Political Crossfire Forums

Dookiestix · Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:04 pm Post subject:

JLB wrote: Deemoore wrote: JLB wrote: I already have the Cut and run, Tax and Spend thread which covers the Democrat Plan.
Thank you for reading my post.
I don't read yours anymore.

I can lead Democrats to knowledge, but I cannot make them think. 8:)
Your "knowledge" is not the kind Democrats would be wiling to think, as they thought otherwise and voted the Repugs out, along with those other non-thinking Republicans who are sick of their party right now.

But nice try... 8:)

Rankor and Pissing · Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 10232

Dookiestix wrote: JLB wrote: Deemoore wrote: JLB wrote: I already have the Cut and run, Tax and Spend thread which covers the Democrat Plan.
Thank you for reading my post.
I don't read yours anymore.

I can lead Democrats to knowledge, but I cannot make them think. 8:)
Your "knowledge" is not the kind Democrats would be wiling to think, as they thought otherwise and voted the Repugs out, along with those other non-thinking Republicans who are sick of their party right now.

But nice try... 8:)

I think you're confused still... non-thinking doesn't keep you in power for 12 years - it keeps you OUT of power for 12 years. Afterall, the Democraps didn't get the moniker of "No ideas" because they were "thinking". Talk about a nice try... :lol:

Revenant · Joined: 16 Apr 2006 Posts: 17927 Location: Bliss

1. Reduce the cost of student loans 1/1
2. Reduce the cost of prescription drugs 2/2
3. Raise the minimum wage (federally is assumed) 2/3
4. Launch an effort to develop alternative fuels 3/4 (as long as nuclear is considered)
5. Enact the recommendations of the 9/11 commission 4/5
6. Eliminate $18 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies 5/6

83.33%, not a bad score. Preferable to the GOP congress.

Need to come up with an immigration plan ASAP however.

Dennis · Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:07 pm Post subject:

homerjay_s wrote: Dennis wrote: homerjay_s wrote: Rankor and Pissing wrote: For those that don't want to read it...

1. Reduce the cost of student loans
2. Reduce the cost of prescription drugs
3. Raise the minimum wage (federally is assumed)
4. Launch an effort to develop alternative fuels
5. Enact the recommendations of the 9/11 commission
6. Eliminate $18 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies

These are all good, and I'm not complaining, but what about the big issues that are NOT being addressed:

- Social Security Reform
- Healthcare
- Immigration and an overhaul of the INS
- Border Security
- Iraq and Afghanistan
- Government spending and the U.S. National Debt which is up to 8.5 trillion dollars
- Domestic spying and the Patriot Act

Compared to the one's I listed, Pelosis' list looks like the scrawny kid with asthma who gets picked on in the school yard. Where's the spending freeze? Where's the hike in taxes (let's face it, 18 million in oil subsidies isn't going to make up 8.5 trillion in debt).

If the Democrats actually won on these items, (which they didn't) it would be a very sad commentary on the Democrats.

You make some very good points about some questions I would also like answered.

The answer is easy to find. It's called "The Platform". :roll:

The paltform does not actually address exactly how things are going to get done.

I disagree.

I read it and understand how things will be done. Give it another shot. Ask for help if you need it.

homerjay_s wrote: However, I will be quick to criticize if I don't think they are doing the right thing.

There's nothing wrong with that! :)

thintheherd · Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 4:04 pm Post subject:

Rankor and Pissing wrote: For those that don't want to read it...

1. Reduce the cost of student loans
2. Reduce the cost of prescription drugs
3. Raise the minimum wage (federally is assumed)
4. Launch an effort to develop alternative fuels
5. Enact the recommendations of the 9/11 commission
6. Eliminate $18 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies
That sounds peachy.. 'till you realize who will pay for it.

Rankor and Pissing wrote: These are all good, and I'm not complaining, but what about the big issues that are NOT being addressed:

- Social Security Reform
- Healthcare
- Immigration and an overhaul of the INS
- Border Security
- Iraq and Afghanistan
- Government spending and the U.S. National Debt which is up to 8.5 trillion dollars
- Domestic spying and the Patriot Act

Compared to the one's I listed, Pelosis' list looks like the scrawny kid with asthma who gets picked on in the school yard. Where's the spending freeze? Where's the hike in taxes (let's face it, 18 million in oil subsidies isn't going to make up 8.5 trillion in debt).

If the Democrats actually won on these items, (which they didn't) it would be a very sad commentary on the Democrats.
Right on.

Sucker Punch · Joined: 08 Nov 2006 Posts: 189

Rankor and Pissing wrote:

If the Democrats actually won on these items, (which they didn't) it would be a very sad commentary on the Democrats.

