Getting hit with large tax return bill....

And what do you propose we do instead? Killer drones? Walls DO work. They work in many other countries. I think it was Poland that reduced illegal immigration by 96% by building a wall.

Lol. Gotta read my friend... stop drinking that kool-aid. Poland is TALKING about building a fence, for pigs - boars. Not for people. Get your facts right. Ain't no 96% reduction in Poland, no idea where that comes from. The only 90%+ drop I can find dealing with a wall in another country is Hungary, from the Middle East of which they had 3528 arrests in 2018 and 5 arrests in 2019. But that situation is far different from ours, read about it.

upload_2019-2-21_17-53-2.png

The "Great wall of Calais" in France has been pretty much ineffective.
Israel's wall is largely ineffective with 60,000 people sneaking in every year.
The Norwegians built a laughable wall that even they laugh at.

So, I'm looking for other countries that built a wall and would support your conclusion.. can't seem to find it.. must be bogus then?

Wait, wasn't mexico going to pay for the wall? Now you're willing to spend upwards of a possible $70 Billion and 150M every year after that?? The Republicans always ask the Dems "How are you going to pay for that?", but this one doesn't get that scrutiny?
Do you really believe that poor, paid-under-the-table, lower than minimum wage earners with no power and no rights are stealing more than $70 Billion dollars? News flash, you build the wall, we Americans get poorer than if we didn't... at the very least, in a narrow minded money-only view.

Most illegal aliens don't cross the border line illegally, they overstay their visas. How is a wall going to help with overstaying your visa?

There are more people leaving the US, across the US-Mexico border than there are coming in. Why is a wall the solution?

About 700,000 travelers to the United States overstayed their visas in fiscal 2017, the most recent year for which the Department of Homeland Security has published figures. DHS estimated that, as of Sept. 30, 2017, the end of that fiscal year, more than 600,000 of those travelers were still in the U.S.

During that same year, there were just 300,000 apprehensions along the Southern border, according to Customs and Border Protection — the lowest number since 1971.
upload_2019-2-21_17-44-48.png
 
I actually tend to blame them both, I despise both of them rather equally. The Dems seem to want an impoverished population they can farm for votes, and the Reps want an underclass they can exploit for cheap labor. Neither wants to fix this, and that's how we got here.

Living in Arizona has run me through the ringer on this one. Knowing families that have lost loved ones to smugglers on their own property, but at the same time knowing the handful of "illegals" that live in my home state that remain illegal despite having a family history of living and working this land that predates not only the state, but the country!

This has been going on for a very long time. And it all frustrates me, because if we'd just live up to our founding ideals, and had done so consistently since day one, Canada and Mexico would BOTH be in this union of ours. Our continent is only divided because we made it so, and we continue to be scared of ourselves and everyone else for reasons I cannot quite fathom.

To turn this around, take a peek at this gem of an article from late 2017: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...r-mexican-schools-struggle-keep-up/629458001/

I mean seriously, the headline really says it all. But you are correct we agree, different thought processes but I think we both agree on all the important bits on what must be done to resolve things.

P.S. the entire H1B program does nothing but import slaves... that mess needs to go. But again, big corporations want it, so we keep expanding it.
 
It's time for this thread to die.

Can't we just talk about gun control instead?

Threads shouldn't die because a non-contributor doesn't like it. Threads should die if they get out of hand and people start attacking each other.

We are having a logical and thoughtful discussion, you may continue on to any of the other 68,645 discussion on the forum.

I don't want to take it out on you specifically, but we have mods and everyone has a report button.
Please don't take the best thing about this forum away from us... the diversity of ideas and the silencing of ideas you don't like. It's precisely the type of discussions on here, that may or may fall off the rails, that furthers the betterment of ourselves. Silence and suppression of speech would be the opposite.
 
You're quite right, of course, but there are manyother places where this kind of US-centric political discussion can take place - most of the Web, in fact.

I'm not trying to deny anyone the right to voice their opinion, just suggesting that you might like to take it outside.

@Kraken?
That is only partially true.. I'm not on another forum and I don't consider the people on other forums as "friends" such as I do here.. maybe that's my problem, sure...

The OP is a politically charged issue based in The USA. Would be happy to export woes to New Zealand.

You are welcome to start a New Zealand-centric discussion if you would like, I would encourage it.
 
Last edited:
Well, Gun Control is an entirely separate issue, yet its rooted in the same faults that got us our tax code and our immigration policy...

It boils down to a lack of adherence to the rule of law.

The 2nd Amendment in the US makes weapon ownership a right, it's as powerful and inseparable as speech and life. People outside the US cannot fathom this. They think it's just a quick matter of passing some regulations. But here's the thing...

It's not a right if you have to ask permission.

So we cannot have "gun control" at all in the US until that amendment is repealed. We have a HUGE population of people that do not trust the government, and will not ever trust the government. Considering the way our nation came to be, this shouldn't be much of a surprise. These people will not allow the amendment to be removed, and you need a huge pile of political support to change or remove an amendment for a ton of good reasons.

So, in the meantime we have well meaning people that pass limitations on that right, but in so doing they've degraded the legal concept of a right entirely. This degradation has been systemic for over a century, and has reached a critical point where basically none of us have any rights at all anymore.

To put it short and blunt, gun control isn't about guns, it's about control and some of us have a problem with that. It's not a left vs right issue, it's a top vs bottom issue.
 
Well put @Sky-Knight. Another issue we 99% agree on.

Giving anyone a gun carte blanche (No background checks, mental health checks) is insanity. On the other extreme, far leftists want to ban guns virtually entirely (Freakin' stupid too).

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Leftists will focus on "Well regulated Militia" stating that it means Police and State Gov't outfits only, while the right will focus only on "the right of the people", stating it applies to everyone as a right.
The Constitution is a framework to be interpreted... and so, it has been interpreted (IMO, correctly, to apply to all people).
Taken in context of the 1700's, pretty sure they were not talking about Police stations... sure seems likely they meant "people, willing and able... like farmers and normal folk."

We have a social problem concerning guns, but it's a terribly dangerous and slippery-slope to attack the tools of aggression, instead of focusing on the social constructs that "make" people use guns as the tools of their aggression. Face it, the guy that runs down to 7-11 and robs it at gun point for $238 probably wouldn't do that if 'he' had a good paying job or opportunity, education, etc.

Per capita, the US is 20th in gun deaths at 37,000(Suicides, accidents and Murder). 45,000 people die every year from lack of health insurance. Just to put things in perspective.

In the end they just want to erode the "peoples" freedoms and rights further.
 
Yeah, and if you dig into those weapon deaths the vast majority of them are hand gun related, and of that almost half are suicides. But what weapons do they want to take away? The big scary semi-automatic rifle, which is responsible for a whopping 150 people a year.

All of the above is far better addressed with comprehensive medical reform that includes mental health resources. That kid in Florida set off every alarm at every level and shot up that school waiting for a bed in a mental institution...

The real solution is brain dead, but some people are just bent on stealing the private property of others because it's "scary".

I won't disarm, they'll have to shoot me to get my guns, it's MY job to defend this house. The police are too far away, and I live in a human trafficking / drug smuggling hot spot. My mother owns an custom built AR-15 for home defense, and yes... she's had to use it. Nothing else will work for her due to a shoulder injury. She's also retired air force... so who's going to tell her she can't protect herself? To make matters worse, because I don't deal drugs if I do get shot myself, it's most likely thanks to a police officer doing so. That's how safe we are statistically, most likely to get shot by a cop. But nightmares still happen, every day.

Meanwhile, I've got a cousin that's disabled due to his service in Iraq, has a massive case of PTSD the VA isn't addressing, and he's a walking arsenal waiting to explode... And yet, there's jack I can do about it. I can't forcibly disarm him until he hurts someone, because you can't just revoke people's rights. Texas isn't going to do a GVRO anytime soon, because reasons, but even if TX had GVROs I'm not sure it'd apply there.

We can't have adult conversations in this country... not generally. But we seem to be able to here. Which means even these hard issues can be tackled, which leaves me wondering how and what we do to get our Congress to do the same.
 
Last edited:
The real solution is brain dead, but some people are just bent on stealing the private property of others because it's "scary".

I think there's a big difference between what pro-gun-regulation people want and how that's being perceived (actually, "marketed" probably fits better....) on the right. Further, the "real solution" you mention (I assume you mean better mental health care options and availability of treatment) is exactly part of another boogeyman opposed by the same folks. I'm pretty positive that there's a very significant overlap between the "liberals want to take my guns!" crowd and the "no socialist healthcare! Keep your filthy government hands off my Medicare!" crowd.
 
The only 90%+ drop I can find dealing with a wall in another country is Hungary, from the Middle East of which they had 3528 arrests in 2018 and 5 arrests in 2019. But that situation is far different from ours, read about it.

Ah, yes, it was Hungary. The border between North and South Korea is also quite effective (although comparing a DMZ to a border wall isn't an apt analogy, I wouldn't be opposed to our military at the border). Is it 100% effective? No. Nothing is. But it's a deterrent. It can't stop all illegal immigration on its own, and no one is claiming that it will. But doing NOTHING isn't an answer either. How much taxpayer money is wasted every year on welfare for illegal immigrants? Waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more than a meager $70 billion. How much money is wasted on the military? Again, way more than $70 billion. The government steals my money and 99% of the crap it wastes my money on I don't agree with. The ONE thing I do agree with is protecting our borders.

As for people overstaying their visas, make them wear GPS tracking ankle bracelets like criminals. I know it's not pretty, but that's the price to pay. They're not citizens and if they want to be treated like citizens and have the rights of citizens, they're free to become a citizen. If not then they have no right to b*tch.
 
The purpose of limiting SALT deductions was to stop states from forcing everyone else to subsidize their "free sh*t for everybody" tax policies. If you want to live in a high-tax state, then be my guest. But everyone else shouldn't have to pay for your crazy socialist programs. If you actually have to pay the full price of your socialist policies then maybe you'll think differently. People always like "free" stuff so long as someone else is footing the bill.

You don't like it? Then vote to change it. Or move to a lower tax state. Just don't vote for the same socialist BS in the new state you move to, otherwise you'll just be bringing the "paradise" you tried to escape from with you. This is what people don't understand. The problem with where you currently live is NOT the place - it's the people. Only move from there if you don't think like everyone else around you, otherwise all you're going to do is ruin the place you move to and turn it into the place you just left. This is the MAJOR problem with immigration. I don't care what country (or state) you're coming from, but chances are YOU are part of the problem. All you're going to do is spread the low quality of living you're currently trying to escape from to where you move to like a disease.

This is why immigration needs to be limited. If you import too many foreign people, all you do is turn your country into their country and nobody is happy in the end. If someone wants to have your quality of life, they have to adapt to the culture they're moving to. I'm not talking about unique cultural things like what you wear or what food you eat. You have to adapt to the way of thinking of the place you're moving to. For example, if I moved to Japan I would still keep a lot of my own culture, but I would change the way I think and act to match THEIR culture because that's WHY their country is the way it is. And if I wanted to move to Japan, I would want to maintain the country the way it is because I like their country and want to be a part of it (hence why I would want to move there).

For example, in Japan, rules are paramount. Here in America if you were going to cross the street and you were waiting for the sign to tell you could you cross but there were no cars (let's say it's 3:00am), you'd just go while carefully keeping tabs of your surroundings so you wouldn't be surprised by a car and get hit. A Japanese person would NEVER do this. Even if there was no cars and no one else around to see you, you'd still wait for the sign to change to tell you that you could cross. That's stupid from an American perspective. But you know what? I'd adapt to that way of thinking. It helps to ensure social order. And God forbid someone actually saw me crossing against the sign. They'd be too polite to point it out, but I don't want to be the dumba$$ American that doesn't know (or worse, doesn't care about) the rules. I'd want to fit in as much as possible for a foreigner.

The problem is, too many people don't want to become a part of the country. They just want to escape their current situation. Then once they get to said country, they change it into where they just came from. All that does is inflict the same type of crap onto the poor people that already live there. The immigrants didn't like the way their country was, so why bring the same crap with them? They can't see that the problem is THEM and NOT the place they left. That's why it's important that we don't import too many immigrants. If the number is kept low enough, they (or their children at least) will adapt to the culture. If too many immigrants are imported, they overwhelm the culture of the country they move to. If I wanted to live in Mexico, I'd move to Mexico. I don't want my own country/state to be turned into Mexico.

And it's not just Mexico, it's ANY country. I like the American culture. I don't want my home to turn into France, Italy, Iran, Japan, Russia, etc. And yes, you can say that American "culture" isn't really our own because it's a mix of so many different cultures. That's true, but remember, immigration wasn't so massive in the past. The culture had time to change and adapt GRADUALLY. Each person brought a part of their culture with them, but their culture did NOT overwhelm the culture that currently existed. It added it's own spice to the mix. What's happening now is instead of adding a dash of salt to the soup, we're pouring 500lbs of salt into a cup of soup and expecting to still have a cup of soup in the end. Instead we're going to end up with an cup of salt (and 499.9 pounds of salt on the floor).

For once Sapphirescales and I agree. The illegal immigration is killing us. Legal or nothing - it is simple. Get rid of the bleeding heart libs.
 
@fencepost Oh yeah, I'm actually at the point of punching family members that say socialism. I've got an almost precanned response for them all now... and it's full on Princess Bride... you keep using that word, I don't think it means what you think it means!
 
@phaZed actually, it isn't... The military doesn't own all of its production, and actually goes out of its way to keep private enterprise well funded to handle those needs. As long as the basic means of production remains privately owned, socialism doesn't apply. There are however aspects of it that are very much socialist, and they must be so because they cannot work any other way. The ability to recognize when that idea structure makes sense and use it productively is rather important for our nation going forward. I just wish people would actually think about it and try to understand it instead of devolving into anti-soviet propaganda talking points from the 60s.
 
@phaZed actually, it isn't... The military doesn't own all of its production, and actually goes out of its way to keep private enterprise well funded to handle those needs. As long as the basic means of production remains privately owned, socialism doesn't apply. There are however aspects of it that are very much socialist, and they must be so because they cannot work any other way. The ability to recognize when that idea structure makes sense and use it productively is rather important for our nation going forward. I just wish people would actually think about it and try to understand it instead of devolving into anti-soviet propaganda talking points from the 60s.

There was no income tax before 1913. The government was funded by tariffs and corporate taxes. I would love for the government to stop stealing my money and giving it to other people that either refuse to work or are here illegally. Even if the funds were used for "good" purposes, the government wastes so much of the money I'd be better off investing in a ponzi scheme (which, ironically, is exactly what the social security program is).
 
@Sky-Knight and @River Valley Computer

Now just replace "military" with "Democratic Socialists" to the above thoughtful statement. Especially this part:
I just wish people would actually think about it and try to understand it instead of devolving into anti-soviet propaganda talking points from the 60s.

;)

There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] with social ownership being the common element shared by its various forms.[5][14][15]

Would that not be the definition of what the Military is? "Social Ownership"? Free housing, Free healthcare, a month every year of paid vacation, paid college tuition. It's a Bernie Sanders wet dream.
 
@sapphirescales That doesn't matter because the CBO thinks we're hitting 60% unemployment sometime in the 2030s thanks to a mini-baby boom landing at the same time automation completes the 2nd Industrial revolution. The idea that everyone will be working is actually falling away, jack we can do about it. Capitalism as we know it requires full employment and we're by all objective measures living the last gasp of low unemployment in the world's history right now. I do hear you on the tax thing though, we're blowing through money at a stupid pace doing things the bulk of our people have no interest in doing. We can save a mint by simply stopping the bombing of brown people on the other side of the planet. Meanwhile we're standing back and letting the medical industry enslave entire swaths of the population... Oh, and there was income tax before 1913, the Federal government fired one up every time there was a war, the one in 1913 was to fund WWI. But after WWII we figured out that letting our military fall to crap between each conflict didn't work out so well... so we kept it around... then didn't adjust it for inflation and the rest is history.

@phaZed Now see this is the stupidity I'm talking about, that's not socialism, that's populism. That's JFK's New Deal stuff, it's not socialism. It's regulated capitalism with socialist inspiration, not the same thing, not even close. The former doesn't work, the latter has all kinds of potential. Indeed socialism as a word has been so poisoned that you can say it's a useless brand even. If Democratic "Socialists" want to get anywhere, they need to leave that word behind. Even Sanders during his attempted Presidential run had to waste a bucket of time telling people he wasn't a socialist! Bad brand! Let it die!
 
Last edited:
If I may steer this back to the original topic for a moment... carmen 617 mentioned about using the 20% income pass through deduction .

There is supposed to be a figure on Line 9 of Form 1040, and I checked my tax software, and yes, that was already figured in. I'm going to continue to research this, and who knows, I may even end up seeking out a tax prep service. I cannot imagine that I am going to have to pay this in, in lieu of the meager salary

https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/taxes/pass-through-income-tax-deduction/
 
Back
Top