You mean he might use taxpayer money to
Posted By: buy up corporations in major industres???? on 2009-01-09
In Reply to: You'll think differently when it all comes to pass...O will be a failure and make us - a complete socialist nation, if he can
Oh wait....hmmmmm
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
She said IF taxpayer money was being used
not that it most certainly was.
She made a good point and instead of taking the time to listen, you jump on her over something she didn't even say.
I understand you don't agree with her on anything but is it so hard to listen to valid concerns without having to argue?
Now you can jump on me, LOL.
The truly poor already get money from the taxpayer.
nm
Oh, so it's NOT taxpayer money then, so what's the beef?
x
Can YOU prove it's taxpayer money?
What's the president make? $140,000 yr.? But, it's the perks that are part of his salary - rent free, utility free, a BUDGET for the president to live on. You can simplify it to simply "frivolous" partying, but I do not believe that is the case - there is far more to it than that. There are traditions and a decorum that is expected. I think our president more than fits the bill.
Petty or not, going on a date with taxpayer money
nm
Secretary of the Interior WASTES $245,000 of taxpayer's money
A Lavish Bathroom at Interior -
If Sen. Ken Salazar (D-Colo.) is confirmed this month as interior secretary, he'll have a snappy, scarcely used bathroom in his fifth-floor office, thanks to Dirk Kempthorne, the outgoing secretary.
Seems Kempthorne spent about $235,000 in taxpayer funds renovating the bathroom a few months ago, which included installing a new shower, a refrigerator and a freezer and buying monogrammed towels, department officials told our colleague Derek Kravitz.
The General Services Administration approved and partially funded the project, an Interior Department official said. The GSA paid about half the cost to refurbish aging plumbing, which needed to be replaced within four years.
But department officials say much of the money was spent on lavish wood paneling and tile. Among the choice items found in the new bathroom: wainscot wood panels extending from floor to ceiling and cabinet doors revealing a working refrigerator and freezer.
"If Gale Norton needed to shower, at least she was conservative enough to go to the gym in the basement of the building," one career employee quipped, referring to Kempthorne's predecessor.
An initial investigation by the department's inspector general, Earl B. Devaney, found no wrongdoing on the secretary's part because the GSA had approved the project.
A department spokesman, Shane Wolfe, did not return messages seeking comment.
Incoming Cabinet officials often waste absurd amounts of money redecorating perfectly posh offices to their tastes. Watchdogs generally decry the waste of money. But if the projects are part of the stimulus package . . .
Yeah, spend more taxpayer money on food stamps.
nm
It is waste alright! You dont spend taxpayer money
nm
We care because it's Alaska taxpayer money for her kids to travel, even though uninvited nm
what a joke palin is... she's had it now
taxpayer dollars?
what makes you think that everyone having an abortion is paying for it themselves?
A satisfied taxpayer........ sm
Tax Bill
Dear Internal Revenue Service:
Enclosed you will find my 2005 tax return showing that I owe $3,407.00 in taxes. Please note the attached article from the USA Today newspaper, dated 12 November, wherein you will see the Pentagon (Department of Defense) is paying $171.50 per hammer and NASA has paid $600.00 per toilet seat.
I am enclosing four (4) toilet seats (valued @ $2,400) and six (6) hammers valued @ $1,029), which I secured at Home Depot, bringing my total remittance to $3,429.00.
Please apply the overpayment of $22.00 to the "Presidential Election Fund," as noted on my return. You can do this inexpensively by sending them one (1) 1.5 " Phillips Head screw (see aforementioned article from USA Today newspaper detailing how H.U.D. pays $22.00 each for 1.5" Phillips Head Screws). One screw is enclosed for your convenience.
It has been a pleasure to pay my tax bill this year, and I look forward to paying it again next year.
Sincerely,
A Satisfied Taxpayer
PBS is taxpayer funded
so it must pay back to taxpayers. But .... did you see if the PBS interviewed, asked opinions of the Real People, who created and defended this nation: Machinists, Mechanics, Builders, Truck Drivers, Soldiers and etc? NO! The PBS is a stage for big media sharks as Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, NY Times and etc
It is an obligation of the PBS to pay back to society: broadcast Forums, Debates of Candidates for US Congress (Senate and House), but intentionally, with conspiracy of big media does not do, that pushed Candidates to accept money, to political prostitution.
