so now conservatives want to tell people what to do with their money? actually im surprised the tax stimulus wasnt give out in the form of exxon gift cards. here's where conservatives are off base. all hung up on spending $10 billion on drug rehab, food stamps and job skills training, etc all the while their parties leaders spend $1 trillion on a very questionable war and another $1 trillion on drugs for old people.
I could turn this around and say "whats the dems deal with old people? Not enough tax dollars to reap?" True the war is costly, and as unfortunate as it is, still going on. The issue now is we are there and we must do what we can to finish what we started. Its terrible for McCain that he has to clean up dubyas mess but it is what it is. I'm not sure if all you clinton/obama supporters know this or not but even if you get the win in Nov nothing is changing anytime soon. Its just logistically impossible. It will take at least a year if not two to undo this crap and in the end will prove to be disasterous none the less. Without trying to hijack the thread, there is so many GOOD things going on there that most of you will never know about. I really wish you did because while it might not change your minds it may at least make you think. Trust me, there is not a swinging richard on this board that wants this crap over with more than I do. I've spent more days there than I care to count, missed birthdays of kids, anniversaires, and seen too many of my friends die. With all that said, even with the false pretenses and bullsh*t, it is what it is and we have to finish it.
No, actually I don't want the government (GOP or DEMs) telling people how to spend their money. Keep in mind though, this wasn't "earned" money, it was to help sustain you. If spinners sustained you, more power to you. My point illustrates that you can't just give money to people and expect it to solve their problems. If you recall, the NFL and NBA were having huge problems when the salaries began to escalate. They had young millionaires, many of whom grew up poor or weren't well educated, ending up broke or in debt when their career ended. They realized they needed to educate these athletes on how to spend, invest, save, etc. and now they rarely have the problems they had a decade ago. There IS a difference between the right to choose and the problem of making bad choices. I'm not going to argue the justification or lack thereof for any war. People don't want to discuss it, they just want to fight and blame the other side. That's not productive, so what's the point? Regarding the money used though...I will make a comment. Regardless of your opinion of the war, anyone who claims that all the money spent is completely lost is misguided or just bitching. I don't know if anyone on this site works for Textron but their facility in Slidell has done quite well as a result of the war. That's money in the local economy...not sent to the Middle East. ...and yes, I do have a problem with $10 billion in social programs. First off, I think it's way more than $10 billion. Second, let's look at the residual impact. Not only are we spending this money but these people aren't paying taxes which is a negative for generating income for the government. Essentially you can double the amount spent on these programs to see their negative impact.
Was it really "their" money? It was taken from fellow citizens under the guise of emergency assistance, which perhaps points to the flaw in just handing out money. That's funny. :hihi: I think you're right that ignoring foreign aid and spending is pretty hypocritical of neocons and republicans that buy the party line. They don't believe in domestic welfare, but turn around and want to practice foreign welfare.
Yeah, its not a free country. Obama should really keep his supporters in check. Break some knees, do like the Russian mafia do.
I think things will change, but republican or democrat, we will continue writing the foreign welfare checks. Domestic welfare baaaad, foreign welfare gooood.
He singles out the huge breaks the over $1,000,000/year crowd (the 1%) got from the tax cuts, not the middle class anywhere. This guy wasn't raised in the 'hood. He was raised by a white middle-class parent and grandparents and seems to have a firm grasp on who middle America is. Indeed, geography is important. California is expensive for damn sure . . . but the incomes are much higher, too. I could make 30% more at a big west coast university, but that's less than the cost-of-living difference from here. That's what taxes are all about, darlin'. It has always been that way. A tiny fraction of us are accountants, you know. Is that really your argument? Definitely, if you're an accountant, you should vote republican. They got your back. They need you to do their taxes. :grin: Read my lips . . . simplifying the tax code means eliminating the complex loopholes that require tax specialists to exists just to take advantage of the overly complex tax laws. I don't want or need a class of specialists between me and the government. Government establishes a tax rate and we pay it. Why does it need to be much more complicated than that? Where do you get this notion? The IRS is there to take your taxes. We "do" our own taxes. Everybody's taxes should be easy, that's what he is saying. Deductions, exemptions, depreciation, credits and all the rest of the loopholes are needlessly complicated. A flat tax is probably where this is all going and I'm liking it more and more. Source? I'm interested in seeing the numbers concerning this. I don't think we're talking about something that simple or that invasive. I think we'd have to declare our income as usual and be prepared to prove it to an auditor on a random or a flagged check. Just a simple listing of income by category multiplied by the tax rate for that kind of income. No need for complicated tax preparation and no opportunity for tax evasion. "A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works." -- John Gaule Simple systems are inherently more reliable than complex systems.
no, the issue is that i hate when republicans harp on the penny social programs because its given to poor people while their party had a major role in spending exponentially more $ for equally (thats being nice) questionable reasons. admit your mistakes of electing big-spender bush, become the party of conservative fiscal policy again, and then maybe we can discuss if $$$ spent on food stamps, job skills and drug rehab is $$$ well spent.
I don't understand. If he hasn't stated that, why do you imagine that's his platform? Obama is not attacking the middle class. If you are making less than a million bucks a year, he's not going after your taxes. Here is where I think your fears are unfounded. There are just not that many people in the country that are able-bodied, lazy folks just living on welfare. What you see in the post-Katrina mess is not reflective of the nation. The "lazy, non-contributors" are the homeless street people and assorted bums that have always been with us. People on welfare in this country are overwhelmingly composed of the disabled, elderly widows, dependent children and the severely impaired. Able-boded men are not eligible. Since the Clinton welfare reforms, there are strict limits on how much assistance even qualified persons can receive. There is no more living from generation to generation on the dole. Unemployment is less than 5% in this country, so people are working. The people that we call "The Poor" in America are overwhelmingly the working poor, not the unemployed. And some of them are working hard for really low pay, like your garbageman and most laborers. Obama's attempts to provide a living wage so that our working poor can get above the poverty line seems like a good thing to me. It's not taking any money from the wealthy or the middle class and it reduces crime, educational apathy, and discontent as poor neighborhood become lower middle class neighborhoods. This is a good thing for all of us because we have to live with them.
