user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Newest Ballots
Newest Blogs
Private Ballots
Joke Ballots
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Good question, but the fact is that further on down the line taxes will have to increase in order to cover the outrageous cost of war and the ballooning deficit REGARDLESS of who's in power.
Spread out among the population $150,000 is owed for every man, woman and child in the US because of the heavy spending and debt incurred by the Bush administration.
"Notice the party in control of the House, Senate, and Presidency doesnt have to use these "shame tactics"."
No, they use different nasty campaign tactics altogether (Swift Boat Vets; "Inventing the Internet"; Willie Horton).
Haha, good one Counciltucky.
Paradox, youre right, this damn war is outrageous. We'll be paying for it for years.
It's good to have the media on their side, gives a considerable advantage and lets them get away with this sort of thing.
Just like the Republicans, they'll do whatever it takes. The Dems and Reps disagree on many issues but they both agree on expanding the power of government and limiting the freedom of the people, so they just agree to disagree on the other issues and continue feeding the leviathan.
Bushy and his gangsters are increasing the size of government dramatically. Since 2000, total government spending has increased 33 percent.
That's 33 percent.
In five years.
The deficit is exploding. That money will have to be paid back, eventually, by taxpayers, of course. Probably with tax increases. Just not on Bushy's watch, so to the naive, he looks like some kind of fiscal conservative hero.
Bah.
Response to Zerhog's untruth:
The media in the US now has a strong conservative bias.
Their core principle is to make people dependent on them so they are forced to vote for them. When people overcome that dependency and think for themselves they get angry.
So no one has listened to the news about the increased tax revenue due to the tax cuts? The increased tax revenue is having a reducing effect on the deficit. When taxes are raised tax revenue decreases and then instead of decreasing taxes, the democrats usually do more increases to compensate which creates (the dems love this word) a quagmire.
ceejj,you & herzog make great points but I don't believe reason & facts get you very far with the Bush-haters.
AS to the ballot directly , I for one am sick to death of seeing my pay check go to these idiot politicans, & the minute they get it they (mis)spend it!
thc you have a good point too , there are money loving idiots in both camps if the truth be told. Amazing how easy it is for them to spend when it's someone else's money.
A potentially good discussion topic, Johnny. Too bad you pulled a "jenny17" and limited choice to make it a diatribe.
The first fallacy, I suggest, is this perception that the major result of taxes is "taking away more form people's paychecks."
When you have some set of products or services (e.g., Government), you need to pay for it. That's just fair. This canard gains power because the people who repeat it conveniently forget to mention any government benefits.
Basically, I submit that, on teh whole, more people would be worse off if they didn't get these services, even if they did pay less in taxes.
In addition, cranky makes an excellent point: The supposedly fiscally- responsible Republicans currently in power have grown Government immensely since they began their reign.
The major fiscal difference, these days, I believe, is that the Dems are way more up front about how they'd pay. Like a spendthrift with a credit card, today's Republicans irresponsibly rack up debt, even as they do the very things they historically accuse Democrats of doing.
Yup. The double standards are glaring on both sides of the aisle, but this administration takes the cake.
This "dependency theory" is a total crock. It's just another big lie spoon fed by the conservative leadership to the gullible white conservative rank-and-file. Most of whom are just looking for another reason to hate black people anyway.
Why is it that conservatives aren't concerned about Bushy increasing goverment spending by a third in less than five years? If a Republican rightwinger does it, it isn't real money? Much of it is going to good things, like war?
cranky, i see what you're saying, but do you have to continually call him "bushy"?
by aya on Thu Jul 14, 05 12:28pm
[+]
Cathexis
Well then you can pay for those "services" from the government and I'll get mine elsewhere. The canard most often repeated from the left is that we pay taxes for government "services". We pay largely for government waste, less than half of the money is actually spent on services we desire.
(rolls eyes) I see the "liberal media" argument has sprung up again. It's truly amazing -- no matter the massive amount of evidence to the contrary, y'all keep saying the media is liberal. I'm not sure if that's ignorance, arrogance, wishful thinking, or what, but it's simply not true, and frankly I don't know why I'm typing this, because no matter what's said, y'all conservatives are just gonna say that the media is liberal. It's like you LIKE to think the media's liberal.
CT: what would you say if I told you that over 90% of the people who work in the media identify themselves as republicans? Overwhelmingly they support the conservative side of issues, anti-abortion, pro war in iraq, against gun control etc, far out of balance with the rest of the country? What if every time a democrat is president certain issues make headlines that don't under republicans, homelessness the economy, world opinion etc despite similiar numbers under republican presidents?
Would you still claim the media is unbiased, or biased to the left?
I challenge you to do a bit a research on the 'Net, regarding tax structures under a Democratic admin as opposed to those under a Republican one. Under a Democratic tax system, those who PAY the most are those who HAVE the most, as it SHOULD be. The tax codes that Mister Bush wants to make a part of the landscape do exactly the opposite, which is disturbing if you've ever taken a hard look at how the Top One Percent live. Google a pic of Billy-Boy Gates' manse in Redmond, and ask yourself the same question I have, why a man and a woman with no children need a sixty-bedroom home. Or is it just sixty rooms? Not sure, but wanted to cover the bases. Still, my point is- WHY? Because they CAN? Tell that to the family living in a two-bedroom apartment with four kids, NOT because they had nothing better to do than lie about and have babies but because they once HAD a nice five-bedroom house until the mortgage industry allowed some unscrupulous bastich to stick them with a predatory rate that forced them to sell out and move down to survive.
Damn Bill Gates for being a genius and coming up with excellent technology that you yourself are probably using. He should be forced to share all his money he earned with his brain power with people who didn't have a stellar idea and the gumption to act on the idea turning it into a huge corporation. Oh wait, he already does share it being extremely generous in his charitable contributions. He just does it voluntarily instead of with a gun to his head as you would prefer.
The Democrats are the party of tax and spend but the Republicans have become the party of Spend and cut the wealthy's tax. Under Reagan who I liked alot the country's deficit grew but he turned the economy around and promoted the national defence. Under the Bush's we've racked up so much debt over nothing that our national security is at risk.
|
|
