It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Cloward Piven strategy. That is how the liberals got us here. So yes, either "Go Galt" and refuse to participate at all anymore; or milk the system for all you can get to hasten the collapse.
Originally posted by woodsmom
reply to post by spoogemonkey
Maybe we should all quit and jump on the system, then who would pay for it?
LOL. It isn't JUST $63. It is $63 per person. For a family of for that is over $250. That is a lot of money to someone trying to make it on two minimum wage jobs. So then, with your "BIG HEART", how many families will you pony up for?
Originally posted by MystikMushroom
Originally posted by usernameconspiracy
So I throw in $63 whole bucks a year and that's my part of helping to ensure that people with preexisting conditions are not refused by insurance? Sounds like a bargain to me. God forbid, I guess we just stay home one Saturday night a year and it's covered. Oh the burden!
I'm with you on that! $63 to make sure that someone that gets a job and insurance can now get the treatment they need...? Sounds like a deal to me.
Unlike many people it seems -- I have a heart.
I wish we could, but the next paragraph shows why we can't.
Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by marg6043
it's time to put the terms "liberals" and "conservatives" away!! they are not the us vs. . them!!
Do you even understand where this so called "help from the government" really comes from? The fact that you want and expect the "government" to "help you" is why we cannot put our differences behind us.
Originally posted by dawnstarromney would not have changed obamacare much....
and I doubt if would have changed the mandate that we all have to be insured.
more than likely the mandate would have stayed, but any hope anyone has of getting any help from the gov't to fulfill that mandate would have been killed dead rather quickly!!
Until you libs stop demanding my money to get you free stuff, we can never unite.
Originally posted by dawnstarain't nothing meaningful gonna be accomplished till we accept what is and quit with the lib/con crap and stand up to them united, and just tell them enough of the crap!
How about we cut those programs and just stop wasting the money? How about we let the people who work actually keep more of what they earn?
Originally posted by dawnstarheck the money they waste, just one of those secret black ops programs that we are not even allowed to know anything about could go quite a ways to giving each and every person in this country very affordable, not breaking the bank healthcare no matter what their paycheck is!!
tell ya what, they do away with those useless black ops, quite wasting the money, quite giving their buddies neat tax breaks and subsidies, and act like they are broke!! because they are broke and borrowing like crazy!! well, then come talk to me about the small pittance they are wasting on healthcare for the poor and sick, social security for the old and feeble, housing and food for the poor families!
Originally posted by dawnstarwe aren't the problem weather we are libs or cons....they are!!!
When was the last time the government ever discontinued a temporary tax?
Originally posted by BellaSabre
The $5.25 per month, (or $63 per year) is the maximum amount that will be charged, and it is scheduled to last for three years, then will be discontinued.
Originally posted by woodsmom
reply to post by milominderbinder
My entire life I have been around hard working people who put in their own blood sweat and tears to better their circumstances. now I see a lot of people who's life skills include 'making it to level 20 of Halo, man'.
Guess who was out there at 10:00 at night chucking laundry with me in the rain. It was the OWNER in all his flanneled glory, not the little spoiled brats who only came into the state to party for the summer. He created those jobs, without his evil company, I would have been homeless for 6 years.
But none of that matters right, as long as someone is still working to pay for everyone else's freebies we will all be alright.
My point is that I am tired of everyone begging for handouts. I don't think that my family should have to pay, yet again for someone else. If we chose to do so, great that is our choice.
I really don't appreciate people who don't even live here make the blanket statement that we should have to pay more because Obamacare is going to save the healthcare system.
So, let me get this straight. This is a long sentence. We’re going to be gifted with a healthcare plan that we’re forced to purchase and fined if we don’t, which purportedly covers at least 10 million more people without adding a single doctor but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents, written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn’t understand it, passed by a Congress that didn’t read it but exempted themselves from it, and signed by a President who smokes — [laughter] — same sentence! — with funding administered by a Treasury chief who didn’t pay his taxes, for which we will be taxed for four years before any benefits take effect, by a government that has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare, all to be overseen by a Surgeon General who is obese — [laughter] — and finally, financed by a country that’s broke.
Originally posted by DarthMuerte
When was the last time the government ever discontinued a temporary tax?
Originally posted by BellaSabre
The $5.25 per month, (or $63 per year) is the maximum amount that will be charged, and it is scheduled to last for three years, then will be discontinued.
How can tax revenues increase when household incomes are declining? Transfer more of the national income to taxes and that leaves less for savings, investment and consumption. The economy contracts, reducing the workforce and wages further.
If that isn't a death spiral, it is a close approximation of one.
Calls to increase taxes on the rich are highly popular with people who are not rich. This is understandable; those of us who do pay income taxes naturally feel we already pay enough and some wealthier person could cough up a few more bucks without undue sacrifice.
And of course those who pay no Federal income tax at all--about half the populace--are also in favor of unnamed "rich people" paying more, though since they have no "skin in the game" because they pay no Federal income taxes, their views are somewhat detached from the entire debate.
Clearly, $1.5 trillion annual Federal deficits to fund the Status Quo--fully 10% of the nation's GDP--is unsustainable. Eventually, the ad hoc "solutions" currently being pushed by the Federal Reserve--zero interest rates to keep borrowing costs artificially low and money-printing operations that buy Treasury debt--will encounter political and/or market pressures which will limit the marginal effectiveness of these interventions, and the real cost of these historically unprecedented deficits will trigger a host of unintended consequences--all negative.
Everyone knows there are only two ways to bring deficits back to sustainable levels: skim more tax revenues from the national income or cut spending on the massive Status Quo programs of Defense/National Security, Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security. The rest of the Federal programs so reviled by various constituencies are a relative drop in the bucket.
The parasitic financial Elite don't do any "work" in the sense of something beneficial for society, as no voluntary payment for their services exists.
If a parasite's entire income is leeched from the productive, then isn't their entire income a tax on those creating value? In this sense, the share of the parasite's income which is carved off by the Central State as tax revenues is a secondary tax: the parasite's entire income is a tax on the economy.
This distinction between legitimate wealth derived from value creation (think Steve Jobs/computer industry) and parasitic wealth skimmed from the productive (think Mitt Romney/investment banker) is the heart of Correspondent James B.'s insightful inquiry into the question: can the parasitic Elite be said to pay taxes at all, given that their income is itself a tax on legitimate wealth creation?