Obama is cutting tax breaks to CHARITIES

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by mental modulator

 

No, I'm not ignoring you. I'm defiantly not letting my emotions get in the way of my politics.

Hoover didn't balance the budget, he started to increase spending right before he was voted out. We were starting to come out of the recession in 1932, before Hoover started dumping cash into the economy. Then comes along Roosevelt with his New Deal, which most of it was declared unconstitutional, he also raised taxes on everybody and implemented price fixes. And despite the decision of the Supreme Court on the New Deal he still let the New Deal policies go on and did not enforce the the decision.

Obama is proposing to do the same thing as both Hoover and Roosevelt and put us in a greater depression. What he is also doing wrong is trying to implement Universal Health Care for 309+ million people. Medicaid and Medicare doesn't work, and the VA is really dirt poor health care and those are the people that have gotten limbs blown off and have shrapnel removed fighting in the wars our country sent them to fight. If that is how they treat our soldiers how do you think they are going to treat us?

Not only that, but expect to start paying a total amount of tax upwards of 55% when everything is said and done. The health care industry will loose millions of jobs, and become sub par. Long waits and some bureaucrat up in Washington telling your doctor that you can't have that live saving operation because it isn't "cost effective".

Then with him reducing the deduction, you can expect less people donating to charities like the Red Cross, St. Judes, cancer research, March of Dimes, etc. You can expect philanthropist donating less mess to building hospitals, and other things that really help the people.

People not saving for a rainy day, is there own fault, and partly the governments for taking money out of their check, even though the get it back at the end of the year. It earns no interest while it is sitting up in Washington or at the state level.

Why should we have to pay for irresponsible people? All we are doing is rewarding failure and punishing success. Oh that also brings up the next problem with this proposed plan. That means less people donating to charities that help homeless people, that rely on donations.

Well first off I was talking to David - second the rewarding failure paragraph is way off base. The PEEONS did not cause this mess - the SUCESSFUL in the highest places did... they debased their companies and essentially stole TRILLIONS.

But to the depression... You realy need to get your facts right. Just because you are righties does not mean that any assertion you make is correct - based on your firm belief in your ideology.

You stated that the depression was almost over in 32??

29 - 32 were some of the worst years ever -

in fact in 32 - corperate profits feel from 10 billion to 1 billion that very year.

Between 1929 and 1932 the income of the average American family was reduced by 40%.

Something like nine million savings accounts had been wiped out between 1930 and 1933.

Between 1929 and 1933, U.S. GDP fell around 30%, the stock market lost almost 90% of its value.

33 was the worst year - the new deal increased employment - 13% up from 35%

Originally posted by stevegmu

Originally posted by mental modulator

Originally posted by David9176
I'm sure there are people who cheat...but that doesn't make it right for those who don't and are actually helping people out of their own good will.

At least they are volunteering money instead of forcibly having it taken from them by the government.

You are right though, some are greedy.

If it was me and i was rich, i'd give lots of it away and keep enough to live comfortably.

Isn't that kind of a reward for making alot of money? Doing good for the society and giving back...voluntarily?

It's what I would do. When people ask me for money on the street i always give some money..even if i think they could be scamming me.

That's what all part of being a good person isn't it?

This and other things are being done to introduce funds into universal healthcare type program. So trying to frame this as just giving money to government is not 100%
accurate. Healthcare was part of Obama's platform, so was raising the tax rates on the top 2% to MY and probably your tax rate, unless your very rich.




[edit on 2-3-2009 by mental modulator]

Where do you live where someone making $200000 is very rich?
Do you actually think the government will do a better job of helping the poor than charitable institutions, like Catholic Charities?

Where do you live to think $200,000 is destitute?

NO...

I do think HMO's have not done a very good job with costs - If Obama is going to start funding a single payer system the money has to come from somewhere.

the charitable dump is -7% from 35% to 28%..

I never said destitute, but it is hardly 'very rich' if one has a $9000/month mortgage/property tax/insurance payment.

reply to post by David9176


If they are really doing it for their own good will, then they wouldn't care about the tax break, period.