Republican Tax Increases

[Wild Cobra]

THE REPUBLICAN TAX INCREASE (http://boortz.com/nealz_nuze/2010/08/the-republican-tax-increase.html)
Now you have to love this bit of nonsense. Once again we're seeing how valuable our system of government education is to the Democrats. After all, you could never pull this off with an educated electorate.

You know, don't you, that taxes are going up at the end of the year. At the beginning of the Bush presidency the Republicans simply didn't have enough votes to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. The Democrats insisted on an expiration date of December 31st, 2010. Now ... since those tax cuts will expire and taxes are going up .. The Democrats have decided it might be a good political ploy to start referring to this as a "Republican Tax Increase."

Nope ... not kidding: House majority leader Steny Hoyer says that the expiration of the Bush tax cuts is a "Republican tax increase" for "working Americans" and the Democrats have "no intention" of allowing it to go into effect. Hoyer says, "We have no intention of allowing the Republican tax increase -- that their policies would lead to -- to go into effect for working Americans. Period .... We're going to act and make sure that the Republican phase out and increase in taxes does not end as they provided for in the laws they passed."

This is just amazing. Now we have a lot of economists telling the Democrats that if they don't extend the Bush tax cuts our economic recovery will be damaged. Democrats don't want to cut the taxes on the top producers. They know that their base constituency loves taxing the rich ... but they also don't want to be seen as increasing taxes during a recovery. After all ... what if the experts are right? What if increasing taxes on the very people who we're depending on for job growth stalls our recovery? Well, that's easy! We'll just call them "Republican tax increases" and let them take the heat!

Again .. not to belabor the point ... but you can't get away with this if the voters are truly educated and informed.

from another link:

http://sg.wsj.net/public/resources/images/ED-AL963_laffer_NS_20100801181202.gif (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703977004575393882112674598.html)

[Marcus Bryant]

If taxes are not increased the national debt will go up even moreso. And who cares about which party gets the blame or credit?

Oh, and...


http://larry5154.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/richard-nixon.jpg

"We're all Keynesians now."

[Spurminator]

What a stupid graph.

[Spurminator]

"Tricks the Right Plays to Make it Look Like the Rich are Getting Fleeced"

[ElNono]

What a stupid graph.

I was going to say. The only thing that graph tells you is that the top 1% never paid as much as the bottom 95%, except very recently.

[ChumpDumper]

Those poor extremely rich people.

They are to be pitied.

[Marcus Bryant]

So we need more deficit financed tax cuts and we're going to bitch about the debt and deficits. Anyways, this is stupid as the debt and deficits are more of a concern to the electorate at this point, an electorate that is not stupid enough to understand that there are two ways to close the fiscal gap and one of those is by increasing tax rates, which is what is set to happen automatically.

Why is it that the answer to the fiscal irresponsibility of the other party is to advocate more of your own?

[Wild Cobra]

So we need more deficit financed tax cuts and we're going to bitch about the debt and deficits. Anyways, this is stupid as the debt and deficits are more of a concern to the electorate at this point, an electorate that is not stupid enough to understand that there are two ways to close the fiscal gap and one of those is by increasing tax rates, which is what is set to happen automatically.

Why is it that the answer to the fiscal irresponsibility of the other party is to advocate more of your own?
We don't need more revenue, we need less spending.

My point of the article was the spin the democrats are putting on these tax cuts.

[DarrinS]

I'm curious. Why does the MSM always refer to the Bush tax cuts as "Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans"?


The cuts applied across the board.

[Wild Cobra]

I'm curious. Why does the MSM always refer to the Bush tax cuts as "Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans"?


The cuts applied across the board.

I've mentioned that before, but these board libtards still refer to them as cutting taxes for the wealthy.

I didn't know that lowering my marginal tax rate by 3% made me wealthy.

[Marcus Bryant]

We don't need more revenue.

It is certainly needed, otherwise that's more from the ChiComs that will have to be borrowed to provide freedom tax cuts to all.



we need less spending.

So what part of the DoD budget are you going to cut?



My point of the article was the spin the democrats are putting on these tax cuts.

WGAF?

[Spurminator]

I was going to say. The only thing that graph tells you is that the top 1% never paid as much as the bottom 95%, except very recently.

What it really says is the top 1% are making more money than they have in a long time.

[Wild Cobra]

we need less spending.
So what part of the DoD budget are you going to cut?

A little, but most the cuts need to come from other places.

[DarrinS]

I've mentioned that before, but these board libtards still refer to them as cutting taxes for the wealthy.

I didn't know that lowering my marginal tax rate by 3% made me wealthy.


Pretty good article on how the expiring Bush tax cuts will affect individuals.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/07/22/expiring-bush-cuts-affect-personal-finance-taxes.html




Most Americans have a fairly strong opinion of former President George W. Bush, either for or against his eight-year reign. One thing that all Americans can agree on, however, is that he was a serial tax cutter, with tax reduction as one of the cornerstones of his economic policy. Many of these tax cuts were enacted with sunset provisions, meaning they were embedded with predetermined expiration dates, many of which are coming up in 2011 and 2012. These sunset provisions were placed in the tax laws in some cases to garner enough legislative support to get the bills passed, or to get around rules that existed on cutting revenue without passing an offsetting spending cut.

Major Legislation
The two major tax-cutting bills from the Bush era were the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act (EGTRRA) of 2001, and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003.

These two laws cut taxes across the board for earned income, long-term capital gains and dividends. The legislation also expanded the child tax credit and made dozens of other changes and adjustments to the tax code, involving exemptions, deductions and the marriage penalty.

Tax Brackets
EGTRRA created six tax rate brackets--10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33% and 35%, based on income levels. If no extension is passed and signed into law, then the pre-2001 tax rates will go back into effect starting in tax year 2011. The 10% bracket would disappear, and those taxpayers would move up to the 15% bracket, which would apply to all incomes below $34,550. The other tax rates would increase to 28%, 31%, 36% and 39.6% for the highest earners making more than $379,650.

Child Tax Credit
One major provision that will expire at the end of 2010 is the child tax credit, which EGTRRA doubled from $500 to $1,000 per child. Unless Congress votes to extend the child tax credit, the maximum amount will revert back to $500 for tax year 2011, and the number of families eligible for that amount will be much less as tougher eligibility standards that existed prior to EGTRRA will go back into effect.

Capital Gains/Qualified Dividends
The maximum tax rate on long-term capital gains and qualified dividends were also reduced to 15%, with lower income filers facing a 0% tax rate. The sunset provisions would move the capital gains rate back to a maximum of 20%, and qualified dividends would resume being taxed at the regular tax rate of the filer, or as high as 39.6%.

Marriage Penalty
EGTRRA also eliminated the so-called "marriage penalty" and gave a married couple filing jointly a standard deduction twice that of a single filer. Tax rates were also adjusted for joint filers to remove the penalty. These provisions are set to expire as well.

Other Expirations
Another legacy of the two tax cuts was the elimination of the phase out of the personal exemption, which was gradually eliminated over time. If no extension is passed, then the phase out will resume at incomes above $122,500.

The phase out for itemized deductions were also eliminated by the Bush tax cuts, and these will also kick back in. Some taxpayers may lose as much as 80% of their itemized deductions if their income is too high.

Democrats Strike Back
The Democratic Party hated the tax cuts when they were first passed and are moving to rein them in. President Obama has asked Congress to extend and make permanent the 10%, 15% and 25% tax rates. The 28% bracket would be recalculated to include individuals with income less than $200,000 and married filers with income less than $250,000. The "rich" would be out of luck under the proposal, with the 33% and 35% brackets expiring at the end of 2010, and the former 36% and 39.6% tax rates going back into effect.

Obama is also seeking to make permanent the long-term capital gain rates of 0% and 15%, but tax capital gains at a rate of 20% for those taxpayers that fall into the 36% and 39.6% brackets. None of this has been decided yet, and passage is not certain due to the politics of Washington in general--and during an election year in particular.

Bottom Line
Most politicians are reluctant to raise taxes. In this case, they may not have to because the sunset provisions embedded in tax-cutting legislation from the Bush era will result in significant tax increases in the United States over the next few years as long as they do nothing. Whether they will do this with an impending election is another thing.

[Marcus Bryant]

A little, but most the cuts need to come from other places.

What other places?

[Wild Cobra]

What it really says is the top 1% are making more money than they have in a long time.
No, it says the top 1% now pay more than 95 times as much as the bottom 95%.

[Spurminator]

No, it says the top 1% now pay more than 95 times and much as the bottom 95%.

And how much more do they make?

[Wild Cobra]

And how much more do they make?
It doesn't make that distinction. You tell me.

[DarrinS]

Maybe be should cut funding to NASA, since they spend most of their time these days studying global warming and improving relations with the Muslim world.

[Spurminator]

It doesn't make that distinction.

Because it's a stupid graph.

[Wild Cobra]

If you go by this graph, the top 1% pay about three times the tax rate as the bottom 95%, meaning they only make about 32 times more:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/07/30/business/economy/AGI.jpg (http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/30/top-1-paid-more-in-federal-income-taxes-than-bottom-95-in-07/)

[LnGrrrR]

I'm curious. Why does the MSM always refer to the Bush tax cuts as "Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans"?


The cuts applied across the board.

Just a guess, but it could be because the more you make, the money money you'll "save". For instance, if I reduce taxes from 15% to 10%, a poor person making $1000 a month saves 50 bucks (100 dollars taxed instead of 150), while a rich person making $100,000 a month saves dramatically more. (Instead of being taxed $1,500, they're being taxed $1000, a savings for 500 dollars.)

Of course, the VALUE of the cut is probably felt more by the poor person than the rich (as those 50 dollars may be more vital to the poor person than the 500 would be to the richer person.)

[Marcus Bryant]

So the middle class doesn't need an extended tax cut, they need to pay more.

[Wild Cobra]

Of course, the VALUE of the cut is probably felt more by the poor person than the rich (as those 50 dollars may be more vital to the poor person than the 500 would be to the richer person.)
So when the tax cuts expire, the little guy gets hurt more. Right?

[DarrinS]

So when the tax cuts expire, the little guy gets hurt more. Right?

Or laid off by evil rich dude.

[Marcus Bryant]

When in doubt, Neo-Keynsianist tax cuts to the rescue.

[Spurminator]

http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms/1-23-07inc-f1.jpg

[Wild Cobra]

http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms/1-23-07inc-f1.jpg
I wonder how many of those top 1% are friend of congress, and have tax loopholes written in that don't affect them when income tax rates increase.

Remember now, we are talking income tax rates. Most of the rich have income and are taxed on capital gains and/or dividends. Not the income these tax rates apply to. So tell me. How is increasing the tax rate of those who actually work for a living, going to help?

[Spurminator]

I wonder how many of those top 1% are friend of congress, and have tax loopholes written in that don't affect them when income tax rates increase.

I don't know, probably the same amount as the top 1% in your graph. It's the same people. What's your point?


Remember now, we are talking income tax rates. Most of the rich have income and are taxed on capital gains and/or dividends. Not the income these tax rates apply to.

Okay, so they make even more money than what is shown on this graph. Noted.


So tell me. How is increasing the tax rate of those who actually work for a living, going to help?

It's not a tax increase. It's the expiration of a temporary tax cut.

[Marcus Bryant]

How are increased debt and deficits going to help? At some point you live within your means and you pay for all the goodies you get. That includes the middle class, which have avoided their true tax burden thanks to the 1% and maxing out the federal credit card.

[Marcus Bryant]

If you expect your country's military to dominate the world, be prepared to pay for it and stop whining about it.

[Wild Cobra]

It's not a tax increase. It's the expiration of a temporary tax cut.
Yes, but after the public being used to a particular rate, it is a tax increase. Do the technical definitions matter much? People will still be paying more, spending less, and probably start a second recession with more unemployment.

Those paying the 10% rate will increase to 15%. At the 15% rate, some wiill stay there, others will move to 28%. The 25% rate will go to 28%, the 28% to 31%, etc.

Most middle-class earners will be paying an additional 3% on their taxable income. The poor who make enough to pay taxes, will pay an additional 5%, or have a 50% increase depending on how you look at it.

Isn't that 10% to 15% going to piss the poor off?

What about the child credits going back to $500 from the current $1000?

[Wild Cobra]

How are increased debt and deficits going to help? At some point you live within your means and you pay for all the goodies you get. That includes the middle class, which have avoided their true tax burden thanks to the 1% and maxing out the federal credit card.
I will contend that it will only help the deficit for only the first year, if any. IAW Laffer's studies, the end result will be less revenue generated as the economy slows.

[Marcus Bryant]

Yes, apparently it is pissing poor Republicans off who are starting threads about it in this forum.

[Marcus Bryant]

So more deficit-financed stimulus. Grand.

[Wild Cobra]

Yes, apparently it is pissing poor Republicans off who are starting threads about it in this forum.
Who would that be?

Yes, I know you mean me, but you prove your ignorance once again. I challenge you to show I'm registered as republican when my voter registration card says "not affiliated."

[Spurminator]

Yes, but after the public being used to a particular rate, it is a tax increase. Do the technical definitions matter much? People will still be paying more, spending less, and probably start a second recession with more unemployment.

Those paying the 10% rate will increase to 15%. At the 15% rate, some wiill stay there, others will move to 28%. The 25% rate will go to 28%, the 28% to 31%, etc.

Most middle-class earners will be paying an additional 3% on their taxable income. The poor who make enough to pay taxes, will pay an additional 5%, or have a 50% increase depending on how you look at it.

Isn't that 10% to 15% going to piss the poor off?

What about the child credits going back to $500 from the current $1000?

It would probably hurt in the beginning before we reach equilibrium but it's a market correction. The tax cuts should never have happened to begin with.

In reality, what will happen is that the tax cuts will be extended for anyone making less than $XX, with XX being whatever income level covers enough voters.

[Marcus Bryant]

It would be ignorant to read this thread or any of the other 5,000 you've started in this forum and reach any other conclusion as to your party affiliation and economic status.

[Wild Cobra]

It would be ignorant to read this thread or any of the other 5,000 you've started in this forum and reach any other conclusion as to your party affiliation and economic status.
Then you once again prove you are a libtard.

[George Gervin's Afro]

I'm curious. Why does the MSM always refer to the Bush tax cuts as "Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans"?


The cuts applied across the board.

Because the all tax cuts are going to be kept in place except for the top income bracket..

[jack sommerset]

It would be ignorant to read this thread or any of the other 5,000 you've started in this forum and reach any other conclusion as to your party affiliation and economic status.

LOL at you complaining about amounts of post or people who start threads in this forum.

[Marcus Bryant]

Then you once again prove you are a libtard.

That is supposed to be an insult?

[Wild Cobra]

That is supposed to be an insult?
Not at all. Consider it a term of endearment if you prefer.

If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.

[Wild Cobra]

Because the all tax cuts are going to be kept in place except for the top income bracket..
Sure, if you believe propaganda from the left.

I'll believe it if they make it so before the November elections. I will bet they are holding this as an election issue, and have no intent of honoring it.

V-Bookie anyone?

[Spurminator]

They will extend the tax cuts for middle class and below, but Republicans will still oppose it, and they will rally droves of tea partiers to protest on behalf of the top 1% as they always so enthusiastically do.

[Wild Cobra]

They will extend the tax cuts for middle class and below, but Republicans will still oppose it, and they will rally droves of tea partiers to protest on behalf of the top 1% as they always so enthusiastically do.
I'm sure republicans will not oppose it unless something irrational is in the bill too.

Think they want to be left dry in the November elections because of this?

I'll also make the bet that democrats will poison any package they design to make republicans oppose it.

History is against the democrats on this one. The final house vote was 231 yes to 200 no. Republicans 224 to 1, democrats 7 to 198.

In the senate, 50/50 with Cheney's vote the tie breaker. republicans 48 to 3, democrats 2 to 46.

[Marcus Bryant]

They will extend the tax cuts for middle class and below, but Republicans will still oppose it, and they will rally droves of tea partiers to protest on behalf of the top 1% as they always so enthusiastically do.

Probably. And the middle class saddles the productive John Galt class and future generations with more debt so they can shirk paying for their wars and government goodies.

[LnGrrrR]

How is increasing the tax rate of those who actually work for a living, going to help?

Yup, only those 1% do anything, the rest of us are filthy heathens, begging for handouts. :tu

[ElNono]

Probably. And the middle class saddles the productive John Galt class and future generations with more debt so they can shirk paying for their wars and government goodies.

I'll play Joe the Plumber for free money... :toast

[LnGrrrR]

Then you once again prove you are a libtard.

I love how you insult Marcus for saying that you obviously are Republican, by claiming to know his party and calling him a libtard.

Marcus is obviously not a liberal to anyone who cares to read it. That you so willingly apply such a broad brush to anyone who disagrees with you gives further credence to what Marcus said.

[ElNono]

I'm just wondering how this self-proclaimed 'independent' voted in the last 5 or so presidential elections.

[Wild Cobra]

I love how you insult Marcus for saying that you obviously are Republican, by claiming to know his party and calling him a libtard.

Marcus is obviously not a liberal to anyone who cares to read it. That you so willingly apply such a broad brush to anyone who disagrees with you gives further credence to what Marcus said.

I will admit to tit-for-tat at times.

[CosmicCowboy]

It would probably hurt in the beginning before we reach equilibrium but it's a market correction. The tax cuts should never have happened to begin with.

In reality, what will happen is that the tax cuts will be extended for anyone making less than $XX, with XX being whatever income level covers enough voters.

Cynical but true.

The simple truth is that "taxing the rich" just isn't enough.

They are gonna eventually have to hit the middle class because thats where the big money is.

[Wild Cobra]

I'm just wondering how this self-proclaimed 'independent' voted in the last 5 or so presidential elections.
Reagan, Reagan, Mickey Mouse, Perot, Dole, Phillips, Bush, Palin.

[Wild Cobra]

Cynical but true.

The simple truth is that "taxing the rich" just isn't enough.

They are gonna eventually have to hit the middle class because thats where the big money is.
That's why we need to focus on bringing blue collar labor back to increase the middle class, and reduce the number or poor.

We need more tax payers. Not more taxes.

[ElNono]

That's why we need to focus on bringing blue collar labor back to increase the middle class, and reduce the number or poor.

We need more tax payers. Not more taxes.

That's easy to say, but actually making it happen is more complicated.

These tax breaks were originally meant to do exactly that by ways of 'trickle down economics', which obviously was a complete failure.

So what alternative do you suggest?

[LnGrrrR]

So when the tax cuts expire, the little guy gets hurt more. Right?

Well, you could take either side of this debate, but I would argue that the "little guy" would be hurt more, yes.

[coyotes_geek]

This thread reinforces my belief in the flat tax.

[Wild Cobra]

This thread reinforces my belief in the flat tax.
Me too, or the Fair Tax.

[CosmicCowboy]

That's easy to say, but actually making it happen is more complicated.

These tax breaks were originally meant to do exactly that by ways of 'trickle down economics', which obviously was a complete failure.

So what alternative do you suggest?

Actually they also raised the threshold where you start to pay tax and even reinforced the negative tax where if you made less than a certain amount you got a check.

I can hardly propose a new tax code in a post on a message board but part of the problem we have today with runaway spending is that too much of our population has NO skin in the game. I don't care if it's 1% on the poorest I think everyone should pay taxes. if you pay no taxes at all or even get a "bonus" check from the government because you don't make enough you have NO personal interest in the Feds pissing off stupid money because it simply doesn't effect you.

[Marcus Bryant]

They are gonna eventually have to hit the middle class because thats where the big money is.

Indeed. The middle class bitches about federal income taxes as if they really share a significant part of the burden.

[Wild Cobra]

Actually they also raised the threshold where you start to pay tax and even reinforced the negative tax where if you made less than a certain amount you got a check.

I can hardly propose a new tax code in a post on a message board but part of the problem we have today with runaway spending is that too much of our population has NO skin in the game. I don't care if it's 1% on the poorest I think everyone should pay taxes. if you pay no taxes at all or even get a "bonus" check from the government because you don't make enough you have NO personal interest in the Feds pissing off stupid money because it simply doesn't effect you.
Yes, and I have often said something similar.

It bothers me that everyone who claims to be an American doesn't believe this way.

[Wild Cobra]

Indeed. The middle class bitches about federal income taxes as if they really share a significant part of the burden.
Isn't about half the burden enough?

[coyotes_geek]

Actually they also raised the threshold where you start to pay tax and even reinforced the negative tax where if you made less than a certain amount you got a check.

I can hardly propose a new tax code in a post on a message board but part of the problem we have today with runaway spending is that too much of our population has NO skin in the game. I don't care if it's 1% on the poorest I think everyone should pay taxes. if you pay no taxes at all or even get a "bonus" check from the government because you don't make enough you have NO personal interest in the Feds pissing off stupid money because it simply doesn't effect you.

Well said. Couldn't agree more. Everyone over the poverty line needs to be paying something, and under no circumstances should anyone be getting a "refund" on taxes they didn't pay.

[LnGrrrR]

Indeed. The middle class bitches about federal income taxes as if they really share a significant part of the burden.

Individually not, but collectively I believe they do.

[fraga]

http://liberal-debutante.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/99problems_graph.jpg

[Wild Cobra]

http://liberal-debutante.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/99problems_graph.jpg
LOL...

Almost completely accurate.

[Nbadan]

Well said. Couldn't agree more. Everyone over the poverty line needs to be paying something, and under no circumstances should anyone be getting a "refund" on taxes they didn't pay.

They don't get a refund on taxes they didn't pay - they get a refund because they have exemptions that amount to a larger total than the amount of taxes they are supposed to pay for their income....kinda like when businesses get to write off business expenses and amortize their furniture and shit from their profit margins so they pay less federal taxes.....

....be consistent, are you for eliminating all business exemptions and write-offs too? Yes? ....You fascists.....

[Nbadan]

Individually not, but collectively I believe they do.

The upper middle class pays the majority of personal taxes.....

[Marcus Bryant]

Individually not, but collectively I believe they do.

A little dated but a reasonable representation of today's situation, considering the Bush tax cuts did shift more of the burden upward (while reducing it in total overall):

http://www.sugisorensen.com/taxes/index.html

A different kind of 80-20 rule. Something to consider the next time you hear Joe Bob bitch about income taxes, unless he's a 'Millionaire Next Door.'

Of course, this does not include SS and FICA taxes.

[ElNono]

Actually they also raised the threshold where you start to pay tax and even reinforced the negative tax where if you made less than a certain amount you got a check.

I can hardly propose a new tax code in a post on a message board but part of the problem we have today with runaway spending is that too much of our population has NO skin in the game. I don't care if it's 1% on the poorest I think everyone should pay taxes. if you pay no taxes at all or even get a "bonus" check from the government because you don't make enough you have NO personal interest in the Feds pissing off stupid money because it simply doesn't effect you.

Well said. Obviously, that would mean taxing more people, not less.

[Nbadan]

Well said. Obviously, that would mean taxing more people, not less.

If there was a living wage in the US that was reasonable, I'm sure more people would not mind paying more in taxes...'bonus checks' to poor people in the form of tax returns are really corporate subsidies for businesses that do not pay their employees a living wage to sustain themselves without assistance...

[Parker2112]

If you go by this graph, you can watch the little guys disappear completely!

Of course taxes paid by the wealthiest percentages are climbing, and crossing the rest of the country...

They are taking claim of the entire damn pie!

And keep in mind this graph doesnt show the increase in wealth for the top 1%, but lumps together the entire top 20%. In effect, it hides the ridiculous spike for the wealthiest one percent.


http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/courses/so11/stratification/Wealth83_04.gif

something like this...
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4007/4484324429_0ffb565bfb.jpg

Thus the crossing tax totals make perfect sense TO THE EDUCATED CONSTITUENT.

[Parker2112]

The little guy says, "Oh Nooooo...."
http://rsl.theoffside.com/files/2010/04/Mr.Bill.jpg

Then tries to cope...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3219/2977095858_e855e6f09d.jpg

[Parker2112]

And Trade Tony Parker Already, Pop!:guin

[DMX7]

Or laid off by evil rich dude.

Another pathetic Trickle Down Economics worshiper... You must have closed your eyes real well during Bush's 8 year reign of failure.

[ElNono]

Reagan, Reagan, Mickey Mouse, Perot, Dole, Phillips, Bush, Palin.

Exactly.

[DarrinS]

Another pathetic Trickle Down Economics worshiper... You must have closed your eyes real well during Bush's 8 year reign of failure.


I take it you're self-employed?

[Wild Cobra]

Exactly.
What do you mean "exactly?" I'll bet it wasn't quite as you thought.

[ElNono]

What do you mean "exactly?" I'll bet it wasn't quite as you thought.

Sure it was. You rather vote for Mickey Mouse than a Democrat.

[Wild Cobra]

Sure it was. You rather vote for Mickey Mouse than a Democrat.
Yes, and I would have voted for Micky mouse instead of McCain.

[ElNono]

Yes, and I would have voted for Micky mouse instead of McCain.

But you did vote for McCain...

[Wild Cobra]

But you did vote for McCain...
My point was I only voted for him because I voted for Palin. If she wasn't hes VP nominee, I probably would not have voted for him.

[clambake]

lol

[Marcus Bryant]

Governor Palin is a fine example of true American womanhood. From her loins come forth true American heirs to the true American inheritance. She lives a pure true American life in the true American wilderness where she wrestles bears for sport and nurses her cubs in the shadow of Mount McKinley (not that anti-American name some give it). She listens to true American music like the Scorpions and drinks true American beer like Bud Light and not any of that gay Belgian crap, and certainly not any of that Kraut beer. And she hates soccer. And taxes. And above all else, moslems and black presidents. But she does love Facebook and I'm a fan.

[clambake]

the guy's on fire.

[boutons_deux]

Family values Real American Trailer Park pitbull bitch has a knocked-up unwed teen daughter with no prosepcts.

While the immoral Clintons have a 30-year daughter with a post-grad degree, great jobs (well, Wall St/McKinsey is good money), and got married apparently non-pregnant.

[ElNono]

My point was I only voted for him because I voted for Palin. If she wasn't hes VP nominee, I probably would not have voted for him.

Right. But McCain did get a vote from you, did he not?

So we have an independent that either votes Republican or an invalid vote. That's some independency you have going on there.

[Parker2112]

My point was I only voted for him because I voted for Palin. If she wasn't hes VP nominee, I probably would not have voted for him.:(

Jesus.

Christo.

[Parker2112]

WC, you mean the Gal who ran on Cap and Trade?

[CosmicCowboy]

Family values Real American Trailer Park pitbull bitch has a knocked-up unwed teen daughter with no prosepcts.

While the immoral Clintons have a 30-year daughter with a post-grad degree, great jobs (well, Wall St/McKinsey is good money), and got married apparently non-pregnant.

Ah, the "progressive" talking children smack. How revealing.

[Parker2112]

"I support cap and trade" @ 4:05

Cbo1yJE1nxk

[boutons_deux]

pitbull bitch per her family in play, and her trashy little daughter is now a fair-game celebrity, and an legal adult.

[CosmicCowboy]

pitbull bitch per her family in play, and her trashy little daughter is now a fair-game celebrity, and an legal adult.

Damn, you are a pathetic angry little bastard.

[Wild Cobra]

Right. But McCain did get a vote from you, did he not?
Technically he did. However, my vote wasn't for him.

So we have an independent that either votes Republican or an invalid vote. That's some independency you have going on there.
You didn't notice the independent names in my list?

Why is this so important to you?

Are you under the strange assumption I cannot vote my conscience, or have valid reasons to vote a particular way, and must vote third party?

I'm sorry, but you are appearing quite the fool to me right now.

I am a conservative variety of a libertarian. Sorry that so many people cannot accept that. I will not vote liberal. I will vote for liberty, and constitutional values over party.

[Marcus Bryant]

T

I am a conservative variety of a libertarian. Sorry that so many people cannot accept that. I will not vote liberal. I will vote for liberty, and constitutional values over party.

Right. And somehow that ends at the GOP, though the LP is on the ballot.

[Wild Cobra]

"I support cap and trade" @ 4:05

Cbo1yJE1nxk

I suppose if you were a car salesman for a Chevy dealer, abut like Fords better, you would tell that to your costumers. Right?

Grow up. Understand life before you output such trivial stuff.

[Wild Cobra]

Right. And somehow that ends at the GOP, though the LP is on the ballot.
I disagree with those who end up being the libertarian front runners. they are anarchists. They go beyond just having liberty.

I choose liberty over authoritarianism. That is why I agree with so many libertarian ideals. Just because I don't fit into your bigoted role as to what a libertarian is, doesn't mean I don't fit in.

My god. Just how shallow are you?

[Marcus Bryant]

I disagree with those who end up being the libertarian front runners. they are anarchists. They go beyond just having liberty.



http://libertarianviewpoint.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Bob_Barr.jpg

Obvious anarchist.

Anyways, what part of the LP's agenda is "beyond just having liberty?

[Marcus Bryant]

That is why I agree with so many libertarian ideals.

Which ones?



Just because I don't fit into your bigoted role as to what a libertarian is, doesn't mean I don't fit in.


How so?

[Wild Cobra]

http://libertarianviewpoint.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Bob_Barr.jpg

Obvious anarchist.

Anyways, what part of the LP's agenda is "beyond just having liberty?
Now I like most of what Bob Barr said. I had originally planned to vote for him. However, Palin came alone.

Yes, I'll revise may statement before saying I would have voted for Bob barr rather than Mickey Mouse if Palin hadn't come along. I forgot about Barr.

[LnGrrrR]

I choose liberty over authoritarianism.

Except for allowing the intelligence community greater access to snoop on Americans suspected of terrorism. Or when the government uses the "state secrets" clause to try and throw out a case. Or when the government says it will assassinate citizens. Or when someone advocates legalizing drugs such as ecstasy and LSD.

[spursncowboys]

Yes, and I would have voted for Micky mouse instead of McCain.

word

[Wild Cobra]

Except for allowing the intelligence community greater access to snoop on Americans suspected of terrorism. Or when the government uses the "state secrets" clause to try and throw out a case. Or when the government says it will assassinate citizens. Or when someone advocates legalizing drugs such as ecstasy and LSD.
We interpret these differently.

[Parker2112]

We interpret these differently.

Sorry buddy, but as long as you and SNC and John Wayne support the bullshit thats going on in the middle east, you're republicans, nothing more nothing less.

You may agree with libertarians on fiscal policies, but the key is libertarians are against the balloon defense budget and the use of US troops abroad.

Until you clowns recant on that BS, you have no claim to anything libertarian.

[ElNono]

Technically he did. However, my vote wasn't for him.

But technically he did get it.



You didn't notice the independent names in my list?

I did notice the lack of Democrats in your list.



Why is this so important to you?

Because I'm tired of hearing your 'independent' bullshit.


Are you under the strange assumption I cannot vote my conscience, or have valid reasons to vote a particular way, and must vote third party?

No, I think you're very conscious to avoid a Democrat vote, which automatically disqualifies you as a unbiased, independent voter.


I'm sorry, but you are appearing quite the fool to me right now.

WGAF?


I am a conservative variety of a libertarian. Sorry that so many people cannot accept that. I will not vote liberal. I will vote for liberty, and constitutional values over party.

Your concepts of liberty and constitutional values change every day, depending on the party affiliation of who is at the helm.

[spursncowboys]

You can label me whatever the hell you want conspiracy nut. I know what I am and what I believe. Unlike you, they change with the situation. Keep living in your bubble.

I also do not think the keys of being a libertarian is the defense budget.

[spursncowboys]

But technically he did get it.




I did notice the lack of Democrats in your list. he said independent. See at the recent voting of these past two years, the dems are politely in line with the liberal wing of their party.





Because I'm tired of hearing your 'independent' bullshit.
Just because someone doesn't vote democrat doesn't mean they aren't independent.











Your concepts of liberty and constitutional values change every day,
there is nothing wrong with this. We as humans are supposed to grow and change our views.

[ElNono]

he said independent. See at the recent voting of these past two years, the dems are politely in line with the liberal wing of their party.

I know what he said. Which is not what I pointed out in an earlier post.
You need to catch up to our conversation if you want to participate.


Just because someone doesn't vote democrat doesn't mean they aren't independent.

Supposedly, an independent voter sees right past party lines. In a basically two party system, not a single vote for a Democrat since Reagan pretty much tells you what kind of independent he is. I mean, if he wants to say he's a Democrat hater, that's fine. Just don't tell me you're seeing past party lines.


there is nothing wrong with this. We as humans are supposed to grow and change our views.

In the context of the edited quote I agree. There's also nothing wrong in the context of the entire original sentence. I can start editing your quotes and make you say something different than what you actually said too.

[spursncowboys]

I know what he said. Which is not what I pointed out in an earlier post.
You need to catch up to our conversation if you want to participate.




Supposedly, an independent voter sees right past party lines. In a basically two party system, not a single vote for a Democrat since Reagan pretty much tells you what kind of independent he is. I mean, if he wants to say he's a Democrat hater, that's fine. Just don't tell me you're seeing past party lines. Being an independent means, imho, that he is not voting along party lines. Like in this instance where he could vote for a tea party candidate over R and D (no, not reverse and drive). If that Byne senator from IN didn't fall in line with Barry's nonsense, I would have voted for him. But for the most part I won't vote for a dem because of their national platform in the past 15 years.




In the context of the edited quote I agree. There's also nothing wrong in the context of the entire original sentence. I can start editing your quotes and make you say something different than what you actually said too.
I thought the end was childish and there was no where to go with it. i guess I can see that I took your statement out of context. Mi mal.

[ElNono]

Being an independent means, imho, that he is not voting along party lines. Like in this instance where he could vote for a tea party candidate over R and D (no, not reverse and drive). If that Byne senator from IN didn't fall in line with Barry's nonsense, I would have voted for him. But for the most part I won't vote for a dem because of their national platform in the past 15 years.

I wouldn't consider you an independent either.


I thought the end was childish and there was no where to go with it. i guess I can see that I took your statement out of context. Mi mal.

It wasn't childish and ultimately it's what's really retarded about his takes.

[spursncowboys]

I wouldn't consider you an independent either.



It wasn't childish and ultimately it's what's really retarded about his takes.
No I'm a conservative.

[Marcus Bryant]

Water Closet likes libertarians because they criticize Democratic policies, but otherwise they're "anarchists." Yeah, minus the stances on civil liberties, drugs, and indiscriminate war Water Closet could be a libertarian. Yeah.

[Marcus Bryant]

Now I like most of what Bob Barr said. I had originally planned to vote for him. However, Palin came alone.



Yeah, you were a libertarian until the authoritarian war-mongering MILF hottie came along. Yeah.

[spursncowboys]

Yeah, you were a libertarian until the authoritarian war-mongering MILF hottie came along. Yeah.

how?

[Marcus Bryant]

A Republican who likes libertarian rhetoric on economic policy but still supports the War on Drugs, the War on Terror, etc...is still a Republican. Ditto for a Democrat who likes libertarian rhetoric on civil liberties and drugs but still supports universal health care, public schools, etc....

[LnGrrrR]

Water Closet likes libertarians because they criticize Democratic policies, but otherwise they're "anarchists." Yeah, minus the stances on civil liberties, drugs, and indiscriminate war Water Closet could be a libertarian. Yeah.

He agrees with libertarian fiscal policies, but a rare few of their social/ethical/legal policies.

[Veterinarian]

Hey, has anyone seen this picture of Obama as Urkel? My God, it's funny! You see it's Obama's head on Urkel's body and he says Urkel's catchphrase. He's even got the suspenders and the pants pulled up!! You see what they did there? You see!?!?

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR4lS4-1zwH-MhPdF8V1a_BTtA-dR8_xtZ4vnZFBRiHLh-Ort0&t=1&usg=__MrlZykIpYhvFsCtmUYpGB6UaJCk=

[spursncowboys]

It's funny cuz it's true.

[Parker2112]

It's funny cuz it's true.

Your ignorance is massive. You and your faux-independant crew.

http://mintresumes.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/clusterstock-4-2-2010-chart-of-jobs-lost-in-bush-and-obama-administrations.png

[Wild Cobra]

No, I think you're very conscious to avoid a Democrat vote, which automatically disqualifies you as a unbiased, independent voter.

You are right, but then I have said on several occasions that I hate democrats. When it comes to our elections, i vote for who is most constitutionally conservative.

She me a democrat that has run for president in the last 40 years that fits that bill please.

[Wild Cobra]

Yeah, you were a libertarian until the authoritarian war-mongering MILF hottie came along. Yeah.
No. Not because she was a hottie, but a down to earth conservative.

If we were not in a time of war, or had any insight it would occur in the future, then I would be glad to have a big "L" libertarian as president. As it stands, after 9/11, it seems better to me to have someone who knows how to be CinC. I was unsure of Barr, and I do forget the details. If I recall, he realized we couldn't just pull out. Am I right or wrong on that?

[ElNono]

You are right, but then I have said on several occasions that I hate democrats. When it comes to our elections, i vote for who is most constitutionally conservative.

She me a democrat that has run for president in the last 40 years that fits that bill please.

You need to describe what 'constitutionally conservative' means. Because as far as respecting the constitution, you've been all over the place depending on the president's party affiliation.

And please, just stop with the independent BS.

[Wild Cobra]

Your ignorance is massive. You and your faux-independant crew.

http://mintresumes.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/clusterstock-4-2-2010-chart-of-jobs-lost-in-bush-and-obama-administrations.png
Yes, the big correction after democrats took over congress.

[Parker2112]

Yes, the big correction after democrats took over congress.

So, Dems saved the day from....Dems?

Your block-headed logic knows no bounds.

The logic you and SNC and CC use amounts to grade-school playground name calling. The Fed Reserve, the spike in oil prices following their placement on commodities markets, the continual deflation of taxpayer confidence, the expense of perpetual war, 9-11, the mortgage crisis...

NONE OF THAT MEANS SHIT, EH? It just so happens that if Dems took prior control, you have your out, history and deregualtion of the Bush admin nothwithstanding. ANd if it just so happens that we have a dem in the white house now, again you three have your out.

What despicable opportunists you three are. What incredible lack of intellect. What typical modern neocon republicans...shining examples of the worst of your kind, as a matter of fact. And most of all...what dishonorable liars you three are.

[CosmicCowboy]

:lmao

Speaking of an incredible lack of intellect....

[Parker2112]

:lmao

Speaking of an incredible lack of intellect....

Your responses = shit. If the kind people at Spurstalk hadn't provided you with smilies/emoticons, most times, you wouldn't have a rebuttal. You are the shining example of your party CC :toast

[Marcus Bryant]

He agrees with libertarian fiscal policies, but a rare few of their social/ethical/legal policies.

He's a Republican who smoked a J once.

[LnGrrrR]

He's a Republican who smoked a J once.

I think he also stated a flat "no" when asked openly if the US government should be able to assassinate American citizens. But apart from that? Yeah... pretty much what you said.

[CosmicCowboy]

Your responses = shit. If the kind people at Spurstalk hadn't provided you with smilies/emoticons, most times, you wouldn't have a rebuttal. You are the shining example of your party CC :toast

Oh noes! The little forum pissant doesn't like me! Woe is me!

[DMX7]

Yes, the big correction after democrats took over congress.

What legislation passed by the democratic congress in 2007 and 2008 and signed by Bush killed all those jobs?

[Parker2112]

Oh noes! The little forum pissant doesn't like me! Woe is me!

Its not that I dont like you. Its just (1) that I call 'em like I see 'em, (2) I'm not here to make friends, and (3) I see em like this: Your wreak of dishonesty.

Now, if you hold grudges because I consistently call you out on your third-grade approach to debate (smilies are the lifeblood of your strategy from what I can see...) and your constant rehash of repug propoganda, well then as Flavor would say: "I can't do nuthin for you man."

[CosmicCowboy]

Its not that I dont like you. Its just (1) that I call 'em like I see 'em, (2) I'm not here to make friends, and (3) I see em like this: Your wreak of dishonesty.

Now, if you hold grudges because I consistently call you out on your third-grade approach to debate (smilies are the lifeblood of your strategy from what I can see...) and your constant rehash of repug propoganda, well then as Flavor would say: "I can't do nuthin for you man."

Sorry, Boutons Lite, but :lol and :lmao are about all your posts deserve. Calling me out? Ha. In your wet dreams.

[spursncowboys]

I think he also stated a flat "no" when asked openly if the US government should be able to assassinate American citizens. But apart from that? Yeah... pretty much what you said.
who you crackas talkin about?

[LnGrrrR]

who you crackas talkin about?

The thread where we discussed how Obama claims the right to assassinate American citizens without due process.

[Wild Cobra]

What legislation passed by the democratic congress in 2007 and 2008 and signed by Bush killed all those jobs?

It was more the fear itself, people of wealth knowing that the liberals are coming after their money for revenues.

Isn't that enough fear to shelter and stop investing in business, until all the ramifications of a new congress are know, and CPA's and lawyers can come of with a game-plan to maintain best profits?

[ElNono]

It was more the fear itself, people of wealth knowing that the liberals are coming after their money for revenues.

Isn't that enough fear to shelter and stop investing in business, until all the ramifications of a new congress are know, and CPA's and lawyers can come of with a game-plan to maintain best profits?

Maybe there's a much simpler explanation, like the economy tanking after the real estate bubble popped in 2006-2007?

[Wild Cobra]

Maybe there's a much simpler explanation, like the economy tanking after the real estate bubble popped in 2006-2007?
I don't think so. That's a pretty small part of the economy that had ignorant investors in. Besides, that was mostly investment of a personal scale, not jobs or taxes... fear of new taxes...

[LnGrrrR]

I don't think so. That's a pretty small part of the economy that had ignorant investors in. Besides, that was mostly investment of a personal scale, not jobs or taxes... fear of new taxes...

I think you're underestimating the size of the market, as well as the amount of banks that used CDS and then swapped those. And CDS's were anything but "personal scale" investments.

[spursncowboys]

the housing bubble can be what started this off. I think the fact that it was near elections, and became so polarizing is what made it so bad. But why is it taking so long to come back?

[Parker2112]

I think you're underestimating the size of the market, as well as the amount of banks that used CDS and then swapped those. And CDS's were anything but "personal scale" investments.

Its not ill informed on WC's part. Its an outright misrepresentation. He knows better.

[Parker2112]

the housing bubble can be what started this off. I think the fact that it was near elections, and became so polarizing is what made it so bad. But why is it taking so long to come back?

Do your homework...its not hard to find the answer to this question. As a matter of fact...if you read some of the longer articles that have been posted here, you'll get some great insight into this very issue.

[spursncowboys]

really parker? You mean I can be as knowledgeable as you?

[DMX7]

It was more the fear itself, people of wealth knowing that the liberals are coming after their money for revenues.


How were the liberals going to come after the money of "people of wealth" without a presidential veto proof 2/3rds majority in both houses of Congress?

Are you suggesting "people of wealth" thought President Bush was going to help raise taxes on them by signing democratic legislation into law?

[SnakeBoy]

Do your homework...its not hard to find the answer to this question. As a matter of fact...if you read some of the longer articles that have been posted here, you'll get some great insight into this very issue.

Instead of always posting lengthy articles/videos that bitch about how things are and telling us we're uneducated/traitorous for not devoting our time to your posts why don't you just take the time to post what you think should be done now. Seriously, just go issue by issue and tell us what King Parker2112 would do to make this a country you would be happy with.

[Parker2112]

really parker? You mean I can be as knowledgeable as you?

You can damn sure question the storyline thats coming out of your damn boob-tube on the fox network. That would make for a good start. You might not even agree with me when you got done, but at least you could claim you were educated on the issues. Thats what responsible citenship is all about. Dont let someone hand you viewpoints that promote the means to achieving their own best interests...make up your own damn mind. Dont buy into the BS from any source...cuz they all got it.

And no, I dont claim to be the smartest on here, but I cant stand you guys that spout the company line 24-7. I hate sheep of any color.

[Parker2112]

Instead of always posting lengthy articles/videos that bitch about how things are and telling us we're uneducated/traitorous for not devoting our time to your posts why don't you just take the time to post what you think should be done now. Seriously, just go issue by issue and tell us what King Parker2112 would do to make this a country you would be happy with.

Dismantle the fed reserve. stop borrowing to pay for big govt. gut unnecessary social services and welfare programs. gut the war effort completely. Bring the boys home. Make sure they are taken care of. Protect our country at the borders, and through diplomacy abroad and strong economy at home. stop getting wrapped up in foriegn messes. diversify our energy economy asap...which might take some govt intervention. Set up term limits to minimze the risk that our govt continues propelling us down the path to hell. legalize dope and tax the shit out of it. make it easier for third parties to enter races and debates. cap campaign contributions severely and make campaigns publicly financed for the most part. elect ron paul as prez.

As for the economy, im no economist. although i do have a new book on economics Ill try and tackle in the coming week or so. Ive seen tons more understanding on this board already than I will have by next year.

But even though Im not sure what the best way to stimulate the economy is, I know trickle down sux dix, and I am so pessimistic about our future with big gov and big corps printing our currency like there is no tomorrow Im not so sure that we need stimulation, but rather a little bit of belt tightening. which is what people/corps are doing.

As for Wild Cobra's take, that a democratic white house led corps to shut down capital expenditures, I can see that.

If WC would have said that, I would have given him credit for a plausible argument. But the typical partisan "blame every damn thing on obama" crap is just not worth a shit. The partisan bellyaching draws my ire every time. because our country needs informed debate at a time like this. We dont have to agree, but if we are to forge ahead in our country's best interests, we all have to begin acting with those interests in mind.

As for me...Im taking up economics.

Thanks for asking snake. I never mind the soap box approach :lol

[Parker2112]

Instead of always posting lengthy articles/videos that bitch about how things are and telling us we're uneducated/traitorous for not devoting our time to your posts why don't you just take the time to post what you think should be done now. Seriously, just go issue by issue and tell us what King Parker2112 would do to make this a country you would be happy with.

Those long videos/articles are critical to learning and understanding the world around you. this is why our voters fail. they dont know history. they dont know economics. they dont know anything about public policy. they dont understand the issues. they only know what they are told on the talk box.

Im no expert, but i believe in learning about things from different angles to prevent being taken in by politicians, and I believe in questioning the party line at all times. from both sides. And when something smacks of truth, i buy.

those videos are there to pick through, to inform yourself, and to learn the dynamics of issues for yourself, BEFORE some commentator/politician begins to tell you what is best FROM HIS PERSPECTIVE.

The ability to learn is critical. the patience and focus that it takes to study issues is rare in a world chocked full of ADD'ers and folks that need constant stimulus, and thus cant sit with a book longer than the introduction. youngsters that are used to plugging into stimulation all day cant usually slow down to teach themselves useful info about their own community or country. and the humility to admit you or your affiliated party was wrong is even more rare

[ElNono]

I don't think so. That's a pretty small part of the economy that had ignorant investors in. Besides, that was mostly investment of a personal scale, not jobs or taxes... fear of new taxes...

Like every bank and investment firm in the nation?
Are you serious?

Much like the tech bubble, it completely diluted investment capital when it popped, which is what makes the economy tick in this country.

[spursncowboys]

Like every bank and investment firm in the nation?
Are you serious?

Much like the tech bubble, it completely diluted investment capital when it popped, which is what makes the economy tick in this country.
are you talking about the surplus that bush spent?

[Wild Cobra]

I think you're underestimating the size of the market, as well as the amount of banks that used CDS and then swapped those. And CDS's were anything but "personal scale" investments.
And if we let those banks fail, the US taxpayer wouldn't have been out the money, and the banks who did it right, would have taken up the slack.

[Wild Cobra]

really parker? You mean I can be as knowledgeable as you?
Careful...

You may lose IQ talking with him too much...

[admiralsnackbar]

Careful...

You may lose IQ talking with him too much...

Too bad you pre-date him as a poster... otherwise you might have an excuse.

[Wild Cobra]

Dismantle the fed reserve.
Maybe. It at least needs a leash.

stop borrowing to pay for big govt.
Absolutely.

gut unnecessary social services and welfare programs.
I agree here too.

gut the war effort completely.
No. Right or wrong, we are now committed to try to win, else be quitters.

Are you a quitter?

Bring the boys home.
Why? Some of them are real proud to be part of something like this. The war has been going on long enough, nobody is there that didn't sign up for it.

Does your authoritarianism mean they cannot do as they please?

Make sure they are taken care of.
Yes. We need to do better there than we have.

Protect our country at the borders, and through diplomacy abroad and strong economy at home.
I agree there too. However, i doubt I agree with the method you would choose.

stop getting wrapped up in foriegn messes.
Yes, we have interfered too much. We need to be more careful than we have been.

diversify our energy economy asap...which might take some govt intervention.
we used to be diverse, until democrats scared productive businesses elsewhere.

Set up term limits to minimze the risk that our govt continues propelling us down the path to hell.
I have mixed feelings about term limits. I prefer requiring public service to be a charity the individual does for his nation, rather than a position that grants power.

legalize dope and tax the shit out of it.
I have agreed with that for almost 40 years.

make it easier for third parties to enter races and debates.
Good luck taking power away from the established powers top be. A first step wouold be to require the winner to have 50%+1 or more, and runoff elections to make it so.

cap campaign contributions severely and make campaigns publicly financed for the most part.
No. Simply not allow groups to give money like corporations who may have stock holders of differing views. Same with unions. Only allow like mined groups and individuals to contribute, and disallow groups who have members who are not all in agreement.

elect ron paul as prez.

No. I think he is great for everything except as Commander in Chief. I would only consider that if we has a five star general to go with the deal.


But even though Im not sure what the best way to stimulate the economy is, I know trickle down sux dix, and I am so pessimistic about our future with big gov and big corps printing our currency like there is no tomorrow Im not so sure that we need stimulation, but rather a little bit of belt tightening. which is what people/corps are doing.

If you don't like trickle down economies, what do you think of the trickle down bailout?


As for Wild Cobra's take, that a democratic white house led corps to shut down capital expenditures, I can see that.

Yes, they are running scared of what to expect in the future. If they knew what to plan for, things would be far better for all of us, even if they knew to plan for things unsettling to them. The not knowing is the worst part.


If WC would have said that, I would have given him credit for a plausible argument. But the typical partisan "blame every damn thing on obama" crap is just not worth a shit.
Please, keep one thing in mind when you read my assumed partisan posts. I take a cross between conservatism and libertarianism. I hate the democrats agenda for that reason. they are both liberal and authoritarian. I have no love for the republicans, but I see them as the lesser of two evils. I am not partisan, but rather, anti-democrat.

[fraga]

We're not quitters....just look at how we won Vietnam...

[Wild Cobra]

We're not quitters....just look at how we won Vietnam...
Yes.

The democrats stopped funding the war they started.

[CosmicCowboy]

Yes.

The democrats stopped funding the war they started.

Technically the US started getting involved by sending money/advisors to Vietnam under the Eisenhower administration, but you are correct that Kennedy/Johnson sent the first combat troops.

[LnGrrrR]

And if we let those banks fail, the US taxpayer wouldn't have been out the money, and the banks who did it right, would have taken up the slack.

No one rightfully knows what would have happened. You can't take a monster like the US economy and predict exactly what will happen... if you could, alot of economists would be out of a job.

You yourself note the difficulty in predicting weather patterns more than a few days out. Do you think the global economy is much simpler?

I agree that, morally, we should have let the banks fail. However, I can see why people supported the bailout, as it did seem to change what might have been a historical depression into merely a huge one.

[LnGrrrR]

No. Right or wrong, we are now committed to try to win, else be quitters.

Are you a quitter?


Didn't you yourself say that you couldn't define what a "win" would be? How could we possibly lose a game if we don't know what winning is?

[Marcus Bryant]

What's this "we" stuff? And who's next on the schedule?

[boutons_deux]

Ah, ridiculous ol' dubya logic: "we have to keep dying in Iraq to honor those who died in Iraq."

[spursncowboys]

when did w say that?

[spursncowboys]

We're not quitters....just look at how we won Vietnam...
yeah "sorry, we aren't funding you baby killers" "sorry vietnamese we are out of here, pay no attention to our vaults of names and addresses we left of our allies".

[ElNono]

are you talking about the surplus that bush spent?

Uh?

[ElNono]

What's this "we" stuff?

True Americans, obviously.

[DMX7]

True Americans, obviously.

or "real" Americans (i.e., people who vote for Sarah Palin and have a single digit IQ)

[spurster]

Actually they also raised the threshold where you start to pay tax and even reinforced the negative tax where if you made less than a certain amount you got a check.

I can hardly propose a new tax code in a post on a message board but part of the problem we have today with runaway spending is that too much of our population has NO skin in the game. I don't care if it's 1% on the poorest I think everyone should pay taxes. if you pay no taxes at all or even get a "bonus" check from the government because you don't make enough you have NO personal interest in the Feds pissing off stupid money because it simply doesn't effect you.

This is a flat-out lie.

Poor workers pay taxes, too: SS tax, sales tax, user fees (driver's license, car registration, ...).

[Winehole23]

CC puts it broadly but when you pin him down he'll admit to a narrow technical emphasis. He just means income tax. He just likes to say po' folks pay no taxes for some reason.

[boutons_deux]

Just read a BP story where Gulf Coast hotel workers (housekeepers, laundry, dishwashers, garbage handlers, etc) on H1B visas want to sue BP for causing their unemployment (they have only a short time before losing their job with their H1B employer and deportation).

They make $7.75/hour, and of course, no tax free benefits, no health care. "Just Go To The Emergency Room (c)"

What inescapable income tax does WC and rich guy CC want to punish these people with? Would the rich guys want to pay $10 more per night to gross up the wages of these $7.75 workers to $15/hour (still below the avg Wal-mart hourly)?

In practice, a minimum 1% tax rate is useless in practice, less that round-off errors in IRS revenues. It's nothing but a punitive, vindictive ethic.

My guess is that these poor manual workers won't get a penny from BP.

[CosmicCowboy]

CC puts it broadly but when you pin him down he'll admit to a narrow technical emphasis. He just means income tax. He just likes to say po' folks pay no taxes for some reason.

That's the beauty of point of sale taxes. They are hard to avoid. Except for taxes on a few commodities like gas, alcohol, and cigarettes however those are essentially state and local taxes.

Most illegal aliens still pay no Federal taxes because they work off the books completely or as contract labor.

[boutons_deux]

"sale taxes. They are hard to avoid"

and therefore extremely regressive, which is why, eg European, countries with high sales taxes also have very high income tax deductions for the low end.

[Nbadan]

Boutons is right.....a person with a $30k/year income is likely to spend all their income every year, whereas, a person who makes $100k/year is likely to save, or invest some of that income...that's a regressive tax because it taxes all of the poor income but only a part of the richers income...

...this is the main weakness of the flat tax too...unless you build some really generous deductions, or exemptions for the poor, and then we are back to the system we have today...

[Wild Cobra]

No one rightfully knows what would have happened. You can't take a monster like the US economy and predict exactly what will happen... if you could, alot of economists would be out of a job.

I'm not saying things would have been smooth sailing. I seriously believe the more we try to control the free market, the less free it becomes, and we then end up fucking it up more than it would otherwise be.


You yourself note the difficulty in predicting weather patterns more than a few days out. Do you think the global economy is much simpler?

Not at all, but would you agree the bigger natural forces or man made forces have more effect?

Isn't it better to let the Titans fall so smaller elements of power cannot do the same scale of destruction?


I agree that, morally, we should have let the banks fail. However, I can see why people supported the bailout, as it did seem to change what might have been a historical depression into merely a huge one.

No way to know without seeing the alternate reality of no bailout. Maybe you're OK with mortgaging away your children's future for your present security, but I'm not into such self-centered acts.

[Wild Cobra]

This is a flat-out lie.

Poor workers pay taxes, too: SS tax, sales tax, user fees (driver's license, car registration, ...).
Really?

Do you know what "making work pay does?

Sure, states that have a sales tax, they pay taxes Fees for things not necessary for life.

As yourself. Is that at the federal level, or at the 10th amendment level?

[Wild Cobra]

Just read a BP story where Gulf Coast hotel workers (housekeepers, laundry, dishwashers, garbage handlers, etc) on H1B visas want to sue BP for causing their unemployment (they have only a short time before losing their job with their H1B employer and deportation).

I don't think they can. the government let BP off the hook with that $20 billion fund. Then on top of that, it's the hype from the media fears generated by the leftists that killed tourism, and not allowing people to go to beaches who still wanted to.


They make $7.75/hour, and of course, no tax free benefits, no health care. "Just Go To The Emergency Room (c)"

Want some cheese with that whine? Sorry about your job.


What inescapable income tax does WC and rich guy CC want to punish these people with? Would the rich guys want to pay $10 more per night to gross up the wages of these $7.75 workers to $15/hour (still below the avg Wal-mart hourly)?

The more you seek redistribution of wealth, over doing actual things to promote that people to take care of themselves, the more you are a liberal loser, and libtard.


In practice, a minimum 1% tax rate is useless in practice, less that round-off errors in IRS revenues. It's nothing but a punitive, vindictive ethic.

From a revenue standpoint, yes. From the reality that now the some people will have skin in the game, more will stop voting for politicians who with to redistribute others wealth.


My guess is that these poor manual workers won't get a penny from BP.

Maybe, maybe not. However, the money is there in that $20 billion fund, if Ken Feinberg things they should get some of it.

[LnGrrrR]

I'm not saying things would have been smooth sailing. I seriously believe the more we try to control the free market, the less free it becomes, and we then end up fucking it up more than it would otherwise be.

But if it's TOTALLY free, then there's problems too, right? Monopolies and whatnot? So you feel that some control is ok, you just think it's alot less than liberals do.


Not at all, but would you agree the bigger natural forces or man made forces have more effect?

I'm not sure which has more forces acting on it; I believe both contain so many numerous force that it's nigh impossible to fully predict something. At best, scientists/economists can guess ratios of possibility (think quantum physics).



Isn't it better to let the Titans fall so smaller elements of power cannot do the same scale of destruction?

No way to know without seeing the alternate reality of no bailout. Maybe you're OK with mortgaging away your children's future for your present security, but I'm not into such self-centered acts.

My children's future? heck, what about mine? You forget that not all of us are as old as you WC. :)

Anyways, like I said, I can see the argument from both sides. Might it not have been better to let the Titans fall? Possibly, but at risk of another Depression, which would have wiped out a great deal of wealth. Agreed? I can see why people did not want to eliminate that wealth, and I can see why some asked why we keep propping up these idiots who got us into this mess.

[SnakeBoy]

I have mixed feelings about term limits. I prefer requiring public service to be a charity the individual does for his nation, rather than a position that grants power.


I don't favor terms limits either. I just heard about Tim Cox's effort to replace career politicians with citizen representatives. He's got an uphill battle but it is an interesting approach...

zzBlocAcdMs