DakotaT
  • DakotaT
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Select Member
15 years ago

Sales and VAT taxes are not progressive, they act somewhat regressively! Do not think that rich people spend more, it is the reverse! A greater proportion of a lower income family's income is spent on consumption compared to a wealthy family, who may spend a lower proportion of their household income on consumption goods, where the rest of the money is invested, hoarded, wasted etc. Sales and VAT taxes do not work in isolation because it worsens the economic balance between the rich and the poor.

"TheEngineer" wrote:



Sales taxes are regressive. They hurt poorer people more. A national sales will also have an adverse effect on the economy, because what they don't tell you is that everything is going to be taxable, even services. What they also don't tell you is the fiscal note of replacing the current income tax rate. The national sales tax rate is going to be a lot higher than what we are paying at our local rates.

National sales is being pushed by the Republican Party because the wealthy Republicans are tired of being overtaxed with the current system. I don't really have a problem with that line of thinking exept for the moral obligation to humanity that many wealthy seem to be willing to set aside for the perceived fairness.

I don't like the fact that there is a free lunch out there for those that choose to live that way, but I've come to the realization in life that if that is how a person wants to constrict himself to a lifestyle, then the system is in place for abuse. Initiative is not inherited trait, it is a learned behavior. I have more of a problem with the upper 10 percent continuing a lifestyle of a king, when a great percentage of them had it all handed to them on a silver platter.

There is not going to be a great equalizer tax system, it's just not possible. What I have witnessed in life is that a balanced tax system is what works best, but having lower rates in all. The problem is politics because PACs talk Legislators into allowing self serving exemptions and credits.
UserPostedImage
Formo
  • Formo
  • 61.75% (Friendly)
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago

Sales and VAT taxes are not progressive, they act somewhat regressively! Do not think that rich people spend more, it is the reverse! A greater proportion of a lower income family's income is spent on consumption compared to a wealthy family, who may spend a lower proportion of their household income on consumption goods, where the rest of the money is invested, hoarded, wasted etc. Sales and VAT taxes do not work in isolation because it worsens the economic balance between the rich and the poor.

"DakotaT" wrote:



Sales taxes are regressive. They hurt poorer people more. A national sales will also have an adverse effect on the economy, because what they don't tell you is that everything is going to be taxable, even services. What they also don't tell you is the fiscal note of replacing the current income tax rate. The national sales tax rate is going to be a lot higher than what we are paying at our local rates.

National sales is being pushed by the Republican Party because the wealthy Republicans are tired of being overtaxed with the current system. I don't really have a problem with that line of thinking exept for the moral obligation to humanity that many wealthy seem to be willing to set aside for the perceived fairness.

I don't like the fact that there is a free lunch out there for those that choose to live that way, but I've come to the realization in life that if that is how a person wants to constrict himself to a lifestyle, then the system is in place for abuse. Initiative is not inherited trait, it is a learned behavior. I have more of a problem with the upper 10 percent continuing a lifestyle of a king, when a great percentage of them had it all handed to them on a silver platter.

There is not going to be a great equalizer tax system, it's just not possible. What I have witnessed in life is that a balanced tax system is what works best, but having lower rates in all. The problem is politics because PACs talk Legislators into allowing self serving exemptions and credits.

"TheEngineer" wrote:



You do realize the bolded is a very wrong statement, right? I'll have to go find my numbers, but the percentage of the wealthy that inherited their wealth is really low. You just have a problem with people making more money than you.. Which is fine, but taking their money away doesn't help anything. Here's a novel idea.. Figure out a way to make more than them! -=gasp!=- I know it's a groundbreaking thought. :thumbright:

BTW, there is NO free lunch out there. Ever. There is no proof you can display that can support that there is. Nothing is ever free.

The point of a sales/VAT tax is to have a flat rate on everything. Yes.. EVERYTHING. You can't tell me it'll tax the poor people more, because they buy less. The $2,000 I spend on a monthly amount is WAAAAAAY less than any person that makes $100k a year spends. I want to know where in the hell you guys come up with the idea that the poor will be taxed more with this tax system.

