diverborg

http://gawker.com/5968818/i-am-adam-lanzas-mother Thought this article was too well written and moving not to share. Pretty depressing read and perhaps can an at least help with some level of understanding.

Was not aware of this, thanks for clarifying. Makes me feel a little better. Pretty much makes my point pointless then, aside from the market consequences of perhaps discouraging investing.

As a small towner that has to travel to NYC several times a year for business, its a no-brainer to me. I can't imagine how bad it would suck to have live in that city for so many reasons. My total commute to work in a smaller town both ways combined is 20 minutes. I've got a 2,000 square foot house that I paid 120,000 for. Ten minute drive and I'm in the great wide open. I can buy a bottle of water less than $5. A Friday dinner date cost me only $30. I could go on and on. And I haven't even touched the "taxes" issue. There's no way my wage increase for living in that area could come close to compensating for the expense of living their. I've looked into it.

Just ponder this for a little while. Every single American in this country with a retirement acct will eventually be paying capital gains tax someday. Raising capital gains is going to make it more difficult for that middle class guy that busted his ass his whole life to make ends meet with what he's managed to scrape up by age 65. Raising capital gains will effect everyone. Not to mention it "could" discourage investing and saving which could cause a whole other slough of problems. I make roughly 90,000 a year. With all my deductions I pay around 10-15% federal rate (rough guess), assuming I was going to retire now, off of a little less income, and the kids are grown and house paid off, I'm going to be collecting about 75% of my income at 15% tax rate. Manageable, but if we decide to stick it to the capital gainers, the possibility of me retiring before I die, is decreasing rapidly depending on how crazy we get with the rates in the name of fairness. Everything you attempt to do will have collateral damage on the middle class. Attacking 1% of the population at the cost of everyone with a retirement acct on the basis of them not paying their fair share when those 1% already pay 40% of the taxes, just seems like a path we don't want to go down. I honestly think we both want the middle class to succeed Kallend, but don't punish me in an attempt to bring down someone that's done better than me. Now if the country decides to treat capital gains as a regular income tax below age 55 or something along those lines, I've got no problem with that. But even that will have a negative effect on investing. If we want growth, we need investors. That incentive to paying less taxes by investing your money is probably a big part of what will ensure that my acct has grown to a "retireable" figure by the time I hit that age. We all benefit from that. But just jacking up capital gains tax under the premise of the "rich need to pay more" is going to hurt a lot of people.

I would really like to learn your logic on this. So I guess if you don't know how to read King James English your doomed to hell huh?

I don't see anything self-righteous in your approach, and your original post was well-worth the read. Much respect. I agree with mblaster, my comment was that you seemed to be the real thing. respect for the comments That's the way I had assumed you meant it, but after re-reading my post, I thought I came across a little sel-righteous myself. Thanks for the kind words.

I disagree with your claim regarding the clergy. I agree with the latter, no rational discussion is possible with you because the rational mind is worldly and natural not spiritual. Are you saying that God doesn't want us to be rationall? God gave us a mind so we could rationalize things. I do believe faith in Him is just that "faith", but I don't find any fault in rationalizing your beliefs. I'm naturally a very rational and intellectual person, yet I believe in God. Also I do believe God speaks to us in many ways, and not always a voice in your head. Sometimes voices in your head are just voices in your head, and sometimes what you hear isn't always from God. If you think God is talking to you, then you need to run that through a course of filters before spouting it as God's word. 1. Is this something Jesus would do (scripturally accurate) 2. Is it wise 3. Is it in Love 4. Will kittens die if I do this, etc, etc.. BTW, God told me to type this.

Not familiar with all of Mother Theresa's entangling's, but it was intended more as a metaphor that the term has become than it was her actual persona. I also apologize if this is came across as self-righteous, it was more intended to stir up re-thinking our positions, and not necessarily my opinion as gospel truth.

LOL, I got thick skin, I can handle it.

Perhaps, not as much on here as it is in the evangelical arena and my stupid facebook newsfeeds. I've seen the quote before that "The greatest reason for atheism is Christians". I'm starting to believe it. The world does not need more Christians, it needs more "disciples of Christ" or Mother Theresa's for that matter.

Ok, first off I consider myself a follower of Christ, and I'm writing this out of a bit of frustration to how I see the majority of the Christrian right wing acting on here, in the media, and the never ending posts I see on my FB newsfeed that are not only lacking in love, but scripturally wrong. I wonder if Christians actually followed Christ's example, and Paul's teachings in the new testament, if we would have such a division between us. First of all, people are not the enemy. God isn't a republican or democrat. Did you know Billie Graham is a registered democrat. Do you think passing all the laws in the world are somehow going to make us a holier nation? When did it become our duty to police the world? Paul talks of "serving all" to "save some" Quit saying this is the most important election in history. Shenanigans!! We've said that every year I've been alive, and I'm tired of people saying we will bring God's wrath on our country unless we elect "His" choice. Did God tell you who his candidate is? Since we want to keep playing the wrath of God card, better re-read the whole Sodom and Gomorrah story a little more carefully. God said he would spare the city if he could find even one righteous. We aren't living in a theocratic Israel. That was an extremely corrupted theocracy which Jesus came to overturn. How we interact in society completely changed from that point and we became free to be in the world not of the world, and serve the unbelievers with the love Christ served us with. Quit buying into these fear-mongering talk radio shows that are making money off instilling fear into believers. We are called to be submissive to our governing leaders. God is bigger than politics and even your fears. Throughout history and the world the church has flourished under persecution, and it becomes stagnant and counterproductive in a society where we think we run the show. I know the first thing a Christian is going to try to rebutt me with is some old testament verse about choosing a leader that upholds God's laws. If you believe what the bible says is true, that you will realize that Israel at this time was interacting with God here on earth. There was no doubt as to his existence or sovereignty within that nation, and they were at the time "God's" nation that was ruled under a theocracy which became so corrupt that God eventually overturned it himself. Today we don't live in a theocracy or even a "Christian" nation, as I get so tired of hearing. By biblical definitions we live in a pagan society and how we interact is different. When we leverage our power over the rest of the world, then God's plan for us and the world goes backward. That wasn't our call. Our call was to serve. In history anytime this has happened it has been a black eye for the faith. Today is no different. We serve without any expectation of return. If we don't have a single convert, we still serve unconditionally because that's what we are supposed to do. Before you go touting it as God's plan to pass laws forbidding gay marriage, better read this verse. Is forbidding them to marry going to bring more people to Jesus? Are gays being able to marry going to change anything about your relationship to Jesus and your duty to serve others? Are more people going to decide to follow Jesus because we don't let gays marry? Also please re-read this passage. This is how we are to interact in society as Christians, not leveraging our power over society. Sure pray for our nation, you're supposed to, but quit claiming that God will judge us if we elect Obama. Romney is mormon, fyi. Most of us don't think mormons are Christians anyway? Last election we touted McCain as Mr Family values, when he's divorced and married to some women half his age. Obama is married to his first wife, and is a loving husband and father. He is the better example of family values and because he doesn't think its his place to tell others how to live, makes him less of a hypocrite than McCain was who pissed all over the sanctity of marriage, but wants to tell others what family values are. And keep in mind, if you vow to uphold the constitution it would be a sin to break those vows. So personal freedoms and choice regardless if you like it needs to be protected. And as I've already pointed out, its not our job as Christians to tell others outside the church what to do anyway. Anyway, just some random thoughts, take it fwiw.

PBS won't go away if they just get advertisers and run it like a business. Oh the horror!! Exactly, Sesame Street is not only financially viable but a hugely profitable enterprise. They earn 15-17 million per year in licensing. I was talking PBS in general. But you are absolutely right. Sesame Street would clean up in the real market. I'm well aware of this, and it was mainly a lame attempt at humor, but one side note is my kid doesn't have the attention span to sit through a commercial, which is the main reason Sesame Street is my choice.

Sesame Street is my only break from parenting in the morning long enough to finish my cup of coffee. Don't do it Romney, you'll lose my vote.

Do us a favor over there in your county, and keep that our little secret.

Sure, I'd love to believe this is the way it is as well, because I'm not an Obama fan, but if you look at the numbers its very likely the majority of that 47% are working class citizens that aren't receiving any special govt entitlements, they are merely taking advantage of a tax system that has benefits written into the laws that prevent a lot of working class families from paying "federal income tax". Keep in mind most these people are still paying FICA, and state taxes, and are probably not on any type of govt assistance, unless you count their tax deductions that lead them to paying no federal income tax as some sort of "govt entitlements". Either way, this is a huge gaff by Romney, its just whether or not the huge portion of his voters that are in that 47% make the connection that they are in that 47%. But I think it was a gaff and nothing more. If Romney realized the reality of those numbers, I don't think he'd be dumb enough to make a comment like that especially since he never made the connection that many of those 47% are in his voting base.

Isn't that true? Not by a long shot. I'm not going to call them free loaders, but I do believe that 47% number is fairly accurate regarding the people that pay no "federal income tax". This of course is not including FICA or state taxes. http://money.howstuffworks.com/only-53-percent-pay-income-tax.htm Howeve one minor detail that I don't think is fair to ignore is that although I don't know the proportion of that 47%, but there are those families within that number that don't pay taxes do to tax benefits within the law for children, elderly, business expenses, and many other write-offs that bring their agi down to an where they pay no tax. Classifying that group as freeloaders while they're likely a responsible working class citizens or retirees that have paid their dues in this life already might be a big mistake.

I don't think I really disagree with anything you've said. The one thing I question is the "Obama's tax cuts" part. I've seen so many different ways this has been skewed I don't know what to believe honestly. I had one calculator showing that I would pay about an extra $4500 next year with Obama's propositions which was a combination of FICA and Income Tax. Unless those numbers are completely bogus, spread by a bunch of lies, thats a lot of money for my income level. I'm not entirely opposed to paying more taxes to get us out of this debacle, if I thought there was even a remote chance that spending would be curbed enough to even make a dent in the budget.

One thing I've never understood is how often times liberals claim they are the champions for the middle class and conservatives are for wealthy. IMO Obama's goals have been most destructive on the middle class specifically when we are talking QE, not to mention his very deceptive selling tactics on his tax propositions. I wish more people would realize this. Will QE hurt the uber wealthy? Prob not. Their wealth is usually tied up in other investments less affected by the value of currency, and when you're worth billions, whats the big deal when you retire and your 2 billion in todays money is only worth 1 billion 20 years from now. Although I don't think the responsible poor benefit from this either (or anybody of any class making an attempt to save for the future), the irresponsible most certainly do. If you have negative 50,000 in net worth, anything you can do to devalue that number is a good thing for you, (bad of course for anybody being responsible). But what about the rest of us stuck in the middle, who are responsibly trying to save a good portion of our income so we can reach a number that we can modestly retire on without leaching off of taxpayer money when we runout. I'm going to struggle my whole working life to get that magical number of what would be prob 1.2 million in todays money to survive the last 10-15 years of my life. What happens when that number is no longer sufficient, because 1.2 mil has now been so devalued its the new annual middle class income 30 years from now. We are creating a financial nightmare for our future, and any shortterm boost in wall-street will be meaningless to us middle classers. I'm sure the investors will be having a hay-day with it though. I'm not going to claim the right is the champion for the middle-class either, but in my observance, liberal economic policies will be and have been much more destructive on the resonsible working class in this country.

Not to mention those that take care of their ill or dying parents for years often times sacrificing their professional lives in the process. Yup they certainly don't deserve a dime that their parents wish to leave them with. This is a ridiculous concept. Should my children have to pay taxes on a car I buy them, or the money I give them to pay for college? How is this any different? They certainly didn't earn anything I chose to buy for them or give to them. Believe me these things I mentione above, by many children would be considered an elitist unearned luxury. I certainly didn't have any of the above given to me as a child, so by that standard all these kids whose parents provided everything for them should be taxed extra, right? Its only fair?

Just like my mama always told me. If you try to please everyone you end up pleasing no one. Anyway what you speak of is no doubt as big of a problem if not bigger than the media influence factor.

Do you guys have any decent whitewater in the area. That dancer makes a decent whitewater boat. I have a sit on top Heritage Redfish kayak that I use for going offshore in the gulf of Mexico, and the Old Town 119 (like pack), for all my inshore saltwater and freshwater river trips. The 119 actually does pretty well in whitewater at Class II's open bow, and with a spray skirt on the front can handle Class III's surprisingly well for a canoe.

Is that a Disco or a Pack? Judging by your seating position it appears to be a Pack. Awesome boat either way. I have a disco 119 and love it!! Basically same boat only polyethylene vs the lighter weight royalex pack. I have been down hundreds of river miles with it, and many miles of saltwater estuaries. That boat is my best friend. Super lightweight to throw over your shoulders and has some serious payload capabilities for those multi-day trips.

I personally think the "committment to social responsibility" would balance itself out if we all played by the same rules regardless if one started a business purely for selfish purpsoses. Humans at their core are selfish, and there's no way to eliminate that. The problem I see isn't with capitalism. What we continue to complain about day in and day out is a corrupted form of corporatism where our govt officials create a world to pander to the wealthy entities that got them elected. Our governing officials have become personal employees of the wealthy entities that got them into elected office, only taxpayers pay their salary, and the "wealthy entitities" just paid the "origination fees" for lack of a better term. We've created the most unfair of playing fields. Whats wonderful is all this could easily be solved if "we the people" elected some real representatives and not the puppets the mainstream media plugs all day. What sucks is that most Americans aren't smart enough to think for themselves and need a media outlet to make their decision for them.

Realistically how much principle would you have left to pay if you did a short sell? Are we talking 100,000, 50,000, 200,000? And what is your current monthly payment with all escrow figured in? IMO, I wouldn't foreclose, mainly because that shit will screw you for a long time. Good luck getting a lease on an apt, unless you have a friend that will let you live with him for the next 7 years. Credit checks are standard procedure for any white collar jobs anymore and also any job where security is important. If you can negotiate a short sell with the bank, and figure up the terms of a loan to repay your negative equity for let say 70,000 (just a guess). Try to find another job anywhere else in the country where you can rent a nice one bedroom apt on $600/month. Then MOVE!!! I'm guessing what you would owe the bank on the shortsell plus the roughly $600 a month on your rent would still be drastically lower than what your current monthly payment is given you don't have to worry about property tax or homeowners insurance anymore. Take the extra money and either invest it or save it for a downpayment on a more reasonable home like the millions of well maintained 2000 sq ft homes selling all over the country for less than $150,000. Then you can buy another home when you finish paying off the remainder of your unpaid principle on the shortsell. Banks do not like doing a shortsell because then you have a big loan floating around out there with absolutely no value tied to it. But they will work with you if they're led to believe thats your only option outside of forclosure. If you foreclose, they're stuck with that same amount of unpaid principle and now they have a piece of property they have to sell for likely a lot less than market value had they negotiated a short sell. Then again this is all dependent on how far negative you really are on equity.

Whats interesting is the basic philosophy behind this statement is almost 100% true for anything in life. People with the least self confidence are usually the bully. People the best at their job are usually the most humble and willing to admit error because they know they have nothing to prove. The best skydivers don't go around trying to show off to every whuffo that walks on the dropzone. And if I'm not overweight, I don't need my wife reassuring me all the time that I'm still attractive to her. You could go on and on with this list. And I think its no different on both sides of the religious debates with the Pledge of Allegiance and our currency. Public prayer and yada yada.