Obama: Change We Can Believe In?

[RC12L4]

Edited, be right back

[Anna]

The only "change" coming to Washington, is the little bit we had left in our piggy banks. Obama is a politician like all the rest. There is nothing new or fresh about him.

[Modica]

I agree that Obama may not be what this country needs, but I am 100% certain that McCain will be a much bigger mistake. To continue the failed policies of Bush, will just move us closer to the end of America. Such selfish attitudes of the pro-Bush people will only lead to more discontent.

[Anna]

The end of the US? Let's pray not. Neither McCain nor Obama will be good for the country, they are both wrong. No one wants to do the hard work that is required to get us out of this mess. Bush wasn't great, but the problems we are experiencing now, have been a long time coming. There is no easy out. This country needs a revolution. As people get hungry, go cold and loose their jobs things will change. There are many groups, on both side if the aisle that have influenced our politicians and they have gotten us here. Our kids will be paying for this many years to come. The only difference between McCain and Obama is who will make what kind of mess and who can make it quicker.

[BillCarson436]

Hello...

My 2 Centavos....

Better the Devil you know than the one you don't.

I've seen enough of this...Snake Oil Salesman to feel unconfortable
about him. True... McCain is no visionary... but we will be SAFER
with him at the Helm.

They don't give command of a Battleship... or much else today.. to a
rookie " of color " just because he thinks he knows how to best handle
it.

If not Hillary... McCain !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Modica]

Can't disagree with what Anna said.

[Modica]

Hello...

My 2 Centavos....

Better the Devil you know than the one you don't.

I've seen enough of this...Snake Oil Salesman to feel unconfortable
about him. True... McCain is no visionary... but we will be SAFER
with him at the Helm.

They don't give command of a Battleship... or much else today.. to a
rookie " of color " just because he thinks he knows how to best handle
it.

If not Hillary... McCain !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
McCain is wrong for the country. He is a joke and needs to retire. How is it that we are safer with McCain? Please explain that one.

[collie]

Obama looks less of a rookie all the time, to me. Lets's see, the latest sophisticated, run of the mill, experienced politician moves include:
1. banning lobbyist money from his campaign but allowing it to come in from third parties (ie the wife of a lobbyist) Whoa, that's a classic move for ya!

2. Going back on his word when it comes to using public campaign funds for his campaign. Whoops, another classic experienced politician move!

And still I will vote for Obamaa, unless he runs Hillary as his veep. That will be the final hypocritical straw that breaks my back.

And I will still vote for him, even though he looks more like an experienced political weasel as the days go by. Why? Because he flip flops less than McCain. Sad to see the Obama of hope become just another dope and the election degenerate into the usual lesser of two evils situation.

[Modica]

As usual collie sees things pretty clearly. I am so not thrilled with the campaign, but will vote for Obama also, even if Hillary is the VP candidate. There is no alternative. McCain is as exciting as plain oatmeal.

[eds]

I think I need to go back to my number one issue. The Second Amendment. In that regard, I think McCain would be better than Obama. On that is really where I am focusing. Everything else is a toss up to me.

[Anna]

I'll vote for McCain, not that it will matter. Obama will win CT. I'm concerned that Obama may actually be able to get something done if he goes to Washington with a Democratic house and senate.

eds, I agree about the Second Amendment issue. I guess I'm just one of those people that cling to guns and religion. :rolleyes:

[UNiRAC]

Edited, be right back

What is Ben Stein's MOVIe called?? ps: BTW...I forgave him for smokin' POT and writing for ''Trickey-Dick'' L0L

pss: and What ever happened to ''Switch Grass'' ? [and even HEMP? ]


psss: To the Bush's ... '' It's the Economy Stupid ! '' :eek:

[BillCarson436]

Hello...

McCain as exciting as oatmeal...lol

Does that make Obama as exciting as Gritz ??? lol

We have just had EIGHT years of an inexperienced President and
your " hope " is that a rookie will keep us safe...lol

Like I said... If I was going under the knife for heart surgery...
I wouldn't pick the guy that said he knew how to fix me... and
just have faith in him. Someone that never attended a medical
class or spent an hour in the O.R.

Yes... he's older... but when did age and experience become of
little importance and empty promises offer hope ???

[Anna]

UNiRAC, The movie is called, "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed"

[Modica]

I'll vote for McCain, not that it will matter. Obama will win CT. I'm concerned that Obama may actually be able to get something done if he goes to Washington with a Democratic house and senate.

eds, I agree about the Second Amendment issue. I guess I'm just one of those people that cling to guns and religion. :rolleyes:
Guns and religion? Somehow the two don't seem to go hand in hand. Will one of McCains campaign posters have Jesus holding a semi-automatic? I guess we have finally gotten to the point in this country where reality is stranger than fiction.

[Modica]

Hello...

McCain as exciting as oatmeal...lol

Does that make Obama as exciting as Gritz ??? lol

We have just had EIGHT years of an inexperienced President and
your " hope " is that a rookie will keep us safe...lol

Like I said... If I was going under the knife for heart surgery...
I wouldn't pick the guy that said he knew how to fix me... and
just have faith in him. Someone that never attended a medical
class or spent an hour in the O.R.

Yes... he's older... but when did age and experience become of
little importance and empty promises offer hope ???
One failed policy after another. I don't feel safer with a guy who is 71 years old and should be sitting on the front porch with granny while he whittles a piece of wood.

[Anna]

Modica, I was quoting Obama. :)

[Modica]

Modica, I was quoting Obama. :)
And that makes the statement correct? Obama was just pandering, but he is still the better candidate. And if you don't know by now, I don't cling to every sound bite like some people who watch the network news do. I really don't watch the news, because it is filled with fluff, lies and murder/mayhem.

[Anna]

Modica, actually it makes it sarcasm.

[Modica]

Modica, actually it makes it sarcasm.
I understand that it was sarcasm. Anyhow, It was a dumb thing for Obama to say. What can I tell you?

[Anna]

Modica, I appreciate that. I listen to everything and read as much as I can. I even listen to O'Reily and Olbermann occassionlly. I can't figure out who is the more pompous ass though. :D

[eds]

Guns and religion? Somehow the two don't seem to go hand in hand. Will one of McCains campaign posters have Jesus holding a semi-automatic? I guess we have finally gotten to the point in this country where reality is stranger than fiction.


Actually Jesus was a big proponent of self-defense. He told His disciples to buy a sword and prepare for when He is not with them. That they will be attacked for following Him. They all carried swords back then. Jesus never forbade His disciples from carrying a sword. Today we have guns not swords.

Nowhere in the Bible does it say you cannot defend yourself. Even the "turn the other cheek" meant more what to do if someone insulted you not if someone actually hit you. Sort of the equivalent of "words can never hurt me". When Jesus was cursed out by a passerby, He said "Peace be with you" because He did not want evil to emanate from Him. But when struck by His teacher when Jesus was 12, Jesus killed His teacher. Accounting of that found in Gospel of Thomas involving the how Jesus knows more about the letter "aleph" than the teacher did.

Gospel Of Thomas: 14 "And Jesus said to him: If thou art really a teacher, and art well acquainted with the letters, tell me the power of the Alpha, and I will tell thee the power of the Beta. And the teacher was enraged at this, and struck Him on the head. And the child, being in pain, cursed him; and immediately he swooned away, and fell to the ground on his face. "

Matt 38 talks about "eye for an eye". The strike it refers to are insults. If you are sued it only take away from you personal possession which are worthless really. If you are forced to toil and work your body into the ground, "forces you to go one mile", you go two miles. It means you are not save your body, because "he who saves himself, looses himself, and he who looses himself for My sake will not taste death". In other words, don't fight for meaningless things. It also means ot not seek vengeance, which is G-d's. When a wrong is done to you, you are not to right that wrong with vengeance. There is a difference between that and self-defense. Even Adam pursued attackers who took his brother captive to get his brother back. That is not vengeance. That is protection. Read Genesis 14:14-16. Vengeance is in the heart. Are you preventing a tragedy, preventing further tragedy, or are you trying to get back at someone. It never said not to defend the ones you love from harm. It is also said that if you give your life to save someone else it is the greatest gift you can give. That can happen from defending another from harm.

Even when Jesus stopped His disciples from cutting off the ear of the Roman soldier, it was so that He would be crucified. The "live by the sword, die by the sword" meant that one should think before using force, not that one should never use force. What it meant is that if your reaction to everything is deadly force, you will make a mistake sooner or later. In that case, the mistake would have been to prevent salvation. In that time, not just anyone could walk up and get a meeting with the High Priest. Like today, you can't just go up and say "Hi!" to the Pope. You had to be invited. Jesus got invited by ****ing off the High Priest, more or less.

Anyway...Jesus definitely wanted you to defend yourself and your family. In fact, in Judiasm, it is a sin to sit idly by and do nothing when someone is being harmed. It is a sin not to protect your family from harm.

This whole belief that followers of Jesus should be entirely passive is so very wrong.

[Modica]

I am sure that even Jesus wasn't entirely passive, but I just thought it was funny to imagine Jesus holding a semi-automatic in a McCain campaign ad. :D

[collie]

Raised Catholic and having attended an Apostolic Church, I was totally amazed by the story of Jesus killing his teacher at age 12. So I got out my King James Bible - I didn't find a chapter by Thomas. Can you tell me, EDS, what Christian branch uses that Chapter and something of the history of it?

That was sure a new twist on Jesus!

[eds]

You won't. It's in the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, it was misleading to just say Gospel of Thomas which is entirely different and which is not part of the "approved" Bible readings. Neither is the infancy gospel. They are part of the Nag Hamadi and Gnostic gospels. Don't get all "DaVinci Code" on me. Not that you are mind you I just get shut down by people sometimes thinking I am buying into that. It has nothing to do with it. DaVinci was work of fiction. These gnostic gospels are extremely controversial and usually result in my Christian friends, well meaning of course, trying to save me. I am not Christian as one might think in the traditional sense as I have said. I do follow Jesus' teachings. But I don't belong to any group. I can be called Hebrew Christian though as I have said before. First Century Christian might also fit. I seek to learn what really happened back then. The context in which in happened. The intended meaning.

These books were not part of the "approved" set of gospels. Why I don't know. But if you read them, you get a whole new perspective on the life of Jesus. I have no reason to believe these books were written with the fore knowledge of changing our viewpoints 2000 years later. I believe they were truthful.

I do my own research, I don't let the Pope's cult of personality influence what I believe.

This is a really good site for information:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/

Here are some links for the Gospel of Thomas:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas
http://www.sofiatopia.org/equiaeon/thomas.htm

Gospel of Thomas Interlinear with the original language.
http://www.metalog.org/files/th_interlin.html

And the Infancy Gospel of Thomas:
http://www.gospels.net/translations/infancythomastranslation.html

The quote from that gospel: If you read the entire thing, it shows Jesus' immense knowledge even at an early age. Another Testament to whom He is and was.

Chapter 14

(1) When Joseph saw the child's willingness and age and that his mind was also ready, he again wanted him to become accustomed to letters. So, taking him, he gave him to another teacher. (2) The teacher said to Joseph, "First I will teach him Greek, then Hebrew." For the teacher knew about the child's earlier attempt and was afraid. Nonetheless, after writing the alphabet, he instructed the boy for many hours, even though he did not reply to him.

(3) Then, Jesus said to him, "If you are really a teacher and if you know the letters so well, tell me the meaning of the alpha and I will tell you the meaning of the beta."

(4) As he was growing frustrated, the teacher struck him on the head. Then, Jesus became angry and cursed him. Immediately, he fainted and fell on his face.

(5) Then, Jesus turned back to Joseph's house, but Joseph was distressed. He instructed the boy's mother, "Do not let him out the door because the people who anger him will die."

