PDA

View Full Version : who pays the taxes



jerseyphin
09-11-2008, 11:57 AM
I love how everybody always comments about the rich getting out of paying taxes. The truth is that the top 5 % pay 80 % of the taxes in this country while most people pay almost nothing. There are people out there that actually get more tax money back than they actually pay. How is that fair? We have a nation of people that think the Government is responsible for supporting them and if they need things in life the government should just tax the rich to support them. This is the Greatest Country in the world and yet we have Presidential Candidates going over seas to apologize for us. Don't apologize for me because I love this country and I don't want to be like those other countries and if you do then maybe you should move there. America is the land of oppurtunity and I hope someday that my taxes are sky high because that will mean that I'm rich. The key word is oppurtunity, not handout.

FinFatale
09-11-2008, 12:50 PM
I love how everybody always comments about the rich getting out of paying taxes. The truth is that the top 5 % pay 80 % of the taxes in this country while most people pay almost nothing. There are people out there that actually get more tax money back than they actually pay. How is that fair? We have a nation of people that think the Government is responsible for supporting them and if they need things in life the government should just tax the rich to support them. This is the Greatest Country in the world and yet we have Presidential Candidates going over seas to apologize for us. Don't apologize for me because I love this country and I don't want to be like those other countries and if you do then maybe you should move there. America is the land of oppurtunity and I hope someday that my taxes are sky high because that will mean that I'm rich. The key word is oppurtunity, not handout.

I'd personally like to see a fair tax program, taxed on what you bought..........everyone even the illegals that don't file tax........every time they buy a soda.......just like me ( that is just an example) they are taxed more at the source and everything is fair to everyone.....................I think the RICH being RICH would be spending more hence being TAXED more so that why maybe everyone would be happy............................I would also like to see all tax dropped on LIPSTICK............

MoFinz
09-11-2008, 12:52 PM
I'd personally like to see a fair tax program, taxed on what you bought..........everyone even the illegals that don't file tax........every time they buy a soda.......just like me ( that is just an example) they are taxed more at the source and everything is fair to everyone.....................I think the RICH being RICH would be spending more hence being TAXED more so that why maybe everyone would be happy............................I would also like to see all tax dropped on LIPSTICK............

Yeah, but then ya gotta tax pig products more...cuz ya know...theyre still pigs:d-day:

The_Dark_Knight
09-11-2008, 02:44 PM
I'd personally like to see a fair tax program, taxed on what you bought..........everyone even the illegals that don't file tax........every time they buy a soda.......just like me ( that is just an example) they are taxed more at the source and everything is fair to everyone.....................I think the RICH being RICH would be spending more hence being TAXED more so that why maybe everyone would be happy............................I would also like to see all tax dropped on LIPSTICK............
:sidelol:

The_Dark_Knight
09-11-2008, 02:48 PM
I'd personally like to see a fair tax program, taxed on what you bought..........everyone even the illegals that don't file tax........every time they buy a soda.......just like me ( that is just an example) they are taxed more at the source and everything is fair to everyone.....................I think the RICH being RICH would be spending more hence being TAXED more so that why maybe everyone would be happy............................I would also like to see all tax dropped on LIPSTICK............
Actually, this is really a good idea. Not only would a federal sales tax generate from our purchases and illegal aliens as the Dolphin Diva points out, but just think of how much money would also be generated for the Treasury from foreign tourists who come vacation in the US.

I've always been an advocate for the Flat Tax and demanding the government exercise fiscal responsibility, but a federal sales tax is starting to intrigue me as well.

ANYTHING has to be better than our current tax system.

Dolphan7
09-11-2008, 05:13 PM
National Sales Tax is gaining momentum and will be an issue in future elections and administrations.

If implemented we wouldn't have the polarizing issues of this guy wants to raise taxes, this guy wants to cut taxes, This guy wants to tax the rich, this guy wants to give tax breaks to the rich.

It gets old after a while.

cmax13
09-11-2008, 09:50 PM
i agree with the fair tax. go check fairtax.org

ih8brady
09-11-2008, 10:54 PM
I'm for the fair tax. It's fair on the middle class, while guarantees the rich will pay without having to skip their responsibilities by hiring a clever tax accountant. Most importantly, criminals or otherwise shady money holders have to pay tax as well.

MDFINFAN
09-12-2008, 01:10 AM
I love how everybody always comments about the rich getting out of paying taxes. The truth is that the top 5 % pay 80 % of the taxes in this country while most people pay almost nothing. There are people out there that actually get more tax money back than they actually pay. How is that fair? We have a nation of people that think the Government is responsible for supporting them and if they need things in life the government should just tax the rich to support them. This is the Greatest Country in the world and yet we have Presidential Candidates going over seas to apologize for us. Don't apologize for me because I love this country and I don't want to be like those other countries and if you do then maybe you should move there. America is the land of oppurtunity and I hope someday that my taxes are sky high because that will mean that I'm rich. The key word is oppurtunity, not handout.

This is what I mean by those who don't know history are duned to repeat it..
First you have to understand that the top 10% own approximated 80-90% of the money, that leaves 10-20% for the rest of the country, so well yea, they would probably pay the majority of the taxes since they kind of own the majority of the money....Let's reveiw...most ppl today say they don't want to engage in class warfare or redistributed money... Hmm

Let's take a trip back down memory lane, this may help some of u understand wealth redistribution.

1. In the 80's under Reagan, the tax code had the rich and corps paying about 45% of their income to tax.
2. middle class ppl could deduct, car interest payments, credit cards interest, capital gains tax, and many more.
3. Regan cut the top from 45 to 36%, and use the trickle down effect..sounded good, except ppl are greedy.
4. To pay for that, the middle class lost all deductions except home mortage and charitiable givings and dental high costs..
5. At the end of Reagan's final term...500 billion dollars were transferred to the upper class from the middle class, and then industry and other things were sent overseas as not to give your money back, so CEO's kept the extra money in their pockets, hince that's how CEO's are able to be paid 25-50 million dollars today.
6. Clinton took the top rate back to 39%, our economy kept going..unlike the lies about that would kill capital investment...it didn't, remember they had an extra 500 billion to pay with
7. Bush 2 cut the top rate to 33%, and we'll were we'll at now..no trickle down, no real income growth for the middle class when inflation is added..
8. Now the repubs are playing the tax and spend game again, and playing on your short memories about wealth redistribution, as bush 2 tax breaks agian have shorted the middle class and push more money to the upper class..and you don't even realize it, yet again, but when a politician tells you he wants to give you BACK some of your money, you don't know how to respond, you say no wealth redistribution, all the buzz words to keep you igorant of the facts..You're just getting some of the money you gave up under repub presidents to pay for the money the rich got.. it's your money ppl.. the rich didn't ask for bush 2 tax break, in the 50's they paid 70% and were still rich..so if they're rate goes back to Clinton's rate, they won't hurt folks..wake up..

cmax13
09-17-2008, 02:26 AM
this is an email i had sent to me today. i ask the same question that's in the first line...

Can anyone tell me if this is wrong?

U.S. Tax System explained in Beer

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. 'Drinks for the ten now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers?
How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
'I only got a dollar out of the $20,' declared the sixth man.
He pointed to the tenth man, 'but he got $10! ''Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man.
'I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I! ''That's true!!' shouted the seventh man.
'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two?
The wealthy get all the breaks!
''Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!
'The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man (the richest) didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.Professor of Economics University of Georgia
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

MDFINFAN
09-17-2008, 11:36 AM
this is an email i had sent to me today. i ask the same question that's in the first line...

Can anyone tell me if this is wrong?

U.S. Tax System explained in Beer

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. 'Drinks for the ten now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers?
How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
'I only got a dollar out of the $20,' declared the sixth man.
He pointed to the tenth man, 'but he got $10! ''Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man.
'I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I! ''That's true!!' shouted the seventh man.
'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two?
The wealthy get all the breaks!
''Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!
'The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man (the richest) didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.Professor of Economics University of Georgia
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

I've seen this before...the part that this story never thinks about is man's greed...the rich will always show up, because 1st, the story never goes like this example...2nd how many rich ppl do you drink with.. 3rd..if you have no workers, you have no rich.. the rich make their money off the labor and buying habits of the less rich..so the moral of the story is if one rich person doesn't show up, go find another and keep on drinking... and if you get a tax cut as a middle class person, the economy will continue to run better because you know who spends for neccessities.. that's how our economy works and that's who everyone to include the rich stay afloat.. With as many rich ppl as we have in the country, why aren't they enough to keep our financials running? Tax them appropriately and you have a chance..

http://www.finheaven.com/images/imported/2008/10/fiscalconservatives-1.jpg

Dolphan7
09-17-2008, 12:47 PM
Actually taxing the rich has never had it's desired effect, ever. From 1980 -2005 , with all the different tax rates assigned to the rich (lowest to highest) the tax rate has remained stable. So it didn't increase the tax revenues. This should be very important to a candidate that wants to use those extra funds to finance new programs.

http://www.finheaven.com/images/imported/2008/09/soakingtherich-1.gif
http://www.fundmasteryblog.com/2008/01/26/does-soaking-the-rich-actually-work/

MDFINFAN
09-17-2008, 12:50 PM
Actually taxing the rich has never had it's desired effect, ever. From 1980 -2005 , with all the different tax rates assigned to the rich (lowest to highest) the tax rate has remained stable. So it didn't increase the tax revenues. This should be very important to a candidate that wants to use those extra funds to finance new programs.

http://www.finheaven.com/images/imported/2008/09/soakingtherich-1.gif
http://www.fundmasteryblog.com/2008/01/26/does-soaking-the-rich-actually-work/

Would you agree that we wouldn't be borrowing as much if the tax rate had remain at the clinton level? The reason sited by experts that McCain's economic plan is more expensive than Obama's is because of his tax cuts to the rich..that brings in less funds to the gov't... that does make sense right.. And sense Obama only wants to go back to the clinton rates, the tax as you rightly pointed out, will be remain stable, but I bet revenue go up. if you control spending and bring in more you're have a clinton..

cmax13
09-17-2008, 10:59 PM
I've seen this before...the part that this story never thinks about is man's greed...the rich will always show up, because 1st, the story never goes like this example...2nd how many rich ppl do you drink with.. 3rd..if you have no workers, you have no rich.. the rich make their money off the labor and buying habits of the less rich..so the moral of the story is if one rich person doesn't show up, go find another and keep on drinking... and if you get a tax cut as a middle class person, the economy will continue to run better because you know who spends for neccessities.. that's how our economy works and that's who everyone to include the rich stay afloat.. With as many rich ppl as we have in the country, why aren't they enough to keep our financials running? Tax them appropriately and you have a chance..

http://www.finheaven.com/images/imported/2008/10/fiscalconservatives-1.jpg

that's why i asked in the original post, if this is wrong. the figures seem correct, but somehow the government spending less, giving everyone a refund just didn't seem right. the premise just seemed off and i'm too dumb to figure out where this gets skewed.

personally, i'm a fairtax person, myself. i figure that's the most efficient way to get everyone to pay their fair share, on what they spend. so it would get those with offshore accounts, drug dealers, etc, those who aren't paying taxes now. plus the idea of receiving my gross pay every paycheck, just sounds too cool.

but i did get a response from someone i know in the IRS and this is what he said:

he read it and he says it's true....benefits go to those who pay. Bill Gates is one of the richest guys in the US if he leaves the country and all his income comes from Europe instead of the US, then the US would loose all he pays in taxes. That's why loads of people have offshore accounts or live outside the US so they don't pay any tax.
I guess he would know as he's a revenue officer and is the one who "takes away" your house, car and etcs if you don't pay.