Also, last thought.. Why do the rich have to help the poor? The best way they could help the poor is to teach them how to get rich, right? (the old give a man a fish-he eats for a day, teach a man to fish-he eats for the rest of his life thing) How does giving the poor a bigger tax break help them to get rich (or how to handle the money they got)?

I guess I'm not in the camp that says to feel sorry or pity the poor and give them money. You want more money? Here's a job, work your way up like the rest of the wealthy have!
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Wade
  • Wade
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago
ah...Formo gets an A in econ class. 🙂
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Formo
  • Formo
  • 61.75% (Friendly)
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago

ah...Formo gets an A in econ class. :)

"Wade" wrote:



I don't know if you are joking.. But I laughed.

Mostly because my econ teacher in high school tried to fail me my senior year (econ was a required credit to graduate). He didn't teach anything, just gave us lecture after lecture after lecture, and graded us on how many notes we took and how many newspaper articles we read/took notes on/tested.

I find out later his agenda was to fail as many kids as possible. LOL

I deserved the F, but passed because my uncle would refuse to let me fail that class and told my teacher to give me the fair amount of papers to write to make up for my idiocy. Final verdict? 18 papers (front and back) on 18 different newspaper articles. It was a record he told me.

The only thing I learned in that class? What the BBB was.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
DakotaT
  • DakotaT
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Select Member
15 years ago
The reason my dear Formo that sales tax is regressive: you tax monthly consumables and lets say the person that makes $5,000 a month spends $200 a week on groceries and so does the person making $2,000 a month. You think they pay the same taxes right, well that same tax kicks the guy making $2,000 in the nuts a lot harder than the guy making $5,000. That's the definition ofo regressive taxes. It really is that simple.

And by the way, I can think whatever I want about silver spoon pricks that never had to earn anything in their life. I'm quite certain I've earned everything I have. You do realize I'm talking about those panty waistes that go from Daddy's mansion to the frat house to Wall Street, basically the dip shits that have been running our country for the last 100 years, convincing middle class America in the process that their enemy is the welfare case.

It's a little bit amusing to me that this country, that's been blessed with so much, cries like a bunch of pussies when it comes to paying their taxes. It's the same dipshits that cry piss and moan about taxes that also want their street cleared first, every pot hole fixed immediately, and their tax refund in a week.

A national sales tax is an OK idea to get us out of this debt, but as for a replacement for the Individual Income Tax; well let's just say your going to be paying around 25% on everything you buy. Real smart. How's that effect your economics Wade?
UserPostedImage
Formo
  • Formo
  • 61.75% (Friendly)
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago

The reason my dear Formo that sales tax is regressive: you tax monthly consumables and lets say the person that makes $5,000 a month spends $200 a week on groceries and so does the person making $2,000 a month. You think they pay the same taxes right, well that same tax kicks the guy making $2,000 in the nuts a lot harder than the guy making $5,000. That's the definition ofo regressive taxes. It really is that simple.

"DakotaT" wrote:



Here's a question then.. Why buy so much groceries? Seriously.. It's not that hard of an issue. Besides, that's just groceries. I'm willing to bet the guy making $5k/month spends more on entertainment and other things than the guy making $2k/month. It balances out.

And by the way, I can think whatever I want about silver spoon pricks that never had to earn anything in their life. I'm quite certain I've earned everything I have. You do realize I'm talking about those panty waistes that go from Daddy's mansion to the frat house to Wall Street, basically the dip shits that have been running our country for the last 100 years, convincing middle class America in the process that their enemy is the welfare case.

It's a little bit amusing to me that this country, that's been blessed with so much, cries like a bunch of pussies when it comes to paying their taxes. It's the same dipshits that cry piss and moan about taxes that also want their street cleared first, every pot hole fixed immediately, and their tax refund in a week.

A national sales tax is an OK idea to get us out of this debt, but as for a replacement for the Individual Income Tax; well let's just say your going to be paying around 25% on everything you buy. Real smart. How's that effect your economics Wade?

"DakotaT" wrote:



Then stop buying so much. =)

What it does is forces people to think about their purchases (you know, the same group of people that have the microwave mentality of I want such-and-such, and I want it NOW!). Hey, I'm with you on the rich that get their wealth handed to them.. Only 5% of those types of people ever expand their wealth (that number probably has changed since I last heard it). But the percentage of wealth that gets handed down isn't as much as you think.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Wade
  • Wade
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago

ah...Formo gets an A in econ class. :)

"Formo" wrote:



I don't know if you are joking.. But I laughed.

Mostly because my econ teacher in high school tried to fail me my senior year (econ was a required credit to graduate). He didn't teach anything, just gave us lecture after lecture after lecture, and graded us on how many notes we took and how many newspaper articles we read/took notes on/tested.

I find out later his agenda was to fail as many kids as possible. LOL

I deserved the F, but passed because my uncle would refuse to let me fail that class and told my teacher to give me the fair amount of papers to write to make up for my idiocy. Final verdict? 18 papers (front and back) on 18 different newspaper articles. It was a record he told me.

The only thing I learned in that class? What the BBB was.

"Wade" wrote:



ah...no, I was serious. I agreed with you.

(oh yes, and the "regressive" argument is a red herring. Technically, a regressive tax is one where the tax _rate_ gets smaller.

Oh yes, and you could impose a 100 % tax on the _wealth_ of the top 5 percent (or the income of the top 15-20 percent), and the USA government would still be grossly bankrupt.

(most econ teachers suck, alas.)
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Wade
  • Wade
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago

The reason my dear Formo that sales tax is regressive: you tax monthly consumables and lets say the person that makes $5,000 a month spends $200 a week on groceries and so does the person making $2,000 a month. You think they pay the same taxes right, well that same tax kicks the guy making $2,000 in the nuts a lot harder than the guy making $5,000. That's the definition ofo regressive taxes. It really is that simple.

And by the way, I can think whatever I want about silver spoon pricks that never had to earn anything in their life. I'm quite certain I've earned everything I have. You do realize I'm talking about those panty waistes that go from Daddy's mansion to the frat house to Wall Street, basically the dip shits that have been running our country for the last 100 years, convincing middle class America in the process that their enemy is the welfare case.

It's a little bit amusing to me that this country, that's been blessed with so much, cries like a bunch of pussies when it comes to paying their taxes. It's the same dipshits that cry piss and moan about taxes that also want their street cleared first, every pot hole fixed immediately, and their tax refund in a week.

A national sales tax is an OK idea to get us out of this debt, but as for a replacement for the Individual Income Tax; well let's just say your going to be paying around 25% on everything you buy. Real smart. How's that effect your economics Wade?

"DakotaT" wrote:



I think I said this above, Dakota, but I'll say it again.

All a tax does is re-distribute wealth from one pocket to another. That is the same whether it is a income tax, a sales tax, a VAT, or a sumptuary tax on lutefisk.

If you want to solve this country's economic problems, NO TAX PLAN, NONE, NADA, is going to do it. You need to find a way to figure out how to ratchet up the growth engine. FInd ways to create more wealth from which to pay the accumulating interest and, eventually, the principal.

Any politician, any economist, any journalist, any think tank who says otherwise is not worth listening to. Because they all are fulla shit.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
DakotaT
  • DakotaT
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Select Member
15 years ago



I think I said this above, Dakota, but I'll say it again.

All a tax does is re-distribute wealth from one pocket to another. That is the same whether it is a income tax, a sales tax, a VAT, or a sumptuary tax on lutefisk.

If you want to solve this country's economic problems, NO TAX PLAN, NONE, NADA, is going to do it. You need to find a way to figure out how to ratchet up the growth engine. FInd ways to create more wealth from which to pay the accumulating interest and, eventually, the principal.

"Wade" wrote:




Are we living some kind of fairy tale vacuum here? Who's paying the hard corp bills in this country without taxation. Are we relying people's good nature to donate the cabbage needed to fund schools, infrastruture, defense and everything else taxes are currently paying for?

Now in this discussion about point of taxation, I will always stand up for the poor man and want to tear down the rich. Throughout the centuries the wealthy have become that on the backs of the poor, they've held power, made the laws, and always were fighting against a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. My question is, do we ever evolve to a world without classes? If this country keeps on having an ever expanding gap between the wealthy and poor, we will fully understand what happened to Marie Antionette, because we will be seeing it.
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago
The Ancien Regime in France was corrupt to the core, yes.

And the French Revolution was all about empowering the people. And what the Committee on Public Safety (the group otherwise known as the Reign of Terror and the consensus pick as inspiration of the term "terrorism", was formed to do was ensure that the poor were so protected. Robispierre, the head of said Committee was in fact, before he came to power and realized (a) he was in over his head and (b) he _really_ liked being in charge, was in fact a "reformer."

And it collapsed as such notions inevitably do, because people think all it takes is to redistribute the wealth is to take from the rich and give to the poor.

Now if you want to argue that "poor person A" is a more productive person than "rich person B" in a lot of cases, I won't disagree. But I dare *anyone* to find a systematic principle upon which one can decide which of the poor and which of the rich ought to switch places.

And even if you could find such a principle, you'd still be stuck with the debt. You just have different people paying the interest now.

And you'd still be stuck with the reality that the only way you're going to deal with the problem is figure out how to increase the country's wealth at a rate that even that rapacious group of capitalist bastards, the single most successful group in human history at increasing a nation's wealth and sustaining that rate of increase, couldn't manage.

Peasant revolts have NEVER worked in the sustained way that the capitalist class have managed. And neither have working-man revolts.

Never.

And *I'm* living a fairy tale?
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Nonstopdrivel
15 years ago
Do people realize our consumer goods economy is somewhere in the vicinity of $6 trillion annually? If we charged, say, a 25% sales tax, that would net u to $1.5 trillion, enough to fund almost 50% of the federal government's obligations this year -- and that is with all of the bailouts.

By the way, to say that sales taxes are regressive is a red herring. It assumes that the same tax will be applied to everything. Read your Constitution -- Congress is authorized to levy excise taxes. Excise taxes can be levied on so-called luxury items at much higher rates than the ordinary sales tax. That's how you soak the rich, if you must (demands to soak the rich are nothing more than thinly veiled class envy and hate mongering anyway).

My treatise is still forthcoming, but I am scrambling to get caught up on homework after this fucking weeklong training with no internet.
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
  • DakotaT
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Select Member
15 years ago
Wade, I sure would be interested in hearing more about your growth theories but please don't leave out stuff like the work ethic of the current labor force and their literacy capabilities. Or the ever stronger prescence of environmentalists influence on stopping industry advances. Also include the fact the baby boomers will be cashing in soon and pulling their retirement dollars out of the equation.

As for my contempt of the elitists in this country, well I rank them somewhere along with Pope Pius X on the scale of righteousness as they funnel their untaxed income into foreign bank accounts.

Come up with any tax system you like boys, but the common denominator in any system is the middle class will get stuck with the bill and continue to be unrepresented in Washington.
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago

Do people realize our consumer goods economy is somewhere in the vicinity of $6 trillion annually? If we charged, say, a 25% sales tax, that would net u to $1.5 trillion, enough to fund almost 50% of the federal government's obligations this year -- and that is with all of the bailouts.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



Sorry, but no.

Okay, you can fund 1.5 trillion of government obligations, I concede that bit.

But you forget the other side of the tax.

Impose a tax and one of two things happens:
1. Those consumers have to pay more in the form of higher prices (the "sellers just pass it on" theory). And so they don't get to spend/invest the $$$ on other stuff.
2. The sellers profits fall (the "they don't need those stinking excess profits" theory). And so *they* don't get to spend/invest the $$$ on other stuff.

Either way, the reduction in spending opportunities under 1 and 2 is roughly, you guessed it, 1.5 trillion.

Now if you think that the government spends money more effectively/more productively than "consumers" or "capitalists", fine. But in that case, don't mess around with that phony tax idea. Just nationalize the crap out of consumption and capital.

About 15 years ago, I let my credit cards get out of hand. Eventually, after trying the really dumb idea of borrowing from Mastercard to pay Visa for awhile, I had to get money from mom to pay them off.

My debt got cleared up by "taxing" my mom. Hooray.

And my mother's spending possibilities got curtailed.

Taxes do not create value. They only redistribute it.

In my opinion, the response to those who would tax should have been my mother's response to me when I asked her to bail me out.

"No."
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Wade
  • Wade
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago

Wade, I sure would be interested in hearing more about your growth theories but please don't leave out stuff like the work ethic of the current labor force and their literacy capabilities. Or the ever stronger prescence of environmentalists influence on stopping industry advances. Also include the fact the baby boomers will be cashing in soon and pulling their retirement dollars out of the equation.

As for my contempt of the elitists in this country, well I rank them somewhere along with Pope Pius X on the scale of righteousness as they funnel their untaxed income into foreign bank accounts.

Come up with any tax system you like boys, but the common denominator in any system is the middle class will get stuck with the bill and continue to be unrepresented in Washington.

"DakotaT" wrote:



Actually, DakotaT, I think you and I probably agree more than we disagree. I share your scorn for the elitists, for example. (Well, except for myself, of course? 🙂 )

And I think the mess that will come as we baby boomers age is going to make today look like an ice cream social.

Nor do I really underestimate the labor force. (Even though literacy has actually steadily declined in the USA since compulsory education was instituted in the late nineteenth century, the USA still has one of the most productive workforces per capita in the world, if not *the* most productive work force -- contrary to popular myth, china and england still lag a bit.

And as for the anti-economy actiions of the environmentalists...well, don't get me ranting on all that stuff.

My main objection here is on the notion that a "tax" -- any tax -- can ever be a solution to the kind of economic problems we face.

America is terminal unless it collectively remembers that its survival is contingent upon finding new ways of increasing overall wealth. And unless it collectively remembers that you increse overall wealth by finding ways of increasing productivity and harnessing creativity and innovation. You don't increase wealth by just taking out of one person's bank account and putting it in another.

Any tax, IMO, can be justified only if two things are true:
1. There are some people who are "more important" to the economy/system than other people. (The more important group become the ultimate recipients of tax recipients; the less important group become the tax payers.)
AND
2. You believe that the people collecting and distributing the tax revenues are better at deciding who those more important people are.

While I can see multiple reasonable determinations to #1 (not all of which agree with mine), I think that anyone who believes #2 is, at best, delusional.

Or to use DakotaT's phrase, living in a fairytale world.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
DakotaT
  • DakotaT
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Select Member
15 years ago

Do people realize our consumer goods economy is somewhere in the vicinity of $6 trillion annually? If we charged, say, a 25% sales tax, that would net u to $1.5 trillion, enough to fund almost 50% of the federal government's obligations this year -- and that is with all of the bailouts.

"Wade" wrote:



Sorry, but no.

Okay, you can fund 1.5 trillion of government obligations, I concede that bit.

But you forget the other side of the tax.

Impose a tax and one of two things happens:
1. Those consumers have to pay more in the form of higher prices (the "sellers just pass it on" theory). And so they don't get to spend/invest the $$$ on other stuff.
2. The sellers profits fall (the "they don't need those stinking excess profits" theory). And so *they* don't get to spend/invest the $$$ on other stuff.

Either way, the reduction in spending opportunities under 1 and 2 is roughly, you guessed it, 1.5 trillion.

Now if you think that the government spends money more effectively/more productively than "consumers" or "capitalists", fine. But in that case, don't mess around with that phony tax idea. Just nationalize the crap out of consumption and capital.

About 15 years ago, I let my credit cards get out of hand. Eventually, after trying the really dumb idea of borrowing from Mastercard to pay Visa for awhile, I had to get money from mom to pay them off.

My debt got cleared up by "taxing" my mom. Hooray.

And my mother's spending possibilities got curtailed.

Taxes do not create value. They only redistribute it.

In my opinion, the response to those who would tax should have been my mother's response to me when I asked her to bail me out.

"No."

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



So did you pay your mom back with interest, no interest, or just took some early inheritence? I wish I had some options like that, just once. Luggage for my high school graduation and not a dime thereafter. No wonder I have this enourmous chip, huh.
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago



So did you pay your mom back with interest, no interest, or just took some early inheritence? I wish I had some options like that, just once. Luggage for my high school graduation and not a dime thereafter. No wonder I have this enourmous chip, huh.

"DakotaT" wrote:



Eventually I started paying her back. I got a few years interest free. Now she has the mortgage on my house and I'm paying her back with interest. And making timely payments (its hard not to when the banker lives in house!)

So, yes, I've been very fortunate.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
DakotaT
  • DakotaT
  • 100% (Exalted)
  • Select Member
15 years ago



So did you pay your mom back with interest, no interest, or just took some early inheritence? I wish I had some options like that, just once. Luggage for my high school graduation and not a dime thereafter. No wonder I have this enourmous chip, huh.

"Wade" wrote:



Eventually I started paying her back. I got a few years interest free. Now she has the mortgage on my house and I'm paying her back with interest. And making timely payments (its hard not to when the banker lives in house!)

So, yes, I've been very fortunate.

"DakotaT" wrote:



I don't know Cliff Clavin, I love my mother, but I'm not moving in with her. My ears hurt for weeks when I just visit for a few a days. Which brings me to the dreaded building the mother in law suite someday. My father in law is a walking heart attack and I can see that happening. I'll just have to work eighty hour weeks all year instead of just half the year.

As for you taxes idea about freeing up disposable income, yeah that's a wonderful concept but how does society then pay the bills? When human nature first vice is sharing instead of greed then maybe we can talk about that.
UserPostedImage
zombieslayer
15 years ago
I was really hoping the argument would steer more in the direction of privacy and less paperwork than what is fair. Look, nothing is fair. There will never be a fair system. Ever. Socialism isn't fair. Capitalism isn't fair. Communism isn't fair. None of those 'isms ever will be fair no matter how much you try to make them fair.

Do you really want the government knowing how much money you make, and what you do with it?

Plus, do you want to be in Porforis' shoes? He's lucky it went as smoothly as it did. For some folks, it doesn't go so smoothly. The Nat'l Sales Tax prevents that crap from happening to you because there no longer is an income tax.

Also, when people say it can never happen, well, it reminds me of what Henry Ford said. He said something along the lines of if you believe you can do something or if you believe you can't do something, either way, you're right.

I remember arguing with some dumb chick (not being sexist, she really was a dumb chick) about medical marijuana. She started mockingly singing "it will never happen, it will never happen" like a fucking four-year-old. Well, a decade later, it's all over California as well as a slew of other states.

Don't ever say it can't happen unless you got a working crystal ball. If you do, invite me over immediately. Do you realize how much money we can make if we know the future?
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (1h) : What the hell
beast (8h) : Packershome going to the Whiteout unis again
Zero2Cool (13h) : Oh wait, they got Cam Ward. 1st overall right? haha oops
Zero2Cool (14h) : They could send Packers a 1st for a QB they are familiar with
Zero2Cool (14h) : Titans QB Will Levis to have season-ending shoulder surgery
Zero2Cool (19-Jul) : Their season did kind of start there, so 🤷
dfosterf (19-Jul) : Eagles put an engraved Brazil flag on their super bowl rings
Zero2Cool (18-Jul) : Benton unsigned no more
Zero2Cool (17-Jul) : That's good analysis, yes you are getting old. It'd a blessing!
dfosterf (14-Jul) : *analysis* gettin' old
dfosterf (14-Jul) : One of the best analyisis I"ve ever watched at this time of an offseason
dfosterf (14-Jul) : Andy Herman interviewed Warren Sharp on his Pack a day podcast
packerfanoutwest (10-Jul) : Us Padres fans love it....But it'll be a Dodgers/Yankees World Series
Zero2Cool (9-Jul) : Brewers sweep Dodgers. Awesome
Mucky Tundra (6-Jul) : And James Flanigan is the grandson of Packers Super Bowl winner Jim Flanigan Sr.
Mucky Tundra (6-Jul) : Jerome Bettis and Jim Flanigans sons as well!
Zero2Cool (6-Jul) : Thomas Davis Jr is OLB, not WR. Oops.
Zero2Cool (6-Jul) : Larry Fitzgeral and Thomas Davis sons too. WR's as well.
Mucky Tundra (5-Jul) : Kaydon Finley, son of Jermichael Finley, commits to Notre Dame
dfosterf (3-Jul) : Make sure to send my props to him! A plus move!
Zero2Cool (3-Jul) : My cousin, yes.
dfosterf (3-Jul) : That was your brother the GB press gazette referenced with the red cross draft props thing, yes?
Zero2Cool (2-Jul) : Packers gonna unveil new throwback helmet in few weeks.
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : I know it's Kleiman but this stuff writes itself
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : "Make sure she signs the NDA before asking for a Happy Ending!"
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : @NFL_DovKleiman Powerful: Deshaun Watson is taking Shedeur Sanders 'under his wing' as a mentor to the Browns QBs
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Dolphins get (back) Minkah Fitzpatrick in trade
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Steelers land Jalen Ramsey via Trade
dfosterf (26-Jun) : I think it would be great to have someone like Tom Grossi or Andy Herman on the Board of Directors so he/they could inform us
dfosterf (26-Jun) : Fair enough, WPR. Thing is, I have been a long time advocate to at least have some inkling of the dynamics within the board.
wpr (26-Jun) : 1st world owners/stockholders problems dfosterf.
Martha Careful (25-Jun) : I would have otherwise admirably served
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Also, no more provision for a write-in candidate, so Martha is off the table at least for this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : You do have to interpret the boring fine print, but all stockholders all see he is on the ballot
dfosterf (25-Jun) : It also says he is subject to another ballot in 2028. I recall nothing of this nature with Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy is on my ballot subject to me penciling him in as a no.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : I thought it used to be we voted for the whatever they called the 45, and then they voted for the seven, and then they voted for Mark Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Because I was too lazy to change my address, I haven't voted fot years until this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : of the folks that run this team. I do not recall Mark Murphy being subject to our vote.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy yay or nay is on the pre-approved ballot that we always approve because we are uninformed and lazy, along with all the rest
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Weird question. Very esoteric. For stockholders. Also lengthy. Sorry. Offseason.
Zero2Cool (25-Jun) : Maybe wicked wind chill made it worse?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : And then he signs with Cleveland in the offseason
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : @SharpFootball WR Diontae Johnson just admitted he refused to enter a game in 41° weather last year in Baltimore because he felt “ice cold”
Zero2Cool (24-Jun) : Yawn. Rodgers says he is "pretty sure" this be final season.
Zero2Cool (23-Jun) : PFT claims Packers are having extension talks with Zach Tom, Quay Walker.
Mucky Tundra (20-Jun) : GB-Minnesota 2004 Wild Card game popped up on my YouTube page....UGH
beast (20-Jun) : Hmm 🤔 re-signing Walker before Tom? Sounds highly questionable to me.
Mucky Tundra (19-Jun) : One person on Twitter=cannon law
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Well, to ONE person on Tweeter
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

18-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

15-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

14-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

10-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

10-Jul / Around The NFL / Zero2Cool

6-Jul / Random Babble / Martha Careful

4-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

2-Jul / Fantasy Sports Talk / dfosterf

1-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.