Yes, it is true that the ideological sides of any particular argument have widened, and entrenched deeper into their own views without any real willingness to accept the others points of view as being even remotely valid. Do you think that is a problem that is only suffered by your opponents? Or can you step back and possibly look and see that this was possibly intentionally stoked for political purposes on both sides at different times?
from j-mac
The loss of a middle adds to the problem. But to give you a really honest and frank answer that you are not going to like - yes indeedy - I think the lions share of the problem is because the right wing has embraced various beliefs in the way a zealot embraces religion. The right believes what it wants to believe because it is convenient for them to believe it. An example is the truisms they constantly float that small government is good and lower taxes are good and local government is better than national government. There are a bunch of axioms like that that have adopted on a level like religious tenets and they permeate the discussion and poison it.
Progressives like myself do not believe in big government. We simply want government that works.
Progressives like myself do not believe that lower taxes are good are higher taxes are good. We simply want a tax system that works for a sustainable society.
Progressives like myself do not rank any hierarchy of local, state or national government as which is the best and most desirable. We simply want government to work.
So yes - I do think the lions share of the problem is the increasing radicalization of the conservative wing of this nation. I see no corresponding radicalization of the left wing - in fact - most of us on the left complain about the toothless lion of democratic politics.
Yep, there's a problem and it's not my fault. You sound just like your president.
They only call it class warfare when we fight back.
The loss of a middle adds to the problem. But to give you a really honest and frank answer that you are not going to like - yes indeedy - I think the lions share of the problem is because the right wing has embraced various beliefs in the way a zealot embraces religion...
An example is the truisms they constantly float that small government is good and lower taxes are good and local government is better than national government. There are a bunch of axioms like that that have adopted on a level like religious tenets and they permeate the discussion and poison it.
Progressives like myself do not believe in big government. We simply want government that works.
Progressives like myself do not believe that lower taxes are good and higher taxes are good. We simply want a tax system that works for a sustainable society.
Progressives like myself do not rank any hierarchy of local, state or national government as which is the best and most desirable. We simply want government to work.
So yes - I do think the lions share of the problem is the increasing radicalization of the conservative wing of this nation. I see no corresponding radicalization of the left wing - in fact - most of us on the left complain about the toothless lion of democratic politics.
envy has been with us for decades and there are still failures who blame the rich for their lack of financial success. If you want money, do something valuable that would cause others to give you some. People like me don't exist just to pour money down upon you no matter how much you complain
No one is asking you to. Take your money and leave if you wish to pay a lower effective tax rate on your income then does the middle class. I understand Somalia has the type of tax rates you prefer.
Look, who gave you the ability to decide who should stay or go in this country? You own it now?
My ability is the same as all Americans, the right to vote how we want our country run, that includes tax rates. From all the polls this year, it appears the great majority of Americans have decided that continuing the tax cuts for the rich is of no benefit to the economy or the majority of the people in this country.
No, that is false..Or at least I don't buy it...Can you show me where 'the great majority" agrees with the premise you are advancing?
j-mac
By all means please identify that problem.
Wow, what a Debbie Wasserman Schultz-esqe type of answer...Just the right amount of arrogance, and snark in order to achieve the precise amount of insult.
Look, who gave you the ability to decide who should stay or go in this country? You own it now?
j-mac
No one is asking you to. Take your money and leave if you wish to pay a lower effective tax rate on your income then does the middle class. I understand Somalia has the type of tax rates you prefer.
No one is asking you to. Take your money and leave if you wish to pay a lower effective tax rate on your income then does the middle class. I understand
Somalia has the type of tax rates you prefer.
My ability is the same as all Americans, the right to vote how we want our country run, that includes tax rates. From all the polls this year, it appears the great majority of Americans have decided that continuing the tax cuts for the rich is of no benefit to the economy or the majority of the people in this country.
Since you appear to be criticizing my posts, please provide proof of your charges or have the decency to retract them.
If we have indeed fallen so far down the ideological rabbit hole that now someone wanting a rational discussion of national tax policy is tagged with being FAR LEFT it shows just how hopeless this situation has become.
Q: Why don't you defend the policy instead of making ad hominem attacks on me and others here who want a rational discussion of national tax policy?
A: Defending the tactics of the right by attacking their critics is the favored methodology as opposed to defending a indefensible policy which benefits a relatively small minority.
However, you are kind of proving my point in your opening by placing all of the blame on your ideological opponents here. It may be true that some on the right at times tend to go overboard in their arguments, sometimes to the exclusion of considering facts that are not convenient to the argument. But I see that on BOTH sides of the argument at times.
Well, I can understand why you see that, and you should be aware then also that we on the right see the exact same things coming out of the progressive left, so to speak. For example, taxes are too low, Federal government is supreme over localities, (Even though I believe that the power of the Federal Government is derived from the states, not the other way around), Global Warming, Eco-greenism, general nanny statist function that saps the power of the individual are also promoted by progressives like religious dogma, and in many cases they permeate discussion, and destroy it equally.
dems realize gun control cost them congress in 1994. Believe me, if they thought they could ban guns and not lose offices they would go for it.
the fact remains that the dems-who have as many or more uber wealthy politicians-realize that to win office they have to pander to the poor, the envious and others who are seduced by the claims that the rich don't pay enough taxes. for rich dems, paying more taxes is worth it if they get the wealth and power that comes from holding public office.
There is little dispute that the Republican party has swung far to the right over the last decade - perhaps longer.
Democrats, on the other hand, have not swung to the far left as a balance. In fact, the opposite has happened.
How many Democrats today stand up for gun control - once a major liberal cause? You cannot even get a resolution introduced after a twenty person massacre these days the pendulum has swung so far to the right.
Once Democrats were strong opposing foreign wars like Viet Nam. Very few today make an issue of it.
Once Democrats vigorously defended organized labor. Even with huge majorities in the Congress in the first two years of Obama they failed to push the check off system that unions wanted.
Sorry, but the record shows no corresponding radicalization of the left of the Democratic Party - just the opposite in fact.
We do not accept as a truism that taxes are too low. We look at current levels, compare them to the levels of the last sixty years and make a factual conclusion that they are among the lowest at this time than at any time in the last sixty years for many people. Capital gains included in that low figure. That is not a statement of faith like "low taxes are the best". It is simply a statement of historical fact that is verified by reality.
As a progressive, I do not believe the federal government is supreme. There is a separation of powers and each of the three levels has their domain and proper powers.
I have never known what the nanny state charge means. It is so vague and over the top as to be meaningless.
To those who have consistently claimed in this post that their effective tax rate is 15% or even higher, please do the math on your own tax return so you don't continue to look foolish. Here's his tax return: http://www.newt.org/sites/newt.org/files/GingrichIncomeTaxReturn.pdf
Take Line 60 of your own return and divide it by Line 37. Thanks.
Mine's never been above 10.7%.
So he admits to paying 15% on money he invested that he was already taxed 30% on?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?