IGNORE FAKE PHONE CALLS-JUST HANG UP IMMEDIATELY

[notes1]

within the last week, we have received 3 calls stating the IRS wanted us to call the number provided, or risk prosecution. I feel sorry for those who fall for this stuff. we used to have investigative reporting that would warn consumers about these scams.

there is no reason to be surprised about the amount of fraud and dishonesty that takes place. it has been happening forever. what is new is that it has become more acceptable to some. you were born the wrong color, the wrong sex, did not come from a wealthy family, did not go to the right college, are too short/tall, the list goes on, all good reasons to cheat and lie. nothing is anyone's fault anymore. I am owed success.

knowing all this fraud exists, whether it be welfare or tax cheating, maybe now you can understand why people say, before you take anymore of my money, how about making sure you are spending the money you do get properly.

[DaBurglar]

within the last week, we have received 3 calls stating the IRS wanted us to call the number provided, or risk prosecution. I feel sorry for those who fall for this stuff. we used to have investigative reporting that would warn consumers about these scams.

there is no reason to be surprised about the amount of fraud and dishonesty that takes place. it has been happening forever. what is new is that it has become more acceptable to some. you were born the wrong color, the wrong sex, did not come from a wealthy family, did not go to the right college, are too short/tall, the list goes on, all good reasons to cheat and lie. nothing is anyone's fault anymore. I am owed success.

knowing all this fraud exists, whether it be welfare or tax cheating, maybe now you can understand why people say, before you take anymore of my money, how about making sure you are spending the money you do get properly. I agree with all this, ALL of it.    I never had a problem understanding the gripe of people, myself included, that all the taxes and fees honest people are compelled to pay really ought to be enough to cover everything society NEEDS in all areas and facets of life ...... but as always, you and I both know it is NOT that simple, straightforward, but is in fact much more complex and muddled.   And you and I also know that CONGRESS KEEPS IT THAT WAY, complex, confused and muddled because that is how they insure people like YOU and I are discouraged from truly pursuing and exposing this crap!     All you have to do is look at how the whole federal spending, budget process, earmarks, compromises etc etc  "Works" and you will see what I mean....Every year, responsible, conservative senators and congresspersons (OF BOTH PARTIES)  regularly publish and decry countless examples of wasteful government spending....it is no secret, it really is not.   It is public info that is available to anyone who want sit or is interested.....so what is the probleM?       Well in a nutshell,   "PORK" is what makes our so-called  representational government work!   and Our senators and congresspeople are addicted to it.....It has been this way pretty much since the civil war, except the scale and scope has continued to expand as each new "LINE" or theshold is crossed.     And this is something that, without doubt, BOTH parties are responsible for going back since World War 2......everytime the Federal DEBT limit was extended, without any real committment to address it the next fiscal period via spending cuts and tax increases, the congress made it easier to do it all again.....to the point now where it MUST be done each time in order to prevent a full scale societal meltdown/shutdown!What is truly needed, notes1 and anyone else reading, is/are congressional (senate & house) members of ANY party who are flat out committed to addressing this spending fiasco that currently exists each fiscal year in congress, and are willing to forgo and forget any other issues or short term objectives FOR THEMSELVES (like a preoccupation with re-election and securing some sort of post congressional lucrative career)  and instead   CUT/SLASH/RE-EVALUATE  all the spending of the federal government, including significant cuts (at least short term) and better strategic allocation for funds to the Defense department/military,  while at the same time initiating a short term (relatively speaking) 5 year TAX hike Program that does indeed go after the extremely wealthy and any and all funds they attempt to "hide" or sit on in places like the cayman islands, etc. (in TRUTH this 5 year  "hike" is in fact mostly a ROLLING back of all the massive tax cuts to the wealthy that the Bush Administration implemented during its 8 years, that the congress WILLINGLY and enthusiastically went along with)  

[notes1]

you are puzzling. appreciate you agreeing with my post, but you then end, wanting more taxes.

answer this, why are we always threatened with SS running out of money, when it was paid for by working folks and their employers. yet, we never hear the same threat of running out money for welfare, even though some who receive it, likely never paid a dime of federal taxes.

why is it such a crime to suggest that those able bodied folks who receive government support, be required to perform public service, in return?

[DaBurglar]

you are puzzling. appreciate you agreeing with my post, but you then end, wanting more taxes.  answer this, why are we always threatened with SS running out of money, when it was paid for by working folks and their employers. yet, we never hear the same threat of running out money for welfare, even though some who receive it, likely never paid a dime of federal taxes.
why is it such a crime to suggest that those able bodied folks who receive government support, be required to perform public service, in return? 
I do not  "WANT" more taxes!!!   I was putting forth a scenario (and a realistic one at that) whereby the Government (or the PEOPLE electing the government) are 100% serious about putting a dent in the massive DEBT owed by the uSA.    The only way to seriously pay off (or payback) a significant portion of the 20 trillion+ owed is to BOTH slash spending and raise revenue.....and the second part most likely requires SOME increased or new taxes on the wealthy.   IT MUST.....and as I said, it would mostly mean  putting them back (temporarily ) to where they were in 2001.   Now, mind you this is simple MATH.    George H.W. Bush knew this, and EVEN Ronald Reagan in his last year in office finally gave in and acknowledged this fact, that the theory of SUPPLY SIDE economics, where you can CUT taxes and INCREASE revenue by Significant amounts, is a total crock.        We need to at the very least pay off MOST of the debt that is owed to foreign interests (especially potentially HOSTILE foreign interests like China & Russia) which means 4-5 Trillion in the next 5-7 years......I dont know what you are so miffed about here.....YOU are not the person who would be paying more in my system of doing things!   Yearggh   <Bangs head on wall>I agree with the principles of what you seem to be advocating in your previous post, but then you ask a question (re:  Why is SSI running out of money yet Welfare is not?) that I just do not comprehend on many levels.    SSI & welfare are not even in the same solar system, so to speak.    And SSI, with its warped history, its byzantine ACCOUNTING methods that the federal government applies to it, and its busted "business model" (Busted in the sense that the demographics of the USA, with its Baby Boomer SURGE and the fact people are living way way way past the point originally conceived)  make it far more complicated than "Welfare".....and you need to specify, WHAT welfare you actually are talking about?   There are numerous, federal, state and city programs that can be termed "Welfare", and they are just that, limited PROGRAMs designed for specific people with specific circumstances, whereas SSI is a massive general fund that applies to anyone and everyone in some shape or form!And it is NOT a  "CRIME" to suggest what you claim you are intending to suggest, lol!   Where did you come up with that?    If able bodied (and sound minded) people are receiving "Welfare" then that itself might be a CRIME (you need to be more specific on that count as to the details of the specific person and situation)       Sadly, as with all programs, there is Social Security Fraud and of course, Welfare fraud, but of the two I am sure you fathom that SSI/SSDI fraud is the more massive and intractable......When you can have DEAD people receiving SSI funds for 15-20 years, with the $$ going to greedy lazy relatives or friends (or Home care nurses, or you name it......) then obviously the system is rife with leaks.     But like Medicare, fixing SSI is almost as cost intensive as the fraud it enables.

[notes1]

not miffed at all. rolling back tax reductions, is a tax increase.

f/y/I, top fed rate 39.6%, CA tax rate can be 13%, add in SS tax, sales tax, property taxes, other taxes, those at the top (not me) can pay 50% tax on their earned income. oh and b/t/w, they get reduced deductions.

and, yes I know capital gains tax are less, but we have already paid taxes on the income we made, before we could invest, to maybe have cap gains.

how much more do you want? (bang head against wall)

[Tedlark]

notes you forgot to say: Yearggh.

[DaBurglar]

not miffed at all. rolling back tax reductions, is a tax increase.

f/y/I, top fed rate 39.6%, CA tax rate can be 13%, add in SS tax, sales tax, property taxes, other taxes, those at the top (not me) can pay 50% tax on their earned income. oh and b/t/w, they get reduced deductions.

and, yes I know capital gains tax are less, but we have already paid taxes on the income we made, before we could invest, to maybe have cap gains.

how much more do you want? (bang head against wall)



I dont WANT a friggin dime......what I do want is someone to tell me where the money will come from to PAY down some of the debt when the time comes to do so.   And I want a realistic, HONEST, non Bullsh*t speculative answer.FYI  I used to live in California, so you just reminded me of one of the reasons I left and  moved back to New england.....out there I worked for others and was taxed excessively mainly because I was single with no children or dependents to help with that aspect.....it was quite exasperating.     Here i work for myself, but its only marginally better since Massachusetts is also a Tax heavy state.....but I feel its better here than there.

[DaBurglar]

notes you forgot to say: Yearggh.excellent well thought out contribution to this latest discussion.....

[ko king]

[QUOTE=notes1]you are puzzling. appreciate you agreeing with my post, but you then end, wanting more taxes.  answer this, why are we always threatened with SS running out of money, when it was paid for by working folks and their employers. yet, we never hear the same threat of running out money for welfare, even though some who receive it, likely never paid a dime of federal taxes.
why is it such a crime to suggest that those able bodied folks who receive government support, be required to perform public service, in return? 
I do not  "WANT" more taxes!!!   I was putting forth a scenario (and a realistic one at that) whereby the Government (or the PEOPLE electing the government) are 100% serious about putting a dent in the massive DEBT owed by the uSA.    The only way to seriously pay off (or payback) a significant portion of the 20 trillion+ owed is to BOTH slash spending and raise revenue.....and the second part most likely requires SOME increased or new taxes on the wealthy.   IT MUST.....and as I said, it would mostly mean  putting them back (temporarily ) to where they were in 2001.   Now, mind you this is simple MATH.    George H.W. Bush knew this, and EVEN Ronald Reagan in his last year in office finally gave in and acknowledged this fact, that the theory of SUPPLY SIDE economics, where you can CUT taxes and INCREASE revenue by Significant amounts, is a total crock.        We need to at the very least pay off MOST of the debt that is owed to foreign interests (especially potentially HOSTILE foreign interests like China & Russia) which means 4-5 Trillion in the next 5-7 years......I dont know what you are so miffed about here.....YOU are not the person who would be paying more in my system of doing things!   Yearggh   <Bangs head on wall>I agree with the principles of what you seem to be advocating in your previous post, but then you ask a question (re:  Why is SSI running out of money yet Welfare is not?) that I just do not comprehend on many levels.    SSI & welfare are not even in the same solar system, so to speak.    And SSI, with its warped history, its byzantine ACCOUNTING methods that the federal government applies to it, and its busted "business model" (Busted in the sense that the demographics of the USA, with its Baby Boomer SURGE and the fact people are living way way way past the point originally conceived)  make it far more complicated than "Welfare".....and you need to specify, WHAT welfare you actually are talking about?   There are numerous, federal, state and city programs that can be termed "Welfare", and they are just that, limited PROGRAMs designed for specific people with specific circumstances, whereas SSI is a massive general fund that applies to anyone and everyone in some shape or form!And it is NOT a  "CRIME" to suggest what you claim you are intending to suggest, lol!   Where did you come up with that?    If able bodied (and sound minded) people are receiving "Welfare" then that itself might be a CRIME (you need to be more specific on that count as to the details of the specific person and situation)       Sadly, as with all programs, there is Social Security Fraud and of course, Welfare fraud, but of the two I am sure you fathom that SSI/SSDI fraud is the more massive and intractable......When you can have DEAD people receiving SSI funds for 15-20 years, with the $$ going to greedy lazy relatives or friends (or Home care nurses, or you name it......) then obviously the system is rife with leaks.     But like Medicare, fixing SSI is almost as cost intensive as the fraud it enables.

[/QUOTE]

I've read a few reports that stated that the federal government took in more revenue the last few years than it ever has in the history of this country. Best I can remember 2014 was a record breaker and 2015 revenue exceeded that.

[DaBurglar]

  I've read a few reports that stated that the federal government took in more revenue the last few years than it ever has in the history of this country. Best I can remember 2014 was a record breaker and 2015 revenue exceeded that. I'd really like to see that report if you can possibly remember it KO.....but I can allow myself to believe this on faith alone.....the actual SIZE of the economy & GNP/GDP  in terms of sheer dollars is obviously larger every year, which means, if conditions are right and if problems with collecting revenue are LOW, the fed govt  can indeed have an occasional "GOOD YEAR"......