• 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!

Tax System Seen as Unfair, in Need of Overhaul

Centinel said:
They are collectivists. In their mind they own you, therefore what you do IS their business.
Click to expand...

They definitely think they own all my stuff. And they try to convince us that they're not socialists. :rofl
 
apdst said:
Let's be even more accurate...the government can't create jobs. Government jobs won't do anything to jump start the economy.
Click to expand...

government jobs provide services to the people.

the more people who have any jobs, the more money is spend and the more the economy grows.
 
Thunder said:
government jobs provide services to the people.

the more people who have any jobs, the more money is spend and the more the economy grows.
Click to expand...

It's been proven for a century, now, that government money can't expand an economy. It didn't work for the Soviets. It hasn't worked in the Euro Zone. Even China has learned that it doesn't work. And, here we are trying the same old failed policies.

The funny part about it all, is that the Libbos cry about how more government jobs is the answer and they're working around the clock to downsize our armed forces. :rofl
 
apdst said:
It's been proven for a century, now, that government money can't expand an economy....
Click to expand...

so, if a state hired 10,000 new workers, and those workers are all paid a good salary, that money won't stimulate the economy?

me thinks you have no clue what you're talking about.
 
Thunder said:
so, if a state hired 10,000 new workers, and those workers are all paid a good salary, that money won't stimulate the economy?

me thinks you have no clue what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

No, it won't, because all you're doing is taking money out of the private sector, putting it into the public sector, then putting part of it back in the private sector.

It doesn't work and the past three years has proven that it doesn't work.
 
apdst said:
No, it won't, because all you're doing is taking money out of the private sector, putting it into the public sector, then putting part of it back in the private sector.

It doesn't work and the past three years has proven that it doesn't work.
Click to expand...

oh, and how many new people did the govt. hire in the last three years?
:lamo
 
Thunder said:
oh, and how many new people did the govt. hire in the last three years?
:lamo
Click to expand...

It's irrelvant. Ultimately, your point, is that government spending will improve the economy. So far, that hasn't happened, even after an additional $4 trillion dollars has been spent.
 
apdst said:
...Ultimately, your point, is that government spending will improve the economy...
Click to expand...

no, that is NOT my point. please don't respond to my posts if you aren't going to have the courtesy to actually read them.

if the government hired 10,000 people who are currently unemployed, at a good middle-class wage, that means tons of money going into the economy...which will stimulate growth and add to tax-revenue.

if you can't understand this, well..what can ya do?
 
Thunder said:
no, that is NOT my point. please don't respond to my posts if you aren't going to have the courtesy to actually read them.

if the government hired 10,000 people who are currently unemployed, at a good middle-class wage, that means tons of money going into the economy...which will stimulate growth and add to tax-revenue.

if you can't understand this, well..what can ya do?
Click to expand...

Where is the money going to come from to pay all these people?
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
Where is the money going to come to pay all these people?
Click to expand...

since you have chosen to move on to another topic, I accept that you have conceded that govt. can indeed create lots of jobs that can of course stimulate the economy.
 
Thunder said:
since you have chosen to move on to another topic, I accept that you have conceded that govt. can indeed create lots of jobs that can of course stimulate the economy.
Click to expand...

Nice dodge! :lamo
 
Thunder said:
dodge?

we are talking about hypotheticals. and govt. can and does create jobs. LOTS of jobs.

you are very aware of this.
Click to expand...

Government jobs don't do anymore for the economy than welfare. So, no, the government can't create jobs. The government doesn't make money. It collects taxes from the citizens. Therefore, only the private sector can create jobs.
 
apdst said:
Who is being pissed?
Click to expand...

The middle class is being pissed on, have for 30 years, its called trickle down economics. That's why the average income for the bottom 50% of the country is $15,800, while those at the top's income has quadrupled.
 
Catawba said:
The middle class is being pissed on, have for 30 years, its called trickle down economics. That's why the average income for the bottom 50% of the country is $15,800, while those at the top's income has quadrupled.
Click to expand...

You can blame the Dems for that, since they've been on charge for most of the time. Looks like it's more to do with big gubmint, than anything else.
 
apdst said:
You can blame the Dems for that, since they've been on charge for most of the time. Looks like it's more to do with big gubmint, than anything else.
Click to expand...

No you can't because this did not occur over the last 3 years, it was over the last 30 years of supply side economics and de-regulation. Name me one spending bill that Bush refused to sign? Name me one that Reagan refused to sign? The only time in the last 30 years we have made a dent in our deficit is when the the Rs and Ds came together to both cut spending and raise taxes.
 
Catawba said:
The middle class is being pissed on, have for 30 years, its called trickle down economics. That's why the average income for the bottom 50% of the country is $15,800, while those at the top's income has quadrupled.
Click to expand...
What is being done to them, exactly?
 
Catawba said:
No you can't because this did not occur over the last 3 years, it was over the last 30 years of supply side economics and de-regulation. Name me one spending bill that Bush refused to sign? Name me one that Reagan refused to sign? The only time in the last 30 years we have made a dent in our deficit is when the the Rs and Ds came together to both cut spending and raise taxes.
Click to expand...

Right! And how many of the past thirty years have the Democrats held the majority? Does the number, "18", sound familiar?
 
apdst said:
Right! And how many of the past thirty years have the Democrats held the majority? Does the number, "18", sound familiar?
Click to expand...

And when during those 12 years the Republicans were in control did they reduce the deficit??? Even when the Democrats controlled the Congress, Reagan and Bush Jr. never once vetoed a spending bill, did they?

The only time they significantly reduced the deficit is when both parties compromised in the 90's to both cut spending and raise taxes. When we eventually get serious again about reducing the debt, both parties will need to compromise. That is currently what the GOP refuses to do.
 
Last edited:
Centinel said:
What is being done to them, exactly?
Click to expand...

Their jobs are being outsourced so the 1% can increase their bottom line, and we give the companies tax breaks for doing so.

Their tax rates have been increased over the last 30 years while they have been lowered for the rich.

Their wages have been kept low to increase pay at the top.

They have been forced to assume debt for the failure of banks caused by deregulation of the banking industry.

They are being bankrupted to try to meet the most expensive health care system in the world.

They are being forced to pay higher prices for everything due to our continued dependence on fossil fuels 30 years past when we passed peak oil in this country.

They are being forced to pay for Middle East wars on behalf of big oil.

They are being subjected for ever increasing climate change due to the profit over health priority of the 1%.
 
apdst said:
Right! And how many of the past thirty years have the Democrats held the majority? Does the number, "18", sound familiar?
Click to expand...

8 years of Reagan. 4 years of Bush I. 8 years of Bush II.


how much did the deficit get reduced during those 20 years?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom