October 16, 2011 at 11:51 pm #160074
Jimmy Carter… now there was a real flop of a President. Bush every time of course. That is not to say that in retrospect I agreed with every policy that was apart of GW’s administration. But on the other hand he too had a tough go of it. It is easy for anyone to arm chair quarterback his decisions. Just remember, America was attacked on our soil and American blood was spilt. In the fog of war sometimes decisions are made based on the best available intel. Sometimes that is not good enough. You may not agree with his policies but you are still here aren’t you? America is still here. I say he did the best that could be done given the circumstances.
s.October 16, 2011 at 11:52 pm #160073Alan Ray, RLAParticipant
he has expanded the wars….”meet the new boss, same as the old boss”October 16, 2011 at 11:59 pm #160072
I don’t really think it matters to much Trace, Any one of the Republican Candidates would be a breath of freshair over what we have now. I haven’t seen much in the way of results with this President only a whole lot more debit on the books, certainly not a better economy, certainly not more jobs. Just what has he done. He has taken lots of trips at the taxpayers expense. Thats great …become the President and see the world (at the taxpayers expense of course) I will guarentee you one thing. Come election day I absolutlely will not vote for an incumbant, regardless of their/my party affiliation. And if things don’t improve that goes for every election from the election forward. It is no longer a Democrat or Republican party thing.
s.October 17, 2011 at 12:00 am #160071Trace OneParticipant
your kidding..You want to gut the EPA, the clean air act, to privatize social security, medicare and medicaid, and abolish unions? You think the world was made 6,000 years ago, global warming is a conspiracy by scientists, mass transit is a joke, and we should take away all the national parks and give them to oil companies to drill for oil? Attack Iran? Waterboard prisoners? No habeus corpus? Take benefits from vets and the very very poor and crazy, build an electrified border fence(who cares about eco-systems where Jaguars live), deny all science, and let all education be for-profit?
No science, no math, no education, no roads, no bridges, no trains..
No, I think there is quite a bit of difference..The republicans are MUCH worse. Dems aren’t great, but Repubs are really crazy..
The economy is a result of our unfunded Iraq war, number one, the bank bailouts, (thanks, Bush) and the tax relief for rich people, which Obama caved and let the repubs re-institute….If they stay home and do nothing the tax releif for rich people will expire and the debt will disappear..
You don’t like Obama taking trips? Now that is a good way to focus on what is important..NOT….You are kidding me..do you also not like Michele’s bare arms, and will you vote on that principle..?
Obama set out some stuff – he let California set the standard for car emissions, which bush blocked..but he keeps caving..
It is still way better than the crazies in the republican party – really crazy! They disavow science, women’s health, the environment, infrastructure? All they stand for is more money for rich people..Herman Cain is funded by the Koch Bros, look that one up!October 17, 2011 at 12:02 am #160070
I don’t agree that there is a huge difference. These same banks own shares of the Fed. The Fed is not run by the government…there was even a court case where a guy tried to sue the US government when a Federal Reserve vehicle ran into him. The case was dismissed because the Federal Reserve is considered a private corporation.
The lines of power are much more blurred then it appears on the surface.October 17, 2011 at 12:03 am #160069
They would all be the same Steve. Consider that Romney is receiving more Wall Street donations then any other candidate currently. Consider that Cain expects someone making $20,000 to pay 9% tax…or that some of the contenders spent months questioning where Obama was born. You do a disservice to yourself defending one side at all. Defend neither side. You think Gingrich would be a breath of fresh air? Or Perry, let’s send the military into Mexico? Sure.October 17, 2011 at 12:33 am #160068
Well actually a person making 20,000. is already paying way more than 9% What Cain is proposing is No more payroll taxes for you the employee or the employer either one. When you factor that into your calcluation you would be much better off under Cains plan and I believe business (especially small business) would be to. I know because I pay the payroll taxes for our company and I see the cash flowing out. I am not saying the plan is perfect. What about the states? So Kentucky has a 6% sales tax, that means anything purchased would cost me15% that is pretty steep. What about the low income elderly on social securtiy? Are they to pay 99? I think some provisions need to be made. What if you are unemployed? Are you to pay 9% of your unemployment check? and 9% additional sales tax would be a big pay cut out of an already meager check. What if you are on disability? What if you are a stay at home mom? that just added 9% of everything purchased at the grocery store. How would his plan work for someone who is on welfare? Many unanswered questions but yet it is a clean break from a corrupt and convoluted system no doubt. Make no mistake, I am on the American side. And I will have no compuction in voting for a Democrat or a Republican or another party if that is better for our country!
s.October 17, 2011 at 12:47 am #160067
It is always a pleasure talking to a stauch Democrat who always believes that government should protect me from myself. No I think that neither party has the answer. The answer lies somewhere between the two parties. Now if we could just get them to actually talk to each other…
s.October 17, 2011 at 12:51 am #160066
Don’t sweat it Heather, just like Newt recently said. Congress created it (the Fed) they can also change it or eliminate it.
s.October 17, 2011 at 2:43 am #160065
Cain is a part of the establishment as much as you would like to think he is a clean break from corruption. He said people that wanted an audit of the Fed didn’t know what they were talking about and it was unnecessary. Of course he worked for the Fed…he has plenty of advantageous political/corporate connections.
Additionally, his plan is not what you think…but is indeed a cut for the rich and a major increase on the poor and middle class.
Of course, I am not surprised that the focus of a GOP candidate would be to make sure that the rich get another tax break.October 17, 2011 at 2:50 am #160064
I don’t think the idea is protecting you from yourself…rather protecting your property, the air you breath and the water you drink from the misdeeds of others. There are reasons regulations were enacted originally…precisely because a capitalist society with no regulations is dangerous to your health. Capitalism is great as long as there are some guidelines. Think Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire, think food safety…do we really want to see rivers on fire again? That is what happens when industry is unregulated…they had a chance to prove they would do it themselves and they fail. We still see industry trying to avoid the regulations we have in place. Even the idea of letting state’s regulate industry themselves becomes useless because so what if you decide to live in a state with tighter water regulations if you live downstream from another one that doesn’t care about sending polluted water over state lines. I am willing to have a discussion about over regulation but I would really love to see some moderation regarding anti regulation…big government issues. We don’t need to guess what would happen if we just threw off all regulation and went completely free market. We had that. People lost fingers, were maimed, poisoned, property was destroyed(we see some of this happening with fracking and mountain top removal), air was unbreathable and water undrinkable.October 17, 2011 at 3:04 am #160063
“Consider two people: one who earns $30,000 a year and spends all of it by necessity, and one who earns $500,000, spends $100,000 of it and saves or invests the remainder. Under Cain’s plan, the first person would pay an 18 percent tax on that $30,000: nine percent in income tax and nine percent in sales tax. But the second person would only pay about 11 percent in taxes on their $500,000 income: nine percent in income tax and 1.8 percent in sales tax, since only 20 percent of their income would be subject to the sales tax, and savings and investments wouldn’t be taxed at all.”October 17, 2011 at 3:15 am #160062
Why would they eliminate it when it works so well for the both of them?October 17, 2011 at 3:35 am #160061
I do believe in a government role in terms of regulation. I do however have issues with government trying to regulate common sense. For example, Last year my dad decided to tear down a 20 year old greenhouse that was built in a hurry 20 years ago because we were out of production space, It was just a small simple wooden structure with a corrigated fiberglass roof and side walls (800 sq ft) So he went downtown to code enforcement to get his building permit. The code enforcement officer looked up the property on computer and politely explained to him that he was operating a commercial business in a R4 zoned residental area and he was out of compliance and could not have a permit. And to that my dad said “but this is a farm” And the officer said you have to have 10 acres to be a farm. And my dad said well I have 10 acres. And the officer said yes but it is on 2 seperate deeds. If you want to hire an attorney and pay the court costs to merge the deeds together (it should take about 3 months) come back and we will talk to you. So he comes home totally dejected. So I said to him if you want your permit give me the paperwork and I will get your permit. So the vary next day I go down to talk to probably the same officer. And he handed me the same song and dance. Right up until I reminded him that in Kentucky a agricultural entity is considered 5.1 acres (including the residence) and since the property that the permit was being request for was 7.6 acres and had been an agricultural entity for the last 30 years what was the problem? I brought a long a copy of the Kentucky KRS regulations and told him that I had a copy with me and asked him if he would like to read them. Well after that, I got my permit. However the city has an ordinace that states any building that is to be demolished has to have a demolition permit. That all the utility companies including preservation has to sign off on before the building can be torn down. And if the building is over 1,100 sq ft. a licensed wrecking contractor has to tear it down. What a hassle. I called my local counselwomen and ask her what posessed her to vote for such an onerous ordinance. To that she responded ” well my first responsibility is the saftey of my constituets. She went on to say that there was an incident in her district where a home owner decided to demolish a garage… using dynamite. And parts of the garage flew over and hit a neighbors house.” And I responded to her by saying ” I am really sorry mam but you can’t fix stupid! I went on to ask her what makes her think that anyone that is that stupid is A) going to be aware that a demolishion permit is required or B) even cares? And furthermore Dynamite is one of the most highly regulated substances in the US so where did the homeowner get the Dynamite in the first place? I reminded her that there are already sufficeint laws on the books to protect her constituets. First of all if the neighbors property was damaged that is what civil lawsuits were designed for. Second if a neighboor got injured or killed that is what criminal charges were created for everything from Wanton endangerment to Manslaughter. And this is exactly the kind of unnecessary legislation that I am refering to. Take Seatbelts in a car for example. I don’t have a problem with making seatbelts manditory for kids. However, I do have a problem with being considered a law breaker because I choose not to wear a seatbelt. Just ask anyone who has been in combat and they will tell you that when it is your time to leave this world there will be no safety device or anything else for that matter that will prevent your departure. It is presumtious of any man to presume that you have any control over when you will die with the one exception of suicide. And all of the safety ra ra stuff that is put on cars just is a way for the auto mfgrs to up the purchase price and make more profit.
s.October 17, 2011 at 3:51 am #160060
Because I am a nerd I took the time to look at two scenarios for a person making $20,000 residing in the state of Idaho…where I live.
Current system: Person does not pay income tax but does pay payroll tax which totals $1500 leaving them with $18,500 to live on…lets assume he uses all of this to live purchasing food, etc. I don’t know how to include rent in there which doesn’t have a sales tax but for the ease of this I will just say 6% of $18,500…or a total sales tax of $1110 for the year. Together that equals $2600 leaving $17,400…hhmm…remember this is the guy everyone is complaining doesn’t pay enough in taxes. His effective tax rate not counting property taxes of course…is 13%.
Under the Cain plan: Person pays no pay roll tax…but let’s look at what he does pay. 9% income tax…or $1800…lets assume he needs every last cent and take another 9% in federal sales tax from $18,200…which would be $1638…but like you mentioned he will also most likely pay a state sales tax…so lets get that extra 6% and take another $1092 for a total taxation (NOT counting property tax) of $4530…an effective rate of 22.65% for this guy making $20,000 a year. Tell me again how that is better?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.