WHO is Jesus?
- Thread starter Angelic Me!
- Start date
- Status
Lalli
Well-known member
read what i wrote, she was asking why im disrespecting my beliefs and livin in the UK and i gave a simple answer how hard is it to understand, just like you dont want your taxes spent on helping poor people i dont want mine spent on funding a war. wat bit dont u understand
pumpkincat210
Well-known member
Quote:
Don't U.K. taxes help fund the war? Last time I checked they were #2 after the U.S.
| Originally Posted by Lalli read what i wrote, she was asking why im disrespecting my beliefs and livin in the UK and i gave a simple answer how hard is it to understand, just like you dont want your taxes spent on helping poor people i dont want mine spent on funding a war. wat bit dont u understand |
Don't U.K. taxes help fund the war? Last time I checked they were #2 after the U.S.
Hawkeye
Well-known member
Lalli, It doesn't matter what YOU want to do with YOUR tax money. YOUR taxes is YOUR money going to YOUR government which does what IT wants with YOUR money. You have absolutely NO control over where your tax money is being spent.
EX: I DESPISE with a passion the fact that MY tax money goes to people on welfare who "say they need it" but rather they would use the money on other things like say a porche or because they are too damn lazy to go out and get a job. I DESPISE with a passion that my tax money is going to the funding of social security.
However, no matter what I personally do, just because I don't like it it doesn't mean I can call President Bush up say, " Listen, I don't like this so I'm gonna stop paying taxes." He probably will be like OK whatever but the IRS is gonna come and throw me in Fed Prison.
Just because you don't want it to happen doesnt mean it isn't happening.
Politicans don't care what you personally say. They care about poll numbers. England is America's partner in this war and whether you like it or not honey, YOUR tax money-is being spent on this war.
EX: I DESPISE with a passion the fact that MY tax money goes to people on welfare who "say they need it" but rather they would use the money on other things like say a porche or because they are too damn lazy to go out and get a job. I DESPISE with a passion that my tax money is going to the funding of social security.
However, no matter what I personally do, just because I don't like it it doesn't mean I can call President Bush up say, " Listen, I don't like this so I'm gonna stop paying taxes." He probably will be like OK whatever but the IRS is gonna come and throw me in Fed Prison.
Just because you don't want it to happen doesnt mean it isn't happening.
Politicans don't care what you personally say. They care about poll numbers. England is America's partner in this war and whether you like it or not honey, YOUR tax money-is being spent on this war.
pumpkincat210
Well-known member
Quote:
Crap, don't YOU yell at me... i misread. Your funding of the war would go to solely the rebuilding, but since the insurgents feel the need to blow up everyone, the money will go to guns to defend ourselves.
| Originally Posted by Lalli ah cant you read, I DONT WANT MY TAXES FUNDING A WAR, |
Crap, don't YOU yell at me... i misread. Your funding of the war would go to solely the rebuilding, but since the insurgents feel the need to blow up everyone, the money will go to guns to defend ourselves.
pumpkincat210
Well-known member
youbeabitch said:
Hawkeye
Well-known member
I just have majors issues with it. I hate how it's being run, I think there will be absolutely no social security for MY retirement yet I'm paying for other people to retire comfortably...here is pretty much how I sum it up (thanks also to the person I borrowed this from who explains it much better than I)
For their entire working lives they had 14% of their earnings ripped off as a Social Security "contribution." In time they will find out that if they are actually lucky enough to get any of this money back when they reach the age of about 70 or so, they will have realized a return of less than 2% on their "investment.'
Social Security is running out of money. Depending on who you listen to, in about 15 to 18 years Social Security taxes will not be sufficient to pay the Social Security benefits to the people then receiving them. At this point the government will have only a few options. Here are the choices:
Extend the retirement age in hopes that many more Americans will actually do the government the favor of dying before they can collect any or all of their benefits.
Deny Social Security benefits to those who worked hard and made good financial decisions in their lives, thereby insuring themselves a sufficient retirement income outside of Social Security. No ... their "contributions" will not be refunded.
Extend the wage base for taxes so that achievement-oriented Americans can poor even more money into this financial sewer; more money that they will never, ever get back.
You do know, don't you, that there is absolutely no legal guarantee that you will receive one single penny of the money that is taken from you. No guarantee at all. The congress can vote tomorrow to end the system and keep every dollar that has been paid in Social Security taxes. There would be nothing you could do about it. Nothing except, that is, to vote against the jerk who stole your money. All your local politician would have to do is come up with a little pork for the district or state and everything would be forgiven.
And just which group of Americans is hurt the most by Social Security? Black males. If you're a black male this is the ultimate "disrespect." You're being ripped off big time.
