normiss 644 #26 September 16, 2008 I disagree with this...it's up to ME to improve my situation. I and I alone am responsible for that. I don't receive any real entitlements from the government. I will vote for those that are (or in my views) most qualified to lead this country and make decisions that are in the best interest of ALL the people in this country. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #27 September 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteSo let me get this straight your ok with bailing out multi-billion dollar corporations Where did I ever say that? You obviously haven't read any of my posts in the last few days screaming about the Govt bailouts. Then how can anyone support a Republican candidate? Actions do speak louder then words, and their actions are a lot more like the criticism I hear made of the Democratic Party. The republicans no longer stand for what they say (small goverment, the little guy) and this has not been the case for a very long time. I just can't understand how we can criticize someone for raising taxes on 5% when all of us are being billed over and over again for these huge corporations. I understand that the best solution is neither but if I have to choose as a middle class guy I am going to choose what’s best for me and my neighbor. The democrats have simply done a better job in my lifetime.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #28 September 16, 2008 QuoteAnd therein lies the problem. People will always vote to improve their situation, or at least go with whomever promises to improve their situation. If my situation is benefitted from more entitlements, I'll vote for whomever promises me the most. Fortunately the people who benefit the most from that are in the minority...for now. QuoteA perfect democracy, a ‘warm body’ democracy in which every adult may vote and all votes count equally, has no internal feedback for self-correction. It depends solely on the wisdom and self-restraint of citizens… which is opposed by the folly and lack of self-restraint of other citizens. What is supposed to happen in a democracy is that each sovereign citizen will always vote in the public interest for the safety and welfare of all. But what does happen is that he votes his own self-interest as he sees it… which for the majority translates as ‘Bread and Circuses.’ ‘Bread and Circuses’ is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure. Democracy often works beautifully at first. But once a state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state. For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader—the barbarians enter Rome." -Robert Heinlein What's one of the Democrat's party planks? More welfare - i.e., "bread and circuses"Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #29 September 16, 2008 Quote Quote Sounds like he should be an accountant for Enron. The numbers don't add up. Yet I continue to hear that Obama's economic plan (which has more specifics than McCain's) comes closer to balancing than his opponent's. McCain's plan cuts revenues over ten years by $4.2 trillion. Obama's cuts revenues by $2.8 trillion. So (very) basically Obama's plan helps more people and costs less. Interesting. Shhh … Don't let facts get in the way of an Obama bashing session.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #30 September 16, 2008 QuoteIf you are unhappy with the government now, think about a future where the government buys votes with redistribution. It's rather ironic that Bush/Cheney did exactly that in 2000; don't you agree?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #31 September 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteIf you are unhappy with the government now, think about a future where the government buys votes with redistribution. It's rather ironic that Bush/Cheney did exactly that in 2000; don't you agree? Oh, please - refer to my several posts about bread and circuses and the Democratic party plank of constant welfare increases. The Reps are pikers next to the Dems in that respect.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 644 #32 September 16, 2008 So how have the democratic reps voted on all the bailouts??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #33 September 16, 2008 QuoteDo you believe that it is a good thing for the economy and the people for people with higher incomes to give a share the fruits of their labors with people who have lower incomes whether they need it or not? Yes. The redistribution should not necessarily be in the form of cash, but but those making a higher income should pay higher taxes than low income persons. It benefits the nation as a whole, which ultimately benefits those making higher incomes. Money trickles up, not down.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #34 September 16, 2008 QuoteGiving someone a subsidy in the form of a rebate check that doesn't pay their fair share of these things? No. You mean like those rebate checks the Shrub pushed through this past spring? Hey everyone who was bragging about the new TV or extra skydives they were gonna spend the money on....you're welcome. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,683 #35 September 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteIf you are unhappy with the government now, think about a future where the government buys votes with redistribution. It's rather ironic that Bush/Cheney did exactly that in 2000; don't you agree? Oh, please - refer to my several posts about bread and circuses and the Democratic party plank of constant welfare increases. The Reps are pikers next to the Dems in that respect. The Reps are responsible for the largest increases in govt. spending in history. Republican fiscal responsibilty is a myth propagated by the GOP to win votes from the ignorant.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #36 September 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteDo you believe that it is a good thing for the economy and the people for people with higher incomes to give a share the fruits of their labors with people who have lower incomes whether they need it or not? Yes. The redistribution should not necessarily be in the form of cash, but but those making a higher income should pay higher taxes than low income persons. It benefits the nation as a whole, which ultimately benefits those making higher incomes. Money trickles up, not down. And they do - and whenever there's a tax cut, MORE of the lower earners end up with NO tax liability.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #37 September 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIf you are unhappy with the government now, think about a future where the government buys votes with redistribution. It's rather ironic that Bush/Cheney did exactly that in 2000; don't you agree? Oh, please - refer to my several posts about bread and circuses and the Democratic party plank of constant welfare increases. The Reps are pikers next to the Dems in that respect. The Reps are responsible for the largest increases in govt. spending in history. Republican fiscal responsibilty is a myth propagated by the GOP to win votes from the ignorant. Wow... HOW did they get that bill through Congress with all those Dems refusing to vote on it and filibustering it and vetoing GW's signature, professor?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #38 September 16, 2008 Quote People will always vote to improve their situation, or at least go with whomever promises to improve their situation. If my situation is benefitted from more entitlements, I'll vote for whomever promises me the most. Fortunately the people who benefit the most from that are in the minority...for now. Well no wonder you Republican types are scared...Obama's plan gives tax breaks to 4 out of 5 American households. According to your logic above (which I cynically agree with, at least as applies to most people), Obama's a shoe-in. Edit to add: Nevermind. I just saw that McCain is promising a tax cut to 5 out of 5 American households, so he should win by virtue of the votes of the top 10% in income. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #39 September 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteAnd therein lies the problem. People will always vote to improve their situation, or at least go with whomever promises to improve their situation. If my situation is benefitted from more entitlements, I'll vote for whomever promises me the most. Fortunately the people who benefit the most from that are in the minority...for now. QuoteA perfect democracy, a ‘warm body’ democracy in which every adult may vote and all votes count equally, has no internal feedback for self-correction. It depends solely on the wisdom and self-restraint of citizens… which is opposed by the folly and lack of self-restraint of other citizens. What is supposed to happen in a democracy is that each sovereign citizen will always vote in the public interest for the safety and welfare of all. But what does happen is that he votes his own self-interest as he sees it… which for the majority translates as ‘Bread and Circuses.’ ‘Bread and Circuses’ is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure. Democracy often works beautifully at first. But once a state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state. For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader—the barbarians enter Rome." -Robert Heinlein What's one of the Democrat's party planks? More welfare - i.e., "bread and circuses" As opposed to the corporate welfare (e.g. tax loopholes) supported by the Republican party? Every form of government has a good/bad dichotomy. A benevolent monarch is perhaps the very best government, but such a system will inevitably take the form of totalitarian dictator over time. A polity is a government of the people in which people vote based on what is best for the whole. As Heinlein (and others) pointed out, that will inevitably be replaced by a government of the people who vote for what is in their individual best interest, aka democracy.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 644 #40 September 16, 2008 amazing how many people have bought the fundamentally childish notion that, if you don’t like the way things are going, the answer is to write a blank check for “change” empowering someone chosen not on the basis of any track record but on the basis of his skill with words. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,683 #41 September 16, 2008 QuoteSo Obama in his interview says he will cut taxes for 95% of the country. The Govt already spends more than they bring in. So how will Obama pay for all of this? . Since the top 5% owns over 60% of the wealth of the country, why should this be a problem?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #42 September 16, 2008 Quoteamazing how many people have bought the fundamentally childish notion that, if you don’t like the way things are going, the answer is to write a blank check for “change” empowering someone chosen not on the basis of any track record but on the basis of his skill with words. Hey, skill with words is better than the last guy, who had a shitty track record AND incredibly little grasp of his native language. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,683 #43 September 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIf you are unhappy with the government now, think about a future where the government buys votes with redistribution. It's rather ironic that Bush/Cheney did exactly that in 2000; don't you agree? Oh, please - refer to my several posts about bread and circuses and the Democratic party plank of constant welfare increases. The Reps are pikers next to the Dems in that respect. The Reps are responsible for the largest increases in govt. spending in history. Republican fiscal responsibilty is a myth propagated by the GOP to win votes from the ignorant. Wow... HOW did they get that bill through Congress with all those Dems refusing to vote on it and filibustering it and vetoing GW's signature, professor? What a Weaseling response. When did the Dems last have enough votes for a guaranteed veto override?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #44 September 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteSo Obama in his interview says he will cut taxes for 95% of the country. The Govt already spends more than they bring in. So how will Obama pay for all of this? . Since the top 5% owns over 60% of the wealth of the country, why should this be a problem? And pay something like 85% of the taxes.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,476 #45 September 16, 2008 >So Obama in his interview says he will cut taxes for 95% of the country. >The Govt already spends more than they bring in. So how will Obama pay for all >of this? Same way we are paying for the war and all the economic incentives - borrow, borrow, borrow! That's the bad news. The good news there is that if you compare their tax plans, Obama's will at least put us less in the hole than McCain's. Still not good, but at least it gets us in that hole more slowly. And my how times have changed. We now have republicans attacking democrats for cutting taxes too much! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,280 #46 September 16, 2008 QuoteOh, please - refer to my several posts about bread and circuses and the Democratic party plank of constant welfare increases. I have no idea why you continue to use that. First, the analogy is historically innacurate (linking pure democracy to the fall of Rome, which had centuries before become a monarchy). Second, the US is not the type of democracy that Heinlein seems to be talking about. He's talking about perfect democracies where the people can vote to give themselves whatever they want, the US is not like that. It does have feedback. It does have correction. Its political decisions do not depend on the self restraint of ordinary citizens and they cannot vote to give themselves whatever they want.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #47 September 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteOh, please - refer to my several posts about bread and circuses and the Democratic party plank of constant welfare increases. I have no idea why you continue to use that. First, the analogy is historically innacurate (linking pure democracy to the fall of Rome, which had centuries before become a monarchy). Second, the US is not the type of democracy that Heinlein seems to be talking about. He's talking about perfect democracies where the people can vote to give themselves whatever they want, the US is not like that. It does have feedback. It does have correction. Its political decisions do not depend on the self restraint of ordinary citizens and they cannot vote to give themselves whatever they want. No, they vote into office people who will give them what they want. Look at the election maps, at the large cities.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
alw 0 #48 September 16, 2008 It isn't representative taxation that I object to, it's the idea that just because someone has a lower income they deserve to get a handout from the government. It is not a tax cut if you don't pay any now (40% of Americans) it's a payout. Some folks may need and deserve that and some probably do not. I object to giving people money for nothing. I also believe that CEO's should be accountable. --------------------------------------------- Every day is a bonus - every night is an adventure. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,476 #49 September 16, 2008 >No, they vote into office people who will give them what they want. Yep. In other words - democracy. > Look at the election maps, at the large cities. Heck, look at Wasilla! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,683 #50 September 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteSo Obama in his interview says he will cut taxes for 95% of the country. The Govt already spends more than they bring in. So how will Obama pay for all of this? . Since the top 5% owns over 60% of the wealth of the country, why should this be a problem? And pay something like 85% of the taxes. As we should. Willy Sutton effect.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
