Obama's Tax Policies

[Malevolence]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Malevolence wrote:

Meanwhile, the same people that advocate going to war, and worse still, staying there(bleeding money) are the most vocally opposed to any form of tax increase.

You see…we feel that government is too big, spends too much and is very inefficient. Therefore, we would like government to take less of our money until they actually understand how to use it wisely. In short, we want our moneys worth which we are not currently getting. This is irrespective of the war.

Do you follow?

[/quote]

Again. The War costs more than our social programs, it can also be interpreted as a social program for Iraq. It demonstrates a big government, both in execution(can’t get much bigger than going to other countries to spend billions of dollars a day blowing things up and rebuilding them) and in theory(helping the Iraqi people? how is that a small government decision?)

I understand just fine that you prefer a small government and you don’t like giving your money away. I doubt anyone here feels differently. It is precisely because I think a smaller government is a positive that I do not support this war(note: although I do support the troops) It does not make any sense to me that the voting base that likes to think of themselves as ‘small government’ could support this war or any war, yet they do, en masse. It flies in the face of their supposed personal philosophy.

But the funny thing is, and this is just supposition on my part, but I would be willing to bet that if we all had to pay an additional $1000+ in taxes every year to account for increased war spending. That the support for this war would all but disappear.
(not that it hasn’t already, but it would have occurred much faster)

[bald_eagle1]

The issue of the war is a little off topic. But I will say this - one of the roles of the fed gov is to fight wars. It is not the role of gov to provide all the various social programs. You will not find that the fed gov has any role in education in the constitution.

You will not find that the fed gov has role in health care. You will not find the gov has any role in my retirement. These things are simply not in the constitution.

As far as the war goes, you do realize that al quaeda has been tied up quite a bit over there in Iraq trying to disrupt things. It has tied up many resources and much man power that they would otherwise been able to use elsewhere. Perhaps here???

A free and stable Iraq will be a huge benefit in the war against terror. But it may be a decade or longer before we can see this benefit in a noticable way.

The whole problem with America now is that we want instant results. We just have no stomach for the long haul. We have way too many whiners in this country.

I don’t know about you guys but I do not want to live like we are - long lines at the airport - shoes off - because of rat bastard terrorists. We need to grow some balls and kill these pieces of scum every where they happen to be.

[100meters]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
100meters wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
100meters wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Malevolence wrote:
So some numbers have come out with regard to Obama’s Tax plans versus McCains. Under Obama the majority of Americans would pay less in taxes than they pay now. If you make over 100k a year, you’ll pay slightly more(but not significantly more) and if you make over 3 million a year then you will end up paying a helluva lot more.

I wager most of the posters on this forum would end up paying less taxes under Obama than McCain. However, if some of you are making over 3 million dollars a year… well… can I be your friend?

And you believe his numbers?

Now that you know he’s actually cutting taxes for most folks, it just can’t be true.

But McCain is really going to cut spending right?

Yet he is repealing tax cuts but he does not consider that a tax increase. His entire campaign is built on double talk on almost every issue. Only a fool would expect a tax cut from this man.

I just figured out what Obama really means by “change”.

That’s all we’ll have left in our pockets after the tax hike: CHANGE.

This is frustrating (I’ve never worked with special-ed people before)

But if you are factually getting 3x more back with Obama than McCain, then what would McCain leave in your pocket?

You’re in denial

What is it about REPEALING A TAX CUT that you don’t understand?

You will have less money in your pocket after the Obama tax plan than you do now.

It’s very simple…

[/quote]

Are you really this stupid. It seems impossible.
Again, it would help a whole lot if YOU READ THE PLAN!
then come back and apologize to everybody in here for repeatedly making shit up.

[zephead4747]

[quote]100meters wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
100meters wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
100meters wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Malevolence wrote:
So some numbers have come out with regard to Obama’s Tax plans versus McCains. Under Obama the majority of Americans would pay less in taxes than they pay now. If you make over 100k a year, you’ll pay slightly more(but not significantly more) and if you make over 3 million a year then you will end up paying a helluva lot more.

I wager most of the posters on this forum would end up paying less taxes under Obama than McCain. However, if some of you are making over 3 million dollars a year… well… can I be your friend?

And you believe his numbers?

Now that you know he’s actually cutting taxes for most folks, it just can’t be true.

But McCain is really going to cut spending right?

Yet he is repealing tax cuts but he does not consider that a tax increase. His entire campaign is built on double talk on almost every issue. Only a fool would expect a tax cut from this man.

I just figured out what Obama really means by “change”.

That’s all we’ll have left in our pockets after the tax hike: CHANGE.

This is frustrating (I’ve never worked with special-ed people before)

But if you are factually getting 3x more back with Obama than McCain, then what would McCain leave in your pocket?

You’re in denial

What is it about REPEALING A TAX CUT that you don’t understand?

You will have less money in your pocket after the Obama tax plan than you do now.

It’s very simple…

Are you really this stupid. It seems impossible.
Again, it would help a whole lot if YOU READ THE PLAN!
then come back and apologize to everybody in here for repeatedly making shit up.

[/quote]

I don’t want him to waste money, as it’ll be my generation that will take the brunt of his punishment. I don’t want stupid uneeded inneficient social programs sucking cash out of my wallet. You need to appologize, not zap. I’m off to read some more of atlas shrugged, I’ll adress any post you make later.

[Beowolf]

[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
Because some people don’t mind paying for the war, but don’t like paying for bullshit social programs. I don’t see how it can get any clearer.[/quote]

Err… no offense but this was just dumb. Watch:

Because some people don’t mind paying for the social programs, but don’t like paying for bullshit war. I don’t see how it can get any clearer.

[Beowolf]

[quote]bald eagle wrote:
The issue of the war is a little off topic. But I will say this - one of the roles of the fed gov is to fight wars. It is not the role of gov to provide all the various social programs. You will not find that the fed gov has any role in education in the constitution.

You will not find that the fed gov has role in health care. You will not find the gov has any role in my retirement. These things are simply not in the constitution.

As far as the war goes, you do realize that al quaeda has been tied up quite a bit over there in Iraq trying to disrupt things. It has tied up many resources and much man power that they would otherwise been able to use elsewhere. Perhaps here???

A free and stable Iraq will be a huge benefit in the war against terror. But it may be a decade or longer before we can see this benefit in a noticable way.

The whole problem with America now is that we want instant results. We just have no stomach for the long haul. We have way too many whiners in this country.

I don’t know about you guys but I do not want to live like we are - long lines at the airport - shoes off - because of rat bastard terrorists. We need to grow some balls and kill these pieces of scum every where they happen to be.

[/quote]

Now this is a much better argument. If there had been some terrorists in Iraq per-invasion, it’d be a lot more sound though. Totally justifies paying for war in Afghanistan though.

[100meters]

[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
100meters wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
100meters wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
100meters wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Malevolence wrote:
So some numbers have come out with regard to Obama’s Tax plans versus McCains. Under Obama the majority of Americans would pay less in taxes than they pay now. If you make over 100k a year, you’ll pay slightly more(but not significantly more) and if you make over 3 million a year then you will end up paying a helluva lot more.

I wager most of the posters on this forum would end up paying less taxes under Obama than McCain. However, if some of you are making over 3 million dollars a year… well… can I be your friend?

And you believe his numbers?

Now that you know he’s actually cutting taxes for most folks, it just can’t be true.

But McCain is really going to cut spending right?

Yet he is repealing tax cuts but he does not consider that a tax increase. His entire campaign is built on double talk on almost every issue. Only a fool would expect a tax cut from this man.

I just figured out what Obama really means by “change”.

That’s all we’ll have left in our pockets after the tax hike: CHANGE.

This is frustrating (I’ve never worked with special-ed people before)

But if you are factually getting 3x more back with Obama than McCain, then what would McCain leave in your pocket?

You’re in denial

What is it about REPEALING A TAX CUT that you don’t understand?

You will have less money in your pocket after the Obama tax plan than you do now.

It’s very simple…

Are you really this stupid. It seems impossible.
Again, it would help a whole lot if YOU READ THE PLAN!
then come back and apologize to everybody in here for repeatedly making shit up.

I don’t want him to waste money, as it’ll be my generation that will take the brunt of his punishment. I don’t want stupid uneeded inneficient social programs sucking cash out of my wallet. You need to appologize, not zap. I’m off to read some more of atlas shrugged, I’ll adress any post you make later.[/quote]

Waste money, really? That’s your issue? After the last 8 years? And McCain’s diehard support for it’s chief executive and promises to continue same wasteful policies?

Really?

also skip atlas…it’s quite silly.

[bald_eagle1]

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
bald eagle wrote:
The issue of the war is a little off topic. But I will say this - one of the roles of the fed gov is to fight wars. It is not the role of gov to provide all the various social programs. You will not find that the fed gov has any role in education in the constitution.

You will not find that the fed gov has role in health care. You will not find the gov has any role in my retirement. These things are simply not in the constitution.

As far as the war goes, you do realize that al quaeda has been tied up quite a bit over there in Iraq trying to disrupt things. It has tied up many resources and much man power that they would otherwise been able to use elsewhere. Perhaps here???

A free and stable Iraq will be a huge benefit in the war against terror. But it may be a decade or longer before we can see this benefit in a noticable way.

The whole problem with America now is that we want instant results. We just have no stomach for the long haul. We have way too many whiners in this country.

I don’t know about you guys but I do not want to live like we are - long lines at the airport - shoes off - because of rat bastard terrorists. We need to grow some balls and kill these pieces of scum every where they happen to be.

Now this is a much better argument. If there had been some terrorists in Iraq per-invasion, it’d be a lot more sound though. Totally justifies paying for war in Afghanistan though.[/quote]

Well, given 9/11 things change. I am not saying Sadam had anything to do with it - but I am saying that it makes you look at the situation differently.

When you have the CIA, British Itel, along with the intel of every major county telling us the same thing - what do want the President to do? His own generals believed he had the weapons. We do know that he had the means to produce them in a matter of months in high quantities. That is close enough for me.

Also, we do know he had terrorist training camps and had been paying $20k to the families of suicide bombers in Israel. Not to mention he had violated 17 UN resolutions - why have them if they are not going to be enforced?

Time will tell if this was the right move. Right now things are settling down and the Iraqi’s are taking over more and more of their own security and the gov there appears anyway to be getting their act together at least a little bit.

But like I said it may be a long time before we can see substantial benefits.

[bald_eagle1]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Malevolence wrote:

Again. The War costs more than our social programs,

This is the governments only job. There is no comparison between social programs which is a manifestation of liberal nonsense promoted through the years by certain key Presidents and the job of making war.

I understand just fine that you prefer a small government and you don’t like giving your money away. I doubt anyone here feels differently.

Then, I assume, that you will not be voting for Obama as he has promised to increase the size of government to unprecedented levels. At least that’s what he say’s he’ll do…is he a liar?

But the funny thing is, and this is just supposition on my part, but I would be willing to bet that if we all had to pay an additional $1000+ in taxes every year to account for increased war spending. That the support for this war would all but disappear.
(not that it hasn’t already, but it would have occurred much faster)

Governments job is to wage war. You can agree with the war, or disagree as I know you do. But “war” has nothing to do with social programs.

Take a ride through the inner city sometime. Take a look at some of the fat welfare queens sitting on their porches. You see my young brain washed friend…they are screwing the system. And people like you and your hero Obama think that they need free medical care and all sorts of goodies supplied to them by the hard working men and women of this country. When did it become our responsibility to support the fat…the lazy and the stupid?

Harsh you say?

I feel that everyone should support good charitable institutions and I give away plenty because I WANT to. But it should not be our duty. charity is a fine thing, but should be done by people who voluntarily give of their time or money to those less fortunate…for whatever reason.

When did it become the governments job to supply braces for little “Timmy” simply because his Mother decided to have more kids than she can afford? Please show me where in our beloved constitution that is says this is our responsibility…don’t bother looking,…it isn’t there.

