homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam

The Geek Culture Forums


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Geek Culture Forums   » News, Reviews, Views!   » Rants, Raves, Rumors!   » Good election news! (Or really bad for some)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Good election news! (Or really bad for some)
Dr Cyclops
Assimilated
Member # 986

Member Rated:
2
Icon 14 posted August 14, 2004 20:09      Profile for Dr Cyclops   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Michael Badnarik polled 5% before he started campaigning in New Mexico. Nader polled about .9%. We are expecting 10-15% by the time he leaves (sometime this weekend).

This means the libertarians could cost Bush the election. (although, we don't care if we cost Kerry the election).

--------------------
When the W'rkncacnter came, Pthia was killed, and Yrro in anger, flung the W'rkncacnter into the sun. The sun burned them, but they swam on its surface.

Posts: 499 | From: Upon the slab, Unbroken. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Aves Corax
Mini Geek
Member # 2533

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted August 15, 2004 10:28      Profile for Aves Corax     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dr Cyclops:
(although, we don't care if we cost Kerry the election).

Speak for yourself. Regardless, I think that, because of the philosophy that John Kerry is a douche bag but we're voting for him anyway and the massive amounts of anti-Bush sentiment, Badnarik's success will be hurting GWB more than JFK.

Still, regardless of who wins, it would be fantastic to see as many as one out of ten people voting Libertarian in a presidential election.

--------------------
"Be ye not lost among precepts of order."
The Principia Discordia

Posts: 65 | From: Virginia, USA | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Dr Cyclops
Assimilated
Member # 986

Member Rated:
2
Icon 1 posted August 15, 2004 13:03      Profile for Dr Cyclops   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I should elaborate that most libertarians I have talked to (including myself) want Bush to lose. He's a dork.

Anyway, Mike is predicting 15-20% in NM!

Gotta go deploy Badnarik for Prez. signs...

--------------------
When the W'rkncacnter came, Pthia was killed, and Yrro in anger, flung the W'rkncacnter into the sun. The sun burned them, but they swam on its surface.

Posts: 499 | From: Upon the slab, Unbroken. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Chesty
Assimilated
Member # 2460

Member Rated:
2
Icon 1 posted August 15, 2004 13:32      Profile for Chesty         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Most libertarians i have talked to say that kerry is a limp-wristed, franenstein headed mooch who lives off the money thta a real man made and left to the floozy that he married.

What a hypocritical piece of crap that lives the high life, says rich people should be taxed to death and at the same time doesn't volunteer more than 50% of his wife's money to the federal government.

Posts: 416 | From: The Beach | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 15, 2004 17:23      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Chesty:
What a hypocritical piece of crap that lives the high life, says rich people should be taxed to death and at the same time doesn't volunteer more than 50% of his wife's money to the federal government.

Um, forgive me if I'm being particularly dense, but what's hypocritical about a rich guy saying that the rich should pay their fair share of taxes?

Hypocritical would be a rich guy who professes concern for the working man, while giving tax cuts to the rich. But nobody would be that hypocritical, would they?

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10680 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
CommanderShroom
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2097

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 15, 2004 17:57      Profile for CommanderShroom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I though hypocrite was in the definitions for polititian. [Big Grin]

I do work with a guy that says all polititians should serve 2 terms. 1 in office and one in jail for the things done in office.

--------------------
Does he know our big secret?
Has one of us confessed?
'Bout the wires circuits and motors
Buried in our chest

Posts: 2465 | From: Utarrrrggggghhh!!!!!!!! | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
quantumfluff
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 450

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted August 15, 2004 20:10      Profile for quantumfluff     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Taxing the rich is very hard to do right. For one thing, income tax is a very, very wrong idea. We should encouage people to earn money. We should tax what they spend. The more you consume, the more you pay. This taxes the rich where it counts, in their ability and desire to live better than everyone else.

On the other hand, this penalizes consumption, which is bad when you are trying to grow your economy out of a rut. Of course, that's exactly the thing to penalize when you're playing the protective end-game once natural resource dry up. (And remember, world-wide oil production will peak around Decemeber 1, 2005, so we're going to start playing that game sooner than we would like).

Anyway, this is all a digression. The Republicans and the Democrats are really so alike in practice it's hard to tell them apart. What makes this election so important, however, is that the Bush administration has used it's power to wage a war for perconal profit. As a mostly Republican, this pisses me off more than some candy-ass liberal potentially misspending a few billion dollars on wrongheaded entitlements.

Posts: 2902 | From: 5 to 15 meters above sea level | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Dr Cyclops
Assimilated
Member # 986

Member Rated:
2
Icon 1 posted August 15, 2004 20:31      Profile for Dr Cyclops   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I can honestly say that I like Mike as a human being.

How many canidates can you say that about?

--------------------
When the W'rkncacnter came, Pthia was killed, and Yrro in anger, flung the W'rkncacnter into the sun. The sun burned them, but they swam on its surface.

Posts: 499 | From: Upon the slab, Unbroken. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 15, 2004 21:12      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dr Cyclops:
I can honestly say that I like Mike as a human being.

How many canidates can you say that about?

Not this one that's for sure. [evil]

<spelling nazi>
It's 'candidate', not 'canidate'.
</spelling nazi>

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10680 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
TMBWITW,PB

Member # 1734

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted August 15, 2004 23:36      Profile for TMBWITW,PB     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quantumfluff:
Taxing the rich is very hard to do right. For one thing, income tax is a very, very wrong idea. We should encouage people to earn money. We should tax what they spend. The more you consume, the more you pay. This taxes the rich where it counts, in their ability and desire to live better than everyone else.

It also unfairly taxes the poor. If you make $20,000/year you probably have to spend all of it, so you are being taxed on 100% of your income under your system.

If you are lucky enough to make $100,000/year and only have to spend $60,000 to make ends meet then you are only being taxed on 60% of your income.

Why should the person who can afford to spend money on public safety, roads, etc. pay less for their upkeep than the person who can barely make their rent each month? The rich are rich because they don't spend their money, not because they spend so much more to keep up their lifestyle. The people you see who do that are movie stars that will be broke and working at Burger King in ten years. People who have had money for generations know how to hang on to it.

--------------------
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and it may be necessary from time to time to give a stupid or misinformed beholder a black eye."
óMiss Piggy

Posts: 4010 | From: my couch | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 16, 2004 02:17      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quantumfluff:
What makes this election so important, however, is that the Bush administration has used it's power to wage a war for perconal profit. As a mostly Republican, this pisses me off more than some candy-ass liberal potentially misspending a few billion dollars on wrongheaded entitlements.

It's not just candy-ass liberals who dish out wrongheaded entitlements.

Our conservative government is heading into an election that looks like being very close, so they announced a 'one-off' $600 per child payment to every family, regardless of their financial position. When an administrative stuff up caused some families to be double paid, they just said "oh well, never mind, you can keep the money - go buy a DVD player or something". (I'm not making this up, the DVD player reference is real)

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10680 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Callipygous
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2071

Member Rated:
4
Icon 5 posted August 16, 2004 02:48      Profile for Callipygous     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quantumfluff:
(snip) candy-ass liberal potentially misspending a few billion dollars on wrongheaded entitlements.

For the benefit of us illiterates from the UK could you please explain what "candy-ass" means why these poor liberal people seem so prone to this dreadful affliction? Is it something to do with sugar and bottom parts? Does this mean you Republicans all have rough hairy buttocks too? Ewwww....

Just curious....

--------------------
"Knowledge is Power. France is Bacon" - Milton

Posts: 2922 | From: Brighton - UK | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
drunkennewfiemidget
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2814

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 16, 2004 06:27      Profile for drunkennewfiemidget     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quantumfluff:
As a mostly Republican, this pisses me off more than some candy-ass liberal potentially misspending a few billion dollars on wrongheaded entitlements.

.. what? Canadian government? *cough*

[Big Grin]

Posts: 4897 | From: Cambridge, ON, Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
quantumfluff
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 450

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted August 16, 2004 07:03      Profile for quantumfluff     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Candy Ass" is a term for sissies. Men who are less than "REAL MEN" (tm). The right wing loves to apply the left just to torque them. The liberals get blamed for large social programs, but it's really both side of our government who dish them out. Our system of entitlement based funding, where you never get to question it once you start it - you just have to figure out a way to pay more for it each year - is going to kill us one day.

PB: I'm sorry. I should have explained it more fully. Our sales taxes are not right either, for they tax transactions, rather than increase in value. There should be no taxes on food items which go into making a meal, but there should be tax on a meal in a restaurant. Thinks something along the lines of the VAT in Europe.

Posts: 2902 | From: 5 to 15 meters above sea level | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
csk

Member # 1941

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted August 16, 2004 18:28      Profile for csk     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quantumfluff:
"Candy Ass" is a term for sissies. Men who are less than "REAL MEN" (tm).

So, who wins in a fight. A Candy Ass, or a Girly Man? [Wink]

--------------------
6 weeks to go!

Posts: 4455 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 16, 2004 18:57      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quantumfluff:
Our sales taxes are not right either, for they tax transactions, rather than increase in value. There should be no taxes on food items which go into making a meal, but there should be tax on a meal in a restaurant. Thinks something along the lines of the VAT in Europe.

<small-business-operator>
No, no, no !
A thousand times NO !

We introduced a GST (VAT) here in oz a few years back, and every small business operator here hates the fscking thing.

The paperwork involved is immense, and because the bastards make you report 4 times a year, you either pay a friggin fortune for an accountant to do it, or you do it yourself, which inevitably leads to mistakes, and nasty letters and penalties from the tax man. I've paid $1100 in penalties in the last year, and I'm not trying to rip off the system, I'm just trying to cope with the mountain of paperwork involved.

There was a huge increase in small business bankruptcies after they introduced the GST, because it's a tax on turnover, not profit.

So, if I make $1100, $100 goes straight to the taxman, then I pay my operating expenses out of the $1000 remaining, then I pay income tax on whatever profit's left after that. Even if I make a loss for the period, the GST still needs to be paid. (This is not just some remote theoretical possibility - my business made a loss last quarter, and I've just had to borrow money to pay the GST.)

