My take on the US presidential election.


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : My take on the US presidential election.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 . . . 21 · Next
Author Message
Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,274
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1230988 - Posted: 12 May 2012, 13:39:30 UTC - in response to Message 1230973.

I was saddened by the realization that we as a country have such low ambitions, and have lost our way when it comes to the spirit of space exploration and the need for a national program to do big things. Instead, those who desire the big wheels of government look to petty handouts and a paternal state system.


Right As Rain Broheim. I'd rather see TRILLIONS go to a Moon Base than see Agencies, as so Aptly Posted By Sir Guy, get All That Taxpayer Dough.

I'd Love To See all those Hand Outs Agency Job workers push themselves away from their computers/phones/paperwork, walk out of The Cubicle, out of The Office Building and over to The Hanger/Fabrication-Assembly Building and Get Cracking on REAL WORK putting HumanKind On The Moon.

We, As Humans, have to get off this Live Planet, where we are Destroying Life(non-human kind) and get on a Dead Planet, where we can start Destroying Ourselves without Destroying Defensiveless(against us) life.

But, The Zombies(Dem/Libs/Socialists) Of The Pitiful(Prez) Party won't have it.

Meh For Prez. To The Moon Meh! Thanks Newt!

SpaceDustDiggingDullnanDo

great Point lets get on with killing the dead planets!!!
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Profile soft^spirit
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6374
Credit: 28,628,501
RAC: 972
United States
Message 1231024 - Posted: 12 May 2012, 14:35:06 UTC

Many of the agencies listed are income producing (state franchise tax board), self sustaining, or duplicate names of the same agency (multiple listings of the same phone number).

Also included was every state college, (I did not look for community colleges) and many other things.

But it looked impressive as long as someone does not look too close.
____________

Janice

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31031
Credit: 11,223,201
RAC: 19,452
United Kingdom
Message 1231028 - Posted: 12 May 2012, 14:40:26 UTC
Last modified: 12 May 2012, 14:41:30 UTC

I'd rather see TRILLIONS go to a Moon Base than see Agencies, as so Aptly Posted By Sir Guy, get All That Taxpayer Dough.


It's a conspiracy I tell you! One moment I find myself actually agreeing with Bobby, nw I'm doing it with Dull? Summats gone badly wrong with my life, Stop the world, I want to get off!

Message 1231036 - Posted: 12 May 2012, 14:55:49 UTC

But it looked impressive as long as someone does not look too close.


Scientist Guy was making A Point with The Long List Of Small Print.

One I'm sure Any Taxpayer Understands. WASTE FRAUD ETC. Yeah, I know Waste and Fraud, etc. will Always Be There.

The General Point is one Nauseatingly Expressed ever since The First Tax was Ripped Out Of Our Hard-Working Hands. What Are You Doing With OUR MONEY, and WHY? is it BEING WASTED? Why THE FRAUD? Why Why Why All Of It that is Wrong Wrong Wrong.

So, like in The Early 60s and 70s, if a Few Of Us want to see a Space Ship thunder up Into The Black and build a Moon Base, it is because One Would Say, "My Taxpayer Dough Did That and it Feels Good".

Now that's Waste and Fraud I Get Into.

You know. Like Infrastructure. Bridges, Dams, blah blah OBlahBlahBlah.

I know, I'm Pitiful. Sickening.

LikeThePrezDullNanDO
____________


Profile CMPO
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 Apr 12
Posts: 57
Credit: 344,990
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1231175 - Posted: 12 May 2012, 20:15:49 UTC - in response to Message 1230837.

Hello xclusive585,

Thank you for the welcome also. I have no problems with the government taxing and spending, well I accept is as a reality lets say ;-). For public works, roads, military spending, space programs etc. I think I have already stated that there are many valid reasons for governments, and that means taxation.
What I disagree with is the argument for social justice that was being proposed, often by progressives and liberals. Social Justice for the poor through government spending is something I reject. And the notion that if one is really a “good Christian”, they should be supporting social spending via the government.

This is actually a veiled argument that religions impulse and government should be married, when I am making the opposite argument. Religious impulse to charity should be divorced from government functions. Taxation is compulsive and forced by law, charity should come from the individual agent or group of agents by free association as protected by our constitution.

When you say that the government is “tasked” with this, it conveys a world view where one might not see the value in not for profit charities, such as many religious and non-religious, charities we are free to donate our funds to towards any disparity we see in our society, enviroment or world. Those who do not actively participate in this system of charities may view the government as the only way to provide this relief to those in need. When this happens, whether people see it or not, the government starts to become a kind of ersatz religious institution in their lives and the only institution to solve social problems. I see this outlook as a big problem.

To be clear I am not against the government helping the less fortunate in principal, I am just against it being the primary form of conveyance, as it results in the abuse of power by the government and has the effect of unburdening the individual responsibility to be involved directly to solve these types of issues. History has shown that this does not work, and we can see what the entitlement culture is doing to Europe and here in the States. I expect we are probably going to have to mutually disagree on this, respectfully of course.

Profile CMPO
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 Apr 12
Posts: 57
Credit: 344,990
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1231192 - Posted: 12 May 2012, 20:55:58 UTC - in response to Message 1230847.

That’s quite a wager. For your sake I hope Obama wins then. If I lose my bet I only lose a few bucks ;-)

I am curious just what you believe the AZ law does. I have obviously not read the whole thing but by the extract and the Supreme Court arguments I have heard I understand it only drives behaviors for state authorities to uphold existing Federal law as mandated under Title 8 in the lawful arrest and detention functions of everyday policing. So if the laws are unjust, it is not AZ law that is to blame, it is the laws of the land. If the Feds are not going to enforce them, or allow the states to, what is the point of them? The real question is are the Federal laws valid, and if so why are they not being enforced? If they are not worthy of being enforced, why is the Federal government not overturning or changing them?


Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 37,657,326
RAC: 10,827
Message 1231215 - Posted: 12 May 2012, 21:28:57 UTC
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 13:29:34 UTC

--

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,274
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1231274 - Posted: 12 May 2012, 23:13:45 UTC - in response to Message 1231254.

Manned space exploration can wait. unmanned missions can do more than sending a fragile species into space with all the things it needs to survive. All that stuff takes up weight and space on any spacecraft sent to explore. We are better served by sending unmanned craft to other worlds and out of the solar system to explore where humans would easily expire after a short time.

If and when we find something to leave for then yes start up a manned space program again. Until then science is better served with our robotic friends doing the exploring
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school


Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 37,657,326
RAC: 10,827
Message 1231343 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 1:11:42 UTC
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 13:27:33 UTC

--

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12089
Credit: 6,384,804
RAC: 8,040
United States
Message 1231349 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 1:19:45 UTC - in response to Message 1231343.
Last modified: 13 May 2012, 1:20:02 UTC

Well maybe our next president will print another $16 billion (not much compared to $5 trillion) and bail California out.

How much money did POTUS just take from fat cat Hollywood types that they should have paid in taxes to California?
____________


Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 37,657,326
RAC: 10,827
Message 1231358 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 1:37:20 UTC - in response to Message 1231349.
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 13:27:24 UTC

--

Profile Ex
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Mar 12
Posts: 2895
Credit: 1,684,113
RAC: 1,193
United States
Message 1231363 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 1:47:25 UTC - in response to Message 1231358.
Last modified: 13 May 2012, 1:50:57 UTC

Well maybe our next president will print another $16 billion (not much compared to $5 trillion) and bail California out.

How much money did POTUS just take from fat cat Hollywood types that they should have paid in taxes to California?


I'm sure the 52 democrat majority (out of 80) in their house and the 25 democrat majority (out of 40) in their senate, along with Jerry Brown are looking at that.

My sister and brother-in-law in the bay area are tapped out. They just filed for bankruptcy. Raising taxes on others in California will surely fix the problems in the state budget.

The good thing about the federal government is that they can always inflate the dollar to fix their budget problems.

Can I ask an honest question Guy?
How about just making BIG hikes on the taxes on the 500(or even 100)milion/year+ group? (and even then, only on income taxes- so as to encourage spending in/from business or else; taxes...)
That doesn't hurt anyone that most of us would know. What do you think/feel?
____________
-Dave #2

3.2.0-33


Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 37,657,326
RAC: 10,827
Message 1231369 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 1:56:13 UTC - in response to Message 1231363.
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 13:26:48 UTC

--

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12089
Credit: 6,384,804
RAC: 8,040
United States
Message 1231372 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 2:04:45 UTC - in response to Message 1231369.


Can I ask an honest question Guy?
How about just making BIG hikes on the taxes on the 500(or even 100)milion/year+ group? (and even then, only on income taxes- so as to encourage spending in/from business or else; taxes...)
That doesn't hurt anyone that most of us would know. What do you think/feel?


Let's bring back the 91% tax bracket. That *causes* the least amount of unemployment. So let's do it. I'm ready.

(I'm tired of trying to say we have a spending problem...)

California has the exact same problem GM had. Can we declare bankruptcy and get some TARP money to fix it? How about in POTUS? We even vote democrat.

____________

Profile Ex
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Mar 12
Posts: 2895
Credit: 1,684,113
RAC: 1,193
United States
Message 1231377 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 2:09:54 UTC - in response to Message 1231369.


Can I ask an honest question Guy?
How about just making BIG hikes on the taxes on the 500(or even 100)milion/year+ group? (and even then, only on income taxes- so as to encourage spending in/from business or else; taxes...)
That doesn't hurt anyone that most of us would know. What do you think/feel?


Let's bring back the 91% tax bracket. That *causes* the least amount of unemployment. So let's do it. I'm ready.

(I'm tired of trying to say we have a spending problem...)


And therein lies the problem with *most* of our politicians, including the Dems but especially the right. They're all too tied into these lobbies and monies to make a change like that...

____________
-Dave #2

3.2.0-33

Dena Wiltsie
Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 01
Posts: 987
Credit: 529,401
RAC: 283
United States
Message 1231401 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 3:20:59 UTC - in response to Message 1231372.


Can I ask an honest question Guy?
How about just making BIG hikes on the taxes on the 500(or even 100)milion/year+ group? (and even then, only on income taxes- so as to encourage spending in/from business or else; taxes...)
That doesn't hurt anyone that most of us would know. What do you think/feel?


Let's bring back the 91% tax bracket. That *causes* the least amount of unemployment. So let's do it. I'm ready.

(I'm tired of trying to say we have a spending problem...)

California has the exact same problem GM had. Can we declare bankruptcy and get some TARP money to fix it? How about in POTUS? We even vote democrat.

I always wondered about the 91% tax rate working, after all it's a violation of the Laffer curve. It turns out the reason 91% worked in the 1950's was because this was just after WW II and we had no competition. Japan and most of Europe was destroyed and about the only country left to compete with us was England. Any tax rate short of 100% would work. That is not the case today.

As for a bailout for California, I don't think it's in the cards. Obama will get California's vote with no bailout so spend the money on buying votes where it will make a difference.
____________

Terror Australis
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 14 Feb 04
Posts: 1666
Credit: 203,458,365
RAC: 26,184
Australia
Message 1231408 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 3:47:39 UTC
Last modified: 13 May 2012, 3:48:09 UTC

I'm speechless. How can we get such a great leader like Chavez here in the U.S.?

If your talking about the quality of leadership rather than their politics. Vote Romney :-)

T.A.

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,274
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1231413 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 4:01:45 UTC - in response to Message 1231401.


I always wondered about the 91% tax rate working, after all it's a violation of the Laffer curve. It turns out the reason 91% worked in the 1950's was because this was just after WW II and we had no competition. Japan and most of Europe was destroyed and about the only country left to compete with us was England. Any tax rate short of 100% would work. That is not the case today.


Exactly, the US went about rebuilding Europe. The US gov't had the money and US contractors had the know how. American businesses made a pile of money off US gov't contracts that a 91% tax rate wasn't even a burden considering how fast and furiously these companies went about rebuilding half the planet.

Since we don't have a couple continents to rebuild 91% is a bit farfetched for our current system.
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12089
Credit: 6,384,804
RAC: 8,040
United States
Message 1231419 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 4:28:53 UTC - in response to Message 1231413.

Since we don't have a couple continents to rebuild 91% is a bit farfetched for our current system.

But we do have a moon to colonize, if we have the guts to take on a real project we can't predict the outcome of in advance.

____________

Dena Wiltsie
Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 01
Posts: 987
Credit: 529,401
RAC: 283
United States
Message 1231420 - Posted: 13 May 2012, 4:35:32 UTC - in response to Message 1231419.

Since we don't have a couple continents to rebuild 91% is a bit farfetched for our current system.

But we do have a moon to colonize, if we have the guts to take on a real project we can't predict the outcome of in advance.

You and I both know if the government got their hands on that type of money, it wouldn't be spent on the moon or mars program.
____________

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 . . . 21 · Next

Message boards : Politics : My take on the US presidential election.

Copyright © 2014 University of California