Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why cut taxes?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Uncle Ted
    replied
    The dems are taking it better than I thought...









    Yeah, y'all need to vote these guys out and then get congress to raise the corporate tax rate to 85%+. That will show those rich b*turds!

    Leave a comment:


  • Moliere
    replied
    Originally posted by Uncle Ted View Post
    Well, so much for the dems adjourn motion...

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...delay-tax-vote
    Ha! While I don't approve of how the bill was passed, I find it funny that these senators can't read cursive handwriting (which apparently, at least according to many congressional tweeters, isn't all that unusual to have on a bill )

    Leave a comment:


  • Uncle Ted
    replied
    What are the odds the house doesn't pass the 'massive tax cuts for the rich' senate bill?

    Senate Passes Massive Tax Cuts For The Rich In Middle Of The Night

    Leave a comment:


  • Uncle Ted
    replied
    Originally posted by Moliere View Post
    Is it ironic that the Democrats are complaining about the tax bill being over 400 pages and the bill being pushed through quickly without people being given time to read it?
    Well, so much for the dems adjourn motion...

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...delay-tax-vote

    Leave a comment:


  • Jeff Lebowski
    replied
    Originally posted by Moliere View Post
    Is it ironic that the Democrats are complaining about the tax bill being over 400 pages and the bill being pushed through quickly without people being given time to read it?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Yes

    Leave a comment:


  • Moliere
    replied
    Why cut taxes?

    Is it ironic that the Democrats are complaining about the tax bill being over 400 pages and the bill being pushed through quickly without people being given time to read it?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • Katy Lied
    replied
    My strategy: Helloooo MacDonalds with your cradle-to-grave minimum wage program!

    Leave a comment:


  • Uncle Ted
    replied
    Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
    I am joking. I am not relying on it at all.

    I know far too many people who will have SS and little or nothing else. Scary.
    I am banking on SS to pay for my gambling habit.

    Leave a comment:


  • PaloAltoCougar
    replied
    Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
    I am joking. I am not relying on it at all.

    I know far too many people who will have SS and little or nothing else. Scary.

    Ditto. Although I hit full retirement age in eight months, I won't starting drawing for awhile, and perhaps wait until I'm compelled by law to start drawing down at 70. But I do think the retirement age should be pushed back starting in a few years and even then having it phased in gradually. It was pushed back for most of us a few years ago.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jeff Lebowski
    replied
    Originally posted by cowboy View Post
    Question for all you guys: How many of your colleagues have enough saved (or can save enough before retirement) that they can retire at 65 and live for 2-5 years on their own savings? That's what needs to happen, but when smart guys like you express the opinion you have, even though it may be partially in jest, I don't know how we get there from here.
    I am joking. I am not relying on it at all.

    I know far too many people who will have SS and little or nothing else. Scary.

    Leave a comment:


  • cowboy
    replied
    Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
    Yes. But not for another decade!
    Originally posted by creekster View Post
    Exactly. That is precisely how I feel and the problem.
    Originally posted by PaloAltoCougar View Post
    I'm concerned for future generations, and thus would extend the retirement age beginning at the end of next year.
    Question for all you guys: How many of your colleagues have enough saved (or can save enough before retirement) that they can retire at 65 and live for 2-5 years on their own savings? That's what needs to happen, but when smart guys like you express the opinion you have, even though it may be partially in jest, I don't know how we get there from here.

    Leave a comment:


  • PaloAltoCougar
    replied
    Originally posted by creekster View Post
    Exactly. That is precisely how I feel and the problem.
    I'm concerned for future generations, and thus would extend the retirement age beginning at the end of next year.

    Leave a comment:


  • creekster
    replied
    Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
    Yes. But not for another decade!
    Exactly. That is precisely how I feel and the problem.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jeff Lebowski
    replied
    Originally posted by Moliere View Post
    Wow. Love me some liberal fearmongering.

    Ha, everyone should be in favor of structural changes to SS and Medicare. As people live and work longer due to advancements in technology and society, we shouldn’t be paying retired people from SS funds for 25+ years. Does anyone really think the retirement age shouldn’t creep up over the next decade or two?
    Yes. But not for another decade!

    Leave a comment:


  • Moliere
    replied
    Why cut taxes?

    The only thing that’s new here is the explicit admission by a Republican officeholder that this is the GOP’s master plan to eviscerate the welfare and retirement of American workers
    Wow. Love me some liberal fearmongering.

    Ha, everyone should be in favor of structural changes to SS and Medicare. As people live and work longer due to advancements in technology and society, we shouldn’t be paying retired people from SS funds for 25+ years. Does anyone really think the retirement age shouldn’t creep up over the next decade or two?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Moliere; 11-30-2017, 08:06 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X