Live in the US? Owe a lot of taxes?

[Fidestro]

So Obama has attempted to appoint two people to his cabinet who owed large amounts of back taxes. Once got in, the other got the boot. The one that was confirmed was the one who will be in charge of, hmm, THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT!

On top of that he has another person involved in his circle of influence who had similar issues, although for less money.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflas...9023_140803.htm

Willie Nelson got the book thrown at him for tax reasons, one of the Isley brothers is in the slammer for tax evasion. Moral of the story is don't sing and steal, vote and steal!

[Bansenshukai]

So Obama has attempted to appoint two people to his cabinet who owed large amounts of back taxes. Once got in, the other got the boot. The one that was confirmed was the one who will be in charge of, hmm, THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT!

On top of that he has another person involved in his circle of influence who had similar issues, although for less money.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflas...9023_140803.htm

Willie Nelson got the book thrown at him for tax reasons, one of the Isley brothers is in the slammer for tax evasion. Moral of the story is don't sing and steal, vote and steal!

I also love the "honest mistake" bit. Right! I'm sure the IRS will forgive my honest mistakes too. There appear to be two sets of tax law. Unfortunately, for those that love Obama - and everything he was marketed to be able to accomplish - this will mean little, if anything. The man can't make mistakes. For those that hate him, this means he's an idiot. I subscribe to neither point of view. But, this does prove to me that ultimately, Obama is a politician who did and said what was required of him to get elected. I still have high hopes for him because we need a strong leader, especially now. Besides, the man is truly brilliant. But, his exeptions to his own rules (no lobbyists) and these two high level appointments have me thinking he's in dire need of quick on the job training. Or, he believes that he has earned enough political capita among the citizens that he can slide this stuff by for now. And, don't even get me started on the "Stimulus Package" that is just replete with programs that have little to no impact in the actual economy. As a home owner, I will not see any benefit from this "Stimulus". Thank God I don't need it. However, I have a close friend that is in danger of foreclosure and she will not see any benefit from this legislation, as is, for a loooong time - by then, it'll be too late. Very little is actually making sense lately.

[slay]

I am sorry to say this, but anyone who faces foreclosure shouldnt have bought a house in the first place. Of course its all easy to blame on the banks, but I remember when my Dad bought a house when I was little, he had to come up with 1/4 of the price, get risk life insurance. And all that only because he had a status where he could NOT EVER lose his job. And he earned pretty damn good (so there was bascially no way my Dad would have been unable to pay - and they still made it difficult for him).

People that barely earn more than the average blue collar worker, buy a house for 400k and can barely pay 500$/month to cover the interest -> thats the problem. If there is no way you can afford it, don't buy it! I don't go out buying yachts either. And then they see a nice car they want and they say "Hey, let's just get the 20th mortgage on our house to buy a prosche!".

But their income would more likely place them in the league of a Saturn or a Fiat and a rental apartment, not a freakin mansion and a porsche. Of course they can never every pay it back. And you have to be a retard to believe that the only thing thats gonna happen to your houses worth is RISE RISE RISE

Edited February 4, 2009 by slay

[Shundi]

Ah.... I saw the news and the headline was "I screwed up" -President Obama. I lost a bet with my old man...being from Massachusetts, he assured me that it would be less than one month into office before we heard that Deval Patrick line...I gave Obama at least two months and I felt that was fairly generous.

Let the games begin!

[Nanuq]

Joe the Plumber for Secretary of the Treasury!

He only owed $1,200 and the media reamed his conservative backside. If a Dem makes a "mistake" 100 times bigger?

*crickets chirping*

[Fidestro]

Joe the Plumber for Secretary of the Treasury!

He only owed $1,200 and the media reamed his conservative backside. If a Dem makes a "mistake" 100 times bigger?

*crickets chirping*

He is now an adviser to the Republican party on the economy. I wish I was kidding.

[Fidestro]

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2009/...he-plumber.html

[HauteHippie]

The worst part of it all is the clear implication from Obama that there are two sets of rules when it comes to paying taxes - so much so that he felt compelled to address this notion forthright on NBC. All socialists seem to think that paying taxes is for the little people.

[jraines87]

The worst part of it all is the clear implication from Obama that there are two sets of rules when it comes to paying taxes - so much so that he felt compelled to address this notion forthright on NBC. All socialists seem to think that paying taxes is for the little people.

I was willing to give Obama a chance, but two weeks in, things aren't looking all that great.

First we had Bill Richardson, then Geitner, then Daschel, then Killefer.... Geez.. what’s next? Skirting your own policy of not bringing lobbyists along? Oh wait, he's doing that too.

Not the mention the stimulus plan. What a cluster…At least he's willing to slap that nut job Pelosi around when needed.

Obama looks less like a leader and more like a man reacting to events. Hope and Change, Hope and Change…..

[Fidestro]

I was willing to give Obama a chance, but two weeks in, things aren't looking all that great.

First we had Bill Richardson, then Geitner, then Daschel, then Killefer.... Geez.. what

[fat.tail.event]

My sentiments exactly...I would also add:

His track record of murdering innocents in the Middle East isnt starting off so well. He is really laying the groundwork for a potential conflict ranging from Afghanistan all the way down to India.

Nice job on the Guantanamo decision making process. Woops, these guys are very bad, been tortured illegaly and are sources on how many leads our intel folks are pursuing. Sure, just let them go immediately.

Thanks for starting a trade war by saying you dont want to start a trade war.

Before the Treasury Sec. is even on the job he's calling one of the largest holders of US Treasuries a 'currency manipulator'. Good plan a couple months before you need to flood that market with $900B+ of Treasuries. Or, what if they start dumping Treasuries (might happen anyhow as demand falls through the floor)? Your low interest rate policy is then shot to hell.

I was willing to give this guy some slack too, but these things are HUGE F'ups right out of the gate.

I was willing to give Obama a chance, but two weeks in, things aren't looking all that great.

First we had Bill Richardson, then Geitner, then Daschel, then Killefer.... Geez.. what

[HauteHippie]

The stimulus plan appears to stimulate more pork barrel spending, exactly what Obama said he was NOT going to do. I believe he said that government waste was "on notice", meanwhile they keep tacking on programs for medical research and development of environmentally friendly autos despite the fact that no one can afford to buy them.

The Pelosi thing is interesting because he has already [censored] off a good chunk of his party. The Republicans don't like Obama, now the Democrats don't like Obama. Folks this could be the longest lame duck president in recorded history if both sides are out to make him look bad, not that it appears he needs any help.

I'm willing to give the guy some more time, but so far, he most definitely is looking like the inexperienced candidate I was worried about....

[addingwatch]

Just remember he grew up in the Illinois political machine; and brought it all to Washington. There will be a lot more "interesting policies & people" to come.

Regards.

[Shundi]

I'm willing to give the guy some more time, but so far, he most definitely is looking like the inexperienced candidate I was worried about....

Exactly.

[Bansenshukai]

Joe the Plumber for Secretary of the Treasury!

He only owed $1,200 and the media reamed his conservative backside. If a Dem makes a "mistake" 100 times bigger?

*crickets chirping*

This is not about political parties. It's about "enough is enough" with the double standards. In fact, if you dig enough, you'll find that both sides of political aisle is replete with tax cheats. To think otherwise, or that this is just "media bias" is quite naive. What I pay in taxes in a year equals to about half of an average worker's yearly salary. If I can find time to pay my taxes, then the very law makers and policy makers that labor so much to use that tax revenue should be the first in line to file their taxes correctly. The reason this is such a big deal is that normal American citizens are sick of the double standard. It's not that a person can't reasonably overlook filing taxes properly. The difference is that for us, like your "backside reamed" Joe "The Plumber", if we don't pay our taxes, we can be hounded by the IRS, are forced to pay our back taxes, plus interest, plus the penalties. This guy, just "discovered" the oversight ... what a coincidence. And, Joe The Plumber is not a lawmaker, nor a policy advisor to the highest office on the land. Put it this way, Joe the Plumber got audited - by sheer coincidence (if you believe in those) just after he became some kind of silly symbol for the Republican Party. And, what did they find ... a whopping $1,200 oversight (about three really good reps, maybe four). This last guy only discovered this recently? So, if he was not nominated, he would have never been discovered? So, about how many members of Congress actually get audited per year by the IRS (excluding anything tied to a vetting process)? That number, I guarantee is quite low if it's not zero. And, that's what got close to 60% of the American people (Republicans, Conservatives, Democrats, Independents, etc.) up in arms.

And, I really don't think the media was biased towards Joe "The Plumber". For the exception of the usual Conservative Talk Show hosts, he was portrayed as an item of marketting propelled to fame by a desperate loosing Republican Campaign. In fact, the tax thing with that clown was all over once it came out. I vividly remember that.

[Bansenshukai]

I am sorry to say this, but anyone who faces foreclosure shouldnt have bought a house in the first place.