[eds]

I will add also that with so much that Jesus did, doesn't anyone find it interesting that so few wrote about Him? That only four wrote about their experiences? These experiences were so profound, even for today. It would be on everyone's tongue. Why then did so few write? Don't you ever wonder what Jesus did as a boy? There is so very little about Him. The only thing was when He preached to the elders during the feast. That was it. Really? Don't you think being who He is and was, that all that power would be from the start? From the beginning? The whole story is being suppressed I firmly believe.


Here something else to read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Aquarian_Gospel_of_Jesus_the_Christ

[eds]

Sorry for such a long post but I am passionate, so to speak.

A public domain book scanned by Google and written in 1824 about all gospels not included in the New Testament. You can download the .PDF without copyright violation as explained in the beginning. Special thanks to Google.

http://books.google.com/books/pdf/The_Apocryphal_New_Testament_.pdf?id=DBs3AAAAMAAJ&output=pdf&sig=EjIC2Q5-afCx4d5TtfBl2qkfGmA

[collie]

Thanks, that is very interesting. I thought the book of Thomas may have been from the books the mainstream Christians edited out along the way. It has always amused me that they also edited out the equality of women and made priests celibate. NOT what Jesus intended I'm sure.

Ah well, good for you you are so learned on the topic of religion. I myself comprehended the message of Jesus at an early age, despite the subtrifudge of nation building, armies based on religion, etc.. I have finally come to the conclusion I can't get the work done I think God wants me to do and commit to a church, both at the same time. The churches all seem to want an awful lot of one's time. Nothing wrong with that if that's your thing. But to me it is not the busy work that will be an impetus for change in the community, etc..

[eds]

We each have our calling.

For anyone reading along...remember that just because I read a lot about Jesus, and pontificate on that topic, doesn't make me any less of a sinner than anyone else. I've had people grill me on end about what makes me think I am so much closer to G-d than they were. Or why I think Jesus saved me and not them. It goes on and on.


Anyway...thanks for listening...

[UNiRAC]

Modica, actually it makes it sarcasm.Personally , I'm voting for a Dem V.P. and maybe let Mickey mouse get bumped. Is THAT sarcasm or did Don Imus make a good one [ I'm not a fan of him [but more so then Howard Stern]]:eek:
ps: reread this before coming to the conclusion that I'm more racist than Don or perverted like Howard.
pss: BTW: I'm on suspension for not being ''Politically Correct'' with my sarcasm... so Don't get me P.O.'d.... "I'm mad as He_aolL and nI'm not gona take it anymore !"

[UNiRAC]

sorry folkz but my computer is misbehaving and it SOMEHOW left ANNA's Worse or Bad thread,,, and I gotta run [hope I fix this Faux Pau <sp>:cool:

[Marc Syrah]

FWIW...
You will be voting for the Vice President...
If Obama is elected some "good ole boy" who doesn't want an African American President will wack him...
If McCain gets in he will probably drop dead from a heart attack before the end of his first term...
Just another thought...

[eds]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2a/Sopranos6.jpg

Whose gonna get whacked?

[flatrat]

Hello...

My 2 Centavos....

Better the Devil you know than the one you don't.

I've seen enough of this...Snake Oil Salesman to feel unconfortable
about him. True... McCain is no visionary... but we will be SAFER
with him at the Helm.

They don't give command of a Battleship... or much else today.. to a
rookie " of color " just because he thinks he knows how to best handle
it.

If not Hillary... McCain !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Not to defend Obama, as he is as much of an opportunist as the next politician, but John "Bomber" McCain has demonstrated such a fundamental lack of understanding of the issues as to make George Bush look intelligent.

The man comes across as old and feeble. He was a spoiled little rich boy when never would have got into Annapolis if his father hadnt been an admiral. He made great use of his time there by graduating fifth from the bottom in a class of almost 900. He started the deadly fire on the USS Forrestal, and managed to get shot down bombing Hanoi.

Although I respect his time spent as a POW, that is not a qualification to be president. Mr Straight Talk has flip flopped so many times, it makes one dizzy.

America is a strong resilient nation, but can we survive four more years of Bush? How much were you paying for gas under Bill Clinton?

And how much experience did George Bush have when he became president? Or Ronald Reagan? I am amazed that all of a sudden "experience" is an issue.

[eds]

Experience is either an attribute or a detriment depending on whom is doing the comparison.

[S_Meriden60]

[QUOTE=flatrat] He started the deadly fire on the USS Forrestal


Just curious as to where you got this info?

[rapuda]

McCain is a disaster.
Capital Hill has the feel of hurricane season. Following the category 5 hurricane called hurricane bush, is a tropical storm called McCain. Will it develop into a hurricane and land on our soil, or will the Obama winds push it further out to sea?

I will never vote for McCain. He would be as bad or worse than Bush 43.

Obama would be better for our country. That being said, I can't vote for him either. I can't vote for someone who will raise my taxes in order to give someone else a tax break. I feel people who make 250k a year already pay their fair share of taxes. Obama wants to label these people as rich and wealthy and raise their taxes. Then he would use the increased revenue to give middle income earners a tax decrease. I'm not voting for those Robin Hood tactics. I guess I'll have to do the write in vote this election.

[eds]

McCain is a disaster.
Capital Hill has the feel of hurricane season. Following the category 5 hurricane called hurricane bush, is a tropical storm called McCain. Will it develop into a hurricane and land on our soil, or will the Obama winds push it further out to sea?

I will never vote for McCain. He would be as bad or worse than Bush 43.

Obama would be better for our country. That being said, I can't vote for him either. I can't vote for someone who will raise my taxes in order to give someone else a tax break. I feel people who make 250k a year already pay their fair share of taxes. Obama wants to label these people as rich and wealthy and raise their taxes. Then he would use the increased revenue to give middle income earners a tax decrease. I'm not voting for those Robin Hood tactics. I guess I'll have to do the write in vote this election.

Totally agree. Check out Barr/Root campaign for Libertarian Party.
http://www.bobbarr2008.com

[RC12L4]

McCain is a disaster.
Capital Hill has the feel of hurricane season. Following the category 5 hurricane called hurricane bush, is a tropical storm called McCain. Will it develop into a hurricane and land on our soil, or will the Obama winds push it further out to sea?

I will never vote for McCain. He would be as bad or worse than Bush 43.

Obama would be better for our country. That being said, I can't vote for him either. I can't vote for someone who will raise my taxes in order to give someone else a tax break. I feel people who make 250k a year already pay their fair share of taxes. Obama wants to label these people as rich and wealthy and raise their taxes. Then he would use the increased revenue to give middle income earners a tax decrease. I'm not voting for those Robin Hood tactics. I guess I'll have to do the write in vote this election.

Reminder:

Obama Voted In Favor Of The Democrats’ FY 2009 Budget, Which Would Raise Tax Rates For Americans Earning $32,000 Or More.

Obama Voted Twice In Favor Of The Democrats’ FY 2009 Budget Resolution. (S. Con. Res. 70, CQ Vote #85: Adopted 51-44: R 2-43; D 47-1; I 2-0, 3/14/08, Obama Voted Yea; S. Con. Res. 70, CQ Vote #142: Adopted 48- 45: R 2- 44; D 44- 1; I 2-0, 6/4/08, Obama Voted Yea)
The Democrats’ Budget Would Raise Taxes On Individuals Earning $32,000 Or More. “Under both Democratic plans, tax rates would increase by 3 percentage points for each of the 25 percent, 28 percent and 33 percent brackets. At present, the 25 percent bracket begins at $31,850 for individuals


Change? I won't have any change left if he keeps raising taxes on me.

[S_Meriden60]

Obama is slicker than Bill "slick willy" Clinton was. I'm not wild about either choice. I'm an independant and vote for the person with the most common sense, if there still is such a thing.
The big problem I have about Obama is all those years (20?) he sat in that church and listened to that racist Reverand Wright. That guy didn't just make a few bad speeches recently. He's been that way.

[rapuda]

I understand taxes will have to be raised. I understand we as a country are in a mess that congress and Bush created. I can't understand raising taxes on a certain group to give another group a decrease. If my taxes get raised to pay for our debt, the war, energy independence, etc, I can accept that as long as others don't pay less from my increase. If I have to pay more, then so should everybody else.

The next president will be hated if he does his job the right way. Taxes will increase and spending will be cut. I don't see any other way to correct the mess we're in.

If joe schmoe had a debt to pay how would he pay it? He'd earn more money and cut back on his spending until the debt was paid. That's what our country needs to do. Doing this will be painful and make people angry. Only a good leader can do what needs to be done. I'm not holding my breath for that to happen.

[Modica]

I understand taxes will have to be raised. I understand we as a country are in a mess that congress and Bush created. I can't understand raising taxes on a certain group to give another group a decrease. If my taxes get raised to pay for our debt, the war, energy independence, etc, I can accept that as long as others don't pay less from my increase. If I have to pay more, then so should everybody else.

The next president will be hated if he does his job the right way. Taxes will increase and spending will be cut. I don't see any other way to correct the mess we're in.

If joe schmoe had a debt to pay how would he pay it? He'd earn more money and cut back on his spending until the debt was paid. That's what our country needs to do. Doing this will be painful and make people angry. Only a good leader can do what needs to be done. I'm not holding my breath for that to happen.
Oh I feel so sorry for all the rich people who may have to pay more in taxes. They make so much money and really don't pay that much in taxes compared to what the rich used to pay 50 years ago. Why do the rich get richer and the poor get poorer? So who is robbing who? It seems to me that the rest of us are paying extra for the rich people's tax breaks. If the rich don't want to pay for the priviledge of living and making a great living in our country, then it seems to me that they really don't care what happens to our country. If you don't care and don't want to pay to make our country great once more, then maybe you should get the hell out. I want to see this country be great once more, and if it takes more sacrifice from ALL of us then I think the extra money spent is worth it.

[eds]

No one should have to pay taxes on their earnings. No matter how much you earn. We should be paying consumption based taxes or we should pay a flat rate income tax. Flat rate income tax is fair. Everyone pays the same percentage.

But that is not the reality we have to deal with. I would love to know what all these tax breaks people keep thinking those of us who earn 100,000, 200,000 or more take.

Anyone can put money into a 401K, IRA. You can invest in tax-free municipal bonds. You can deduct property taxes, state income taxes, interest on your mortgage. You deduct losses from a business and offset capital gains with losses. If you have no money to invest, no money to buy a house, no money to invest in IRA or 401K, no money to buy new cars and real property to deduct property taxes, then why should you get a tax break? If you can't itemize deductions, you will pay through the nose for taxes. Best way to save on taxes is to get married, buy a house with a mortgage, and put 10% of your gross earnings into your retirement accounts. You can lower your tax rate from 22-25% to 10-13% just doing that.

Nothing is stopping anyone from building positive personal wealth. There is tons of information out there on how to manage money to your benefit and be a financial guru. To be a good financial planner, you need to know when it makes sense to use a debt instrument, when it makes sense to pay cash, and when it makes sense to take out a mortgage even if you have the cash in the bank to buy a house outright. When is it good to buy a car or lease a car? All these financial decisions take an investment of time and intellect. Why should people who take the time to do all that be penalized because they mastered the art of personal wealth building?

When politicians were talking about eliminating the property tax on cars, some cried foul; that somehow the poor would miss out on the tax break. But if you are poor and have no car, you don't pay any taxes to begin with.

If you are talking about tax breaks that involve legal asset hiding, trust funds, and the like, again, you need assets to hide and assets to put into trust funds. Again, if you have little or no money to put into a trust fund, then why should get any benefit from it.

We sensationalize the few wealthy people like Ken Lay of Enron fame, or Dennis Koslowski of Tyco fame, when they steal from their companies pensions and employee payrolls. But in reality most wealthy people are upstanding citizens and do make a significant contribution back to society.

What makes the have-nots think they can just take from the haves is beyond me. No one is preventing the have-nots from having and no one stole anything from the have-nots. This is America. Anyone can go from flipping burgers on an hourly wage to owning a multi-national burger chain.

[Modica]

No one should have to pay taxes on their earnings. No matter how much you earn. We should be paying consumption based taxes or we should pay a flat rate income tax. Flat rate income tax is fair. Everyone pays the same percentage.

But that is not the reality we have to deal with. I would love to know what all these tax breaks people keep thinking those of us who earn 100,000, 200,000 or more take.

Anyone can put money into a 401K, IRA. You can invest in tax-free municipal bonds. You can deduct property taxes, state income taxes, interest on your mortgage. You deduct losses from a business and offset capital gains with losses. If you have no money to invest, no money to buy a house, no money to invest in IRA or 401K, no money to buy new cars and real property to deduct property taxes, then why should you get a tax break? If you can't itemize deductions, you will pay through the nose for taxes. Best way to save on taxes is to get married, buy a house with a mortgage, and put 10% of your gross earnings into your retirement accounts. You can lower your tax rate from 22-25% to 10-13% just doing that.

Nothing is stopping anyone from building positive personal wealth. There is tons of information out there on how to manage money to your benefit and be a financial guru. To be a good financial planner, you need to know when it makes sense to use a debt instrument, when it makes sense to pay cash, and when it makes sense to take out a mortgage even if you have the cash in the bank to buy a house outright. When is it good to buy a car or lease a car? All these financial decisions take an investment of time and intellect. Why should people who take the time to do all that be penalized because they mastered the art of personal wealth building?

When politicians were talking about eliminating the property tax on cars, some cried foul; that somehow the poor would miss out on the tax break. But if you are poor and have no car, you don't pay any taxes to begin with.

If you are talking about tax breaks that involve legal asset hiding, trust funds, and the like, again, you need assets to hide and assets to put into trust funds. Again, if you have little or no money to put into a trust fund, then why should get any benefit from it.

We sensationalize the few wealthy people like Ken Lay of Enron fame, or Dennis Koslowski of Tyco fame, when they steal from their companies pensions and employee payrolls. But in reality most wealthy people are upstanding citizens and do make a significant contribution back to society.

What makes the have-nots think they can just take from the haves is beyond me. No one is preventing the have-nots from having and no one stole anything from the have-nots. This is America. Anyone can go from flipping burgers on an hourly wage to owning a multi-national burger chain.
The Haves certainly have no trouble taking money from the poor though. It all goes back to my statement about "what kind of country do you want to live in". You want a country were the priviledged become weathy while the poor become poorer. I know many poor people who work very hard and they are nice people also, but in eds world only the wealthy need to be protected from government exploitation. At one time we used to talk about how we can make life better for all Americans, but now it is how we can make life better for the ones who already have more than they need. I think that if ALL gainfully employed people are doing well, then we have a better country. Our economy has fallen hostage to much finacial speculation, which has created instability as well as inequality. Most of the wealthy know that, but could care less about how it affects average Americans.

[eds]

The Haves certainly have no trouble taking money from the poor though. It all goes back to my statement about "what kind of country do you want to live in". You want a country were the priviledged become weathy while the poor become poorer. I know many poor people who work very hard and they are nice people also, but in eds world only the wealthy need to be protected from government exploitation. At one time we used to talk about how we can make life better for all Americans, but now it is how we can make life better for the ones who already have more than they need. I think that if ALL gainfully employed people are doing well, then we have a better country. Our economy has fallen hostage to much finacial speculation, which has created instability as well as inequality. Most of the wealthy know that, but could care less about how it affects average Americans.
1. How do the have's take money from the poor?
2. Anyone can become wealthy. The privileged just have it easier.
3. Working hard does not equate to wealth. Working smarter does. You can work hard sweating and digging ditches all your life, but without financial savvy you will never become wealthy. The ditch digger in this example would be wise to start a ditch digging business and hire other ditch diggers.

Financial speculation is commonly referred to as investing. Nothing is stopping you from speculating. You do have a 401K right?

What you are complaining about is the very nature of capitalism. Your speech and thinking seems similar to Che Guevara, a Marxist.

Marxism is essentially a belief that owners of production exploit their workers, that class structures are created out of this continued exploitation, that class structures create class conflict, that that people's conditions are directly reflected by their material condition and that this condition will lead to eventual demise of class structures through revolution.

[rapuda]

If you don't care and don't want to pay to make our country great once more, then maybe you should get the hell out. I want to see this country be great once more, and if it takes more sacrifice from ALL of us then I think the extra money spent is worth it.

Modica,
I have no problem with the above statement that you wrote other than it seemed a little defensive. I do have a problem with making 250k a year and being labled rich. Do you think that people who make 250k - 400k a year are sitting around their pools sipping margaritas all day? Maybe these people are well off because they busted their butts to get a high paying job. Maybe they also work 50-60 hours a week to make that money. Most people in this income bracket earned the right to make that money. Remember, I'm not talking about corporate CEO's or millionares. I'm talking about people who make between 250-400k a year. These people constantly get grouped in with the lifestyles of the rich and famous. I'm not saying these people are living a hard life. I'm saying they pay their fare share in taxes. As you said, if it takes more sacrifice from ALL of us then I think the extra money spent is worth it.
The key word being ALL.
As far as tax breaks, It seems to me that the rest of us are paying extra for the rich people's tax breaks.
Please give me some examples of these tax breaks. I want to use them.

The Haves certainly have no trouble taking money from the poor though.

Please give me some examples as to how I'm hurting the poor.
I don't collect welfare, food stamps, any form of government assisted living, my kids won't get help for college(we make too much), I don't get most if not all the tax write-offs that most tax payers get and I'm in the highest tax bracket there is. A large portion of my tax dollars go to programs that I don't qualify for. So once again. How is someone who makes 250k a year hurting the poor?

[Anna]

"The best thing we can do for the poor, is not become one of them."
A distribution of wealth brings some people down a level, it doesn't elevate anyone.
IMHO.

[Modica]

1. How do the have's take money from the poor?
2. Anyone can become wealthy. The privileged just have it easier.
3. Working hard does not equate to wealth. Working smarter does. You can work hard sweating and digging ditches all your life, but without financial savvy you will never become wealthy. The ditch digger in this example would be wise to start a ditch digging business and hire other ditch diggers.

Financial speculation is commonly referred to as investing. Nothing is stopping you from speculating. You do have a 401K right?

What you are complaining about is the very nature of capitalism. Your speech and thinking seems similar to Che Guevara, a Marxist.

Marxism is essentially a belief that owners of production exploit their workers, that class structures are created out of this continued exploitation, that class structures create class conflict, that that people's conditions are directly reflected by their material condition and that this condition will lead to eventual demise of class structures through revolution.It is great that Eds lives in a fairy tale world where all corporations and rich people are just perfect and the poor are worse than scum around your toilet bowl. I am all for capitalism as long as it works for a majority of the people. I see that it works less and less for ALL Americans and more for the well-to-do. You can't expect everyone in our society to be smart when it comes to investing. Some people worry about things like feeding their children and providing other essentials. Not everyone was born with a silver spoon in their mouth or the smarts and the capital to invest. Please don't say that I hate rich people either, because I grew up in a very upscale neighborhood and have many very wealthy friends who I enjoy quite a bit. My problem is more with the paronoid Neocons, who grew up without a pot to pee in and now all they do is complain about how they are treated so unfairly by the tax system. My heart bleeds for them.

[Modica]

"The best thing we can do for the poor, is not become one of them."
A distribution of wealth brings some people down a level, it doesn't elevate anyone.
IMHO.
And you have examples of that? It seems that many people with money for some reason want to keep certain people down. We would not want to elevate the bourgeois pigs now would we?

[eds]

So what can I do about the poor? Give them my money? You say your heart bleeds for them. What do you do about solving poverty? How will disproportionately taxing the rich solve poverty? Do you think a flat tax with no deductions allowed would work? I do. I would love to pay a flat tax of 15%. Or a consumption tax and no income tax. Also just as fair.

I will not give one red cent to people who will not work. But if you are working but can't earn the living that say someone who earns six figures does, why should that bother me? Why should my heart go out to anyone who can't earn enough money to pay the rent, so to speak? I didn't do anything to anyone to cause that. How do I know they want my pity anyway? Maybe they are happy living like that. I never said they were toilet scum. They live their life as they want to and I live mine. I am no robber baron stealing pensions from Enron employees. I am a worker just like everyone else it.

Why is it your personal crusade to make everyone live in some happy world where everyone has money for everything they ever want? Life is not like that. I can't do anything about it. Life has always been like this. Ever since we had kings and dukes and barons who owned large tracts of land that they let people farm. Everything isn't about Cinderella fairy tales where everyone lives happily ever after. Life does not offer you any guarantees of wealth.

My objection is taking MY MONEY and redistributing it because someone only earns $50K a year and can't make ends meet. How is that my problem? Just because one makes six figures a year, doesn't mean one has all this extra money lying around to give to those less fortunate. And why should they anyway?

Each is given that to which is one's own ability.

[Modica]

If you don't care and don't want to pay to make our country great once more, then maybe you should get the hell out. I want to see this country be great once more, and if it takes more sacrifice from ALL of us then I think the extra money spent is worth it.

Modica,
I have no problem with the above statement that you wrote other than it seemed a little defensive. I do have a problem with making 250k a year and being labled rich. Do you think that people who make 250k - 400k a year are sitting around their pools sipping margaritas all day? Maybe these people are well off because they busted their butts to get a high paying job. Maybe they also work 50-60 hours a week to make that money. Most people in this income bracket earned the right to make that money. Remember, I'm not talking about corporate CEO's or millionares. I'm talking about people who make between 250-400k a year. These people constantly get grouped in with the lifestyles of the rich and famous. I'm not saying these people are living a hard life. I'm saying they pay their fare share in taxes. As you said, if it takes more sacrifice from ALL of us then I think the extra money spent is worth it.
The key word being ALL.
As far as tax breaks, It seems to me that the rest of us are paying extra for the rich people's tax breaks.
Please give me some examples of these tax breaks. I want to use them.

The Haves certainly have no trouble taking money from the poor though.

Please give me some examples as to how I'm hurting the poor.
I don't collect welfare, food stamps, any form of government assisted living, my kids won't get help for college(we make too much), I don't get most if not all the tax write-offs that most tax payers get and I'm in the highest tax bracket there is. A large portion of my tax dollars go to programs that I don't qualify for. So once again. How is someone who makes 250k a year hurting the poor?
Well since I am in the income range you listed, I know that I am not one of the rich, therefore; obviously I wasn't referring to people who make between 250k and 400k. I really am not defensive, but I just seem to have more empathy for people who are struggling. Am I a socialist? Not with the amount of money I take in a year, but I know that if we helped others make a difference in their lives then our country will be all the better. Unfortunately, the me me me generation(baby boomers) have made it difficult for people to make it these days. Everyone complains about taxes, but if you want to maintain the standard of living then you really need to pay your fair share. Otherwise, crime, disease and a collapsing infrastructure will result. Instead of comlaining about how high our taxes are, maybe we should start complaining about where our money goes.

[eds]

Well since I am in the income range you listed, I know that I am not one of the rich, therefore; obviously I wasn't referring to people who make between 250k and 400k. I really am not defensive, but I just seem to have more empathy for people who are struggling. Am I a socialist? Not with the amount of money I take in a year, but I know that if we helped others make a difference in their lives then our country will be all the better. Unfortunately, the me me me generation(baby boomers) have made it difficult for people to make it these days. Everyone complains about taxes, but if you want to maintain the standard of living then you really need to pay your fair share. Otherwise, crime, disease and a collapsing infrastructure will result. Instead of comlaining about how high our taxes are, maybe we should start complaining about where our money goes.
So you talk about the extremely affluent then? Those earning more than say a half-million a year? You do realize that only about 20% of HH earn more than 100,000 and therefore even less than that earn 500,000 or more.

Source US Census Data: http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032007/hhinc/new06_000.htm

According to an NPR news report I remember hearing once, that the top 1% of earners represent only about 16% of the total wages paid in I think it was 2005.

The group of people to whom you refer encompass so very little of the population.

