• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

Status
Not open for further replies.
from Turtle

When someone whines that estate taxes should be "high and steep" the only conclusion to be drawn is that the speaker either is fabulously wealthy or hates those who actually have an inheritance to look forward to.
Click to expand...

Do you realize what you are doing in taking this stance? You are both demonzing those richer than you and those poorer than you simply because they have adopted a position on an issue which works against your own greed. So only those with an income like you who think like you based on having beliefs like you have any credibility? That is patently absurd.


Its based on envy and its a surcharge on those who have already paid more than their fair share of taxes.
Click to expand...

What did Andrew Carnegie - on the worlds richest men in his day - have to be envious about?

What does Bill Gates - one of the richest men in the world today - have to be envious about?

What does Warren Buffet - one of America's richest men ' have to be envious about?

Your constant whine about ENVY is without merit. It is a defense mechanism adopted by those attempting to elevate themselves on a pedestal in their own minds pretending that everybody else simply wants to be like them. The charge of ENVY is self serving and phony in the extreme.

Nothing is funnier than someone who pretends to adopt the alleged noble views of the very wealthy in order to have the government confiscate wealth of people more industrious than he is.
Click to expand...

Actually, those were my views before I had ever discovered the writings of Carnegie or others. And once again, you are ignorant of how industrious I am or any other member actually is so why do you levy such irresponsible charges when you have no foundation for them or no actual knowledge of our industry?

What Haymarket ignores is that most wealthy people work hard for their families and while some may wish to leave their wealth entirely to charity (which, of course is their right) to claim that justifies government confiscation of such wealth is specious and of course spiteful
Click to expand...

No. What I want is an America in which every person knows the joy and pride of what it takes to make it in this country. The rich man who clads his progeny in silk diapers with a diamond studded pacifier does a huge disservice to the fop or dandy he produces and raises. Carnegie knew that as do many many others who made it on their own.

If you are going to subscribe to the ideology which carnegie himself criticized as craven and without merit

"Man must have an idol -- The amassing of wealth is one of the worst species of idolatry. No idol more debasing than the worship of money."
Click to expand...

at least have the courage and initiative to go out and build your own idol with money you earned yourself honestly and with the sweat of your own brow.


I can understand how somebody who is not a self made man or woman can take umbrage at that thought. After all, if one has things handed to them and starts out life with great advantages, they feel entitled to that. But that is why we as a society through our elected government have adopted the wise policy of estate and income taxes.

God Bless the United States of America and its people.
 
Last edited:
Folks


Anyway, you were an FO? I've jumped with and secured them. You may call us troops, with your pretty beret.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
I jumped with grey or blue flyboys from the patent-shoes club.
 
Charlie (11C[a]); from A, B or C company of our bat. I was 11H, special weapons company, D/505th PIR.

Division artillery? Yeah, right... like I give a crap about calling people after my buddies are dead.
 
Last edited:
I wish I had the time to enjoy that civilian action. Anyway, artillery didn't jump with us. We had some Sheridan guys and pushed 'em out with the hummers before we dropped. My friends were pathfinder and tabbed, but I chose a PhD because peacetime.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
I wish I had the time to enjoy that civilian action.

Anyway, artillery didn't jump with us. We had some Sheridan guys and pushed 'em out with the hummers before we dropped.
Click to expand...



yeah the reason I asked was when I was with the 10th, they often called the artillery observer guys "FOs'" or "FAO's" I forget.... fisties or something....
 
Yeah, I've heard FO for artillery, but there were no guns in the birds (aside from the Sheridans) except charlies from other companies. Maybe after the airfield was secure they came. Hell, I've set DZs for the 82nd band (slept with a fine musician from them too) - who can tell what the remfs are doing. fwiw, I also had me a parachute folder; they got chicks in some units.
 
Last edited:
The Prof said:
aint that the truth, thales

which is why, given their druthers, they'd rather be WORKING IN TEXAS
Click to expand...

Funny thing is....Texas HAS to hand out tons of corporate welfare in order to get the companies to go there. Ultimately a bad deal.
 
ecofarm said:
Yeah, I've heard FO for artillery, but there were no guns in the birds (aside from the Sheridans) except charlies from other companies. Maybe after the airfield was secure they came. Hell, I've set DZs for the 82nd band (slept with a fine musician from them too) - who can tell what the remfs are doing. fwiw, I also had me a parachute folder; they got chicks in some units.
Click to expand...



I remember the 82nd band..... I am still confused by this...... :lol:
 
disneydude said:
Funny thing is....Texas HAS to hand out tons of corporate welfare in order to get the companies to go there. Ultimately a bad deal.
Click to expand...

What corporate welfare? Texas has no state income taxes and TX knows that businesses bring employees to the state that buy goods and services and purchase property that they taxes on. Texas creates jobs many coming from your state. Thanks.

By the way, Business owners get it, when will you? We need more taxpayers not higher taxes.

Business owners 'fear' Obama, says casino owner Wynn - The Oval: Tracking the Obama presidency
 
Catawba said:
Considering the US is 37th in education funding as a percentage of GDP, I would agree there may be up to 36 countries whose students are better prepared for graduate work. :sun
Click to expand...

You want more funding? I don't think we need more funding but if YOU do, then how about true shared sacrifice and getting the approximately 56 million income earning Americans that pay zero in income taxes to pay SOMETHING? You want more funding, then how about creating more taxpayers by putting the approximately 24 million unemployed or underemployed Americans back to work paying FULL taxes?

The potential next VP of the United States continues to get it right thus is being ignored by the left and the media. Think about it?

Press Releases - Newsroom - U.S. Senator for Florida, Marco Rubio

“We don't need new taxes. We need new taxpayers, people that are gainfully employed, making money and paying into the tax system. Then we need a government that has the discipline to take that additional revenue and use it to pay down the debt and never grow it again. That's what we should be focused on, and that's what we're not focused on.

“You look at all these taxes being proposed, and here's what I say. I say we should analyze every single one of them through the lens of job creation, issue number one in America. I want to know which one of these taxes they're proposing will create jobs. I want to know how many jobs are going to be created by the plane tax. How many jobs are going to be created by the oil company tax I heard so much about. How many jobs are created by going after the millionaires and billionaires the president talks about? I want to know: How many jobs do they create?
Click to expand...
 
haymarket said:
I have said many times that I believe ALL Americans should pay some federal income tax.
Click to expand...

Well, now I am pleasantly surprised. When the Bush tax cuts were made, it did take additional people off the income tax rolls. I thought that was foolhardy. Here is a first, Haymarket and I are in agreement. Which one of us should be afraid? :2dance:
 
LesGovt said:
Well, now I am pleasantly surprised. When the Bush tax cuts were made, it did take additional people off the income tax rolls. I thought that was foolhardy. Here is a first, Haymarket and I are in agreement. Which one of us should be afraid? :2dance:
Click to expand...

I think Bush realized that we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem and although he didn't do much to cut spending his 2008 budget was 700 billion less than the 2010 Obama budget. Is there anyone here that has ever looked at the U.S. Federal Budget and questioned why we need so much revenue to fund line items that are included in state budgets? Obama wants tax hikes to redistribute wealth which is the change he envisioned but never expressed to the electorate in campaign speeches. The American people continue to buy the Obama rhetoric, his smile, his youth while ignoring his actual results.
 
Conservative said:
I think Bush realized that we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem and although he didn't do much to cut spending his 2008 budget was 700 billion less than the 2010 Obama budget. Is there anyone here that has ever looked at the U.S. Federal Budget and questioned why we need so much revenue to fund line items that are included in state budgets? Obama wants tax hikes to redistribute wealth which is the change he envisioned but never expressed to the electorate in campaign speeches. The American people continue to buy the Obama rhetoric, his smile, his youth while ignoring his actual results.
Click to expand...

I believe Senator Obama, while campaigning, made it crystal clear that he wanted to redistribute wealth. Remember what he said to Joe, the plumber?
 
LesGovt said:
I believe Senator Obama, while campaigning, made it crystal clear that he wanted to redistribute wealth. Remember what he said to Joe, the plumber?
Click to expand...

Oh, I remember it well, it just didn't seem to make his campaign speeches and when he ran on the hope and change message, the message of change meant something else to the public than it meant to Obama. Obama knew exactly what he was doing, the electorate however was in a daze over his smile and rhetoric. If he had made redistribution of wealth a central theme of his campaign do you think he would have been elected?
 
Conservative said:
I think Bush realized that we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem and although he didn't do much to cut spending his 2008 budget was 700 billion less than the 2010 Obama budget. Is there anyone here that has ever looked at the U.S. Federal Budget and questioned why we need so much revenue to fund line items that are included in state budgets? Obama wants tax hikes to redistribute wealth which is the change he envisioned but never expressed to the electorate in campaign speeches. The American people continue to buy the Obama rhetoric, his smile, his youth while ignoring his actual results.
Click to expand...

LOL....says the man who is one of the few who still thinks that GWB was an economic genius.......
 
Conservative said:
Oh, I remember it well, it just didn't seem to make his campaign speeches and when he ran on the hope and change message, the message of change meant something else to the public than it meant to Obama. Obama knew exactly what he was doing, the electorate however was in a daze over his smile and rhetoric. If he had made redistribution of wealth a central theme of his campaign do you think he would have been elected?
Click to expand...

No, I don't believe so.
 
Conservative said:
Oh, I remember it well, it just didn't seem to make his campaign speeches and when he ran on the hope and change message, the message of change meant something else to the public than it meant to Obama. Obama knew exactly what he was doing, the electorate however was in a daze over his smile and rhetoric. If he had made redistribution of wealth a central theme of his campaign do you think he would have been elected?
Click to expand...

Funny thing.....you guys have no problem with wealth redistribution in the form of tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans.....but you scream and holler any time the table is turned. You guys are so transparent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom