We simply don't know if the taxes we pay will go to vital National Securuity needs or to paying for the vegetable and fruit platters McCain will use in his meetings with mining and drilling councils.
Well, I think that's what's interesting about it. It is always going to be the case that if you are a taxpaying citizen, you will be paying for things that will benefit others directly and not yourself. But ideally, we trust that the things that are benefiting others directly are benefiting us indirectly. If we pay to educate everyone, including the poor who can't afford to send their kids to private school, then it reduces crime. If we create roads in rural areas where fewer people use them, then we allow new businesses and real estate to develop--things that keep our economy going. If we give tax cuts to the middle class, then we stimulate the economy, which works its way to everyone, including the people paying more in taxes. So you can choose to think of that last part as redistribution of wealth and think "well that's just unfair," or you can think of it as doing things that are generally beneficial to the American people and economy. Then the point worth debating is what is the BEST way to stimulate the economy. Is it larger tax cuts to the middle class or is it tax cuts across the population as a whole?
If we get hung up on it being "unfair" then we have to recognize the unfairness on both sides. Its been said before: poor people are not all lazy and rich people are not all hard-working. There is an imperfect correlation between hard work and money in our society and we can't just say the poor should just choose different careers, b/c then who would do all those low-paying jobs that keep us going? So focusing on fairness may end in a stalemate.
These comments aren't all directed at you, just getting my thoughts out there :-)
<How is it not relevent? Where is the difference in tax and spend policies?
Because BUSH isn't running... >
Other than earmarks, where has McCain distainced himself from Bush'e economic polocies?
From A Updated Analysis of the 2008 Presidential Candidates’ Tax Plans
"Including interest costs, Obama’s tax plan would boost the debt by $3.5 trillion by 2018. McCain’s plan would increase the debt by $5 trillion on top of the $2.3 trillion increase that the Congressional Budget Office forecasts for the next decade"
Pages
Here's all you need to know about this country's economic meltdown.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ld1PAIgqVSM
Okay then.
We simply don't know if the taxes we pay will go to vital National Securuity needs or to paying for the vegetable and fruit platters McCain will use in his meetings with mining and drilling councils.
Or, to terrorist organizations.
Just going by the passage Malice quoted, Obama does not
So now just the thought that Obama will win is driving our stock market to its lowest levels in years?
I disagree somewhat.
<>
No!
<>
Well, I think that's what's interesting about it. It is always going to be the case that if you are a taxpaying citizen, you will be paying for things that will benefit others directly and not yourself. But ideally, we trust that the things that are benefiting others directly are benefiting us indirectly. If we pay to educate everyone, including the poor who can't afford to send their kids to private school, then it reduces crime. If we create roads in rural areas where fewer people use them, then we allow new businesses and real estate to develop--things that keep our economy going. If we give tax cuts to the middle class, then we stimulate the economy, which works its way to everyone, including the people paying more in taxes. So you can choose to think of that last part as redistribution of wealth and think "well that's just unfair," or you can think of it as doing things that are generally beneficial to the American people and economy. Then the point worth debating is what is the BEST way to stimulate the economy. Is it larger tax cuts to the middle class or is it tax cuts across the population as a whole?
If we get hung up on it being "unfair" then we have to recognize the unfairness on both sides. Its been said before: poor people are not all lazy and rich people are not all hard-working. There is an imperfect correlation between hard work and money in our society and we can't just say the poor should just choose different careers, b/c then who would do all those low-paying jobs that keep us going? So focusing on fairness may end in a stalemate.
These comments aren't all directed at you, just getting my thoughts out there :-)
<
Because BUSH isn't running... >
Other than earmarks, where has McCain distainced himself from Bush'e economic polocies?
From A Updated Analysis of the 2008 Presidential Candidates’ Tax Plans
"Including interest costs, Obama’s tax plan would boost the debt by $3.5 trillion by 2018. McCain’s plan would increase the debt by $5 trillion on top of the $2.3 trillion increase that the Congressional Budget Office forecasts for the next decade"
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411750_updated_candidates_summary.pdf
We've had enough years of trickle down. The rich have gotten richer and the middle class are
Pages