Anti-Missle Defense for Commercial Airlines

j7915

Senior
Sep 7, 2002
423
0
[blockquote]----------------On 2/10/2003 9:35:27 AM Buck wrote: With the near bankruptcy of American Airlines and the cry for employess to cut their pay and benefits, lets hope that AA does not take on this modification even on part of it's fleet.

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2003/2...ile-defense.htm


----------------[/blockquote]
Buck you are avionics right? Read the article again, the Feds would pay for the installation.
 
OP
Buck

Buck

Veteran
Contributor
Aug 20, 2002
7,318
1,576
www.fairtax.org
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/10/2003 11:38:36 AM WingNaPrayer wrote:

Yeah, and we all know the taxpayers have 7-10 Billion just laying around for any program let alone this proposal.

I hope everyone realizes that it's going to take this country 50 years or more to repair the damage Dubya has done in the first two years of his reign alone! This guy just won't quit until he has us spent into the next depression - but at least he'll have his spot in the history books that he so desperately wants!
----------------
[/blockquote]
You had to go political again....

Ok I did not mention the author of the proposed legislation to add a missile defense system U.S. aircraft. But it is Sen. Schumer from New York. So it is both parties that spend our tax dollars and yet it is the Republicans that are proposing a reduction in my income taxes. I do not know about anyone else, but I live almost paycheck to paycheck after I take advantage of my 401k and IRA opportunities. So any decrease in my income taxes is a blessing.
 
OP
Buck

Buck

Veteran
Contributor
Aug 20, 2002
7,318
1,576
www.fairtax.org
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/10/2003 10:01:31 AM j7915 wrote:

Buck you are avionics right? Read the article again, the Feds would pay for the installation.

----------------
[/blockquote]
You are QA right? Whatever that has to do with anything. I read the article, the $7 - $10 Billion would be great. However, the money could be used for other reasons to help the airline industry.
 

WingNaPrayer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,742
0
EYW
Visit site
The republicans do not want to reduce your income taxes. In fact, your Republican president says that blue collar workers earning 75K or less need to be made to pay 1/3rd more in taxes, and that they need to share more of the burdons of this government since there are more of them than there are the ultra rich.

In other words, when he first got into office and handed out 300-600 dollar checks (to pay for votes) it was just a loan, now he wants it back at an interest rate is 900% - That's right, 1/3rd more means those in the 50-75K income tax (b)racket on average will be paying an additional 2700.00 in taxes if Dubya gets his way.

....of course....Republicans don't raise taxes, just like they don't start wars and quadruple the national debt every time one of them lies, cheats, and steals their way into office either...

Now, couple all this under the table crap on top of the fact that AMR wants wage concessions (pay cuts) and Dubya wants tax increases from those of you at AA (most of whom) fall into his target bracket of 75K or less....well...good luck!

With the republicans in control, who else is to blame? Dubya is SURE he'll get what he wants. What a guy!
 

WingNaPrayer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,742
0
EYW
Visit site
Yeah, and we all know the taxpayers have 7-10 Billion just laying around for any program let alone this proposal.

I hope everyone realizes that it's going to take this country 50 years or more to repair the damage Dubya has done in the first two years of his reign alone! This guy just won't quit until he has us spent into the next depression - but at least he'll have his spot in the history books that he so desperately wants!
 
OP
Buck

Buck

Veteran
Contributor
Aug 20, 2002
7,318
1,576
www.fairtax.org
This was about the cost of a missile defence system for the Airline industry, however tax tables show that my tax rate for $45,200-$109,250 income was 28% in 2001 and under the presidents plan would be: $45,200-$166,500 and 25%. I do not know about you but I have yet to acheive anything over $110,000 even with substantial overtime. I live in the world of my income, not the ultra rich or poverty. I believe people in the lower income brackets will do even better. Speaking taxes where do your dues to the union go?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/reports/taxplan.html
 

jetdryvr

Member
Jan 24, 2003
88
0
Just more form the liberal propaganda machine. I fall into the same tax bracket and would also see my tax rate fall for federal income. In the mean time my Democratic county exect wants to make a significant raise in county income tax, property tax, and a .10 cent gas tax increase. The democratic party would like to tax us like we are a socialist country but not provide any of the services.

