What if we collected taxes from

[Guest]

folks like this, before we started with the Buffiet rule ?

"MSNBC’s Al Sharpton is reeling in debt and back taxes.

The liberal provocateur owes nearly $1 million to creditors and the federal government as a result of his failed bid for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination.

His campaign’s unpaid bills exceed $888,000, according to federal filings.

It is unclear why Sharpton has not paid his creditors. He does not lack for income."

"In August 2011, Sharpton took over the 6 p.m. slot from Keith Olbermann, who earned more than $4 million per year working in the same slot at the network. Sharpton also drew a $240,000 salary from his nonprofit group, National Action Network, in 2011 even as the group racked up nearly $1 million in unpaid federal payroll taxes, interest, and penalties."

I am sure there are both Republicans and Democrats who fit this very bill and wonder why that does not get public....if they dont pay but sound off on television about who should pay......

"Sharpton, who has endorsed President Barack Obama’s calls for taxing the rich, has his own tax issues. He owed the IRS $2.6 million in income taxes in December 2011, as well as almost $900,000 in New York state taxes."

http://freebeacon.com/more-money-more-problems/

Republican or Democrat, these are the kinds of hypocrits we need to call out !

[Guest]

Oh you silly silly boy, Al baby is a Democrat, they don't pay taxes, that is only for us little folks.

[Guest]

folks like this, before we started with the Buffiet rule ?

"MSNBC’s Al Sharpton is reeling in debt and back taxes.

The liberal provocateur owes nearly $1 million to creditors and the federal government as a result of his failed bid for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination.

His campaign’s unpaid bills exceed $888,000, according to federal filings.

It is unclear why Sharpton has not paid his creditors. He does not lack for income."

"In August 2011, Sharpton took over the 6 p.m. slot from Keith Olbermann, who earned more than $4 million per year working in the same slot at the network. Sharpton also drew a $240,000 salary from his nonprofit group, National Action Network, in 2011 even as the group racked up nearly $1 million in unpaid federal payroll taxes, interest, and penalties."

I am sure there are both Republicans and Democrats who fit this very bill and wonder why that does not get public....if they dont pay but sound off on television about who should pay......

"Sharpton, who has endorsed President Barack Obama’s calls for taxing the rich, has his own tax issues. He owed the IRS $2.6 million in income taxes in December 2011, as well as almost $900,000 in New York state taxes."

More Money, More Problems | Washington Free Beacon (http://freebeacon.com/more-money-more-problems/)

Republican or Democrat, these are the kinds of hypocrits we need to call out !

I don't know anything about Al Sharpton's taxes or income, but as a faithful MSNBC viewer I do know that Keith Olbermann was never on in the 6:00pm hour. Keith was always on at 8:00pm. Sharpton replaced Cenk Uygur, the young Turk, at 6:00pm. And Olbermann was replaced by Ed Schultz at 8:00pm. If freebeacon.com got this all wrong, how much other stuff is correct?

[Guest]

janmcn - given bucco's post and yours...can you come up with any legitimate reason why sharpton is not paying what he owes the irs? i sent my payment off by the deadline! sharpton could at least get on an irs installment plan! :icon_wink:

[Guest]

I don't know anything about Al Sharpton's taxes or income, but as a faithful MSNBC viewer I do know that Keith Olbermann was never on in the 6:00pm hour. Keith was always on at 8:00pm. Sharpton replaced Cenk Uygur, the young Turk, at 6:00pm. And Olbermann was replaced by Ed Schultz at 8:00pm. If freebeacon.com got this all wrong, how much other stuff is correct?

I am shocked to hear that you are a regular watcher of MSNBC...really ???

You missed the point...I mentioned both Republicans and Democrats in my post but of course, as a regular viewer of MSNBC that would not be important.

And this from the NYPOST in December of 2011

"Sharpton drew a $241,732 salary and perks that included first-class or charter air travel, tax filings show. He owes the IRS $2.6 million in income tax, and nearly $900,000 in state tax.

The defunct Rev-Al Communications Inc. owes the state almost $176,000, and Bo-Spanky is $3,500 behind on state-tax liens."

