On 9/4/24 3:05 PM, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "Jayle Byrd" <jbyrd@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:vba9tc$3vq6d$5@news.mixmin.net...
>> On 9/4/2024 9:48 AM, Scout wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Governor Swill" <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:fkqedj9og6n3k9tv8gj19daroi26mvd4rp@4ax.com...
>>>> On Tue, 3 Sep 2024 09:30:08 -0500, "Scout" wrote:
>>>>> "Governor Swill" <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>  wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/30/24 3:41 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>>>>>>>  -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>>> ...and just wait until P2025 abolishes police, fire, & weather
>>>>>>>>> services:
>>>>>>>>>   better start to calculate how much more its going to cost an
>>>>>>>>> individual citizen to replace just these services with
>>>>>>>>> privately run (&
>>>>>>>>> for-profit) services.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I guarantee you it will cost more than the tax savings.  Then
>>>>>>>> there'll
>>>>>>>> be the lawsuits filed by the homeowners whose houses caught
>>>>>>>>  fire because a neighbor didn't have a fire service contract.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Agreed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is merely YA example of where it becomes painfully clear
>>>>>>> just how
>>>>>>> bad many people are at actually developing an expenses budget,
>>>>>>> and then
>>>>>>> go on to make bad decisions that are against their own self
>>>>>>> interests.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> FWIW, another common example of this is how they claim that EU
>>>>>>> taxes are
>>>>>>> frightfully bad (eg, 44%), not realizing that it includes
>>>>>>> healthcare and
>>>>>>> higher education, so the correct comparison starts their own 22% Fed
>>>>>>> rate, but then adds +32% ($25K/Median Income) for healthcare,
>>>>>>> plus let's
>>>>>>> say +1% for college/etc, for (22% + 32% + 1%) = 55% >> more than EU.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Top five national income tax rates.
>>>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/H1LJylHMPz0>
>>>>>
>>>>> So you're trying to prove your point by ignoring many taxes...
>>>>
>>>> My point is that in exchange for their higher taxes, Europeans get a
>>>> lot more
>>>> than we do.  Free university education.  No/low co-pay healthcare
>>>> including
>>>> prescriptions.  Vast public transportation networks that make it
>>>> unnecessary to
>>>> own a car for most people and one of the best quality road networks
>>>> on the
>>>> planet.  European highways are built to last twice as long as ours.
>>>>
>>>> Caveat:  Their defense budgets have historically been lower than
>>>> ours owing to
>>>> our investment in our mutual security.  Think about post WW II.  Who
>>>> in their
>>>> right mind would want to see Europe rearm itself?  Nobody.  For that
>>>> reason, we
>>>> dominated European security to avoid the risks of them rearming.
>>>>
>>>> That danger is now past with the EU and Schweringen so they can now arm
>>>> themselves in earnest.  And they are.
>>>>
>>>>> But let's go with income tax.
>>>>>
>>>>> In California combined state and federal income tax takes over 50%
>>>>> of your
>>>>> income.
>>>>
>>>> Well, that's right wing propaganda because California, like federal,
>>>> has a
>>>> progressive tax rate and their top marginal rate is currently 14.4%.
>>>> The
>>>> federal is 37%, but those are "top marginal" rates.  For those who
>>>> don't know
>>>> haw marginal rates work:
>>>
>>> You're just looking at income tax.. do you think that the ONLY tax
>>> that exists?
>>>
>>> Heck, pretty soon Kamala would be evicting people from their homes
>>> because they can't pay the 25% in the unrealized income from any
>>> increase in the value of their home.
>>>
>>> Further, I don't see Europe ignoring their homeless while being able
>>> to pay to fly illegal immigrants here and arranging their illegal
>>> entry into the country, while then providing them housing, food,
>>> jobs, transportation and legal representation while the government
>>> pretends that deportation would ever occur for them.
>>>
>>> I wonder how much the money spend on opening the border and all the
>>> care given to those who ignored are laws would have done to help our
>>> own homeless and poor????
>>>
>>> I heard somewhere this has cost $451 Billion/year so far, and let's
>>> say half of that/
>>>
>>> https://www.nationalreview.com/news/border-crisis-costs-american-
>>> taxpayers-451-billion-annually-house-gop-report-claims/
>>>
>>> We currently have (according to HUD, 653,104 homeless Americans)
>>> that's $345,274 per person.
>>>
>>> In ONE year we could virtually eliminate our homeless problem and
>>> certainly within 2.
>>>
>>> Instead, we allow a lot of homeless illegal immigrants who then
>>> compete with poor americans for housing, jobs, food, etc.
>>>
>>> So tell me, give our TOTAL level of taxation is higher than in
>>> Europe.. why don't we have such things here????
>>>
>>> I mean Democrats are seriously talking about taxing money that people
>>> don't even have.
>>>
>>> How long until grandma is evicted from her home because she can't pay
>>> the 25% tax on the unrealized income made from the increase in
>>> property values?
>>
>> "Fight to stop 96-year-old Pacific Grove woman's eviction continues"
>>
>> https://www.ksbw.com/article/california-96-year-old-pacific-grove-
>> womans-eviction/62046753
>>
>>> Who will buy these homes? Corporations will who will then make you
>>> pay to live in them because you can't afford to buy a home.
>>
>> That is exactly what they are doing and why homes have become
>> unaffordable.
>>
>>> How about the 25% you will have to pay on the income your 401K, and
>>> what will you do for retirement with the government sucking all that
>>> income from your retirement account?
>>
>> Biden stole 30% from 401k savings in 2023.
>>
>>> And in the end will it really change how the rich do things? No, it
>>> wont'.
>>
>> Putting Nancy Pelosi in jail for inside trading and graft would would
>> be a good start.
>
> That's one I could NEVER understand.. how did Congress EVER get to the
> point that the laws they create for everyone else does NOT apply to them.

Because too many politicians today are selfish money grubbing assholes,
with zero interest in Public Service. Its also why there's sections of
the tax code which have so many qualification requirements that they
literally only apply to one (nicely donating) taxpayer.

> Frankly I would love to throw those those into jail.
>
> Our leadership was NEVER suppose to be 'above the law' yet that's
> exactly what we have. Further, due to insider trading, their decisions
> can now become decided not what is best for the nation, but rather which
> stocks will move the most and how much can they profit personally
> choosing B over A.

Then stop voting those jerks into office & support ethics reforms for
them .. and for SCOTUS too.

> You will also note that THEIR retirement funds don't go into SSA, but
> rather their own PRIVATE fund. Why is that? If SSA is good enough for
> the rest of us it should be good enough for them.

Incorrect; Feds do pay into SSA.

You would have been correct if the ancient Federal "CSRS" retirement
system from 1920 ..yes, 15 years before Social Security existed, but
that system was obsoleted & replaced way back in 1984 (40 years ago).
At that time, existing CSRS workers were given the option to convert, or
continue, but since its been 40+ years, 99% of whoever stayed on the old
system have long since retired.

The current "FERS" retirement system does pay into SS, plus into their
own separate pension with a 4.4% employee contribution requirement at
present, making it self-funding without taxpayers.

> Further as trustees of the SSA, the fact they have bleed the assets into
> ultralow yield government bonds should be grounds from criminal charges.>
> I mean if I took my parent's trust fund and invested it in special low
> yield stock in my company... I would be charged with embezzlement... but
> not Congress critters.

But if it were invested in the private sector, you'd be complaining that
it is "choosing winners & losers".

> Finally, on a last note they have by and large absolved most of their
> legislative duties to flunkies. Specifically allowed government agencies
> and departments generate 'directives' that have the nature and force of
> law.. if they decide product X should be made illegal, it goes in the
> register and wham bam it's now illegal after 90 days.. congress never
> even has to know about it.

Management classically means delegation/assignment, which is what
Agencies writing the detailed rules for Congress means. Plus the
qualifications to work there is a lot stricter than to be a Congressman.

Plus the workflow doesn't work at all in the way that you've described,
because there's public comment periods on proposed language that remains
open for months as well as other oversights.

> Heck, even when it comes to laws they create some are so broad and
> sweeping as to be outside of their control. There use to be a law on the
> books for endangered/threatened species that stated that any
> jurisdiction that applied protections or limits on living things were
> also a matter of US law.
>
> For example, in Maine, I think the smallest lobster you are allowed is
> 12", yet there was some country somewhere that was trying to reestablish
> their lobster population and they set a limit at 14 or 16 inches... In
> theory... lobster boats could then be impounded, their crews subject to
> fines and imprisonment because of a law some other nation made for THEIR
> situation.
>
> A law professor made a big stink about it in a view and it was quietly
> removed but I'm sure similar things are still buried within the law.

So what is your point? That it is possible for humans to make mistakes?

> because so much of it doesn't even go through Congress and that which
> does is often so massive that no one can possibly even read the bill
> before it goes to vote.

That's on Congress, since it is their business workflow. And the reason
why they tolerate it is because that language is often ghost written by
Lobbyists, not Congressional Staff. Likewise, Congress can task various
departments to do analysis (GAO is a classic example), but they don't
hold themselves accountable to go fix whatever problems audits reveal.

-hh