Because I'm too lazy to post with any degree of regularity, apparently. Not really. It's more that I'm ridiculously busy. To give you a view into my life: Sunday and Wednesday I have church. Tuesday and Wednesday I do after-school programs for kids. Monday I work. Thursday I work. Fridays are shopping days, and Saturdays usually have something going on. Yeah. My life is fun. v.v
Anyway.
I'm not quite sure what all the mess in Wisconsin is about. I guess it has something to do with unions and how they're awesome. Which I don't think they are. Once upon a time, they had their uses - back when Irish immigrants were derided for being immigrants and were practically ordered to return home (now what does that sound like?). People were taken advantage of. I understand that.
But does anybody seriously think that we're going to dissolve unions then instantly end up with 18 hour workdays and $1 an hour wages? Yeah. Right. Whatever.
I think unions can safely be classified with child labor laws: they're basically obsolete, and serve only to make money for the government when they're crossed. Nobody in their right mind is going to go up against the unemployment laws the government has in place, particularly not if they're a small business. Workers will probably be happier when they don't have to pay union dues that take a goodly portion of their weekly pay.
Basically, everybody but the union bosses will win. And I get the feeling that nobody but said union bosses would cry.
In other news, the Obama administration is actually going to maybe, kind of, sort of fulfill a campaign promise that wasn't absolutely ridiculous! DOMA is on the chopping block now, and even though it took two years for the President to set his sights on it, I'm glad. Maybe now that silly piece of legislation will get passed.
To all the people who will now proceed to yell at me because after all, gay marriage is "immoral," I just want to say - personally, I agree with you. Homosexual rights defenders, don't get mad at me. I do think gays should be able to get married. They are citizens of the United States, and as such should be afforded every privilege and right that every heterosexual person receives.
I am of the opinion that government should have no place in marriage, period, but that's not going to happen any time soon...so I'll just settle for equal protection.
The Arizonans are at it again, once again targeting immigration. This time, they're taking it one step further - illegals could be restricted from driving, sending their kids to school, and getting benefits completely!
Right. So...basically, we're just going to make Hispanics an even more targeted member group of society.
Nice.
Coupled with last year's bill, that made it possible for police officers to ask for a person's papers any time to prove they were, in fact, citizens, I see a lot of potential for abuse here. Once again. Considering you're more likely to be killed by a cop than a terrorist these days...
Do we really want to do this? v.v
Showing posts with label companies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label companies. Show all posts
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Free Market?
Only so long as companies stay here. If they want to leave, forget it. We hate them and we hate the elected representatives who gave them the freedom to leave.
It will never cease to amaze me, the hypocrisy here. Especially on the Republican side. Republicans, sit down and think about this for a minute. The free market is good. The free market is our friend. The free market regulates corporate behavior and makes sure that companies go where profits are. In the end, everybody's well off. But now the free market is taking businesses to China. Bad. The government should stop them because only the government can fix the free market, even though the government can't fix the free market so they should get out of it.
....Riiiight....
Recomputing.
Now, on the Democrat side. Obviously, giving companies an incentive to be here (tax breaks) means they're going to outsource and lay off workers here. But if we just...raise their taxes...and make it astronomically expensive to operate here in the States, they'll stay here.
Mm-hmm.
What planets are you all living on, again?
In any case, its become fashionable now to bash one's opponent in a midterm election race with the fact that they'll "send jobs overseas." Seeing as that's the one thing they all can agree on- that the other side is going to make jobs disappear overseas- I say we just get rid of all of them.
It will never cease to amaze me, the hypocrisy here. Especially on the Republican side. Republicans, sit down and think about this for a minute. The free market is good. The free market is our friend. The free market regulates corporate behavior and makes sure that companies go where profits are. In the end, everybody's well off. But now the free market is taking businesses to China. Bad. The government should stop them because only the government can fix the free market, even though the government can't fix the free market so they should get out of it.
....Riiiight....
Recomputing.
Now, on the Democrat side. Obviously, giving companies an incentive to be here (tax breaks) means they're going to outsource and lay off workers here. But if we just...raise their taxes...and make it astronomically expensive to operate here in the States, they'll stay here.
Mm-hmm.
What planets are you all living on, again?
In any case, its become fashionable now to bash one's opponent in a midterm election race with the fact that they'll "send jobs overseas." Seeing as that's the one thing they all can agree on- that the other side is going to make jobs disappear overseas- I say we just get rid of all of them.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Islam: Taking over Campbell Soup
Yes sir, that's right. Campbell Soup apparently decided it needed to cave to the pressures of those evil Muslims (who want to kill infidels) and make sure its canned soups were halal-friendly. Dietary halal is a set of rules about what Muslims can and cannot eat, obviously non-infidel friendly, as it restricts the eating of the beloved bacon and spiral-cut ham and also the gorging typically exercised in all-you-can-eat restaurants that are, of course, near and dear to the American heart.
This is, as you can see, yet more proof that all the Muslims want to kill all of us infidels. What will it be next? Will all-you-can-eat restaurants begin closing down? Will pork become scarcer? Will Jews be forced to eat halal foods instead of kosher? What will it be then?
How much will be too much? Will our government continue to let these private companies do what they can to make money, and accede to the demands of the evil Muslim conspiracy that is infiltrating our society bit by tiny bit? Will they let the Muslims use soup as a wedge to drive yet more space between themselves and the rest of American society?
Stop the Soup. Boycott Campbell Soup.
This is, as you can see, yet more proof that all the Muslims want to kill all of us infidels. What will it be next? Will all-you-can-eat restaurants begin closing down? Will pork become scarcer? Will Jews be forced to eat halal foods instead of kosher? What will it be then?
How much will be too much? Will our government continue to let these private companies do what they can to make money, and accede to the demands of the evil Muslim conspiracy that is infiltrating our society bit by tiny bit? Will they let the Muslims use soup as a wedge to drive yet more space between themselves and the rest of American society?
Stop the Soup. Boycott Campbell Soup.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Hmm
Sorry it's been awhile since I last blogged...my life has been pretty boring lately, and hence I've been too bored to actually write a blog post. Although, in my defence, I was out of town from Thursday to Sunday night (actually, Monday morning if you want to be technical), and so I couldn't blog.
So...in the news this week, local police officers are now going to have even more license to make eternal nuisances of themselves, as their job descriptions are now going to be expanded to "watching for precursor activity to terrorist activities" or something like that. (And an hilarious image of Barney Fife trying to apprehend a terrorist just popped into my head...)
From this article: "But this initiative represents the administration’s first thoughtful steps in fulfilling President Obama’s commitment to defining a lasting rule of law for this brave new world. We must make it work."
We "must"? Oh yeah, that's right. So we can be safe, yada yad. Right. I forgot that part. Of course, there are other options. Like, you know, we could, like stop bombing and invading sovereign nations without cause and stuff. You know. Be smart and courteous and all that good stuff. Stop hitting other children on the playground.
But oh wait. That would be the smart thing to do. We're Americans. We aren't smart, so we're not needed to be. That's right.
In that same vein, our government is now trying to control the internet- oh wait. Not control it...just make sure...you don't say something stupid, using the vehicle of fear. There goes half of my Facebook activities. Sarcasm? Out the window. Joking references to terrorism and your plot to blow up the 2011 Comic-Con? Don't even think about it.
You see, apparently the government has decided that Americans don't use phones enough anymore. We've all migrated to the internet, so now, naturally, the government is going to have to start imposing rules upon the internet. Well, to be fair, not quite rules. They just want to team up with social networking sites to get information about their widdle citizen's activities. Because we all need to be babysat, of course.
"Essentially, officials want Congress to require all services that enable communications — including encrypted e-mail transmitters like BlackBerry, social networking Web sites like Facebook and software that allows direct “peer to peer” messaging like Skype — to be technically capable of complying if served with a wiretap order. The mandate would include being able to intercept and unscramble encrypted messages."
Mm-hmm. Because it's always good to tie the hands of independent companies that operate on the free world of the internet so that they have to cooperate. At least Google went into willingly.
Once again along that tack, the Obama administration (which is, of course, for terrorists and against anything akin to intel gathering or the wars) wants to have more control over banks, not for the purpose of money, but so that banks have to report money transfers out-of-country.
But always remember- Obama is soft on terror.
In a rather ironic twist, atheists and agnostics score the highest on a poll on American religious knowledge.
Right.
That's sad, Christians.
The midterm elections are approaching, which is rather...well, not exactly exciting, per se, since I am fixing to make a prediction about who's going to take the Congress. Before I do that, I'd just like to say that this prediction kind of stinks.
Because I'd really rather the Democrats lose their majority, but the Republicans not gain one.
I dream of a better world where the true interests of the people are represented by a four, five, six party Congress...
I dream big, in case you couldn't tell.
There's lots more I could talk about. But I don't really want to. I'm already depressed enough.
So...in the news this week, local police officers are now going to have even more license to make eternal nuisances of themselves, as their job descriptions are now going to be expanded to "watching for precursor activity to terrorist activities" or something like that. (And an hilarious image of Barney Fife trying to apprehend a terrorist just popped into my head...)
From this article: "But this initiative represents the administration’s first thoughtful steps in fulfilling President Obama’s commitment to defining a lasting rule of law for this brave new world. We must make it work."
We "must"? Oh yeah, that's right. So we can be safe, yada yad. Right. I forgot that part. Of course, there are other options. Like, you know, we could, like stop bombing and invading sovereign nations without cause and stuff. You know. Be smart and courteous and all that good stuff. Stop hitting other children on the playground.
But oh wait. That would be the smart thing to do. We're Americans. We aren't smart, so we're not needed to be. That's right.
In that same vein, our government is now trying to control the internet- oh wait. Not control it...just make sure...you don't say something stupid, using the vehicle of fear. There goes half of my Facebook activities. Sarcasm? Out the window. Joking references to terrorism and your plot to blow up the 2011 Comic-Con? Don't even think about it.
You see, apparently the government has decided that Americans don't use phones enough anymore. We've all migrated to the internet, so now, naturally, the government is going to have to start imposing rules upon the internet. Well, to be fair, not quite rules. They just want to team up with social networking sites to get information about their widdle citizen's activities. Because we all need to be babysat, of course.
"Essentially, officials want Congress to require all services that enable communications — including encrypted e-mail transmitters like BlackBerry, social networking Web sites like Facebook and software that allows direct “peer to peer” messaging like Skype — to be technically capable of complying if served with a wiretap order. The mandate would include being able to intercept and unscramble encrypted messages."
Mm-hmm. Because it's always good to tie the hands of independent companies that operate on the free world of the internet so that they have to cooperate. At least Google went into willingly.
Once again along that tack, the Obama administration (which is, of course, for terrorists and against anything akin to intel gathering or the wars) wants to have more control over banks, not for the purpose of money, but so that banks have to report money transfers out-of-country.
But always remember- Obama is soft on terror.
In a rather ironic twist, atheists and agnostics score the highest on a poll on American religious knowledge.
Right.
That's sad, Christians.
The midterm elections are approaching, which is rather...well, not exactly exciting, per se, since I am fixing to make a prediction about who's going to take the Congress. Before I do that, I'd just like to say that this prediction kind of stinks.
Because I'd really rather the Democrats lose their majority, but the Republicans not gain one.
I dream of a better world where the true interests of the people are represented by a four, five, six party Congress...
I dream big, in case you couldn't tell.
There's lots more I could talk about. But I don't really want to. I'm already depressed enough.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Economic Woes
The economy is still failing- at least, if you measure the success or failure of that sector by unemployment rates, which still stand at over 9 percent. This rate is increasing amongst high-tech skilled workers, who are getting laid off due to lack of work- and then their jobs are being given to younger people fresh out of college. Exacerbating the problem is the fact that many of these jobs are now being sent overseas, where there is a burgeoning job market for these kinds of talents, and where workers will do the same work for less than Americans.
As we know, high-tech positions and workers aren't the only ones being hurt by this recession, but I think there is some credibility to the argument that they are sometimes hurt more than less skilled laborers. If an electrician gets laid off, he can get a job somewhere else relatively easy, even if it isn't electrical. But if there is a drop from somewhere like Hewlett-Packard as a computer engineer to fast food...well, that just isn't good.
But you know, don't worry. Our fearless leader has a plan. He's calling for $50 billion to be put into a new infrastructure fund and for there to be a push to upgrade the roads and railroads of America, thereby creating jobs.
It's about time, if you ask me. Some of the stretches of interstate highway I've seen are absolutely disgraceful. (Still better than some stretches of highway between Lusaka and Livingstone in Zambia, Africa, but still pretty bad. ^.^)
This is one measure I think I could potentially agree with President Obama on. Our road and railroad system is due for an overhaul, and this seems like a good idea. It may or may not be wise during a time of economic upheaval as we're in, but at least it's Constitutional. I also think some of the logic behind the plan, that of hoping to prevent earmarks headed for transportation projects, is good. It might make our lawmakers more focused on important things. Or wait...maybe we don't particularly want that.
In any case (and all jokes aside), at least they're still trying. But there's one area that some are saying shouldn't be maintained, and they should stop trying.
That's the housing market. From this article:
"As the economy again sputters and potential buyers flee — July housing sales sank 26 percent from July 2009 — there is a growing sense of exhaustion with government intervention. Some economists and analysts are now urging a dose of shock therapy that would greatly shift the benefits to future homeowners: Let the housing market crash. When prices are lower, these experts argue, buyers will pour in, creating the elusive stability the government has spent billions upon billions trying to achieve."
In the Texas town where I live, house sales are crazy. You drive down a residential street, and you're almost guaranteed to see a house for sale. And these houses aren't selling. They're just sitting there on the market, waiting for someone with enough money to come along.
And as the article above pointed out, despite the billions of dollars the government has pumped into the industry, it hasn't helped. The housing market is still failing. Further, the government insured thousands of loans and credit for mortgages on new houses, and now those people are defaulting, costing us even more money.
Personally, I agree that they should just leave it alone. Experience shows us that oftentimes, when an industry like this goes down, it springs back up soon after. People have to have houses to live in, one way or the other, and they'll continue to buy them, just as they will food or clothes.
As we know, high-tech positions and workers aren't the only ones being hurt by this recession, but I think there is some credibility to the argument that they are sometimes hurt more than less skilled laborers. If an electrician gets laid off, he can get a job somewhere else relatively easy, even if it isn't electrical. But if there is a drop from somewhere like Hewlett-Packard as a computer engineer to fast food...well, that just isn't good.
But you know, don't worry. Our fearless leader has a plan. He's calling for $50 billion to be put into a new infrastructure fund and for there to be a push to upgrade the roads and railroads of America, thereby creating jobs.
It's about time, if you ask me. Some of the stretches of interstate highway I've seen are absolutely disgraceful. (Still better than some stretches of highway between Lusaka and Livingstone in Zambia, Africa, but still pretty bad. ^.^)
This is one measure I think I could potentially agree with President Obama on. Our road and railroad system is due for an overhaul, and this seems like a good idea. It may or may not be wise during a time of economic upheaval as we're in, but at least it's Constitutional. I also think some of the logic behind the plan, that of hoping to prevent earmarks headed for transportation projects, is good. It might make our lawmakers more focused on important things. Or wait...maybe we don't particularly want that.
In any case (and all jokes aside), at least they're still trying. But there's one area that some are saying shouldn't be maintained, and they should stop trying.
That's the housing market. From this article:
"As the economy again sputters and potential buyers flee — July housing sales sank 26 percent from July 2009 — there is a growing sense of exhaustion with government intervention. Some economists and analysts are now urging a dose of shock therapy that would greatly shift the benefits to future homeowners: Let the housing market crash. When prices are lower, these experts argue, buyers will pour in, creating the elusive stability the government has spent billions upon billions trying to achieve."
In the Texas town where I live, house sales are crazy. You drive down a residential street, and you're almost guaranteed to see a house for sale. And these houses aren't selling. They're just sitting there on the market, waiting for someone with enough money to come along.
And as the article above pointed out, despite the billions of dollars the government has pumped into the industry, it hasn't helped. The housing market is still failing. Further, the government insured thousands of loans and credit for mortgages on new houses, and now those people are defaulting, costing us even more money.
Personally, I agree that they should just leave it alone. Experience shows us that oftentimes, when an industry like this goes down, it springs back up soon after. People have to have houses to live in, one way or the other, and they'll continue to buy them, just as they will food or clothes.
Monday, August 2, 2010
Conquest through Corporation
So I had a thought last night- for the last ten years, our country has been embroiled in two conflicts to quash out radical Islam. Recently, we've also had problems with Iran (she's radical too, apparently). However, what we need isn't wars.
We just need to push Walmart and McDonalds to settle down there, make themselves at home, and open up shop. There's nothing like Western fast food and convenience to quash those pesky concerns about religious and national identity. It's worked great in other countries, anyway.
We just need to push Walmart and McDonalds to settle down there, make themselves at home, and open up shop. There's nothing like Western fast food and convenience to quash those pesky concerns about religious and national identity. It's worked great in other countries, anyway.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Healthcare- or Insurance?
