FCS Football | Message Board | News
https://www.championshipsubdivision.com/forums/
https://www.championshipsubdivision.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=42744
Do you even read the articles you post..?travelinman67 wrote:The clearest sign of ignorance...
...professing one's immortality.
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/23751 ... -rid-of-us
Unbeknownst to many, some state tax agencies are already handling collections for the IRS.
Don't pull that shit here, cut and copy...Chizzang wrote:Do you even read the articles you post..?travelinman67 wrote:The clearest sign of ignorance...
...professing one's immortality.
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/23751 ... -rid-of-us
Unbeknownst to many, some state tax agencies are already handling collections for the IRS.
it seems more and more like you don't
...try again, Troll.March 31, 2015 - 03:55 PM EDT
IRS chief to GOP: You can't abolish us
BY BERNIE BECKER
Something we agree on.kalm wrote:I think we should take all 110,000 IRS agents and put them on the border.
travelinman67 wrote:Don't pull that shit here, cut and copy...Chizzang wrote:
Do you even read the articles you post..?
it seems more and more like you don't
...try again, Troll.March 31, 2015 - 03:55 PM EDT
IRS chief to GOP: You can't abolish us
BY BERNIE BECKER
"Unemployed" has a nice ring to it!Chizzang wrote:travelinman67 wrote:
Don't pull that shit here, cut and copy...
...try again, Troll.
Yeah but he's not saying what you're implying..
He agrees the IRA can indeed be abolished - as the article says - he goes on to say that fter being abolished you'd just have to call the people responsible for collecting taxes by another name...
It's like Baldy calling net neutrality the Obamacare of the internet in the other thread. People are not only listening to him but believing his every word.travelinman67 wrote:Something we agree on.kalm wrote:I think we should take all 110,000 IRS agents and put them on the border.
But what do you do with all those private sector tax attorneys and CPA's?ASUG8 wrote:Simplify the tax code and you need only a fraction of the bureaucracy.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiRGRvE_Wqg[/youtube]kalm wrote:But what do you do with all those private sector tax attorneys and CPA's?ASUG8 wrote:Simplify the tax code and you need only a fraction of the bureaucracy.
Q: What's a busload of attorneys going off a cliff into the ocean?kalm wrote:But what do you do with all those private sector tax attorneys and CPA's?ASUG8 wrote:Simplify the tax code and you need only a fraction of the bureaucracy.
kalm wrote:It's like Baldy calling net neutrality the Obamacare of the internet in the other thread. People are not only listening to him but believing his every word.travelinman67 wrote:
Something we agree on.
The Cruzing down of America...
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/03/cruz-i ... rs-agents/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
They become Financial Planners. With the absence of government predators foraging on American wealth, saving money will no longer be an endangered practice.kalm wrote:But what do you do with all those private sector tax attorneys and CPA's?ASUG8 wrote:Simplify the tax code and you need only a fraction of the bureaucracy.
Every CPA I know (and I know A LOT of CPA's) hate, absolutely HATE, doing individual income tax returns. Then again, not many CPA's do individual income tax returns. That's why they hire accountants.travelinman67 wrote:They become Financial Planners. With the absence of government predators foraging on American wealth, saving money will no longer be an endangered practice.kalm wrote:
But what do you do with all those private sector tax attorneys and CPA's?
Oh wow…you're going to really defend this...Baldy wrote:kalm wrote:
It's like Baldy calling net neutrality the Obamacare of the internet in the other thread. People are not only listening to him but believing his every word.
The Cruzing down of America...
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/03/cruz-i ... rs-agents/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
You ain't to brite sometimes.
It's just ironic that many of the same people who believe consolidating our choices in health care providers is the best thing possible, but are hell bent against doing the same thing with internet service providers.
So how is net neutrality (or whatever this thing is called) not Obamacaring the interwebz?
I don't blame them. Why spend 4 years undergrad followed by a grueling exam and ongoing education to do what they teach a bunch of newbies in 2 months at H&R Block every year?Baldy wrote:Every CPA I know (and I know A LOT of CPA's) hate, absolutely HATE, doing individual income tax returns. Then again, not many CPA's do individual income tax returns. That's why they hire accountants.travelinman67 wrote:
They become Financial Planners. With the absence of government predators foraging on American wealth, saving money will no longer be an endangered practice.
"The Life of klam"kalm wrote:Oh wow…you're going to really defend this...Baldy wrote:
You ain't to brite sometimes.
It's just ironic that many of the same people who believe consolidating our choices in health care providers is the best thing possible, but are hell bent against doing the same thing with internet service providers.
So how is net neutrality (or whatever this thing is called) not Obamacaring the interwebz?
Let's start simple. Net neutrality doesn't fine consumers for not purchasing internet access. Net neutrality doesn't slow down internet access. Most people can afford to go without internet access. There is no middle man (insurance) between internet providers and their customers creating an extra layer of profit taking and bureaucracy.
But I'm sure you'll keep the hits coming!!!
You've bought the provider/Thune gift wrapped story hook line and sinker.Baldy wrote:"The Life of klam"kalm wrote:
Oh wow…you're going to really defend this...
Let's start simple. Net neutrality doesn't fine consumers for not purchasing internet access. Net neutrality doesn't slow down internet access. Most people can afford to go without internet access. There is no middle man (insurance) between internet providers and their customers creating an extra layer of profit taking and bureaucracy.
But I'm sure you'll keep the hits coming!!!
Wants the government to guide and run his life from cradle to grave. Everything from his internet access to his health care.
Under net neutrality, you can bet that internet access will be more expensive for the consumers who do purchase it. Yeah, net neutrality doesn't slow down internet access, just like making all red lights green doesn't slow down traffic on the streets. Most can afford to go without internet access...for now. Those days will be coming to an end sooner rather than later. Just like the IRS has stepped between the patient and their health care provider under Obamacare, the FCC is now the extra layer between between the consumer and your internet provider.
Is there any part of your life where you can function without government guidance?
As I said, you make me laugh.
I got one hell of a chuckle with your rants about Greenwald, Snowden, NSA, government surveillance blah blah blah. On the other hand, you are falling over yourself to willingly hand over your most personal private medical information to the same government under a single payer system.
Boggling
Thune?kalm wrote:You've bought the provider/Thune gift wrapped story hook line and sinker.Baldy wrote: "The Life of klam"
Wants the government to guide and run his life from cradle to grave. Everything from his internet access to his health care.
Under net neutrality, you can bet that internet access will be more expensive for the consumers who do purchase it. Yeah, net neutrality doesn't slow down internet access, just like making all red lights green doesn't slow down traffic on the streets. Most can afford to go without internet access...for now. Those days will be coming to an end sooner rather than later. Just like the IRS has stepped between the patient and their health care provider under Obamacare, the FCC is now the extra layer between between the consumer and your internet provider.
Is there any part of your life where you can function without government guidance?
As I said, you make me laugh.
I got one hell of a chuckle with your rants about Greenwald, Snowden, NSA, government surveillance blah blah blah. On the other hand, you are falling over yourself to willingly hand over your most personal private medical information to the same government under a single payer system.
Boggling
Capitalism is great when you have sensible regulation like considering the internet a public utility. Obamacare on the other hand, I'm not a fan of.
Government regulation is a pain in the ass, something I have to deal with daily, and often times over the top. This is a liberal soft spot. But government is also a necessary evil at times...to protect the consumer, competition, AND the market.
Failure to recognize that is a conservative soft spot.
But by all means, keep on truckin'!
So you, me, and Paine agree that government is a necessary evil. Excellent!Baldy wrote:Thune?kalm wrote:
You've bought the provider/Thune gift wrapped story hook line and sinker.
Capitalism is great when you have sensible regulation like considering the internet a public utility. Obamacare on the other hand, I'm not a fan of.
Government regulation is a pain in the ass, something I have to deal with daily, and often times over the top. This is a liberal soft spot. But government is also a necessary evil at times...to protect the consumer, competition, AND the market.
Failure to recognize that is a conservative soft spot.
But by all means, keep on truckin'!
No, it's looking at what government has fucked up over the years with it's "oversight". The USPS, Fannie, Freddie and Sallie, Amtrack, 60% of the calls to the IRS go unanswered, the VA, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
What you fail to realize is that the Conks know that the government is a necessary evil. There is a reason the Constitution puts severe limitations on government, and gives the government only a few enumerated powers. The founding fathers (even Thomas Paine) knew then what Conks know now:
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
--Thomas Paine
Then you don't know Paine very well.kalm wrote:So you, me, and Paine agree that government is a necessary evil. Excellent!Baldy wrote: Thune?
No, it's looking at what government has fucked up over the years with it's "oversight". The USPS, Fannie, Freddie and Sallie, Amtrack, 60% of the calls to the IRS go unanswered, the VA, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
What you fail to realize is that the Conks know that the government is a necessary evil. There is a reason the Constitution puts severe limitations on government, and gives the government only a few enumerated powers. The founding fathers (even Thomas Paine) knew then what Conks know now:
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
--Thomas Paine
The only disagreement is whether Comcast is better suited at maintaining an open internet and market competition or the government. Yes there are numerous examples of where government regulation has failed. And there are also examples of deregulation or privatization failure. The very best argument you could make is what happens if the regulators are captured by corporate interests as has happened in other industries. If that's your assertion, then welcome aboard the campaign finance/corporate personhood train.
The internet is a part of the commons and I'm guessing Paine would have little problem with government protecting it's use and access.
Oh yes…the FCC is a brutal and crushing monopoly! Those poor telecommunications companies suffering under that evil yoke!Baldy wrote:Then you don't know Paine very well.kalm wrote:
So you, me, and Paine agree that government is a necessary evil. Excellent!
The only disagreement is whether Comcast is better suited at maintaining an open internet and market competition or the government. Yes there are numerous examples of where government regulation has failed. And there are also examples of deregulation or privatization failure. The very best argument you could make is what happens if the regulators are captured by corporate interests as has happened in other industries. If that's your assertion, then welcome aboard the campaign finance/corporate personhood train.
The internet is a part of the commons and I'm guessing Paine would have little problem with government protecting it's use and access.
The private sector is always better at maintaining competition. The FCC is in the monopoly business through it's licensing of TV and radio, frequency and wireless broadband sales, etc., but you want them to be the regulator of market competition in broadband internet? Really?