Originally posted by bkcrt
And "spreading the wealth" as he puts it, is socialism.

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

But I'll not argue it with you here. You might want to do some research on "Socialism" to find out what it actually is. The term "Spreading the wealth" is highly subject to interpretation, and DEFINITELY does not necessarily mean the dreaded Socialism.

I was just trying to find out what you're really afraid of. And I can see that you might disagree with his tax policies, which, IMO, doesn't necessarily translate to "fear", but rather disagreement. I think people have forgotten what "fear" really means. When they disagree with something, they become afraid... It's too bad, really.

Originally posted by bkcrt
Stealing is stealing.

So... ALL taxes are "stealing", right? We are being stolen from now. Why weren't you afraid before this? Why are Obama's taxes particularly frightening, when the government's been stealing from you all along?

[edit on 18-11-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by bkcrt
And "spreading the wealth" as he puts it, is socialism.

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

But I'll not argue it with you here. You might want to do some research on "Socialism" to find out what it actually is. The term "Spreading the wealth" is highly subject to interpretation, and DEFINITELY does not necessarily mean the dreaded Socialism.

I was just trying to find out what you're really afraid of. And I can see that you might disagree with his tax policies, which, IMO, doesn't necessarily translate to "fear", but rather disagreement. I think people have forgotten what "fear" really means. When they disagree with something, they become afraid... It's too bad, really.

Originally posted by bkcrt
Stealing is stealing.

So... ALL taxes are "stealing", right? We are being stolen from now. Why weren't you afraid before this? Why are Obama's taxes particularly frightening, when the government's been stealing from you all along?

[edit on 18-11-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]

Taxing people and spending the money on things they use everyday like roads and military is fine. Taxing people to "Spread the wealth" and using it to fund programs for those who have not earned it is not ok.

Taxes should be used for public works, military and government. Not for social programs. Leave it to the public to develop social programs for themselves or they become dependant on government.

From Dictionary.com:

6 dictionary results for: socialism
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
so⋅cial⋅ism   /ˈsoʊʃəˌlɪzəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [soh-shuh-liz-uhm] Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun 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.
2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

I think "spreading the wealth" falls under that definition. Oh, and that 3rd bullet in that definition is the scarest part of all.


[edit on 18-11-2008 by bkcrt]

Originally posted by bkcrt
Taxing people and spending the money on things they use everyday like roads and military is fine. Taxing people to "Spread the wealth" and using it to fund programs for those who have not earned it is not ok.

Our taxes ALREADY go to programs like Welfare and Social Services, health care for the poor and so on. Who do you think pays for that? Are you scared yet? If you're not scared of the current tax system (or more specifically the way the taxes were structured under Clinton, when we had all that job growth and great economy), it doesn't hardly make sense that you're scared we'll be going back to those tax schedules.

Were you scared under Clinton?

Or are you just anti-Obama and spouting the talking points?

I think "spreading the wealth" falls under that definition. Oh, and that 3rd bullet in that definition is the scarest part of all.

I understand that you're shaking in your boots about Socialism, but I don't understand why you think going back to the Clinton tax structure is Socialism...