I think I have figured republicans out AKA tea party

No, I am not in agreement on that, and it's obviously you did not comprehend my post stating that there are multiple approaches to deal with taxation. I don't think you understand what an analytical post is. That post was taking into the aspect of one of your posts that involved the phrase "the right answer." When you involve the quoted phrase in an answer, you automatically imply that there is only one solution to a problem.

 

So then Obama is the problem because of his bad luck LOL

 

The tax system is broke beyond repair it is time to get rid of the IRS and get a sales tax based tax. You do realize federal income tax was supposed to be temporary so you could say it is illegal.

 

Liberals don't like the fair tax system, because then there would be no way to soak
the rich for more money to support their socialist utopia plans.

And they would hate it if we passed a Government spending limit at about 18% of GDP
because this too would limit the socialist spending spree.

These are just the things we are going to do, after 2012. And they know it.


....

 

It's so far fetched that no one is taking this thread seriously. Read around us, everyone is laughing at this guy.

The Tea Party and the GOP preach unreasonable scenarios.....well welcome to politics...you must be new. The DNC and the liberal basis do this too, so unless you want that aspect of his point to backfire on him we'll just leave it aside for now.

Yes, social security is an entitlement. A few conservatives telling you otherwise doesn't speak for everyone. I'll agree with you on that point, but for the larger picture that the OP is trying to paint...no. I know people on this board do sometimes put us conservatives in a bad light. You have to be able to judge between personal belief and group belief though.

GW may have started the deficit and ran it up, but Obama has doubled if not tripled it, in less than half the amount of time Bush had. That's saying something there. Not only that he's leading us into a second failure of the economy, and lets not forget the proverbial dropped ball our commander and chief made when our credit was dropped (he was warned in April by S & P). Bush may have started it, but the liberal base cannot simply keep passing the buck to Obama's predecessor. He is going to have to take responsibility for at least SOME of his actions at one point.

Unions have been around since Lincoln. Unfortunately they hold too much political influence for either side to ignore...or do what they should've a long time ago and abolished the unions. Both sides are at fault for the unions for decades....this isn't a new issue.

Where are the jobs? I don't know, you could pose the same question to Obama though. He hasn't done anything either. Reagean turned his problem around though and is remembered as being a great President.

Where? I just see assumptions and wide ranging personal opinion to me.... (maybe it's hiding underneath all the hearsay opinion??)

The fact that the left thinks the OP has scored any sort of point, much less a debate against the right is insulting. That's not debate, that's not even intelligent. I could come in here spouting off all sorts of BS too...but I wont because who really wants to respond to that. If I'm going to say something like the OP I'll source it...because that's what a debate is. Not a "he said she said" baited by a member of the opposite views. The fact that the right does not entertain this shows that some on this board still have respect for debate, actual debates, not this. I don't see many of the left in here either..same idea? They saw this and said "whatever..forget that, better debates are elsewhere".

The only reason I am here is because I'm bored and secondly I'm still laughing at all of you taking this thread even slightly serious. Maybe I should make a thread about liberals causing that Idaho stage to collapse....that would be about the same BS that this OP has decided to bait us all with.

 

Liberals hate a fair tax system, because it would limit the growth of big government
and there would be no way to spend for socialist agendas.

And they would hate it if we passed a Government spending limit at about 18% of GDP
because this too would limit the socialist spending spree.

But these things we will pass come 2012, and they know it, and it scare them.
So bye Bye socialism.


...

 

Yes, I don't like the fair tax system, but for different reasons. One reason why is that the tax places a disproportionate burden on the middle and working class, as we are the primary consumers. Furthermore, what makes it a CEO's dream is that it provides them with a better reason to invest in a risky financial transactions when you consider that it targets the anything a CEO can and will buy. This includes corporate jets, penthouses, and mansions. Therefore, I would expect the rich to actually spend less on consumer products than they currently spend, and instead invest in more self-interested financial pursuits.

 

Yes, but that all changed with the 16th amendment, so do you want to repeal the 16th amendment?

 

And they should. So now we know what really buggs you, it's that they are rich and your not.
boo hoo, get real dude, you can't lay claim to that which is not yours.


...

 

Alright, then get ready for another financial crisis, because those self-interested financial pursuits are derivatives, CDO's, and other risk-transfer agreements that allow CEO's, bankers, etc. to generate wealth at the expense of mortgage and loan owners.

Furthermore, be prepared to experience extensive wealth disparity.

 

So you know what people will do and that should dictate taxes LOL

You are wrong. The reason we have problems now is Obamacare and regulation Obama is passing. No one will hire or expand with Obama as president

 

If it gets rid of the IRS and this broken tax system, yes.

 

Obama is already creating that

 

I beleive in positive economics over normative economics, so morals are secondary to statistical success and balance.

Now, take a look at income distribution differences:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/United_States_Income_Distribution_1947-2007.svg

When you analyze and apply this data to a fair tax system, you can clearly predict that wealth disparity between the 95th percentile and 80th percentile and below would increase as the 95th percentile would find safe havens risk-transfer agreements and other self-interested financial pursuits instead of spending more money on consumer products, and the working class and middle class would become more important as consumer spenders, but would have less money to use for financial priorities such as paying bills, mortgages, and loans. Therefore, a consumption tax is not fair.

 

Of course not. What I said was truth and you know it.

 

It’s customary to leave the posters username in the reply; that way we know there is one: you must be new . . .

Now, if you know how to read someone’s post, it’s very easy to apply the noodle and interpret it or simply ask for clarification; something perhaps that you should have done.

Serious people don’t preach unreasonable scenarios, and if you think the left does then it is your charge to produce such scenarios rather than just imply that someone is wrong. So, name the DNC scenarios that are unreasonable. Secondly, how can an insurance policy that you pay into be an entitlement? Perhaps you can answer that. Moreover, as for individual vs group belief, the right-wing group n this forum is made up of people who say the same things and extremely rarely argue from a position of strength: meaning they know what they’re talking about and can prove it; this thread of course is yet another example of that; rather than try and reply with at least some sort of fair play, you righties exercise mockery, which is just another way of saying, “well, since I can’t understand the post, I’ll just say stupid things”.

Now, Bush and the right drove this country into such a hole that we are going to be years trying to right this boat. Obama has gone to FDR’s deficit spending strategy that worked by getting people up and working: NRA, CCC, New Deal, labor rights, all these things contributed greatly to overcoming the effects of the Gat Depression. President Obama is not without his faults in this thing, but to suggest that all of this since he took office is his fault is utterly ridiculous: the wars in the Middle East were financed by borrowed money, and the costs didn’t hit the budget until Obama had to present a new one. So I suggest that do more study on all of this in order to give your opinions some sort of weight.

Respecting labor: 1865?

http://www.aflcio.org/aboutus/history/history/timeline.cfm

Your lack of knowledge with social economics and their history has put you in an embarrassing position. Please read a little more and really try and grasp the subject of organized labor before you wreck your ship completely.

On jobs: Reagan ran over 10% unemployment for three years running – after he began his labor by firing the Air Traffic Controllers. Ronald Reagan produced “paper growth” not real growth at all.

The rest of your post is just nonsense, and I’ve covered your opinion on the OP already. Now, if your just bored, then don’t be a troll.

 

I doubt you have figured out how to even dress yourself, much less figure out what the tea party stands for, despite the fact that it's been pointed out on this forum numerous times.

Tea party people do not want anyone to live on the bare minimum as far as I know. They want the tax increases stopped and the tax money to be spent wisely.

As for tea partiers not wanting people to make more than 25k/year. I don't know where you came up with that but it sounds like a democrat thing. Sounds like some communist garbage of, well I'm mad that that person makes more than me, he should share his wealth and we should all make the same amount of money.

Are you an illegal?

Listen, stop expecting the government to take care of you with my tax money. If you are living the life you want then either get a job that pays you more, or fix your priorities.

 

What tax increases? There haven't been any in almost 10 years! Spare us your faux outrage.

 

Montoya, I seriously doubt you have ever figured anything out. You usually can't even repeat liberal talking points well. If only the Republican Party and Tea Party were synonymous as you think they are.

 

So regulation with new fees are not taxes?

http://www.usnews.com/news/washingt...stration-added-95-billion-in-red-tape-in-july

 

So ... you agree with the OP? Actually, you seem to take it all at least one step further than the OP thinks you do. But, basically, you agree?

 

By that logic, we should eliminate the military and find some other way of defending the country, 'cause the wars were supposed to be temporary, too.

Wait a minute. Did I just defend the IRS? Hold on, I've got a soul around here somewhere ... ah, there it is ...

I don't think a sales tax will work. Maybe an income tax doesn't work, either, but I think it works better than a sales tax.

 

Another one that seems to agree with the OP.

Republicans appear to have two answers to the OP's question: avoid it, or admit that it's accurate (and then claim that it's justified).

Where are the people who actually believe that republican policy will be good for the people of America -- all of them, not just the rich? I know you guys are out there. C'mon.

I like to think that we all want what's best for the American people -- well, the Americans among us do, anyway.

 

Okay, here's something -- you think Obama is responsible for the wealth disparity? Explain more, please.

 

Smartmouthwoman says they're the same thing. Where are you two differing on your perspectives?