Obama or McCain?

[toffeestillidie]

Yep, I read it all. Some part I found very difficult and distasteful. Other points were at least thought provoking. But I think that Tx Bill and Dylan represent many points of my rebuttal so I will not rehash. However, I would like to comment about the math of taxes. First off, the US government needs to reduce its spending dramatically. Too much money goes to Washington. There is enormous waste in the federal government and many programs and departments should flatly be shuttered. The only impact felt should those "services" be eliminated, would be to those employed within those departments. Government is not the answer to individual problems. It rarely even understands the issues around those problems.

The US government has too much power to tax and the taxpayers are over-taxed. To free the economy, the burden on taxpayers must be reduced. The top 5% of tax payers contributes something like 40-50% of all tax revenues. Is that fair and who is to be the judge of fair? Of course, when taxes are reduced, the people who pay the most should get the most relief. If payer A remits 10-grand annually and payer B remits 1-million, you can't give payer A a 15-grand reduction in his taxes. Millions of low-income American's do not even pay taxes. So no, the lowest earning Americans have seen little or change in their tax brackets.

The financial problems that low-income wage earners encounter do not result from the possibility that their neighbor isn't taxed heavily enough. That's the politics of envy. More typically, low economic status is correlated to education. That cycle can be difficult to break for many reason but it has been proven over and over that spending more on education doesn’t necessarily improve academic results. So there’s another problem not likely to be fixed by a federal program and tossing more money. So there’s some libertarian blather for you. How about we just agree that Texas succeed from the US and stay to ourselves? We don’t need the rest of the US anyway. Well… maybe a little.

sorry about the delayed reply, i've been away on holiday. on the subject of government spending, i really agree we need to cut spending, i just think the first place we should cut spending is the defence budget. with the current system, so much money is spent by the government just to line the pockets of contractors, the United States' defence budget is huge, theres no reason for that much money to be spent on it. additionally, our defence budget includes money like billions of dollars being sent to israel, which is an industrialized nation, theres no need to send aid money to an industrialized nation.

on taxation: you said it yourself that the top brackets contribute the majority of the money to the system, which i don't think is a bad system really, as they're less burdened by the loss of money (losing that higher percentage of money constitutes less of a strain on their financial means, just because the financial priorities of different brackets are so different). also, because they contribute so much more, the government can raise their taxes slightly, and be able to lower the taxes of lower brackets drastically. i don't know the math exactly, but a 1% increase on the taxes of the top 2 brackets would allow the government to lower the taxes on the lower brackets by a substantial amount and still have the same amount of revenue.

so to modify your scenario for simplicity purposes, lets say instead that each person earns 10 grand and 1 million respectively, if you raise the taxes on the top person by .1%, you can cut taxes for the bottom person by 10% without losing any revenue. thats why, since the top brackets contribute so much, it makes very little sense to give them negligible tax relief and lose so much money, as it greatly hurts the federal government's total revenue. it may not seem fair, but lets say in that scenario, they raised the top person's taxes by .05% and cut the bottom persons taxes by 5%, i gaurantee the less well off person would feel the benefit of the tax change much much more than the top person would feel the loss.

and as for the low income people who don't pay taxes, here in virginia, if you make less then around 8,000 dollars year, you get your federal and state withholdings back. That means there are people who make around 10,000 dollars a year who still have to pay taxes, and are hurt by the loss of income even though the federal government is barely benefitted by the taxes levied from them. seems a backward system to me. with the extra revenue that can be generated by taxing the top brackets marginally higher, the government could fix our healthcare system to help alleviate the struggles of the working class, and reinvest in other programs that will working and middle class americans.

 

[Dylan]

Ok, I am done with my scrabble sillyness now

 

[McBain]

McCain announces AK Governor Sarah Palin as his Vice Presidential running mate.

Two words describe this pick for his running mate.


Grand Slam.

Is it good thing? Two years in the job and McCain was basing his campaign on experience?

Whats your take there TX?

 

[toffeestillidie]

Is it good thing? Two years in the job and McCain was basing his campaign on experience?

