AMT
 

The biggest problem with the AMT is the fact that it is a "stealth" tax; you only know if you are subject to it after you calculate the regular FIT and the AMT. It's also viewed as unfair because it strips out a lot of so-called preferences, like state taxes, accelerated depreciation, and things that taxpayers foolishly believed that they are entitled to because Congress enacted them.

As for it being on the front burner, it's been there for at least the last three Congresses and has never gotten anywhere. That's largely because it raises a shitload of revenue that will have to be made up for by raising the regular FIT.

You have a point that it is somewhat closer to a "flat" tax than the regular tax, but it can't be used on its own as written, because the AMT is only about three sections in the Code that key entirely off of the regular tax.

We've already beaten the alleged flat tax proposals to death about a dozen times, so I won't go down that road again.


Unless I'm provoked.

Ann you have really gone off the reservation. What is with your latest column? I have two Muslim employees and a Muslim business partner. Is there any rational justification I can give them for the comments in bold down below? Bombing Syria into the Stone Age equals genocide does it not? I will be surprized if any legitimate papers will run your column now.

MUSLIM BITES DOG
February 15, 2006

The amazing part of the great Danish cartoon caper isn't that Muslims immediately engage in acts of mob violence when things don't go their way. That is de rigueur for the Religion of Peace. Their immediate response to all bad news is mass violence. That's a "dog bites man" story and belongs on page B-34, next to the grade school hot lunch menu and the birth notices.

After an Egyptian ferry capsized recently, killing hundreds of passengers, a whole braying mob of passengers' relatives staged an organized attack on the company, throwing furniture out the window and burning the building to the ground. Witnesses say it was the most violent ocean liner-related incident since Carnival Cruise Lines fired Kathie Lee Gifford.

The "offense to Islam" ruse is merely an excuse for Muslims to revert to their default mode: rioting and setting things on fire. These people have a serious anger management problem.

So it's not exactly a scoop that Muslims are engaging in violence. A front-page story would be "Offended Muslims Remain Calm."

What is stunning about this spectacle is that their violence is working. With a few exceptions, the media won't show the cartoons that incited mass violence around the globe (cartoons available at www.anncoulter.com). And yet, week after week, American patriots endure "The Boondocks" without complaint. Where's the justice here?

Perhaps we could put aside our national, ongoing, post-9/11 Muslim butt-kissing contest and get on with the business at hand: Bombing Syria back to the stone age and then permanently disarming Iran.

The mass violence by Muslims over some cartoons reminds us why we have to worry when countries like Iran start talking about having nukes. Iran is led by a lunatic who makes a big point of denying the Holocaust. Indeed, in response to the Muhammad cartoons, one Iranian newspaper is soliciting cartoons about the Holocaust. (So far the only submissions have come from Ted Rall, Garry Trudeau and The New York Times.)

Iran is certainly implying that it has nukes. Maybe they do, maybe they don't, but you can't take chances with berserk psychotics. What if they start having one of these bipolar episodes with a nuclear bomb?

If you don't want to get shot by the police, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, then don't point a toy gun at them. Or, as I believe our motto should be after 9/11: Jihad monkey talks tough; jihad monkey takes the consequences. Sorry, I realize that's offensive. How about "camel jockey"? What? Now what'd I say? Boy, you tent merchants sure are touchy. Grow up, would you?

In addition, I believe we are legally required to be bombing Syria right now. And unlike the Quran's alleged prohibition on depictions of Muhammad, I've got documentation to back that up!

Muslims in Syria torched the Danish Embassy a few weeks ago, burning it to the ground. According to everyone, the Syrian government was behind the attack — the prime minister of Denmark, Condoleezza Rice and White House spokesman Scott McClellan. I think even the gals on "The View" have acknowledged that Damascus was behind this one.

McClellan said: "We will hold Syria responsible for such violent demonstrations since they do not take place in that country without government knowledge and support."

We are signatories to a treaty that requires us to do more than "hold Syria responsible" for this attack. Syria has staged a state-sponsored attack on our NATO partner on Danish soil, the Danish embassy. According to the terms of the NATO treaty, the United States and most of Europe have an obligation to go to war with Syria.

Or is NATO — like the conventions of civilized behavior, personal hygiene and grooming — inapplicable when Muslims are involved? Liberals complain about "unilateral action," but under the terms of a treaty created by Dean Acheson and the Democrats, France, Germany, Spain and Greece are all obliged to go to war with us against Syria. Why, it's almost like a coalition! OK, Mr. Commie: Saddle up!

COPYRIGHT 2006 ANN COULTER

DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE

4520 Main Street, Kansas City, MO 64111

AMT
 

Both. It will be even more front burner on Apr. 17.

It's progressive. the $58k standard deduction takes care of that. But if you don't think so, why not start with the model of the AMT, and then make it progressive by having a higher tax rate for income over a threshold?

AMT
 

Could it be rewritten with similar results? I realize the calculation is a mess, at least as I understand it from my accountant, because it appears that you take your regular tax, then back out a bunch of things (the prefernences you cite), apply different rates, and then come up with a surtax.

But that's just a calculation method keyed off the current code. Couldn't one rewrite the code to impose the AMT, allowing only deductions for charities and home mortgage (and whatever else)? Would there be a massive revenue loss because the major deduction would mean no poor people would pay any tax?

She's clearly losing it. She forgot to call them camel schtuppers.

AMT
 

The massive revenue loss I was referring to is the loss that would result from simply repealing the AMT, as most have proposed.

If you were to rewrite the AMT, you would have to start from scratch, for instance, by defining what is income. As you can imagine, the horse-trading and lobbying would be in full bloom from the get-go, and we'd wind up with a new tax code that might look different than the one we have now, but it would be just as complex.

But maybe I'm just being cynical. I blame Steve Dahl and the Disco Demolition.

Oh, come on. Hillary and Dick are soulless soulmates. They'd make an excellent team, except that Hillary doesn't like Dick.

"Towel Head" is the new Camel Schtupper.

AMT
 

Well, I'd never quarrel with an argument that Congress will fuck things up.

A couple of years ago someone (Economist or WSJ) had a chart showing that it would cost more to repeal the AMT than the income tax by 2009. That is, so many people would be in AMT-land that it would be easier to keep that tax than the regualr income tax. That's what got me to thinking.

But I guess "repeal" wouldn't really work (although I suspect one could define income similarly without much problem, but then again I don't work on the hill).

AMT
 

Just a quick little parable on why you should enter into major tax overhaul with extreme caution. This is the sort of shit tax lawyers can get hung up on.

I belong to a discussion group that meets once a month to talk about current problems we're having or issues we want the group to brainstorm. The meetings always seem to kick off with somebody throwing out a goofy question "just out of curiosity."

We met last week, and the goofy question was whether someone who exchanges his timeshare for another timeshare has income. The problem is this: the person has received something of value (the use of a different timeshare) but because the timeshare use is personal, the cost of giving up his own timeshare isn't deductible. Since the exchange was only for one year's use, say two weeks, there was no sale or exchange. Therefore the taxpayer cannot even offset his basis against teh value.

And that's why you don't want anybody to try to define "income" under a new tax regime.

AMT
 

the viagra is not working?

AMT
 

Not with a bad heart.

AMT
 

I was in law school once, and remember discussions of that sort. Although I don't work on the Hill, it is close enough to me that I have some faith that one might form a coalition that would not provide for a change in interpretation of the term "income" as currently defined in IRC 61, as modified by relevant AMT provisions. While tax reform has the potential to open up the full can of worms, it's not an absolute certainty.

But, carry on with your time-share swap.

AMT
 

just out of curiosity, does your group endorse a penis pump? i heard that when Shifter had his "problems" slave had him use one.

AMT
 

I'm afraid I really can't help you. Perhaps there's a support group nearby?

Same song second verse.......
 

Anyone else going to this?

http://www.cagop.org/SpringConv_content.aspx

Same song second verse.......
 

which panels do you recommend?

Same song second verse.......
 

It depends what drapes you'd like to hang, and whether you're going with wall to wall or hardwood.

I love burnished teakwood, but I'm all about the light and airy stuff.

Same song second verse.......
 

Fag.

AMT
 

Once again, I find myself recommending Showdown at Gucci Gulch. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/039...Fencoding=UTF8 (of course, buy through LT link). Though TRA '86 was 20 years ago, I think a lot of what went on then w/r/t deductions for state income tax vs. sales taxes vs. property taxes and other things is still relevant. It is really, really hard to outright take any of these deductions away.

*sniff* I miss Bob Dole.

Same song second verse.......
 

Sebby's wife usually flys in to work most conventions- but with the pregnancy she's been able to move to private dates with the kink crowd.

C'mon, Spanky. This is the woman who wrote "we should invade their countries ... and convert them to Christianity by the sword."


Whaddya expect?

http://www.taner.net/wtc/media/www.l...elebration.jpg

It's still a good idea

Same song second verse.......
 

Panels? I don't recommend any panels.

Wasn't that said during a debate? There is a difference between an off the cuff remark and putting something in a column. And that comment got her banned from many networks.

She still works for Human Events. If Human Events doesn't at least disavow these statements I will be surprized.

I also thought of myself as a extreme opponent of political correctness. But now I am second guessing my beliefs. If comments like this don't create outrage maybe the backlash against PC has gone a little too far.

Backlash? Guys like Ty think they should be able to stop newspaper from publishing cartoons for PC reasons. What backlash are you talking about?

Do girls think you're cute when you play stupid?

do you know if fringey is really a girl?

do you know if fringey is really a girl?

You're sister is not a girl, she's a woman. and they think it is cute when you show them the proper pc gender respect. anti-blasphemy is not just for the muslims.

RT, can you edit Ty's post to mitigate offense?

You're sister is not a girl, she's a woman. and they think it is cute when you show them the proper pc gender respect. anti-blasphemy is not just for the muslims.

RT, can you edit Ty's post to mitigate offense?

I'm pretty sure.

Danny Bonaduce was pretty sure thatDarius Barney was a girl too.


Ty, is your dome light broke or you wasteed?

I know.

Who takes offense at Anne Coulter? Nobody takes anything she says seriously. She's the Howard Stern of political pundits.

I don't even read any quotes to her stuff anymore or watch her when she appears on a talk show. Its a waste of time. She angles to say the most outrageous shit possible to spur a reaction. There's no substance. Its like when I glom onto an absurd argument here just to fuck with someone...

Or 90% of what Penske wrote.

I recall that it was in a column. It was shortly after 9/11, which could be an excuse for writing something really stupid, but only if you retract or soften it later.



That makes one of you. This is her standard m.o.



Good for you. It's time for everyone to grow up.

I'm old enough to remember when "politically correct" was an insult used by people on the political left. It was directed at those who were unthinkingly, fashionably leftish. As someone put it, people who summered in the Hamptons but insisted on saying "Nicaragua" with an accent that sounded like they were gargling.

The Coulter and Limbaugh dittoheads are no better than the worst PC-folks.

I do. Not so much because it bothers me that some right-wing publicity-hound twat accuses me of "Treason". But because people who should be intelligent enough to ignore her don't, but instead parrot what she says and profess their admiration for her -- or even consider her diatribes amusing.

Club, for example, talks about "my girl, Ann."

Slave has been known to quote her affectionately, often in the heat of passion.

And Bilmore? Ann Coulter with breasts.

I'm not sure your flattery of that audience is warranted.

I find her amusing.

She's also a great ad for the Left - a car wreck of a personality with a national platform proving column after column that The Radical Right Has a Screw Loose.

Oh, don't be a scold here. There's no place where we should observe free market rules/free speech more expansively than the media. Any and every crank should be allowed to speak whatever he likes. People should be smart or dumb enough to select what information/disinformation they like and run with it to their heart's content. I know you didn't suggest curtailing free speech, but that's the inveitable solution offered to cure the problem of people like Coulter. I say, let an idiot have his podium. More comedy for the rest of us.

:( :confused: there's no such thing as bad press IMHO