Large Scale Central

Socialism?

General Discussion
#1

Here is Obama’s tax plan

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Factsheet_Tax_Plan_FINAL.pdf

Here is a sumary of what he proposes

He wants to cut taxes on most people, and let the tax rates on those who make over $250,000 a year go back to the levels they were at during the Clinton years. So he
s not adding new taxes, he’s letting tax rates on pele who make more than 25, 000 retunr to the rates they were at under Clinton. You remeber those terrible days, when we had a budget surplus?

He also proposes to keep capital gains taxes the same as they are now for people making under $250,000 a year

and raise the capital gains rate for the remaining people to 20%; which is exactly where where it was after Bill Clinton cut it in 1997.

He would eliminate some corporate tax loopholes, but eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses.

Doesn’t seem all that outrageous, does it? most people get a tax cut, the top 2% go back to the way it was under Clinton.

#2

Mike,

I don’t remember the days of Clinton being that great. I remember people leaving the military as fast as they could because of a Crazy Commander in Chief with his wife the Witch. And the talk of our military being controlled by the UN The first bombing of the World’s Trade Towers, the bombing of our Embassies in Africa and then the bombing of the USS Cole. There was also Bosnia, Serbia, Mogadishu, Somalia, stains on the carpet and what"is" is. Fuzzy math on the numbers and the radical hippies of the 60’s being in control.

I guess people see and remember things differently.

#3

Ok, but those are different issues from the tax plan, aren’t they? I’m not posting here about terrorism, or whose wife is annoying, or the UN. It’s just abot is tax plan and the charge that he’s some kind of radical socialist.

And in terms of overall fiscal health, the US was in much better shape in 1998 than it is now. That’s all I’m talking about–his tax plan.

#4

Mike,
I understand your opinion on taxes, but 1998 was before 9/11. Our lack of resolve and failure to respond to our enemies created what happened on and after 9/11. It is all part of the same budget and you can’t pay less taxes or have our tax money spent on non-defense projects without protecting our shores and our interests overseas. In th 1990’s, the Clintonians wanted us to be the peace officers of the World and be nice, not powerful. He was living off the results of the Reagan and Bush1 years.

I know many blame all this on Bush and his administration, but a lot of what we are paying for now is because of what happened, or didn’t happen, in the Clinton years.

#5

Here’s my “garbage spin”. Obama’s HUGE FATAL mistake is thinking the “pie” he’s trying to redistrubute is static, when in fact it is totally fluid and changes day by day.

Try to “soak it” to the rich - they’ll hide their wealth even more, or just live off whatever they already have. Try to tax “fat cat” corporations and 1. they pass the cost on to their CUSTOMERS in the form of higher prices. 2. Lay people off and close factories. and 3. Move their corporate offices offshore (think Haliburton) and pay even LESS taxes.

In the end, the “middle class” you claim you are trying to help will end up with even MORE of the tax burden (Remember the parable of the guys going out to eat in the other thread?) IMO we need to enforce what we HAVE more effectively FIRST, rather than blindly monkeying about with changes to the system just for the sake of change.

Stick to History, at this point your grasp of macroeconomics and finance makes you vulnerable to looking silly.

#6

If McCain and Obama claim they can turn things around in four to eight years Mr. Bush sure could have done so as well. I’ve heard people blaming our current mess on policies as far back as Carter! It is time for the Republican party to take ownership for the last eight years and defend it on it’s own merits.

The Republicans have had control over the government for six of the last eight years! It is time for the Republicans to “man up” to their failures, take praise for their achievements, and most important, stop whinning like Al Gore!

If the Republicans lose this election they need to look at the mirror in front of them, not the rear-view mirror. They lose not because of what Carter or Clinton did or didn’t do, they lose based on their own actions and failures.

To the point of the thread, Socialism…I watched as McCain stated he wanted to “force” banks to re-negotiate loans based on current market values, I dang near passed out! Talk about re-distribution of wealth! Where is the John McCain I supported eight years ago? If anyone finds him let me know.

#7
Mark Verbrugge said:
It is time for the Republican party to take ownership for the last eight years and defend it on it's own merits.

… It is time for the Republicans to “man up” to their failures, take praise for their achievements, and most important, stop whining like Al Gore!

If the Republicans lose this election they need to look at the mirror in front of them, not the rear-view mirror. They lose not because of what Carter or Clinton did or didn’t do, they lose based on their own actions and failures.


In this I DO agree. However, with ONE caveat. Substitute the word “neoCon” for the word “Republican”. MOST of the failures have been due to a rather radical form of conservatism which has hi-jacked control of the party in the last 10 years or so. (much like the Democratic Party was by extreme liberalism in the late 60’s)…

I don’t blame “all Muslims” for the actions of the crazed few. I don’t believe “all black people” think like Jeremiah Wright, Al Sharpton, or Jesse Jackson… or even Mr Wonderful. Nor do I believe “all Democrats” are crooked like The Kingfish, clueless like Nancy Pelosi, or meglomaniacs like Hillary. I ask you to do the same.

