Isn't it time for a new election thread?!

[Tweedling]

Suck it. I don't recall my ever saying let's just poor all the $$ you make in the pockets of the poor who don't wish to work. Lame republican argument. Someone ripped and took my sign because McCain is losing and they hate it.

 

I never said you did say that. And hey I'll take a page out of your book, if you can't take a joke "why don't you just put me on ignore?" It seems as though you can dish it.......

[ikol]

Cutting spending wouldn't do enough. What programs would you take away? Infrasturucture, defense, education. Defense definitely needs to be cut by about half. The only problem with that is we are such a militarized economy now, a lot of jobs could be lost. The red herring is "pork barrel" spending which barely makes a dent in our budget.

 

I would cut defense and privatize social security.

 

What is "fair"?

 

25%

 

I agree you should have enough to pay off your own debt, have a nice house and car, and attend as many wilco shows as you can -- which you can easily do without going over the $250K per year threshold (esp in AR may I add). However, if you should go over that $250K annually (and if I am correct -- the $250 is annual income, not net worth), would it be so awful to pay higher taxes than someone making less?

 

Well, I wouldn't be making $250,000 if I was getting taxed at 40-50%. And I would already being paying higher taxes (in both dollar amount and percentage of income) than someone making less under current tax rates.

[Sal]

I would cut defense and privatize social security.

 

 

 

25%

 

 

 

Well, I wouldn't be making $250,000 if I was getting taxed at 40-50%. And I would already being paying higher taxes (in both dollar amount and percentage of income) than someone making less under current tax rates.

 

Cutting defense is a good start, we would still be spending more on defense than anyone else. We need to close some of our foreign military bases as well. I am not for privatization of social security, especially after the last couple of weeks, but I can understand the argument.

 

I would cut defense and privatize social security.

 

 

 

25%

 

 

 

Well, I wouldn't be making $250,000 if I was getting taxed at 40-50%. And I would already being paying higher taxes (in both dollar amount and percentage of income) than someone making less under current tax rates.

 

I have never heard Obama say 40-50%. He has talked about bringing it back to the Clinton levels around 31%. I seem to remember that people still made money back then.

[Griddles]

I am not supporting either major candidate but thought this was funny. It is a facebook group entitled "Fuck Off Barack Osama. You can see it without a facebook account.

[Party @ the Moontower]

I am not supporting either major candidate but thought this was funny. It is a facebook group entitled "Fuck Off Barack Osama. You can see it without a facebook account.

 

 

This pic would have a better one for their page

[bleedorange]

This is one of the lamest posts ever. I understand that you and I likely have different philosophies on how to run a country, but all you need to do is take a look at the current president to see how flawed your logic is. You act like it is only the poor who would have the gall to work "just enough." How about John McCain who would have been kicked out of the military at least four times if his dad wasn't his dad? Did he bust his ass to become a senator or did he know the right people?

 

We all feel we deserve more. One group defines more as money, the other defines more in terms of living standards. We're never going to get around that until the wealthy and privileged get it through their heads that they can have their half of the equation while helping us have ours.

 

Give me a break. For one, I was responding directly to viatroy's post about work ethic, etc. Secondly, I don't act like the poor work "just enough." Stop putting words in my mouth. Third, getting to your second paragraph, people who do work hard for the money they make deserve to keep as much of it as possible for themselves.

 

On a purely philosophical level, I couldn't disagree more with your last sentence.

[Moe_Syzlak]

Wow, the ability of this thread to ignore all reasoned and civil discussion in favor of vitriol, hyperbole and distortions has sunk to a new low. I guess I shouldn't expect less in October of an election year.

[bleedorange]

Wow, the ability of this thread to ignore all reasoned and civil discussion in favor of vitriol, hyperbole and distortions has sunk to a new low. I guess I shouldn't expect less in October of an election year.

 

 

I agree and we're all guilty of it from time to time. It's just harder to have reasoned discussion on a message board as opposed to in person because it's so easy and tempting to take one aspect of an argument and just run with it.

[Moe_Syzlak]

I agree and we're all guilty of it from time to time. It's just harder to have reasoned discussion on a message board as opposed to in person because it's so easy and tempting to take one aspect of an argument and just run with it.

Well earlier in the evening I responded in what I felt was a reasonable way to engage you in a discussion of issues to try to understand each others points of view to hopefully make BOTH of us more informed voters. You ignored the response in favor of baiting other posters. Perhaps I expect too much, but I'd rather ignore the vitriol and concentrate on understanding the philosophical differences I have with other voters.

[fatheadfred]

Face it, it is politically smart to cut taxes on a large majority (90% ?) that will receive a break. I would agree that rich folk pay a bulk of the tax total, however, they are not currently struggling like the rest of us serfs. Maybe it makes sense to change our tax focus until the serfs can catch up. What are you rich bastards gonna do if we can't afford to buy or invest in your shit or the bus lines can't afford to run and your servants can't clean your palaces?

 

I've never seen people get this pist over taxes.

[bleedorange]

I don't read it that way at all. I'm in the camp that would pay more under Obama's plan, but the past eight years have shown, IMO, that a global economy such that it is cannot sustain the trickle down policies of Reaganomics (if they ever could). I would love to see government spend less, but we are in too big of a hole to simply spend less so our revenue needs to come from someplace (preferably not China) and I think those that can afford it should pay it. To me, that's country first. The GOP talking points will call it redistribution of wealth, socialism and giving hard-working folks' money to lazy slobs, but you're smarter than that. I think an apt analogy is rent. If you live in a nicer house and neighborhood, you'll pay more. I could pay next to nothing to live in a housing project, but I doubt many would choose to do that. Sure there are abusers, but the vast majority of people living in lower tax brackets DO work hard and barely scrape by. That needs to change, IMO, for the long-term health of our nation.

 

Now, if you believe that Reaganomics or some other policy is better suited to right the ship, I'd love to hear it. But don't assume anybody is pushing for socialism or doesn't have a valid opinion that simply differs from yours.

 

Sorry I missed it earlier (I assume this is the post). I think my main issue is that I believe the wealthy are already paying more than their fair share. Simply asking them to pay more because they can isn't sound policy, nor is it fair. I do believe that it is a form of redistribution of wealth.

 

Our problems as a country on an economic scale are too complex for me to even fathom and everything I have read points me in two different directions, based mainly on political ideology. I guess that's just par for the course in an election year. But we do need to spend less.

 

However, I guess it remains to be seen if the Dow rebound today was an anomaly or a bounce back due to greater confidence with the global bailouts.

 

I've never seen people get this pist over taxes.

 

It's what led to the formation of this country.

[MrRain422]

There's also a certain amount of simple practicality element to this as well, aside from the question of fairness. At this particular juncture, the current taxation system cannot support our two wars, and there is not enough money to address vital needs, such as infrastructure. Simply put, we need a tax and spend system that will actually work in such a way that our government will have the resources it needs to perform its vital functions without destroying the taxpayer's ability to survive within their means. Ending the wars will free up a lot of money eventually, but in the mean time, we need money, and it doesn't make any sense to have a tax system that doesn't recognize where the actual resources are. To suggest otherwise is like suggesting that the oil crisis could be solved by drilling in Greenland instead of the Middle East. It's nice to stand on some principle, but in the end it's all pointless if the system that hatches from it doesn't work to address the nation's most basic needs.

[explodo]

Give me a break. For one, I was responding directly to viatroy's post about work ethic, etc. Secondly, I don't act like the poor work "just enough." Stop putting words in my mouth. Third, getting to your second paragraph, people who do work hard for the money they make deserve to keep as much of it as possible for themselves.

There are people in the world who work hard for the money but simply don't make enough to live at a fair standard. Like it or not, the American dream is a myth and the class you are born into is the class you are going to stay in. There are exceptions, of course, but you have to understand that hard work is not everything. A poor kid births another poor kid, a rich kid births a rich kid. And I agree, hand outs as they are currently structured can be a negative force in terms of motivation to work hard, but the same thing that applies to the welfare mother has to apply to the student attending private school on his parent's dime. So there needs to be some items we're all willing to sacrifice for. Health care for everybody? Can you honestly tell me you'd rather be sure you can buy an RV when you retire than help me pay my bills if I find out tomorrow that I have a brain tumor? I may have worked less than you due to my age, but I can't believe I've worked less hard. But that is what this is about, this is what we're playing for in this election. I'm bankrupt or dead if I get sick. You get to go to one less football game or buy less albums or whatever it is that you like to do if I get health insurance. And that's not all. There are programs that help you or your kids, too. Green technology can save the economy and the planet if we invest in it. Public transportation can reboot our crumbling infrastructure, vegetable subsidies can offset childhood obesity. I can go on and on. I haven't even mentioned education. I simply can't understand people who don't understand this. And I'm sure you can't understand me either. I see greed and you see selfishness, or something to that effect....

 

Workers of the world, unite?

[Spawn's dad]

I suppose I find many of these type of conversations to be a lot of chest

puffing with not too much substance. Unless one is willing to put hard and

fast definitions on terms such as 'rich' this all remains abstract. So who

is rich? Before you answer I'd throw my family up there as an example. My

paternal grandfather was the only member of his family to survive the

holocaust. He came to America, met my grandmother, and started a family. He

had a small seltzer company in the Bronx that my father and uncles worked.

When they came of age, after high school, they got jobs.

 

My one uncle got in computers and ultimately became wildly wealthy,totally

self made, and well known enough that he'd be on magazine covers and stuff

like that. He's retired now, lost one of his two daughters recently, and

lives to take care of his family.

 

My other uncle got a doctorate and became a reasonably successful therapist

in NY.

 

My dad got a job at what was at the time one of the largest companies in the

world. He started in the mail room, but ultimately worked his way up to

running a sales division. VP kind of gig When the corporate machine got him

down he decided to go to a small start up which he ended up running. It was

a significant lifestyle change, and it wasn't until I was an adult that I

found out we basically lived on credit and check to check. At some point

the corporation he worked for needed to sell some pieces to help the whole

survive. I was going from dead end publishing job to dead end publishing

job, so my father and I agreed that I'd go into the business and he'd find a

way to borrow the capital to buy it. We had a very successful little

company, my dad finally had a pot to piss in and then some.

 

My parent's lifestyle never changed, but they needn't want for anything, and

I never really strayed from that model of living myself. When my dad died, I

took over the company and we carried on for 5 years or so until the import

market forced us out of business. When my mom died this year my brother and

I both inherited a reasonably large sum of money, enough to have to give the

government about 400k of previously taxed money that I was instrumental in

creating. Doesn't seem particularly fair from where I sit. Still, I know

I can send my kid through college and I have no debt at all, though it hardly

makes me rich by any definition I hold.

 

To all those who decry the rich giving the money to their children...is it not

every parent's wish to give their kids a good life? Damn, if I could insure that

my child, grandchildren, whatever, could be secure financially I'd do it. I still

think they need to obtain certain values, and if you read between the lines

people are saying that those rich kids don't have no values, which strikes

me as some absurd movie type generalization about people we don't know.

Those cutters always seemed cooler than the college kids. Shrug.

 

Bill Gates is the richest SOB and the biggest philanthropist. I don't wish to

dredge up the Gates vs. Mother Theresa argument again, but just to say

if stereotypes are bad in one direction, they need to be bad in the other direction.

 

Ball players or movie stars get paid obscene salaries It's true. But they only get paid

so much because we flood their industries with cash. No one makes us.

[explodo]

To all those who decry the rich giving the money to their children...is it not

every parent's wish to give their kids a good life? Damn, if I could insure that

my child, grandchildren, whatever, could be secure financially I'd do it.

I don't think people are doing this. I think they're (or at least I am) arguing that you can leave your child 9/10th of the money he/she was going to get before and an America that is hundred of times more prepared to offer that same child security, education, health, and employment.

[Spawn's dad]

I would need to do the math, but off the top of my head I think we're keeping less than that.

[ikol]

There are people in the world who work hard for the money but simply don't make enough to live at a fair standard. Like it or not, the American dream is a myth and the class you are born into is the class you are going to stay in. There are exceptions, of course, but you have to understand that hard work is not everything. A poor kid births another poor kid, a rich kid births a rich kid. And I agree, hand outs as they are currently structured can be a negative force in terms of motivation to work hard, but the same thing that applies to the welfare mother has to apply to the student attending private school on his parent's dime. So there needs to be some items we're all willing to sacrifice for. Health care for everybody? Can you honestly tell me you'd rather be sure you can buy an RV when you retire than help me pay my bills if I find out tomorrow that I have a brain tumor? I may have worked less than you due to my age, but I can't believe I've worked less hard. But that is what this is about, this is what we're playing for in this election. I'm bankrupt or dead if I get sick. You get to go to one less football game or buy less albums or whatever it is that you like to do if I get health insurance. And that's not all. There are programs that help you or your kids, too. Green technology can save the economy and the planet if we invest in it. Public transportation can reboot our crumbling infrastructure, vegetable subsidies can offset childhood obesity. I can go on and on. I haven't even mentioned education. I simply can't understand people who don't understand this. And I'm sure you can't understand me either. I see greed and you see selfishness, or something to that effect....

 

Workers of the world, unite?

 

So what's the limit on funding your healthcare? What if there is some new treatment for your brain tumor that costs $1,000,000 and will not cure you but extend your life by a couple months? Is the government obligated to pay for that? Who gets to make the decision on whether you get that treatment?

 

I know I asked this yesterday, but I never got a clear answer from anyone, so I'll ask it again to anyone willing to answer: What do you think is a fair tax rate for someone making $250,000 per year? My answer is 25%.

[myboyblue]

So what's the limit on funding your healthcare? What if there is some new treatment for your brain tumor that costs $1,000,000 and will not cure you but extend your life by a couple months? Is the government obligated to pay for that? Who gets to make the decision on whether you get that treatment?

 

I know I asked this yesterday, but I never got a clear answer from anyone, so I'll ask it again to anyone willing to answer: What do you think is a fair tax rate for someone making $250,000 per year? My answer is 25%.

 

From what I have read, Obama is proposing 26.6% for those between $225k & $600k. It amounts to an average additional payment of just over $100 per year. The REAL difference is for people making over $600k. They would be paying over $90k more than they have been under Bush.

 

I'd really like to see what the plans are for cost cutting in the government for both sides. Spending is obviously way out of control and you can't take it from the Defense budget.

[JUDE]

I suppose I find many of these type of conversations to be a lot of chest

puffing with not too much substance. Unless one is willing to put hard and

fast definitions on terms such as 'rich' this all remains abstract. So who

is rich? Before you answer I'd throw my family up there as an example. My

paternal grandfather was the only member of his family to survive the

holocaust. He came to America, met my grandmother, and started a family. He

had a small seltzer company in the Bronx that my father and uncles worked.

When they came of age, after high school, they got jobs.

 

My one uncle got in computers and ultimately became wildly wealthy,totally

self made, and well known enough that he'd be on magazine covers and stuff

like that. He's retired now, lost one of his two daughters recently, and

lives to take care of his family.

 

My other uncle got a doctorate and became a reasonably successful therapist

in NY.

 

My dad got a job at what was at the time one of the largest companies in the

world. He started in the mail room, but ultimately worked his way up to

running a sales division. VP kind of gig When the corporate machine got him

down he decided to go to a small start up which he ended up running. It was

a significant lifestyle change, and it wasn't until I was an adult that I

found out we basically lived on credit and check to check. At some point

the corporation he worked for needed to sell some pieces to help the whole

survive. I was going from dead end publishing job to dead end publishing

job, so my father and I agreed that I'd go into the business and he'd find a

way to borrow the capital to buy it. We had a very successful little

company, my dad finally had a pot to piss in and then some.

 

My parent's lifestyle never changed, but they needn't want for anything, and

I never really strayed from that model of living myself. When my dad died, I

took over the company and we carried on for 5 years or so until the import

market forced us out of business. When my mom died this year my brother and

I both inherited a reasonably large sum of money, enough to have to give the

government about 400k of previously taxed money that I was instrumental in

creating. Doesn't seem particularly fair from where I sit. Still, I know

I can send my kid through college and I have no debt at all, though it hardly

makes me rich by any definition I hold.

 

To all those who decry the rich giving the money to their children...is it not

every parent's wish to give their kids a good life? Damn, if I could insure that

my child, grandchildren, whatever, could be secure financially I'd do it. I still

think they need to obtain certain values, and if you read between the lines

people are saying that those rich kids don't have no values, which strikes

me as some absurd movie type generalization about people we don't know.

Those cutters always seemed cooler than the college kids. Shrug.

 

Bill Gates is the richest SOB and the biggest philanthropist. I don't wish to

dredge up the Gates vs. Mother Theresa argument again, but just to say

if stereotypes are bad in one direction, they need to be bad in the other direction.

 

Ball players or movie stars get paid obscene salaries It's true. But they only get paid

so much because we flood their industries with cash. No one makes us.

 

 

Nice post Gary.

[M. (hristine]

Real email this morning from real people I know:

 

"According to The Book of Revelations:

 

The Anti-Christ will be a man, in his 40's, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal....the prophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power, he will destroy everything.

And Now:

For the award winning Act of Stupidity Of all times the People of America want to elect, to the most Powerful position on the face of the Planet -- The Presidency of the United states of America .. A Male of Muslim descent who is the most extremely liberal Senator in Congress (in other words an extremist) and in his 40's.

 

Have the American People completely lost their Minds, or just their Power of Reason ???

 

I'm sorry but I refuse to take a chance on the 'unknown' candidate Obama...

 

Let's send this to as many people as we can so that the Gloria Aldreds and other stupid attorneys along with Federal Justices that want to thwart common sense, feel ashamed of themselves -- if they have any such sense.

 

As the writer of the award winning story 'Forest Gump' so aptly put it,

 

'Stupid Is As Stupid Does'"

 

 

 

 

You want to talk about fear mongering? This too is America. ^ And far more prevalent than you would like to believe.

[explodo]

So what's the limit on funding your healthcare? What if there is some new treatment for your brain tumor that costs $1,000,000 and will not cure you but extend your life by a couple months? Is the government obligated to pay for that? Who gets to make the decision on whether you get that treatment?

The same price as a single bomb. Which one is the better investment? (Though, for the record, I'd only want my life extended if I felt good at the same time, which is usually not the case with cancer treatments)

 

And exorbitant costs are offset, to a degree, by preventative care. It's not cost-effective to be healthy (or smart or financially sound, but those are different stories) in this country, so you end up with epidemics before you begin to address the issues that are the leading causes of our swelling health care tab. Besides, if you're insured, you are already "paying" for my million dollar cancer treatment. The only difference is where the deduction shows up on your pay stub.

[Sir Stewart]

Ball players or movie stars get paid obscene salaries It's true. But they only get paid

so much because we flood their industries with cash. No one makes us.

It's also important to note that ballplayers are only getting that kind of salary for about 5-15 years of their entire lives.

[Good Old Neon]

It's also important to note that ballplayers are only getting that kind of salary for about 5-15 years of their entire lives.

 

 

True, but most of us could live and work and then die and then return again to live and work and die again, hundreds of times and never come even close to making what a well paid ball player makes in 5-15 years or even 6 months.

 

Unless of course we

[fatheadfred]

Our problems as a country on an economic scale are too complex for me to even fathom and everything I have read points me in two different directions, based mainly on political ideology. I guess that's just par for the course in an election year. But we do need to spend less.

 

It's what led to the formation of this country.

 

I agree. Neither candidate understands this shit, in depth. However, they both have a team of advisors and it appears to me that Obama gleans more info from his folk.

 

Yeah, I wasn't alive then.

 

I wonder if we could choose to direct our tax contributions? Say we pick our top 3 areas, e.g. education, transportation, energy, on our withholding form? And if we don't want to decide, we can leave it up to the man, like we currently do. This way we have more control than just "call your representative".

[JUDE]

I would love to revisit this thread in the distant future when some of you become moderately successful or when you reach retirement age and you start to spend your retirement funds at a time when you have limited tax deductions and most everything becomes ordinary income.