Tancredo: Obama is a Worse Threat Than the Soviet Union Or Al Qaeda

WingnutsJuly 2010 • Views: 3,035

Former Congressman and GOP presidential candidate Tom Tancredo showed up at a rally in Colorado for Senate candidate Ken Buck, and announced that the worst threat the United States has ever faced — worse than the Soviet Union and worse than Al Qaeda — is President Barack Obama.

Youtube Video

Ken Buck immediately went into damage control mode:

Following the rally, Buck was quick to distance himself from Tancredo’s remarks.

“I don’t agree,” he said. “I think there are a lot of threats to the White House and I don’t think the man in the White House is the greatest threat to this country at all. I am concerned about the direction of the country, but — I love Tom, but I don’t always agree with him.”

But of course, they can’t possibly have been surprised. Everyone knows what to expect if you book Tancredo as a speaker.

(Hat tip: Killgore Trout.)

Jump to bottom

167 comments

Sol Berdinowitz Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:20:45am

Duck and Cover!!!

HappyWarrior Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:22:16am

I’ll have what he’s drinking today for 1000, Trebek. Seriously I knew Tancredo was incredibly batshit insane but didn’t know he was that insane.

Targetpractice Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:22:55am

Is there one GOP candidate from ‘08 who hasn’t proven themselves to be utter nutbars?

Sol Berdinowitz Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:23:19am

“It’s not just a dramatic statement that someone would make to get press….”

Pray tell, what is it, then? Delusional? Ideological to the point of imbecility?

Killgore Trout Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:25:45am

But of course, they can’t possibly have been surprised. Everyone knows what to expect if you book Tancredo as a speaker.

Of course none of Buck’s supporters in the audience were offended. I hope Buck’s opponent uses this video in advertisements.

theheat Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:26:03am

re: #3 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Sure, last seen riding out of town on his unicorn.
//

The critter doesn’t exist.

Obdicut Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:26:08am

re: #3 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Romney was doing kind of okay until he dishonestly attacked SALT at great length.

teleskiguy Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:26:31am

I heard Tancredo on the radio this last weekend. He read a speech given by one Geert Wilders on the dangers of “Islamizaton” of Europe. It was disgusting, to say the least. Tancredo is all about making Islam illegal. What a fuck-nut.

theheat Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:28:35am

re: #7 Obdicut

Romney’s left brown stains on his sheets since he starting blowing the far right to maintain any kind of relevancy. Have you seen the company he keeps?

rwdflynavy Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:29:04am

I’M COO COO FOR COCOA PUFFS!!!!!!!11!!!
//

Really Tom?

Obama is worse than Mutual Assured Destruction, the death of millions of people at the hands of the Soviets and a terror network responsible for thousands of deaths?

The title of Bat-Shit Crazy has never been more deserved.

jamesfirecat Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:29:45am

/Of course it goes without saying that if we believe Mr. Tancredo Obama is also worse than Hitler….

MandyManners Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:29:48am

re: #3 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Is there one GOP candidate from ‘08 who hasn’t proven themselves to be utter nutbars?

Quiet a few but they don’t make headlines. I like Paul Ryan.

Aceofwhat? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:29:52am

re: #10 rwdflynavy

seeeriously

Aceofwhat? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:30:05am

re: #12 MandyManners

Quiet a few but they don’t make headlines. I like Paul Ryan.

yep.

rwdflynavy Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:30:19am

re: #11 jamesfirecat

/Of course it goes without saying that if we believe Mr. Tancredo Obama is also worse than Hitler…

You are a Godwin Nazi!!!!
//

Sol Berdinowitz Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:30:21am

re: #10 rwdflynavy

I’M COO COO FOR COCOA PUFFS!!!11!!!
//

Really Tom?

Obama is worse than Mutual Assured Destruction, the death of millions of people at the hands of the Soviets and a terror network responsible for thousands of deaths?

The title of Bat-Shit Crazy has never been more deserved.

Then the majority of the US electorate who put him in office are compllicit with this threat to America and need to be rounded up…

Targetpractice Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:30:44am

re: #7 Obdicut

Romney was doing kind of okay until he dishonestly attacked SALT at great length.

Mitt never stood a chance as a candidate, on account of religion. Between SALT and his speech to CPAC about how Obama “doesn’t get America,” the man’s been sucking up to the far-right plenty in recent months. He hasn’t had his howler moment yet, but he’s certainly on the path.

What, me worry? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:30:47am

re: #8 teleskiguy

I heard Tancredo on the radio this last weekend. He read a speech given by one Geert Wilders on the dangers of “Islamizaton” of Europe. It was disgusting, to say the least. Tancredo is all about making Islam illegal. What a fuck-nut.

Yea. I was thinking of finding those “Yep I’m a Racist” t-shirts, buying up the whole lot and shipping them to Tancredo’s office.

SpaceJesus Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:31:02am

Image: 3b775735054e897339b7eba31c6872a1507d51f0.gif

SpaceJesus Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:31:32am

re: #19 SpaceJesus

this is what republicans actually believe fyi

Obdicut Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:31:50am

re: #9 theheat

sure. But to me that just indicated pandering. Dishonestly attacking a national security issue is a step beyond that, into nutbar territory.

The GOP aren’t even the party of national security anymore. Romney’s false critique signaled that. So what exactly can they run on?

rwdflynavy Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:31:57am

re: #15 rwdflynavy

You are a Godwin Nazi!!!
//

The term Godwin Nazi is copyright 2010 rwdflynavy
//

jamesfirecat Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:32:17am

re: #19 SpaceJesus

Image: 3b775735054e897339b7eba31c6872a1507d51f0.gif

Link isn’t working for me….

goddamnedfrank Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:32:42am

Is it okay for us to question their patriotism yet?

SpaceJesus Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:33:07am

re: #23 jamesfirecat

huh works for me

Targetpractice Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:33:10am

re: #12 MandyManners

Quiet a few but they don’t make headlines. I like Paul Ryan.

I do like what I’ve seen of Paul Ryan so far, but I said the same thing about Sarah back after she garnered the VP nomination.

theheat Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:33:24am

re: #21 Obdicut

The run on their own renewable fuel: crazy. Crazy all day, crazy all night, crazy in public, crazy at the computer, crazy at crazy rallies with other crazies. You can hang with that much crazy and not get any on you.

theheat Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:33:55am

re: #27 theheat

PIMF - you can’t run with…

Sol Berdinowitz Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:35:55am

re: #27 theheat

The run on their own renewable fuel: crazy. Crazy all day, crazy all night, crazy in public, crazy at the computer, crazy at crazy rallies with other crazies. You can hang with that much crazy and not get any on you.

You either have to come to a point where you actively disagree and distance yourself or you have to go along with tacitly agreeing with it.

kirkspencer Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:36:27am

I’m speculating here, but I think all these straws may wind up breaking the camel’s back.

By most predictive measures, Republicans look to come close to if not succeed in taking the house. Yet you keep getting these dings from Angle and Paul and Bachmann and Tancredo and, well, the list goes on. I think there’s a good possibility a lot of non-zealot voters are going to pause and wonder if someone didn’t bring a crazy STD to the party.

If my speculation is right, it’ll be kinda subtle in the polls. A bit less enthusiasm, a small shift in numbers from R to D, that sort of thing. In the end, you see only about 30 seats change hands in the House.

Amory Blaine Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:36:40am

re: #12 MandyManners

Quiet a few but they don’t make headlines. I like Paul Ryan.

Hmmm, you’re not from Wisconsin I take it. His nutball policies are the same as every other right wingers out there. I.E. privatizing social security, medicare, tax cuts for the rich etc. etc.

Another one trick pony.

Jack Burton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:36:42am

re: #3 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Is there one GOP candidate from ‘08 who hasn’t proven themselves to be utter nutbars?

*rings in*
“What is ‘NO’”

I’ll take ‘Kooks’ for 1000 Alex.

What, me worry? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:37:36am

re: #24 goddamnedfrank

Is it okay for us to question their patriotism yet?

hehe you’re so clever!

Varek Raith Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:38:19am

re: #24 goddamnedfrank

Is it okay for us to question their patriotism yet?

Dude, I question his sanity.

Aceofwhat? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:38:24am

re: #19 SpaceJesus

1. Always Be Closing
2. Attention, Interest, Decision, Action
3. Previewed Images Make Friends

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:38:25am

re: #21 Obdicut

sure. But to me that just indicated pandering. Dishonestly attacking a national security issue is a step beyond that, into nutbar territory.

The GOP aren’t even the party of national security anymore. Romney’s false critique signaled that. So what exactly can they run on?

And he will be speaking at the Western Conservative Summit 2010 this weekend in Denver… winder what wacky comments he’ll make there?

Sol Berdinowitz Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:38:38am

re: #30 kirkspencer

I’m speculating here, but I think all these straws may wind up breaking the camel’s back.

By most predictive measures, Republicans look to come close to if not succeed in taking the house. Yet you keep getting these dings from Angle and Paul and Bachmann and Tancredo and, well, the list goes on. I think there’s a good possibility a lot of non-zealot voters are going to pause and wonder if someone didn’t bring a crazy STD to the party.

If my speculation is right, it’ll be kinda subtle in the polls. A bit less enthusiasm, a small shift in numbers from R to D, that sort of thing. In the end, you see only about 30 seats change hands in the House.

This is my call: they will make some gains, but not as much as some zealots are predicting.

And when they do, the apologists will blame it on those moderates who strayed from their core values of lunacy, ignorance, bigotry and threat-mongering.

Jeff In Ohio Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:38:49am

Obama is why I sit up nights, sweating in fear. Obama scares me. Is there one corner of our economic and social life he has not annexed and spread his evil socialismuslim over?

What, me worry? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:38:54am

re: #21 Obdicut

sure. But to me that just indicated pandering. Dishonestly attacking a national security issue is a step beyond that, into nutbar territory.

The GOP aren’t even the party of national security anymore. Romney’s false critique signaled that. So what exactly can they run on?

Sex and religion and the heathen-ness of Democrats. Well they can run on it, but they won’t get far.

Aceofwhat? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:39:36am

re: #27 theheat

The run on their own renewable fuel: crazy. Crazy all day, crazy all night, crazy in public, crazy at the computer, crazy at crazy rallies with other crazies. You can hang with that much crazy and not get any on you.

helps explain anti-AGW sentiment, though.

“what emissions? i’m renewable, bitch”/

MandyManners Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:39:45am

re: #31 Amory Blaine

Hmmm, you’re not from Wisconsin I take it. His nutball policies are the same as every other right wingers out there. I.E. privatizing social security, medicare, tax cuts for the rich etc. etc.

Another one trick pony.

What’s wrong with reducing the top rate to 25 per cent? Class envy, much?

darthstar Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:40:23am

re: #38 Jeff In Ohio

Downdinged for lack of a sarc tag.

Irenicum Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:40:26am

Well, he has out-Godwined himself hasn’t he? Who knows, maybe he’ll replace Steele.

Feline Fearless Leader Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:40:31am

re: #30 kirkspencer

I’m speculating here, but I think all these straws may wind up breaking the camel’s back.

By most predictive measures, Republicans look to come close to if not succeed in taking the house. Yet you keep getting these dings from Angle and Paul and Bachmann and Tancredo and, well, the list goes on. I think there’s a good possibility a lot of non-zealot voters are going to pause and wonder if someone didn’t bring a crazy STD to the party.

If my speculation is right, it’ll be kinda subtle in the polls. A bit less enthusiasm, a small shift in numbers from R to D, that sort of thing. In the end, you see only about 30 seats change hands in the House.

The other thing might happen is that the anti-incumbent wave in 2010 is strong enough to get a fair number of Republicans elected to the House. And then they bring the crazy there for two years while nothing useful gets done until the 2012 elections.

At that point would you expect to see a very large ground swell in favor of the Democrats since they can run anti-incumbent against the Republicans on top of anti-crazy and anti-irrational?

jamesfirecat Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:40:34am

re: #38 Jeff In Ohio

Obama is why I sit up nights, sweating in fear. Obama scares me. Is there one corner of our economic and social life he has not annexed and spread his evil socialismuslim over?

Hey there friend I think you forgot your sarc tag, feel free to help yourself to one of mine.

/// /// /// /// /// /// ///

Jeff In Ohio Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:40:36am

re: #24 goddamnedfrank

Is it okay for us to question their patriotism yet?

The Milli Vanilli of Patriots.

Amory Blaine Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:40:55am

re: #41 MandyManners

What’s wrong with reducing the top rate to 25 per cent? Class envy, much?

Despise maybe, envy no.

Targetpractice Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:41:04am

re: #37 ralphieboy

This is my call: they will make some gains, but not as much as some zealots are predicting.

And when they do, the apologists will blame it on those moderates who strayed from their core values of lunacy, ignorance, bigotry and threat-mongering.

Heh, it’ll be ‘06 all over again:

Wingnut: “Those bastards stole the elections!”
Me: “What do you mean?”
Wingnut: “They stuffed the ballot boxes, committed fraud, and kept people away from the polls!”
Me: “How do you figure that?”
Wingnut: “Because if they hadn’t, we’d have won far more seats than we did! And by far higher margins!”

Aceofwhat? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:41:34am

re: #31 Amory Blaine

Hmmm, you’re not from Wisconsin I take it. His nutball policies are the same as every other right wingers out there. I.E. privatizing social security, medicare, tax cuts for the rich etc. etc.

Another one trick pony.

Allowing guarded private investment of social security is just good math. You think you’re getting a good deal now? Heh.

Compound interest is my friend.

Jeff In Ohio Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:41:36am

re: #42 darthstar

Downdinged for lack of a sarc tag.

Life to slow today?

jamesfirecat Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:42:29am

re: #41 MandyManners

What’s wrong with reducing the top rate to 25 per cent? Class envy, much?

We reduced tax cuts for the top 25 per cent under Bush.

It did not do wonders for our economy…..

Jeff In Ohio Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:42:30am

re: #45 jamesfirecat

I don’t need no fucking sarc tags. You keep them for the confused and bewildered.

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:42:58am

There is going to be a major convergence of right wackos in Denver starting today… the Western Conservative Summit 2010…

[Link: www.ccu.edu…]

Amory Blaine Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:43:10am

re: #49 Aceofwhat?

Allowing guarded private investment of social security is just good math. You think you’re getting a good deal now? Heh.

Compound interest is my friend.

Wow. Thanks for the good laugh.

Tigger2005 Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:43:22am

This statement is practically treason, IMO. He’s telling a base already worked into a lather that our own President is a greater threat to the country than the people who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center. You have to wonder how some of the more rabid among them will interpret that.

darthstar Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:44:04am

re: #52 Jeff In Ohio

I don’t need no fucking sarc tags. You keep them for the confused and bewildered.

Updinged for belligerence.
:)

Too many people won’t see the sarc (even with sarc tags, I suppose).

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:44:29am

re: #55 Tigger2005

This statement is practically treason, IMO. He’s telling a base already worked into a lather that our own President is a greater threat to the country than the people who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center. You have to wonder how some of the more rabid among them will interpret that.

Exactly as planned.

What, me worry? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:44:44am

re: #53 Walter L. Newton

There is going to be a major convergence of right wackos in Denver starting today… the Western Conservative Summit 2010…

[Link: www.ccu.edu…]

Malkin and Tancredo under one roof. Well Boy Howdy!!

MandyManners Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:45:30am

re: #51 jamesfirecat

We reduced tax cuts for the top 25 per cent under Bush.

It did not do wonders for our economy…

That’s not what it means. It means not taxing more than 25 per cent.

lostlakehiker Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:45:33am

re: #3 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Is there one GOP candidate from ‘08 who hasn’t proven themselves to be utter nutbars?

Romney? Tancredo was never a serious candidate, nor was Paul. Huckabee had some sort of outside chance, so we’ll count him as a GOP candidate from 08, but he doesn’t qualify as all that sensible. That leaves Romney and McCain.

Utter nutbars? No. McCain is old, and they both play to their party’s base which means saying some things that don’t make much sense. But that happens with both parties.

Irenicum Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:45:45am

re: #55 Tigger2005

This statement is practically treason, IMO. He’s telling a base already worked into a lather that our own President is a greater threat to the country than the people who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center. You have to wonder how some of the more rabid among them will interpret that.

As someone has already asked, is it OK to question their patriotism yet?

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:45:46am

re: #58 marjoriemoon

Malkin and Tancredo under one roof. Well Boy Howdy!!

And Bachmann.

theheat Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:46:12am

re: #55 Tigger2005

They burn hysteria as a crazy fuel additive. They get more mpg on hysteria + crazy than crazy alone.

Jeff In Ohio Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:46:13am

re: #56 darthstar

Updinged for belligerence.
:)

Too many people won’t see the sarc (even with sarc tags, I suppose).

Shrug…

Sol Berdinowitz Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:46:39am

re: #52 Jeff In Ohio

I don’t need no fucking sarc tags. You keep them for the confused and bewildered.

It’s just considered good form for those who do not know you that well…

Four More Tears Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:47:11am

OT: “Napolitano’s gone Freejack!”

[Link: www.huffingtonpost.com…]

MandyManners Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:47:12am

re: #55 Tigger2005

This statement is practically treason, IMO. He’s telling a base already worked into a lather that our own President is a greater threat to the country than the people who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center. You have to wonder how some of the more rabid among them will interpret that.

Treason???

MandyManners Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:47:23am

My head hurts. bbl

What, me worry? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:48:13am

re: #55 Tigger2005

This statement is practically treason, IMO. He’s telling a base already worked into a lather that our own President is a greater threat to the country than the people who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center. You have to wonder how some of the more rabid among them will interpret that.

He would never make such a comparison to a white president. He mentioned Clinton in that little diatribe which is the most insane thing since the country did very well under Clinton, but he stopped short of equating Clinton with Islamic terror.

Why didn’t he? Bin Laden did more damage to U.S. interests, killed more Americans, during the 8 years Bill was president.

Obama is Black and Clinton is White. Do the math.

darthstar Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:48:20am

BREAKING: Paul the Octopus picks Spain for the final.

Paul is tako in my book.

[Link: www.sfgate.com…]

lostlakehiker Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:48:44am

re: #30 kirkspencer

I’m speculating here, but I think all these straws may wind up breaking the camel’s back.

By most predictive measures, Republicans look to come close to if not succeed in taking the house. Yet you keep getting these dings from Angle and Paul and Bachmann and Tancredo and, well, the list goes on. I think there’s a good possibility a lot of non-zealot voters are going to pause and wonder if someone didn’t bring a crazy STD to the party.

If my speculation is right, it’ll be kinda subtle in the polls. A bit less enthusiasm, a small shift in numbers from R to D, that sort of thing. In the end, you see only about 30 seats change hands in the House.

That’s a reasonable guess. Then again, predicting the future is notoriously difficult, especially if you have to do it ahead of time.

The only one who seems to know anything is that German octoracle.

Jeff In Ohio Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:48:58am

re: #65 ralphieboy

In a weird way I had to sort of just free myself up to believe that it was ok to be stupid or dumb.

What, me worry? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:49:12am

re: #62 Walter L. Newton

And Bachmann.

Walter, you need to attend that one with a camera and some video recording device.

Aceofwhat? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:51:08am

re: #54 Amory Blaine

Wow. Thanks for the good laugh.

Ok. What would you estimate your rate of return to be right now on your social security account? Let’s say, for our purposes, that your SSincome is the equivalent of a 20-year annuity at whatever monthly payment you can expect from social security.

Add up what you’ll pay in until you’re 65. the difference between that and the price of said annuity is your rate of return.

what’s your rate of return? less giggling, more math, please.

Sol Berdinowitz Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:51:16am

re: #72 Jeff In Ohio

In a weird way I had to sort of just free myself up to believe that it was ok to be stupid or dumb.

Dair 2 B stoopid.

jamesfirecat Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:51:20am

re: #59 MandyManners

That’s not what it means. It means not taxing more than 25 per cent.

Sorry I’ll give you that I misread your statement.

However after looking at our current income tax brackets, while I wouldn’t mind taxing no more than 25% for some of the upper middle brackets, I think there’s something wrong when our highest tack bracket seems to be
Single Married Married Filing Separately
35% $373,651+ $373,651+ $186,826+

And $373,651+ for Head of Household….

We shouldn’t be taxing people who make half a million and make over ten million at the same income tax rate for all of their earnings.

At least that’s my two cents, and why yes I am very loose with other people’s money.

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:51:31am

re: #73 marjoriemoon

Walter, you need to attend that one with a camera and some video recording device.

I probably would if I was off this weekend… the supermarket has been loading all my hours this summer on days like Thursdays through Mondays. I’m working Today and tomorrow, and I haven’t seen the schedule, won’t until this afternoon, but I suspect I’ll be there Sunday too.

Aceofwhat? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:52:15am

re: #70 darthstar

mmm…tako…

it’s not as good as toro, but it’s good.

alexknyc Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:52:26am

re: #37 ralphieboy

This is my call: they will make some gains, but not as much as some zealots are predicting.

And when they do, the apologists will blame it on those moderates who strayed from their core values of lunacy, ignorance, bigotry and threat-mongering.

Which will drag the party even more to the right, making it more and more irrelevant.

Can’t happen soon enough for me. Maybe then we can get a real opposition party that isn’t run by the batshit insane.

Jeff In Ohio Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:52:44am

re: #75 ralphieboy

Dair 2 B stoopid.

Not as eloquent as Tugg Speedman, but yeah.

jamesfirecat Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:53:03am

re: #71 lostlakehiker

That’s a reasonable guess. Then again, predicting the future is notoriously difficult, especially if you have to do it ahead of time.

The only one who seems to know anything is that German octoracle.

I still like Rachel Madow’s “Prognoctapus”

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:53:20am

re: #76 jamesfirecat

Sorry I’ll give you that I misread your statement.

However after looking at our current income tax brackets, while I wouldn’t mind taxing no more than 25% for some of the upper middle brackets, I think there’s something wrong when our highest tack bracket seems to be
Single Married Married Filing Separately
35% $373,651+ $373,651+ $186,826+

And $373,651+ for Head of Household…

We shouldn’t be taxing people who make half a million and make over ten million at the same income tax rate for all of their earnings.

At least that’s my two cents, and why yes I am very loose with other people’s money.

Generally speaking, who’s money are you spending right now? Do you live at home, how old are you, do you have a job.

I’m not saying you are right or wrong, it’s how you feel, but you may want to consider that there are more parameters to how people view taxes than just altruistic feelings.

Varek Raith Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:53:40am

Obama.
WORSE THEN HITLERKHANPOLPOKJONGILMOUSSOULINIDARTHSIDIUS COMBINED!
/Whew, say that 5 times fast!

Amory Blaine Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:53:49am

re: #74 Aceofwhat?

Ok. What would you estimate your rate of return to be right now on your social security account? Let’s say, for our purposes, that your SSincome is the equivalent of a 20-year annuity at whatever monthly payment you can expect from social security.

Add up what you’ll pay in until you’re 65. the difference between that and the price of said annuity is your rate of return.

what’s your rate of return? less giggling, more math, please.

I don’t care what the rate of return is. You want to invest in the market that’s your business.

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:54:03am

re: #81 jamesfirecat

I still like Rachel Madow’s “Prognoctapus”

Why would Maddow make fun of the porgs?

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:54:12am

re: #85 Walter L. Newton

Why would Maddow make fun of the porgs?

PROGS…

alexknyc Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:54:24am

re: #47 Amory Blaine

Despise maybe, envy no.

You despise those in the top tax bracket for being in the top tax bracket?

Am I misreading you?

Varek Raith Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:54:30am

Lol.

kirkspencer Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:54:56am

re: #44 oaktree

The other thing might happen is that the anti-incumbent wave in 2010 is strong enough to get a fair number of Republicans elected to the House. And then they bring the crazy there for two years while nothing useful gets done until the 2012 elections.

At that point would you expect to see a very large ground swell in favor of the Democrats since they can run anti-incumbent against the Republicans on top of anti-crazy and anti-irrational?

Yes.

At the same time, I expect the Democrats to hold the Senate and Presidency in 2012. I lean toward expecting the house as well, but there’s a big question on that due to all the redistricting after the census reports back.

Look, Ruy Teixeira’s numbers are pretty solid. Republicans have an overwhelming majority among White Elderly Church-going Males. Non-white, young, females who only go to church a couple of times a year at best vote overwhelmingly Democratic. Each category you move from one to the other moves the overall majority to the Democrats. We’re not going to change the male/female ratio, but we’re seeing more minorities, the young increase while the elderly die, and church attendance has been in decline for a couple of decades. The Republicans have to change the equation or dwindle to irrelevancy.

As it happens, I think that’s a very large factor in some of the crazy. If, for example, the minority population stops growing (or even better declines) that’s a major change in the equation. I don’t think it’ll work, but it’s an explanation.

jamesfirecat Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:55:02am

re: #85 Walter L. Newton

Why would Maddow make fun of the porgs?

You’re probably just yanking my chain, but what the hell everyone on LGF can have a new word of the day.

Prognosticate.

[Link: www.thefreedictionary.com…]

Varek Raith Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:55:06am

re: #88 Varek Raith

Quote fail!

Lol.

re: #85 Walter L. Newton

re: #86 Walter L. Newton

Amory Blaine Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:55:26am

re: #87 alexknyc

She said I was envious. I am not.

Spare O'Lake Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:55:50am

re: #37 ralphieboy

This is my call: they will make some gains, but not as much as some zealots are predicting.

And when they do, the apologists will blame it on those moderates who strayed from their core values of lunacy, ignorance, bigotry and threat-mongering.

I suggest you save the Dem lib rationalizations for after the election. That’s when they’ll really be needed.

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:56:15am

re: #91 Varek Raith

Quote fail!

re: #85 Walter L. Newton

re: #86 Walter L. Newton

I know… kind of took the edge off the humor…

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:56:34am

BBIAB…

jamesfirecat Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:56:36am

re: #82 Walter L. Newton

Generally speaking, who’s money are you spending right now? Do you live at home, how old are you, do you have a job.

I’m not saying you are right or wrong, it’s how you feel, but you may want to consider that there are more parameters to how people view taxes than just altruistic feelings.

At the moment living at home mooching of parents while trying to find a job having recently graduated since you asked so kindly.

So yeah like I said just my two cents, take it or leave it.

Varek Raith Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:56:41am

re: #93 Spare O’Lake

I suggest you save the Dem lib rationalizations for after the election. That’s when they’ll really be needed.

I suggest you don’t count your thermal detonators before they are made.
;)

abolitionist Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:56:50am

re: #55 Tigger2005

This statement is practically treason, IMO. He’s telling a base already worked into a lather that our own President is a greater threat to the country than the people who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center. You have to wonder how some of the more rabid among them will interpret that.

Not treason, I think, but sedition

Sedition is the stirring up of rebellion against the government in power. Treason is the violation of allegiance to one’s sovereign or state, giving aid to enemies, or levying war against one’s state. Sedition is encouraging one’s fellow citizens to rebel against their state, whereas treason is actually betraying one’s country by aiding and abetting another state..

What, me worry? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:57:00am

re: #69 marjoriemoon

He would never make such a comparison to a white president. He mentioned Clinton in that little diatribe which is the most insane thing since the country did very well under Clinton, but he stopped short of equating Clinton with Islamic terror.

Why didn’t he? Bin Laden did more damage to U.S. interests, killed more Americans, during the 8 years Bill was president.

Obama is Black and Clinton is White. Do the math.

Sorry, that’s not really accurate, is it. Probably since Reagan, OBL has killed and maimed more Americans. Even so, I think Tancredo is a racist so I weigh everything he says against that.

100

Aceofwhat? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:57:02am

re: #84 Amory Blaine

I don’t care what the rate of return is. You want to invest in the market that’s your business.

apparently not, since i ask for the opportunity to do so with my social security income and you laugh at me.

i suppose then, when i’ve used the market to supplement my income when i retire, you’ll be calling me ‘rich’ and telling me that i somehow lucked into having more money than others with previously similar incomes but dumber retirement math?

101

Amory Blaine Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:57:52am

re: #100 Aceofwhat?

apparently not, since i ask for the opportunity to do so with my social security income and you laugh at me.

i suppose then, when i’ve used the market to supplement my income when i retire, you’ll be calling me ‘rich’ and telling me that i somehow lucked into having more money than others with previously similar incomes but dumber retirement math?

Yep you got me all figured out.

102

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:58:02am

re: #96 jamesfirecat

At the moment living at home mooching of parents while trying to find a job having recently graduated since you asked so kindly.

So yeah like I said just my two cents, take it or leave it.

I did. Thank you for your answer… you made my point for me.

103

Boogberg Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:58:31am

re: #83 Varek Raith

I wonder how that computer voice thing would handle that one. lol

Check this out, it’s funny as hell:

[Link: www.youtube.com…]

104

Aceofwhat? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:58:32am

re: #92 Amory Blaine

She said I was envious. I am not.

it’s an interesting question, though. i take you at your word that you are not envious.

do you despise those in or around the top brackets?

105

What, me worry? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:59:02am

re: #89 kirkspencer

Yes.

At the same time, I expect the Democrats to hold the Senate and Presidency in 2012. I lean toward expecting the house as well, but there’s a big question on that due to all the redistricting after the census reports back.

Look, Ruy Teixeira’s numbers are pretty solid. Republicans have an overwhelming majority among White Elderly Church-going Males. Non-white, young, females who only go to church a couple of times a year at best vote overwhelmingly Democratic. Each category you move from one to the other moves the overall majority to the Democrats. We’re not going to change the male/female ratio, but we’re seeing more minorities, the young increase while the elderly die, and church attendance has been in decline for a couple of decades. The Republicans have to change the equation or dwindle to irrelevancy.

As it happens, I think that’s a very large factor in some of the crazy. If, for example, the minority population stops growing (or even better declines) that’s a major change in the equation. I don’t think it’ll work, but it’s an explanation.

Exactly. And what Obama did was motivate all these young folks (both minority and majority) who never thought the system had anything to do with them or cared anything about it. They made a huge difference in 2008 and they know it. They’re not going away easily.

106

Amory Blaine Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:59:31am

re: #104 Aceofwhat?

it’s an interesting question, though. i take you at your word that you are not envious.

do you despise those in or around the top brackets?

Some I do. Are there no top bracket earners worthy of it? Or are they all saints?

107

Aceofwhat? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 11:59:45am

re: #101 Amory Blaine

Yep you got me all figured out.

I am quite open to having wrongly presumed. Please feel free to correct me.

108

alexknyc Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:00:04pm

re: #92 Amory Blaine

She said I was envious. I am not.

I got that part… it’s the rest of it I’m wondering about.

109

McSpiff Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:00:11pm

re: #102 Walter L. Newton

I did. Thank you for your answer… you made my point for me.

I know I said I wouldn’t address you…

but do you really think asking someone’s age proves a point? Why does it matter how old he is? You of all people should know better.

110

Varek Raith Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:00:30pm

re: #103 Boogberg

I wonder how that computer voice thing would handle that one. lol

Check this out, it’s funny as hell:

[Link: www.youtube.com…]

Lol.
“I don’t care”

111

Aceofwhat? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:01:55pm

re: #106 Amory Blaine

Some I do. Are there no top bracket earners worthy of it? Or are they all saints?

They are not all saints. However, despite the mantra that money is the root of all evil, i’ve had a difficult time finding more to despise amongst one particular bracket than another.

In fact, i find that the top earners’ contributions to society are often underestimated. But really, i don’t think that someone’s income is any indication of whether they are “good”.

112

Amory Blaine Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:03:28pm

re: #111 Aceofwhat?

They are not all saints. However, despite the mantra that money is the root of all evil, i’ve had a difficult time finding more to despise amongst one particular bracket than another.

In fact, i find that the top earners’ contributions to society are often underestimated. But really, i don’t think that someone’s income is any indication of whether they are “good”.

I think they’re overestimated.

113

Varek Raith Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:03:37pm

re: #111 Aceofwhat?

They are not all saints. However, despite the mantra that money is the root of all evil, i’ve had a difficult time finding more to despise amongst one particular bracket than another.

In fact, i find that the top earners’ contributions to society are often underestimated. But really, i don’t think that someone’s income is any indication of whether they are “good”.

I am the root of all evil.

As for taxes on the wealthy, beats me, I ain’t no economist. I’ll leave that to those who do know.
:)

114

Gus Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:03:43pm

Invite controversial buffoon to speak at campaign event. Allow him to once again open his valve to spew forth incoherent, paranoid nonsense. Then apologize.

Buck’s from Colorado so he should be rather familiar with this diminutive congressional despot. In fact, old Tancredo has his square headed mug shot in the second section of today’s Denver Post.

115

alexknyc Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:03:45pm

re: #106 Amory Blaine

Some I do. Are there no top bracket earners worthy of it? Or are they all saints?

Of course they’re not all saints.

But would you still despise them if they did the same things but weren’t rich?

My question really comes down to this:

Do you despise these people because they’re rich or because of something they’ve done?

If it’s the latter, then being in the top tax bracket has nothing to do with it.

116

alexknyc Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:06:22pm

re: #109 McSpiff

I know I said I wouldn’t address you…

but do you really think asking someone’s age proves a point? Why does it matter how old he is? You of all people should know better.

My girlfriend’s 19 year old niece just finished her freshman year of college. She has some fascinating ideas about how to spend other people’s money.

How many of those ideas will survive when “other people’s money” turns into “holy shit, they’re taking 1/3 of my paycheck before it even gets to me?”

It’s not just age… it’s all the things that come with not being responsible for yourself financially yet.

117

Gus Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:07:09pm

Ken Buck’s website.

Talk about a cookie cutter site. The GOP must be using a template of sorts. They’re all almost exactly alike right down to their stands on the issues. Even the order in which they appear are the same.

118

Varek Raith Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:08:16pm

re: #117 Gus 802

Ken Buck’s website.

Talk about a cookie cutter site. The GOP must be using a template of sorts. They’re all almost exactly alike right down to their stands on the issues. Even the order in which they appear are the same.

Heh, it really is.

119

jamesfirecat Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:08:34pm

re: #117 Gus 802

Ken Buck’s website.

Talk about a cookie cutter site. The GOP must be using a template of sorts. They’re all almost exactly alike right down to their stands on the issues. Even the order in which they appear are the same.

Maybe they hired the same guys who did Exon/BP/Shell/other oil companies disaster reaction strategy sites….

120

HappyWarrior Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:08:38pm

It’s almost like Tancredo and those who think like him want Obama to a dictator so they can act like they liberated our country from the evil dictator. It truly blows my mind every time some nutcase compares Obama to Hitler, Stalin, Mao, or whoever. Shows a complete lack of respect for the real people who risked their lives against those guys.

121

Obdicut Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:08:42pm

re: #116 alexknyc

The more money I make, the more glad I am that I pay taxes, because the deeper understanding I get of just how complex things have to be to support the markets and society we have.

122

Varek Raith Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:09:24pm

re: #121 Obdicut

The more money I make, the more glad I am that I pay taxes, because the deeper understanding I get of just how complex things have to be to support the markets and society we have.

SCREW THAT, I WANT MAH MONEE!
/

123

Gus Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:10:26pm

re: #118 Varek Raith

Heh, it really is.

Homogeneous
Bland
Generic
Routine
Uniform

Step one: pass this litmus test or at least say you agree with everything on the “issues template.”

124

McSpiff Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:11:24pm

re: #116 alexknyc

My girlfriend’s 19 year old niece just finished her freshman year of college. She has some fascinating ideas about how to spend other people’s money.

How many of those ideas will survive when “other people’s money” turns into “holy shit, they’re taking 1/3 of my paycheck before it even gets to me?”

It’s not just age… it’s all the things that come with not being responsible for yourself financially yet.

Walter is someone who’s had a harder time getting a job in his main field due at least partially to his age (at least that’s been my reading of it). If he (or you, or anyone else) feels that someone not financially independent will have certain incorrect views based on that, fine. But to base the validity of an argument off the age of the person making it is the exact same discrimination as not hiring someone based on age. Its both ageism, and its both wrong.

I know 16 year olds that are financially independent and I know 50 year olds who aren’t. Has absolutely nothing to do with age.

125

Amory Blaine Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:12:18pm

re: #115 alexknyc

I’m not going to write a 4 page manifesto defending a position. The original post was a response to someone saying because I was against a 25% cap on top tax earners, I must be jealous. She likes Paul Ryan not me. Hey go ahead and cut their rate to 0. I don’t give a shit. The rich enjoy quite a lot of services in this country, if they don’t want to pay for it and think that burden should be spread further into the working class, that’s for the voters to decide. You aren’t going to box me into a position, but I will say this, blood attracts sharks.

126

Feline Fearless Leader Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:13:45pm

re: #122 Varek Raith

SCREW THAT, I WANT MAH MONEE!
/

So you’re saying that Anakin flipped out because he’d found out that the Jedi Council had secretly drained the Jedi Social Security admin of Force Points to cover a long series of budget shortfalls?

I just thought it was because he was a whiny teen without a clue…

127

Varek Raith Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:14:34pm

re: #126 oaktree

So you’re saying that Anakin flipped out because he’d found out that the Jedi Council had secretly drained the Jedi Social Security admin of Force Points to cover a long series of budget shortfalls?

I just thought it was because he was a whiny teen without a clue…

No, Anakin’s just a whiny little [deleted].

128

alexknyc Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:19:34pm

re: #124 McSpiff

Walter is someone who’s had a harder time getting a job in his main field due at least partially to his age (at least that’s been my reading of it). If he (or you, or anyone else) feels that someone not financially independent will have certain incorrect views based on that, fine. But to base the validity of an argument off the age of the person making it is the exact same discrimination as not hiring someone based on age. Its both ageism, and its both wrong.

I know 16 year olds that are financially independent and I know 50 year olds who aren’t. Has absolutely nothing to do with age.

That’s a wonderful argument if I hadn’t ended my sentence with the word “yet.”

Don’t know Walter personally but is it the case that he’s never been financially independent? Because, if not, it makes it tough to use him to refute my argument.

As for the financially independent 16-year olds, do they hold the same type of views on taxes and spending as those still in school and being taken care of by their parents? Again, my argument had to do with more than just age.

129

kirkspencer Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:21:10pm

re: #76 jamesfirecat

Sorry I’ll give you that I misread your statement.

However after looking at our current income tax brackets, while I wouldn’t mind taxing no more than 25% for some of the upper middle brackets, I think there’s something wrong when our highest tack bracket seems to be
Single Married Married Filing Separately
35% $373,651+ $373,651+ $186,826+

And $373,651+ for Head of Household…

We shouldn’t be taxing people who make half a million and make over ten million at the same income tax rate for all of their earnings.

At least that’s my two cents, and why yes I am very loose with other people’s money.

Take the following with a HUGE block of salt as I don’t think I have enough sarc tags…

I propose the Simple tax.

Only income after the larger of $50,000 per person (single or married couple) or expenses shall be taxed. It shall be taxed at a rate of 50%.

I submit first that taxing the entirety of individual income is tantamount to taxing the gross income of businesses, and that until the threshold of covering expenses is met any loss of money is destructive to the taxee.

I submit further that any money not spent is obviously not needed by the recipients, and that it is instead removed from circulation with a negative impact on the economy.

I submit finally that this tax is truly simple. If money is received, regardless of source, it is income. Money spent, regardless of recipient, is an expense.

I anticipate objections.

The first such anticipated objection is likely to come from the wealthy, who note that the default level of expenses means that only the top quintile of households (the roughly 20% which earn $100,000 or more) will be subject to taxes. I respond to this by quoting the great sage Willie Sutton: “That’s where the money is.”

The second objection will come from the other end, who will object to the fact there are no restrictions on expenses. I respond by noting money spent is money received by someone else, which is the critical core to a working economy.

A third complaint will come from those who wish tax collectors would disappear. I note that taxes, like death, are certain and someone must collect them. I also note that someone will try to claim less income or more expense than reality dictates, and we will need agents to identify, pursue, and recover from those cheaters lest we need raise the rate higher in compensation.

I will end with a pair of administrative notes in regard to corporations. First, because so-called capital gains taxes would be eliminated, I would make the payment of dividends a pre-tax expense. Second, I would point out that income is not only wages, but also includes gifts and benefits. On the other hand, any other taxes are also an expense.

////////////……

130

alexknyc Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:22:48pm

re: #125 Amory Blaine

I’m not going to write a 4 page manifesto defending a position. The original post was a response to someone saying because I was against a 25% cap on top tax earners, I must be jealous. She likes Paul Ryan not me. Hey go ahead and cut their rate to 0. I don’t give a shit. The rich enjoy quite a lot of services in this country, if they don’t want to pay for it and think that burden should be spread further into the working class, that’s for the voters to decide. You aren’t going to box me into a position, but I will say this, blood attracts sharks.

That’s all fine by me but you used the word “despise” in such a way that I inferred it to be because of their status.

It wouldn’t take a 4 page manifesto to clear up the issue of whether I’ve read you correctly but, if you think that would box you into a position, I have no trouble letting this go.

131

McSpiff Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:24:22pm

re: #128 alexknyc

Exactly, age is irrelevant. I know a 17 year old who recently purchased a house. I’m reasonably certain you’d have similar views to her on taxes.

I also know 50 year olds who have never had a serious job. Married the rich guy in college. Never paid taxes.

Walter asking james “how old are you” is as relevant to the discussion as “what race are you?”. If the question is financial independence, ask that.

Walter, as someone who has been passed over for jobs because of discrimination based on age, should know better than to make those same nasty assumptions on the relationship between qualifications and age.

132

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:25:13pm

re: #109 McSpiff

I know I said I wouldn’t address you…

but do you really think asking someone’s age proves a point? Why does it matter how old he is? You of all people should know better.

McSpiff… address me if you want, it doesn’t bother me, you had something to say, fine, I’m ok with that. I was taking a shower, so I just saw your comment. Reading down the thread, I think alexknyc makes my points.

133

Aceofwhat? Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:27:04pm

re: #130 alexknyc

That’s all fine by me but you used the word “despise” in such a way that I inferred it to be because of their status.

It wouldn’t take a 4 page manifesto to clear up the issue of whether I’ve read you correctly but, if you think that would box you into a position, I have no trouble letting this go.

yes, exactly. ‘despise’ is a much different term than “well, i’m sure some of them aren’t very nice”.

134

McSpiff Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:27:37pm

re: #132 Walter L. Newton

McSpiff… address me if you want, it doesn’t bother me, you had something to say, fine, I’m ok with that. I was taking a shower, so I just saw your comment. Reading down the thread, I think alexknyc makes my points.

Sorry, wasn’t aware you were gone when I first posted that. I’d be happy to address it with you. Sorry if that came across as overly harsh. I just know people in the 18-25 age bracket that are probably paying more in taxes than many of the posters here.

135

alexknyc Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:28:13pm

re: #131 McSpiff

Exactly, age is irrelevant. I know a 17 year old who recently purchased a house. I’m reasonably certain you’d have similar views to her on taxes.

I also know 50 year olds who have never had a serious job. Married the rich guy in college. Never paid taxes.

Walter asking james “how old are you” is as relevant to the discussion as “what race are you?”. If the question is financial independence, ask that.

Walter, as someone who has been passed over for jobs because of discrimination based on age, should know better than to make those same nasty assumptions on the relationship between qualifications and age.

As a side note, how did the 17-year old who just bought a house get around the legality of having to be 18 to sign an enforceable contract? Is she an emancipated minor and would that change her legal status before turning 18?

136

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:30:57pm

re: #124 McSpiff

Walter is someone who’s had a harder time getting a job in his main field due at least partially to his age (at least that’s been my reading of it). If he (or you, or anyone else) feels that someone not financially independent will have certain incorrect views based on that, fine. But to base the validity of an argument off the age of the person making it is the exact same discrimination as not hiring someone based on age. Its both ageism, and its both wrong.

I know 16 year olds that are financially independent and I know 50 year olds who aren’t. Has absolutely nothing to do with age.

If you noticed… James didn’t answer me about his age, and I didn’t press him on it. You are correct, there are financially independent 16 years old… and, on the other hand, James ran off a litany of his conditions that I would claim makes someone his age fairly unaware of what it takes to be financially independent.

And yes, I have had to make my way since about 14, and no, I’ve never been totally financially dependent on anyone since than. More financially independent then ever needing too much help. And why, my dad taught me to fend for myself, and not one fucking soul in the world owes you anything. Whatever karma you build up, it’s your own doing… make the best of gifts, but expect nothing, freely receive, without conditions, give back the same (Tzedakah)…

137

McSpiff Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:31:04pm

re: #135 alexknyc

Yup, got emancipated at 16. As far as the legalities… I’m not entirely sure? I do know she’s living with her boyfriend, and its jointly owned property.

138

Amory Blaine Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:31:51pm

re: #133 Aceofwhat?

Yeah. You’re right. The next time I’m insulted, I’ll try to stay out of the mud.

139

McSpiff Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:33:52pm

re: #136 Walter L. Newton

If you noticed… James didn’t answer me about his age, and I didn’t press him on it. You are correct, there are financially independent 16 years old… and, on the other hand, James ran off a litany of his conditions that I would claim makes someone his age fairly unaware of what it takes to be financially independent.

And yes, I have had to make my way since about 14, and no, I’ve never been totally financially dependent on anyone since than. More financially independent then ever needing too much help. And why, my dad taught me to fend for myself, and not one fucking soul in the world owes you anything. Whatever karma you build up, it’s your own doing… make the best of gifts, but expect nothing, freely receive, without conditions, give back the same (Tzedakah)…

In that case we agree. For the record, I’m far from financially independent for a long list of reasons. But I still wouldn’t list my age as one.

140

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:35:53pm

re: #135 alexknyc

As a side note, how did the 17-year old who just bought a house get around the legality of having to be 18 to sign an enforceable contract? Is she an emancipated minor and would that change her legal status before turning 18?

First off, I assumed nothing, since I asked a question. If it were an assumption, I would have said… “You must be young, do your parents support you, I bet you don’t even have a job” and so on. That’s assumptions. I asked 4-5 questions of James.

But, you combine his answers, and his more than honest admittance that he has not had to be financially independent, and that can paint a profile of someone who has not had the life experiences as of yet to understand the rigors of being financially independent.

I say a person in James’ life position can (not always), but can, have a unreasonable view on wealth, taxes and the various subject that orbit around that… as we have been discussing.

141

Boogberg Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:36:18pm

re: #136 Walter L. Newton

Wow. That’s pretty harsh having to pay your way at 14. I worked when I was 14 too but it was just because I wanted shit my folks couldn’t afford.

142

McSpiff Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:36:43pm

re: #136 Walter L. Newton

For the record, my own decision to accept financial support from my parents for university is one I regret. Should have stuck with my plan of ROTC but thats an entirely different story.

143

McSpiff Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:39:22pm

re: #140 Walter L. Newton

First off, I assumed nothing, since I asked a question. If it were an assumption, I would have said… “You must be young, do your parents support you, I bet you don’t even have a job” and so on. That’s assumptions. I asked 4-5 questions of James.

But, you combine his answers, and his more than honest admittance that he has not had to be financially independent, and that can paint a profile of someone who has not had the life experiences as of yet to understand the rigors of being financially independent.

I say a person in James’ life position can (not always), but can, have a unreasonable view on wealth, taxes and the various subject that orbit around that… as we have been discussing.

Again, I’m not saying you’re wrong. And you’re right, you asked questions that James freely answered. And a lack of financial independence will certainly color any discussion of taxes. That’s all correct. I just objected to your question of “How old are you?”. Nothing more, nothing less. Everything else I agree with 100%.

144

William Barnett-Lewis Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:39:42pm

re: #31 Amory Blaine

Hmmm, you’re not from Wisconsin I take it. His nutball policies are the same as every other right wingers out there. I.E. privatizing social security, medicare, tax cuts for the rich etc. etc.

Another one trick pony.

Beat me to it. He’d be funnier if he wasn’t from my state.

145

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:40:16pm

re: #141 Boogberg

Wow. That’s pretty harsh having to pay your way at 14. I worked when I was 14 too but it was just because I wanted shit my folks couldn’t afford.