As opposed to what - the pubs not only NOT having plans for any of the afore mentioned items other than Iraq (full speed ahead into oblivion) - but not having any plans for the democrat initiated changes either?

And seeing how this administration greatly contributed to this sickening debt -how exactly do you expect them to formulate a plan this quick to deal with it.

Dennis · Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:49 pm Post subject:

thintheherd wrote: Rankor and Pissing wrote: For those that don't want to read it...

1. Reduce the cost of student loans
2. Reduce the cost of prescription drugs
3. Raise the minimum wage (federally is assumed)
4. Launch an effort to develop alternative fuels
5. Enact the recommendations of the 9/11 commission
6. Eliminate $18 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies
That sounds peachy.. 'till you realize who will pay for it.

As opposed to the big oil tax breaks, corporate loopholes and subsidies, bridges to nowhere, and $30,000 a year politician pay raises we are paying for now?

Heh...I would rather pay for what's on that list above, thanks. :lol:

Dennis · Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:52 pm Post subject:

thintheherd wrote: Rankor and Pissing wrote: For those that don't want to read it...

1. Reduce the cost of student loans
2. Reduce the cost of prescription drugs
3. Raise the minimum wage (federally is assumed)
4. Launch an effort to develop alternative fuels
5. Enact the recommendations of the 9/11 commission
6. Eliminate $18 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies
That sounds peachy.. 'till you realize who will pay for it.

As opposed to the big oil tax breaks, corporate loopholes and subsidies, bridges to nowhere, and $30,000 a year politician pay raises we are paying for now?

Heh...I would rather pay for what's on that list above, thanks. :lol:

Dennis · Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:55 pm Post subject:

thintheherd wrote: Rankor and Pissing wrote: For those that don't want to read it...

1. Reduce the cost of student loans
2. Reduce the cost of prescription drugs
3. Raise the minimum wage (federally is assumed)
4. Launch an effort to develop alternative fuels
5. Enact the recommendations of the 9/11 commission
6. Eliminate $18 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies
That sounds peachy.. 'till you realize who will pay for it.

As opposed to the big oil tax breaks, corporate loopholes and subsidies, bridges to nowhere, and $30,000 a year politician pay raises we are paying for now?

Heh...I would rather pay for what's on that list above, thanks. :lol:

Rankor and Pissing wrote: These are all good, and I'm not complaining, but what about the big issues that are NOT being addressed:

- Social Security Reform
- Healthcare
- Immigration and an overhaul of the INS
- Border Security
- Iraq and Afghanistan
- Government spending and the U.S. National Debt which is up to 8.5 trillion dollars
- Domestic spying and the Patriot Act

Compared to the one's I listed, Pelosis' list looks like the scrawny kid with asthma who gets picked on in the school yard. Where's the spending freeze? Where's the hike in taxes (let's face it, 18 million in oil subsidies isn't going to make up 8.5 trillion in debt).

If the Democrats actually won on these items, (which they didn't) it would be a very sad commentary on the Democrats.

All of those issues were presented in the platform, the 6-point plan, and during candidate speeches. Not sure why you missed that.

thintheherd · Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 9:33 am Post subject:

Dennis wrote: thintheherd wrote: Rankor and Pissing wrote: For those that don't want to read it...

1. Reduce the cost of student loans
2. Reduce the cost of prescription drugs
3. Raise the minimum wage (federally is assumed)
4. Launch an effort to develop alternative fuels
5. Enact the recommendations of the 9/11 commission
6. Eliminate $18 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies
That sounds peachy.. 'till you realize who will pay for it.

As opposed to the big oil tax breaks, corporate loopholes and subsidies, bridges to nowhere, and $30,000 a year politician pay raises we are paying for now?

Heh...I would rather pay for what's on that list above, thanks. :lol:
You don't understand.... each increase in coporate taxes and reductions in subsidies will be paid for, by us, at the register. No business pays taxes, they are all factored into the cost of production and passed down to the consumer. Surely you know my stance on that in so much as they should all be abolished.

As to the last two expeditures you mentioned? I happen to agree with you, but they are unrelated to the list.

Dennis · Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 4:46 pm Post subject:

thintheherd wrote: You don't understand.... each increase in coporate taxes and reductions in subsidies will be paid for, by us, at the register.

:lol:

As a supporter of the so-called Fair Tax, as you are, you are shooting yourself in the foot:

As you stated, each increase in corporate tax and decrease in subsidies - Democrat solution - means we pay more at the register.

What you didn't mention is that this also means that each decrease in corporate tax and increase in subsidies - Republican solution - means we pay more on our taxes! (The money lost for the government by decreased taxes and the money to pay for increased subsidies has to come from somewhere! It comes from our taxes)

So, the choice is to pay more at the register or pay more at tax season.

For someone who supports the Fair Tax, I would think you would rather support the ability to decide "when" to pay at that register, as opposed to not being able to decide "when" to pay your taxes that cost you on a regular basis. :roll:

Let me also add a moral dilemma to this, as well. Having to pay more at the register for the reasons we've listed means that we have to make up for money that corporations have lost and need to run effectively. Having to pay more on taxes for reasons I have listed means having to make up for money that the government has lost and needs to run effectively.

I would rather worry about my government be able to run effectively than some corporation - CEO whose a millionaire now instead of a billionaire. :cry:

Think about that.

thintheherd wrote: As to the last two expeditures you mentioned? I happen to agree with you, but they are unrelated to the list.

Wrong. They are related to the list because we pay for them with our taxes.

thintheherd · Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 5:29 pm Post subject:

Dennis wrote: thintheherd wrote: You don't understand.... each increase in coporate taxes and reductions in subsidies will be paid for, by us, at the register.

:lol:

As a supporter of the so-called Fair Tax, as you are, you are shooting yourself in the foot:

As you stated, each increase in corporate tax and decrease in subsidies - Democrat solution - means we pay more at the register.

What you didn't mention is that this also means that each decrease in corporate tax and increase in subsidies - Republican solution - means we pay more on our taxes! (The money lost for the government by decreased taxes and the money to pay for increased subsidies has to come from somewhere! It comes from our taxes)

So, the choice is to pay more at the register or pay more at tax season.
You do know that this also means that the poor citizens that currently have no "federal tax liability" are forced to pay someone elses taxes at the register no matter which scenario is played out don't you?

Oh, and didn't the repubs lower taxes on some individuals and watch gov't revenues go up? hmmmmm

Dennis wrote: For someone who supports the Fair Tax, I would think you would rather support the ability to decide "when" to pay at that register, as opposed to not being able to decide "when" to pay your taxes that cost you on a regular basis. :roll:
See above. Nearly everything we purchase is currently riddled with embedded taxes. How do you see that as a choice is beyond me.

Dennis wrote: Let me also add a moral dilemma to this, as well. Having to pay more at the register for the reasons we've listed means that we have to make up for money that corporations have lost and need to run effectively. Having to pay more on taxes for reasons I have listed means having to make up for money that the government has lost and needs to run effectively.

I would rather worry about my government be able to run effectively than some corporation - CEO whose a millionaire now instead of a billionaire. :cry:

Think about that.
Perhaps you should think about what you just said for a moment... You are telling me that you would rather have an increase on corporate taxes to keep millionaires from becoming billionaires and yet you recognize that they are not paying taxes... you are.

That's odd.

So, you're OK with that just to 'keep your gov't running'?

By the way... (and again) if you knew anything about the FairTax you would know that I believe that all income taxes be abolished, that includes corp income tax. So actually, your argument is moot.

Dennis · Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:29 am Post subject:

I find the capability of my government to be able to actually function a lot more important than some billionaire's company's capacity to function...yes.

thintheherd · Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:37 am Post subject:

Dennis wrote: I find the capability of my government to be able to actually function a lot more important than some billionaire's company's capacity to function...yes.
And you're ok with paying their corporate taxes? You, and everyone else, personally?

Ozzone · Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 4:33 pm Post subject:

Deemoore wrote: Hint : Everyone knows the national debt has doubled in Bush's tenure.

Fact: No it hasn't.

Dennis · Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2006 8:20 am Post subject:

thintheherd wrote: Dennis wrote: I find the capability of my government to be able to actually function a lot more important than some billionaire's company's capacity to function...yes.
And you're ok with paying their corporate taxes? You, and everyone else, personally?

No, I'm not. They should be paying their taxes, not me. And, if they are not paying their taxes, they should be fined or put in jail, just like everyone else.

Of course, if we enact the Flat Tax, this would not be an issue.

Dennis · Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2006 8:21 am Post subject:

Ozzone wrote: Deemoore wrote: Hint : Everyone knows the national debt has doubled in Bush's tenure.

Fact: No it hasn't.

Really? That's news to me. :?

beachbum bob · Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2006 8:33 am Post subject:

JLB wrote: Deemoore wrote: JLB wrote: I already have the Cut and run, Tax and Spend thread which covers the Democrat Plan.
Thank you for reading my post.
I don't read yours anymore.

I can lead Democrats to knowledge, but I cannot make them think. 8:)

should try that with the republicans...they need it much more 8:) 8:)