A balanced budget is a good thing, but not always. Sometimes deficit spending is necessary to pull the country out of a recession.
No one here believes in Socialism. We all believe in capitalism. But, when there is a Great Recession, as we've just been through, steps should be taken to end the recession as quickly as possible. Throwing money at the problem, or priming the pump, is the answer and, as you can see, it's working once again.
As for "helping the less fortunate with no demands being placed on them", most of the money being spent now is to help people help themselves -- create jobs, repair infra-structure, make education more accessible, etc. Even health care reform will help the country by easing the financial burden on small businesses and on hospitals whose emergency rooms now have to care for so many uninsured individuals.
Republicans keep presiding over lots of boom and bust, with too many busts -- 1929 (Hoover); 1987 (Reagan); 2008 (Bush). Every few years, the Democrats keep having to ride to the rescue. Yet Republicans say that they believe in capitalism and liberals believe in Socialism. Isn't that a sick joke?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
29 comments:
"Yet Republicans say that they believe in capitalism and liberals believe in Socialism. Isn't that a sick joke?"
-CJP
Then why do you believe in redistribution of wealth? That is socialism!
so⋅cial⋅ism
1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
Notice that part in there that says "distribution, of capital, land, etc...", that is why democrats are socialists!
When Republicans reduce the tax bracket on America's highest earners, so that everyone else has to pay more of the tax burden of running this country, why isn't that called "a redistribution of wealth"?
Brandon, you define Socialism as "a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole."
That is a very accurate description of Socialism.
And it has nothing whatsoever to do with anything that is going on in the United States today, or with anything that either political party is doing or advocating.
CJP,
why do you make the statement that it has nothing to do with things today. If you look at government spending from 1910 to 2010 it has risen from 8% of GDP to a projected 45% of GDP. By definition, if the government is spending more it is getting it from the people. The larger percentage they get, the more the are redistributing to both left and right wing causes. I think the big point is that they need to stop.
A consumption tax would seem the fairest. A tax on things that people buy. You could exclude the necessary items such as groceries, basic clothing and fuel. One problem is that we have so many hidden taxes. An analysis I saw recently, I can not recall the source, clearly indicated that when you add all the taxes together that the AVERAGE american pays (state, fed, payroll, sales, real estate, etc) it averages 40-45%.
This is a central issue.
"why isn't that called "a redistribution of wealth"?"
-CJP
Because the wealthy are already paying a higher percentage than everyone else. We are not trying to tip the scales, only balance them!
I know you think Warren Buffet pays less than his secretary but you cant explain that to me. Everyone I know who makes six figures has to pay a much higher percentage of their income in federal withholdings.
"or with anything that either political party is doing or advocating."
-CJP
What about redistribution of wealth? Redistribution of wealth is the very heart of socialism! Working hard to make sure everyone is equal. That isnt what I want, I dont want to be equal. I want to be the best I can be and if I can do better than average, then let me!
"A consumption tax would seem the fairest."
-America?
I couldnt agree more, one tax for the federal, state and local governments. Add them all together into one nice sales tax and watch how quickly Americans start complaining about how much they pay in taxes. I bet most people never even think about how much money goes to the government.
Government is always looking for new taxes that will create alot of tax dollars without pissing off to many people. Example: Tobacco taxes, most people dont smoke, so most people oppose it. They only want to pick on small groups so they dont piss of the whole.
The best example would be the rich, most Americans are not rich so tax increases on our most productive Americans doesnt bother the rest of Americans.
CJP
What happends to you when you need your retirement money to pay off some major problems? Say you needed 200K, that is all added to your income. When you add that to your regular income you are now most likely in the highest tax bracket, plus you have another 10% penalty fee on top of that. OUCH!!! you just lost around half your money, I hope you didnt really need 200K because that would mean you would have had to take out 400K to begin with so you could pay your 200k emegency.
Really sucks being rich in America doesnt it?
Brandon:
I assume then that you are supporting Obama's Health Reform plan lock, stock and barrel, including the public option.
If you are talking about an emergency that would require someone to withdraw $200,000 from his retirement funds, then you must be talking about a medical emergency. Medicare and Medicare supplements cover those costs for most older Americans.
Obama's program of Universal Health insurance will cover younger Americans and will reduce or eliminate the kinds of financial disasters you are describing which today are being caused by medical emergencies.
I'm happy to see you presenting such a splendid argument in favor of Obama's health insurance programs.
"I'm happy to see you presenting such a splendid argument in favor of Obama's health insurance programs."
-CJP
Private insurance will cover anything Obama care will! Nice try...
I'll take the private insurance and you can keep your socialism!
"Their labor is just not worth enough to their employers to support the high cost of an American health insurance plan: $13,000 a year, on average, for a family of four."
"With "Obamacare," the bill for four decades of permissive immigration has at last come due."
--
Good article by David Frum.
You all realize that CNN had Beck first then for some reason he went to Faux? I tried reading Beck on CNN a few times and couldn't get through even one of his pieces. Anyway, here is a new con on CNN that actually makes some sense, a little...
http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/10/26/frum.immigration.health.care/index.html
Well worth the read in my opinion. No where near the caliber of Brooks, but still very good.
"A consumption tax would seem the fairest. A tax on things that people buy."
--
I still think taxes can kill 2 birds with one stone. ie; gas tax, tobacco tax, alcohol tax, etc is the way to go.
"a projected 45% of GDP"
Isn't most of that spending going towards defense and medical?
"Isn't most of that spending going towards defense and medical?"
-Raygun
since you hate defense, why do you support more government spending?
"Then why do you believe in redistribution of wealth? That is socialism"
Brandon said.
Bailing out Wall Street by Dubya last year was definitely socialism or welfare for the rich, paid for by the taxpayers.
"Bailing out Wall Street by Dubya last year was definitely socialism or welfare for the rich, paid for by the taxpayers."
-Anonymous
I am not sure what your point is but Yes, that also could be considered socialism. The TARP fund could also be seen as an investment rather than a redistribution of wealth.
I dont think the government should be investing any tax dollars. Investing has risk and I dont want my tax dollars in a risky spot.
Bush is to blame for starting the TARP and now Stimulus kick. The worst part about it was that he gave the sack of money to a democrat congress. If you don't think it's working then blame the dems. They have had 100% control of all TARP and Stimulus money. Let me say that again because it's worth repeating. The democrats have been in control of 100% of all TARP and stimulus money. Look at the damage they've done and they still want more.
"Let me say that again because it's worth repeating. The democrats have been in control of 100% of all TARP and stimulus money."
---
JC HOTR, you listening to Faux News again?
"Documents Reveal How Paulson Forced Banks To Take TARP Cash"
http://www.businessinsider.com/uncovered-tarp-docs-reveal-how-paulson-forced-banks-to-take-the-cash-2009-5
Raygun, do you dispute that the dems have had 100% control of all stimulus money? Please give me a detailed answer that leaves "fox news" out of it. I bet you can't do it. Also here is something you libs might want to look at. This is from Frontline so you can't say it's a republican controlled program. It's a little long because it breaks the start of the financial crisis in a detailed way. If you're busy working then break it down to 2 or 3 sections. It'll help you to be more informed instead of throwing out dem talking points.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/
"It'll help you to be more informed instead of throwing out dem talking points."
--
JC HOTR, I just took what you said: "The democrats have been in control of 100% of all TARP" and typed in "Paulson" and "TARP", and came up with hundreds of links, professing to the fact that idiot Paulson was in charge of distributing the funds.
And don't you remember Paulson saying trust me, trust me, just give me the money, which they did, and which was promptly never seen again, and is pretty much untraceable.
Thanks again cons, for the con job, and shaming us for ever trusting you all. We won't be fooled again.
Is your link a movie HOTR?
I don't watch movies on the computer.
I did read this in a small written section
"former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan and former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin -- convinced him that Born's attempt to regulate the risky derivatives market could lead to financial turmoil, a conclusion he now believes was "clearly a mistake."
And that's what most say is the reason for the near collapse. Lack of financial regulation. And "thou shalt not regulate" is the cons 11th commandment. Thanks cons.
"And don't you remember Paulson saying trust me, trust me, just give me the money, which they did, and which was promptly never seen again, and is pretty much untraceable."
I agree Raygun. Paulson is an idiot and I wish the democrat controlled congress would have been smart enough not to trust him. I guess they're just not that smart.
"And that's what most say is the reason for the near collapse. Lack of financial regulation. And "thou shalt not regulate" is the cons 11th commandment. Thanks cons."
Libs are funny. It's not a movie. It's a news report. From Frontline no less. They've been pretty good to dems. Anyway, I knew you wouldn't watch this because it would make your arguments look silly. By the way, a democrat tried very hard to stop this mess and I applaud her. Guess who stopped her?
"I knew you wouldn't watch this "
--
JC, HPOR, why do cons watch and libs read? (for the record, I am an independent)
Please read the bible HPOR. Please read, don't listen and watch the preachers on TV or in church.
Reading fires up your own minds eye, not the eye that others wish you to see as your own.
Nothing wrong with reading. I read every night. You're absolutely right. Reading fires up the mind. It's wonderful. But there are some things that need to be watched. Writen words can be changed. You can't hide from video. Sometimes if you want the absolute truth, you have to see them say it. Do yourself a favor Raygun. Watch this and I promise you will be surprised.
"Watch this and I promise you will be surprised."
--
I am sure I will see something different than you. Please find me the video in text.
That's why I like Huffington Post so much, as all they show in vids, they also put into words for one to read. (And I always read it, and never watch it)
I watch a ton of movies and documentary's also, but only on the local big screen.
Have you ever seen "Whatever Works"?. Woody Allen. GD (most will probably not like it, but I loved it). In my top 5 favorite movies for sure. Just watched it today.
I got this on the PBS.org site so I don't know if they have it in text. Oh well. I think we could have had a great discussion about it. Haven't seen Whatever Works but I am a Woody Allen fan. I love the older movies. Haven't really seen the recent ones. I'll have to check it out.
"Whatever Works" was released in 2009.
It's so funny on so many different levels. I worry that a lot won't get it. ... It's Woody Allen talking about himself, and his past life, and the beautiful women in his life.
Ohhh, and especially religion...
It's all tied together. God I hope it does well in the awards.
buy ativan ativan dosage valium - ativan dosage sublingual
buy xanax do jobs drug test for xanax - lisinopril xanax drug interactions
Post a Comment