Hello Confused,

I have just one question for you; I pay 38 percent of my income into taxes. What percentage do you pay? 11 Percent? The bottom tier pay around 2 percent. I know that on average I pay somewhat more, but it is because I am a widow, no children in the home that I support, no mortgage payment.....and so on. I have never complained until now. It seems that I spent my lifetime making smart investments, going to work, and saving my money while others (and I am not saying you or pointing a finger) eat most of their meals from fast food, buy houses that they can not afford and then allow them to go into foreclosure, by a new car every two years that they can not afford to maintain. And then the government steps in and spends how much of my money on bailing out banks? Bailing out a failing housing market? Bailing out entire cities? All because I made good decisions. Somehow the government and the Liberals want people like myself to feel somehow obligated to pay people to have more children than they can either afford or willing to raise? We are supposed to feel good about paying people to sit at home all day and go shopping on our dime. And now the government wants to take what I worked for because I did the right thing, and they want to spread my wealth. And you think this is fair? I also have to tell you, the government gives me nothing! You make the statement that in one year you give away more money to the rich! Well, if that is so I will send you the information so you can make a direct deposit into my accounts! I will even send you a thank you note; which is a lot more than I receive from those that my taxes are supporting. What I get from those I support with my taxes is a demand for more!!!!!

Merry Christmas!!

You know that broken-record mantra that Democrats have about the rich paying “their fair share?” That load of BS should get tossed out of the window with the most recent study undertaken by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The old liberal story goes that it’s just unfair, how much more money the rich make than the poor. They talk about the wealth gap and how the rich just keep getting richer, as if these things are inherently bad.

Guess what? They’re not.

So liberals site all of these “problems” as reasons that the rich should pay more taxes. It’s patriotic, as the Vice President says.

Well, the CBO would beg to differ.

The top 40 percent of households by before-tax income actually paid 106.2 percent of the nation’s net income taxes in 2010.

Yeah, you read that right. The top 40% of households in America paid more than 100% of the nation’s net income taxes in 2010. How ridiculous is that? What can the liberals possibly have to complain about with our progressive tax code, when less than half of the people in the nation pay MORE than 100% of the taxes?

Oh, but wait. It gets better.

At the same time, households in the bottom 40 percent took in an average of $18,950 in what the CBO called “government transfers” in 2010.

Doesn’t that just knock your socks off? The bottom 40% of households in America actually MADE almost $19,000 from the top 40%. The CBO calls these “government transfers,” the President calls it spreading the wealth around. Who can forget that moment when our good friend “Joe the Plumber” helped the President reveal his true colors?

Really liberals? Are the wealthy not doing their fair share? Are the poor really getting abused by the rich business owners who provide them with employment and with welfare? This is silly, and the latest report by the CBO just continues to prove that the liberals’ narrative of class warfare where the rich are stepping on the necks of the poor is simply fantasy. The liberal story line could not be further from the truth.

washington3Just to express the point a bit further – the top 20% of households paid 70% of income taxes. While the lowest 20% received an average of almost $23,000 in “government transfers”!

Our “progressive” tax code is just not fair, America, and the people it really hurts are the lower income groups. The rich don’t really feel the burden of our tax system because it simply means that they are just a little less rich because of it. However, if the rich were able to use that excess money that is taxed (or stolen) away from them to invest and make more money – it would mean more jobs and higher wages for lower income groups. This is the “dirty secret” of progressivism. By taxing the rich more and growing the welfare state… the progressive tax code actually CREATES MORE POVERTY!

Let’s end this foolishness. Abolish the income tax. Abolish the IRS. Let’s move to the only truly “fair” tax there is – a consumption tax. Where people are only taxed on the goods they purchase. In this way, the poor will continue to pay very little, while the rich will continue to carry the lion’s share of the tax burden. The difference is this system isn’t robbery, because no one is being forced to give up their money, they are choosing to do it when they choose to purchase goods.

If this was roughly 250 years ago, we'd all be revolting.

C’mon America, let’s fix our tax problems – we’ll all be better off when we do.

by Onan Coca

You know that broken-record mantra that Democrats have about the rich paying “their fair share?” That load of BS should get tossed out of the window with the most recent study undertaken by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The old liberal story goes that it’s just unfair, how much more money the rich make than the poor. They talk about the wealth gap and how the rich just keep getting richer, as if these things are inherently bad.

Guess what? They’re not.

So liberals site all of these “problems” as reasons that the rich should pay more taxes. It’s patriotic, as the Vice President says.

Well, the CBO would beg to differ.

The top 40 percent of households by before-tax income actually paid 106.2 percent of the nation’s net income taxes in 2010.

Yeah, you read that right. The top 40% of households in America paid more than 100% of the nation’s net income taxes in 2010. How ridiculous is that? What can the liberals possibly have to complain about with our progressive tax code, when less than half of the people in the nation pay MORE than 100% of the taxes?

Oh, but wait. It gets better.

At the same time, households in the bottom 40 percent took in an average of $18,950 in what the CBO called “government transfers” in 2010.

Doesn’t that just knock your socks off? The bottom 40% of households in America actually MADE almost $19,000 from the top 40%. The CBO calls these “government transfers,” the President calls it spreading the wealth around. Who can forget that moment when our good friend “Joe the Plumber” helped the President reveal his true colors?

Really liberals? Are the wealthy not doing their fair share? Are the poor really getting abused by the rich business owners who provide them with employment and with welfare? This is silly, and the latest report by the CBO just continues to prove that the liberals’ narrative of class warfare where the rich are stepping on the necks of the poor is simply fantasy. The liberal story line could not be further from the truth.

washington3Just to express the point a bit further – the top 20% of households paid 70% of income taxes. While the lowest 20% received an average of almost $23,000 in “government transfers”!

Our “progressive” tax code is just not fair, America, and the people it really hurts are the lower income groups. The rich don’t really feel the burden of our tax system because it simply means that they are just a little less rich because of it. However, if the rich were able to use that excess money that is taxed (or stolen) away from them to invest and make more money – it would mean more jobs and higher wages for lower income groups. This is the “dirty secret” of progressivism. By taxing the rich more and growing the welfare state… the progressive tax code actually CREATES MORE POVERTY!

Let’s end this foolishness. Abolish the income tax. Abolish the IRS. Let’s move to the only truly “fair” tax there is – a consumption tax. Where people are only taxed on the goods they purchase. In this way, the poor will continue to pay very little, while the rich will continue to carry the lion’s share of the tax burden. The difference is this system isn’t robbery, because no one is being forced to give up their money, they are choosing to do it when they choose to purchase goods.

If this was roughly 250 years ago, we'd all be revolting.

C’mon America, let’s fix our tax problems – we’ll all be better off when we do.

by Onan Coca

Not a single right as outlined in the Bill of Rights and its amendments is without some reasonable restrictions and guidelines in keeping with the spirit of those liberties. Gun Nuts--yes, nuts--say no to reason and established tradition. Anything but totally unregulated ownership defines the Second Amendment. Is there any precedent for such a view of our basic liberties? Took me half a second: NO! Being unaware of a few Supreme Court decisions regarding this issue is to be understood; until today I was not aware of them. Put that aside for now. (But a Spoiler Alert: gun-nuts beware!)

I am not saying that those who own guns or advocate for gun ownership are evil, nuts, or fanatics; I believe in gun ownership as a basic right of self-defense and a guard against oppression. And, of course, as a means to survival in gathering food for the table. But what many are calling "infringements" on this basic right is not only absurd, irresponsible, and dangerous but goes directly against the spirit of liberty, which depends on a nation of laws.

We can, and it seems we have, succumb to fear and paranoia on this issue: any reasonable regulation is the slippery slope to confiscation. Let me ask you: how easy will that be?

Almost every topic on the American mind starts with fear as its foundation. Who is responsible for that? Distrust is de rigueur: who made that a way of regular seeing? If you want to say the Left, reliable sources, please, but take a gander at most Conservative posts at 1pp or a line up of topics this month at Fox TV. "We have met the enemy...and it is us." How to bring a nation down in three easy steps? 1) Make fear the standard of judgment for the people by unrelenting threats; 2) consistently reinforce this fear is warranted by consistent examples, factual or not, that there is a definable and real enemy; 3) herald fear as superior to reason and discernment in evaluating danger.

I did not mean that the farmer did not have to list their amount of fuel used. What I meant was the off-road diesel was not mandatory to be used. The reason is that off-road is not as refined as on-road and has the dye added so inspectors can determine what grade is being used. My son bought a new 2013 John Deere tractor and will not use off-road in it because he said he did not enjoy breathing the smoke that it creates.

Oh you can bet sweet bippy they cheat. And the bigger they are , the greater they cheat. I know of farmers who always manage to have several calves die at birth or killed soon after. It is almost as bad as the old time dog trader that would trade a hundred dogs and use the same set of registration papers with each and every one. He evidently copied these papers until they fell apart from use.