? For liberals: If taxes go up on rich, how will you feel about consequences?

[Zander]

It is a bad move to take an economy that is teetering on the brink of a double dip recession and increase taxes. Most Democrats understand this. Don't be surprised to see the tax rates extended in December.

IMHO, we need to cut spending - that is the key. Government spending never goes down - regardless of how much revenue is collected. That needs to change and change NOW. I am all for a 1% national sales tax - provided the revenue goes to strictly to debt reduction and we have a constitutionally mandated balanced budget. No more deficit spending - under any circumstances. We can still get out from under this mess, but discipline, especially from our political class, is in very short supply.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Small businesses will a) reduce staff b) reduce salaries and benefits c) raise prices

Middle class will suffer the most. As usual.

Trickle down misery.

Why? You're taxed on your profit not your labor cost. Getting rid of workers because your net profit is taxed a small amount more doesn't make any sense. One has nothing to do with the other.

If the taxes on the money you made over 200,000 were to be taxed at 39% instead of 36%, would you want to not make that money?

What if 100,000 of your income was taxable in the top bracket (meaning you made about 300,000 taxable in all). And your tax on that top 100,000 was 36,000. and then your tax went to 39,000.

Would you really not want any of the 60 plus thousand, out of spite, so you didn't have to pay the extra 3,000?

Who is dumb enough to do that?

 

[Synthaholic]

I'm really sick of the term "Bush tax cuts". From this point forward I will refer to it as "Obama tax increases". It's his economy now.

No, if it's a tax increase, it would correctly be called The Republican Tax Increase: they set the 10 year time frame on which it would expire.

Why didn't they make them permanent? Because they used RECONCILIATION to pass the tax cuts, which mandate a 10 year time frame. In other words, they bypassed the Democrats to get it passed, they put a 10 year limit on it, and now they are blaming the Democrats for . . . WHAT?

 

[EriktheRed]

For liberals: If taxes go up on rich, how will you feel about consequences?

Did taxes go up on the rich back in '93?

 

[rightwinger]

It is a bad move to take an economy that is teetering on the brink of a double dip recession and increase taxes. Most Democrats understand this. Don't be surprised to see the tax rates extended in December.

IMHO, we need to cut spending - that is the key. Government spending never goes down - regardless of how much revenue is collected. That needs to change and change NOW. I am all for a 1% national sales tax - provided the revenue goes to strictly to debt reduction and we have a constitutionally mandated balanced budget. No more deficit spending - under any circumstances. We can still get out from under this mes, but discipline, especially from our political class, is in very short supply.

Great idea

Lets start with pulling the plug on two wars at $2 bil a week

 

[chanel]

Small businesses will a) reduce staff b) reduce salaries and benefits c) raise prices

Middle class will suffer the most. As usual.

Trickle down misery.

Why does the right equate small business with the "rich". How many "small businesses" have a billion dollars?

How come you guys NEVER
defend the Middle Class? Are they no good? Not worth the time or effort?

Besides, I suspect you aren't rich. If you were, you would be off somewhere in your private yacht.

No private yacht here. Since when does 250' equal a billion dollars? Oh right. Liberal math.

$250K is not "rich" here in NJ. Look it up.

 

[JBeukema]

Small businesses will a) reduce staff b) reduce salaries and benefits c) raise prices

Middle class will suffer the most. As usual.

Trickle down misery.

Why does the right equate small business with the "rich". How many "small businesses" have a billion dollars?

How come you guys NEVER defend the Middle Class? Are they no good? Not worth the time or effort?

Besides, I suspect you aren't rich. If you were, you would be off somewhere in your private yacht.

Republican Mantra: **** the proletariat; them them buy their own congressmen

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Small businesses will a) reduce staff b) reduce salaries and benefits c) raise prices

Middle class will suffer the most. As usual.

Trickle down misery.

Why does the right equate small business with the "rich". How many "small businesses" have a billion dollars?

How come you guys NEVER defend the Middle Class? Are they no good? Not worth the time or effort?

Besides, I suspect you aren't rich. If you were, you would be off somewhere in your private yacht.

Republican Mantra: **** the proletariat; them them buy their own congressmen

Democrat Mantra: Raise taxes! On everybody else.......

 

[JBeukema]

JB's mantra: both parties are shit

 

[Political Junky]

I've heard it said that trickle down economics doesn't always work. But trickle down misery is almost a given. I don't think extending the tax cuts will necessarily improve the economy. But I'm almost certain raising taxes will make things worse. Small businesses and the wealthy are hoarding cash right now and it's only going to get worse. Too much uncertainty; too little faith.

George H.W. Bush was right when he called it "Voodoo Economics".

 

[asterism]

Small businesses will a) reduce staff b) reduce salaries and benefits c) raise prices

Middle class will suffer the most. As usual.

Trickle down misery.

Why does the right equate small business with the "rich". How many "small businesses" have a billion dollars?

How come you guys NEVER defend the Middle Class? Are they no good? Not worth the time or effort?

Besides, I suspect you aren't rich. If you were, you would be off somewhere in your private yacht.

Republican Mantra: **** the proletariat; them them buy their own congressmen

I'm sure the use of a Marxist term to describe a group of people is merely a coincidence.

 

[daveman]

Why does the right equate small business with the "rich". How many "small businesses" have a billion dollars?

How come you guys NEVER defend the Middle Class? Are they no good? Not worth the time or effort?

Besides, I suspect you aren't rich. If you were, you would be off somewhere in your private yacht.

Republican Mantra: **** the proletariat; them them buy their own congressmen

I'm sure the use of a Marxist term to describe a group of people is merely a coincidence.

Da, Comrade.

 

[asterism]

Republican Mantra: **** the proletariat; them them buy their own congressmen

I'm sure the use of a Marxist term to describe a group of people is merely a coincidence.

Da, Comrade.

Funny how they used to pretend that they were not promoting class welfare, marxism, socialism, and nationalization of industry huh?

Remember all those IndyMedia folks who said this wasn't the agenda and that folks like you and I were paranoid?

I think I remember one comment in particular:

"The UAW would NEVER own stock in a car company. Their role is to represent the workers and provide a balance to the owners' interests."

That brings to mind another LA IMC comment from 2004:

"A young man named Barack Obama spoke at the convention. This guy is the real deal. He'll end both wars in the first week if we're smart enough to elect him."

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Well, I think people have had enough. For decades we've been called every name in the book when we disagreed. Now.. here we are. The folks McCarthy warned us about are in power and are implementing their master plan... 3 pillars.... Energy, Health Care & Education.

 

[JBeukema]

Why does the right equate small business with the "rich". How many "small businesses" have a billion dollars?

How come you guys NEVER defend the Middle Class? Are they no good? Not worth the time or effort?

Besides, I suspect you aren't rich. If you were, you would be off somewhere in your private yacht.

Republican Mantra: **** the proletariat; them them buy their own congressmen

I'm sure the use of a Marxist term to describe a group of people is merely a coincidence.

Marxian, actually. And it's not a 'group of people', it's a broad socioeconomic class that can be further divided, as I've done before.

There is the unprotected proletariat (read: much of China, Indonesia, and the Philippines), there is the protected proletariat which benefits from socialist economic systems and worker protection reforms (see: the united States' 'working class'). This is the first major division of the proletariat.

 

[asterism]

Well, I think people have had enough. For decades we've been called every name in the book when we disagreed. Now.. here we are. The folks McCarthy warned us about are in power and are implementing their master plan... 3 pillars.... Energy, Health Care & Education.

Notice how they've got us all carved up into neat "classes" too. It's a dehumanizing tactic. Don't talk about the entrepreneur who took $100K out of his SEP-IRA to make payroll, talk about the "upper class" or the "rich."

Don't listen to the people that know how to make money, exploit the jealousy and call them greedy.

President Obama made $400,000 last year that he didn't need. Why didn't he just give it all back to the government? Why has Paul Krugman not led by example and contributed directly to paying off the national debt?

https://www.pay.gov/paygov/forms/formInstance.html?agencyFormId=23779454

In fact, why hasn't anyone here who advocates higher mandatory taxes done the same?

 

[JBeukema]

I'm sure the use of a Marxist term to describe a group of people is merely a coincidence.

Da, Comrade.

Funny how they used to pretend that they were not promoting class welfare, marxism, socialism, and nationalization of industry huh?

Remember all those IndyMedia folks who said this wasn't the agenda and that folks like you and I were paranoid?

I think I remember one comment in particular:

"The UAW would NEVER own stock in a car company. Their role is to represent the workers and provide a balance to the owners' interests."

That brings to mind another LA IMC comment from 2004:

"A young man named Barack Obama spoke at the convention. This guy is the real deal. He'll end both wars in the first week if we're smart enough to elect him."

1: who is 'they'?

2: Noone here has advocated Marxism. My 'Red Republic' is rather a decentralized limited social democracy with a compromise (between federation and confederation) political structure in which the States manage their own social safety nets and the Fed is returned to its proper role of managing the army, aiding in coordinating inter-state commerce and cooperation on large-scale projects, and little else. Not unlike the United States used to be.

3: All developed nations lean towards socialism. You don't like OSHA? Public hospitals? Public roads? city-planned sewage systems? Fire departments run by the cities? Public libraries? Electrification of urban areas? Public education*?

4: Who here has advocated nationalizing industry?


I was a a Ron Paul supporter, btw



*While the current system needs much overall, the concept is sound in principle, as an educated populace is a necessary condition for the survival of a free republic

 

[asterism]

Republican Mantra: **** the proletariat; them them buy their own congressmen

I'm sure the use of a Marxist term to describe a group of people is merely a coincidence.

Marxian, actually. And it's not a 'group of people', it's a broad socioeconomic class that can be further divided, as I've done before.

There is the unprotected proletariat (read: much of China, Indonesia, and the Philippines), there is the protected proletariat which benefits from socialist economic systems and worker protection reforms (see: the united States' 'working class'). This is the first major division of the proletariat.

Thank you for the clarification.

Which variance of Marxian governance suits your fancy? Has it ever been proven to work?

 

[JBeukema]

There is no such thing as 'marxian governance'

Marxian economics are economic theories on the functioning of capitalism based on the works of Karl Marx. Adherents of Marxian economics, particularly in academia, distinguish it from Marxism as a political ideology and sociological theory, arguing that Marx's approach to understanding the economy is intellectually independent of his advocacy of revolutionary socialism or his belief in the proletarian revolution.[1][2] Adherents consider Marx's economic theories to be the basis of a viable analytic framework, and an alternative to more conventional neoclassical economics. Marxian economics do not lean entirely upon the works of Marx and other widely known Marxists; they draw from a range of Marxist and non-Marxist sources.

Marxian economics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Marxian is one school upon which I draw, though I draw from it mostly my understanding of the socioeconomic class system. By economic policies are broadly based on the Austrian school, though I am leery of those who call for unabashed capitalism without those regulations designed to protect the People.

We've seen where that leads us.

We've also seen where totalitarian socialism leads us and what happens when Progressives are let off the leash and allowed to enact their visions unrestrained and unchecked by reality.

Read The Science of Liberty. The solution is to learn from past experiments and stick with what works, letting results, not blind ideology, guide us.

 

[asterism]

Da, Comrade.

Funny how they used to pretend that they were not promoting class welfare, marxism, socialism, and nationalization of industry huh?

Remember all those IndyMedia folks who said this wasn't the agenda and that folks like you and I were paranoid?

I think I remember one comment in particular:

"The UAW would NEVER own stock in a car company. Their role is to represent the workers and provide a balance to the owners' interests."

That brings to mind another LA IMC comment from 2004:

"A young man named Barack Obama spoke at the convention. This guy is the real deal. He'll end both wars in the first week if we're smart enough to elect him."

1: who is 'they'?

Progressives refusing to admit that they had a Marxist agenda and would reject any overtures to nationalizing the means of production in the US, and anti-war protesters who assured me over and over again that if a Democrat was in office and we were still in Iraq and Afghanistan they would call for his impeachment.

2: Noone here has advocated Marxism. My 'Red Republic' is rather a decentralized limited social democracy with a compromise (between federation and confederation) political structure in which the States manage their own social safety nets and the Fed is returned to its proper role of managing the army, aiding in coordinating inter-state commerce and cooperation on large-scale projects, and little else. Not unlike the United States used to be.

Perhaps I am mistaken.

So who do you like for 2012 right now? Who was your first choice in 2000?

3: All developed nations lean towards socialism. You don't like OSHA? Public hospitals? Public roads? city-planned sewage systems? Fire departments run by the cities? Public libraries? Electrification of urban areas? Public education*?

I don't like OSHA. That's a clusterfuck of oversight that has become a racket. Proper oversight is dictating a safe workplace and judging on results. OSHA micromanages procedures and actually penalizes safety innovations. I have some specific examples if you care.

I am not a fan of government hospitals. Too much bureaucracy and not enough medicine. Fiefdoms and power grabs rule the roost almost as much as the clerks who process the paperwork.

Public roads are a valid and Constitutional expense. I think it could be more efficient and I think that local taxes should pay for maintenance of local roads, not have federal dollars expanding I-295 because it's a "federal" thoroughfare even though the reason it has to be expanded is because the local traffic has overwhelmed it.

Locally funded Fire Departments are wonderful as long as they are sustainable. I want a line item in the tax bill for them so that when we have to squabble about how much our county is going to spend on Global Climate Change the county doesn't put 100 firefighters on furlough because they ran out of money (but still paid $20,000 for Dr. Jones to come speak to the County Commission).

Public Education is broken. The funding model has allowed a situation where daycare and education is outsourced to government officials and parents are blamed for lazy teachers.

Electrification of urban areas? Why is that a government function in your opinion?

4: Who here has advocated nationalizing industry?

Anyone that approves the Financial Reform Law, GM's boondoggle, and the "public option" that is being proposed.

I was a a Ron Paul supporter, btw

Ah. Damn good Congressman, crappy Presidential candidate in my opinion. He's too isolationist as a matter of policy, but it would be wonderful if we have 75 more people just like him in Congress.

Too bad he was inept at using his massive movement to help get others elected. The all or nothing approach to his Presidential pipe dreams has left a very sour taste in my mouth.

*While the current system needs much overall, the concept is sound in principle, as an educated populace is a necessary condition for the survival of a free republic

An educated populace is exactly opposite of what we're getting with government-controlled education.