Tax This!, Read the whole thing or you have eat a poopy sandwhich Options

[Hostile]

545 PEOPLE--By Charlie Reese

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them..

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.... . The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace
545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red ..

If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power..

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.

Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees...

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.

What you do with this article now that you have read it......... Is up to you.

This might be funny if it weren't so darned true.
Be sure to read all the way to the end:

Tax his land, Tax his bed, Tax the table, At which he's fed.

Tax his tractor, Tax his mule, Teach him taxes Are the rule.

Tax his work, Tax his pay, He works for peanuts Anyway!

Tax his cow, Tax his goat, Tax his pants, Tax his coat.

Tax his ties, Tax his shirt, Tax his work, Tax his dirt.

Tax his tobacco, Tax his drink, Tax him if he Tries to think.

Tax his cigars, Tax his beers, If he cries Tax his tears.

Tax his car, Tax his gas.

Tax all he has Then let him know That you won't be done Till he has no dough.

When he screams and hollers; Then tax him some more, Tax him till He's good and sore.

Then tax his coffin, Tax his grave, Tax the sod in Which he's laid...

Put these words Upon his tomb, Taxes drove me to my doom....' When he's gone, Do not relax, Its time to apply The inheritance tax..

Sales Tax
School Tax
Liquor Tax
Luxury Tax
Excise Taxes
Property Tax
Cigarette Tax
Medicare Tax
Inventory Tax
Real Estate Tax
Well Permit Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Inheritance Tax
Road Usage Tax
CDL license Tax
Dog License Tax
State Income Tax
Food License Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Gross Receipts Tax
Social Security Tax
Service Charge Tax
Fishing License Tax
Federal Income Tax
Building Permit Tax
IRS Interest Charges
Hunting License Tax
Marriage License Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Personal Property Tax
Accounts Receivable Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Workers Compensation Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service FeeTax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Utility Taxes Vehicle License Registration Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax

STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world.
We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

What in the hell happened? Can you spell 'politicians? ' I hope this goes around THE USA at least 100 times!!!
YOU can help it get there!!!
GO AHEAD - - - BE AN AMERICAN!!!

[mike_]

Powerful, and I fully agree.

[duke_Qa]

Well, I guess it's a copy of a chain-email. It was sorta annoying to read, but the gist of the "politicians on both sides say they want to remove taxes, so why don't they?" is pretty thought-provoking and/or clever. I could have said wise, but that is a loaded word

Politicians say what the people want to hear, not that they need to know. People want to hear that taxes should go away, but to keep civilized society working somewhat functioning we need to support the organizations that are the cornerstones of our nations. Taxes have risen together with the size of governments, and there is very little we can do about it.

The best way to reduce a government's costs is to rule by fear and let people sail their own sea. That way you can reduce taxes and cut health-care, crime prevention or maintenance; Just have enough cash for prisons(and public Executions) of 3-10% of your population and you can easily silence any complaining voice.

[Allathar]

Completely disagree with it, and at the same time he has a point though.

Problem is, it ain't that easy. People want the government to lower unemployment - only way to do so is to spend, causing deficits. Other way is to cut back on the general labour agreements (or whatever it's called there, in Dutch it's the CAO) but those unions are against it, and people will be afraid to lose their jobs or get lower wages.

A way to lower government deficits is to rise taxes, but noone wants that. Another way is to print money, but that causes inflation.

People want to have the government take care of them, but at the same time they don't want high taxes or a too large government, and they want to be free.

People want to have a stable economy, so the federal bank controls the money supply to lower interest in times of need, but this has effects on inflation.

People want lower taxes on import products, but if they become too cheap, domestic suppliers will lose their jobs.

I could go on for a while, but I think my point stands. Still, as said above, the writer has a point - the government controls too much. More of a free market capitalism might hurt a bit in the short run, but in the long run it's only for the better

[{IP}Pasidon]

I stopped following politics after we turned into a constitutional demi-monarchy dictatorship... glad you're keeping me updated with political nonsense Hos. It's all true for all we know (who knows what's not being said and what's being lied about) but the issue is voters don't care anymore. The voters have elected a mess of people, not by their experience, but by how they personally effect the voter. Unless the masses are just guessing... which is plausible. But like I always say... these people don't have degrees in their positions. The most unqualified people on earth are running our country because they're being elected for their money, not experience. That's why we can't seem to get anyone who doesn't seem corrupt in my opinion.

Completely disagree with it, and at the same time he has a point though.

Either a contradiction or a revelation just occurred...

[Romanul]

constitutional demi-monarchy dictatorship

Either a contradiction or a revelation just occurred...

Anyway,regarding promises,elections will always mean just choosing between the lesser evil,no matter what.Democracy is equal to dictatorship,at least in my point of view.

"Democracy is superior to Dictatorship.And Dictatorship is superior to Democracy."

As for taxes,this idiot(sorry,but have to call him like that) forgets about:
-Inflation
-import rates
-export rates
-different currencies
etc.

Economy is not only taxes...

[{IP}Pasidon]

They don't teach that in Dictator School, unfortunately.

[Admiral Jamoking]

Fully agree with you Hostile, 545 to 300 million, no matter how hard you try you can't get 545 to cover 300 million. It's like trying to make a PB&J sandwich with only one slice of bread and only a teaspoon of PB, you're missing the Jelly entirely.

I think a Pre-Revolutionary war quote applies all too well to our current America unfortunately

"No Taxation without Representation!" - American Colonists

In reality, after George Washington left office, America was doomed to progress to it's current state. We just kept postponing it over the years, like how John Conner only postponed Judgement Day in T2, to see it only occur later in T3. GW warned about political parties but did we listen? All you have to do is turn on the TV to find your answer. George Washington chose not to rerun because he wanted America to grow, it just grew in the wrong way.

[Romanul]

They don't teach that in Dictator School, unfortunately.

Issue is that I doubt that a dictatorship will come in the US in probably the next 1-2 centuries.Tho the rest of the world is pretty much OK for this theory.

I don't believe in totalitarian dictatorships.Really.Benevolent ones,maybe.But only if I'm the dictator.

[Hostile]

A dictorship won't happen in the US anytime soon, there are too many people applying for the job.

[Rob38]

545 PEOPLE--By Charlie Reese

STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world.
We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

I'm sorry but the feminist in me was bugged by this statement. What does "Mom staying home to raise the kids" have to do with being a prosperous society? Women can work and still be great mothers. Why doesn't "Dad stay home and raise the kids?" The Mom statement is just silly.

[{IP}Pasidon]

Of course people will get insulted... we're at war!

A dictorship won't happen in the US anytime soon, there are too many people applying for the job.

Heh heh heh! Awesome... You get a Pasidon point chip for that one.

[Hostile]

545 PEOPLE--By Charlie Reese

STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world.
We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

I'm sorry but the feminist in me was bugged by this statement. What does "Mom staying home to raise the kids" have to do with being a prosperous society? Women can work and still be great mothers. Why doesn't "Dad stay home and raise the kids?" The Mom statement is just silly.

Being a pro feminist myself, I don't think the idea was mom's place should be barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen. I saw it as more of a more "prosperous time" because it only required one income earner for the household. I'm sure in modern times either parent could stay home while the other wins the bread.

[Rob38]

545 PEOPLE--By Charlie Reese

STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world.
We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

I'm sorry but the feminist in me was bugged by this statement. What does "Mom staying home to raise the kids" have to do with being a prosperous society? Women can work and still be great mothers. Why doesn't "Dad stay home and raise the kids?" The Mom statement is just silly.

Being a pro feminist myself, I don't think the idea was mom's place should be barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen. I saw it as more of a more "prosperous time" because it only required one income earner for the household. I'm sure in modern times either parent could stay home while the other wins the bread.

Interesting thing about that. There was only a short time in American history where a majority of two-parent families had only one parent being the "breadwinner" in the family. It has been far more common for both parents to be working in some form or fashion (part-time or full-time).

[Taralom]

Of course people will get insulted... we're at war!

If you ask me, you are not at war. You are farming.
Wonder what farming is? It is a MMO phenomenom where a higher-ranked player attacks a lower-ranked player and takes his resources. Swap the Higher-ranked player with U.S.A. and the lower ranked with Afghanistan or Iran, and I myself see little difference.

This post has been edited by Taralom: Jul 28 2010, 08:51 PM

[Imagine]

If you ask me, you are not at war. You are farming.
Wonder what farming is? It is a MMO phenomenom where a higher-ranked player attacks a lower-ranked player and takes his resources. Swap the Higher-ranked player with U.S.A. and the lower ranked with Afghanistan or Iran, and I myself see little difference.

Hit the nail on the head IMO. Back on point though, taxes is one topic that it's hard not to look like a hypocrite. By lowering taxes you lose vital functions like, Health and Policing. Whereas raise it and you piss off a load of poor people. I've always wondered why we don't drop taxes by 7.5% on the lowest earning 25% of families and then raise taxes by 10% on the highest earning 25% of families. Then cut wages to unnecessarily overpaid sectors of government.

[Allathar]

If you ask me, I think it's better to cut in the bs-spendings rather than increasing the taxes. Subsidized art, for example.

[Hostile]

If you ask me, you are not at war. You are farming.
Wonder what farming is? It is a MMO phenomenom where a higher-ranked player attacks a lower-ranked player and takes his resources. Swap the Higher-ranked player with U.S.A. and the lower ranked with Afghanistan or Iran, and I myself see little difference.

Hit the nail on the head IMO. Back on point though, taxes is one topic that it's hard not to look like a hypocrite. By lowering taxes you lose vital functions like, Health and Policing. Whereas raise it and you piss off a load of poor people. I've always wondered why we don't drop taxes by 7.5% on the lowest earning 25% of families and then raise taxes by 10% on the highest earning 25% of families. Then cut wages to unnecessarily overpaid sectors of government.

My friend, how much more can we possibly be taxed from the top down?

http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

top 1% of the US population pays 40% of the taxes
top 5% pays 60% of the taxes
top 10% pays 71% of the taxes

Bottom 50% pays 2.89% of all US taxes. What is unfair?

How much more can you tax them? 70%, 80% of their income?

Do you want to take all of the top income earner's money?

How much can you possibly ask for from rich people? All of it? Do you believe all of their money should go to taxes and none from the lower 50% of the earned income ?

Something has to give. You can't keep taxing the richest people on a disastrous level and then blame them for not paying enough.

Then we wonder why people with businesses are not hiring new people. They are scared of the new socialist mechanisms that are in place.

[Imagine]

@Hostile: I see what you're saying but from my view that was just a generic statement I put in. Problem is you can't tax the rich any more than currently because of the reasons you stated and the poor can't be taxed as much due to lower income and such. Cutting unnecessary spending is the best option and has always been IMO. The benefits systems in the UK currently are a joke. If I had it my way I'd remove benefits such as; Child benefits (To mothers under 17) if you're stupid enough to have a child that young happily take tax-payers money, think again. I'd pretty much leave the barebone's of society (Health, Education, Policing, Public sector, Housing and Military) then trim the fat, Some benefits or tighten up the rules on them even simple stuff like MP expenses, why should MP's get second home allowances when lots of people struggle to get a first in the current climate. That's just my three cents thrown in.

[Romanul]

If you ask me, you are not at war. You are farming.
Wonder what farming is? It is a MMO phenomenom where a higher-ranked player attacks a lower-ranked player and takes his resources. Swap the Higher-ranked player with U.S.A. and the lower ranked with Afghanistan or Iran, and I myself see little difference.

Hit the nail on the head IMO. Back on point though, taxes is one topic that it's hard not to look like a hypocrite. By lowering taxes you lose vital functions like, Health and Policing. Whereas raise it and you piss off a load of poor people. I've always wondered why we don't drop taxes by 7.5% on the lowest earning 25% of families and then raise taxes by 10% on the highest earning 25% of families. Then cut wages to unnecessarily overpaid sectors of government.

My friend, how much more can we possibly be taxed from the top down?

http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

top 1% of the US population pays 40% of the taxes
top 5% pays 60% of the taxes
top 10% pays 71% of the taxes

Bottom 50% pays 2.89% of all US taxes. What is unfair?

How much more can you tax them? 70%, 80% of their income?

Do you want to take all of the top income earner's money?

How much can you possibly ask for from rich people? All of it? Do you believe all of their money should go to taxes and none from the lower 50% of the earned income ?

Something has to give. You can't keep taxing the richest people on a disastrous level and then blame them for not paying enough.

Then we wonder why people with businesses are not hiring new people. They are scared of the new socialist mechanisms that are in place.

Hostile,consider your nation lucky.That's all I gotta say.