• 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!

More Democrats break with Obama on tax cuts

We hold the power to over throw the government every election cycle. As long as that is true, we are the government and get exactly what we choose to have. Even not voting is part of that choice. We only have ourselfs to blame. We are the government.

Technically yes. In practice no. The system is rigged by partisanship, lobbyists and a media intent on furthering the divide.

There are too many systems in place to stop us from actually being able to effect change for the statement "we are the government" to be true. Complacency can be blamed on the populous allowing us to get here, but ~40 years of bad law/policies have effectively removed us from the loop.
 
We hold the power to over throw the government every election cycle. As long as that is true, we are the government and get exactly what we choose to have. Even not voting is part of that choice. We only have ourselfs to blame. We are the government.

We hold the power to spend 15 seconds in an election booth. That's it. We remember those slanderous commercials and half explained slogans and check a box. Then we cheer for "our guy" even though he goes on to do things not terribly unlike his predecessor. For the rest of the two or four years, corporations are the government. The same corporations that funded those slanderous commercials and campaign speeches across the city or nation.

You want to change this country, lead the coup and start with economic rules and regulations. The rest will fall in line.
 
Last edited:
We have another study elsewhere that shows the opposite. So, it is not at all settled. And if you look at it historically, you can chart that taxes have had almost no effect on either jobs or the economy. These things too have been posted before on these threads.

Also, no none has said anything about punishing anyone. Frankly, no one will suffer let alone be punished by return to the previous tax rate. The cuts did not produce jobs, as we have lost jobs with the cuts. So, there is little reason to fear a return to the previous tax rate.

Revenues went up after the Reagan tax cuts.
 
We hold the power to spend 15 seconds in an election booth. That's it. We remember those slanderous commercials and half explained slogans and check a box. Then we cheer for "our guy" even though he goes on to do things not terribly unlike his predecessor. For the rest of the two or four years, corporations are the government. The same corporations that funded those slanderous commercials and campaign speeches across the city or nation.

You want to change this country, lead the coup and start with economic rules and regulations. The rest will fall in line.

And that's our fault. We accept this, demand little more, and get what we tollerate. And even when we get angery, we turn to stupid and not to anything resembling a better option. Again, we hold the power, but refuse to use it.
 
Revenues went up after the Reagan tax cuts.

Even if true, is that the only history there is? And were they any other factors?

Too many hold too little standard for evidence and this makes them tools for those who use a little truth to prove a large lie. you have to look at all periods of tax rates, high and low, and see what happens, and then you have to look at other factors of the time.

BTW, there's a thread on Reagan's time in another area. You might want to look at that. ;)
 
Technically yes. In practice no. The system is rigged by partisanship, lobbyists and a media intent on furthering the divide.

There are too many systems in place to stop us from actually being able to effect change for the statement "we are the government" to be true. Complacency can be blamed on the populous allowing us to get here, but ~40 years of bad law/policies have effectively removed us from the loop.

Honestly, most of it hasn't been that bad. We still do quite well, and little has really gone to hell so to speak. But i wouldn't excuse us too much. We still hold the power, and we can still exercise it. No matter why we choose not to, it is still our choice.
 
It's amazing aid for our struggling economy is not a priority for all Americans and politicians. I could see if aid to small businesses would cause more harm however it seems it will not. If you have to spend- spend.

It's up to us the citizens to spend as well. We need jobs staying domestic. We need businesses selling products with continued buyers. We need citizens working so we can repay the monies needed in order to rebuild our economic state.

What America doesn't need logically are politicians that feel, doing nothing but yelling about how our government is too big while spending is out of control, interfering with the stabilization of our economy.
 
Even if true, is that the only history there is? And were they any other factors?

Too many hold too little standard for evidence and this makes them tools for those who use a little truth to prove a large lie. you have to look at all periods of tax rates, high and low, and see what happens, and then you have to look at other factors of the time.

BTW, there's a thread on Reagan's time in another area. You might want to look at that. ;)

All you have to do is look at the top of this page, post #54 for proof.

But I'm sure you'll do your best to wiggle out and claim something crazy, like it was Carter that actually brought the prosperity of the 80s.
 
And that's our fault. We accept this, demand little more, and get what we tollerate. And even when we get angery, we turn to stupid and not to anything resembling a better option. Again, we hold the power, but refuse to use it.

Oh, you optimist you. Absolutely true in theory, but think about it on practical terms. We are not a third-world country and our military is simply not going to coup for the people unless something absolutely unthinkable occurs. Furthermore, the military would and could easily destroy any coup it doesn't agree with nomatter how many Americans have shotguns and hunting rifles. This means that power to divert this nation into a more positive direction is going to come from votes, which is what would be best anyway of course. But in a system where the one we hate the least is elected, we are stuck hoping that one of them will defy the obvious corporate path that immediate gratification delivers.

I don't think it is about a refusal. It's about ignorance and an inability to strike correct balance between individual liberty and national security and power.
 
Last edited:
It is completely hypocrtical to be pro-life and pro-death penalty

nonsense, it is quite reasonable to oppose the abortion of INNOCENT life

whereas it is not only beyond reasonable doubt, it is beyond ALL doubt the GUILT of john wayne gacy, ted bundy, patricia krenwinkle, susan denise atkins, charles tex watson, leslie van houten, jeff dahmer, edwin ramos, henry lee lucas, cary staynor, leonard lake, charles chitat ng, ed gein, kenneth bianci, angelo buono, gary ridgway, richard ramirez, ted kaczynski, mark chapman, timothy mcveigh, karla homolka, melissa huckabee and hundreds of others

watch MSNBC's dark heart, iron hand

watch 48 hours, watch id

the worst must pay the ultimate price for their ultimate theft

the innocent are innocent

hello
 
We have another study elsewhere that shows the opposite. So, it is not at all settled. And if you look at it historically, you can chart that taxes have had almost no effect on either jobs or the economy. These things too have been posted before on these threads.

The only correlation I can see is... Lower taxes, more take home money, more money more buying, more buying more products, more projects more employment.

ricksfolly
 
Last edited:
This means that power to divert this nation into a more positive direction is going to come from votes, which is what would be best anyway of course. But in a system where the one we hate the least is elected, we are stuck hoping that one of them will defy the obvious corporate path that immediate gratification delivers.

Congress may have been that way at one time. Now it's just inane statements, buzzwords, and a battle of gotchas... Recalcitrant school children...

ricksfolly
 
Funny...its worked great in this country for years. It wasn't until you had the great Reagan corporate welfare handout and the Bush deregulation that this country started to really struggle.

Remember when people could actually buy a home in this country? Remember when it was a luxury for both parents to work, not a necessity?

Don't know how old you are....but it was before Reagan destroyed our manufacturing base and the Reagan/Bush policies rewarded compnaies for shipping good paying goods overseas.

If recycling money is such a great idea, then why isn't it working this time? Too much money has been spent on turtle tunnels, deer underpasses and researching the cocaine habits of monkies?
 
I don't think it is about a refusal. It's about ignorance and an inability to strike correct balance between individual liberty and national security and power.

As my dad use to say... First get their attention, then make your case. If they don't listen, you've got nothing.

ricksfolly
 
If recycling money is such a great idea, then why isn't it working this time? Too much money has been spent on turtle tunnels, deer underpasses and researching the cocaine habits of monkies?

Yes, but it also hires people to do it, and jobs, any kind of job, is what we need.

ricksfolly
 
Yes, but it also hires people to do it, and jobs, any kind of job, is what we need.

ricksfolly

The government can't create jobs. That's been proven over the past 18 odd months.
 
If recycling money is such a great idea, then why isn't it working this time? Too much money has been spent on turtle tunnels, deer underpasses and researching the cocaine habits of monkies?

$800,000 went to Africa to teach them how to wash their genitals.
Feds Spent $800,000 of Economic Stimulus on African Genital-Washing Program | CNSnews.com
The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), a division of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), spent $823,200 of economic stimulus funds in 2009 on a study by a UCLA research team to teach uncircumcised African men how to wash their genitals after having sex.
Perhaps we'll send a couple million to the EU to teach their women to shave their armpits and legs.

.
 
Last edited:
If recycling money is such a great idea, then why isn't it working this time? Too much money has been spent on turtle tunnels, deer underpasses and researching the cocaine habits of monkies?

WTF is wrong with turtle tunnels. You try walking across a street being 8" tall and not getting squashed:lamo:mrgreen:
 
Yeah, life in the U.S. under Carter was a dream. Speaking of owning a home, almost no one could afford one during the Carter years because the interest rate was over 15%. I was able to buy my first house after Reagan's policies finally made home ownership possible.

You really believe lower taxes don't increase tax revenues??? It was a fact under Reagan:

View attachment 67112373

I always love it when people try to post these charts as proof that Trickle down economics works. However, you fail to take into account 2 huge things. First of all, the population and therefore total revenue increases every year as a result of new people in the population. However, ever bigger, you fail to address the fact that while Reagan cut taxes in half for the richest Americans, he doubled taxes on the middle class.
 
The government can't create jobs. That's been proven over the past 18 odd months.

How many times are you going to say that after being proven wrong countless times?

If the government cannot create jobs, then everyone who works for the government, including the military doesn't have a job?

What kind of stupid logic is that?
 
How many times are you going to say that after being proven wrong countless times?

If the government cannot create jobs, then everyone who works for the government, including the military doesn't have a job?

What kind of stupid logic is that?

the point that was obvious to most people was that government action doesn't create private sector jobs
 
Back
Top Bottom