PDA

View Full Version : What Democrats Have In Store For You


gmsisko1
11-01-2006, 01:00 PM
WHAT THE DEMOCRATS HAVE IN STORE FOR YOU. TODAY'S INSTALLMENT

Again .. do I think that the Republicans have earned our continued permission to control both the House and the Senate in Washington? Not only no, but hell no. The best that can be said of the Republicans now is that they're not Democrats, though they seem to be trying to erase any differences as fast as they can. Republicans in control for two more years --- spending and increasing the size of government --- is an acceptable outcome next week only because the alternative is so much worse.

This week I'm detailing some of the plans that the Democrats have for you and your bank accounts if and when they get the control that they think is their birthright.

Today I want to share with you another delicious little morsel the Democrats have waiting for you if they ever gain the political power they so ardently desire. It's called "imputed income." If you are a home owner, pay attention. This concerns your wallet and your bank account.

Let me start this off with a few points that I don't think you will dispute. Democrats are the party of big government. Democrats are the party of the social welfare state. Democrats want to make more and more Americans dependent on government because they know that the higher the degree of dependency the weaker the people and the stronger the government. It goes without saying that the stronger and more powerful government becomes, the stronger and more powerful the politicians who control that government become. This isn't rocket surgery here.

Money in the hands of the people who earned it contributes to their personal independence. Independent people don't need politicians. Money taken from those who earn it and then used to build the government social welfare state robs people of their independence. Democrats love this scenario. They want you to be dependent on government. To do that they need to take your money and use it to grow the federal welfare state. This is why Democrats just love the idea of tax increases.

To be sure, Democrats know that all of their rhetoric about raising taxes on the rich and the rich "paying their fair share" resonates well with their voter base. Playing to wealth envy will always earn votes ... but nothing earns votes quite like dependence on government. Creating that dependence, though, is an expensive proposition. To cover the tab the Democrats have to drain every penny from your pocket that they can -- right up to the point that you decide it's time to revolt.

Democrats will tell you that they only want to raise taxes on the so-called "rich." Nancy Pelosi will probably come up with some figure in the $200,000 or $250,000 range to describe "rich" when she and her Democrat pals start to work on their tax increase plans. But here's a warning. If you happen to fall below that "rich" category, you're in their crosshairs as well. They have various schemes in the works to put you smack in the middle of the "rich" category, and thus set you up for some pretty substantial tax increases.

One such scheme targets homeowners. It's called "imputed income," and its a brilliant and devious idea on how to tax your home ownership.

Here's how it works.

Let's say that you've owned your home for about 20 years. For 20 years your home has been appreciating in value ... big time. Your monthly payments on that home are about $550 a month. Remember, it's a 20-year-old loan made when the cost of your home was much, much less. There isn't much of a home mortgage tax deduction left at this point since you almost have the home paid off, and the bulk of your payments go to principal instead of interest.

The very fact that you're living in such a nice home, and paying so little, attracts the interest of Democrats. They know that there are a lot of people in your neighborhood that paid a lot more for their homes than you did, and their mortgage payments are a lot higher. Not only that, but there are other people renting homes in your neighborhood and they're paying much more than you are every month. It's obvious that you're enjoying some great economic benefit due to the fact that you've owned your home for so long and your payments are so low. Well, where there's an economic benefit, there must be a tax!

Enter the concept of imputed income!

Under this wonderful plan, first floated by Clinton Democrats before the voter revolution of 1994, the government would figure out how much your home would rent for every month. To do this they would use all of that census data they've gathered, plus any information that they can develop on current sale and rental prices up and down your street.

Let's say that the government --- the IRS, if you will --- determines that your home would rent for $3,250 a month. That would add up to $39,000 a year. But the IRS discovers that you're only paying $550 a month, or $6,600 a year in rent. Well, there's that economic benefit you're enjoying by virtue of your long-term home ownership. The economic benefit of your home ownership is the difference between the $39,000 you should be paying to live there, and the $6,600 you're actually paying. Do the math. You're getting away with $32,400 every year in non-taxed economic benefits!

The Democrat plan is simple. Just take that $32,400 and add it to your taxable income on your next tax return. Then you get the privilege of paying income taxes to the federal government on the economic benefit you derive from your long-term home ownership. The IRS has "evened the playing field" in your neighborhood ... so to speak. Your neighbors had to pay taxes on the full $39,000 they're paying to live down the street ... now you're having to do the same. After all ... it's only fair, right!

Just remember this. Democrats actually believe that the best use for every single penny you earn is for it to be spent by government for what they love to call the "common good." They will grudgingly allow you to keep enough of your earnings to avoid your participation in a full-scale tax revolt. A good Democrat knows that only Democrats and the government know what is good for you, and that you will be so much better off and your life oh so much better if you will just succumb to the power of government and it's ability to care for you much better than you can care for yourself.

In tomorrow's Nuze ... what would you think about a proposal to limit where you can invest your retirement funds ... a limit based on political correctness.



By: Boortz

paulc
11-01-2006, 01:24 PM
What would be the situation if you were to sign your house over to one or all your kids, if you have any.
Or if you were in a situation were a couple were childless, youd be safer selling your home and renting it off the buyer, just to keep the Gov from getting it,
something similar happens in the UK.

WindWip
11-01-2006, 03:36 PM
When I read a title that says "What Democrats Have In Store For You" I already know that there is a major bias in the article. I will be humbled if you bring up an actual fair and balanced article (FOX doesn't count).

Travh20
11-01-2006, 03:41 PM
I look forward to a democrat leaderhip. I say let them have a chance. Besides, I want to see how quickly all of our problems dissapear form the media and how suddenly the economy is doing so great.

paulc
11-01-2006, 03:47 PM
It would take more than a few weak Democrats to fix what them morons in Washington have done.

Travh20
11-01-2006, 03:54 PM
LOL, what makes you think either party wants to fix anything? its fixed just perfect for them now, they get to stay in office no matter what happens. what we need is a reformation.

paulc
11-01-2006, 04:05 PM
Unfortunatly if thats the case, more people are gonna die in Iraq.Afghanistan.Lebanon.Palestine.Europe and United States.
I would agree,I personally think the two party system in US just dosent work.

WindWip
11-01-2006, 04:29 PM
I think we need a more educated society. Either that or a standardized test that you have to take in order to be allowed to vote. Something that makes sure that you can read, write, do basic algebra and that you know at least who the president and vice president are.

paulc
11-01-2006, 04:47 PM
Might be a better idea if nobody voted, say a protest thing.
Too many people in America, like most Western Countries vote blindly for 'their party'.The whole things grinding to a halt, especially in a 2 party state.

BorgHunter
11-01-2006, 04:51 PM
A Democratic House is almost a certainty for the 110th Congress. The Senate could go either way. A split government like that is almost always good.

Travh20
11-01-2006, 04:53 PM
IU think so too, its beter to have the prez be one thing and the congress be another, this much I have learned in the past couple of years

paulc
11-01-2006, 04:59 PM
I aint 100pc on how it works guys.If the Reps rule the Senate,and the Demos rule the Congress, right, does a Republican President need majority in both houses to get things done.

WindWip
11-01-2006, 05:25 PM
Might be a better idea if nobody voted, say a protest thing.
Too many people in America, like most Western Countries vote blindly for 'their party'.The whole things grinding to a halt, especially in a 2 party state.
Ok, I'll let everyone else not vote, then cast mine at the last second :thumbs:

WindWip
11-01-2006, 05:25 PM
I aint 100pc on how it works guys.If the Reps rule the Senate,and the Demos rule the Congress, right, does a Republican President need majority in both houses to get things done.
It definitely limits the prez. But limitation can be a good thing.

paulc
11-01-2006, 07:49 PM
Ok, I'll let everyone else not vote, then cast mine at the last second :thumbs:
I like it.

500lbguerilla
11-01-2006, 08:10 PM
Snake Oil and the
Midterm Elections

by Joshua Frank

So we are in the trenches of another election season, and if you peer closely you can see the explosions on the horizon. I've yet to be convinced the Democrats have the capacity to take back Congress, and to tell you the truth I don't really care if they do. Not only do they not have the ability to lead, they also do not possess the moral impetus to change the direction of this war if they are lucky enough to regain control. Indeed, they are just as responsible for the ruin in Iraq and back home as the Bushites.

