• 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!

State of the Union Address

The State of the Union address and the Republican response were perfect examples of the vast difference in ideologies between Liberals and Conservatives.

Liberals inspire with hope, while Conservatives motivate with fear.

That's why I'm a liberal. I refuse to be frightened into doing something like sheep. Obama gave us ideas for improving our union while Mitch Daniels told us the apocalyse is just around the corner, but can be averted if we do what Republicans tell us to do. Honestly, what did Mitch offer that wasn't proposed 30 years ago by Republicans? What did he offer that Bush didn't do while in office? That's why it's so easy to compare Republicans to Bush, they want to try the same things Bush did yet tell us to expect a different result.

Obama gave me exactly what I needed to vote for him over the next Republican nominee.
 
What happened in 90s was a balanced budget!

Yep, because we both cut spending and increased taxes on the rich.

When we decide to get serious about reducing the deficit, that is exactly what will have to be done again.
 
It took 30 years of both spending too much and taxing the rich too little to get us into this mess. It will take the opposite to fix the mess.

It's going to take 30 years (the opposite) to spend less and tax the rich more??? BOY, this debate is going to get very old. Unless I live to a VERY ripe old age I will DIE before this occurs.

Since you seem so knowledgable on this about how high do you predict the debt to get before trending down?
 
I like the whole "loyal opposition" thing. Sounds very Orwellian.
 
......... Liberals inspire with hope, while Conservatives motivate with fear.

That's why I'm a liberal. I refuse to be frightened into doing something like sheep. Obama gave us ideas for improving our union while Mitch Daniels told us the apocalyse is just around the corner, but can be averted if we do what Republicans tell us to do. Honestly, what did Mitch offer that wasn't proposed 30 years ago by Republicans? What did he offer that Bush didn't do while in office? That's why it's so easy to compare Republicans to Bush, they want to try the same things Bush did yet tell us to expect a different result.

Obama gave me exactly what I needed to vote for him over the next Republican nominee.

Oh brother ... liberals "inspire" with hate and envy, and their "hope" is to get something paid for by someone else.

30 years ago Ronald Reagan faced a huge mess courtesy Jimmy Carter. Reagan not only "inspired with hope", but more importantly, his policies made things much better, and he carried 49 states in his reelection which Obama now faces in 9 short months. Meanwhile, Obama's results still suck, and he won't be carrying 49 states. :)
 
It's going to take 30 years (the opposite) to spend less and tax the rich more??? BOY, this debate is going to get very old. Unless I live to a VERY ripe old age I will DIE before this occurs.

Since you seem so knowledgable on this about how high do you predict the debt to get before trending down?

Notice the word in bold in my previous statement.

"It took 30 years of both spending too much and taxing the rich too little to get us into this mess."

And as I also stated, it will take the opposite to fix it.
 
It could be given to a person.
It could be inherited.
It could be profits from other investments.
It could be the result of an award from a lawsuit.
It could be found money.


The possibilities are as wide and varied as the number of people are.

And so what if the money invested was earned as wages and taxed as such? That investment is not taxed "again". It is called CAPITAL GAINS for a reason - the idea being that you pay on the GAINS part of it.

For something to be taxed AGAIN, that same money has first to be taxed once. And that is not the case here.

You are using the term AGAIN in error.

This is a game for you, isn't it. You know quite well but cannot admit it that most investment capital has already been taxed once and was earned. How many times should income be taxed in your world?
 
The State of the Union address and the Republican response were perfect examples of the vast difference in ideologies between Liberals and Conservatives.

Liberals inspire with hope, while Conservatives motivate with fear.

That's why I'm a liberal. I refuse to be frightened into doing something like sheep. Obama gave us ideas for improving our union while Mitch Daniels told us the apocalyse is just around the corner, but can be averted if we do what Republicans tell us to do. Honestly, what did Mitch offer that wasn't proposed 30 years ago by Republicans? What did he offer that Bush didn't do while in office? That's why it's so easy to compare Republicans to Bush, they want to try the same things Bush did yet tell us to expect a different result.

Obama gave me exactly what I needed to vote for him over the next Republican nominee.

Believe what you will. I challenge you to go back 5-6 years and listen to a Bush SOTU speach and then Pelosi's responce and you will realize that both parties practice the same tactic its just that the role each plays is dependent on the power positions.
 
