Raise my taxes...really...

[billc]

I finally get it. I now know why everyones taxes need to be raised, and raised and then raised again. I know why people who want taxes lowered are actually greedy bastards. The answer...the government needs money. It is as simple as that. This past week has really opened my eyes to that simple truth. I mean...

How embarrassing is it for us as Americans to find out our Secret Service, the men and women sworn to defend the President of the United States with their very lives, have to argue with high end, colombian prostitutes over 800 dollars. Come on. How cheap are we as tax payers. The secret service is Obama's posse. They should be able to go into any country in the world, with a roll of cash from their expense accounts that would put a new rap star to shame. When the prostitute says, "Baby, it's 800 dollars," the Agent in question should be able to say "Baby, no problem," whip out his expense account roll of cash and count out 800 dollars faster than you can say Mac Daddy ( is that still the cool term ). He should even be able to whip out another 200 as a tip to the high end call girl for doing her all for Old Uncle Sam. You know what I mean? How cheap are we as americans that we would put our civil service employees in a situation where they have to haggle with the local escorts over a measly 800 dollars? Our guys should be able to go to any high end strip club or brothel anywhere in the world and roll in like Saudi Princes on vacation in the west.

That my friends requires your tax dollars.

How embarrasing is it when the General Services Administration can only throw parties for 800,000 dollars? That they have to make up awards to give away so they can have expensive award ceremonies. These are our employees. They should be able to go to vegas and blow so much cash that we feel it all the way in our own wallets. It is truly embarrasing that we would be so cheap to force them to spend so little on their festivities.

That my friends is why we need to pay more taxes and keep paying them. Our employees need to Party hard, like it's 1999.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ding-scandal/2012/04/16/gIQARn6ZMT_story.html

How cheap are we as taxpayers that Leon Panetta, a cabinet member can only fly home to his crib in california once a week? Why only once a week? Cause we only give him 32,000 dollars a week for the trip. Each week. 52 weeks a year. Sure, the previous cabinet member only went home 3 times a year, and 32,000 dollars a week in travel on a personal g-5 aircraft is an improvement, but come on. How cheap are we. Leon Panetta should be able to commute from washington to california everyday. Why can't he? Because we are cheap a** tax payers.

http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/panetta-bay-area-travel-costs-cause-stir/nMKxq/

How stingy are we as tax payers when green energy company after green energy company goes bankrupt. Why? Because we are cheap A** tax payers. We only gave Solyndra 500 million dollars in loan garauntees and that was only one of several failed green companies. If we had only tripled or quadrupled that money, imagine what the executives of Solyndra could have done. What stopped their success? Cheap A** tax payers.

The list goes on and on. Government employees crippled in their activities of soliciting prostitutes, partying, bankrupting companies, and traveling the country and the world, because the government needs more money.

I have learned the error of my ways. Please, tax me more. The government employees need that money. They deserve that money. You cheap A** taxpayers need to pay your fair share. Thank you.:bangahead:

 

[K-man]

I finally get it. I now know why everyones taxes need to be raised, and raised and then raised again. I know why people who want taxes lowered are actually greedy bastards. The answer...the government needs money. It is as simple as that. This past week has really opened my eyes to that simple truth.

I have learned the error of my ways. Please, tax me more. The government employees need that money. They deserve that money. You cheap A** taxpayers need to pay your fair share. Thank you.:bangahead:

Good on you Bill. "Put up, pay up and shut up", that's what I say. With more people like you, prepared to put your hand in your pocket to help your country, the world can not help but be a better place. I'm actually getting quite emotional, tearing up in fact, at your largesse.

 

[billc]

Thank you K-man. Now, if you will give me your home address, social security number, age, birth date and place of birth I'll make sure that the government employees can get your fair share from you. Don't worry. It doesn't hurt. In fact, they give you a nice "pod," to take home with you. You simply place it under your bed before you go to sleep and when you wake up, you will understand everything.:ultracool

 

[billc]

As to the secret service and their need for more cash...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2012/04/19/gIQAmIt7TT_print.html

One of the Secret Service supervisors ousted from the agency this week for their involvement in the Colombia prostitution scandal made light of his official protective work on his Facebook page, joking about a picture of himself standing watch behind Sarah Palin.
David Randall Chaney, 48, posted several shots of himself on duty in a dark suit and sunglasses, including one that shows him behind the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee during that campaign.
“I was really checking her out, if you know what i mean?” Chaney wrote in the comments section after friends had marveled at the photo. He is married and has an adult son.
Chaney, who had been a supervisor in the Secret Service’s international programs division, retired under pressure Wednesday, according to people familiar with an internal agency investigation into the allegations that 11 agents and uniformed officers participated in a night of carousing April 11 ahead of President Obama’s visit to the Summit of the Americas.
He was one of two senior supervisors who are accused inthe scandal, which investigators believe included heavy drinking, visits to a strip club and payments to women working as prostitutes. Several people familiar with the matter have identified the other supervisor as Greg Stokes, who was assistant special agent in charge of the K-9 division. Stokes has been notified by agency officials that he will be fired, although he will be given an opportunity to contest the charges, those with knowledge of the case said.

This guy needed some down time in Colombia, can't you see that...

 

[elder999]

I hear ya dude. But, even in Columbia, a "high end" prostitute costs more than $800...:lfao:

Secret service got them some McWhores....:lfao:

 

[billc]

Here is Mark Steyn on the Secret Service and their attempt to pay less for "services rendered."

http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/296640

Unlike the government of the United States, I can’t claim any hands-on experience with Colombian hookers. But I was impressed by the rates charged by Miss Dania Suarez, and even more impressed by the U.S. Secret Service’s response to them.
Cartagena’s most famous “escort” costs $800. For purposes of comparison, you can book Eliot Spitzer’s “escort” for $300. Yet, on the cold grey fiscally conservative morning after the wild socially liberal night before, Dania’s Secret Service agent offered her a mere $28.
Twenty-eight bucks! What a remarkably precise sum. Thirty dollars less a federal handling fee? Why isn’t this guy Obama’s treasury secretary or budget director? Or, at the very least, the head honcho of the General Services Administration, whose previous director has sadly had to step down after the agency’s taxpayer-funded public-servants-gone-wild Bacchanal in Vegas.
All over this dying republic, you couldn’t find a single solitary $28 item that doesn’t wind up costing at least 800 bucks by the time it’s been sluiced through the federal budgeting process. Yet, in one plucky little corner of the Secret Service, supervisor David Chaney, dog-handler Greg Stokes, or one of the other nine agents managed to turn the principles of [COLOR=#216221 !important][FONT=inherit !important][COLOR=#216221 !important][FONT=inherit !important]government [/FONT][COLOR=#216221 !important][FONT=inherit !important]procurement[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR] on their head. If the same fiscal prudence were applied to the 2011 Obama budget, the $3.598 trillion splurge would have cost just shy of $126 billion. The feds’ half a billion to Solyndra would have been a mere $18 million. The 823-grand GSA conference on government efficiency at the M Resort Spa & Casino would have come in at $28,805.

 

[K-man]

Here is Mark Steyn on the Secret Service and their attempt to pay less for "services rendered."

http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/296640

I reckon he could get a gig here anytime. I can never understand how you can have a government contract for 'X' billion dollars that becomes 10'X' billion on completion of the contract.

With this guy we could save a fortune. Even if we did pay what we contracted to pay!

 

[WC_lun]

Hmm You must be pretty well off, Billi, since no one is asking to raise anyone's taxes unless they are really well off and already paying a less effective tax rate than almost everyone else. You keep being generous and truthful though

 

[billc]

I guess you don't have a 401k then. The politicians are looking at all of that money locked away in those retirement plans and are making their plans to get it for themselves. So, you don't have to be rich, in fact, the real money isn't with the wealthy, it is with the rest of us, and they are going to come and get it eventually.

 

[billc]

This link shows you how you too can be taxed the way the rich are taxed...

Here is what the democrats want...

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11031

Dems Target Private Retirement Accounts

Democratic leaders in the U.S. House discuss confiscating 401(k)s, IRAs


RALEIGH — Democrats in the U.S. House have been conducting hearings on proposals to confiscate workers’ personal retirement accounts — including 401(k)s and IRAs — and convert them to accounts managed by the Social Security Administration.

Triggered by the financial crisis the past two months, the hearings reportedly were meant to stem losses incurred by many workers and retirees whose 401(k) and IRA balances have been shrinking rapidly.

The testimony of Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, in hearings Oct. 7 drew the most attention and criticism. Testifying for the House Committee on Education and Labor, Ghilarducci proposed that the government eliminate tax breaks for 401(k) and similar retirement accounts, such as IRAs, and confiscate workers’ retirement plan accounts and convert them to universal Guaranteed Retirement Accounts (GRAs) managed by the Social Security Administration.

Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor, in prepared remarks for the hearing on “The Impact of the Financial Crisis on Workers’ Retirement Security,” blamed Wall Street for the financial crisis and said his committee will “strengthen and protect Americans’ 401(k)s, pensions, and other retirement plans” and the “Democratic Congress will continue to conduct this much-needed oversight on behalf of the American people.”

Currently, 401(k) plans allow Americans to invest pretax money and their employers match up to a defined percentage, which not only increases workers’ retirement savings but also reduces their annual income tax. The balances are fully inheritable, subject to income tax, meaning workers pass on their wealth to their heirs, unlike Social Security. Even when they leave an employer and go to one that doesn’t offer a 401(k) or pension, workers can transfer their balances to a qualified IRA.

Mandating Equality

http://www.sharedprosperity.org/bp204.html

This paper proposes a rescue plan for the American retirement income security system, based on a mixed system composed of Social Security, employer defined-benefit pension plans, and a new type of personal retirement savings account called a Guaranteed Retirement Account (GRA). This rescue plan will not work without a strong defined-benefit pension system and a strong Social Security system. Tax breaks for 401(k)-style plans and IRAs will be converted into flat tax credits to offset the cost of these new accounts, so the plan will improve the retirement security of most Americans without costing taxpayers more than the current system.The plan calls for all workers not enrolled in an equivalent or better defined-benefit pension to enroll in a GRA, a plan that borrows the best features of defined-benefit and defined-contribution plans, including guaranteed retirement benefits that last a lifetime, low administrative costs, and steady contributions. With GRAs, workers will accumulate savings in investment funds that earn a rate of return guaranteed by the federal government. These funds will be converted to life annuities upon retirement. Along with Social Security benefits, these will replace approximately 70% of pre-retirement earnings for the typical retiree.Guaranteed Retirement Accounts eliminate the regulatory and tax law favoritism that not only gives 401(k)-type plans wide discretion and little scrutiny, but does so at the expense of the defined-benefit system. Most defined-benefit plans yield a much higher benefit than even Guaranteed Retirement Accounts, though they typically also require average contributions of over 6% of payroll for sustainability.​

You can file the government retirement accounts under, "We're from the U.S. government and we're here to help..."

 

[billc]

Here are some more delightful aspects of Government, garaunteed retirement accounts...

GRAs would guarantee a fixed 3 percent annual rate of return, although later in her article Ghilarducci explained that participants would not “earn a 3% real return in perpetuity.” In place of tax breaks workers now receive for contributions and thus a lower tax rate, workers would receive $600 annually from the government, inflation-adjusted. For low-income workers whose annual contributions are less than $600, the government would deposit whatever amount it would take to equal the minimum $600 for all participants.

In a radio interview with Kirby Wilbur in Seattle on Oct. 27, 2008, Ghilarducci explained that her proposal doesn’t eliminate the tax breaks, rather, “I’m just rearranging the tax breaks that are available now for 401(k)s and spreading — spreading the wealth.”

All workers would have 5 percent of their annual pay deducted from their paychecks and deposited to the GRA. They would still be paying Social Security and Medicare taxes, as would the employers. The GRA contribution would be shared equally by the worker and the employee. Employers no longer would be able to write off their contributions. Any capital gains would be taxable year-on-year.

Analysts point to another disturbing part of the plan. With a GRA, workers could bequeath only half of their account balances to their heirs, unlike full balances from existing 401(k) and IRA accounts. For workers who die after retiring, they could bequeath just their own contributions plus the interest but minus any benefits received and minus the employer contributions.

Don't worry WC lun, you won't have to be rich to have your taxes raised. You too will be treated like a 1%'er but you just won't have had all their money before you are taxed into poverty...

 

[K-man]

You can file the government retirement accounts under, "We're from the U.S. government and we're here to help..."

We have the same helpful folk here.

Our superannuation contributions are not tax free but they are taxed at a lower rate to encourage voluntary contributions.