There goes your job ....

[400pilot]

400pilot, I agree with much of what you said. Except you claim that we relly haven't seen taxes on the middle class increase. On this point, I beg to differ. Sure, my INCOME taxes haven't changed in a long while. True. But I pay oh so much more than income taxes in this world.

Income tax was all I was addressing based on what was said previous. Call it a targeted response, if you will. I am well aware of the drain on the poor and middle class that embedded taxes impose. That is why I am a big supporter of the Fairtax. As well, the rest of the taxes do take up some of my income, but not nearly as much as federal, payroll and state taxes do.

 

[AvroJockey]

A responsible member of society realizes it is in each of our own best interest for everyone to succeed.

Envy?

Assuming you're talking about financial prosperity, I say not everyone should succeed...that would mean we don't have the opportunity and liberty to fail. I can tell you that my life is full of choices that I wish I could take back. That's what is great about this country. The majority of those you deem as 'privileged' probably failed multiple times before being successful. Those whom aren't 'successful' are either happy with their life and successful by their definition, or are lazy.

Give me an example of a country that is successfully socialistic, and not tied financially to the prosperity of the USA.

BTW, I agree with your assessment of the public school system, but its purpose doesn't parallel social medicine. If it does you could complete this statement: "Social medicine contributes to the nations economic prosperity because..."

Also...everything you're attributing your success too happen when you were a minor. I believe it is the responsibility to provide for those which can't for themselves. That's why we have social security and medicare/medicaid. Social medicine is for those who choose not to change their circumstance to provide for themselves...they're not children.

Here is a great example of what I'm talking about: Almost every EU country pays for it's citizen's higher education. Why is America the most prosperous country in the World without this hugh benefit? When you answer this question you realize the failure that is socialism.

 

[AvroJockey]

I'm not going to get on here and pretend to be something I'm not, an economist (nor should you), but here is some rational thought on the subject.
http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=13829461

This article doesn't provide a resolution...it's only an observation. It might work, it might not. The article even states this at the end:

"Paradoxically, the financial bust, by adding so much debt, may boost the chances of a breakthrough. If not, another financial catastrophe looms."

Good try though.

I'm not an economist, as you stated, but solving our nations problems, which were created by debt, with more debt is insanity. That is the definition of insanity...doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome.

 

[AvroJockey]

Fun debate. Long story short: When have we EVER seen the government do anything on time, under budget, and efficiently? They could screw up a one-car funeral!

A government healthcare option? HA! It'll be a disaster from out of the gate! And I predict it'll be less than a year after it starts when we start hearing form Washington how, erm, uhhh, yeah, it looks like this whole thing may cost up to four times what we originally estimated (and it's completely unaffordable for the government right now!).

By the way, does anyone know how many entitlement programs are in existence for the poor now? Anyone? You know, social security, medicare, medicade, food stamps, education assistance (government loans for college), housing assistance, disability, etc, etc, etc............Feel free to add to the list. And once you've finished the list, can anyone tell me if we have fewer poor folks today than at any time in the past? So, putting two and two together, do entitlement programs actually lift people out of the poor caste? Or does it just create more government dependence? And who, exactly, is paying for these entitlement programs? By the way, once an entitlement program gets started, can anyone point to a program that finally stopped when its goal was achieved?

What's my point? Simple. Governement programs don't actually improve ANYTHING in society. They cost lots and lots of money. They NEVER go away once started. And ALL the working schloms out there, from poor to rich, are asked (well, told really) that they will be funding all of this garbage!

400pilot, I agree with much of what you said. Except you claim that we relly haven't seen taxes on the middle class increase. On this point, I beg to differ. Sure, my INCOME taxes haven't changed in a long while. True. But I pay oh so much more than income taxes in this world. Where do I begin? I own a home, so my property taxes increase from time to time (if I rented and my landlord's property taxes went up, I'd see a corresponding increase in my rent when renewing). When taxes on corporate profits rise, they simply pass the increase along to the consumer, so I pay more for everything. I pay energy taxes on my gas and electricity for my home. Taxes on the trash collection at my house. Taxes on my methods of communication (internet, phone, etc....). Taxes (MANY) on the gas for my car. Taxes on any service I purchase. Every toll road I drive is nothing more than another tax on my transportation.My home town recently instituted a pour tax on alcohol (I don't drink, but it's just another excuse to pick the pockets of everyone out there). And many many many MANY more taxes on EVERYTHING you can possibly think of!! Every new tax on some little thing that seems inconsequential at first, every tax increase on something you think won't affect you, is just chipping away, bit by bit, at YOUR hard-earned money. ABSOLUTELY the middle class is being targeted!!! Just because it's not a straight forward income tax doesn't mean the government doesn't understand who the biggest consumers (and therefore drivers) of the economy are. It's the middle class, and they're hitting us hard!!

As a result of all this, I'm completely AGAINST the governemt providing anymore entitlement programs to anyone. That includes healthcare for everyone. They can't afford it (and by extension, WE can't afford it). I'm sorry for those who don't have health insurance. I went without it for a long time myself. But that's life. I'm working for MY family. I'm working to provide them with a roof over their heads (not a Mcmansion either). I'm working to feed them. I'm working to clothe them. I'm working to save for our retirement and my kids' college education. I'm working to provide them with a little bit of fun now and then (a new bike, a vacation to the Outer Banks, etc.....). And the best part is, if the government would just levae me alone (keep taxation at the level it's currently at), I should be pretty successful at provising most, or all, of thise things WITHOUT help from anyone.

I can tell you what I'm NOT working for: I'm not working to pay my neighbor's mortgage (no matter how nice they may be). I'm not working to provide illegal aliens with social security. I'm not working to pay for everyone else's college education. And I'm certainly NOT working to make sure every single person in this country has health insurance.

I'm sorry if that sounds hard-hearted. but if the government forces me to pay for all this crap, then I won't be able to provide all the other stuff for my family. And If, for example, I'm not successful in saving for my kids' college education, then we simply end up with more folks in debt in the future. And if it gets so bad that i can't afford my mortgage, there'll be one more family looking to live off the government teet. And if I can't save enough for retirement, there'll be one more couple living in poverty AND living off the government teet.

Time to shrink the government and make people fend a little more for themselves. Damn straight that NONE OF US can afford to keep "helping" all the unfortunates out there the way the government thinks we should.

And just for the record, I give regularly to a number of charities. If my disposable income starts shrinking due to numerous tax increases to pay for this and that within the government, guess where I'm going to cut spending first?

X2

Unfortunately, it seems the choir is preaching to itself. :laugh:

 

[ned plimpton]

The people that make me ill are those that refuse to send their elite kids to public schools, and then want to avoid paying for public education. A responsible member of society realizes it is in each of our own best interest for everyone to succeed.

I don't plan on "refusing" to send my kids to public schools, but I do plan on CHOOSING to send them to private schools if I can.

Does that make you ill?

Also, I don't plan on "avoiding" paying for public education, but I'm not going to ingnore the fact that despite throwing more and more money at this problem for decades, the results are still the same if not worse.

How exactly is trying the same failed solution over and over with no result considered to be "responsible" or to be helping everyone succeed?

 

[Fozzy]

point of order

By the way, does anyone know how many entitlement programs are in existence for the poor now? Anyone? You know, social security, medicare, medicade, food stamps, education assistance (government loans for college), housing assistance, disability, etc, etc, etc...........

Medicare is for the elderly. Which includes a lot of former hard working retired folks. Not saying the system isn't screwed up by the government, but the folks covered are not poor. At least not all of them.

Continue.

 

[AvroJockey]

All in all, this is my position...

We all need to be good stewards and provide for those in legitimate need. Be it through our own good will (which I prefer), or through government mandates...we have this moral obligation. I believe we currently have a system that meets this standard, even though government isn't managing things well (Example: social security).

That being said, many social programs result in dependancy. The federal government has become a favorite drug of entitlists, who don't need its stewardship, and are driving this country into the ditch of socialism. If conservatives don't stand up to this ideology, it will eventually lead to our demise. They too have been trapped into socialistic ideals to appease their constituents, and satisfy their greedy ambitions.

Do you think I'm crazy? The US has never been a purely capitalistic society, but over our very short history mass has been gradually added to the socialistic side of the scale. With socialism as a failed framework, why does anyone think this is a good thing?

When I taught my girls how to ride a bike, I told them they will fall and get hurt...they were scared. However, they saw other kids on two-wheelers, and saw joy, freedom, and liberties. They eventually didn't care about the scrapes, bumps, and bruises and pressed on toward their goal. As we all know, learning how to ride a bike is life changing experience, for its relative insignificance. I bet everyone on this board remembers every detail of riding a bike for the first time.

Ultimately we all need to make a choice: Do we want a system that lets you tuff it out with greater reward, or a system that holds the back of your seat, makes you ride a tricycle, or doesn't let you have a bike at all. This is what it comes down to...and I say take your damn had off my banana seat!!!

 

[Trash8Mofo]

Give me an example of a country that is successfully socialistic, and not tied financially to the prosperity of the USA.

That is a stupid logic. You are saying prosperous countries do well only because they are tied to the capitalism of the USA. Well, by your logic, since all countries are tied to China, then Communism must be working. Plus, what about the third world countries that are tied to the USA, can capitalism be blamed for their short-comings? Of course we are all tied financially in this world.

And who says the USA is prosperous? we as a country are running on credit that we don't have, we abuse credit to finance stuff that we don't need nor can we afford. And again, by your logic, Socialism must then be working and are able to better their countries on the backs of the sometimes short-sightedness of Capitalism.

BTW, Socialism is not referring to a country's social programs, unlike what FOX News has you believe. What experts some people are.

 

[AvroJockey]

That is a stupid logic. You are saying prosperous countries do well only because they are tied to the capitalism of the USA. Well, by your logic, since all countries are tied to China, then Communism must be working. Plus, what about the third world countries that are tied to the USA, can capitalism be blamed for their short-comings? Of course we are all tied financially in this world.

First off all..I said prosperous socialistic countries only do well because they're tied to US commerce.

Why do you think China is so prosperous? How many products do they produce that are sold to Americans? I highly doubt they would be prosperous if they suffered the embargos of North Korea or Cuba. The World economy is tied to America...this is fact. I've lived in Europe and have seen how closely Europeans watched our election...they know what is going on more than the average American. Do you know why? It's because what goes on in the US effects the rest of the World, that includes prosperity. In fact, this is how close Europeans watch US events: I found out about McCain's selection of Palin from one of my French flight attendants.

Here's another tidbit for you...When I first moved to the EU I read an editorial in the Irish Times about the fledging EU economy and how it seemed to have finally severed the economic umbilical cord from the US. It wasn't a few months later and the subprime market crashed, the US started going into a recession, and I started seeing articles about the negative effects of the US economy on the EU.

Give me an example of a country which was unaffected by our recent economic demise, and answer my original question...Give me a successful socialistic country that is cut from the US.

And who says the USA is prosperous? we as a country are running on credit that we don't have, we abuse credit to finance stuff that we don't need nor can we afford. And again, by your logic, Socialism must then be working and are able to better their countries on the backs of the sometimes short-sightedness of Capitalism.

If you read my other posts you would've seen that I agree with this. Our current situation is the result of fraying of our moral fiber...decades ago. The reason we're in this mess...prosperity at any cost (greed), and lack of education. The latter is a debate in itself, but I will note that nothing in our educational system teaches us about finances, when we live a capitalistic society. The question is: how do we change our behavior to prevent repeating these mistakes? It seems the governments answer is to push the nation even further in debt, creating a facade, to make sure the consumer keeps spending beyond their means. This is socialism my friend!!! In a purely capitalistic society the government would take a ring-side seat, and watch Mother Capitalism smack us around. This negative reinforcement is what was needed to change our behavior...and instead, the government reinforced our bad behavior.

BTW, Socialism is not referring to a country's social programs, unlike what FOX News has you believe. What experts some people are.

Your slightly delusional if you believe I'm influenced by what the media says...regardless the genre. I'm smart enough the read between the lines, and disseminate the good from the bad.

Riddle me this...when do you think the entitled will stop asking for stuff? Do you really think it will stop with social medicine? How about government mandated vacations like the EU? France gets 35 days a year...I should have 36!!!

 

[blueridge71]

This mess started well before that. Sub prime lending began back in the Clinton days. That's the root of our current economic problems. The Bush admin. obviously didn't try to fix the problem when they could have though.

But they did try on several occasions. There were always shot down by Democrats protecting Fannie and Freddie, which incidentally was charged by President Clinton with creating a huge secondary market for subprime mortgages.