If it isn't taxpayer funded
then why would Bush cut back funding and why would it hurt PBS so much if they weren't taxpayer funded. Watch who you call ignorant or at least look in the mirror first.
Well, either way, it's a taxpayer thing.....
it's not for hiring anyone! It's for teaching the already hired employees to be friendlier and more "well-mannered", and to "Hello", "thank you", and "come again". What a joke and what an absolutely stupid waste of taxpayers' dollars!!!
If state employees are supposed to be saying these things in the first place and that is a must, then fire them and hire someone who really wants a job! Really, do YOU or I need someone to come in to teach up how to say "come again" and "thank you"? These people are nuts!!!
More than one way to skin a taxpayer
or attack an amendment. What good is a bullet launcher without bullets? I heard that with their allotment of materials, manufacturers have been directed to make ammunition only for the government because of the war. Hold on a second.....isn't the war supposed to be winding down??
Printing money we dont have? Borrowing money
nm
Exactly how do you know both are financed by the RNC on the taxpayer dime?...
And even if it were, it's not up to you how the RNC spends its money.
Ten to one, she pays for her own kids way...about the wardrobe...sounds like you're a bit jealous, is all I can see from here.
Yep, let the hard-working taxpayer pay for those
nm
And it is a CONTINUOUS bonus to the taxpayer's pay, ....sm
Trickle-down economics did not work in all those Republican years, so I guess it might be time to think outside the sandbox,guys? Perhaps a new President with new ideas, since the old ones got us in this predicament in the first place? Why aren't the hard-core Pubs more angry that their government and leaders got us here and kept us here, while feeding the rich more tax cuts, and while taking off all the banking regulations and looking the other way???? Crony-ism at its best!
NYT ad alone cost $200,000 in taxpayer funds. Not a big deal?nm
z
How much are we supposed to stand for???...government keeps trying to turn to the taxpayer ...sm
to fix all these messes when we are not the ones with the money. Go to the CEOs, etc with the huge bonuses and golden parachutes, and ALL the money, and have them bail the banks out. They are the ones who made this mess. I live in a state that already double taxes me on my vehicles, has one of the highest sales tax rates in the country, and we even have taxes/fees our loved ones have to pay when we DIE~!!@!@ I am so sick of this! Think I'll quit paying all my taxes and when the IRS comes knocking on my door, I'm gonna hold my hand out on my way out the door on that Bahamas cruise NOT paying taxes paid for, and say oh please bail me out, I can't pay this. Yeah I'll get bail alright, but not in a good way!
As long as a taxpayer complies with the code as it was written
Taxpayers are not responsible for observing "the intent" of the tax law, but for observing its specific terms.
It's the obligation of the legislature to make sure that the law is written in such a way that it reflects their intentions. Unfortunately (or in some cases, fortunately), the intentions of the legislature are often so ambiguous, inappropriate or impossible to implement by tax laws that such a hope is doomed from the start.
It takes money to make money. nm
Charging is not spending money...it is spending someone elses money!
When you are debt free (as we are) THEN you spend money...anything else is just going into debt. I highly doubt he pays cash for anything.
money was cut due to war
I have compassion for those affected by Katrina. It is Bush and his ilk that I have no compassion for. This article states that the money was cut in 2003 due to the war. That is why I posted it. Money has been cut to the states since Bush's war, we are strapped in many ways in America due to Bush's war. Open you eyes and see your president for what he is..a jerk, a low IQ imbecile, and for what he has done to America due to his war.
Money.........
Well, if they don't have money for birth control, they sure as shoot don't have it for a baby BUT in my neck of the woods, there are LOTS of illegitimate babies, mostly by mothers who started at 12, 13, 14 and by high school, had 2 or more. They even sit in school and brag about getting a bigger paycheck because they are pregnant again. Now, really, does that sound like someone who is interested in birth control in the first place? Some of these girls who get pregnant at 12 or 13 don't even think birth control. They usually get talked into sex by a guy several years older than them in the first place, and he is a loser anyway, and usually has fathered several babies already anyhow. And, belive me, most of these girls because of community experiences, already know where the clinics are and they can get there. They sure as heck don't have a problem getting there for all the free healthcare their child gets, usually in the ER on Friday and Saturday night because they are too lazy to get to the clinic through the week. Planned Parenthood isn't doing anything positive for them.