It seems to be the prevailing notion among nearly everyone that the 'healthcare' bill currently in the Congress will institute some sort of 'universal system'.
Not quite. Of course, I'd have quite a bit more respect for Congress if they'd just go all the way if they absolutely must pass some sort of healthcare bill and just give us a universal system. It's not as if they listen to their constituency in any case.
The bill(s) currently being proposed will not create any kind of system at all; they will merely give more power to what we already have in place. The bills will mandate health insurance coverage for every man, woman, and child, in the US, and create a radically expanded Medicare-like program for those who cannot afford private health insurance (my family would be one of these families).
However, I do not believe this will solve the problem. The insurance companies are the problem, not the lack of government involvement. Insurance companies are corrupt from the bottom up. They deny coverage to many on a regular basis, sometimes for the most idiotic reasons. They jack rates on those who are 'at risk', and people still go bankrupt.
The current bills will only cause that corruption to spread wider, and will put yet more people at the mercy of the insurance companies. Furthermore, I believe some people will simply not get coverage, as they do now, because the fines imposed for the lack of insurance will be much less than getting the actual insurance.
So these bills will not be creating a 'universal system', and will not truly solve anything.
Not quite. Of course, I'd have quite a bit more respect for Congress if they'd just go all the way if they absolutely must pass some sort of healthcare bill and just give us a universal system. It's not as if they listen to their constituency in any case.
The bill(s) currently being proposed will not create any kind of system at all; they will merely give more power to what we already have in place. The bills will mandate health insurance coverage for every man, woman, and child, in the US, and create a radically expanded Medicare-like program for those who cannot afford private health insurance (my family would be one of these families).
However, I do not believe this will solve the problem. The insurance companies are the problem, not the lack of government involvement. Insurance companies are corrupt from the bottom up. They deny coverage to many on a regular basis, sometimes for the most idiotic reasons. They jack rates on those who are 'at risk', and people still go bankrupt.
The current bills will only cause that corruption to spread wider, and will put yet more people at the mercy of the insurance companies. Furthermore, I believe some people will simply not get coverage, as they do now, because the fines imposed for the lack of insurance will be much less than getting the actual insurance.
So these bills will not be creating a 'universal system', and will not truly solve anything.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
More Nationalization!
Our lovely administration is going to outline a new plan for keeping this recession at bay!!
The solution?
Let the government take over all the banks, and make sure that none of them collapse. After all, they're so much better at handling debt than you are!!
Everyone involved with money in Washington should be required to sit down and read Dave Ramsey's Total Money Makeover. Seriously. That book would help them. A lot.
Anyway- the plan would make it so that larger banks ('To big to fail' banks!!) will be required to submit stricter records to the government, and make sure they're lending to the right people.
This plan will also put stricter regulation on things like hedge funds, private equity funds, and venture capital funds. The people who manage these funds would be required to submit records about who, what, and where they're investing.
The records given to the government would be reviewed by a 'systemic risk regulator.' And who is this 'systemic risk regulator' going to be? Well, they aren't sure yet. Let's just eliminate the job before it's created, how 'bout that?
These hedge funds haven't been hurt by the recession (maybe that's why people have one?!). Apparently, that automatically makes them a bad thing. (Remember, the owners of the funds aren't 'sharing' their hard earned money! Oh no!)
From the page- I quote- " Now, a growing number of lawmakers and policy makers are worried that hedge funds have become too big a part of the financial market to operate without government monitoring."
This. Is. Not. The. Government's. Job. Period, end of story.
So why do they think it is? Why do they think that 'monitoring' the economy is their job, not ours, the people's?
I don't know. But they need to get their act together. This is not their job. It doesn't matter how much of a mess Wall Street has made of things. Wall Street will fix it- we hope- and if it doesn't, it still isn't the government's place to get involved!
That is what capitalism is. It rises, it falls, it ebbs, but it always recovers by itself.
In fact, what has caused this recession is government intervention! We would never have had this recession if they had just let the free market take it's own road. Instead, they had to get involved in every minute area of the market- monitoring jobs, finances, lending...
When will it stop? Where will it stop?
The solution?
Let the government take over all the banks, and make sure that none of them collapse. After all, they're so much better at handling debt than you are!!
Everyone involved with money in Washington should be required to sit down and read Dave Ramsey's Total Money Makeover. Seriously. That book would help them. A lot.
Anyway- the plan would make it so that larger banks ('To big to fail' banks!!) will be required to submit stricter records to the government, and make sure they're lending to the right people.
This plan will also put stricter regulation on things like hedge funds, private equity funds, and venture capital funds. The people who manage these funds would be required to submit records about who, what, and where they're investing.
The records given to the government would be reviewed by a 'systemic risk regulator.' And who is this 'systemic risk regulator' going to be? Well, they aren't sure yet. Let's just eliminate the job before it's created, how 'bout that?
These hedge funds haven't been hurt by the recession (maybe that's why people have one?!). Apparently, that automatically makes them a bad thing. (Remember, the owners of the funds aren't 'sharing' their hard earned money! Oh no!)
From the page- I quote- " Now, a growing number of lawmakers and policy makers are worried that hedge funds have become too big a part of the financial market to operate without government monitoring."
This. Is. Not. The. Government's. Job. Period, end of story.
So why do they think it is? Why do they think that 'monitoring' the economy is their job, not ours, the people's?
I don't know. But they need to get their act together. This is not their job. It doesn't matter how much of a mess Wall Street has made of things. Wall Street will fix it- we hope- and if it doesn't, it still isn't the government's place to get involved!
That is what capitalism is. It rises, it falls, it ebbs, but it always recovers by itself.
In fact, what has caused this recession is government intervention! We would never have had this recession if they had just let the free market take it's own road. Instead, they had to get involved in every minute area of the market- monitoring jobs, finances, lending...
When will it stop? Where will it stop?
Monday, March 16, 2009
Helping Small Business
Yay! Let's all help the small businesses!! I have an idea to help them. Let's stop taxing the lives out of them. Let's stop making them pay outrageous unemployment. Let's stop making them pay Medicare, social security, and all the thousands of dollars they pay in taxes.
That'd help them a whole lot more than this. Believe me.
My dad is the owner of a small business. It was started just this last year (2008). He now owes over $10,000 in taxes. He didn't even make a profit on the business. They own all their own vehicles. And they owe the government, which thinks it owns the business.
You know how much unemployment tax the company has to pay? $28,000 a year. Yeah. $7,000 a quarter. If that isn't just disgusting, I don't know what is.
Businesses have to pay per employee for medicare and social security. Lest that sound not so bad, let me clarify. The employees themselves pay about $100 per week from their paychecks for these two costs. Then, the employer must match that money. For instance, if a business has seven employees, then the employer/company must pay $700 per week, including the other $700 that is being taxed from the employees themselves. That's $1,400 each week per business the government is raking in.
Not outraged yet? Let us continue.
The capital gains tax is a tax on the profit a company makes. But even companies that haven't made a profit have to pay the 'capital gains' tax. These are the taxes President Obama is seeking to raise. Yeah, that's a great idea!
Not.
So, in closing: what is the point of so many taxes? Apparently, the government is trying to dig itself out of a trillions-deep hole...and not getting anywhere, despite the many taxes they charge. Want to know why? They keep borrowing. And investing in stupid programs that don't do anything anyway.
Sometimes politics disgust me.
That'd help them a whole lot more than this. Believe me.
My dad is the owner of a small business. It was started just this last year (2008). He now owes over $10,000 in taxes. He didn't even make a profit on the business. They own all their own vehicles. And they owe the government, which thinks it owns the business.
You know how much unemployment tax the company has to pay? $28,000 a year. Yeah. $7,000 a quarter. If that isn't just disgusting, I don't know what is.
Businesses have to pay per employee for medicare and social security. Lest that sound not so bad, let me clarify. The employees themselves pay about $100 per week from their paychecks for these two costs. Then, the employer must match that money. For instance, if a business has seven employees, then the employer/company must pay $700 per week, including the other $700 that is being taxed from the employees themselves. That's $1,400 each week per business the government is raking in.
Not outraged yet? Let us continue.
The capital gains tax is a tax on the profit a company makes. But even companies that haven't made a profit have to pay the 'capital gains' tax. These are the taxes President Obama is seeking to raise. Yeah, that's a great idea!
Not.
So, in closing: what is the point of so many taxes? Apparently, the government is trying to dig itself out of a trillions-deep hole...and not getting anywhere, despite the many taxes they charge. Want to know why? They keep borrowing. And investing in stupid programs that don't do anything anyway.
Sometimes politics disgust me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
