• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

NBC GOP Debate 9pm EST - 9pm PST

How is it a narrow picture? Conservatives always call for a fairer, flatter tax. So how is it acceptable when the wealthy pay a lower rate? The lengths conservatives will go to protect the wealthy is unbelievable.

Its a narrow picture as it only looks at it from one vantage point.

I'd suggest you avoid stereotyping, especially incorrect stereotyping. Conservatives in general call for a flatter INCOME tax system typically. For myself, I don't mind a progressive income tax system though I believe significant reform would need to be done for it. I also think that comparing INCOME tax to CAPITAL GAINS tax, when the two things are taxing ENTIRELY Different things that contribute to the economy in entirely different ways is an illegitimate comparison, especially when one attempts to act like they're speaking of the exact same thing.
 
Is it your attention span, or are you intentionally being obtuse? What does that have to do with your claims of sacrifice? Oh, Romney's Daddy was rich? From what i understand, Romney started at the bottom of a very small investment firm. He delivered mail to the executives.. Doesn't sound like Ole Dad was very helpful, perhaps it was due to the fact that his Dad was a conservative as well? Just like my kids.. I mad ethem go out and shovel snow from driveways last weekend. Why? because they need to know how to earn their own way, and exactly how value is placed on money and hard work.


Tim-

I want you to re-read what you just said about "values" and "hard work", then tell us again exactly how Mitt Romeny "earned" his money.
 
Its a narrow picture as it only looks at it from one vantage point.

I'd suggest you avoid stereotyping, especially incorrect stereotyping. Conservatives in general call for a flatter INCOME tax system typically. For myself, I don't mind a progressive income tax system though I believe significant reform would need to be done for it. I also think that comparing INCOME tax to CAPITAL GAINS tax, when the two things are taxing ENTIRELY Different things that contribute to the economy in entirely different ways is an illegitimate comparison, especially when one attempts to act like they're speaking of the exact same thing.

The capital gains tax is an "investment tax".

The income tax is a "wage tax".

The payroll tax is a "labor tax".

If you combined the wage tax with the labor tax and compare their rates to the capital gains tax rate, most people will very likely discover that they pay a much higher overall tax rate than Mitt Romney does and they put in HARD WORK...LABOR for less earnings. How the hell is that fair?
 
You missed the point. Why would an individual paying 14% of his $24 million income, represent more of a hardship than an individual paying 22% of his $50,000 income?

Then lobby for a tax overhaul? What is your idea of a fair tax system? Do you believe only successful people should pay taxes?

Tim-
 
You are implying that he is somehow making more of a sacrifice that someone who makes $50,000 that pays a greater proportion of his income in taxes and that is BS.

I'm implying no such thing; you're simply inferring it based on your own prejudiced view of what you believe conservatives think or stand for. I am not implying that he is making more of a scarifice, I'm stating that speaking about his impact in the scheme of things regarding taxes simply by looking at the percentage of his total monetary intake is a ridiculously narrow way to view it.
 
I want you to re-read what you just said about "values" and "hard work", then tell us again exactly how Mitt Romeny "earned" his money.

And I want to examine how 47% of the US population pay no taxes. And then apply that to your overall philosophy. What do the 47% do to contribute? What do the folks on welfare who are perfectly capable of working do to earn their welfare checks?

We can do this all day?


Tim-
 
I agree with your latter point that we need to find ways to reduce the cost of our entitlement programs and reduce military spending, but my point here is for a political party that's so eager to cut federal spending, the policies each candidate would follow would actually increase federal spending.

First, your assumption is that they would push for this spending while not also pushing for cuts in other areas, thus creating either a net stagnation or possibly even a decrease. While I agree with skepticism on that as being reasonable, I think you can't necessarily state plainly they absolutely will increase federal spending simply because they want to do those things.
 
He's right, though, on Gingrich being a lobbyist. I say this as a guy who will never pull the lever for Mitt. It amazes me what Newt is able to get away with.
Better hope Rick stays in.
 
With 10 months to go, you can claim that, because you saw one hour and forty minutes of television.

I can make that claim because each of the GOP candidates exposed the hypocrisy of Conservatism from the Right.

omg Romney sounds like a spoiled brat that isn't getting his way. He sounds horrible IMO, he is imploding. Romney needs to get back to attempting to show Republicans how he can lead conservatively. Holy crap I can't believe it is degenerating into a ****fest. These guys need to stop its starting to look bad for all of them.

Interesting take you guys had.

My initial impression was that Gingrich had a bad night. He seemed old and a bit weak tonight. He was under attack, and never really got going.

Romney looked a lot stronger to me. He's not a great debater, so he's not going to pump a lot of people up, but this performance was night and day from last week. He looked like a leader.

Santorum had a good night, but he's still Rick Santorum. He's just not going to be the guy.

Oh, and Ron Paul was there too. :peace

Poor debate performance from the whole field, IMO.

Meh.

It appears the candidates are going to destroy any chance the GOP had of winning the presidency by tearing each other apart like harpies in debate after debate. Do they not realize that many undecided voters are watching these debates and deciding Obama isn't so bad after all? This debate was particularly damaging to Romney - and I still feel he was the only candidate that could have realistically beaten Obama, but after the last two debates I feel that chance is gone. Newt has too many skeletons that Obama will be able to bring out one at a time and dance before the public for months and months. Santorum is, well he is Santorum. And there is no way the GOP would let Paul win the nomination.

I seriously have heartfelt sympathy for the GOP.

So, let's spell out what we've learned from last night's debate.

Ron Paul. Definitely without a doubt the GOP outsider! He totally and utterly EXPOSED THE ENTIRE REPUBLICAN PARTY not only by saying their policies have led us to where we are today, but also by stating that Republicans are not ready to govern, that the party is in a mess and needs to change. HE SAID THAT. Those were Ron Paul's words (or atleast in summary).

Newt Gingrinch. Talk about the consumate Washington insider! Not only has Newt followed in the footsteps of Conservatism since 1964 - HIS OWN ADMISSION - but he lead the charge for instituting conservative policies, as well as ushering in this latest montely crew of misfits Tea Parties that has John Boehner having nightmares! Again, BY HIS OWN ADMISSION, Newt Gingrinch was intimately involved with those issues - policies that Ron Paul openly admitted have the country in the economic condition it's in NOW! Moreover, Newt was a lobbyist! No way he can deny this now. Mitt Romney effectively and totally exposed him! Talk about crony capitalism at its best! My God!! Unless you just went deft at that point, how do you ignore the obvious conflict of interest there? YOU CAN'T!!!

Mitt Romney. For all the finger pointing he did towards Newt, he didn't do himself any favors either. His tax policy was so damned stupid! How the hell are middle-class wage earners to take advantage of the tax policies he'd usher in, i.e., tax credit on savings, investing, etc. Does he really think the middle-class has the kind of "investment dollars" he has? Clearly not since his tax cut would start at the upper level = $200K. Not so sure his ideas are good ideas, but people will hear that and shift alittle to his side without really thinking it through because...well, it sounds nice.

Santorum. This guy is a piece of work. He'd isolate the U.S. from any other nation he believes is "hostile" to America. That's half the world right there (atleast if you listen to Conservative Republicans tell it). Not working with Cuba, for example, at all until the Casto family line is completely gone! What an assinine foreign policy to have....just wait until the ruling family line dies off, then we'll talk. Thank God the Russians killed Hilter before he and Eva Brown could have kids. :roll: And let's not forget that HE IS THE MOST CONVERSTIVE CANDIDATE ON THE PANEL...following in lock-step with the Tea Party. YES! The same political group that once again has caused Speaker Boehner fits AND led to the first credit rating downgrade this country has ever experienced!! Come on, people! Wake up!!

Not one of these candidates is fit to lead this nation. NONE!!! Again, listen to what they say and put their words in their proper context where economic, domestic and foreign policy is concerned in relation to where our society is today and then it will all start to make sense. Obama couldn't have done better to expose the hypocrisy of the Republican Party than these guys did by themselves.
 
Last edited:
I can make that claim because each of the GOP candidates exposed the hypocrisy of Conservatism from the Right.

omg Romney sounds like a spoiled brat that isn't getting his way. He sounds horrible IMO, he is imploding. Romney needs to get back to attempting to show Republicans how he can lead conservatively. Holy crap I can't believe it is degenerating into a ****fest. These guys need to stop its starting to look bad for all of them.[/QUOTE]





So, let's spell out what we've learned from last night's debate.

Ron Pau. Definitely without a doubt the GOP outsider! He totally and utterly EXPOSED THE ENTIRE REPUBLICAN PARTY by saying their policies have led us to where we are today, but stating that Republicans are not ready to govern, that the party is in a mess and needs to change. HE SAID THAT. Those were Ron Paul's words (or atleast in summary).

Newt Gingrinch. Talk about the consumate Washington insider! Not only has Newt followed in the footsteps of Conservatism since 1964 - HIS OWN ADMISSION - but he lead the charge for instituting conservative policies, as well as ushering in this latest montely crew of misfits Tea Parties that has John Boehner having nightmares! Again, BY HIS OWN ADMISSION, Newt Gingrinch was intimately involved with those issues - policies that Ron Paul openly admitted have the country in the economic condition it's in NOW! Moreover, Newt was a lobbyist! No way he can deny this now. Mitt Romney effectively and totally exposed him! Talk about crony capitalism at its best! My God!! Unless you just went deft at that point, how do you ignore the obvious conflict of interest there? YOU CAN'T!!!

Mitt Romney. For all the finger pointing he did towards Newt, he didn't do himself any favors either. His tax policy was so damned stupid! How the hell are middle-class wage earners to take advantage of the tax policies he'd usher in, i.e., tax credit on savings, investing, etc. Does he really think the middle-class has the kind of "investment dollars" he has? Clearly not since his tax cut would start at the upper level = $200K. Not so sure his ideas are good ideas, but people will hear that and shift alittle to his side without really thinking it through because...well, it sounds nice.

Santorum. This guy is a piece of work. He's isolate the U.S. from any other nation he believes is "hostile" to America. That's half the world right there (atleast if you listen to Conservative Republicans tell it). No working with Cuba, for example, at all until the Casto family line is completely gone! What an assinine foreign policy to have....just wait until the ruling family line dies off, then we'll talk. Thank God the Russians killed Hilter before he and Eva Brown could have kids. :roll: And let's not forget that HE IS THE MOST CONVERSTIVE CANDIDATE ON THE PANEL...following in lock-step with the Tea Party. YES! The same political group that once again has caused Speaker Boehner fits AND led to the first credit rating downgrade this country has ever experienced!! Come on, people! Wake up!!

Not one of these candidates is fit to lead this nation. NONE!!! Again, listen to what they say and put their words in their proper context where economic, domestic and foreign policy is concerned in relation to where our society is today and then it will all start to make sense. Obama couldn't have done better to expose the hypocrisy of the Republican Party than these guys did by themselves.
You'll be voting for Obama, so what's your point?
 
And I want to examine how 47% of the US population pay no taxes. And then apply that to your overall philosophy. What do the 47% do to contribute? What do the folks on welfare who are perfectly capable of working do to earn their welfare checks?

We can do this all day?



Tim-
Thats a lie. 86% of all americans pay taxes.
 
I find that hard to believe when you factor in tax credits and exemptions. Where are the statistics to support that?
 
The capital gains tax is an "investment tax".

The income tax is a "wage tax".

The payroll tax is a "labor tax".

If you combined the wage tax with the labor tax and compare their rates to the capital gains tax rate, most people will very likely discover that they pay a much higher overall tax rate than Mitt Romney does and they put in HARD WORK...LABOR for less earnings. How the hell is that fair?

Ignoring the fact that his capital investments could've potentially lead them to have the oppertunity that allowed them to do said "HARD WORK". That said, when did I say that it was "fair". If you'd like I could link you to my comments in another thread concerning what my view is in regards to the attempt to be "fair" with regards to a tax system.
 
I can make that claim because each of the GOP candidates exposed the hypocrisy of Conservatism from the Right.


You'll be voting for Obama, so what's your point?

My point is your party has lots of damage control to do after this Florida debate. Only someone who either tuned them out, turned down the volumn on their TV or totally agree with the collective mindset they all espoused is a total and complete lunitic!

I would not and could not support any of these candidates - not even Ron Paul although he's the ONLY one who has spoken the truth among the panelist - because each represents the very things that are wrong with this country based on their policies, their political viewpoints.

Washington insider.

Poor moral values.

Questionable ethics.

Single-minded ideological viewpoints.

Would foster intrusion on personal family health and legal liability matters. (Re: How in the world do you claim to defend the santity of marriage on the one hand, yet throw your Christian value of (Genesis 2:24 KJV - "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." How do you reconcile that Christian marriage tenent yet have the federal government at the judicial level make a medical decision on a life or dealth matter that should be left up to the surviving spouse? How do you rationalize this? YOU CAN'T!!!)
 
Last edited:
Ignoring the fact that his capital investments could've potentially lead them to have the oppertunity that allowed them to do said "HARD WORK". That said, when did I say that it was "fair". If you'd like I could link you to my comments in another thread concerning what my view is in regards to the attempt to be "fair" with regards to a tax system.

Link away...

Not that it matters. A flat tax would never work in America. It would only breed more income inequality.
 
Then lobby for a tax overhaul? What is your idea of a fair tax system? Do you believe only successful people should pay taxes?

Tim-

How do you jump from my position - that those who's income is primarily from investments shouldn't pay a lower tax rate than someone making $50,000,

to your strawman that "only successful people should pay taxes?"
 
I'm implying no such thing; you're simply inferring it based on your own prejudiced view of what you believe conservatives think or stand for. I am not implying that he is making more of a scarifice, I'm stating that speaking about his impact in the scheme of things regarding taxes simply by looking at the percentage of his total monetary intake is a ridiculously narrow way to view it.

I don't get your point then, other than he is very wealthy. He is paying a smaller portion of his income in taxes than are millions of Americans. How do you justify that?
 
I don't get your point then, other than he is very wealthy. He is paying a smaller portion of his income in taxes than are millions of Americans. How do you justify that?

Why must that be justified?
 
How do you jump from my position - that those who's income is primarily from investments shouldn't pay a lower tax rate than someone making $50,000,

to your strawman that "only successful people should pay taxes?"

I'm not following? Where is the strawman?


Tim-
 
How much tax does someone who A) lives in government housing, or gets a subsidy that pays all of their rent. B) receives food stamps and C) gets a tax credit when they file their taxes?

I realize you are playing the all taxes vs the income taxes card but still not everyone pays their bills out of pocket.
 
Do you read your own links, pal? I am correct, and YOU are wrong. 47% of American's FY09 paid no federal income tax, PERIOD.. :)


Tim-

Federal income taxes only make up 40% of federal revenue. Payroll taxes also make up 40 % of federal revenue and the working class pay for 90% of the payroll taxes.

As the study show. only 14% pay no federal taxes, and they consist of the disabled and the elderly poor. How much you propose we tax the disabled and elderly poor, while we allow the super rich to pay lesser tax rate than the middle class?
 
Back
Top Bottom