What will happen when the bill comes due?
06-27-2009, 05:43 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Math Teacher
Posts: 2,273
My take on it is this:
A healthy, educated, and well nourished labor force is the prerequiste to sustainable economic growth. Period. You can't accomplish much when you're sick, dumb and famished. How that is to be accomplished? I don't know. I'll leave it up to experts, but I will say this, there going to have to be a good mix of government and private sector to get the job done and done right. Leaving that task to the efforts of one entity would probably make matters even worse.
atp
A healthy, educated, and well nourished labor force is the prerequiste to sustainable economic growth. Period. You can't accomplish much when you're sick, dumb and famished. How that is to be accomplished? I don't know. I'll leave it up to experts, but I will say this, there going to have to be a good mix of government and private sector to get the job done and done right. Leaving that task to the efforts of one entity would probably make matters even worse.
atp
06-28-2009, 07:16 AM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: Looking out the window
Posts: 148
Granted, the price of housing is down, but in many places it's still ridiculous. I read an article that said in 18 years the cost of a 4 year degree is expected to be $200,000-$250,000 if the percentage increases continue to go up. Gas costs more, food costs more, clothes cost more. The point I'm trying to make is every year, even with a modest wage increase, many people are making less and less money. At some point, something will have to give. It's not a matter of if, but when. Our country cannot sustain this. It's not just the fact that we're in a recession right now. This has been going on for years but nobody seems to notice or care. They're more interested in Jon and Kate Plus 8 than reading and learning something that actually pertains to their own lives. What's the answer? Who knows. It's taken a long time to get us into this mess and a few quick big fixes by the goverment isn't going to work. The founding fathers of this country wanted a small amount of federal oversight. The Civil War was fought over states rights. Now, the federal government feels the need to stick their spoon in every pot and stir it a little. Our elected officials do what suits them. What do the citizens want, who do the experts who study these things say..... who cares because "we the government" know best. I think if more people actually payed close attention to what's wrong with this country, more people would be upset. "I thought we the people had a right, I guess we the people were wrong. We the people always are." Mudvayne. Ok, my rant is over now
06-29-2009, 04:37 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: 777 Captain in Training
Posts: 1,457
Originally Posted by atpwannabe
The ship analogy was a broad generalization; granted, however, I firmly believe economically speaking, we will be in a better position in the next few years than what we were just a few short years ago. I am fully aware that not all of the present administration's proposals on stabilizing the economy are going to be readily accepted, nor do I think that the President and his advisors will be able to fully address all that ails the economy in four years. It's going to take much longer. There will be some tweaking along the way.
President Obama has some of the best and brightest minds surrounding himself. Geithner, Volker, Emanuel, Holder and Gates. Not to mention that he's no slouch either; teaching constiutional law for 12 years, President of the Harvard Law Review and list is long and distinguished. Again, I think that initially the govenment is going to have to step in and regulate, and that as the economy recovers and the private sector begins to stabilize and then grow, government oversight and intervention will decrease to a point that will support sustained economic growth.
atp
President Obama has some of the best and brightest minds surrounding himself. Geithner, Volker, Emanuel, Holder and Gates. Not to mention that he's no slouch either; teaching constiutional law for 12 years, President of the Harvard Law Review and list is long and distinguished. Again, I think that initially the govenment is going to have to step in and regulate, and that as the economy recovers and the private sector begins to stabilize and then grow, government oversight and intervention will decrease to a point that will support sustained economic growth.
atp
Yea right Geithner is so smart he can not even remember to pay his taxes. When you get older you will understand how wrong you were with this post. If Obama has his way with the Carbon Credits legislation you never need your pilots license and be lucky to be riding a bicycle.
06-29-2009, 05:59 PM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: USAF
Posts: 1,398
Originally Posted by UpThere
Granted, the price of housing is down, but in many places it's still ridiculous. I read an article that said in 18 years the cost of a 4 year degree is expected to be $200,000-$250,000 if the percentage increases continue to go up. Gas costs more, food costs more, clothes cost more. The point I'm trying to make is every year, even with a modest wage increase, many people are making less and less money. At some point, something will have to give. It's not a matter of if, but when. Our country cannot sustain this. It's not just the fact that we're in a recession right now. This has been going on for years but nobody seems to notice or care. They're more interested in Jon and Kate Plus 8 than reading and learning something that actually pertains to their own lives. What's the answer? Who knows. It's taken a long time to get us into this mess and a few quick big fixes by the goverment isn't going to work. The founding fathers of this country wanted a small amount of federal oversight. The Civil War was fought over states rights. Now, the federal government feels the need to stick their spoon in every pot and stir it a little. Our elected officials do what suits them. What do the citizens want, who do the experts who study these things say..... who cares because "we the government" know best. I think if more people actually payed close attention to what's wrong with this country, more people would be upset. "I thought we the people had a right, I guess we the people were wrong. We the people always are." Mudvayne. Ok, my rant is over now
07-06-2009, 03:20 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Math Teacher
Posts: 2,273
Originally Posted by HIFLYR
Yea right Geithner is so smart he can not even remember to pay his taxes. When you get older you will understand how wrong you were with this post. If Obama has his way with the Carbon Credits legislation you never need your pilots license and be lucky to be riding a bicycle.
Oh yeah, btw, I'll be 48 this year!
atp
07-06-2009, 03:48 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: CRJ900
Posts: 230
Originally Posted by atpwannabe
I believe that if there was any intent whatsoever on Geithner's part to defraud the Federal Government, that he wouldn't be in the position that he holds now. I don't think the opposition party would have stood silently along the sidelines and allowed him to be sworn in.
Oh yeah, btw, I'll be 48 this year!
atp
Oh yeah, btw, I'll be 48 this year!
atp
07-08-2009, 05:21 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Math Teacher
Posts: 2,273
Originally Posted by Puckhead
Well I won’t begin to speculate on his intentions or why he didn't do something but here’s a question for you. Should it matter what his reason was? He is after all holding a very big government job with a lot of responsibility. Why should it be ok for him not to pay and keep his job? Again I’m just curious what your reasons are since I guarantee we have opposing views.
Puckhead:
No Puckhead, it shouldn't matter; but I will say this.....I believe that those who hold positions such as Geithner's and any other high profile governmental position, probably have their taxes done by outside firms. That's just my guess. Given the tremendous amount of responsibility that they have, I can see where filing for an extension with the firm that's doing their taxes may have slipped their mind or something along those lines.
I also believe in giving people the "benefit of the doubt" unless they do something really immoral or out of character such as the Govenors of Nevada, South Carloina, New Jersey and the former State Attorney of New York. We as a country tout certain values and mores, and public officials should be held to the highest of these standards.
atp
07-08-2009, 08:34 AM
#28
Libertarian Resistance
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 757 FO
Posts: 1,057
Possibility for Real Change
The Geithner (and Daschle, et al.) tax issue(s) raise what I think is an important point. If we treat is as a given that Geithner is one of "the best and the brightest", then what of his non-performance on his Federal taxes?
His non-payment of his tax burden was either intentional, or it was not. If it was intentional then he is a criminal and should not be in his current position. If it was not intentional then he apparently did not completely understand the tax law as it applied to him. Since he is not stupid (see "best and brightest", above) then the income tax code is too complex.
So there are your choices: either Geithner is a felon or the tax code is too complex (logically, these are not mutually exclusive as both could be true). Transferring Geithner's responsibility to his bookkeeper does nothing to exonerate Geithner, and strengthens the argument that the tax code is too complex.
WW
His non-payment of his tax burden was either intentional, or it was not. If it was intentional then he is a criminal and should not be in his current position. If it was not intentional then he apparently did not completely understand the tax law as it applied to him. Since he is not stupid (see "best and brightest", above) then the income tax code is too complex.
So there are your choices: either Geithner is a felon or the tax code is too complex (logically, these are not mutually exclusive as both could be true). Transferring Geithner's responsibility to his bookkeeper does nothing to exonerate Geithner, and strengthens the argument that the tax code is too complex.
WW
07-08-2009, 02:08 PM
#29
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
Originally Posted by Winged Wheeler
The Geithner (and Daschle, et al.) tax issue(s) raise what I think is an important point. If we treat is as a given that Geithner is one of "the best and the brightest", then what of his non-performance on his Federal taxes?
His non-payment of his tax burden was either intentional, or it was not. If it was intentional then he is a criminal and should not be in his current position. If it was not intentional then he apparently did not completely understand the tax law as it applied to him. Since he is not stupid (see "best and brightest", above) then the income tax code is too complex.
So there are your choices: either Geithner is a felon or the tax code is too complex (logically, these are not mutually exclusive as both could be true). Transferring Geithner's responsibility to his bookkeeper does nothing to exonerate Geithner, and strengthens the argument that the tax code is too complex.
WW
His non-payment of his tax burden was either intentional, or it was not. If it was intentional then he is a criminal and should not be in his current position. If it was not intentional then he apparently did not completely understand the tax law as it applied to him. Since he is not stupid (see "best and brightest", above) then the income tax code is too complex.
So there are your choices: either Geithner is a felon or the tax code is too complex (logically, these are not mutually exclusive as both could be true). Transferring Geithner's responsibility to his bookkeeper does nothing to exonerate Geithner, and strengthens the argument that the tax code is too complex.
WW
You left out the insanity plea defense and the twinkie defense.
07-09-2009, 06:08 AM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Math Teacher
Posts: 2,273
Originally Posted by Winged Wheeler
The Geithner (and Daschle, et al.) tax issue(s) raise what I think is an important point. If we treat is as a given that Geithner is one of "the best and the brightest", then what of his non-performance on his Federal taxes?
His non-payment of his tax burden was either intentional, or it was not. If it was intentional then he is a criminal and should not be in his current position. If it was not intentional then he apparently did not completely understand the tax law as it applied to him. Since he is not stupid (see "best and brightest", above) then the income tax code is too complex.
So there are your choices: either Geithner is a felon or the tax code is too complex (logically, these are not mutually exclusive as both could be true). Transferring Geithner's responsibility to his bookkeeper does nothing to exonerate Geithner, and strengthens the argument that the tax code is too complex.
WW
His non-payment of his tax burden was either intentional, or it was not. If it was intentional then he is a criminal and should not be in his current position. If it was not intentional then he apparently did not completely understand the tax law as it applied to him. Since he is not stupid (see "best and brightest", above) then the income tax code is too complex.
So there are your choices: either Geithner is a felon or the tax code is too complex (logically, these are not mutually exclusive as both could be true). Transferring Geithner's responsibility to his bookkeeper does nothing to exonerate Geithner, and strengthens the argument that the tax code is too complex.
WW
Good God amighty; I was laughing so hard, I couldn't come up with a decent rebuttal. That was a great counterpoint.
atp
Last edited by atpwannabe; 07-09-2009 at 08:49 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
