Repub tax policy, gravy for rich, hostile to the middle class

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by houtiger, Dec 15, 2007.

Page 3 of 4
  1. TigerWins

    TigerWins Founding Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    4,666
    Likes Received:
    157
    Well, at least that explains your hostility lately.:hihi:

    I can't disagree that the current group of republicans screwed the pooch and let a lot of us down. And the candidates running for Prez are less than impressive.

    I've resigned myself to the fact the Dems will win the WH and control Congress for at least the next 4 years. Guess it'll be my turn to start these threads complaining about the things they do.:wink:
     
    TigerWins, Dec 16, 2007
    #21
  2. houtiger

    houtiger Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2003
    Messages:
    4,287
    Likes Received:
    390
    lol !!! I betcha will !!!:grin:
     
    houtiger, Dec 16, 2007
    #22
  3. shane0911

    shane0911 Helping lost idiots find their village

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    37,755
    Likes Received:
    23,932
    If I don't beat him to it. I'm not ready to concede as I am still aboard the "stop hillary express". God help you people that think she is going to do ANYTHING remotely close to "good" for this country. She is a jackass and even worse, a clinton. ughhhh.
     
    shane0911, Dec 17, 2007
    #23
  4. houtiger

    houtiger Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2003
    Messages:
    4,287
    Likes Received:
    390
    shane,

    You have posted NO facts or opinions on the repub tax policy of this administration, which is what this thread is about. You have only posted the most general statements of your personal opinion that Clinton was bad, unsubstantiated by any facts. If you want to start a 'Clinton was bad' thread, please go start another thread and maybe I'll post on it. If you want to post on this 'republican tax policy' thread, which I have asserted is pro the rich people and anti the middle class, then state an opinion and back it up with some facts, please.

    You called my post "jibberish" yesterday, well, where are your opinions backed by some facts? If you disagree with me, show me where Bush tax policy the last 7 years has favored the poor or middle class over the rich of this nation.
     
    houtiger, Dec 17, 2007
    #24
  5. shane0911

    shane0911 Helping lost idiots find their village

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    37,755
    Likes Received:
    23,932
    I don't really have the time to sit around and look up numbers because I do have a job. But I can tell you that I'm in the middle class, at least I think I am. My taxes are down (fact) I own more property now than I ever have before (fact) I'm live comfortable (fact). Comfortable does not equal something you would see off of cribs, it just means I don't really "need" for anything. I want a whole bunch but thats different. Point is, if I'm in the middle class and maybe even on the bottom half of that spectrum, and doing okay then whatever policy they have can't be all that bad.
     
    shane0911, Dec 17, 2007
    #25
  6. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    But there was a republican congress for those 8 years. It is a very partisan issue. The Bush Republicans have raised spending to dramatic levels while at the same time irresponsibly cutting tax income creating these huge deficits. The Dems posted surpluses and were paying down the huge National Debt when they were in the WH.

    The solution is balance and there are only two issues:

    1. We must cut spending to balance the amount we bring in.

    2. We must bring in more to balance what we spend.

    We must do both and maintain the budget balance with a small surplus to pay down the debt and to handle emergencies like Katrina.

    The tax advantages heaped on the rich in this country are creating a giant gap between the fabulously-rich and the ordinary rich, not just between them and the middle class. The ultra-rich amass huge fortunes and do not pay their fair share due to these tax breaks
     
    red55, Dec 17, 2007
    #26
  7. TigerWins

    TigerWins Founding Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    4,666
    Likes Received:
    157
    The republicans didn't take control of Congress until the 1994 elections, two years into Clinton's admin. The 1993 tax increases, including the AMT, was done with the Dems in control. It was Al Gore who broke the tie in the Senate.

    You can't have it both ways, Red. You mentioned the republican congress during the Clinton admin above, yet you claim it was the Dems who posted a surplus during that time. You can't blame them for one thing without giving them credit for the other.

    The deficit has dropped from a record of $412B in '04 to $162B in '07 without the aid of new taxes. I argue that we have enough revenue, it's the spending that is out of control. At some point, our government needs to prove they can spend and manage our money better before asking for new taxes.
     
    TigerWins, Dec 17, 2007
    #27
  8. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    I agree, but I also feel the same way about the idle rich. Why should the working middle class be taxed on their salaries but the folks who make their money off of inheritances, dividends, and capital gains, doing little to add to the productivity of the country get tax break after tax break adding millions to their wealth?

    Let the super-rich help pay for the poorest among us, they can afford it easily and it leaves the working middle class alone.

    Large gaps between the privileged rich and the ordinary citizens has historically led to national decline and revolutions. See Rome, European monarchies, and the Soviet Union. This gap is getting huge in the US because the clever Republicans have convinced much of the middle class that they are somehow on the same team with the ultra-wealthy. Amazing.
     
    red55, Dec 17, 2007
    #28
  9. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Executives set the budget policies so Clinton can be credited for budget surpluses and Bush can be credited for deficits. Congress controls making the laws, so both republican and democratic congresses can be credited for the existence and continuation of AMT.


    Agreed. But its going to take both steps from time to time. The huge non-military government spending under Bush has dwarfed that of Clinton and government services have been cut to reduce that deficit. The citizens have to come to agreement on how many government services they are willing to pay for. Then they either pay enough taxes to cover the desired services or they cut those undesired services.

    Easier said than done, but blanket policies against taxes are just unrealistic in a dynamic economic environment.
     
    red55, Dec 17, 2007
    #29
  10. shane0911

    shane0911 Helping lost idiots find their village

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    37,755
    Likes Received:
    23,932
    All I can say is top 1% paying 40% of taxes, and I'm not for sure for sure but like 70% of the taxes are paid by around the top 7-10%. That doesn't leave a lot left for the rest of the taxpayers to cover down on. What amazes me is that the ones screaming the loudest for a tax break/cut don't pay taxes anyway. You can't get the cut if you don't pay them.
     
    shane0911, Dec 17, 2007
    #30
Page 3 of 4

Share This Page