I stand with what I said that credit should have been given to President Obama for the capture of Bin Laden as credit was given to President Bush for the capture of Saddam Hussein, which led to victory in his re-election. I never said that credit shouldn’t go to the Navy Seals; I said not all the credit. I didn’t think there would be anyone so stupid to think otherwise. No president goes to war. They give the orders, and without his orders, the military can’t attack.
A lot of people don’t pay income tax, because they don’t go into that bracket. I don’t pay income tax, but I pay state tax, property tax and royalty taxes and have reached the full retirement age and receive a social security check, Medicare and VA benefits. I paid income tax when I was working; I pay $99.40 a month for Medicare, and I paid for my VA benefits when I served my country – the USA, not Mexico or Denmark.
About the females having babies they can’t support – that is a problem, because we can’t tell them not to get pregnant, as they can’t tell you to stop working so you won’t have to pay income tax if you don’t want them to use your tax dollars.
I was approached by three girls who were upset at your letter; after listening to them, I asked one of them where do you think he/she has his/her heart? She replied “in his wallet.” Every time I think what this dropout said, I crack up laughing!
Abildgaard, I’m having a very hard time trying to be good when everyone else is having a jolly time being bad!
Cipriano C. Perez
Let's set the record straight here for those who call Vietnam vets child-killing, druggies. Here's some recent facts for you, chump, from Iraq and Afghanistan.
"Alcohol abuse is rising among veterans of combat in Afghanistan and Iraq, many of them trying to deaden the repercussions of war and disorientation of home. Studies indicate that the problem is particularly prevalent among those suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, as it was after the Vietnam War. Studies indicate that illegal drug use, much less common than heavy drinking in the military, is up slightly, too.
Increasingly, these troubled veterans are spilling into the criminal justice system. A small fraction wind up in prison for homicides or other major crimes. Far more, though, are involved in drunken bar fights, reckless driving and alcohol-fueled domestic violence. Whatever the particulars, their stories often spool out in unwitting victims, ruptured families, lost jobs and crushing debt.
No one generation of patriots has a magic pill to protect them from months or years of combat. WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm (400,000 applications for medical problems), and others continue to point out that war is hell, and when you come back from hell, you're damaged goods.
War mongers and flag wavers can boast all they want about our great military and our war history, but the truth is we've not made the world safer, we've bankrupted our economy, and we've killed millions of innocent people in the process.
I wish all of you a Happy New Year, and I truly hope that someday we'll all learn to live in peace. (Without weapons)
As a veteran who served during the Vietnam War, and having lived through those times, I know our country has duped us into going to war. It had nothing to do with freedom or democracy. Now if you don't like to think we can be duped by our government, then why do you and most on the right express that very opinion: from Obama's birth certificate to the UN taking over Congress? You can't have it both ways, and you can't complain about government spending when you have spent most of your entire professional life in government. And it doesn't maker any difference if you're in the military or running a library, it's taxpayer money behind your check, and the military takes most of our budget with our massive cold war sized bloated defense industry. This is not an attack you or on anyone who has served in the military, but facts are facts.
Here's an example of your "defense of freedom" concept. When we mined the harbor of Managua, and spent tens of millions of taxpayer dollars, secretly I might add, to overthrow the socialist government of Nicaragua, the excuse was to protect the borders of the US from communist infiltration and attack. The small country of Costa Rica, the neighbor of Nicaragua, didn't even have an army. And were they concerned? Not at all. Mexico wasn't concerned, Guatemala couldn't care less, etc. We were scared. Were were scared because United Fruit Company was about to lose their factories and land to the new government. If you want to send your kid to war for United Fruit Company, go ahead, but don't call it freedom.
Maintaining the best military is fine, but does our military spending and our army (however reduced from Vietnam era levels), still need to be the largest military force on the planet. The combined armies of the entire world are not as large as ours. Now if you don't see the absurdity of this scenario, then you've got your head in the sand. I don't blame troops for anything, but let's take a stand on making the world safer from us, because that's what the rest of the world thinks, and they can't all be wrong.
I'm not arguing for no defense, but to spend 50% of our budget on defense is a sick joke. And 50% is more than 47% where I come from.
The product that the military makes is called “freedom.” You may have heard this a few times, but need I remind you that “freedom isn’t free.” Once again, it’s the taxpayers who make this happen. Unlike social programs, there’s a return on the investment. And, because the military is a government organization, it’s doesn’t exist to make a profit. That’s what private companies do and the only reason they stay afloat.
Yes, I will admit that defense industries design weaponry that kills enemy forces. Would you suggest we just throw rocks instead? Hopefully, we don’t have to use them, but they make a good deterrent. Imagine what would have happened during the Cuban missile crisis, or if we had no nuclear arsenal in our northern states. Russia would have attacked us years ago. If you recall, it was the Japanese who attacked Pearl Harbor. Our nuclear response changed the course of the war. Tragically, thousands of Japanese died, but it sent a strong message to the rest of the world. Hopefully, we never have to do it again.
You are exactly one of those individuals Gov Romney was talking about; the 47% who won’t change their thought process no matter what he were to say. So, I won’t attempt to change your perspective either. And you’re right; a lot of people don’t fall into the income bracket that requires them to pay taxes. Maybe you’re okay with that, but myself and scores of working class citizens from all political parties agree that should change. In my post, I pointed out that every worker should pay a percentage of income tax based on what they make. And, it should be the same percentage across the board. I will tell you, I paid over $25,000 in taxes last year. Is that not enough? Should I give more to fund additional social programs? When is it ever enough?
I’m surprised you and many other less fortunate haven’t lobbied to have sales tax done away with for people below a certain income level. Is it fair that the wealthy pay a smaller percentage than the middle class? Is it fair that low income workers’ pay no tax? In your eyes, it’s apparent that the wealthy and middle class should pay more, and you pay nothing. Why, because low income people become the benefactors of everyone else’s dollars.
We agree on one thing; females having babies they can’t support. We can’t tell them not to, but should the taxpayer be forced to support these children when they do? Sure, let’s continue to pass the responsibility on to someone else. At what point in time are these mothers accountable for their deeds? Would you make the same argument if these women were strung out on drugs or committed crimes? Should someone else pay their fines, or serve time in jail so they don’t have too. Accountability sir! You’ve really missed the point!
Imagine what the world would look like if everyone had the same mentality. Nobody worked and expected the other person to take care of them. I guess we would all be homeless and die of starvation waiting on the support of someone else.
As far as the three girls, anyone can find some poor lost souls to rally in their corner. I’m betting you weren’t speaking to any who went on to college with plans of becoming independent. It’s just sorry that you glamorized the fact one was a dropout. A responsible person would have encouraged her to get back in school so she doesn’t end up in the condition you find yourself in today.
I actually have a heart. But, I’m tired of all the entitlement people thinking people like me don’t do enough. I didn’t grow up with a silver spoon in my mouth, so I had to make sacrifices to get to where I’m am; sacrifices that many of the irresponsible refuse to make. I gave over $1500 to charity this year that I didn’t have too. How much did you give? I do volunteer construction projects for elderly and low income families. How much of your time do you give towards the needy? Do you contribute to society, or are you government liability?
Like you I served in the military. But, I went on to retire after 28 years. How long did you serve? I took the time and garnered three college degrees and I’m currently studying law. How much schooling do you have? I’ve earned a military retirement; I max out my 401K every year, I’m working on a civil service retirement, and will someday collect some of my social security when I’m eligible. What kinds of plans did you make for your future?
Mr. Perez, life is about choices. We all make bad ones, but some of us learn to correct those mistakes versus sitting back and letting others do our dirty work. If you get anything out of this, just remember that “failure is easy because you don’t have to do a damn thing to achieve it.”
By the way, this is a philosophical discussion. You have shared your viewpoint as I have shared mine. It’s not personal, nor do I have any dislike for you. Hell, I don’t even know you. It would be ignorant to hate a person you don’t know. I only hate one person and she lives right there in Beeville, Texas (with my daughter).
Thanks for making me laugh today!
I won't sit here and stew about it Ms Deborah. You lose!
I won't sit here and stew Ms Deborah. You lose! Care to play again sometime?
I won't sit here and stew about anything. You lose! Care to play again sometime?
Your response is predicated on a number of incorrect assumptions about me. To begin with, I am employed and while not in the same tax bracket as you, I am a member of the 28% tax bracket so why don't you refrain from making further conjecture about me since you are making a fool of yourself.
I certainly wish that I could earn a retirement from any of my employers (previous or current), but none of them had/have pension plans and they offered 401(k) programs instead. I receive fairly generous matches to my contributions by today's standards, but I think both of us would agree that defined benefit plans provide more retirement security than the defined contribution plans of my parents generation.
That doesn't respond to all of your incorrect guesses, but I prefer to let you remain bewildered as to how wrong you really are about me. I can also see why you want to want to be a lawyer--all of your responses are extremely long-winded and pointless.
Finally, why should I identify myself to you? Do you intend to pursue me and try to have me blacklisted because of my comments? What about my right to express my opinions whether anonymously or if I choose with my actual name? It seems like you are the type who would enjoy conducting a vendetta based upon your multiple responses to me. Therefore, I prefer to let you stew in the dark as to my identity. However, have a Merry Christmas!
Never had a restraining order placed against me for any reason. I choose to stay out of Beeville because of ridiculous people like you. Maybe it’s the water in which breeds such incompetence. As far as supporting my daughter, it’s the right thing to do and I have given much more than the government requires.
And, over ten years at each place doesn’t mean you’ve made of career of any jobs. I guess you can’t claim you’ve actually earned a retirement then. All employees help companies make millions of dollars; even those at McDonalds. But, that doesn’t place you high on the hog. So talk to me when you pay 25K a year (or higher) in taxes like I do. Oh wait, you live in Beeville, TX and will probably never make that kind of money. You did claim to be successful though; meaning you have reached your full potential—whatever that might be.
I also noticed you didn’t respond to my proposal of identifying yourself. I guess you actually took my advice and decided to keep your mouth shut about disrespecting our military. But, if you want to continue with cowardly comments about our post-draft service members, then have the testicle fortitude to come out of the closet to which you hide. Mercenaries….really?
By the way, if you’re not Mr. Perez you sure use much of the same language. I believe he served (or claimed too) during the pre-draft period. Gee, that’s the same period that you seem to idolize. If I recall, they were raping/killing women and children and routinely using drugs. Although our generation of post-war veterans aren’t perfect, they don’t compare to the criminal acts that took place during Vietnam. But you know what? I still support “all” that have served—even Mr. Perez. Like I said before, I may not like a person’s belief system, but it doesn’t mean I hate them.
So, go to work (if you can) and pay taxes like the rest of us. Please stop complaining about what you think you’re entitled too from the government and strive to be a bit more independent. That’s all we (people like me) ever ask of anyone. ObamaCare is on its way, so be happy you’ll get something else for free at the cost of everyone else!
I commend you for opening your heart and adopting a child. I never did adopt any myself, but it doesn't mean that I'm any less than you because of it. Otherwise, it isn't any of my business. Your concern about who I support is noted and also none of your business. Go fish.
I checked the tax tables and the 33% bracket applies to net taxable income after deductions of $178,650 – $388,350 for single people and $217,450 – $388,350 for married filing jointly. I certainly understand why you would want a low flat tax rate like 15% because it would result in over $13,000 in savings each year. I guess those child support payments are eating you up though--how dare that evil government tell you what you have to pay to support your spawn!
As far as your conjecture regarding whether I pay federal taxes, I can answer that yes I do and plenty of them. However, I have no qualms paying them because that is the price of a civilized society.
I am in favor of progressive taxation and I think additional rates should be established at $500K, $1 mil and $5 mil with rates up to 50%. Historically, those rates are low--the rates were 70% with Nixon and 91% with Eisenhower. I don't recall that people were leaving the US in droves to go to China, Cuba or Vietnam when Eisenhower or Nixon were in office except in relation to our military excursions. I also don't recall anybody claiming that we were a "socialist society" when the marginal tax rates were that high, so your argument doesn't hold water.
I will state that I'm considered to be successful and that I have a stable employment history with over ten years experience at each place of employment along with being a valued employee that has made millions of dollars for my employers. I am grateful that I had and have the good fortune to work around many wonderful people who appreciate me, so I am laughing at your ridiculous comments.
I won't take the time to answer the remaining questions and comments that you made since I want to enjoy the remainder of my day.
First off,
Let me commend you for the way you articulated your words. It seems to me you have a bit more than a High School education; albeit not much. However, you get and “F” in reading comprehension because you misquoted anything I have said thus far. Additionally, you are quite the spin master in diverting the real issues at hand.
I never suggested that we eliminate government assistance to needy people. What I said was there should be some accountability for those fall in that category through irresponsible actions. And, since you insist on using children in your argument, consider those who were born in poverty. Is that fair to them? It surely wasn’t my fault. I too have kids, but had the sense to stop at the amount (through surgery) that I could afford to support. Years later, I actually adopted a needy child. To this day, I provide $15,000 a year in child support to her mother. How many needy people do you support? How many children have you adopted and brought out of poverty?
Like you, none of us were asked to be born. The kids don’t get to pick their parents or choose their living conditions. As Donald Trump once said, “some have the luxury of being part of the lucky sperm bank.” Personally, I don’t support Mr. Trump, but he made a valid point.
As far as my opinion on taxation, I currently pay 33%; a much higher percentage than the wealthy, and 100% higher than the non-taxpayers. You may not agree with me on this because you probably don’t pay any Federal tax yourself, nor do you want too. Exactly why I said this (flat tax) wouldn’t make it through Congress. Wealthy don’t want to pay a higher percentage, and the not-so-wealthy want to avoid paying any. If I were king for a day (stay with me now), having everyone—low, middle, and high income people all paying taxes, it would bring in more revenue and the tax rate could be lowered.
Here’s some simple math to which I believe even you can comprehend: A person who made $100 a week with a 15% tax rate would mean they only pay $15. Someone who makes $1000 a week at the same rate would pay $150, and someone making $10,000 a week would pay $1,500. However, you would rather low income pay nothing at all, the middle income paying 33% or $330 a week based on the same income, and the wealthy paying 33% or $3,300 of the $10,000. Of course, if you really had you way, you would require middle and high income pay 50% of their income and give the other 50% to the less fortunate! You might actually believe that’s fair, but we are not a socialist society. Move to China, Cuba, or Vietnam!
In a free market society, people have the right to work hard and make as much money as possible. That being said, Congress has the right to levy taxes. Personally, I hope the President is successful in making the wealthy pay more; at least the same percentage I do. But then again, I hope he makes concessions to streamline the social programs. Have you ever known anybody to that misuses their Loan Star card? What about the parent who applied for benefits, yet buys something with her card and exchanges it for cash, drugs, or alcohol? Who’s taking food away from the kids now? Certainly not me.
I completely support the Planned Parenthood concept and would much rather have tax dollars spent on abortions, vasectomies, and tying tubes. The religious zealots (the right and left) probably wouldn’t support my position. Then again, how many of them are out their adopting or supporting these children?
You made the point of stating, “People don’t morally deserve their income because almost everyone’s income results largely from factors beyond their control such as access to a superb set of institutions and a grand scale of specialization and trade within our borders.” Where are the facts to support this? Where do you draw the line? Somewhere between low and middle income perhaps? Do I deserve my income? Like these others, you don’t know me or the hurdles I’ve had to jump to get to where I am. Go back Trump’s comments. While there are people out there who don’t deserve it such as Paris Hilton, or the Kardashians, there are those who made sacrifices along the way. Therefore, maybe you’re upset with your own failures and think it’s everyone else’s fault; especially the government. Maybe you just need some psychological help. There’s always the VA and it won’t cost you a dime.
I’m sure you have held many jobs, but you lead me to believe you are currently unemployed. If true, then it would be interesting to know why you no longer work. Maybe you were over opinionated and didn’t get all the entitlements you felt you should. Maybe you were employed long enough. It’s called RETIREMENT! Had I left the service before I reached 20 years, I would not have the benefits I enjoy today. It doesn’t appear that you lasted with any employer, so I’m not exactly sure which entitlements you’re waiting on; Social Security or VA disability?
Having read your posts, I would have terminated your employment if you worked for me. You’re obviously a bad apple and one that would have contaminated the rest of the staff. You can always apply to work at the prison those. They have positions for people just like you—the outside pickets (guard towers). Oh, and they have great benefits. But, you will have to pay taxes!
Are you still with me? When it comes to the 47% issue, those were not my words. They were Gov Romney’s. I only said I support him on what he said about the people whose minds he could not change.
Finally, I’m pretty sure of your true identity as I alluded to in the beginning. But, I have better things to do (such as work and school) than waste my time confronting you personally. Trust me; I won’t be making any trips to Beeville in the near future. However, one would expect a person with such a strong view point to at least identify themselves versus hiding behind a screen name. However, with your latest irresponsible and distasteful comments about people serving in the post draft era, its best you remain anonymous. Calling our military vets a bunch of “mercenaries” was the dumbest thing you have written so far. Tell that to a parent/relative of someone who currently serves or even died in the Middle East and you may find yourself in grave danger. Not even the lowest of incomes would support you on that comment!
Apparently my comment about the children did catch your attention, otherwise you wouldn't have responded. While you do not directly suggest that the children should go hungry, what do you think would happen if you eliminated government assistance to those parents?
I don't see anything fair about having a set percentage of taxation paid by all people. If the government creates a rule that says everyone must pay an equal share of their income, revenue will be restricted to the rate that the lowest earning workers can afford to pay. Meanwhile, those who could afford to pick up a larger share of the burden will skate by and enjoy the bounty of our nation with miniscule contributions. If people deserved most of their income, there would be a good case that they should be able to keep it. However, people don’t morally deserve their income because almost everyone’s income results largely from factors beyond their control such as access to a superb set of institutions and a grand scale of specialization and trade within our borders.
As far as your question about adults having too many children--what are we supposed to do? Do we force welfare mothers to be sterilized or should the children be forcefully taken away and become wards of the state? Maybe you would like to create a market for these children so that they can be adopted? Personally, I cannot offer any acceptable solutions to this problem--however, neither have you.
I've worked at jobs that came with benefits. Those benefits only applied through the term of my employment and they did not entitle me to receive those benefits after I left the job. Yes, you earned your entitlements with your military service. However, I have also earned the entitlements that I will receive in the future also. My point was that you condemned the 47% of mooching off the government when most of those people were gainfully employed during their working careers. Why is it right that you get to receive your entitlements while it is wrong for anyone else who you deem to be unworthy not be able to get their entitlements?
As far as your dare is concerned--much to your chagrin, you will have to deal with my anonymity. I guess that is what disappoints you though because you want to have someone to confront.
Based on your responses, you voluntarily joined the military. You took a job and you got paid for it. You fought in the conflicts in the Middle East to protect America's oil and to keep dictatorial regimes in control in those countries. During the first Gulf War, the government actually made a profit. Because of these facts, I consider our current military (post-draft) to be a bunch of mercenaries. So don't expect any apologies or corrections to my earlier statements.
Sorry if you don't like it, but that is why I have a different view!
After a long day at the office (yes, I mean work), I had to come home and see what opinions others might post in regards to my response to Mr. Perez. And there it was…..an opinion from someone who’s hiding their true identity with a screen name; DifferentView2. I must say, you truly have a different view.
Anyhow, you’ve tried unsuccessfully of diverting the attention away from the issues by inserting the, “you are willing to take food out of the mouth of children” comment. Is that the best you can do? No one is suggesting that kids should go hungry, so let’s stay on point shall we? My position all along has been about adults being irresponsible and bringing children into this world they can’t afford to take care of. Once they’re here, someone has to feed them. Let me underline my question(s) so you and others can stay focused. At what point in time should these adults be held accountable, and should they have as many kids as they want; expecting the government to come to their aid? Not surprising, people who share your ideology are also the some of the same people who receive government assistance. And, they don’t want it to stop.
As far as the 47% remark, Gov Romney was talking about the voters and he wasn’t referring to children. They may be attached to the voters by relationship, but they have no impact on the outcome of any election—you must know this. If I may quote myself, I said “scores of working class citizens from all political parties. . . . “. I never said all Americans would, or the election would have been different. Also, I never said who I voted for and you’re making an assumption because I’m defending Gov Romney’s comments. But, I also support the President’s view that the wealthy should pay more. I never wavered on either position, so take a few minutes and re-read my posts.
Regarding morality, you can’t have it both ways. In one sense, you assert that the moral thing to do is increase taxes on those who benefit the most from the legal and financial structures of this nation, yet you also imply it’s okay if people in low income brackets don’t pay any. Why not be fair and make everyone pay the same percentage across the board regardless of income? Of course, this is where the stalemate takes place. The wealthy don’t want to pay more, and the less fortunate don’t want to pay any. Once again, it falls on the middle class.
As to my studies, morality plays a part in shaping law. We call that the court of public opinion. For instance, in the United States, it’s immoral to prostitute and therefore laws exists to punish those who partake in such behavior. But, there’s no law that ties morality with taxes. Maybe there should be as people may come to the conclusion that “everyone” contributes their fair share—which leads me to another point. In your household, do you put the burden of doing chores (based on ability) on one person, or do you equally distribute responsibility among the inhabitants? I hope in today’s society that everyone in your home pitches in to help.
I’ll make an assumption and you can surely correct me if I’m wrong, but if you’re living in Beeville and defending the waste and fraud involved in some social programs, I doubt you will ever rise above your current economic situation. You’re obviously where you want to be. Since you’re so willing to pay additional taxes should you reach a certain income, why not donate a portion of what you have now. You don’t have to be successful to give. It’s a nice facade, but if you’re not digging into your pockets now, you won’t do it if you had more to give. By the way, being successful isn’t necessarily about making more money; it’s about reaching you’re full potential. Have you gone as far in life as you plan to go? If so, then you have succeeded!
Now to the not-so-nice part of my discussion. First off, my education was a shared cost. In some respects, it was paid for as benefit for serving my country. You ever had a job that came with benefits? This is no different. I was also employed by a few corporations who picked up the tab. Currently, my legal studies are being partially paid for through the VA and I pay the rest. It’s called the Post 9-11 bill. This was an entitlement enjoyed by all service members who elect to further their education, and spent time in the Middle East during Operations IRAQI/ENDURING Freedom. Yes, I’ve been to the war zone three times and put my life on the line for this thing we call freedom. For you to imply that I mooched off the government for my 28 years of service to protect the very freedom you enjoy, someone should ………….. out of you. Not only did you disrespect me, you disrespected every single military member (past and present) who has ever served in the United States Armed Forces. Please tell me that it was misstated and you didn’t mean it. Otherwise, I dare you to uncloak yourself and let the readers know who you are and the fact you think those who served are moochers (your words, not mine).
By the way, I also think it is fair for different tax rates to be charged as one's income increases. The people that benefit the most from the legal and financial structures of this nation should be taxed more. It is the moral thing to do--or do they mention morality in any of your law classes? Whenever I cross into a higher income tax bracket I am proud and willing to pay those taxes because it is a sign that I am a success!
BTW, how did you pay for all of those college degrees? Was it through those generous VA programs? If so, then you are one of the 47% who benefited from entitlements. Heck, you admitted that you were a government moocher for 28 years! I guess that you'll make an attempt to rationalize all of that though.