English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

23 answers

the democrats (libs) only want to increase taxes to support a social role that they think are necessary. For some reason they think that what ever wealth I have (or don't have in my case) should be shared with people who don't make as much. I say I worked for what I've got, and I didn't mooch the govt to get it.

2006-08-21 14:48:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

Let's say you earn a $30,000 salary, hypothetically speaking.

1) Scenario 1 - You buy a house, auto, and run up about $10,000 in credit card debt. You sacrifice certain luxuries, but set aside most of your income to pay for these things. Naturally, some of your credit spending is for entertainment purposes and fun, since it's healthy to pay yourself back first, but you don't hesistate to pay the bills timely on these either.

2) Scenario 2 - You run up $675,000 in credit card debt simply because the creditors suddenly decided you could make your own qualifications and credit limit criteria. When you realize you could not possibly pay this back, you sign your house over to an interest only loan, go buy a Ferrari for good measure, and somehow manage to sign over the majority of the debt to your unborn children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren. Then, you get the mafia and the armed redneck down the street to loan you some money to support your spending addiction. Getting a second job for more income is out of the question, of course.

Now, which sounds like the current administration? Which is financially more prudent? Think about it.

2006-08-21 21:59:51 · answer #2 · answered by Joe D 6 · 0 0

Everyone seems to feel that the government is made of money. They need to realize the government doesn't create wealth or any productive product. They do contract out creating infrastructure.

The more we teach entitlement the more taxes we will be asked to pay. If an economically viable solution to the dwindling fossil fuels isn't started before the energy crisis collides with the baby-boomers' retirement bill there will be no funds for ANY liberal agenda.

2006-08-21 21:56:47 · answer #3 · answered by viablerenewables 7 · 1 0

Regardless of who is in office, the tax burden must be spread around (although weighted heavily towards the richer among us. It is a fact that the wealthy pay most of the federal personal income taxes. What Democrats need to understand is that you can lower taxes and raise tax receipts. The recent tax cuts resulted in double digit gains in the rate of tax collections. It should also be common knowledge that raising taxes can reduce tax receipts. Democrats have never been able to grasp that fact although the evidence is there for all to see.

Everyone needs to pay into the system. You squeeze the golden goose too hard, you may lose all those golden eggs. Democrats need to understand that, although I have little faith that they ever will. It is not politically acceptable and beneficial for them to admit the truth about taxes.

2006-08-21 22:08:48 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

If you had to choose again in 2000 between somewhat higher taxes for the higher end of the middle class or $77,000 (currently) of national debt per person in the US, what would you choose?

2006-08-21 22:50:14 · answer #5 · answered by switzerlandiscool 2 · 0 0

People think Clinton saved us a ton of money raising taxes, but where he got the money is from shutting down our military. Bush had to build the military back up and spend a lot of money to do it. Bushes tax cuts are working and the national debt is dropping but you wont see that in the liberal media.

2006-08-21 21:54:06 · answer #6 · answered by Go Rush! 3 · 3 2

When will conservatives come up with a plan that does not send the middle class's jobs to Malaysia and China while cutting taxes for billionaires? Thus putting the country a trillion dollars in debt to Communist China, thus making the dollar worth a lot less, thus making the price of imported goods--think of GASOLINE--go higher? Thanks for the war, nice job, we really appreciate it.

2006-08-21 21:49:22 · answer #7 · answered by jxt299 7 · 2 4

When you get a real 'blue collar' President in the White House, rather than a wealthy white collar business power stockbroker, keen on looking out for his fellow robber baron friends.

Until then, we--the commoner middle class--have to raise hell at being ridden by the rich and politically empowered who have NO clue as to how we live or how truly difficult their policies have us living.

2006-08-21 21:48:37 · answer #8 · answered by Hard Rocker 4 · 2 3

Your hated liberals actually balanced the budget.
GWB has built such a huge defecit that the world is now vulnerable to recession again. Bottom line is that the totally irresponsible party is the republicans and your kids are gonna pay in spades for this, whether they are lower, middle or upper class.

2006-08-21 21:47:06 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 6

Only after the tax burden they impose has drained the middle class of all of its money.

2006-08-21 21:45:15 · answer #10 · answered by Albannach 6 · 3 5

fedest.com, questions and answers