Tea Party Movement

darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/180#post_3311638
 
If I change any of my insurance plans (car, auto, life, etc.) to another provider, and I have paid premiums in advanced for those plans, I get a credit back for the portion I didn't use. Depending on the life insurance policy you get, you actually accrue interest (whole life policy I believe). It's like a form of CD.
 
Do you pay your unemployment tax ahead of time, or is it divided up at a set rate per check.....dumb argument on your part considering we don't pay taxes ahead of time.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/180#post_3311640
 
I kknow exactly how it works. Yes, they do hold out less for each exemption that you claim. But based on your taxable income, BEFORE DEDUCTIONS, you are liable for a certain amount of income tax to be paid to the IRS. Example:
 
Married couple, no kids - husband/wife claim Zero exemptions - Taxable Income before deduction $100.000. $15,000 taken out of payroll deductions for income taxes. Taxes on $100,000 -$13,000. They get $2,000 REFUND on tax return.
 
Married couple, 4 kids - husband claims 5 exemptions, wife claims 1 - Taxable income before deduction $100,000. $8,000 taken out of payroll deductions for income taxes (less money taken out because of exemptions), Taxes on $100,000 - $13,000. They have to PAY $5,000 back to the IRS for not paying enough income taxes during the year.
 
Now these are not exact numbers, but you get what I mean. Both families still have to pay the same amount of taxes based on their earned income. There no different between the two. Now the family with the kids can reduce the $5,000 they owe by child credits, daycare expenses, etc. But both families start out owing the same amount regardless. Like I said, "Pay them now, or pay them later"
 
LOL!
 
The couple with kids don't have to pay anything back because they claimed the correct amount of deductions. Less money is held out of their paycheck because at the end of the year they don't owe as much tax.
 
Example
 
Couple one earns 100,000.00 and has no kids. They claim the standard deduction for married filing jointly which we'll say is 10,000.00 so they pay taxes on 90 grand. Lets say that they are in a 10% tax bracket so they owe 9k in taxes so 750.00 per week is held out. At the end of the year they should have paid the amount owed unless they have additional income or credits they can file.
 
Couple two earns 100,000.00 and has 4 kids. They claim the same married filing joint deduction of 10,000.00. They they add the dependent deduction of 3650 per kid, 3650x4= 14600.00
 
So by virtue of having 4 kids their taxable income is decreased by another 14600.00 for a total taxable income of 75,400.00. so they owe 7,540.00 so they will have 628.00 held out per check and again should be even with the government at the end of the year.
 
Couple two pay and owe 1,460 less in income taxes Plus they can file for the 1000.00 per child credit and also the child care credit if they qualify.
 
fishtaco

fishtaco

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/180#post_3311619
 
Unemployment is nothing more than insurance. If your car insurance, health insurance, or life insurance is cancelled, do you get anything back from what you paid in if it was never used. If you never claim unemployment do you get your money back later? No. So why is ending the program any different than if those other forms of insurances ended? why should you get the money back?
 
I by no means feel unemployment should be ended...I just think it needs streamlined...
Wow Darth, do you think it is legal and above board for your health insurance or auto insurance to just get cancelled for no reason and that is how we do business in America? I also do think it would be fair for the consumer to get his money back from the insurance company if you are cancelled for absolutely no excuse and have never made a claim, the companies made interest on my money and that should be plenty good enough.
 
But even that is not as strange as saying that the government mandates I pay into a system, then because of no fault of my own I am out everything I have paid in because some conservative politician decided what is good for me is absolutely ridiculous. I expect better of you than to just defend this because it is the idea of a Tea Party canidate and this is exactly the type of thing that conservatives are having a fit over with healthcare. Is hypocrisy the new flavor of kool-aid or what.
 
Fishtaco
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtaco http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/200#post_3311702
Wow Darth, do you think it is legal and above board for your health insurance or auto insurance to just get cancelled for no reason and that is how we do business in America? I also do think it would be fair for the consumer to get his money back from the insurance company if you are cancelled for absolutely no excuse and have never made a claim, the companies made interest on my money and that should be plenty good enough.
 
But even that is not as strange as saying that the government mandates I pay into a system, then because of no fault of my own I am out everything I have paid in because some conservative politician decided what is good for me is absolutely ridiculous. I expect better of you than to just defend this because it is the idea of a Tea Party canidate and this is exactly the type of thing that conservatives are having a fit over with healthcare. Is hypocrisy the new flavor of kool-aid or what.
 
Fishtaco

 
So where does the money come from to pay your social security? Liberal politicians have been spending every cent you paid in from the first job you ever had. Average US income is only about 50 grand. even if you remove the cap on FICA at the current rate that is 7500.00 a year per person paid into the Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid system. There is estimated to be 2.3 people per retiree paying in at the height of the baby boom retirement window. Thats like 17K a year per retiree. That ain't even close to covering the current benefit scale.
 
 
fishtaco

fishtaco

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/200#post_3311803
 
So where does the money come from to pay your social security? Liberal politicians have been spending every cent you paid in from the first job you ever had. Average US income is only about 50 grand. even if you remove the cap on FICA at the current rate that is 7500.00 a year per person paid into the Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid system. There is estimated to be 2.3 people per retiree paying in at the height of the baby boom retirement window. Thats like 17K a year per retiree. That ain't even close to covering the current benefit scale.
 
I think the subject was unemployment insurance Reef. But never the less, I hope you have been enjoying my manifesto so far this week.
 
Fishtaco
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtaco http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/200#post_3311813
I think the subject was unemployment insurance Reef. But never the less, I hope you have been enjoying my manifesto so far this week.
 
Fishtaco
 
You are talking about paying into a system and then having "some conservative politician" take it away. Thought you were talking SS because nobody has seriously suggested ending unemployment. Some have argued against extending it far beyond it's intended purpose. If you insured your house for 100,000.00 and it burned to the ground and then discovered it would cost 150,000 to rebuild should the insurance company make up the difference?
 
Insurance is no different than gambling really. You are paying to cover your possible losses. By the same token insurance companies play an odds game. Let's say you own your house 30 years and pay 1000.00 a year to insure it. assuming you never file a claim the insurance made 30 grand on you. But how many of those special policy holders like you does it take to cover people who have their house burn down or have other claims? I can tell you that every house in the area I live in has had the roof replaced in the last year because of hail damage. We are talking thousands of houses and a average cost of well over 5K per claim. It's going to take the insurance company 10 years just to break even on my policy.
 
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by spanko http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/200#post_3311821
I would suggest to you that we are already adhering to most of the socialist party platforms. Be careful whatwho you vote for as the Tea Party is being absorbed by the Republicans and will be co-opted, and we will get more of the same in a different way.
 
http://blog.riseofreason.com/socialist-platform-of-1928/111/
Here's the deal. In the 2006 elections one reason the Democrats took power was by running "Conservative" candidates in areas a liberal couldn't win in. But the party power brokers knew there weren't enough of those conservative candidates to thwart the party's liberal agenda. They made some noise but when it came down to brass tacks they wouldn't defect over to the Republicans.
 
If these Tea Party candidates are successful it will affect the political philosophy of not just Republican but Democrat candidates going forward. We should see more small government outsiders running in both parties if the TP folks do well in November. The Tea Party leaders might be dumb enough to get sucked into the mail line GOP but maybe not. We will see. I would love to see the Libertarian party fold up camp and move into the GOP. I think that would be a very good thing.
 
spanko

spanko

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/200#post_3311831
Here's the deal. In the 2006 elections one reason the Democrats took power was by running "Conservative" candidates in areas a liberal couldn't win in. But the party power brokers knew there weren't enough of those conservative candidates to thwart the party's liberal agenda. They made some noise but when it came down to brass tacks they wouldn't defect over to the Republicans.
 
If these Tea Party candidates are successful it will affect the political philosophy of not just Republican but Democrat candidates going forward. We should see more small government outsiders running in both parties if the TP folks do well in November. The Tea Party leaders might be dumb enough to get sucked into the mail line GOP but maybe not. We will see. I would love to see the Libertarian party fold up camp and move into the GOP. I think that would be a very good thing.
I think just the opposite, have the GOP for up camp and move into the Libertarian party. I think that would be a very good thing. I cringe when I think of Sarah being the "Tea Party" leader, don't get me wrong she has some great potential but she is already making a "power" grab.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by spanko http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/200#post_3311839
I think just the opposite, have the GOP for up camp and move into the Libertarian party. I think that would be a very good thing. I cringe when I think of Sarah being the "Tea Party" leader, don't get me wrong she has some great potential but she is already making a "power" grab.
yeah, but in this political system, you have to make a "power grab" do effect any real change...
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by spanko http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/200#post_3311839
I think just the opposite, have the GOP for up camp and move into the Libertarian party. I think that would be a very good thing. I cringe when I think of Sarah being the "Tea Party" leader, don't get me wrong she has some great potential but she is already making a "power" grab.
In either case if the Libertarian minded folks who left the Republican party in the years since Reagan were back in the party it would be better off.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtaco http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/200#post_3311702
Wow Darth, do you think it is legal and above board for your health insurance or auto insurance to just get cancelled for no reason and that is how we do business in America? I also do think it would be fair for the consumer to get his money back from the insurance company if you are cancelled for absolutely no excuse and have never made a claim, the companies made interest on my money and that should be plenty good enough.
 
But even that is not as strange as saying that the government mandates I pay into a system, then because of no fault of my own I am out everything I have paid in because some conservative politician decided what is good for me is absolutely ridiculous. I expect better of you than to just defend this because it is the idea of a Tea Party canidate and this is exactly the type of thing that conservatives are having a fit over with healthcare. Is hypocrisy the new flavor of kool-aid or what.
 
Fishtaco

You do not read very well. I clearly stated I don't support it.
 
The government mandates you have car insurance...........
 
...if the insurance company goes bankrupt (like our current system) do you get what you paid in back?
 
fishtaco

fishtaco

Active Member
I know you don't support it Darth, but you are making an excuse for it which I don't agree with. All these politicians can find some money somewhere else without raking me over the coals and stealing more from me. You guys all are asking what the difference is between a company and the government collecting benefits and not paying out, well not that much, but there should be consumer protection in place to keep it from happening regardless.
 
I don't know about you people, but I'm not one to support big business or government that is clearly acting unethically and then sit around and cry trickle down economics and depend on that to get me through life. I think a lot of your problem in understanding what is going on is you think the business model of good old fashioned American capitalism still exists and it unfortunately has went the way of the dodo. Heck, I worked for a long time for a small business with an owner who understood the value you get back from treating your people right and I still laughingly expect CEO's of insurance companies and the people I elect to understand it also. Jokes on me too.
 
Fishtaco
 
slice

slice

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtaco http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/200#post_3311885
I know you don't support it Darth, but you are making an excuse for it which I don't agree with. All these politicians can find some money somewhere else without raking me over the coals and stealing more from me. You guys all are asking what the difference is between a company and the government collecting benefits and not paying out, well not that much, but there should be consumer protection in place to keep it from happening regardless.
 
There is, it is The Constitution, although we have a bit of enforcement problem right now...
 
I don't know about you people, but I'm not one to support big business or government that is clearly acting unethically and then sit around and cry trickle down economics and depend on that to get me through life. I think a lot of your problem in understanding what is going on is you think the business model of good old fashioned American capitalism still exists and it unfortunately has went the way of the dodo. Heck, I worked for a long time for a small business with an owner who understood the value you get back from treating your people right and I still laughingly expect CEO's of insurance companies and the people I elect to understand it also. Jokes on me too.
 
Spoken like a true TPer.
 
Fishtaco
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtaco http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/200#post_3311885
I know you don't support it Darth, but you are making an excuse for it which I don't agree with. All these politicians can find some money somewhere else without raking me over the coals and stealing more from me. You guys all are asking what the difference is between a company and the government collecting benefits and not paying out, well not that much, but there should be consumer protection in place to keep it from happening regardless.
 
I don't know about you people, but I'm not one to support big business or government that is clearly acting unethically and then sit around and cry trickle down economics and depend on that to get me through life. I think a lot of your problem in understanding what is going on is you think the business model of good old fashioned American capitalism still exists and it unfortunately has went the way of the dodo. Heck, I worked for a long time for a small business with an owner who understood the value you get back from treating your people right and I still laughingly expect CEO's of insurance companies and the people I elect to understand it also. Jokes on me too.
 
Fishtaco
The second half of your post has nothing to do with the topic.
 
But I will address the first in two different ways.
 
There are many things our taxes go for that we never see any benefit from ourselves. state and federal parks, Highways, monuments, subsidized farm land, and so on. Do we get to enjoy all of these? How many federal parks are closed to the public...do we see our tax money back when these parks are closed? This leads me into my second point as I know this one will be weak in your eyes.
 
As a nation, and I mean the people, not the politicians, not big business, but you and me, our fathers and mothers, grandparents, and so on. We have asked for more and more as time has gone on from our federal government. with each new program comes added cost...we wanted retirement, we wanted retirement healthcare, we want healthcare, we want state parks, we want city parks, we want metro transportation, we want welfare, we want we want we want.....Overtime we as a nation will want so much we will collapse.....it may not be overnight as with the USSR, but eventually each program will start to collapse...the postal service is on that verge now....
 
when we bring up cutting these programs, it isnt because we r heartless...it is because rational has set in and we see we can sustain all of this....without a drastic increase in taxes, which will then affect our current cost of living as well as quality of life....Most conservatives aren't heartless, we are just trying to prevent or slow down the inevitable at the rate we are going.
 
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///forum/thread/380296/tea-party-movement/200#post_3311920
 
The second half of your post has nothing to do with the topic.
 
But I will address the first in two different ways.
 
There are many things our taxes go for that we never see any benefit from ourselves. state and federal parks, Highways, monuments, subsidized farm land, and so on. Do we get to enjoy all of these? How many federal parks are closed to the public...do we see our tax money back when these parks are closed? This leads me into my second point as I know this one will be weak in your eyes.
 
As a nation, and I mean the people, not the politicians, not big business, but you and me, our fathers and mothers, grandparents, and so on. We have asked for more and more as time has gone on from our federal government. with each new program comes added cost...we wanted retirement, we wanted retirement healthcare, we want healthcare, we want state parks, we want city parks, we want metro transportation, we want welfare, we want we want we want.....Overtime we as a nation will want so much we will collapse.....it may not be overnight as with the USSR, but eventually each program will start to collapse...the postal service is on that verge now....
 
when we bring up cutting these programs, it isnt because we r heartless...it is because rational has set in and we see we can sustain all of this....without a drastic increase in taxes, which will then affect our current cost of living as well as quality of life....Most conservatives aren't heartless, we are just trying to prevent or slow down the inevitable at the rate we are going.
 
 
 
So we should do away with state and national parks simply because "everyone can't use them"? What's stopping you? Get in your car, aim it towards your nearest park, AND DRIVE! You don't benefit from the highways you have to drive on a daily basis? What, just because you can't drive on some highway in Kentucky, the residents in that state don't deserve that highway because it takes your taxes to build it? You sound like we should live in some 'individual isolated world'. "I'll take care of myself and my personal little world, and I don't need help from anyone." Maybe you need to find where they filmed that movie Castaway. That island would be perfect for you.

 
I never wanted 'retirement' from the government. I wish they wouldn't junked SS and Medicare decades ago. If I could've taken the money I put in SS into a 401K plan back when I was 15, I'd have a couple million easy in that account today. Same thing with Medicare. Give me a health plan that I can afford, I'm more than content with having that. Medicare is so convoluted today, you have to buy all this supplemental insurance to cover all the medical and prescription expenses that program doesn't cover. What the heck is wrong with Metro transportation? It reduces traffic on the roads, and it provides reliable transportation for those who can't afford to buy even a piece of junk for $10,000 (which also includes adding the maintenance and insurance to even own a car). What's your aversion to parks? Sorry but this is one of the lamest arguments I've ever seen you post to make a point.
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top