I think you see people who have nothing, or very little, struggle to make ends meet and to make yourself feel better about your situation, being in the affluent wage earner category, you try to do something to alleviate your guilt. Are you ashamed that you earn so much and yet other people do not? Why be apologetic for your success?

[RC12L4]

As a general notice to the entire board.

If anyone feels guilty about the money you make let me know, I'll be more than happy to alleviate you of some of that money...uh....I mean "guilt".

[Anna]

And you have examples of that? It seems that many people with money for some reason want to keep certain people down. We would not want to elevate the bourgeois pigs now would we?

Modica, The quote "The best thing we can do for the poor is not become one of them.", was from a loving and thoughtful priest who has worked with the poor for 20 years. This was his humble observation. If taking money from some and giving it to others worked, it would have worked by now. The great social experiment of welfare is not a success. Entitlement programs are failures. Nothing would make be happier than to see all Americans do well. The better we all do, the better we all do. If people are "elevated", less of my money is needed to support them. This is a win win. I have no idea how to make this happen. My main question to you is, how does my or anyone elses being well off, keep anyone down? If I were to become one of the poor, I could not give to charity, I could not pay taxes and my family would be one more group needing entitlements. This hurts the needy far more than my having a decent income.

[Modica]

So you talk about the extremely affluent then? Those earning more than say a half-million a year? You do realize that only about 20% of HH earn more than 100,000 and therefore even less than that earn 500,000 or more.

Source US Census Data: http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032007/hhinc/new06_000.htm

According to an NPR news report I remember hearing once, that the top 1% of earners represent only about 16% of the total wages paid in I think it was 2005.

The group of people to whom you refer encompass so very little of the population.

I think you see people who have nothing, or very little, struggle to make ends meet and to make yourself feel better about your situation, being in the affluent wage earner category, you try to do something to alleviate your guilt. Are you ashamed that you earn so much and yet other people do not? Why be apologetic for your success?
Wanting to help others has nothing to do with guilt. I was brought up to be caring and I won't appologize for the way I feel. I had many people from my family, school and church who helped me become the person I am today and I see nothing wrong with doing the same for others. Being in this cynical age of ours, I think it is unfortunate that you feel that there is something wrong with a person who wants to help others.:(

[eds]

Wanting to help others has nothing to do with guilt. I was brought up to be caring and I won't appologize for the way I feel. I had many people from my family, school and church who helped me become the person I am today and I see nothing wrong with doing the same for others. Being in this cynical age of ours, I think it is unfortunate that you feel that there is something wrong with a person who wants to help others.:(

I don't think there is anything wrong with people wanting to help. But your posts seems to indicate that you thing there is something wrong with people who don't feel that way. I was trying to determine why you feel that way. Your posts seem to suggest that if we all started helping one another that everything would be just fine. But I disagree. That helping can sometimes be enabling and really solves nothing.

[Modica]

I don't think there is anything wrong with people wanting to help. But your posts seems to indicate that you thing there is something wrong with people who don't feel that way. I was trying to determine why you feel that way. Your posts seem to suggest that if we all started helping one another that everything would be just fine. But I disagree. That helping can sometimes be enabling and really solves nothing.
I agree that some people can never be helped no matter what, but there are many others who only need a little help in order to motivate them so that they can realize their dreams. And I do think that if we all helped one another we would be a better nation and maybe in doing so we all would be better people. And no, I am sorry, but I don't understand people who are all about themselves. I think that it is quite unhealthy to be so excessively interested in oneself.

[RC12L4]

Wanting to help others has nothing to do with guilt. I was brought up to be caring and I won't appologize for the way I feel. I had many people from my family, school and church who helped me become the person I am today and I see nothing wrong with doing the same for others. Being in this cynical age of ours, I think it is unfortunate that you feel that there is something wrong with a person who wants to help others.:(

I think it's great that you want to help others and I think most people would agree. I think the problem is you imply that like it or not everyone else should help too as dictated by you.

What gives you the right to tell me or anyone else who, what, when, why or how I should help people? What gives you the right to put your hand in my pocket and hand my money over to someone else? And what qualifies you better than me or anyone else for that matter how I help?

[Charles E. Peevyhouse]

eds: I cannot remember when I heard this report but it was on NPR and the report pointed out that under the current Bush tax scheme the wealthiest 10% pay three times in taxes what they paid under Clinton. (I wish I could remember the date of that story)(and yes as conservative as I am, I listen to NPR pretty regularly)

So Modica there is your socialist redistribution of wealth and it looks like your hated W has taken more out the pockets of the rich and put into the general fund than billy boy.

Plus what is the deal with the agent of change and public funding of campaign.

[rapuda]

Modica,

I'm still waiting for examples of tax breaks that people who make over 250k a year can use, that others cannot.

Also, how are the upper middle class hurting the poor? I need examples so I can respond.

[rapuda]

This came from a previous post that I made in the thread Economic stimulus package.

People who make a few hundred thousand a year don't have the write offs the wealthy have, nor do they have the same write offs as lower income earners. I read an editorial in Sundays paper(1/27/08) by Rich Lowry that had information from the Tax Foundation. It said;
Including ALL taxes, between 1991 and 2004, the only income group whose share of total taxes increased was the higher income quintile. The top 40% of tax payers paid 99.1% of federal income taxes in 2004, leaving the other 60% of taxpayers to pay .9%. The wealthiest 1% of taxpayers pay almost 40% of the total federal income tax.
When all federal, local, and state taxes and spending are taken into account, the lowest 20% of households got $8.21 in spending for every dollar of taxes spent in 2004, while the top 40% paid more in taxes then they received in spending.
The same holds true for the personal income tax in CT.
According to a report in 2002 by CONNECTICUT VOICES FOR CHILDREN
The personal income tax is CT’s most progressive tax. That is, its burdens fall more on the state’s wealthier
residents than on its poorer residents. In the 1999 income year, CT residents who reported an
adjusted gross income of $200,000/year or more were only 4% of all resident taxpayers, but
paid 47% of the total state personal income tax paid by residents. By contrast, 17% of our
poorer residents who filed state income tax returns in 1999 paid no state income tax at all.
My point is, people who make more than the average worker pay their share of taxes too. They actually pay an unfair share. They shouldn't be bashed because they make more and are successful.

