I just realized today that the only thing that has no tax is the air we breathe. We pay tax for driving in highways, we pay tax for eating food (from cooking or in restaurants), we even pay for the water we use when we use the restrooms. What else don't have tax?

let me guess, hhmmm, i guess you don't pay your taxes when you are sleeping..LOL

We are also being taxed because of a war. Something the American people had no say in. We weren't allowed to vote "Yes or No" to go to war. They don't give a **** what we think, but they'll take our money, that's not a problem.

That's what you should be complaining about...

Originally Posted by TheTrueHuman

We are also being taxed because of a war. Something the American people had no say in. We weren't allowed to vote "Yes or No" to go to war. They don't give a **** what we think, but they'll take our money, that's not a problem.

That's what you should be complaining about...

Good point

Originally Posted by TheTrueHuman

We are also being taxed because of a war. Something the American people had no say in. We weren't allowed to vote "Yes or No" to go to war. They don't give a **** what we think, but they'll take our money, that's not a problem.

That's what you should be complaining about...

Your right they didn't have multiple votes in the senate from senators that you voted for (or had the opportunity to vote for) to go to war. [/sarcasm]

And furthermore, I love how people make such ridiculous statements and people just accepts them as fact. Show me where are taxes went up because of this war? I'll give you a hint *You can't. In fact Bush lowered our taxes.

i guess you don't pay your taxes when you are sleeping

Oh you think so !?
Of course you are. You pay taxes on the money you owe, so when you sleep, as your money brings interest, you pay taxes on them.

Aren't they trying to tack a lot of "other" things on to the current war appropriations bill right now?? I would love to see the amendments done away with entirely, if your budget request can't stand up on it's own you don't get it.. I would also like to see a line item veto added for the same reason..

They were just talking about this on the radio yesterday.. I'm just too busy to find the amount they wanted to tack on the to bill.. And if it goes through I bet it gets counted as money spent on the war effort and not as money tacked on by greedy congresspeople..

Me myself I am for the fair tax law; you should read about it if you don't know what it is.

Originally Posted by jv17

let me guess, hhmmm, i guess you don't pay your taxes when you are sleeping..LOL

If you are sleeping in a hotel, you are paying hotel taxes to sleep. If you are in a home you own, property tax. Maybe renting does have its advantages, though in all fairness you paid income tax on the money you used for rent.

I'd say sex is tax free, unless you are using a state certified brothel. Then again, when you think of how many drinks and dinners you buy your date before getting busy, I guess there is a use of taxed income. A wife is much closer to the break even point, and may even weigh in your favor financially and tax wise, until the divorce that is.

Surfing is tax free so long as you stole or inherited your surf board.

Regarding the difference between Republicans and Democrats, the Republicans need a war to increase spending, Democrats do it as a matter of principal. Republicans won't raise taxes (in principal) even with an increase in spending. Democrats raise taxes regardless of any increase in spending, if only because they feel the rich are too rich and need to be taxed more.

Originally Posted by jabo

I just realized today that the only thing that has no tax is the air we breathe. We pay tax for driving in highways, we pay tax for eating food (from cooking or in restaurants), we even pay for the water we use when we use the restrooms. What else don't have tax?

We pay taxes for driving on highways because somebody had to pay to build those highways in order for us to drive on them. The same can be said for most things - if some idiot falls asleep with a cigarette burning, the fire department will come put his house out. If a murderer comes through your town, the police arrest and imprison him, keeping society as a whole safe. You could have no taxes at all if you could accept living in complete anarchy, and doing everything for yourself - I don't think many people would be very happy with that option. Roads and highways are built, but they need upkeep, and I don't think you're going to volunteer to do it.

I pay my taxes. I'm not enthusiastic, but I make it happen. It's all of our moral responsibility to, since we all enjoy the benefits (at least some of) of living in civilized society.

Originally Posted by Cheshire_cat

And furthermore, I love how people make such ridiculous statements and people just accepts them as fact. Show me where are taxes went up because of this war? I'll give you a hint *You can't. In fact Bush lowered our taxes.

1. Reconstruction - rebuilding all of what we destroyed.
2. Paying for ongoing medical care for the tens of thousands of US casualties - injured soldiers.
3. Etc etc etc etc. The Iraq war costs the US taxpayer $341 million a day.

What you're objecting to is that GWB has been robbing Peter to pay Paul. The tax payers are still left holding the check - it's just that so many other expenditures (on things like police, etc) have been cut. While we're paying for someone else's dinner, we stopped buying anything to drink, to hide the overall cost. But we're still paying for the war, to the tune of $500 billion, and we're not getting a lot of other basic services because of it. Things like no national guard in many of our recent disasters.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

We pay taxes for driving on highways because somebody had to pay to build those highways in order for us to drive on them. The same can be said for most things - if some idiot falls asleep with a cigarette burning, the fire department will come put his house out. If a murderer comes through your town, the police arrest and imprison him, keeping society as a whole safe. You could have no taxes at all if you could accept living in complete anarchy, and doing everything for yourself - I don't think many people would be very happy with that option. Roads and highways are built, but they need upkeep, and I don't think you're going to volunteer to do it.

good point and I also pay my taxes properly. And it is ok as long as every cent that I give goes on to something useful.. Wait, there are no such things as countries spending taxpayers money well....

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

Reconstruction - rebuilding all of what we destroyed.

1. Paying for ongoing medical care for the tens of thousands of US casualties - injured soldiers.
2. Etc etc etc etc. The Iraq war costs the US taxpayer $341 million a day.

What you're objecting to is that GWB has been robbing Peter to pay Paul. The tax payers are still left holding the check - it's just that so many other expenditures (on things like police, etc) have been cut. While we're paying for someone else's dinner, we stopped buying anything to drink, to hide the overall cost. But we're still paying for the war, to the tune of $500 billion, and we're not getting a lot of other basic services because of it. Things like no national guard in many of our recent disasters.

I said to show me were taxes went up due to the war. And they haven't.

Originally Posted by Cheshire_cat

I said to show me were taxes went up due to the war. And they haven't.

Of course they have, you just have to peel back the Enron (friend of Bush) style accounting. Taxes remain constant, we stop getting virtually anything back for our tax money.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

Of course they have, you just have to peel back the Enron (friend of Bush) style accounting. Taxes remain constant, we stop getting virtually anything back for our tax money.

What are we not getting now that we were getting before?

Originally Posted by Cheshire_cat

What are we not getting now that we were getting before?

WASHINGTON - Governors of both parties said Sunday that Bush administration policies were stripping the National Guard of equipment and personnel needed to respond to hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, forest fires and other emergencies.

Tens of thousands of National Guard members have been sent to Iraq, along with much of the equipment needed to deal with natural disasters and terrorist threats in the United States, the governors said here at the winter meeting of the National Governors Association.
The National Guard, which traces its roots to the colonial militia, has a dual federal-state role. Governors normally command the Guard in their states, but Guard members deployed overseas in support of a federal mission are under the control of the president.

The governors said they would present their concerns to President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Monday. In a preview of their message, all 50 governors signed a letter to the president opposing any cuts in the size of the National Guard.

"Unfortunately," the letter said, "when our National Guard men and women return from being deployed in foreign theaters, much of their equipment remains behind." The governors said the White House must immediately re-equip Guard units "to carry out their homeland security and domestic disaster duties."

Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, a Republican and chairman of the governors association, said: "The National Guard plays an incredibly valuable role in the states. What we are concerned about, as governors, is that when our troops are deployed for long periods of time, and their equipment goes with them but does not come back, the troops are very strained, and they no longer have the equipment they were trained to use."

Nearly one-third of the American ground forces in Iraq are members of the Army National Guard.

There was a storm called Katrina, where we paid $10,000 per day for Blackwater toy soldiers to stand in for the National Guard, who had been sent to Iraq.


After that, a fairly important bridge in Minnesota was felled, because domestic infrastructure is a lesser priority than Iraqi nation building.


After that, you might remember another catastrophic storm and the Republican governor complaining that her people were dying, and the National Guard was desperately needed, but off in Iraq. The Bush administration responded that the governor didn't request help "through the proper channels".


But all this is besides the point. The $340 million a day we're spending in Iraq is paid for by American tax money. This is undenyable. It's patently obvious that 2 things could have happened to that money we're pouring into the fire. Either we could have done something useful with it, or we could have reduced taxes for all Americans by a total of $340 million per day.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

There was a storm called Katrina, where we paid $10,000 per day for Blackwater toy soldiers to stand in for the National Guard, who had been sent to Iraq.

What are you getting at? I thought the big expenditure on Katrina was all the money many of the Louisiana residents defrauded the government out of.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

After that, a fairly important bridge in Minnesota was felled, because domestic infrastructure is a lesser priority than Iraqi nation building.

State issue. Not sure what that has to do with Iraq.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

But all this is besides the point. The $340 million a day we're spending in Iraq is paid for by American tax money. This is undenyable. It's patently obvious that 2 things could have happened to that money we're pouring into the fire. Either we could have done something useful with it, or we could have reduced taxes for all Americans by a total of $340 million per day.

We did something useful with it, just like Reagan did something useful with the obscene amounts of money he spent on the arms race, but unlike the money Kennedy and Johnson wasted on Vietnam. Why is the money only spent on something useful if it is spent on something advocated by the Democrats?

Originally Posted by Cheshire_cat

I said to show me were taxes went up due to the war. And they haven't.

Two words: Deficit spending. Which started back in full force when Dubya took office. Which "paid" for that "tax rebate". Nine trillion dollars worth of borrowing since Reagan took office that is already crippling our economy. Fewer and fewer people think I'm mad for thinking we're already in the beginning throes of a depression. Had we gotten our refineries back up and running, tapped our oil reserves, and focused our military attention entirely on al Qaeda the war would have been over and any Middle Eastern countries we didn't like would have been economically crippled.

tim

Originally Posted by cbwm

State issue. Not sure what that has to do with Iraq.

I think that there are lots better more activities which are far more important than Iraq. Money spent in Iraq could have built schools and hospitals and could have given teenagers better education and health.

You guys are missing the point. The thread is about paying taxes not spending, If your argument is that W (and the senate/house) could have spent the money better, yes I agree with you. But I was responding to a very specific false statement

We are also being taxed because of a war.

The reality is that we are not paying for it, like someone said we are going in debt because of it, but taxes have gone down since Bush took office thats a fact.

Going into debt means paying taxes (and interest!) in the future. We're also not getting value for most of our tax money today because GWB is robbing Peter to pay Paul for his Iraq adventure.

There's nothing about tax cuts, hikes, or rebates in

We are also being taxed because of a war.

The $341 million dollars a day being funded by the American tax payer, who's left holding the bill. That much is undeniable.