Purpose Of Tea Party Is Clear But Obama Is Not Listening

[Trajan]

[

You see... a lot of 'tea partiers' and a lot of REPs and a lot of Conservatives support a flat tax system that brings back into the tax paying fold the ~50% that pay ZERO in income taxes... and is blind equal treatment across the board with zero exceptions

So the general principle of tax policy for a consensus of self described Tea Partiers is

To raise taxes on lower income Americans and lower taxes on higher income Americans.


...is that accurate? If not why not?

*ugh* argh*..I'd answer but..... I am busy trying to deconstruct that strawman......

 

[Dick Tuck]

Facts GT can not disprove...

Obama Spent More Than Every President COMBINED!

FOXNews.com - Obama Shatters Spending Record for First-Year Presidents

And then there's the deficit...

Budget 2011: Past Deficits vs. Obama’s Deficits in Pictures | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

And then there's the national debt...

Obama Added More to National Debt in First 19 Months Than All Presidents from Washington Through Reagan Combined, Says Gov?t Data | CNSnews.com

RealClearPolitics - When in Doubt, Obama Adds to Debt

The Obama Debt Monitor|Tracking the US National Debt through the Obama Administration (2009, 2010, 2011, 2012)

And then there's all the jobs lost since owebama took office...

White House: 3.6 Million Jobs Lost is “Quite Positive” | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

Obama Jobs Deficit Hits 7.7 Million and Climbing | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

And then there's some icing on the cake...

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

Warning: Debt Disaster Ahead-Defeat The Debt

So if GT still wants to play mister arrogant know it all and bull shit people here with some outlandish story about everything being sooo good under this charlatan POS radical socialist we have in the White House, then go for it. I just hope people here aren't buying into his line of pure horse shit.

We're in trouble. Deep, deep trouble. And much of the reason why is obama and his radical band of spend, spend, SPEND LIKE THE WIND liberals, period, end of story. What we need now is to get conservatives back in power to clean up the mess, cut spending, enact a fair tax, repeal owebama care, no more bail outs, etc., etc., etc..

How much should the government spend for general welfare? How much should we spend making sure the capitalism is able to survive, by keeping our financial system afloat? What kind of idiotic douche bag would claim that putting your political ass on the line to save our financial system is socialist?

 

[mudwhistle]

Last week all but two Republican Senators voted against a bill that cut taxes on small businesses.

Problem is it evolved more spending.

The spending needs to stop.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Last week all but two Republican Senators voted against a bill that cut taxes on small businesses.

Problem is it evolved more spending.

The spending needs to stop.

No it didn't.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

You see... a lot of 'tea partiers' and a lot of REPs and a lot of Conservatives support a flat tax system that brings back into the tax paying fold the ~50% that pay ZERO in income taxes... and is blind equal treatment across the board with zero exceptions

So the general principle of tax policy for a consensus of self described Tea Partiers is

To raise taxes on lower income Americans and lower taxes on higher income Americans.


...is that accurate? If not why not?

*ugh* argh*..I'd answer but..... I am busy trying to deconstruct that strawman......

The poster made the point that the flat tax would 'bring back into the fold' the 50% who don't now pay income tax (the number cited was 47% of households) so yes

1. the flat tax would raise taxes on lower income Americans, and

2. the flat tax lowers the higher progressive rates on higher income Americans, thus lowering their tax rate, so,

I was exactly correct to say that the poster's advocacy for the flat tax would effectively RAISE taxes on lower income Americans and LOWER taxes on higher income Americans.

 

[Cuyo]

and that 'platform' is found where exactly? can you link to it please?

undereducated masses?

Cut spending. Fine. That means fewer compliance officers enforcing enviornmental regulations. Cut spending. Fine. That means fewer mouths fed. Cause and effect, my man. Cause and effect.

If the masses had a broader background as to where the federal government benefits each citizen every day, fewer of them would want to saw off the limb upon which they stand.

we cannot keep spending what we are spending, this is a fact, its not a conspiracy.

Maybe the 'broader masses' are a little tired of paying for and being regulated by this ( and previous) gov. 's benefits...and they no longer see whats so 'beneficial' about it at the present cost especially...

environmental regulations?? Env. regs are enforced at the local level as well. There is a great deal more out there than the EPA and Fed Osha......

mouths fed?? explain please?

The only deficit you need to worry about is the trade deficit. About $800B per year last I checked. That is the deficit that's lowering the SOL of average citizens. Unfortunately, the same mechanisms that create that result also make the upper echelons of society extremely wealthy; And these are the people for whom the GOP advocates. The rest of you have just been tricked. Room, may I introduce you to the elephant.

The deficits were much, much higher (as % of GDP of course) during the 1940s, and we got out of it - Not by gutting the government and throwing consumers to the wolves, but by investing in our country. We could do it again, but get real folks, the owners of this country don't want that. They will say *anything*, marxist this, socialism that, to get you on their side.

