If you are WEALTHY like Hillary you are fine.
If you have an income of $250 - $500 K you are not a millionaire but YOU depend on your INCOME to get ahead and live the American Dream. She and the other WEALTHY Democrats will take your money to buy votes from the poor and they will CREATE two classes and the American Dream will be shattered.
2007-10-12 03:56:19 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
1st I don't make anything near 250k. But I can tell you I don't believe that a gradiated tax structure is fair nor ever was.
By design the current tax code reinforces the ability of politicians (left or right) to play class warfare to garner votes.
I believe we do need fundamental changes to the way taxes are assessed and collected in this country, I also believe "We the People" should be more diligent about the out of control spending..
We need to eliminate the power in the revenue stream the ONLY proposal on the table capable of doing that is HR25/S25. No life long politician wants it nor do any K - Street lobbyists because it is a threat to the $500 billion/year tax code compliance industry.
People left and right need to take a look and get an understanding of it. I will vote for politicians who sign on to it and commit to pushing it forward. It time to get the IRS and 16th amendment monkey off our backs.
It's time to base our tax structure on consumption rather then production. I believe the winning hand would be the US economy would again become a haven for businesses to home base right here.
http://www.fairtax.org
Government spends more then it takes in in revenue and slowly with each successive generation is selling off this country to overseas interests. The Chicoms hold a good deal of our debt. This gives me the chills.
"A democracy is always temporary"
About the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh , had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior:
"A democracy is always temporary in nature ; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."
"The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years.
During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:
1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage "
2007-10-12 05:32:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
We should never have policies in a free society that punish success. This is a land of opportunity. Not everyone takes advantage of the opportunities available to them and not all of those who try will succeed. But the opportunity to reach for the top is there for everyone in this country. Why should we punish those who make it just because we haven't? Redistribution of wealth is just petty jealousy. Hillary is appealing to the basest of human emotion to get the people who have little to look with greed upon those who have a little more and say, "I want what you have." Then she promises to take from them and give to you. It is both a bribe and a means to pick a fight between the rich and the poor. And also between those who think it is wrong to steal from others and those who covet what others have. But never does she risk her own possessions or those of her wealthy friends. And any who think that Democrats are not looking out for the interests of the wealthy are deluding themselves. They get their money from wealthy backers just like republicans do. They just are not as honest about it.
2007-10-13 18:40:07 · answer #2 · answered by James L 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Just because a person is poor...you say they are selling
their vote? And what do you classify as 'poor'? Poor
can be lack of a lot of things and if you're talking money,
how much do you have after your bills are all paid...? I
prefer a happy home and health in my family to describe
wealth...not many votes are bought with that...so, if I vote
for Hillary or for Rudy...my vote won't be bought by money,
but how I feel .....and this I reserve as my business!
2007-10-12 11:18:00 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
well the problem is that we're not just talking about the super rich here. Between my wife and I we make around 55K a year which is not a ton of money and not easy to live on when you have school loans, but libs will say that is too much and redistribute it to, often times people who simply don't want to work. So is that fair, is it even fair if someone does earn 250k a year to have a larger, much larger percentage of their money taken. I'm all for helping people out, but i think it should be the individual responsibility of people, not the job of the government. And, I read a study recently that said democrats (those who vote that way at least) while making slightly more than rep., are outgiven by them (rep.) nearly 4 to 1.
2007-10-12 11:11:39 · answer #4 · answered by Gammon 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋
RLP, I agree... here is the thing , most small businesses fall in that range and we will have a massive Unemployment if she gets her way....
...Heck she doesn't care, she has little people sheltering her money...case in point the resent money laundering scheme that no one seems to want to talk about, where her little friend that makes $40,000 a year buys a 200,000 instrument her husband played!
..If you do the numbers over 80% of the people that vote don't make that much and of course they probably don't understand that there boss has that money coming in to pay them and the other 10 employees, as lower income people do not seem to grasp money and businesses, ....If you get rid of the little business man all you will have is the BILL Gates, and the graveling majority begging for crumbs....Sick!... When are the Libs going to learn to READ! about economics! Da!
...and of course since they are the majority we will all have to live under the "most" ignant of society's choice for a leader...scary!
2007-10-12 18:25:27 · answer #5 · answered by Rada S 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Sounds good to me, lets give it a try, because the system we have isn't working.
She must really have a chance of becoming President, you can tell just by the way the rightwingers grab at ANYTHING to try to make her look bad, but it all boils down to, "We, the Ones in Power, Are Afraid We Are Going to Lose that Power, and We Can't Let that Happen, Because Our Saudi Arabian Masters Will Be Displeased".
Fearmongering and lying to make your point are SO 7 years ago. It's time for legitimate, rational discourse, something I'm not convinced the right is capable of, because we NEVER hear from anyone who would be considered a "rational right-winger".
It's all insults, hate, fear and name calling. Too bad you have to live with such hate and fear in your life, that you would tell such mendacities in a public forum.
How much is Bandar Bush paying you to say these things?
2007-10-12 11:05:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Hillary said all of the following:
1 - "Were going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
2 - "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few, time to reject the idea of an 'on your own' society and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."
3 - "We can't just let business as usual go on. And that means something has to be taken away from some people."
4 - "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in our entire economy that they're being watched."
2007-10-14 09:21:37 · answer #7 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's nothing but fancy talk to win the primaries.. it's what everyone does till the main election.
You won't actually know what a candidate stands for if you just listen to the media and what they say till after the Primaries (and even then you have to dig a bit)
2007-10-12 11:02:39 · answer #8 · answered by pip 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Are you saying I should worry more about people who make $250 - $500 K than the average American? I don't care if they are re-distributed.
Save your money for a couple years and retire.
2007-10-12 11:02:04 · answer #9 · answered by Zardoz 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Agreed
I haven't seen one thing that shows Hillary (or any politician) give up even a small portion of their own money to the poor and if people on this board say it isn't so then let them produce factual links and I don't mean the LIEberal media links. I want hard facts. She lies just like every politician, even many democrats can see through her lies.
2007-10-12 11:12:38 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