#8

Caveat accepted. It is the far right wing nut jobs that drove me away from the party. Liberal whack-jobs damaged the Dem’s, and Neo-nuts have harmed the Rep’s. Turned me into a true independant, spelled with a small “i”.

#9
Mark Verbrugge said:
Caveat accepted. It is the far right wing nut jobs that drove me away from the party. Liberal whack-jobs damaged the Dem's, and Neo-nuts have harmed the Rep's. Turned me into a true independant, spelled with a small "i".
I've always been independant --- plus cynical and contrary.... Sometimes I'm even right. When people start trying to feed me a load of road apples like the mainstream press has this election, I have to ask, "Why?"

“trickle down” economics doesn’t work as well in reality as it does in theory because it overlooks one human part of the equation… Greed. It ASSumes people will reinvest their money to make more money in ways that inadvertantly help someone else, rather than just hoarding it… They don’t. The guys at Enron and AIG who cooked the books, the #$%& who manipulated oil futures to the detriment of the world economy, even the Walton heirs. Those who call it an abject failure overlook the fact that, on a global view, it DID work… unfortunately the greater bulk of the jobs created were in places like China and India.

OTOH socialism doesn’t work either because there is little incentive to do anything beyond the bare minimum since you won’t gain anything by it anyway. Also, centralized micromanagement tends to overlook the obvious and make things worse. (Is ANYBODY really happy with the “dumbing down” of public schools so that rich white kids aren’t too far ahead of their inner city peers?)

Of the two, I’ll take the first, at least maybe I have a chance for more than subsistence eventually.

#10
Ric Golding said:
Mike, I understand your opinion on taxes, but 1998 was before 9/11. Our lack of resolve and failure to respond to our enemies created what happened on and after 9/11. It is all part of the same budget and you can't pay less taxes or have our tax money spent on non-defense projects without protecting our shores and our interests overseas. In th 1990's, the Clintonians wanted us to be the peace officers of the World and be nice, not powerful. He was living off the results of the Reagan and Bush1 years.

I know many blame all this on Bush and his administration, but a lot of what we are paying for now is because of what happened, or didn’t happen, in the Clinton years.


But ether way, my point was simply that there is nothing “socialist” about Obama’s tax plan, and unless you think that “capital gains tax=terrorist attack” I can’t see any connection. If you want to vote against Obama because you think he’ll be soft on terrorists well, that’s a different discussion and one I’d be happy to have. Obama has said nothing whatsoever about cutting the military budget–in fact, he’s called for more troops to Afghanistan.

My point is just that his tax plan aims to increase revenue, not reduce it, and it aims to increase revenue by returning taxes to closer to what they were under Clinton.

But I should not worry–if your argument is that Clinton was successful because of Reagan and Bush I, then Obama is going to be a raging success, thanks to W!

#11

Yesterday, Barney Frank called for a 25% cut in the DOD budget, with the proceeds going to welfare projects.

#12

Since (according to Obama) we are almost all going to be paying less taxes, who is going to pay for the trillions of dollars in bailouts? Who is going to pay for Obama’s ‘free’ health care for all? Who will pay for the legalization, and thus increased costs of 12 million illegal immigrants? Who will pay for the next round of ACORN outreach programs?

A typical political ploy is to say “I’ll solve the money problem by taxing the rich.” The “rich” being everyone making more than the current audience. That always gets an extended applause, and certainly has great appeal to the downtrodden liberal masses.

The Obama put forward by the media and liberal interests simply does not exist. With statements like “. . . redistribute the wealth,” it’s obvious that he is a Socialist in Democrat garb. His entire background is based on ties to radical causes, individuals, and extreme, hate filled organizations. His 20+ years of “not hearing” Reverend Wright’s racist, anti-American rhetoric is just one example of where his ideas come from.

Promised tax breaks or not, I don’t believe it is in the best interests of the United States of America to have such a radical, anti-American personage as president. I vote NO on Obama.

Happy RRing (and politicing),

Jerry

#13
Steve Featherkile said:
Yesterday, Barney Frank called for a 25% cut in the DOD budget, with the proceeds going to welfare projects.
Oh--when did Barney Frank announce he was running for President? The subject was Obama's tax plan, not Barney Frank. But I can see how you got confused--one is a cngressman, the ther is a senator, one is running fo president, the other is not, one is gay, the other is straight, one is from Massachusetts, the other from Illinois...
#14
Jerry Bowers said:
Since (according to Obama) we are almost all going to be paying less taxes, who is going to pay for the trillions of dollars in bailouts? Who is going to pay for Obama's 'free' health care for all? Who will pay for the legalization, and thus increased costs of 12 million illegal immigrants? Who will pay for the next round of ACORN outreach programs?
He wants to RAISE Taxes on the top 2.5 percent. Raise them to the levels they were at in 1998.

