Sooooooo... Obama won again huh?

[Triple-H_2005]

I know tons of rednecks here in Ga, make less than me , don't have health care insurance and won't even consider voting for Obama or Hillary on the basis of "taxes" and "liberal program giveaways".
The ironic thing is they are voting against the very tax breaks and programs that would bennefit them and their kids  DIRECTYLY...go figure.

I'll make it really simple for you.

They believe in WORKING FOR WHAT THEY HAVE.  Not ACCEPTING GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS.

Althought they are "rednecks" (don't know how that one elevated the conversation), they know that it is noth the JOB of the Federal Government to take care of them.  The job of the Feds is to provide for the National Defense.

[Triple-H_2005]

wtf? McCain is a good man, but, look the sheer number of dem vs GOP voters in the primary vote!
2 to 1 dem to GOP. What politcla data  are you looking at to form your opinion?
Howard

Take into consideration the fact that the Republican race isn't a race at all.  McCain is gonna be the nominee.  Period.  Where's the motivation to get out and vote for someone that's had the nomination all but sewn up for a month?

When the General Election arrives, Repubs will come out of the woodwork to vote against Hillary or Obama.

[shootfighter1]

Very true Triple H.  The government needs to protect our rights and protect our country.  It was never intended to give the kind of handouts and spend this much of our tax $.

The one thing I would like the government to intervene in is healthcare.  Not to run healthcare but to look out for its citizens and make sure insurance companies and drug companies are playing fairly...which they are not.  

[benchthis]

ha ha true instead of spending our money on ourselves lets spend it freeing Iraq

[Top Dog]

ha ha true instead of spending our money on our self's  lets spend it freeing Iraq fucking idiots

Grammatical genius. 

[benchthis]

good looking out 

[Top Dog]

good looking out 

?  Excuse me?

[pumpster]

All these posts are meaningless except to the 5 people posting.

[shootfighter1]

I'd rather it not be spent in Iraq either.  Cut spending overall so we can pay down this unheard of debt and stop borrowing $ from other countries.  Also, why do we give out so much $ in aid when we are 10 trillion in debt? 

[240 is Back]

My guess is that he will raise taxes on everyone making over $70,000

anyone over 50k, by some accounts.

but when you consider that most people who make that much have been living fat off an inflated DOW for 6 years, it's fair.  Either that, or we can keep living large with low taxes, and wake up one day to discover the DOW at 7k.

[240 is Back]

Also, why do we give out so much $ in aid when we are 10 trillion in debt? 

You pay aid money and you're allowed to set up bases in their country.  You're allowed to let your military/intel assets operate freely.  You're around to find and protect bigger opportunities.  And you can ensure no bad groups appear in the area without you knowing about them in their infancy.  Plus when you're giving a country $5 bil a year, they tend to give you the heads up on things.

[shootfighter1]

I absolutely (and respectfully) disagree.  People making $50-$150,000 are the people that get hit hardest by taxes, miss most of the loopholes and fund our government spending.  Many of those people didn't come from rich families, they are common professionals that sacrificed and worked damn hard to make that $.  The government should not take 35-40% of our $!

[Danimal77]

Obama must feel very honoured to be named after the great Saddam Hussein, descendant of the prophet Muhammed (peace be upon him).

Where the hell are you from?

[240 is Back]

I absolutely (and respectfully) disagree.  People making $50-$150,000 are the people that get hit hardest by taxes, miss most of the loopholes and fund our government spending.  Many of those people didn't come from rich families, they are common professionals that sacrificed and worked damn hard to make that $.  The government should not take 35-40% of our $!

The idea is that it'd be scaled... raise taxes by 2% for those making 50 to 70k.   raise taxes by 4% for those making 70k to 120k.  Etc etc.  The people are the top - they pay less in taxes than their secretaries do.   I'll be hit too, and it'll suck, but I'd rather take the hit now, then see a major economy crash because we didn't stop the bleeding now.

[Danimal77]

All these posts are meaningless except to the 5 people posting.

Just like the Truce thread is, eh Psycho?

[shootfighter1]

The people that make a lot of $ pay a f-ck load of taxes.  Only people or corporations that can hide their $ escape.
There is a common misconception that people that make good $ pay less taxes.  Not only do they pay way more in total dollars for the same services, they pay a greater % of their own income.  (I'm sure you know this 240, but some people don't understand our graduated system when politicians speak about taxes).  We penalyze acheivement.  

For some people that finally come out of graduate school, paying off loans, sacrificed a lot and now get hit with the realization that they must pay 38% of their hard earned $90k salary/yr to taxes...thats bullshit.  That means, in reality they are making $55,000.  (this is a rough example to see real #s).

Cut spending and close corporate tax loopholes (and loopholes that the ultra-wealthy may find).

A fair tax/consumption tax is the way things should be.  Then everyone pays their share and no one can hide their $.

[240 is Back]

Cut spending and close corporate tax loopholes (and loopholes that the ultra-wealthy may find).
McCain will not.  Obama might.



A fair tax/consumption tax is the way things should be.  Then everyone pays their share and no one can hide their $.

The poor will stop spending as much and the portfolios of the rich will drop as a result.  Remember, the poor already spend 100% of their income on rent and at walmart.  You move sales tax from 6% to 23% and they'll spend $100 less per week at walmart.

When 80 million people all spend $100 less per week, the economy dudn't feel so good.

[HowieW]

I'll make it really simple for you.

They believe in WORKING FOR WHAT THEY HAVE.  Not ACCEPTING GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS.

Althought they are "rednecks" (don't know how that one elevated the conversation), they know that it is noth the JOB of the Federal Government to take care of them.  The job of the Feds is to provide for the National Defense.

That is true and I garee. But they are still voting against there own interests. why?
Ok first I use the term "redneck" to describe a demographic . By redneck I mean , blue collar workers that live in rural areas around the south.
By voting against their own interest I mean the following:
Many vote with taxes in mind and buy into the Bush type of neocon "fair " tax code.
What they are buying into to, is tax breaks and capitol gains perks to those that are VERY wealthy and have NOTHING to do with their personal situation.  I share much of the same interests with the rednecks in terms of econmics.
I make about 70 k per year and never have been a rich guy and come from a middle working class family.
The money is going to go somewhere and it can go to preserve and add to the wealth of the top 1% or it can go to make the life of the avg working person a little better. Basic econmics my friend.
Howard

[HowieW]

Cut spending and close corporate tax loopholes (and loopholes that the ultra-wealthy may find).
McCain will not.  Obama might.



A fair tax/consumption tax is the way things should be.  Then everyone pays their share and no one can hide their $.

The poor will stop spending as much and the portfolios of the rich will drop as a result.  Remember, the poor already spend 100% of their income on rent and at walmart.  You move sales tax from 6% to 23% and they'll spend $100 less per week at walmart.

When 80 million people all spend $100 less per week, the economy dudn't feel so good.

Excellent pt and well stated.
Plus, the so called fair tax is based on consumption not stable , consistant economic triggers.
When the tax base is cyclic you can't fund basic infrastructure on a consistant steady basis.
Many grab on to that fair tax model as it sounds good until you look deeper into both the practical and ecoteric ideas of what would happen. Overall , the fair tax is a poor econmic model for continued growth of the GDP.

[California Muscle]

Not quite plagiarism when you have a relationship of exchanging these ideas with a person   Nice try.  These two have a history and an acquaintanceship in this regard.  It's not the same boat as stealing someone's lines IE plagiarism... In this respect it is no different than a speechwriter. move on fool

lol. Ok, you commie shitbag.  I guess you're the lead authority on such things. 

Fact is, you don't take passages from another's speech without acknowledging it.

[California Muscle]

An Obama/Hilary ticket is where it's heading.

Might not be a bad thing.  Let Obama be the face for the world - positive force for change.  And let Hilary handle the complex things that Obama cannot.

They're practically tied heading into the convention - Hilary will be able to demand the VP seat, probably successfully.

She can demand it, but it'll be up to Obama.  From what I understand, he really dislikes her.  Plus, too many heads are saying that a 'double first' would be overkill on a ticket, especially for the dems.

[WhiteCastle]

The people that make a lot of $ pay a f-ck load of taxes.  Only people or corporations that can hide their $ escape.
There is a common misconception that people that make good $ pay less taxes.  Not only do they pay way more in total dollars for the same services, they pay a greater % of their own income.  (I'm sure you know this 240, but some people don't understand our graduated system when politicians speak about taxes).  We penalyze acheivement.  

For some people that finally come out of graduate school, paying off loans, sacrificed a lot and now get hit with the realization that they must pay 38% of their hard earned $90k salary/yr to taxes...thats bullshit.  That means, in reality they are making $55,000.  (this is a rough example to see real #s).

Cut spending and close corporate tax loopholes (and loopholes that the ultra-wealthy may find).

A fair tax/consumption tax is the way things should be.  Then everyone pays their share and no one can hide their $.

This isn't really true, those are talking points devised for the rich by the rich.  The group thats actually pays the lowest proportion of their income in taxes are at the top.  They can afford the lawyers and can afford the loophole finders (i.e., the "death tax", which affects almost nobody but is parroted by the rightas if anybody who dies will lose 1/3 of their estate).  But the loopholes are there because the rich have lobbied to create the loopholes in the first place.  The distribution of taxes paid proportionately to income is almost bell-curved, but overall it is fairly flat.  The middle class pays the most.  The poor and the rich pay the least, but the rich pay the least of all.  Look at how they are (not) taxed on capital gains.  Look at how hedge funds are not taxed like other funds.  The conservative (business) right perpetuate the flat tax movement because they know it will never pass and as long as the reform isn't possible, they continue to benefit.  It's the same dance that has been performed for centuries, but just different shoes.  Maybe it's for the better.  The libertarian right genuinely believes in it but is delusional.

If I can find the paper to show it, I'll post it.  I do remember that it was by a relatively centrist and if anything somewhat conservative group that did the analysis.  I think it was in the Atlantic Monthly.

38% of 90k isn't a lot to pay.  I think it should be 50%.

[Tapeworm]

This isn't really true, those are talking points devised for the rich by the rich.  The group thats actually pays the lowest proportion of their income in taxes are at the top.  They can afford the lawyers and can afford the loophole finders (i.e., the "death tax", which affects almost nobody but is parroted by the rightas if anybody who dies will lose 1/3 of their estate).  But the loopholes are there because the rich have lobbied to create the loopholes in the first place.  The distribution of taxes paid proportionately to income is almost bell-curved, but overall it is fairly flat.  The middle class pays the most.  The poor and the rich pay the least, but the rich pay the least of all.  Look at how they are (not) taxed on capital gains.  Look at how hedge funds are not taxed like other funds.  The conservative (business) right perpetuate the flat tax movement because they know it will never pass and as long as the reform isn't possible, they continue to benefit.  It's the same dance that has been performed for centuries, but just different shoes.  Maybe it's for the better.  The libertarian right genuinely believes in it but is delusional.

If I can find the paper to show it, I'll post it.  I do remember that it was by a relatively centrist and if anything somewhat conservative group that did the analysis.  I think it was in the Atlantic Monthly.

38% of 90k isn't a lot to pay.  I think it should be 50%.

You almost certainly know more about US tax law than I since I know 0, and you're probably going to take me to school, but ^ that's true as far as I know, which is why people set up family trusts, gift the tax free maximum p.a., gift the maximum "single gift", etc.  Anyone can take advantage of existing "loopholes."  You don't have to be rich to talk to an accountant about how to minimize your tax liability and maximize what your beneficiaries will receive.

Admittedly, those who are living hand to mouth don't have enough money to worry about protecting it, but the middle and upper middle classes are generally short sighted when it comes to their money, taxes, and death, and could do a much better job of things.  It's more fun to "buy shit" tho.

[Tre]

Very true Triple H.  The government needs to protect our rights and protect our country.  It was never intended to give the kind of handouts and spend this much of our tax $.

Right, yet we continue to allow the Republicans and Democrats to grow the government and to do exactly that. 

The one thing I would like the government to intervene in is healthcare.  Not to run healthcare but to look out for its citizens and make sure insurance companies and drug companies are playing fairly...which they are not.  [/quote]

Big Insurance loves Big (and confused) Government and with good reason - profits.  In order to preserve the free market system, I think the best patch right now is to allow those who want insurance to buy into a large, nationwide group plan that could be automatically administrated.  It would be like having the option of shopping at Costco instead of having no choice but to pay full retail for everything.