Reply
Tue 26 Oct, 2004 03:49 pm
go ahead on.....you make me laugh....
link is one post below....
I'd love to see Bush grant so many tax cuts and breaks that the government couldn't finance its own operation, at least without severe cuts in services. Too many people on the dole or working for the government directly or indirectly.
cjhsa wrote:I'd love to see Bush grant so many tax cuts and breaks that the government couldn't finance its own operation, at least without severe cuts in services. Too many people on the dole or working for the government directly or indirectly.
well that's the idea......feudal society on the horizon....
Looks to me as though it's the legislature that has run amok. Take it up with them.
BP, when there's a so called government "holiday" that no one else gets off, and the crowded freeways of northern CA suddenly become autobahns, then there's a real problem with government being too big.
cjhsa wrote:I'd love to see Bush grant so many tax cuts and breaks that the government couldn't finance its own operation, at least without severe cuts in services. Too many people on the dole or working for the government directly or indirectly.
Yeah, who needs those pesky military people anyway!
Heck with them and all their guns, too!
Up with the corporations! Down with the people!
Looks like maybe it's indefensible...
cjhsa wrote:I'd love to see Bush grant so many tax cuts and breaks that the government couldn't finance its own operation, at least without severe cuts in services. Too many people on the dole or working for the government directly or indirectly.
I think that is the actual goal here.
Many of the people who 'indirectly' work for the government include those who work for companies that are defense contractors. Something tells me those people will still have jobs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/23/business/23income.html?ex=1099022400&en=d90dc6232f456046&ei=5070
Defend what? Corporate Welfare has been a problem for years. GW is making it worse. Kerry has no plan to correct it either.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/prtopincometable.html
Yet, Kerrys "plan" to increase the top brackets will not significantly shift the tax burden.
Both of these candidates are blowing smoke and neither can justify their positions. Kerry can not make all the promises AND onlyraise taxes on top earners. GW can not give away the store to Corporations AND reduce taxes on dividends.
I agree with that woiyo. But what I can see is that if Bush gets a second term in office he will continue on the current path. And that is the problem. I'll take the chance that Kerry will be more responsible.
The only thing I am confident in with Kerry is he WILL RAISE EVERYONES TAXES. I am confident he will NOT attempt to decrease spending. I am confident he will not revise the current tax plan that slowly reduces the Estate Tax.
I can not even say anymore that with GW the chance of my taxes going down are better than with Kerry.
That only leaves me with one issue to decide on, and the economy is not it with these 2 clowns.
I didn't realize spending was suddenly a concern for republican voters / Bush supporters.
Quote:Looks to me as though it's the legislature that has run amok. Take it up with them.
This isn't an excuse, when Republicans control the
House
Senate
AND Presidency
AND the Supreme Court
They should be able to handle things. Strangely, it seems they cannot... hmmm...
Cycloptichorn
Stop making excuses along party lines. Neither parties incumbants in the Senate, House etc..are overly concerned about reducing spending.
You have the Dummycrats looking to raise revenue to hand out to the unwilling and the Repuglicans giving it away to Corporate America.
And the middle gets squeezed each time. Yet, not too many people on this thread are willing to admit it and keep on defending their silly little agenda.
I think most of us would readily admit that the middle gets sqeezed because both parties like to give things away to their respective bases. However, if you're going to take my tax money and give it away, I'd rather it be given to people less fortunate, or to build infrastructure, or to go toward finding a way to make poverty and other scourges of society less of an impact.
I don't usually agree with the dems on how to go about that, but I've seen the other side of that coin now and it is repulsive. I hope to give Kerry 4 years to get us back where we were, and I hope we'll have better options in '08.
Quote:Stop making excuses along party lines. Neither parties incumbants in the Senate, House etc..are overly concerned about reducing spending.
You have the Dummycrats looking to raise revenue to hand out to the unwilling and the Repuglicans giving it away to Corporate America.
And the middle gets squeezed each time. Yet, not too many people on this thread are willing to admit it and keep on defending their silly little agenda.
Actually, I agree more with this than anything you've ever written (that I've seen, I guess).
Cycloptichorn
Cyclo - then SAY IT. Stop pretending that the "lesser of 2 evils " approach is acceptible. That is the trap the politicians want to put us in.
Duck - The Constitutional purpose of the Federal Govt as a taxing authority was to build infrastructure and the military PERIOD. The Govt is attempting to disguise themselves as a charitible institution and is constantly being abused by the unwilling. Don't force charity on me. If I want to give my hard earned money away to the unwilling, I'll do it myself. The UNABLE should be supported, but not the unwilling and certainly not criminal alliens.
Taxpayers better start to realize that a fundemaental change at the LOCAL level is necessary before we can see fundemental change at the Federal Level.
I purposely stated TAXPAYERS rather than VOTERS. TAXPAYERS have a stake in the system, the unwilling do not, they are a drain.
Woiyo,
At heart I am a socialist who would like to see massive reform of our society, including our governmental system.
As a realist, I don't see it happening anytime soon; so I am forced to make decisions within the framework due to my unwillingness to start the revolution myself.
We need to change our attitudes and morals before we can even hope to change our government.
Cycloptichorn
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace