Who should foot the bill for the last 8 years?

Everyone who voted for Bush should pay

 

I am confused deepblue...

While I can certainly agree with the argument that the american consumer is, on average, an idiot - how exactly does this relate to government defecit?

I'm failing to understand how 950 billion in credit card debt (lookout JP morgan, BTW.), for example, in any way can be faulted for an administration that has simultaneously cut taxes while increasing spending.

 

Can anyone explain to me how we can afford $10 billion a month in an endless war, bail out criminals to the tune of a trillion dollars and NOT raise taxes to pay for it? Where is the money going to come from?

 

Thanks for the article. It's not often I agree with what Pat Buchanan says.

He's asking the right questions there.

 

Draw the line? How many lines can you draw from 250k to 250million?

Tell the guy makes 250k trying to buy a 1 bedroom in NYC he is rich.

 

Likewise.

I would dearly like to see the US pull out of every foreign nation. Every single one. Take that money and invest it in future technologies (primarily energy), then market it back out to pwn the whole world.

 

Increase spending was perceived as an easy way to get us out a recession, along with tax cuts are suppose to stimulate consumer spending.

Just like the next president will be doing lots of deficit spending to get out of the current recession.

 

You did not answer the question.

 

This is a consumer driven economy, deficit spending and tax cuts are in part to spur consumer spending.

 

I'd argue it was stupid to feed the beast in the first place.

Secondly, defecit spending on foriegn wars and tax cuts to the uber-wealthy betray any so called "spur" marketed to the ignorant.

 

Of course life is easier for me than someone who is making 80k, and "rich" is only a matter of opinion. The point is my situation is a lot more in common with him than Buffet. We both have mortgages payments, childcare costs etc. to worry about. And I am already paying a higher tax rate than the 80k guy.

I guessing you are not married yet? Living cost for a family and single guy is very different.

 

they're not going to admit it, republicans are hilarious. talk about representing your candidates. oliver stone was on msnbc last night talking about his movie and bush's largest problem is admitting he was wrong. its unbelievable. i remember when some comedian was talking about will ferrel's dead bush impersonation and he talked about the frat boy attitude of knowing more than everyone else. its the whole party apparently. something like the twilight zone.

 

you got fatty in one thread talking about liberal whining, completely ignoring republican whining on a host of issues, and then saying the whining over the last eight years as if everything has been awesome

you got iroc ignoring mccain's questionable associations while still harping on Ayers.

then you got basso still totally ignoring the real issue about acorn, including them policing themselves, and still not having proved any actual voter fraud because of acorn

its scary

 

Why have A line, that's hardly the true progressive tax code you wanted. Of course 250k is not an arbitrary number, its a number which pits a large group against a small group. If that's not promoting class warfare, I don't know what is.

I honestly don't mind if my tax is raised a bit, and government spending is held in check. But that's not going to happen, we are so locked into borrow and spend mode, either Obama and McCain will be increasing the spending.

 

God says he's good with it. He wanted me to let you know.

His "big government" plan was called Jubilee. Surprisingly, it's not talked about much in many churches in the United States. He also warned the Israelites that they probably didn't really want a king so they could be like the other nations surrounding them....He told them it would lead to them being sent off to wars they had litle stake in. They wanted a king anyway...and they got what He told them they'd get.

 

WE should restore the tax rates on those making over $250,000 to what they were during the Clinton Administration. We need to start taxing estates over $1 million dollars. These two steps are compatible with a good economy as we have seen in the past. There should be an even higher rate for incomes over say $500,000 or $1 million per year. Even higher for $5 million plus. There should also be an increase in the capital gains tax if it exceeds say $500 per year. This can raise additional money without decreasing consumer spending much as capital gains over a $hundred bucks or two are paid mainly by the upper classes.

This type of tax for the wealthy may have the additional benefit of driving down speculation in the financial markets and coastal/ hot real estate since they won't have as much wealth to speculate with.

We need to stop fighting unnecessary wars, which are very wasteful from an economic point of view. We can close our bases in Japan, Korea and many others around the world. The empire is costly and it looks like it is time to let much of ours go.

We need the additional revenues generated by restoring the tax cuts to the wealthy and the money not wasted on the military to convert to alternative energy and do the various bailouts and stimuli that need to do for the banking crisis and the recession.

 

Maybe he should have his house note subsidized if it is really a problem. Don't use this as an excuse to not tax multi-millionaires and let hedge fund managers pretend that their millions per year in income should be taxed at 15% capital gains instead of income tax rates.