I felt the same amount of moral arrogance not too long ago. I used to think the same thing you just posted. Why? Because I make very good money and live quite well. That put me on the "moral high ground" and I could look down on the "others" and decree as such. But, I've seen some exceptions, brother. A person that buys a house may not anticipate a financial melt down that takes away his/her livelyhood. That person figures that his wife, who is facing surgery and can't work, will be OK because of his well paying job. Until it goes away. So, I too said what you wrote above many times. Then, I saw it happen to someone I know, whose work ethic I know. Then, my judgemental arrogance came into question. I have since adjusted into a more measured point of view.

I must admit, however, that a large segment of the population did bite at the sub-prime mortage bit years ago. If one must budget tightly just to make the bills and the mortage at the end of the month, then that person bought too much house. I've seen that as well. Those that are out due to that are directly responsible for their financial state.

In the end, maybe Capitalism is a strange form of Darwinism. Those of us that survive its chaos were maybe meant to survive after all.

[Bansenshukai]

I'm willing to give the guy some more time, but so far, he most definitely is looking like the inexperienced candidate I was worried about....

We were discussing this very thing at the office today. In the final analysis, President Barack Obama was a product of shrewd marketing on a population thirsty for anything "not-Bush". He was certainly less experienced in the political arena than Hillary Clinton (I hate myself for even writing it, but it's true). In my opinion, he needed more time in the arena. In fact, I considered McCain and Hillary as poor choices for President of the US, but both were certainly better choices than Obama. McCain suffered from the fact that he was a Republican (and, some Republicans might say that he was that in name only). Hillary suffered from the fact that she was trust up against the very constituency that her and her husband counted on as "theirs", the unified black vote (which brings along many other minority votes with it). That, and the fact that people were weary of family "legacies" in the White House. Add to that Barack Obama's incredible charisma, eloquence, education and oratory skill. It's like reading the fancy package of a product. You figure if the company spends that much money in making the package look that good, and it's sooo expensive, it's got to be good, if not great. I am sad to admit that Barack Obama has disappointed me multiple times already, and he just got into office. This current spending bill he is backing as an economic "stimulus", is really pissing me off too. It's like a list of everything every member of Congress ever wanted to get money to do, hidden inside a campaign of fear ("we must act now, or else"), with a fancy PC name like an "Economic Stimulus Package". I for one don't think that "$400 million for global-warming research" is going to somehow create thousands of jobs, and somehow get our economy moving. That Obama is even spending his political capita to push this bill as is just screams "inexperienced".

Edited February 4, 2009 by Nouns Defions

[Nanuq]

In the end, maybe Capitalism is a strange form of Darwinism. Those of us that survive its chaos were maybe meant to survive after all.

If only that were true.

Darwin's theory proscribes that "selection" removes the population members that are ill-fitted for survival.

In our current economic climate the ones LEAST fitted for economic survival, speaking in broad terms, are those about to be bailed out for their poor choices. The ones that have paid their bills and lived within their means are the ones doing the bailing.

This is reverse Darwinism, if anything. It certainly is not capitalism.

[jraines87]

If only that were true.

Darwin's theory proscribes that "selection" removes the population members that are ill-fitted for survival.

In our current economic climate the ones LEAST fitted for economic survival, speaking in broad terms, are those about to be bailed out for their poor choices. The ones that have paid their bills and lived within their means are the ones doing the bailing.

This is reverse Darwinism, if anything. It certainly is not capitalism.

I just hope the stock market doesn't go kaput in the next week or two. Obama opens his mouth and the market takes a dive. Soon as the loons pass card check, it's all but over....

[Demsey]

Well, all this should come as no real surprise. It's not to me and certainly isn't to the the Vice President and the Secretary of State. They both admitted as much less than a year ago when they acknowledged in debate the "Presidency" is no place for 'on the job training' and no place for 'Senator Obama'. Uh. Duh.

I'm with 'Chieftang' tho'. He may learn on a steep, fast, curve. He is smart. Here's to hoping for the best. It's what America deserves. Some of his constituancy responsible after 'knowing better' but knew they could capitalize on politcal environment? Perhaps less so. The Democrat party of Latterday Saints wants to govern en masse'. They have no need or want of an individual, a true 'leader', a 'JFK', a Kerry or an Obama will do. Dupes to bend to their sway and agendas. I don't read Obama like that tho'. He's fumbling his way through now, but he's going to p*ss off the House proper in time. It'll work out.

Did he really, literally say "I screwed up" with regard to his vetting of appointees? Jeez. That's an incredibly foolish position and statement for a President. "Ooops, my bad." ??? Good Lord.