No, I would rather the money be used for ..sm
necessities for Alaska instead of asking the lower 48+1 to subsidize them.
The money that has gone to the war...
has been appropriated for that specific purpose. It was not just lying around waiting to be spent, so there is no reason to believe that if the war were not going on that amount of money would be spent elsewhere. That is not how the government works.
If the government did not help these institutions out, it would destabilize the economy which could trickle down to our banks and what little money we have in them. At least they learned from the fannie/freddie fiasco...when they gave the loan to AIG they kicked the top folks who ran it out, with no golden parachute and will oversee it...and in this case, finally...since it is a loan...if they stay solvent and pay it back the interest will benefit us all as it will go back into the coffers with the principal.
Exactly the kind of thing McCain has been talking about for years. Glad Bush finally listened.
yes, you can if it is your money..
I have done it already.
Sure there are.......you want all your money given as
xx
Of course you would....it's not your money
You'd be screaming a different tune. Even those without it have better sense than to believe this is a terrible thing. The more he makes, the more people he can hire. So clueless and bitter
No, that's not where he's getting his money
22
I don't think money should be taken from those
who make more AT ALL. I think there should be a tax PERCENTAGE and it is based on income so it is even across the board. I don't think those who make $200,000 should have a higher percentage than those who make $30,000. There is enough crap out there that doesn't need funding that can go to those who HONESTLY need help.
Those who HONESTLY need help are those who are trying to do something to get out of the whole and can't. Not those who go and buy a house that is way out of their price range, or who pop out 7 or 8 kids just to get food stamps. Not those who live in section 8 government housing for $60 a month and then buy a brand new BMW in someone elses name because they make money selling drugs or working under the table and not reporting it.
I said it is based on grades ALSO. Meaning it is based on both income and grades. Which means if I don't TRY and keep my grades up no matter how little money I make, I'm not going to receive it. That's the difference. No one seems to want to TRY anymore. Everyone just wants more, more, more, and they are doing less, less, less.
My argument is that those who do well for themselves should not have to pay for those who don't give a hoot and don't try to do well for themselves and just sit back and try to let daddy government take care of them.
Where did all that money come from?
Scam after scam keeps coming out. Phony donators sending money with prepaid credit cards that can't be traced. Gee, wonder where the money is coming from ? He is not honest or truthful about anything, and so many people trusting him with their future...sad.
With all the money that
Barrack Obama raised for his campaign.....I wonder who he owes now? I mean....surely some of these people who gave a bunch of money want something in return. Are there promises Obama has promised to keep to individuals who gave him money that we don't know about? This is one reason why I hate political parties. The DNC raised all that money and you have some serious extreme left psychos who gives money and then they want something in return. Does this make Barrack Obama the democratic party puppet now? How does that work?
Where is all this money going to come from?nm
x
so where does all this money come from and
when do we STOP bailing companies out? I was not a fan of the first bailout. I think that in the end, all of this will make things much worse and we are just slowing down the process. I understand that both McCain and Bush wanted the bailout, but I am capable of thinking for myself. If you want the auto industry to keep up employment, I would think that the best way to make that happen is to buy American cars, bot hand them over a lot of my hard earned money. I think that the money I paid for my car is enough.
where the money comes from
Okay, those are some interesting links. I feel even better about the job banks program now, because, check it out--this program was *created* to discourage outsourcing. The union felt like it made it too expensive for the car companies to outsource jobs. So the car companies obviously did some calculations and discovered that they could pay these guys not to work, AND outsource, AND still make money (that they failed to make money has less to do with those out of work guys, I suspect, than it does with decades of misreading consumer preferences!). So if this program is a big money-suck, it's only because they insisted on outsourcing.
It's also great to see that this job bank was not available for workers until AFTER they had exhausted their unemployment benefits--and that *those* benefits were also being funded by the automakers. So our tax dollars don't really have much to do with the story. As for the bailout...well, personally I'd rather the bailout money help actual people, rather than Wall Street, so I'm not really concerned about some guys playing checkers.
(as for the $31 an hour, I'm still having trouble doing the math on how a $5 billion dollar committment by GM for 4 years for 5000 workers works out to $31 an hour, but I'll let it go for now!)
I fuss (I like that word!) about spreading the wealth from rich to poor, and about these auto workers, because I think they represent an important case for us to learn from. How will we protect *our* livelihoods? Can companies begin to take us into account, and not at the same time do the same stupid mistakes that always bankrupt them, and not make it look like *our* fault that they're going bankrupt?
me too, me too - I want some of that money
Although I don't use sm as my handle. Does that disqualify me. LOL
why not put the money to better use
come on, there are much better things those donors could do with some of that that money than a ridiculously overpriced a party, for pete's sake.
We owe them money. (NM below)
x
Really! Well, that was exactly what the money was
before they used it illegally push Obama into office...... please stop falling for all this mumbo jumbo hype about non-profit organizations. Acorn will get the money regardless because the liberals nut jobs up there will see to it.
I say - take the money and run!!
from what I've seen, Michigan's economy has been in the toilet for decades...you guys NEED the money - let's just hope they don't do idiotic sh*t like build new malls or luxury hotels...........
Them using their own money???????
Why should they use their own money when they've got ours.
Please show me the link that says they are using their own money from their own bank accounts to fund their party. If I see it I will eat my words and apologize. But it's not just the money.
It's them turning the WH into a party house. This is not what the white house is suppose to be for. And in these times when we have so many people loosing their jobs, and homes, and going hungry this is sending the wrong message to America. "Hey, your out of work, getting ready to lose your home, hungry? Well hold on and I'll address that when I'm done partying dude".
But where does the money come from?
Tax dollars, right? So what O'Reilly stated was really true.
BTW, glad to see you admit to watching Fox once in a while, even if you don't agree with them. 
No worries....got all the money
Won't be a problem in Iran, either. God forgive us.
Senate Votes to Raise Debt Limit
By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer 44 minutes ago
The Senate voted Thursday to allow the national debt to swell to nearly $9 trillion, preventing a first-ever default on U.S. Treasury notes.
The bill passed by a 52-48 vote. The increase to $9 trillion represents about $30,000 for every man, woman and child in the United States. The bill now goes to President Bush for his signature.
The measure allows the government to pay for the war in Iraq and finance Medicare and other big federal programs without raising taxes. It passed hours before the House was expected to approve another $91 billion to fund the war in Iraq and provide more aid to hurricane victims.
The partisan vote also came as the Senate continued debate on a $2.8 trillion budget blueprint for the upcoming fiscal year that would produce a $359 billion deficit for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1.
The debt limit will increase by $781 billion. It's the fourth such move — increasing the debt limit by a total of $3 trillion — since Bush took office five years ago.
The vote came a day after Treasury Secretary John Snow warned lawmakers that action was critical to provide certainty to financial markets that the integrity of the obligations of the United States will not be compromised.
On Thursday, Treasury postponed next week's auction of three-month and six-month bills pending Senate action, though the move was likely to be quickly reversed given the Senate's vote.
The present limit on the debt is $8.2 trillion. With the budget deficit expected to approach $400 billion for both this year and next, another increase in the debt limit will almost certainly be required next year.
The debt limit increase is an unhappy necessity — the alternative would be a disastrous first-ever default on U.S. obligations — that greatly overshadowed a mostly symbolic, weeklong debate on the GOP's budget resolution.
Democrats blasted the bill, saying it was needed because of fiscal mismanagement by Bush, who came to office when the government was running record surpluses.
When it comes to deficits, this president owns all the records, said Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. The three largest deficits in our nation's history have all occurred under this administration's watch.
Only a handful of Republicans spoke in favor of the measure as a mostly empty Senate chamber conducted a brief debate Wednesday evening.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said Bush's tax cuts account for just 30 percent of the debt limit increases required during his presidency. Revenue losses from a recession and new spending to combat terrorism and for the war in Iraq are also responsible, he said.
As for the $781 billion increase in the debt limit, Grassley said: It is necessary to preserve the full faith and credit of the federal government.
Before approving the bill, Republicans rejected by a 55-44 vote an amendment by Max Baucus, D-Mont., to mandate a Treasury study on the economic consequences of foreigners holding an increasing portion of the U.S. debt.
At present, foreign countries, central banks and other institutions hold more than one-fourth of the debt, but that percentage is growing rapidly.
Following the debt limit vote Thursday, the Senate was expected to vote late in the day on the budget plan, a nonbinding measure proposing tax and spending guidelines for the next five years.
Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., appears poised to win an increase of $7 billion in new and real funding for education and health research. The $7 billion would effectively be used to break Bush's $873 billion budget cap for 2007, which represents the most significant vestige of fiscal discipline remaining in Senate Budget Committee Chairman Judd Gregg's budget.
The underlying Senate budget plan is notable chiefly for dropping Bush's proposed cuts to Medicare and for abandoning his efforts to expand health savings accounts or pass legislation to make permanent his 2001 tax cut bill.
Unlike last year, when Congress passed a bill trimming $39 billion from the deficit through curbs to Medicaid, Medicare and student loan subsidies, Senate GOP leaders have abandoned plans to pass another round of cuts to so-called mandatory programs.
But Gregg's measure re-ignites last year's battle over allowing oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, since it would let Senate leaders bring an ANWR drilling measure to the floor under rules blocking a filibuster by opponents.
Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Questions or Comments
Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Ad Feedback
O'Reily's right on the money
I think we should have used more *shock and awe* and less soldier feet on the ground in Iraq.
About the murder and torture investigations--Bill's quote was right on the mark:
What is Murtha's intent? Is this an 'I-told-you-so' because he opposes the war? Murtha should answer that question because 95% of the military is performing heroically overseas. In the chaos of war perspective and fair play are vitally important.*
Sure there some bad apples there always is, but is there widespread corruption and criminal behavior in the military? I highly doubt it.
Money is the root...sm
Presidential Race May Cost Hopefuls $500 million
Those three dollars you've set aside in your tax returns as a good deed toward clean presidential elections? Forget about it. Nobody wants them anymore, the AP says.
Strategists from both parties estimate the White House race in 2008 could cost each nominee $500 million — far more than the Presidential Election Campaign Fund can afford. As a result, this next presidential campaign could mark the first time in 30 years that the Democratic and Republican nominees turn down the fund's millions in both the primary and the general elections.
I agree - they take your money but they never want to pay
You're right. Such premiums are criminal. My ex-husband was in the same boat, had a childhood policy for a chronic condition, and after he had surgery for that condition they raised the rates every 6 months until he was forced to drop it, which is what they wanted him to do.
As long as insurance lobbyists find someone to bribe in Washington, their party continues. They spend more money finding loopholes and rewriting policies so they can deny claims than they would ever spend just paying for the dang healthcare.
I don't think we can afford to police them and force them to pay up either. That's why I like Kucinich's plan, one provider, nationwide, and the rest go out of business.
Or at least we could enact laws to make them keep it simple. You pay for coverage, you should have coverage. Any language in any policy starting with "pre" should be outlawed. No more "preexisting", "preauthorization", etc. Even premium starts with "pre"! The laws are written to protect THEM. The policies are written to protect THEM. It takes a lot of time to dig through the fine print in any policy just to see how you're "allowed" to be sick and what your copays and caps are. By the time you figure out what the rules are, you change jobs or your company changes policies, and you have a new set to figure out.
They carry on about people not having insurance - but the majority of people who do have it can't get a claim paid anyway. The policies cost more and more, they deny more and more claims (or discount them down to nothing).
I used to do billing. A radiologist charged $20 to read a chest x-ray. Medicare forced him to take $2.95 in pay for that x-ray and write off the rest. Medicaid forced him to take $2.65 for it. BCBS would pay $7.65, Aetna $5.25, and so on. In what other industry does the buyer tell the seller what they get to charge? That is where the real problem begins that drives up the cost of health care. He has to read more and more x-rays to break even, or see a majority of patients with no insurance - because its legal to charge them full price!
No matter how much we spend on health care, the money does not go to the provider. It goes to the middleman, the insurance companies, and you have to fight to get them to part with a cent.
I never saw so much money wasted as when
Tell me, where is Obama going to get the money for
nm
|
