Alliedassault

Alliedassault (alliedassault.us/index.php)
-   Offtopic (alliedassault.us/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   BUSH CO OBJECTIONS (alliedassault.us/showthread.php?t=38001)

Short Hand 07-03-2004 03:16 AM

[quote="TGB!":374ae][quote="Short Hand":374ae]Funny how you failed to comment on the ethic I presented towards the War in Iraq. Seems you have me beat in the political point of the arguement & I have you in the whole war in Iraq part. ohh well.[/quote:374ae]

I'm not here to debate ethics or morality which are at BEST opinion and at worse partisan weapons of stalling. I'm here to debate FACTS, and so far your "FACTS" are conjecture and second-hand repeating of garbage. I'm glad you have an interest in politics Short I am - but you need to take those fucking glasses off and see the big picture.[/quote:374ae]

I say the same to you. We agree to disagree then ?

Madmartagen 07-03-2004 02:50 PM

[quote="Pick Axe":ba0d9]From factcheck.org:

[quote:ba0d9]It is true that everybody who paid federal income taxes is getting a cut. But according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center , 35.6 million individuals and families got zero benefit from the Bush cuts because their income was so low they were not paying federal income taxes before the cuts. This number includes 15.1 million workers who are paying federal payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare. That's 15 million "taxpayers" who were left out.[/quote:ba0d9]

If you didn't pay the tax, no you can't get money back. And everybody pays into Social Security and Medicare, everyone. Hell, last year I made around $1900, not much I know. I didn't have to pay any income Taxes, but I still payed Social Security, everybody does. No, Bush's plan didn't give refunds for social security "taxes", did anybody really expect that??? We pay that money for the benifit of those on Social Security or Medicare, Which we may be on one day ourselves. To give that money back to those 15 million "taxpayers" would be to 'disenfranchise' people who need social security or medicare, and have themselves been paying into it their entire lives.[/quote:ba0d9]

Right, what is this about? If you dont pay taxes (dont make the minimum) you arent going to get a tax break. I dont understand why you put these paragraphs. I quoted the White House ONCE (although I try not to quote any administration using their own statistics) but I quoted it because it is its own budget list and not a stance or claim on any particular issue.

Pick Axe 07-03-2004 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madmartagen
Under Bush's tax cut, the top 2% earners were taxed at a lower percentage than the poorest people, thats what I'm getting at.Should the poorest people in America pay more than the richest?

My point is that the poorest people don't pay more than the richest. The rich are taxed at a higher percent than the lower income brackets. The rich pay more because they make more, and also because they are charged more per dollar. This is the way our tax system has been set up for a long time. It's still that way. If you can give me geunuine proff of your statment, "The top 2% earners were taxed at a lower percentage than the poorest people", I would welcome it. Untill then, I will have to believe that our system is set up where the more you make, the more you make, the more you pay (percent).

You know, accross the country, it seems like more and more people are speaking out about politics. More people are taking an interest in our government. I hope this will lead to a more people-founded government.

Madmartagen 07-03-2004 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snuff
The people that make more than I do are paying taxes. A lot of taxes. A majority of the taxes. One thing I think we can both agree on is that the economy's health is not just soley a tax issue. I mentioned welfare and you mentioned medicare and social security. I do think that we have an obligation to help others that truely need it, but there are way too many people using and abusing the system at others tax expense.

Its true that people abuse programs, but thats why we have investigators and clerks who do research. These people are actively sought out by the police. I dont think the majority or a significant amount of people are abusing the system enought to cause a severe setback to our national economy. Still, if money is being taken out of your check for these programs, then you are entitled to receive benefits.

No I don't don't agree with health benefits(medicare/medicaide) for every numbnut who just won't pay health insurance premiums.

Benefits are not taken care of by the govt, they are subsidized by your employer. If you had to pay 100% of your premium, you would jump off a skyscraper roof because you wouldnt be able to afford anything else. Thats how it is in CA, I dont know about everywhere else though.

I do agree that people who are disabled congenitally or by some bad turn of events deserve our support. I do not feel that I owe people who make poor choices in life anything. ( mothers who decide to become sexually active and have 5 kids by the age of 22, high school drop outs that deal drugs, the guy who was laid off from his job for coming to work drunk and used what little money he had to by alcohol and ciggerettes instead of paying for health insurance) the list goes on.

Again, if you pay for these services out of your check, then you are entitled to them when you need them. A young mother needs help more than most people, and if you and others wont let her have an abortion, then maybe here is a justification as to why she should have that option. But in this case, she chose to keep the child, she needs help and if she pays for these benefits every two weeks like everyone else, then I feel like shes entitled to them. You cannot selectively determine who can and who cannot receive a claim becaused you think they mad a bad decision in life. If someone is abusing the system, they get caught and punished. I still dont think people who abuse the system cause a significant hit to our numbers, but I'm sure it is alot of money. You dont get laid off for coming in drunk, you get fired. Getting laid off and fired are two completely different things.

It is not our responsibility to support all the baby boomers who can't take care of themselves. Social security is owed to the older folks because they have paid into it. The problem is that it is now so top heavy that it won't work. I do not expect to see a penny of my ss benefits when I retire. So yes , I am all for axing social security if an alternative can be found for the existing retirees. The responsibility lies on us know to plan for our own retirements and not have to rely on the government. That would make SS unneccessary.

Correct, but we had a surplus at the start of 2001, Clinton had set aside an estimated $238M for social security alone. During the 2000 campaing both Bush and Gore supported the idea of using a 'lockbox,' or setting a certain amount of the budget for SS so that the funds could not be reapportioned elsewhere. But, after Bush's inaguration, he used $480M (including the $238M for SS to fund basic federal operations. But again, people depend on SS to make ends meet. They paid for it, they should be entitled to its benefits. It isnt their fault the country is in financial difficulties, its the spenders and the people who make the budget who are responsible for ensuring our financial security.

The whole burden of funding the federal government should not just fall on the hands of the wealthier people in this country. I would like a flat tax also as a fairness issue,but then we would lose massive funding for the goverment and talking about creating deficits.In closing, the issue is much more complex than either of us are saying but I do support tax cuts for the rich because they simple pay most of the taxes period.

Yes they do pay more because they make more. What is the purpose of heavily taxing the lower and middle classes to poverty??

I can't really speak specifically on how things differed under Clinton. I was in a totally differnt financial situation then. I do know one thing, when I got married I payed more taxes even though I now had another person to support. Now I get a tax credit for my child biggrin:

http://www.imf.org/external/Pubs/NFT/Op/227/index.htm
http://slate.msn.com/id/2093707/
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=139

CoMaToSe 07-03-2004 03:33 PM

[quote="Short Hand":fe2eb]watch ferenheit 9/11 they are countless. if you haven't seen it then stfu,.[/quote:fe2eb]
argh! damn canadians, stay out of our affairs. you wannabes dont know shit. the fact on the election is that gore couldn't win no matter how he sliced the votes in florida, he always lost the popular vote. the supreme court eventually had to draw the line on how many recounts would be allowed. micheal moore is, in a short form, full of shit. the people in this fuckin continent are stupid enough to eat his stuff like gospel. please tell me canadians are slightly smarter.

Madmartagen 07-03-2004 03:40 PM

[quote=CoMaToSe]
Quote:

Originally Posted by "Short Hand":9a5d2
watch ferenheit 9/11 they are countless. if you haven't seen it then stfu,.

argh! damn canadians, stay out of our affairs. you wannabes dont know shit. the fact on the election is that gore couldn't win no matter how he sliced the votes in florida, he always lost the popular vote.[/quote:9a5d2]
umm actually, Gore won the popular vote, he lost the electoral vote. kind of a big difference there, eh?
[img]http://img11.exs.cx/img11/6444/fugly.jpg[/img]

Snuff 07-03-2004 04:00 PM

Madmartagen
I know we can't just pick and choose who recieves benefits, but there should be a way of holding these people accountable for their actions, not just providing a path to less reponsibility. Medicaide is govt. subsidized. Someone is eating the cost of their healthcare. The hospital, healthcare provider, and the govt. all take a hit which results in an increased cost for all. I live in an area of the country where many just don't deem it necessary to have health coverage even if they can afford it.

Investigators and clerks do not solve the problem. It is an overall attitude of apathy with some people. Employing enough investigators to catch these people would cost too much money. These people should not have such an easy path to take. Point is: they should have to take some responsibility and make a contribution.

The "lock box" even untouched is still not a long term solution. SS will eventually not work. With advances in medicine, people are living longer and are more dependant on the system in their golden years. I don't agree
with SS as a long trm solution. Some resposibilty must fall on the working generation of today to plan for their retirement.

I wasn't speaking of a young mother with a child. I was talking about ones that do it over and over and over when there is no way she can support these children. Does she need help? Of course, but should we keep suppoting a system that does not hold these people accountable?

The lower class was not taxed heavily in the first place. Giving a tax cut to wealthier people who pay most of the taxes anyway does not mean that you are taxing the lower class more heavily.

Yes i wish we were not in a defict. I do not agree totally with either parties economics 100% On economics alone, a business man could run the economy much better, but at what cost?

I'll let you get the last word biggrin: This debate is wearing out my hunt and peck typing method spank: I'm signing off....

Madmartagen 07-03-2004 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snuff
I'll let you get the last word biggrin: This debate is wearing out my hunt and peck typing method spank: I'm signing off....

Nooooooo!!!! I signed off first.

Fireal 07-03-2004 05:59 PM

Michael moore is full of shit. The whole movie is propaganda, and nothing more. He names only the bad, and blows the bad way out of proportion. When he named the Coalition, he named really small countries, as if an insult them. Then doesnt mention the bigger countries, like Great britain. He is a douche bag, plain and simple

Madmartagen 07-03-2004 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fireal
Michael moore is full of shit. The whole movie is propaganda, and nothing more. He names only the bad, and blows the bad way out of proportion. When he named the Coalition, he named really small countries, as if an insult them. Then doesnt mention the bigger countries, like Great britain. He is a douche bag, plain and simple

Wrong thread. GG.

Fireal 07-03-2004 06:07 PM

Or not, look at comatose quote in his post. Kthx

Madmartagen 07-03-2004 06:15 PM

This thread isnt about Michael Moore or Canadians vs. Americans and all that other bs. You guys seriously fuck up every serious thread with this shit. It was about people listing opinons as to why Bush isnt a good president and rebuttles by people who feel that he is doing a good job. I for one am bored with it all and feel that myself and my counterparts have made our own points and we all left the table agreeing that we need some lunch. If you guys want to debate Canada vs. America or Michael Moores shit, take it outside.

Fireal 07-03-2004 06:39 PM

Well, Moore was entered into this thread, so its now being discussed. Oh, the humanity.

Himmler 07-03-2004 07:59 PM

ROFL i just beat the game, fun but a waste of time it hink

Short Hand 07-03-2004 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fireal
Well, Moore was entered into this thread, so its now being discussed. Oh, the humanity.

Fireal go back to the danm art forum and flame a newb. You made just about as much a impact as camatose.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:15 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.12 by ScriptzBin
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 1998 - 2007 by Rudedog Productions | All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners. All rights reserved.