The Democrats have assisted the Republicans at virtually every turn over the past six years. From the bloody invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq to the support of the PATRIOT Act, to the dismantling of habeas corpus, to backing Israel's brutal assault on Lebanon – the Democratic Party has long played the role of enabler. And now they want your vote.
http://www.antiwar.com/frank/?articleid=9946

Evakian
11-01-2006, 08:44 PM
Oh god, we were all missing our bi-daily dose of Boortz courtesy of sisko.

Brooks
11-01-2006, 09:14 PM
I would agree,I personally think the two party system in US just dosent work.What exactly does this mean?
Which nation's system should we substitute for our own?

LionelHutz
11-01-2006, 10:21 PM
When I read a title that says "What Democrats Have In Store For You" I already know that there is a major bias in the article.

It's an opinion piece (albeit one of limited value) - of course it's biased.

Jester
11-02-2006, 04:39 AM
I aint 100pc on how it works guys.If the Reps rule the Senate,and the Demos rule the Congress, right, does a Republican President need majority in both houses to get things done.You always need a majority in both houses for any legislation to be passed, whether the legislation originates in Congress or is proposed by the President. That's why it's harder for the President to carry out his agenda if one of the houses is controlled by the opposite party. And that's usually a good thing since it forces moderation.

gmsisko1
11-02-2006, 06:57 AM
Does CNN count? How about USA today??? (The answer is no)

Please let me know what is not fact in that article. Thanks


When I read a title that says "What Democrats Have In Store For You" I already know that there is a major bias in the article. I will be humbled if you bring up an actual fair and balanced article (FOX doesn't count).

gmsisko1
11-02-2006, 07:01 AM
When and if the Dems get elected, we will be taxed out of our @#$

Excessive taxes will only hurt the economy. Here is an exellent point in the article.




One such scheme targets homeowners. It's called "imputed income," and its a brilliant and devious idea on how to tax your home ownership.

Here's how it works.

Let's say that you've owned your home for about 20 years. For 20 years your home has been appreciating in value ... big time. Your monthly payments on that home are about $550 a month. Remember, it's a 20-year-old loan made when the cost of your home was much, much less. There isn't much of a home mortgage tax deduction left at this point since you almost have the home paid off, and the bulk of your payments go to principal instead of interest.

The very fact that you're living in such a nice home, and paying so little, attracts the interest of Democrats. They know that there are a lot of people in your neighborhood that paid a lot more for their homes than you did, and their mortgage payments are a lot higher. Not only that, but there are other people renting homes in your neighborhood and they're paying much more than you are every month. It's obvious that you're enjoying some great economic benefit due to the fact that you've owned your home for so long and your payments are so low. Well, where there's an economic benefit, there must be a tax!

paulc
11-02-2006, 08:09 AM
What exactly does this mean?
Which nation's system should we substitute for our own?
I wouldnt suggest American politics copys any other countrys system, but your in dire need for a 3 party system.
PS. Not like you to come out and support John Kerry, Brooks.
These must be the troops he was talking about, you know, the ones who cant spell 'IraQ'.

DanF
11-02-2006, 10:29 AM
The country is so divided on opinions.
I was watching CSpan for a few minutes and one caller called in and said that
the Republicans are the party of opportunity and the Democrats were the party of victims.
The next caller said that the Republicans are the party of opportunists and the Democratic party was the party of victimizers.

Art Linkletter was correct:"people are funny."

Evil Homer
11-02-2006, 01:26 PM
I wouldnt suggest American politics copys any other countrys system, but your in dire need for a 3 party system.
PS. Not like you to come out and support John Kerry, Brooks.
These must be the troops he was talking about, you know, the ones who cant spell 'IraQ'.

It was a joke Paul...

WindWip
11-02-2006, 02:11 PM
Let me start this off with a few points that I don't think you will dispute. Democrats are the party of big government. Democrats are the party of the social welfare state. Ok.

Democrats want to make more and more Americans dependent on government because they know that the higher the degree of dependency the weaker the people and the stronger the government.
They want to make more people dependent on government? Oh please. This is verging on a conspiracy theory.

It goes without saying that the stronger and more powerful government becomes, the stronger and more powerful the politicians who control that government become. This isn't rocket surgery here.
No this isn't 'rocket surgery' - I don't think anything is 'rocket surgery'.

Money in the hands of the people who earned it contributes to their personal independence. Independent people don't need politicians.
Bullshit. This is absolute total BS. If you have money then you don't need politicians, which means that you don't need government. Fine, lets go back into anarchy - every man for himself.

Money taken from those who earn it and then used to build the government social welfare state robs people of their independence. Democrats love this scenario.
Here he goes again, telling us how Democrats think.

They want you to be dependent on government. To do that they need to take your money and use it to grow the federal welfare state. This is why Democrats just love the idea of tax increases.
I swear, this nutjob is worse than that guy that said 9-11 was caused by the government.

To be sure, Democrats know that all of their rhetoric about raising taxes on the rich and the rich "paying their fair share" resonates well with their voter base. Playing to wealth envy will always earn votes ... but nothing earns votes quite like dependence on government.
No it doesn't. I hate excessively large governments. BTW I think that Bush has been forcing the government to grow with his expansion of the military, increasing debt, the patriot act, etc....

Creating that dependence, though, is an expensive proposition. To cover the tab the Democrats have to drain every penny from your pocket that they can -- right up to the point that you decide it's time to revolt.
Oh really. More expensive than war? Personally I hate both welfare and pointless wars, but I would rather pay my money to welfare than to a war like the one in Iraq.

Enter the concept of imputed income!
Imputed income is the term the I.R.S. applies to the value of any benefit or service that should be considered income for the purposes of calculating your federal taxes. It is in effect right now, it is not a proposal in the works.

Under this wonderful plan, first floated by Clinton Democrats before the voter revolution of 1994, the government would figure out how much your home would rent for every month. To do this they would use all of that census data they've gathered, plus any information that they can develop on current sale and rental prices up and down your street.

Let's say that the government --- the IRS, if you will --- determines that your home would rent for $3,250 a month. That would add up to $39,000 a year. But the IRS discovers that you're only paying $550 a month, or $6,600 a year in rent. Well, there's that economic benefit you're enjoying by virtue of your long-term home ownership. The economic benefit of your home ownership is the difference between the $39,000 you should be paying to live there, and the $6,600 you're actually paying. Do the math. You're getting away with $32,400 every year in non-taxed economic benefits!
This is retarded. This guy knows nothing of real estate. The 550 a month, or property tax (actually payed once or twice a year) IS NOT RENT!!! It is what you owe for OWNING the house. Renting out the house is COMPLETELY different. That is income - the tax you pay for owning a house is not income. No you are not 'getting away' with money for living there. You paid for the damn place when you bought it so that you wouldn't have to pay rent. gmsisko, you asked me if anything he said was not true - this whole article is a load of crap. I feel stupid for having read it.

sedan
11-02-2006, 02:39 PM
Please let me know what is not fact in that article. ThanksEverything. Except, oddly enough, this one statement:

This is not rocket surgery.

He really hit the nail on the head with that one!

I did a search for this so-called 'Democratic plan' and could find nothing other than this same article by Boortz. Do you have any evidence that this is anything but a total fabrication on his part?

paulc
11-02-2006, 03:57 PM
It was a joke Paul...
I never could get the hang of American humor, just ask Sedan, hes always firing them, and I miss them everytime.

fluffernutter
11-03-2006, 01:42 AM
When and if the Dems get elected, we will be taxed out of our @#$
Please stop with the myth that the GOP actually cut taxes. Any tax cut without a corresponding cut in spending is nothing more than a deferred tax hike and you don't need to be a rocket surgeon to figure that out.

gmsisko1
11-03-2006, 05:20 PM
Okay some od it is opinion, but none of it is false.


