Posted on 05/26/2004 8:01:12 AM PDT by Moose4
She's a Baptist and loves Kids.
I'm amazed that her womb hasn't fallen out!
By maxing your payments, I assume you are talking about contributing the maximum allowable tax-free to your 401k. That's a smart move, because Social Security is a bad joke for people who are under 40 today. We will pay and pay, and get next to nothing when the time comes. The Baby Boomers (AKA The Locust Generation) will have consumed it all before we get a chance at that money.
Read later.
This being an issue of such earth-shattering importance, I have to side with the Goldwater Guy -- though I admit AJA's interpretation is clever and works too!
"Or a theater troupe. As in, the show must go on. Hence, a trouper is someone who keeps going in spite of trouble."
Go back and read my original post. What I said was that I am happy for them and at the same time angry that they don't have to bear full responsibility.
How is that showing hostility to "people who simply love children?"
I can be happy for the individuals and angry at the system.
Well, of course. No one argued that--that's why I used the derisive term "Ponzi scheme." I just think you're worked up over at most a minor issue if they support themselves.
I wonder who is paying for it? Somehow, I'd bet tax dollars are helping foot the bill(s)
"This being an issue of such earth-shattering importance, I have to side with the Goldwater Guy"
This is a very shortsighted comment. I grew up on a street with a great number of Irish Catholic families. We had ten kids, the McGinnis' had 12, the McAdams 5, etc. None of our families were ever on welfare. For the most part, we had hardworking fathers and stay at home moms.
To use the tax deduction angle to say they don't is to follow a slippery slope indeed, my friend. It presupposes the...socialist...notion that all money is the government's and we get to rightly keep what the government allows us to.
Gives new meaning to the phrase, "The J Team."
Good for her.
I love dogs but 3 is enough to handle.
She can make up for all the kids the rest of us are choosing not to have.
I am Pro Life and respect her choice but it stil boggles my mind.
Though the article cameo's Mom, it seems to me, from the picture, these are indeed Christians with an agenda favorable and desired by America as we remember/wish we had/are trying to recover etc.
The clothes and the haircuts are a sure sign of control by the parents and a sound education in propriety and decency.
Wouldn't mind at all havin' 'em fer neighbors.
Actually what I meant was that regardless of future contributions the "expected" benefit or monthly payment for me will never increase. Yet I still have 25 years of work left in me......I do max the 401K contributions because I don't expect any benefit from SS.
I just get tired of hearing the children are the future, why does anyone object to paying for the future? My problem is that I'm paying about half my earned income so my trash gets picked up once a week! (Yes, military security is important.)
In the interest of the "future" we have allowed socialism to slowly take our freedoms and we applaud it!
Now this post, I agree 100% with everything you say.
What is a Jinger Duggar?
Is that a boy or a girl?
The last discussion I had with a father of a large family, 8 chilrun, he admitted that his refunds were larger than any with-holdings. In plain english the government gives them other people's money. This isn't a case of getting their own money back, its a case of getting more than they would have earned in the first place.
My stance isn't that deductions should be eliminated, it is that taxes should be eliminated/minimized. Then my tax bill wouldn't be 50% while they get supplemental checks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.