The election may be over but...

The election may be over but a person can always show their feelings when it comes to your wallet. Regardless of which party you voted for you can show your approval or dislike of the election results by purchasing from Companies that are established in states that you feel are inline with your values and where you think the country should go. I would even suggest that you send companies a quick letter or email expressing your choices and why you are choosing to shop there or no longer shop there.

I can't vote so I am along for the ride but I can sure choose where to shop for my parts. I've seen a lot of fighting and bitterness this past week and it has not been good for anybody. This idea won't change the outcome of the election but maybe it will bring happiness to some people that are still upset over the results.

Peoples feelings have not yet begun to be shown as many have no idea whats just around the corner, If anyone is planning a mad purchase with your tax refund, be prepared for a significantly lower amount of return.

IDIeselman wrote:Peoples feelings have not yet begun to be shown as many have no idea whats just around the corner, If anyone is planning a mad purchase with your tax refund, be prepared for a significantly lower amount of return.

If you get one...

It doesn't matter, the zombies are coming.

IDIeselman wrote:Peoples feelings have not yet begun to be shown as many have no idea whats just around the corner, If anyone is planning a mad purchase with your tax refund, be prepared for a significantly lower amount of return.

why would anyone one return be less ?
only reason I know of is they worked at a lower paying job (ok 2nd) or didnt work full time/hours in per avr. week

because the fiscal cliff we face, the increase the debt ceiling to continue to pay huge amounts of money to people and companies doing nothing for the major good, is going to require the government sucking more money out of those that attempt to make ends meet.

This years tax calculation may be the last one that sees "returns" for almost anyone.

From what I've been hearing for about three years now is the tax raises that have been discussed will effect those making OVER $250,000 a year. If this IS NOT agreed on by the party that 'rules' the House by Dec 31 (and that's what they are saying) then people that make UNDER $250,000 a year will HAVE TO pay more. I can't understand why some people can not understand this??? If the party that 'rules' the House would quit being so stubborn and pigheaded, people that make UNDER $250,000 a year won't be effected. OUR President wants to let the bush tax cuts run out on those making OVER $250,000 a year and let the bush tax cut stay in effect for those making UNDER $250,000 a year! How is this so hard to understand???
Maybe the fox news network is not explaining this well enough?

I'll keep my mouth shut!

Ross Perot!

This should not be looked at as "who can afford to pay more taxes". The real problem is government spending beyond their means. It's the same problem most people in financial trouble have. There is a huge amount of waste and fraud in the budget every year because the politicians in both parties can't seem to cut the pork and fraud out of the amount of money they spend. The politicians love to have us bicker and whine about who isn't paying their fair share because then we wont make them fix the real problem.

10% flat tax across the board. Free loaders to billionaires

I got a shinny new QF carb today..........


and for the record Ford still cant build or buy a radiator that dont leak.........2 to replace in 6.7s when i get back, thank god they are out of warranty.........

schmitty wrote:This should not be looked at as "who can afford to pay more taxes". The real problem is government spending beyond their means. It's the same problem most people in financial trouble have. There is a huge amount of waste and fraud in the budget every year because the politicians in both parties can't seem to cut the pork and fraud out of the amount of money they spend. The politicians love to have us bicker and whine about who isn't paying their fair share because then we wont make them fix the real problem.

You are right, but this waste has been going on for quite a while. It's not just this administration or the one before it. The facts are the President does not want to raise taxes on 97% of small business and 98% of the middle class. I just listened to his address. That is EXACTLY what he said. No matter what anyone wants to make of it "that is what he just said". He wants to let the bush tax cuts run out on 2 per cent on the taxpayers and 3% of the businesses and let the bush tax cuts CONTINUE on the other 97 the 98 per cent of us. As far as I can surmise that is about 99% of the people on this forum.

kim wrote:10% flat tax across the board. Free loaders to billionaires

Or maybe 15%, that way everyone pays their fair share

blown86hallet wrote:

I'll keep my mouth shut!

Ross Perot!

I voted for him once

I dont have a problem with paying my taxes but i want the top to pay the same. All the free shit is a problem but nothing compared to the waste on wars in other countries.

Personally, I think dropping federal income taxes altogether would be better.

A federal sales tax would be used in its place. The rich folks that liberal douches are always complaining about(you know, the 2% that pays something like 85% of all federal income tax) would pay more, because they buy more expensive things. Drug dealers, criminals, people working under the table, and others that now pay nothing, would have to pay too. You or I would pay based on how much we consume. Kinda like gasoline tax. Think how much we could save by getting rid of the IRS.

Jess

Mustang-junky wrote:Personally, I think dropping federal income taxes altogether would be better.

A federal sales tax would be used in its place. The rich folks that liberal douches are always complaining about(you know, the 2% that pays something like 85% of all federal income tax) would pay more, because they buy more expensive things. Drug dealers, criminals, people working under the table, and others that now pay nothing, would have to pay too. You or I would pay based on how much we consume. Kinda like gasoline tax. Think how much we could save by getting rid of the IRS.

Jess

Absolutely! That would do away with tax free income.

IRS would still be needed to keep an eye on the sales taxes. But they could do it with a few 100,000 less employees.

Curt wrote:

Mustang-junky wrote:Personally, I think dropping federal income taxes altogether would be better.

A federal sales tax would be used in its place. The rich folks that liberal douches are always complaining about(you know, the 2% that pays something like 85% of all federal income tax) would pay more, because they buy more expensive things. Drug dealers, criminals, people working under the table, and others that now pay nothing, would have to pay too. You or I would pay based on how much we consume. Kinda like gasoline tax. Think how much we could save by getting rid of the IRS.

Jess

Absolutely! That would do away with tax free income.

IRS would still be needed to keep an eye on the sales taxes. But they could do it with a few 100,000 less employees.

And 100,000 less CPA's

sorry!

GT300TD wrote: From what I've been hearing for about three years now is the tax raises that have been discussed will effect those making OVER $250,000 a year. If this IS NOT agreed on by the party that 'rules' the House by Dec 31 (and that's what they are saying) then people that make UNDER $250,000 a year will HAVE TO pay more. I can't understand why some people can not understand this??? If the party that 'rules' the House would quit being so stubborn and pigheaded, people that make UNDER $250,000 a year won't be effected. OUR President wants to let the bush tax cuts run out on those making OVER $250,000 a year and let the bush tax cut stay in effect for those making UNDER $250,000 a year! How is this so hard to understand???

Maybe because people over $250,000 are sick and tired of carrying the tax burden for 99% of the country. I'm not against raising taxes but be fair about it. Why is that so hard to understand???

jasonf wrote:

GT300TD wrote: From what I've been hearing for about three years now is the tax raises that have been discussed will effect those making OVER $250,000 a year. If this IS NOT agreed on by the party that 'rules' the House by Dec 31 (and that's what they are saying) then people that make UNDER $250,000 a year will HAVE TO pay more. I can't understand why some people can not understand this??? If the party that 'rules' the House would quit being so stubborn and pigheaded, people that make UNDER $250,000 a year won't be effected. OUR President wants to let the bush tax cuts run out on those making OVER $250,000 a year and let the bush tax cut stay in effect for those making UNDER $250,000 a year! How is this so hard to understand???

Maybe because people over $250,000 are sick and tired of carrying the tax burden for 99% of the country. I'm not against raising taxes but be fair about it. Why is that so hard to understand???

Or the politicians could take pay-cuts for the good of the country

bigblok2000ranger wrote:I was talking with a long time customer yesterday who had to cut our services due to losing her job of 28 years when Mitt Romney bought controlling interest in the company she worked for then promptly sold the jobs overseas! 1500 people out of work!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


" full time job that sometimes I work 50-60 hours at and do not have time to get on here every night. "

Quote 2000 ranger.........from 460 ford.com

Seems you got alot of time to be here and talk about things you know little about.

i wish i could pay taxes on $251,000........................

oasis......

richter69 wrote:oasis......

camel toe......