who will definetly lose....makes sense.

you have an opinion, as do i, and i really hate to debate politic's...

__________________
PA Forums
Philly Sports
Delaware Online
boomshockalacka

That has nothing to do with true and untrue. It's what I believe should happen. I didn't say anything that can be proven true or false so I'm not sure what you're getting at at all with that.

I'm stating, each person should get a flat percentage of their earnings taken, NO MATTER WHAT THEY MAKE.

An Example

Person A:
25,000
10% = $2,500

Person B:
250,000
10% = 25,000

That is fair to me. Each person is giving the same ratio of what they've earned. You can attempt to put political or economic skews on it but I don't really care.

__________________
Camaro Forums || Firebird Forums
Check out vBulletin Setup for all your vBulletin SEO Questions & Tips
There is always someone faster, and in your case, that someone is Me

They may very well lose but it won't be because I didn't vote for them.. It'll be because you and millions others who would vote for them if the media told them they had a chance at winning won't do it.

What doesn't make sense is picking the lesser of evils. <--- See that word there.

__________________
Ford Mustang Forums - F-Series Trucks

BamaStangGuy I like your analysis. I really do and was a little surprised when you mentionned Ron Paul at the end there.

I am also a massive fan of Ron Paul.

This goes to show that this isn't about party loyalty - it's about choosing the person that you believe has an honest and intelligent plan. Ron Paul v Obama - Is a very close call.

But why does Ron Paul stand so alone in his party? Why do so many of the party have completely different beliefs to him?

Taxation is what fiscal responsibility is - to call it lame and make it seem like an irrelevant piece of the puzzle isn't fair.
Of course there are many things that make a healthy and fair and growing economy. Taxation is one piece

LOL - Why was that idiot elected twice in a row?

I don't think that people should vote based purely on party. When you talk about them running... that's not accurate. Most are looking at the options and weighing what's best. They all have freedom to choose so why is it bad that someone who usually votes democrat ends up voting for McCain, or someone who usually considers themselves a republican ends up voting for Obama?

Nothing wrong with that...

Sure he's a politician. But less divisive than the other 2. This again is only a small factor but important non-the-less.

I don't expect him to accomplish everything he says or thinks that he can do including making everything transparent. I do however think that he'll go further than any other candidate to try and achieve this. Transparency is important. How could it not be. Otherwise forget rules about monopolies, mergers, cartels, market forces and competition regulation. Each individual/company for themselves. While we're at it why not just forget about filing taxes... waste of paper anyway

Bill Clinton? Look how that turned out? Booming economy, record low jobless, budget surplus... That's right budget surplus! (or did you forget about that?)


Sure it's complex. You can only fix it if you look at the pieces. Subprime problems could have been prevented if there was better regulation. Some lenders advised wrongly, some lenders were greedy, some buyers were greedy, many were tricked.

Just because you think something will only have a small positive effect (like getting rid of tax breaks for the rich) if it can be fixed easily, and if it will help, then it should be done... then move on to the next thing that can be fixed.

I also strongly disagree that tax cuts would have a tiny effect on the economy. Taking these tax breaks from the rich will mean that the government will have more of a budget - some of this can be used to repair infrastructure - further putting people to work. There are cycles of benefits in this. Too many to mention.



Democrat does not = liberal
Obama isn't as liberal as you think. What are you scared that he's going to do?

About not caring about the level of tax on those above 200k - you should. Not because I think that the rich should be squeezed, but just because I think that if you knew details like increasing their rate of tax by 1% would pay for X number of extra teachers in schools (reducing class sizes) etc. this is useful information to know. How much revenue can be collected from such an increase and what could you do with it?



Now that doesn't make any sense.
Not everybody needs a tax break. Maybe nearly everyone wants a tax break.

Of course there should be discrimination of people based on how much they make. That's how stepped taxation systems are developed. Otherwise the money would always flow up to the richest of the rich. You can't just keep printing the money - Ron Paul was precise on talking about this point - it's devaluing people's savings and messing with inflation


Fiscal conservative spending starts with taking a look at taxation.

Obama is the closest out of the 3 to Ron Paul.
Ron Paul was also very clear on his message about war and empire building. That isn't fiscal responsibility.

Ron Paul was clear on his message about the best way to protect The States is to do it from home. Not with permanent bases around the world - which leads to animosity within many of those countries. Obama understands this the most and can fix it.

