WE Blog

Screw your “national polls” conducted with out-dated and obsolete methods. Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who could defeat a democrat. If Paul doesn’t get the nod, I’ll write him in and join the grassroots effort to destroy the Republican Party. If Republicans are that blind and that gluttonous for punishment, then let them be punished and forgotten.

The polls have been so accurate lately. Like the time in New Hampshire. You put enough faith in these polls you would probably stop bothering to actually vote. Which is funny, since that is the only poll that matters.

Yeah polls,

Let’s see a show of hands. Perhaps we could draw straws. Or high card wins…

Yep, those polls…

Who can do the most damage to the country? A hard core liberal who will surrender in Iraq or a RINO who will not!

Let’s all hope Giuliani wins Florida today!

Ben, I’ve been told here on the blog that what will finally unite the Republicans is Hillary being named the Democratic nominee. So we don’t need to pay much attention to their varied winners since that isn’t how they’re deciding their nominee this time.

Rush may be right. The Republican Party is currently divided, mainly over the issues of immigration and Iraq. I believe that internal division was a significant reason the 2006 election gave the majority in Congress to the Democrats. The Republicans were never able to take the lead on any issue due to those divisions. The Democrats lost control of Congress in 1994 for the same reason.

On many issues, McCain is closer to being a conservative Democrat than a liberal Republican. He has sided with the Democrats many times against his own party. Although he may be a “lesser-evil” when compared to Hillary, there are many in the Republican Party who won’t follow him, and as Bush found out, if you can’t even lead your own party while you are President, you will be hard pressed to lead a nation.

Mitt Romney is the only candidate still in the race that can appeal to all of the elements of the Republican Party. He has taken strong line on national defense and the need for victory in Iraq (like McCain), but he is also economically brilliant, tough on illegal immigration, and a social conservative. Those are factions that McCain can’t and won’t be able to lead.

Conversations with Saadam (60 minutes last Sunday) finally admits he did have some WMDs and was planning more. The Dumb sh_t was telling the world he had them to avoid being attacked by Iran. So much for the Bush Lied story. He also planned to give up quick and come back with the ‘insurgency’.
From there Bush did screw up the war. He left Rummy in there too long. He also left Many of the Clinton appointees in place. He should have had the stones to clean house immediately but he was trying to be a Uniter, not a divider. Dumb!

Bush gave McCain the Kiss of Death (again, first time on the head) when he paid homage for Kennedy and McCains legalization bill! Florida, is a second place for him now.

CF2F – oh, but ain’t it fun! And, as for Giuliani today I agree with but I can still hope! Keep that pot boiling over there.

One thing I have notoced is a number of Republicans saying “I would never vote for … ” but all the Democrats I know say “I will proudly vote for any of the three”

Rush Limbaugh should just relax with his stash of oxycontin and other pain killers and let the world unfold as it should. McCain is the only Republican with a shred of credibility.

Apparently Rush Limbaugh is on drugs again.

Ron Paul and John Edwards will run together, it will be the ultimate presidency. They are the only decent candidates. Hilary and Obama don’t even have positions or views, they just speak their speeches like their talking to children. McCain is an honorable man, but not presidential material, and the polls don’t mean squat.

Gee, and it’s not just Rush… Yesterdday, Beck was all over McCain like flies on horse hockey… It was unbelievable!! Beck, the Mormon talk show host, was SO backing Romney it was almost pathetic. And there are other Right Wing Talk Radio hosts that are running so scared of McCain, it’s really sad to hear… I agree – the OxyContin will be flowing!! Like talk radio “snow” ??

The Democrat Party. The party of compassion?
Making fun of drug addiction?
Most drug addicts are Democrats.
Hypocrat Party more like it.

Yep… I got my big recliner all set, and plenty of cheese curls too!! Thanks CF2K!!

I would much rather have truth (vinegar) then sugar (pandering). Ron Paul’s message is very uplifting if you seek freedom and liberty. Some folks don’t. Ron Paul has had and practiced the same message for each of his 10 terms in Congress. He keeps getting re-elected. He is able to run for congressional re-election concurrently with his presidential bid. The Democrats aren’t even putting up opposition. The seat will be his no contest. That is what is admirable about Dr. Paul; no sugar coating. This may hurt, but it is for the best. That is the kind of president I want. Make me hurt now so my kids and their kids won’t later. Sounds better to me than a little pandering and lies served up by most politicians these days.

*than sugar* Hooked on phonics has destroyed me ;-)

I hear what you’re both saying. I still think the same message can be delivered without all the doom and gloom. I would rather hear the solutions stated clearly than the problems enumerated harshly. Ron Paul comes off negative. If he can change my world for the better why isn’t he happy to tell me about it?

And, once elected he gets to work with all the people whom he has made enemies of? Hmmm, that’s a management style I don’t think works.

Unlike the current idiot in charge would have us believe, we are supposed to have three EQUAL branches of government. That’s what has worked and when we get back to it will work again.

And, once elected he gets to work with all the people whom he has made enemies of? Hmmm, that’s a management style I don’t think works.

Again, I would rather have a president that will do what is right (and not compromising standards and/or ethics) as opposed to –making friends- in the houses. If you are interested in Ron Paul’s plans (he has some extremely sound plans and legislation pending regarding the economy) I would be more than glad to point you to some links. Ron Paul is extremely transparent in his ideologies and courses of action.

we are supposed to have three EQUAL branches of government. That’s what has worked and when we get back to it will work again.

If you’d like to get back to the type of government the framers intended, Ron Paul is definitely your guy. I have links for that too. – By the way, your above statement, I could not agree more !!!

PaulTheCon – does your entire world revolve around the Clintons?

Rush is the poster child for why not to do drugs.

Hee hee hee Stumper!

And the heart attack a Clinton win would give max would be worth the cost!

You just cant buy entertainment like watching pauli and max having a momnent at the THOUGHT of Hillary winning.

After Republican screwed the Seniors on SS out of a tax rebate, McCain will be lucky to keep his Senate job!

“Goodbye Rudy, you won’t be missed.”

That’s not true! Some of us will miss him … for entertainment value …

Clark, don’t begrudge anyone on age. Seventy is the new 50. Free radicals (like me) actually keep you younger, not make you older.
Reagan didn’t sleep through his presidency–he was doing horoscopes in his head. And you thought he was senile.

SS Tax, now there is a concept. Let’s make them pay taxes on money that was essentially a tax throughout their working life. What a moronic concept.

Sol, a theoretical question. The employer’s share of FICA is a deduction to the employer, and, as not a deduction from the employee’s wages, has not, in fact, been taxed. Thus, should there be a differential in treatment in taxation of that part of the benefit received that may be allocated to the employer’s share (assume one-half) and that part of a pension that is due to an employer’s contribution (fully taxable)?

I agree, VT. You should be taxed for money earned not previously taxed. Then again, I probably won’t see any of that pyramid scam since I’ll probably have to work for two weeks after I die to stay afloat.

The Phantom
Posted January 29, 2008 at 11:43 am | Permalink
After Republican screwed the Seniors on SS out of a tax rebate, McCain will be lucky to keep his Senate job!

Republicans didn’t screw anybody. Both party leaders agreed to the proposal Bush announced.

And you can’t screw someone out of something they didn’t have to begin with: The seniors in question did not earn any money. How can you give it back to them!!!?

Ben, to me that’s the only workable way to do it, IMO.

Sol, I understand your position. Again, I was limiting my comments to the employer’s share, not that withheld from the employee. Again, though, if SS and private plans are to be treated the same, earnings on the employee’s share should also be subject to tax, as are earnings from an IRA which are tax deferred until withdrawal (and the principal amounts represented by the distribution, assuming a traditional IRA funded by deductible contributions).

FICA and Medicare are computed based upon your income. Not the other way around. What did KPERS lower? The reportable gross income, and you are paying pretax dollars for some entitlement? That reduction, for all workers, reduce your AGI for federal income taxes, but not our contributions to FICA and MEDICARE. Unfortunately, most pay based upon our total wages (I’d say all with exceptions).

“You just cant buy entertainment like watching pauli and max having a momnent at the THOUGHT of Hillary winning.”

Yes indeedy . . . priceless!

Yes Vaughn, I did note the difference in Fed and State taxing for KPERS.

Amway – I didn’t understand what you were saying. All I know is I’m paying into something that, by all accounts, won’t be available in 32 years when I will be “entitled” to it.

Sol, you don’t honestly think I couldn’t find my own links, do you?

I’m trying to tell you that I don’t want to read any links you provide or any I find on my own because Ron Paul turns me off. I don’t read some of the posters here because I figured out they aren’t going to post anything but attacks. I stay away from people like that.

I’ve watched every debate and RP is a sour puss — always negative, on the attack, whiny. It isn’t that I don’t agree with him (sometimes I do!), but his demeanor makes listening to him difficult and unpleasant. If he is really happy about any solutions he can bring, he needs to “let it shine!” Have you ever seen him smile? The way a person presents themselves really does matter! That’s what I meant by the teaspoon of sugar helps the medicine go down. POTUS is a management position so effectively working with others is a necessary skill.

Will he frown and complain his way through diplomatic solutions and in the effort to repair our reputation around the world?

I’m not shallow or unthinking, I don’t hold presence as the most important attribute, but I do think a person needs to know how to behave appropriately.

TDT,

I’m getting out of my reach here but it sounds like you are still gainfully employed by a state agency and you are seeing your contributions to the state retirement program reduced from your total earnings for FIT.

However, like those of us with civilian jobs, our 401K plans also reduce our total earnings for federat income tax. But, the money contributed to both medicare/FICA are not reduced by our retirement plans.

I think they are figuring:

You still earned the higher amount and they will base your ultimate SS entitlement based upon the higher wages AND your contribution to medicare will be needed based upon your entire income, when you get old and sickly :-)

But look on it this way: We are encouraged to SAVE in our retirement plans, by reducing our AGI by the money we put in. We are further encouraged by having a company match contributed also tax free. We also reap the interest and compounded growth on our retirement account.

But then, we get to withdraw it when we get old and have it all taxed as ordinary income.

AmWay, arguably the tax rate applied to the 401k, etc., withdrawals in the future will be lower than that which might be paid now without the voluntary reduction. Then, of course, we get into future value computations…..

arguably :-)

Of course if our government keeps printing out more of this FREE MONEY, at some point, someone is going to have to pay the piper.

When there are 77 million boomers with trillions in their protected retirement accounts,

401*,TSP, and IRA’s (to include Roth’s) will look too attractive to our politicians.

AmWay and VT

Successfull retirees never completely liquidate their before tax IRA and 401(K) accounts, before they die. Therefore, the larger the capital pool to draw from, the larger the interest distribution in retirement.

Therefore, the idea that you will “pay taxes on it anyway” really doesnt hold up.

Econ, exactly. I wonder how long it will take to make SS benefits received in excess of the individual’s contributions fully taxable income. You are correct, too, about how most folks do not understand the computation to arrive at the correct amount to enter on line 20, Form 1040. BTW, I also am not advocating a darned thing here. Just pointing out one scenario (among many that exist) in this area.

Full disclosure: I’m of the age that I’ll likely get mine. I’ll need to wait a bit longer than 65 to be able to get the full amount. I worry about what the changes will be for younger folks, a class that includes my daughters.

Fortunately I won’t have to calculate that number – my computer will. It even gets more fun when you have Form 8606 because you have a basis in a Traditional IRA.

So what you guys are saying is that McCain will tax Social Security if he’s elected!?!

As of now, income is taxed until the magic $80,000 is reached, then not taxes on the excess. Tax it all, and SS might survive. And if the rich, who don’t pay anything over $80,000 earned, were required to pay on all their income, just like the little guy, I would put that in the catagory of, “doing something for your country”.

Ben
I am sure that a great many people who made “non deductable traditional IRA contributions” did not do as good a job, at record-keeping, as you have done.

Those people will pay taxes on the same money, twice.

Non qualified deferred annuities were always a better idea, in my opinion. Not near the paper work head ache.

The IRS LOVES cost-basis in a traditional IRA.
Very few people keep track of it, properly.

(We are not talking about ROTH IRA’s folks, we are talking about people who went above the “threshold” that limits deductability, on the original, deductable type of IRA)

Paul – it would still flow to 20 just as IRA flows to 15. However, like the 8606 for IRA line 15b. The thing I would do differently (with both of them) is basis recovery first instead of pro-rata as it is now on 8606 for IRAs.

Ceiling for collection (withholding) of FICA (the 6.2% one) for 2008 is $102,000. Per IRS Publication 15, a/k/a “Circular E”.

Long and short… Taxes suck. Elect Ron Paul and you won’t have to worry about this crap :-D

Elect Huckabee, and we can have a National sales tax. that is the way to go. estimated savings in government and private sector for tax regulation over 30 billion a year.

VT – I have also heard it called the TPFEA – Tax Professionals Full Employment Act since it extends to software etc.

Eliminate Taxes on Dividends and Savings. The basis of capitalism is savings, and Americans who do so should be rewarded.
Pass HJ Res. 23 to encourage savings over consumption.

Repeal the Death Tax. Attacking small businesses and breaking up family farms smothers growth and kills jobs.
Pass H.R. 2734 to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.

Cut Taxes for Working Seniors. Grandmothers and grandfathers working to make ends meet should keep all the fruits of their labor.
Pass H.R. 191 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the inclusion in gross income of Social Security benefits.

Eliminate Taxes on Social Security Benefits. That money belongs to seniors, not the government. They paid into the system for a lifetime, and they should be free to spend every penny as they see fit.
Pass H.R. 192 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the 1993 increase in taxes on Social Security benefits.

Accelerate Depreciation on Investment. We need to help companies grow and create jobs.
Pass H.R. 4995 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce corporate marginal income tax rates.

Eliminate Taxes on Capital Gains. Investment should be embraced and rewarded.
Pass H.J. Res 23 (The “Liberty Amendment”), proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.

Eliminate Taxes on Tips. The single parents and working students who earn their income chiefly through tips deserve to keep all of their money. This tax on “estimated income” is unfair and should be ended.
Pass H.R. 3664 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that tips shall not be subject to income or employment taxes.

Support the Mortgage Cancellation Relief Act. Working families who lost their homes should not be punished a second time with a big IRS bill.
Pass H.R. 1876 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from the gross income of individual taxpayers discharges of indebtedness attributable to certain forgiven residential mortgage obligations.

Some I lost your smiley in the quote–my bad!

Social security – keep it in place for those that already paid in. Allow younger folks the choice. If you drop the bloated gov’t agencies we don’t need, end the illegal war, pull all our troops home, pull out of the UN and other dysfunctional entities we sink billions into, -to keep the list short; all other BS we waste money on – you can do away with the income tax and still provide the services we need. The income tax has only been around since 1913. We did quite well before we had it. Betting we can do so again without it.

McCain only GOP candidate who can win, polls showRush Limbaugh contends that if John McCain wins the GOP presidential nomination, it will destroy the Republican Party. But leading national polls indicate that McCain is the only GOP candidate who can defeat Democratic front-runners Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in a head-to-head match. The other top GOP candidates would lose handily to Clinton and by double digits to Obama, according to the polls.

Meanwhile, McCain appears to be in a tight battle with Mitt Romney for today’s Florida primary, though the endorsement of McCain by Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (in photo) should give McCain a boost.
By Phillip BrownleePosted today at 10 hours and 7 minutes agoFiled under Presidential race
PermalinkComments RSS Trackback URL « Open thread 1/29Busing decision was necessary first step »93 CommentsPleefer
Posted January 29, 2008 at 6:13 am | Permalink
Screw your “national polls” conducted with out-dated and obsolete methods. Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who could defeat a democrat. If Paul doesn’t get the nod, I’ll write him in and join the grassroots effort to destroy the Republican Party. If Republicans are that blind and that gluttonous for punishment, then let them be punished and forgotten.

ProudMan
Posted January 29, 2008 at 6:56 am | Permalink
The polls have been so accurate lately. Like the time in New Hampshire. You put enough faith in these polls you would probably stop bothering to actually vote. Which is funny, since that is the only poll that matters.

Taz
Posted January 29, 2008 at 7:06 am | Permalink
Rush needs to go back to his drugs and shut up.

CF2K
Posted January 29, 2008 at 8:13 am | Permalink
Ha ha ha ha! Good times, watching the Wingnuts turn on McCain. Eat your own much, Wingnuts?

As for elections being “the only poll that matters,” a sentiment aptly expressed by the party of election fraud. Two stolen Presidential elections, and counting!

Joe
Posted January 29, 2008 at 8:14 am | Permalink
Who can do the most damage to the country? A hard core liberal who will surrender in Iraq or a RINO who will not!

lindainks55
Posted January 29, 2008 at 8:25 am | Permalink
Joe, The fight is done; WE WON! And somehow we left our troops behind after the victory. The new liberal President will clean up after the current failed administration.

(Now if someone just knew what winning means, what was the cause, what wonders did the fight bring about, what changes and improvements??)

Ben
Posted January 29, 2008 at 8:28 am | Permalink
Let’s all hope Giuliani wins Florida today!

The Phantom
Posted January 29, 2008 at 8:30 am | Permalink
Ben, Amen!

lindainks55
Posted January 29, 2008 at 8:32 am | Permalink
Ben, I’ve been told here on the blog that what will finally unite the Republicans is Hillary being named the Democratic nominee. So we don’t need to pay much attention to their varied winners since that isn’t how they’re deciding their nominee this time.

Ben
Posted January 29, 2008 at 8:33 am | Permalink
Let’s all back Brownback in a third-party run!

CF2K
Posted January 29, 2008 at 8:55 am | Permalink
lindainks55,

Indeed: Republicans aren’t called ‘reactionaries’ for nothing. Other than lower taxes for the rich and war on the poor, what DO Repubicans stand for?

Ben,

You’re killin’ me. I’m guessing today will be Ghouliani’s last stand. And I’m also guessing that, by a semi-ironic twist of fate, that a good number of the same Jewish voters who put him in the mayor’s office in NYC in 1992 will be voting today in Florida to take him out of the running. Couldn’t have happened to a nicer Fascist. Rudy, we hardly knew ye.

Oh, and pretty funny to hear Romney and McCain calling each other that dirtiest of wirty durds–LIBERAL! Pathetic, impotent, and spent–the both of them.

george
Posted January 29, 2008 at 9:06 am | Permalink
On the Republican side John is the News Media baby. I’m for Mitt. John is just too liberal for me. However I will take him over any democrat candidate.

Ben
Posted January 29, 2008 at 9:06 am | Permalink
CF2F – oh, but ain’t it fun! And, as for Giuliani today I agree with but I can still hope! Keep that pot boiling over there.

One thing I have notoced is a number of Republicans saying “I would never vote for … ” but all the Democrats I know say “I will proudly vote for any of the three”

SolDevVB
Posted January 29, 2008 at 9:16 am | Permalink
George, and you have no problems with Mitten’s blatant lies? He is a big pandER bear. If you like smoke blown up your skirt, more power to you.

Ben
Posted January 29, 2008 at 9:18 am | Permalink
What will Limbaugh et.al. do if McCain gets the nomination? Especially if Huckabee is running mate?

Might there be a big run on OxyContin?

WAR
Posted January 29, 2008 at 9:19 am | Permalink
Apparently Rush Limbaugh is on drugs again.

Ben
Posted January 29, 2008 at 9:20 am | Permalink
Again? Or maybe STILL?!

WhiteElephant
Posted January 29, 2008 at 9:36 am | Permalink
Ron Paul and John Edwards will run together, it will be the ultimate presidency. They are the only decent candidates. Hilary and Obama don’t even have positions or views, they just speak their speeches like their talking to children. McCain is an honorable man, but not presidential material, and the polls don’t mean squat.

WhiteElephant
Posted January 29, 2008 at 9:39 am | Permalink
I don’t have insider information or anything, I’m just hoping that something like RP and JE will run together, it would make a balanced presidency. Both have good views though different, and both have peoples interests in mind.

Chas.
Posted January 29, 2008 at 9:40 am | Permalink
Gee, and it’s not just Rush… Yesterdday, Beck was all over McCain like flies on horse hockey… It was unbelievable!! Beck, the Mormon talk show host, was SO backing Romney it was almost pathetic. And there are other Right Wing Talk Radio hosts that are running so scared of McCain, it’s really sad to hear… I agree – the OxyContin will be flowing!! Like talk radio “snow” ??

CF2K
Posted January 29, 2008 at 9:47 am | Permalink
WhiteElephant,

While I think Paul is a whacko, if you’re willing to go Edwards/Paul rather than Paul/Edwards, I’ll take that bet. Just keep Edwards away from grassy knolls and limousine sunroofs, and I’m on board.

Chas,

Yeah-it’s a thirty-year GOP meltdown we got on our hands; kind of like the cicadas coming back. Pull up a chair and enjoy the show. The GOP’s tearin’ itself to pieces and it’s a damn fine show, ah tell yew whut…

SolDevVB
Posted January 29, 2008 at 9:53 am | Permalink
Ron Paul goes against most everything liberal. Read entitlements. I can’t see RP choosing a socially liberal running mate nor accepting a VP under a social liberal. Ron Paul is the most educated on economics. I fear he is the only candidate that will focus on our budget and get it straightened out for the long run. IMHO, every other candidate will rig the budget to support his/her programs and maybe see some very short term gains. With RP, IMHO, we may hurt like a bitch for the next 4-8 years, but in the long run, we will once again be a fiscally sound nation.

Chas.
Posted January 29, 2008 at 9:54 am | Permalink
Yep… I got my big recliner all set, and plenty of cheese curls too!! Thanks CF2K!!

lindainks55
Posted January 29, 2008 at 10:01 am | Permalink
“With RP, IMHO, we may hurt like a bitch for the next 4-8 years, but in the long run, we will once again be a fiscally sound nation.”

Sol, even IF he were elected once the above doesn’t sound like a recipe for reelection.

Haven’t we all been hurt badly enough by the current idiot in charge??

Maybe if Ron Paul didn’t look so glum and maybe if he could deliver hope with his message. The medicine really does go down better with sugar vs vinegar.

SolDevVB
Posted January 29, 2008 at 10:08 am | Permalink
I would much rather have truth (vinegar) then sugar (pandering). Ron Paul’s message is very uplifting if you seek freedom and liberty. Some folks don’t. Ron Paul has had and practiced the same message for each of his 10 terms in Congress. He keeps getting re-elected. He is able to run for congressional re-election concurrently with his presidential bid. The Democrats aren’t even putting up opposition. The seat will be his no contest. That is what is admirable about Dr. Paul; no sugar coating. This may hurt, but it is for the best. That is the kind of president I want. Make me hurt now so my kids and their kids won’t later. Sounds better to me than a little pandering and lies served up by most politicians these days.

Pleefer
Posted January 29, 2008 at 10:13 am | Permalink
We don’t need sweetener, we need truth (as hard as it may be to swallow). These clowns (aside from the only sane and honorable candidate, Dr. Paul) tell us, as usual, what we want to hear and nothing more. There is no one on either side who will help us, unless you approve of where we are going.

SolDevVB
Posted January 29, 2008 at 10:19 am | Permalink
*than sugar* Hooked on phonics has destroyed me

Pleefer
Posted January 29, 2008 at 10:24 am | Permalink
This experiment is likened to a college chemistry project. Only as the punks we are we coaxed the professor out of the room and locked the door. He’s watching us through the door seeing us not paying attention and doing nothing to observe the experiment. The teacher knows that if no one is watching it there will be a catastrophe. But us “smart” and snotty kids just laugh at him. Let the doctor back inside or else this experiment will fail miserably and leave us all maimed and crying.

lindainks55
Posted January 29, 2008 at 10:37 am | Permalink
I hear what you’re both saying. I still think the same message can be delivered without all the doom and gloom. I would rather hear the solutions stated clearly than the problems enumerated harshly. Ron Paul comes off negative. If he can change my world for the better why isn’t he happy to tell me about it?

And, once elected he gets to work with all the people whom he has made enemies of? Hmmm, that’s a management style I don’t think works.

Unlike the current idiot in charge would have us believe, we are supposed to have three EQUAL branches of government. That’s what has worked and when we get back to it will work again.

Econ101
Posted January 29, 2008 at 10:42 am | Permalink
Hillary Clinton says that she was named after Sir Edmond Hillary, a man who did not become famous until AFTER Hillary was born.

Hillary Clinton attacks Obama for doing a small about of work for Rezko, even though Obama’s law firm TOLD him to do that work.

Hillary and Bill have their picture taken with Rezko, voluntarily.

Hillary says “I can’t recall” dozens of times, when questioned, under oath, about her financial dealings.

Who is the liar?

SolDevVB
Posted January 29, 2008 at 10:45 am | Permalink
And, once elected he gets to work with all the people whom he has made enemies of? Hmmm, that’s a management style I don’t think works.

Again, I would rather have a president that will do what is right (and not compromising standards and/or ethics) as opposed to –making friends- in the houses. If you are interested in Ron Paul’s plans (he has some extremely sound plans and legislation pending regarding the economy) I would be more than glad to point you to some links. Ron Paul is extremely transparent in his ideologies and courses of action.

we are supposed to have three EQUAL branches of government. That’s what has worked and when we get back to it will work again.

If you’d like to get back to the type of government the framers intended, Ron Paul is definitely your guy. I have links for that too. – By the way, your above statement, I could not agree more !!!

GMCAMH1USNRET
Posted January 29, 2008 at 10:53 am | Permalink
Yeah, maybe. But the Shamnesty, Fiengold, Kennedy pal ain’t gettin’ mine.
It is time for the Retired Captain and Distinguished Naval Aviator to Retire again.
I respect Captain McCain for his service and for what he went through. But, when he took a position against the soveriegnty of his own nation he compromised his priciples.
He is, in fact the only member of the Senate that I will come to the position of attention for. That much he is due but no more.

Ben
Posted January 29, 2008 at 10:57 am | Permalink
PaulTheCon – does your entire world revolve around the Clintons?

TDT
Posted January 29, 2008 at 11:06 am | Permalink
Paul – Knowing that you are a Republican, and won’t be voting for any Democrat, why do you post about Democrats. All it does is rile people up, including yourself, and it doesn’t sway people from their own opinions. I don’t mean to offend, truly, but your opinion on the democratic candidates is moot.

stumper
Posted January 29, 2008 at 11:08 am | Permalink
Rush is the poster child for why not to do drugs.

stumper
Posted January 29, 2008 at 11:09 am | Permalink
My one hope is Hillary gets elected just so econ has someone to blame for all his problems, and we then have something to laugh at.

ksfarmgrrl
Posted January 29, 2008 at 11:21 am | Permalink
Hee hee hee Stumper!

And the heart attack a Clinton win would give max would be worth the cost!

You just cant buy entertainment like watching pauli and max having a momnent at the THOUGHT of Hillary winning.

WSClark
Posted January 29, 2008 at 11:33 am | Permalink
My two cents worth means nothing when it comes to the Republican nominee for president, since I am a registered Democrat, but is this REALLY the best that the Republics can do?

John McCain – seventy-two years old? Isn’t there ANYONE in the Republic Party that is a BIT younger. We went through the Reagan presidency with Ronnie sleeping through most of his administration. We need a wee bit more energy.

Mitt Romney – the candidate from Hollywood Central Casting? Come on – the man will say ANYTHING, take ANY position that he thinks will get him elected. If he gets the GOP nod, watch him suddenly take a sharp Left turn.

Rudy Guiliani – He is done, the only question is whether he tosses it in before midnight tonight or does he wait until tomorrow morning. Goodbye Rudy, you won’t be missed.

Alan Keyes – You have to be kidding – that man makes Charles Manson look sane.

Ron Paul – some good ideas, but has absolutely no chance to get the nomination from the GOP – zero – he is hated by the Republic Party hierarchy more than even Hillary Clinton.

The Phantom
Posted January 29, 2008 at 11:43 am | Permalink
After Republican screwed the Seniors on SS out of a tax rebate, McCain will be lucky to keep his Senate job!

Ben
Posted January 29, 2008 at 11:51 am | Permalink
“Goodbye Rudy, you won’t be missed.”

That’s not true! Some of us will miss him … for entertainment value …

ghotiphaze
Posted January 29, 2008 at 11:52 am | Permalink
Duplicate comment detected; it looks as though you’ve already said that

Then where the snot do they go????

ghotiphaze
Posted January 29, 2008 at 11:55 am | Permalink
Clark, don’t begrudge anyone on age. Seventy is the new 50. Free radicals (like me) actually keep you younger, not make you older.
Reagan didn’t sleep through his presidency–he was doing horoscopes in his head. And you thought he was senile.

Pleefer
Posted January 29, 2008 at 11:55 am | Permalink
They should get the rebate and have no taxes on their ss though.

We let our country go…

SolDevVB
Posted January 29, 2008 at 11:58 am | Permalink
SS Tax, now there is a concept. Let’s make them pay taxes on money that was essentially a tax throughout their working life. What a moronic concept.

Pleefer
Posted January 29, 2008 at 12:05 pm | Permalink
Exactly… we have the most evil of people in power and they keep getting into power because people refuse to wake up. they’d much rather just bitch about “those crooks in Washington” THAT THEY KEEP PUTTING THERE.

Vaughn Tolle
Posted January 29, 2008 at 12:06 pm | Permalink
Sol, a theoretical question. The employer’s share of FICA is a deduction to the employer, and, as not a deduction from the employee’s wages, has not, in fact, been taxed. Thus, should there be a differential in treatment in taxation of that part of the benefit received that may be allocated to the employer’s share (assume one-half) and that part of a pension that is due to an employer’s contribution (fully taxable)?

Ben
Posted January 29, 2008 at 12:09 pm | Permalink
VT – that is a point I also would make. Perhaps the simple way to approach it would be to allow the first ‘x’ dollars be tax-free and then fully tax those afterwards. Let x = the person’s basis in the account.

ghotiphaze
Posted January 29, 2008 at 12:09 pm | Permalink
I agree, VT. You should be taxed for money earned not previously taxed. Then again, I probably won’t see any of that pyramid scam since I’ll probably have to work for two weeks after I die to stay afloat.

SolDevVB
Posted January 29, 2008 at 12:19 pm | Permalink
FICA is deducted from my wages against my will. I don’t want SS. I want to plan my own retirement. I see that as a tax. I may be way off the target, but that is how I view it. Seniors getting taxed on money taken from them by the government for their working life span.

American Way
Posted January 29, 2008 at 12:20 pm | Permalink
The Phantom
Posted January 29, 2008 at 11:43 am | Permalink
After Republican screwed the Seniors on SS out of a tax rebate, McCain will be lucky to keep his Senate job!

Republicans didn’t screw anybody. Both party leaders agreed to the proposal Bush announced.

And you can’t screw someone out of something they didn’t have to begin with: The seniors in question did not earn any money. How can you give it back to them!!!?

American Way
Posted January 29, 2008 at 12:31 pm | Permalink
Those of you being critical of social security should remember the words of posters on this blog:
It is a shining example of a great government entitlement program!

Tax em when they earn it,
Tax em when they invest it on their own
and withdraw it,
Tax the interest on the money already taxed,
Tax the capital gains on the money already taxed,
and then give em some of it back as SS and tax it once again,
And when they die – tax their leftovers!

Vaughn Tolle
Posted January 29, 2008 at 12:47 pm | Permalink
Ben, to me that’s the only workable way to do it, IMO.

Sol, I understand your position. Again, I was limiting my comments to the employer’s share, not that withheld from the employee. Again, though, if SS and private plans are to be treated the same, earnings on the employee’s share should also be subject to tax, as are earnings from an IRA which are tax deferred until withdrawal (and the principal amounts represented by the distribution, assuming a traditional IRA funded by deductible contributions).

TDT
Posted January 29, 2008 at 12:55 pm | Permalink
Okay, I’m getting into this confusing discussion. My KPERS lowered my gross income, so that I was in a lower tax bracket arguably. Why don’t they do that with FICA? Why doesn’t whaqt you contribute to FICA and Medicare lower your gross income, because that would help me A LOT!!

American Way
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:01 pm | Permalink
FICA and Medicare are computed based upon your income. Not the other way around. What did KPERS lower? The reportable gross income, and you are paying pretax dollars for some entitlement? That reduction, for all workers, reduce your AGI for federal income taxes, but not our contributions to FICA and MEDICARE. Unfortunately, most pay based upon our total wages (I’d say all with exceptions).

Vaughn Tolle
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:02 pm | Permalink
TDT, that would arguably make all SS benefits taxable income, given the current approach taken in the Code. BTW, you will note the differential between Federal and Kansas income subject to taxation due to the KPERS contribution, right?

I don’t have a clue what your total income is, TDT; taking a rough calculation of $90,000 subject to FICA/Medicare, allowing the deductions you propose would lower your gross $6885; assuming the status of married, filing jointly, on the federal level, you would be in the 25% bracket, for a savings of $1721.25 in federal income tax. Yeah, it would be helpful.

stumper
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:09 pm | Permalink
“You just cant buy entertainment like watching pauli and max having a momnent at the THOUGHT of Hillary winning.”

Yes indeedy . . . priceless!

stumper
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:11 pm | Permalink
On target article about the rudister:
http://www.nolanchart.com/article1488.html

TDT
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:18 pm | Permalink
Yes Vaughn, I did note the difference in Fed and State taxing for KPERS.

Amway – I didn’t understand what you were saying. All I know is I’m paying into something that, by all accounts, won’t be available in 32 years when I will be “entitled” to it.

lindainks55
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:24 pm | Permalink
Sol, you don’t honestly think I couldn’t find my own links, do you?

I’m trying to tell you that I don’t want to read any links you provide or any I find on my own because Ron Paul turns me off. I don’t read some of the posters here because I figured out they aren’t going to post anything but attacks. I stay away from people like that.

I’ve watched every debate and RP is a sour puss — always negative, on the attack, whiny. It isn’t that I don’t agree with him (sometimes I do!), but his demeanor makes listening to him difficult and unpleasant. If he is really happy about any solutions he can bring, he needs to “let it shine!” Have you ever seen him smile? The way a person presents themselves really does matter! That’s what I meant by the teaspoon of sugar helps the medicine go down. POTUS is a management position so effectively working with others is a necessary skill.

Will he frown and complain his way through diplomatic solutions and in the effort to repair our reputation around the world?

I’m not shallow or unthinking, I don’t hold presence as the most important attribute, but I do think a person needs to know how to behave appropriately.

ghotiphaze
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:29 pm | Permalink
Paul smiled on Bill Maher’s show.

Can’t blame him–Maher’s show gives me a smile, too.

American Way
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:36 pm | Permalink
TDT,

I’m getting out of my reach here but it sounds like you are still gainfully employed by a state agency and you are seeing your contributions to the state retirement program reduced from your total earnings for FIT.

However, like those of us with civilian jobs, our 401K plans also reduce our total earnings for federat income tax. But, the money contributed to both medicare/FICA are not reduced by our retirement plans.

I think they are figuring:

You still earned the higher amount and they will base your ultimate SS entitlement based upon the higher wages AND your contribution to medicare will be needed based upon your entire income, when you get old and sickly

But look on it this way: We are encouraged to SAVE in our retirement plans, by reducing our AGI by the money we put in. We are further encouraged by having a company match contributed also tax free. We also reap the interest and compounded growth on our retirement account.

But then, we get to withdraw it when we get old and have it all taxed as ordinary income.

American Way
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:37 pm | Permalink
not reduced by our retirement plans

Should read, “are not reduced by our contribution amount to our retirement plans.”

Vaughn Tolle
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:43 pm | Permalink
AmWay, arguably the tax rate applied to the 401k, etc., withdrawals in the future will be lower than that which might be paid now without the voluntary reduction. Then, of course, we get into future value computations…..

Econ101
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:46 pm | Permalink
VT
This is NOT something I want to see, but I do think it is inevitable:

Social Security is already taxed, of course. There are two “brackets” one causes 50% of SS to be taxed.

The next “bracket” causes 80% of SS to be taxed.

The country can not possibly afford to continue SS in its present form. It can NOT be done. None of you can show me a path to the future that does not change the system, somehow.

I think that the “path of least resistance” is to make SS benefits COMPLETELY taxable.

Think about it. If we “means test” SS it becomes a pain to determine who does and does not qualify, and what amount they should receive.

Bury the “means test” on line 20 of the 1040, and you get around the political heat, or at least some of it. Also, this would be the most efficient way to handle it. Incomes vary, year to year. Deductions vary, year to year.

Again, I am not advocating a darn thing here.

I just think that political “solutions” take the path of least resistance.

Beyond that, look at the way the taxation of SS benefits works, currently.

“Soak the rich” types will be happy to know that “tax exempt” Municipal Bond interest is actually “morphed” into a taxable investment, under the taxation of social security benefits.

You have to take your “AGI” and add your SS benefits and your muni bond interests, with some other adjustments, to figure out the taxation on your SS benefits.

It is confusing. Most people do not understant it. — Another reason why the politicians will go for this idea.

American Way
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:46 pm | Permalink
arguably

Of course if our government keeps printing out more of this FREE MONEY, at some point, someone is going to have to pay the piper.

When there are 77 million boomers with trillions in their protected retirement accounts,

401*,TSP, and IRA’s (to include Roth’s) will look too attractive to our politicians.

American Way
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:48 pm | Permalink
TDT,

1.45 of your gross income goes to medicare
1.45 match of your gross is also sent to medicare from your employer

6.2 of your gross income goes to SS
6.2 match of your gross is also sent to SS from your employer

So, 7.65 percent of your gross is sent to SS and medicare. Since your employer is also sending in that amount, a total of potential income of 15.3% goes into Uncle Sams general fund to pay for all government programs (like the rebate man!)

Those who will receive a rebate, yet did not pay a dime in taxes – thank you.

Econ101
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:48 pm | Permalink
AmWay and VT

Successfull retirees never completely liquidate their before tax IRA and 401(K) accounts, before they die. Therefore, the larger the capital pool to draw from, the larger the interest distribution in retirement.

Therefore, the idea that you will “pay taxes on it anyway” really doesnt hold up.

Ben
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:51 pm | Permalink
Paul – I would still fall back to my idea above – SS 100% taxable AFTER return of basis.

Vaughn Tolle
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:53 pm | Permalink
Econ, exactly. I wonder how long it will take to make SS benefits received in excess of the individual’s contributions fully taxable income. You are correct, too, about how most folks do not understand the computation to arrive at the correct amount to enter on line 20, Form 1040. BTW, I also am not advocating a darned thing here. Just pointing out one scenario (among many that exist) in this area.

Full disclosure: I’m of the age that I’ll likely get mine. I’ll need to wait a bit longer than 65 to be able to get the full amount. I worry about what the changes will be for younger folks, a class that includes my daughters.

Vaughn Tolle
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:55 pm | Permalink
Yep, Econ, if the minimum required withdrawals are handled correctly, and other needs are met with other income, the IRAs, etc. will not be exhausted during the individual’s life. However, the balance on death might well be subject to income taxation at some point in the future, for reasons you know, and I don’t want to take the time to set out.

Ben
Posted January 29, 2008 at 1:57 pm | Permalink
Fortunately I won’t have to calculate that number – my computer will. It even gets more fun when you have Form 8606 because you have a basis in a Traditional IRA.

Econ101
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:10 pm | Permalink
Ben
The “basis” issue gets dicey, but I dont dismiss it, out of hand.

First, “EIC” was first established as a way to diminish the pain of the “payroll tax” — So, if you do better, later in life, should your “basis” include SS “taxes” that were actually “refunded” to you, already?

Also, there is such a thing as a “spousal benefit” under SS. It is not as common as it once was, but I do find couples that need to calculate their benefits 2 different ways, and determine who’s benefits to draw against.

There are also divorced people who draw on a former spouse’s benefit.

You also have “Railroad Retirement” processing issues. A similar plan, but absolutely NOT identical to SS!

Yes, it is “do-able” — figuring out the “basis” for everyone.

I simply think it would be easier to do it on line 20 of the 1040.

Your “basis” idea would employ more accountants and attorneys, in government and the private sector, however.

Kansas
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:11 pm | Permalink
So what you guys are saying is that McCain will tax Social Security if he’s elected!?!

Vaughn Tolle
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:13 pm | Permalink
Econ, you know full well that every “tax reform” act that has been passed in my lifetime has an implicit informal title of the “Accountants and Attorneys Full Employment Act of (insert year here)”, right?

stumper
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:13 pm | Permalink
As of now, income is taxed until the magic $80,000 is reached, then not taxes on the excess. Tax it all, and SS might survive. And if the rich, who don’t pay anything over $80,000 earned, were required to pay on all their income, just like the little guy, I would put that in the catagory of, “doing something for your country”.

Steven Davis
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:14 pm | Permalink
“Hillary Clinton says that she was named after Sir Edmond Hillary, a man who did not become famous until AFTER Hillary was born.”

Paul, you haven’t heard? For the first 6 years of her life, Hillary’s parents addressed her as “Hey, you.” They did not name her until Sir Hillary was famous.

Econ101
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:15 pm | Permalink
Ben
I am sure that a great many people who made “non deductable traditional IRA contributions” did not do as good a job, at record-keeping, as you have done.

Those people will pay taxes on the same money, twice.

Non qualified deferred annuities were always a better idea, in my opinion. Not near the paper work head ache.

The IRS LOVES cost-basis in a traditional IRA.
Very few people keep track of it, properly.

(We are not talking about ROTH IRA’s folks, we are talking about people who went above the “threshold” that limits deductability, on the original, deductable type of IRA)

Vaughn Tolle
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:15 pm | Permalink
Stumper, first: the $80,000 figure is a bit outdated. It’s over $90,000 now. Second, the Medicare tax (1.45% employee withholding, 1.45% employer match) is collected on all compensation, no ceiling.

Ben
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:15 pm | Permalink
Paul – it would still flow to 20 just as IRA flows to 15. However, like the 8606 for IRA line 15b. The thing I would do differently (with both of them) is basis recovery first instead of pro-rata as it is now on 8606 for IRAs.

Ben
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:17 pm | Permalink
Paul – very true on that (basis). It is one of those ‘forever’ records retention things.

Vaughn Tolle
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:23 pm | Permalink
Ceiling for collection (withholding) of FICA (the 6.2% one) for 2008 is $102,000. Per IRS Publication 15, a/k/a “Circular E”.

Econ101
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:24 pm | Permalink
Stumper
Sorry, but, first of all, we are mixing apples and oranges. The “payroll tax” on employee earnings, is one thing. Yes, there is a cap of $80K (indexed, I think dont want to look it up) on that number.

However, the “John Edwards” tax dodge is available, for business owners.

Edwards avoids the Medicare Tax by paying himself, almost exclusively, in “divindends” from his corporation.

A “payroll tax” requires a payroll. Many of the “rich” are not, really, employees. They can always control their income. They can, frequently, change the “definition” of that income.
—–
By the way, the “camel’s nose” is already in the tent, as far as “means testing” Medicare is concerned.
The “rich” are now paying a higher “Part B” premium than the “poor”.

SolDevVB
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:25 pm | Permalink
Long and short… Taxes suck. Elect Ron Paul and you won’t have to worry about this crap

Vaughn Tolle
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:28 pm | Permalink
Econ, a few years ago IRS was putting an unusual twist on the “reasonable compensation” argument for sub-S shareholder/employees. Instead of challenging high salaries as a way to avoid dividend treatment, IRS was looking at the high dividends paid (or credited) to sub-S shareholder/employees with a view towards collecting additional payroll taxes. Haven’t heard much about this lately. You are right; choice of entity allows creative, but lawful so long as one is not a hog, methods of income characterization.

BG
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:30 pm | Permalink
Elect Huckabee, and we can have a National sales tax. that is the way to go. estimated savings in government and private sector for tax regulation over 30 billion a year.

Vaughn Tolle
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:30 pm | Permalink
BTW, many were availing themselves of the “John Edwards tax dodge” long before Mr. Edwards did it. The liberalization of Subchapter S during the Regan years, as well as during subsequent administrations, made use of a so-called “S Corp” an attractive alternative for many.

Ben
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:32 pm | Permalink
VT – I have also heard it called the TPFEA – Tax Professionals Full Employment Act since it extends to software etc.

Vaughn Tolle
Posted January 29, 2008 at 2:34 pm | Permalink
Ben, I was showing my age a bit there, wasn’t I?

Rage
Posted January 29, 2008 at 3:16 pm | Permalink

Long and short… Taxes suck. Elect Ron Paul and you won’t have to worry about this crap.

Uhm, , ,and how do your pay for the government then, Sol? “User fees”?

Sure taxes suck, but going trillions of dollars in debt is worse. And if you “opt-out” of social security, are just gonna forget about all those wages you paid in?

Rage
Posted January 29, 2008 at 3:17 pm | Permalink
Some I lost your smiley in the quote–my bad!

Rage
Posted January 29, 2008 at 3:18 pm | Permalink
Oh–nevermind–text to graphic. Duh.

SolDevVB
Posted January 29, 2008 at 3:29 pm | Permalink
Social security – keep it in place for those that already paid in. Allow younger folks the choice. If you drop the bloated gov’t agencies we don’t need, end the illegal war, pull all our troops home, pull out of the UN and other dysfunctional entities we sink billions into, -to keep the list short; all other BS we waste money on – you can do away with the income tax and still provide the services we need. The income tax has only been around since 1913. We did quite well before we had it. Betting we can do so again without it.

Vaughn Tolle
Posted January 29, 2008 at 3:40 pm | Permalink
One small exception to the income tax history post, Sol; there was an income tax enacted during the Civil War, which was subsequently declared unconstitutional, IIRC. This eventually led to the Sixteenth Amendment.
Post a CommentYour e-mail address is never published or shared. Required fields are marked *
Comments for this post will be closed on 28 February 2008.

Comment spam protected by SpamBam
(2166 spam filtered)

Name *

E-mail *

Web site

Comment

Hmmmmm, didn’t like that one . . how about dumping the last kansas post as being both redundant and stupid.

Never mind, calling kansas both redundant and stupid is redundant in itself. Kinda like calling rush a drug addict.

I think last time I ran out of scroll grease gster had some. First come, first served! Off to find gster, y’all are on your own.

Ben, he’ll probably end up sleeping with Ann Coulter, then denying it.

The man backs amnesty for illegals.

Still want him in office?

My My Kansas Sort of touchy, huh?? Like do you think you OWN the Blog or what??

I think the Blog got broken!! WOW!!

I really like the necktie McCain is wearing in the photo. I’m going to vote for that necktie.

Actually Huckabees idea of a national tax is a bad idea. It would mean there would be a 30% tax on everything. Wanna buy a new 200 thousand dollar house, be prepared to pay 30% tax on it. Imagine buying a 10,000 dollar car, you would have to pay 3000 dollars on top of that for the national tax. Its good news for rich people, but bad idea for the poor and middle class.

The Republic Party really, really hates McCain.

And why not. “The jobs in Michigan are never coming back. The immigrants from Mexico are never going away. And there’s gonna be a lot more wars.”

Helluva platform, there.

I get the feeling Romney definitely took a bad hit yesterday. Who knows, the Republican nominee might be known before the Democratic one!