Printable View
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..
LOL! That's kinda funny. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by borzoimom
Neither, I think bumper stickers are tacky.Quote:
Originally Posted by borzoimom
Quote:
Originally Posted by caseysmom
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 :(
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).Quote:
Originally Posted by sparks19
I haven't seen that sparks, and yes I had a magnet for years until it fell apart.
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
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)Quote:
Originally Posted by caseysmom
I uh have been known to tape on the inside of windows.. lol..
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:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
yup!!!
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 source, administrative costs could account for nearly 24% of total health care costs.Quote:
Originally Posted by sparks19
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.
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...
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by borzoimom
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-Now he's saying he was ALWAYS pro-life. Then he supported civil unions, at least, for gays. Now he is backing off that.Quote:
'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."
Once I thought he would be a great candidate - now I have no respect for him. He will say anything to get elected.
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..
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pembroke_Corgi
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOBS DAD
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.
You are on the button.Quote:
Originally Posted by sparks19
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?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...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/servl...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.
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-faili...fe-health-care
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
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.
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by sparks19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pembroke_Corgi
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
""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
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceph
Do you have any idea what percent of the population pays a 40% tax rate in the US?
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....
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceph
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceph
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.
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.
I have now gone through probate twice and trust me at least in California there is no death tax.
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.
We have the death tax in Virginia too- outragious amount of money when my grandfather and grandmother died.. My parents got socked big time!
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. :)
http://www.360financialliteracy.org/...tate+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:
State gift tax may also be owed if you are a resident of Connecticut, Louisiana, North Carolina, Tennessee, or Puerto Rico.
- 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
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
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)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceph
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"