 

[mudwhistle]

Absolutely right! What's the Tea Party's position on the social issues? If it's all about spending, where was the Tea Party when the Bush administration ran a budget surplus into a record deficit? Why did the Tea Party suddenly spring to life six weeks after President Obama was inaugurated?

Radical right wing politics which serves only the richest Americans but appeals to the social Conservatives and politically undereducated masses. Tea Party equals more outsourced jobs, fewer environmental safeguards, fewer services to those who need them most and an erosion of personal liberty.

and that 'platform' is found where exactly? can you link to it please?

undereducated masses?

Cut spending. Fine. That means fewer compliance officers enforcing enviornmental regulations. Cut spending. Fine. That means fewer mouths fed. Cause and effect, my man. Cause and effect.

If the masses had a broader background as to where the federal government benefits each citizen every day, fewer of them would want to saw off the limb upon which they stand.

I suggest they start with every bill Obama has signed as President.

That should trim about 3 trillion off the budget this year.

 

[mudwhistle]

[

You see... a lot of 'tea partiers' and a lot of REPs and a lot of Conservatives support a flat tax system that brings back into the tax paying fold the ~50% that pay ZERO in income taxes... and is blind equal treatment across the board with zero exceptions

So the general principle of tax policy for a consensus of self described Tea Partiers is

To raise taxes on lower income Americans and lower taxes on higher income Americans.


...is that accurate? If not why not?

Well...he's already screwing everyone with 8 new taxes. Taxes on cigarettes and booze...that sort of thing so he's already instituted a flat tax on us.

A flat tax will just be a more fair tax. Fewer people will be able to go around the tax code. Money will be taken out of our checks before we even see it.

But then you already knew that.

 

[gautama]

Mudwhistle:

"Purpose Of Tea Party Is Clear But Obama Is Not Listening."

Obami Salaami, THE EXPOSED MONUMENTAL FRAUD is too busy listening to the voices wafting into him from his crazed COMMIE Mommy, and his falling down drunk COMMIE daddy, as well as putting to work the lessons learned from the Black Racist Whackjob Wright who in Obami's own words is his "pastor, friend, and mentor".

 

[Charles_Main]

In a town hall meeting yesterday Obama said "The challenge of the Tea Party is to identify what would you do".

Well they have Barry....but you ain't listening.

It's not good enough to claim your opposition doesn't have a clear message. It helps if you listen to that message in the first place.

Since it's inception the Tea Party movement has been about spending. Too much of it. That pretty obvious. The Tea Party is against all of the spending that's been going on. Obama admits now that he has been spending too much but he's now asking what would we cut. Then he gives us a list of programs that he had nothing to do with....that has been in place for decades. This is a dishonest response because what the Tea Party fears is all of the "NEW" spending that is going on. Not the "OLD" spending.

What the Tea Party fears is "NEW" taxes...not "OLD" taxes. A proposed Value Added Tax (VAT). To pay off all of the old and new spending the Obama administration is saying now that everything is on the table including instituting a new tax that will only grow over time. A tax that will be added to every product and service at every level in our economy...from the manufacturer to the consumer.

The second thing Tea Party members fear is that all of the new spending is forcing the government to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire. The panic that many Democrats show is obvious because now they're proposing letting them stay in place....but not for the rich.

This points out another lie. The slogan "Tax-cuts for the rich" is really a tax-cut for everyone. It also shows the weakness in their progressive ideology. If these tax-cuts caused the recession why in the hell would you even consider leaving any of them in place?

The Tea Party has been painted as racist, homophobes, terrorists, you name it. What they are is just a group of concerned Americans that see a government that is bent on destroying our way of life. Ether Democrats can't show them any future benefits of their failed policies or there aren't any. That is the reason the Tea Party was formed. But in all honesty if Obama refuses to listen what's the point of answering his question.

 

[snjmom]

The deficits were much, much higher (as % of GDP of course) during the 1940s, and we got out of it - Not by gutting the government and throwing consumers to the wolves, but by investing in our country. We could do it again, but get real folks, the owners of this country don't want that. They will say *anything*, marxist this, socialism that, to get you on their side.

We also conveniently had trading partners that had just gotten their industrial base decimated. We have just the opposite situation now.

This points out another lie. The slogan "Tax-cuts for the rich" is really a tax-cut for everyone. It also shows the weakness in their progressive ideology. If these tax-cuts caused the recession why in the hell would you even consider leaving any of them in place?

If you look closer, you will see that the tax cuts created a deficit, not the recession. The recession doesn't really hit till 2007. We were converting tax revenues to deficits way before the recession hit.

What the Tea Party fears is "NEW" taxes...not "OLD" taxes. A proposed Value Added Tax (VAT). To pay off all of the old and new spending the Obama administration is saying now that everything is on the table including instituting a new tax that will only grow over time. A tax that will be added to every product and service at every level in our economy...from the manufacturer to the consumer.

It's a pretty egalitarian way to pay for statehood. Would you oppose it if it replaced the income and property tax?

 

[Annie]

In a town hall meeting yesterday Obama said "The challenge of the Tea Party is to identify what would you do".

Well they have Barry....but you ain't listening.

It's not good enough to claim your opposition doesn't have a clear message. It helps if you listen to that message in the first place.

Since it's inception the Tea Party movement has been about spending. Too much of it. That pretty obvious. The Tea Party is against all of the spending that's been going on. Obama admits now that he has been spending too much but he's now asking what would we cut. Then he gives us a list of programs that he had nothing to do with....that has been in place for decades. This is a dishonest response because what the Tea Party fears is all of the "NEW" spending that is going on. Not the "OLD" spending.

What the Tea Party fears is "NEW" taxes...not "OLD" taxes. A proposed Value Added Tax (VAT). To pay off all of the old and new spending the Obama administration is saying now that everything is on the table including instituting a new tax that will only grow over time. A tax that will be added to every product and service at every level in our economy...from the manufacturer to the consumer.

The second thing Tea Party members fear is that all of the new spending is forcing the government to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire. The panic that many Democrats show is obvious because now they're proposing letting them stay in place....but not for the rich.

This points out another lie. The slogan "Tax-cuts for the rich" is really a tax-cut for everyone. It also shows the weakness in their progressive ideology. If these tax-cuts caused the recession why in the hell would you even consider leaving any of them in place?

The Tea Party has been painted as racist, homophobes, terrorists, you name it. What they are is just a group of concerned Americans that see a government that is bent on destroying our way of life. Ether Democrats can't show them any future benefits of their failed policies or there aren't any. That is the reason the Tea Party was formed. But in all honesty if Obama refuses to listen what's the point of answering his question.

Perhaps this would help him understand?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mfMG66LtVU]YouTube - School House Rocks - Tyrannosaurus Debt[/ame]

 

[CountofTuscany]

I find it interesting that Obama talks about reducing debt yet every move he makes increases it. Obama has proven himself to be a shifty smooth talker and nothing else.

 

[Cuyo]

The deficits were much, much higher (as % of GDP of course) during the 1940s, and we got out of it - Not by gutting the government and throwing consumers to the wolves, but by investing in our country. We could do it again, but get real folks, the owners of this country don't want that. They will say *anything*, marxist this, socialism that, to get you on their side.

We also conveniently had trading partners that had just gotten their industrial base decimated. We have just the opposite situation now.

I don't think decimated is the right word, but I get the point.

I wouldn't say we have the opposite situation now, at least not to nearly the same magnitude. European and Asian manufacturing were obliterated during that time. Ours is not obliterated, it's just not being used. We have facilities and hungry workers standing by, they're just not being used because of the trade deficit.

There are really only 2 real ways I can see to change this. One would be to obtain patents to new technologies so only we can produce the new products; The other is to change trade deals or outsourcing regulations to make our own manufacturing competitive again for already existing products.

I will throw a bone to McCain here; He had said something on the campaign trail to the tune of the government offering a bounty of sorts (Call it $250M, I don't remember the number) to the person who comes up with suitable battery technology for electric cars. I support that. That's one way the government can intervene and "Turn every garage in the country into a battery lab," to incentivise study and get some lucky chum to come up with the right concoction. The other would be a giant Manhattan project-style government lab with the monetary and intellectual resources to come up with these technologies.

But there's no reason we can't make a profit having Americans sew tee-shirts and paint toys for $15 an hour, other than the fact that it's more profitable for company executives to have this done overseas. Again, the owners of this country don't want that. They want a flooded labor pool so Wal-Mart and McDonalds can retain a workforce prepared to work for peanuts. "Free Trade" is a win-win for uber wealthy. Having that word "Free" in there helps garner support from people who don't realize they're voting against their own best interests.

 

[Cuyo]

I find it interesting that Obama talks about reducing debt yet every move he makes increases it. Obama has proven himself to be a shifty smooth talker and nothing else.

Record deficits were inevitable. It doesn't matter which suit was in the White House. We would have record deficit and record debt right now no matter who had won. The deficit is far, far beyond the amount of spending over which POTUS has control.

 

[parentrap]

Tea party advocates are mostly lunatics.


THANK GOD OBAMA IS NOT LISTENING !

 

[CountofTuscany]

I find it interesting that Obama talks about reducing debt yet every move he makes increases it. Obama has proven himself to be a shifty smooth talker and nothing else.

Record deficits were inevitable. It doesn't matter which suit was in the White House. We would have record deficit and record debt right now no matter who had won. The deficit is far, far beyond the amount of spending over which POTUS has control.

You don't introduce a costly National Healthcare plan during a recession. You allocate the full funding of a near trillion dollar stimulus package to economic recovery, not pet pork projects. You decrease sepnding on wars that shouldn't be, not increase it. Take a page from Roosevelts book. Create jobs, pay people, but have them working to rebuild the infrastructure. We need to rethink how we work. At best Obama has saved a few jobs though taxpayer based funding. What happens when that funding runs out? He's done nothing to stimulate new jobs. He's only added to a tax burden.