Taxing the rich - what is the cutoff?

[Daseal]

Yes, That Guy. The war in Iraq is currently being paid for by China. All our debt is quickly being gobbled up by China and it will hurt us in the long run.

Iraq is an investment in the long term future and safety of our beloved country.

Support the troops!

I'm curious -- how was it an investment? What threat was there? Also, why is this a troop support issue. I have no issue with the troops at all. I come from a military family, in fact I have two family members that recently returned from Iraq along with many friends on their way over shortly. You can be totally against a war and support the troops. I bet a majority of the troops would rather not be in Iraq, but they do as their told.

I'm not trying to hijack the thread. But people want to complain about social programs trying to improve our country when our spending for wars and other efforts are making the debt go to an all-time high.

Schneed -- if my views are so short sighted, I am very interested to hear how the Iraq war will make money for the United States.

On a completely unrelated note. Did anyone get a piece of mail saying that your stimulus check would be sent out within 3-5 business days? What a waste of money that was.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Yes, That Guy. The war in Iraq is currently being paid for by China. All our debt is quickly being gobbled up by China and it will hurt us in the long run.


I'm curious -- how was it an investment? What threat was there? Also, why is this a troop support issue. I have no issue with the troops at all. I come from a military family, in fact I have two family members that recently returned from Iraq along with many friends on their way over shortly. You can be totally against a war and support the troops. I bet a majority of the troops would rather not be in Iraq, but they do as their told.

I'm not trying to hijack the thread. But people want to complain about social programs trying to improve our country when our spending for wars and other efforts are making the debt go to an all-time high.

Schneed -- if my views are so short sighted, I am very interested to hear how the Iraq war will make money for the United States.

On a completely unrelated note. Did anyone get a piece of mail saying that your stimulus check would be sent out within 3-5 business days? What a waste of money that was.

I'm not questioning your support for the troops but what you're advocating is retreat. We must accomplish the mission and return home with honor. Like my man McCain says, only a fool likes wars but we shouldn't leave Iraq without achieving our objectives. We must wipe out terrorist off the face of the earth by fighting them over there rather than over here. We have to stabilize Iraq and bring democracy to the middle east. We can't afford not to succeed. We have to succeeded even if it takes 100 years.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Daseal

On a completely unrelated note. Did anyone get a piece of mail saying that your stimulus check would be sent out within 3-5 business days? What a waste of money that was.

not as big a waste as the stimulus check that followed :/.

and when you offer 140 degree weather, sandstorms, and guys with guns firing on you and planting bombs randomly in roads... i don't think anyone sees that as the ideal place to spend their summer vacation.

the good news is hiring 100k insurgents to fight for us has really worked out well (not as well as say, if we decided not to be retarded and disband the iraqi military overnight, but still), and we're a lot closer to being able to leave with friendly ties and more influence in the middle east than we were a year ago... societal collapse upon reduction of troop levels is no longer an immanent threat, increased UAV orbits are making ground patrols safer, and the new iraqi army is able to diffuse anti-americanism in certain situations now (ie sadr city).

I mean, we probably will keep permanent bases there, just because it's a good location and they'll probably want to keep the military trainers and american toys (fighters/bombers/helos/UAV) around in case iran tries something, but i imagine the manning in country will be vastly (VASTLY) reduced, and it won't take that long to get there...

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by saden1

I'm not questioning your support for the troops but what you're advocating is retreat. We must accomplish the mission and return home with honor. Like my man McCain says, only a fool likes wars but we shouldn't leave Iraq without achieving our objectives. We must wipe out terrorist off the face of the earth by fighting them over there rather than over here. We have to stabilize Iraq and bring democracy to the middle east. We can't afford not to succeed. We have to succeeded even if it takes 100 years.

saden, have you started drinking the kool aid? staying in Iraq for 100 years shouldn't even be an option. and im interested to hear what people think would happen, if we do pull out? and the comment about wiping terrorists off the face of the earth is down right brutal. i don't care if we fight the gazillion years in Iraq, there will always be terrorists. i think you have done a 180 degree turn in your thinking

[JoeRedskin]

I think he is using the rhetorical art of hyperbolic sarcasm.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Schneed -- if my views are so short sighted, I am very interested to hear how the Iraq war will make money for the United States.

Who in the H-E-double-hockey-sticks ever said the war would make money for us??? That would be utterly despicable to go to war for the purposes of financial gain. I responded to your statement about the disconnect between wanting to lower taxes and be for the war (and war spending) at the same time.

This shouldn't be hard to understand. Take your own personal budget. You could be for spending money on a plasma TV, say $1000. You could also be for taking a job for less money (say you want more vacation time). Say this new job represents a $3000 decrease in your pay.

You can still get the plasma TV, as long as you're for cutting $4000 out of your monthly budget. $3000 of cuts to account for the decrease in pay, and $1000 in cuts to pay for the Plasma TV. Maybe you figure I don't need a car, I'll trade it in for a motorbike and save on gas. Maybe you figure I don't need a cell phone. Maybe you figure you don't need to eat out as much. Maybe you figure you don't need a vacation this year. Whatever.

Same thing with the Iraq war. Just because people want to see lower taxes doesn't mean they have to give up spending on the war. Perhaps they want to cut wasteful spending in other government agencies before they consider halting the war spending.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by dmek25

saden, have you started drinking the kool aid? staying in Iraq for 100 years shouldn't even be an option. and im interested to hear what people think would happen, if we do pull out? and the comment about wiping terrorists off the face of the earth is down right brutal. i don't care if we fight the gazillion years in Iraq, there will always be terrorists. i think you have done a 180 degree turn in your thinking

I get the feeling saden was being playful, but I'm not. I agree with what he wrote, even if he doesn't.

Those who want to pull out of Iraq immediately think way too selfishly about the interests of the United States. Picture this: You hate your American government, it's a dictatorship and oppressive. A foreign military storms into the United States, defeats our military handily to the point where our own troops are deserting the fight, marches into our capital, overthrows our government, destroys our infrastucture so we have little electicity and poor quality drinking water, disrupts our security forces and police from doing their jobs. Got that picture in your head?

Now, imagine that even though you didn't like your American government that was just overthrown, you're more fearful now for your family's safety because there is no American police force, no American military, only this foreign force present in your streets. There's no order, they don't answer to you or your government, and you're not clear what the laws are and what the consequences are for certain actions. You're more fearful for you family's life than when your oppressive American government was in control. You need electricity, and there's nobody to complain to.

So a group of Americans, some loyal to the American regime that was just forced out, and some just flat out tired of the deplorable conditions, decide to take up arms against these foreign invaders. Fighting breaks out in streets in your neighborhood. Bombs go off at the supermarket, where you're simply trying to buy food for your family. The American uprising grows stronger, causing more fighting, and fighters from Canada and Mexico begin coming across the border to fight the foreign regime, many of whom shared radical religious beliefs with the former American dictator. The fight grows stronger and more intense.

You are scared, you are tired, and you're clamoring for life to return to normal. You recognize that the American uprising, this American insurgency, is not equipped to take on this powerful foreign regime, so they hide, and they plant bombs, but they never fight the foreign regime in a full-on attack. The foreign regime is forcing them to operate covertly. The foreign regime sends in a surge of troops, and helps to quell some of the violence, and things begin getting better, and your streets start to feel safer, and you start to feel hopeful that the worst is behind you.

Now, imagine that with this uprising in place, imagine that this foreign regime just leaves. You have no local police force worth a darn, no American military capable of maintaining security. How do you feel now? How do you feel as the radical American fighters come out of the woodwork, no longer suppressed by the presence of a powerful foreign military. They fight your pathetic excuse for an American military and kill what little police you have.

Are you scared? Is your life any better?

You may find fault with the reasons we went to Iraq, and I can't say I can disagree with that. And you may question the logic behind trying to fight terrorists in this manner, and I can't say I have much of an argument.

But the fact is we fucked up the lives of many, many innocent Iraqis. We CANNOT abandon them. We owe it to them to restore order. From a moral standpoint, I have a major problem with the United States leaving the Iraqi people in a worse situation than the one they had with Saddam in charge. We must see to it that they achieve a democratic society with the ability to at least maintain some semblance of security, at least as much as is possible in today's Middle East.

Morally, we owe them that much. On top of it, we stand to gain a permanent strategic military presence in the middle of that region. From a strategic defense standpoint against ICBMs and other long-range nuclear weapons, it is important to have a base established there capable of shooting down any Iranian ICBMs before they can threaten Europe, Asia, Israel, or the United States.

But nevermind the military strategy. From a moral standpoint, I cannot stomach abandoning the Iraqi people after all we've done to them.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I get the feeling saden was being playful, but I'm not. I agree with what he wrote, even if he doesn't.

Those who want to pull out of Iraq immediately think way too selfishly about the interests of the United States. Picture this: You hate your American government, it's a dictatorship and oppressive. A foreign military storms into the United States, defeats our military handily to the point where our own troops are deserting the fight, marches into our capital, overthrows our government, destroys our infrastucture so we have little electicity and poor quality drinking water, disrupts our security forces and police from doing their jobs. Got that picture in your head?

Now, imagine that even though you didn't like your American government that was just overthrown, you're more fearful now for your family's safety because there is no American police force, no American military, only this foreign force present in your streets. There's no order, they don't answer to you or your government, and you're not clear what the laws are and what the consequences are for certain actions. You're more fearful for you family's life than when your oppressive American government was in control. You need electricity, and there's nobody to complain to.

So a group of Americans, some loyal to the American regime that was just forced out, and some just flat out tired of the deplorable conditions, decide to take up arms against these foreign invaders. Fighting breaks out in streets in your neighborhood. Bombs go off at the supermarket, where you're simply trying to buy food for your family. The American uprising grows stronger, causing more fighting, and fighters from Canada and Mexico begin coming across the border to fight the foreign regime, many of whom shared radical religious beliefs with the former American dictator. The fight grows stronger and more intense.

You are scared, you are tired, and you're clamoring for life to return to normal. You recognize that the American uprising, this American insurgency, is not equipped to take on this powerful foreign regime, so they hide, and they plant bombs, but they never fight the foreign regime in a full-on attack. The foreign regime is forcing them to operate covertly. The foreign regime sends in a surge of troops, and helps to quell some of the violence, and things begin getting better, and your streets start to feel safer, and you start to feel hopeful that the worst is behind you.

Now, imagine that with this uprising in place, imagine that this foreign regime just leaves. You have no local police force worth a darn, no American military capable of maintaining security. How do you feel now? How do you feel as the radical American fighters come out of the woodwork, no longer suppressed by the presence of a powerful foreign military. They fight your pathetic excuse for an American military and kill what little police you have.

Are you scared? Is your life any better?

You may find fault with the reasons we went to Iraq, and I can't say I can disagree with that. And you may question the logic behind trying to fight terrorists in this manner, and I can't say I have much of an argument.

But the fact is we fucked up the lives of many, many innocent Iraqis. We CANNOT abandon them. We owe it to them to restore order. From a moral standpoint, I have a major problem with the United States leaving the Iraqi people in a worse situation than the one they had with Saddam in charge. We must see to it that they achieve a democratic society with the ability to at least maintain some semblance of security, at least as much as is possible in today's Middle East.

Morally, we owe them that much. On top of it, we stand to gain a permanent strategic military presence in the middle of that region. From a strategic defense standpoint against ICBMs and other long-range nuclear weapons, it is important to have a base established there capable of shooting down any Iranian ICBMs before they can threaten Europe, Asia, Israel, or the United States.

But nevermind the military strategy. From a moral standpoint, I cannot stomach abandoning the Iraqi people after all we've done to them.

gotta say i agree with that pretty strongly.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

Well, you've certainly got the talking points down. Obviously I have sharp ideological differences with you and I just cannot help thinking about late 19th century politics when I start hearing buzzwords like "confiscation and wealth redistribution" since those were the same arguments that helped topple the Reconstruction project (cf. Heather Cox Richardson, The Death of Reconstruction). Like those Gilded Age politicians you ignore structural inequality and effectively say that the wealthy have money because they are worthy and the poor do not because they are lazy and unworthy. More importantly, I think you oversimplify the argument by setting up the strawman of the 'tax and spend' liberal boogyman.

First, I agree with you, we do have sharp ideological differences. However, IMO even though we have these differences it is important to have the discussion even though neither of our minds will be changed.

My post has nothing to do with "talking points", I didn't search Hannity or Rush's websites, the RNC or anyone else's. Other than accuse me of using "talking points", then throw out the "buzz-word" implication, you haven't put forward any accurate or logical dispute to what I said.

I understand structural inequalities and I would argue that we are not in 1888, but 2008 and while not perfect, I think our government has done a better job than most in putting programs in place to address that. Our tax structure is already progressive, it certainly doesn't need to become confiscatory.

Let me be clear. I don't consider $ 250-300K yr. for a family "wealthy". If one spouse or the primary breadwinner in a family with this level of income lost his/her job that family would be in trouble. If a person puts in the work, makes good decisions, and the necessary sacrifices, and that person is rewarded with material wealth they should not feel guilty or be the object of ridicule (as the "greedy" or "wealthy"). If people are poor because they didn't take advantage of educational opportunities, or government programs available, or repeatedly made bad decisons regarding having children or with drugs/alcohol, their situation is their own fault.

I'm also not setting up any "tax and spend boogeyman". I didn't mention the appropriations of tax dollars only the principles behind their collection. As far as I'm concerned, the Bush Administration has been as bad or worse than any Democrat or Democrat controlled Congress when it comes to increasing the scope and size of government.

Here's some interesting info:
Where do these two points come from?
1) Establish a heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
2) Abolish all rights of inheritance (Death Tax)
Answer: Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto, 1848.

In 1894 a 2% tax on those making over $ 4,000 / yr. was struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional. In 1896 and 1908 the Democratic Party was pushing for a constitutional ammendment to add the income tax, Republicans were against it. Even in the early 1900s, it was touted as a "tax on the rich" that wouldn't affect most Americans (OOOOPS!). Adjusted for todays dollars the income tax in 1913 was 1% on those making over $ 250K and 7% on those making over $ 6M. How far we've come. I'll get down now.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

2) I agree with Slingin' Sammy: you can't keep taxing the well-to-do just because they have the money. {Pssst...sounds like someone likes the Fair Tax idea}

You caught me, LOL!

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Philosophically, I'm right there with you. From a practical standpoint, a flat tax just won't work. Either our government would experience a drastic reduction in revenues, or way too many people would be thrust into poverty.

I agree. I would like to see us move to the Fair Tax. The Fair Tax would still be progressive in that those making more will spend more dollars, therefore paying the same or very close to the same percentage of the federal tax bill that they are paying now. I know there are some disagreements in the details of rate and who will actually be paying what portion of the federal tax bill, but the disagreements can be overcome (ref. to the FactCheck.org article). A new method of collecting federal taxes that reduces our tax code to something manageable, cuts the IRS to a fraction of its current size, taxes the underground economy, brings more businesses & jobs back to the U.S., and shuts down half of "K St." has my support.

[steveo395]

Originally Posted by dmek25

saden, have you started drinking the kool aid? staying in Iraq for 100 years shouldn't even be an option. and im interested to hear what people think would happen, if we do pull out? and the comment about wiping terrorists off the face of the earth is down right brutal. i don't care if we fight the gazillion years in Iraq, there will always be terrorists. i think you have done a 180 degree turn in your thinking

Iran will probably take over Iraq, and then nuke Israel. Ahmadinejad is totally insane and said he wanted to wipe Israel off the map, which would bring us right back into the war, but it will be much, much worse.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by steveo395

Iran will probably take over Iraq, and then nuke Israel. Ahmadinejad is totally insane and said he wanted to wipe Israel off the map, which would bring us right back into the war, but it will be much, much worse.

I wish we could just drop a nuke on the Iranians and just be done with it.

[That Guy]

you're adding so much value to the thread saden :/

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

I generally oppose starting wars because they are costly and often counterproductive and the American public has demonstrated that it lacks the intestinal fortitude to finish what it start (see Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq). I also believe our defense budget is, at least during peacetime, far too large. But, I also believe that you don't cause a mess, spend billions of dollars, lose thousands of troops, and lay American credibility (vis-a-vis our enemies, not Europe or college professor) on the line and simply walk away from the conflict and those who have stuck their necks out because it's tough or we are losing lives.

I am also pissed that I work 5 months out of the year for the government. I believe our taxes are WAY to high. I'd like to see cuts in taxes AND many government programs (including the defense budget). I don't think any of those ideas are contradictory.