Sharpton’s civil-rights group juggling tax woes - NYPOST.com (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/rev_al_deep_in_the_red_FFFX2IRlXVlP0sh79dWyxL)

Again,the point was to point out the hyprocisy...he is just a shining beacon.

BUT...thanks for pointing out the viewing times on MSNBC

[Guest]

What if we collected taxes from ..................................

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Guest]

What if we collected taxes from ..................................

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is that the ONLY church we should collect from ?

I ask because you were so specific !!!!!!!

[Guest]

Is that the ONLY church we should collect from ?

I ask because you were so specific !!!!!!!




ALL religious institutions that currently do not pay taxes.

[Guest]

Fig a good honest post and you wreck it by saying Dems do not pay taxes. Your statement is just plain stupid! Please stop it.

[Guest]

What if we collected taxes from ..................................

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ALL religious institutions that currently do not pay taxes.

coralway - religious institutions benefit from specific irs exclusion - al sharpton does not! al owes his taxes NOW...religious institutions will only owe them if and when exclusions are legally changed.

[Guest]

Al Sharpton dodging his tax obligation certainly is no surprise. It fits his profile.

But the bigger story is Obama pushing the Buffet Rule. Presidents Taft, Johnson, Nixon and clinton all promised to tax the rich but ended up hitting the middle class. If you recall the Alternative Maximum Tax was suppose to ensure that the rich paid their fair share. The rich loopholed around the provision and a substantial increase of the AMT hit the middle class hard.

Even if Obama's 30% minimum on the rich was effective it wouldn't raise enough tax over a 10 year period to pay this year's obligation.

People need to stop thinking about tax "fairness" and start thinking about effective tax policy. If they did perhaps the Al Sharpton's couldn't as easily
dodge their obligation.

The nation would benefit it Congress lowered corporate and personal income taxes, eliminated capital gains and dividends taxes and eliminate estate taxes. by doing so more of this money would be reinvested into the economy by way of capital spending, research and development consumer spending.

One final thought. I use a gold fish net to catch geckos on my lanai, perhaps we need a large gold fish net to catch the Al Sharpton's have them pay then release them:a040:

[Guest]

janmcn - given bucco's post and yours...can you come up with any legitimate reason why sharpton is not paying what he owes the irs? i sent my payment off by the deadline! sharpton could at least get on an irs installment plan! :icon_wink:

I have no idea what Rev Sharpton's tax status is as I was only pointing out a discrepancy in the MSNBC line-up. Doesn't the IRS have the ability to garnish one's paycheck for unpaid taxes?

[Guest]

just some statistics which show how the catholic church saves the fed govt millions....it educates in the US alone, 2.6 million students every day, at a cost to parents and parishes of ten billion dollars a year...if these students went to public schools, it would cost the taxpayers 18 billion a year! in secondary education the church supports 230 colleges and universities, with 700,000 students of all religions going on to top careers which benefit our society. in health care, the non-profit catholic hospitals in this country (637 of them) provide the health care for one in five american patients every day... these statistics come from a new book, Rediscover Catholicism, which seeks to remind battered catholics of the wonderful things our church does for not only the united states but on a global scale for many millions of people.... so don't begrudge a tax exemption to an institution which provides much more and more efficiently than a government bureaucracy can!

[Guest]

I have no idea what Rev Sharpton's tax status is as I was only pointing out a discrepancy in the MSNBC line-up. Doesn't the IRS have the ability to garnish one's paycheck for unpaid taxes?

the irs sure didn't hesitate to garnish some of the employees where i used to work! but those emps didn't have any impact on the budgets and staffing of that agency! ya know what i'm sayin!

even though charile rangel was found guilty by a house ethics committee panel for concealing assets and violating the tax code, i don't recall anything happening to him beyond his paying a fine re the misuse of a rent-stabilized apt in nyc.

[Guest]

just some statistics which show how the catholic church saves the fed govt millions....it educates in the US alone, 2.6 million students every day, at a cost to parents and parishes of ten billion dollars a year...if these students went to public schools, it would cost the taxpayers 18 billion a year! in secondary education the church supports 230 colleges and universities, with 700,000 students of all religions going on to top careers which benefit our society. in health care, the non-profit catholic hospitals in this country (637 of them) provide the health care for one in five american patients every day... these statistics come from a new book, Rediscover Catholicism, which seeks to remind battered catholics of the wonderful things our church does for not only the united states but on a global scale for many millions of people.... so don't begrudge a tax exemption to an institution which provides much more and more efficiently than a government bureaucracy can!




