a federal prison where we pay taxes
Posted By: blondee on 2008-01-27
In Reply to: She's committing a federal crime - Freebie
to feed her, clothe her and provide her with medical care. She ought to be extricated to her own country. I wonder what the Mexican feds would do with her. I don't feel sorry for these people. They were in the wrong in the first place by sneaking into this country. They deserve whatever they get. As for the unborn child, if the mother wasn't so selfish, she would put the child up for adoption in the US where people who could afford to love and raise that child right would have the opportunity to.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Two-Thirds of US Corps pay no federal income taxes
Most Companies Pay No Federal Income Tax
GAO Study Also Finds 68% Of Foreign Companies In U.S. Avoid Corporate Taxes
WASHINGTON, Aug. 12, 2008
(AP) Two-thirds of U.S. corporations paid no federal income taxes between 1998 and 2005, according to a new report from Congress.
The study by the Government Accountability Office, expected to be released Tuesday, said about 68 percent of foreign companies doing business in the U.S. avoided corporate taxes over the same period.
Collectively, the companies reported trillions of dollars in sales, according to GAO's estimate.
"It's shameful that so many corporations make big profits and pay nothing to support our country," said Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who asked for the GAO study with Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.
An outside tax expert, Chris Edwards of the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, said increasing numbers of limited liability corporations and so-called "S" corporations pay taxes under individual tax codes.
"Half of all business income in the United States now ends up going through the individual tax code," Edwards said.
The GAO study did not investigate why corporations weren't paying federal income taxes or corporate taxes and it did not identify any corporations by name. It said companies may escape paying such taxes due to operating losses or because of tax credits.
More than 38,000 foreign corporations had no tax liability in 2005 and 1.2 million U.S. companies paid no income tax, the GAO said. Combined, the companies had $2.5 trillion in sales. About 25 percent of the U.S. corporations not paying corporate taxes were considered large corporations, meaning they had at least $250 million in assets or $50 million in receipts.
The GAO said it analyzed data from the Internal Revenue Service, examining samples of corporate returns for the years 1998 through 2005. For 2005, for example, it reviewed 110,003 tax returns from among more than 1.2 million corporations doing business in the U.S.
Dorgan and Levin have complained about companies abusing transfer prices - amounts charged on transactions between companies in a group, such as a parent and subsidiary. In some cases, multinational companies can manipulate transfer prices to shift income from higher to lower tax jurisdictions, cutting their tax liabilities. The GAO did not suggest which companies might be doing this.
"It's time for the big corporations to pay their fair share," Dorgan said.
more blacks in prison...why?
Your post is a racist post. Tell me, why do blacks make up the majority in prison? Could it be bad cops sending innocent black people to prison..you bet..could it be no opportunites for blacks, you bet..Your statement trying to defend Bennetts undefensible comments make me wonder.
I think Bush should go to PRISON.
nm
He refused to be released from prison...
because there were men who had been there longer than he had and he felt using his dad's clout to get him out was wrong for those men, and it was, and that takes the kind of courage and integrity Barack Obama can only dream about.
How can you say he never regretted it? Does Obama regret throwing a friend and mentor, the man who baptized his children, under the bus for his political career? This is a man you should trust? Hello??
You're right--that's why noone ever goes to prison for murder. nm
nm
A mainland *supermax* prison
would be quite a change to the gitmo detainees. but it would also provide one benefit they don't have now, access to new recruits for jihad. unless they are sequestered from all other prisoners, these men will be enlisting other convicts to their cause. conversion to islam is rampant in our prison system. giving these terrorist suspects the opportunity spread their form of radical islam to other convicts, who might actually be released from prison, would be a big mistake.
Halliburton will build new prison on Guantanamo
Halliburton subsidiary gets $30 million to build new Guantanamo prison
ASSOCIATED PRESS
11:28 a.m. June 17, 2005
WASHINGTON – A subsidiary of Houston-based Halliburton has been awarded a $30 million contract to build an improved 220-bed prison for terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the Pentagon announced.
Kellogg Brown and Root Services Inc. of Arlington, Va., is to build a two-story prison that includes day rooms, exercise areas, medical bays, air conditioning and a security control room, according to the Pentagon. It is to be completed by July 2006.
Congress previously approved the funding for the construction job. Some members, along with human rights groups, are now calling for Guantanamo to close because of reports of prisoner abuses there and because the foreign detainees are being held indefinitely with no charges filed.
KBR beat out two other bids for the job, the Pentagon said.
"The future detention facility will be based on prison models in the U.S. and is designed to be safer for the long-term detention of detainees and the guards," according to a statement provided by a Pentagon spokesman. "It is also expected to require less manpower to operate."
The new prison building, called Detention Camp {PI:EF}6, will replace some of the older facilities at the Navy base, which officials say are not adequate for holding prisoners for the long term.
The total contract could be worth up to $500 million through 2010, the Pentagon said. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Atlantic, in Norfolk, Va., is the contracting agency.
About 520 prisoners from the Bush administration's war on terrorism are held at Guantanamo. Already, $110 million has been spent on construction there, and the prison costs about $95 million a year to operate.
White House officials have said there are no plans to close the facility because the detainees being held there are too dangerous to release while the war on terror continues.
Report: 1 in 31 U.S. adults in prison system
Updated: 8:07 p.m. ET Nov. 2, 2005
WASHINGTON - Nearly 7 million adults were in U.S. prisons or on probation or parole at the end of last year, 30 percent more than in 1995, the Justice Department said Wednesday.
That was about one in every 31 adults under correctional supervision at the end of 2004, compared with about 1 in 36 adults in 1995 and about 1 adult in every 88 in 1980, said Allan J. Beck, who oversaw the preparation of the department’s annual report on probation and parole populations.
Beck attributed the overall rise in the number of people under correctional supervision to sentencing reforms of the 1990s. The nation’s incarcerated population has been increasing for more than 30 years, with sharp growth in the last decade.He said crime rates have fallen in recent years, which helps account for slower growth among people on probation — those allowed to live in the community with some restrictions rather than being incarcerated.
The number of people on probation in 2004 grew by 6,343 to about 4.2 million in 2004, the report said.
Nearly 50 percent of all probationers at the end of last year were convicted of a felony. Twenty-six percent were on probation for a drug-law violation, and 15 percent for driving while intoxicated, said the annual Justice Department report.
Racial imbalance persists in probation
Whites made up 56 percent of the probation population and only 34 percent of the prison population, according to Wednesday’s report and another Justice Department report released last month.
“White people — for whatever reason — seem to have more access to community supervision than African Americans and Hispanics,” said Jason Ziedenberg, executive director of the Justice Policy Institute, which promotes alternatives to incarceration. He called probation a cheaper and more effective form of rehabilitation.
Blacks, he noted, comprised 30 percent of probationers and 41 percent of prisoners at the end of 2004. Hispanics made up 12 percent of the probation population and 19 percent of the prison population
Parolees grew fastest among those under correctional supervision. They are criminal offenders who rejoin society with restrictions for a time after they complete a prison term.
Number of parolees grows
The adult parole population grew 20,230, or 2.7 percent, during the year, more than twice the average annual increase of 1.3 percent since 1995, the report said. The total number of parolees at the end of 2004 was 765,355.
Beck said a late 1990s spike in prison populations is now showing up in the number of parolees, as the number of prisoners released rises.
The parole population grew during 2004 in 39 states, with double-digit growth in 10 states, led by Nebraska’s 24 percent increase. The number of people on parole decreased in nine states and didn’t change in Maine.
About 187,000, or 39 percent of discharged parolees went back to prison or jail in 2005. While the number has grown, the rate has held relatively stable since 1995, when 160,000, or 39 percent of discharged parolees returned to incarceration.
The total number of people incarcerated in the United States grew 1.9 percent in 2004 to 2,267,787 people, according to the report released last month.
© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Barney Frank in prison, is that that what you'd call
x
Minorities do make up a lopsided percentage of the prison population.
But just stating that as a fact which is self-evident pays no attention whatsoever to the root causes of minority tension in our nation, nor address the fact that rich people with their various crimes tend to be well-connected enough to keep their butts out of jail, thus disproportionately skewing the prison statistics. Many more reasons can be advanced to explain the sad state of America's penal system, but none of that matters in the subject at hand.
Bennett's conclusion (as a member of the wealthy, advataged and least-likely-to-go-to-prison-for-his-crimes club) is that mass genocide would solve our crime problems.
Don't you realize how frightening that is?
Germany seek charges against Rumsfeld for prison abuse sm
Friday, Nov. 10, 2006
Exclusive: Charges Sought Against Rumsfeld Over Prison Abuse
A lawsuit in Germany will seek a criminal prosecution of the outgoing Defense Secretary and other U.S. officials for their alleged role in abuses at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo
By ADAM ZAGORIN
Just days after his resignation, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is about to face more repercussions for his involvement in the troubled wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. New legal documents, to be filed next week with Germany's top prosecutor, will seek a criminal investigation and prosecution of Rumsfeld, along with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, former CIA director George Tenet and other senior U.S. civilian and military officers, for their alleged roles in abuses committed at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The plaintiffs in the case include 11 Iraqis who were prisoners at Abu Ghraib, as well as Mohammad al-Qahtani, a Saudi held at Guantanamo, whom the U.S. has identified as the so-called 20th hijacker and a would-be participant in the 9/11 hijackings. As TIME first reported in June 2005, Qahtani underwent a special interrogation plan, personally approved by Rumsfeld, which the U.S. says produced valuable intelligence. But to obtain it, according to the log of his interrogation and government reports, Qahtani was subjected to forced nudity, sexual humiliation, religious humiliation, prolonged stress positions, sleep deprivation and other controversial interrogation techniques.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs say that one of the witnesses who will testify on their behalf is former Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, the one-time commander of all U.S. military prisons in Iraq. Karpinski — who the lawyers say will be in Germany next week to publicly address her accusations in the case — has issued a written statement to accompany the legal filing, which says, in part: It was clear the knowledge and responsibility [for what happened at Abu Ghraib] goes all the way to the top of the chain of command to the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld .
A spokesperson for the Pentagon told TIME there would be no comment since the case has not yet been filed.
Along with Rumsfeld, Gonzales and Tenet, the other defendants in the case are Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen Cambone; former assistant attorney general Jay Bybee; former deputy assisant attorney general John Yoo; General Counsel for the Department of Defense William James Haynes II; and David S. Addington, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff. Senior military officers named in the filing are General Ricardo Sanchez, the former top Army official in Iraq; Gen. Geoffrey Miller, the former commander of Guantanamo; senior Iraq commander, Major General Walter Wojdakowski; and Col. Thomas Pappas, the one-time head of military intelligence at Abu Ghraib.
Germany was chosen for the court filing because German law provides universal jurisdiction allowing for the prosecution of war crimes and related offenses that take place anywhere in the world. Indeed, a similar, but narrower, legal action was brought in Germany in 2004, which also sought the prosecution of Rumsfeld. The case provoked an angry response from Pentagon, and Rumsfeld himself was reportedly upset. Rumsfeld's spokesman at the time, Lawrence DiRita, called the case a a big, big problem. U.S. officials made clear the case could adversely impact U.S.-Germany relations, and Rumsfeld indicated he would not attend a major security conference in Munich, where he was scheduled to be the keynote speaker, unless Germany disposed of the case. The day before the conference, a German prosecutor announced he would not pursue the matter, saying there was no indication that U.S. authorities and courts would not deal with allegations in the complaint.
In bringing the new case, however, the plaintiffs argue that circumstances have changed in two important ways. Rumsfeld's resignation, they say, means that the former Defense Secretary will lose the legal immunity usually accorded high government officials. Moreover, the plaintiffs argue that the German prosecutor's reasoning for rejecting the previous case — that U.S. authorities were dealing with the issue — has been proven wrong.
The utter and complete failure of U.S. authorities to take any action to investigate high-level involvement in the torture program could not be clearer, says Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, a U.S.-based non-profit helping to bring the legal action in Germany. He also notes that the Military Commissions Act, a law passed by Congress earlier this year, effectively blocks prosecution in the U.S. of those involved in detention and interrogation abuses of foreigners held abroad in American custody going to back to Sept. 11, 2001. As a result, Ratner contends, the legal arguments underlying the German prosecutor's previous inaction no longer hold up.
Whatever the legal merits of the case, it is the latest example of efforts in Western Europe by critics of U.S. tactics in the war on terror to call those involved to account in court. In Germany, investigations are under way in parliament concerning cooperation between the CIA and German intelligence on rendition — the kidnapping of suspected terrorists and their removal to third countries for interrogation. Other legal inquiries involving rendition are under way in both Italy and Spain.
U.S. officials have long feared that legal proceedings against war criminals could be used to settle political scores. In 1998, for example, former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet — whose military coup was supported by the Nixon administration — was arrested in the U.K. and held for 16 months in an extradition battle led by a Spanish magistrate seeking to charge him with war crimes. He was ultimately released and returned to Chile. More recently, a Belgian court tried to bring charges against then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for alleged crimes against Palestinians.
For its part, the Bush Administration has rejected adherence to the International Criminal Court (ICC) on grounds that it could be used to unjustly prosecute U.S. officials. The ICC is the first permanent tribunal established to prosecute war crimes, genocide and other crimes against humanity.
but that's the right way to do it, not federal
xx
Looks we all need Federal
Or start taking birth control if you are already not on them.
http://beltwayblips.dailyradar.com/video/nancy_pelosi_birth_control_will_stimulate_the_economy/
cut what federal programs??
So the Federal govt is gonna cut back in entitlement programs to fund the rebuilding of NO? Not gonna cease his tax cuts for the rich, just gonna cut back on programs for.....the disadvantaged, of course, the ones whose voices will not be heard..Whose fault was NO? Bush and his administration. I say Bush should donate some of his millions to the rebuilding of NO, let some of the unfortunate ones camp on his 1700 acres that he boasts about..He got us into this awful mess. His speech the other night was a joke..Just another press moment, trying to pull on Americans heart strings but it aint working, LOL..**Long live equality**..Three more years? Oh gee, can we survive? What will be the next catastrophe under this fool? 9/11, Iraq and now NO..**America where are you**?
Huh? You think Fox created the Federal
Heaven help us, I certainly hope and pray they wanted to make the government SMALL. I cannot believe you just said what you did and do not even understand the point you made, which is government is NOT SUPPOSED TO BE BIG. That is the problem!!!!!! I definitely want my government as small as possible, small enough we can drown it in the bathtub!!!!
Are you daft poster? Don't you see where BIG government has us now? They are DROWNING US!!!!!!! That's the entire point of small government, not regulating the h@ll out of me and my family.
I realize generations of people think that is what government is supposed to do....tell you how to think, what to read, how to raise our children (give them another pill if that's what the government says too),who to associate with, take away our civil rights one by one until we have nothing left of the country this was supposed to be.
Of course you want the government small. Did you think it was SUPPOSED to be big! That's what Obama wants.....MORE GOVERNMENT, BIGGER GOVERNMENT, more control of YOUR life. No thanks!!!!!!!! My life has been invaded enough by our out of control government.
Federal Reserve
The world central banks are printing money like crazy to try and free up the markets. E-mail congress and tell them the Federal Reserve is not elected by the people and should not be allowed to devalue our currency by printing it out of thin air until it is worthless. This is way past republicans and democrats now. Call or flood them with e-mails and get Congress to protect us.
Oh please.......that's now the Federal Reserve
I said last night these were very old families, especially the Rothschild who have very deep deep filthy rich pockets and contribute greatly to the Federal Reserve and that this goes all the way back to England and British rule in the early 1900s. You act as if you found something no one else could find.
This is not news, maybe just to you or those who don't have a clue about the Federal REserve and I can guarantee you most liberal dems running their mouth on here didn't have a clue about the Fed Res....probably thought it was part of their government. And I hope this litle chart has clarified everything for you, which wouldn't surprise me, because you should already know the Rothschild family is part of this....it's who the others are that are kept quiet. They are listed as the Bank of England. You really need to understand where the Fed Res comes from, the fact that we have never really broken free from England. Someone asked last night about JP Morgan and why he was the beloved son or something, well, gee, get a clue. Look where his family comes from, their contributions to this country alone, and their very deep pockets. Those you will never know the names of put out little pawns in this country, i.e., JP Morgan and let them do their bidding. Unfortunately, they got greedy but don't think for a minute the Feds didn't know this was going on...they had to have known. The bigger question is what are they planning in order to continue to lower rates, allow these institutions to offer such fraudulent loans in the first place, taking advantage of anyone and everyone who walked through their doors.
If you knew half as much as you think you do, you would have realized a long time why Ron Paul has begged to abolish the Federal Reserve in this country, to disallow it to ever rule this country again, as it has done for soooo long. We are being ruled by an elite few, who pull the strings of every government they have their hands in.....is that what you want? That isn't a free country my friend...that is British rule.
I believe that a federal sales tax........sm
REPLACING the current income tax system would be a fairer, more equitable way of collecting taxes from the US citizens. The more you spend, the more you would pay in taxes. The rich who buy nicer cars and top of the line merchandise would pay more, reflecting their ability to be able to do so, while the poorer would pay less based on their ability to afford less. I also believe a system such as this, in place for a number of years, would tremendously cut the waste in America drastically by causing the American people, especially those in the middle class and lower class to consider their purchases more carefully. However, I doubt it would have as much of an affect on the higher income class in terms of wastefulness.
Most of these are federal prisons and
military bases that do have prisons for military personnel plus the barracks.
Don't get so upset. I think most of that link is just to fire up people's imagination. What do you think they would do with the prisoners in these federal prisons???? Turn them loose? Don't think so. It's scare tactics.
Look at your bills. There are federal
"excise" taxes on just about everything you mentioned.
She's committing a federal crime
Nofify the Federal Marshalls and they'll bust her. I lived down the street from a girl doing that and she went to federal prison!
I agree. I think those federal dollars could be used...
for other things. It is not like the news is not out there. Kids know more today at 10 or 11 than I knew at 15 or 16. It is discussed on TV ad nauseam, all of the shows aimed at kids have discussed every aspect of sex you can imagine including STDs, AIDS, homosexuality, abortion, keeping a child rather than aborting, birth control, the whole 9 yards. And I figure most parents have had "the talk" with kids. The culture has been created that sex is an expression, it is no longer saved for marriage, multiple partners don't matter and you don't even have to like each other...that is the culture that has been created. No amount of birth control programs, sex ed programs, is going to put that horse back in the barn. We reap what we sow.
So why spend even more federal dollars on this? It makes no sense to me. You do the best you can to talk to your kids and explain the consequences of choices...but in the end, you cannot force them not to engage in premarital sex. It is ultimately their choice, and federally funded programs at this stage in our culture...waste of money in my view, because it is only repeating what is already out there.
Just my two cents.
Federal Reserve folks......
Stop throwing accusations at one another and blaming whatever party on Capitol Hill you hate!!!!!!!!! All this blame game crap is absolutely nauseating..... all parties have been part of the government since way back when. The parties in Washington at this moment had absolutely NOTHING to do with the situation at hand......the problem started decades ago with an absolutely desperate president who started up the Federal Reserve program, trying to coax people into believing their money was safe to put in the banks after the banks collapsed. They were lulled into a false sense of security in hopes they would start putting their money back in the bank and being told their government would guarantee it.........nothing to do with rep or dem, just a desperate president at the helm at the time and all those idiots who should have known better but let it continue nonetheless.
The corrupt companies in this fix now have been allowed to go this route because of an institution that was started up a looooong time ago, this just didn't happen overnight or a few years.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-466210540567002553
You really need to google Federal Reserve
Sorry you're that drawn in by Fox news or think everyone else is, but you probably need to understand that just because posters may be more educated than you on some things, i.e., the Federal Reserve, doesn't mean you can't educate yourself. Now, granted, it will take more than 5 seconds of scant reading because this institution goes back a long ways, but more than likely you will hear those words "Federal Reserve" mentioned time and time again. They are the reason we are in this mess.
You will probably hear a LOT of economists preaching this....they should know; this is what our economy leans on instead of our own two feet. You need to understand who has been running the show behind the scenes for decades.....it ain't rep or dem; it's the Federal Reserve and it should never have happened!!!!
Federal Reserve....... I have done my homework
The Federal Reserve is not a bank...it has absolutely nothing to do with government, though it does run our government as well as many governments throughout the world. The Federal Reserve is made up of very deep filthy rich pocket individuals. Just try to find the names of those that make up the Federal Reserve....you can't. You can only find their board of governors. Our President does elect the chairman, in this case Bernanke. Fed Res is a private central bank that decides everybody's interest rates. The history on that is a good read and sickens me frankly, because it is a deceitful organization with a corrupt history. NOBODY owns the Federal Reserve except those you will never know of.....these families go back to the days of British rule, though by carefully reading, you will get the picture of who those families are.
Paulson worked for Goldman Sachs among being elected to other high boards (and has very close ties with China which scares the crap out of me); don't know what he really has going with them, so everyone should be concerned there, as half of the billions they have taken from us are now going to foreign investors/countries....why? No foreign country is going to pay us if we invest and their country fails to profit.
JP Morgan was a very powerful banker and during his time alive, he helped combine GE and actually financed steel companies in this country which created a huge economic boom for this country when it really needed it, so he basically is considered a man who saved the US economy and more imporantly, the US government on at least two occasions. This is a man who dates back to England, where his dad was also a wealthy banker, so like I said, we have always had strong ties with British banking since we tried to break from the British rule. Morgan's contributions to this country go way back and are really good ones, so he has handed down quite a good legacy. He even helped our railroads succeed. He is responsible for establishing U.S. Steel, so you can see why this company is basically gold to many. Matter of fact, he helped sell push gold to keep this country afloat. His life is a good read as well.
Now, common sense dictates why Citigroup is fighting with Wells Fargo, even though Wachovia did agree to sell to Citigroup to begin with. That's the behind-the-scenes deals that you will never know the truth about. As far as FDIC, the Federal Reserve was pushing for it, but our government did NOT want to make any financial guarantees of funds. THere is a block on that buyout for a good reason; if this took place, with a sell to either Wells Fargo or Citigroup, this would put the US citizens' money in the hands of three banks, Bank of American, JP Morgan, and whoever bought Wachovia. Whoever buys Wachovia would literally own 30% of the banking industries profits (bad, bad, bad). If only these three banks exist, they would dominate the banking industry and would have so much power that they could set their own prices for loans and services. I'm sure then stricter federal regulations would be placed on them but no doubt then the smaller banks would be so squeezed, they would have to look for buyers as well and guess who would buy them then? Wah lah....a monopoly will be formed......
So, in answer to your question, the banks don't own the governement, the Federal Reserve owns the government and always has since Roosevelt's days back in 1913. That is why those of us who understand how wrong it is for the fed res to even exist, want it abolished. Ron Paul has brought this before the floor on many occasions, to many deaf ears. Now, ask yourself why that is. Mostly, because most those nitwits don't have a clue what the federal reserve is, where it came from, and what it does.
So when you end up with just three banks, look out folks!! This has happened before with three central banks in our history and they all participated in fractional banking...creating money out of thin air.....sound familiar?
So if you want to solve this problem, blame the Federal Reserve and petition your government to abolish it NOW. I beg everyone to please do your homework on the Federal Reserve and when you think you could puke knowing the corruption of it all, then here is a site for a petition to sign to abolish it. Ron Paul has been all over this for years. President Andrew Jackson abolished the first version of a centralized governing bank. Thomas Jefferson could see this coming.....
Thomas Jefferson said, "If the America people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currencies, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their prosperity until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." This is serious business folks!!
http://www.petitiononline.com/fedres/petition.html
all that means is doing away with the federal part -
He says that states should be able to mandate it on their own. He does not intend to overturn Roe v. Wade
I would favor a federal sales tax if
there were no exemptions whatsoever. If, say you earned a dollar, you owed a dime. No exceptions regarding where the money comes from. Tax welfare benefits too. Social Security is already taxed for some recipients. Those of us who receive Social Security and have enough income to pay taxes on 85% (maximum) of it ALL had the opportunity for a better life. Some took advantage of that and some didn't. Young people today have little hope of receiving Social Security and they also have little hope of being able to live while saving for their future.
In my usual long-winded way, t hat's what I think.
I am not in favor of a federal sales tax....
as much as I am in favor of a flat percentage income tax. For the sake of argument...let's say 10%. No deductions, no nothing. Flat 10%. I don't care if you make a dollar or 10 million dollars. Everyone pays the same amount. Cut back the IRS because if you pay a flat tax you don't need them and the incessant forms and reams of laws. Cutting back on the IRS would save millions in and of itself. Then every American pays the same tax. THAT is equality. Everyone gets the same shake. You make less, you pay less. You make more, you pay more. They should also abolish the death tax. IF the feds have already taxed all your money, they should not tax it AGAIN just because you die. That is unfair to the heirs you worked to provide for. Just my opinion.
Federal and State tax refunds
Have you heard that some states are issuing IOUs for tax refunds this year? Yep. I have also heard, don't know how true but at this point I think anything is possible, that the gov may be doing the same thing the later a person files or quite possibly not paying them at all. I have heard that we should file quickly because the longer we wait, the harder it might be to get our refund. Any truth to any of this anyone?
Then your state is in violation of federal
federal funding for their welfare programs. I was not aware that any states had refused federal funds designated for this purpose. Interesting.
Bye..Bye..Scooter Enjoy Your Time in the Federal Pen
Happy days are here again..**Waiting for the next indictment**..
10 federal employees and 1 w/ criminal charges
over improper relationships between interior dept officials who oversee offshore drilling and oil executives...............Big oil? Offshore drilling? Run afoul of the law?Nahhhhh
One more reason why I favor federal sales tax....sm
Our retirees are being taxed on money on which they have already paid taxes.
And yes, there should be no exemptions. People are going to buy cars, appliances, take vacations, remodel their homes, etc., so the federal sales tax should apply to everything. Food.....I'm still not too sure about that as I believe that food is a basic necessity of life.
Here is a site that shows the federal budget
over the past 3 years, including charts. This is by the National Debt Awareness Center. There are lots of other links on there to check out too but, again, I am short on time today.
http://www.federalbudget.com/
This is an article from U.S. News about the budget outlook:
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/2009/02/25/hot-docs-bleak-and-uncertain-federal-budget-outlook-as-deficit-climbs.html
I saw today where they passed a budget to take us through the next couple months to the tune of $896B. Filled with pork. Hopefully, I'll get a chance to look it up tomorrow.
Federal government is an agent of the state
--
You confuse federal and local govt
Each state is supposed to govern themselves, not the federal government. Actually, it is unconstitutional for the federal government to even dictate laws to any state, which is why many states have now declared sovereignty from the federal government; they see the writing on the wall.
Taxes taken in by the states are supposed to be decided upon by the state how to use that money, including schools, law enforcement, etc..... NOT the federal government.
And yes, you would be able to defend yourself from foreign invaders because that is ALL the federal government is supposed to oversee in the first place, a strong military to defend our country against foreign invasion, which is a joke, considering they can't even defend our Mexico/US border!!!
You don't seem to understand that your government was NEVER to dictate to states what they do with their money, even if given money by the federal government; states are supposed to decide themselves how to best use the money..... federal government only says we'll give you the money but YOU have to do with it what we tell you to.
That is BIG brother mentality and it was never to be.......unfortunately, it is now worse than ever!!!
Is Anyone Minding the Store at the Federal Reserve?
05/08/09 Rep. Alan Grayson asks the Federal Reserve Inspector General about the trillions of dollars lent or spent by the Federal Reserve and where it went, and the trillions of off balance sheet obligations. Inspector General Elizabeth Coleman responds that the IG does not know and is not tracking where this money is.
The Federal Reserve is not government related....
nm
Bush didn't create the federal reserve......
xx
Wow! You'd better go back to school. The Federal Reserve System is definitely
Perhaps you're thinking of Freddie Mac or Sallie Mae...or the Post Office, maybe?
At Wounded Knee, two federal agents were shot to death. sm
One was killed while going for his gun after being shot at. The gun was so high powered, it severed his hand. He was married and a father. I don't think Wounded Knee is anything to be proud of.
Answer this question PLEASE. If the incompetence of the federal, state, and local
governments (especially federal because this is a national disaster) has nothing to do with race why was the response so slow?
Why is it that Bush is on the TV in the middle of hurricaines in Florida making appropriations for relief funds and when he DID not respond so abruptly even as New Orleans drowned in front of our eyes. I urge you to read the article I posted below A DIFFERENT AMERICA.
I think Bush and his office, the governor of Louisianna and the mayor of Louisianna (though I think he for one had good intentions) NO ONE, should have to wait on a permission slip to rush to the aid of Americas people.
I'm sorry, but the the govenor told us he didn't need the guard, story does not get anywhere with me because any competent president after hearing that NO was drowning with a good number of it's people in it would have immediately made it a national disaster. So again, if race didn't have anything to do with it, what is the reason?
I'm open minded and waiting for a good answer to this question.
Federal Grand Jury Digging Deep into Bush Crimes
PRESIDENT INDICTEDFEDERAL GRAND JURY DIGGING DEEP INTO BUSH CRIMES
By Greg SzymanskiA federal whistleblower close to the Chicago federal grand jury probe into perjury and obstruction charges against President Bush and others said indictments of top officials were handed down this week. A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Northern District of Illinois, however, refused to confirm or deny the source’s account.
“We are not talking about any aspect of this case, and our office is not commenting on anything regarding the investigation at this time,” said Randall Sanborn from the office of U.S. federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, the attorney conducting the grand jury probe into whether Bush and others in his administration violated federal law in a number of sensitive areas, including leaking the name of a CIA operative to the media.
In December 2003, Fitzgerald was named special counsel to investigate the alleged disclosure of Valerie Plame’s name to several mainstream columnists, but the present grand jury probe has expanded to include widereaching allegations of criminal activity as new information has surfaced.
Although the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Chicago is staying silent, it is well known that Fitzgerald is digging deep into an assortment of serious improprieties among many Bush administration figures, based, in part, on subpoenaed testimony provided by former Secretary of State Colin Powell.
According to whistleblower Tom Heneghen, who recently reported on truthradio.com, Powell testified before the citizen grand jury that Bush had taken the United States to war based on lies, which is a capital crime involving treason under the U.S. Code. “Regarding the Powell testimony, there is no comment,” said Sanborn.
However, sources close to the federal grade jury probe also allegedly told Heneghen a host of administration figures under Bush were indicted, including Vice President Richard Cheney, Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Cheney Chief of Staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, imprisoned New York Times reporter Judith Miller and former Cheney advisor Mary Matalin. Heneghen, unavailable for comment, also allegedly told sources White House advisor Karl Rove was indicted for perjury in a major document shredding operation cover-up.
In recent weeks, there has been much controversy over Fitzgerald’s wide-reaching probe, which is extending far beyond the Bush administration to include what some have called “a wholesale cleansing” of a crimeladen White House and Congress.
Fitzgerald’s investigation is said to be also centered on members of the 9-11 Commission, members on both sides of the aisle in the House and Senate and also select high-powered members of the media.
Needless to say, administration officials are “fighting mad” with Fitzgerald. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts is trying to derail Fitzgerald’s probe by calling him to testify before the Senate regarding his true motives behind the investigation.
Political observers are now wondering whether administration-friendly Republican legislators, some under investigation themselves, are conspiring like President Nixon did in Watergate with Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox in an attempt to shield the Bush administration from prosecution.
In late July, reports about the recent bomb scare in the subway under the congressional offices at the Dirksen Building—coincidently near where Fitzgerald was holding his grand jury hearings—raised questions as to whether government operatives were sending the zealous prosecutor a “warning message” that he was entering dangerous waters with his investigation.
The bomb scare was reported to local police late Monday afternoon, July 18, causing the subway to be evacuated for approximately 45 minutes while bomb sniffing dogs and SWAT team members searched for what was reported to be “a suspicious package” left on one of the subway cars.
Fitzgerald began serving as the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Illinois in September 2001. He was initially appointed on an interim basis by former Attorney General Ashcroft before being nominated by Bush.
The Senate confirmed his nomination by unanimous consent in October 2001. In December 2003, he was named special counsel to investigate the Plame case. Based on the testimony of ABC sources in late July, it appears that at least two close associates of Rove testified before the grand jury. One was Susan Ralston, a longtime associate of Rove and considered to be his right hand.
The other was “Izzy” Hernandez, regarded as Rove’s left hand and now a top official in the Commerce Department.(Issue #33, August 15, 2005)
My husband does just that. He is on the phone weekly with our sens and reps. state and federal. sm
Our congressment and senators et AL are on speed dial. If my husband has a beef or a question, he is on the phone letting them know (nicely of course) that they screwed up. But on the other hand he does call and tell them thank you when they do something right. One of the congressmen from Michigan voted no on the bailout. So he got a call from both of us. Same with the senator from Michigan who voted FOR the bailout. He got a call saying he has just lost 2 votes. We may be a minority, but the aides in those offices know who my husband is..and all he has to say is his first name. If you keep the heat on, hopefully things can change. Maybe not right away, but hopefully at some time. Just not in my lifetime I am afraid.
You can have our federal money along with a new state motto: "Michigan - The Slave State". n
NM
You won't pay more taxes
The fact of the matter is McCain's tax proposals are the same as Bushes - he wants to make the tax cuts for the rich PERMANENT. Therefore, the burden of taxes falls on the backs of the middle class. Yes, I worked for Children Services - by taking in foster children and adopting hard to place children the parents receive quite a few entitlements - that is true. (I'd rather work - I saw how hard it was to raise "damaged" children). I had a weekend foster child, as a single mother, with my own 2 children and custody of my neice and never applied for food stamps, medical care, etc. My husband took off and dodged state-to-state to avoid paying childsupport. How we managed, I guess it was just easier then. Obama's tax plan does not include YOU at your tax bracket - you will benefit from his plan - are you benefitting from Bush's? I know we aren't. I'm not asking for pity. 1 out of 3 people will get cancer. I paid for my disabiity insurance and I am still fighting for my benefits (they play games and lie to delay payments), so I will scrap aluminum and do whatever I have to in order to keep food on the table. I'm not lazy. I worked hard raising my children by myself, bought my own home and did not remarry until my kids were adults. I had to write to state representatives in order to get my insurance disability to MOVE. I have written my state representatives before when my ex-husband was dodging child support. I learned to lean Democrat while working at Children Services and also by all the things I learned in college. Those dem state reps helped me and even called me at work to ensure the Bureau of Support was doing their jobs. How can I argue with that? Please read the issues on both candidates and don't believe everything you hear on the news and read on this board. McCain's attack ads are lies and that's sad as we considered him when he ran against Bush. Now he is just another Bushie.
Taxes
mCcain gives back rich. Obama to give back to middle class. Simple as that. I have never attended any institute of higher lurnin so that makes me sure I am right. Too much knowledge a dangeris thingie.
More about taxes...
My personal taxes (single renter w/no dependents) WERE higher under Clinton, but there was only ONE reason for that: I was making a LOT MORE MONEY BACK THEN.
That's when my MT paycheck was at it's highest ever, about$40K per year. Since then, my income has gone down (thanks in large part to nobody in Bush's term in office doing diddly to stop the hemorrhage of our jobs out of the US & off to India, Pakistan, Philippines, etc.
And to make things worse, these same companies selling our livelihood down the river were getting REWARDED monetarily for doing so.
So now, I make half of what I made during the Clinton years. (About $20K/year, for doing about twice the work.) Retirement is now almost a virtual impossibility, thanks to the tanking of our stock-market-driven 401K not only after 9/11, but today as well.
I just hope, if we end up with 4-8 more years of this greed on Capital Hill, and throughout our nation's corporate world, that everyone gets used to paying for those who will have nothing. If I lose my job and/or health insurance, then I, too, will be contributing to the money-pit that hospital emergency rooms have become (and which is why they're closing one by one), because that's where I, too, will have to go for my medical care.
Taxes
McCain will raise taxes too. How else is he going to fund his wars? Not to mention Bushes bail out of his cronie Wall Streeters, never mind that those execs collected millions in bonuses before they ran the companies into the ground. We taxpayers are left to pick up the tab. If Obama sticks to his guns he won't raise taxes on MOST of us, certainly not me, as I don't come close to an income over $250,000 per year...wish I did, I'd be happy to fork over a few extra tax dollars.
taxes are taxes
you don;t get to chose where your money goes. Only United Way does that.
that would still be taxes... nm
x
|