Can you show me where he wants a government sponsored program of legalization for illegal immigrants? Ive never seen him say he supports that. Or where he has prposed sending huge amounts of money to ACORN?

I mean, you can imagine he wants to do all sorts of things, and who knows? Maybe he really is a secret marxist who is also a chirstian whos is also a muslim who is actually an america hating terrorist. Who wants to broil babies. Maybe he’s a space alien, like Kang and Kodos in that episode of the Simpsons

I’m just looking at what he’s actually proposed.

#15

Mike,

Your statement - “if your argument is that Clinton was successful because of Reagan and Bush I, then Obama is going to be a raging success, thanks to W!l”

I believe Clinton was doing his best to screw things up until Congress was taken away from him in 1994, because of his 2 years of totally trying to spend anything and everything with Hillary’s medical plan and raping the military.

Your statement - “If you want to vote against Obama because you think he’ll be soft on terrorists well, that’s a different discussion and one I’d be happy to have.”

I really don’t have a dog in this fight, because I haven’t voted for a Democrat in any election all the way down to alderman, since they started advocating killing off the unborn in the 70’s. I just don’t consider demi’s an option. That does sometime makes the choices pretty limited, so when the choices are poor I just vote against whatever democrat is running.

#16

Mike:

Under the Obama tax plan you are so excited about, the (so-called) “rich” folks who are currently looking to invest in the U.S. based technology / manufacturing startup venture I am currently working for will instead be forced to give that potential investment money over to pay for Obama’s ‘tax the rich and give to the poor’ and ‘redistribute the wealth’ plans. Thanks, but I’d rather pay the taxes myself. In fact, his tax plan makes me wonder why I bother going to work everyday.

It doesn’t take much looking to find where Obama advocates giving citizenship to 12 million illegal aliens as a reward for their criminal activities. Obama says that he would have the federal government be the only agency attacking the illegal immigration problem (as opposed to any state or local agencies, or private citizen reports), thus virtually freeing these criminals from any concern of being caught, and would “. . . create a pathway of citizenship for the 12 million people who are already here.” That is quoted from a December 4, 2007 Democratic radio debate on NPR. That statement clearly advocates a federal government sponsored program for illegal immigrants, not just legitimizing their presence here, but actually promoting them into U.S. citizenship. Trying to ignore it or spin it otherwise is just a lie. That would be 12 million CRIMINALS given a free pass. No thanks.

I don’t think he wants to be “. . . sending huge amounts of money to ACORN.” Probably just continue the regular handouts so they can continue their various anti-American activities, including voter fraud among others.

What he proposes and where he stands are hardly secrets: As an example of his forthrightness, prior to his run for president, he spent 20 years in the Reverend Wright’s ‘amen pew,’ while putting tens of thousands of dollars in the donation plate to support the preaching of racial hatred and anti-American dogma. Which part of that is imaginary?

Happy RRing,

Jerry

#17

Jerry,

You said - “Thanks, but I’d rather pay the taxes myself. In fact, his tax plan makes me wonder why I bother going to work everyday.”

I’ve been thinking about that, also. If it is a case that we are so wrong because of not wanting to support a radical, socialist to be President and responsible for our freedom. Maybe if we end up as just another minority and we should just accept our position and quit working. Thinking about the fact of collecting from taxes paid in and not paying them may not be so bad. Wonder if I could get some student aid and go back to school. Hell, I might become a history major and go for my teaching degree. It sure would be better than paying for taxes.

#18
Jerry Bowers said:
Mike:

Under the Obama tax plan you are so excited about, the (so-called) “rich” folks who are currently looking to invest in the U.S. based technology / manufacturing startup venture I am currently working for will instead be forced to give that potential investment money over to pay for Obama’s ‘tax the rich and give to the poor’ and ‘redistribute the wealth’ plans.

Happy RRing,

Jerry


Cry me a friggin river for the rich folks Jerry. What a load of crap.
We will have to tax everybody to pay back all the money we have borrowed under the Republicans this last eight years. We won’t have any to give to the poor. It will be all we can do to pay the interest.
By the way, did you watch the beginning of 60 minutes tonight? Explained the current financial mess rather well. Also told of hedge fund managers who made billions off the mess, including Paulsen’s brother, who made $3.7 billion last year.
Ralph

#19

Ralph,

There’s a small consolation, with a bit of luck (I’m counting on their greed) the billionaire beneficiaries invested in the “hottest” stock and hit the skids BIG TIME!

#20

Greed is good??? :wink: