan political bumper
sticker. The hottest selling bumper sticker comes from New York state


"RUN HILLARY RUN"




Democrats put it on the rear bumper.
Republicans put it on the front bumper.

[Laura's Babies]

OK, you got me with that one....FUNNIEEEEEE!

[critter crazy]

Defintely gonna put that on the front of my TRuck!!!!In Big BOLD Letters!!:D

[theterrierman]

http://home.granderiver.net/~capnjim/politics/run-hill.gif

[catnapper]

LOL! Now that is funny!!!!!

[Riptide]

LOL! I remember seeing this on Glenn Beck's website about a year ago xD

[borzoimom]

Defintely gonna put that on the front of my TRuck!!!!In Big BOLD Letters!!:D
OURS TOO- The front of his truck- and the front of my Van!!

[JenBKR]

Defintely gonna put that on the front of my TRuck!!!!In Big BOLD Letters!!:D

Me too! But wait...

I might not want her to know that I'm coming ;)

[mugsy]

That is a RIOT!!! I can't wait to show Mike when he finishes with his customer.

[critter crazy]

hey!! do you think they could make a a fake hillary imprint for the grill of my truck??? Oh wait, i would rather have a real one!:D

[IRescue452]

Me too, front of my car. And my car has a pointy triangle front bumper, like a spearhead. I'm fine with a woman president, but she's so far out there with radical changes that she would ruin it for women everywhere. I don't want her representing me.

[GreyhoundGirl]

Hahaha...

Wait... I don't get it... :confused: :o

[Pembroke_Corgi]

Wait... I don't get it... :confused: :o
I don't either...why anyone would think it's funny is beyond me.


God only knows that the last 6 years have been a disaster.

Exactly. And if anyone actually made a joke involving the death of Mr. Bush, they'd probably be thrown in some kind of work camp. :rolleyes:

[JenBKR]

Right, because there have never been any jokes about Bush's death... :confused:

[DrKym]

What is better than a bird in hand? a burning Bush.........................

from an email I recieved :p

[JenBKR]

I'm fine with a woman president, but she's so far out there with radical changes that she would ruin it for women everywhere. I don't want her representing me.

Exactly :)

[GreyhoundGirl]

Who is Hillary? :confused:

[critter crazy]

Who is Hillary? :confused:
Hillary Clinton

[rosethecopycat]

Today I heard a byte by Hillary saying that she did NOT vote for the preemptive war but rather she was voting for arms inspections.

:eek: :eek:

Gee, Hillary, everybody else was voting for or against the war and you were voting for something completely different! (by the way, there were inspections for about 11 years!)

I don't want a President who doesn't even know what they are voting on, or worse, won't admit to what they did and has a revisionist viewpoint.

Down with Hillary! :mad:

[borzoimom]

Today I heard a byte by Hillary saying that she did NOT vote for the preemptive war but rather she was voting for arms inspections.

:eek: :eek:

Gee, Hillary, everybody else was voting for or against the war and you were voting for something completely different! (by the way, there were inspections for about 11 years!)

I don't want a President who doesn't even know what they are voting on, or worse, won't admit to what they did and has a revisionist viewpoint.

Down with Hillary! :mad:
She is just a " Clinton"- typical like her husband- with his affairs ( in more way than one) when talking about both sides of her mouth.
As stated above- I would like a female president too- but not that one.. !

[rosethecopycat]

As stated above- I would like a female president too- but not that one.. !


Exactly.

[Ceph]

Her husband piddled...she piddled...its a matter of integrity...I dont like her because I have this dirty little feeling that like her husband she will make military cuts...and military cuts = pay cuts = very bad. And I personally think she has the integrity of a rat...but that may just be the dislike of the clinton name talking.

I dont really care what gender the president is...as long as they do a good job, and as long as I feel I am represented.

(Colin Powell for president!!! (I wish.....)

Could be an interesting election though.

[Pawsitive Thinking]

Me too! But wait...

I might not want her to know that I'm coming ;)

Use reverse

[JenBKR]

Use reverse

haha That would certainly work better now wouldn't it!

[Edwina's Secretary]

!)

I don't want a President who doesn't even know what they are voting on, or worse, won't admit to what they did and has a revisionist viewpoint.



Does that extend to someone who, as govenor, worked against and veto a bill for health care reform, and then when it passed over his veto....took credit for passing it? Is that revisionist?

I hae a problem with Hillary because she DID vote for going to war in Iraq. But I think Bob's Dad has an excellent point.

[borzoimom]

:D
Use reverse
I love it!!!!!!!!!!! Good idea! lol..

[Miss Z]

Well I guess I am no expert on the ins and outs of American political figures, but I was quite surprised at how unpopular Hilary is. Nice idea for a bumper sticker though.

[Pawsitive Thinking]

Who is Hillary? :confused:


Love it!!!! :D

[animal_rescue]

Aww I love Hillary and so do over half the girls in my high school.

[sparks19]

Why do I dislike Hillary?

She is all about taking from the mediocre and giving to the poor as long as you don't take her stuff or her money. Of course I think taking money from anyone to give to anyone is terrible. yes there is a poverty problem but taking money from those who are just barely getting along and have worked VERY hard for their money is not exactly a tip top solution. And you can't punish people for being successful.

As for the war, yes something else needs to be done but she wants to "open up a dialogue" and "reason with these people" UM I would like to see that. She is only going to make it worse than it already is. You can't reason with people that DON'T reason. They are kidnapping our citizens and chopping their heads of on film to show on tv. Yes sounds like they are up for opening a dialogue :rolleyes:

She just thinks she is so much smarter than everyone else and I hate that holier than thou attitude. I am not against voting for a democrat if their ideas are the best but she is certainly not in that running.

By the way, she is also for socialized medicine. If done right it can be a great thing.... however, the government never does anything right. Look at Canada. Sure we get "free" health care. In Ontario we pay 15% sales tax as well as federal income taxes on our pay cheques. The government gets our money when we make it and when we spend it. The health care system there is in shambles. Ontario was voted the worst place to be if you have to be treated for Cancer. Treatments are so backed up that people aren't getting the treatment they n eed until it is too late.

My brother had to have total reconstructive knee surgery. He had to wait almost 2 years JUST to get the MRI. then had to wait another year to get the surgery. Hospitals are losing more and more beds each year because they can't pay enough Dr's and nurses. It is not uncommon to wait in an ER at any given time at any given hospital for over 10 hours before you even get a room. once you get a room you must wait more hours before you can even see a student Dr. then you have to wait another hour or so for them to check with their cheif resident.

the healthcare system is in a terrible state and everyone thinks it is perfect because it is "free". The fact is it is NOT free, you pay for it before hand with outrageous taxes. People pay for it with their lives every year because they can't be treated because there aren't enough Dr's, enough space and enough machines.

Hillary thinks this kind of healthcare is the answer..... it is NOT.

There are far better candidates than her.
I want the front bumper sticker ;)

[borzoimom]

Socialized medicine here would be as big a mess - if not more so.. Its hard enough to deal with an insurance company, but make our health in government hands- I would have been dead by now..
As it is by insurance I had to have two previous surgeries before the last one- and the last one ended up on an emergency basis- ..
The rest- I will leave alone- I do not like the morality with her, or back tracking either- Senator- fine- -PRESIDENT- nooooooo way!

[Edwina's Secretary]

Last year I was hospitalized. I entered the hospital on an emergency basis on Thursday afternoon. I left (ama) Saturday morning at 7:30. I had treatments but no sugery. I also had some tests in the emergency room. I spent the rest of the time in a bed hooked up to some ivs. As it was an intestinal infection, I had no food.

My bill....$15,000.

I know that because I asked for a copy of my bill (not that I could understand it.) Normally, I would simply be told my deductible and the bill sent to my insurance carrier.

Yes, I have insurance so I did not pay $15,000.

What does someone do who does NOT have insurance? I can assure you if I had known what it would cost I would have refused admittance.

Right now the federal minimum wage (yes, some states it is higher and congress is considering raising it) is $5.15 per hour. That means my two day hospital stay cost about 1.5 times the annual income of a minimum wage earner. The very people most likely to be uninsured.

That sounds to me like a system that is broken. I don't know what the right solution is to the problem but is cannot go on the way it is. It is not good for the health of America or the health of Americans.

[JenBKR]

That sounds to me like a system that is broken. I don't know what the right solution is to the problem but is cannot go on the way it is. It is not good for the health of America or the health of Americans.

I completely agree. Our health care system is a mess, and something needs to be done. I don't know what, but I hope our next president can figure something out......

[CathyBogart]

That sounds to me like a system that is broken. I don't know what the right solution is to the problem but is cannot go on the way it is. It is not good for the health of America or the health of Americans.

A few months ago my boyfriend was hospitalized for UNDER TWO HOURS and the bill was $8,000. Diagnosis? A scraped knee. We are going to be in debt paying this off for at least two years, over A SCRAPED KNEE.

[sparks19]

Edwina, just be glad you were able to have your tests in a timely fashion. With socialized medicine they will only give you the ones they deem absolutely nessecary and schedule for the rest at their "earliest available date" which is usually a year down the road.
I do not have health insurance here. I am currently pregnant and will have to see Dr's and give birth eventually. I am paying the bill out of my pocket. But we don't have to pay it all at once. We will pay a certain amount each month. BUT at least my Dr cares.

I was pregnant once before.... a few years ago. My Dr refused for a while to even give me a test until I had missed two periods. I became very ill and she insisted that it was all in my head...... I lost my baby because my Dr didn't care. She wasn't getting paid extra to give me special care so she figured she wouldn't. I finally had to go to a womens clinic and have them schedule me for an ultra sound only to find it was too late. My baby was not growing, I was too ill to continue even trying to carry my baby and I had to have an emergency termination. I am not saying this could have been prevented had my Dr cared enough to do the extra tests but you never know.

Yes health care everywhere is a mess. Anything run by government is a bigger mess. I don't know what the best solution is either but I know it isn't socialized medicine. People can't afford to pay the thousands upon thousands that a hospital stay can cost but many people ALSO can not afford the thousands upon thousands that they lose by the increased income tax AND inflated sales tax that socialized medicine costs.

Edited to add:
If medicine in the US becomes socialized you will also lose MANY Dr's and nurses because they can't make money. They will leave to other places where they can charge for everything again. That's what happened in Ontario. That is why it takes so long to get any care. The dr's couldn't make money so they moved their practice to somewhere that they could. Then we will be in the same predicament if not worse than we are now.

[Daisy and Delilah]

First of all, I have to say that I'm with you Dan(BOBS DAD), on everything you've said so far. Especially, your comment about the last six years of disaster we've experienced in this country. You've made many good points, as always.

Just a question.......if Hillary isn't a good choice, who are some of you looking at as a good choices in the upcoming election? Why are these choices good? I didn't vote for George Bush either time and I want to make sure I educate myself in every way again this time.

I don't intend to hijack this thread. I'm reading that Hillary is not so popular for reasons mentioned. I just wonder who everyone feels is the best candidate. Feedback appreciated :)

[caseysmom]

Bob's dad I totally agree with you, lets argue issues at hand not morality or the candidates marital issues.

[borzoimom]

In the position as President- morality would matter alot! It shows how someone sees the laws- or is it just " hairs to split". I would more so vote for a candiate that was divorced than one that uh supported incidences that goes against the "structure" of what we call "marriage".. Thats also why whats-his-name is under so much fire now- he is a Morman- that has many beliefs different than the " common" man such as multiple wives etc..

[caseysmom]

Well my point is there are lots of the past presidents that were considered great and that did many good things for this country and they were not always faithful to their wives. I think its easier for people to point that out than to one by one systematically address the issues. It just seems like an easy way out to me.

[caseysmom]

by the way bm thanks for brining this thread back, there is absolutely nothing heated here.

[borzoimom]

Virginia has had I believe more presidents than any other state- and yes- especially the ones in the beginning well things were uh different.. ( LIke Jefferson..whom everyone adored in this state.)
The point of this thread was to be a bi-partisian bumper sticker.. Take your pick- front or back..

[Husky15]

At last, a bumper sticker for both parties.


FINALLY, someone has come out with a 100% bipartisan political bumper
sticker. The hottest selling bumper sticker comes from New York state


"RUN HILLARY RUN"




Democrats put it on the rear bumper.
Republicans put it on the front bumper.

LOL! That's kinda funny. :D

[caseysmom]

The point of this thread was to be a bi-partisian bumper sticker.. Take your pick- front or back..

Neither, I think bumper stickers are tacky.

[sparks19]

Neither, I think bumper stickers are tacky.


Have you seen this trend of painting all the windows on your car? I have nver seen it before I moved here to PA. Everyone here has stuff painted all over their car windows..... including the rear window. How can that not affect your view through your mirror.

I kinda like the magnet one though. BUT they fall off in the car wash :(

[JenBKR]

Have you seen this trend of painting all the windows on your car? I have nver seen it before I moved here to PA. Everyone here has stuff painted all over their car windows..... including the rear window. How can that not affect your view through your mirror.


hmm must not be on my side of PA - I haven't seen that (other than high school seniors on the last day of school, that is a tradition).

[caseysmom]

I haven't seen that sparks, and yes I had a magnet for years until it fell apart.

[sparks19]

Yes Bobsdad I have seen those. I think those are kinda cool cause you can actually see right through them.

but here in Lancaster everyone paints words all over their windows. Deaths, celebrations, sports teams.... everything lol. I guess it must just be a lancaster county thing. I have never seen it anywhere else.... just here.

Especially when the hershey bears went to the Calder Cup. EVERYONE had their windows painted up. They just take a brush and some sort of water soluable paint and just paint up their windows.

I have even seen people driving around with RIP Tom or whatever the persons name happens to be and then dates and other things all over the windows.

I have never seen anything like it before. I thought.... why would you want to paint on your car lol

[borzoimom]

Neither, I think bumper stickers are tacky.
I have dog magnets on my van and these like stained glass on the inside- but I do not put stickers on the bumpers- as this changes the value of your vehicle should you trade it in. ( it will show a sunlight mark)
I uh have been known to tape on the inside of windows.. lol..

[Pembroke_Corgi]

I know that many people hate Hilary for different reasons, but I don't see how she is any different from other politicians, yet people seem to hate her more. I can only assume it's because she's a woman, and therefore whatever she does (or doesn't do) is subject to more ridicule.

As for health care, I think socialized health care is a MUCH better solution than anything that this administration has managed to come up with. Which was what- tell people to save up their own money? Let's see, if you make minimum wage, you can use you $500 tax return on 5 mins in the ER. :rolleyes:

[sparks19]

I know that many people hate Hilary for different reasons, but I don't see how she is any different from other politicians, yet people seem to hate her more. I can only assume it's because she's a woman, and therefore whatever she does (or doesn't do) is subject to more ridicule.

As for health care, I think socialized health care is a MUCH better solution than anything that this administration has managed to come up with. Which was what- tell people to save up their own money? Let's see, if you make minimum wage, you can use you $500 tax return on 5 mins in the ER. :rolleyes:


AH yes but remember.....

You may be paying for it right now but if they socialize medicine your taxes will have to sky rocket. After all, they have to pay for it somehow and it certainly isn't going to come out of their pockets. it's going to come out of yours. Like I said, in Ontario they tax almost half of your pay cheque and then you pay an extra 15% sales tax on everything you buy.... including nessecities. So those people on minimum wage that can't afford health care now will not be able to afford to live because the government is going to tax them out the wazoo. We are experiencing this exact problem in ontario right now. Minimum wage people can't afford to live because for one they make minimum wage and two the governemtn is taking over 50% of their money in pay cheque taxes and sales taxes. You must pay taxes on food and clothing too. 15%. Oh sorry.... it's 14% now that harper is in parliment. and they STILL can't afford the health care system. So it really isn't that much better a solution. Either way the people that can't afford it are still going to be paying for it.... except NOW you will paying for it whether you are using their services or not.

[borzoimom]

yup!!!

[Pembroke_Corgi]

AH yes but remember.....

You may be paying for it right now but if they socialize medicine your taxes
will have to sky rocket. After all, they have to pay for it somehow and it certainly isn't going to come out of their pockets. it's going to come out of yours. Like I said, in Ontario they tax almost half of your pay cheque and then you pay an extra 15% sales tax on everything you buy.... including nessecities. So those people on minimum wage that can't afford health care now will not be able to afford to live because the government is going to tax them out the wazoo. We are experiencing this exact problem in ontario right now. Minimum wage people can't afford to live because for one they make minimum wage and two the governemtn is taking over 50% of their money in pay cheque taxes and sales taxes. You must pay taxes on food and clothing too. 15%. Oh sorry.... it's 14% now that harper is in parliment. and they STILL can't afford the health care system. So it really isn't that much better a solution. Either way the people that can't afford it are still going to be paying for it.... except NOW you will paying for it whether you are using their services or not.
Have you ever heard the saying "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure?" This is true in the health care industry- meaning, people who can't afford to see a doctor wait until their symptoms/problem are way more difficult and costly to cure. This adds strain on our health care system- as does administrative costs associated with different insurances, etc. According to this (http://dll.umaine.edu/ble/U.S.%20HCweb.pdf) source, administrative costs could account for nearly 24% of total health care costs.

And actually, the USA spends the MOST money of any country in the world on health care per capita. And as for the problem of low-wage earners being taxed, well, the solution is simple: tax the rich more than the poor. They have the "bigger piece" of that pie that is supposed to trickle down somehow so that's one way. Also, I read an article that health care premiums have risen about 5,000% in the last ten years, so I'm not really worried about being taxed- the premiums are just as high if not higher. Plus, that way ALL Americans could be covered, not just ones with cushy jobs.

[borzoimom]

But socialized heath care is based on a tax per dollar- not like an income tax- its taxper dollar... It doesnt work- and you are stuck with waiting for the doctor to move you though a level of paper process that is slower than molassass in Vermont in January...

[Grace]

In the position as President- morality would matter alot! It shows how someone sees the laws- or is it just " hairs to split". I would more so vote for a candiate that was divorced than one that uh supported incidences that goes against the "structure" of what we call "marriage".. Thats also why whats-his-name is under so much fire now- he is a Morman- that has many beliefs different than the " common" man such as multiple wives etc..

Mitt Romney is his name, and he is a Mormon. The Mormons have not practiced plural marriages for over 100 years. Yes, there are some off-shoots from the LDS that do it, but they are ostracized by main stream Mormons, and some of them are arrested for their practices.

Romney's problems right now stem from his flipping and flopping all over the place about abortion and gays. When he ran for Governor of Massachusetts in 2002, he said this about abortion-
'I respect and will protect a woman's right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one," Romney wrote in answer to a NARAL questionnaire during the campaign. ''Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government's. The truth is, no candidate in the governor's race in either party would deny women abortion rights. So let's end this argument that does not exist and stop the cynical, divisive attacks made only for political gain."

Now he's saying he was ALWAYS pro-life. Then he supported civil unions, at least, for gays. Now he is backing off that.

Once I thought he would be a great candidate - now I have no respect for him. He will say anything to get elected.

[borzoimom]

scary isnt it??? Maybe we should make bumper stickers of all the candiates- and let the decide front or back.
thank you for providing his name- I am sorry- I forgot it... The field is LOADED AT THIS point..

[sparks19]

Have you ever heard the saying "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure?" This is true in the health care industry- meaning, people who can't afford to see a doctor wait until their symptoms/problem are way more difficult and costly to cure. This adds strain on our health care system- as does administrative costs associated with different insurances, etc. According to this (http://dll.umaine.edu/ble/U.S.%20HCweb.pdf) source, administrative costs could account for nearly 24% of total health care costs.

And actually, the USA spends the MOST money of any country in the world on health care per capita. And as for the problem of low-wage earners being taxed, well, the solution is simple: tax the rich more than the poor. They have the "bigger piece" of that pie that is supposed to trickle down somehow so that's one way. Also, I read an article that health care premiums have risen about 5,000% in the last ten years, so I'm not really worried about being taxed- the premiums are just as high if not higher. Plus, that way ALL Americans could be covered, not just ones with cushy jobs.

AHHH so we should punish people for being successful? typical. I think THAT is crap. So because my husband and I worked are butts off to get where we are and make the money we do we should be punished for it because some people didn't do the same? We are far from rich but we are also far from poor. Because of that we should have to pay everyone else's way? I despise that way of thinking. Why should people be punished for being successful? You start doing that and people will stop being successful becuase they will end up making more money working minimum wage jobs and then where will we be? Although that seems to be Hillary's line of thinking as well.... as long as you aren't taking her money from her. I just don't get that.... take money from people who earned it just because they worked hard to get where they are. How about this.... instead of socialized medicine how about we just send everyone's medical bills to the rich people and they can pay them. does that sound fair? I truly hope you don't say yes.

Not to mention..... how much do you thinkt hey will have to raise taxes to pay Dr's enough so they can pay enough for insurance because of the OUTRAGEOUS settlements they are awarding people for a cut finger. Do you know on average how much a Dr has to pay for malpractice insurance each year? it ain't cheap. But that's ok... we just let the well off people foot the bill right?

yes I have heard that saying. but I have also witnessed socialized medicine first hand. NOW people can go to the Dr whenever they like for anything they like no matter how trivial. NOW Dr's don't care... they don't want to do the tests for something more serious because 9 times out of 10 it's nothing. Now no Dr's are taking patients because they are overloaded with the patients they have. Now you must wait hours and hours to get into a walk in clinic or an emergency room because people are there for the sniffles or a scraped knee. NOW the medical system is just a rotating door.... get them in and get them out as fast as you can. ZERO personal care.... ZERO intiative to take a closer look. The only extra money they make is from drug companies who want Dr's to peddle their product... and the Drs do very willingly. It doesn't solve the problem but it sure gets the patients out of the office for a day or two.

here is a better idea.... regulate how much someone can get for malpractice suits. Millions of dollars for a cut finger that got infected becuase you didn't take care of it is ridiculous. If it is BLATANT malpractice then by all means you should get money for your medical bills, missed time at work, and perhaps some for pain and suffering but I don't know ANYONE that felt better after getting millions from a Dr. THAT is what causes medical rates to go up so much. At least that is a big part of it. Regulate it. Insurance costs will go down, Dr's won't have to charge as much and we won't have to pay as much. but socialized medicine does NOT work. Just because the US has money does not mean it will work for you. You also have millions more people than any other country. those millions of people are going to start seeking medical help for everything and thus clogging up the entire system for those who really need it.

[sparks19]

Just out of curiousity... if Canada's Health care system is sooo awful, why do they maintain one of the highest life expectancies (about 80 years) and lowest infant morality rates of industrialized countries.

Usually countries with such deplorable health systems have very low life expectancies and an extremely high infant mortality rates.

Just a question...


apparently we are just healthy people :D all that cold freezes the germs lol.

I can't say but we WERE voted the worst place to live if you have a possibly terminal illness because you just can't get the care you need. I will see if I can find an article on that but again I don't know where to look.

My grandmother and Grandfather are both over 85 BUT thank goodness neither one has had any serious illness to contend with. My great grandmother was the same way. Sharp as a tack till the day she died.

Plus, most elderly people have to seek out the care of a specialist for any kind of specific treatment... specialists are not covered under OHIP. Specialists DO get to charge and if you don't have benefits you must pay them, the government doesn't. so that could be another reason. although my grandmother could have to have a hip replactment.... she sees and orthopedic Dr, OHIP doesn't cover him and she still has to wait 2 years for the replacement because they can't get an OR, they are all booked until then.... although at her age I don't really see the point... the surgery will be far more detrimental to her health than not having it I assume at her age.

Basically unless it is an EMERGENCY you can't get any kind of scheduled surgery in under a year.

it's general practitioners that are the real problem... we don't have enough and the ones we do have don't care. but they pump you full of antibiotics so that must count for something.

[RICHARD]

Not to mention..... how much do you thinkt hey will have to raise taxes to pay Dr's enough so they can pay enough for insurance because of the OUTRAGEOUS settlements they are awarding people for a cut finger. Do you know on average how much a Dr has to pay for malpractice insurance each year? it ain't cheap. But that's ok... we just let the well off people foot the bill right?

Now you must wait hours and hours to get into a walk in clinic or an emergency room because people are there for the sniffles or a scraped knee. NOW the medical system is just a rotating door.... get them in and get them out as fast as you can. ZERO personal care.... ZERO intiative to take a closer look. The only extra money they make is from drug companies who want Dr's to peddle their product... and the Drs do very willingly. It doesn't solve the problem but it sure gets the patients out of the office for a day or two.



You are on the button.

Medicine/drug research and law are the three reasons that medicine in the U.S. sucks.

----------


Mitt's got charm. which more than I can say for the other fence straddlers.

I was at an event when they ran the torch to SLC and he was there as the SLCOOC head.

He was articulate, friendly had some of the tools to be the prez already in place.

-----------

Does Barack have a middle name?

[sparks19]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061121.wwaittimes21/BNStory/cancer

Here is one article.... there are more but they are in PDF form and for some reason I can't get the pages to open. I just get a blank screen.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061124.wxcancerreact24/BNStory/cancer

Also, I should change my wording.... it really isn't Canada's health system... it is Ontario's OHIP. The Ontario health insurance policy that is failing. Of course I only have experience with Ontario's socialized medicine and it seems to be the worst in all of Canada.

BTW, if you are having trouble following my train of thought have no fear... did you know that a pregnant womans brain can shrink up to 8% during pregnancy. it's a good excuse I think :D


This is an interesting "letter to the editor"

notice he says that this kind of health care system is just not feasible in this day and age. but I think he makes a good point about making practioners responsible for their fees.

[sparks19]

Bob's Dad I correct myself.... it is actually Ontario that has the terribly failing system. I think it was in Canada and the US, ontario was the worst place to be treated.

Here is another article. thank goodness McGuinty didn't last long in office
http://ontariondp.com/mcguinty-failing-ontarians-access-safe-health-care

[Daisy and Delilah]

Call me crazy or just plain dumb here. After reading those articles, I see that Canada, at least, is trying to have a definite structured plan. At least Canada is trying to be organized. Around here, all I see are doctors offices with doctors holding their hands out and taking every penny they can get their hands on. Just as fast as they can possibly collect it. I don't see a great deal of followup care or compassion going on either.

As it stands, I'm already waiting forever to get into a specialist if any kind. I'm still trying to figure out how it could get much worse than we already have it in the US. It's normally a glorified cattle drive situation in my area. I always wonder what happened to the older types of doctors. Nobody seems to care anymore and I'm not the only person here that feels like this. It's very widespread.

There's no such thing as good medical care here, as far as I can tell. We have learned to do with what we have. The only thing that medical offices are good at down here is collecting your money in due time. They seem to have great efficiency if funds aren't received immediately :( Maybe this is just a situation in the state of Florida--I'm not sure but I would love to know if anyone living in the US feels the same way about their area.

Sorry if this sounds like I'm rambling worse than usual. I need sleep :D

[sparks19]

Try Try Try. Like I said before.... the road to h*ll is paved with good intentions.

perhaps the government here should regulate what and how much Dr's can charge and they should also regulate how much someone can get from a malpractice suit. malpractice hand outs go down.... insurance goes down.... dr's fees go down. Nobody deserves Millions and millions of dollars for a mistake.... unless of course that mistake has cost you something very serious and there is NO doubt that it was caused by that mistake and could not be prevented any other way. But like I said.... I never heard of millions of dollars giving someone their leg back... or their life back. Medical expenses should be enough and missed work time. But these people that sue for millions because they had a cold that turned into bronchitis or because they had a cut that got infected.... ridiculous. Perhaps that is where you should start looking if you want to cut down medical costs.

giving it away for "free" is only going to result in greater debt for the country.... much higher taxes for EVERYONE rich and poor.... and eventually it will get too expensive for even taxes to pay for. Medicine is advancing more and more everyday. to accomodate the new costs like machines, more Dr's, new tests, better lab equipment they are goin to have to either hike taxes more and more and more or start charging again.

You are waiting forever for specialist care now? Imagine how long you will wait when every Tom Dick and Harry is seeking out medical advice for a pimple, or a sniffle, or a bruise. That's what comes with "free" health care.

[Ceph]

I thought I would post my own little thing about healthcare.

First a few numbers = Italy is considered in the top ten of healthcare while the US is only 37 in the WHO ranks....you know what though....thats CRAP.

My grandmother was born, raised, and lives in Italy, and is now in her late eighties. A few years ago she decided it would be a good idea to go running after a guy who stole her purse. She collapsed and was taken into a hospital where they proceeded to put a pacemaker in.....a pacemaker that was promptly turned off when she came to the states to visit us...she didnt need it...and while she now has a get out of jail free card when it comes to airport security, I have no idea why she had to be put through that.

More so than that, the hospitals are in bad conditions - there arent enough doctors because their medical school sucks, and because they arent getting paid enough they dont care as much. There arent enough nurses for the same reason. And they dont have the same health standards there either.

I frequent Europe on a regular basis...and I cant say I am very impressed with these socialized/nationalized systems...I see that those who have the money and means to come to the states do come to see doctors here because they dont trust their own nations healthcare. I know that, with maybe the exception of switzerland (because they are so dang tight and concise and Picky about everything) I would never go to a european hospital....having been in some as an observer I have kind of gotten this frightening perspective.

The problem with malpractice is not only do the doctors loose alot of money...they loose their credibility...and with their credibility goes their jobs....no kind of regulation of price will change that. My Uncle Ben had to stop practicing because some jerk decided he had done something wrong - in court Uncle Ben came out smelling like a rose...but because he was in a malpractice suit period he lost his credibility and his patients...It was a pity...he was one of the top eye docs in DC. My Uncle Max has been a little more shrewed...and thank goodness - he is one of the top eye surgeons at home as well. I hate malpractice (but at the same time I understand it for reasons)....I just cant imagine the number of good doctors who have been hacked off from their proffession because someone wanted a little extra money.

As far as taxing the richer more than the poor....hec, my family is towards the lower middle half of the pay bracket...and I know I for sure will be when I start completley paving my own way after graduation (the goverment pays its service members soooo well(hack ::sarcasm:: cough); and I think everyone should get taxed the same daggone way....the same percentage accross the board. Its fair that way...I dont begrudge those who had more drive then me to do something better or different....who had talents in other sections than I did....whatever....it's stupid to be jealous of those who have more than me...if they want to donate money to some charity...thats cool - but you shouldnt force them to support everyone else.

just my two cents.

[Pembroke_Corgi]

AHHH so we should punish people for being successful? typical. I think THAT is crap. So because my husband and I worked are butts off to get where we are and make the money we do we should be punished for it because some people didn't do the same? We are far from rich but we are also far from poor. Because of that we should have to pay everyone else's way? I despise that way of thinking. Why should people be punished for being successful? You start doing that and people will stop being successful becuase they will end up making more money working minimum wage jobs and then where will we be? Although that seems to be Hillary's line of thinking as well.... as long as you aren't taking her money from her. I just don't get that.... take money from people who earned it just because they worked hard to get where they are. How about this.... instead of socialized medicine how about we just send everyone's medical bills to the rich people and they can pay them. does that sound fair? I truly hope you don't say yes.

Oh, now I understand. Wealthier people work harder for their money. So therefore, they deserve access to a doctor, and insurance for their children. Poor people are just lazier and that's why they don't need to have basic health needs met. But wait- they might have to use public programs like Medicaid to suck all us hardworking, deserving Americans dry. Gosh, I guess you could make the argument that instead of fairly taxing the rich, we should really just tax the poor more to pay for stuff we hard working people need. And we sure could use more money for that war in Iraq.

[Ceph]

Oh, now I understand. Wealthier people work harder for their money. So therefore, they deserve access to a doctor, and insurance for their children. Poor people are just lazier and that's why they don't need to have basic health needs met. But wait- they might have to use public programs like Medicaid to suck all us hardworking, deserving Americans dry. Gosh, I guess you could make the argument that instead of fairly taxing the rich, we should really just tax the poor more to pay for stuff we hard working people need. And we sure could use more money for that war in Iraq.


Why is it fair to tax the wealthy more than the poor? I wish someone would explain that too me....it makes sense in my mind to take the same percentage from everyone...thats fair.

Oh, btw, that money for Iraq partially went to paying those well paid soldiers who are working to protect their nation...those soldiers who are in more liklihood getting less money a year than most people here. But naw, they shouldn't get paid should they...or even better....lets pay them less....its not like they are working all that hard...its not like they are being injured, dying and coming home under the flag. So when you are making statements regarding the poor and then statements about money going into Iraq...do try to remember that a large population of those poor...those who arent paid a whole lot, are being paid by that money going towards Iraq. Or do they not deserve it because they're soldiers?

~Ceph

[wombat2u2004]

""Why is it fair to tax the wealthy more than the poor? I wish someone would explain that too me....it makes sense in my mind to take the same percentage from everyone...thats fair.""

Maybe it has something to do with fair and equitable distribution of money so that most everyone can live some sort of decent lifestyle.
I believe that lower income earners must pay a lower tax percentage than those in the higher income groups....and I believe THAT is fair. It has been written on this thread that wealthy and successful people have worked hard for what they have, well that may be so in some cases, but not in others. Luck and opportunity play a big role in wealth and success. A lot of people work hard and are not successful or wealthy, do they deserve to pay the same rate of tax as those who are obviously overpaid ???? I think not. I believe that everyone deserves some sort of break, because the danger lies in the wealth gap....the wider the gap becomes betweeen the have's and the have nots, the more trouble your country will be in.
Wombat

[Ceph]

That still doesnt sound right to me. lets say everyone is paying....oh say, 40% accross the board. Those that make 2000 a month (averagish for the military) are going to pay less than those who make 10000 a month because that is how percentages work....you're saying those who make 10000 should get charged what? 60%. Because they make a more...again, that doesnt strike me as fair, or right.

Or, we could do something useful like getting rid of the death tax or the marriage penalty....that might help some people out.

~Ceph

[Edwina's Secretary]

That still doesnt sound right to me. lets say everyone is paying....oh say, 40% accross the board. Those that make 2000 a month (averagish for the military) are going to pay less than those who make 10000 a month because that is how percentages work....you're saying those who make 10000 should get charged what? 60%. Because they make a more...again, that doesnt strike me as fair, or right.

Or, we could do something useful like getting rid of the death tax or the marriage penalty....that might help some people out.

~Ceph

Do you know what the so-called death tax is? And who is affected by it? Do you know what the so-called marriage penalty is? When and how it affects people?

Do you have any idea what percent of the population pays a 40% tax rate in the US?

[Ceph]

the numbers were hypothetical...I know out of the 200 I recieve a month for drill pay I only get about half that back between state taxes and federal taxes...I know I had to join the Guard so that I could pay for school...I know we almost lost our house of fifty years when my grandfather died because he had owned it...I know that when my grandmother died my other grandfather could almost lost his house as well because of the taxes.

or maybe I was imagining that....

[Cataholic]

I just cant imagine the number of good doctors who have been hacked off from their proffession because someone wanted a little extra money.



Sorry, Ceph, this one just sets me off. As someone that practices in the area of malpractice, I can tell you first hand- medical malpractice cases are the most expensive to try, and the most difficult to win. Malpractice cases are not just these little things that people pursue because someone wanted a little extra money.

The ONLY case that gets to trial, or even past a motion for summary judgment, is that case in which the person has a significant injury- loss of life, limb, paralysis, permanancy. Anything else, it isn't worth the client OR the attorney's time to pursue.

Malpractice litigation happens because doctors refuse to be like the rest of us, imperfect human beings, capable of minor, major or agregious conduct. When INSURANCE companies stop practicing medicine, we all will be much better off.

Bows to her faithful audience, and steps off the soap box.

[Cataholic]

the numbers were hypothetical...I know out of the 200 I recieve a month for drill pay I only get about half that back between state taxes and federal taxes...I know I had to join the Guard so that I could pay for school...I know we almost lost our house of fifty years when my grandfather died because he had owned it...I know that when my grandmother died my other grandfather could almost lost his house as well because of the taxes.

or maybe I was imagining that....

Are you in the US? This would be contra to most probate situations that I know of. I don't think you were imagining it, but, I am not sure you had all of the information.

The Ohio estate tax is $338,000, and the federal is 1 Mil (or thereabouts). Are you suggesting that your grandfather's estate was greater than those amounts? (I imagine Oh would be similar to other states). Cause only IF your grandparents estate (house, and all other stuff) was more than that, would you (or, actually, the estate pays it, from the assets of the estate).

Just think, I actually charge people for this information. You are getting it for free.
Just curious.

[Ceph]

Oops, sorry, I forgot to mention that I do know there are cases that warrant it, that there are good doctors along with the bad.

lol, I dont know what doctors you meet that are trying to be perfect....none of the docs I know, my uncles included, are perfectionists...they just try to do the best they can, which is usually quite good.

I dont remember the details, I was too young with my Uncle Ben, but what I know from my Dad was that he was tried for something he didnt cause. And as a result he lost his practice. That seems kind of unfair to me. I do understand that there are several malpractice suits that should happen when a doctor does something grossly stupid or neglectful.

Sorry that I came off sounding so snarty there though.

[caseysmom]

I have now gone through probate twice and trust me at least in California there is no death tax.

[Ceph]

There is here in Maryland...Anything that gets inherited gets taxed out the wazoo....I've never lived anywhere but there, but I sort of assumed it was everywhere. Allright...I will bow my head...I was wrong, sorry.

[borzoimom]

We have the death tax in Virginia too- outragious amount of money when my grandfather and grandmother died.. My parents got socked big time!

[Cataholic]

I am not following the people that post about their parents getting hit big time. Are you suggesting that your parents were somehow paying tax on someone else's estate? OR, are you saying that the decedent's estate was taxed, and that the amount owed on the assets of the estate were paid from the assets of the estate?

Again, I remain convinced that tax is there when the estate is significant. I have had estates over the minimums, and tax was owed....just, not usually.

And, Ceph, I am not picking on you. I think we ALL make statments that we think are right, and they might not be completely right, you know? No hard feelings, I hope. Just like to clarify some urban legends. :)

[critter crazy]

http://www.360financialliteracy.org/Life+Stages/Retirement/Articles/Estate+planning+basics/Gift+and+estate+taxes.htm

GIFT AND ESTATE TAXES

If you give away money or property during your life, those transfers may be subject to federal gift tax and perhaps state gift tax. The money and property you own when you die (i.e., your estate) may also be subject to federal estate taxes and some form of state death tax. You should understand these taxes and when they do and do not apply, especially since the passage of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (the 2001 Tax Act) signed by President Bush on June 7, 2001. This law contains several changes (some of which are retroactive) that are complicated and uncertain, making estate planning all the more difficult.


Federal gift tax and federal estate tax--background
Under pre-2001 Tax Act law, no gift tax or estate taxes were imposed on the first $675,000 of combined transfers (those made during life and those made at death). The tax rate tables were unified into one--that is, the same rates applied to gifts made and property owned by persons who died in 2001. Like income tax rates, gift and estate tax rates were graduated. Under this unified system, the recipient of a lifetime gift received a carryover basis in the property received, while the recipient of a bequest, or gift made at death, got a step-up in basis (usually fair market value on the date of death of the person who made the bequest or gift).

The law substantially changed this tax regime.


Federal gift tax
The 2001 Tax Act increased the applicable exclusion amount for gift tax purposes to $1 million for 2002 and each year thereafter (even though the applicable exclusion amount for estate tax purposes increases in years 2004 through 2009). The top gift tax rate is 48 percent in 2004, 47 percent in 2005, 46 percent in 2006, 45 percent in 2007 through 2009, and 35 percent in 2010 (the top marginal income tax rate in 2010 under the 2001 Tax Act). In 2011, the gift tax rates revert to pre-2001 Tax Act levels. The carryover basis rules remain in effect.

However, under the new law, many gifts can still be made tax free, including:


Gifts to your U.S. citizen spouse (you may give up to $114,000 in 2004 tax free to your noncitizen spouse)
Gifts to qualified charities
Gifts totaling up to $11,000 to any one person or entity during the tax year, or $22,000 if the gift is made by both you and your spouse (and you are both U.S. citizens)
Amounts paid on behalf of any individual as tuition to an educational organization or to any person who provides medical care for an individual
State gift tax may also be owed if you are a resident of Connecticut, Louisiana, North Carolina, Tennessee, or Puerto Rico.


Federal estate tax
Under the 2001 Tax Act, the applicable exclusion amount for estate tax purposes increases in steps until it reaches $3.5 million in 2009 (the applicable exclusion amount for gift tax purposes remains fixed at $1 million). Top estate tax rates are 48 percent in 2004, 47 percent in 2005, 46 percent in 2006, and 45 percent in 2007 through 2009. The estate tax (but not the gift tax) is repealed in 2010, but the estate tax applicable exclusion amount and rates revert to pre-2001 Tax Act levels in 2011.

When the estate tax is repealed in 2010, the basis rules will be changed to those similar to the gift tax basis rules. The step-up in basis rules return in 2011.

Many of the estate tax deductions remain in effect, and some have even been improved, but the qualified family-owned business deduction has been eliminated for persons dying after 2003.

Note: For estates that have previously elected the qualified family-owned business deduction, the recapture rules continue to remain in effect until the 10-year recapture period has expired.


Federal generation-skipping transfer tax
The federal generation-skipping transfer tax (GSTT) taxes transfers of property you make, either during life or at death, to someone who is more than one generation below you, such as a grandchild. The GSTT is imposed in addition to, not instead of, federal gift tax or federal estate tax. You need to be aware of the GSTT if you make cumulative generation-skipping transfers in excess of the GSTT exemption, which is $1.5 million (in 2004 and 2005). A flat tax equal to the highest estate tax bracket in effect in the year you make the transfer is imposed on every transfer you make after your exemption has been exhausted.

Some states also impose their own GSTT.

Note: Starting in 2004, the GSTT exemption is the same amount as the applicable exclusion amount for estate tax purposes.


State death taxes
The three types of state death taxes are estate tax, inheritance tax, and credit estate tax, which is also known as a sponge tax or pickup tax. The estate and inheritance taxes are known as basic taxes, and some states impose one of the two. All states impose the credit estate tax, either alone or in addition to a basic tax.

[sparks19]

That still doesnt sound right to me. lets say everyone is paying....oh say, 40% accross the board. Those that make 2000 a month (averagish for the military) are going to pay less than those who make 10000 a month because that is how percentages work....you're saying those who make 10000 should get charged what? 60%. Because they make a more...again, that doesnt strike me as fair, or right.

Or, we could do something useful like getting rid of the death tax or the marriage penalty....that might help some people out.

~Ceph


THANK YOU.

People that make more money are already paying MORE taxes then the middle or lower class folk. Like stated above 40% of nothing is NOTHING, but 40% of a lot is A LOT.

So do you think we should tax them enough so that it brings them down the the middle and lower class level? should we all make the same money? Thats what it sounds like to me.

I said that lower income people are lazy? LOL hmmm don't recall saying those words but ok. I am the middle lower class people I refer too. I COULD have gone to college for a better career but instead I want to do something that I like... not just something that makes me money. My husband makes a pretty decent wage but he worked HARD for it. he spent 12 years inthe army and got his education while in the army. I have a friend who was inthe marines for 12+ years. he never took advantage of the schooling option and now he whines and complains that uncle sam isn't giving him a hand out for his service. AH well he had a perfectly good opportunity to get a good education so that he could have a decent job when he got out but he didn't and that is no one's fault but his own.

You don't get a CEO position as soon as you step into a company. it takes years and years of hard work to move up to such a position and I think they deserve the money they make.... they earned it. But screw them, I don't want anyone making more than me so lets tax them so that they can only make as much as I do :rolleyes:

Sorry, whether it is luck, hard work, or whatever.... people should NOT be punished for being successful. In this nation in this day and age everyone has an opportunity to succeed. Some do and some don't. life's tough.... wear a helmet. I just refuse to believe that it is right to charge more taxes to those that are lucky enough to make the money they do. YOu know these CEO's don't work a 9-5 monday to friday job like the rest of us. they usually have to put in 60-80 hours a week despite what you believe about the wealthy.

My uncle is a regional manager for McDonalds. YES McDonalds. It was his first job. he started out minimum wage but he stuck with the company and now he gets a big fat pay cheque because he worked hard to get where he is. Now he can provide his family with everything he wanted to be able to give them. A nice home, nice stuff, and loving parents. he has 4 children. So should he be taxed much more than the rest of us? I don't think so. He put up with the minimum wage, the bull crap of being on the bottom of the "food chain" but he stuck it out to get where he is. I see so many people that say "UGh I quit this job because they weren't paying me what I think I should be paid. or they didn't treat me like they treat the higher ups" or what have you. You have to work to move up. We all have to do things we don't like in order to make the money we feel we deserve.

As for the death tax.... I hate that crap. I think the death tax should be done away with. the government has already taxed the money and those goods once.... it is not right to tax it again. IMO.

[Ceph]

lol, thank you...you said it better then me...it keeps on getting garbled when I try to say things. My grandad's estate was worth over 1m because he was a successful doctor and had his own practice and a house in an area that was rapidly growing. After Dad inherited the house and Uncle Max inherited the practice there was nothing left at all. I dont know how it is in other states, but MD has a lower exclusion than alot of other states.

And I dunno...its not really fair that it got taxed while he was alive and then taxed again.

and there, I have said my piece....It may be different in other states, but at least that is how it is here.

[sparks19]

lol, thank you...you said it better then me...it keeps on getting garbled when I try to say things. My grandad's estate was worth over 1m because he was a successful doctor and had his own practice and a house in an area that was rapidly growing. After Dad inherited the house and Uncle Max inherited the practice there was nothing left at all. I dont know how it is in other states, but MD has a lower exclusion than alot of other states.

And I dunno...its not really fair that it got taxed while he was alive and then taxed again.

and there, I have said my piece....It may be different in other states, but at least that is how it is here.

My husband and I were talking about this. When his dad passes away he has a substantial amount of money saved and in his insurance to give to his two kids and his wife. He earned quite a decent amount of money during his lifetime. he was/is a nuclear technician. But they didn't live a life of luxury. He used what he had to to provide for his family. They had good food a nice home and things of that sort but every extra cent went into a fund to leave to his family when he passes. (should we tax him extra because he makes more money than the rest of us even though that money is going to provide for his family when he passes on? Seems many of you think so. YES let's gyp his family so that we don't have to pay as much tax as him)

now he has already paid taxes on that money. Actually twice. he pays taxes on the funds he has saved up and he paid taxes when he first got the money in his pay chq. NOW they want to tax it again when he passes on and they deal out his estate. Why should the government be able to tax it three times? the tax on that money and those goods has already been paid. it is wrong to take money from his family that has already been taxed just because it is "changing hands"

[Ceph]

lol, again, hypothetical numbers....not real...fake...there to try and put accross what I was saying.

And I dont pretend to be an accountant either (or very good with numbers...the military helps me keep it stimple)...most of the kind of accounting I know if corporate accounting, and I dont know that all that well either. I just think that everyone should get taxed the same....thats it....nothing more...I promise.

Edit : just on a side note - the last drill I had was a MUTA - 2...made half of what I usually make...my yearly income from the guard is about 3K, and I got 22% removed in taxes (FICA, State, and Federal)....but because they are paying for college I limp by on the quite well actually. I dont know if I am crazy or not, but I do know math...and I am pretty sure those tax brackets dont fit on me so well.

[sparks19]

:eek: 50K is limping by? Yikes. then we are definately in the lowest tax bracket. Of course right now my husband is the only one that makes money. i work for free rent since I rent my boss's house. I work enough hours to pay the rent and I just don't get a pay cheque. Of course, due to "child" support (no children involved but the ex is very much like a child lol) my hubby is bringing home far less than that. around 55k a year minus $550 a month for alimony until June. but I wouldn't consider myself poor by any means. We live quite a comfortable exsistence. Of course most of that money is also going towards more immigration stuff and dr;s fees for prenatal care since I don't have health insurance here. but even after all that we are still living comfortably and wouldn't consider us downtrodden or poor or less fortunate.

the bills get paid and we still have enough to do the things we enjoy. of course not all of those things cost money. We also don't own or need a 65,000 dollar vehicle, a pool, a huge house with all the trimmings to be happy.

that is one thing I have noticed lately. In fact, a few months ago (I don't know the specifics) but after the PA senate gave themselves a HEFTY pay raise... everyone raised heck because they make enough already. You know what their defense was? We need to make this much because we have to send our kids to college and we have to survive. instead of redistributing the unused tax dollars that I feel are rightfully ours and should be redistributed they gave it to themselves.

:eek: that just shows how out of touch with the real world these people are. If they need to make that much money to survive how do the rest of us survive and send our kids to college. Perhaps if they got rid of their summer homes.... their big expensive vehicles..... and lived a normal exsistence they wouldn't have to make that much to "survive"

[Ceph]

My dad thinks its punishment - and he is helping to support (with our assitance too) two kids going to college on a little over 45K yearly....He's paying plenty of taxes, and like me (lol, I know parental raising has something to do with how you view the world).

Believe me, its pretty easy to get by on 20 and 30K.

Edit : oops, I was wrong, He makes closer to 4, sorry about that...it just gets taxed way down (house, FICA, Federal and State)....There are a few places in my area - mostly the county housing that I actually wouldnt have to much trouble surviving on a military paycheck...it is possible...just in the right places.

[sparks19]

Sparks,

you keep saying that but no-one is suggesting any such thing!!! And no one (but you) classifies this practice as punishment. I have done well some years and not so well others - in the more prosperous years, I had no problem paying a slightly higher % of my good fortune. And in my leaner years, I have appreciated the slight reduction I paid as a percentage. I am not sure why people keep putting out numbers like 50 and 60% and suggesting that those who are making 30,000 get away with not paying anything. The range is more like 25-35%. I could go on, but I will hold off for a maybe later post.


then I must be misinterpreting the posts saying that rich people should pay more in taxes then the little people. I was just using those numbers as an example. Just saying that if I am taxed 40% (not saying that I AM just using the number as an example) I don't think it is fair that the next higher up bracket should pay 50% or the next highest should pay 60%. Again these numbers are only for examples. Again, if we are going to make people who are better off pay the highest percentage then why don't we just send them our medical bills. Everyone should pay the same percentage. If you make 10,000 your percentage will equal out to a small fraction. if you make 1,000,000 your percentage will equal out to a lot more money going into taxes. they already pay more then the lower class. why should they pay even MORE than that. LOL what if those people in the higher tax bracket have 12 kids to support? should they pay less tax then?

this is the impression I have gotten from previous posts. that those who make more money should pay a higher percentage of tax. I disagree.

Ceph, it really is. I keep seeing people say that they ONLY make 20,000 and it's almost impossible to get by. How is that possible? In all my life I don't think I have ever had a job that I made more than 25,000 per year. I am able to survive just fine on that. You just have to live a more moderate exsistence. YOu don't go out and buy the most expensive care... or the biggest house. Live by your means and 20,000 provides a fine living.

My mother (a single mother) never made much money yet I always had a nice house to live in, clean clothes on my back and good food on the table. What more do you need?

[Ceph]

^
||

what she said :p

[borzoimom]

As far as making 25 grand a year as being comfortable, in this area- look at these average household earnings. No way in the world could anyone survive on 25 grand in this area- no way.. And Loudon county is one of the highest paid, and fastest growing counties in the US...
A person making 25 grand in like Fairfax county would be all but bankrupt- where as I am sure there are other parts of the country that would work..http://www.co.loudoun.va.us/business/growth_summary_2004/b_2.pdf

[Pembroke_Corgi]

then I must be misinterpreting the posts saying that rich people should pay more in taxes then the little people. I was just using those numbers as an example. Just saying that if I am taxed 40% (not saying that I AM just using the number as an example) I don't think it is fair that the next higher up bracket should pay 50% or the next highest should pay 60%. Again these numbers are only for examples. Again, if we are going to make people who are better off pay the highest percentage then why don't we just send them our medical bills. Everyone should pay the same percentage. If you make 10,000 your percentage will equal out to a small fraction. if you make 1,000,000 your percentage will equal out to a lot more money going into taxes. they already pay more then the lower class. why should they pay even MORE than that. LOL what if those people in the higher tax bracket have 12 kids to support? should they pay less tax then?

this is the impression I have gotten from previous posts. that those who make more money should pay a higher percentage of tax. I disagree.

Ceph, it really is. I keep seeing people say that they ONLY make 20,000 and it's almost impossible to get by. How is that possible? In all my life I don't think I have ever had a job that I made more than 25,000 per year. I am able to survive just fine on that. You just have to live a more moderate exsistence. YOu don't go out and buy the most expensive care... or the biggest house. Live by your means and 20,000 provides a fine living.

My mother (a single mother) never made much money yet I always had a nice house to live in, clean clothes on my back and good food on the table. What more do you need?

Well, the rich DON'T pay a higher percentage of their income in most taxes, that is the point. For example, SS taxes are only taken out of the first $90,000 or so of your income. I'm not sure exactly what the figures are, but I think they take roughly 10% for SS. That means, if I make $25,000/year I pay on 100% of my income, etc, but if I make $250,000 a year, I pay SS tax on roughly 36% of my income. Is that "fair?" No.

And most rich people have such good tax lawyers, etc, I'm sure that very few pay "fairly." Also, most truly needy people probably don't pay many income taxes, if any at all. It's the middle class that carries the burden- is that "fair?"

Also, I'm not going to make judgments on how much money per year is "enough," but keep in mind, $20,000 in Pennsylvania goes a lot further than $20,000 in California.

[Ceph]

I think the problem isnt so much the federal taxes though now that I look at it....It's mostly FICA taxes...For the first time I really Looked at my LES and FICA and State taxes where what was taking the majority out of my pay.

Now, I need help...can someone tell me how the FICA taxes change from Tax bracket to bracket, because that I really dont know.

[borzoimom]

sorry all- here is the link- I added it in edit.. Someone making a 100 grand in northern virginia with the price of housing and cost of living, to be taxed the same as someone making like a 100 grand in other parts of the country.. Is flat out stupid.. http://www.co.loudoun.va.us/business/growth_summary_2004/b_2.pdf

[sparks19]

:eek: 50K is limping by? Yikes. then we are definately in the lowest tax bracket. Of course right now my husband is the only one that makes money. i work for free rent since I rent my boss's house. I work enough hours to pay the rent and I just don't get a pay cheque.

I should reword that previous statement. Do not get me wrong... i technically DO get a pay cheque... so I do pay taxes. I just don't see the pay cheque. it is immediately signed over to my boss. I don't even cash the cheque myself.

[sparks19]

That's the beauty of the American way... we all want something until it adversely affects us. It's just plain old human nature.

So many have posted and maintained that everyone should pay the same amount (% of income earned)! PERIOD. That's it! It is unfair and downright puishment to charge someone "who has worked hard to be succesful" a slightly hegher percent.

But on a similar note, you perhaps now think that it is unfair (or at least stupid) to charge you the same amount (%) of your $100,000.00 as someone who lives somewhere else (with a lower costs of living).

SO... are you suggesting it would be "fairer" or at least "less stupid" to tax you less???

I think that the answer or comeback to your implication is that "we are all free to move to where ever we like". Usually the higher costs of living in a given area warrants a higher pay wage for the same job. I find that to be very true in my industry. Someone doing my job in Los Angeles will generally make 3-4 times more than I. I could move to L.A, but my financial gains would easily be offset by my higher costs of living.
AH see now that is a good point that I didn't think about.

In New York City the cost of living is outrageous. 100,000 a year is like 20,000 a year here. Very good point.
but different states have different taxes.

just like in Canada. Not everyone pays the same tax as Ontario but ontario is the most heavily populated.

HAHA just a funny side note. I was looking at population charts for Canada the other day. Ontario is the most populated lol the least populated was the Yukon and the population was something like 30 LOL

[borzoimom]

I am saying the current " tax system" especially the income tax, has removed so much you can write off ( except your mortgage payment) its not right. As far as which way to go- I am not sure.
I am not really sure how a bumper sticker thread turned into taxes- but it is interesting to read.

[caseysmom]

I am saying the current " tax system" especially the income tax, has removed so much you can write off ( except your mortgage payment) its not right. As far as which way to go- I am not sure.
I am not really sure how a bumper sticker thread turned into taxes- but it is interesting to read.

Because the bumper sticker was political in nature.

[borzoimom]

Because the bumper sticker was political in nature.
Obviously.. But Taxes are more decided by the states...

[caseysmom]

Obviously.. But Taxes are more decided by the states...

Taxes are an important political topic. The bumper sticker was political in nature. If the bumper sticker was about dogs are kids who are honor roll students I could understand you being surpised.

[borzoimom]

Taxes are an important political topic. The bumper sticker was political in nature. If the bumper sticker was about dogs are kids who are honor roll students I could understand you being surpised.
Not totally surprised- just commenting. ...

[wombat2u2004]

You've hit the nail right on the head old mate....you are so right.
Wombat



My Dad sent 5 kids to college (most of us took out Federal loans) on less than 12K a year. Believe me, a "gravedigger" didn't make much money in the 60's.

No-one "likes" paying taxes, but I am sure that the government didn't get rich off my Dad's paycheck. I am also sure that he was thankful that his "fair share" was a slightly less % than the CEO's of the Cemetery.

[wombat2u2004]

I am saying the current " tax system" especially the income tax, has removed so much you can write off ( except your mortgage payment) its not right. As far as which way to go- I am not sure.
I am not really sure how a bumper sticker thread turned into taxes- but it is interesting to read.

""I am not really sure how a bumper sticker thread turned into taxes- but it is interesting to read.""

Because lower income earners would pay more of a percentage of their income to buy a bumper sticker than those on a higher income ???? LOL
Wombat

[Edwina's Secretary]

FICA...which is retirement income, medicare, death and disablity payments is split into two pieces. The first part - retirement is 6.2% on income up to a maximum of around $95,000 (it goes up every year) and 1.45% for medicare. That totals 7.65%. Your employer matches that contribution and pays exactly the same dollar amount on your behalf.

Unless you are self-employed as I am. I pay 15.3%.

Most people pay around 25% of their income in federal taxes.

[Edwina's Secretary]

Bob's Dad...the other "fairness" aspect of the cap on FICA is there is a cap on earnings FROM Social Security...the amount you get upon retirement is pegged to your income while working but there is a maximum so ... in return...there is a maximum contribution.