Suggested Video: A New Beginning...

[pollyannaish]

@cudjo I don't think we should look for a way around the 1099. As he says over and over, this is not a tax escape plan but a way to organize our lives differently.

 

Washington laws are not nearly as stringent on independent contractors as Colorado @SrWoodchuck. At least in my field. For my biggest new client, I have an office in their facility, business cards under their logo but maintain control of my own schedule and work with approval from them on each initiative. They tell me what they need, I figure out how to get it done.

 

The financial part comes under my business and is run as a client.

 

So are the stringent laws in your state specific to contracting? It seems to me that they would be designed specifically to keep people in the construction field from paying under the table.

 

What appeals to me about Whittle's perspective is not the specifics. We already spend thousands of dollars to put our kids in private schools. And while I think the space program is cool, it's not my top priority at the moment. The genius of his presentation is the call for us to quit looking to the government for solutions and to start looking to figure out how to get the job done despite the government. Figure out solutions that don't involve them.

 

Case in point. About eight years ago I got a solicitation from an organization that wanted money to help repeal roe v. Wade laws. I started to send them five bucks when I got to thinking differently. Here was the process.

 

1. The goal is to support the right to life of the unborn and stop as many abortions as possible.

2. Not one life would be saved if I sent money to this organization. It would simply go to feed the strange symbiotic relationship between the problem and the problem solvers.

3. So my money should be sent to organizations not focused on the law, but on saving lives one at a time in my community.

 

In that vein, I have started suggesting to my liberal friends when they complain about the government and the poor to quit supporting the organizations trying to change the government and just support organizations that do the kind of work they want. Politics aside. It's working here and there.

 

The point is that we are at an impasse politically and we need to find other ways to change the country. That is to BE the country you want it to be. Bill's solution is not the only one. We need to crowd source the solution. Quit railing against the machine and use that energy to find legal ways around the machine.

[Rokke]

Didn't sleep well last night -- kept thinking about Bill Whittle. I agree with @SrWoodchuck's first comments about this video. Whittle is reacting to the same shock we all felt Tuesday night. He does have some interesting ideas, and obviously he has been thinking about this for some time, but as @SrWoodchuck said it is also a bit naive. I hope he is able to pull some of his ideas off, but we shall see.

 

His comments about liberals having no virtue was over the top, IMO. I know people who voted for Obama who are very virtuous. They are not "takers," they just see themselves as caring about their fellow man. Whereas we do not, in their view. Wrong, but not all are lacking in virtue.

How do they care for their fellow man? The definition of "taking" doesn't have to imply they are taking things for themselves. A person who votes to take my money through higher taxes to pay for a program that they have the means to support but have decided not to support, is a "taker". Joe Biden comes to mind. He is richer than all of us on this site combined, yet gives almost nothing to charity. Yet, he believes people like me should pay more to pay for his agenda. He's not willing to pay for it. He's taking my money to pay for it. Without being on welfare...he's a taker.

[cudjo]

for all of these movie stars and politicians that want all these wonderful things for needy people, let them spend their own money and leave mine alone. I am just as compasionate as anyone but let them work for what they want

[Valin]

Didn't sleep well last night -- kept thinking about Bill Whittle. I agree with @SrWoodchuck's first comments about this video. Whittle is reacting to the same shock we all felt Tuesday night. He does have some interesting ideas, and obviously he has been thinking about this for some time, but as @SrWoodchuck said it is also a bit naive. I hope he is able to pull some of his ideas off, but we shall see.

 

His comments about liberals having no virtue was over the top, IMO. I know people who voted for Obama who are very virtuous. They are not "takers," they just see themselves as caring about their fellow man. Whereas we do not, in their view. Wrong, but not all are lacking in virtue.

How do they care for their fellow man? The definition of "taking" doesn't have to imply they are taking things for themselves. A person who votes to take my money through higher taxes to pay for a program that they have the means to support but have decided not to support, is a "taker". Joe Biden comes to mind. He is richer than all of us on this site combined, yet gives almost nothing to charity. Yet, he believes people like me should pay more to pay for his agenda. He's not willing to pay for it. He's taking my money to pay for it. Without being on welfare...he's a taker.

 

I don't question the motives of the left...ie help the less fortunate, No I do however question the results. Remember what the road to hell is paved with.

[SrWoodchuck]

Didn't sleep well last night -- kept thinking about Bill Whittle. I agree with @SrWoodchuck's first comments about this video. Whittle is reacting to the same shock we all felt Tuesday night. He does have some interesting ideas, and obviously he has been thinking about this for some time, but as @SrWoodchuck said it is also a bit naive. I hope he is able to pull some of his ideas off, but we shall see.

 

His comments about liberals having no virtue was over the top, IMO. I know people who voted for Obama who are very virtuous. They are not "takers," they just see themselves as caring about their fellow man. Whereas we do not, in their view. Wrong, but not all are lacking in virtue.

How do they care for their fellow man? The definition of "taking" doesn't have to imply they are taking things for themselves. A person who votes to take my money through higher taxes to pay for a program that they have the means to support but have decided not to support, is a "taker". Joe Biden comes to mind. He is richer than all of us on this site combined, yet gives almost nothing to charity. Yet, he believes people like me should pay more to pay for his agenda. He's not willing to pay for it. He's taking my money to pay for it. Without being on welfare...he's a taker.

 

I don't question the motives of the left...ie help the less fortunate, No I do however question the results. Remember what the road to hell is paved with.

Obamabucks?

 

The bodies of dead Mexican & American citizens......no, wait......those are bumps in the road to hell.

[Valin]

for all of these movie stars and politicians that want all these wonderful things for needy people, let them spend their own money and leave mine alone. I am just as compasionate as anyone but let them work for what they want

 

 

A small question for Barbra Streisand

 

 

Do you really need a home like this, when so many people are living in squalled conditions or are homeless?

[nickydog]

Didn't sleep well last night -- kept thinking about Bill Whittle. I agree with @SrWoodchuck's first comments about this video. Whittle is reacting to the same shock we all felt Tuesday night. He does have some interesting ideas, and obviously he has been thinking about this for some time, but as @SrWoodchuck said it is also a bit naive. I hope he is able to pull some of his ideas off, but we shall see.

 

His comments about liberals having no virtue was over the top, IMO. I know people who voted for Obama who are very virtuous. They are not "takers," they just see themselves as caring about their fellow man. Whereas we do not, in their view. Wrong, but not all are lacking in virtue.

How do they care for their fellow man? The definition of "taking" doesn't have to imply they are taking things for themselves. A person who votes to take my money through higher taxes to pay for a program that they have the means to support but have decided not to support, is a "taker". Joe Biden comes to mind. He is richer than all of us on this site combined, yet gives almost nothing to charity. Yet, he believes people like me should pay more to pay for his agenda. He's not willing to pay for it. He's taking my money to pay for it. Without being on welfare...he's a taker.

 

Yes, that's a good point and of course you are right. Plus I am certainly not going to try to defend the self-righteous point of view of the left.

[pollyannaish]

To be fair, I do know some very good liberals. In SOME areas. But they want all people to be virtuous by force, and that is where it falls down. You can not force virtue. You can only treasure it, and believe me I actually believe those liberals are simply conservatives who haven't figured it out yet.

[Valin]

To be fair, I do know some very good liberals. In SOME areas. But they want all people to be virtuous by force, and that is where it falls down. You can not force virtue. You can only treasure it, and believe me I actually believe those liberals are simply conservatives who haven't figured it out yet.

 

Not Evil....Just Wrong.

[Valin]

for all of these movie stars and politicians that want all these wonderful things for needy people, let them spend their own money and leave mine alone. I am just as compasionate as anyone but let them work for what they want

 

 

A small question for Barbra Streisand

 

 

Do you really need a home like this, when so many people are living in squalled conditions or are homeless?

 

Ace Of Spades:It's Time For Hollywood To Pay Its Fair Share as Part of a Balanced Approach

 

New tax: Any fee of $1 million or more, the performance for which is substantially completed over the course of six months or less, is hit with a 20% surtax above and beyond normal tax rates. If the work for fee is completed in five months or less, 30%; if the work for fee is completed in four months or less, 40%; if three months or less, 50%.

 

Reason? If you're making $10 million on a Hollywood shoot that lasts six weeks, that's not fair. Even among millionaires, that's not fair. The usual millionaire must work a full year for that kind of money. But a high paid actor, or athlete, can make that much in a season, and then take the rest of the year off.

 

(Snip)

 

 

 

[Rheo]

[saveliberty]

Thank you, I loved this!

[Valin]

Thank you, I loved this!

 

Not me! It makes me think. QUICK where my Lady Gaga album!

[Rheo]

This is the new project we are working on for Bill. An entry portal to connect to thousands of existing web sites and networks to build and share a parallel welfare/mentor system that take gov't out and can empower those that need help by donating time and/or money and linking to thousands of sites to find workers, find work, hire people, etc.

[Rheo]

If anyone is interested in joining the project, let me know and I can invite you into the FB page that we are using for the "think tank" to put this together. Bill has given us the project with no restrictions and allowing us to invite others into the group. Come join 820+ strangers to brainstorm. ha