Tax Deadbeats

[Pell Mell]

The agency with the most tax scofflaws is the U.S. Postal Service, with 28,913 employees who owe $297,933,756. But that is still a dramatic improvement from 2007 when more than 54,000 employees owed more than $407 million.

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=428&sid=1838232

These are Mosty's good guy friends. :lol:

[hcap]

Some more from your link you neglected to mention...

""It's important to look at the percentage of postal employees who may be delinquent on their federal taxes, not just the number itself. According to IRS figures, the delinquency rate for Postal Service employees is relatively small."

The Postal Service, the largest employer in the federal government aside from the military, has a non-compliance rate of 3.95 percent compared to the federal average of 2.8 percent.

Retired military personnel make up about 33 percent of the money owed with $1,343,538,055 in unpaid taxes for 2008.

The agency with the highest percentage of delinquent employees is the National Capital Planning Commission, where 10.42 percent of its 48 employees owe $26,947. "



So bitch about the Military and the other agencies who owe more percentage wise

[Tom]

I will give the military a pass. Many of them put their lives on the line.
I don't care how much they owe - forget it all. End of story.

Start with the Postal union boys.
They have no excuses.

btw, my Simulcast Weekly just arrived all chewed up up by these great people.

Again.

[hcap]

Because one liberal member of this board was a postal employee, shit is taken out of context to-if I got this right-DEVALUE his views by an idiotic bit taken out of context. Could there be any other reason to post such crap? Pell?

I bet right here among horse players and gamblers, more is owed percentage wise than any governmental agency.
Close down internet betting. Save some tax dollars!

Tom, the gorilla in the room is staring you right back from your looking glass. And our thread originator might a genuine banana eating gorilla as well :D

[Pell Mell]

Mission accomplished :lol:

[Show Me the Wire]

How can you devalue, which has no value? ;)

[Pell Mell]

Some more from your link you neglected to mention...

""It's important to look at the percentage of postal employees who may be delinquent on their federal taxes, not just the number itself. According to IRS figures, the delinquency rate for Postal Service employees is relatively small."

The Postal Service, the largest employer in the federal government aside from the military, has a non-compliance rate of 3.95 percent compared to the federal average of 2.8 percent.

Retired military personnel make up about 33 percent of the money owed with $1,343,538,055 in unpaid taxes for 2008.

The agency with the highest percentage of delinquent employees is the National Capital Planning Commission, where 10.42 percent of its 48 employees owe $26,947. "



So bitch about the Military and the other agencies who owe more percentage wise

I ain't bitchin about the military because there are a ton of reasons why they are delinquent.

Now you go to the NCPC where about 5 people owe to the tune of about $550. apiece. How does that compare to over 26,000 owing a grand apiece.?

Now I'm sure your a helluva lot better than this old man at digging up stats and putting a spin on them but the fact is, the frigging postal workers ain't paying.
In addition, and I know a few postal workers, how many of them pay taxes on all those xmas gifts. yeah, I know they're not supposed to accept gifts but I never saw one give the card with the twenty in it back. I got a nephew who's a mailman and he can't wait for the holidays every year to grab that 3-4 grand. :bang:

[boxcar]

I ain't bitchin about the military because there are a ton of reasons why they are delinquent.

Now you go to the NCPC where about 5 people owe to the tune of about $550. apiece. How does that compare to over 26,000 owing a grand apiece.?

Now I'm sure your a helluva lot better than this old man at digging up stats and putting a spin on them but the fact is, the frigging postal workers ain't paying.
In addition, and I know a few postal workers, how many of them pay taxes on all those xmas gifts. yeah, I know they're not supposed to accept gifts but I never saw one give the card with the twenty in it back. I got a nephew who's a mailman and he can't wait for the holidays every year to grab that 3-4 grand. :bang:

Yeah...and I bet they declare all those "gifts" as income, too, on their tax returns. :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

[DJofSD]

Mission accomplished :lol:
:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: You rabble rouser!

[ArlJim78]

maybe their returns got lost in the mail.:D

[boxcar]

maybe their returns got lost in the mail.:D

More likely is that their returns never made it that far. :D

Boxcar

[mostpost]

Because one liberal member of this board was a postal employee, shit is taken out of context to-if I got this right-DEVALUE his views by an idiotic bit taken out of context. Could there be any other reason to post such crap? Pell?

I bet right here among horse players and gamblers, more is owed percentage wise than any governmental agency.
Close down internet betting. Save some tax dollars!

Tom, the gorilla in the room is staring you right back from your looking glass. And our thread originator might a genuine banana eating gorilla as well :D
I doesn't concern me one bit. I will continue to express my opinions based on facts. They will continue to express their opinion based on Drudge and Breitbart and Beck.

They try to devalue my opinion by snide comments on my former employer, because they can't devalue it with the truth.

[mostpost]

I will give the military a pass. Many of them put their lives on the line.
I don't care how much they owe - forget it all. End of story.

Start with the Postal union boys.
They have no excuses.

btw, my Simulcast Weekly just arrived all chewed up up by these great people.

Again.
I never get any mail which has been chewed up. I wonder if your problems are due to the fact that I forward all you Post Office coments to Caiandaigua PO. :lol:

[mostpost]

I never get any mail which has been chewed up. I wonder if your problems are due to the fact that I forward all you Post Office coments to Caiandaigua PO. :lol:
OOOOOPPPPs I misspelled Cadangcadugua.

[NJ Stinks]

So over 96% of all postal workers are not delinquent on their federal taxes. 96% got you an A when I was in school. :ThmbUp:

[boxcar]

So over 96% of all postal workers are not delinquent on their federal taxes. 96% got you an A when I was in school. :ThmbUp:

Does that mean that when only 96% of the class got an A, the other 4% did, too? Was the ideal of Equal Outcomes in vogue back then, too? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[hcap]

A bunch of horse playing gamblers bitchin' about tax delinquents. Anyone have any notion of how many righties here don't report winnings? Judging by the faux outrage, all are 100% virgins. :eek:

I did not think even the PA 24/7/365 bitchin' amalgamation would claim swimming in shit elevates them to such purity. :rolleyes:

[Tom]

Did you pay taxes on the big perch you caught and tried to sell here?:lol:

Nice dodge of the facts once again hcap....you are good at ignoring the truth.

[hcap]

Did you pay taxes on your idiotic arm chair general armed insurrection tirades you blabbed about when you were in your matching on DC period?

BTW, my perch story is at least as pertinent to Bushs' bullshit, as Pell Mells' bullshit about postal employees.
And the only facts in this nonsense here is that horse playing gamblers with way too much time on their hands don't like the Post Office, and think that when they don't report suff to the IRS, they are better citizens than federal workers :rolleyes:

[Rookies]

A bunch of horse playing gamblers bitchin' about tax delinquents. Anyone have any notion of how many righties here don't report winnings? Judging by the faux outrage, all are 100% virgins. :eek:


As a gambler, I'd be willing to bet a year's pay on it !:lol:

It's a perfect illutsration of the Con zeitgeist that they're always blowing out on the stories of the welfare cheat or low paid gov worker appearing to connive a dime, but when the titans of Wall Street or their fellow con travellers abscond/ cook the books with million$- billion$... it's simply a yawn.

Why ? Because, as the QBs of capitalism they are above reproach. God forbid, you couldn't possibly hang them as the Chi Coms do to their biz scofflaws.

[hcap]

What the cons conveniently forget is that those with the most moolah, lawyers, and power, abuse the system 100x' more than the working stiffs on food stamps.

It is as though the "welfare queen" mythology is the new twist on Ayn Rands' silly Objectivism.
I mean how can such stalwarts like Howard Rourke or John Galt rise to Ubermench heights when all them white trash, brown and black moochers are holding them down? Making $7.60 an hour and no benefits might cause our stalwart heroes to care about them poor folks just too damn much.

The stifling mediocrity of the masses will give our heroes an upset stomach.
Back to bitchin' about what ever happened to 1890 and all them company stores?

[hcap]

Speaking about Ayn Rands' silly Objectivism and John Galt. Is it true that in Atlas Shrugged...

"In the novel, Galt is the son of an Ohio garage mechanic, who leaves home at age twelve and begins college at Patrick Henry University at age sixteen. There he befriends Francisco d'Anconia and Ragnar Danneskjöld as all three of them double-major in physics and philosophy. After graduating, Galt becomes an engineer at the Twentieth Century Motor Company, where he designs a revolutionary new motor powered by ambient static electricity' ?

Double-major in physics and philosophy?
Ambient static electricity :rolleyes: :jump: :D :faint: :bang: :cool: :sleeping: :mad:




Now I understand trickle down economic theory, and where deregulated free markets come from.
Both were designed by John Galt :rolleyes:

At least there are were no eyesores like gaudy balconies added to these doctrines to piss off Gary Cooper (Howard Rourke of "The Fountainhead"fame)

His worst picture by far.

[Tom]

Did you pay taxes on your idiotic arm chair general armed insurrection tirades you blabbed about when you were in your matching on DC period?

BTW, my perch story is at least as pertinent to Bushs' bullshit, as Pell Mells' bullshit about postal employees.
And the only facts in this nonsense here is that horse playing gamblers with way too much time on their hands don't like the Post Office, and think that when they don't report suff to the IRS, they are better citizens than federal workers :rolleyes:

Wow, are you losing it fast or what? :lol:
Can you translate this into English?

[Tom]

As a gambler, I'd be willing to bet a year's pay on it !:lol:

It's a perfect illutsration of the Con zeitgeist that they're always blowing out on the stories of the welfare cheat or low paid gov worker appearing to connive a dime, but when the titans of Wall Street or their fellow con travellers abscond/ cook the books with million$- billion$... it's simply a yawn.

Why ? Because, as the QBs of capitalism they are above reproach. God forbid, you couldn't possibly hang them as the Chi Coms do to their biz scofflaws.

While you and hcap guess about this, let me point out a certainty - the top financial guy in the Obama administration is a known tax cheat.

[hcap]

Wow, are you losing it fast or what? :lol:
Can you translate this into English?
Ok I repeat my question
"Did you pay taxes on your idiotic arm chair general armed insurrection tirades you blabbed about when you were in your matching on DC period?

Well if you think selling perch is sillier than you selling Tom the Warrior Prince, you gotta be delusional.

[hcap]

So Tom is it true that John Galt in Ayn Rands' Atlas Shrugged used Ambient static electricity as a source of automobile energy?

Maybe you can suggest that to some of tech guys in your auto related company.
Big big raise on the horizon. :cool:

Maybe you and box can also harness refrigerator stick'im magnets as well. Box told me they were a remarkable source of energy.
I believe he used the term "miraculous" even.

No wonder the right wing is anti-evolution, anti-climate change and overall anti-science.
You gotta understand basic concepts in physics first.

Ambient static electricity :rolleyes: :eek: :sleeping: :cool: :D :p :lol: :bang: :faint: :jump: :confused:

[DJofSD]

Speaking about Ayn Rands' silly Objectivism and John Galt. Is it true that in Atlas Shrugged...

"In the novel, Galt is the son of an Ohio garage mechanic, who leaves home at age twelve and begins college at Patrick Henry University at age sixteen. There he befriends Francisco d'Anconia and Ragnar Danneskjöld as all three of them double-major in physics and philosophy. After graduating, Galt becomes an engineer at the Twentieth Century Motor Company, where he designs a revolutionary new motor powered by ambient static electricity' ?

Double-major in physics and philosophy?
Ambient static electricity :rolleyes: :jump: :D :faint: :bang: :cool: :sleeping: :mad:




Now I understand trickle down economic theory, and where deregulated free markets come from.
Both were designed by John Galt :rolleyes:

At least there are were no eyesores like gaudy balconies added to these doctrines to piss off Gary Cooper (Howard Rourke of "The Fountainhead"fame)

His worst picture by far.

http://www.russia-ic.com/news/show/9082/

You seem to scoff at the idea of a double major. Why? Is it b/c you think physics and philosophy are incompatible?

[boxcar]

What the cons conveniently forget is that those with the most moolah, lawyers, and power, abuse the system 100x' more than the working stiffs on food stamps.

Another classic example of a lib putting the cart before the horse. The inconvenient truth you want to forget is: Who wrote the tax laws with all their deliberately designed loopholes that just beg to be exploited!? I applaud anyone, except the politicians who put them there, who is smart enough to find those loopholes.

And, by the way, why would a "working stiff" be on food stamps?

Boxcar

[hcap]

http://www.russia-ic.com/news/show/9082/

You seem to scoff at the idea of a double major. Why? Is it b/c you think physics and philosophy are incompatible?Double majors who propose such nonsense must have graduated from The Boxcar Institute Of The 6000 year Old Earth.

Your article is worthless. Moreover, researchers suggest abandoning gasoline, since cars can receive energy for moving from emitting wire, embedded directly into roadbed
Not ambient, really a third rail. Powering an automobile with ambient static electricity is off by a magnitude of at least 10,000 x. Maybe a mobile Van de Graaff generator?

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

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/82/Van_de_graaff_generator_sm.jpg/200px-Van_de_graaff_generator_sm.jpg

Problem is although voltage is high, amperage is minuscule, and you have to supply it with power in the first place. Not at all what is proposed by Rand.

John Galt is barking up the "free energy" school of physics.
That's why the Enterprise goes way faster than the speed of light.

[hcap]

And, by the way, why would a "working stiff" be on food stamps?

BoxcarDid you ever do physical labor to feed your family? Somehow I get the feeling you are an ass sitter. With no
understanding of blisters-except on your aforementioned part

BTW, would a working stiff or family member ever show up at the emergency room?
I guess everyone making $8 bucks an hour is just to proud.

[jonnielu]

What the cons conveniently forget is that those with the most moolah, lawyers, and power, abuse the system 100x' more than the working stiffs on food stamps.

It is as though the "welfare queen" mythology is the new twist on Ayn Rands' silly Objectivism.
I mean how can such stalwarts like Howard Rourke or John Galt rise to Ubermench heights when all them white trash, brown and black moochers are holding them down? Making $7.60 an hour and no benefits might cause our stalwart heroes to care about them poor folks just too damn much.

The stifling mediocrity of the masses will give our heroes an upset stomach.
Back to bitchin' about what ever happened to 1890 and all them company stores?

It amazes me that the American people have been made so subservient, that they will send their only real power to the federal jurisdiction, with the thought that they are somehow buying a superior citizenship with the money.

Nevermind, that it is a free country, it always has been, and there is no citizen that is superior to the other.

jdl

[boxcar]

Did you ever do physical labor to feed your family? Somehow I get the feeling you are an ass sitter. With no
understanding of blisters-except on your aforementioned part

BTW, would a working stiff or family member ever show up at the emergency room?
I guess everyone making $8 bucks an hour is just to proud.

:sleeping: :sleeping: :sleeping: I'm still waiting for a real answer: Why is a "working stiff" collecting food stamps at other people's expense? Hint: Feel free to dispense with your touch-feely, viscerally-induced replies. If that "$8 buck an hour" job of his isn't cutting it, why isn't he out working a second job, like so many other truly proud Americans who are too proud to accept handouts?

And thanks for you deep concern for how I feed my family. One thing of which you can be certain, though, is this family's income is earned! This family is self-supportive and derive no support on the backs of other working families -- thanks be to God.

Boxcar
P.S. Yes, I have almost always used my God-given brain to make my money as opposed to brawn; however, if I had to use the latter, I would.

[Tom]

No wonder the right wing is anti-evolution, anti-climate change and overall anti-science.
You gotta understand basic concepts in physics first.

Ambient static electricity :rolleyes: :eek: :sleeping: :cool: :D :p :lol: :bang: :faint: :jump: :confused:


As it turns out, we are working with a major automotive supplier on both fuel cells (being developed locally) and fuel alternatives, our part being the tooling side. Our motives is.....profit. :eek::eek::eek:

[Show Me the Wire]

hcap:

Why aren't you posting polls showing us how popular the sitting President's leadership and judgment is currently viewed? You use to relish posting polls about the former President. Just wondering.

[hcap]

As it turns out, we are working with a major automotive supplier on both fuel cells (being developed locally) and fuel alternatives, our part being the tooling side. Our motives is.....profit. :eek::eek::eek:
If Ayn Rand had John Galt inventing a practical fuel cell, I would retract my sarcasm. Static electricity from the air can only give you a mild shock.

Try making a profit from 'ambient static electricity' and you can see why the trickle downers broke the country.
You might make a superior whoopee cushion though :ThmbUp:

[DJofSD]

If Ayn Rand had John Galt inventing a practical fuel cell, I would retract my sarcasm. Static electricity from the air can only give you a mild shock.

Try making a profit from 'ambient static electricity' and you can see why the trickle downers broke the country.
You might make a superior whoopee cushion though :ThmbUp:
Is our glass half empty again?

[hcap]

I'm still waiting for a real answer: Why is a "working stiff" collecting food stamps at other people's expense? Hint: Feel free to dispense with your touch-feely, viscerally-induced replies. If that "$8 buck an hour" job of his isn't cutting it, why isn't he out working a second job, like so many other truly proud Americans who are too proud to accept handouts?Many are and still can't make it. Particularly if they are trying to recoup income from a previous but now gone real job.

2 x $8 bucks with no benefits does not make up for $20 an hour real job that has evaporated that did provide benefits.

Food stamps or Snap..

http://hawaii.gov/dhs/self-sufficiency/benefit/FNS#Number

During FY 2007, the program served 26.5 million people, with a total Federal cost of $30 billion.

Other peoples expenses to fund food stamps is very little compared to how wall street bankers took our cash and screwed the country. Or for that matter the Iraqi War that was a fantasy of the Bush administration and bled us dry. Or our military budget 5x more than all the other military budgets in the world combined.

[cj's dad]

It amazes me that the American people have been made so subservient, that they will send their only real power to the federal jurisdiction, with the thought that they are somehow buying a superior citizenship with the money.

Nevermind, that it is a free country, it always has been, and there is no citizen that is superior to the other.

jdl

I beg to differ; there are many to which I am far superior. Want to start with those in jail, i.e. murderers, rapists, pedophiles, ???

[hcap]

hcap:

Why aren't you posting polls showing us how popular the sitting President's leadership and judgment is currently viewed? You use to relish posting polls about the former President. Just wondering.
I guess I am too busy reading about the Roman Catholic Priests scandalinvolved in four decades of child sex abuse in Ireland.
I guess you are to busy to post about that. You used to relish Catholic as much purer than Muslims, didn't you?

Just wondering.

[Tom]

Other peoples expenses to fund food stamps is very little compared to how wall street bankers took our cash and screwed the country. Or for that matter the Iraqi War that was a fantasy of the Bush administration and bled us dry. Or our military budget 5x more than all the other military budgets in the world combined.

So you say it is ok to cheat now?
You are happy with the status quo?
You accept the 5,000 earmarks in Porkey's II?
You see ne reason to save a few million everywhere we can?
Jut as long as we get those evil bankers?

Tell me, dude, how do we pay off a 12 trillion dollar debt when even in the economic times we have now, congress has no sense of fiscal responsibility?

Why should I pay more taxes to keep someone else in cable TV?

[Tom]

I beg to differ; there are many to which I am far superior. Want to start with those in jail, i.e. murderers, rapists, pedophiles, ???....and my Iggy list! :lol:

[boxcar]

Many are and still can't make it. Particularly if they are trying to recoup income from a previous but now gone real job.

2 x $8 bucks with no benefits does not make up for $20 an hour real job that has evaporated that did provide benefits.

Food stamps or Snap..

http://hawaii.gov/dhs/self-sufficiency/benefit/FNS#Number

During FY 2007, the program served 26.5 million people, with a total Federal cost of $30 billion.

Other peoples expenses to fund food stamps is very little compared to how wall street bankers took our cash and screwed the country. Or for that matter the Iraqi War that was a fantasy of the Bush administration and bled us dry. Or our military budget 5x more than all the other military budgets in the world combined.

Well...then since screwing people out of their money is a relative thing based on the amounts involved, who gets to set the limit on when it really matters? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[PaceAdvantage]

I guess I am too busy reading about the Roman Catholic Priests scandalinvolved in four decades of child sex abuse in Ireland.That's a stretch and a half...nice dodge though...

[mostpost]

Does that mean that when only 96% of the class got an A, the other 4% did, too? Was the ideal of Equal Outcomes in vogue back then, too? :rolleyes:

Boxcar
NJ said "96% got you an A." Meaning, if you got 96% of the questions on a test correct you got an A. He did not say 96% of the class got an A.
There's no danger of you getting a "A" in reading comprehension is there?

[mostpost]

I'm still waiting for a real answer: Why is a "working stiff" collecting food stamps at other people's expense? Hint: Feel free to dispense with your touch-feely, viscerally-induced replies. If that "$8 buck an hour" job of his isn't cutting it, why isn't he out working a second job, like so many other truly proud Americans who are too proud to accept handouts?
It used to be a person took a second job because he wanted something extra. Now, a second job is a requirement just to provide for your family. And second jobs aren't all that easy to come by. To say that someone should just take a second job when many don't have first jobs is a great example of "Marie Antoinette" syndrome.

[Show Me the Wire]

Let's see when did second jobs or two income families become a necessity? During Jimmy Carter's term, what a surprise.

[Tom]

Why would anyone tale a second job when NJ is laying in wait to at-tax them as soon as they get that first check? :lol:

[hcap]

Let's see when did second jobs or two income families become a necessity? During Jimmy Carter's term, what a surprise.
.................................................. .................................................. ...........................

http://www.recessioneering.com/2009/01/07/gauging-economic-climate-change-pt-2-jobs-and-income/


In early 2008, before the housing and credit collapse, New York Times correspondent Steve Greenhouse examined this trend in The Big Squeeze: Tough Times for the American Worker:

One of the least examined but most important trends taking place in the United States today is the broad decline in the status and treatment of American workers — white-collar and blue-collar workers, middle-class and low-end workers — that began nearly three decades ago, gradually gathered momentum, and hit with full force soon after the turn of this century. A profound shift has left a broad swath of the American workforce on a lower plane than in decades past, with health coverage, pension benefits, job security, workloads, stress levels, and often wages growing worse for millions of workers.

That the American worker faces this squeeze in the early years of this century is particularly troubling because the squeeze has occurred while the economy, corporate profits, and worker productivity have all been growing robustly. In recent years, a disconcerting disconnect has emerged, with corporate profits soaring while workers’ wages stagnated.

…this may be the first time in American history that the typical working household goes through an economic expansion without any increase in income whatsoever.

This, unfortunately, is the continuation of a long-term squeeze. Since 1979, hourly earnings for 80 percent of American workers (those in private-sector, nonsupervisory jobs) have risen by just 1 percent, after inflation. The average wage was $17.71 at the end of 2007. For male workers, the average hourly wage actually slid by 5 percent since 1979. Worker productivity, meanwhile, climbed 60 percent. If wages had kept pace with productivity, the average full-time worker would be earning $58,000 a year; $36,000 was the average in 2007. The nation’s economic pie is growing, but corporations by and large have not given their workers a bigger piece.

The squeeze on the American worker has meant more poverty, more income inequality, more family tensions, more hours at work, more time away from the kids, more families without health insurance, more retirees with inadequate pensions, and more demands on government and taxpayers to provide housing assistance and health coverage. Twenty percent of families with children under six live below the poverty line, and 22 million full-time workers do not have health insurance. Largely as a result of the squeeze, the number of housing foreclosures and personal bankruptcies more than tripled in the quarter century after 1979. Economic studies show that income inequality in the United States is so great that it more closely resembles the inequality of a third world country than that of an advanced industrial nation.

..Greenhouse goes on to report that the average middle-class husband and wife combined are working three months more per year than 25 years ago!

[boxcar]

NJ said "96% got you an A." Meaning, if you got 96% of the questions on a test correct you got an A. He did not say 96% of the class got an A.
There's no danger of you getting a "A" in reading comprehension is there?

Nor you, for this what NJ wrote:

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks
So over 96% of all postal workers are not delinquent on their federal taxes. 96% got you an A when I was in school.

In the context he wasn't talking about the number or percentage of "test questions", he was talking very clearly, though, about the percentage of people.

Before you presume to speak to my supposed reading inability, pull the logs out of both your own eyes; for then, PERHAPS, you'll be able to see more clearly what was actually said!

Mosty, you're totally shot. I don't believe there's much more you can lose because it's already been lost.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

It used to be a person took a second job because he wanted something extra. Now, a second job is a requirement just to provide for your family. And second jobs aren't all that easy to come by. To say that someone should just take a second job when many don't have first jobs is a great example of "Marie Antoinette" syndrome.

So....the "working stiff" ('cap's phrase) should just leech off the fruits of other people's labors?

Furthermore, what is a working stiff doing on food stamps to begin with!? There are supposedly stringent requirements involved before one can collect. This is the good news. The very bad, however, is that once on the program, it's pretty easy to stay on it -- indefinitely.

I actually know a "working stiff" who does work and is on the food stamp program. Know how he does it? He works as a stockman for a liquor store and gets paid under the table. So, now he has the best of both world's: Admittedly, a modest paying but tax-free job (so he's actually netting more than he would if he paid taxes) and free food. Not a bad deal.

Shouldn't a tax cheat like that get locked up? And how about that employer, too?
Tsk, tsk, tsk.

Boxcar

[hcap]

Many are and still can't make it. Particularly if they are trying to recoup income from a previous but now gone real job.

2 x $8 bucks with no benefits does not make up for $20 an hour real job that has evaporated that did provide benefits.

Food stamps or Snap..

http://hawaii.gov/dhs/self-sufficie...efit/FNS#Number

During FY 2007, the program served 26.5 million people, with a total Federal cost of $30 billion.

Other peoples expenses to fund food stamps is very little compared to how wall street bankers took our cash and screwed the country. Or for that matter the Iraqi War that was a fantasy of the Bush administration and bled us dry. Or our military budget 5x more than all the other military budgets in the world combined.

Well...then since screwing people out of their money is a relative thing based on the amounts involved, who gets to set the limit on when it really matters? :rolleyes:

BoxcarJust think of moving 1/2 of the Department of Defense monies into funding people instead of weapons designed for a non-existent cold war. Invest in people not war. Think of it as a building a human infrastructure. Too touchy feelie?

30 billion or so for food stamps pale in comparison. The military spends as much on hammers.

Want to sing Kumbaya now box? :rolleyes:
Where Have All the Flowers Gone? :rolleyes:

So....the "working stiff" ('cap's phrase) should just leech off the fruits of other people's labors?
Another "welfare queen" straw man.

[Tom]

Still ignoring the Porkey's II post, huh hcap?
Why let reality get the way of a good rant? :lol:

[mostpost]

Nor you, for this what NJ wrote:



In the context he wasn't talking about the number or percentage of "test questions", he was talking very clearly, though, about the percentage of people.

Before you presume to speak to my supposed reading inability, pull the logs out of both your own eyes; for then, PERHAPS, you'll be able to see more clearly what was actually said!

Mosty, you're totally shot. I don't believe there's much more you can lose because it's already been lost.

Boxcar
Let's ask him what he was talking about. NJ?

[mostpost]

I actually know a "working stiff" who does work and is on the food stamp program. Know how he does it? He works as a stockman for a liquor store and gets paid under the table. So, now he has the best of both world's: Admittedly, a modest paying but tax-free job (so he's actually netting more than he would if he paid taxes) and free food. Not a bad deal.

Shouldn't a tax cheat like that get locked up? And how about that employer, too?
Obviously.

[mostpost]

Let's see when did second jobs or two income families become a necessity? During Jimmy Carter's term, what a surprise.
During Jimmy Carter's term, a second job or a two income family became a necessity due to a financial crisis caused by oil prices and unsound economic planning. I won't argue if you say Carter, and his administration, was lacking in solutions.
The continued need for a second job or a two income family is being caused by a deliberate and calculated attempt to shift wealth from the many poor and middle class to the very few rich and ultra rich.

[hazzardm]

Let's see when did second jobs or two income families become a necessity? During Jimmy Carter's term, what a surprise.

Second jobs have never been a necessity. Most folks choose a standard of living/expenses beyond what they earn. My feeling is most people have started to believe that things like pizza delivery, cable tv, cell phones, $80 sneakers are a necessity? They are not, they are all luxuries.

[Robert Goren]

Getting back on topic for a second, I am pretty sure that poker players lead the way in not paying their taxes. There are even lawyer-accountant offices who specialise in "getting them legal" for ones that become a little too high profile.

[Show Me the Wire]

I can't fathom how you can say what you said, unless you were not a wage earner trying to survive under Carter. The second job was to pay for reasonable housing, food, etc.

The elderly, on fixed incomes, dined on cat food.

You are right bout the $80. gym shoes made with child labor.

[Pell Mell]

Just think of moving 1/2 of the Department of Defense monies into funding people instead of weapons designed for a non-existent cold war. Invest in people not war. Think of it as a building a human infrastructure. Too touchy feelie?

30 billion or so for food stamps pale in comparison. The military spends as much on hammers.

Want to sing Kumbaya now box? :rolleyes:
Where Have All the Flowers Gone? :rolleyes:


Another "welfare queen" straw man.

But war is good business, so said General Bullwinkle.:lol:

On a more serious note, I remember people screaming about sending a man to the moon when we had starving people here. I can agree about the need for money for things other than war or space programs. But the point is, had there been no war, the money spent on the war would never in a million years been allocated to entitlement programs so why discuss that aspect.

[Show Me the Wire]

Even now it goes to Obama's chronies, er I mean his administration's employees (record pay levels) instead of the needy elderly.

Where's the change?

[NJ Stinks]

So over 96% of all postal workers are not delinquent on their federal taxes. 96% got you an A when I was in school. :ThmbUp:


Does that mean that when only 96% of the class got an A, the other 4% did, too? Was the ideal of Equal Outcomes in vogue back then, too? :rolleyes:


NJ said "96% got you an A." Meaning, if you got 96% of the questions on a test correct you got an A. He did not say 96% of the class got an A.
There's no danger of you getting a "A" in reading comprehension is there?



In the context he wasn't talking about the number or percentage of "test questions", he was talking very clearly, though, about the percentage of people.

Before you presume to speak to my supposed reading inability, pull the logs out of both your own eyes; for then, PERHAPS, you'll be able to see more clearly what was actually said!

Mosty, you're totally shot. I don't believe there's much more you can lose because it's already been lost.

Boxcar


Obviously, "got you an A" was meant in the singular. Boxcar's "percentage of people" is very clearly a reach although not a huge one by Boxcar's standards. :p Notice how Boxcar managed to get socialism into the conversation. No that's vintage Boxcar! :lol:

[boxcar]

Let's ask him what he was talking about. NJ?

You ask him. He wrote what he wrote. Plain and simple. Anyone with an IQ above his shoe size can understand what he wrote. Now, you're going to elicit some inane response from him telling us that he really didn't mean that, and you expect him to be honest about it? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar
P.S. Did I hear you say that neither you or NJ wear shoes? :lol: :lol: That explains a lot.

[mostpost]

Obviously, "got you an A" was meant in the singular. Boxcar's "percentage of people" is very clearly a reach although not a huge one by Boxcar's standards. :p Notice how Boxcar managed to get socialism into the conversation. No that's vintage Boxcar! :lol:
One hour and forty five minutes after you posted your response, Boxcar posted that it would be futile to question you as you would undoubtedly lie about your intention. Now I'm sure :rolleyes: that Boxcar :rolleyes: didn't notice your reply :rolleyes: before he responded. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: .
After all, who would know better what you meant? You or Boxcar?

[mostpost]

You ask him. He wrote what he wrote. Plain and simple. Anyone with an IQ above his shoe size can understand what he wrote. Now, you're going to elicit some inane response from him telling us that he really didn't mean that, and you expect him to be honest about it?
Yes, I do. His track record here earns him that. Your's???????????? not so much!!!!!

[boxcar]

One hour and forty five minutes after you posted your response, Boxcar posted that it would be futile to question you as you would undoubtedly lie about your intention. Now I'm sure :rolleyes: that Boxcar :rolleyes: didn't notice your reply :rolleyes: before he responded. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: .
After all, who would know better what you meant? You or Boxcar?

That's a dumb question. All libs know how to is misrepresent and lie.

Again, this is what NJ wrote:


Originally Posted by NJ Stinks
So over 96% of all postal workers are not delinquent on their federal taxes. 96% got you an A when I was in school.

Singular, smingular. He clearly meant that that postal workers get the A because 96% of THEM aren't them delinquents. The 96% in the second sentence is referring back to the same 96% in the first, and in first it's referring to postal workers. He's saying that those 96% of WORKERS rate an A.

Both of you wingnuts can take your spin and spin it with someone who doesn't wear shoes, or whose IQ is <= than his/her Shoe Size.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

That's a dumb question. All libs know how to is misrepresent and lie.

Again, this is what NJ wrote:



Singular, smingular. He clearly meant that that postal workers get the A because 96% of THEM aren't them delinquents. The 96% in the second sentence is referring back to the same 96% in the first, and in first it's referring to postal workers. He's saying that those 96% of WORKERS rate an A.

Both of you wingnuts can take your spin and spin it with someone who doesn't wear shoes, or whose IQ is <= than his/her Shoe Size.

Boxcar
We asked him what he meant. He told us what he meant. Anyone who read what he wrote could see what he meant. Unless that someone was so locked into a particular ideology that no amount of logic and facts could convince him of his error. OH WAIT.........THAT'S YOU

[DJofSD]

We asked him what he meant. He told us what he meant. Anyone who read what he wrote could see what he meant. Unless that someone was so locked into a particular ideology that no amount of logic and facts could convince him of his error. OH WAIT.........THAT'S YOU
That's the pot calling the kettle black.

[Murph]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091215/ap_on_go_ot/us_taxes_federal_workers

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press Writer Stephen Ohlemacher, Associated Press Writer – Tue Dec 15, 2:06 pm ET
WASHINGTON – Federal workers owed the government more than $3 billion in back income taxes in 2008, just as federal tax revenues started to suffer from the recession.

More than 276,000 federal employees and retirees owed back income taxes as of Sept. 30, 2008, according to data from the Internal Revenue Service. The $3.04 billion owed was up from $2.7 billion owed by federal employees and retirees in 2007.

[newtothegame]

Murph......although honorable in your efforts, the libs do not want to see nor tallk about this.
All they want to talk about is the Iraq war and its cost, yet forget about the cost of Afghanstan ( maybe its because this is Obama's war he is supporting?)
They don't want to talk about people not paying taxes, as this would include most of Obama current cabinet. They would prefer to talk about how wal-mart is cheating workers by not giving them the company profits (even if its as little as 1% right most?).
They don't want to talk about getting together ( remember the bipartisan thingy Obama promised ) on healthcare and real reform such as tort reform. They would prefer to talk about a 1.1 TRILLION dollar spending bill with OVER 5200 pork bills added in as a way to save america.
There ideals have nothing to do with wanting to actually save money. As I have said many times, it is IMPERATIVE for libs to keep BIG government rolling. Its all about VOTES.
And just so you libs don't get the wrong idea.....do I personally think those execs on wall street make ALOT of money? Yes, I do. But, and this is a huge BUT. IT IS NOT FOR UNCLE SAM TO DECIDE who makes what and how much in a capitalistic society. Now you can draw you own conclusions to what type of societ DICTATES how much private industry can make. Heres a hint...it won't be private industry for long.
Just look no further then the debacle which has become Government Motors. Has all of that "bailout" money saved them for the disaster???? :lol: :lol:

[hcap]

http://epi.3cdn.net/9f5a60cec02393cbe4_a4m6b5t1v.pdf

Minimum wage....

• The minimum wage raises the wages of low-income workers in general, not just those
below the official poverty line. Many families move in and out of poverty, and near-poor
families are also beneficiaries of minimum wage increases.
There is no evidence of job loss from previous minimum wage increases.

• A 1998 EPI study failed to find any systematic, significant job loss associated with the
1996-97 minimum wage increase (Bernstein and Schmitt 1998). In fact, following the
most recent increase in the minimum wage in 1996-97, the low-wage labor market
performed better than it had in decades (e.g., lower unemployment rates, increased
average hourly wages, increased family income, decreased poverty rates).

• Studies of the 1990-91 federal minimum wage increase, as well as studies by David Card
and Alan Krueger of several state minimum wage increases, also found no measurable
negative impact on employment.

• New economic models that look specifically at low-wage labor markets help explain why
there is little evidence of job loss associated with minimum wage increases. These models
recognize that employers may be able to absorb some of the costs of a wage increase
through higher productivity, lower recruiting and training costs, decreased absenteeism,
and increased worker morale.

• A recent Fiscal Policy Institute (FPI) study of state minimum wages found no evidence of
negative employment effects on small businesses. Minimum wage increases stimulate the
economy through increased consumer spending.

• A study by the Chicago Federal Reserve found that households with minimum wage
workers increase their spending when the minimum wage goes up.

• EPI estimates that the increase to $7.25 will, over the course of the following 12 months,
boost consumer spending by over $5.5 billion.

[Tom]

EPI estimates that the increase to $7.25 will, over the course of the following 12 months, boost consumer spending by over $5.5 billion

Not when they implement all those new taxes Obama promised us would never happen!

I think 3 billion in back taxes by federal employees is a pretty good chunk of change, no? How many HC policies do you think that will buy?
Pick the low hanging fruit first.

[hcap]

First you guys bitched about the post office using an out of context snip.
Then we argued about working stiffs, food stamps and the minimum wage.
Now some crap about back taxes from federal employees.
How do federal workers compare to the tax cheats in the private sector? Any idea?
I bet about the same.

And what about horse players and gamblers?
Undoubtedly worse than the above 2 groups.
And apparently the most bitchin' of them all.

[hcap]

Most of the time you righties claim the moral highground comparing yourselves so so favorably to those less fortunate as "anchors", "leeches", and "moochers". Don't you get tired of strutting around like roosters crowing foul about how all those "THEYS" that are trying to pull you down to their level?

Well here is a tidbit about elevating yourselves above the common things in the world.
And how you can feel so special and chosen for glory. And I won't even bring in Ayn Rand.
Cotton Mather:

I was once emptying the Cistern of Nature, and making Water at the Wall. At the same Time, there came a Dog, who did so too, before me. Thought I; “What mean and vile Things are the Children of Men, in this mortal State! How much do our natural Necessities abase us and place us in some regard, on the Level with the very Dogs!”…Accordingly, I resolved, that it should be my ordinary Practice, whenever I step to answer the one or other Necessity of Nature, to make it an Opportunity of shaping in my Mind some noble, divine Thought.
So remember to feel superior while peeing. :cool:

[newtothegame]

Most of the time you righties claim the moral highground comparing yourselves so so favorably to those less fortunate as "anchors", "leeches", and "moochers". Don't you get tired of strutting around like roosters crowing foul about how all those "THEYS" that are trying to pull you down to their level?

Well here is a tidbit about elevating yourselves above the common things in the world.
And how you can feel so special and chosen for glory. And I won't even bring in Ayn Rand.

So remember to feel superior while peeing. :cool:

lol...not much different then being the "little" guy and blaming on your problems on big bankers and their salaries. Or the outrageous incomes of the evil, dirty, scum on wallstreet that libs cry are stealing from them huh???:lol:

[hcap]

Very different. The difference is scale.

The Welfare Queen straw man argument accounts for a small percentage of waste and abuse.
Foods stamps cost 30 billion. The total cheating by the small guy at the bottom of the economic barrel is pennies
compared to the large big bucks unregulated speculating banks. If they had not played casino games with
sub prime mortgages, the housing market collapse would have been 1/10 the disaster that we find ourselves in now.
Used to be a time that banks lent capital to make money. Honorable and necessary. Instead the biggies churned financial instruments and manipulated by leveraging 30 or 40 to 1.

[DJofSD]

Very different. The difference is scale.

The Welfare Queen straw man argument accounts for a small percentage of waste and abuse.
Foods stamps cost 30 billion. The total cheating by the small guy at the bottom of the economic barrel is pennies
compared to the large big bucks unregulated speculating banks. If they had not played casino games with
sub prime mortgages, the housing market collapse would have been 1/10 the disaster that we find ourselves in now.
Used to be a time that banks lent capital to make money. Honorable and necessary. Instead the biggies churned financial instruments and manipulated by leveraging 30 or 40 to 1.
Aided and abetted by Congress and a host of federal level agencies that looked the other way. Least of which was Cox and the SEC.

[Tom]

First you guys bitched about the post office using an out of context snip.
Then we argued about working stiffs, food stamps and the minimum wage.
Now some crap about back taxes from federal employees.
How do federal workers compare to the tax cheats in the private sector? Any idea?
I bet about the same.

And what about horse players and gamblers?
Undoubtedly worse than the above 2 groups.
And apparently the most bitchin' of them all.


You just can't discuss anything specifically, can you? Like our DC brethren, you spin, dodge, side-step, change the subject. I for one am for clamping down on private sector tax cheats. After we agree on the groups we KNOW arae cheating, then we can SPECULATE on horseplayers. The truth is just to painful for you to face, isn't it? :lol:

[hcap]

There is no problem agreeing on which groups are cheating. Every one cheats. The problem is you gentlemen skew everything your way. And manipulate anything related to government help into communism, socialism or the end of the world.
Government sucks, I agree except for those things that it does better than the private sector-those social programs that feed or house the less fortunate. Or supplement those that can't make it.

You would rather misinterpret evolutionary theory to justify their elimination, clothing it in bullshit "survival of the fittest", when you have no concept of social evolution, or the survival value of evolutionary groups. Boxcar distorts Christianity into his own brand of selfish egotistical political rationalizations. Totally misunderstands his own religion, yet crows his nonsense as tho he has a divine connection.

The very beginning of this thread was an outright lie designed to go after a liberal member of this board.

You guys take minor evils and blow them totally out of proportion. While the real problems are winked at.
Facts be damned.

[Tom]

Evolution? You mean thread drift.
Nice try, but you reveal yourself as what you accuse us of being.
Got a new poll or cartoon to throw in about now?

[boxcar]

There is no problem agreeing on which groups are cheating. Every one cheats. The problem is you gentlemen skew everything your way. And manipulate anything related to government help into communism, socialism or the end of the world.
Government sucks, I agree except for those things that it does better than the private sector-those social programs that feed or house the less fortunate. Or supplement those that can't make it.

Coming right out of the box, your premise is serious flawed. There is nothing the government does better! Look at the P.O. Look at medicare. In fact, because government has this strong proclivity to botch things up so badly, all social programs should be more strictly regulated and even have sunset dates attached to some of them.

And perhaps even more importantly, those social programs that give and give and give other people's money to those "that can't make it" are not grounded in biblical principles and , therefore, those programs are abused by both the recipients and the government itself that is always looking for ways to bribe people of their votes. D.C. consists of nothing but a den of larcenous, greedy, corrupt politicians whose only ambition in life is to get re-elected and procure more power. And, of course, these twin ambitions can only be realized on the backs of taxpayers.

You faith in unknown and unknowable politicians is misguided and indeed even misplaced. These are not kind, charitable, virtuous, altruistic, righteous human beings. In fact, most of them are anything but. This is why government's power must be limited and why the Constitution was framed as it was.

You would rather misinterpret evolutionary theory to justify their elimination, clothing it in bullshit "survival of the fittest", when you have no concept of social evolution

That, sir, is an unintended consequence of evolution, isn't it? "Survival of the fittest" is a fine theory with your monkey ancestors from whom you think you evolved, but when carried over to the social realm of humans, well...it's just suddenly very misunderstood. :rolleyes: Strangely, it doesn't apply to humans, who really are just a little higher form of animal -- not very much difference at all between "us" and "them" over in the animal kingdom, right? So, Mr. 'cap, you have you and your ilk to thank for any "misunderstanding". :rolleyes:

or the survival value of evolutionary groups. Boxcar distorts Christianity into his own brand of selfish egotistical political rationalizations. Totally misunderstands his own religion, yet crows his nonsense as tho he has a divine connection.

All Christians have a divine connection. The bible is the revealed will of God.
So, Christians know what God wants from our lives. We also know what he doesn't want. Methinks that is you who seriously needs to consider getting hooked up -- getting connected to God through Christ.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091215/ap_on_go_ot/us_taxes_federal_workers

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press Writer Stephen Ohlemacher, Associated Press Writer – Tue Dec 15, 2:06 pm ET
WASHINGTON – Federal workers owed the government more than $3 billion in back income taxes in 2008, just as federal tax revenues started to suffer from the recession.

More than 276,000 federal employees and retirees owed back income taxes as of Sept. 30, 2008, according to data from the Internal Revenue Service. The $3.04 billion owed was up from $2.7 billion owed by federal employees and retirees in 2007.
We started this thread with a story that said federal workers owed $3B in unpaid taxes and the worst offenders were Postal Service workers. Now we have a story which says the worst offenders are with the department of Housing and Urban Development. So which is it?

Once again you guys prove that you fail to read even the material that YOU post. For once again it disproves the very theory you postulate. Here are two segments from Mr. Ohlemacher's report:

Among cabinet agencies, the Department of Housing and Urban Development had the highest delinquency rate, at just over 4 percent. The Treasury Department, which includes the IRS, had the lowest delinquency rate, at 0.98 percent.

Overall, the 9.7 million federal workers included in the data had a delinquency rate of about 2.9 percent.
and:

The IRS doesn't provide a comparable delinquency rate for income taxes paid by the public. The nation's overall compliance rate, which includes taxes paid by small businesses and corporations, has hovered around 85% for decades, according to IRS statistics.

So we see that the delinquincy rate for the general public has hovered around 15% for decades, according to IRS statistics.
while the delinquincy rate for federal workers is 3%. In other words, a member of the general public is five times more likely to be delinquent on his/her taxes than a federal worker. And it's all right there in a story you cited.
Furthermore, in the last report I could find in which the IRS reported the dollar amount of unpaid taxes, total unpaid taxes was $345B. So Federal workers, which are 10%+ of the nations work force (9.7 Million according to Mr. Ohlemacher's story) accounted for 1% of the shortfall.

[boxcar]

We started this thread with a story that said federal workers owed $3B in unpaid taxes and the worst offenders were Postal Service workers. Now we have a story which says the worst offenders are with the department of Housing and Urban Development. So which is it?

Once again you guys prove that you fail to read even the material that YOU post. For once again it disproves the very theory you postulate. Here are two segments from Mr. Ohlemacher's report:


and:

The IRS doesn't provide a comparable delinquency rate for income taxes paid by the public. The nation's overall compliance rate, which includes taxes paid by small businesses and corporations, has hovered around 85% for decades, according to IRS statistics.

So we see that the delinquincy rate for the general public
while the delinquincy rate for federal workers is 3%. In other words, a member of the general public is five times more likely to be delinquent on his/her taxes than a federal worker. And it's all right there in a story you cited.
Furthermore, in the last report I could find in which the IRS reported the dollar amount of unpaid taxes, total unpaid taxes was $345B. So Federal workers, which are 10%+ of the nations work force (9.7 Million according to Mr. Ohlemacher's story) accounted for 1% of the shortfall.

I wonder what the percentage is for the small elite group of politicians in terms of cheating or delinquency. That would be a very interesting stat.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

Murph......although honorable in your efforts, the libs do not want to see nor tallk about this.
1 All they want to talk about is the Iraq war and its cost, yet forget about the cost of Afghanstan ( maybe its because this is Obama's war he is supporting?)
2. They don't want to talk about people not paying taxes, as this would include most of Obama current cabinet. They would prefer to talk about how wal-mart is cheating workers by not giving them the company profits (even if its as little as 1% right most?).
3. They don't want to talk about getting together ( remember the bipartisan thingy Obama promised ) on healthcare and real reform such as tort reform. They would prefer to talk about a 1.1 TRILLION dollar spending bill with OVER 5200 pork bills added in as a way to save america.
There ideals have nothing to do with wanting to actually save money. As I have said many times, it is IMPERATIVE for libs to keep BIG government rolling. Its all about VOTES.
And just so you libs don't get the wrong idea.....do I personally think those execs on wall street make ALOT of money? Yes, I do. But, and this is a huge BUT. IT IS NOT FOR UNCLE SAM TO DECIDE who makes what and how much in a capitalistic society. Now you can draw you own conclusions to what type of societ DICTATES how much private industry can make. Heres a hint...it won't be private industry for long.
Just look no further then the debacle which has become Government Motors. Has all of that "bailout" money saved them for the disaster???? :lol: :lol:
1
The cost of the Iraq war was a big concern, but the major concern was that the Iraq war did not address the terrorist problem. In fact it increased that problem and stole resources that were needed to fight that problem.
I am definitely concerned about the War in Afghanistan. The reason I am concerned is that we should not need to be there. The entire issue was on the cusp of resolution when many of our troops were withdrawn and sent to Iraq.
2.
This one is just nonsense. One member of Obama's cabinet failed to pay taxes in a timely manner. That was Timothy Geithner. Here is the Wikipedia entry on the matter.
At the Senate confirmation hearings, it was revealed that Geithner had not paid $35,000 in self-employment taxes for several years,[28] even though he had acknowledged his obligation to do so, and had filed a request for, and received, a payment for half the taxes owed. The failure to pay self-employment taxes, in part due to the way his employer reported his wages which was not in accordance with tax law, was noted during a 2006 audit by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), in which Geithner was assessed additional taxes of $14,847 for the 2003 and 2004 tax years. Geithner also failed to pay the self-employment taxes for the 2001 and 2002 tax years (for which the statute of limitations had expired) until after Obama expressed his intent to nominate Geithner to be Secretary of Treasury.[29] He also deducted the cost of his children's sleep-away camp as a dependent care expense, when only expenses for day care are eligible for the deduction.[30] Geithner subsequently paid the IRS the additional taxes owed,[31] and was charged $15,000 interest, but was not fined for late payment.[32] As President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Geithner annually completed an ethics statement noting any taxes due or unpaid, along with any other obligations. Geithner's completed statement did not surface during confirmation hearings.

In a statement to the Senate panel considering his nomination, Geithner called the tax issues "careless," "avoidable" and "unintentional" errors, and he said he wanted to "apologize to the committee for putting you in the position of having to spend so much time on these issues."[31] Geithner testified that he used TurboTax to prepare his own return and that the tax errors are his own responsibility.[33] This statement is in conflict with statements by the Obama campaign that Geithner was advised by his accountant that he did not owe the taxes.[34] The Washington Post quoted a tax expert who said that TurboTax has not been programmed to handle self-employment taxes when the user identifies himself as being employed.[35] Geithner said at the hearing that he was always under the impression that he was an employee, not a self-employed contractor,[35] while he served as director of the Policy Development and Review Department of the IMF.[5] Geithner comments are contradicted by the Senate report that showed he was not only informed of his status, but that he actively applied for the allowance.[36]

Geithner definitely failed to pay taxes which he owed, at the time he owed them. Was this a matter of deliberate fraud or a misunderstanding of complicated tax laws. I think one thing; you think another, but I would point out that while Geithner paid his tax debt and was charged interest, the IRS did not charge him any penalties. Nor was there ever a criminal investigation.

The second person with tax problems during the formation of the cabinet was Tom Daschle. Daschle withdrew his nomination and thus cannot be included in your "Most of the cabinet" From wikipedia:
On January 30, 2009, it was reported that Daschle's friendship and business partnership with businessman Leo Hindery could cause problems for Daschle's Senate confirmation. Daschle has been a paid consultant and advisor to Hindery's InterMedia Partners since 2005, during which time he received from Hindery access to a limousine and chauffeur. Daschle reportedly did not declare this service on his annual tax forms as required by law. A spokeswoman for Daschle said that he "simply and probably naively" considered the use of the car and driver "a generous offer" from Hindery, "a longtime friend".[30][40][42][43] Daschle told the Senate Finance Committee that in June 2008—just as he was letting the press know he would like to be HHS secretary in an Obama administration[36] -- that "something made him think that the car service might be taxable" and he began seeking to remedy the situation.[44]

Daschle reportedly also did not pay taxes on an additional $83,333 that he earned as a consultant to InterMedia Partners in 2007; this was discovered by Senator Daschle's accountant in December 2008.[44] According to ABC News, Daschle also took tax deductions for $14,963 in donations that he made between 2005 and 2007 to charitable organizations that did not meet the requirements for being tax deductible.[45]

The former Senator paid the three years of owed taxes and interest—an amount totaling $140,167—in January 2009,[42][43][44][46] but still reportedly owed "Medicare taxes equal to 2.9 percent" of the value of the car service he received, amounting to "thousands of dollars in additional unpaid taxes".[47]

On Tuesday, February 3, 2009, Daschle withdrew his nomination,[48] saying that he did not wish to be a "distraction" to the Obama agenda.[3]

Here again we have a questionably and, probably, self-serving interpretation of the tax laws. Also in this case taxes were paid and no criminal investigation was ever started.

The final name I found was Nancy Killifer, who was to be Chief Performance Officer. The total taxes she failed to pay over a period of a year and a half was $246.00
On to Wal-Mart. First of all WalMart's profit margin isn't 1%, it's 3.9%. Second those profits are morally indefensible to the extent that they are made as a result of unfair and illegal treatment of employees. There are many instances of WalMart management breaking the law. Employees being made to work overtime without pay. Employees being locked in the store overnight.
3. Your idea of bipartisan is that Democrats agree with every stupid and failed idea Republicans have tried over the last three decades. Tort reform is one of those ideas. There are abuses and those abuses should be addressed, but tort reform would save less than 2% on health care costs. The truth is Republicans will be "bipartisan" only if we give themn everything they want and renounce everything we believe in.

[boxcar]

1
The cost of the Iraq war was a big concern, but the major concern was that the Iraq war did not address the terrorist problem. In fact it increased that problem and stole resources that were needed to fight that problem.
I am definitely concerned about the War in Afghanistan. The reason I am concerned is that we should not need to be there. The entire issue was on the cusp of resolution when many of our troops were withdrawn and sent to Iraq.
2.
This one is just nonsense. One member of Obama's cabinet failed to pay taxes in a timely manner. That was Timothy Geithner. Here is the Wikipedia entry on the matter.


[COLOR=Magenta]Geithner definitely failed to pay taxes which he owed, at the time he owed them. Was this a matter of deliberate fraud or a misunderstanding of complicated tax laws. I think one thing; you think another, but I would point out that while Geithner paid his tax debt and was charged interest, the IRS did not charge him any penalties. Nor was there ever a criminal investigation.

And naturally, 'ol Timmy boy, being the head honcho of all the agencies under him (including the IRS) ,wouldn't have had anything to do with that end result right? The IRS would have certainly prosecuted their boss just as quickly as any other taxpayer, right? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Tom]

Geithner definitely failed to pay taxes which he owed, at the time he owed them. Was this a matter of deliberate fraud or a misunderstanding of complicated tax laws.


So, doens't this pretty much disqualify him from his job?:lol:
Or, did he take a night class at the Charles Rangle School of Tax Laws?

[newtothegame]

1
The cost of the Iraq war was a big concern, but the major concern was that the Iraq war did not address the terrorist problem. In fact it increased that problem and stole resources that were needed to fight that problem.
I am definitely concerned about the War in Afghanistan. The reason I am concerned is that we should not need to be there. The entire issue was on the cusp of resolution when many of our troops were withdrawn and sent to Iraq.
2.
This one is just nonsense. One member of Obama's cabinet failed to pay taxes in a timely manner. That was Timothy Geithner. Here is the Wikipedia entry on the matter.


Geithner definitely failed to pay taxes which he owed, at the time he owed them. Was this a matter of deliberate fraud or a misunderstanding of complicated tax laws. I think one thing; you think another, but I would point out that while Geithner paid his tax debt and was charged interest, the IRS did not charge him any penalties. Nor was there ever a criminal investigation.

The second person with tax problems during the formation of the cabinet was Tom Daschle. Daschle withdrew his nomination and thus cannot be included in your "Most of the cabinet" From wikipedia:


Here again we have a questionably and, probably, self-serving interpretation of the tax laws. Also in this case taxes were paid and no criminal investigation was ever started.

The final name I found was Nancy Killifer, who was to be Chief Performance Officer. The total taxes she failed to pay over a period of a year and a half was $246.00
On to Wal-Mart. First of all WalMart's profit margin isn't 1%, it's 3.9%. Second those profits are morally indefensible to the extent that they are made as a result of unfair and illegal treatment of employees. There are many instances of WalMart management breaking the law. Employees being made to work overtime without pay. Employees being locked in the store overnight.
3. Your idea of bipartisan is that Democrats agree with every stupid and failed idea Republicans have tried over the last three decades. Tort reform is one of those ideas. There are abuses and those abuses should be addressed, but tort reform would save less than 2% on health care costs. The truth is Republicans will be "bipartisan" only if we give themn everything they want and renounce everything we believe in.

But you see mosty, here in lies the problem I have with your ideals.....
You say "tort reform would save less than 2% on healthcare cost", insinuating that because its such a small number, that its not worth the effort. Yet your willing to go after wal-mart for THEIR profits which you admit is a mere "3.9%". So do you want the small fried or not??? Then you go on to say ( and I assume this is the difference your referring too) that wal-mart "management breaking the law". Well, I would tell you that if I recall correctly, wal-mart lost those fights in court and were punished for them. So they got their just due. So that fish has been caught....you can only catch the same fish once (I believe there is a presedence for this..its called not being able to try someone or somerthing for the SAME thing twice).
And please....geithner, how can you even possibly attempt to give this guy a pass because of possible "misinterpretation" of the law??? This is a guy who is a part of Obama's administration who helps to MAKE laws. Now your gonna come back and say he doesnt "make" them but I would propose to you that someone that high in public office better know the law.
Now, onto Bi-partisanship...I never once said I want the dems to roll over and play dead for the republicans. For that matter, I have stated many times I could care less for ALL of the incumbents in congress repub or not. But was it not nancy and the rest of the dems who said they didnt need the republicans??? That was the whole idea of the sixty votes...remember??? They point blank say they will pass laws without bi partisanship and your telling me how I am asking them to roll over....get real!!!

http://www.oneangryman.com/ken/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/obama_corruption.jpg

[mostpost]

But you see mosty, here in lies the problem I have with your ideals.....
You say "tort reform would save less than 2% on healthcare cost", insinuating that because its such a small number, that its not worth the effort. Yet your willing to go after wal-mart for THEIR profits which you admit is a mere "3.9%". So do you want the small fried or not??? Then you go on to say ( and I assume this is the difference your referring too) that wal-mart "management breaking the law". Well, I would tell you that if I recall correctly, wal-mart lost those fights in court and were punished for them. So they got their just due. So that fish has been caught....you can only catch the same fish once (I believe there is a presedence for this..its called not being able to try someone or somerthing for the SAME thing twice).
And please....geithner, how can you even possibly attempt to give this guy a pass because of possible "misinterpretation" of the law??? This is a guy who is a part of Obama's administration who helps to MAKE laws. Now your gonna come back and say he doesnt "make" them but I would propose to you that someone that high in public office better know the law.
Now, onto Bi-partisanship...I never once said I want the dems to roll over and play dead for the republicans. For that matter, I have stated many times I could care less for ALL of the incumbents in congress repub or not. But was it not nancy and the rest of the dems who said they didnt need the republicans??? That was the whole idea of the sixty votes...remember??? They point blank say they will pass laws without bi partisanship and your telling me how I am asking them to roll over....get real!!!

http://www.oneangryman.com/ken/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/obama_corruption.jpg
Tort Reform? Yes, absolutely. But Tort Reform doesn't come close to solving the Health Care problem. Neither does allowing companies to sell across state lines.
WalMart? I'll bet we do catch that fish again. Many times.
You know double jeoporady refers to a specific crime, not a class of crimes.
Geithner? Tax laws are very complex, particularly as you get richer. No one knows all of them. Even as Secretary of the Treasury, Geithner is concerned with economic policy. The details are left to experts. Does the CEO of General Motors know how to install the computer that regulates fuel mixture?
BiPartisanship? Don't take things so personally. The Republicans I was referring to were McConnell and Kantor and Boehner and Grassley and etc.
Nice cartoon :D

[mostpost]

And naturally, 'ol Timmy boy, being the head honcho of all the agencies under him (including the IRS) ,wouldn't have had anything to do with that end result right? The IRS would have certainly prosecuted their boss just as quickly as any other taxpayer, right? :rolleyes:

Boxcar
You're right. The IRS would have prosecuted their boss just as quickly as any other taxpayer. Somehow that :rolleyes: at the end makes me feel you don't really believe what you wrote. :confused:

[boxcar]

You're right. The IRS would have prosecuted their boss just as quickly as any other taxpayer. Somehow that :rolleyes: at the end makes me feel you don't really believe what you wrote. :confused:

And somehow you don't know how to interpret these little :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: in posts.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

And naturally, 'ol Timmy boy, being the head honcho of all the agencies under him (including the IRS) ,wouldn't have had anything to do with that end result right? The IRS would have certainly prosecuted their boss just as quickly as any other taxpayer, right? :rolleyes:

Boxcar
Here is another flaw in your ointment. Geithner made his final payment on his back taxes on Nov. 21, 2008. He wasn't the boss at Treasury under after he was confirmed by the Senate in 2009. In 2008 the Treasury Department was still a part of the Bush administration. Theyfound no reason to prosecute.

[boxcar]

Tort Reform? Yes, absolutely. But Tort Reform doesn't come close to solving the Health Care problem. Neither does allowing companies to sell across state lines.

Of course not. Nothing short of a complete dismantling of the health care industry in the free market place and a government takeover would please you.

WalMart? I'll bet we do catch that fish again. Many times.
You know double jeoporady refers to a specific crime, not a class of crimes.
Geithner? Tax laws are very complex, particularly as you get richer. No one knows all of them. Even as Secretary of the Treasury, Geithner is concerned with economic policy. The details are left to experts. Does the CEO of General Motors know how to install the computer that regulates fuel mixture?
BiPartisanship? Don't take things so personally. The Republicans I was referring to were McConnell and Kantor and Boehner and Grassley and etc.
Nice cartoon :D

I love it. Months ago you said that "changing circumstances" replaced lying. Now, incomprehensible tax laws replace tax cheats? Is there any wickedness that you don't support or for which you're not an apologist?

Boxcar

[PaceAdvantage]

And what about horse players and gamblers?
Undoubtedly worse than the above 2 groups.
And apparently the most bitchin' of them all.The most bitchin' of them all? You mean even more than the left here from 2001-2009? Not bloody likely.

[PaceAdvantage]

You guys take minor evils and blow them totally out of proportion. While the real problems are winked at.
Facts be damned.:lol: You mean, just like you from 2002-2009?:lol:

[hcap]

:lol: You mean, just like you from 2002-2009?:lol:
You still don't get it. The famous " How low can he go? " thread I started to track Bushs' unpopularity, did not even start until
11-03-2005. Almost 4 years into the rutabagas' presidency. You guys started anti-Obama crap immediately.
There is no comparison.

[hcap]

Speaking of rutabagas, and the rutabagas' tax cuts in proper deficit perspective. Gee, where are "welfare queens", food stamps, and raising the minimum wage??

http://static.crooksandliars.com/files/uploads/2009/12/CBPP_deficit_factors_2019_a8d9a.jpg

[Tom]

Speaking of rutabagas, and the rutabagas' tax cuts in proper deficit perspective. Gee, where are "welfare queens", food stamps, and raising the minimum wage??



At OTB.

[DJofSD]

So, did we figure it out yet? Are tax cheats a protected class?