It began with Presidents like Johnson who, 45 years ago began a “war on poverty” and stepped up the size and scope of government in the area of social concern. As a side note there were more people on government programs at the end of Johnsons term than at the beginning.

More people became impoverished under Johnson than any other President. You reward people for not having enough money with government hand outs and poof…more people arrive for government hand outs…go figure huh?

But…

Obama will make President Johnson look like a right wing conservative by the time his four years are over…should he get the opportunity…

No … I’m not for Obama I don’t care what you think of the war in Iraq…I’d sooner vote a jackass into office than the most liberal Senator in the US Senate. And this is without even taking his anti gun and pro abortion stances into consideration. This guy is an absolute catastrophe waiting to happen.

And all the simple minded idiots can do is walk away chanting CHANGE…or some other spoon fed marketing gimmick like YES WE CAN.

It’s enough to make a thinking man sick to his stomach.

[/quote]

AMEN!

[Malevolence]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
It’s enough to make a thinking man sick to his stomach.

[/quote]

None of what you said addresses anything that I was talking about.

I don’t believe in Social programs, by and large. I think that they are usually a waste of time and money. But, they are not a $3 TRILLION dollar waste of time and money, as this War in Iraq has overwhelmingly proven itself to be.

When your primary argument against social programs consists of financial and logistical concerns, you have no foot to stand on when you support a war which more than quadruples the same financial and logistical shortcomings, compounded with the reality that part of why our war in Iraq costs so much because we are trying to provide social programs for Iraqis.

Yes, the Government wages wars and it has every right to through the Constitution. That does not make this war any cheaper, it does not make it any more of a time-suck, and it does not make the existence of relatively inexpensive social programs in the States of any real concern. Or at least, it shouldn’t.

Instead, the pro-war, anti-tax crowd is happy to piss trillions of dollars away to a bunch of ungrateful assholes in the middle east, but at the same time crying bloody murder when we piss a few billion away on broken social programs, and they don’t see a problem with that.

[Malevolence]

The question was directly related to taxes. You ignored that in your responses to me and focused more on bashing liberals for a number of things unrelated to my point.

My concern with the Iraq War is about taxes, finance and the economy. I don’t really care about Iraqis, never have and probably never will. I do however care about gratuitous spending and the harmful effects on an economy it will have, particularly if the people supporting that spending are not willing to sacrifice anything for it.

[Zap_Branigan]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Malevolence wrote:
The question was directly related to taxes. You ignored that in your responses to me and focused more on bashing liberals for a number of things unrelated to my point.

My concern with the Iraq War is about taxes, finance and the economy. I don’t really care about Iraqis, never have and probably never will. I do however care about gratuitous spending and the harmful effects on an economy it will have, particularly if the people supporting that spending are not willing to sacrifice anything for it.

This has nothing to do with “Obama’s Tax Policies”. Stop playing the fool.[/quote]

Weren’t we in debt before the war?

[Malevolence]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Malevolence wrote:
The question was directly related to taxes. You ignored that in your responses to me and focused more on bashing liberals for a number of things unrelated to my point.

My concern with the Iraq War is about taxes, finance and the economy. I don’t really care about Iraqis, never have and probably never will. I do however care about gratuitous spending and the harmful effects on an economy it will have, particularly if the people supporting that spending are not willing to sacrifice anything for it.

This has nothing to do with “Obama’s Tax Policies”. Stop playing the fool.[/quote]

To a point. What you should have brought up was the fact that Obama is trying to stop the war, but he is also trying to raise some taxes. Which flies in the face of the theory that the responsible way(economically) to start a war is to raise taxes to pay for it.

So, we have Obama who is looking to stop the war, which could be a serious financial relief(but probably not, because stopping the war will cost a lot of money as well) Then additionally, his early tax policy statements would most likely make me personally pay less taxes than I have, as well, his plans, compared to McCains are speculated to shrink our deficit considerably.

Meanwhile McCain wants to continue cutting taxes, extend the War in Iraq and conceivably launch a new campaign against Iran. It is insane, but Obama is looking like the more fiscally conservative candidate next to the ridiculous new avenues of spending McCain would open up.