I worked at 14 so I could have money enough to stay away from the house as much as I could. It was a self-imposed exile. Yes, I slept there (when I didn’t have someplace else to sleep), I went to scholl, and so on, but I worked at a supermarket so I could be away from home after school, and also make some of my own money. I wasn’t wanting at home financially, I was wanting for peace at home. It was chaos and violent.

So I learn early on who to fend for myself. And I would never wish it on anyone else, but I would fight anyone that tried to take the experiences away from me. They are mine and I’m proud of them.

146

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:40:43pm

re: #143 McSpiff

Again, I’m not saying you’re wrong. And you’re right, you asked questions that James freely answered. And a lack of financial independence will certainly color any discussion of taxes. That’s all correct. I just objected to your question of “How old are you?”. Nothing more, nothing less. Everything else I agree with 100%.

Ok.

147

McSpiff Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:43:32pm

re: #146 Walter L. Newton

Ok.

On a side note, thanks for this discussion. When its kept civil between us, I really enjoy it.

148

Walter L. Newton Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:46:20pm

re: #147 McSpiff

On a side note, thanks for this discussion. When its kept civil between us, I really enjoy it.

Sure enough. Probably catch you later this evening… leaving for the supermarket in about 20 minutes… 5 hour shift coming up… hell… it’s almost like being semi-retired… being semi-not-wanted in the job market… which I guess a semi-take-with-a-grain-of-salt because there’s not a hell of a lot I can do about it… and it does afford me more time to myself than I’ve had over the last 40 years or so of working.

149

Boogberg Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:48:35pm

re: #145 Walter L. Newton

Sorry to hear that. There was some violence in my house but it wasn’t chronic. Like you, all in all I can’t complain. Could’ve been much worse.

150

webevintage Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:51:01pm

Can I call Tom Tancredo and the people who agree with him crazy?

151

McSpiff Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:51:21pm

re: #148 Walter L. Newton

Sure enough. Probably catch you later this evening… leaving for the supermarket in about 20 minutes… 5 hour shift coming up… hell… it’s almost like being semi-retired… being semi-not-wanted in the job market… which I guess a semi-take-with-a-grain-of-salt because there’s not a hell of a lot I can do about it… and it does afford me more time to myself than I’ve had over the last 40 years or so of working.

Sounds good to me. I’m taking the cousins to toy story in an hour or so, but I should be around tonight.

Keep your head up with the job thing. I’m trying to find the next job now… its no fun. And you know, there isn’t anything inherently evil about free time.

152

WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Jul 9, 2010 12:56:11pm

re: #82 Walter L. Newton

Generally speaking, who’s money are you spending right now? Do you live at home, how old are you, do you have a job.

I’m not saying you are right or wrong, it’s how you feel, but you may want to consider that there are more parameters to how people view taxes than just altruistic feelings.

I agree with him completely and I pay my own taxes quarterly, none of this withholding stuff.

153

Amory Blaine Fri, Jul 9, 2010 1:02:11pm

re: #150 webevintage

Can I call Tom Tancredo and the people who agree with him crazy?

If you’re running for office under the GOP banner I’d say you better tread carefully. Especially in Colorado.

154

WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Jul 9, 2010 1:02:23pm

re: #116 alexknyc

My girlfriend’s 19 year old niece just finished her freshman year of college. She has some fascinating ideas about how to spend other people’s money.

How many of those ideas will survive when “other people’s money” turns into “holy shit, they’re taking 1/3 of my paycheck before it even gets to me?”

It’s not just age… it’s all the things that come with not being responsible for yourself financially yet.

I don’t have a “paycheck”. I pay taxes for myself, I run my own business. As a self-employed person I got taxes to pay. OH how I got taxes to pay.

So yeah, this meme that the financially responsible suddenly go HRGLRGHL HOW DARE THEY TAKE MY MUHNEE AH RRRNED IT YUP, it just ain’t true. Nobody’s more “financially responsible” than people like me, the self-employed, the person who must account for every penny, make every dime themselves. No goofing around and getting a paycheck. if I don’t get up out of bed and hustle and work my ass off to make stuff every day, I don’t eat.

And I am glad to pay taxes, because I’m not some child. I’m a grownup. grownups accept the fact that they live in a human society that needs taxes to operate.

155

Amory Blaine Fri, Jul 9, 2010 1:05:27pm

re: #154 WindUpBird

I don’t have a “paycheck”. I pay taxes for myself, I run my own business. As a self-employed person I got taxes to pay. OH how I got taxes to pay.

So yeah, this meme that the financially responsible suddenly go HRGLRGHL HOW DARE THEY TAKE MY MUHNEE AH RRRNED IT YUP, it just ain’t true. Nobody’s more “financially responsible” than people like me, the self-employed, the person who must account for every penny, make every dime themselves. No goofing around and getting a paycheck. if I don’t get up out of bed and hustle and work my ass off to make stuff every day, I don’t eat.

And I am glad to pay taxes, because I’m not some child. I’m a grownup. grownups accept the fact that they live in a human society that needs taxes to operate.

Goofs who get paychecks help keep “self-employed” people working.

156

WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Jul 9, 2010 1:06:15pm

Two retarded GOP memes I get so very very very very very very very sick of:

the “other people’s money” line. OTHER PEOPLE’s MONEY HURR DE HURR As if anyone in this country, anyone at all, would have the opportunity to earn shit without taxpayer-paid-for infrastructure that we all take for granted.

and the “only kids who don’t pay their own way talk about raising taxes and spending money” line. Been hearing that one since I WAS in college. Probably my father heard it when he was in school as well.

Stupid memes. Stupid.

157

WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Jul 9, 2010 1:07:27pm

re: #155 Amory Blaine

Goofs who get paychecks help keep “self-employed” people working.

Of course.

I’m addressing a very specific, tried, stupid and worn out GOP meme, and that is the “financially responsible people all want lower taxes, and only those having their way paid for talk about how great taxes are”

Not true, never been true.

158

WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Jul 9, 2010 1:08:25pm

None of us would be here without the taxpayer paid infrastructure and research that created the internet.

159

Amory Blaine Fri, Jul 9, 2010 1:08:31pm

re: #157 WindUpBird

I hear ya.

160

Boogberg Fri, Jul 9, 2010 1:17:58pm

re: #158 WindUpBird

How cool would it be to have a patent on the internet? Imagine the toll revenues from that particular highway!

161

Amory Blaine Fri, Jul 9, 2010 1:21:46pm

The Tubes!!!!!

162

Boogberg Fri, Jul 9, 2010 1:25:55pm

re: #161 Amory Blaine

Hadn’t seen that one before. Pretty cool! :D

163

ryannon Fri, Jul 9, 2010 1:52:09pm

re: #74 Aceofwhat?

Ok. What would you estimate your rate of return to be right now on your social security account? Let’s say, for our purposes, that your SSincome is the equivalent of a 20-year annuity at whatever monthly payment you can expect from social security.

Add up what you’ll pay in until you’re 65. the difference between that and the price of said annuity is your rate of return.

what’s your rate of return? less giggling, more math, please.

They never said there would be math!

164

blueraven Fri, Jul 9, 2010 2:01:41pm

re: #59 MandyManners