Romney what are you doing???

why do we have government mandated system that allows for taking more than one puts in? That's legalized theft, regardless of how we couch it.

You know the answer to that BPV. It is the wackos in Washington that write and pass the laws.

I agree that no one should get more of a tax refund than they have paid in. The system needs reformed to fix that.

That is a different issue than saying a working couple with 2 children that do work full time and only make up to $35-40,000.00 a year and do take the legal deductions that the law allows them to take is a leech.

The entire tax system is screwed up. Calling the millions of people that work for lower paying jobs leeches is absurb.
 
Just cart the elderly and disabled out into the streets around neighborhoods and places of business so the people who don't care if they die can watch it happen. Then after they're dead, leave the corpses to rot. It would be a waste of tax dollars to dispose of the bodies.

A lot of those people contributed to society when they were capable but now that they can't fend for themselves, "it's their problem". In the mean time, criminals are housed and provided for so why stop there? Let's shut down prisons. Give them all the death penalty instead of feeding and housing criminals for bad behavior while you toss the old and crippled out on the streets. Or should they just commit a crime so they can be provided for in prison too? Let's just apply the same concept that some of you want to use for the elderly. When it gets to the point that their stay cost more than they've put in(almost always), throw them back out on the streets or shoot them. They're one and the same for a lot of the elderly and disabled.

That's not even humane. I guess it's not the government's job to be humane...? Some of you want a system that was designed by the people and for the people to stop giving a crap about the people. Well, stop giving a crap about some people as long it benefits you. It's pretty amazing what money and greed does to people. People are actually criticizing the government for not throwing old people out on the streets to die. That's really the kind of government you want? I can't believe this is about to come out of my mouth(figuratively) but it sounds like the government(the liberal half) is more compassionate than the republican voters.

Obviously the system is broken and needs to be fixed because lots of people are being given handouts when they're more than capable of working but the idea that you should just let the people who truly need it be cast aside to die is unethical. Oh well... it's their problem. All I'm hearing is, "better they get screwed over by the system than me". That attitude is as much of the problem as anything. Not everybody is jobless and broke because of their choosing. You can thank a number of things for that. Banks flat out lying to people about their ability to pay off houses and giving out two mortgages to everyone who came crawling. A meaningless war that drained the funds.

People want the government to spend less but nobody else is willing to do the same to help their fellow man. The people doing well for themselves apparently would throw the elderly and disabled out on the streets for an extra grand a year to buy more Apple junk. There are people working crap jobs that they're above just to make their minimum payments on bills but when you already have a family, a house and whatever else, it doesn't cover what you could originally afford. You're blaming those people for the economy sucking and saying it's their problem? Wait until your company cuts back and it's you that's let go because the economy sucks. You think places are just begging for your service because you have a college degree? Guess what... most people do these days. We've created a society where anyone and everyone can go to college. I wonder how many people with degrees are waiting tables and making sandwiches because they were on the ass end of cuts. Oh well, their problem. Could be you but who cares, right?

You've made that money and you're free to do whatever with it. With that being said, how many of you live well above your needs? Just about everybody. I wasn't going to bring up Jesus but I think this is where people bring him into play. A number of you have basically said F the old people and it's not your problem. That is the opposite of following Jesus's teaching. You would rather people die just to have a little bit more money. A lot of you think the system is doomed anyways which means your money will be nothing but pieces of paper. Hopefully you were smart enough to trade that paper for gold/silver, Judas. Willing to kill off fellow man for a small increment. You fit right in with the the oil tycoons. Greedy.

Mottos of the future...

The good of the many outweigh the good of the few so let the plug pulling commence!

Throw people overboard so the ship doesn't sink!

When you run out of ideas, kill people!

At this point, I'd say the rich and powerful have won and nobody here is in that boat. The blue eye/brown eye and prison guard/prisoner experiment has done it's job in turning the middle class against each other. There are plenty of people without jobs who are more qualified than somebody with the same job currently working. The middle class people with jobs have made sure to blame the people without jobs that it's their fault and rub it in that they have a job even though everyone of them could find a jobless person more qualified to replace them. A lot of the jobless people have been beaten down and are glad to take the free hands out because instead of sympathizing with them, the other half of the middle class thinks they're better and would let people die if it meant a new ipad.

Whatever... turn against each other. Nothing is going to change because everybody would rather b**** at each other than work together. Me included, I'm just a dumbass with now clue how to fix any of this. So go ahead and vote in my place. The odds of either side making it better are slim to none anyways. The one thing I have going for me... I'd rather give a little more to keep the elderly and disabled housed. If you're willing to throw them on the street to die, hopefully for your sake that there isn't a hell. I'm probably going anyways but that's besides the point.

It's been fun giving my retarded, worthless opinion so I'll see you guys on the football forum. Where my opinion is also useless and stupid. :good!:
 
That is a different issue than saying a working couple with 2 children that do work full time and only make up to $35-40,000.00 a year and do take the legal deductions that the law allows them to take is a leech.

so why am I not allowed the same deductions for my son? Does he not cost the same to raise? Am I not already paying taxes to deal with things like his education?
 
Wow, TOP. I didn't get past your first paragraph. I can only imagine the stupidity and strawman building that followed.
 
why do we have government mandated system that allows for taking more than one puts in? That's legalized theft, regardless of how we couch it.

Having a problem with the system and how it works is one thing, and another discussion. Saying someone is a leech on society is another.

Again, not talking about the welfare lifestyle, talking about people that are legitimately trying to work.

Am I leeching off the system because I take a child and mortgage deduction that could otherwise be going to a government program? Afterall, that is money that could be going in the coffers but isn't.
 
and said 50k earner should live a life commensurate with that income level, including retirement. What merits money from someone else's pocket?

This isn't an entitlement issue. This is an issue where somebody paid into a system their entire life. The size of the payment they receive back, or why the system is there in the first place is a different discussion that I'm sure we would see eye to eye on.
 
so why am I not allowed the same deductions for my son? Does he not cost the same to raise? Am I not already paying taxes to deal with things like his education?

Correct me if I am wrong.
We all are entitled to the same deduction per child.

I believe what you are talking about is the earned income credit that lower wage families receive.
That is where the big tax refunds come from.
That is not a deduction.


EDIT: The earned income tax creidit is basically a gift to lower wage familes that need to be reformed.
 
Last edited:
Correct me if I am wrong.
We all are entitled to the same deduction per child.

I believe what you are talking about is the earned income credit that lower wage families receive.
That is where the big tax refunds come from.
That is not a deduction.

No! The child tax credit along with many others has an income limit. We have not been able to claim it for a few years.
 
Correct me if I am wrong.
We all are entitled to the same deduction per child.

I believe what you are talking about is the earned income credit that lower wage families receive.
That is where the big tax refunds come from.
That is not a deduction.

the child tax actually gets smaller as income increases. I didn't realize it until I filed my taxes last year

Limitations - The credit is limited if your modified adjusted gross income is above a certain amount. The amount at which this phase-out begins varies depending on your filing status. For married taxpayers filing a joint return, the phase-out begins at $110,000. For married taxpayers filing a separate return, it begins at $55,000. For all other taxpayers, the phase-out begins at $75,000. In addition, the Child Tax Credit is generally limited by the amount of the income tax you owe as well as any alternative minimum tax you owe.
 
I agree. They are the only ones I pay attention to.

Rasmussen was a disaster in the 2010 midterms. They overestimated the Republican candidates standing by an average of four points. I agree in 2006 and 2008 they were pretty reliable. If you want someone who has an accurate track record check out Nate Silver. Correctly picked all 50 states in the 2008 election. In 2010, all Senate races and he identified the 75 most competitive house races and picked 73 correctly. Yes I know he's liberal and works for the NY Times but that is pretty impressive.
 
the child tax actually gets smaller as income increases. I didn't realize it until I filed my taxes last year

Thanks for clarifying that.

I was understanding the only difference was the EIC.

The last child I claimed as a deduction is now 34.
 
Rasmussen was a disaster in the 2010 midterms. They overestimated the Republican candidates standing by an average of four points. I agree in 2006 and 2008 they were pretty reliable. If you want someone who has an accurate track record check out Nate Silver. Correctly picked all 50 states in the 2008 election. In 2010, all Senate races and he identified the 75 most competitive house races and picked 73 correctly. Yes I know he's liberal and works for the NY Times but that is pretty impressive.

Nate Silver got smoked in the 2010 election
 
Nate Silver got smoked in the 2010 election

He said Repubs would win 54 seats in the house they won 63, so I was mistaken. He said they would 7 senate seats and they only won six. He also correctly picked 36 of the 37 gubernatorial races. Not sure if that's the definition of "smoked". Although, still better than your boy Scott who missed the Hawaii senate race by 40 points and thought Sharron Angle was a lock.
 
Last edited:
He said his final prediction would be wrong because of "cell phones" and how Dem turn out would be greater due to their 2008 registration efforts. His final statement before the 2010 election was "The consensus view of Dem doom is not on such sound footing". Dude got smoked
 
He said his final prediction would be wrong because of "cell phones" and how Dem turn out would be greater due to their 2008 registration efforts. His final statement before the 2010 election was "The consensus view of Dem doom is not on such sound footing". Dude got smoked

Did the Dem doom happen? They lost the house which everybody, including Silver, predicted. They didn't lose the Senate which most people predicted. Again, bad night? Yes. Doom? nope. Now Rasmussen deserves credit for his polling of the special election in Mass where he showed Scott Brown leading when most polls showed Martha Coakley ahead,but it was pretty rough year for Scott.
 
New CNN poll has Obama up 52-44 in Michigan.

Where Romney was born and raised. Fat lady is warming up ....
 
New CNN poll has Obama up 52-44 in Michigan.

Where Romney was born and raised. Fat lady is warming up ....

The election is far from over. Still two jobs reports and three debates before the election. Although the first debate is the only one that makes a difference. Romney still has an opening.
 
The election is far from over. Still two jobs reports and three debates before the election. Although the first debate is the only one that makes a difference. Romney still has an opening.

Yes it's his home state, but it's still Michigan. No surprise that Obama is ahead.


Its a swing state, although at this point you'd have to say that one is locked down Obama.

I understand what you are saying about its not over until its over, but at this point it certainly appears as though the only way for the GOP to win the presidency this year is to cheat.
 
Its a swing state, although at this point you'd have to say that one is locked down Obama.

I understand what you are saying about its not over until its over, but at this point it certainly appears as though the only way for the GOP to win the presidency this year is to cheat.

I'm only 29 but no time in my teenage or adult life has Michigan been considered a swing state.
 

VN Store



Back
Top