Everything. Except, oddly enough, this one statement:

This is not rocket surgery.

He really hit the nail on the head with that one!

I did a search for this so-called 'Democratic plan' and could find nothing other than this same article by Boortz. Do you have any evidence that this is anything but a total fabrication on his part?

The Praetorian
11-03-2006, 05:26 PM
Everything. Except, oddly enough, this one statement:

This is not rocket surgery.
LMFAO!

unlawflcombatnt
11-06-2006, 03:52 AM
Let me start this off with a few points that I don't think you will dispute. Democrats are the party of big government.

Yes, in fact, I do dispute that. Republicans have been giving increasingly larger amounts of taxpayers' money to Corporate America since Bush stole his first election. In fact, it is the Republicans who are the party of "welfare." In this case, it's Corporate Welfare. And guess what? Corporate Welfare costs taxpayers many times the amount of money that social welfare costs. That's what the Republi-thugs don't want anyone to know about. Republicans have taken more and more from American taxpayers, while reducing money available for those who are truly needy. Increasing profits at the taxpayer's expense is more important than taking care of the rest of America.

Napsterbater
11-06-2006, 09:23 AM
I never could get the hang of American humor, just ask Sedan, hes always firing them, and I miss them everytime.

Sorry, mate, you just get left out of the loop. Satire is one of those types of humor that just doesn't cross country lines very well. It isn't your inability to get the funny, it's your not having been inundated with enough culture to even know what he's getting at. I say it's your gain, not loss.

paulc
11-06-2006, 11:13 AM
Thanks, I think.

Freethinker
11-06-2006, 01:04 PM
Let me start this off with a few points that I don't think you will dispute. Democrats are the party of big government. ____Boortz

True, Boortz!!

TRUE.

Unfortunately, as the past 6 years have irrefutably demonstrated, the Republicans are the Party of even BIGGER government.

Democrats are the party of the social welfare state.

True.......but 2 points here; I did not notice the Republicans abolishing this e-ville 'welfare State' while enjoying absolute control of Government for 6 years.........and the largest Federal reform of Welfare and the largest cuts to welfare were signed into law by an evil Demoncrat named Bill Clinton, ....NOT by a Republican.


Democrats want to make more and more Americans dependent on government because they know that the higher the degree of dependency the weaker the people and the stronger the government.

And they do that to EXACTLY the same degree that Washington Republicans do it.

It goes without saying that the stronger and more powerful government becomes, the stronger and more powerful the politicians who control that government become.

Absolutely. A point that is near and dear to the hearts of the ConservaFascists of all stripes, both Democrat AND Republican.

To be sure, Democrats know that all of their rhetoric about raising taxes on the rich and the rich "paying their fair share" resonates well with their voter base.

While the RepubliFascists prefer the ceaseless mantra of *God-Guns-and-Guts* to mobilize THEIR immense base of 2 digit IQ bumpkins.

Playing to wealth envy will always earn votes ... but nothing earns votes quite like dependence on government. ]

Au contraire.

The greatest vote garnering ploy in the history of mankind belongs to the RepubliFascists---i.e., -- "We are a Godly nation that needs men of God, men of morality in government, and we are under constant threat of invasion from the evil darkskinned foreign hordes who are jealous of what he have!!"

(as so aptly noted by Goring ----"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger".")

The Democrat plan is simple. Just take that $32,400 and add it to your taxable income on your next tax return. Then you get the privilege of paying income taxes to the federal government on the economic benefit you derive from your long-term home ownership.

If the plan is viewed as not being in the best interests of the People, let the Republicans shout their opposition from the rooftops, and vote against it.

Just remember this. Democrats actually believe that the best use for every single penny you earn is for it to be spent by government for what they love to call the "common good."

Just remember this. ALL ConservaFascists --whether Dem or Repub-- are 100% convinced that the best use for your taxdolars is for them to be spent by government for what they euphemisticall call "defense".........which is simply another way of saying --"We're going to hand over a half TRILLION taxdollars or more every year to the military/Industrial complex, i.e., huge "Defense" contractors like General Electric, Lockheed, Grumman and Halliburton".