"Would you please raise my taxes?"

[blucher]

Originally Posted by oldognewtrick

I really think the only reason I watch it is to see the blonde bounce around in tight shirts. Bout the only thrill left for oldogs.

Mercifully the only thing I have in common with Sheldon is an aversion to airy blondes. Oddly she is probably the best equipped to live in the real world without mother academia sheltering her from harsh realities.

In fact only because these guys are grad students can I begin to believe any of them ever get lucky. In college a slide rule & a pocket protector were certain signs of virginity.

[oldognewtrick]

Originally Posted by blucher

In fact only because these guys are grad students can I begin to believe any of them ever get lucky. In college a slide rule & a pocket protector were certain signs of virginity.

Funniest thing I've seen in a while.

[teaberryeagle]

E-mail info. ........

Direct Deposit for SS Checks


ON JANUARY 1 ST 2012, THE GOVERNMENT IS REQUIRING EVERYONE TO HAVE
DIRECT DEPOSIT FOR SS CHECKS.
WONDER WHY?
1% tax on all bank transactions HR4646

Watch for this AFTER November elections; remember this BEFORE you VOTE
in case you think Obama's looking out for your best interest.

1% tax on all bank transactions HR 4646

This government just cannot think of enough ways to hurt the American
people! I sure hope this dies!!!!!

FORWARD THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW!

1% tax on all bank transactions HR 4646 - ANOTHER NEW OBAMA TAX SLIPPED
IN WHILE WE WERE ASLEEP. Checked this on snopes, it's true! Check out HR
4646.

President Obama's finance team is recommending a one percent (1%)
transaction fee (TAX). Obama's plan is to sneak it in after the November
elections to keep it under the radar.

This is a 1% tax on all transactions at any financial institution -
banks, credit unions, savings and loans, etc. Any deposit you make, or
even a transfer within your account, will have a 1% tax charged. ~If
your paycheck or your social security or whatever is direct deposit, it
will get a 1% tax charged for the transaction. ~If your paycheck is
$1000, then you will pay Obama $10 just for the privilege of depositing
your paycheck in your bank. Even if you hand carry your paycheck or any
>check into your bank for a deposit, 1% tax will be charged. ~You receive
a $5,000 stock dividend from your broker, Obama takes $50 just to allow
you to deposit that check in the bank.. ~If you take $1,000 cash to
deposit at your bank, 1% tax will be charged.

Mind you, this is from the man who promised that, if you make under
$250,000 per year, you will not see one penny of new tax. Keep your eyes
and ears open, you will be amazed at what you learn about this guy's
under-the-table moves to increase the number of ways you are taxed.

Oh, and by the way, if you receive a refund from the IRS next year and
you have it direct deposited or you walk in to deposit that check, you
guessed it. You will pay a 1% charge of that money just for putting it
in your bank. Remember, any money, cash, check or whatever, no matter
where it came from, you will pay a 1% fee if you put it in the bank.

Some will say, oh well, it's just 1%. Are you kidding me? It's a 1% tax
increase across the board. Remember, once the tax is there, they can
also raise it at will. And if anyone protests, they will just say,
"Oh,that's not really a tax, it's a user fee"! Think this is no big
deal? Go back and look at the transactions you made on one year's
banking statements. Then add the total of all those transactions and
deduct 1%. Still think it's no big deal?

" A government big enough to give you everything you want is also big
enough to take away everything you have." - Barry Goldwater

[Eddie_T]

Originally Posted by blucher

In college a slide rule & a pocket protector were certain signs of virginity.

We now know two things about blucher;
1. He's neither a scientist nor engineer.
2. He didn't attend UTK.

[teaberryeagle]

Too good not to share! This puts it into perspective!




For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who
do not understand, no explanation is possible.Priceless,



Tax System explained in beer


Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for
all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes,
it would go something like this

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the
arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are
all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your
daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes
so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.
But wha t abou t the other six men - the paying customers? How could they
divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that
from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end
up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would
be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he
proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 ( 22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four
continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men
began to compare their savings.

'I only got a dollar out of the $ 20,'declared the sixth man. He
pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'

'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a
dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!'

'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10
back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'

'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't
get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine
sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the
bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money
between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is
how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the
most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for
being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might
start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia


The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

[blucher]

..............

FORWARD THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW!

1% tax on all bank transactions HR 4646 - ANOTHER NEW OBAMA TAX SLIPPED
IN WHILE WE WERE ASLEEP. Checked this on snopes, it's true! Check out HR4646.

H.R. 4646 - Obama's 1% Transaction Tax - Urban Legends

Email: Obama Plans 1% Transaction Tax
Netlore Archive
By David Emery, About.com Guide

H.R. 4646: Email claims President Obama's finance team plans to impose a 1% transaction tax on all transactions at financial institutions, including bank deposits.

Description: Email rumor
Circulating since: Aug. 2010
Status: Mostly false

Analysis: Quite misleading. It's true (as of this writing) that there's a bill in the House of Representatives, the Debt Free America Act (H.R. 1125), which would impose a one percent tax on certain financial transactions if passed, and it's also true that the bill was introduced by a Democrat, Rep. Chaka Fattah of Pennsylvania (who introduced more or less the same legislation in 2010 as H.R. 4646).

However, the legislation has zero co-sponsors, nor has it ever been acknowledged, let alone endorsed or supported, by anyone in the Obama administration.

Moreover, contrary to what is repeatedly claimed in the email, under the proposed legislation personal bank deposits would not be subject to subject to the tax. Section 4501(b)(2) of the current version of the bill reads as follows:

EXCEPTIONS- The term ?specified transaction? shall not include--

(A) any transfer between accounts of the taxpayer, and

(B) any deposit into a personal account of an individual.

Like all previous iterations of the Debt Free America Act, the 2011 version isn't expected to be voted on, let alone passed by Congress.

Learn the Truth about H.R. 4646

Learn the Truth about H.R. 4646
An internet rumor has been circulating that claims that I introduced a bill titled H.R. 4646 along with Senator Tom Harkin and that it would levy a 1 percent tax on every financial transaction including credit card transactions and even social security deposits. It also claims to be supported by the non-partisan factchecking website Snopes.com

This is email is false. I do not support and have never supported this legislation. H.R. 4646 was introduced in 2010 by Rep. Chaka Fattah of Pennsylvania, and has no cosponsors.

Hoax e-mails run gamut from products to politics
Hoax e-mails run gamut from products to politics -- here's how to check them out: Plain Dealing | cleveland.com

The other e-mail Nicoloff questioned claims that a 1 percent tax on all banking transactions is "another new Obama tax slipped in while we were asleep." The copy Nicoloff received asserts "Checked this on Snopes, it's true!"
Snopes.com, a site that researches urban legends, in fact rates the e-mail as a "mixture" of fact and fiction. HR 4646 exists, the site says, but its passage is hardly imminent. The bill has only one sponsor and has languished in committee since its introduction in February.
PolitiFact, investigating a variant of the same hoax, wrote "H.R. 4646 had no support — and certainly not from Obama's "finance team.'"
There's plenty in this world to rail about without feeding the myth machine.