question for democrats..

[Al Doggity]

People who paid zero in income taxes should not have gotten a payment. 

Withholdings are payments.

[Decker]

It's not a redistribution if the government is returning tax dollars it collected from the taxpayers.  It's actually repayment of an interest free loan. 

This allocation of governmental tax dollars in the form of a tax rebate is pure governmental redistribution.  Taxes are not loans to the government.  The gov. owns those tax dollars.

All governments redistribute wealth.  It could be in the form of the purchase of ICBMs, AFDC payments, or tax cuts in general....all forms of governmental spending.

[Dos Equis]

This allocation of governmental tax dollars in the form of a tax rebate is pure governmental redistribution.  Taxes are not loans to the government.  The gov. owns those tax dollars.

All governments redistribute wealth.  It could be in the form of the purchase of ICBMs, AFDC payments, or tax cuts in general....all forms of governmental spending.

Nah.  WE own tax dollars.  We allow the government to use our money.  What should be happening is the government providing essential services in the most efficient manner possible, using as little of our money as possible.  If government is able to return some of our money, then it is doing just that.  You talk as if the government is doing us a favor by returning our money.     

[Straw Man]

Nah.  WE own tax dollars.  We allow the government to use our money.  What should be happening is the government providing essential services in the most efficient manner possible, using as little of our money as possible.  If government is able to return some of our money, then it is doing just that.  You talk as if the government is doing us a favor by returning our money.     

And the government creates the safe and viable marketplace in which you thrive

what's that worth?

[Decker]

Nah.  WE own tax dollars.  We allow the government to use our money.  What should be happening is the government providing essential services in the most efficient manner possible, using as little of our money as possible.  If government is able to return some of our money, then it is doing just that.  You talk as if the government is doing us a favor by returning our money.     

You are right.  We the People own that tax money...not you or any individual.  The government redistributed that money as a stimulus bribe under Bush's plan. 

I know my mom got a stimulus check.  She paid no income taxes.

[Dos Equis]

You are right.  We the People own that tax money...not you or any individual.  The government redistributed that money as a stimulus bribe under Bush's plan. 

I know my mom got a stimulus check.  She paid no income taxes.

We are made up of individual taxpayers, so yes, I do own the money that I work hard for and give (or loan) to the government.  The government belongs to and works for us, not the other way around.  At least that's the way it should be.   

The government should not have given a "stimulus check" to anyone who didn't pay income taxes. 

[Decker]

We are made up of individual taxpayers, so yes, I do own the money that I work hard for and give (or loan) to the government.  The government belongs to and works for us, not the other way around.  At least that's the way it should be.   

That's an interesting spin.  There is no legal support for your story though.  Taxes are not loans.  And our representatives in government figure out the best way to allocate tax revenue.

Notice that I said Tax REVENUE....not tax loans.

The government should not have given a "stimulus check" to anyone who didn't pay income taxes.

Don't blame me.  You're the one that voted Bush the Socialist into office. 

I tried to warn all prospective Bush voters of the err of their ways....

[Dos Equis]

That's an interesting spin.  There is no legal support for your story though.  Taxes are not loans.  And our representatives in government figure out the best way to allocate tax revenue.

Notice that I said Tax REVENUE....not tax loans.
Don't blame me.  You're the one that voted Bush the Socialist into office. 

I tried to warn all prospective Bush voters of the err of their ways....

I think what you've said is spin.  I understand you're trying to compensate for the fact that liberals are firmly entrenched in the redistribution of wealth mindset, as Obama essentially admitted to Joe the Plumber, but I don't agree. 

I'm not sure people will heed your warning about McCain either.  There will probably be another 60 million-plus dummies on election day.   

[Decker]

I think what you've said is spin.  I understand you're trying to compensate for the fact that liberals are firmly entrenched in the redistribution of wealth mindset, as Obama essentially admitted to Joe the Plumber, but I don't agree. 

I'm not sure people will heed your warning about McCain either.  There will probably be another 60 million-plus dummies on election day.   

I was talking about Bush.  Do you agree with the statement that all types of governments redistribute wealth?

How do you feel that Powell is supporting a candidate that you characterize as 'socialist' and a danger to our country's capitalistic economy?

[Dos Equis]

I was talking about Bush.  Do you agree with the statement that all types of governments redistribute wealth?

How do you feel that Powell is supporting a candidate that you characterize as 'socialist' and a danger to our country's capitalistic economy?

I don't know about all types of governments, but I agree that ours does to some degree. 

I disagree with Powell's endorsement.  I posted my comments in the Powell thread. 

[CQ]

I know my mom got a stimulus check.  She paid no income taxes.

My stepdaughter did too, and she doesn't pay taxes either.

[Decker]

I don't know about all types of governments, but I agree that ours does to some degree. 

I disagree with Powell's endorsement.  I posted my comments in the Powell thread. 

Can you conceive of a single government that has not redistributed wealth?

[Dos Equis]

Can you conceive of a single government that has not redistributed wealth?

Not without doing some research.  Will not be doing that in this calendar year.    

But what's your point?  If you're trying to say that unfairly taxing certain segments of the population to benefit other segments of the population is okay, I disagree.  That type of redistribution is bad policy.  The kind that Obama endorses (spreading the wealth around).  The kind of "redistribution" that works is using tax dollars for essential government services.

The government should punish success for the benefit of others.   

[Fury]

Can you conceive of a single government that has not redistributed wealth?

China.

[Decker]

Not without doing some research.  Will not be doing that in this calendar year.    

But what's your point?  If you're trying to say that unfairly taxing certain segments of the population to benefit other segments of the population is okay, I disagree.  That type of redistribution is bad policy.  The kind that Obama endorses (spreading the wealth around).  The kind of "redistribution" that works is using tax dollars for essential government services.

The government should punish success for the benefit of others.   

All governments redistribute wealth.  Every single one.  No exception....except for anarchy and that's not really a government, is it.  From dictatorships to democracies...all of them redistribute wealth.

So the sine qua non of socialism cannot be redistribution of wealth b/c all forms of government do it.

I wouldn't get too worked up about blanket criticisms of Obama's alleged socialism proclivities.  If you don't like his tax program, fine.  But accusations of socialism are pure propaganda.

So did you mail your stimulus check back to the Bush administration as form of protest against creeping socialism?

[Dos Equis]

All governments redistribute wealth.  Every single one.  No exception....except for anarchy and that's not really a government, is it.  From dictatorships to democracies...all of them redistribute wealth.

So the sine qua non of socialism cannot be redistribution of wealth b/c all forms of government do it.

I wouldn't get too worked up about blanket criticisms of Obama's alleged socialism proclivities.  If you don't like his tax program, fine.  But accusations of socialism are pure propaganda.

So did you mail your stimulus check back to the Bush administration as form of protest against creeping socialism?

I can't really respond to your comment about all governments redistributing wealth, because I haven't done the research. 

But the type of redistribution advocated by Obama is only part of what makes him a quasi-socialist.  He believes the government is the answer to pretty much of all of our problems.  He wants to the government to step in and takeover the healthcare system.  He wants the government to take money from successful people and pay for his government programs.  He wants the government to have a more expansive role in the private sector.  He believes in pitting "the wealthy" against "the middle class." 

If the government ever returns my money, it is going right in the bank . . . and then probably to one of my brat kids who think I'm a money machine. 

[Decker]

I can't really respond to your comment about all governments redistributing wealth, because I haven't done the research. 

But the type of redistribution advocated by Obama is only part of what makes him a quasi-socialist.  He believes the government is the answer to pretty much of all of our problems.  He wants to the government to step in and takeover the healthcare system.  He wants the government to take money from successful people and pay for his government programs.  He wants the government to have a more expansive role in the private sector.  He believes in pitting "the wealthy" against "the middle class." 

If the government ever returns my money, it is going right in the bank . . . and then probably to one of my brat kids who think I'm a money machine. 

Obama's plan for healthcare utilizes private insurance companies.  Where exactly does the 'government takeover' happen?

Every president for the last 100+ years has wanted government to take money from its citizenry to pay for government programs.  It's called taxes.  And the Roman Empire crumbled when the taxes went uncollected.

Our country's progressive income tax has been around for about 100 years.  That's a sound time-tested policy.  Your politics of class warfare in using this time honored system of taxation as a club to defend the avarice of the financial elites is not productive.

Try being conservative and conserve what works and has worked throughout much of our country's history.

[Dos Equis]

Obama's plan for healthcare utilizes private insurance companies.  Where exactly does the 'government takeover' happen?

Every president for the last 100+ years has wanted government to take money from its citizenry to pay for government programs.  It's called taxes.  And the Roman Empire crumbled when the taxes went uncollected.

Our country's progressive income tax has been around for about 100 years.  That's a sound time-tested policy.  Your politics of class warfare in using this time honored system of taxation as a club to defend the avarice of the financial elites is not productive.

Try being conservative and conserve what works and has worked throughout much of our country's history.

We've already discussed the socialist aspects of Obama's healthcare plan. 

You're not accurately stating Obama's "spread the wealth" philosophy.  He wants to raise taxes on people and businesses who earn over a purely arbitrary figure and use that tax revenue to benefit people who make less money.  That's the distinction.  That type of class warfare is destructive, not productive.   
 

[big L dawg]

at least he's not flying his kids around on the tax payers dime huh.

[Decker]

We've already discussed the socialist aspects of Obama's healthcare plan. 

You're not accurately stating Obama's "spread the wealth" philosophy.  He wants to raise taxes on people and businesses who earn over a purely arbitrary figure and use that tax revenue to benefit people who make less money.  That's the distinction.  That type of class warfare is destructive, not productive.   
 

What is arbitrary about providing a modest tax hike to those citizens most able to pay the tax?

Would you prefer that tax revenue benefit wealthy people instead of the lower class? 

Why is redistributing a portion of the high wage-earner's money to those making less or nothing a bad thing?

On that third question above, I see progressive taxation and redistribution as a very sound system.  Here's why:  it keeps the workforce viable.  Cooperation works better than pure competition.  Your unmoderated pure capitalism is a dead end.  We saw the effects of laissez faire economics in the early part of last century.  We had a couple of decades of destitute poverty.  How was that fixed?  Just look at the policies of FDR.

[Dos Equis]

What is arbitrary about providing a modest tax hike to those citizens most able to pay the tax?

Would you prefer that tax revenue benefit wealthy people instead of the lower class? 

Why is redistributing a portion of the high wage-earner's money to those making less or nothing a bad thing?

On that third question above, I see progressive taxation and redistribution as a very sound system.  Here's why:  it keeps the workforce viable.  Cooperation works better than pure competition.  Your unmoderated pure capitalism is a dead end.  We saw the effects of laissez faire economics in the early part of last century.  We had a couple of decades of destitute poverty.  How was that fixed?  Just look at the policies of FDR.

It's arbitrary because it picks a number out of thin air and assumes that people and businesses earning anything above that arbitrary figure are "wealthy."  Why should a hard working family in a high cost of living area have to pay higher taxes to support some welfare tax refund?  A person making $50,000 a year with a family isn’t necessarily working any harder than a person making $250,00 with a family.   

I would prefer that everyone who pays taxes receive tax relief. 

Taking from high wage earners and giving to low wage earners is punishment.  It discourages success.  It discourages hard work and high achievement.  It gives people something for nothing.  It punishes small business, which is the backbone of our economy.   

I have never said I favor "unmoderated pure capitalism."  I think the market should be regulated.  What I oppose is raising anyone's taxes, particularly when raising those taxes is to fund some federal government program.  Haven't you noticed how bad the federal government is at managing our money?   

Also, what doesn't get talked about enough is raising taxes on business punishes everyone.  Increased cost of goods and services are passed along to consumers.  We raised the general excise tax here a few years ago and businesses just passed those increased taxes on to us.   

[Decker]

It's arbitrary because it picks a number out of thin air and assumes that people and businesses earning anything above that arbitrary figure are "wealthy."  Why should a hard working family in a high cost of living area have to pay higher taxes to support some welfare tax refund?  A person making $50,000 a year with a family isn’t necessarily working any harder than a person making $250,00 with a family.   

Progressive taxation is predicated on the notion that those with the ability to pay more as they earn more do so.  That's not arbitrary.  Basing a tax code on the ability to pay sounds pretty damn rational and delineated to me...not arbitrary at all.

I would prefer that everyone who pays taxes receive tax relief. 

Everyone that works does pay taxes--Payroll taxes.  When one concentrates only on the income tax that's not true.  We're you opposed to the Bush tax cut of 2001 b/c the highest income bracket got much more out of the tax cut than they put in...
(it was disproportional)?

Taking from high wage earners and giving to low wage earners is punishment.  It discourages success.  It discourages hard work and high achievement.  It gives people something for nothing.  It punishes small business, which is the backbone of our economy.

How do you know progressive taxation discourages success.  In the 1950s, the top marginal tax rate was 91%.  The US enjoyed its highest standard of living in that decade.  How could that be if businesses were discouraged?

If people in the top tax bracket don't want to pay that tax on the dollars in that bracket, they are welcomed to earn less and get the hell out of the way of more 'hungry' people looking to earn top bracket dollars.  The free market at work my friend.  If you don't want it, someone else will take it.   

I have never said I favor "unmoderated pure capitalism."  I think the market should be regulated.  What I oppose is raising anyone's taxes, particularly when raising those taxes is fund some federal government program.  Haven't you noticed how bad the federal government is at managing our money?

That depends.  If you're talking Social Security, then gov puts all like private enterprise to shame.  If you're taking about a bridge to nowhere or an illegal invasion/occupation of Iraq, then I would agree with you. 

Also, what doesn't get talked about enough is raising taxes on business punishes everyone.  Increased cost of goods and services are passed along to consumers.  We raised the general excise tax here a few years ago and businesses just passed those increased taxes on to us. 

I have no problem with this at all.  It's like insurance.  The costs of government via business tax is spread around the population....sort of like insurance. 

[Dos Equis]

If people in the top tax bracket don't want to pay that tax on the dollars in that bracket, they are welcomed to earn less and get the hell out of the way of more 'hungry' people looking to earn top bracket dollars. 

I think this summarizes why we will never agree on this.  We have a fundamental disagreement.  It's also the difference between the rhetoric/philosophy of Obama vs. McCain.  What you're saying is you can work hard, make money, but just not too much or the government will take it from you and give it to someone else.  That's not how government should work.

I'll have to find the quote from Bork's "Slouching Towards Gomorrah" book.  It sounds like you fall into that category of people who are jealous of those who make a lot of money.  I don't know if that's true, but that's the impression I get.   

[big L dawg]

If Jesus existed.He was a socialist.HTH

[garebear]

China.

Wrong.