[aldante]

[quote=markmax33]Domo,
Do you even know the Libertarian position on the environment? You call his world bizzaro when he has a really good idea that came from the constituion?
The libertarian position is that the environmental regulation we have is not authorized by the constitution. It is therefore defaulted into state and local governement. To me a bizaro world is one in which we disgard the constitution and stop reading Article 1 section 8. The constitution is a set of lessons learned from our founding fathers because England was a failing government. If you don’t like it, you should support a constitutional ammendment.
Wouldn’t you rather let your local or state government determine how to deal with the horned frog of the southwest that is only in San Diego county? Why would we let some idiot in Congress pass a bill he probably didn’t even read, probably didn’t have a chance to hear witnesses on the subject testify on the matter, etc?
It’s important pass the laws on the local and state level where your voice can actually be heard and the experts can actually have a say. The constution was written to protect your liberties because the founding fathers well knew that with too much control the GOV would become overpowering and bankrupt the country. Why are you so willing to give it up? I think that is bizaro.[/quote]

Well Said!

[aldante]

Here you go pri_dk……
I think your world of big government is the true “bizzaro world” http://www.cnbc.com/id/45031100

$40 billion lost in iraq…..pretty soon we will be talking about real money.

I will explain the Paul position. Big Government regulators protect the large companies that give big donations. Many examples abound but look no further then TARP. $700 billion was handed over to the banks who caused the financial crisis.
What happened to the small banks (all of whom may not have been evil) in this mess? Most small banks never did the type of irresponsible lending that C, GS, BAC, MER, LEH, Bear Sterns (I can’t remember the call symbol) Chase. But by the government (regulators) bailing out the big banks the small banks have to compete with the government backed banks. Guess who will win that battle. Do you even know that “ALLY” bank offeres much higher cd’s then most other banks? That is the former GM bank. You may remember GMAC was bailed out by our illustrious, smart, every omnicient regulators. That is a true life example of how our govenment rewards bad practices and pushs out good practices.
Now for the environment. The idea of Government is to intervene if one’s liberty is being infringed upon by another. So thus, there is a role for government (also defense) but bigger governemnt does not make it better. In fact it makes it much worse becasue these faceless beaurcrates write law without any liability.
In your bizarro world these faceless beaurcrats are trustworthy and all knowing. I call BS on that one.
Are there evil capitalist? Hell yes. The difference is that the market is far more efficent at rooting them out then the government.

This explains it pretty well:

http://www.isil.org/resources/introduction.swf

[aldante]

Ok I will play.
Let’s look at the wildfires here in San Diego when president Bush with a flip of his wrist helped those “poor homeowners” rebuild. It was the humane thing to do right?
Or was it? Those homes 500k+ homes are built right back where they were….in the same wildfire prone area? Now let’s look at a single home lost to a fire that was not bailed out by the government. Why is that persons loss ok? Ok stay with me here because if you answered that it is not and he should be bailed out also….then you have made the leap that it is the governments job is to fix everyone’s problem. So my Leakey water pipes should be replaced by the government. How about my engine gasket? At this point you may see that I am leading you down the rabbit hole and say to yourself….” That is for the qualified government people to decide.”….. what happens the one time that the government makes a “wrong” choice? Who sets that straight?
I sat on then sidelines while the madness of greed in real estate took me out of this market for 7 years!!!!!!!! All the while the criminal homeowners who lied on their application were bailed out by every government program imaginable. WITH MY MONEY. And yes I am still PISSED about it. I spoke with one of those assholes today, he was wondering if he could get a refi even though he did a “strategic default” a couple of year ago on his “rental Property”(true Story)
I WILL DECIDE HOW I SPEND MY CHARITY MONEY. IF YOU FEEL SORRY FOR THESE PEOPLE GET OFF YOUR ASS AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT YOURSELF!!!!!!!!! But do not try and foist your morales on to me. In fact we may even have the same morales…..but I will never force you to give to charity.
By the way none of this is possible without the Federal Reserve. All of the “humanitarian” missions are pulled with off with currency that is indebting our kids. It is enslaving us. Do you really want to spend millions of dollars fronting Uganda?
A wise man once said that you are a slave to who you owe debt. We are all slaves because of ignorant thinking like yours.
I am tired of hypocrites who won’t change their lives to help the less fortunate but want everyone else to change their life. THERE IS MISERY EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD. PICK A PLACE A MAKE A REAL DIFFERENCE. But do not tell me how to live my life.
By the way, the reason that the corporations are running roughshod over this country is because the government is so Frigging big that it is being bought off by special interest of the corporations. The answer is smaller more accountable government.
By the way if you doubt who is right on this topic do a little experiment. Go to YouTube and look up what all the other politicians were saying in 2002. Look up Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, all those people who said it was the governments job for every American to own a home…..Then look up Ron Paul. He tells us what will happen and it’s causes. So I would take his judgement over anyone else’s. that is what makes him Presidential. His courage to say the unpopular thing……and then to be proven right. that makes him Presidential. Did you know that he has over 110,000 individual donors to his campaign. Mitt has 24000 but has raised 5 times as much. He has raised more from the active military then all other candidates combined yet you think he I’s beholder to the corporation?
His popularity has only gained. Look around maybe you will learn something. Maybe if you have an open mind you too can be part of the Solution instead of being part of the problem.

