[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"How Israel Used Spies, Smuggled Drones and AI to Stun and Hobble Iran"

There hasn’T been ... a single updaTe To This siTe --- since I joined.

"This Is Not What Authoritarianism Looks Like"

America Erupts… ICE Raids Takeover The Streets

AC/DC- Riff Raff + Go Down [VH1 Uncut, July 5, 1996]

Why is Peter Schiff calling Bitcoin a ‘giant cult’ and how does this impact market sentiment?

Esso Your Butt Buddy Horseshit jacks off to that shit

"The Addled Activist Mind"

"Don’t Stop with Harvard"

"Does the Biden Cover-Up Have Two Layers?"

"Pete Rose, 'Shoeless' Joe Reinstated by MLB, Eligible for HOF"

"'Major Breakthrough': Here Are the Details on the China Trade Deal"

Freepers Still Love war

Parody ... Jump / Trump --- van Halen jump

"The Democrat Meltdown Continues"

"Yes, We Need Deportations Without Due Process"

"Trump's Tariff Play Smart, Strategic, Working"

"Leftists Make Desperate Attempt to Discredit Photo of Abrego Garcia's MS-13 Tattoos. Here Are Receipts"

"Trump Administration Freezes $2 Billion After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands"on After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands

"Doctors Committing Insurance Fraud to Conceal Trans Procedures, Texas Children’s Whistleblower Testifies"

"Left Using '8647' Symbol for Violence Against Trump, Musk"

KawasakiÂ’s new rideable robohorse is straight out of a sci-fi novel

"Trade should work for America, not rule it"

"The Stakes Couldn’t Be Higher in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Race – What’s at Risk for the GOP"

"How Trump caught big-government fans in their own trap"

‘Are You Prepared for Violence?’

Greek Orthodox Archbishop gives President Trump a Cross, tells him "Make America Invincible"

"Trump signs executive order eliminating the Department of Education!!!"

"If AOC Is the Democratic Future, the Party Is Even Worse Off Than We Think"

"Ending EPA Overreach"

Closest Look Ever at How Pyramids Were Built

Moment the SpaceX crew Meets Stranded ISS Crew

The Exodus Pharaoh EXPLAINED!

Did the Israelites Really Cross the Red Sea? Stunning Evidence of the Location of Red Sea Crossing!

Are we experiencing a Triumph of Orthodoxy?

Judge Napolitano with Konstantin Malofeev (Moscow, Russia)

"Trump Administration Cancels Most USAID Programs, Folds Others into State Department"

Introducing Manus: The General AI Agent

"Chinese Spies in Our Military? Straight to Jail"

Any suggestion that the USA and NATO are "Helping" or have ever helped Ukraine needs to be shot down instantly

"Real problem with the Palestinians: Nobody wants them"

ACDC & The Rolling Stones - Rock Me Baby

Magnus Carlsen gives a London System lesson!

"The Democrats Are Suffering Through a Drought of Generational Talent"

7 Tactics Of The Enemy To Weaken Your Faith

Strange And Biblical Events Are Happening

Every year ... BusiesT casino gambling day -- in Las Vegas

Trump’s DOGE Plan Is Legally Untouchable—Elon Musk Holds the Scalpel

Palestinians: What do you think of the Trump plan for Gaza?

What Happens Inside Gaza’s Secret Tunnels? | Unpacked


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Chris Christie's big Presidential idea: torch Social Security
Source: LA Times
URL Source: http://www.latimes.com/business/hil ... tial-idea-20150414-column.html
Published: Apr 14, 2015
Author: Michael Hiltzik
Post Date: 2015-04-14 18:56:23 by Willie Green
Keywords: None
Views: 3402
Comments: 33

If there's any immutable rule in politics, it should be: beware of candidates who try to be "bold" merely for the sake of looking bold.

Chris Christie, trying desperately to keep his Presidential hopes alive, wants to look bold, and he's not above throwing millions of elderly Americans under his campaign bus to do so. That's the only conceivable explanation for the New Jersey Republican governor's misinformed and dangerous proposals to "fix" Social Security.

In his big campaign speech delivered Tuesday in New Hampshire, Christie showed that he doesn't understand what Social Security is for, why it exists, how it's funded, or who gets benefits and why.

His major proposals are to cut off Social Security for high-earning recipients, and to raise the retirement age. Neither would significantly improve Social Security's fiscal condition, and raising the retirement age might even be damaging.

More on that in a moment.

Click for Full Text!


Gov. Christie Fails to Report Income,
Avoids $152,000 in Taxes

Tuesday, 14 Apr 2015 06:04 PM
By Mark Lagerkvist, Watchdog.org

Gov. Chris Christie failed to report as income or pay taxes on $380,000 in expense allowances he received from the state, according to a New Jersey Watchdog examination of Treasury data and the governor’s tax returns.

By not declaring the allowances on their joint returns, Christie and his wife, Mary Pat, avoided roughly $152,000 in federal income taxes over four years.

Despite an exchange of emails, Christie’s press office did not offer comment.

In addition to his $175,000 a year salary, Christie gets a $95,000 a year expense account. In the state budget, it’s described as an "allowance to the governor of funds not otherwise appropriated, for official reception on behalf of the state, operations of an official residence, and other expenses."

The governor is not required to provide receipts, refund surpluses, or provide information to the state on how the money is used. But failure to report a "non-accountable" allowance to the Internal Revenue Service is a different matter.

Contrary to IRS rules, Christie did not declare the allowances as income on federal returns for 2010, 2011, 2012, or 2013. The 2014 return is due Wednesday, but Christie typically receives six-month filing extensions.

The allowance is a New Jersey tradition that began in the mid-1970s. The original purpose was to provide funds to the state’s chief executive to run the governor’s mansion, now at Drumthwacket in Princeton, and hold official events there.

Click for rest of story at NewsMax


Poster Comment:

As if the bridge scandal isn't bad enough, Governor LardAss is a tax cheat who thinks senior citizens should have to keep working past their retirement years.

What an asshat.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 29.

#2. To: Willie Green (#0)

Want to save Social Security? Then tax all income with it. It goes into the general fund and is spent. So treat it as a general revenue raiser and hit dollar earned with it, a flat tax if there ever was one. Don't just hit wages below a certain level, and leave really massive wages without it.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-04-14   20:05:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Vicomte13 (#2)

" Want to save Social Security? "

Lets also do the following:

No pay in, no pay out

No use those funds for general use

Stoner  posted on  2015-04-14   20:57:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: Stoner (#3)

Lets also do the following:

No pay in, no pay out

No use those funds for general use

I dislike accounting games - pretending that the Income Tax is different from Social Security is different from Medicare is different from gas excises...that money is "earmarked" for certain things.

All that does is create a lack of transparency which then allows politicians and government accountants to run riot.

I prefer replacing ALL taxes and gamesmanship about taxes with one simple flat gross wealth tax, at a fixed rate, with no exceptions for anything, not even one. Applied universally.

Put the money all in the general fund, and then apportion it to expenses without pretending that some money is different from other money. It's not. When they say it is, it's a lie and it always has to be a lie: money is utterly fungible. There is no such thing as a lockbox. It's a trick.

I dislike tricks.

We're not going to go to a flat gross wealth tax. But if Social Security and Medicare tax hit ALL income, it would cease being regressive, and is flat and has no deductions.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-04-15   11:27:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: Vicomte13 (#7)

"with one simple flat gross wealth tax"

The tax on existing wealth has already been paid since that wealth was acquired with after-tax income.

Are you're saying that you want a tax on all new wealth? Think you can raise enough money?

misterwhite  posted on  2015-04-15   11:41:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: misterwhite (#9)

The tax on existing wealth has already been paid since that wealth was acquired with after-tax income.

Are you're saying that you want a tax on all new wealth? Think you can raise enough money?

No. Tax EXISTING wealth. All of it. Old. New.

An income tax taxes NEW wealth. And is steep.

I do not think that work should be encouraged, and rapaciously taxed, while old stored up wealth is immune from taxes.

Tax ALL of it, at one low rate, and stop the nonsense of dozens of different taxes at different rates, all just to grab another piece of what somebody has.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-04-16   16:14:53 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Vicomte13 (#14)

"while old stored up wealth is immune from taxes."

And by "old, stored-up wealth" you mean savings and investments. You're saying that people who set aside money for the future or risked their money by investing it should be penalized.

Whereas the people who spent all of their income like drunken sailors with no regard for their future or the future of this country should get a pass.

misterwhite  posted on  2015-04-16   16:37:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: misterwhite (#15)

And by "old, stored-up wealth" you mean savings and investments. You're saying that people who set aside money for the future or risked their money by investing it should be penalized.

Penalized? No. Just taxed on it.

Right now, people who work and whose wealth is in the form of wages are penalized. But people who have accumulated wealth see it rise in wealth from year to year, without taxes, with taxation delayed.

Stop privileging old wealth over wages. Tax EVERYTHING, it's all wealth and a dollar is a dollar. Tax all of it at about 2%. Do away with the rest of the taxes.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-04-16   16:59:12 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Vicomte13 (#16)

Right now, people who work and whose wealth is in the form of wages are penalized. But people who have accumulated wealth see it rise in wealth from year to year, without taxes, with taxation delayed.

Stop privileging old wealth over wages. Tax EVERYTHING, it's all wealth and a dollar is a dollar. Tax all of it at about 2%. Do away with the rest of the taxes.

Let me get this straight...

You want to tax wealth which probably was taxed at some other time again because it is stored wealth. If it is taxed all at once, then you won't have to tax it again, correct.

If that is the case, then what if the GrubberMint spends up all of this "tax" money? Does it go through another round of 2% tax on all stored wealth? Also, this does give a pass to people who does not have stored wealth to tax. That means that the "wealth", or wages as you call it, belongs to the employers at the time, so the employers will be the ones to get taxed. Do the workers see this "tax" reflected on their paychecks?

Currently we have a system of "wealth transference" taxation, which means that taxes to not incur until money is transferred due to an economic transaction. Do we do away with economic transactional based taxes?

Help me out here, I am nowhere near the financial expert you are...

TheFireBert  posted on  2015-04-16   18:05:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: TheFireBert (#17)

"If it is taxed all at once, then you won't have to tax it again, correct."

Nope. He wants to tax your accumulated wealth at 2% every year. If your wealth is in fixed assets (home, car, boat, etc.), good luck finding the cash every year to pay your tax.

As with the inheritance (death) tax, you'll probably have to sell off your assets in order to come up with the money.

(They did a wealth tax in Europe and it failed miserably. And it was just a supplemental tax.)

misterwhite  posted on  2015-04-16   18:39:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: misterwhite (#20)

Nope. He wants to tax your accumulated wealth at 2% every year. If your wealth is in fixed assets (home, car, boat, etc.), good luck finding the cash every year to pay your tax.

Which is an idea dreamed up by Leftards during the Clinton administration.

CZ82  posted on  2015-04-16   18:49:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: (#22)

You all DO realize that the property tax on your house is a wealth tax.

You pay taxes on your income. And then you pay taxes, every year, on your house. Year after year.

And taxes on houses average about 1.25%.

So therefore we should remove all property tax, because it's a tax on wealth, right?

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-04-17   8:38:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: Vicomte13 (#23)

"So therefore we should remove all property tax, because it's a tax on wealth, right?"

No. We should remove it because it's unfair. Why should property owners be singled out to pay all the costs for local education, police, fire, ambulance, community center, library, etc.?

misterwhite  posted on  2015-04-17   14:19:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: misterwhite (#24)

Why should property owners be singled out to pay all the costs for local education, police, fire, ambulance, community center, library, etc.?

Perhaps because they receive the benefits?

Jameson  posted on  2015-04-17   14:41:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: Jameson (#25) (Edited)

Perhaps because they receive the benefits?

Is it considered proportional, or is it considered socially just?

Owning a house is not always a sign of wealth. It just means that the owners created a way to keep what they paid for, rather than to continue paying someone while retaining zero value in return.

In states where property tax is the only tax available, citizens who do not own property contribute a lot less to their own burden. I am not for causing more of a burden on those who do not have the same means, but at least they could contribute more that near-zero for their own benefit. I found it ridiculous that when I was making under $30K and married, I rarely paid enough tax, state or federal, to even say I was contributing. Without the state sales tax, it would have been closer to being paid to live. If I were using public transport and didn't own a vehicle, I know I would have been a leech on society, even though I was "paying taxes"...

TheFireBert  posted on  2015-04-17   17:06:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: TheFireBert (#27)

In states where property tax is the only tax available, citizens who do not own property contribute a lot less to their own burden.

"...citizens who do not own property contribute a lot less to their own burden..."

I would argue that their landlord collects their proportional share of his property tax...

Jameson  posted on  2015-04-20   8:01:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 29.

        There are no replies to Comment # 29.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 29.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com