Understanding Obama and our times.

[Spence]

Why should the rich be taxed harder? Because they have more money? I don't believe that's a valid reason. Should they be taxed because they've contributed more to society than somebody who works at Taco Bell as their career? I know it sounds harsh, but just because you have done what you've needed to do legally to create your own wealth doesn't mean the government should penalize you for it. I realize you keep most of it and are better off than those who don't get that kind of money, but I don't see the reasoning behind it.

A pretty good portion of the rich (Trump included) inherited...they were fortunate in their choice of parent..that's all. The rich start with a head start that they do not relinquish.

So. Is the money not theirs? Why should someone else have the right to that money? I don't understand why people think they have the right to someone else's money if they did nothing to earn it. If you want to leave a house to your child why would it be fair for the government to take it and split it up among people less fortunate then you? If you want to leave your child anything that is yours, something you have paid the taxes on already, you should have that right. The fact that people think that someone should surrender their wealth because they have more then someone else amazes me.

[Eric]

I like the idea of freedom. Therefore, I believe adults should be able to do whatever they want with their wealth. If you're one of the lucky ones to inherit it, so be it. Is it fair? Not exactly to those who didn't win the genetic lottery when it comes to who their parents are, but if the government steps in and tells people what to do with their money besides paying a reasonable amount in taxes, that's pretty dangerous.

What about those who are self-made? Should they pay because you think "most" inherit their wealth?

[Spence]

I think if your parent gives you a prized watch, money, some land, or what ever, that it isn't anyone else's business - especially the government. The fact that people somehow think they have a right to something that clearly isn't theirs is just wrong and not one of those people would see it the same way if it was their property that was being confiscated. Because it belongs to some spoiled rich kid makes it alright with them.

[WoVeU]

It isn't the sentiment that causes this, it is the politicians who incite it. The fact about this over 250 tax is that it is a small business tax. The actual "rich" people you refer to will shelter their money. They can, so they will. The businesses really can not do that unless they move out of the country. So they will pay the tax and they will raise the price of their goods to cover the tax because they have no choice. They have a bottom line to meet. Lots of people do not realize that most small businesses file on their personal income. Some, who pay for their products without a line of credit, appear to make a lot of money. The truth of the matter is that money is to pay for more product. To keep things moving. Lots of people think if an item sells for $20.00 that the seller probably paid $4 or $5 for it, when the reality is that they likely paid $18. At least that is how the wholesale business works - with probably another 1 to 2% marketing money under the line. For the right to make that $2 he has to pay for the product, pay to get it shipped, pay to get it unloaded, pay to warehouse it, pay for someone to pick it to ship back out, and pay someone else still to deliver it. Not to mention paying someone to sale it and do the accounting and all of this with benefits. The net profit on a business like this figures somewhere between 1 and 2%. That means most of the money you bring in goes to pay for new product, utilities, payroll, and benefits. If you do enough volume you have to think about expanding. If you have been lucky enough to do enough business to be able to expand - build an new building or an addition, and hire more people to help man it - you have to invest money that the business has made and money the business will make (hopefully) to pay for it. Business just can't eat the cost of the tax, it must be passed on to the consumer. This means that everyone who uses the product pays the tax.

In Ohio we pay a federal tax, medicare, social security, state tax, county tax(in some counties), local tax(in most counties), school taxes (in some counties), property tax, sales tax, fuel tax (44 cents per gal.), and several sin taxes. Every year someone puts a levy on to pass a tax add on for a quarter of a cent for this or that good cause (and it is usual an important or usefull service). Politicians justify it saying it will only cost you an extra 25 or 50 bucks a year or say that someone else will pay for it, not you. It is how politicians raise taxes on the middle class. They tell you they are only raising taxes on someone else. Here is an idea. Why don't we tell them to make do with what they have. Even better, less then they have. Lets not raise taxes on anyone. Lets make them work inside a budget with a set amount of money like all of the rest of us. This divide and conquer system of class warfare used by politicians is only effective if we let it be effective.

I have children like many other people. My oldest is a diabetic, her new insulin pump just cost me $6200. Her infusion sets cost me $34 every two or three days. Does insurance pay for most of it - yeah. Except someone has to pay for that insurance and the way that works is the insurance company adds up the cost of all your employees medical costs and spreads them out between the group. It is re-evaluated every year. We pay 75%. I pay 100% of mine and 75% of theirs. I think I pay enough already, I don't need someone telling me how lucky I am. A loaf of bread will cost me as much as the next guy.

That was just a real good post!

[WoVeU]

I think everyone should pay tax and we should do iot practically and simply. All sales tax State + Federal, whatever the rate 15, 18, 20%. The only income type tax would be on income over 1.2 Million annually (like 6%, then 3% more per each .6 Million). Bonuses over $200,000 annually are taxed, the rate would be like 8% up to 24% at 1,200,000. After that the rate is 36%. At 2.4Mill it is 42%, 3.6Mill is 48%, 5.0 MIll is 50%. At amounts greater than 5 MIll...75%.

Then get rid of the IRS. Which would work well with my legalizing and taxing drugs. Then getting rid of the DEA, ATF, and many State Troopers and many city cops. Domestic disturbance, the cops show up the first time and take the offender of note to jail. The second time for the same victim and offender...both go to jail. Then you put a wrist or ankle bracelet on them for a 6 month period...if those 2 devices get within 50 feet of each other a signal goes out and they immediately get picked up again. I put up speed detection and camera systems in the more needy places and give people a break of several miles per hour unless it is sustained over a lengthy period. I reduce the fine levels (you get 2 warnings first) and no points can be assessed by Ins. Companies. We then need police almost entirely for DUI enforcement.

We creat real jobs and increased government revenues while greatly reducing costs.

I put the Secret Service, US Marshalls, Homeland Security, NSA, CIA, and the FBI in the DOD. A Civil Service side for all those and then the rest of the would be US Military...no more of the 4 branches plus Coast Guard. Greatly reduce the administration costs.

Energy...every sunny guard rail in America would have solar panels bolted behind them, also oon the back side of the big road signs. This gets the cost down to electrical parts, you have structure and access. I put prisoners to work installing the stuff (not major offenders they would be in one of those prison cells design by Spence and I, a concrete closet.)


I think these are all doable things for obvious concerns and wasteful spending!

[Derek]

Why should the rich be taxed harder? Because they have more money? I don't believe that's a valid reason. Should they be taxed because they've contributed more to society than somebody who works at Taco Bell as their career? I know it sounds harsh, but just because you have done what you've needed to do legally to create your own wealth doesn't mean the government should penalize you for it. I realize you keep most of it and are better off than those who don't get that kind of money, but I don't see the reasoning behind it.

Why? Read the Communist Manifesto. A "Progressive" tax is necessary, in the eye's of the commie's.

That's why we have it....It's very useful for Class warfare. When it was passed in the US in 1913 and an income tax was enacted, one of the ways they passed it off was a "tax on the rich"...a popular saying was..."Tax that guy behind the tree, but don't tax me."

They prey on people. Which is why the Founding fathers did not allow an income tax, and the country did fine until it was enacted. We survived 140 years without an income tax, why start???

Power.

[Spence]

Why should the rich be taxed harder? Because they have more money? I don't believe that's a valid reason. Should they be taxed because they've contributed more to society than somebody who works at Taco Bell as their career? I know it sounds harsh, but just because you have done what you've needed to do legally to create your own wealth doesn't mean the government should penalize you for it. I realize you keep most of it and are better off than those who don't get that kind of money, but I don't see the reasoning behind it.

Why? Read the Communist Manifesto. A "Progressive" tax is necessary, in the eye's of the commie's.

That's why we have it....It's very useful for Class warfare. When it was passed in the US in 1913 and an income tax was enacted, one of the ways they passed it off was a "tax on the rich"...a popular saying was..."Tax that guy behind the tree, but don't tax me."

They prey on people. Which is why the Founding fathers did not allow an income tax, and the country did fine until it was enacted. We survived 140 years without an income tax, why start???

Power.

Exactly. It is hard for politicians to pass a tax unless they pit people against each other. If we had a straight flat tax politicians that raised taxes would have a hard time being elected. It will never happen because they would be at the mercy of the masses.

Bottom line is we get the government we decide we want and at some point we (as a group) have decided the government should take care of every little detail of our lives. I don't think that was the vision of the founding fathers - who started a revolution on the back of a tax on tea.

[Dossenator]

Here is a great quote I read today:

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." (Thomas Jefferson)

[WoVeU]

Here is a great quote I read today:

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." (Thomas Jefferson)

If the gub'ment is giving one (or some) groups close to everything they want....then said gub'ment is doing so by taking just about everything that one (or some) groups have.

[Eric]

Each day, my faith (which was minimal to begin with) is eroding in this administration. Geitner is destroying the stock market every time he opens his mouth, Gibbs is about the worst press secretary anyone could find, and Pelosi is running this country. The amount of spending is insane and Republicans are letting it happen. I'd vote against every one of those slimeballs who voted for that bill today

Oh well. What's another 400 billion dollars worth of "stimulus"? I guess it never crossed their mind that they should use that to throw at the debt problem that is mounting at a rapid rate. You know what the worst part is? People who participate in polls give Obama a relatively high mark in popularity polls but disagree with specific policies that he's pushing forward. A little consistency? Yeah, I support Obama but disagree with his policies. What?

And this whole Rush Limbaugh thing was a nice little diversion. It's very true that the Republican party does not want to get on his bad side, but the Dems are just as bad when presidential candidates visit the Daily Kos convention and bend over backwards to institutions like MoveOn and the like. Ridiculous hypocrisy. I'm sick of people, with no basis whatsoever, saying that the Republican party is too "far right". Inane. If anything, it's become more like the leftists they're supposed to oppose. Are they looking at their own party? Pelosi and Reid are two of the farthest left members in all of Congress and I was shocked to see Feingold speak out against this bill they just passed. It helps when you have a whole wing of communications in your corner to paint a picture. Even if you think Fox News is biased (which they aren't, considering there is a difference between hard news coverage and entertainment which separates Glen Beck and Hannity from shows such as NBC Nightly News), it feels relieving to watch them just to balance out the one-sidedness. While I'm on the topic, if you watch Fox News' actual news shows, it's pretty neutral. If you watch shows like Sean Hannity, that's obviously not balanced and that's not the way it's intended to be. There's a market for Conservative news shows and Fox News is just filling that gap. The news industry is amazing to me that networks would put ideology over profit, but whatever.

/rant

[Dossenator]

Eric...to know that only two people seperate Pelosi from the White House scares me to death. I can't believe the people of CA keep voting for this lady...they love her here though. Obama said in his address last week that he was going to cut the deficit in half by the end of this term. How is that possible when you are throwing hundreds of billions around in these stimulus packages like it is mere pennies.

[Derek]

WOW!!

You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that, my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.

Dr. Adrian Pierce Rogers (September 12, 1931 - November 15, 2005) of Love Worth Finding Ministries, Pastor Emeritus of Bellevue Baptist Church.

[WoVeU]

ANd on money going overseas and liberals...hand-in-hand, they are in love with "we are the world" and thereby worldtrade. I buy American where I can, which is a very slim basket now. By the mid-80's it was cool to buy foreign, from radios to cars. Now I don't see us having the basic building blocks to rebuild. I'm tired of the press getting on Amercian Car companies. They make great cars, but so does Toyota, Honda, Volkswagon, Subaru, and the premium brands. But America has again been winning car and truck awards (even on what I find to be an unfair field of comparison). They say they make gas guzzlers when Chevy makes 10 models that get 30 or more mpg, my Cobalt gets 36-37 mpg hwy while having the most HP in it's class. The problem is the whole market is flooded because the cars are so good. These cars will last 16 years pretty easy with an average service and repair cost of probably like $3000 for a Chevy up to maybe $9000 on some other brands over that many years including all fluid services for 330,000 miles. What some do not understand is many are shipped off-shore and out of this market because the quality is so good.

The government should help a couple of companies start-up and occupy empty factories the Big 3 doesn't use anymore and start a couple of electronic companies to again give Americans a home built option. You know, radios, televisions, dvd players, and computers. ANd then also firm up the appliances market, especially if GE is getting out of that business.

What we need are small tarriffs that are based on trade deficit percentages. And we should definitely be selling missile defense systems to any country that wants it. Screw the UN and Russian crying. It is one thing we know without any doubt that we make better than anyone else. And the companies that build these defense systems are the ones I'd want to spin off commercial companies to make the other electronics and appliances. Lockheed Martins's Martin Marietta, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, etc. As 70% of what they already have can be leveraged into commercial products.

We just need big changes in real ways, like manufacturing, and we need it pretty soon!

[Dossenator]

I didn't know the United States made cars anymore. I would venture to say that the so called American cars are assemble here but most if not all the cars components and parts are made over seas somewhere. My wife and I owned a Ford Windstar Minivan and drove it for years. Most of the parts were from over seas...and guess what it was assemble in Canada. However, it was called an American car. It was no more American then the Mazda I drive now...by the way it is the best car I have ever owned.

As for the quality of the American made car I am skeptical. My grandparents about 8 years ago bought a brand new Pontiac Grand Am...it was a piece of junk. Gave them problems from almost day one. They traded it in a few years ago on a brand new Ford Focus...another piece of junk. The inside door knobs/handles, buttons on the radio, etc were broken within the first 2 months (and my grandpa took care of his vehicles). Before buying these American made cars my grandfather had a Mazda truck and drove it for many years...no problems. It was a great truck...and he regretted not buying another Mazda. And he was one of those types that tried to always buy American made products...but he was smart enough to know that there really is no American made cars anymore.

When I was a kid my parents purchased a brand new Ford Pinto (do I really have to say anything here besides piece of junk)...they then purchased a brand new Chevy Cavalier (you never new if the car was going to start). My parents then traded it in on a Buick Skylark...now that was a great car (ran for years with no problems).

I have owned a Ford Windstar...once it reached 80,000 miles it was in the shop about 4 times a year for major repairs. Most of the time stemming from some sort of computer failures. I made sure to service it every 3,000 miles, always checked fluids, tire pressure, etc. I don't even want to begin to list the problems it had after 80,000 miles....no way it could last 300,000 miles. I owned a Chevy Luv truck in high school and it was always broke down...stupid truck. I think I am going to stick with my Mazda.

[Eric]

Mazdas are nice. I'd say Cobalts aren't bad either, as far as I know. I'm not car aficionado, though.