My proposal for the upcoming election

[infidel]

I'd like to see a system put in place that if Bush is re-elected, and institutes the draft (which there is a HIGH likelihood of - consider the restaffing of draft boards, etc.), that the FIRST people to be drafted (perhaps the only people until they're exhausted) should be those who vote for him. Voting for him essentially means you agree with us focusing on invading and occupying countries that have nothing to do with the War on Terror - so, if a person feels that way, THEY should be the ones to be drafted to fight in those unnecessary wars. People who aren't ignorant enough to fall for the lies from Karl Rove shouldn't be the ones who get killed because of the rest of the gullible public.

[valvano]

and if kerry is elected:

the people who voted for him get their taxes raised first since they obviously feel that the govt knows better how to spend their money than they do...

(y)

[valvano]

that's a mature, well thought out reply.........

good job!

so if kerry wins how much you sending back to the us treasury since you don't really need all that money you make and you agree with kerry, the govt needs your money more than you need it (i am assuming you DO work and earn a paycheck)

(y)

[STANKY808]

that's a mature, well thought out reply.........

good job!

so if kerry wins how much you sending back to the us treasury since you don't really need all that money you make and you agree with kerry, the govt needs your money more than you need it (i am assuming you DO work and earn a paycheck)

(y)

A question - Why are taxes such a big boogey man to those on the "right"? I'm all for accountability, but there are ways to have it without gutting government programs. You know some of the most prosperous times have occured when government has spent big on things like infrastructure projects (interstae highways, large electrical generators, etc). The prevailing attitude seems to be that the government is nothing but a drain, yet a lot of things the private sector depends on for their businesses to be profitable are provided by the government. The bottom line is the way things are now, costs (for roads, ports, etc) are socialized and the benefits are privatized. We all pay and very few really benefit in a large way.

[Echewta]

valvano,

I'm assuming you make over 200,000 dollars a year and thats why you are so upset with Kerry's plan to bring back the Clinton like tax system to that bracket. I have yet to hear how anyone else, which is the majority of this country, is going to be taxed again.

The generic 80's cry of "dems will raise your taxes and spend like crazy" doesn't wash with those who might read the paper or watch the evening news. And if you fall for it, you deserve a president like Bush.

Bush is using the government like a credit card and has increased the size of government to the point where it sounds like a mythical democrat is in office.

Now please, go borrow money you don't have and spend it on things that aren't going to help you in the long run.

[sneakyimp]

it's true that kerry and bush BOTH have the exact same line about middle class tax cuts...NEITHER has described how they will pay for that tax cut. it is widely assumed that kerry will raise taxes on the higher income brackets and that bush will dramatically slash government spending.

i don't really see how we can cut enough government spending to pay for the war. do you?

[valvano]

A question - Why are taxes such a big boogey man to those on the "right"? I'm all for accountability, but there are ways to have it without gutting government programs. You know some of the most prosperous times have occured when government has spent big on things like infrastructure projects (interstae highways, large electrical generators, etc). The prevailing attitude seems to be that the government is nothing but a drain, yet a lot of things the private sector depends on for their businesses to be profitable are provided by the government. The bottom line is the way things are now, costs (for roads, ports, etc) are socialized and the benefits are privatized. We all pay and very few really benefit in a large way.

stanky808,

can you name 1 govt program that has actually met that goals as it was originally intended, stayed under the initial estimated budget, did not result in additional bureacracy, and has not been a failure?

let me get started for you..
amtrak? flop, wasted money, if there were a market for a nationalized rail system the private railroads would still be operating it
social security? a legalized pansy scheme designed to fail
welfare? that's working REAL well
medicare? how long before that pansy scheme collapses like social security
military? $200 hammers
agriculture buyouts? if the farmers cant make it in the free market, they need to find a new line of work

do i need to go on??

[valvano]

valvano,

I'm assuming you make over 200,000 dollars a year and thats why you are so upset with Kerry's plan to bring back the Clinton like tax system to that bracket. I have yet to hear how anyone else, which is the majority of this country, is going to be taxed again.

The generic 80's cry of "dems will raise your taxes and spend like crazy" doesn't wash with those who might read the paper or watch the evening news. And if you fall for it, you deserve a president like Bush.

Bush is using the government like a credit card and has increased the size of government to the point where it sounds like a mythical democrat is in office.