Whats your take there TX?

i think women all across the country should be offended by this pick, mccain is obviously underestimating the intelligence of females.

clinton and McCain differ on just about every single issue, and now mccain is making an obvious play at winning over clinton supporters by adding a female to the ticket. i pray the female clinton supporters pay attention to the fact that biden authored the violence against women act, the fact that Palin doesn't think women should have control over their own bodies when deciding what to do about a pregnancy, and the fact that many women's voting groups have already endorsed Obama. i guess we'll see how it plays out.

 

[Seamus Colemole]

i pray the female clinton supporters pay attention to the fact that biden authored the violence against women act, .

The what now?

 

[TX Bill]

i think women all across the country should be offended by this pick, mccain is obviously underestimating the intelligence of females.

clinton and McCain differ on just about every single issue, and now mccain is making an obvious play at winning over clinton supporters by adding a female to the ticket. i pray the female clinton supporters pay attention to the fact that biden authored the violence against women act, the fact that Palin doesn't think women should have control over their own bodies when deciding what to do about a pregnancy, and the fact that many women's voting groups have already endorsed Obama. i guess we'll see how it plays out.

Do you have any understanding of conservative philosophy at all?

You've pretty much parroted the standard liberal talking points on the pick so I'm guessing not.

I can tell you that among conservative voters, she is a hit. Furthermore, the pick has energized the base in a way that none of his other potential running mates could have. Sure she'll pick up some Clinton voters but if you think that's the primary reason she was picked, then you probably ought to go back and look at her record and her stance on the issues.

Who was Obama's pick for VP. A 30 year veteran of the Senate who be bringing a lot of new ideas and change that Obama's supporters are just clamoring for. Change indeed.

For the record, Palin is the person I wanted to see McCain pick a few months ago so I'm extremely pleased. Like I said, Grand Slam.

Lastly, the part I bolded there ToffeestillIdie. Here's a novel idea in response to that.

Show some responsibility and don't sleep with someone or use birth control. Women absolutely have a choice. But the choice isn't made AFTER pregnancy. It's made BEFORE.

(EDIT: I could give a crap whether he gets Clinton voters or not. He can win the election with out them to be frank. They'll certainly help, no doubt about that. But their votes aren't required for him to win the election. Obama needs those votes more than McCain does.)

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Havn't really followed the latter part of the thread, but wasn't Biden the chap that pretended to be Neil Kinnock back in the day? I seem to remember that he lifted some of his speeches verbatim and even altered his life history to mirror that of the former Labour leader? It's bad enough telling such porkies but you'd think the man would have better taste in people to mimic.

 

[TX Bill]

I believe that's him Bruce.

You could probably get that confirmed on Wiki or just search for those terms on Google.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I noticed the abortion issue was raised and whilst personally speaking I pretty much agree with Bill that greater care before people become pregant would be my personal preference I don't see how I am in any position to force those beliefs onto other people.

The wonderful thing about society is that everyone is different, everyone is unique. How can anyone possibly say that one solution is correct in each and every circumstance? The United States was founded on the general principle of live and let live. They were good principles then, and they're good principles now.

 

[TX Bill]

I noticed the abortion issue was raised and whilst personally speaking I pretty much agree with Bill that greater care before people become pregant would be my personal preference I don't see how I am in any position to force those beliefs onto other people.

The wonderful thing about society is that everyone is different, everyone is unique. How can anyone possibly say that one solution is correct in each and every circumstance? The United States was founded on the general principle of live and let live. They were good principles then, and they're good principles now.

Bruce, I agree with you.

The problem when that is applied to the topic of Abortion is that many of us believe that it's out and out murder.

So while I wouldn't want to force my beliefs upon someone else, I certainly would hope that same society would give a child every right to live and have a happy and productive life.

Like you said above, "...live and let live."

Well I wholeheartedly agree.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I guess it falls back on when an embryo becomes a human being. I'm not sure that they are human when they're aborted.

I should perhaps add that I'm adopted so am no doubt the beneficiary of someone deciding not to abort me. As a general principle however I still support the function for those that wish to use it.

 

[The Esk]

Obama for me, that McCain's had his chips as far as I'm concerned.

 

[toffeestillidie]

The what now?

Violence Against Women Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[toffeestillidie]

Do you have any understanding of conservative philosophy at all?

You've pretty much parroted the standard liberal talking points on the pick so I'm guessing not.

I can tell you that among conservative voters, she is a hit. Furthermore, the pick has energized the base in a way that none of his other potential running mates could have. Sure she'll pick up some Clinton voters but if you think that's the primary reason she was picked, then you probably ought to go back and look at her record and her stance on the issues.

Who was Obama's pick for VP. A 30 year veteran of the Senate who be bringing a lot of new ideas and change that Obama's supporters are just clamoring for. Change indeed.

For the record, Palin is the person I wanted to see McCain pick a few months ago so I'm extremely pleased. Like I said, Grand Slam.

Lastly, the part I bolded there ToffeestillIdie. Here's a novel idea in response to that.

Show some responsibility and don't sleep with someone or use birth control. Women absolutely have a choice. But the choice isn't made AFTER pregnancy. It's made BEFORE.

(EDIT: I could give a crap whether he gets Clinton voters or not. He can win the election with out them to be frank. They'll certainly help, no doubt about that. But their votes aren't required for him to win the election. Obama needs those votes more than McCain does.)

alright bill i personally have never knocked up a girl and had her abort the pregnancy, but i also come from a relatively well-off socio-economic background. in poorer areas the importance of birth control and responsible sexual practices aren't quite as clearly instilled, which is part of the reason why the AIDS epidemic is so prevalent in lower income areas. and maybe you can say it was their own fault for growing up in a poor area and not being educated about it, so should we just let the baby be born then, to be a drain on society, passed from foster home to foster home, or perhaps raised by a struggling single mother, to become an emblem of that family breakdown you conservatives are always trumpeting on about? one could argue that it would be immoral to bring about that sort of life on someone else. and don't try bringing up adoption, because babies from the populations where abortions are most prevalent, that is minority populations, have the most difficulty getting adopted, a high percentage of people who adopt babies adopt white babies.

we shouldn't try to shift the issue way from just what bruce says, it all comes down to whether one believes that life begins at conception or not. i personally am not entirely sure of what i believe, but its clear that their can never be a definitive answer to that question, and as such it seems absurd to force one's own beliefs onto others with no concrete evidence, which is precisely why i'm pro-choice, not pro-abortion. i can understand how you would view it as outright murder, but you can't deny that there is ambiguity in that issue, and that ambiguity is precisely why i think concrete, all encompassing laws are inappropriate. Surely you'd agree that abortion is okay in cases of rape and incest, and many pro-life conservatives are okay with abortion when the mother's life is in danger, so if you view it as murder, why is it that murder of a presumably innocent life, which is the way you seem to see it, is okay in these instances. (i'm kind of speculating that you'd draw the exception to your pro-life beliefs in these areas, most conservatives do anyways)

on that subject, i'll leave you with these words from one of the funniest bumper stickers i've ever seen "may the fetus that you save turn out to be gay".

and you can't accuse me of not having an understanding of the conservative philosophy, i simply phrased the issue the way i see it, i'm sure you would do the same, it shows an admitted bias, yes, because its a politically charged statement, but it doesn't show a lack of understanding. furthermore, i'm a freshmen at Washington and Lee University, which is one of the most conservative schools in the country, so i'm constantly surrounded by people with the conservative mindset, and the vast majority of my friends are conservative. i'm an openminded person, my parents are moderates and it took me a while to form concrete opinions, so don't ever accuse me of lacking an understanding of the conservative philosophy again.

also, on the subject of the VP choice, today when our college president, most likely a conservative, was addressing the class, he mentioned the VP pick, and he said "If any of you students are from Alaska, could you please tell us who she is." Face it, outside of committed followers of politics, and outside of alaska, she's virtually anonymous, and the republican camp are more than aware of this. they realized they needed a pair of tits on the campaign, so they did it. i don't think she's too bad of a person, i just think its an obvious attempt to bring in female votes ahead of all else, and if i were female i'd be insulted.

 

[TX Bill]

Sorry there mate.

Didn't mean "you."

I meant women in general should show responsibility.

After reading what I had written, it didn't come out the way I wanted it.

My apologies.