• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Willardians should be happy now ! Predict win for Romney ...

mobiushky

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2012
Messages
830
Location
Alaska (ex-Colorado)
Even if we fire the failure of a president we have now, a triple-witching hour occurring on New Year's Day could push us over the fiscal cliff, even before the replacement can take office three weeks later.

Well, to be fair, a retro-active to Jan 1 bill could effectively delay that. IE, if parties get together after the election and say we will do this and we will make it retro active to Jan 1, don't panic. That might work. Might.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Well, to be fair, a retro-active to Jan 1 bill could effectively delay that. IE, if parties get together after the election and say we will do this and we will make it retro active to Jan 1, don't panic. That might work. Might.

After the election, if the Dems have lost the White House (and especially if they have also lost the Senate), expect petulance and the Dems blocking everything that is not perfectly to their liking. That means we will go over the cliff, the only question being how high the cliff is. If the cliff is high enough, disaster will have struck before a new Congress and president could do a thing about it.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Are you part of the top 1%? Or even the top 25%? Do you know who pays most taxes?


Unless the federal debt is repudiated, who do you think is going to pay for it, either by taxes or dollar depreciation from the price inflation that follows printing money out of thin air?


Also, keep in mind that price inflation hits the poorest the hardest. They are last to receive the newly created money; thus price inflation is already a factor by the time the newly created money trickles down to them.

So, unless the debt is repudiated, somebody is going to pay. It will either be taxes, which can include business taxes that get added to the price the consumer pays for goods. Or, it will be price inflation taking away purchasing power.


This all assumes the system of government debt and money creation doesn't come crashing down. In that case, we all are going to pay--pay heavily indeed.
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Heck, only 1/2 the country pays income tax ... I'm in the top 10% .. and I ain't rich

Exactly, unless a person is in that upper level the politicians are not into their pockets. They are into the pockets of those paying most of the taxes. Fairly the people paying the taxes are into the consumer pockets by passing down their costs of doing business with interest. It is called profit percentage. So if the business owner have their operating expenses raised by 10% they will make a profit on their outlay. That 10% will be closer to 16% by the time it reaches the consumer.

The people on the bottom of the scale are such numpties. They think they are getting a handout, but paying for it in higher prices, or less jobs, and less pay and benefits. The rich should pay their fair share, but so should everybody else. When the fed makes money out of thin air everybody loses, except the politicians.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Exactly, unless a person is in that upper level the politicians are not into their pockets. They are into the pockets of those paying most of the taxes. Fairly the people paying the taxes are into the consumer pockets by passing down their costs of doing business with interest. It is called profit percentage. So if the business owner have their operating expenses raised by 10% they will make a profit on their outlay. That 10% will be closer to 16% by the time it reaches the consumer.

The people on the bottom of the scale are such numpties. They think they are getting a handout, but paying for it in higher prices, or less jobs, and less pay and benefits. The rich should pay their fair share, but so should everybody else. When the fed makes money out of thin air everybody loses, except the politicians.

Oh, yes they are. You didn't read my post just above.

Also, just because they are not directly taxed doesn't mean they aren't indirectly taxed:

  • price inflation; when caused by government/banking system is properly considered a stealth tax.
  • excise taxes on consumer goods
  • federal taxes on fuel
  • do we have the carbon tax yet to add to electricity?
  • tax on electricity--universal connectivity charge or whatever was supposed to electrify rural areas
  • corporate taxes that get passed on in the form of higher prices
  • federal tax on their alcohol
  • federal religious tax--their spirits are taxed by ATF no? :)
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that only millionaires pay taxes and that only millionaires can complain about taxes! :rolleyes:


At the current rate of deficit spending (borrowing/increasing the debt), I wonder if who pays the taxes is even decided yet. I mean, its a neat trick to move the taxation off to the side into the form of borrowing. It means the taxes to pay for that spending isn't being paid yet.

But, unless the debt is repudiated, somebody is going to pay it. Who will it be?
 
Last edited:

PistolPackingMomma

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,884
Location
SC
At the current rate of deficit spending (borrowing/increasing the debt), I wonder if who pays the taxes is even decided yet. I mean, its a neat trick to move the taxation off to the side into the form of borrowing. It means the taxes to pay for that spending isn't being paid yet.

But, unless the debt is repudiated, somebody is going to pay it. Who will it be?

Considering the latest EO, whomever the government wants to go after by deeming them in allegiance with the 'enemy'.

Obama's Executive Order
 

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
Are you part of the top 1%? Or even the top 25%? Do you know who pays most taxes?

Do we get to make claims and set policies based on our household income? That seems silly to me, but it most likely gives me more control than the rest of you, so uh... hm...
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Exactly, unless a person is in that upper level the politicians are not into their pockets. They are into the pockets of those paying most of the taxes. Fairly the people paying the taxes are into the consumer pockets by passing down their costs of doing business with interest. It is called profit percentage. So if the business owner have their operating expenses raised by 10% they will make a profit on their outlay. That 10% will be closer to 16% by the time it reaches the consumer.

The people on the bottom of the scale are such numpties. They think they are getting a handout, but paying for it in higher prices, or less jobs, and less pay and benefits. The rich should pay their fair share, but so should everybody else. When the fed makes money out of thin air everybody loses, except the politicians.
Ouch! Anti-liberty statement.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
What is a "fair share"?

The best way to answer that question is to go see Atlas Shrugged part II.

Looks like there is at least a part III since we were left hanging when Dagney finally finds out "Who is John Galt."
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
There is no such thing as a "fair share. There is a lawfully required share.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

That is what people are paying now. Everybody should pay some income tax, or nobody should. It may not be the same rates across the board but it should at least be close.
 

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
Please explain?

The rich now are paying more than their fair share, so you are saying that would be anti-liberty for them to pay less? Are you a socialist?
Are we paying for more than our fair share? What does it mean to be "a socialist", anyway? I see the term bandied about, I want to make sure we're on the same definition page.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
--snip--
  • federal religious tax--their spirits are taxed by ATF no? :)
No - strangely enough BATFE is no longer involved with taxes on either alcohol or tobacco. Since 2003, that has been the perview of the TTB (Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau)

That and I don't think that religious organizations are required to pay tax on spirits used for sacraments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_and_Tobacco_Tax_and_Trade_Bureau

http://www.ttb.gov/about/stat_auth.shtml

The alphabet soup has changed a bit.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Are we paying for more than our fair share? What does it mean to be "a socialist", anyway? I see the term bandied about, I want to make sure we're on the same definition page.

Who is "we"? Do you have a mouse in your pocket? I can't say if you are paying more than your fair share. Taking from one group to give to another(even in the form of taxes) I consider socialism.
 
Top