Would You Pay Significantly Higher Taxes? And Why or Why Not

[Bronco_Beerslug]

To increase our military by two divisions and add 40,000 more special forces?
Kerry is going to add these forces to fight terrorism. This is how he will avoid a draft. He will not raise your taxes to accomplish this unless you make over $200,000 a year.
Not a if or well maybe question. Yes or No.

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Kerry's said that tax increase will pay for about a half dozen of his programs. I believe it's been taken.

and for about the 5th time, physically where are those troops coming from? According to you they can't hit recruitment levels or retention levels. So there will be no natural increase.

They can allocate all the money they want for more troops, but where are those people coming from? Call for enlistments or the draft?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

To increase our military by two divisions and add 40,000 more special forces?
Kerry is going to add these forces to fight terrorism. This is how he will avoid a draft. He will not raise your taxes to accomplish this unless you make over $200,000 a year.
Not a if or well maybe question. Yes or No.
This should have read by two divisions and add more special forces for a total over 40,000 new troops.

[Crushaholic]

No way am I voting for higher taxes. It's MY money. I want it! :moon:

[Kaylore]

I don't trust goverment to spend my money wisely. Most programs' funding are wasted on bureaucracy and red tape. Taxes can also negatively impact the eb and flow of the economy resulting in poor growth. There are some programs I think are necessary and good for society, but since government hasn't learned to spend the money we've given them responsibly yet, I don't intend to give them any more.

[TomServo]

there is a check off box on MA's tax return forms that lets a taxpayer pay the low rate or opt to pay a higher rate. guess which rate the kerrys picked? thats right the lowest rate.

also if im not mistaken there is a federal form that lets a person give back to the federal govt. any or all the bush tax relief they choose to. lesse how much michael moore gives back.

[Taco John]

I didn't pay taxes much mind during the hey-day... It wasn't until the economy went in the crapper that I started realizing the full implication of taxes on my income.

I sure don't want to pay any more taxes than we already do. I'd rather see spending cuts. It's hard for me to believe that we haven't seen this Administration cut a single thing or veto even one spending bill. I can't believe that we'd cut the border security by $18 million, and then turn around and boost the National Endowment for the Arts by $18 million... in a time of war, no less.

We really need to expand the system to allow for third party candidates to at least participate in the debates.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I don't trust goverment to spend my money wisely. Most programs' funding are wasted on bureaucracy and red tape. Taxes can also negatively impact the eb and flow of the economy resulting in poor growth. There are some programs I think are necessary and good for society, but since government hasn't learned to spend the money we've given them responsibly yet, I don't intend to give them any more.
Well, whether you intend to give the government more or not is not going to be your choice if you and I want to try and secure our country from terror attacks. Can you tell me how the 100s of billions of dollars needed to protect our borders and coastlines, public transportation systems, industrial sites, nuclear plants, etc... is going to come from? Even if we weren't pouring 5 billion a month into Iraq to police that country this money will have to come from somewhere.
I, for one, will have no problem paying more to help secure our country and it's people.

[broncogary]

I don't understand the question.

[baja]

Well, whether you intend to give the government more or not is not going to be your choice if you and I want to try and secure our country from terror attacks. Can you tell me how the 100s of billions of dollars needed to protect our borders and coastlines, public transportation systems, industrial sites, nuclear plants, etc... is going to come from? Even if we weren't pouring 5 billion a month into Iraq to police that country this money will have to come from somewhere.
I, for one, will have no problem paying more to help secure our country and it's people.

According to Mile High Shack we all need to keep an eye on "those rag heads"

[Spider]

Depends on the job forcast , if we get a few million more working , then thats a few Million more paying taxes , Personaly dont think we need to crank up taxes , we do need to cut spending more so . We need to get a grip on our trade deficite ... What has made America great isnt high Taxes , it is hard working Americans kicking ass on any competitor from any country , technology ,ingenuity and good ole American know how , we need to get back to that , but yes I would be willing to pay more in taxes to defend this country , what good is money , when your country has been taken over ?

[Spider]

I love the mantra , it is my Money , Screw the goverment ......... But hey War on Iraq is a good thing but I dont want to pay for it , Defend me from terrorist but I dont want to pay for protection .......

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I don't understand the question.
It's Ok, there are simpler threads you could reply to here.

[gunns]

there is a check off box on MA's tax return forms that lets a taxpayer pay the low rate or opt to pay a higher rate. guess which rate the kerrys picked? thats right the lowest rate.

also if im not mistaken there is a federal form that lets a person give back to the federal govt. any or all the bush tax relief they choose to. lesse how much michael moore gives back.

And which rate would you pick? And did you give your tax relief back? Please, there aren't many who would not do the exact same. No I don't want my taxes raised. I make between 40-50K a year and with 3 children still at home and still in college I can't afford much more taken out of my check and after Bush's joke of a tax cut, I don't feel I even got one. After raising 6 children I feel I've paid my fair share of taxes, everywhere. I think those making over 200,000 a year should lose their tax cut, they can afford it. Besides they pay 82% of the tax, it WILL provide money.

[Spider]

And which rate would you pick? And did you give your tax relief back? Please, there aren't many who would not do the exact same. No I don't want my taxes raised. I make between 40-50K a year and with 3 children still at home and still in college I can't afford much more taken out of my check and after Bush's joke of a tax cut, I don't feel I even got one. After raising 6 children I feel I've paid my fair share of taxes, everywhere. I think those making over 200,000 a year should lose their tax cut, they can afford it. Besides they pay 82% of the tax, it WILL provide money.
excellent point ..... The tax cut effected the prices of everything right across the board .......

[broncogary]

It's Ok, there are simpler threads you could reply to here.

That's ok. I'm sure you and Spider can explain it to me.

[Spider]

That's ok. I'm sure you and Spider can explain it to me.
Not realy much to explain ..... Just live in the real world ....... ;D

[W*GS]

It's a dumb question - it all depends on what these additional taxes are used.

Right now, the governments get more than enough of our money to do everything they need to do.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

It's a dumb question - it all depends on what these additional taxes are used.


First sentence, first post.

[broncogary]

First sentence, first post.

Stupid me! I couldn't tell if the hypothetical was to be based on the thread title or the entire first post.

I never dreamed it was restricted to the first sentence, first post.

I wonder if this changes anyone's answer. hmmm...

[biggertrux]

It's Ok, there are simpler threads you could reply to here.
22 (that is TWENTY-TWO) congressional sponsors on bills to re-instate the draft. ALL OF THE DEMOCRATS, NON OF THEM VOTED FOR THEIR OWN STINKIN,STUPID, MORINIC, IDIOTIC, EMBECILLIC, SHAM OF A BILL ("I'm just a bill, yes I'm only a bill, George Dubya won't sign me but John Kerry will")

[baja]

22 (that is TWENTY-TWO) congressional sponsors on bills to re-instate the draft. ALL OF THE DEMOCRATS, NON OF THEM VOTED FOR THEIR OWN STINKIN,STUPID, MORINIC, IDIOTIC, EMBECILLIC, SHAM OF A BILL ("I'm just a bill, yes I'm only a bill, George Dubya won't sign me but John Kerry will")

By stating emphatically that Kerry would sign a draft in you first post you show right out of the box that you have no creditability, thanks for the honesty.

[patteeu]

To increase our military by two divisions and add 40,000 more special forces?
Kerry is going to add these forces to fight terrorism. This is how he will avoid a draft. He will not raise your taxes to accomplish this unless you make over $200,000 a year.
Not a if or well maybe question. Yes or No.

So let me get this straight. Kerry will somehow increase the size of our military (without a draft) by raising taxes, but Bush will be forced to implement a draft because he plans on maintaining the current force levels (without a tax increase)?

I guess that makes some sense if you are saying that Kerry's high tax scenario will kill jobs and drive young people to the military voluntarily in order to make a living, while Bush's low tax scenario will continue to make private sector jobs relatively more available to those who otherwise might enlist. Somehow I don't think this is what you mean so I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you are full of it.

FWIW, I'm not willing to pay higher taxes until we have a flat tax of some kind (income tax or sales tax) so that higher taxes for one means higher taxes for all. I am willing to let you pay higher taxes on a voluntary basis though, if that helps.

[Mile High Shack]

According to Mile High Shack we all need to keep an eye on "those rag heads"

what the hell is your problem dickhead?

[baja]

what the hell is your problem d***head?

Unthinking racist sheep like you are my problem.

[Mile High Shack]

Unthinking racist sheep like you are my problem.

I wasn't even involved in this thread...are you obsessed with me???

I already have a wife and no I won't have sex with you..you freak.

btw....Muslims make up 99.9% of terroists we deal with....so whatever....racists..LOL..nice try on that one.

my mother is 1/2 black you fuggin' moron.

[baja]

I wasn't even involved in this thread...are you obsessed with me???

I already have a wife and no I won't have sex with you..you freak.

btw....Muslims make up 99.9% of terroists we deal with....so whatever....racists..LOL..nice try on that one.

my mother is 1/2 black you fuggin' moron.

I suppose you think only white people can be racists Mr. Never had an original thought.

Report back to me when you compile a list of suspicious looking "Rag Heads"

[Mile High Shack]

I suppose you think only white people can be racists Mr. Never had an original thought.

Report back to me when you compile a list of suspicious looking "Rag Heads"

you were owned..now go obsess over someone else you lonely old man.

maybe you need to go get laid...probably hard to get any since your so bitter since your divorce.

so no..go away old man, I won't have sex with you.

[baja]

Maybe we should round up all them there "Rag Heads" and put them behind constantina wire like we did with them sneaky japs during WWII

[alkemical]

I guess rag-heads could look like a white person, say from the 'rumored' 25 that crossed the boarder into mexico

[baja]

you were owned..now go obsess over someone else you lonely old man.

maybe you need to go get laid...probably hard to get any since your so bitter since your divorce.

so no..go away old man, I won't have sex with you.

The beauty of stupidity is that it allows the owner through that very same handi cap the inability to see the stupidness that is theirs

[alkemical]

On to the question of the thread:

I honestly believe now the government passes taxes, because it's racketeering period.

We have taxes on food (maybe not a sales tax, but what taxes are taxed before the good even is purchased), sales tax, taxes on vices (yet to make it to candy/junkfood/fastfood), gas taxes, entertainment taxes, i mean i could keep going.

IF we didn't have so many military operations going on globally (i'm not talking just the war on terrorism, war on drugs, war on freedom, etc) imagine how much money would be left over.

IF done right, i'm sure the amount of money saved from military operations, and just general pork Medicare/Medicaid, SSI could easily be paid for, easily.

[Mile High Shack]

The beauty of stupidity is that it allows the owner through that very same handi cap the inability to see the stupidness that is theirs

hello pot

guess what..this is the kettle calling

seriously baja, get off my jock, I don't start threads or even mention you by name.

I'm not sure why your so obsessed with me, but like I've said, I'm already married and I don'ts swing that way.

sorry to disillusion you old man.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Stupid me! I couldn't tell if the hypothetical was to be based on the thread title or the entire first post.

I never dreamed it was restricted to the first sentence, first post.

I wonder if this changes anyone's answer. hmmm...
It could have been worded better. It came from a discussion on another thread.

[Rascal]

Unthinking racist sheep like you are my problem.

Try the ignore option if you have a problem with him. Otherwise STFU.

[Rohirrim]

I see that we at the OM are slipping into the last two weeks of the election gestalt: Sling that **** and cuss each other out. Man, I can't wait till this bs is over.

[Mile High Shack]

I see that we at the OM are slipping into the last two weeks of the election gestalt: Sling that **** and cuss each other out. Man, I can't wait till this bs is over.

well, that's why I stopped posting on current political posts....in regards to the election.

history and religion I'll still discuss, but as far as current situations, it's just denigrated down to mud slinging and personal attacks.

I shouldn't of dipped down to his level...and to the rest of the board, I apologize for that....it won't happen again.

[Nocturnal]

Although I would not be effected by Kerry's taxes as I'm not in the top 50% - much less the top 10%.

With my small business opening soon I hopefully will be in the next four years. With that said I would more than happily pay taxes instead of getting a fat return check. We have to think about the future, not mortgage it out.

[ClevelandBronco]

Would I pay significantly higher taxes? Yes.

Why? Because the government has more and bigger guns than I have.

[alkemical]

the government cannot protect you

[watermock]

On to the question of the thread:

I honestly believe now the government passes taxes, because it's racketeering period.

IF we didn't have so many military operations going on globally (i'm not talking just the war on terrorism, war on drugs, war on freedom, etc) imagine how much money would be left over.

IF done right, i'm sure the amount of money saved from military operations, and just general pork Medicare/Medicaid, SSI could easily be paid for, easily.

Here we get the dimwit patrol.

We have taxes on food (maybe not a sales tax, but what taxes are taxed before the good even is purchased), sales tax, taxes on vices (yet to make it to candy/junkfood/fastfood), gas taxes, entertainment taxes, i mean i could keep going.

what taxes are taxed? Most states don't tax food, most gas tax is appropriate it's used for infrastructure, a word you might not even comprehend., entertainment taxes is your problem. I mean really, your in such a delusional realm you should be able to buy popcorn on your latest movie.

[alkemical]

mock,

are you sponsored by craftsman? cuz you are a tool.

[Billy Clyde Puckett]

I don't trust goverment to spend my money wisely. Most programs' funding are wasted on bureaucracy and red tape. Taxes can also negatively impact the eb and flow of the economy resulting in poor growth. There are some programs I think are necessary and good for society, but since government hasn't learned to spend the money we've given them responsibly yet, I don't intend to give them any more.


Here here!!!! That goes for both parties. Neither knows how to spend money. Something has to be done about the waste. Saturday's paper said the 2 senate candidates in colo had spent a combined $5.5 million in TV ads the last two months the entire campaign will probably end up at $20 Million. You can't tell me that that kind of money is being spent without the donors expecting a return. Had that $20 million been funneled into the economy, it would have created a few thousand jobs.

Again, both parties are guilty of throwing around numbers, but one that sticks out to me is kerry's health plan which he says will be paid for by taxpayers who make over $200k per year. Using his numbers the tax bill for each of those taxpayers would increase by an average $600k per year. Yea you bet thats going to happen. Those folks already pay 82% of all taxes and provide the majority of the campaign funding.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The irony is, these military increases could have been funded easily with the budget surplus Smirk inherited (as would social security.) Instead, the Smirking Sociopath chose to give the money away to the wealthiest Americans during a time of war.

As always, the working and middle classes are stuck with the bill while Smirk's super-rich cronies receive a windfall and aren't asked to share in the sacrifice.

What was the name of that billionaire who sacrificed to help bail America out of the great depression? Times have definitely changed.

[RaiderH8r]

War Bonds anybody?

[broncogary]

What was the name of that billionaire who sacrificed to help bail America out of the great depression?

Te-ree-za! ROFL!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Te-ree-za! ROFL!

Non-sequitur humor at its finest.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.bartcop.com/tax-baby.jpg

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.bartcop.com/lc041015.gif

[broncogary]

http://www.bartcop.com/lc041015.gif

He must have been a Republican. A Dem would have gone to the unemployment office.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

He must have been a Republican. A Dem would have gone to the unemployment office.

Now that argument really gets bush off the hook for presiding over the first net job loss since the great depression (not to mention the corporate welfare policies which made the outsourcing of the guy's job possible in the first place.)

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

He must have been a Republican. A Dem would have gone to the unemployment office.

Yeah, if you vote republican then it follows that you've never collected unemployment.

[broncogary]

Now that argument really gets bush off the hook for presiding over the first net job loss since the great depression (not to mention the corporate welfare policies which made the outsourcing of the guy's job possible in the first place.)

They're just not counting all the new lawnmowing business that have started up as jobs. Rrrrr!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

They're just not counting all the new lawnmowing business that have started up as jobs. Rrrrr!

Don't forget to factor in those folks making money selling things on eBay.

Quotes

"Bush has been a polarizer at home and abroad, confrontational with allies and adversaries alike, blind to the effects of his favor-the-rich economic policies and deaf to the millions of Americans who have lost jobs or health care or have sunk into poverty on his watch. If he were elected to a second term, Bush could not be expected to solve problems he doesn't concede exist."

--Boston Globe, endorsing Kerry

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2004/10/17/the_case_for_change/

[broncogary]

Don't forget to factor in those folks making money selling things on eBay.

Yeah, I'd like to see them outsource those jobs.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Yeah, I'd like to see them outsource those jobs.

Nah. Never happen.

They have to have something to show they've created domestic jobs on their watch.

[bendog]

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/bush/articles/2004/10/19/bushs_bad_news_on_black_wealth/

It goes beyond race and even beyond BushII's tax cut, as outsourcing and globalism are realities beyond politics, but ..... the tax cut is part of it. IMO its the the real issue that distinguishes the two candidates. BushII's stated purpose is to finish dismantling federal aid to the poor, and possibly to the middle class in terms education and social security. Kerry is more inclined to perpetuate the current status quo. With medicaid covering more stuff that MY paid for health plan, I'm not liking Kerry, but BushII is a a tool of the richest 2%, and THAT is class warfare.

Kerry may have a more global view of for policy, or possibly BushII will be less adventursim in light of Iraq.

[alkemical]

****ed up

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/bush/articles/2004/10/19/bushs_bad_news_on_black_wealth/
It goes beyond race and even beyond BushII's tax cut, as outsourcing and globalism are realities beyond politics, but ..... the tax cut is part of it. IMO its the the real issue that distinguishes the two candidates. BushII's stated purpose is to finish dismantling federal aid to the poor, and possibly to the middle class in terms education and social security. Kerry is more inclined to perpetuate the current status quo. With medicaid covering more stuff that MY paid for health plan, I'm not liking Kerry, but BushII is a a tool of the richest 2%, and THAT is class warfare.

Bingo.

Which makes it all the more incredible that so many poor folks in rural America unwittingly vote against their own economic interests when they vote Smirk.

[bendog]

You think the dems have done much for white rural folks? There's a reason 50% of them aren't voting. It ain't the democratic party of FDR

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You think the dems have done much for white rural folks?

A lot more than the Grandiose Oil Party.

[bendog]

Possibly, but it could also be that somewhere around 75% of the rural poor who don't vote democrat believe their principles on social issues outweigh the little econ good the dems offer.

Look, I'm more of a Goldwater goper - a libertarian on social issues, a hawk on defense (so long as there's actually a threat that can't be dealt with without war) and a hawk on the deficit. I have no home in the GOP, or at least no President to vote for. I'd rather vote for Jimmy Carter than this schmuck, or even Hillary Rodhard Clinton. But the democratic party stands for giving the son of JC Watts or Jesse Jackson, millionaires, a preference into not just college but also financial aid, over these peoples' children, even when the poor whites have a record of grades despite poverty, and I don't see any evidence that the dems will successfully cut their taxes. Small wonder the Dems find mining votes with them so tough.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Possibly, but it could also be that somewhere around 75% of the rural poor who don't vote democrat believe their principles on social issues outweigh the little econ good the dems offer.

I was agreeing with this until the word "little."

Then I thought about the number of jobs created on Clinton's watch (not just in the tech sector) vs. the first net job loss since Hoover on bush's watch. I also thought about the alarming increase in the number of people slipping into poverty and the manufacturing jobs in poor rural areas being shipped overseas on Smirk's watch. Doesn't sound so "little" to me.

[W*GS]

Then I thought about the number of jobs created on Clinton's watch (not just in the tech sector) vs. the first net job loss since Hoover on bush's watch.

How much credit (or blame) can a President take for employment? Very little.

I also thought about the alarming increase in the number of people slipping into poverty and the manufacturing jobs in poor rural areas being shipped overseas on Smirk's watch. Doesn't sound so "little" to me.

Outsourcing accounts for only a negligible portion of job losses. It's this sort of cheap economic populism that gives me pause when I consider Kerry - especially with Edwards on the ticket.

LABF, didja read those Economist articles I pointed everyone to?

[bendog]

hmmm. Agreed WJC continued a sound fiscal strategy - but Greenspan forced Poppy into it initially. Recall WJC's lament after healthcare reform went south, "We are now Eisenhower repbulicans." Which imo was both correct and not a bad thing! (-:

I don't see how logically one can hold BushII responsible for a recession, when it seems to me the recession was caused by supply outstripping demand, esp for capital expenditures for electronics and manufacturiing.

Stiglitz, who while an adivisor to WJC was prolly to his left, argues that since '75 we've shifted the tax burden from capital/savings to wages, and one result is we have less consumer demand, and in a consumer economy that is a bad thing. I think he's right. But, the dems haven't really run a populist campaign, as Dean was the closest to a populist, and besides being a yuppie he's prolly nuts.

But in essence, I'll agree that the Dems offer more economically to the working rural white poor than the gop, but the Dems also diss them on affirm action and social issues.

[bendog]

I gotta go, but I wonder what would happen if a Dem ran on a platform of NO racial preferences, but enough aid so every working poor and middle class kid could get 4 yrs of college or tech training without loans, even if that involved buying in with communtiy/military service; federal funds to public education so every kid had access to a HEALTHY breakfast and supper; a LIVING wage for all those who choose to work; security for the aged and disabled; a TRULY progressive income tax; .....

well, I'm gone. Peace.

[alkemical]

dog,

great post, and not even dem, if a goper did that, i'd vote for them

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Gallup: Huge turnaround in economic views, U.S. blames Bush

WASHINGTON - Americans are becoming increasingly concerned about the state of the US economy and blaming President George W. Bush, according to Gallup poll figures.
A poll conducted from last Thursday to Saturday showed Democratic Senator John Kerry leading Bush 51-45% on the economy, a turnaround from late September when the Republican was on top by the same margin.

The survey of 1,013 adults found that 51% disapproved of Bush's handling of the economy, up from 48% in late September. It also said the economy ranked uppermost in voter's minds, followed by terrorism and Iraq.

A separate poll conducted from Monday to Thursday of last week showed that Americans' view of the economy had dimmed in recent months, Gallup said.

It said 34% said economic conditions were excellent or good while 22% rated the economy as poor. The 12-point difference was considerably lower than the Gallup findings in August and September.

Gallup said Americans were taking a bleaker view of the direction of the economy.

39% said economic conditions were getting better while 50% said they were getting worse. In July, 51% were optimistic and 38% were negative.

http://www.bday.co.za/bday/content/direct/1,3523,1731308-6078-0,00.html

[watermock]

We allready have student loans that are basically free money.

It's odd you would mention a Democrat running on "no racial preferences" because unless I am reading you right, the last time I saw Kerry at a Baptist Church, (Kerry is pro-abortioon), he was hanging with Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and a crazy preacher screaming and one more radical.

I don't think we should throw a carrot out there for a free education for military service. We allready have incentives if you serve and that isn't appropriate. We allrady have slackers that only signed up for the benefits.

I used to have a food card at school they stamped, and the food was healthy, if not goumet, and it was subsidized food. Don't blame me that we are building McDonalds instead.

I agree we need a living wage, but if you look at some of these tax cuts, 30 percent of theUS doesn't even have income tax.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

How much credit (or blame) can a President take for employment? Very little.

More naivete, W*GS-style.

Outsourcing accounts for only a negligible portion of job losses.

Tell that to the record numbers of Americans whose jobs have been sent overseas. Tell it to the guy who was making $60-100K as a computer programmer and is now flipping burgers.

It's only "negligible" when you're looking at it from mom's basement like W*GS.

LABF, didja read those Economist articles I pointed everyone to?

Your articles are worth nothing when you deny and minimize economic realities that are visible to all.

[broncogary]

Tell that to the record numbers of Americans whose jobs have been sent overseas. Tell it to the guy who was making $60-100K as a computer programmer and is now flipping burgers.

He should have developed some intermediate skills. Burgers cooked in India don't taste that good.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

He should have developed some intermediate skills. Burgers cooked in India don't taste that good.
1 line Bgary has turned over a new leaf. He now is posting 1 1/2 line replies.
Great take on how stupid Americans are for not having acquired multiple skills in anticipation of the Bush administration promoting out-sourcing.
Maybe you can become a food taster for Bush when he retires on his ranch. After all, you're already in the area and know what sacred cows taste like.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

He should have developed some intermediate skills.

Exactly what the Kennebunkport Cowboy is going to need come 11/2.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Great take on how stupid Americans are for not having acquired multiple skills in anticipation of the Bush administration promoting out-sourcing.


His "take" is representative of the usual republican mindset: "I've got mine--f*ck all those other poor slobs."

(Either that, or he lives in his mom's basement and isn't part of the work force.)

[broncogary]

It only takes one line to debunk your BS.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

It only takes one line to debunk your BS.
Only in the mind of a backer of the great simpleton.
I haven't seen anything out you that debunks anything except for the fact that you contribute to the thread in any manor whatsoever.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

It only takes one line to debunk your BS.

What "BS" of his did you "debunk?"

Looked like nothing more than the same smarmy little quips to me.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Only in the mind of a backer of the great simpleton.


LOL

They back the simpleton because the Kennebunkport Cowboy is a reflection of themselves.

[broncogary]

The fact that you resort to name-calling suggests that you are losing the argument.

[broncogary]

Only in the mind of a backer of the great simpleton.
I haven't seen anything out you that debunks anything except for the fact that you contribute to the thread in any manor whatsoever.

I was trying to conduct a civil discourse.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The fact that you resort to name-calling suggests that you are losing the argument.

Speaking of name-calling, didn't you just refer to BB's input as "BS?"

By your own logic, you must be taking a beating in the argument.

[broncogary]

Speaking of name-calling, didn't you just refer to BB's input as "BS?"

By your own logic, you must be taking a beating in the argument.

I'm only taking a beating as long as you and BB are the only one's here.

[broncogary]

Speaking of name-calling, didn't you just refer to BB's input as "BS?"

By your own logic, you must be taking a beating in the argument.

Besides, that was descriptive of his argument, not him.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Besides, that was descriptive of his argument, not him.

Either way, it was still name-calling.

[broncogary]

Either way, it was still name-calling.

If you say so.

[bendog]

Wags, I looked at your Economist link briefly, and while it didn't tell me anything new, imo, it was pretty solid factually and down the middle, ie 'fair,' if it didn't out and out call each candidate a bald faced liar on what they're lying about, and if it didn't really go into much detail on various "solutions" to problmes like soc sec / medicare. Actually I bookmarked it, because I somehow lost my old bookmarks and I'd missed checking the Economist from time to time. Thanks.

http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=3257934

[errand]

To increase our military by two divisions and add 40,000 more special forces?
Kerry is going to add these forces to fight terrorism. This is how he will avoid a draft. He will not raise your taxes to accomplish this unless you make over $200,000 a year.
Not a if or well maybe question. Yes or No.

Wow...first Kerry says that Bush's tax cuts gave the rich (obviously in Kerry's mind anyone who earns more than $200K annually) $89 million to line their pockets. So logic tells us that by eliminating these same tax cuts, he will retain that same $89 million annually.

So do the math, people...Kerry is going to raise, train and pay two divsions and special forces totalling 40,000?

Without a draft? (liberals scream that nobody wants to join military due to increased chance of dying in wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time)

On top of providing healthcare for EVERY child in America?

On top of increasing the funding for education?

On top of increasing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research?

On top of providing more $$$ for AIDS research?

On top of whatever other program he's got cooking in his feeble mind?

A mere $89 million dollars annually will pay for all that?

[errand]

I think those making over 200,000 a year should lose their tax cut, they can afford it. Besides they pay 82% of the tax, it WILL provide money.

So you need more of your hard earned money, but others don't?

So those making over $200K pay approximately 82% of all taxes collected, and you want them to pay more? Should they be forced to pay 98%?

25% of the nation should pay for all services provided by the government? You really think that is "fair"? How is one person paying 35 cents on every dollar earned while another pays 10 cents on every dollar earned "fair"?

The rich pay taxes, they foot the bill for most of this nation.

You want to punish people for achieving financial independence?

Why do you work? To make money to pay your bills and provide a good high quality of life for both you and your family right? So wouldn't it stand to reason that the more you earn, the better the quality of life? And wouldn't it also stand to reason that if you punish people for earning more money, fewer will strive to do so?

Why would a surgeon strive to become the best in the world if he was going to be punished for doing so?

Why would your child strive to bring home A's if he got punished for doing so?

People need incentive and motivation to achieve...money is a huge motivator and incentive. Why would people strive to earn more if they know that the extra earnings are just going to go to benefit someone else?