Yes, I'm aware of that and think it's a good thing. I however could not agree with your first statement of "Tax" it. Two different views here. This one I can live with. :wink:

 

To encourage the folks who need a reminder ....earthonempty.com has "Tickets" that can be put on the rest of the offenders. The citations remind the owners of the environmental impact of their vehicle.

Peer pressure can be a positive force.

 

Has anyone else gone to this site??? Tree huggers of the world unite!!! The SUV will single handedly destroy the planet..... What a bunch of tree hugging crap!!! Their office is in Cambridge, Mass. (Not too liberal there... :lol: )

It makes me want to take my Explorer straight to the dealer and trade it for a Navigator or maybe a HEMI Dorango. :P

 

This thread is never going to end, is it?

 

and the times they are a changing "Bob Dylan"

 

Wow. What a site. Comparing The Secretary of Energy to a Baath Party leader. Good comparison. One tries to regulate emissions and the other probably had a hand in killing and torturing thousands of innocent people. And also, are you aware that most hybrids cost much more thna an avergae car. Maybe all the rich liberals can afford them but I'm not sure about Joohn Q. Public. The Honda Insight. Hmmmmmm, can't have the A/C on the same time you're running the engine, yet it costs upwards of $21,000. They're right, everyone should buy a hybrid. If everyone did as they say, the country's poverty level would sky rocket. Not just expensive SUV's have crappy emissions. Regular base model sedans are more geared to economy than emissions. And I love that comment, "try taking the bus". Even if people "car pool" on the bus, those things are 40 times worse than your average SUV. And what about the new hybrid SUV's that Lexus and Ford have displayed? Just because they are SUV's and only get 20-25 mpg, we should still buy a more efficient sedan hybrid? I don't think anything will ever be good enough for those people.

 

I just started reading the replies. Those negative ones are frilarious. Read them, they'll brighten up your day.

 

Try reading and spelling 101 "frivolous"

 

A new attribute???..... Now not only a bleeding heart, tree hugging liberal...... Now we add "Thread editor" and "Spelling coach" to the mix... :lol: :lol: :lol: Did I spell everything correctly???

sealevel.... Why don't you just give it a rest? Now you've gotten so petty you are trying to pick the fly crap out of the pepper! :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

WMiclaels Wrote:"...sealevel.... Why don't you just give it a rest? Now you've gotten so petty you are trying to pick the fly crap out of the pepper!" :roll: :roll: :roll:

Are you sure it's not the other way around... picking pepper out of fly crap??? 8) 8) 8)

 

Good one AZ.... :lol: :lol: :lol: You may be very right. Either way it's a daunting task. :P

I sure hope I spelled "daunting" right! :lol:

 

Hahahahaha. He thought I was trying to spell frivolous. No I merely made up my own word. Freaking and Hilarious. Wow, stop trying to find little mistakes in peoples' posts just becasue they are right and you are wrong. I even explained my word in a previous post. Just look at my profile.

 

What the heck is Sealevel talking about with that tax loophole? I am a farmer, and I've taken a writeoff for my equipment, but only because I can prove it's directly used in crop production. City boys aren't legally writing off their Hummers as farm vehicles. And I don't see too many folks pulling hopper wagons around with them, either. Can you cite a reference for that claim? I took a write off for my '95 Dodge Ram 3500 (it's a farm truck) but not my wife's Sebring or the Crossfire (Not farm vehicles). And if you tried doing it for an H2 (or H1) I bet you'd get audited. And if you did get away with it (as perhaps some folks have) is that any worse than some of the shenanigans liberals pull with their tax dodges? Doesn't excuse it, but the earlier comment regarding throwing stones from glass houses applies.

By the way, and it's just my opinion that you're free to disagree with, but we'd have all the tax dollars we'd ever need if we cut out all the entitlement programs that squander hard-earned money by giving it to lazy/stupid people. I'd rather buy another B-2 than give one more penny to the National Endowment for the Arts or Welfare.

And if invading Iraq, emptying Saddamm's torture chambers and changing regimes in cesspool middle eastern countries will lower my cost for diesel fuel, then BOMBS AWAY!!!

Oh yeah and Hummers are cool. I wish I had one. I prefer the H1, though. :P

Regards,
John

 

Stovebolt for President!!!

I like the way you think!!!

 

Why thangya -- thangya verra mush!

Elvis

 

This thread has gone wild, but if we are talking about how to fix the tax loopholes and laws, here is my take:

Eliminate the current method of trying to legislate the morals of the people and giving benefits to your friends though the tax laws. If you truly want a fair tax system, make it the same for everybody.

For personal taxes: the first $20K of income is tax exempt. Then all income over that amount is taxed at 20%. This takes care of the taxes on the poor, but keeps the incentive to make more.

For corporate taxes: The first $100K of net income (gross income less cost of sales) is exempt from corporate taxes. Then all net income over that amount is taxed at 25%. This gives the small companies a chance to grow, and keeps the larger companies on an even footing, since there will be no beneficial treatment with loopholes specifically written for them.

Advantages: The tax forms would be no more than 10 lines long. The IRS department would be reduced by about 50%, since there would be no "interpretation" of the law. The truly needy are taken care of. Tax accountants and lawyers would no longer be needed (my personal favorite!).

Disadvantages: The Congress would no longer be able to reward those that pay off to them with tax benefits or appeal for votes by the needy with promises of lower taxes. But is that really a disadvantage?

Analysis: Will this system ever be put into place? No. Why? See "Disadvantages" as listed above.

Fix #2: Term limits on all government officials. Government service was never supposed to be a lifetime career The President can only be in office for 8 years. Why can Congressmen and Senators be allowed to be there for ever? Makes no sense to me.....

I could keep going, but you get the idea!

If you want to start the write-in campaign for me as President and Stovebolt for Vice-President, let me know..... ;-)

I promise to run a non mud slinging campaign.

Yea, right....

 

I've always thought that the "Flat Tax" idea was a good one. I think if the Flat tax was 20% we would have a huge surplus in very short order.

 

I've considered the flat tax a viable alternative as well, but as long as it means eliminating the mortgage deduction, and most models do, it would single handedly destroy the housing industry, housing market, wreak havoc on related industries...and pretty much decimate the hub of most middle class families retirement/financial planning.

Any serious effort to eliminate the mortgage deduction for a flat tax would be as deadly a third rail as cutting Social Security, maybe worse.

That said, if it could be worked around, a flat tax is fair.

 

Wow.... Kusheen.... Are you ready for this... .... I agree with you whole heartedly. :lol: :lol: :lol:

The mortgage deduction is the only deduction that should remain. However deductions for equity loans should go. And this is coming from someone that financed his Crossfire with just such a loan. I have my title and deduct my interest.... Because I can and because I pay a ton in taxes that I wouldn't be paying with a flat tax. Just one more reason why I love this car like one of my kids.

 

I disagree with the statement. By making the first $25K of income tax exempt, it would more than make up for the interest deduction. And our current system takes your income for the year and taxes it at higher and higher rates when you make more, which makes people prone to "fudge the numbers". Based on a flat tax, someone making $50K would pay 20% of $25K (first $25K is exempt) or $5K in taxes, leaving $45K of disposable/savable income. And rather than spending hundreds of dollars tring to "get a refund" of money I was forced to send to the IRS at zero interest for a year, I could be investing it in any way I see fit.

I truly believe this would work, and I agree it would fix the budget in a reasonable amount of time.

Aren't dreams a wonderful thing?