11 Facts About Obamacare That No Conservative Knows About, Cares About, Or Will Read

[dblack]

You can't have it both ways, "dude".

Either fess up and admit that the mandate is a tax and suffer the consequences, come election day.....

OR insist that it is NOT a tax and repeal it yourselves before we do in November.

Its a tax penalty.

It's a tax, not a penalty. If you don't have children, you pay a higher tax, than of you did, is that a penalty?
If you don't have a mortgage and can't write off the interest, is that a penalty?

A penalty is only issued if you do not pay your taxes on time. If you have ever received a bill from the IRS, it includes the word penalty on their bill.

It's an abuse of the power to tax. Where and when did we decide it was ok to use the taxation power as a means of arbitrarily rewarding and punishing people?

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Its a tax penalty.

It's a tax, not a penalty. If you don't have children, you pay a higher tax, than of you did, is that a penalty?
If you don't have a mortgage and can't write off the interest, is that a penalty?

A penalty is only issued if you do not pay your taxes on time. If you have ever received a bill from the IRS, it includes the word penalty on their bill.

It's an abuse of the power to tax. Where and when did we decide it was ok to use the taxation power as a means of arbitrarily rewarding and punishing people?

When we started using our tax dollars to pay for:

-War
-Oil subsidies
-Farm subsidies
-Corporate loopholes
-Small Business incentives

The list goes on and on. I love how indignant Conservatives get about where tax money goes to, but think Liberals shouldn't be allowed to demand a say in it.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Ah yes..."THE GREATER GOOD"!

Here's the thing, Conserva...I "DO" mind paying higher taxes when I pay those taxes to a bloated, inefficient entity that wastes most of the money that I give them...I actually mind that a whole bunch. I'm one of those people that gets annoyed when people like you demand that we ALL pay more for "THE GREATER GOOD". I already pay enough in taxes. You want to have more money for "THE GREATER GOOD"? Tell the idiots in Washington to stop wasting the money I "DO" send them.

That's fine, buddy. You're allowed to not want to help out your fellow man. You're allowed to think about life selfishly. You're allowed to think you pay enough. That's fine. This is a system where if your guy wins, he'll do the shit you want him to do. If my guy wins, he'll do that shit.

I mean...are you mad, bro?

That post right there, Conserva...is why so many people really dislike progressives. I tell you that I'm angry that my government wastes the tax dollars that I send them and you accuse me of being selfish and not wanting to help out my fellow man.

You still don't get it, and you likely NEVER will. You still think in your dumb little Conservative brain that Liberals love to take people's money. That we LOVE when tax dollars get wasted. You are being selfish and unwilling to help your fellow man if you'd cut entitlements but not Defense. If you'd cut entitlements before raising the tax rates on the rich to levels they were paying not 20 years ago, you're being selfish.

Here's the thing, I'm not going to let Conservatives make ME feel about MY philosophy on taxation, and I encourage every other Progressive to the same thing. I'm tired of being told I'm the one with the mental disorder since I don't inherently and automatically distrust the government. That's paranoia. The kind of paranoia that when fostered and left to grow can lead to movements like the Tea Party, which has CRIPPLED our legislation.

I want MY tax dollars to stop paying for wars before it pays for medicine. I don't care how "hippie-dippy" that makes me sound. I don't care what idiotic insults you or the Right Propaganda Machine spins at my cause. I'm through negotiating with fiscal and legislative terrorists, and if Obama does win a second term, I think you'll see he's reached that point too.

And if you think the independent voter isn't going to start seeing the Tea Baggers for what they are and vote them out when they do, you're gravely mistaken.

 

[dblack]

It's a tax, not a penalty. If you don't have children, you pay a higher tax, than of you did, is that a penalty?
If you don't have a mortgage and can't write off the interest, is that a penalty?

A penalty is only issued if you do not pay your taxes on time. If you have ever received a bill from the IRS, it includes the word penalty on their bill.

It's an abuse of the power to tax. Where and when did we decide it was ok to use the taxation power as a means of arbitrarily rewarding and punishing people?

When we started using our tax dollars to pay for:

-War
-Oil subsidies
-Farm subsidies
-Corporate loopholes
-Small Business incentives

The list goes on and on. I love how indignant Conservatives get about where tax money goes to, but think Liberals shouldn't be allowed to demand a say in it.

With the exception war (but only when declared by Congress and actually in defense of the nation) all of those are examples of abuse of the taxation power. Do you have any interest in discussing the issue outside of partisan tit-for-tat?

 

[ConservaDerrps]

It's an abuse of the power to tax. Where and when did we decide it was ok to use the taxation power as a means of arbitrarily rewarding and punishing people?

When we started using our tax dollars to pay for:

-War
-Oil subsidies
-Farm subsidies
-Corporate loopholes
-Small Business incentives

The list goes on and on. I love how indignant Conservatives get about where tax money goes to, but think Liberals shouldn't be allowed to demand a say in it.

With the exception war (but only when declared by Congress and actually in defense of the nation) all of those are examples of abuse of the taxation power. Do you have any interest in discussing the issue outside of partisan tit-for-tat?

Absolutely. So you're saying you'd be totally okay with closing all the corporate loopholes, ending oil and farm subsidies and closing all the small business loopholes as well, since they're abuses of taxation power?

 

[dblack]

When we started using our tax dollars to pay for:

-War
-Oil subsidies
-Farm subsidies
-Corporate loopholes
-Small Business incentives

The list goes on and on. I love how indignant Conservatives get about where tax money goes to, but think Liberals shouldn't be allowed to demand a say in it.

With the exception war (but only when declared by Congress and actually in defense of the nation) all of those are examples of abuse of the taxation power. Do you have any interest in discussing the issue outside of partisan tit-for-tat?

Absolutely. So you're saying you'd be totally okay with closing all the corporate loopholes, ending oil and farm subsidies and closing all the small business loopholes as well, since they're abuses of taxation power?

I'd like to see a constitutional amendment banning the practice at all levels of government. It's a gross violation of equal protection.

 

[dblack]

With the exception war (but only when declared by Congress and actually in defense of the nation) all of those are examples of abuse of the taxation power. Do you have any interest in discussing the issue outside of partisan tit-for-tat?

Absolutely. So you're saying you'd be totally okay with closing all the corporate loopholes, ending oil and farm subsidies and closing all the small business loopholes as well, since they're abuses of taxation power?

I'd like to see a constitutional amendment banning the practice at all levels of government. It's a gross violation of equal protection.

I'd include in this all income tax deductions that aren't directly involved in calculating net income.

 

[code1211]

So what if I can't afford 6.3% of My income? I make over 29,000 and have a Family of 4. We currently have no Coverage and struggle to make payments on all our bills each month.

So tell me how Obama Care is going to help me come up with 6.3% of my income to pay for Insurance please.

Did you not read about the $4000 in tax credits to help you afford health care coverage?

So, why are we jumping through all these hoops? Half a billion redirected from from medicare, an extra trillion over ten years in taxes and everyone who is already paying premiums, continue to pay them.

What about this creates savings?

 

[Oldstyle]

That's fine, buddy. You're allowed to not want to help out your fellow man. You're allowed to think about life selfishly. You're allowed to think you pay enough. That's fine. This is a system where if your guy wins, he'll do the shit you want him to do. If my guy wins, he'll do that shit.

I mean...are you mad, bro?

That post right there, Conserva...is why so many people really dislike progressives. I tell you that I'm angry that my government wastes the tax dollars that I send them and you accuse me of being selfish and not wanting to help out my fellow man.

You still don't get it, and you likely NEVER will. You still think in your dumb little Conservative brain that Liberals love to take people's money. That we LOVE when tax dollars get wasted. You are being selfish and unwilling to help your fellow man if you'd cut entitlements but not Defense. If you'd cut entitlements before raising the tax rates on the rich to levels they were paying not 20 years ago, you're being selfish.

Here's the thing, I'm not going to let Conservatives make ME feel about MY philosophy on taxation, and I encourage every other Progressive to the same thing. I'm tired of being told I'm the one with the mental disorder since I don't inherently and automatically distrust the government. That's paranoia. The kind of paranoia that when fostered and left to grow can lead to movements like the Tea Party, which has CRIPPLED our legislation.

I want MY tax dollars to stop paying for wars before it pays for medicine. I don't care how "hippie-dippy" that makes me sound. I don't care what idiotic insults you or the Right Propaganda Machine spins at my cause. I'm through negotiating with fiscal and legislative terrorists, and if Obama does win a second term, I think you'll see he's reached that point too.

And if you think the independent voter isn't going to start seeing the Tea Baggers for what they are and vote them out when they do, you're gravely mistaken.

And what IS the Tea Party? Despite attempts by progressives like yourself to demonize them, the truth is the vast majority of the Tea Party is made up of ordinary Americans who are simply fed up with seeing their hard earned money wasted by a government that's broken. How is it that THAT makes them into "fiscal and legislative terrorists"? Because they won't rubber stamp more spending? That's idiotic!

As for "my" selfishness? First of all if you go back and read my responses to HOW cuts should be made to government you'll find that I've repeatedly advocated ACROSS THE BOARD CUTS INCLUDING THE MILITARY! I don't think one part of the government is functional and others are not....I think that ALL of government is inherently wasteful and inefficient and the it ALL needs to be put on a revenue diet.

As for the tax rate on the wealthy? I have zero problem with fixing the tax structure so that there are fewer loop holes through which wealthy people can escape paying taxes. That being said however...I DO have a problem with the notion put forth by people like you that we can continue to cover the costs of layer upon layer of unfunded entitlement programs by simply taking more and more money from the wealthy. My problem isn't based on whether or not that is "fair"...it's based on simple arithmetic. You could raise the tax rate on the wealthy to 100% and it wouldn't come CLOSE to covering the cost of the entitlement programs we've put in place going forward so those programs will necessarily have to be paid for by the Middle Class as well. But you won't admit THAT...will you, Conserva?

 

[hortysir]

I already did. But since you got to post from a Right Wing site, you can read this:

Infographic: Obamacare Is a Tax Cut for Middle-Class Families

PolitiFact | Limbaugh, GOP have it wrong: Health care law is not the largest tax increase ever

Okay, I clicked the Politifact link.
It was addressing a remark by Tub-o-Limbaw that the mandate was the largest tax increase in history.
No one here has made that ridiculous claim.
Only that it IS a tax increase.

And that is supported in your link:

While the health care law certainly is, on the whole, a tax increase, it’s not the largest in American history -- and as such -- cannot be the largest in the history of the world. (Luckily, there's enough U.S.-based research that we don't have to explore the tax increases of the Roman Empire, adjusted for inflation.)

Okay, we can call it a tax increase. That's fine by me, actually. I realized that I really don't give a **** about paying higher taxes if it's for the greater good.

So...yeah.

And I wouldn't have a problem paying a little more in taxes if i thought it would go towards our debt/deficit and if it would save my grandkids from having to pay a LOT more.

But we both know that when our government draws more revenue, they only spend and borrow even more.

 

[JagOnDaRoad]

Insurance is a gamble, usually a good bet. But to mandate that we buy it...it just makes no sense. Will they mandate that we play slots to earn our retirement? But I digress. We've had several "radio" conversations here lately, and among the most disturbing considerations is how Gov't- all of us-will decide how to manage costs. Will we restrict access, and allow less needed individuals to go ahead and pass on? Will we mandate behavior control, forcing the obese to diet, forcing everyone into daily exercise regiments, forcing people into the house on hot days, cold days? What other wild ideas will a group of overpaid bureaucrats come up with? Look, Obamacare is government run amock, period.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Absolutely. So you're saying you'd be totally okay with closing all the corporate loopholes, ending oil and farm subsidies and closing all the small business loopholes as well, since they're abuses of taxation power?

I'd like to see a constitutional amendment banning the practice at all levels of government. It's a gross violation of equal protection.

I'd include in this all income tax deductions that aren't directly involved in calculating net income.

So are you also in favor of getting rid of the mortgage deductions we all take too? I'm just trying to gauge what your idea of "fair" is, so we have a basis to jump off from.

I know this sounds harsh, but for me, I am more and more becoming apathetic to the rich. Not because I wish them ill, or think they deserve to be punished. I don't view taxes as a punishment. I view them as our acknowledgment that we all need to do our part to keep our country running. And yes, that means taxing those that are better off a little more than we tax everyone else. I'm not suggesting we go back to 90% tax rates, that's insane. But I'll address that more in your post.

 

[Oldstyle]

Insurance is a gamble, usually a good bet. But to mandate that we buy it...it just makes no sense. Will they mandate that we play slots to earn our retirement? But I digress. We've had several "radio" conversations here lately, and among the most disturbing considerations is how Gov't- all of us-will decide how to manage costs. Will we restrict access, and allow less needed individuals to go ahead and pass on? Will we mandate behavior control, forcing the obese to diet, forcing everyone into daily exercise regiments, forcing people into the house on hot days, cold days? What other wild ideas will a group of overpaid bureaucrats come up with? Look, Obamacare is government run amock, period.

The Lottery is used to pay for education...should the government be able to mandate that I buy lottery tickets? Should I be liable for a "penalty" if I choose not to do MY PART to help support education?

We've stepped out onto a very slippery slope with this Supreme Court ruling...all in the interest of protecting an awful piece of legislation that doesn't do what it was supposed to do in the first place...lower the costs of health care.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

And what IS the Tea Party? Despite attempts by progressives like yourself to demonize them, the truth is the vast majority of the Tea Party is made up of ordinary Americans who are simply fed up with seeing their hard earned money wasted by a government that's broken.

You just described virtually EVERY American. Why do you think Congress' approval rating is in the low teens, if not single digits? We ALL see how broken things are, but I genuinely feel like the rise of the Tea Party has meant only a further division in American politics. You have a group of people who came in proclaiming that they would not EVER compromise, and the number one goal of their party was to ensure that Obama fails.

How do you ensure Obama fails? Obstructionism. That's how. And I'm sorry, friends, but if you openly and willingly engage in obstructionism, you're harming the COUNTRY too. The right wing can try and pretend like Harry Reid is sitting on all these Republican-written jobs bills, but it doesn't take a lot of research to find out that most of them are simply deregulation bills.

And this may sound crazy to you, but there are a lot of people like me who think creating more pollution for the CHANCE of creating jobs (there's almost no money earmarked in these "jobs" bills for actual jobs) is just plain counter-productive. I'm tired of Americans being so focused on the almighty dollar that they dismiss climate science, economic science and just plain ol' history to chase that buck.

How is it that THAT makes them into "fiscal and legislative terrorists"? Because they won't rubber stamp more spending? That's idiotic!

It makes them fiscal and legislative terrorists because they don't get the entire point of our Congressional bodies. It's not to have one political group with all the cards, ramming their policies down the American people's throats, which is precisely what the Tea Party Congressional members have been doing, and the GOP establishment seems content to let them do it.

Again, you cannot call ANYTHING that they've done anything other than Obstructionism. And I know that you old guys will say, "Well, good cuz we don't want those crazy liberals spending all our money!" But that's bullshit and selfish and you KNOW if the Democrats were doing it you'd be flipping out. They've abused the filibuster to the point that bills that had an actual majority and should have passed the Senate to head to Obama's desk were killed.

NOWHERE in the Constitution does it say that you have to have 60 votes to pass a bill to the President. Only a simple majority. This is why they are terrorists. They have held the legislative process hostage rather than do what has been done FOREVER which is let the majority pass the bill, and if it's a clunker you either work to repeal or you work to amend.

Sorry dude, but this is what the Tea Party has done since coming into power. All this talk of the "divisive" nature of Obama really is just code for "The Tea Party doesn't like Liberals and Obama so they've admittedly slowed the recovery to make him look worse. It's disgusting and speaks VOLUMES of your party right now that you'd be proud of them for doing it.

As for "my" selfishness? First of all if you go back and read my responses to HOW cuts should be made to government you'll find that I've repeatedly advocated ACROSS THE BOARD CUTS INCLUDING THE MILITARY!

Then we agree. But how much do you think Defense should be cut? I advocate a full 20% reduction in funding for Defense. We've ignored the advice of a Republican President who was also a General when he warned of the expansion of the military industrial complex. There is no doubt in my mind that Cheney pushed Bush into Iraq so that Haliburton could get some FAT contracts out of it. That's war profiteering, and that's criminal, in my mind. So let's cut some of the shit out of Defense, because I'm sure even if we slash 20% out, we'll still have the biggest, most elite armed forces in the world.

I don't think one part of the government is functional and others are not....I think that ALL of government is inherently wasteful and inefficient and the it ALL needs to be put on a revenue diet.

That's where you and I just fundamentally disagree as a Conservative and a Progressive. I look at Government as having a unique ability to fill in the gaps left by the private sector when it comes to charity, and such. The bottom line is that I feel we ALL have a responsibility to help our fellow man, because we'd want help if we were in that position ourselves, right? And it's just good karma, man. You might call it being a "Good Christian." So entitlement programs are ways for us all to give a little that goes a long way.

The bottom line is that private charity is unreliable. It's great, and should certainly be encouraged, but depending on it to feed and clothe everyone is fantasy. Sure, maybe government can't do that either, but it sure has the ability to reach a lot more people than private charity does...unless Buffet and Gates just write a blank check and tell us to "have at."

As for the tax rate on the wealthy? I have zero problem with fixing the tax structure so that there are fewer loop holes through which wealthy people can escape paying taxes.

Another point we agree completely on. The reason that Tea Bagger people have no credibility on the tax thing is that they act as if rich people really do all pay taxes the way we do. Sure, they pay a big part of it, but they dodge and hide money EVERYWHERE. Look at Mitt. Dude has more money stashed away in one account in Europe than you or I will probably ever have.

That being said however...I DO have a problem with the notion put forth by people like you that we can continue to cover the costs of layer upon layer of unfunded entitlement programs by simply taking more and more money from the wealthy.
My problem isn't based on whether or not that is "fair"...it's based on simple arithmetic. You could raise the tax rate on the wealthy to 100% and it wouldn't come CLOSE to covering the cost of the entitlement programs we've put in place going forward so those programs will necessarily have to be paid for by the Middle Class as well. But you won't admit THAT...will you, Conserva?

Not more and more. Just the same amount, consistently. I don't want them paying more than 45% or so. I think that's fair, because even on that tax rate, they can make up all that shit by dunking some money into some investment opportunities that let them make money with their money. Basically, I'm not really worried about the rich. THEY'LL BE FINE. The only way these people fall from grace is if they're caught stealing, or if they murder someone (maybe). Seriously, unless by their own hand they **** up, they are almost bullet-proof. And you know that.

You know how I want to pay for the entitlement and social programs? Stop spending so much on bombs and guns, close some loopholes, and let's see where that leaves us. Is that such a bad thing?

 

[dblack]

I'd like to see a constitutional amendment banning the practice at all levels of government. It's a gross violation of equal protection.

I'd include in this all income tax deductions that aren't directly involved in calculating net income.

So are you also in favor of getting rid of the mortgage deductions we all take too? I'm just trying to gauge what your idea of "fair" is, so we have a basis to jump off from.

Yep. All means all.

I don't view taxes as a punishment.

That's not what taxes should be, but that is how we use them. Taxes should be used to finance government, not to reward or penalize people based on whether they do as they are told or not.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

I'd include in this all income tax deductions that aren't directly involved in calculating net income.

So are you also in favor of getting rid of the mortgage deductions we all take too? I'm just trying to gauge what your idea of "fair" is, so we have a basis to jump off from.

Yep. All means all.

I don't view taxes as a punishment.

That's not what taxes should be, but that is how we use them. Taxes should be used to finance government, not to reward or penalize people based on whether they do as they are told or not.

Freeloaders are bad though, right? that's why Conservatives hate welfare? Correct?

 

[dblack]

So are you also in favor of getting rid of the mortgage deductions we all take too? I'm just trying to gauge what your idea of "fair" is, so we have a basis to jump off from.

Yep. All means all.

I don't view taxes as a punishment.

That's not what taxes should be, but that is how we use them. Taxes should be used to finance government, not to reward or penalize people based on whether they do as they are told or not.

Freeloaders are bad though, right? that's why Conservatives hate welfare? Correct?

What?? Or, rather, what does this have to do with what we've been talking about?

 

[JagOnDaRoad]

I'd like to see a constitutional amendment banning the practice at all levels of government. It's a gross violation of equal protection.

I'd include in this all income tax deductions that aren't directly involved in calculating net income.

So are you also in favor of getting rid of the mortgage deductions we all take too? I'm just trying to gauge what your idea of "fair" is, so we have a basis to jump off from.

I know this sounds harsh, but for me, I am more and more becoming apathetic to the rich. Not because I wish them ill, or think they deserve to be punished. I don't view taxes as a punishment. I view them as our acknowledgment that we all need to do our part to keep our country running. And yes, that means taxing those that are better off a little more than we tax everyone else. I'm not suggesting we go back to 90% tax rates, that's insane. But I'll address that more in your post.

Rather than tax the rich more, how about writing tax code to incentivise them to pay those who make them rich more. The tax base would then expand, and the gov't would get its funding? Eh? I see the problem as not being the rich don't pay enough, but instead, there are not enough rich to pay. Why do hard working people not make more? Illegal immigration? Doing business with countries where the populace live below our standards of living. We really need to be working toward a higher standard of living here and throughout the world rather than trying to demoralize those who make it big.

That said, not every rich person earns his/her wealth at the expense of others. Why do these people need to be taxed harshly? Another example: If a person wins the lottery, takes home 160,000,000 AFTER millions in taxes, is this person's tax liability done? He/she has paid more than 99% will ever pay in their entire life....so do we tax him/her annually?

 

[dblack]

Rather than tax the rich more, how about writing tax code to incentivise them to pay those who make them rich more. ...

No. We grant Congress the power to tax us so they can fund government, not so they can manage our lives for us. No more 'incentives' or 'mandates'.

 

[Oldstyle]

And what IS the Tea Party? Despite attempts by progressives like yourself to demonize them, the truth is the vast majority of the Tea Party is made up of ordinary Americans who are simply fed up with seeing their hard earned money wasted by a government that's broken.

You just described virtually EVERY American. Why do you think Congress' approval rating is in the low teens, if not single digits? We ALL see how broken things are, but I genuinely feel like the rise of the Tea Party has meant only a further division in American politics. You have a group of people who came in proclaiming that they would not EVER compromise, and the number one goal of their party was to ensure that Obama fails.

How do you ensure Obama fails? Obstructionism. That's how. And I'm sorry, friends, but if you openly and willingly engage in obstructionism, you're harming the COUNTRY too. The right wing can try and pretend like Harry Reid is sitting on all these Republican-written jobs bills, but it doesn't take a lot of research to find out that most of them are simply deregulation bills.

And this may sound crazy to you, but there are a lot of people like me who think creating more pollution for the CHANCE of creating jobs (there's almost no money earmarked in these "jobs" bills for actual jobs) is just plain counter-productive. I'm tired of Americans being so focused on the almighty dollar that they dismiss climate science, economic science and just plain ol' history to chase that buck.

How is it that THAT makes them into "fiscal and legislative terrorists"? Because they won't rubber stamp more spending? That's idiotic!

It makes them fiscal and legislative terrorists because they don't get the entire point of our Congressional bodies. It's not to have one political group with all the cards, ramming their policies down the American people's throats, which is precisely what the Tea Party Congressional members have been doing, and the GOP establishment seems content to let them do it.

Again, you cannot call ANYTHING that they've done anything other than Obstructionism. And I know that you old guys will say, "Well, good cuz we don't want those crazy liberals spending all our money!" But that's bullshit and selfish and you KNOW if the Democrats were doing it you'd be flipping out. They've abused the filibuster to the point that bills that had an actual majority and should have passed the Senate to head to Obama's desk were killed.

NOWHERE in the Constitution does it say that you have to have 60 votes to pass a bill to the President. Only a simple majority. This is why they are terrorists. They have held the legislative process hostage rather than do what has been done FOREVER which is let the majority pass the bill, and if it's a clunker you either work to repeal or you work to amend.

Sorry dude, but this is what the Tea Party has done since coming into power. All this talk of the "divisive" nature of Obama really is just code for "The Tea Party doesn't like Liberals and Obama so they've admittedly slowed the recovery to make him look worse. It's disgusting and speaks VOLUMES of your party right now that you'd be proud of them for doing it.



Then we agree. But how much do you think Defense should be cut? I advocate a full 20% reduction in funding for Defense. We've ignored the advice of a Republican President who was also a General when he warned of the expansion of the military industrial complex. There is no doubt in my mind that Cheney pushed Bush into Iraq so that Haliburton could get some FAT contracts out of it. That's war profiteering, and that's criminal, in my mind. So let's cut some of the shit out of Defense, because I'm sure even if we slash 20% out, we'll still have the biggest, most elite armed forces in the world.



That's where you and I just fundamentally disagree as a Conservative and a Progressive. I look at Government as having a unique ability to fill in the gaps left by the private sector when it comes to charity, and such. The bottom line is that I feel we ALL have a responsibility to help our fellow man, because we'd want help if we were in that position ourselves, right? And it's just good karma, man. You might call it being a "Good Christian." So entitlement programs are ways for us all to give a little that goes a long way.

The bottom line is that private charity is unreliable. It's great, and should certainly be encouraged, but depending on it to feed and clothe everyone is fantasy. Sure, maybe government can't do that either, but it sure has the ability to reach a lot more people than private charity does...unless Buffet and Gates just write a blank check and tell us to "have at."

As for the tax rate on the wealthy? I have zero problem with fixing the tax structure so that there are fewer loop holes through which wealthy people can escape paying taxes.

Another point we agree completely on. The reason that Tea Bagger people have no credibility on the tax thing is that they act as if rich people really do all pay taxes the way we do. Sure, they pay a big part of it, but they dodge and hide money EVERYWHERE. Look at Mitt. Dude has more money stashed away in one account in Europe than you or I will probably ever have.

That being said however...I DO have a problem with the notion put forth by people like you that we can continue to cover the costs of layer upon layer of unfunded entitlement programs by simply taking more and more money from the wealthy.
My problem isn't based on whether or not that is "fair"...it's based on simple arithmetic. You could raise the tax rate on the wealthy to 100% and it wouldn't come CLOSE to covering the cost of the entitlement programs we've put in place going forward so those programs will necessarily have to be paid for by the Middle Class as well. But you won't admit THAT...will you, Conserva?

Not more and more. Just the same amount, consistently. I don't want them paying more than 45% or so. I think that's fair, because even on that tax rate, they can make up all that shit by dunking some money into some investment opportunities that let them make money with their money. Basically, I'm not really worried about the rich. THEY'LL BE FINE. The only way these people fall from grace is if they're caught stealing, or if they murder someone (maybe). Seriously, unless by their own hand they **** up, they are almost bullet-proof. And you know that.

You know how I want to pay for the entitlement and social programs? Stop spending so much on bombs and guns, close some loopholes, and let's see where that leaves us. Is that such a bad thing?

You know what your problem is, Conserva? You don't have the faintest idea what conservatives ARE in this country. Everything that you post here is based on misconceptions.

Take the Tea Party. Where did you come up with the notion that the number one priority of the Tea Party was ensuring that Barack Obama "fails"? The number one priority of the Tea Party has always been shrinking the size of government and getting rid of the waste that is SO prevalent in our government. Do the people in the Tea Party think Barack Obama is the man to do that? Quite obviously NO. Barack Obama is a progressive who believes that more government is the answer to all problems. THAT is the Tea Party's problem with Obama.

Calling them "obstructionists" and "fiscal terrorists" because they don't believe that government IS the answer to all problems is quite frankly, a cheap shot. These are people that care just as deeply about this country as you do...they simply don't believe as you do, that spending more and more money on a dis-functional Federal Government is a wise course of action.

You've repeatedly put forth the notion that Tea Party politicians have deliberately sabotaged economic recovery because they want to see Barack Obama "fail". What you can't seem to grasp is that those politicians were ELECTED by an electorate that were unhappy with the policies of Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, an electorate that wanted them reined in. It's your fellow Americans that "sabotaged" Barack Obama's agenda, Conserva because they don't agree with it. THAT is democracy. Those Tea Party freshmen now in Congress and the Senate are not there to further the progressive agenda ...they are there at the behest of the electorate to STOP that agenda.