On another note it sounds like the trial lawyers are at it again.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/business/1772542

What a joke.
 

RV4

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,885
80
www.usaviation.com
I am stupid and cannot find the new topic button. Plus if I posted this political crap on it's own thread nobody would read it. Thus, I will take a page from WingNaPrayer playbook and interrupt everyone else's fine day with a slanted political diatribe....

Feed Economic Growth and Create More Jobs

Rhetoric vs. Reality

Critics claim the President’s economic growth plan will drive up the federal deficit.

Reality check! Most economists agree, the resulting growth would put the "cost" of the plan at $102 billion instead of upwards of $300 billion.

Federal revenues increase when the economy grows and hundreds of thousands of new jobs are created. The Bush plan will create more than 2.1 million new jobs just in the next three years.

More jobs mean more taxpayers, which means more revenues for the federal government.


Critics claim the President’s economic growth plan only benefits the rich, the “top 1%†of Americans.

Reality check! There are only about 1.2 million taxpayers in the top 1%, yet more than 84 million Americans now own stocks. Economic growth boosts stocks, which means growing nest eggs for everybody.

And 34 million Americans would see the marriage penalty reduced, while an additional 27 million now in the top tax bracket would benefit from a lower tax rate. That’s millions more Americans who are not in the top 1% who will benefit from the Bush economic growth plan.


Critics like Bill Clinton claim President Bush’s economic growth plan will contribute to the growth in health insurance premiums.

Reality check! The truth is that a growing economy that is creating new jobs will move millions of Americans from the ranks of the uninsured into employment that provides health insurance coverage. The Bush plan is estimated to create more than 2.1 million new jobs just in the first three years after enactment and millions more during the next seven years.


Critics claim the President’s economic growth plan represents discredited “deja voodoo economics.â€

Reality check! History is on President Bush’s side. His plan is based on the same economic principle underlying President John F. Kennedy's plan that sparked the economic boom of the 1960s and the record-breaking prosperity that resulted from President Ronald Reagan’s program in the 1980s.

History proves that solid economic policy seeks to lower the costs of government and let people keep more of their hard-earned dollars. Critics forget, or refuse to admit, that when government spends more and taxes more, working Americans have less to spend on things like new houses, college savings, transportation and much else.
The President' s Economic Plan equals economic growth:

Boosts the economy and creates hundred of thousands of new jobs, estimated at 2.1 million over the next 3 years.
Ensures strong economic growth not just for the next two years but for the next 10 as well. And we need a boost! The Commerce Department just reported that the economy grew at an anemic .7 of a percent last quarter. Heritage' s work indicates that the President' s plan would add a full half of a percent to the annual growth rate when fully implemented.
Enacts the best aspects of the President' s 2001 tax plan ahead of schedule.
Reduces the marriage penalty for more than 34 million married couples by doubling the standard deduction and making the starting point of the joint 27 percent bracket twice that of the starting point of the single 27 percent bracket.
Helps reduce the top marginal rate on 27 million taxpayers be enacting the rate reductions in 2004 and 2006 this year.
Benefits another 41 million taxpayers through the expansion of the 10 percent bracket.
Just What the Economy Needs
The President's plan is just what the economy needs, an analysis by Bill Beach, Director of Heritage's Center for Data Analysis.

The Real Growth Factor: Scoring Bush' s Economic Growth Plan
Alfredo Goyburu and Andrew Olivastro deliver a preliminary CDA analysis of the President's dividend tax relief plan that shows it would:

cost a total of $102 billion over 2003-2012, instead of upwards of $300 billion;
increase the employment level by an annual average of 311,000 taxpaying jobs between 2003-2012;
increase Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by an average of $40 billion between 2003-2012;
increase purchases of business equipment by an average of $32 billion between 2003-2012.
Fact v. Fiction: Why temporary tax cuts and tax rebates are not true ways to achieve economic growth.

Fact v. Fiction: State Spending
Fact v. Fiction: Tax Rebates
Fact v. Fiction: Temporary Tax Cuts
End Double Taxation

Rhetoric vs. Reality

Critics claim the President’s economic growth plan only benefits the rich, the “top 1%†of Americans.

Reality check! There are only about 1.2 million taxpayers in the top 1%, yet more than 84 million Americans now own stocks. Economic growth boosts stocks, which means growing nest eggs for everybody.

And 34 million Americans would see the marriage penalty reduced, while an additional 27 million now in the top tax bracket would benefit from a lower tax rate. That’s millions more Americans who are not in the top 1% who will benefit from the Bush economic growth plan.
Chart: Up to Four Layers of Tax on Income is Saved and Invested: Tax Code Punishes Capital Formation, Making America Poorer

Eliminating the double taxation of dividends would:

Reduce revenues to the Treasury by only 30 percent of the so-called static cost. Instead of a static cost of $367 billion, the ending of the double taxation of dividends so stimulates the economy that Treasury revenues only fall by $102 billion over 10 years.
Increase the employment level by an average of 311,000 taxpaying jobs per year;
Expand the revenues going to Social Security by $50 billion;
Increase Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by an average of $40 billion;
Increase purchases of business equipment by an average of $32 billion.
Would help the 84 million people who own stock by either cutting the taxes they pay or helping them benefit from stronger stock growth.
Tax Reform Benefits Everyone
Fundamental tax reform will allow all Americans to keep more of their money instead of sending it to Washington -- dividend tax relief is an important part of such reform.

Tax Cuts Increase Federal Revenues
Critics often claim that the 1980s Reagan tax cuts failed to increase tax revenues. Heritage's Brian Riedl has crunched numbers to show otherwise.

Interactive tool: Tax Dividend Calculator
(Flash 6 plug-in required)

Chart: Dividend Tax Relief in the OECD
This Cato Institute chart (second image) shows that the U.S. taxes dividends at the second-highest rate, globally.

Protect America's Seniors

Rhetoric vs. Reality

As of 2000, more than 42 million American workers owned a 401(k) plan, and nearly 40 percent of all U.S. households owned an IRA.
Data show that, as of 2002, nearly 53 million U.S. households (just under 50 percent) and about 84 million individuals owned some form of equities.
For more see Who Really Benefits from Dividend Tax Relief?

Benefit Income Tax Payers

Rhetoric vs. Reality

Critics claim that families and individuals who don't own stocks receive no benefit from dividend tax cuts.

Reality check! The truth is our economy benefits whenever anyone, regardless of income level, has more money to save, invest and spend. But these tax cuts do benefit everyone. When corporate managers have more money to spend they will offer more jobs, and market competition means lower prices.


Critics claim the President’s economic growth plan only benefits the rich, the “top 1%†of Americans.

Reality check! There are only about 1.2 million taxpayers in the top 1%, yet more than 84 million Americans now own stocks. Economic growth boosts stocks, which means growing nest eggs for everybody.

And 34 million Americans would see the marriage penalty reduced, while an additional 27 million now in the top tax bracket would benefit from a lower tax rate. That’s millions more Americans who are not in the top 1% who will benefit from the Bush economic growth plan.
Chart (Excel file): What the Average Family of Four Can Buy with the Tax Savings from the President's Plan

Chart (Excel file): State-by-State Breakdown of President Bush's Growth Package: Benefits for Married Couples and Families with Children

Quick Checks

What Every American Wants

A major tax cut will be a step toward smaller government.
Government is too large and intrusive.
Americans do not get their money's worth for the roughly 40% of income that is spent by government -- federal, state and local -- supposedly on their behalf, or the additional 10% or so of income that residents or businesses spend in response to government mandates and regulation.
There is only one way to cut government down to size: the way parents control spendthrift children, cutting their allowance.
For government, that means cutting taxes.
Resulting deficits will be an effective -- the only effective -- restraint on the spending propensities of the executive branch and the legislature. The public reaction will make that restraint effective.
First step: Make the already voted tax reductions permanent, bring their effective dates forward, and lower the rates further to improve the quality of the already enacted tax cuts.
For more see Milton Friedman's commentary, What Every American Wants, from Wednesday's Wall Street Journal. [Subscription required].

An Economic Plan That Adds Up

President Bush's plan is a bold and visionary step that will make our nation stronger and improve the living standards of all Americans.
The president's call to end double taxation of dividends is sure to give the stock market a boost and improve America's global competitiveness.
There's no question a dividend tax cut would produce growth.
Discarding one of these extra layers of taxation will encourage businesses to invest more, leading to more jobs and higher living standards.
Removing the second tax on dividends will increase future income flow and therefore help the stock market, potentially boosting national wealth by nearly $1 trillion.
Even Marxist economists recognize that investment is the key to long-run growth and rising wages.
But this isn't just an economic issue: It's time the government stopped imposing penalties -- or granting preferences -- depending on how people get or spend their income.
You don't help the poor by imposing high taxes on the rich. Such policies simply drive money from the U.S. economy and benefit our competitors.
Critics claim the tax cuts will explode the deficit. As President Kennedy explained more than 40 years ago, the purpose of cutting taxes is not to incur a deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy that can bring a surplus.
For more see An Economic Plan That Adds Up by Dan Mitchell

Who Are the Rich?
The National Center for Policy Analysis breaks down a New York Times article examining who makes up the "rich" in America:

Some debaters base their definition on salaries -- and claim that any household making $100,000 a year is rich. Others ignore
salaries and base their definition on household assets.
Complicating the effort to define personal wealth is the question
of economic geography -- with $1 million going much further in
some areas of the country than in others.


What can't be denied is that the ranks of the well-off have
multiplied in recent years.

The fortunes of many families that were already rich have soared since 1980 -- as did the ranks of the newly
wealthy, with the ranks of households making at least $1 million almost doubling to 4.8 million from the early
1980s to the late 1990s, even after accounting for
inflation.
Almost three million of the 130 million U.S. families
filing tax returns in 2001 reported at least $200,000 of
income -- up from 1.3 million in 1995.
Wealth in the United States remains concentrated in
metropolitan and coastal areas -- but some rural enclaves and growing wealth in the Rocky Mountain states have somewhat altered that picture.
Some 13 percent of Americans consider themselves either rich or upper income -- while 59 percent say they are in the middle-income crowd, and 27 percent identify
themselves as lower income or poor.
It took an income of only $83,500 in 2001 to place an American in the top-fifth, or quintile, of earners.

The source article: David Leonhardt's, "Defining the Rich in the World's Wealthiest Nation," New York Times, January 12, 2003.
 

GGpillow

Advanced
Aug 19, 2002
103
0
www.usaviation.com
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/10/2003 4:53:10 PM RV4 wrote:

SNIP

The source article: David Leonhardt's, "Defining the Rich in the World's Wealthiest Nation," New York Times, January 12, 2003.




----------------
[/blockquote]


Good article. Suprised it got published in the Times though, cough-liberals-cough.
 

acmech

Advanced
Aug 20, 2002
183
9
The best anti-missle defense for the airlines would be for all of us to root out these bad folks, get rid of them, and parade what is left of them on tv just like the somalies did to our boys a few years back.

Bottom line is the we as a nation have to send the message to these terrorist folks that they are not welcome.

I lost my job because of them, and I am still very bitter about it. But, at least I will be starting a new one this week. My hope is time will heal that open wound.