Do you agree, yes or no?

[douseiai]

i'm fine with admiting that i am a fiscal conservative... there are plenty of buisness ethics i agree with mostly because they are quite beneficial towards consumers...

 

[The_Reaper]

Gay Republican!? (gets the eggs ready, just so you know a few people will throw them...Others will throw rocks.)

I have to disagree.

As a Canadian, I've grown accustomed to the social systems we've established here.

Health Care and so forth....

But we can do better.

If you were to look at Sweden, your entire post-secondary education is paid for!

Granted, half of your paycheque goes directly to the government...But for the services provided, one can hardly complain.

 

[dunno260]

I think we have an obligation to provide services such as healthcare, education, food, to the poor. Until there is such a time when private charities provide that, or there aren't any poor, then it will be up to government to do that.

To add, I think its unconscionable for our nation to be in the shape that its in right now in regards to the wealth gap. I think its horrible that the country that has the most equitable distribution of healthcare in the world is Cuba (yes Cuba). The American Dream is mostly a myth, but it pervades our policy decisions today.

 

[tonyboy]

You hit the nail right on the head in this thead. That has traditionally been the Republican point of view, and with any sort of leadership from that party it will become the dominant philosophy again.

Your short thread was very well written friend. You managed to give a concise description of the basic conservative philosophy of govenment.... some Demorcrats have followed that principle in the past, not too many though.

 

[james1200]

i was an economics major and it's economics 101 that you can only have so many tax cuts before they have no net effect on the economy. our tax rate on the wealthy are already the lowest of the western countries...lowering them any further will only result in them pocketing the money or spending it on high end items that won't beneift the general economy. that's why the only worthwhile tax cuts are targeted once that will guarantee that they will re-invest the money into growing their business not the b.s. personal income ones that just allows the wealthiest 1% to keep accumulating more and more wealth.

and that lecture was free folks.

 

[WYSIWYG]

Well, I disagree about the Republicans. I actually pay MORE taxes now under this administration. Being in teh middle class I pay more taxes than a rich person! Less items for me to deduct now on my tax returns! Also are u aware that this congress also passed new laws on how credit card companies charge you interest? Or how the laws have changed when declaring bankrupcy? And how about the freedoms we have lost? Immigration...don't get me started!!!

Republicans are supposed to believe in LESS government, while this administration establaished teh BIGGEST Federal agency EVER!!!

 

[littlemonster]

I don't mind spending money on taxes as long as I feel it's going to something worthwhile. The traditional Republican ideals are actually really cool - less taxation, less government, etc... but that is not what the republican party is doing in the US. My tax dollars go to big corporations that are being contracted to keep the wars we are fighting going and that really pisses me off.

Anyone from Sweden here that wants an American husband? I'm smart, cute and single.

And I'm ready to move to Europe.

 

[Swellegant]

While I agree that lower income taxes would certainly benefit the economy, I don't believe that the Republican Party, as it currently stands, is actually interested in lowering taxes for the average American... I feel they are mostly interested in lowering taxes for their benefactors, large corporations and those who run them. If old Honest Abe had a look at what the Grand Old Party has become in the last couple of decades, I think he'd turn Democrat.

And I do agree that the rich carry an unfair burden of taxation, sometimes as much as fifty percent of their income goes to taxes. But there are so very few rich people, comparatively, that their contribution doesn't make that much of a difference. And of course the average American doesn't give a rat's ass about doing the rich any favors.

Everybody wants to pay less taxes, and everybody wants to get lots of service from the government. And we can't have both. Personally, I'd rather get good service for my money, but that doesn't seem to be on the menu.

 

[MadeUpName27]

As you may or may not know about one Republican philosphy is that Republicans believe you should be able to keep most of the money you make, in other words less taxes. They believe that's what America is all about.

This philosophy was refered to as "Voodoo Economics" by George H.W. Bush - a Republican, BTW...

By taxing people less, this allows people to accumulate wealth; the more they make the more money they accumulate, which allows them to break the social class barrier and become the upper middle class and top earning Americans.

This tax policy failed to help anyone but the wealthy when Ronald Reagan enacted it.
It failed to help anyone but the wealthy under George H.W. Bush.
It is failing to help anyone but the wealthy under George W. Bush.
It will never succeed in helping anyone but the wealthy.
It is, was, and always will be, a FLAWED ECONOMIC THEORY.

And beside people getting rich...less taxes also benefits the ecomony. It means more money for people to spend and businesses would be able to better expand and invest more, which means they can higher more people.

