What is your "Debt Free Date"

[grsthegreat]

this thread is driving me nuts..im subscribing out of it.

have fun youall

 

[300UGUY]

this thread is driving me nuts..im subscribing out of it.

have fun youall

I think I will too. Good idea.

 

[Gizmo2]

man, I would never have guessed there were this many communists in in TBN
:ashamed:

:laughing: Yeah reading the last few post there are some that need serious medical attention. Not really, I guess they just need another handout. But I'm working as hard as I can. BTW who cares if Eddie's article is years old, if it is, I never saw it and it still holds true for the most part.

 

[EddieWalker]

I just had a breakthrough. We go back and forth, but never get anywhere. Facts are stated, conclusions are drawn and refrences are given to support a position. It's ignored, riduculed or dismissed by those who don't want to hear it.

I posted a joke. A humurous story that explains a theory in simple to understand terms. It was never meant to be take and being real, but shockingly enough, several of you replied that you didn't believe it was real. DUH!!!!!

How could you possibly understand reality when you don't even know when a humurous metaphore is presented?

Eddie

 

[two_bit_score]

Eddie Walker for Congress!

 

[Loren49]

The spelling is "metaphor" and sometimes it is difficult to tell if you really believe what you post or if you're kidding. Its just not as black and white as you feel. Not a good reason to attack those with whom you disagree.
Your story sure had the appearance of a political attack that you were presenting in that light. It misrepresented our President and his policies. How about something on "debt free date"? Also you were called on a simple repost of statements that have floated around for a while. You also missed the part about more corporate welfare than welfare to the poor.

http://thinkbynumbers.org/blog/gove...fare-statistics-vs-social-welfare-statistics/

"About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92 billion is spent on corporate subsidies. So, the government spent 50% more on corporate welfare than it did on food stamps and housing assistance in 2006."

Loren

 

[lilranch2001]

Eddie Walker for Congress!

**** with Congress, How about for Prez?
:thumbsup:

 

[lilranch2001]

The spelling is "metaphor" and sometimes it is difficult to tell if you really believe what you post or if you're kidding. Its just not as black and white as you feel. Not a good reason to attack those with whom you disagree.
Your story sure had the appearance of a political attack that you were presenting in that light. It misrepresented our President and his policies. How about something on "debt free date"? Also you were called on a simple repost of statements that have floated around for a while. You also missed the part about more corporate welfare than welfare to the poor.

Corporate Welfare vs. Social Welfare Statistics

"About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92 billion is spent on corporate subsidies. So, the government spent 50% more on corporate welfare than it did on food stamps and housing assistance in 2006."

Loren

How can anyone miss-represent Obama, everything he does is behind closed doors, or sealed paperwork

 

[riptides]

I just had a breakthrough. We go back and forth, but never get anywhere. Facts are stated, conclusions are drawn and refrences are given to support a position. It's ignored, riduculed or dismissed by those who don't want to hear it.

I posted a joke. A humurous story that explains a theory in simple to understand terms. It was never meant to be take and being real, but shockingly enough, several of you replied that you didn't believe it was real. DUH!!!!!

How could you possibly understand reality when you don't even know when a humurous metaphore is presented?

Eddie

Well DUH. Perhaps YOU don't explain your position properly, so others have a hard time following your thoughts.

 

[two_bit_score]

How can anyone miss-represent Obama, everything he does is behind closed doors, or sealed paperwork

Just because something 'has been around awhile' and puts the overall perspective in general terms doesn't mean it doesn't make a valid point.

The complainers have put nothing forward except the presentation without additional comment. That in no way invalidates the observations made in it.

 

[EE_Bota]

I trust faux news to give the truth much more that Clinton News Network or all of the Obama networks

OH yeah. by the way so does a high percentage of America based on FOX News ratings

In regards to this, I remember 5-6 years ago how when you would go into a business somewhere and they would have CNN on their tv's, not most everywhere ya go they have FOX News on

I NEVER listen to Faux, since when people even mention that station, they sound crazy to me. I think Faux ought to be canceled, since it drives the liberals even crazier than they were.

But I do listen to Fox News some, just to get a brief overview of what's going on. I combine it with my web sources, and my local news channel, and I think I get a pretty descent overview.

 

[EE_Bota]

One other quick thought...it has been expressed that more is spent on "corporate welfare" than other forms of welfare.

Is there any person in this thread in favor of "corporate welfare?"
I don't see anyone supporting it, so who have I missed?

I have seen some defend oil "subsidies" in partisan discussions. But in some readings, I find that the "subsidy" is depreciation, depreciation that most any business would be allowed to take. But...if we wish to do away with depreciation, I am in favor, as this would be simpler.

Now...many of us want the tax system totally replaced with a simpler system. I like Fair Tax. Some have expressed they like "Flat Tax." It there any person in this thread who likes the current system?

So...does it do any good at all to try to saddle other people with what they actually wish would be changed / done away with?

I pay taxes. I hope to always "earn" and be "productive" and therefore be able to contribute my share to the burden of running this country. But I would prefer to not be bled through the nose to run a spendy wasteful government. With all the taxes I pay, MY DEBT INCREASES.

Is there anyone who doesn't understand that? Is there anyone who doesn't believe me? Is there anyone who thinks that is "good" or "just" or "best" or "fair?"

 

[EddieWalker]

The spelling is "metaphor" and sometimes it is difficult to tell if you really believe what you post or if you're kidding. Its just not as black and white as you feel. Not a good reason to attack those with whom you disagree.
Your story sure had the appearance of a political attack that you were presenting in that light. It misrepresented our President and his policies. How about something on "debt free date"? Also you were called on a simple repost of statements that have floated around for a while. You also missed the part about more corporate welfare than welfare to the poor.

Corporate Welfare vs. Social Welfare Statistics

"About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92 billion is spent on corporate subsidies. So, the government spent 50% more on corporate welfare than it did on food stamps and housing assistance in 2006."

Loren

Loren,

I must appologize for my spelling errors, grammer mistakes and lack of punctuation. I joke that it's becasue I went to a public school that was more proud of mixing the races then actually graduating students with an education. Big Liberal West Coast City. Did I mention that I was a Liberal Democrat Union Steward that voted for Clinton and a whole bunch of other Demorcats back in the 80's and early 90's? I know Nancy well, I'm from her part of the country!!!

As for not replying to the question. I do try to respond to most quotes that somebody takes the time to address if it's a real question or a perceived insult. In a good debate, points are brought up that I'm not aware of, and I can improve my undersanding of what happened. With some posters, there isn't any point in replying because we're not at the same place. I also like to see how far they will go to discredit themselves, which for me has proven to be something that I enjoy.

If you would be so kind, Pleas ask your question again.

Thank you,
Eddie

 

[lilranch2001]

Well DUH. Perhaps YOU don't explain your position properly, so others have a hard time following your thoughts.

well duhhh if someone had half a brain they would have understood

 

[lilranch2001]

One other quick thought...it has been expressed that more is spent on "corporate welfare" than other forms of welfare.

Is there any person in this thread in favor of "corporate welfare?"
I don't see anyone supporting it, so who have I missed?

I have seen some defend oil "subsidies" in partisan discussions. But in some readings, I find that the "subsidy" is depreciation, depreciation that most any business would be allowed to take. But...if we wish to do away with depreciation, I am in favor, as this would be simpler.

Now...many of us want the tax system totally replaced with a simpler system. I like Fair Tax. Some have expressed they like "Flat Tax." It there any person in this thread who likes the current system?

So...does it do any good at all to try to saddle other people with what they actually wish would be changed / done away with?

I pay taxes. I hope to always "earn" and be "productive" and therefore be able to contribute my share to the burden of running this country. But I would prefer to not be bled through the nose to run a spendy wasteful government. With all the taxes I pay, MY DEBT INCREASES.

Is there anyone who doesn't understand that? Is there anyone who doesn't believe me? Is there anyone who thinks that is "good" or "just" or "best" or "fair?"

I am all for the fair tax

 

[Loren49]

EddieW - I was out of place about the spelling. I've made many errors and would make many more if not for the spell checker.

My point with the level of corporate welfare (good handouts and bad handouts) is that many people complain only about the welfare for the poor while seeming to give other handouts a free pass. I feel that with welfare for the poor there are also deserving and very needy folks. (mentally or physically can't make it without help) Nobody is for handouts to the able bodied who are just lazy.
In the big picture welfare is a minor peice of our economic problems. Two very costly wars that we not only did not tax extra for but taxes were cut. This did not happen with previous wars. (1.2 trillion is significant.)
It is a fact that we are at historic lows for income tax levels. I don't feel its working this way. I'm also for a "fair tax" but what someone came up with and labeled the "fair tax" isn't clearly fair to me.

Loren

 

[EddieWalker]

EddieW - I was out of place about the spelling. I've made many errors and would make many more if not for the spell checker.

My point with the level of corporate welfare (good handouts and bad handouts) is that many people complain only about the welfare for the poor while seeming to give other handouts a free pass. I feel that with welfare for the poor there are also deserving and very needy folks. (mentally or physically can't make it without help) Nobody is for handouts to the able bodied who are just lazy.
In the big picture welfare is a minor peice of our economic problems. Two very costly wars that we not only did not tax extra for but taxes were cut. This did not happen with previous wars. (1.2 trillion is significant.)
It is a fact that we are at historic lows for income tax levels. I don't feel its working this way. I'm also for a "fair tax" but what someone came up with and labeled the "fair tax" isn't clearly fair to me.

Loren

I want to be fair, so please let me know where I'm wrong here. My understanding of corporate welfare is that it's a tax break givin to corporations. Where I live, the county or city will tell a company that if they move their business here, they will let them oporate for so many years without paying certain taxes, or reducing their tax burdon for a period of time.

On a bigger scale, the Federal Government does the same thing. Some of their tax breaks are on research, others are on new hires, or expanding their operations. Each company is different, but the goal is to encourage the business to grow and hire more people and of course, pay more in taxes down the line. Or, to stay in the country and continue to due business here.

I hear some people complain about the corporate welfare that big oil gets, but they never mention that the oil companies pay a MASSIVE tax to the governement. Off the top of my head, I think it's something like 30 cents a gallon goes to the federal governement and their net profit is around 3 cents a gallon.

Welfare to the poor is something that I support, but it has to be responsible. Sadly, it has become a political tool. The history of it is that it doesn't work over the long term. The more money that is spent on the poor, the more dependent the become on that money and the less likely they are to advance their standing or personal wealth. This is exactly what that metaphore about the college professor was about!!!!!


Clinton did a lot for welfare reform, but not nearly enough. Bush didn't do too much that I'm aware of either way. I think he increased the spending quite a bit, but nothing to fix any of the issues. Corruption, waste and abuse it rampant.

I think there has to be an incentive to get people off of welfare. If you are physicaly and mentally capable of working, they you get it for a short period of time and then it starts to decrease. I think that it's three years now that a person can collect. Who is going to look for a job for the first 2 and a half years?

On top of that, agencies that promote it, also make money off of keeping it going. ACORN is probably the biggest, and they receive tax payer money to help the poor, but without any hing of success.

Show me where welfare for the poor works, and I'll suport it. But I'm still going to be for getting rid of the rest of it.

As for jobs, there is always a job for somebody who wants to work. It might not be what you want to do, and it might not pay what you want to earn, or think you are worth, and it might not be where you want to live, but if you had to survive on what you earned, you would do what it takes. Sadly, with welfare, it has to opposite effect.

I can't argue with you where we are in tax levels. That gets confusing because of how the doller if valued over time, and what the actual revenues are compared to how they project everything and then adjust it months after the fact.

I believe that with the amount that comes in today, there is plenty of money to run the government, keep our military sounds, and pay off the debt. What there isn't enough of is the growing size of government and the growing dependency for handouts.

Social Security could be fixed and so can Medicare. Both are said to be the big problems, but the problem isn't in the lack of funds, it's in the waste that's done with those funds, and the regulations put on them by government. Start addressing each issue and then moving on to the next. Illegal immigrants are a huge expense on medicare. Emergancy room visits also cost a fortune when it's not a serious situation.

Instead of fixing anything, they just create more problems and add to it. Obamacare does not address a single issue that was wrong with our medical system, and instead, it makes it worse and adds new problems. It doesn't lower the cost, it does not increase coverage and it does not improve the service that you get.

Eddie

 

[MossRoad]

Last call for on topic posts.

 

[Pilot]

Well, Moss this too is OT:

You hear politicians call for getting rid of "subsidies" for "big oil".

So I looked up subsidies for oil companies.

I guess if you call a tax deduction like any business gets a "subsidy", then I guess oil companies get subsidies. They get to write depreciate equipment just like all businesses. They get to deduct costs of employees, utilities, etc., just like other businesses. Well, there is that depletion allowance, but that's available to mining companies and other extractive industries.

I couldn't find any real subsidies for oil companies. Maybe someone else knows about them.

 

[Gizmo2]

EddieW - I was out of place about the spelling. I've made many errors and would make many more if not for the spell checker.

Thank you, I was almost afraid to post again.

Last call for on topic posts.

Good one.:laughing: But I have to admit I'm sort of enjoying both topics.