0
   

BUSH IS PLANNING TO RUN ON HIS RECORD

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 10:22 am
I'm fine with your philosophy on it, Larry. Everyone is entitled to believe what they want about taxation.

But the fact remains that your state, whichever one it is, had a huge drop in federal funding over the last two years. So that tax cut you have will either have to go to cover the local service deficiencies (in which case you won't be able to 'enjoy' it) or there will continue to be unfunded deficiencies. The taxes have to be paid somewhere in order to fund our critical emergency response personnel.

You don't have a problem doing it locally, fine. Do you live in a rural area? Cities have much more of a problem with this.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 10:23 am
Larry434 wrote:
Horn: No question the funding for local law enforcement and fire fighting and education has been shifted back to the states where it belongs.

I say that because a tax dollar collected in my city for those needs that STAYS in the city is much more effective than the same tax dollar sent to DC only to be passed thru numerous bureaucracies before being returned to my city, decimated by overhead handling costs, for its intended use.


I would argue then that the bulk of my tax payments ought to be sent to my state, where it belongs. My state and local taxes, though significant, are a small portion of my overall taxes. If the government gives me a tax cut of a couple of hundred dollars, but in so doing reduces my local services (schools, police, first responders) then I don't see where I have received a net gain.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 10:23 am
Bingo, Freeduck.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 10:28 am
FreeDuck wrote:
Larry434 wrote:
Horn: No question the funding for local law enforcement and fire fighting and education has been shifted back to the states where it belongs.

I say that because a tax dollar collected in my city for those needs that STAYS in the city is much more effective than the same tax dollar sent to DC only to be passed thru numerous bureaucracies before being returned to my city, decimated by overhead handling costs, for its intended use.


I would argue then that the bulk of my tax payments ought to be sent to my state, where it belongs. My state and local taxes, though significant, are a small portion of my overall taxes. If the government gives me a tax cut of a couple of hundred dollars, but in so doing reduces my local services (schools, police, first responders) then I don't see where I have received a net gain.


I agree with you Duck. Further federal income tax cuts, across the board, are in order.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 10:45 am
No response to me, Larry?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 10:49 am
Sorry, horn, but I am not sure to what you want me to respond.

If it is about whether I live in a rural area. No, I live in a large city.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 10:52 am
Given that the states are receiving big tax cuts,

And given that these cuts directly affect emergency service personnel (who are critical for homeland defense),

And given the money must come from somewhere in order to fund these people,

Are you okay with them not being properly funded? Or would you rather use the money you saved on your tax cut to pay directly to the city/state to fund it? And if the second is true, how can you be said to be 'enjoying' your tax cut?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 11:07 am
"Are you okay with them not being properly funded?"

No.

" Or would you rather use the money you saved on your tax cut to pay directly to the city/state to fund it?"

Yes, and whatever additional required to provide the level of services the residents of my city, county and state are willing to pay for.

"And if the second is true, how can you be said to be 'enjoying' your tax cut?"

If the dollar I pay in taxes is kept here for its intended use it follows that I will have to pay LESS dollars than if my dollar is first sent thru the bureacracy in DC.

That is my reponse, horn.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 11:08 am
Thanks!

Now for the real question: Have your local taxes gone up at all?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 11:14 am
Not yet. There have been attempts to raise taxes but the Legislature was flooded with petitions against it and it failed to pass for the second year in a row.

As a result, non-essential services have been cut back ( no cuts in fire and police) to the point the citizens are beginning to squeal about that.

So I expect to see a moderate increase in taxes and services in the near future.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 11:24 am
Cool. As long as you realize that when you cut taxes in one place, you have to raise them in another place.

I hate to get so, I don't know, nitpicky, but many people don't think about the effects of tax cuts and when you wrote about how you were enjoying yours, I just jumped into 'where's the money coming from' mode, sorry for that.

Cheers

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 11:31 am
No problem horn.

A lot of folks on the Left seem to think that what they have come to EXPECT from the federal govenment is free, whereas if they have to pay it from local taxes it is not.

Looks like you have your head on straight about that. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 11:43 am
To get the thread back on track a little....

Or maybe not...

http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/31/news/economy/confidence/index.htm?cnn=yes

Quote:
Job woes slam confidence

Consumer confidence reading sinks to lowest since May on worries about jobs.
August 31, 2004: 12:58 PM EDT



NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Worries about the job market sent consumer confidence tumbling in August, a research group said Tuesday, in a report that could spell more trouble for the economy ahead.

The Conference Board, a business research group, said its index of consumer confidence sank to 98.2 from a reading of 105.7 in July. Economists surveyed by Briefing.com had forecast that the index would slip, but just a bit to 103.4. The August reading was the lowest since May and showed the biggest drop since February.

Confidence is an important indicator of consumer willingness to spend, especially on big-ticket items. About two-thirds of the nation's economy is driven by consumer spending.


Analyst said the drop, after four months of gains, was another worrisome sign of slower economic growth that could have an impact on the November elections.

The reading follows much weaker-than-expected employment reports for June and July. The government's August employment report is due Friday.

"The slowdown in job growth has curbed consumers' confidence," said Lynn Franco, director of he Conference Board's Consumer Research Center. "The level of consumer optimism has fallen off and caution has returned. Until the job market and pace of hiring picks up, this cautious attitude will prevail."

Those saying jobs are "plentiful" slumped to 18.1 percent from 19.7 percent, while those claiming jobs are "hard to get" was virtually unchanged at 25.8 percent.


The consumer outlook for the employment market also worsened. The survey found 15.4 percent expecting fewer jobs six months from now, up from 13.5 percent in the July survey. Those expecting more jobs six months from now fell to 16.2 percent from 19.5 percent.

Consumers were also less optimistic about the general business climate. The survey found 23.2 percent who believe business conditions are "good," down from 25.2 percent. Those claiming conditions are "bad" rose to 20.1 percent from 19.1 percent.

Anthony Chan, senior economist for J.P. Morgan Fleming Asset Management, said that the survey confirms that the slowdown in the economic recovery is more pronounced than forecast by many economists earlier this spring. He said the great impact of weak consumer confidence could be what it means for the election than what it means for the economy.

"It's saying this soft patch is a little wider than previously thought," he said. "I think I would be more concerned from a political standpoint. But if we get a good employment report on Friday, these numbers can easily turn around. These numbers can virtually turn on a dime."

Robert Brusca of FAO Economics said the report is a sign the job market is far weaker than many economists have been willing to recognize.

He said broad consumer attitudes are shaped by their own experience in the employment market, not just their reading of economic data.

"The personal experience is important," he said. "This (survey) tends to confirm we do have a downturn in place. The depth of this index decline is telling and shocking."

The board surveys 5,000 households for its monthly report.


For the lazy, the article describes shrinking consumer confidence levels due to a lack of jobs.

Let me ask the conservatives a question: if jobs drive consumer confidence, and confidence drives spending (according to the article, especially spending on big-ticket items), how does the tax cut to the rich help, again? They aren't spending the money that they saved, according to the report...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 11:52 am
"Anthony Chan, senior economist for J.P. Morgan Fleming Asset Management, said that the survey confirms that the slowdown in the economic recovery is more pronounced than forecast by many economists earlier this spring. He said the great impact of weak consumer confidence could be what it means for the election than what it means for the economy.

"It's saying this soft patch is a little wider than previously thought," he said. "I think I would be more concerned from a political standpoint. But if we get a good employment report on Friday, these numbers can easily turn around. These numbers can virtually turn on a dime."

The uncertainty of the election outcome is probably making some consumers from both ends of the political spectrum overly cautious.

So I will stay tuned for further developments.
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 01:23 pm
not making a political point here. this is a general question.

do you think that perhaps we are in one of those occassional periods when it may take a couple of different presidents and admin residents to make the corrections that will really move the country beyond the 9/11, iraq/afghanistan and economic woes?

in other words, no quick fix whether it winds up as pres b or pres k.
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 01:30 pm
DontTreadOnMe wrote:
not making a political point here. this is a general question.

do you think that perhaps we are in one of those occassional periods when it may take a couple of different presidents and admin residents to make the corrections that will really move the country beyond the 9/11, iraq/afghanistan and economic woes?

in other words, no quick fix whether it winds up as pres b or pres k.


I fully agree DTOM, the country is MUCH stronger than any President's administration. Our continued prosperity and growth over the couple of centuries of our Republic, under both liberal and conservative Presidents and Congresses (and even some corrupt ones) bears that out.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 01:39 pm
If Bush is running on his record, he might want to look a little closer at who his allies are.

One of the co-sponsors of the Federal Anti-Gay Marriage amendment has decided to decline for running for office again after it has been revealed that he regularly participates in his local gay community.

http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=74982&ran=126361

Quote:


http://www.blogactive.com/2004/08/action-write-congressman-ed-schrock.html <--- for the original story

I can't seem to verify this one way or the other, but it sure doesn't look good for this guy.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 02:15 pm
remember in grade school, "the smeller's the feller"?

a crude analogy, but maybe just a litlle bit on target?
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 02:22 pm
Larry434 wrote:

the country is MUCH stronger than any President's administration. Our continued prosperity and growth over the couple of centuries of our Republic, under both liberal and conservative Presidents and Congresses (and even some corrupt ones) bears that out.


yep, all in all, not a bad place. that's why it just kills me when the people are at each others throats over who's going to be class president.

the over arching hatred is really pretty irrational. not to mention, obl is probably sitting in one of his crappy caves with a battery powered tv and a bag of popcorn laughing his ass off over it. divide and conquer. always a classic strategy.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Aug, 2004 02:34 pm
Agreed.

And it was 'He who smelt it, dealt it' where I came from. A little more poetical.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 05/02/2024 at 07:24:04