Can't blame the President for being at a loss with regard to 'double standard' now. It was in full swing, and practice, throughout his campaigning. In direct regard to himself; Sure I smoked a little weed, dealt a little in the 'hood, hung with the seditious priest, the unrepentant terrorist, the shady realtor and the Chicago politco/thug mill................. "It's OK Barak, we're not here to judge.................you go man!"

I have faith in Obama. The agendist partisan party system and public 'American Idol' mind set that got him elected? Frankly, scares the cr*p out of me.

[fat.tail.event]

Until proven otherwise...EMPTY SUIT

Pretty clear he's not managing, rather being managed. The opposite of what his disciples expected.

I heard transition period approval high % was 83, now its 68. Pretty big drop for a couple of weeks.

[Bansenshukai]

If only that were true.

Darwin's theory proscribes that "selection" removes the population members that are ill-fitted for survival.

In our current economic climate the ones LEAST fitted for economic survival, speaking in broad terms, are those about to be bailed out for their poor choices. The ones that have paid their bills and lived within their means are the ones doing the bailing.

This is reverse Darwinism, if anything. It certainly is not capitalism.

Great point. You are absolutely right on this point.

[triplehd]

Lets keep in mind that Obama has only been in office for 2 weeks and he's inheriting alot on his plate vs what Bush inherited when he took over (and what did Bush do in his first 2 weeks, nonetheless first 100 days).

Now, if you guys watch FoxNews (pro-Republicans) or MSNBC (pro-Democrats), what's on? Pickering politicians bitching and moaning about the stimulus plan. Dont get me wrong - we need one, hell, we need 3-4 additional ones too. Lets remember, our country is going through something that we have never been through previously. No, its the same situation as the 20's. Even thought people would like to compare our current situation to that of the 20s - night and day difference.

No matter if the Dems have their way with this bill or if the Reps have their way and change it - is it really going to work? No one knows. More than likely no. Why? Again, for a country never facing the economic issues we're facing today (geez, cant imagine what tomorrow will bring - scary), we just cannot say, we need to do "x" instead of "y" to fix z.

I dont consider myself a Republican or a Democrate - but an Independent. I dont see Left...I dont see Right...I see everything Including pickering politicians who are already looking at 2012 instead of today. That's the problem with our politicians. They spend more time on TV bitchin than using that energy to help the American people - the same American people who elected their sorry asses in the first place.

That's my 2 cents.

[Nanuq]

Well said.

You want to stimulate the economy? How about a tax holiday for the first fiscal quarter? That's right, NO taxes taken out of your paycheck. People would go hog wild with spending and enthusiasm.

[Demsey]

You want to stimulate the economy? How about a tax holiday for the first fiscal quarter? That's right, NO taxes taken out of your paycheck. People would go hog wild with spending and enthusiasm.

That would work. 'Pan-class' tax breaks. So would 7-0% capital gains tax, drastic reduction of corporate tax, doing away with 'mark-to-market', and a radical restructure of the IRS. But those are stimulus particulars that would surround a Conservative Republican House and Administration. What McCain platformed. Unfortunately.......................

It's ironic though, his own party is going to be this President's biggest 'hang' until the mid-term elections, when a better balance of power will return to the house. I do think Obama wants to work in a bi-partisan environment; not to give Conservatives merely 'what they want', but trying to convince them to come around to 'his way'. The beauty there is; through debate, he may just come around to 'their way' of thinking too. A pluralist middle ground. Obama is not above, "Hmmmmm, I see, thank you, I was wrong here, let's go forward". But that's just not going to happen. It will be a slug fest until 2010. The House is going to bully the President.

The first economic indicator of a recovering economy is the stock market. That event has applied to every recession and the depression and is steeped in sound economics and probably more importantly; the psychological factors to 'booming economy' specifically with regard to GDP and grass roots' household ' spending. The President really, REALLY, needs to work on his rehtoric when he makes public comment. Like Reagan, he needs to not 'lie', but focus on a more agreeable and positive statement. If he states the obvious one more time, "This is the worst set of economic circumstances since the great depression, it's only going to get worse. Much worse. It's going to be terrible. Get ready." I'm going to lose it. The market was doing pretty well yesterday on some sound economic news until Obama, once again, laid the current state of affairs on Wall Street and bemoaned the stall of his stimulus plan." Al Qaeda could do no more damage with yellow cake in a briefcase. Who writes this junk for him? The Speaker of the House?

Edited February 5, 2009 by Demsey