taxes (ndc)

1 view
Skip to first unread message

theothr1

unread,
Mar 31, 2007, 11:09:19 AM3/31/07
to
Anyone think it's possible to get
a box on the tax form next year,
that allows the individual to
opt out, sending their taxes for war?


Bzl.

unread,
Mar 31, 2007, 11:33:02 AM3/31/07
to

"theothr1" <theo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:wQuPh.1880$H_5....@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net...

Sure. It's also possible to face Federal charges for doing so.


Edwin Hurwitz

unread,
Mar 31, 2007, 11:43:46 AM3/31/07
to
In article <wQuPh.1880$H_5....@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net>,
"theothr1" <theo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Yep, it will read "Send my taxes directly to Halliburton!"


Edwin

DGDevin

unread,
Mar 31, 2007, 12:36:50 PM3/31/07
to
"theothr1" <theo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:wQuPh.1880$H_5....@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net...

> Anyone think it's possible to get

Sure, although that will allow everyone else to opt-out of their taxes being
used for things they don't approve of too, like welfare, or NASA, or the
teaching of evolution in public schools or whatever. Is that how you want
it to work, everybody gets to say what their taxes can or cannot be used
for, or were you thinking of just people who agree with you?


Message has been deleted

DGDevin

unread,
Mar 31, 2007, 1:04:55 PM3/31/07
to
"No one's noticed" <Mark....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1175360297....@y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

>
>> Sure, although that will allow everyone else to opt-out of their taxes
>> being
>> used for things they don't approve of too, like welfare, or NASA, or the
>> teaching of evolution in public schools or whatever. Is that how you
>> want
>> it to work, everybody gets to say what their taxes can or cannot be used
>> for, or were you thinking of just people who agree with you?
>
>
> Fabulous idea. That's *absolutely* how it should work.
> Doesn't that sound democratic to you?

There's this representative democracy thing where the people elect
representatives who will spend the taxes and if the people don't like how
it's done they can vote out the reps and choose someone else, but if you
want every last taxpayer to have micro-management say over the whole deal
you have some explaining to do about how that's gonna work.


Message has been deleted

DGDevin

unread,
Mar 31, 2007, 2:24:50 PM3/31/07
to
"No one's noticed" <Mark....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1175364552.8...@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...

>> There's this representative democracy thing where the people elect
>> representatives who will spend the taxes and if the people don't like how

>> it's done they can vote out the reps and choose someone.
>
> That's an adorable idea. And we tried it. It's morphed into something
> unrecognizable.

Then all you have to do is explain your superior system.

> Our representatives are debating a $140 billion war "emergency
> spending bill" that includes $20 million for Mormon cricket
> eradication? What? How'd that get in there?
>
> Who's ready for version 2? By show of hands.

So if your car has a flat tire or a dead battery you get rid of the whole
thing instead of fixing what's wrong?


Message has been deleted

Octopus Ride

unread,
Mar 31, 2007, 2:44:14 PM3/31/07
to

"No one's noticed" <Mark....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1175364552.8...@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...

> On Mar 31, 1:04 pm, "DGDevin" <dgde...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>> There's this representative democracy thing where the people elect
>> representatives who will spend the taxes and if the people don't like how
>> it's done they can vote out the reps and choose someone.

> That's an adorable idea. And we tried it. It's morphed into something
> unrecognizable.
>

> Our representatives are debating a $140 billion war "emergency
> spending bill" that includes $20 million for Mormon cricket
> eradication? What? How'd that get in there?
>
> Who's ready for version 2? By show of hands.

The interesting thing is how this debate has been turned on its head.

Until this administration, war and military spending (especially when we
know it will be needed in advance as opposed to some actual emergency that
just popped up) has always been included in the regular budget and spent via
the annual defense appropriations bill. This war is being financed off
budget, not subject to normal budget procedures or rules (like finding
offsets for new spending). Its not like they didn't know last year that
money would be needed this year. This has been going on for four years and
this massive spending is still not included in the budget or in the defense
appropriations bill.

Until this administration the annual supplemental emergency appropriations
bill existed exactly to fund things like Mormon cricket eradication, drought
relief, crop failure assistance, hurricane relief, earthquake relief, flood
relief, etc. A lot of it was always pork, but the ostensible purpose of
this annual bill is to fund actual emergency spending for unforseen
disasters in the United States.

Now we hear the right wing whining about spending that has always been the
ostensible SOLE PURPOSE of this bill being included in the bill where it
rightly belongs! They act as if the emergency supplemental appropriations
bill is supposed to be for war funding and that relief from domestic
disasters belongs somewhere else.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The truth is that this annual bill
exists to fund relief from domestic disasters and that war and military
spending belongs in the on-budget defense appropriations bill. It was the
Bush administration that corrupted the entire concept of the bill and they
are using it to spend hundreds of billions of dollars for inappropriate
purposes. This is the domestic disaster / pork bill!

Even if we leave that argument aside, I have to say its bizarre to complain
about 20 million to eradicate a plague of locusts and a hundred million to
fund rural schools when they're blowing yet another hundred BILLION on a
failed war we will never win.

OR


Octopus Ride

unread,
Mar 31, 2007, 2:49:26 PM3/31/07
to

"No one's noticed" <Mark....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1175366454....@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

> On Mar 31, 2:24 pm, "DGDevin" <dgde...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> So if your car has a flat tire or a dead battery you get rid of the whole
>> thing instead of fixing what's wrong?
>
> Not crazy about the "flat tire" analogy. And whatever that thing is,
> it's not a car anymore.
>
> By the way here's the extra $40 billion of "ornaments" on the $103
> billion "christmas tree" emergency spending bill
> (from the New York Times OpEd)
>
> This is how your representatives get re-elected. It is a corrupt,
> broken system.
>
> SENATE
> $1.98 Million Land acquisitionm
> $2 Million Uganda peace process
> $2 Million Repairing ditch irrigation systems
> $3 Million Sugar cane cooperative (Hawaii)
> $3.2 Million Vietnam, for environmental remediation of dioxin
> storage sites
> $3.5 Million Guided tours of the Capitol
> $6 Million Flooded crop and grazing land
> $6 Million Nepal, for election aid, reintegration of former
> combatants, and other assistance to the peace process
> $6 Million Philippines, for typhoon relief
> $13 Million Ewe lamb replacement and retention
> $13 Million Save Americas Treasures
> $20 Million Mormon cricket eradication (Nevada)
> $24 Million Sugar beet production (Minnesota)
> $26 Million Asbestos abatement at the Capitol power plant
> $25 Million Safe and Drug Free Schools program
> $30 Million Farm Service Agency, for administration in hiring
> employees and computer upgrades
> $40 Million Tree Assistance Program (bill defines tree as
> including Christmas, ornamental, nursery and potted trees)
> $59 Million Contributions to international organizations
> $75 Million Farm Service Agency, for salaries and expenses
> $94.1 Million Levee work (California)
> $95 Million Dairy farmers
> $100 Million Democratic and Republican National Conventions
> $105 Million Fisheries Disaster Relief
> $187 Million International disaster and famine assistance
> $214 Million Kosovo assistance
> $388.9 Million Backlog of Transportation Department projects
> $425 Million Education grants for rural areas
> $640 Million Low Income Home Energy Assistance Programm
> $660 Million Transportation Security Administration for purchase of
> an explosives detection system
> na. Allow transfer of funds from holiday ornament sates in
> the Senate gift shop
>
> HOUSE
> $4 Million Office of Women's Health at Food and Drug Administrationm
> $5 Million Breeding, rearing and transporting of live fish
> $5.27 Million Detection of avian influenza in wild birds
> $16 Million Security upgrades to House office buildings
> $20 Million Education and culturat exchange programsm
> $23 Million Emergency conservation program for farmland damaged by
> freezing temperatures
> $25 Million Spinach growers (California)
> $25 Million Hurricane Livestock Indemnity Program
> $35 Million NASA, for risk-miflgaUon prciects on the Cult
> Coast
> $48 Million Farm Services Agency for salaries and expenses
> $50 Million Asbestos abatement at the capitol power plant
> $60.4 Million Disaster assistance for salmon fishing
> $74 Million Peanut storage (Georgia)
> $100 Million Citrus assistance (California)
> $100 Million Hurricane citrus program
> $120 Million Shrimp and menhaden fishing industries for hurricane
> damage compensationm
> $283 Million Milk Income Loss Contract programm
> $400 Million Rural schools
> $500 Million Emergency wildfire suppression
> $750 Million State Children's Health Insurance Fund
> $969.65 Million Influenza pandemic preparedness
> $1.25 Billion Public housing agencies

Argue about the specific projects or the amounts being spent, but this bill
is where this spending belongs. Its the SOLE PURPOSE of the annual
supplemental emergency appropriations bill.

Its the military spending in this bill that is inappropriate and belongs
somewhere else. And that's the vast majority of spending in the bill!

OR


Message has been deleted

volkfolk

unread,
Mar 31, 2007, 3:29:41 PM3/31/07
to

"theothr1" <theo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:wQuPh.1880$H_5....@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net...

I would prefer to have election day moved to April 16th or tax day moved to
the day before election day.

Realixticly both of my ideas have about the same chance of success as yours
does, which is exactly zero

Scot


Tim Donohoe

unread,
Mar 31, 2007, 9:15:59 PM3/31/07
to
theothr1 wrote:

It is way more trouble than it is worth. After a few years of dodging
and lawyering you end up paying the bill anyway and find out that the
government doesn't care or notice why you didn't pay, they just start
the process of making you pay. You'd be better off moving out of the
country and investing in your adopted homeland. They do notice that.

Steve Lenier

unread,
Apr 1, 2007, 4:58:56 AM4/1/07
to
On 3/31/07 9:36 AM, in article
C6wPh.18375$tD2....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net, "DGDevin"
<dgd...@invalid.invalid> wrote:


You know, if you put away your mean/sarcastic streak for a moment, maybe
that's not such a bad idea. Have a checklist of things, and you check "yes"
or "no" indicating if you want your tax money used that way. Not that the
leaders would then follow the answers given, but it sure would be an
interesting and probably fairly accurate poll of the American taxpayer, if
you could somehow get a high rate of compliance (3% off your taxes if you
fill out the survey).

Stupid unfounded war...NO
NASA...yes, within limits
Welfare...sure, just be sure it's done right
Free money for people living in Orange County CA named Steve who are
Grateful Dead fans....YES

Steve

Rogues Island's finest

unread,
Apr 1, 2007, 10:38:06 AM4/1/07
to
On Apr 1, 4:58 am, Steve Lenier <n...@real.com> wrote:
> On 3/31/07 9:36 AM, in article
> C6wPh.18375$tD2.3...@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net, "DGDevin"
>
>
>
>
>
> <dgde...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> > "theothr1" <theot...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message

> >news:wQuPh.1880$H_5....@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net...
>
> >> Anyone think it's possible to get
> >> a box on the tax form next year,
> >> that allows the individual to
> >> opt out, sending their taxes for war?
>
> > Sure, although that will allow everyone else to opt-out of their taxes being
> > used for things they don't approve of too, like welfare, or NASA, or the
> > teaching of evolution in public schools or whatever. Is that how you want
> > it to work, everybody gets to say what their taxes can or cannot be used
> > for, or were you thinking of just people who agree with you?
>
> You know, if you put away your mean/sarcastic streak for a moment, maybe
> that's not such a bad idea. Have a checklist of things, and you check "yes"
> or "no" indicating if you want your tax money used that way. Not that the
> leaders would then follow the answers given, but it sure would be an
> interesting and probably fairly accurate poll of the American taxpayer, if
> you could somehow get a high rate of compliance (3% off your taxes if you
> fill out the survey).

So if our elected numbnuts (in my case the great, drug addled mind of
Patches Kennedy) are going to ignore it, why are we gonna do this? To
make us feel better?
Ain't gonna work, Steve.

> Stupid unfounded war...NO
> NASA...yes, within limits
> Welfare...sure, just be sure it's done right
> Free money for people living in Orange County CA named Steve who are
> Grateful Dead fans....YES

That last one is gonna get you audited for sure.

Mark

theothr1

unread,
Apr 1, 2007, 10:44:56 AM4/1/07
to

"Tim Donohoe" wrote...

-- - -
You think Halliburton is gonna pay it's fair share this year?
Hmmmm... maybe I could get a house by their home office!


Steve Terry

unread,
Apr 1, 2007, 10:41:30 AM4/1/07
to

"Steve Lenier" <n...@real.com> wrote in message:

> Free money for people living in Orange County CA named Steve who are
> Grateful Dead fans....YES

Orange County here I come!


Message has been deleted

Tim Donohoe

unread,
Apr 1, 2007, 12:27:34 PM4/1/07
to
theothr1 wrote:

One of the US Government's biggest accounting firms opened a satellite
office in the Virgin Islands, they then made that office their
headquarters and stopped paying taxes on the money they were making from
the US government. I'm sure if you looked into it you will find that
many Halliburton employees are listed as working overseas and don't pay
income taxes on their first $100,000. You need to be really rich to
evade taxes.

Stuknot

unread,
Apr 1, 2007, 1:26:35 PM4/1/07
to
On Mar 31, 11:09 am, "No one's noticed" <Mark.Ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 31, 1:04 pm, "DGDevin" <dgde...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > There's this representative democracy thing where the people elect
> > representatives who will spend the taxes and if the people don't like how
> > it's done they can vote out the reps and choose someone.
>
> That's an adorable idea. And we tried it. It's morphed into something
> unrecognizable.
>
> Our representatives are debating a $140 billion war "emergency
> spending bill" that includes $20 million for Mormon cricket
> eradication? What? How'd that get in there?
>
Dept. of Homeland Security program. The Mormons should play baseball
like the rest of us real Americans.

HTH,
John H.

Brad Greer

unread,
Apr 2, 2007, 9:49:01 AM4/2/07
to

The idea that some individual amount of taxes is spent on some
specific thing is kind of silly, isn't it? The government takes all
the money in and puts it in a big bucket and then distributes it out.

Not to mention that by the time you're filling out your 1040 the
money's already been spent by the govenrment.

Joe

unread,
Apr 2, 2007, 11:07:33 AM4/2/07
to
>The government takes all the money in and puts it in a big bucket
>and then distributes it out.

Evil Uncle Sam The Taxman says: "Here's one for you America, and 19 for
Halliburton."

Joe

Gladys

unread,
Apr 2, 2007, 11:13:01 AM4/2/07
to
Brad Greer wrote:

>
> Not to mention that by the time you're filling out your 1040 the
> money's already been spent by the govenrment.

Hell - in the case of a lot of people on this forum (not me) it was
spent before you were born.

Gladys.

theothr1

unread,
Apr 2, 2007, 11:16:54 AM4/2/07
to

"Joe" < wrote ...
: >The government takes all the money in and puts it in a big bucket
-- - -
Question 10: Donate a $1 for presidential election? Y/N
Question 11: Do you want a % of your taxes used for war? Y/N


theothr1

unread,
Apr 2, 2007, 11:30:29 AM4/2/07
to

"theothr1" wrote
:
: "Joe" < wrote ...
:
:
oops! I meant the answers to Question 11 should read: Y/N/HELL NO!


Brad Greer

unread,
Apr 2, 2007, 12:21:46 PM4/2/07
to

We get 5%? That's more than I thought.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages