Thread: Chavez snubs US

Originally Posted by PinestrawGuys

I'm not a proponent of the 'Fair Tax' either, even though it's my own Congressman that introduced it. (Linder - Ga.) If you make $30K, EVERYTHING you spend is on essentials, especially if it includes private health insurance.

My own personal opinion is that the last hundred years has been manipulated adroitly by the 'Globalist cabal' and all of our disputing over the details will stop us from beheading the monster.

I truly fear for my children's future.

True enough. I believe that you may have misunderstood the intent of my earlier posts and vice versa. We need to eliminate the Fed for starters. the enacting legislation allows our government to "buy back" our monetary system for a nominal fee. We need to call the fraudulent "federal debt" exactly what it is and set it aside as unconscionable. Everything else would be secondary to getting those two things accomplished, because without them we would end up in the same place again in a generation.

I am a serious proponent of a national sales tax IF we are promised a ceiling that is hard and fast and we are pormised that other taxes will not be created or increased. And of I detest the rebate idea as it not only violates the uniformity requirement but also opens itself up to abuse and to federal monitoring (which would be necessary to determine how much tax a given individual had paid - instead of knowing every dollar you make, the federal government would now necessarily know every purchase you make!). However, I prefer to that a reduction in the size and expenditures of the federal government to the extent that the income tax could be eliminated without the need for a replacement tax.

This proves you don't know anything at all about the Fair Tax.

The Fair Tax Rebate is precalculated uniformly such that every household of 1 receives a; every household of 2 adults receives b; every household of a 1 adult and a dependent receives c; 2 adults 1 child receives d; and on and on.

There is complete and total uniformity. The Rebate is based upon "heads" not your individual actual expenditures. It is predetermined; precalculated; on a chart; and couldn't be more fair, more accuate, more constitutional, or easier to collect at the register or upon payment of the bill.

It's also voluntary. You apply for the Rebate. If you don't want it, then don't apply for it.

neese, crocketsghost and 2ndamendsis ... I noticed you all hadn't signed the petition to say no to guest worker program.

Thought you might have missed it.

Sorry, Judy...no can do. NAWER opposes unions and I grew up a blue collar kid, and my Dad was in the Union. They gave me a roof over my head and the clothes on my back. Although I agree, some unions abuse their power, and times have changed, I would be a hypocrite if I signed it. Thanks for the reminder, though.

neese ... I grew up the daughter of a Union Boiler Maker.

I don't care who is for unions or opposed to unions. We have to come together under ONE ROOF called the USA in order to stop Guest Worker Program.

But if you're not comfortable with it, I certainly understand.

Originally Posted by Judy

I am a serious proponent of a national sales tax IF we are promised a ceiling that is hard and fast and we are pormised that other taxes will not be created or increased. And of I detest the rebate idea as it not only violates the uniformity requirement but also opens itself up to abuse and to federal monitoring (which would be necessary to determine how much tax a given individual had paid - instead of knowing every dollar you make, the federal government would now necessarily know every purchase you make!). However, I prefer to that a reduction in the size and expenditures of the federal government to the extent that the income tax could be eliminated without the need for a replacement tax.

This proves you don't know anything at all about the Fair Tax.

The Fair Tax Rebate is precalculated uniformly such that every household of 1 receives a; every household of 2 adults receives b; every household of a 1 adult and a dependent receives c; 2 adults 1 child receives d; and on and on.

There is complete and total uniformity. The Rebate is based upon "heads" not your individual actual expenditures. It is predetermined; precalculated; on a chart; and couldn't be more fair, more accuate, more constitutional, or easier to collect at the register or upon payment of the bill.

It's also voluntary. You apply for the Rebate. If you don't want it, then don't apply for it.

No, it's either not uniform or else it is unconstitutional on the grounds that it amounts to unauthorized payout from the public coffers, given that recipients may receive more than they put in.

Follow me. IF you index the amount to the amount paid in, it is not uniform AND it requires monitoring of personal expenditures in detail.

IF the rebate is uniform, then it is not a rebate, because some people will not input as much tax as is "rebated". That makes it a robin Hood giveaway.

I argued this tax back at the time that it was being debated the first time. It's a great idea UNTIL you add the rebate. At that point, there is no way to reconcile it with the Constitution except through amendment. That's because the FFs did not want the government to play Robin Hood. They didn't want SOME people to profit from a taxation system that was a burden to others, because that amounts to buying votes and/or loyalty. The federal government is not meant to be a charity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairTax#Monthly_tax_rebate

pinestrawguys ... look at the rebate chart for Fair Tax. See the schedule?

You are rebated ... they call it a Prebate because it's sent immediately when the program begins in advance rather than at the end of the monthly period.

See what your annual consumption is based upon your household?

The predetermination has assumed that it cost two adults $19,600 in essentials. So a married couple would be rebated $4,500 a year sent monthly in 12 equal installments. A couple with 2 children is assumed to spend $26,400 on essentials and is rebated $6,072.

So lets take a gross earnings of $30,000 a year and assume you spent the entire salary on essentials and whatever else and you paid 23% of the entire amount in sales tax. You paid $6,900 in national sales tax. Of that depending on the household you receivedgot either $4,500 (husband and wife) or $6,072 (husband, wife and 2 children .. assuming) so you paid only $2,400 (couple) or only $829 (couple with 2 kids) in federal sales tax for the entire year and that assumes you spent it all on taxable items and didn't save anything or buy anything used (exempt).

Originally Posted by Judy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairTax#Monthly_tax_rebate

pinestrawguys ... look at the rebate chart for Fair Tax. See the schedule?

You are rebated ... they call it a Prebate because it's sent immediately when the program begins in advance rather than at the end of the monthly period.

See what your annual consumption is based upon your household?

The predetermination has assumed that it cost two adults $19,600 in essentials. So a married couple would be rebated $4,500 a year sent monthly in 12 equal installments. A couple with 2 children is assumed to spend $26,400 on essentials and is rebated $6,072.

So lets take a gross earnings of $30,000 a year and assume you spent the entire salary on essentials and whatever else and you paid 23% of the entire amount in sales tax. You paid $6,900 in national sales tax. Of that depending on the househoud you got either $4,500 (husband and wife) or $6,072 (husband, wife and 2 children .. assuming) so you paid only $2,400 (couple) or only $829 (couple with 2 kids) in federal sales tax for the entire year and that assumes you spent it all on taxable items and didn't save anything or buy anything used (exempt).

That is why the tax is not uniform. It is not indexed against actual expenditures, but is rather predicated on presumptions that may or may not be accurate. So, again, using the presumption may well result in cases in which the alleged "rebate" exceeds to amount paid in. The reason I ridicule the idea of calling it a rebate is that a rebate cannot be more than the amount initially paid. What the welfare pimps have done is call a handout a "rebate" to make it more palatable.

Allow me to explain what is fundamentally wrong with this scheme. We know that anything that can be abused will be, so let's look at the gross potential for abuse of this system.

What we see in the table looks reasonable enough. The "predetermination" seems to have made reasonable assumptions, but the system can allow for the predetermination to change. If the government wants to buy more loyalty or more votes, all it has to do is change the way that it calculates the rebate amount. If the rebate increases (and who could say no to that?), the number of people who get "rebates" that exceed their actual pay-in increases. That means that more and more people will potentially and up being net recipients of government largesse rather than taxpayers. Socialism.

Judy wrote:

It's okay with me if you all want to blame Hugo Chavez and what he's doing in Venezuela ... I just wish someone would document what he's done to harm the United States or even one American Citizen by trying to feed, educate and provide medical services to Venezuelans. He could fall dead from a heart attack tomorrow and nothing would change in the United States

Here is a small sample of what Venezuela is really like:
http://viewswire.com/index.asp?layout=V ... er=printer

since the administration of US President George Bush—with which Mr Chávez has a hostile relationship—banned the sale of military supplies and spare parts to Venezuela. The Russian aircraft will begin to replace Venezuela’s ageing fleet of US-supplied fighter jets and other equipment. The US opposed the sale, arguing that Venezuela’s purchases of military materiel are unnecessary for its own defence and are a threat to regional security.

As relations between Caracas and Washington have grown colder in recent years, Mr Chávez has reached out to other countries, including many with similar nationalist and anti-US ideologies. These include Cuba, Iran, Syria and North Korea. Before arriving in Moscow, Mr Chávez also visited—and avidly embraced—the authoritarian president of Belarus, Aleksandr Lukashenko.

You were upset that President Bush was not allowing the sale of aircraft parts to Venezuela, but with the friends Mr Chavez likes to keep, I believe he is protecting our best interest.

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_t ... _1059.html

Venezuela’s most senior leaders, including President Chavez, regularly express anti-American sentiment. The Venezuelan government’s rhetoric of hate directed against the U.S. government, as well as American culture and institutions, is slowly affecting attitudes in what used to be one of the most pro-American countries in the hemisphere

Venezuela may have been our friend at one time, however, I believe that is changing with Chavez's anti-US propaganda.

Judy wrote:

I don't care who is for unions or opposed to unions. We have to come together under ONE ROOF called the USA in order to stop Guest Worker Program.

I am more cautious as to whom I am associated with. I learned the hard way when I signed up with Moveon.org to take people in after Hurricane Katrina. I don't care how good my intentions were, it still makes my skin crawl to think that I had any association with them. I should have checked it out in advance. Live and learn.

I don't understand neese. What is wrong with Chavez meeting with Putin to discuss military sales and energy deals? Chavez came to the US first and Bush rebuked him like I said. So then he traipses off to Russia. We're friends with Russia. Don't you remember? Bush looked into the eyes of Putin and saw his soul?

All Bush did was antagonize a friendly trading partner, rhetoric aside, and now instead of flying US military aircraft they'll spend $3 Billion with Russia instead of the United States. I know General Dynamics Fort Worth Division now part of Lockheed would have enjoyed that $3 Billion contract and so would their employees who certainly need the work.

If you want to dislike Venezuela, that's okay with me. I just don't understand why you would and still don't. But that's okay, too.

As to our nation, I think it most unwise not to have paid Venezuela more respect, honored our aircraft deal with them, encouraged more sales to them, and treated them like the friendly trading partner they are. It doesn't matter to me that Chavez doesn't like Bush. I don't like Bush either so I understand that. It matters very much to me that countries like our nation and hold us in high regard and treat our nation with respect if not our leader.

When Chavez does something to hurt my country or my fellow citizens, then my wrath will cloud up and rain all over him.

Originally Posted by Judy

I don't understand neese. What is wrong with Chavez meeting with Putin to discuss military sales and energy deals? Chavez came to the US first and Bush rebuked him like I said. So then he traipses off to Russia. We're friends with Russia. Don't you remember? Bush looked into the eyes of Putin and saw his soul?

All Bush did was antagonize a friendly trading partner, rhetoric aside, and now instead of flying US military aircraft they'll spend $3 Billion with Russia instead of the United States. I know General Dynamics Fort Worth Division now part of Lockheed would have enjoyed that $3 Billion contract and so would their employees who certainly need the work.

Scarcely. Neese is absolutly right on this one. Chavez has been very specific and forceful in his anti-American rhetoric since before he was ever elected.

Specifically, Chavez had made much of his "anti-imperialism." All so-called anti-imperialists have to have an imperial bogeyman, and Chavez has always used the US in that role, going back before Bush's Presidency. He trumpeted his anti-American rhetoric as a cornerstone of his Bolivarianism, which was a mishmash of radical nationalism and leftist/Communist ideology. His vallainy was confirmed when he attempted a coup d'etat against the existing government in 1992 even though he had the support of a maximum of about 10% of the populace.