A Question For The Liberals Here

Bush jr abandoned the Conservatives on fiscal issues his last years in the Presidency and it pissed off all the true conservatives I know.

BUT you didn't answer the question. Or I guess you did. You pay all your taxes, and nothing extra. And let's not forget that Obama has added more to the National Deficit in 19 months than Washington through Reagan combined. And while Obama is in charge (foreign) banks got huge federal handouts, wall street got megabonuses, and GE paid no taxes. And we're in another military altercation which while liberals avoid calling it what it is (WAR) it still costs as much as a war.

Son

I suppose you might consider me a "Liberal" though this is not how I define myself. I can see by your first sentence that you are firmly in the throws of the "us and them" mind set by the manner in which you capitalized the word liberal. That observation would not hold of course if you hail from a country in which there is a Liberal Party but the rest of your post suggests to me that your perspectives are of conservative U.S. origin. And of course there is your proud moniker.

I wonder how many "Liberals" consider themselves to be proud sons of liberty or is that honor reserved for those who consider themselves conservative? Oh, wait a moment here. I get it. Liberal.....liberty. Liberty......liberal. You don't suppose there is a connection there do you?
Son, are you a "Liberal"? I'm just joshing you.

But back to your questions. You seem to be tossing down the gauntlet here, Son. Offering questions and references to supposed beliefs that you for one reason or another find yourself opposed to. I guess you are hoping some "Liberal" will step up to the plate and you will just mow-em down with your predetermined list of fast balls. Like ducks in a bucket. Hold still there you "Liberal". I gottcha in my sights. Oh yeah and you socialists to.

Ok enough of my silly banter. I woke up early this morning and could not go back to sleep. I lay here thinking about the "Great Divide" , you know , that coin flip between one side and the other? Each side thinking they are right and supposing the other side to be either just plain stupid or down right evil to get it? You know what I'm talking about. You can't help but see it can't you? That's what I was thinking when I found your post at the top of the queue. Ah another member with insomnia, thinks I..

This dead end civilization has gotten us to the point were we are at each others throats. Maybe we always were, though I think not. I think there was a time long ago when there was no room for this type of squabbling. A time when mere survival insisted on brotherhood and cooperation. Long ago when we roamed in tribes and not so long ago when we lived in small villages where working together was the only way to win against the elements.
Now though it seems we have gotten so fat and lazy that all we can do is fight amongst ourselves like two babies and a rattle.

So up with your dukes Son, let's get this thing done. I'm right and your wrong to the end like that old Star Trek with the two guys with black and white painted faces parted down the middle fighting into eternity.

Naaa. I think not. Not now, not this fight. I'm going back to sleep Son. Good night and pleasant dreams.

reply to post by avatar22
Thanks for your reply. If we must have taxes, I agree that all should pay their fair share. That is why I support the "fair tax". However, making more does not automatically mean those people have more disposable income. They may have, as I do, additional responsibilities that you do not have. All should carry part of the burden, but the government spends too much money. Much of that overspending is due to entitlement programs. If you support them, then you should shoulder an extra part of the burden to reflect that support. Unless you only support spending other people's money?

Originally posted by ariel bender

Saint Reagan Raised Net taxes during his presidency, myths notwithstanding.


The problem is the Tax code, There should be a Flat tax that each person, including corporations, should pay. no exceptions. The Tax return should be the size of a postcard; your gross income,return, interest, capital gains, etc, etc, and then the flat tax rate.

a 21% across the board Flat tax rate on each person including corporations would eliminate Deficit and Debt within a Generation. Of course this will never happen as reason the Wealthy support politicians is to write tax code as as soon as their candidate is elected favoring their industry, business, or environment.

Thanks for your reply. I like how you couched your argument. Yes collected taxes did rise, but tax rates were lowered. The lower rates helped the economy grow. The growing economy resulted in higher net revenue for the government.

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
I think we can assume that most of these tax dodging corporations do not support the entitlement programs I have mentioned.

Right. Neither do they support the wars, the security of their country in which they operate, Social Security, the roads they use, federal debt interest or anything!

I ask again, how much extra do you pay to the government to support the programs you believe in?

I don't pay "extra". Why should I pay extra? Why should anyone? I pay MY PART. If everyone did, we wouldn't have this problem. I already support these programs by paying my taxes.

Here. Let's turn it around... How much extra do you pay TO THE GOVERNMENT to support the programs you agree with? Do you have kids? Ever plan to? How much extra do you pay TO THE GOVERNMENT for education? Do you support Defense? How much extra do you pay to support the wars? Ever been disabled? Ever plan to be? Unemployed? How much extra do you pay to the government for these programs? Will you collect Social Security? Do you know you will never use Medicare?

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
If you support them, then you should shoulder an extra part of the burden to reflect that support.

Since when do we get to pick and choose which governmental program our taxes support? If that's the case, I'm not paying for wars and education any more! I don't have kids. I am not a veteran, so I don't want to pay their benefits, either! I don't travel or use the roads very much at all, so I want those dollars of mine that are going toward the infrastructure of this country!

Sounds selfish and stupid, doesn't it?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

I ask again, how much extra do you pay to the government to support the programs you believe in?

I don't pay "extra". Why should I pay extra? Why should anyone? I pay MY PART. If everyone did, we wouldn't have this problem. I already support these programs by paying my taxes.

However liberals, especially your champion BO, insist we must raise taxes to support these entitlement programs. I want to know if the liberals "voluntarily raise their own taxes" in order to support the entitlement programs that they so cherish?

Here. Let's turn it around... How much extra do you pay TO THE GOVERNMENT to support the programs you agree with?

That is the thing, lol. I am a libertarian. I don't believe that the government should be doing any of those programs you list unless specifically enumerated in the Constitution. That mainly means defense out of your list iirc. Is the defense budget bloated beyond belief? Absolutely! I support closing all bases outside the US. I support ending all financial and military aid to every nation outside our own. I support bringing the troops home and ending the failing experiment to "export democracy".

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
If you support them, then you should shoulder an extra part of the burden to reflect that support.

Which I don't so no.

You have a point, why should my taxes pay for socialist programs.

Why should I pay for someones job training, why should my taxes pay for someones tools?

Why should my taxes pay for someones housing, medical care, food, transportation, etc?

We should end this socialism and completely privatize the military.

reply to post by whatukno
LOL. I recall your utmost respect for the Constitution from another thread. You challenged myself and others demanding to know if we hated the Constitution. Thus, mindful of the love and respect I know you have for that precious document, I must draw your attention to section 8 of the US Constitution...

Section 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

You can see, from multiple entries and references, that the military is under the purview of the US government. It is directed by the Constitution, which you and I both purport to revere, to raise and maintain an Army and a Navy. Thus it should not be "privately contracted" as you suggest.

reply to post by sonofliberty1776


I am very much in support of fair tax. I think it is the best solution we have at the moment. BUT, I have to say one thing as to the "responsibilities" you mentioned that those in higher tax brackets than myself seem to have. It was a CHOICE to have those greater financial responsibilities. You choose to spend YOUR money the way you see fit. That is your right as an American Citizen, but it is a choice non-the-less. You created the debt/financial obligations you are in. I do not have the constraints of such debt, and because of that I count my blessings and am grateful not to be considered even "middle-class". Yes, I struggle from pay check to pay check, but I have not created a hole in which I cannot climb out of.

I am not a liberal and Obama is not my "champion". In fact, most of those political tests have me as a Libertarian. So watch your assumptions. That's the quickest way to lose me. Please talk to me as an individual. Thanks.

I would gladly pay more taxes to to insure that people in this country have medical coverage, social security, Planned Parenthood and NPR. I do think the programs need a serious overhaul. Money is being wasted and some people take advantage of the social programs. That's not a reason to throw out the whole of social programs. By the way, we DO contribute extra to the programs that we support, just not through the government.

I see you sidestepped my questions:

Do you have kids? Ever plan to? How much extra do you pay TO THE GOVERNMENT for education?
Ever been disabled? Ever plan to be?
Unemployed? How much extra do you pay to the government for these programs?
Do you plan to collect Social Security or will you deny it?
Do you know you will never use Medicare?

You and other people who are going after these social programs are going after the thousands and ignoring the billions.

reply to post by sonofliberty1776


"Thanks for your reply. I like how you couched your argument. Yes collected taxes did rise, but tax rates were lowered. The lower rates helped the economy grow. The growing economy resulted in higher net revenue for the government"



You are quite incorrect; Saint Reagan raised fixed corporate taxes, the largest payroll tax increase, and much more, stop drinking conservative Kool Aid;

1982 Reagan raised taxes by rolling back corporate tax loopholes, the largest single tax increase on corporations in history.

1982 Gas Tax increase

1983 Reagan increased payroll with holding tax, Plus 165 billion dollar bailout of SS

1984 deficit reduction tax

1985 railroad revenue act

1985, 1986 1987 the omnibus budget reconciliation acts

In all there is close to a trillion dollars of added taxes during President Reagans terms. The problem isn't that Reagan raises taxes, it is that the myth surrounding tax and economic stimulus seem to be lost within party rhetoric and talking points. It is a myth that for whatever reason broadcasters like Fox news seem bent on brainwashing those that cannot research the facts themselves

Cutting taxes ONLY works on excessive tax rates, once you are cutting past point of paying for services of nation, then the deficit and debt will wipe out all gains, plus cutting taxes ONLY stimulates when it is middle class tax cuts, not the 1% wealthiest in the nation.
These are the facts.

reply to post by sonofliberty1776


Yes you are correct, the Army and Navy are very much Constitutional. However I see nothing about the marines nor do I see anything about an Air Force.

So perhaps a compromise then? Eliminate the two wasteful unconstitutional branches of the Military.

Of course theres also the general Welfare clause in there that conservatives feel is just a typo, so maybe those parts about the military are just typos too.

Originally posted by avatar22
reply to post by sonofliberty1776

 

I am very much in support of fair tax. I think it is the best solution we have at the moment.

I agree 100%

BUT, I have to say one thing as to the "responsibilities" you mentioned that those in higher tax brackets than myself seem to have. It was a CHOICE to have those greater financial responsibilities. You choose to spend YOUR money the way you see fit. That is your right as an American Citizen, but it is a choice non-the-less. You created the debt/financial obligations you are in. I do not have the constraints of such debt, and because of that I count my blessings and am grateful not to be considered even "middle-class". Yes, I struggle from pay check to pay check, but I have not created a hole in which I cannot climb out of.

So my choosing to help support my mother when she cannot support herself is an obligation that, in your view, I can just sidestep? IMO, that is a huge problem with our nation today. We expect the government to do the things we should be doing ourselves.

reply to post by sonofliberty1776



I would much rather my tax dollars go to helping my fellow Americans than helping those that profit on the blood and lives of our youth. If that make me a liberal, then I am a proud to call myself a liberal. I find it hypocritical for conservatives to attack social programs but totally ignore huge corporate welfare in the form of subsidies to companies that show record profits, and the corruption in the military industrial complex.

www.americanprogress.org...


How much of this is waste?

costofwar.com...


Don't let your ideology get in the way of your common sense.

reply to post by sonofliberty1776


Your supporting your mother is no different than my responsibilities to feed my children. That was not what I was referring to. Did not mean for my comment to be directed toward you specifically. Yes, you are right, more money doesn't mean more disposable income, BUT my point is that the higher the income, the more "created responsibilities", the TRUE struggles in day to day living diminish as income increases. There are far to many people in this country who cry about money and taxes when they put themselves into more debt than they can ever expect to get out of.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I am not a liberal and Obama is not my "champion". In fact, most of those political tests have me as a Libertarian. So watch your assumptions.

That's the quickest way to lose me. Please talk to me as an individual. Thanks.

I stand corrected and apologize for the generalization.

I would gladly pay more taxes to to insure that people in this country have medical coverage, social security, Planned Parenthood and NPR.

I am totally opposed to abortion and by extension planned parenthood. I believe it should be removed from the public teat. If we subsidize left-wing NPR, how can we not support right-wing FOX? I believe we should support neither. The government should not be supporting any private business and should not be in the "news" business at all.

I do think the programs need a serious overhaul. Money is being wasted and some people take advantage of the social programs. That's not a reason to throw out the whole of social programs. By the way, we DO contribute extra to the programs that we support, just not through the government.

I completely disagree, as would almost any Libertarian. You are the only purported Libertarian I have heard that supports government based entitlement programs. I am confused. Can you please provide information on what type of libertarian you are?

The Libertarian Party opposes taxation in pretty much all forms, and deals with the revenue loss by opposing entitlement programs in pretty much all forms. This means that people keep more of what they earn, but it also means that there is no social safety net. And ambitious new proposals--such as universal pre-kindergarten and universal health care--are obviously not compatible with this objective.

Now there are some Libertarian policies that I oppose, for example immigration. But entitlement programs are so outside of Libertarian philosophy that I cannot understand your claim. Could you explain your view in comparison to the general beliefs of most Libertarians. Thanks.

I see you sidestepped my questions:

Do you have kids? Ever plan to? How much extra do you pay TO THE GOVERNMENT for education?

I do. My kids go to a private Christian school. I pay no extra for that and never would.

Ever been disabled?

No

Ever plan to be?

Plan to be? Does any one?

Unemployed? How much extra do you pay to the government for these programs?

I have been unemployed, I have never collected unemployment.

Do you plan to collect Social Security or will you deny it?

I do not believe it will exist when I get to retirement age. Given the option, I would take a refund of all I ever paid and agree to never collect.

Do you know you will never use Medicare?

Another program I expect to be insolvent before I am eligible. I would support immediate abolition.

You and other people who are going after these social programs are going after the thousands and ignoring the billions.

Sorry, but you are wrong. Entitlement programs make up a huge percentage of the budget.

reply to post by whaaa

My ideology would eliminate both corporate subsidies and these unlawful wars.

If I had the financial means I would shoulder all the tax burden for every conservative in the country just to expose what deadbeat whiners conservatives are.

Conservatives want a 0% tax rate, but somehow they feel justified in traveling on roads paid for by taxes, they somehow feel justified to go to war.

But god forbid their taxes are used to help someone instead of killing them, then it's just waste.

Originally posted by avatar22
reply to post by sonofliberty1776

 

Your supporting your mother is no different than my responsibilities to feed my children. That was not what I was referring to. Did not mean for my comment to be directed toward you specifically. Yes, you are right, more money doesn't mean more disposable income, BUT my point is that the higher the income, the more "created responsibilities", the TRUE struggles in day to day living diminish as income increases. There are far to many people in this country who cry about money and taxes when they put themselves into more debt than they can ever expect to get out of.

I also support my children. I send them to private school because the government schools are atrocious and will continue to decline in quality as long as the federal government and teachers unions control those schools. You consider that "created responsibility"? I attended public school, but back then schools were much better. Talk back to a teacher? Bend over boy because the paddle is coming out. Then when you get home.... Teachers seemed to care more then, now they whine about pay and benefits while many Americans are unemployed. Teachers are busy "teaching the test" in most cases. What happened to teaching our children how to think? I could go on and on about public schools, but I would be derailing my own thread

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
You are the only purported Libertarian I have heard that supports government based entitlement programs. I am confused. Can you please provide information on what type of libertarian you are?

I am not a purported Libertarian. I said most tests I've taken call me that. I do not, nor have I ever, belonged to a political party or purported to. I would abolish political parties.