Let me put this is politely as I can, ok?

HOGWASH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Battered catholics? Are you referring to the ruined lives of all the young men the church as abused, physically and otherwise?

EVERY religious institution should be forced to pay real estate taxes. St. Patricks alone would bring in billions in revenue. That would alleviate the tax burden on a lot of others who have to pay higher taxes because the church pays nothing.

[Guest]

religious freedom cannot be guaranteed if churches are subject to pressures from the govt, be it through taxes or forced purchase of any products...our rights in this country are given by God, not by the govt! in case you had forgotten....and by battered i mean having to hear about the abuse by a few as if it were the whole story of the church, over and over again ad nauseum. the media just loves this story and loves to attack the church whenever possible because it stands in the way of the leftist agenda.

[Guest]

religious freedom cannot be guaranteed if churches are subject to pressures from the govt, be it through taxes or forced purchase of any products...our rights in this country are given by God, not by the govt! in case you had forgotten....and by battered i mean having to hear about the abuse by a few as if it were the whole story of the church, over and over again ad nauseum. the media just loves this story and loves to attack the church whenever possible because it stands in the way of the leftist agenda.





Yes, preventing the molestation and rape of boys by the church's priests should be a part of everyone's agenda. If that is strictly a "leftist" agenda, count me IN.

Unless, of course, God (who according to you gave us our rights) condones such criminal behavior.

[Guest]

religious freedom cannot be guaranteed if churches are subject to pressures from the govt, be it through taxes or forced purchase of any products...our rights in this country are given by God, not by the govt! in case you had forgotten....and by battered i mean having to hear about the abuse by a few as if it were the whole story of the church, over and over again ad nauseum. the media just loves this story and loves to attack the church whenever possible because it stands in the way of the leftist agenda.

I assume you or your children, were not ones that were abused by a priest.......er.... leftest agenda.

[Guest]

religious freedom cannot be guaranteed if churches are subject to pressures from the govt, be it through taxes or forced purchase of any products...our rights in this country are given by God, not by the govt! in case you had forgotten....and by battered i mean having to hear about the abuse by a few as if it were the whole story of the church, over and over again ad nauseum. the media just loves this story and loves to attack the church whenever possible because it stands in the way of the leftist agenda.

You are so right on all of the above, but the last half of the last sentence isn't quite right.

A large portion of American Catholics join forces with the leftist agenda in the name of "social justice" when they vote for leftists like Obama, Pelosi, Biden, Boxer, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Rod Blagodevich, Rahm Emanuel, Al Franken, Harry Reid, and Maxine Waters The Erudite......

MAXINE WATERS OUTS THE DEMS SOCIALIST AGENDA - YouTube

[Guest]

Isnt taxing contributions to the Catholic Church OR any church for that matter, double taxation since the money was already taxed once ?

Secondly, I think it may have been Business Week who did a report a few years ago that said MOST of the small entities of the Catholic Church and each is a separate entity lost money on an annual basis due to such large expenses for schools, hospitals, orphanages, and different charity organizations.

And keep in mind, should they not run these institutions our federal or state government would need to bear the cost of all of them.

The thread is about taxes an taxation and NOT anything else that I am aware of.

[Guest]

I don't know anything about Al Sharpton's taxes or income, but as a faithful MSNBC viewer I do know that Keith Olbermann was never on in the 6:00pm hour. Keith was always on at 8:00pm. Sharpton replaced Cenk Uygur, the young Turk, at 6:00pm. And Olbermann was replaced by Ed Schultz at 8:00pm. If freebeacon.com got this all wrong, how much other stuff is correct?

Oh I see, because he replaced someone at the 8:00 pm slot instead of the 6 PM slot he obviously does not owe the money. Could be a time zone thing but that would still not make him owe the taxes, right?
Thanks for clearing that up????

And how do we get from Al's tax debt to raping little boys?
I know, we are arguing with liberals. You know, if you got nothing to ad just change the subject.

[Guest]

Oh I see, because he replaced someone at the 8:00 pm slot instead of the 6 PM slot he obviously does not owe the money. Could be a time zone thing but that would still not make him owe the taxes, right?
Thanks for clearing that up????

And how do we get from Al's tax debt to raping little boys?
I know, we are arguing with liberals. You know, if you got nothing to ad just change the subject.

they have totally switched from the tax situation to attack mode on anything....Catholic Church is a normal attack item on their agenda.

But in defense of Janmcn...I understood what she was talking about...she alluded to if that is wrong could not the info on Sharpton be wrong so I got her a few more links to satisfy but I understood what she was saying

[Guest]

But in defense of Janmcn...I understood what she was talking about...she alluded to if that is wrong could not the info on Sharpton be wrong so I got her a few more links to satisfy but I understood what she was saying

The problem with that is the facts that were stated are easily researched and makes Janmcn's statement sound disingenuous . He owes taxes plan and simple, easy to find out. It does not matter if he replaces the guy at 6pm or Mickey mouse. I think the post was an attempt to cast doubt on the FACTS. A typical liberal tactic.

[Guest]

The problem with that is the facts that were stated are easily researched and makes Janmcn's statement sound disingenuous . He owes taxes plan and simple, easy to find out. It does not matter if he replaces the guy at 6pm or Mickey mouse. I think the post was an attempt to cast doubt on the FACTS. A typical liberal tactic.

Oh I have no doubt that her remarks may have been an attempt to make fun of my post but I get used to that...not ignoring them anymore since yesterday ! But I needed to defend her because I did understand what she was saying !

[Guest]

Oh I have no doubt that her remarks may have been an attempt to make fun of my post but I get used to that...not ignoring them anymore since yesterday ! But I needed to defend her because I did understand what she was saying !

i understood what janmcn intended - as well as i understand notlongnow's intention!

got nothing to add? - bug off!

[Guest]

Fig a good honest post and you wreck it by saying Dems do not pay taxes. Your statement is just plain stupid! Please stop it.

How many in the current administration owe back taxes? I rest my case.:boom:

[Guest]

Yes, preventing the molestation and rape of boys by the church's priests should be a part of everyone's agenda. If that is strictly a "leftist" agenda, count me IN.

Unless, of course, God (who according to you gave us our rights) condones such criminal behavior.

Coralway, I hate to insert facts in this discussion but hope it may shed some light on your opinion of the Catholic Church. The facts are simple. There has been sexual abuse by priests in the Catholic Church, however, sexual abuse in public schools is 100 times worse! While you may dislike (perhaps not a strong enough word) the Church, your children and grandchildren will be many times safer in a Catholic School. Think about it. Do you really want your grandchildren to be in an unsafe environment or in a much safer, although not totally safe environment?

OUR VIEW: Sex abuse still rampant in public schools (vote) | coach, jennifer, public - Opinion - Colorado Springs Gazette, CO (http://www.gazette.com/articles/coach-108557-jennifer-public.html)

[Guest]

just some statistics which show how the catholic church saves the fed govt millions....it educates in the US alone, 2.6 million students every day, at a cost to parents and parishes of ten billion dollars a year...if these students went to public schools, it would cost the taxpayers 18 billion a year! in secondary education the church supports 230 colleges and universities, with 700,000 students of all religions going on to top careers which benefit our society. in health care, the non-profit catholic hospitals in this country (637 of them) provide the health care for one in five american patients every day... these statistics come from a new book, Rediscover Catholicism, which seeks to remind battered catholics of the wonderful things our church does for not only the united states but on a global scale for many millions of people.... so don't begrudge a tax exemption to an institution which provides much more and more efficiently than a government bureaucracy can!

chachacha: spot on. I find it interesting that some protest posters neglected to add other institutions schools, universities scouts, etc etc with their molester attacks on the Catholic Church alone. I agree that the Catholic Church was wrong but with the number of other enities and parents, etc, with whom we place trust engaged in this vile act it is clear that our society is doing a horrible job of protecting our young.

Secondily despite these criticisms I also find it interesting that parents if given the chance for school vouchers scamble for relgious schools. Perhaps it is to escape a decaying public school system that rather spend time for a "Day of Silence" to support the gay community rather than teaching basic writing reading and arithmetic.

I view myself as a nominal catholic however I also view myself as trying to be fair in my assesments and not containing my emotions when dealing with issues.

One final point I did a lot of employment recruiting in my day and it became clear that my counterparts and I recognized the same statistic. Most students who had attended catholic high schools by far went on to college and by the way the better colleges and universities in the country and that their scholastic standings were exemplary.

[Guest]

BBQ: The difference is as follows.

In the public schools, when there's abuse, someone is arrested and prosecuted.

In the Catholic schools, if you're the boss who facilitated it, you get to be suddenly "recalled to the Vatican" two days before a subpoena is due and get to claim "diplomatic immunity".

As far as Sharpton and what slot he took over - isn't it possible that the website containing the story might have been in the Mountain Time Zone - which IS at 6PM when it's 8PM in New York?

...just a thought :)

[Guest]

i understood what janmcn intended - as well as i understand notlongnow's intention!

got nothing to add? - bug off!

Sorry to offend

[Guest]

You are so right on all of the above, but the last half of the last sentence isn't quite right.

A large portion of American Catholics join forces with the leftist agenda in the name of "social justice" when they vote for leftists like Obama, Pelosi, Biden, Boxer, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Rod Blagodevich, Rahm Emanuel, Al Franken, Harry Reid, and Maxine Waters The Erudite......

MAXINE WATERS OUTS THE DEMS SOCIALIST AGENDA - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrA9zj94NuU)

i have agreed with this statement since i taught religious ed and was dismayed at the emphasis on social justice instead of the tenets of our faith. i think this is a product of infiltration of the church from the left. not that social justice is not a good thing, but it does nothing to make us appreciate the beauty of our faith and tradition....there are 67 million catholics in the US. if they could be made aware of this leftist agenda, we could truly change the face of this country. there is a great video called Test of Fire produced by a church affiliated group...check it out on you tube...and VOTE!

[Guest]

Sorry to offend

bucco - you didn't offend me - i got your intention, too! ;)

[Guest]

Government jobs are growing as we know.....must be a good place to work...

"...as of 2010, there are 98,291 federal employees who owe us $1.034 billion. (That’s billion with a B.) This really shouldn’t surprise anyone since the number of federal employees who are also tax delinquents has been fairly consistent: about 100,000 over the last seven years. The problem is that during that period the amount owed has soared from $600 million to over $1 billion."

While not the worst of the lot, worth noting...

"The Presidential staff has 36 employees owing a total of $833,000 – that comes out to $23,000 per employee!"

Maybe we dont need the class warfare if we just went after these folks, AND it appears that finally..

"So what has the Congress been doing to rein in their employees who are tax chiselers? Not much, which is why the amount of money owed in back taxes continues to skyrocket. But finally, there is an effort to clamp down on this disgusting matter. Congressman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) has decided that the American people deserve better behavior from their employees."

He has actually entered a bill that would allow termination for those who do not pay their income taxes. As we know this will be blocked at some venture along the way along with our budget and everything else...

Our Government Employees Skip Paying Taxes - Bruce Bialosky - Townhall Conservative Columnists (http://townhall.com/columnists/brucebialosky/2012/02/06/our_government_employees_skip_paying_taxes/page/full/)

[Guest]

While the number of Federal employees owing taxes is too high - remember that there are approximately 2,748,978 Federal employees. The 98,291 (if my arithmetic is correct) constitutes less than 1%.

Take any very large corporation like IBM and I would bet there are at least 1% of the employees who owe Federal taxes.

True, Government should be an example to the rest of the country - but with 99% not owing Federal taxes is not too much to gripe about.

The Federal Government DOES do penalties on employees who have government debt either through pay being reduced until it is paid off or penalties that does include dismissal.

[Guest]

While the number of Federal employees owing taxes is too high - remember that there are approximately 2,748,978 Federal employees. The 98,291 (if my arithmetic is correct) constitutes less than 1%.

Take any very large corporation like IBM and I would bet there are at least 1% of the employees who owe Federal taxes.

True, Government should be an example to the rest of the country - but with 99% not owing Federal taxes is not too much to gripe about.

The Federal Government DOES do penalties on employees who have government debt either through pay being reduced until it is paid off or penalties that does include dismissal.

"He now has introduced a bill that gives every department the authority to terminate employees who don’t pay their taxes. When I asked him why the bill doesn’t require the employee to be fired, he replied that the Democrats would never agree to that, principally because they were concerned that key people might be among the debtors. I then wondered aloud whether federal workers could then say “You can’t fire me or make me pay my taxes because I am too important.”

I dont disagree with the premise that MAYBE their are others but this is the fastest growing segment of jobs, and I just wonder why this and the "Sharpton type" things never make the news. To me, anyway, it IS a story to be told. In addition the Presidential staff number of employees and average amount owed is glaring.

I am sure that there have been others but under the current circumstances you sort of wonder why this is not in the news more.

[Guest]

I just Googled "income tax owed by federal employees" and came up with several pages of facts and figures. They were excerpts from television (CBS, NBC, ABC, and newspapers including Washington Post) as well as countless others.

How much coverage do you want on the subject?

[Guest]

I just Googled "income tax owed by federal employees" and came up with several pages of facts and figures. They were excerpts from television (CBS, NBC, ABC, and newspapers including Washington Post) as well as countless others.

How much coverage do you want on the subject?

Point well taken.....dont think it can get enough ! I need to start watching television I suppose ! Never read it until this morning

[Guest]

ChaCha -

I have nothing against a Catholic church being tax exempt. That is the same for all churches whether they are Catholic, Protestent, Jewish, or Islam.

[Guest]

Oh you silly silly boy, Al baby is a Democrat, they don't pay taxes, that is only for us little folks.C'mon Figmo, it's not just the Democrats. Both Mitt Romney and Warren Buffett (as well as thousands of other 'top one percenters' I suspect) paid a lower tax rate on their income last year than I did. And I'm just an old retired guy living in The Villages.

Somehow continuing to lower the taxes on the 'job creators' while incrteasing the tax rates on people like me seems a little counter-intuitive...particularly when the job creators don't seem to be creating any jobs.

[Guest]

C'mon Figmo, it's not just the Democrats. Both Mitt Romney and Warren Buffett (as well as thousands of other 'top one percenters' I suspect) paid a lower tax rate on their income last year than I did. And I'm just an old retired guy living in The Villages.

Somehow continuing to lower the taxes on the 'job creators' while incrteasing the tax rates on people like me seems a little counter-intuitive...particularly when the job creators don't seem to be creating any jobs.

I dont believe that FIGMO was referring to what rate, BUT payment of ANY taxes whatsoever

[Guest]

I dont believe that FIGMO was referring to what rate, BUT payment of ANY taxes whatsoeverI still think it's ridiculous that the GOP steadfastly protects the wealthiest among us from paying any more in taxes than they pay now. In fact, most of the GOP proposals cut the taxes on the rich even more. It's pretty clear to anyone who pays even the least bit of attention that the tax code, including all the loopholes, deductions and exclusions, has been bought and paid for by the lobbyists representing the wealthy. Most people know it and the overwhelming majority of Americans think it's wrong and that the wealthiest should pay more. But the GOP continues to 'serve and protect', just like the police for the rich.

Doesn't anyone ever ask WHY??

[Guest]

I still think it's ridiculous that the GOP steadfastly protects the wealthiest among us from payinmg any more in taxes than they pay now. In fact, most of the GOP proposals cut the taxes on the rich even more. It's pretty clear to anyone who pays even the least bit of attention that the tax code, including all the loopholes, deductions and exclusions, has been bought and paid for by the lobbyists representing the wealthy. Most people know it and the overwhelming majority of Americans think it's wrong and that the wealthiest should pay more. But the GOP continues to 'serve and protect', just like the police for the rich.

Doesn't anyone ever ask WHY??

So you are one who believes in the Buffet rule ? That is the political gimmick that the President is touting INSTEAD of wholesale tax code revision.

So you believe in NO BUDGET at all, hiding the health care costs ? That seems to be the way of the Democrats and has been for years they are in control.

VK I totally respect your financial knowldege and your post will be the mantra of the democratic party....and it is class warfare. The house budget by Ryan is far far from right on but our secy of Treasury says he doesnt care what it says, he is against it.

The Republicans are not correct and neither are the Democrats, but you seem to think they got it and the Republican do not With all due respect I disagree totally with you.


As far as the polls, the polls also said that the majority were against the healthcare bill, but we got it anyway, and NO conversation about all the taxes hidden in that bill EVER !

You and the democrats propose the easy way...the way that sounds good and will certainly sway voters....and that is it. If you think that just raising taxes on a few rich people is the answer, wow...how simple that is.

Lets go to work and revise the tax code.....but stop the political pandering about rich and poor !!!

Sorry, I do respect your opinion but when you come out backing this Democratic party I have to disagree. It was you who said we need to cut and cut deeply, yet the house budget gets not a look....just tax the rich and we will be ok.

By the way...the "serve and protect" line is a good one. Did you share that with the party ?

[Guest]

VILLAGEKAHUANA....saw this the other day and thought of you when you used to go on about the size of banks and how whatever was being done would reduce those large banks....I am paraphrasing so feel free to correct me on that but at least in my head that is what you were saying.

This is from a blurb I saw the other day...

"Two years after President Barack Obama vowed to eliminate the danger of financial institutions becoming “too big to fail,” the nation’s largest banks are bigger than they were before the credit crisis.

Five banks – JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co., and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. — held $8.5 trillion in assets at the end of 2011, equal to 56 percent of the U.S. economy, according to the Federal Reserve.

Five years earlier, before the financial crisis, the largest banks’ assets amounted to 43 percent of U.S. output. The Big Five today are about twice as large as they were a decade ago relative to the economy, sparking concern that trouble at a major bank would rock the financial system and force the government to step in as it did during the 2008 crunch."

Great news: “Too big to fail” banks even bigger now « Hot Air (http://hotair.com/archives/2012/04/16/great-news-too-big-to-fail-banks-even-bigger-now/)

Bottom line to me....I/we trusted this man on health care and he lied and continues to do so. There were a number of things that I actually thought this man would or could do...but he lied all around.

That is enough for me !!

[Guest]

So you are one who believes in the Buffet rule ? That is the political gimmick that the President is touting INSTEAD of wholesale tax code revision.

So you believe in NO BUDGET at all, hiding the health care costs ? That seems to be the way of the Democrats and has been for years they are in control.

VK I totally respect your financial knowldege and your post will be the mantra of the democratic party....and it is class warfare. The house budget by Ryan is far far from right on but our secy of Treasury says he doesnt care what it says, he is against it.

The Republicans are not correct and neither are the Democrats, but you seem to think they got it and the Republican do not With all due respect I disagree totally with you.


As far as the polls, the polls also said that the majority were against the healthcare bill, but we got it anyway, and NO conversation about all the taxes hidden in that bill EVER !

You and the democrats propose the easy way...the way that sounds good and will certainly sway voters....and that is it. If you think that just raising taxes on a few rich people is the answer, wow...how simple that is.

Lets go to work and revise the tax code.....but stop the political pandering about rich and poor !!!

Sorry, I do respect your opinion but when you come out backing this Democratic party I have to disagree. It was you who said we need to cut and cut deeply, yet the house budget gets not a look....just tax the rich and we will be ok.

By the way...the "serve and protect" line is a good one. Did you share that with the party ?You kinda broadened out the discussion, Bucco. Of course I'm for a broad and complete reworking of the tax code...combined with an aggressively crafted budget that substantially cuts both discretionary spending, but more importantly entitlement spending.

What I'm really for is a Congress and a POTUS who will do the arithmetic and then act on the results. Our fiscal problems cannot be solved without both substantial spending cuts as well as tax increases. The most likely and logical tax increases will have to be borne by the wealthiest individuals and those companies who either pay no or little taxes or benefit from tax loopholes that are not needed other than to increase their profits.

Is that "income redistribution"? Yeah, I guess it is. The wealthy will have to contribute more of their earned income to pay for government services, many of which will benefit those who can't afford to pay for them. But in my mind, that's the role of a democratic government in a developed country.

If that's the Democratic mantra...yep, I'm for it! If that's what the GOP will support, I'm for them too!

[Guest]

VILLAGEKAHUANA....saw this the other day and thought of you when you used to go on about the size of banks and how whatever was being done would reduce those large banks....I am paraphrasing so feel free to correct me on that but at least in my head that is what you were saying.

This is from a blurb I saw the other day...

"Two years after President Barack Obama vowed to eliminate the danger of financial institutions becoming “too big to fail,” the nation’s largest banks are bigger than they were before the credit crisis.

Five banks – JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co., and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. — held $8.5 trillion in assets at the end of 2011, equal to 56 percent of the U.S. economy, according to the Federal Reserve.

Five years earlier, before the financial crisis, the largest banks’ assets amounted to 43 percent of U.S. output. The Big Five today are about twice as large as they were a decade ago relative to the economy, sparking concern that trouble at a major bank would rock the financial system and force the government to step in as it did during the 2008 crunch."

Great news: “Too big to fail” banks even bigger now « Hot Air (http://hotair.com/archives/2012/04/16/great-news-too-big-to-fail-banks-even-bigger-now/)

Bottom line to me....I/we trusted this man on health care and he lied and continues to do so. There were a number of things that I actually thought this man would or could do...but he lied all around.

That is enough for me !!Big isn't always bad, Bucco. But what is bad is big combined with a tepid and ineffective regulatory structure. Unfortunately, that's what we have. Dodd-Frank is a joke. It doesn't provide the regulatory structure that I think is necessary and in fact the complicated regulations it does require tends to drive the smaller, community banks out of business, making the largest banks even larger. (That's what they wanted, of course, and that's what they got as the result of their lobbyists payments to members of Congress.)

I know that the vast majority of those on the right have ObamaCare squarely in their sights. But really, the law that has the potential of creating another life-changing crisis in the near term is Dodd-Frank. But nary a word about overturning that abomination. And unfortunately, the critics don't understand our financial regulatory structure any better than they understand the contents of ObamaCare.

[Guest]

Big isn't always bad, Bucco. But what is bad is big combined with a tepid and ineffective regulatory structure. Unfortunately, that's what we have. Dodd-Frank is a joke. It doesn't provide the regulatory structure that I think is necessary and in fact the complicated regulations it does require tends to drive the smaller, community banks out of business, making the largest banks even larger. (That's what they wanted, of course, and that's what they got as the result of their lobbyists payments to members of Congress.)

I know that the vast majority of those on the right have ObamaCare squarely in their sights. But really, the law that has the potential of creating another life-changing crisis in the near term is Dodd-Frank. But nary a word about overturning that abomination. And unfortunately, the critics don't understand our financial regulatory structure and better than they understand the contents of ObamaCare.

It iis interesting how you rail against Republicans all the time, and in this case on Dodd-Frank, the Republicans ARE and HAVE been trying to get this thing "fixed". HOWEVER, your wonderful Democratic party says...well..

"Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is warning that if GOP lawmakers continue their push to roll back portions of the Dodd-Frank financial reform law, it could "critically undermine" the ability to prevent damaging future crises.

In a letter sent to lawmakers Tuesday, Geithner blasted a package of measures set to be considered by the House Financial Services Committee on Wednesday, including a pair that would repeal or trim key pieces of the Wall Street makeover.

"The act provides essential reforms that should not be weakened or repealed," he wrote to committee Chairman Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) and ranking member Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.)."

Geithner: Hands off Dodd-Frank - The Hill's On The Money (http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/banking-financial-institutions/222195-geithner-to-gop-hands-off-dodd-frank)

And I think the Republicans actually have legislation to change parts of it already in the works.

[Guest]

What if we collected taxes from ..................................

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is that the ONLY church we should collect from ?

I ask because you were so specific !!!!!!!

ALL religious institutions that currently do not pay taxes.

coralway - religious institutions benefit from specific irs exclusion - al sharpton does not! al owes his taxes NOW...religious institutions will only owe them if and when exclusions are legally changed.

IRS tax exempt status for religious organizations is predicated on the institution compling with Federal law/IRS rules. One rule prohibits partisan politics. I (Jim) believe churches should not avail themselves of the exemption. Church leaders would then be free to say anyhting from the pulpit without fear of losing their tax exempt status.

In turn, members would not be able to take tax deductions for their contributions. That seems right in view of the Bible's admonition to, "render unto Caesar,that which is Caesar's" and to give your "alms in secret that you may be rewarded" secretly.