SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: tejek who wrote (737523)9/6/2013 1:25:40 PM
From: bentway  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1578704
 
Texas also has no income tax. But. sales taxes are high, as are local property taxes. All pay, just through different methods. Income tax is less regressive than others.



To: tejek who wrote (737523)9/6/2013 3:26:29 PM
From: Tenchusatsu2 Recommendations

Recommended By
i-node
Jorj X Mckie

  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1578704
 
Ted,
I don't mind paying taxes if I feel like I am getting back a level of service commensurate with the amount of taxes I am paying. I feel that's true of WA state.
Exactly.

Now consider how much people pay in federal taxes, including SS and Medicare. Are we getting a level of service commensurate with the amount of taxes we're paying? Judging from the approval numbers, definitely not.
How is paying lots of taxes being conservative?
Conservatives believe in flatter taxes. Sales taxes and property taxes would qualify.

Liberals believe in progressive taxes. Works great until those you are trying to tax figure out how to dodge them.

Flatter taxes by nature are harder to dodge.

Tenchusatsu



To: tejek who wrote (737523)9/6/2013 4:16:50 PM
From: Brumar89  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1578704
 
Getting benefit from your tax $: An American Crisis: Fat LesbiansPosted on | September 6, 2013 | 25 Comments



Why are lesbians fat? Or, why are fat women lesbians? Is correlation causation? This profound scientific mystery demands an answer, and you can’t have science without a federal research grant:

The federal government has spent $2.2 million studying why three quarters of lesbians are obese despite sequestration-mandated budget cuts that critics warned could “delay progress in medical breakthroughs.”
The National Institutes of Health awarded an additional $682,873 to Brigham and Women’s Hospital for the study on July 17. The project had received previous grants of $778,622 in 2011, and $741,378 in 2012. Total funding has reached $2,202,873.
The project has survived budget cuts due to sequestration, which the NIH warned would “delay progress in medical breakthroughs.” . . .
“Obesity is one of the most critical public health issues affecting the U.S. today,” the grant’s “public health relevance” statement reads. . . .
“It is now well-established that women of minority sexual orientation are disproportionately affected by the obesity epidemic, with nearly three-quarters of adult lesbians overweight or obese, compared to half of heterosexual women,” the project’s abstract states. “In stark contrast, among men, heterosexual males have nearly double the risk of obesity compared to gay males.”

Wait a minute — both lesbians and heterosexual males have obesity issues, compared to either straight women or gay men?

EXPOSURE TO VAGINA CAUSES OBESITY!

The science is settled. That will be $2.2 million, please.

theothermccain.com