Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If a store charged a 10 usage fee and other stores didnt that sold the same product would you avoid that store?
I would.
An extra tax to avoid cutting spending is a bad tax.
GOP doesn't mind new taxes or raising taxes, as long as its for defense.
Stupid. Yes, medicare needs to be revised. Yes, small changes need to occur to social security. Massive cuts need to happen to defense.
Question:
Of those three tings you mention, Medicate, Soc Sec and Defense, which one is specifically mentioned as a valid role of govemrent Under Article !, Section 8 USC?
I'll give you a hint. There is no mention whatsoever in the Constitution, either directly or indirectly, of a federal pension plan (Soc Sec) or a Federal Medical Care Plan (Medicare).
If a store charged a 10 usage fee and other stores didnt that sold the same product would you avoid that store?
I would.
An extra tax to avoid cutting spending is a bad tax.
The usage fee is obligatory in this case. Personally I think it's easier to pay it upfront than deal with it at the end of the year.
Of those three tings you mention, Medicate, Soc Sec and Defense, which one is specifically mentioned as a valid role of govemrent Under Article !, Section 8 USC?
I'll give you a hint. There is no mention whatsoever in the Constitution, either directly or indirectly, of a federal pension plan (Soc Sec) or a Federal Medical Care Plan (Medicare).
Question, has the US Supreme court, the ones tasked with interpreting the constitution, said that medicare and social security are constitutional?
And, just because defense may be specifically enumerated, doesn't mean that we shouldn't cut it, drastically.
The usage fee is obligatory in this case. Personally I think it's easier to pay it upfront than deal with it at the end of the year.
Personally I would prefer to see serious efforts made to cut spending before efforts are made to create new taxes.
If you cant make ends meet do you first go get a second job or look at how you spend money and see what money is being wasted first?
Me I stop spending money where I can before I consider another job.
Is it wrong to expect our government to first cut out the waste?
Germany and Japan are strategic allies. Afghanistan and Iraq... I agree. Whether we like it or not, our economy is weighted heavily on military spending.
All those soldiers can be based here in the United States and
A) Save a hell of a lot of money
and
B) Keep that money here in the United States instead of foreign entities.
I just forward the receipts to my accountant as they come in. He takes care of the rest. I can tell you everything I've purchased online this year, as well as years before. I'm more organized than you.
Trust me, it's very easy.
Just forward receipts to my accountant..... haha, that's pretty amusing. I don't own a business, or have a bunch of investments; we are just boring old wage earners. Like most Americans I don't have enough money to justify the expense of an accountant. If I lived in Michigan or California I would probably just use their tables because I actually don't want to avoid paying taxes I legitimately owe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest
The usage fee is obligatory in this case. Personally I think it's easier to pay it upfront than deal with it at the end of the year.
Agreed. Either tell me "You earn this much so pay this much," or set up a mechanism to collect as items are purchased.
Of those three tings you mention, Medicate, Soc Sec and Defense, which one is specifically mentioned as a valid role of govemrent Under Article !, Section 8 USC?
I'll give you a hint. There is no mention whatsoever in the Constitution, either directly or indirectly, of a federal pension plan (Soc Sec) or a Federal Medical Care Plan (Medicare).
The constitution does not enumerate the procurement of missiles, barracks, active duty health benefits etc etc either. But we do not argue that these are not captured as part of 'Defense'. It would be absurdly obtuse to make that argument. I would think the person making that argument is fanatically stupid.
So when the constitution enumerates Congress's power to provide for the 'general Welfare' of the people, IMMEDIATELY after enumerating 'defense' (both in the preamble and in Article I, Section 8), I think it is similarly absurdly obtuse and fanatically stupid to say that providing for food, shelter and health are extraconstitutional.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