Explanation: Divide the people who have been paying Social Security taxes for the past 40 years into four basic groups. White Males, black males, white females, black females. Statistics will show that of these four demographic groups white females have the longest life expectancy; black males the shortest. In 2002 the life expectancy for a newborn white female was 79.9 years. The life expectancy of a newborn black male was 68.8 years. If you were born after 1960 your Social Security full retirement age is 67. This means that a black male can expect to get Social Security benefits for about two years, while a white female can expect to receive those benefits for almost 13 years. You do the math. even if you went to a government school you can figure out that the average white female will receive Social Security benefits 11 years longer than the average black male. It has been estimated that during his lifetime the average black male will lose about $10,000 in income that will be forcibly transferred to a white woman.
The solution? Privatization! If you own your own account it can't be taken from you or your family and given to some stranger living in a retirement community in Palm Desert, California. If you have the misfortune to die before the law allows you to start withdrawing retirement benefits from your account the money goes to your family. Isn't that the way you would want it? Wouldn't you want that money to be spent to make your spouse or children rather than someone you didn't know and who might not have even given you the time of day if you had known them during life?
This is absurd, folks. We're supposed to be living in free country that recognizes property rights. You own you, not the government. You work for you, not for some stranger. In a free country your government should not seize your money by force and put it into a phony "retirement" fund that earns you a sub-par rate of return and to which you have no legal right beyond what politicians are willing to grant. When you die the money you earned during life shouldn't be seized by government to be transferred to another individual you don't know while your family scrambles about looking for a way to keep their home and pay for your funeral, but that's exactly what the AARP is fighting for.
You do know what happened in Chile, don't you? Chile, for God's sake! They got it right!
Chile used to have a Social Security system that was a virtual copy of ours. Chile, however, didn't have an AARP. What Chile did have was politicians who realized that their system was doomed to collapse, and who did something about it. Chile privatized every individual's retirement benefits. The former Chilean secretary of labor says that Chile first "ended the illusion that both the employer and the worker contribute to retirement." That's a huge step. The dumb masses in America still actually believe that their employers actually "contribute" a matching amount to their Social Security "account." It's those government schools again.
Americans even believe that there's actually a Social Security trust fund. Yesterday's USA Today story about the AARP's opposition to privatization contained this line: "Excess payroll taxes are held in a trust fund for future benefit payments." That's just flat-out wrong. USA Today reporter Jim Drinkard either knows it's wrong, and lied intentionally, or he's not bright enough to be writing for a national newspaper. There is no Social Security money being held anywhere. It's all spent. Every single penny. What the politicians don't have to spend on current Social Security benefits they seize and spend on their various spend-and-elect schemes.
Today in Chile workers pay 10% of their pretax earnings into their own retirement plans. They can elect to pay an additional 10% in pretax earnings if they wish. The companies who manage these funds are prohibited by law from engaging in any other type of business. The sole business purpose of these companies is to take these privately owned retirement accounts and grow them. If they die before the retirement age the money goes to their families. If Chileans live to retirement age they have three options:
Purchase a family annuity from a life insurance company.
Leave their funds in a personal account and make monthly withdrawals adjusted to match their life expectancy.
Any combination of 1 and 2.
The government steps in to guarantee a "minimum pension" for people who have worked at least 20 years and who's benefits don't meet the minimum monthly amount required by the Chilean law.
In Chile 95% of workers participate in the private plan. In America 100% of workers don't have that option, and the AARP is doing everything it can to make sure they never do.
Thanks, AARP. If younger Americans ever figure out what an enemy to their financial future you truly are things may change and you may lose that grip you have on government.
For their entire working lives they had 14% of their earnings ripped off as a Social Security "contribution." In time they will find out that if they are actually lucky enough to get any of this money back when they reach the age of about 70 or so, they will have realized a return of less than 2% on their "investment.'
Social Security is running out of money. Depending on who you listen to, in about 15 to 18 years Social Security taxes will not be sufficient to pay the Social Security benefits to the people then receiving them. At this point the government will have only a few options. Here are the choices:
Extend the retirement age in hopes that many more Americans will actually do the government the favor of dying before they can collect any or all of their benefits.
Deny Social Security benefits to those who worked hard and made good financial decisions in their lives, thereby insuring themselves a sufficient retirement income outside of Social Security. No ... their "contributions" will not be refunded.
Extend the wage base for taxes so that achievement-oriented Americans can poor even more money into this financial sewer; more money that they will never, ever get back.
You do know, don't you, that there is absolutely no legal guarantee that you will receive one single penny of the money that is taken from you. No guarantee at all. The congress can vote tomorrow to end the system and keep every dollar that has been paid in Social Security taxes. There would be nothing you could do about it. Nothing except, that is, to vote against the jerk who stole your money. All your local politician would have to do is come up with a little pork for the district or state and everything would be forgiven.
And just which group of Americans is hurt the most by Social Security? Black males. If you're a black male this is the ultimate "disrespect." You're being ripped off big time.
Explanation: Divide the people who have been paying Social Security taxes for the past 40 years into four basic groups. White Males, black males, white females, black females. Statistics will show that of these four demographic groups white females have the longest life expectancy; black males the shortest. In 2002 the life expectancy for a newborn white female was 79.9 years. The life expectancy of a newborn black male was 68.8 years. If you were born after 1960 your Social Security full retirement age is 67. This means that a black male can expect to get Social Security benefits for about two years, while a white female can expect to receive those benefits for almost 13 years. You do the math. even if you went to a government school you can figure out that the average white female will receive Social Security benefits 11 years longer than the average black male. It has been estimated that during his lifetime the average black male will lose about $10,000 in income that will be forcibly transferred to a white woman.
The solution? Privatization! If you own your own account it can't be taken from you or your family and given to some stranger living in a retirement community in Palm Desert, California. If you have the misfortune to die before the law allows you to start withdrawing retirement benefits from your account the money goes to your family. Isn't that the way you would want it? Wouldn't you want that money to be spent to make your spouse or children rather than someone you didn't know and who might not have even given you the time of day if you had known them during life?
This is absurd, folks. We're supposed to be living in free country that recognizes property rights. You own you, not the government. You work for you, not for some stranger. In a free country your government should not seize your money by force and put it into a phony "retirement" fund that earns you a sub-par rate of return and to which you have no legal right beyond what politicians are willing to grant. When you die the money you earned during life shouldn't be seized by government to be transferred to another individual you don't know while your family scrambles about looking for a way to keep their home and pay for your funeral, but that's exactly what the AARP is fighting for.
You do know what happened in Chile, don't you? Chile, for God's sake! They got it right!
Chile used to have a Social Security system that was a virtual copy of ours. Chile, however, didn't have an AARP. What Chile did have was politicians who realized that their system was doomed to collapse, and who did something about it. Chile privatized every individual's retirement benefits. The former Chilean secretary of labor says that Chile first "ended the illusion that both the employer and the worker contribute to retirement." That's a huge step. The dumb masses in America still actually believe that their employers actually "contribute" a matching amount to their Social Security "account." It's those government schools again.
Americans even believe that there's actually a Social Security trust fund. Yesterday's USA Today story about the AARP's opposition to privatization contained this line: "Excess payroll taxes are held in a trust fund for future benefit payments." That's just flat-out wrong. USA Today reporter Jim Drinkard either knows it's wrong, and lied intentionally, or he's not bright enough to be writing for a national newspaper. There is no Social Security money being held anywhere. It's all spent. Every single penny. What the politicians don't have to spend on current Social Security benefits they seize and spend on their various spend-and-elect schemes.
Today in Chile workers pay 10% of their pretax earnings into their own retirement plans. They can elect to pay an additional 10% in pretax earnings if they wish. The companies who manage these funds are prohibited by law from engaging in any other type of business. The sole business purpose of these companies is to take these privately owned retirement accounts and grow them. If they die before the retirement age the money goes to their families. If Chileans live to retirement age they have three options:
Purchase a family annuity from a life insurance company.
Leave their funds in a personal account and make monthly withdrawals adjusted to match their life expectancy.
Any combination of 1 and 2.
The government steps in to guarantee a "minimum pension" for people who have worked at least 20 years and who's benefits don't meet the minimum monthly amount required by the Chilean law.
In Chile 95% of workers participate in the private plan. In America 100% of workers don't have that option, and the AARP is doing everything it can to make sure they never do.
Thanks, AARP. If younger Americans ever figure out what an enemy to their financial future you truly are things may change and you may lose that grip you have on government.
pumpkincat210
Well-known member
Quote:
omg. i had no idea the AARP were so bad. Thanks for this info, i'm going to look into this. I heard that Social Security would run out before 2020.
| Originally Posted by youbeabitch I just have majors issues with it. I hate how it's being run, I think there will be absolutely no social security for MY retirement yet I'm paying for other people to retire comfortably...here is pretty much how I sum it up (thanks also to the person I borrowed this from who explains it much better than I) For their entire working lives they had 14% of their earnings ripped off as a Social Security "contribution." In time they will find out that if they are actually lucky enough to get any of this money back when they reach the age of about 70 or so, they will have realized a return of less than 2% on their "investment.' Social Security is running out of money. Depending on who you listen to, in about 15 to 18 years Social Security taxes will not be sufficient to pay the Social Security benefits to the people then receiving them. At this point the government will have only a few options. Here are the choices: Extend the retirement age in hopes that many more Americans will actually do the government the favor of dying before they can collect any or all of their benefits. Deny Social Security benefits to those who worked hard and made good financial decisions in their lives, thereby insuring themselves a sufficient retirement income outside of Social Security. No ... their "contributions" will not be refunded. Extend the wage base for taxes so that achievement-oriented Americans can poor even more money into this financial sewer; more money that they will never, ever get back. You do know, don't you, that there is absolutely no legal guarantee that you will receive one single penny of the money that is taken from you. No guarantee at all. The congress can vote tomorrow to end the system and keep every dollar that has been paid in Social Security taxes. There would be nothing you could do about it. Nothing except, that is, to vote against the jerk who stole your money. All your local politician would have to do is come up with a little pork for the district or state and everything would be forgiven. And just which group of Americans is hurt the most by Social Security? Black males. If you're a black male this is the ultimate "disrespect." You're being ripped off big time. Explanation: Divide the people who have been paying Social Security taxes for the past 40 years into four basic groups. White Males, black males, white females, black females. Statistics will show that of these four demographic groups white females have the longest life expectancy; black males the shortest. In 2002 the life expectancy for a newborn white female was 79.9 years. The life expectancy of a newborn black male was 68.8 years. If you were born after 1960 your Social Security full retirement age is 67. This means that a black male can expect to get Social Security benefits for about two years, while a white female can expect to receive those benefits for almost 13 years. You do the math. even if you went to a government school you can figure out that the average white female will receive Social Security benefits 11 years longer than the average black male. It has been estimated that during his lifetime the average black male will lose about $10,000 in income that will be forcibly transferred to a white woman. The solution? Privatization! If you own your own account it can't be taken from you or your family and given to some stranger living in a retirement community in Palm Desert, California. If you have the misfortune to die before the law allows you to start withdrawing retirement benefits from your account the money goes to your family. Isn't that the way you would want it? Wouldn't you want that money to be spent to make your spouse or children rather than someone you didn't know and who might not have even given you the time of day if you had known them during life? This is absurd, folks. We're supposed to be living in free country that recognizes property rights. You own you, not the government. You work for you, not for some stranger. In a free country your government should not seize your money by force and put it into a phony "retirement" fund that earns you a sub-par rate of return and to which you have no legal right beyond what politicians are willing to grant. When you die the money you earned during life shouldn't be seized by government to be transferred to another individual you don't know while your family scrambles about looking for a way to keep their home and pay for your funeral, but that's exactly what the AARP is fighting for. You do know what happened in Chile, don't you? Chile, for God's sake! They got it right! Chile used to have a Social Security system that was a virtual copy of ours. Chile, however, didn't have an AARP. What Chile did have was politicians who realized that their system was doomed to collapse, and who did something about it. Chile privatized every individual's retirement benefits. The former Chilean secretary of labor says that Chile first "ended the illusion that both the employer and the worker contribute to retirement." That's a huge step. The dumb masses in America still actually believe that their employers actually "contribute" a matching amount to their Social Security "account." It's those government schools again. Americans even believe that there's actually a Social Security trust fund. Yesterday's USA Today story about the AARP's opposition to privatization contained this line: "Excess payroll taxes are held in a trust fund for future benefit payments." That's just flat-out wrong. USA Today reporter Jim Drinkard either knows it's wrong, and lied intentionally, or he's not bright enough to be writing for a national newspaper. There is no Social Security money being held anywhere. It's all spent. Every single penny. What the politicians don't have to spend on current Social Security benefits they seize and spend on their various spend-and-elect schemes. Today in Chile workers pay 10% of their pretax earnings into their own retirement plans. They can elect to pay an additional 10% in pretax earnings if they wish. The companies who manage these funds are prohibited by law from engaging in any other type of business. The sole business purpose of these companies is to take these privately owned retirement accounts and grow them. If they die before the retirement age the money goes to their families. If Chileans live to retirement age they have three options: Purchase a family annuity from a life insurance company. Leave their funds in a personal account and make monthly withdrawals adjusted to match their life expectancy. Any combination of 1 and 2. The government steps in to guarantee a "minimum pension" for people who have worked at least 20 years and who's benefits don't meet the minimum monthly amount required by the Chilean law. In Chile 95% of workers participate in the private plan. In America 100% of workers don't have that option, and the AARP is doing everything it can to make sure they never do. Thanks, AARP. If younger Americans ever figure out what an enemy to their financial future you truly are things may change and you may lose that grip you have on government. |
omg. i had no idea the AARP were so bad. Thanks for this info, i'm going to look into this. I heard that Social Security would run out before 2020.
Hawkeye
Well-known member
The thing is that todays culture-we're more in tune to things that seriously do not matter (I mean come on, who really thinks that Britney Spears new haircut is going to change our lives?) Politicians LOVE this because they know that we have no clue as to what is actually affecting our lives.
The Eminate domain situation for example-there wasnt a huge uproar about it until it started to be actually practiced.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...6/210243.shtml
is a nice place to get started
The Eminate domain situation for example-there wasnt a huge uproar about it until it started to be actually practiced.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...6/210243.shtml
is a nice place to get started
pumpkincat210
Well-known member
Quote:
Oh my barf. This is particularly scary. I actually know something on this because in a genealogy study i found out sandra day o'connor was my 7th cousin. Since then I always tried to stay up to date on her supreme court decisions. At first I had to admit she was wayyy more conservative than me. Over time she did mellow a little. (she is for the right to abortion and against the new immenent domain crap).
I have also run into the immenent domain law on a search for America's castles recently.. http://www.dupontcastle.com/castles/
It is a very real and frightening problem.
| Originally Posted by youbeabitch The thing is that todays culture-we're more in tune to things that seriously do not matter (I mean come on, who really thinks that Britney Spears new haircut is going to change our lives?) Politicians LOVE this because they know that we have no clue as to what is actually affecting our lives. The Eminate domain situation for example-there wasnt a huge uproar about it until it started to be actually practiced. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...6/210243.shtml is a nice place to get started
|
Oh my barf. This is particularly scary. I actually know something on this because in a genealogy study i found out sandra day o'connor was my 7th cousin. Since then I always tried to stay up to date on her supreme court decisions. At first I had to admit she was wayyy more conservative than me. Over time she did mellow a little. (she is for the right to abortion and against the new immenent domain crap).
I have also run into the immenent domain law on a search for America's castles recently.. http://www.dupontcastle.com/castles/
It is a very real and frightening problem.
Hawkeye
Well-known member
Oh yes, we have MANY big problems that need to be corrected so desperately. Our tax system, the eminate domain, right now there is a bill before congress that is saying you cannot have the right to burn flags-even though I find the act dispictable myself its the government telling you what you can and cannot do. If that bill passes-just what else can pass?
The school system is another problem the government has. It's very scary unnerving how few people know about many things that can really impact them
The school system is another problem the government has. It's very scary unnerving how few people know about many things that can really impact them
Lalli
Well-known member
im a studen i work part time i dont pay taxes YET. my mum and dad do, id rather see my money spent on calming the gun amnesty in our country getting rid of all the homeless and providing them with places to stay and better job oppurtunities, and giving aid to those who need it. War is not needed.
Quote:
Quote:
| Originally Posted by youbeabitch What do you think taxes should be spent on Lalli? And again, please know I'm not attacking you in anyway. Maybe, you should try to start getting a fair tax in your country like we are here 
|
Lalli
Well-known member
Quote:
stop being chidlish and moaning about being yelled at, its a forum for gods sake im not sitting in head and yelling at you.
right since when have you had to fear insurgents blowing up a car outside where you live, if you lived in iraq maybe then id understand the need for a gun to protect yourself.
| Originally Posted by pumpkincat210 Crap, don't YOU yell at me... i misread. Your funding of the war would go to solely the rebuilding, but since the insurgents feel the need to blow up everyone, the money will go to guns to defend ourselves. |
stop being chidlish and moaning about being yelled at, its a forum for gods sake im not sitting in head and yelling at you.
right since when have you had to fear insurgents blowing up a car outside where you live, if you lived in iraq maybe then id understand the need for a gun to protect yourself.
Hawkeye
Well-known member
I don't think anyone is being childish-I think you are the one being childish because you are still in those years where you believe you know everything and know every solution to every single problem pertaining to the world. Some of the responses to you have been very uncalled for but then again, some of your responses have ( I mean come on, that whole blah blah blah and just because you think your a soldier makes you think you know everything crap is quite childish. It borders on that of being a four year old.)
So my next question to you is-since you don't pay taxes-what do you care what it's spent on? It's not YOUR money going to the government.
And from what you've indicated it's not like you've tried to protest the whole thing.
So my next question to you is-since you don't pay taxes-what do you care what it's spent on? It's not YOUR money going to the government.
And from what you've indicated it's not like you've tried to protest the whole thing.
- Status