MDFINFAN
09-17-2008, 11:23 PM
that's why i asked in the original post, if this is wrong. the figures seem correct, but somehow the government spending less, giving everyone a refund just didn't seem right. the premise just seemed off and i'm too dumb to figure out where this gets skewed.

personally, i'm a fairtax person, myself. i figure that's the most efficient way to get everyone to pay their fair share, on what they spend. so it would get those with offshore accounts, drug dealers, etc, those who aren't paying taxes now. plus the idea of receiving my gross pay every paycheck, just sounds too cool.

but i did get a response from someone i know in the IRS and this is what he said:

he read it and he says it's true....benefits go to those who pay. Bill Gates is one of the richest guys in the US if he leaves the country and all his income comes from Europe instead of the US, then the US would loose all he pays in taxes. That's why loads of people have offshore accounts or live outside the US so they don't pay any tax.
I guess he would know as he's a revenue officer and is the one who "takes away" your house, car and etcs if you don't pay.

you IRS person is dead on, rich people take their money off shore, so when we cut their tax, all we do is give them more money to take off shore and out of our economy. That's why we don't see the neccessary finances to support our economy right now. Let's face it, our economy runs best when the regular guy make smart decisions and spend on the everyday things he needs. That why I favor cutting middle class and lower class taxes.. the more money the average person has the better this economy growths...rich ppl are so rich they have profolios for all kinds of tax codes, so they stay rich.. but when all those benefits were taken from us and 500 billion got transferred from the middle class to the upper class, we had no options. Our income became flat, and we are more suspectable to inflation than a rich ppl. Like everyone else, I wouldn't mind being rich, so that I'm inflation proof too...that's why all of us hope to become rich. If trickle down worked, I wouldn't be so against it, but when I see head ppl's pay rise, and jobs cut..I know that isn't the formula for us.. it has to be somewhere in between...... and as I said before since the top the 10% has 80-90% of the money, of course they'll pay the most in taxes, even if everyones tax was the same..

Dolphan7
09-18-2008, 12:32 AM
Would you agree that we wouldn't be borrowing as much if the tax rate had remain at the clinton level? The reason sited by experts that McCain's economic plan is more expensive than Obama's is because of his tax cuts to the rich..that brings in less funds to the gov't... that does make sense right.. And sense Obama only wants to go back to the clinton rates, the tax as you rightly pointed out, will be remain stable, but I bet revenue go up. if you control spending and bring in more you're have a clinton..I agree that McCains plan will remove more from the tax revenue, but just a little more than Obama. But I believe McCain will work hard to trim the budget and cut unnecessary spending, cut pork barrel spending, cut earmarks, cut lot's of inneficiencies out of uncles sams fat obese lazy arse!

Cutting taxes is only part of it, we need to cut spending as well, and spend more wisely.

McCain will do that.

ih8brady
09-18-2008, 12:45 AM
I agree that McCains plan will remove more from the tax revenue, but just a little more than Obama. But I believe McCain will work hard to trim the budget and cut unnecessary spending, cut pork barrel spending, cut earmarks, cut lot's of inneficiencies out of uncles sams fat obese lazy arse!

Cutting taxes is only part of it, we need to cut spending as well, and spend more wisely.

McCain will do that.

Like 100 years of occupation? Or the more wars promised? my friend?

Dolphan7
09-18-2008, 01:15 AM
Like 100 years of occupation? Or the more wars promised? my friend?
Kewl.... like... you know .. like.... out of context, dude....like....you know... kewl!

ih8brady
09-18-2008, 01:27 AM
Kewl.... like... you know .. like.... out of context, dude....like....you know... kewl!



Well, I'm still waiting to hear how we can afford a war with Iran. Let alone a war then with whatever other country is next on the list(Syria? North Korea? Venezuela? Russia?), my friend.


