• 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!

Who are Norquist pledge-signers loyal to - the American People or someone else?

Is signing Norquist's anti-tax pledge un-American?

  • Signing Norquist's pledge is anti-American

    Votes: 8 44.4%
  • Signing Norquist's pledge is pro-American

    Votes: 2 11.1%
  • Other (please comment)

    Votes: 8 44.4%

  • Total voters
    18
The text is irrelevant, this "pledge" makes the signer responsible to an entity other than the American People.

House

"I, _______________, pledge to the taxpayers of the _____ district
of the state of__________, and to the American people..."

* * *

Senate

"I, _______________ , pledge to the taxpayers of the state
of of__________, and to the American people..."


Nope, you're wrong.
 
Exactly my point but it was/has been heralded as 'got to' pass legislation that will eliminate 'too big to fail' by those who promoted it. At the time it was passed the Democrats held the majority in both houses AND the WH. And after passage they all threw their arms out of socket patting themselves on the back. Unfortunately the American public was hornswagled...again...by the other side this time.


Both sides. It passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.
 
House

"I, _______________, pledge to the taxpayers of the _____ district
of the state of__________, and to the American people..."

* * *

Senate

"I, _______________ , pledge to the taxpayers of the state
of of__________, and to the American people..."


Nope, you're wrong.


In my humble opinion, it's not the 'who' of the pledge, it's the what. Essentially, signers are saying that regardless of what happens to our country, no matter what new facts are brought to light, no matter what events occur, I've already made up my mind.

That's just stupid. I don't happen to think it's unpatriotic. But it sure is dumb.
 
I don't see much difference in pledging this pledge or pledging to be a member of a political party.... there are good, and similar, arguments as to why both are distasteful.
 
House

"I, _______________, pledge to the taxpayers of the _____ district
of the state of__________, and to the American people..."

* * *

Senate

"I, _______________ , pledge to the taxpayers of the state
of of__________, and to the American people..."


Nope, you're wrong.

Easy to say after conveniently ignoring the rest of my post. ATR and Norquist don't give a **** about the American People, they're out to line their own pockets.
 
Can you be more specific and connect the dots on how your plan addresses income disparity directly?

" For over 30 years America's MOST RICH have been waging war against the middle class and poor. They have hidden their secret agenda in a fancy term called Supply Side economics. Our rich have argued that if we reduce their taxes, lower government regulation and increase privatization that ALL Americans would prosper.

Warren Buffet claims this economic argument is a fraud. "The rich are always going to say that, you know, just give us more money and we'll all go out and spend more, and then it will trickle down to the rest of you," he told Christiane Amanpour on THIS WEEK. "But that has not worked the last 10 years, and I hope the American public is catching on."

The Tax Foundation reported in July 2009 that between 2000 and 2007, pre-tax income for the top 1 percent of tax returns grew by 50 percent, while pre-tax income for the bottom 50 percent increased by 29 percent (not adjusted for inflation) ...

Since 2001, the average tax rate has fallen from 4.09 percent to 2.99 percent for the bottom 50 percent of tax returns and has fallen from 28.20 percent to 21.46 percent for the top 0.1 percent and 27.5 percent to 22.45 percent for the top 1 percent. TAXFOUNDATION "

America's Wealthy Wage War Against the Middle Class



And what about those wealthy who ARE creating jobs? Do we end their tax cuts also? And this will help how?

I have no problem with target tax cuts for job creation in this country. What is stupid is giving tax cuts just because someone is rich that are not creating jobs in this country.


I thought Dodd-Frank did that. Was I wrong?

Its better than what we had, but it doesn't go far enough. We need something like HR 1489, Return to Prudent Banking Act, that would end the banks too big to fail problem, by once again legally separating commercial banks from investment banks (as they were for a half century following the Great Depression) so we are never again in the situation where the public has to transfer large sums of money to Wall Street for making risky investments: H.R. 1489: Return to Prudent Banking Act of 2011
 
Didn't they have the same choice three years ago? And what’s changed? Oh yeah, we spent $750b which “Over 90% of the income gains in the first year of the recovery went to the top 1%”. How’d that work out for the ‘consumer class that drives the demand’?

Over 90% of the income gains in the first year of the recovery went to the top 1% « Economics for public policy

If re-elected what’s gonna change in the next four years?

It will not be enough to just to reelect the president if the country wants to address its problems, we will also have to elect more progressives in Congress. We need more congressmen who put their fellow citizens and the economy more before tax cuts for their rich sponsors.
 
Back
Top Bottom