But they DON'T hire more people.
Not in THIS country.
American Corporations are sending as many jobs overseas as they can.
I'm sure that you've heard of "Out-Sourcing."

It doesn't matter what kind of tax cut it is; it always benefits the economy.

No. It only benefits the wealthy people receiving the tax cut.
And their heirs.

This is ofcourse the contrary to what liberals and European believe in; they believe that the more you make the, the more you should be taxed. What do you think? Do you agree or not? As much oppose to gay rights as most Republicans are, I believe they are correct on this issue. I'm happened to be a gay Republican if you wonder.

I believe in paying one's Fair Share.
I DO NOT believe in establishing a new Monied Ruling Class at the expense of the rest of the country.
I DO NOT believe in running up a $10 Trillion Dollar Deficit and calling yourself a "Fiscal Conservative."

 

[teh_nathan]

The_Reaper said it better than I could've.

 

[james1200]

call it what it is madeupname...they're just greedy bastards. what they want is no taxes on their income while they continue to get public services, at whose expense i don't know. if they were taxed at 5%, i guarantee you that would be too much. and the top tax rate is 33%....what is this republican party bullshit that you pay 50% of your income if you're rich. guys, stop listening to rush limbaugh...you're being brainwashed. read for yourselves.

 

[taiger65]

I don't think it matters whether the tax cut is for the rich or not...it still benefits the enconomy (more money). And, yes, today the top earning Americans pay almost half of what they make in taxes out of their own pockets. Today the rich family dynasty doesn't last. Today with unwise spending anyone can go bankrupt event the rich. That's why you hear a lot about rich movie star that files for bankruptcy. I have a friend who happens to own her own business and is very hard working, and she would often complain to me that she had to payed a lot of what she makes to taxes; after the taxes were deduct from her check, she was pissed because she didn't have that much left.

wow, i didn't know the rich would pay that much. how much would people have to earn to have to pay that much? any idea?

 

[james1200]

and oh, consider yourselves lucky that you didn't live in the 1930's when FDR put thru a 90% tax rate for the wealthy, cause unregulated capitalism sent this country and then the world into the great depression and people wanted to punish the people who took us there partly by taxing them to death...somehow, they survived. and so did our country and we got some good programs like social security out of the money that flowed in.

 

[MadeUpName27]

wow, i didn't know the rich would pay that much.

I'm in the Top Tax Bracket.
I don't pay 50%.
Even if you factor in State Income Taxes...
And Social Security...
And Property Taxes...


Don't believe the hype.

 

[mega]

I like good infrastructure and services and I'm willing to put out for it. I think corps and the the wealthy should pay more. Any religious group involved with politics should pay thru the nose.

 

[mega]

^I agree...

 

[CuriousMonkey]

Repblicans use a screen of smoke and mirrors to justify shifting tax burdens from the very wealthy individuals and corporations to hard working individuals. They do this under the guise of wanting less government, but in reality they use the established structures to reallocate weath from general fund tax pools back out to the wealthy, primarily through government contracts.

If they were interested in fairness, they would institute a simple flat tax ... the same for everyone regardless of their level of income or wealth level ... and start cutting unnecessary government spending on activities that deny individual rights ... such as the war on drugs, secret prisons, etc.

 

[twardmo]

i agree, even though there may be fewer government paid services available, in theory you would make more money therefore if you want it you could buy it and be able to choose which you want rather than have to settle for what is already provided, but this is only my opinion, i'm not educated enough on the issue to make a definite statement.

 

[pjlikesporn]

Much of the debate depends on how you think the goals of the individual should be balanced with those of society. That is, balancing wealth creation with wealth distribution. The US has historically leaned toward the individual, coming from an Enlightenment ideal and believing in the Puritan work ethic--that people who can keep their wealth will work harder and that will better society.

Such a system has worked in the past, but we may be on the far side of the pendulum right now. We may be ready for a turn. The result of the US' focus on individualism has resulted in a tremendous wealth gap as well as a substantial amount of resources going toward keeping people rich. Concentrating on individual wealth may also lead to enormous copropate salaries with golden parachutes and greedy lawsuits--phenomena that drain societal resources so that individuals can get unjustifiably rich.

Perhaps it's time that the US looked more toward what a society--particularly one with the US' level of wealth--can do for itself. I grew up being told that the US was the greatest place in the world, but I certainly think that socialized medicine and public education would be worthwhile goals.

 

[Soilwork]

As much oppose to gay rights as most Republicans are, I believe they are correct on this issue. I'm happened to be a gay Republican if you wonder.

Yes, from your sentence structure and writing skills, I would have guessed Republican or mildly retarded.