Medicare - Page 3

**Jiro** · 06-19-2012, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

The point is, it's not a "gimme" attitude as you stated.

I'm not referring to retirees. Only those irrational bunch with self-entitlement attitude.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

But at least you do have roads. How would your current commute be without any roads or overpasses or bridges or traffic lights?

I'd be delighted! no traffic jam and I'd have a blast. I don't think anything can beat this kind of commute

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Maybe for parts of the journey but for most of the trip the trucks use interstate highways.

right. all thanks to Eisenhower. a perfect example why we all gotta split in and share a burden for the good of this country and its well-being.... such as PPACA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

They should have sent a copter for my SIL when he had his accident. He had an hour-long ride on bumpy roads in an ambulance, without pain killers. It was very bad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Of course, copters can't land everywhere, and they're not available everywhere. That also brings up another federal agency--the FAA.

yea oh well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

If our taxes didn't pay for transportation infrastructure, no one (including you) would have a choice.

that's ok. I make do. Adapt and people in other countries have it worse and they ain't complaining anyway. Like I said - I don't expect much in return. Are you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Without the infrastructure, almost no one could travel.

that's why we all gotta pay our share and share a burden.... all for more reason why we should support PPACA. Without proper health care and preventative care for majority of Americans, we would be in trouble.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

It's not reasonable to believe that private services can cover everything.

why not? almost everything is privatized. Our tolls, prisons, security, commerces, defense contractors, customer service, etc. are privatized. Government's their biggest client.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

I think the Federal government is involved in too many things but I also believe that there are some functions (as enumerated in the Constitution) that only the Federal government can and should do.

I agree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Even the privileged can't defend the entire country. Do the privileged have a fleet of ballistic submarines? Do the privileged have nuclear weapons? Do the privileged have war ships? Do they have squadrons of fighter and transport aircraft?

these war machines are designed and built by companies owned by privileged people. Many countries in the world are using our defense contractors to provide security, to assist in drug war, to train a military, and to serve as consultant/meditator/negotiator for hostage situation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

I never said that it was. I do expect the government to keep its word and use it for what was promised.

don't we all? that's why I don't expect much from them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

I don't know to what "line" you're referring. I'm in no hurry to get Medicare, that's for sure.

it's a metaphor. a soup line during Great Depression.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

I never said anything about not liking what the Army has (whatever it is you're referring to).

again - a metaphor for "you just make-do with what we have for you."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

As much as I boost Blackwater (I still prefer that name), they obviously can't provide our country with national defense.

not very concerned about it. there are millions of armed citizens including me who are ready to defend this country together with our soldiers. all I can say to foreign invaders - good luck!

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." -Yamamoto

**Reba** · 06-19-2012, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

not very concerned about it. there are millions of armed citizens including me who are ready to defend this country together with our soldiers. all I can say to foreign invaders - good luck!

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." -Yamamoto

You still don't get it. We don't want to let any foreign invaders land on our shores, fly over our country, or send bombs and missiles to our cities. A good national defense would prevent anything of the enemy even touching our shore or air space, much less being in range of any armed civilians. Who wants them coming to our neighborhoods? I don't want to see the whites of their eyes before getting rid of them.

I don't care how well armed you are; you can't shoot down a missile with what you have. You can't protect our shipping lanes with what you have.

**Jiro** · 06-19-2012, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

You still don't get it. We don't want to let any foreign invaders land on our shores, fly over our country, or send bombs and missiles to our cities. A good national defense would prevent anything of the enemy even touching our shore or air space, much less being in range of any armed civilians. Who wants them coming to our neighborhoods? I don't want to see the whites of their eyes before getting rid of them.

I don't care how well armed you are; you can't shoot down a missile with what you have. You can't protect our shipping lanes with what you have.

still not concerned. when's the last time we've actually had a foreign invasion? Pearl Harbor?

**TXgolfer** · 06-20-2012, 02:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

I'm not referring to retirees. Only those irrational bunch with self-entitlement attitude.

Actually, you said...

Quote:

I trust that the system will improve itself to be less flawed.

The amount of money I leave in a system would be a trifle compared to my retirement fund.

Then I said...

Quote:

Glad you have a plan....many don't. Also, most people consider 12.4% of their income (10.4 currently) to be a significant amount of money and would want it back...If you don't that is your right. *shrug*

then you said

Quote:

ah.... that gimme gimme gimme attitude....

So you were talking about retirees.....at least at one point.

**Reba** · 06-20-2012, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

still not concerned. when's the last time we've actually had a foreign invasion? Pearl Harbor?

The reason we haven't been invaded is because we have a strong national defense. Duh!

**Jiro** · 06-20-2012, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

The reason we haven't been invaded is because we have a strong national defense. Duh!

yes because we have been paying taxes despite of many people who are too poor or too greedy to pay for taxes.

we all share a burden for the sake of national security... so why not another burden for the sake of this country's well-being? at this current rate, I don't think we'll have much of a strong national defense if our nation is too fat and sick to protect ourselves but since PPACA has finally passed.... looks like my confidence has been restored back!

one for all, all for one...

**Jiro** · 06-20-2012, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

So you were talking about retirees.....at least at one point.

again - "irrational bunch with self-entitlement attitude".

As you said.... "Also, most people consider 12.4% of their income (10.4 currently) to be a significant amount of money and would want it back."

if it's currently 10.4%... but they want 12.4%... sounds like gimme gimme gimme!

**TXgolfer** · 06-20-2012, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

again - "irrational bunch with self-entitlement attitude".

You say that now...

Quote:

As you said.... "Also, most people consider 12.4% of their income (10.4 currently) to be a significant amount of money and would want it back."

if it's currently 10.4%... but they want 12.4%... sounds like gimme gimme gimme!

Wow! You really have no understanding of how this works do you? The Feds withhold 12.4% annually to put toward social security. 6.2% paid by the employee....6.2% paid by the employer. For the years 2011 & 2012 the employee contribution is reduced to 4.2% (hello borrowing against SS) thus, "currently 10.4%" total. Self employed people like Reba and I (formerly) pay both halves of that burden. So, yeah most people would consider throwing away 12.4% of their lifetime income to be silly. But if you don't that is your choice.

**Foxrac** · 06-20-2012, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

You say that now...

Wow! You really have no understanding of how this works do you? The Feds withhold 12.4% annually to put toward social security. 6.2% paid by the employee....6.2% paid by the employer. For the years 2011 & 2012 the employee contribution is reduced to 4.2% (hello borrowing against SS) thus, "currently 10.4%" total. Self employed people like Reba and I (formerly) pay both halves of that burden. So, yeah most people would consider throwing away 12.4% of their lifetime income to be silly. But if you don't that is your choice.

That's part of life so quit being whine.

Frisky Feline · 06-20-2012, 02:11 PM

**Jiro** · 06-20-2012, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

You say that now...

Wow! You really have no understanding of how this works do you? The Feds withhold 12.4% annually to put toward social security. 6.2% paid by the employee....6.2% paid by the employer. For the years 2011 & 2012 the employee contribution is reduced to 4.2% (hello borrowing against SS) thus, "currently 10.4%" total. Self employed people like Reba and I (formerly) pay both halves of that burden. So, yeah most people would consider throwing away 12.4% of their lifetime income to be silly. But if you don't that is your choice.

A reduction of 2% tax rate is part of Tax Relief Act of 2010.... which is why you and Reba are paying 10.4% instead of 12.4%. a modest tax cut.

For self-employment, well yea you're both employee and employer but hey... you get to do a heck lot more tax deductions than an employee like me. You're basically saving more money if you do it right and get clever with it.

**Foxrac** · 06-20-2012, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

With a reduction of 2% tax rate, that's a part of Tax Relief Act of 2010.... which is why you and Reba are paying 10.4% instead of 12.4%.

For self-employment, well yea you're both employee and employer but hey... you get to do a heck lot more tax deductions than an employee like me. You're basically saving more money if you do it right and get clever with it.

It looks like TXgolfer had bad tax preparer so that why he didn't get any saving.

**Jiro** · 06-20-2012, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foxrac

It looks like TXgolfer had bad tax preparer so that why he didn't get any saving.

No. He knows money very well. Just that he's obfuscating the issue

**TXgolfer** · 06-20-2012, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

A reduction of 2% tax rate is part of Tax Relief Act of 2010.... which is why you and Reba are paying 10.4% instead of 12.4%. a modest tax cut.

Ah good, so you get it now....except of course that the employed also get this temporary cut. I doubt you understand the concept of how this is in fact a type of loan.....so we will just skip that.

Edit to add.... suffice to say, they are counting on that 2% being recovered at some point. Charities and financial planners would be put in jail for similar dealings.

Quote:

For self-employment, well yea you're both employee and employer but hey... you get to do a heck lot more tax deductions than an employee like me. You're basically saving more money if you do it right and get clever with it.

Depends...for some it is better not to itemize.

**TXgolfer** · 06-20-2012, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

No. He knows money very well. Just that he's obfuscating the issue

Not really, retirees pay that money in. 12.4% of lifetime earnings is alot of money to some. Now if you want to cut off freeloaders....I am all for that.

**Jiro** · 06-20-2012, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

Ah good, so you get it now....except of course that the employed also get this temporary cut. I doubt you understand the concept of how this is in fact a type of loan.....so we will just skip that.

It's not that I don't understand. It's how you perceive it. I, of course, see it differently.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

Edit to add.... suffice to say, they are counting on that 2% being recovered at some point.

gimme gimme gimme!

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

Charities and financial planners would be put in jail for similar dealings.

and? why are you talking about it? it's very simple - you break the law, you go to jail.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

Depends...for some it is better not to itemize.

in your case..... you have a much wider latitude than a regular employee when it comes to itemizing. You flying around... eating out... hotel... your car.... all or mostly itemized

**Reba** · 06-20-2012, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

...Self employed people like Reba and I (formerly) pay both halves of that burden. So, yeah most people would consider throwing away 12.4% of their lifetime income to be silly. But if you don't that is your choice.

Correct. Hubby (TCS) and my daughter also do the same.

Our Federal taxes are about 33%.

**Reba** · 06-20-2012, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foxrac

That's part of life so quit being whine.

If we had a Fair Tax (consumption tax) that you don't like, would you like me to tell you the same thing?

**Reba** · 06-20-2012, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

A reduction of 2% tax rate is part of Tax Relief Act of 2010.... which is why you and Reba are paying 10.4% instead of 12.4%. a modest tax cut.

For self-employment, well yea you're both employee and employer but hey... you get to do a heck lot more tax deductions than an employee like me. You're basically saving more money if you do it right and get clever with it.

You're kidding, right? We get no more tax deductions than anyone else. We have business expenses that are calculated in but they hardly make a dent in the tax burden.

For every $1,000 of expenses, maybe it knocks off $10 from the taxes. Big deal. We never get refunds; we get a bill from the IRS every year.

If by clever you mean dishonest or unethical, no we don't do that.

Our only deductions we get are the same that anyone can get, such as for charitable giving. Even that makes a teeny difference in taxes.

**TXgolfer** · 06-20-2012, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

gimme gimme gimme!

So now the government has the gimme gimme gimme mentality.... I see. That's quite a switch you made there.

Quote:

and? why are you talking about it? it's very simple - you break the law, you go to jail.

That's the way it should be.....but government gets to make different rules for themselves.

Quote:

in your case..... you have a much wider latitude than a regular employee when it comes to itemizing. You flying around... eating out... hotel... your car.... all or mostly itemized

If I were currently in business, yes I would most likely benefit from itemizing.

**Jiro** · 06-20-2012, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

You're kidding, right? We get no more tax deductions than anyone else. We have business expenses that are calculated in but they hardly make a dent in the tax burden.

For every $1,000 of expenses, maybe it knocks off $10 from the taxes. Big deal. We never get refunds; we get a bill from the IRS every year.

If by clever you mean dishonest or unethical, no we don't do that.

Our only deductions we get are the same that anyone can get, such as for charitable giving. Even that makes a teeny difference in taxes.

there you go! just gotta know money and system to maximize your profit, minimize your tax. you may have to live in different state for that.

and no I don't mean by being dishonest or unethical when getting clever with it. if it ain't there, it ain't illegal.... aka loopholes. or yes some people fudge it around and stretch the truth and that's frowned upon.

**Foxrac** · 06-20-2012, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

If we had a Fair Tax (consumption tax) that you don't like, would you like me to tell you the same thing?

Fair Tax isn't in our law book.

It is very impossible to pass Fair Tax, just like gay marriage, though.

**Foxrac** · 06-20-2012, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

You're kidding, right? We get no more tax deductions than anyone else. We have business expenses that are calculated in but they hardly make a dent in the tax burden.

For every $1,000 of expenses, maybe it knocks off $10 from the taxes. Big deal. We never get refunds; we get a bill from the IRS every year.

If by clever you mean dishonest or unethical, no we don't do that.

Our only deductions we get are the same that anyone can get, such as for charitable giving. Even that makes a teeny difference in taxes.

Simple: Use loophole.

GE used that and they don't pay any of income tax.

**Jiro** · 06-20-2012, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

So now the government has the gimme gimme gimme mentality.... I see. That's quite a switch you made there.

never made a switch. Did you miss the part where I'm scorning government for instituting income tax? That's a massive gimme gimme gimme! IRS is a bunch of gimme gimme gimme hoodlums

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

That's the way it should be.....but government gets to make different rules for themselves.

exactly. I'm glad that they're going to remove insider trading exemption for Congress.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

if I were currently in business, yes I would most likely benefit from itemizing.

yes. some people are just clueless about it. or didn't want to do it much out of fear of IRS audit

**Jiro** · 06-20-2012, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foxrac

Simple: Use loophole.

GE used that and they don't pay any of income tax.

no not that simple. big corporations like GE can do that because they have departments and several limousines of fancy-suit lawyers and genius accountants. and plus..... they have politicians in their pockets who would overlook their shady financial dealings.

we don't. but some people do loopholes and most of times - they get caught.... or not.

06-20-2012, 02:11 PM	#70 (permalink)
Frisky Feline Registered User Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 20,239	Reba likes this.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com