Notice the word in bold in my previous statement.

"It took 30 years of both spending too much and taxing the rich too little to get us into this mess."

And as I also stated, it will take the opposite to fix it.

LOL ... "taxing the rich too little" ..... if you took every penny that the "rich" owned ... all of their assets ..... you might cover one year of deficit. One friggin year.

And then what ?

The Bush tax cuts for the "rich" reduced revenues by about $35 B per year. The Bush tax cuts for the middle class reduced revenues by about $300 B per year.

And yet you are stuck on this mantra of class envy. Of "blaming the rich". Why ?
 
The State of the Union speech was fruitless.

Our fellow friends, neighbors, family members will let our nation decay into a state of chaos before they'll admit that they've been had by these Yahoos in Washington. Yep, sucked, scammed, conned into believing there is more than one America.

Which America do you live in? The Conservative America? The Liberal America? The Centralist America? Have you started hating each other enough yet?

Meanwhile...while you've been duped into hating each other...the assholes in Washington and their cronies are stealing all three Americas right out from under your noses.
 
Notice the word in bold in my previous statement.

"It took 30 years of both spending too much and taxing the rich too little to get us into this mess."

And as I also stated, it will take the opposite to fix it.

WOW, I like your debate technique...let me try it...Notice the word in my previous statement 'spending less AND tax the rich more'...notice where I said "(the opposite)"...

What did I miss?
 
The State of the Union speech was fruitless.

Our fellow friends, neighbors, family members will let our nation decay into a state of chaos before they'll admit that they've been had by these Yahoos in Washington. Yep, sucked, scammed, conned into believing there is more than one America.

Which America do you live in? The Conservative America? The Liberal America? The Centralist America? Have you started hating each other enough yet?

Meanwhile...while you've been duped into hating each other...the assholes in Washington and their cronies are stealing all three Americas right out from under your noses.

:applaud

Bestest.
 
This is a game for you, isn't it. You know quite well but cannot admit it that most investment capital has already been taxed once and was earned. How many times should income be taxed in your world?
It's only taxed once, regardless of how it was earned.
 
This is a game for you, isn't it. You know quite well but cannot admit it that most investment capital has already been taxed once and was earned. How many times should income be taxed in your world?

and the inital investment capital is not taxed again. wtf are you talking about?
 
Believe what you will. I challenge you to go back 5-6 years and listen to a Bush SOTU speach and then Pelosi's responce and you will realize that both parties practice the same tactic its just that the role each plays is dependent on the power positions.

Okay, I will.

Full text of Democratic response - politics - State of the Union - msnbc.com

Throughout our nation's history, hope and optimism have defined the American spirit. With pride and determination, every generation has passed on a stronger America than the one it inherited. Our greatest responsibility is to leave our children a world that is safer and more secure.

As House Democratic Leader, I want to speak with you this evening about an issue of grave concern — the national security of our country.

Any discussion of our national security must begin with recognition and respect for our men and women in uniform. Whether they are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, or delivering humanitarian aid to the victims of the tsunami in Asia, our troops have the gratitude of every American for their courage, their patriotism, and the sacrifice they are willing to make for our country.

I have seen that sacrifice up close. I've met with our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. And I've visited our wounded in military hospitals here and overseas. Our troops not only defend us, they inspire us. They remind us of our responsibility to build a future worthy of their sacrifice.

Because of the courage of our servicemen and women and the determination of the Iraqi people, Iraq's election on Sunday was a significant step toward Iraqis taking their future into their own hands. Now we must consider our future in Iraq.

Here's a link to the 2007 Democrat response to State of the Union address.
Democratic Response to the State of the Union Address
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is a game for you, isn't it. You know quite well but cannot admit it that most investment capital has already been taxed once and was earned. How many times should income be taxed in your world?


What part of this do you not clearly understand: for something to be taxed AGAIN it first must be taxed one previous time.
 
Folks. The issue is "Capital Gains". Not the original money that was invested. We all agree that such original money passed through a mechanism where it likely was exposed to taxation. I side with a few liberal posters here in that the issue with regard to capital gains taxation is soley with regard to any GAINS. The original investment is not re-taxed.

Those GAINS are currently taxed at about 15%. If someone earned $1 M in wages in one year, they would be taxed at about 35%. If earned as Capital Gains, at about 15%. This is the "disparity" Obama is trying to highlight. It is pointed to as "unfair".

"Fair" is not in the Constitution. Like it or not, as a "business" that must bring in revenue, the Government must treat income (wages) differently than it does income (capital gains) when looking to tax both. If yo raise taxes on the latter, you get less investment, and less revenue. Libs, not one of you has yet to show evidence otherwise.

The solution is a consumption tax. Most of you libs are against such. Why ?
 
LOL ... "taxing the rich too little" ..... if you took every penny that the "rich" owned ... all of their assets ..... you might cover one year of deficit. One friggin year.

And then what ?

The Bush tax cuts for the "rich" reduced revenues by about $35 B per year. The Bush tax cuts for the middle class reduced revenues by about $300 B per year.

And yet you are stuck on this mantra of class envy. Of "blaming the rich". Why ?


You just completely ignored the spending too much part of my statement.
Let's try again:

"It took 30 years of both spending too much and taxing the rich too little to get us into this mess. It will take the opposite to fix the mess."
 
You just completely ignored the spending too much part of my statement.
Let's try again:

"It took 30 years of both spending too much and taxing the rich too little to get us into this mess. It will take the opposite to fix the mess."

No. Actually, I let it stand as correct :)
 
Like it or not, as a "business" that must bring in revenue, the Government must treat income (wages) differently than it does income (capital gains) when looking to tax both. If yo raise taxes on the latter, you get less investment, and less revenue. Libs, not one of you has yet to show evidence otherwise.

Why must capital gains be treated differently than other income? Are you aware of what the Capital gains tax rates have been through our history?
 
Thank you for the effort. Now to reiterate, do these not sound like the antithesis of ‘while Conservatives motivate with fear’?

Despite the Administration's rhetoric, airline cargo still goes uninspected, shipping containers go unscreened, and our railroads and power plants are not secure. Police officers and firefighters across America have pleaded for the tools they need to prevent or respond to an attack, but the Administration still hasn't delivered for our first responders.

The greatest threats to our homeland security are the tons of biological, chemical, and even nuclear materials that are unaccounted for or unguarded. The President says the right words about the threat, but he has failed to take action commensurate with it.

We can and we must keep the world's most gruesome weapons out of the world's most dangerous hands. Nothing is more important to our homeland security, and indeed to the safety of the world.

For three years, the President has failed to put together a comprehensive plan to protect America from terrorism, and we did not hear one tonight.


These are not examples of motivation by fear?
 
"Fair" is not in the Constitution. Like it or not, as a "business" that must bring in revenue, the Government must treat income (wages) differently than it does income (capital gains) when looking to tax both. If yo raise taxes on the latter, you get less investment, and less revenue. Libs, not one of you has yet to show evidence otherwise.

The solution is a consumption tax. Most of you libs are against such. Why ?

Why is it important to say if it is or is not in the Constitution? That would be irrelevant. The issue of fairness certainly is right and proper in a discussion of public tax policy.

You state that the government must treat wages differently than capital gains. I see no proof of your statement of belief that there would be less investment and less revenue. Can you provide that please?

How can one show evidence otherwise from somthing you have not supplied evidence for yourself?

Why should anyone here be for a consupmption tax in the first place?
 
What part of this do you not clearly understand: for something to be taxed AGAIN it first must be taxed one previous time.

Ok, not directly taxed but it does create the investment capital that is used to grow and stimulate the U.S. economy and if it wasn't made in the first place there wouldn't be any investment capital for liberals to steal without taking any risk.
 
Ok, not directly taxed but it does create the investment capital that is used to grow and stimulate the U.S. economy and if it wasn't made in the first place there wouldn't be any investment capital for liberals to steal without taking any risk.

That took long enough for you to admit the error of your ways.

So now the question is why did you keep insisting on something that you knew to be false?
 
That took long enough for you to admit the error of your ways.

So now the question is why did you keep insisting on something that you knew to be false?

What you fail to recognize is that we have a growing economy based upon a growing investment and if you stop investing you stop growth. you think raising taxes provides the incentive to invest? I will always support individual risk taking and individual wealth creation, why won't you? What is it about liberalism that has people living in a vacuum.
 
Back
Top Bottom