About jumping sides - as I said before people are free to choose. You seem to be making it a taboo for them to do so. I'm more democrat although there was a good chance that I would have voted for Ron Paul. I'm not making it a bad thing if other democrats wanted to vote for a republican - so why are you making it seem like such a bad thing for a republican to decide they like someone from the other party more?

That's bad debating - there is no reason why it's a bad thing. Maybe all the republicans out there simply don't think that McCain will do as good a job as one of the democrats would do.

That's what the evidence supports.

Not that people are making irrational decisions and jumping ship to be with someone they don't know anything about!

You might as well call Ron Paul a liberal then.


Ron Paul and Obama aren't that different at all - in fact I know many people who have moved from Paul to Obama because of the similarities. You should take a look again, really, there are many similarities. Obama is the closest to Paul out of the 3.


Bush v Obama. Hmmm let me think!


I have no idea what you're talking about here. Tax 'cuts' or 'breaks' do not mean 'tax free'.

The fact that you know no one making $250k+ and that you are happy that these people are paying less tax under the bush administration even though they didn't ask for the reduction is crazy.

Why aren't you bothered about this?
This money could pay for better schools for your kids, or even tax benefits for the people making the least.

__________________
London Student Forums promotion agencies London Universities

Because he is fighting to change the party.

The same question can be asked by Obama. Why is Obama so readily accepted into the Democratic party. A party that is ready to accept either Clinton or Obama. The answer is easy, it's because they are not far apart. Do you think Nanci Pelosi and Howard Dean want transparency? No. Why have people like Mike Gravel changed parties and refused to support Barrack Obama. Ron Paul refuses to support Barrack Obama as well and there is a reason for it.


The lame part was more on claiming that it was the cause of the current economic conditions.


because this country is a conservative country. It's why Democrats have such a hard time even after 8 years of Bush of getting the White House. This country is not for Democrats principles on economics and social policy. I'm not saying Republicans social policies are correct but they more readily reflect those of the majority of America. That is why George Bush won in 2004. Because John Kerry was the complete opposite of America.

They shouldn't vote on party. They should vote on the issues they believe in. Anyone that votes for Ron Paul and supports him can not justify in anyway supporting Barrack Obama because their issues are so far apart. You can't even compare the two. They don't have the same views on Iraq, Economics or social issues.

Not enough for me to give up voting for my principles and give him a vote. Bob Barr is less divisive than Obama and shares many more of my beliefs. So I will be voting for him. Ron Paul has also endorsed Bob Barr which also helps. I refuse to play to the current two party system. It fails us time and again.


What you are missing is Obama/Clinton and McCain are not the only ones running. If you are a fan of Ron Paul why abandon everything that he has worked so hard to setup with the Ron Paul Revolution and give in to the Democratic party because they are better than the Republican party right now?

Why abandon that?


See that's my point exactly. One President has a budget surplus and then suddenly the entire United States thinks that Democrats are the only ones that can do that.

My point was the transparency not the economy. Bill Clinton was responsible for just as many scandals as any of the previous Presidency. I'm not talking about Lewinsky either.

Bill Clinton may have balanced the budget but he did so in a time where the economy was growing on it's own. If you are going to give credit to Bill Clinton for the 90's economy you must also give credit to the Republican controlled House and Senate. Or do you believe that Bill Clinton ran the country by himself?


I don't have time to respond to all of this because I have to leave.

My point is the U.S. government wastes more money on useless shit that taking more money from just the rich isn't going to solve anything. I care more about the way the government wastes the money than what Bill Gates pays in taxes.

Yes it does. That's all the Democrats put up for election in the Presidential race. It's leaders are stone cold liberals. Nanci Pelosi and Howard Dean. The most prominent Democrats Ted Kennedy, Robert Byrd and John Kerry.

If you are voting democrat in the Presidential race you are voting for a liberal. Obama is no exception.

What am I afraid he is going to do? Give hand outs to the poor at my expense. Handouts never work period. All it does is make people lazy.

Raise taxes on the middle class. I pay 30% taxes right now because I am self employed. I don't need him to add insult to injury.

He also has legislation that seeks to have a Global U.N. tax so we can send more money overseas so it can be wasted.

Then you get into the heart of the Democratic platform that I can't stand. Gun Control for example.

Neither! Vote for someone else. It's not a two party system, no matter what the media tells you. Ask Ross Perot what happens when people realize there is a third candidate.

__________________
Ford Mustang Forums - F-Series Trucks