[aldante]

At 40 the rule is not just a 10% penalty it is actually ordinary income plus 10% penalty. The penalty is based on the income not the after tax income. So 60k withdrawal (5% of $1,200,000)from an ira x 15% = $9,000 paid in ordinary taxes. Then one must take $60,000 x 10% = $6,000. $9,000 plus $6,000 = $15,000 tax on a $60,000 distribution leaving you with

Walaa : $45,000. (It is only that much if you are in the %15% bracket) So what that means is a your 5% distribution only gets you purchasing power of 3.75%.

Of course that deplets your ira by 60k so by age 41 your IRA is only worth $1,140,000 (assuming you do not make or lose any in the market)
The only way to avoid the 10% penalty on an ongoing basis is if you take a 72t distribution which figures your life expectency and gives you a yearly payment. If you try and stop that payment before age 59.5 you are subject to a 50% tax.

Based on those numbers my plan would be to stop working and have your wife work.

[aldante]

At 40 the rule is not just a 10% penalty it is actually ordinary income plus 10% penalty. The penalty is based on the income not the after tax income. So 60k withdrawal (5% of $1,200,000)from an ira x 15% = $9,000 paid in ordinary taxes. Then one must take $60,000 x 10% = $6,000. $9,000 plus $6,000 = $15,000 tax on a $60,000 distribution leaving you with

Walaa : $45,000. (It is only that much if you are in the %15% bracket) So what that means is a your 5% distribution only gets you purchasing power of 3.75%.

Of course that deplets your ira by 60k so by age 41 your IRA is only worth $1,140,000 (assuming you do not make or lose any in the market)
The only way to avoid the 10% penalty on an ongoing basis is if you take a 72t distribution which figures your life expectency and gives you a yearly payment. If you try and stop that payment before age 59.5 you are subject to a 50% tax.

Based on those numbers my plan would be to stop working and have your wife work.

[aldante]

At 40 the rule is not just a 10% penalty it is actually ordinary income plus 10% penalty. The penalty is based on the income not the after tax income. So 60k withdrawal (5% of $1,200,000)from an ira x 15% = $9,000 paid in ordinary taxes. Then one must take $60,000 x 10% = $6,000. $9,000 plus $6,000 = $15,000 tax on a $60,000 distribution leaving you with

Walaa : $45,000. (It is only that much if you are in the %15% bracket) So what that means is a your 5% distribution only gets you purchasing power of 3.75%.

Of course that deplets your ira by 60k so by age 41 your IRA is only worth $1,140,000 (assuming you do not make or lose any in the market)
The only way to avoid the 10% penalty on an ongoing basis is if you take a 72t distribution which figures your life expectency and gives you a yearly payment. If you try and stop that payment before age 59.5 you are subject to a 50% tax.

Based on those numbers my plan would be to stop working and have your wife work.