May the fleas of 1000 camels infest the pubes of whoever devised that ridiculous tax !

</small-business-operator></rant>

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10680 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
quantumfluff
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 450

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted August 17, 2004 07:57      Profile for quantumfluff     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ok, so maybe it's not such a good idea after all. [Wink]

But, it would not be so bad in the US because we allready have sales taxes in most placesand that paperwork is horrible. A merchant here must collect sales taxes for the state and sometimes the county as well as set aside tax wihholding on employee wages for both the federal and state goverments. Then they have unemployement insurance. It's at least 4 sets of paperwork each quarter. If they employ people who live in a different state, it just adds to the fun.

Replacing our sales *AND* income taxes with a single VAT would reduce the paperwork burden on employers in the US. Of course, nothing is ever really that simple.

Posts: 2902 | From: 5 to 15 meters above sea level | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
quantumfluff
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 450

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted August 17, 2004 08:56      Profile for quantumfluff     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
But, back to the original topic, I just came across this article which some of you might find interesting Ron Reagan on the Bush presidency
Posts: 2902 | From: 5 to 15 meters above sea level | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
greycat

Member # 945

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted August 17, 2004 09:20      Profile for greycat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TMBWITW,PB:
It also unfairly taxes the poor. If you make $20,000/year you probably have to spend all of it, so you are being taxed on 100% of your income under your system.

It doesn't have to be that way. You can charge a variable sales tax depending on the type of item it is: groceries can be tax-free (as they are now in most states, I believe); medicine is tax-free; prepared meals could be, say, 5%; movie rentals, video games, etc. could be, say, 8%; and so on up to "football stadiums - 120%". [Wink]

The numbers are all arbitary, but the concept is sound. The point is that someone who's only buying the basic necessities of life will be mostly untaxed, but people buying luxury goods will pay high taxes on them. I believe either New Zealand or Australia has a system like this.

Posts: 1522 | From: Ohio, USA | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
csk

Member # 1941

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted August 17, 2004 15:23      Profile for csk     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by greycat:
quote:
Originally posted by TMBWITW,PB:
It also unfairly taxes the poor. If you make $20,000/year you probably have to spend all of it, so you are being taxed on 100% of your income under your system.

It doesn't have to be that way. You can charge a variable sales tax depending on the type of item it is: groceries can be tax-free (as they are now in most states, I believe); medicine is tax-free; prepared meals could be, say, 5%; movie rentals, video games, etc. could be, say, 8%; and so on up to "football stadiums - 120%". [Wink]

The numbers are all arbitary, but the concept is sound. The point is that someone who's only buying the basic necessities of life will be mostly untaxed, but people buying luxury goods will pay high taxes on them. I believe either New Zealand or Australia has a system like this.

Yeah, that would be us (NZ has a VAT/GST too, but not sure of the mechanics of it). I remember back before it came in, people would argue over the minutae of what was in and out (Is a cup of hot chips from the local takeaway exempt? What about a frozen chicken? A cooked chicken? etc).

I'd echo what TFD said about the reporting overhead. Small business operators despise the GST for the exact reasons he said. The general public seems used to the idea now. The thing that annoys me is that certain things that should have gone down when they swapped duties etc for the GST have been replaced by "equalisation taxes" like this one

--------------------
6 weeks to go!

Posts: 4455 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 17, 2004 17:17      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by greycat:
It doesn't have to be that way. You can charge a variable sales tax depending on the type of item it is: groceries can be tax-free (as they are now in most states, I believe); medicine is tax-free; prepared meals could be, say, 5%; movie rentals, video games, etc. could be, say, 8%; and so on up to "football stadiums - 120%". [Wink]

The numbers are all arbitary, but the concept is sound. The point is that someone who's only buying the basic necessities of life will be mostly untaxed, but people buying luxury goods will pay high taxes on them. I believe either New Zealand or Australia has a system like this.

And this just adds to the administrative load on the small business, as each item that's charged at a different rate needs to be tracked differently. And it's not just what you sell, businesses claim back the GST on their inputs, so must track all GST they pay.

Here there are 3 categories of goods and services, Normal (taxable, GST on inputs claimable), Exempt (No GST charged, GST on input is claimable) and 'input taxed' (no GST charged, but GST on inputs not claimable). There is one rate of GST, 10%, except when it's not. There is no discernable logic for when it's not.


Imagine you're in a business that provides all 3, how do you apportion the GST on the new computer you've just bought? How much of the GST gets apportioned to the 'input taxed' sales you make, and how much is claimable against the GST on other sales? You'd better get it right, or your next return will raise a flag on the tax office computer, and the tax man will come down on you like a tonne of bricks.

This is the kind of paper-warfare every small business in oz now endures, because 'The Party Of Small Business' wanted to 'simplify' the tax system.


<Captain-Hook>
I hate, I HATE, I HATE THE GST !
</Captain-Hook>

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10680 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged


All times are Eastern Time  
Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | Geek Culture Home Page

© 2015 Geek Culture

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.4.0



homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam