How did I end up...
...Registered as a member of the Republican Party (GOP)? Everyone that knows me personally knows that I cannot in good conscience register myself with either party! Although I firmly believe in personal responsibility, the right to bear arms and that government be fiscally responsible most of the time, I also believe in pro-choice, and that Government should be a "safety net" (meaning in times of hardships, Government should give a "hand-up" to folks--note this is NOT a "hand out"!). Also, taxes need to be fair (meaning the Middle Class, myself included, shouldn't be bearing most of the costs!) for everyone. The rich should pay a bit more because they can afford it but they shouldn't be punished for being successful. Estate taxes should be on anything over $10 Million (and possibly adjust it every few years for inflation), with no loopholes. Come on, if your estate is that big, then what are you doing??? You can't take it with you, so why not live a great life and help out the rest of your family and close friends while you're doing it?
When the last set of Bush tax cuts came down, someone said that the poor got a "happy meal", the middle class got a "nice dinner for a family-of-4", while the rich "got a lexus, a condo and some servants to go along with it". I can't agree with that. That along with the fact that he then spent us into a major hole of a deficit. Bush should have used some of his own common sense that when you increase spending but cut taxes, you have got to come up with the money from somewhere. I refuse to let my future kids and grandkids pay for his mistakes! Let President Bush and his cronies pay for it.
To those of you who feel a consumption based tax is fairest, I'll say this. I don't mind consumption based taxation so long as you DO NOT tax basic foods bought in a grocery store! You can tax restaurant food (and I include fast food as well as street vending and convenience stores in this) all you want, because you're paying for a service. But when you tax basic staples like milk and bread, you punish the poorest folks who can barely afford to put that food on the table by taxing them. Go ahead and tax liquor, soda, beer, etc., because those in lower income brackets who really want to feed their families shouldn't be buying those things on a regular basis anyway. As someone who has seen poverty, middle class and extravagant wealth (and everything in between), I think that's the closest thing to fair that I can come up with. If you think you can convince me otherwise, go ahead and post a reply! After all, I know I'm not the best mind out there, but at least I have some ideas!
--
Anonymous comments are allowed, just keep them clean, o.k. However, due to the amount of "ad postings" that I have deleted lately, I've had to add a verification word before you can post, sorry.
When the last set of Bush tax cuts came down, someone said that the poor got a "happy meal", the middle class got a "nice dinner for a family-of-4", while the rich "got a lexus, a condo and some servants to go along with it". I can't agree with that. That along with the fact that he then spent us into a major hole of a deficit. Bush should have used some of his own common sense that when you increase spending but cut taxes, you have got to come up with the money from somewhere. I refuse to let my future kids and grandkids pay for his mistakes! Let President Bush and his cronies pay for it.
To those of you who feel a consumption based tax is fairest, I'll say this. I don't mind consumption based taxation so long as you DO NOT tax basic foods bought in a grocery store! You can tax restaurant food (and I include fast food as well as street vending and convenience stores in this) all you want, because you're paying for a service. But when you tax basic staples like milk and bread, you punish the poorest folks who can barely afford to put that food on the table by taxing them. Go ahead and tax liquor, soda, beer, etc., because those in lower income brackets who really want to feed their families shouldn't be buying those things on a regular basis anyway. As someone who has seen poverty, middle class and extravagant wealth (and everything in between), I think that's the closest thing to fair that I can come up with. If you think you can convince me otherwise, go ahead and post a reply! After all, I know I'm not the best mind out there, but at least I have some ideas!
--
Anonymous comments are allowed, just keep them clean, o.k. However, due to the amount of "ad postings" that I have deleted lately, I've had to add a verification word before you can post, sorry.
posted by Mike at 9:33 PM
1 Comments:
Bush should have used some of his own common sense that when you increase spending but cut taxes, you have got to come up with the money from somewhere.
This is the fundamental flaw in the thinking of most voters, especially Republicans. (It also assumes that Bush has any common sense--egos like his rarely walk hand in hand with any common sense.) Bush, and many others (of both parties) in high office, truly don't give a rat's behind about you, your finances, your taxes, your children, or anything else in your life. Do you honestly believe that a Congress that cares about the middle classes would be conducting itself as the current one is? The orgy of spending in Washington, including the pork, is unparalleled in history of US gov't. And the biggest spenders are the Republicans--who still serve up the big fat lie about the need for fiscal responsibility, and their voters fall for it.
The only--and I mean the ONLY--concern in D.C. is to transfer wealth into the pockets of officeholders and the megacorps that bankroll them. The deficit, which is larger than you see reported because many items (like the war in Iraq) are funded off the books, is not at all a reflection of Bush's lack of common sense. It is a vivid testimony to his arrogant disregard for and indifference to you and every other middle class citizen. Until Americans stop allowing themselves to be duped by the moronic, bumper-sticker platitudes and lies of politicians, they will continue to have the gov't they thoroughly deserve.
The Democrats are feeling gleeful that Bush's popularity has tanked. They are fools. The people who were stupid enough to vote for Bush will vote for someone exactly like him simply because that candidate will blabber idiotic lies about freedom, morality, values, responsible gov't, abortion, taxes, Social Security, or whatever else the public wants to hear but not think about. Same with the Dems themselves. Not one of them is offering a viable alternative to Bush's policies, and often they simply engage in grandstanding, publicly complaining about Bush but voting in disturbingly large numbers for Bush's policies. They too have to accept their share of the responsibility for the gov't red ink, and they too have a base that is unwilling to vote for change.
I guarantee you, with 100% certainty, that the fall elections will do little or nothing to change the current course of events in D.C. Your children's children's children's great-grandchildren will be paying for the foolishness the current American voters are endorsing.
Post a Comment
<< Home