[aldante]

At 40 the rule is not just a 10% penalty it is actually ordinary income plus 10% penalty. The penalty is based on the income not the after tax income. So 60k withdrawal (5% of $1,200,000)from an ira x 15% = $9,000 paid in ordinary taxes. Then one must take $60,000 x 10% = $6,000. $9,000 plus $6,000 = $15,000 tax on a $60,000 distribution leaving you with

Walaa : $45,000. (It is only that much if you are in the %15% bracket) So what that means is a your 5% distribution only gets you purchasing power of 3.75%.

Of course that deplets your ira by 60k so by age 41 your IRA is only worth $1,140,000 (assuming you do not make or lose any in the market)
The only way to avoid the 10% penalty on an ongoing basis is if you take a 72t distribution which figures your life expectency and gives you a yearly payment. If you try and stop that payment before age 59.5 you are subject to a 50% tax.

Based on those numbers my plan would be to stop working and have your wife work.

[aldante]

At 40 the rule is not just a 10% penalty it is actually ordinary income plus 10% penalty. The penalty is based on the income not the after tax income. So 60k withdrawal (5% of $1,200,000)from an ira x 15% = $9,000 paid in ordinary taxes. Then one must take $60,000 x 10% = $6,000. $9,000 plus $6,000 = $15,000 tax on a $60,000 distribution leaving you with

Walaa : $45,000. (It is only that much if you are in the %15% bracket) So what that means is a your 5% distribution only gets you purchasing power of 3.75%.

Of course that deplets your ira by 60k so by age 41 your IRA is only worth $1,140,000 (assuming you do not make or lose any in the market)
The only way to avoid the 10% penalty on an ongoing basis is if you take a 72t distribution which figures your life expectency and gives you a yearly payment. If you try and stop that payment before age 59.5 you are subject to a 50% tax.

Based on those numbers my plan would be to stop working and have your wife work.

[aldante]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=briansd1]What do you guys think of Bill Clinton going vegan?

I think that it’s smart of him. It will stop heart disease and allow him to live a long time.[/quote]

Brian: I do hope Slick Willie lives a long time. Hillary is going to need his wise counsel when she mounts a primary challenge in 2012.

Kidding aside, he looks healthier. Do you think Monica Lewinsky gave up meat, too?[/quote]

Allan,
I am howling right now…..thanks!

[aldante]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=briansd1]What do you guys think of Bill Clinton going vegan?

I think that it’s smart of him. It will stop heart disease and allow him to live a long time.[/quote]

Brian: I do hope Slick Willie lives a long time. Hillary is going to need his wise counsel when she mounts a primary challenge in 2012.

Kidding aside, he looks healthier. Do you think Monica Lewinsky gave up meat, too?[/quote]

Allan,
I am howling right now…..thanks!

[aldante]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=briansd1]What do you guys think of Bill Clinton going vegan?

I think that it’s smart of him. It will stop heart disease and allow him to live a long time.[/quote]

Brian: I do hope Slick Willie lives a long time. Hillary is going to need his wise counsel when she mounts a primary challenge in 2012.

Kidding aside, he looks healthier. Do you think Monica Lewinsky gave up meat, too?[/quote]

Allan,
I am howling right now…..thanks!

[aldante]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=briansd1]What do you guys think of Bill Clinton going vegan?

I think that it’s smart of him. It will stop heart disease and allow him to live a long time.[/quote]

Brian: I do hope Slick Willie lives a long time. Hillary is going to need his wise counsel when she mounts a primary challenge in 2012.

Kidding aside, he looks healthier. Do you think Monica Lewinsky gave up meat, too?[/quote]

Allan,
I am howling right now…..thanks!

[aldante]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=briansd1]What do you guys think of Bill Clinton going vegan?

I think that it’s smart of him. It will stop heart disease and allow him to live a long time.[/quote]

Brian: I do hope Slick Willie lives a long time. Hillary is going to need his wise counsel when she mounts a primary challenge in 2012.

Kidding aside, he looks healthier. Do you think Monica Lewinsky gave up meat, too?[/quote]

Allan,
I am howling right now…..thanks!

[aldante]

Arraya,
I not know how to box your quotes then refute them.
I welcome any real debate on Ron Paul but really it is a waste of time for me to respond to people who simply want to relive their High School debate team days and simply try and score points.Not that you are doing that. I honestly think that this country is in more danger of losing its identity then at any other time since the civil war.
I find your that the biggest difference we have is that I believe that given more liberty people will do much better and our system will be improved. I see this as a crisis of education. I see that our media is perpetuating this whole charade. From reading your post it sounds like you think the whole thing should be chucked.
1. You did not address my point. While it is debatable how many people saw the collapse coming there is no debate on the fact that Ron Paul is the only candidate running for President who not only saw it coming took the risk of stating this in public.

This is an example of leadership unlike any other candidate or our current President in my opinion.

He may have got it right because he was an “old kooky man with old ideas” and got lucky. On the other hand he may have a method (Austrian Economics) that is predictive and deserves (based on its successful predictive analysis) to be utilized when making public policy decisions.

2. François Quesnay, Bernard Mandeville, wrote 200 years before Bastiat. Bastiat actually undermines the bee hive analogy. I guess that you did not that or you chose not to add that to your post. Go to http://www.campaignforliberty.org if you want reference material. Ron Paul’s book “END THE FED” is a very quick read as well which brings into the 21st century what liberty means. It explains how war plays a central part in keeping this regime (both dems and republicans)in power.

3. You resort to saying that the whole system is completely broken and needs to be tossed out. Ok….I am not that far gone. I do believe in liberty and defending that liberty.

4. I find it depressing that your analysis of Romer, Goolsby,Krugman, Paulson, Geithner, et al., is “Well they were really trying to do good but it is a flawed system”. I think that they did one hell of a lot to perpetuate this flawed system . I prefer to believe that if we get the right people with the right thought processes they will start to make the system more correct.

So just to reiterate. Ron Paul is the only person (running) that I can see who has wanted to pull the cover off our corrupt crony system. I believe in the Republic.

[aldante]

Arraya,
I not know how to box your quotes then refute them.
I welcome any real debate on Ron Paul but really it is a waste of time for me to respond to people who simply want to relive their High School debate team days and simply try and score points.Not that you are doing that. I honestly think that this country is in more danger of losing its identity then at any other time since the civil war.
I find your that the biggest difference we have is that I believe that given more liberty people will do much better and our system will be improved. I see this as a crisis of education. I see that our media is perpetuating this whole charade. From reading your post it sounds like you think the whole thing should be chucked.
1. You did not address my point. While it is debatable how many people saw the collapse coming there is no debate on the fact that Ron Paul is the only candidate running for President who not only saw it coming took the risk of stating this in public.

This is an example of leadership unlike any other candidate or our current President in my opinion.

He may have got it right because he was an “old kooky man with old ideas” and got lucky. On the other hand he may have a method (Austrian Economics) that is predictive and deserves (based on its successful predictive analysis) to be utilized when making public policy decisions.

2. François Quesnay, Bernard Mandeville, wrote 200 years before Bastiat. Bastiat actually undermines the bee hive analogy. I guess that you did not that or you chose not to add that to your post. Go to http://www.campaignforliberty.org if you want reference material. Ron Paul’s book “END THE FED” is a very quick read as well which brings into the 21st century what liberty means. It explains how war plays a central part in keeping this regime (both dems and republicans)in power.

3. You resort to saying that the whole system is completely broken and needs to be tossed out. Ok….I am not that far gone. I do believe in liberty and defending that liberty.

4. I find it depressing that your analysis of Romer, Goolsby,Krugman, Paulson, Geithner, et al., is “Well they were really trying to do good but it is a flawed system”. I think that they did one hell of a lot to perpetuate this flawed system . I prefer to believe that if we get the right people with the right thought processes they will start to make the system more correct.

So just to reiterate. Ron Paul is the only person (running) that I can see who has wanted to pull the cover off our corrupt crony system. I believe in the Republic.

[Author]

Posts