Topic: Obama Offers a Beautifully Packaged Lie

[monstertruck]

Seriously Dmast, what is with the "this guy scares me" bit? 

I think Obama is going to equal government at it's most intrusive. He will want to take from the "rich" and give to the poor. But what that really means he will take from anybody that produces and give it to those who produce nothing. He is backed by the very people he seems to be against. Wall Street loves this guy, and that's a huge strike against him in my book.
I remember back in the '90s when I lived in California, there was always a fight to pass a budget. We had a republican govener, Pete Wilson, and a predominately democratic house of representatives. They house would write up a budge loaded with pork for their various special projects, and Wilson refuse to sign it until it was trimmed. They went back and forth every year until the government literally have to get a budget signed to keep paying it's employees. It was always signed at the last minute, but every year it was the same fight. Then Grey Davis was elected governer. A democrat. For the next few years the budget flew through and there was never any problems. It was slick. Until Grey Davis announced (one year after he was reelected) that California was 40 billion in debt, and running at a $10 billion deficit annually. Where did that debt come from? Think those nice budgets that flew through weren't loaded with spending that the state simpley couldn't afford?
Obama is a left leaning democrat who will have a democratic congress and senate. The democrats will be in complete control of the governement for at least 2 years. I see nothing good that can come from this. They will become bigger, fatter, and tax more people more of the time. You may think this is a good thing. You may think this country is screwed up and there are too many people who need help. I think this country takes better care of the needy than most other countries right now. I think the care is there, we don't need more, but will get more.
But the rich will continue to get richer, and the poor will continue to remain poor. That won't change. It never will.

Are you a one issue voter and is this your hang-up issue?   

I pointed out 2 or 3 issues there. One is the probability of our taxes going up, the other is the overall economic heath of the country, and the third is my expectation that this means more government control in our lives.
I think it was Bush senior who said "It's the economy stupid!"
There are other issues. Do I think Obama can get us out of Iraq? No, not any more than Bush could (and yes I know he got us into Iraq). Obama, when asked about how he would deal with Iraq, said he would insist on the Iraqi government taking control of their country so we can get out. You don't think Bush has done that? you don't think that, as soon as we leave Iraq, it will become disaster area? As soon as we leave, there will be internal conflict for control of Iraq, there will be civil war, or Iran will just move in and take over. None of these alternatives are good. If Obama just pulls us out without that's what's going to happen. So we can get out and watch the situation degenerate, or we stay and try to keep things under, at least somewhat, undercontrol.
I can't discuss what will happen to the "war on terror." There's no such thing as a war on terror. Will we get hit again? I don't think it matters if Obama or McCain is president, if they want to hit us, they will hit us. Hopefully they won't.
What other issues do you want me to look at?

Taxpayer subsidized healthcare for all.

[Pacer]

If you liked Hillary, then I assume it was based on policy and not on gender? If that is in fact the case, I don't  follow how one could like Hillary but "dislike" Obama unless they based their vote on superficiality. Now, to prefer one to the other is another thing. "This guy scares me" is an irrational fear held by many on  the extreme right. He's not scary, he's not a "commie" or a socialist. Most moderate republicans, independents, liberals and democrats are just fine with Obama(clearly). I see some things in this thread that I really want to respond to, but frankly, I feel too ill to even go there tonight. But I will say, this country will never be Libertarian or Communist for that matter, taxes are necessary and so are social services. If these things are too much for you to bare, why not move? Anyhow things are looking good so far, happy about that.

By that ill-logic, approx. half the people in the U.S. would have to move every 4-8 years!

I've used that same comment before though...

I wouldn't call it illogic. It's just that everytime I come here you and Dmast are complaining about taxes and social programs. No matter how you two feel about taxes and social programs, we will always have to pay taxes and we will always have social programs, no matter who enters the White House. Therefore, you will never be happy, so again, why not move? Or if you feel you have such novel ideas, run for office yourself. Further, it's been clear that we aren't doing so great on the economic front, so yeah taxes are going to increase because of it. Under Obama, those making under a quater-million( the people who apparently "produce nothing") a year will receive federal tax cuts, but state taxes will probably increase somewhat(state taxes were going to increase no matter who entered the White House). And obviously government was going to expand no matter who entered the White House. Extreme right wing beliefs don't change reality.

Unicorns...The tooth fairy...Libertarianism.

This is a great time in history. I'm happy I was able to witness it and I'm happy I was on the right side of it. Congratulations to President elect Barrack Obama  . A special congratulations to his supporters.  It took all of us from all walks of life, united together, to make this happen. Be proud of this moment.

