Hmmm..  I work over 2200 hours per year.  My wife works the same amount.  We spend less than we make.  We spend a lot less than we make.  We CHOOSE to buy health insurance rather than buying an RV, some motorbikes and some new rims for the car.   We work for the government for the first 5 months of the year.  Every single dime we make in the first 5 months of the  year goes to the government.  The rest of what we make the next 7 months we get to keep.  And people call this capitalism?? Yet there is a growing number of people in this country who think I should work even longer for the government.  There is a strong and vocal population in this country who think I do not contribute enough to this country.  Curiously, many of them do not work one single day of the year for the government. Not one single hour of their labor do they share with the government.  Yet they are being told that it is my fault that they spend more than they make.  That it is my fault they do not have enough money to buy health insurance after they have already bought the RV, motorbikes and the new rims. Somehow, their lack of fiscal restraint and lack of planning and priorization is my fault.

Can someone please tell me how it is my fault? 

Ron,

Your posts always refer to them or they. Who Are them or they.

We have suffered through 19 years of republican leadership. It is republican leadership that has brought us to where we are today. It was only under Clinton that America appeared to see government going in the right direction.

But let me point out that my post was not political. It was a statement as to the definition and application of Capitalism.

The rules of capitalism are written in ink. The are contained in books.

The rules can not be changed to appease those that wish to be anti social. Those that wish to be selfish. Those that fear returning prizes back to society that gave them the opportunity to succeed.

Unless of course you wish to wander of to the mountain tops. And play economy by yourself.

 Are you saying I am not being social?? That I do not care for the good of the country?? What do you have to say for the 50% in this country that do not donate one single hour of their labor to the federal government?? Do you think something should be done about their civic responsibility?? 

Mexico,

Who are the fifty percent that pay nothing to the Federal government. Have you been brainwashed to believe that the income tax is the Federal governments great provider.

Don't those who are part of the ownership society. Those of us that pay only capital gains. Don't we count?

Warren Buffet's tax rate is lower than his secretary's. Doesn't he count?

The income tax is only a small part of the federal budget.

Social Security and Medicare are funded on there own, completely separate from the income tax.

Licensing and fees pay for a large part of the government expenses.

Sales tax is a huge part of government funding.

The fact that 42% of your taxes go to pay for Bush's war. May just cheer you up enough to get through your 12 hour shift. That's 5 ½ hours of your shift toward invading another's homeland.

 I am all for making the capital gains tax 90%.  How about it?? Are you for a 90% tax on capital gains?? How about a 90% tax on oil and gas royalities?  Sounds good to me..

I am all for getting every dime I paid into social security and medicare back.  How about it??  Are you for that?

When I buy a license or fee, I am paying for that service.  I have no problem with that.   I think there should be more license and fees.

If income tax is such a small part of the federal budget, and over 50% do not pay income tax, why not just get rid of it?? Think of how much money that would save.  Are you for abolishing the income tax??

 At first I was horrified to read your approval of a 90% tax on anything. Talk about further killing whatever economy we have left. Then I realized your sarcasm and I couldn't agree with you more. The Social Security Administration, following approval by OUR Congress, put my qualification to collect the benefits I have already paid for to age 66 instead of 62 1/2. So you are correct Ron, I have paid already more than I will ever receive, and unless I can afford to retire at 62 1/2 without needing my benefits for an additional 3 1/2 years, I will continue to pay about $9,000.00 a year into the Socialist Fund. Perhaps if our Congress were forced to have greater personal participation into the fund, they would allow us to invest it within reasonable legal limits to provide for ourselves. That just doesn't go hand in hand with the current "cradle to grave citizens are too stupid to do anything for themselves so we will decide for them" policy that Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid have "deemed best for our own good". That's in essence about a $32,000.00 Tax Increase, assuming the rate of contributions is not increased or Congress doesn't increase the age of benefit qualification to 150 which they can do at will. I have 11 1/2 years to qualify now since their arbitrary rule change. I will never qualify for more benefits than I have already paid for. That' what happened in France for a while under former President Chirac. Short work week, the "me" mentality, and ending with the collapse of French economy as a result of the socialism. You can see where this goes. Why work for free. You will not be equal with anyone else when contributing your income for redistribution under the Pelosi, Kennedy, Reid scenario. Stay home and don't have a heart attack. I have no problem with taxes and fees either when they are fairly allocated, representative of the cost of providing services, as well as when those services are managed without tons of waste and self dealing by government. And yes I would trade the complicated income tax for a national sales or flat tax in the blink of a California second. If everyones makes a hundred dollars and pays 10 cents of it in tax, on it's face it appears fair. If everyone paid the same percentage of tax on their earnings, that seems inherently fair. With the underground economy being alleged to be larger than the above ground economy, it's easy to understand why so many people feel ripped off. If a dime on a dollar is fair, it doesn't matter how many dollars the taxpayer makes. If he makes twenty times more dollars than you, he contributes twenty more times as many dimes. The fact that he makes more than than you did, doesn't mean he should pay 4 dimes on every dollar even though you only pay one dime. If this is true, as I believe, than the real taxpayers are paying far in excess of what is fair to subsidize those that don't pay anything. I believe a fair tax plan would eliminate most cheaters, most income difficult to find, and would make taxpayers more honest. The incentive to cheat would be taken away, cheating wouldn't be worth it for those that do. A national sales tax would completely eliminate the underground economy. It doesn't matter why you are on American soil, how you got here, why you are currently here, everything you buy gets a 15% tax, or whatever the number is. How fair is that? Ok Ron, you got me going.

Tkozy, you need to read this. 

You needed to read this like 10 years ago, but David Mamet hadn't figured it out or written it until yesterday.  Tkozy, read this and after a good night's sleep, you can wake up tomorrow a wiser, better man: a centrist.

It's in The Village Voice, Tkozy,  By David Mamet.  There is no greater lefty cred than that.  So I know you won't be able to resist.

The piece is called "Why I'm No Longer A Brain-Dead Liberal."  Harsh title, yes.  Ironic or satirical?  Nope.

( http://www.villagevoice.com... )

My gift to you, tkozy!

 Tk

let me point out the fact that most of Clinton's so called accomplishments were because of a republican congress and that Clinton ran on Conservative values to win. Heck his only real accomplishment if you want to call it that is he committed perjury as the pres and convinced everyone he just got a blow job, no big deal lol.

And I don't care what anyone says Hillary Clinton being the first lady doesn't qualify her to be Pres. her so called experience is being some ones wife? Heck by her calculation of time in white house being experience that means the cook their for the last 20 years should be very qualified.....

Hey TK I just say this when you posted this first time, I replied did you want me to reply on this one too? 

Clinton was the best Republican president since Eisenhower.  If the gains made were due to the Republican Congress, why did they evaporate when Shrub took over?

.

And, once again, he did *NOT* commit perjury and it *WASN'T* a big deal.

Considering how large the baby boomer generation is, here's some bad news if you're a conservative:

Busting Myth, People Turn More Liberal With Age

http://www.livescience.com/...

 And here's some bad news if you're a Liberal Socialist Layabout............

TSM is your spokesman

Cncl, Publican and Super.

NOT ONE PENNY of the Social Security or Medicare programs comes form the General tax fund. Never have never will.

This is a basic truth of the American Tax system. It is unimaginable that you would not be aware of this fact.

Their funds are both collect as if they were a premium on any private annuity..

Please stay on topic. Restrict your comments to taxes please.

 I used to live in Taxes

Chico, the bad news is that this country doesn't really *HAVE* a liberal or socialist spokesman.  The spectrum is shifted rightwards, more's the pity.

.

Tkozy, that doesn't mean the money doesn't flow the other way.  Your Social Security is funding Shrub's lost war in Iraq.

 I was born in Taxas, but not in the official part.

 donde esta frijole kozy?

NDak esse?

Minot still there?

52's still?

Any Minutemen?

 mebbe you could do it RF.

you were born in Juarez?

 Random, what about Ed Schultz? He's pretty good

 nice long rant that is all over the board

again....capitalism thrives on self improvement...and is based on the principle that you are responsible for yours

redistribution of wealth is a liberal ideal that thrives on irresponsibility of self

maybe you need to quit hittin the bong before your macro econ class @ BC

 let me point out the fact that most of Clinton's so called accomplishments were because of a republican congress and that Clinton ran on Conservative values to win

Republican Congress was the best thing that ever happened to Billy Boy

Sometimes I think having too much leeway with House and Senate doomed Bush

He lost veto pen and started trying to please the then Dem Minority!

He thought he could do no wrong

So he did...................

Learn,

The stock market is self improvement? How about 401k plans. Auto and life insurances. Health insurance?

Learn, here is a short version for the definition of Capitalism.

Society expects that those who can. Must improve themselves. But that in return. Society deserves credit for making wealth available to the individual.

Redistribution of Wealth is a basic tenet of Capitalism. It is a point that you can not discard without disrespecting the very heart and soul of Capitalism.

Please stop the Ad hominem attacks and announce if you accept the terms required to be a capitalist.

 Redistribution of wealth is a basic tenet of capitalism?? Bullshit.

Mexico,

You might try reading the Wealth of Nations. Stop taking lessons at Mugs.
 

Without a form of redistribution of wealth. All wealth would at some point pool in the hands of one man.

Thus turning the nation into a fiefdom. Not a pleasant thought. Not a economy even you would approve of.

 Tkosy what are you talking about? maybe you dont thin redistribution of wealth means the same thing I do

R of W= when the government takes wealth from some and gives it to all no matter if they worked for it or not. capitalism only redistributes wealth if you consider some one working more effiently at something than some one else is is abloe to make a better profit.

Oh and by the way with socialism everyone slowly get poorer while in capitalism the everyones wealth is brought up. Of course there are exceptions but generally this is sound the beauty is that it is constanly changing and if you mess up you can start again. The point being when your successful you make more jobs, provide generate more money into the economy, make advancments in tech,

Whether you realize it or not every major achievment in the 20th century and most in history is based in a free market or capitalistic society, in socialism only a slow decline of society is ever achieved. Its nice to think that some one else  can work hard and is being forced to sahre it with others but eventually people stop trying and when no one is working hard any more advancement stops...that the problem with socialism. It sucks.... I can believe your trying to quote the wealth of Nations when you have no idea what its about....

 Good video though

Redistribution of wealth under Socialism:  tax-funded social programs for the poor.

Redistribution of wealth under Capitalism:  no-bid contracts for defense contractors.

.

Whether you realize it or not, your assertion is not backed by anything other than your say-so.  The first man in space was not a capitalist, for example.  Have *YOU* read the Wealth of Nations, by the way?  Just asking--it's on my *LONG* list of books to read one of these days.  But I know enough about Adam Smith that he was not merely a naked capitalist himself. 

 There is a place at the table for Govt Random, of course. But it shouldn't be the one who carves the turkey, especially when the turkey was bought and raised up by the others at the table and Govt just sat there waiting to eat!

I would refer you to the point in kozy's blog made my mexico (and me previously) about the govt making the lion's share of profits (taxes) on a bbl of crude and doing virtually nothing to earn it.....................