Now please, go borrow money you don't have and spend it on things that aren't going to help you in the long run.

if you HONESTLY believe that you will not be paying more in federal taxes under Kerry (I'm not just talking about income either), I have some prime ocean-bottom property you may be interested in..............

correct me if I am wrong, but in Kerry's 20 years in the senate he has NEVER seen a tax he didnt want to increase...

when was the last time he submitted a bill to lower taxes for somebody? anybody know????

[sneakyimp]

i'll ask it again. how are we going to pay for a $200 billion war? are we really going to cut $200 billion from domestic programs to fund a war abroad? i'm not sure i can see that happening.

and as for social security being a failure...tell that to all the retired people who live off it. you also seem to be ignoring the fact that the social security system helped pull us out of the great depression and part of it is the credit reporting system that helps monitor people's credit. it prevents all kinds of fraud.

And you also seem to be leaving out other important government programs...like the ones that provide us with Firemen, Police, roads, etc. Are those failures? If we have to cut $200 B from the budget, i GUARANTEE you they will be cut before our military gets cut.

[STANKY808]

stanky808,

can you name 1 govt program that has actually met that goals as it was originally intended, stayed under the initial estimated budget, did not result in additional bureacracy, and has not been a failure?

let me get started for you..
amtrak? flop, wasted money, if there were a market for a nationalized rail system the private railroads would still be operating it
social security? a legalized pansy scheme designed to fail
welfare? that's working REAL well
medicare? how long before that pansy scheme collapses like social security
military? $200 hammers
agriculture buyouts? if the farmers cant make it in the free market, they need to find a new line of work

do i need to go on??

I assume you mean a Ponzi scheme?

As far as your reply goes, I agree waste is bad and I think it can be eliminated.
The private sector has such a better record on coming in on budget? I can think of several instances where public money was spent on building stadiums/arenas by private companies and they are always late and over budget. $200 hammers? A rip-off, but who sold them to the government? A private company! They should never be allowed to have a government contract again.

And by the way, you never did address the electrical generators, roads and ports as government funded operations which enable profit making by the private sector. Or the fact the government spending on these projects had huge spin-off effects to the economy.

[Whois]

and if kerry is elected:

the people who voted for him get their taxes raised first since they obviously feel that the govt knows better how to spend their money than they do...

(y)

You hate America too, PUPPY KILLER!
:eek:

[infidel]

Most economists agree that there will have to be tax increases no matter who holds the next term in office. Difference will be which class of citizens will get the increase. Think we all know which echelon bush favors to protect.
"Read my lips", junior will be just like his dad.

[Whois]

Most economists agree that there will have to be tax increases no matter who holds the next term in office. Difference will be which class of citizens will get the increase. Think we all know which echelon bush favors to protect.
"Read my lips", junior will be just like his dad.

Reagan's deficit had to be paid for by someone...gee, us...go figure.

[valvano]

people,
we pay more than enough right now in taxes, the problem is spending,

our elected officials, both democrat and republican, are like heroin addicts when it comes to govt spending. they are addicted to that power, one of the most powerful tools that exists for a politician. the deficits you mention under reagan were not because we werent taxed enough, its that congress spent too much. and thats the case with most deficits produced by the fed govt.

the one biggest thing that can happen is that there be a const ammdnt requiring a true balanced budget, just as nearly all states must operated under. unfortunately, as the result of numerous years of ever expanding entitlement programs and govt programs, there would be a lot of whining and crying should a REAL budget axe come down on govt spending

we can all say dems are liberals whiners and republicans are nazis, but there is only 1 true difference between them. democrats have no problems with taxing and spending. republicans too have no problems with taxing and spending either, they just PRETEND to feel guilty for it............

:mad:

[Whois]

people,
we pay more than enough right now in taxes, the problem is spending,

our elected officials, both democrat and republican, are like heroin addicts when it comes to govt spending. they are addicted to that power, one of the most powerful tools that exists for a politician. the deficits you mention under reagan were not because we werent taxed enough, its that congress spent too much. and thats the case with most deficits produced by the fed govt.

the one biggest thing that can happen is that there be a const ammdnt requiring a true balanced budget, just as nearly all states must operated under. unfortunately, as the result of numerous years of ever expanding entitlement programs and govt programs, there would be a lot of whining and crying should a REAL budget axe come down on govt spending

we can all say dems are liberals whiners and republicans are nazis, but there is only 1 true difference between them. democrats have no problems with taxing and spending. republicans too have no problems with taxing and spending either, they just PRETEND to feel guilty for it............

:mad:

(y) (y) (y)

[Bob]

and if kerry is elected:

the people who voted for him get their taxes raised first since they obviously feel that the govt knows better how to spend their money than they do...

(y)

drafted or taxes....drafted or taxes....drafted or taxes....yeah you know what, i'll live with taxes

stop voting with your wallets

[Whois]

drafted or taxes....drafted or taxes....drafted or taxes....yeah you know what, i'll live with taxes

stop voting with your wallets

You do realize that the idea of bringing back the draft was put forth by a Democrat, right?

[QueenAdrock]

and if kerry is elected:

the people who voted for him get their taxes raised first since they obviously feel that the govt knows better how to spend their money than they do...

(y)


I don't know how many fuckin' times I have to say it. Kerry proposes keeping the tax cuts for the middle and lower class, and rolling them back for the upper 2% of America, who have enough money for it ANYWAYS.

[valvano]

who are you to decide if somebody has enough money??

:confused:

[QueenAdrock]

$200,000 is more than enough money to have a house, food, family, car, extracurricular spending cash with money left over to buy stocks to get even more money. People who are middle class and lower class NEED their money to survive. Simply, people who have enough money to buy Hummers are also the people who have enough money to pay higher taxes. You'll never see an upper class person having higher taxes and having to suffer because of it. Unless by "suffer" you mean not being able to buy that extra timeshare you wanted.

[valvano]

$200,000 is more than enough money to have a house, food, family, car, extracurricular spending cash with money left over to buy stocks to get even more money. People who are middle class and lower class NEED their money to survive. Simply, people who have enough money to buy Hummers are also the people who have enough money to pay higher taxes. You'll never see an upper class person having higher taxes and having to suffer because of it. Unless by "suffer" you mean not being able to buy that extra timeshare you wanted.

so what incentive does somebody have to work hard and obtain the american dream if, based what you would like to see implemented, they would be punished for their hard work via high taxes???

do you not want to meet your full potential upon graduating from Terp Town? well, then you very well become of your robin hood mentality that you have.

i am glad you are comfortable in determining what "others" should have and making the decision as to what "they" need....

[Bob]

You do realize that the idea of bringing back the draft was put forth by a Democrat, right?

yep, and last i heard, kerry likes it too. i was just trying my very hardest to point out that there are evils bigger than motherfucking taxes, because i'm sick of hearing about them

[Whois]

yep, and last i heard, kerry likes it too. i was just trying my very hardest to point out that there are evils bigger than motherfucking taxes, because i'm sick of hearing about them

Ah, thanks...

[infidel]

so what incentive does somebody have to work hard and obtain the american dream if, based what you would like to see implemented, they would be punished for their hard work via high taxes???

I wouldn't necessarily say they are being "punished" if they have more than enough money.

Think about the higher taxes as helping others reach the American dream, give back a little of what you took instead of hording it.

[valvano]

I wouldn't necessarily say they are being "punished" if they have more than enough money.

Think about the higher taxes as helping others reach the American dream, give back a little of what you took instead of hording it.

so you think people who reach the american dream do so by taking it? hard work, sweat, investment, education, taking risk, trial and error, late nights, early mornings, etc have nothing to do with it????

boy, some college professor sure has fucked you train of thought up good......

and again, i ask, who the fuck are YOU to decide when somebody else has earned enough money and it is time to start taking it back from them??????? what gives you that right??????

[QueenAdrock]

so what incentive does somebody have to work hard and obtain the american dream if, based what you would like to see implemented, they would be punished for their hard work via high taxes???

do you not want to meet your full potential upon graduating from Terp Town? well, then you very well become of your robin hood mentality that you have.

i am glad you are comfortable in determining what "others" should have and making the decision as to what "they" need....

They don't get punished. They should feel happy that their taxes go towards better schools, better streets, police forces, etc. etc. Why is it such a pain in the ass to pay taxes? I work part time for a dentist and I pay for my college tuition, a car, gas, credit card bills, and a cell phone. And I STILL don't mind paying taxes. I don't see why rich yuppies with money to spare should care more than I do. Not only that, most of the upper-class people I know have no problem with paying taxes, either (and mind you, I live in one of the richest counties in the US). Boyfriend's father is a doctor, he's fine with taxes. He's voting for Kerry. He's willing to give up his tax break in order to pay for things we need.

Not only that, but they still have the reward of having tons of money. They have the reward of having a big house, nice car, great health insurance, everything else. They have surpluses of money, so don't worry. They'll still have much more money than the rest of the population, even with the extra taxes taken out, so there's no need for complaining.

[deita]

IF ____ IS ELECTED i hope the world doesn't go to hell :eek:

[Rich Cheney]

$200,000 is more than enough money to have a house, food, family, car, extracurricular spending cash with money left over to buy stocks to get even more money. People who are middle class and lower class NEED their money to survive. Simply, people who have enough money to buy Hummers are also the people who have enough money to pay higher taxes. You'll never see an upper class person having higher taxes and having to suffer because of it. Unless by "suffer" you mean not being able to buy that extra timeshare you wanted.

So by sacrificing my life and working my ass of to provide my family the better things in life I should be punished for it by paying higher taxes?

Yeah, OK.

[valvano]

They don't get punished. They should feel happy that their taxes go towards better schools, better streets, police forces, etc. etc. Why is it such a pain in the ass to pay taxes? I work part time for a dentist and I pay for my college tuition, a car, gas, credit card bills, and a cell phone. And I STILL don't mind paying taxes. I don't see why rich yuppies with money to spare should care more than I do.

Again, I ask you, at what point do you determine somebody had made enough money and they hav more than enough to spare? What give you that right? Did you learn that at UMD? And why do you use the term rich yuppies, its as though you find disgust in somebody who has humped their ass to live out the american dream? You find it greedy that somebody who has worked to build up their wealth is greedy that they want to hold on to it but its need greedy for the govt to try to take 30-40 or even 50% of that income back?

So if you want the govt to sock it to these "rich yuppies" as you call them, then want incentitive is there to suceed in life? Why instead don't we all just quit working, quit trying to better ourselves, and just wait by the mailbox for the 3rd of each month for our monthly govt check? That's what you seem to advocate, the "rich yuppies" have made enough, take it from them disperse it to the non producers in society.

Boy, you will be in a for a reality check when you graduate from the comforable surrounds of College Park...............................I'm glad for you now that you don't mind paying taxes, just you wait, just you wait...

[yeahwho]

so you think people who reach the american dream do so by taking it? hard work, sweat, investment, education, taking risk, trial and error, late nights, early mornings, etc have nothing to do with it????

boy, some college professor sure has fucked you train of thought up good......

and again, i ask, who the fuck are YOU to decide when somebody else has earned enough money and it is time to start taking it back from them??????? what gives you that right??????

The college professor who fucked my head up showed me responsibility comes with wealth. The free ride your looking for, doesn't exsist. You want to play, you will pay. You don't want to play, you will pay. Taxes are a way of life in the USA. The knowledge I gained from my "college professor" was to play the fucking game. For money obsessed assholes such as yourself, tax shelters, charitable causes, community involvement, do the right thing and don't bitch to the rest of us already doing it. How does your math work anyway? The folks making less than $40,000 a year should pick up the slack?

Until a flat tax comes along, somebody will always pay more than the next guy.

I worked my ass off for many years, while I did, I paid taxes. If your looking for a break, your nuts.

My college professor also taught me this, work smart, not hard.

[infidel]

I find it quite ironic that the people who think that taxes for the rich are too high call it a punishment while the common folk just accept it as a fact of life living in the US

[Destroyer]

You are wise young infidel.

[D_Raay]

Again, I ask you, at what point do you determine somebody had made enough money and they hav more than enough to spare? What give you that right? Did you learn that at UMD? And why do you use the term rich yuppies, its as though you find disgust in somebody who has humped their ass to live out the american dream? You find it greedy that somebody who has worked to build up their wealth is greedy that they want to hold on to it but its need greedy for the govt to try to take 30-40 or even 50% of that income back?

So if you want the govt to sock it to these "rich yuppies" as you call them, then want incentitive is there to suceed in life? Why instead don't we all just quit working, quit trying to better ourselves, and just wait by the mailbox for the 3rd of each month for our monthly govt check? That's what you seem to advocate, the "rich yuppies" have made enough, take it from them disperse it to the non producers in society.

Boy, you will be in a for a reality check when you graduate from the comforable surrounds of College Park...............................I'm glad for you now that you don't mind paying taxes, just you wait, just you wait...
Arguing for the sake of arguing once again. And straying from the point too. We are in a time of international crisis, who gives a fuck about some rich guys having to pay a little more in taxes!