So I ask again. How are the higher income earners hurting the poor when the poor get more from taxes than higher earners do? Please don't get defensive. I want to understand, but I need facts.

[eds]

You won't get the answer you seek. It's human nature to covet. Some just covet, others covet and then steal or otherwise make it their goal to obtain what you have legally or otherwise.

[Modica]

I think it's great that you want to help others and I think most people would agree. I think the problem is you imply that like it or not everyone else should help too as dictated by you.

What gives you the right to tell me or anyone else who, what, when, why or how I should help people? What gives you the right to put your hand in my pocket and hand my money over to someone else? And what qualifies you better than me or anyone else for that matter how I help?
You live your life the way you see fit to live it. I am only pointing out that I don't understand it. You want to keep all your money, then keep it, but I think the problem with taxes is not how much we pay but where our taxes go. I guess you are right, no matter how much we pay in taxes the money will never go to help people who really need it. I guess that is what I object to. Anyhow, why is it that people with a good amount of money are always so worried about it being taken away. If I lost all my money tomorrow, I would still have myself, my family, my friends and all my senses. I don't think that it would be the end of the world like some of you think it would be.

[RC12L4]

You live your life the way you see fit to live it. I am only pointing out that I don't understand it. You want to keep all your money, then keep it, but I think the problem with taxes is not how much we pay but where our taxes go. I guess you are right, no matter how much we pay in taxes the money will never go to help people who really need it. I guess that is what I object to. Anyhow, why is it that people with a good amount of money are always so worried about it being taken away. If I lost all my money tomorrow, I would still have myself, my family, my friends and all my senses. I don't think that it would be the end of the world like some of you think it would be.

So if money isn't that important to you you wouldn't mind giving me 25% of your take home pay from now on?

[RC12L4]

Modica,

I'm still waiting for examples of tax breaks that people who make over 250k a year can use, that others cannot.

Also, how are the upper middle class hurting the poor? I need examples so I can respond.

Getting anything more than the talking points from Modica is an exercise in futility. If you notice Modica does a ton of question asking, finger pointing and accusing but absolutely zero question answering.

[RC12L4]

Congress’ Joint Economic Committee disclosed that the richer half of the American population pays nearly 97 percent of income taxes. Most of that, 54 percent, is paid by those in the top 5 percent, Investor’s Business Daily (IBD) disclosed.

And the richest of the rich – just the top 1 percent – pay a hefty 34 percent of all personal income taxes collected by the federal government.

[eds]

America helps just about every oppressed nation in the world. We send aid to every corner of the Earth. In America, more people are helped than in other countries, like El Salvador, where my grandparents emigrated from. Can every last person be helped? No. You will always find someone in need, genuine need, that isn't being helped. But even if you raised taxes to 100%, you would still not help everyone. It is impossible. But America still is by far the only nation that help its citizens the most. But it is not perfect. No country is.

[rapuda]

Anyhow, why is it that people with a good amount of money are always so worried about it being taken away.

It doesn't matter how much you make, when you get taxed you complain.
High income earners aren't the only group of people who worry about money being taken away. Read the newspaper and watch the news. There are plenty of middle income earners worrying right now.

My prediction. Within the next year, our society will turn on the higher income earners. Rich bashing will occur. Politicians will key on higher earners to please the middle income voter. People who make over 250k a year will be grouped in with the Donald Trumps of the world. Obama is already starting to do it.

[Modica]

So if money isn't that important to you you wouldn't mind giving me 25% of your take home pay from now on?
Oh RC I was waiting for that one. No I would give it to someone who needed it. You don't need it.

[Modica]

Anyhow, why is it that people with a good amount of money are always so worried about it being taken away.

It doesn't matter how much you make, when you get taxed you complain.
High income earners aren't the only group of people who worry about money being taken away. Read the newspaper and watch the news. There are plenty of middle income earners worrying right now.

My prediction. Within the next year, our society will turn on the higher income earners. Rich bashing will occur. Politicians will key on higher earners to please the middle income voter. People who make over 250k a year will be grouped in with the Donald Trumps of the world. Obama is already starting to do it.
Middle income voters are the biggest block of voters. I really don't know how they have gotten away with turning their backs on the middle class, but with the failing economy that will change. Rapuda is correct on that prediction.

[RC12L4]

Oh RC I was waiting for that one. No I would give it to someone who needed it. You don't need it.

How do you know I don't need it?

[Modica]

How do you know I don't need it?
You are a lawyer.

[Charles E. Peevyhouse]

You are a lawyer.

I am the lawyer, not RC and I can tell you that I pay more in taxes than some people earn in salary, so do not give me this nonsense of the middle class being oppressed under a tax burden. I earn, I pay my share and that is enough. I pay taxes so that children can get free and reduced lunch, people can get medical care, etc, etc. This is not what a limited federal government should be about.

[RC12L4]

You are a lawyer.

When did you draw this conclusion?

[Modica]

I am the lawyer, not RC and I can tell you that I pay more in taxes than some people earn in salary, so do not give me this nonsense of the middle class being oppressed under a tax burden. I earn, I pay my share and that is enough. I pay taxes so that children can get free and reduced lunch, people can get medical care, etc, etc. This is not what a limited federal government should be about.
I meant to say that the middle class is the largest segment of our society and that as a collective they pay the most of all. I really don't know why people get so defensive. If you are secure with yourself and happy with the way you conduct yourself in society, it really should not matter what me or anyone else says. But I still think that things will boil over soon and it may be a class war rather than a race war. Maybe it will never happen, but I know there are alot of ticked off people in the middle who really are not getting satisfaction from either side of the aisle.

[Charles E. Peevyhouse]

When did you draw this conclusion?

It must be those witty little signatures you include on your posts.

[Modica]

It must be those witty little signatures you include on your posts.
Sorry but I was mistaken. I don't keep tabs on everyone who posts.:)