Taxpayer Ripoffs.

[rn79870]

This is a "post a taxpayer ripoff" here thread. Feel free to vent.

It seems that there are a few Lawyers advertising in the base papers (for the military folks) requesting surrogate mothers and offering from 10,000 to 50,000 dollars for the services. Why the military papers? Because the lawyers know that a military spouse will get FREE medical care for the pregnancy and delivery. The bad thing is that there is no claim against the money the "mother" as she is entitled to the medical care based on her husbands service.

What pi$$es me off is this is yet another example of lawyers screwing the public and taking advantage of "loopholes" in the law.

Feel free to add your favorite taxpayer ripoff to this list...

[JerodKing]

Maybe not quite what you mean but in Pittsburgh they passed a 10% drink tax to keep the busses running. Even though the state just gave them millions, and they squandered it. Even though they cut routes, and busses don't run past midnight now (bad when your going to a bar). Even though the Port Authority wants to cut health care and pensions for employees even now. Even though the amount of money raised is 10X more than what they needed, with it just sitting around collect dust (and losing value with inflation). And ESPECIALLY because they just spent $400 MILLION dollars to dig a route UNDER the river to connect the trolley to the North Shore from downtown, as opposed to using the BRIDGE!

Oh, and the $52/year privelage to work tax is BS too.

[WDRacing]

This is a "post a taxpayer ripoff" here thread. Feel free to vent.

It seems that there are a few Lawyers advertising in the base papers (for the military folks) requesting surrogate mothers and offering from 10,000 to 50,000 dollars for the services. Why the military papers? Because the lawyers know that a military spouse will get FREE medical care for the pregnancy and delivery. The bad thing is that there is no claim against the money the "mother" as she is entitled to the medical care based on her husbands service.

What pi$$es me off is this is yet another example of lawyers screwing the public and taking advantage of "loopholes" in the law.

Feel free to add your favorite taxpayer ripoff to this list...

What exactly is your issue here? I'm just wondering because I don't understand.

[rn79870]

Military dependents accept 10,000 to 50,000 for becoming a surrogate mother. Then, after she is fertilized, she uses military assets (or is funded by military health care) for her pregnancy and delivery. After she has the kid, she turns the child over to the "adoptive parents" and collects her 10 to 50 thousand dollars. I see it as the US financing her baby business. It would be different if she decided to give the child up for adoption after she had it, but not when she goes into the plan knowing that she's in it only for the money.

[WDRacing]

So you don't think the fact that her husband can die for our country is worth the expense of a delivery? You don't think that when her husband deploys for 1.2 years at a time it just might be worth over looking a little spending our part...think of it as our way of saying thanks.

Or don't...

Out of all the possible ways your tax dollars are wasted THIS should earn the very least of your concern.

[rn79870]

No Brian, that's not what I'm saying. She is running a "for profit" business at the expense of the taxpayer. She should support her own economic enterprise. On the otherhand, if she and her husband are having a kid, fine, they are entitled. But when she is inplanted with a fertilized embryo for the sole purpose of prifiting from gestating that child, then perhaps the taxpayers shouldn't be footing the medical bill. -After all, medical expenses would be a writeoff for her "for profit business." It's really pretty obviously a tax payer ripoff.

[WDRacing]

I'm just for the people in the Military and there families getting ahead if possible. In this case they found a loophole...I support it. But I will concede that it is definitly a tax loophole.

I was talking to Mike, S13FX, about how he discovered he makes quite a bit more money working 65hrs then he does 70 because of how much the tax bracket jumps. Not sure if that's related to the topic, but I found it very interesting. Work less, make more...our tax system definitly needs a revamp.

WD

[rn79870]

First of all, I don't think the service men and women are compensated for all they risk. Neither are the police and firemen who also serve. I'll never stand for anything that takes from any of them that which they earn, but, when I see what I believe is them ripping off the US, then I say something.

Let me take the same example and ask you this. What if there were only a limited amount of medical care allocated to the military. And when that care was used up, there was no more for the rest of the year. If that was the case, would you see the "for profit" pregnancies as a fair use of those limited assets? Now, just because the government has an endlessly deep pocket, is it really any different?

[skylndrftr]

As interesting as some of the work they do is, and as useful as some of their discoveries have been (the internet?) DARPA is kinda a big waste of tax payer money in my mind. They pay huge sums of money for development of thigns they then buy back...

Some of the stuff is just kinda oofy to. Its like they wanna build cartoon land. They actually spent $30m pursuing a way of spraying a slippery chemical over a battlefield and then developing slippery resistant boots and tank treads....

[WDRacing]

Let me take the same example and ask you this. What if there were only a limited amount of medical care allocated to the military. And when that care was used up, there was no more for the rest of the year. If that was the case, would you see the "for profit" pregnancies as a fair use of those limited assets? Now, just because the government has an endlessly deep pocket, is it really any different?

If that were the case then no, I wouldn't support it. But it isn't and I do.

I admit it is a tax loophole...but it's one that I don't personally mind. Especially when I can say for certain that I have personally wasted more money then 100 deliveries would cost at the expense of the tax payer while I was active duty. All of which was done following retarded procedures that do nothing but provide someone with job security.

For instance, changing a $32,000 manifold assembly when the pressure switch "I'm not allowed to change" is only $25.

Our country wastes money left and right and I'll freely admit the Military is a huge chunk of it. If we stopped the waste we'd only pay maybe 8 or 9 % income tax I'm sure of it. Wouldn't that be nice?

[rn79870]

There again, many things start with one stap at a time. You seem to follow the philosophy that as long as there is one example of something worse, we don't need to start fixing anything at all. Typical conservative hogwash.

[WDRacing]

There again, many things start with one stap at a time. You seem to follow the philosophy that as long as there is one example of something worse, we don't need to start fixing anything at all. Typical conservative hogwash.

Nowhere have I inferred that. In fact you'd have to be completely ignorant to arrive at the conclusion. My thoughts don't represent a political party at all, they are MY thoughts. I just got done saying we waste money and that if we stopped doing so our taxes would could be decreased. How do you derive what you said from that? Oh...you're just trying to put a Liberal spin on something we actually agree on...because you're so BLINDED by your stance you can't even see that we basically agree. I'm FOR cutting back on how we waste money and FOR not paying as much taxes. I simply said that I don't mind paying for the Military spouse taking advantage of the loophole. To ME there are other things that I'd rather see investigated and reformed...hence my statement..

Our country wastes money left and right and I'll freely admit the Military is a huge chunk of it. If we stopped the waste we'd only pay maybe 8 or 9 % income tax I'm sure of it. Wouldn't that be nice?

If you would actually pop your head out for a second you'd see that what I said has nothing to do with leaving things as they are.

Thanks for making my point over and over again Bob. There is no actual discussion with you...it's all about "The Spin". Which is to bad because I was really looking forward to seeing where this thread would go.

BTW, I don't subscribe to your "Do Nothing" philosophy...I subscribe to fixing the things that most need fixing. Not randomly applying band aide patches to a sinking ship...which apparently you think is going to stop it's descent even though you're hemorrhaging water because your hull is half gone. Which would be a typical Liberal stance...to little to late.

[rn79870]

Nowhere have I inferred that. In fact you'd have to be completely ignorant to arrive at the conclusion.

Oops, I thought you said...

...I admit it is a tax loophole...but it's one that I don't personally mind. Especially when I can say for certain that I have personally wasted more money then 100 deliveries would cost at the expense of the tax payer while I was active duty...

Our country wastes money left and right and I'll freely admit the Military is a huge chunk of it.

I'd go to other threads where you don't see that the sum of the parts has a total, but, I think I've proven my point here.

Care to backpedal now...

BTW, I don't subscribe to your "Do Nothing" philosophy...I subscribe to fixing the things that most need fixing.

If that were true, you'd be voting for Obama, not McCain. THat's how I intend to fix. More backpedaling needed for you here Brain.

[AZhitman]

She is running a "for profit" business at the expense of the taxpayer.

when she is inplanted with a fertilized embryo for the sole purpose of prifiting from gestating that child, then perhaps the taxpayers shouldn't be footing the medical bill.

Yep - That's a rip.

Even if it's not THE most wasteful thing, it's inappropriate and needs to be shut down.

The REALITY of it is, every time you go and try to eliminate some of the wasteful spending of the Armed Forces, some damned ambulance-chasing attorney screws it all up.

Like B said, why should he have to replace a $25K assembly when he can FIX a $18 part? The FIX that the military trained him to do in the FIRST place! Because of liability, that's why. And it happens a hundred times a day on every base in the US.

[WDRacing]

More backpedaling needed for you here Brain.

No backpedaling needed. You made all my points for me by only quoting things that make your case, not the entire statement which places it out of context. But thanks for playing Bobby...

Especially when I can say for certain that I have personally wasted more money then 100 deliveries would cost at the expense of the tax payer while I was active duty. All of which was done following retarded procedures that do nothing but provide someone with job security

Is what you needed to quote, but you left off the things you don't like seeing and posted up random propaganda BS. See it clearly states that I did what I did because it was following the regulations...that I called BS and in the same post called for reform. SO how are YOU gonna back peddle and spin this one there Bobbo?

Was I supposed to go against Military regulation here Bob?

You can spin ALL you want...in the end you're just making MY points for me. So please...continue.

[rn79870]

Brian, look around you. You're the only one here who doesn't see this as a taxpayer rip off. Your defense to this is based a "the military is wasteful" counterargument. Sorry buddy, but maybe next time.

[WDRacing]

Bob...stop while you're ahead. Or at least read what I'm saying again please.

I admit it is a tax loophole...but it's one that I don't personally mind.

I said it was a loophole...I agreed. It just doesn't personally bother me...that's all. I'm not for ripping off our taxes it's just that in this ONE instance it DOESN'T bother me personally. It has nothing to do with my political stance at all. I was military, my Wife is military, my Dad was military, HIS Dad was military...ALL the way back to Scotland where you can trace my roots to some of the original Scottish warriors. If anything I'm simply guilty of wanting to take care of the people in the military because I KNOW they get screwed SO often and NOBODY else gives a crap. And that makes me biased...thats all. So please take off the horse blinders man and let this go.

I'm ALL for tax reform...all for it. If you would like to continue the discussion instead of attacking me over some misunderstood personal issue I'm ok with that.

WD

[rn79870]

Whoa, settle down Brian. Just try to defend what you're saying and relax, it's not the end of the world when you're wrong.

[AZhitman]

Bob's just bummed that he's not in the military so he could be a surrogate.

Don't ask, don't tell!

[rn79870]

It's the money Greg, honest, the money, nothing else matters.

(but I'll donate some super seeds to the young ladies.)

[WDRacing]

Whoa, settle down Brian. Just try to defend what you're saying and relax, it's not the end of the world when you're wrong.

I admitted I was wrong when I admitted that it was indeed a loophole. I also explained my thoughts surrounding why I felt the way I do. Perhaps you should take your own advice and admit that you misunderstood everything I was saying and that we do in fact agree that TAX reform is in dire need and that perhaps you misquoted me a few times.

One can not defend himself if the other party is never willing to make a concession that he/she may indeed be in the wrong.

You'll know when I'm excited Bob...you've never seen it.

[rn79870]

I admitted I was wrong...

Good enough, we agree. Now, back to the real world issues.

[WDRacing]

Ok Bob...

ding ding...just remember that this is all your choice.

[smockers83]

The War on Drugs???

The more we fight it, the more expensive it makes the drugs at the end-user level. This makes it more profitable to be in the drug business, thus creating more people wanting to get in on the trade. I'm not advocating making those kinds of drugs legal, but we need to find a better way. And rehab for those with problems, not all the jail time.

[rn79870]

War on Drugs? Taxpayer ripoff?

[smockers83]

Yeah, in 2005 they spent $45.5 billion, not including indirect costs. In 1998, it is estimated that $143.4 billion was spent directly and indirectly. I've always questioned the War on Drugs since high school, I even did a speech on it one time. Don't remember much of what I said, but I still came to the conclusion that it is mostly a waste of time. Plus, apparently the CIA is in the drug trade anyway, so what's the point?

Add in there the increasing gang violence, the Mexican cartels infiltrating the US, lost legit economic activity, etc etc. Why should I have to pay for something that doesn't bother me and causes more problems than it solves?

[nzmoman]

Can anyone tell me what Government program or institution is NOT a taxpayer rip off?

I am trying to think of one program the government has started where the money was well spent and what they said was going to happen is actually happening without excess spending or lingering fear of the bottom falling out....

wait...actually... NASA...is there another?

Its very obvious that all of these "trendy" type programs never work. They don't because people get adjusted to them. Yeah, a few less people smoke crack, but the truth is that its not govt programs that did it. I think it was communities that made the change. After things got so bad many of them fought back, and the majority of places where this is a major issue, are places where people have given up.

There is something severely wrong with our society because we either don't pay attention or we don't care what our gov't is up to.

thats my .02

[AZhitman]

^ Great point.

Start hacking into some of these damn social service programs, cut taxes and let people decide for themselves how it should be spent...

Remember, we're a VERY generous society, donating over $300 BILLION last year alone. I think local civic groups, churches and advocacy groups can manage that money FAR better than the retards on the Hill.

[smockers83]

A lot of programs do have excess spending, but that comes with the size of the government and the huge bureaucracies involved. I've seen the bureacracies in a large university setting and how money is wasted (some of that wasted for me, but of course I'm not going to complain about those ones), I can't imagine how bad it is at state and federal levels.

[ishkabibble]

Can anyone tell me what Government program or institution is NOT a taxpayer rip off?

The GAO, for one.