Oh and a special thanks to my Ohio peeps. I knew you guys would get tired of being kicked in the head eventually, I'm just glad it happened during this election cycle.

[Pacer]

Barrack Obama won by a landslide tonight! 

Time will tell what will happen to this country with a Democratic controlled Congress and Democratic President!  In the past; it has not worked out to good for the country.  Most recently when this happen was with President Carter!  19% inflation!  9% unemployment!

Hopefully Obama will be more like Clinton - middle of the road and not progressive left wing idealogy!  If he is middle of the road he will most likely be a "great" president and be re-elected by the same or larger majority!

This is a 'landslide'?
Obama  52%
62,170,724

McCain47%
55,173,953
You're crappin' me with that right?

So folks, what do you think the first glowing "change"  will be now that the Left will control both the White House and Congress?

Say  to your hard earned money and personal freedoms.
   That's what you folks voted for!

It's called the electoral college, and yes it was a land slide. So are you expecting us to believe that republicans are all about tax cuts for the middle class, they're all about personal freedoms and individual rights? Now that's hysterical. Oh, why I'm a doing this? I'm too tired and sick for this. Just ignore me. Happy thoughts, happy thoughts.

[monstertruck]

Barrack Obama won by a landslide tonight! 

Time will tell what will happen to this country with a Democratic controlled Congress and Democratic President!  In the past; it has not worked out to good for the country.  Most recently when this happen was with President Carter!  19% inflation!  9% unemployment!

Hopefully Obama will be more like Clinton - middle of the road and not progressive left wing idealogy!  If he is middle of the road he will most likely be a "great" president and be re-elected by the same or larger majority!

This is a 'landslide'?
Obama  52%
62,170,724

McCain47%
55,173,953
You're crappin' me with that right?

So folks, what do you think the first glowing "change"  will be now that the Left will control both the White House and Congress?

Say  to your hard earned money and personal freedoms.
   That's what you folks voted for!

It's called the electoral college, and yes it was a land slide. I don't know where you guys get your right wing propaganda, but apparently it isn't based in reality. Republicans are all about tax cuts for the middle class, they're all about personal freedoms and individual rights. Now that's hysterical. Oh, why I'm a doing this? I'm too tired and sick for this. Happy thoughts, happy thoughts.

Obama  52%
62,170,724

McCain47%
55,173,953


Oh wait, I get what you mean, the actual voters themselves don't count in your proclamation of a landslide.

[monstertruck]

If you liked Hillary, then I assume it was based on policy and not on gender? If that is in fact the case, I don't  follow how one could like Hillary but "dislike" Obama unless they based their vote on superficiality. Now, to prefer one to the other is another thing. "This guy scares me" is an irrational fear held by many on  the extreme right. He's not scary, he's not a "commie" or a socialist. Most moderate republicans, independents, liberals and democrats are just fine with Obama(clearly). I see some things in this thread that I really want to respond to, but frankly, I feel too ill to even go there tonight. But I will say, this country will never be Libertarian or Communist for that matter, taxes are necessary and so are social services. If these things are too much for you to bare, why not move? Anyhow things are looking good so far, happy about that.

By that ill-logic, approx. half the people in the U.S. would have to move every 4-8 years!

I've used that same comment before though...

I wouldn't call it illogic. It's just that everytime I come here you and Dmast are complaining about taxes and social programs. No matter how you two feel about taxes and social programs, we will always have to pay taxes and we will always have social programs, no matter who enters the White House. Therefore, you will never be happy, so again, why not move? Or if you feel you have such novel ideas, run for office yourself. Further, it's been clear that we aren't doing so great on the economic front, so yeah taxes are going to increase because of it. Under Obama, those making under a quater-million( the people who apparently "produce nothing") a year will receive federal tax cuts, but state taxes will probably increase somewhat(state taxes were going to increase no matter who entered the White House). And obviously government was going to expand no matter who entered the White House. Extreme right wing beliefs don't change reality.

Unicorns...The tooth fairy...Libertarianism.

This is a great time in history. I'm happy I was able to witness it and I'm happy I was on the right side of it. Congratulations to President elect Barrack Obama  . A special congratulations to his supporters.  It took all of us from all walks of life, united together, to make this happen. Be proud of this moment.

Oh and a special thanks to my Ohio peeps. I knew you guys would get tired of being kicked in the head eventually, I'm just glad it happened during this election cycle.

Agreed.  There will always be taxes and they will always go up.
There will always be social services as well there should be.

However, if you think those promised tax cuts to the middle class will come to fruition or exist for any length of time, I'd say you are sadly mistaken.

 

[dmastous]

I wouldn't call it illogic. It's just that everytime I come here you and Dmast are complaining about taxes and social programs. No matter how you two feel about taxes and social programs, we will always have to pay taxes and we will always have social programs, no matter who enters the White House. Therefore, you will never be happy, so again, why not move? Or if you feel you have such novel ideas, run for office yourself. Further, it's been clear that we aren't doing so great on the economic front, so yeah taxes are going to increase because of it. Under Obama, those making under a quater-million( the people who apparently "produce nothing") a year will receive federal tax cuts, but state taxes will probably increase somewhat(state taxes were going to increase no matter who entered the White House). And obviously government was going to expand no matter who entered the White House. Extreme right wing beliefs don't change reality.

Now you are painting me with a pretty broad and nasty brush. I'm not some kind of right wing kook, and I never cast Obama as a "commie". I do think he is a socialist, but that's not the same thing.
I am not complaining about the taxes I pay. I'm expecting to have to pay more. That's the problem. I am not complaining (too much) about the existing social programs. At least with respect to the Obama discussion. I'm complaining about his portraying this country as if there are no social programs. It's as if there is no help to be had if you are poor. That is just not true. They are in place, and they do a very good job helping people. They are effective (if not too effective, and very inefficient).
You talk about that $250,000 figure as if it's some line placed in the sand, not to be crossed. I expect it to be crossed almost immediately (in fact I'll bet you will hear that it was $250K businesses, not personal income soon). I'm fully expecting to pay more taxes under Obama not less, and I make much, much less than $250K. I make just enough money to live as it is right now, perhaps with some comfort. I struggle to get the bills paid. But I will make less in the coming years. That's what I expect, and that's what I'm scared of.
Obviously people who make less than $250K can't be categorized as producing nothing. I never said that. I said we take money from those who produce something, and give it to those who produce nothing. Sometimes, it's because they are incapable of producing. They are disabled, or mentally incapable of doing so. I have no problem with that. I have a problem when they are capable, but don't because they don't have to, and complain because the assistance that they already get isn't enough. That is a growing portion of the population.
If what I am expecting doesn't come to pass, if people making under $100K annually aren't getting taxed more, and somehow the economic crisis abates, and the debt is still cut, then I will applaud Obama, and change my tune. If he can implement universal healthcare, and not have it become a fiasco, like Hawaii, great. I'll be a happy camper, becuase I won't have to keep paying for my own crappy healthcare. I don't think he has a realistic chance of doing what he seems to want to do and not create more chaos.

[monstertruck]

As a business owner that works mostly for people with income over the $250K mark, how long do you figure it will be before I start laying people off now that those 'rich' people will have less disposable income and are less inclined to spend it on their homes?

Oh that's right, those fellows that I lay off will have all these wonderful social services to help them get by under the Dems plans!!!   That's what I call a plan to fail.

[OSU Buckeye]

If you liked Hillary, then I assume it was based on policy and not on gender? If that is in fact the case, I don't  follow how one could like Hillary but "dislike" Obama unless they based their vote on superficiality. Now, to prefer one to the other is another thing. "This guy scares me" is an irrational fear held by many on  the extreme right. He's not scary, he's not a "commie" or a socialist. Most moderate republicans, independents, liberals and democrats are just fine with Obama(clearly). I see some things in this thread that I really want to respond to, but frankly, I feel too ill to even go there tonight. But I will say, this country will never be Libertarian or Communist for that matter, taxes are necessary and so are social services. If these things are too much for you to bare, why not move? Anyhow things are looking good so far, happy about that.

By that ill-logic, approx. half the people in the U.S. would have to move every 4-8 years!

I've used that same comment before though...

I wouldn't call it illogic. It's just that everytime I come here you and Dmast are complaining about taxes and social programs. No matter how you two feel about taxes and social programs, we will always have to pay taxes and we will always have social programs, no matter who enters the White House. Therefore, you will never be happy, so again, why not move? Or if you feel you have such novel ideas, run for office yourself. Further, it's been clear that we aren't doing so great on the economic front, so yeah taxes are going to increase because of it. Under Obama, those making under a quater-million( the people who apparently "produce nothing") a year will receive federal tax cuts, but state taxes will probably increase somewhat(state taxes were going to increase no matter who entered the White House). And obviously government was going to expand no matter who entered the White House. Extreme right wing beliefs don't change reality.

Unicorns...The tooth fairy...Libertarianism.

This is a great time in history. I'm happy I was able to witness it and I'm happy I was on the right side of it. Congratulations to President elect Barrack Obama  . A special congratulations to his supporters.  It took all of us from all walks of life, united together, to make this happen. Be proud of this moment.

Oh and a special thanks to my Ohio peeps. I knew you guys would get tired of being kicked in the head eventually, I'm just glad it happened during this election cycle.

I am shocked Ohio went with Obama here.  As I said in another thread, Ohio has many racist folks still running around.............especially out in the sticks..............which Ohio has alot of (please excuse my generalizations)!  I have a really good joke brewing in my head about how much these racist people must have disliked George W. Bush that they would vote an African American into the presidency.    BTW, I am not trying to say that all of Ohio is racist. 

[jeffrx]

To me, this is one of the top three greatest days in the history of this country.  What more can I say, really?

We all showed that passion, hard work, persistence, and integrity can bring anything if you want it bad enough.  It was a dirty campaign and the kitchen sink was indeed thrown at Obama, but by staying positive and believing in what we knew was the right thing to do, we convinced the majority of the country to join our effort.  The best candidate truly did win and I will always be extremely proud to have played a very small role in what was accomplished.  Against all odds, the effort of ordinary Americans got Barack Obama elected.  Today is indeed a great day in American history.  I would rank it right up there with the signing of the Declaration of Independence, winning World War II, and ending slavery.  After eight years of feeling that our country was spinning out of control, we now have what many feel is the greatest feeling of all - hope.

[OSU Buckeye]

To me, this is one of the top three greatest days in the history of this country.  What more can I say, really?

We all showed that passion, hard work, persistence, and integrity can bring anything if you want it bad enough.  It was a dirty campaign and the kitchen sink was indeed thrown at Obama, but by staying positive and believing in what we knew was the right thing to do, we convinced the majority of the country to join our effort.  The best candidate truly did win and I will always be extremely proud to have played a very small role in what was accomplished.  Against all odds, the effort of ordinary Americans got Barack Obama elected.  Today is indeed a great day in American history.  I would rank it right up there with the signing of the Declaration of Independence, winning World War II, and ending slavery.  After eight years of feeling that our country was spinning out of control, we now have what many feel is the greatest feeling of all - hope.

I agree with all you say but lets be a bit more cautious and optimistic that things indeed will improve! 

[Pacer]

I wouldn't call it illogic. It's just that everytime I come here you and Dmast are complaining about taxes and social programs. No matter how you two feel about taxes and social programs, we will always have to pay taxes and we will always have social programs, no matter who enters the White House. Therefore, you will never be happy, so again, why not move? Or if you feel you have such novel ideas, run for office yourself. Further, it's been clear that we aren't doing so great on the economic front, so yeah taxes are going to increase because of it. Under Obama, those making under a quater-million( the people who apparently "produce nothing") a year will receive federal tax cuts, but state taxes will probably increase somewhat(state taxes were going to increase no matter who entered the White House). And obviously government was going to expand no matter who entered the White House. Extreme right wing beliefs don't change reality.

Now you are painting me with a pretty broad and nasty brush. I'm not some kind of right wing kook, and I never cast Obama as a "commie". I do think he is a socialist, but that's not the same thing.
I am not complaining about the taxes I pay. I'm expecting to have to pay more. That's the problem. I am not complaining (too much) about the existing social programs. At least with respect to the Obama discussion. I'm complaining about his portraying this country as if there are no social programs. It's as if there is no help to be had if you are poor. That is just not true. They are in place, and they do a very good job helping people. They are effective (if not too effective, and very inefficient).
You talk about that $250,000 figure as if it's some line placed in the sand, not to be crossed. I expect it to be crossed almost immediately (in fact I'll bet you will hear that it was $250K businesses, not personal income soon). I'm fully expecting to pay more taxes under Obama not less, and I make much, much less than $250K. I make just enough money to live as it is right now, perhaps with some comfort. I struggle to get the bills paid. But I will make less in the coming years. That's what I expect, and that's what I'm scared of.
Obviously people who make less than $250K can't be categorized as producing nothing. I never said that. I said we take money from those who produce something, and give it to those who produce nothing. Sometimes, it's because they are incapable of producing. They are disabled, or mentally incapable of doing so. I have no problem with that. I have a problem when they are capable, but don't because they don't have to, and complain because the assistance that they already get isn't enough. That is a growing portion of the population.
If what I am expecting doesn't come to pass, if people making under $100K annually aren't getting taxed more, and somehow the economic crisis abates, and the debt is still cut, then I will applaud Obama, and change my tune. If he can implement universal healthcare, and not have it become a fiasco, like Hawaii, great. I'll be a happy camper, becuase I won't have to keep paying for my own crappy healthcare. I don't think he has a realistic chance of doing what he seems to want to do and not create more chaos.

OK. Maybe I made a mistake in lumping you together with Monsta( this is not a slag on you Monsta ). For whatever reason, I assumed you both were on the same page, if my assumption was off base, I apologize. Most of what you have written is just your opinion and I'm not going to change your mind no matter what I say really. I do believe that taxes at the state level will increase and I do believe that those who make less than a quarter-million will recieve FEDERAL tax cuts. We are in a recession that may take years to get out of. Things are not going to go smoothly right now no matter who would have won last night.

If your position is that social programs need to be improved so that they are more efficient, and the programs which have proven to be ineffective or unnecessary are cut, then we agree. Which Obama says he plans to do.

If your position is that all social programs need to be cut across the board and we must then rely on charitable donations to meet the needs of the most needy. Then we disagree entirely.

If your position is that we should continue the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, instead giving those tax cuts to the middle class. Then, again, we disagree. You earn more, you pay more taxes, that's the way it has always been in our country, this is nothing new. If anyone believes that those individuals who are going to be faced with this tax increase,  are going to be so heavily burdened by this increase, that they'll have to lay off employees or whatever else needs to check to see what the increase is going to actually look like.   Basically Clinton era.

If you prefer a policy of consumption(McCain) to a policy of investment(Obama) then again we disagree. Uh, I'll stop here, I'm getting tired again. Just think how investing in human capital and infrastructure will pay off in the long run.

Nice post Jeffrx!

[dmastous]

OK. Maybe I made a mistake in lumping you together with Monsta( this is not a slag on you Monsta ). For whatever reason, I assumed you both were on the same page, if my assumption was off base, I apologize. Most of what you have written is just your opinion and I'm not going to change your mind no matter what I say really. I do believe that taxes at the state level will increase and I do believe that those who make less than a quarter-million will recieve FEDERAL tax cuts. We are in a recession that may take years to get out of. Things are not going to go smoothly right now no matter who would have won last night.

If your position is that social programs need to be improved so that they are more efficient, and the programs which have proven to be ineffective or unnecessary are cut, then we agree. Which Obama says he plans to do.

If your position is that all social programs need to be cut across the board and we must then rely on charitable donations to meet the needs of the most needy. Then we disagree entirely.

If your position is that we should continue the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, instead giving those tax cuts to the middle class. Then, again, we disagree. You earn more, you pay more taxes, that's the way it has always been in our country, this is nothing new. If anyone believes that those individuals who are going to be faced with this tax increase,  are going to be so heavily burdened by this increase, that they'll have to lay off employees or whatever else needs to check to see what the increase is going to actually look like.   Basically Clinton era.

If you prefer a policy of consumption(McCain) to a policy of investment(Obama) then again we disagree. Uh, I'll stop here, I'm getting tired again. Just think how investing in human capital and infrastructure will pay off in the long run.

Nice post Jeffrx!

Perhaps you are right, and those who make money have a moral imperitive to help those who don't (notice I didn't use the word can't). In that case as time goes by, there be less who earn, and more who don't. That's the old water always finding the easiest path concept. Maybe you've heard of it.
I don't really have a problem being lumped in with the Monster. I'm not in lockstep with him, but most of what he says, I agree with. I just don't want to get lumped in with the real nuts, extremists, and far right wingers (Reverend Falwell types, the Archie Bunker types or neo nazi types). Like I said, I don't consider Obama a commie (or "pinko commie"), but I do see him as a socialist, because he is all about the redistribution of wealth. He has talked about it as the government's job. Take from the rich and give to the poor. But what ends up happening is, the rich find ways around it, and the middle class ends up with the burden.
As for Bush's tax cuts, what tax cuts? There was a tax refund. Everybody making over $30,000 recieved a check for $600 (couples got $600 for each). If you made $30K or $1,00,000 you got $600. If that's a tax cut for the rich, than so be it. To me regardless of how much you "tax" the rich, they will find a loophole and avoid paying. They are typically very smart (that's why they are rich) and resourcefull (because they are rich). The people who really get hurt are people who aren't the rich, but the middle class. People in the $50K- $100K range. We don't have the resources to find loopholes, so we end up footing the bill. That's why I believe in a flat tax. Just take a certain percentage off the top, and close all the loopholes. Then everybody will be paying their "fair share".
I think I understand your viewpoint, and where it comes from. I did live, for 9 years in Nortern California, and spent some time hanging out in Berkeley. I'm not going to try and elucidate my views anymore, as I just don't think that many people share them. In the end, we get what we deserve (and we will). You got what you deserved in California when you elected Gray Davis as govenor, and I predict the same kind of issues with Obama.

[monstertruck]

OK. Maybe I made a mistake in lumping you together with Monsta( this is not a slag on you Monsta ). For whatever reason, I assumed you both were on the same page, if my assumption was off base, I apologize. Most of what you have written is just your opinion and I'm not going to change your mind no matter what I say really. I do believe that taxes at the state level will increase and I do believe that those who make less than a quarter-million will recieve FEDERAL tax cuts. We are in a recession that may take years to get out of. Things are not going to go smoothly right now no matter who would have won last night.

If your position is that social programs need to be improved so that they are more efficient, and the programs which have proven to be ineffective or unnecessary are cut, then we agree. Which Obama says he plans to do.

If your position is that all social programs need to be cut across the board and we must then rely on charitable donations to meet the needs of the most needy. Then we disagree entirely.

If your position is that we should continue the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, instead giving those tax cuts to the middle class. Then, again, we disagree. You earn more, you pay more taxes, that's the way it has always been in our country, this is nothing new. If anyone believes that those individuals who are going to be faced with this tax increase,  are going to be so heavily burdened by this increase, that they'll have to lay off employees or whatever else needs to check to see what the increase is going to actually look like.   Basically Clinton era.

If you prefer a policy of consumption(McCain) to a policy of investment(Obama) then again we disagree. Uh, I'll stop here, I'm getting tired again. Just think how investing in human capital and infrastructure will pay off in the long run.

Nice post Jeffrx!

Perhaps you are right, and those who make money have a moral imperitive to help those who don't (notice I didn't use the word can't). In that case as time goes by, there be less who earn, and more who don't. That's the old water always finding the easiest path concept. Maybe you've heard of it.
I don't really have a problem being lumped in with the Monster. I'm not in lockstep with him, but most of what he says, I agree with. I just don't want to get lumped in with the real nuts, extremists, and far right wingers (Reverend Falwell types, the Archie Bunker types or neo nazi types). Like I said, I don't consider Obama a commie (or "pinko commie"), but I do see him as a socialist, because he is all about the redistribution of wealth. He has talked about it as the government's job. Take from the rich and give to the poor. But what ends up happening is, the rich find ways around it, and the middle class ends up with the burden.
As for Bush's tax cuts, what tax cuts? There was a tax refund. Everybody making over $30,000 recieved a check for $600 (couples got $600 for each). If you made $30K or $1,00,000 you got $600. If that's a tax cut for the rich, than so be it. To me regardless of how much you "tax" the rich, they will find a loophole and avoid paying. They are typically very smart (that's why they are rich) and resourcefull (because they are rich). The people who really get hurt are people who aren't the rich, but the middle class. People in the $50K- $100K range. We don't have the resources to find loopholes, so we end up footing the bill. That's why I believe in a flat tax. Just take a certain percentage off the top, and close all the loopholes. Then everybody will be paying their "fair share".
I think I understand your viewpoint, and where it comes from. I did live, for 9 years in Nortern California, and spent some time hanging out in Berkeley. I'm not going to try and elucidate my views anymore, as I just don't think that many people share them. In the end, we get what we deserve (and we will). You got what you deserved in California when you elected Gray Davis as govenor, and I predict the same kind of issues with Obama.

I don't wanna be a fake nut I wanna be a real nut!

[monstertruck]

I wouldn't call it illogic. It's just that everytime I come here you and Dmast are complaining about taxes and social programs. No matter how you two feel about taxes and social programs, we will always have to pay taxes and we will always have social programs, no matter who enters the White House. Therefore, you will never be happy, so again, why not move? Or if you feel you have such novel ideas, run for office yourself. Further, it's been clear that we aren't doing so great on the economic front, so yeah taxes are going to increase because of it. Under Obama, those making under a quater-million( the people who apparently "produce nothing") a year will receive federal tax cuts, but state taxes will probably increase somewhat(state taxes were going to increase no matter who entered the White House). And obviously government was going to expand no matter who entered the White House. Extreme right wing beliefs don't change reality.

Now you are painting me with a pretty broad and nasty brush. I'm not some kind of right wing kook, and I never cast Obama as a "commie". I do think he is a socialist, but that's not the same thing.
I am not complaining about the taxes I pay. I'm expecting to have to pay more. That's the problem. I am not complaining (too much) about the existing social programs. At least with respect to the Obama discussion. I'm complaining about his portraying this country as if there are no social programs. It's as if there is no help to be had if you are poor. That is just not true. They are in place, and they do a very good job helping people. They are effective (if not too effective, and very inefficient).
You talk about that $250,000 figure as if it's some line placed in the sand, not to be crossed. I expect it to be crossed almost immediately (in fact I'll bet you will hear that it was $250K businesses, not personal income soon). I'm fully expecting to pay more taxes under Obama not less, and I make much, much less than $250K. I make just enough money to live as it is right now, perhaps with some comfort. I struggle to get the bills paid. But I will make less in the coming years. That's what I expect, and that's what I'm scared of.
Obviously people who make less than $250K can't be categorized as producing nothing. I never said that. I said we take money from those who produce something, and give it to those who produce nothing. Sometimes, it's because they are incapable of producing. They are disabled, or mentally incapable of doing so. I have no problem with that. I have a problem when they are capable, but don't because they don't have to, and complain because the assistance that they already get isn't enough. That is a growing portion of the population.
If what I am expecting doesn't come to pass, if people making under $100K annually aren't getting taxed more, and somehow the economic crisis abates, and the debt is still cut, then I will applaud Obama, and change my tune. If he can implement universal healthcare, and not have it become a fiasco, like Hawaii, great. I'll be a happy camper, becuase I won't have to keep paying for my own crappy healthcare. I don't think he has a realistic chance of doing what he seems to want to do and not create more chaos.

OK. Maybe I made a mistake in lumping you together with Monsta( this is not a slag on you Monsta ). For whatever reason, I assumed you both were on the same page, if my assumption was off base, I apologize. Most of what you have written is just your opinion and I'm not going to change your mind no matter what I say really. I do believe that taxes at the state level will increase and I do believe that those who make less than a quarter-million will recieve FEDERAL tax cuts. We are in a recession that may take years to get out of. Things are not going to go smoothly right now no matter who would have won last night.

If your position is that social programs need to be improved so that they are more efficient, and the programs which have proven to be ineffective or unnecessary are cut, then we agree. Which Obama says he plans to do.

If your position is that all social programs need to be cut across the board and we must then rely on charitable donations to meet the needs of the most needy. Then we disagree entirely.

If your position is that we should continue the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, instead giving those tax cuts to the middle class. Then, again, we disagree. You earn more, you pay more taxes, that's the way it has always been in our country, this is nothing new. If anyone believes that those individuals who are going to be faced with this tax increase,  are going to be so heavily burdened by this increase, that they'll have to lay off employees or whatever else needs to check to see what the increase is going to actually look like. ;-()  Basically Clinton era.

If you prefer a policy of consumption(McCain) to a policy of investment(Obama) then again we disagree. Uh, I'll stop here, I'm getting tired again. Just think how investing in human capital and infrastructure will pay off in the long run.

Nice post Jeffrx!

Slag away at will Pacer, you're a good egg!

I'm confused as to how anyone can believe that individuals or businesses that feel the pinch from additional taxation for increased social service won't just pass it on down the line.  Being a 'very small' business owner just accentuates the reality of the matter for me.  What am I gonna do, raise my rates on people that are already taking a hit on their income?  Seems to me the problem will be amplified exponentially as the size of the business gets bigger.  I'll be sure and keep you posted as to how this all plays out over the next year or so.

[Pacer]

Families earning more than $1 million a year saw their federal tax rates drop more sharply than any group in the country under Bush's tax cuts. Tax rates for middle-income earners edged up in 2004, while rates for people at the very top continued to decline. So who is really benefiting here? "Redistribution of wealth" this "redistribution of wealth" that, that's all I hear from the extreme right wing. If giving tax cuts to people who actually need them and creating opportunities for people who wouldn't otherwise have them, is a redistribution of wealth then so be it. It's not about some moral imperative, social programs benefit society economically by creating wealth opportunities in lower income communities. Cut them and see what you get.

A nation that does not invest in human capital will eventually find itself in economic turmoil, it would be total chaos. From what you two write, my impression of the both of you, is that you have extreme views, you leave little room for life's complexities. I can't imagine you two are moderate republicans. I also can't imagine that either of you would ever be happy no matter who is in office because this country would never go the direction you'd like it to. John McCain is actually a moderate, he would have never gone in the direction that you two would prefer. It seems that anything to the left of you is considered socialism. But hey, I can be wrong, wouldn't be the first time. I don't understand you trying to slag me off because I live in California though. But since I like you and you're a former resident, I'll take it with a grain of salt.
I'm 24, so I never voted for Davis. Arnold hasn't done much either, and I also didn't vote for him. The 3 (sometimes 4 including Babble) of us have argued these points, in 3 or 4 different threads and we just end up going in circles because we are never going to agree, no matter what, we just aren't going to budge. But it's all good on my end, we don't have to agree.  I'll end with that.  If you guys want to know more about Obama’s tax platform read for yourself:
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Factsheet_Tax_Plan_FINAL.pdf

Random thought. I just figured out what the rx in Jeffrx stands for.

[dmastous]

Families earning more than $1 million a year saw their federal tax rates drop more sharply than any group in the country under Bush's tax cuts. Tax rates for middle-income earners edged up in 2004, while rates for people at the very top continued to decline. So who is really benefiting here? "Redistribution of wealth" this "redistribution of wealth" that, that's all I hear from the extreme right wing. If giving tax cuts to people who actually need them and creating opportunities for people who wouldn't otherwise have them, is a redistribution of wealth then so be it. It's not about some moral imperative, social programs benefit society economically by creating wealth opportunities in lower income communities. Cut them and see what you get.

A nation that does not invest in human capital will eventually find itself in economic turmoil, it would be total chaos. From what you two write, my impression of the both of you, is that you have extreme views, you leave little room for life's complexities. I can't imagine you two are moderate republicans. I also can't imagine that either of you would ever be happy no matter who is in office because this country would never go the direction you'd like it to. John McCain is actually a moderate, he would have never gone in the direction that you two would prefer. It seems that anything to the left of you is considered socialism. But hey, I can be wrong, wouldn't be the first time. I don't understand you trying to slag me off because I live in California though. But since I like you and you're a former resident, I'll take it with a grain of salt.
I'm 24, so I never voted for Davis. Arnold hasn't done much either, and I also didn't vote for him. The 3 (sometimes 4 including Babble) of us have argued these points, in 3 or 4 different threads and we just end up going in circles because we are never going to agree, no matter what, we just aren't going to budge. But it's all good on my end, we don't have to agree.  I'll end with that.  If you guys want to know more about Obama’s tax platform read for yourself:
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Factsheet_Tax_Plan_FINAL.pdf

Random thought. I just figured out what the rx in Jeffrx stands for.

I figured it out a couple days ago, so there! 

[monstertruck]

Families earning more than $1 million a year saw their federal tax rates drop more sharply than any group in the country under Bush's tax cuts. Tax rates for middle-income earners edged up in 2004, while rates for people at the very top continued to decline. So who is really benefiting here? "Redistribution of wealth" this "redistribution of wealth" that, that's all I hear from the extreme right wing. If giving tax cuts to people who actually need them and creating opportunities for people who wouldn't otherwise have them, is a redistribution of wealth then so be it. It's not about some moral imperative, social programs benefit society economically by creating wealth opportunities in lower income communities. Cut them and see what you get.

A nation that does not invest in human capital will eventually find itself in economic turmoil, it would be total chaos. From what you two write, my impression of the both of you, is that you have extreme views, you leave little room for life's complexities. I can't imagine you two are moderate republicans. I also can't imagine that either of you would ever be happy no matter who is in office because this country would never go the direction you'd like it to. John McCain is actually a moderate, he would have never gone in the direction that you two would prefer. It seems that anything to the left of you is considered socialism. But hey, I can be wrong, wouldn't be the first time. I don't understand you trying to slag me off because I live in California though. But since I like you and you're a former resident, I'll take it with a grain of salt.
I'm 24, so I never voted for Davis. Arnold hasn't done much either, and I also didn't vote for him. The 3 (sometimes 4 including Babble) of us have argued these points, in 3 or 4 different threads and we just end up going in circles because we are never going to agree, no matter what, we just aren't going to budge. But it's all good on my end, we don't have to agree.  I'll end with that.  If you guys want to know more about Obama’s tax platform read for yourself:
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Factsheet_Tax_Plan_FINAL.pdf

Random thought. I just figured out what the rx in Jeffrx stands for.

What a spectacular plan!
Just like most politicians these are nothing but empty campaign promises until they are implemented.
Let's see what happens.

Pacer, you have my permission to jab a stick in my eye if any of this plan is actually enacted!

[retro]

I'd rather be rich and be "taxed unfairly" than be poor

[monstertruck]

I'd rather be rich and be "taxed unfairly" than be poor

I'd rather be poor and taxed fairly than accept handouts from anyone.

[kickserve]

I'd rather be rich and be "taxed unfairly" than be poor

I'd rather be poor and taxed fairly than accept handouts from anyone.

Because you have a mistaken assumption that poor people have only themselves to blame