Do you actually think McCain will resist the temptation of more war?

ohall
09-18-2008, 03:23 AM
Well, I'm still waiting to hear how we can afford a war with Iran. Let alone a war then with whatever other country is next on the list(Syria? North Korea? Venezuela? Russia?), my friend.


Do you actually think McCain will resist the temptation of more war?

Why wouldn't your concern be directed at Iran?

The_Dark_Knight
09-18-2008, 09:30 AM
The government's budget problem is the same as so many Americans today. They spend MORE than they make. If I make $75,000 a year, I surely can't spend double or triple that and expect not to have financial problems.

It's the same for the government. Congress spends billions of dollars in revenues it doesn't have on pork barrel projects that it doesn't need.

If ANYONE can understand this concept it's our friend poornate. I'm sure he's having to CUT his spending left and friggin right so he and his family can get by and God Bless him, I know he's had to make some TOUGH decisions. Why can't anyone seem to grasp this same concept when it comes to government spending?? You don't have the money for this, that or the other...DON'T SPEND IT!!!!!! Make the tough decisions, don't spend what you don't have!!!

FinFatale
09-18-2008, 02:09 PM
:logic:
The government's budget problem is the same as so many Americans today. They spend MORE than they make. If I make $75,000 a year, I surely can't spend double or triple that and expect not to have financial problems.

It's the same for the government. Congress spends billions of dollars in revenues it doesn't have on pork barrel projects that it doesn't need.

If ANYONE can understand this concept it's our friend poornate. I'm sure he's having to CUT his spending left and friggin right so he and his family can get by and God Bless him, I know he's had to make some TOUGH decisions. Why can't anyone seem to grasp this same concept when it comes to government spending?? You don't have the money for this, that or the other...DON'T SPEND IT!!!!!! Make the tough decisions, don't spend what you don't have!!!

Eshlemon
09-18-2008, 02:19 PM
I love how everybody always comments about the rich getting out of paying taxes. The truth is that the top 5 % pay 80 % of the taxes in this country while most people pay almost nothing. There are people out there that actually get more tax money back than they actually pay. How is that fair? We have a nation of people that think the Government is responsible for supporting them and if they need things in life the government should just tax the rich to support them. This is the Greatest Country in the world and yet we have Presidential Candidates going over seas to apologize for us. Don't apologize for me because I love this country and I don't want to be like those other countries and if you do then maybe you should move there. America is the land of oppurtunity and I hope someday that my taxes are sky high because that will mean that I'm rich. The key word is oppurtunity, not handout.

There is no doubt we have one of the most progressive individual income taxes in the world with the top 50% paying 95% of income taxes. But to say that the tax code lacks all 'fairness' is not correct. 70% of the non-payrol taxes are collected thru the prog inc tax with the other 30% coming from those flatly applied to individuals directly and indirectly thru corporate, gas and other excise taxes. Also, the 70-30 federal split is about reversed on the much more regressive municipal and state tax base made of sales, property, much less progressive income.

Personaly, I prefer to eliminate more of the regressive for expanded progressive by eliminating the corporate income tax.

MDFINFAN
09-18-2008, 02:21 PM
I agree that McCains plan will remove more from the tax revenue, but just a little more than Obama. But I believe McCain will work hard to trim the budget and cut unnecessary spending, cut pork barrel spending, cut earmarks, cut lot's of inneficiencies out of uncles sams fat obese lazy arse!

Cutting taxes is only part of it, we need to cut spending as well, and spend more wisely.

McCain will do that.

I think they both will, we can't keep spending what we don't have..the govenment has got to learn to live within it's means, just like the rest of us. Part of the problem is we don't hold them responsible. We need to start voting out ppl who want hold up to staying within what the gov't is paid..

Dolphan7
09-18-2008, 03:33 PM
Well, I'm still waiting to hear how we can afford a war with Iran. Let alone a war then with whatever other country is next on the list(Syria? North Korea? Venezuela? Russia?), my friend.


Do you actually think McCain will resist the temptation of more war?Ah ....A much better question.

The answer?......I have no idea, but I do know this - McCain has seen the most ugliest side of war first hand, I don't think he willingly will enter into one lightly. So this warhawk personification just doesn't fit him. Granted he rattles his saber a lot, but that is important for our enemies to hear.

What would you rather our enemies hear from our Commander In Chief?

"Well, Let me think about that, now. You see, we have this problem and I think we can change a few things and work together so that everyone is happy and then we can all sit down and have a drink or something..."

Or this:

"Here is the line, don't cross the line, or else."

MDFINFAN
09-18-2008, 04:34 PM
Ah ....A much better question.

The answer?......I have no idea, but I do know this - McCain has seen the most ugliest side of war first hand, I don't think he willingly will enter into one lightly. So this warhawk personification just doesn't fit him. Granted he rattles his saber a lot, but that is important for our enemies to hear.

What would you rather our enemies hear from our Commander In Chief?

"Well, Let me think about that, now. You see, we have this problem and I think we can change a few things and work together so that everyone is happy and then we can all sit down and have a drink or something..."

Or this:

"Here is the line, don't cross the line, or else."

:err: You mean the image he's protrayed in this campaign is a lie..we're all georgians aren't we..??

Dolphan7
09-18-2008, 05:02 PM
:err: You mean the image he's protrayed in this campaign is a lie..we're all georgians aren't we..??For a Political Party that promotes that we need to improve our credibility in the world, I find it odd that you would take offense to his coming to the defense of a smaller and weaker nation.

But that's politics for ya!

MDFINFAN
09-18-2008, 05:25 PM
For a Political Party that promotes that we need to improve our credibility in the world, I find it odd that you would take offense to his coming to the defense of a smaller and weaker nation.

But that's politics for ya!

Good point, but this is why.

The repubs are suppose to to be the party of lower taxes for the rich, less spending, and a strong military.
1. Lower taxes for the rich to trickle down to the lesser and investments
2. Less gov't, thus less spending
3. Strong military so they can talk junk basically and have the military to back it up.

Well in this administration, the test of their philosophy was put to the test and it failed misery... They got to do all the things they profess and now we see the results.

They had the floor of our nation for the first 6 years of Bushes tenure..
They got to enact their brand of legislation
We got to see the full repub playbook like never before
and now we know it doesn't work, when it has to a chance to be enacted in all 3 phases..

Lower taxes and backing up mouth with war, caused more spending, more gov't, in this case, less security, and less satute around the world. The repub strategy as we now know is a failure...oyea, and did I mention a bad economy to boot.

Dolphan7
09-18-2008, 05:37 PM
Good point, but this is why.

The repubs are suppose to to be the party of lower taxes for the rich, less spending, and a strong military.
1. Lower taxes for the rich to trickle down to the lesser and investments
2. Less gov't, thus less spending
3. Strong military so they can talk junk basically and have the military to back it up.

Well in this administration, the test of their philosophy was put to the test and it failed misery... They got to do all the things they profess and now we see the results.

They had the floor of our nation for the first 6 years of Bushes tenure..
They got to enact their brand of legislation
We got to see the full repub playbook like never before
and now we know it doesn't work, when it has to a chance to be enacted in all 3 phases..

Lower taxes and backing up mouth with war, caused more spending, more gov't, in this case, less security, and less satute around the world. The repub strategy as we now know is a failure...oyea, and did I mention a bad economy to boot.But the pubs didn't stick to their playbook, they spent and spent and spent and spent and the dems said hey we want some of that action too and so they kicked out the pubs and spent and spent and even decided to continue to spend on the pubs war in Iraq.

Go figure.

MDFINFAN
09-18-2008, 05:43 PM
But the pubs didn't stick to their playbook, they spent and spent and spent and spent and the dems said hey we want some of that action too and so they kicked out the pubs and spent and spent and even decided to continue to spend on the pubs war in Iraq.

Go figure.

They were force to spend because 2 of their tenacles didn't work. One, they stopped bringing in enough money (tax cuts)to offset the next phase call war (backing up mouth)..thus 3 cutting spending wasn't a option (less gov't)...my point is you can't do all 3 of their playbook.. so the playbook is flawed.. Why have a playbook you can't run your whole offense and defense out of.. if called upon..

The_Dark_Knight
09-20-2008, 04:29 AM
But the pubs didn't stick to their playbook, they spent and spent and spent and spent and the dems said hey we want some of that action too and so they kicked out the pubs and spent and spent and even decided to continue to spend on the pubs war in Iraq.

Go figure.
This is exactly right!! President Bush is not a TRUE conservative. Hell, he ran on what he labeled "compassionate conservatism" and lived up to that by spending money left and right. Had President Bush been a TRUE fiscal conservative, he wouldn't have opened up the government's checkbook as he did and wrote a blank check so to speak. Had President Bush been a TRUE fiscal conservative, following 9/11 and our invasions in Afghanistan and subsequently Iraq, he would have CUT spending and in order to finance the war effort...and dare I say...even considered repealing the FIRST tax cut in order to ensure the Treasury and economy was secure, THEN consider cutting taxes again...just like his daddy had to do (remember?? read my lips?)

THAT is fiscal conservatism guys (and Diva). That is NOT what President Bush did.

MDFINFAN
09-20-2008, 03:31 PM
This is exactly right!! President Bush is not a TRUE conservative. Hell, he ran on what he labeled "compassionate conservatism" and lived up to that by spending money left and right. Had President Bush been a TRUE fiscal conservative, he wouldn't have opened up the government's checkbook as he did and wrote a blank check so to speak. Had President Bush been a TRUE fiscal conservative, following 9/11 and our invasions in Afghanistan and subsequently Iraq, he would have CUT spending and in order to finance the war effort...and dare I say...even considered repealing the FIRST tax cut in order to ensure the Treasury and economy was secure, THEN consider cutting taxes again...just like his daddy had to do (remember?? read my lips?)

THAT is fiscal conservatism guys (and Diva). That is NOT what President Bush did.

:up:

http://www.finheaven.com/images/imported/2008/10/fiscalconservatives-1.jpg

The_Dark_Knight
09-20-2008, 03:55 PM
:up:

http://www.finheaven.com/images/imported/2008/10/fiscalconservatives-1.jpg
I'm glad you're agreeing with me on this MD...and since we're making nice and swappin' spit...please keep ONE thing in mind...McCain is a fiscal conservative...he's NOT President Bush, ok?? The majority of the republican party are fiscal conservatives.

So if you're going to agree with me on this, you can't back peddle and say Bush and McCain are the same fiscally. It just doesn't add up. You've GOT to give in on this one, bite the bullet and admit I'm right...otherwise, we're just blowing political clamor.

jtsacksyou
09-21-2008, 09:46 PM
if you tax the rich they have less money to spend. By letting the upper class keep more of their money they can expand their businesses. Expanding businesses means more workers. More jobs are created. That makes more money for everyone. Money isn't like a pie. If you have a big piece I get a small piece. Its more like, if the rich's piece gets bigger, my piece will get bigger. Also, if the rich have more money in their pocket, they will have more to spend and spending is good for the economy. Giving 10% back to the poor would mean they get their bills paid. Giving the same amount back to the rich would mean more jobs, which means the poor still get their bills paid, and also creates more spending. We need to stop heavily taxing the rich!

poornate
09-21-2008, 11:54 PM
Hey thanks for that "new" theory... haven't we tried that for quite a while Ronnie, er, I mean Geor... uh, I mean JT?

TheMageGandalf
09-22-2008, 01:59 AM
if you tax the rich they have less money to spend.

The crux of this is that your assuming that the Rich are not going to be greedy.

In a utopian world then you'd be right.

But in this world we live in, the Rich think about how they can go to another country and pay workers there with that $$$ they keep and not American workers. Thats the deal, expand overseas...not here. Those that do stay here usually want to hire the cheapest possible labor they can find. So again, if you told me that they give out decent wages since they get taxed less then fine, but thats not the case. Instead its the opposite, where they will keep the windfall and not think twice should something happen and they have to adjust their lifestyle (like have 5 sports cars instead of 6)...make no mistake they will fire you and get cheap labor or just stick the remaining employees with the extra work, period.

The Rich in this world don't spend as much as you'd think. They usually just dump their cash into Accounts overseas so that they can avoid almost all taxes and/or make more cash through Stock plans. Why do you think that the government didn't want to send checks to the wealthiest of Americans to help boost this economy a few months ago? It was because they knew that the wealthy wouldn't SPEND the money. They'd dump it in their fat savings accounts and it would be a waste.

I could go on and on...

Make no mistake, its mans greed that screws things up.

MDFINFAN
09-22-2008, 01:04 PM
I'm glad you're agreeing with me on this MD...and since we're making nice and swappin' spit...please keep ONE thing in mind...McCain is a fiscal conservative...he's NOT President Bush, ok?? The majority of the republican party are fiscal conservatives.

So if you're going to agree with me on this, you can't back peddle and say Bush and McCain are the same fiscally. It just doesn't add up. You've GOT to give in on this one, bite the bullet and admit I'm right...otherwise, we're just blowing political clamor.

All I can say is look at McCain's site and you point out the difference in both policies with a few exceptions... I think, and there's no proof, since every fiscal conservative from Regan to now has never produced a surplus, that the tenant is to cut spending, cut taxes, and keep a strong military. The only problem I've had with fiscal conservatives, is that the tax cuts are only done at the highest incomes..Reagan thru bush 2.. That's my problem.. And since the repubs had both houses and the presidency in the first 6 years of Bush.. He didn't have to be a fiscal conservative, you had enough house and senate members who should have done it for him.. They all failed the fiscal conservative label...and yet again, we have a deficit.. either in war or without war, cutting taxes for the rich hasn't done it for the regular joe. When the upper class owes 80-90% of the money of the country, and every time you cut their taxes, the money goes everywhere else except this country, you've done us a great disservice, and I'm not stupid enough to let you tell me if we raise their taxes this and that.. if we lower they're taxes the same this and that happens, and who gets screwed, the avg joe. This country is one the greatest on earth, if they don't like being taxed then let them leave, we have others who'll move into their place...

jtsacksyou
09-22-2008, 05:25 PM
The crux of this is that your assuming that the Rich are not going to be greedy.

In a utopian world then you'd be right.

But in this world we live in, the Rich think about how they can go to another country and pay workers there with that $$$ they keep and not American workers. Thats the deal, expand overseas...not here. Those that do stay here usually want to hire the cheapest possible labor they can find. So again, if you told me that they give out decent wages since they get taxed less then fine, but thats not the case. Instead its the opposite, where they will keep the windfall and not think twice should something happen and they have to adjust their lifestyle (like have 5 sports cars instead of 6)...make no mistake they will fire you and get cheap labor or just stick the remaining employees with the extra work, period.

The Rich in this world don't spend as much as you'd think. They usually just dump their cash into Accounts overseas so that they can avoid almost all taxes and/or make more cash through Stock plans. Why do you think that the government didn't want to send checks to the wealthiest of Americans to help boost this economy a few months ago? It was because they knew that the wealthy wouldn't SPEND the money. They'd dump it in their fat savings accounts and it would be a waste.

I could go on and on...

Make no mistake, its mans greed that screws things up.
yeah but if they put it in their fat savings account aren't they helping the banks? Which means they can give out more loans to help the middle and lower class and to help start more small businesses? And if they put all that money in investments doesn't that help our businesses?? One thing that should be done is put a tax so high on foreign stock markets that it becomes useless to invest in them. That way when the rich do invest their money its in our economy, going to our businesses, to help them grow and expand.