Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111213 LastLast
Results 105 to 117 of 157

Thread: Fiscal cliff

  1. #105
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    412
    Quote Originally Posted by ga-hvac-tech View Post
    Actually, there is one more group:

    Folks who will work just enough to claim they are trying... yet INTENTIONALLY apply for every form of assistance they can get; both govt and private. These are the ones who have learned how to work the system... and they have literally NO shame.

    Now I have a question: Id say welfare cheats are more greddy because at least corporations employ people and pay taxes were welfare cheats are nothing but a drain on our economy .

    Between supposedly greedy corp types... and this group of welfare cheats... which is more greedy?

    IMO if we are being honest with ourselves... the answer is not what the media would want you to think.
    Welfare cheats are more greddy because they are nothing but a drain on our economy . Corporations employ people and pay taxes . Actually they probally pay most taxes .

  2. #106
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    412
    I copied and pasted this from slate because i found it interesting.

    The fiscal cliff. It’s the most boring political story of the year. It has none of the human drama of an election campaign. None of the white-knuckle terror of a financial system calamity. Just a lot of endless, tedious negotiations leading up to the inevitable deal. Except here we are—Dec. 31, 2012, and there’s no deal in place. We’re going to go “over the cliff.” Probably not forever. Probably some deal will pull us partially back in January. But for a little while at least, we’ll be cliffed. You may be sitting around on a Monday thinking about tonight’s party and mildly regretting having skipped past all of the past two months’ worth of fiscal cliff stories. It’s all about to happen, but you have no idea what it means. In particular, what does going over the cliff mean for you? Well, that all depends on who you are. Fortunately, I’m here to help you figure it out.

    Are you a low-income, retired person who relies overwhelmingly on Social Security benefits for money? If so, you just hit the fiscal cliff jackpot. You don’t pay any taxes, so your taxes won’t go up. And Social Security cuts aren’t part of the cliff. In fact, quite the opposite. Virtually all the deals that have been in play in Congress this month involve averting the fiscal cliff in part by cutting Social Security by changing the cost-of-living adjustment formula. If you’re smart, you should hope there’s never a deal.

    Do you supplement your labor, pension, or Social Security income with dividend income? To the extent that you do, you’re totally screwed. Taxes are set to go up across the board, but the scheduled rate increases on dividend income are much higher than the rest. Kindly firms like Slate’s parent company have been dealing with this by paying big “special” dividends in December to disgorge corporate cash in today’s low-tax climate rather than waiting for what may be a rough 2013.
    Advertisement

    Do you build wind turbines? Bad news. The production tax credit on which your industry depends is going away, and work may all but vanish for a while.

    Are you a full-time student with no job? You’re in the clear. The perfect example of someone unaffected by the cliff. Unless, that is, the cliff hits your parents in the pocketbook so hard that they cut you off and you have to go get a job.

    Have you been collecting Unemployment Insurance for more than 26 weeks? You’re out of luck. The federal program providing funding for extended UI coverage is expiring. And you’re the opposite of the Social Security moocher. Reduced Social Security benefits was a concession the White House was clearly willing to make to get a deal, but securing funding for extended UI was a key thing the administration was looking for. In the new baseline, there’s a decent chance UI will end up being lost in the shuffle as future negotiations focus on tax issues.

    Do you have a job? Get ready to pay higher taxes. If you have an Adjusted Gross Income of less than $250,000, the odds are overwhelming that Congress and the White House will soon work out a deal to put your tax rates back down again. But even so, the payroll tax holiday is expiring and won’t be coming back. That money’s going to be taken right off the top of your paycheck.

    Are you self-employed? Same deal, but this time the money won’t be taken off the top, so you need to remember to calculate for the need to pay higher taxes in April as your money comes in.

    Do you directly or indirectly work for the government? If so, you’re set to be hit by the sequestration provisions of the Budget Control Act of 2011. That means about $1.2 trillion in cuts over the next 10 years, divided about equally between defense and non-defense provisions. Social Security benefits and most assistance to the poor are exempt, but that means big cuts to the rest. Federal civilian employees, manufacturers of military equipment, Medicare providers, and other government contractors will be hit hard. So will lots of service providers in the D.C. metropolitan area whose incomes depend indirectly on federal funding streams.

    This is basically bad news all around. But note that it’s especially bad news for rich people and people living in the Washington, D.C., area. You’ll probably have noticed that high-income individuals living in the D.C. area have disproportionate influence over the political press, which is one reason there’s been so much fiscal-cliff hype. A deal to at least relieve the middle-class tax aspect of the cliff will probably pass in January when the new baseline lets everyone call the deal a “tax cut” and undo much of the harm to the non-rich.
    Last edited by 54885488; 12-31-2012 at 12:35 PM.

  3. #107
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Atlanta GA area
    Posts
    20,893
    Quote Originally Posted by 54885488 View Post
    I copied and pasted this from slate because i found it interesting.

    The fiscal cliff. It’s the most boring political story of the year. It has none of the human drama of an election campaign. None of the white-knuckle terror of a financial system calamity. Just a lot of endless, tedious negotiations leading up to the inevitable deal. Except here we are—Dec. 31, 2012, and there’s no deal in place. We’re going to go “over the cliff.” Probably not forever. Probably some deal will pull us partially back in January. But for a little while at least, we’ll be cliffed. You may be sitting around on a Monday thinking about tonight’s party and mildly regretting having skipped past all of the past two months’ worth of fiscal cliff stories. It’s all about to happen, but you have no idea what it means. In particular, what does going over the cliff mean for you? Well, that all depends on who you are. Fortunately, I’m here to help you figure it out.

    Are you a low-income, retired person who relies overwhelmingly on Social Security benefits for money? If so, you just hit the fiscal cliff jackpot. You don’t pay any taxes, so your taxes won’t go up. And Social Security cuts aren’t part of the cliff. In fact, quite the opposite. Virtually all the deals that have been in play in Congress this month involve averting the fiscal cliff in part by cutting Social Security by changing the cost-of-living adjustment formula. If you’re smart, you should hope there’s never a deal.

    Do you supplement your labor, pension, or Social Security income with dividend income? To the extent that you do, you’re totally screwed. Taxes are set to go up across the board, but the scheduled rate increases on dividend income are much higher than the rest. Kindly firms like Slate’s parent company have been dealing with this by paying big “special” dividends in December to disgorge corporate cash in today’s low-tax climate rather than waiting for what may be a rough 2013.
    Advertisement

    Do you build wind turbines? Bad news. The production tax credit on which your industry depends is going away, and work may all but vanish for a while.

    Are you a full-time student with no job? You’re in the clear. The perfect example of someone unaffected by the cliff. Unless, that is, the cliff hits your parents in the pocketbook so hard that they cut you off and you have to go get a job.

    Have you been collecting Unemployment Insurance for more than 26 weeks? You’re out of luck. The federal program providing funding for extended UI coverage is expiring. And you’re the opposite of the Social Security moocher. Reduced Social Security benefits was a concession the White House was clearly willing to make to get a deal, but securing funding for extended UI was a key thing the administration was looking for. In the new baseline, there’s a decent chance UI will end up being lost in the shuffle as future negotiations focus on tax issues.

    Do you have a job? Get ready to pay higher taxes. If you have an Adjusted Gross Income of less than $250,000, the odds are overwhelming that Congress and the White House will soon work out a deal to put your tax rates back down again. But even so, the payroll tax holiday is expiring and won’t be coming back. That money’s going to be taken right off the top of your paycheck.

    Are you self-employed? Same deal, but this time the money won’t be taken off the top, so you need to remember to calculate for the need to pay higher taxes in April as your money comes in.

    Do you directly or indirectly work for the government? If so, you’re set to be hit by the sequestration provisions of the Budget Control Act of 2011. That means about $1.2 trillion in cuts over the next 10 years, divided about equally between defense and non-defense provisions. Social Security benefits and most assistance to the poor are exempt, but that means big cuts to the rest. Federal civilian employees, manufacturers of military equipment, Medicare providers, and other government contractors will be hit hard. So will lots of service providers in the D.C. metropolitan area whose incomes depend indirectly on federal funding streams.

    This is basically bad news all around. But note that it’s especially bad news for rich people and people living in the Washington, D.C., area. You’ll probably have noticed that high-income individuals living in the D.C. area have disproportionate influence over the political press, which is one reason there’s been so much fiscal-cliff hype. A deal to at least relieve the middle-class tax aspect of the cliff will probably pass in January when the new baseline lets everyone call the deal a “tax cut” and undo much of the harm to the non-rich.
    And the primary problem... which is too much political influence and not enough free markets... goes on.

    I guess folks are either too stupid or too afraid to go it on their own. Shame... we HAD a great country... now we have a 3rd world banana republic masquerading as a great nation.
    GA-HVAC-Tech

    Quality work at a fair price with excellent customer service!

    Romans Ch's 5-6-7-8

    2 Chronicles 7:14

  4. #108
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,171
    ..................................

  5. #109
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,171
    Firstly i would like it make it clear, that i am against "social welfare as lifestyle choice"
    There are many during their life who do NOT have a choice, and this is when social welfare is required.
    I see my taxes (and I have paid plenty over my working years) partially as charity. It will or may not need benefit me directly.
    Who chooses how my charity is to be spent, whilst i have a vote, indirectly I do.
    If i gave to a charity organisational, for example I church, I do not. There are many good people with religious organisations, but they still have shytsters. I have no way of getting rid of these, an elected Representative i do.
    If you call the society you live in the country you live in, then we would except some form of equality in far as law and social benefits. This would not occur on local based charity giving.
    If you live in a relatively wealthy area, then charity intake will be high, not just because of the wealth, but in the skill of organisation. So the needy in this area will in deed be well looked after. If those who are in control of the donations, decide to give to the needy that maybe seem morally inferior.
    So yes a society (country) needs government control, so the real question is how do you control your government.
    ........

  6. #110
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Chicagoland Area
    Posts
    4,510
    and the verdict is in
    http://news.yahoo.com/house-wont-vot...-politics.html
    Did you expect any different?
    Officially, Down for the count

    YOU HAVE TO GET OFF YOUR ASS TO GET ON YOUR FEET

    I know enough to know, I don't know enough
    Liberalism-Ideas so good they mandate them

  7. #111
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Atlanta GA area
    Posts
    20,893
    Quote Originally Posted by barbar View Post
    Firstly i would like it make it clear, that i am against "social welfare as lifestyle choice"
    There are many during their life who do NOT have a choice, and this is when social welfare is required.
    I see my taxes (and I have paid plenty over my working years) partially as charity. It will or may not need benefit me directly.
    Who chooses how my charity is to be spent, whilst i have a vote, indirectly I do.
    If i gave to a charity organisational, for example I church, I do not. There are many good people with religious organisations, but they still have shytsters. I have no way of getting rid of these, an elected Representative i do.
    If you call the society you live in the country you live in, then we would except some form of equality in far as law and social benefits. This would not occur on local based charity giving.
    If you live in a relatively wealthy area, then charity intake will be high, not just because of the wealth, but in the skill of organisation. So the needy in this area will in deed be well looked after. If those who are in control of the donations, decide to give to the needy that maybe seem morally inferior.
    So yes a society (country) needs government control, so the real question is how do you control your government.
    ........
    To me, the problem is:

    First... ARe there not shysters in govt? Really now... And by voting does one really get rid of anything... Seems the verifiable track record is we only change the tone of sheysting...
    And to give the polecats the power they get in buying votes with charity... is to give them WAAAAY too much power. The govt that governs least, governs best!

    The goal of charity is to help folks who fall on hard times get back on their feet and BECOME PRODUCTIVE MEMBERS OF SOCIETY. The goal of charity has never been and never will be to support someone for the rest of their lives... that is welfare.

    LOCAL charity... whether it is religious based, social based, activist based... is still LOCAL... and as such a lot easier to control. And as we know... humans being what they are... we ALL need a little control when it comes to spending $$$... ESPECIALLY other folks $$$.

    Old saying: What keeps honest folks honest... is someone looking over their shoulder...
    GA-HVAC-Tech

    Quality work at a fair price with excellent customer service!

    Romans Ch's 5-6-7-8

    2 Chronicles 7:14

  8. #112
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Atlanta GA area
    Posts
    20,893
    Quote Originally Posted by 2sac View Post
    and the verdict is in
    http://news.yahoo.com/house-wont-vot...-politics.html
    Did you expect any different?
    It would appear someone in congress has gonads...

    The issue is too much spending... and it appears only the 'bad guys' have the gonads to do something about it.
    GA-HVAC-Tech

    Quality work at a fair price with excellent customer service!

    Romans Ch's 5-6-7-8

    2 Chronicles 7:14

  9. #113
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Eastern PA
    Posts
    68,923
    Quote Originally Posted by barbar View Post
    Firstly i would like it make it clear, that i am against "social welfare as lifestyle choice"
    There are many during their life who do NOT have a choice, and this is when social welfare is required.
    I see my taxes (and I have paid plenty over my working years) partially as charity. It will or may not need benefit me directly.
    Who chooses how my charity is to be spent, whilst i have a vote, indirectly I do.
    If i gave to a charity organisational, for example I church, I do not. There are many good people with religious organisations, but they still have shytsters. I have no way of getting rid of these, an elected Representative i do.
    If you call the society you live in the country you live in, then we would except some form of equality in far as law and social benefits. This would not occur on local based charity giving.
    If you live in a relatively wealthy area, then charity intake will be high, not just because of the wealth, but in the skill of organisation. So the needy in this area will in deed be well looked after. If those who are in control of the donations, decide to give to the needy that maybe seem morally inferior.
    So yes a society (country) needs government control, so the real question is how do you control your government.
    ........
    In the U.S., taxation was never intended to be for a few to determine how to redistribute money earned by the many to those who are in need for any reason. I am opposed to any tax that does not directly result in benefits for all Americans. I didn't sign up to be a donor, I don't expect to continually be bled.
    Government is a disease...
    ...masquerading as its own cure…
    Ecclesiastes 10:2 NIV


  10. #114
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by ga-hvac-tech View Post
    To me, the problem is:

    First... ARe there not shysters in govt? Really now... And by voting does one really get rid of anything... Seems the verifiable track record is we only change the tone of sheysting...
    And to give the polecats the power they get in buying votes with charity... is to give them WAAAAY too much power. The govt that governs least, governs best!

    The goal of charity is to help folks who fall on hard times get back on their feet and BECOME PRODUCTIVE MEMBERS OF SOCIETY. The goal of charity has never been and never will be to support someone for the rest of their lives... that is welfare.

    LOCAL charity... whether it is religious based, social based, activist based... is still LOCAL... and as such a lot easier to control. And as we know... humans being what they are... we ALL need a little control when it comes to spending $$$... ESPECIALLY other folks $$$.

    Old saying: What keeps honest folks honest... is someone looking over their shoulder...
    Yes there are shyters is Govt, but you have an opportunity to get rid of them.

    Your local is the USA, and maybe the beast (Govt) is just to big to control, or even to small, by which I mean not enough representatives, people who can hide their corruption by being remote from the electorates.

    There is nothing wrong with very local charity, and usually is very beneficial to the local area and give excellent value as far return of donations, (you and I work for free, we do not charge for incidentals and so on, plus the benefits of this charity we can generally see an imidiatly) but the model can not be directly modeled up, without a national organisation, dare i say back to an elected government. Where people need to be employed and dedicated structures are in place (all of which have a direct cost on the donation, tax or tithe)

  11. #115
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Eastern PA
    Posts
    68,923
    Barbar, you will never be able to understand the American mindset, whether liberal, conservative or anywhere in between. You live in an island nation with no where near the geographical, cultural or economic variances that we have in the U.S. What works for a small island nation is not necessarily even close to being good for a country such as the U.S.

    I'll grant you, there is quite a diversity in the New Zealand geography and climate from one area to another, especially for such a small amount of landmass. Still, as countries go, New Zealand is more like a theme park version of what the U.S. is. And not to be too petty, but your national bird can't even fly....
    Government is a disease...
    ...masquerading as its own cure…
    Ecclesiastes 10:2 NIV


  12. #116
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Atlanta GA area
    Posts
    20,893
    Quote Originally Posted by barbar View Post
    Yes there are shyters is Govt, but you have an opportunity to get rid of them.

    Your local is the USA, and maybe the beast (Govt) is just to big to control, or even to small, by which I mean not enough representatives, people who can hide their corruption by being remote from the electorates.

    There is nothing wrong with very local charity, and usually is very beneficial to the local area and give excellent value as far return of donations, (you and I work for free, we do not charge for incidentals and so on, plus the benefits of this charity we can generally see an imidiatly) but the model can not be directly modeled up, without a national organisation, dare i say back to an elected government. Where people need to be employed and dedicated structures are in place (all of which have a direct cost on the donation, tax or tithe)
    First... I said it does not matter who one votes for... when govt has the power it does from buying votes with charity. The corruption from allowing that behavior will permeate and destroy even the most honest individual. Keeping govt SMALL is the key to keeping govt under control.

    And as to voting them out... one can do that with their checkbook at the local level. Just watch which charity produces the least desirable results... and quit giving them $$$. It is that old thing about the market-place... something liberals hate! Because it exposes the ones playing games from the ones doing their job.

    May be a difference of country... however IMO there is no need to model up charity. It works just fine managed at the local level. MANY times; smaller IS better... Ever see a small organization that was more efficient than a large one... I have seen it many a time.
    GA-HVAC-Tech

    Quality work at a fair price with excellent customer service!

    Romans Ch's 5-6-7-8

    2 Chronicles 7:14

  13. #117
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by RoBoTeq View Post
    In the U.S., taxation was never intended to be for a few to determine how to redistribute money earned by the many to those who are in need for any reason. I am opposed to any tax that does not directly result in benefits for all Americans. I didn't sign up to be a donor, I don't expect to continually be bled.
    Taxation is a fact of life, regardless, or not, the distribution will always be left to the few. "Managers"

    How can any tax benefit (USA or any other country) benefit all, all of the time. It can not.

    Do you give blood, is so why? Do help others and just in case other will help you if you need blood. If you are lucky enough that you never need blood, then it could be deemed hard done to, tax is no different, its an organised social net.

Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111213 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event