Happy Days

[smurphy]

Why do I need to pay for those who choose not to not make it on their own?

This is a very loaded question in a couple ways. Most governemnt spending is NOT used on people who simply choose not to make it on their own. BY FAR, our largest expenses are defense and social security. Am I to assume that you don't like these programs? Am I to assume that you feel it's OK for our defense and social security to continue to operate at a loss? ..Or do we a responsibility to be financially CONSERVATIVE and balance these budgets?

Also, would you say that life/economy is composed of winners and losers? When someone makes a great investment (as you say yours have "flourished"), doesn't that usually mean someone else somewhere is losing? In reality, this is true. Sometimes everybody wins, but usually when someone profits it means someone else is losing. ...Not because the choose to lose, but rather because they simply didn't win. So, do you (as DTB has clearly stated he feels) have absolutely no sympathy for those that put forth the effort but simply haven't been able to come out ahead?

 

[bryanz]

I realize you don't know me, but if you did it would have been obvious to you that I was speaking tongue in cheek. In reality, I would not like to live in Europe, nor would I expect to ever be forced to leave.

As for problems I have w/ Hillary. I will start with Capital gains tax rate being nearly doubled. That alone, is a problem for me. Why do I need to pay for those who choose not to not make it on their own?

I agree, we do not need to raise any taxes. Let's take care of the mass waste and fraud and criminal activity in government before we waste more hard earned money. I can't remember his name but some ****ing idiot in this forum tryed to tell me that he didn't mind paying more taxes because most of it went to the right place after the waste. When I read that response, I shook my head and could not muster a reply. Go back and look it up !! There are some in our government that say BILLIONS ARE BEING WASTED. I could see if the basics were being met, but they are not. NO NEW TAXES UNTIL WE FIND OUT WHERE THE MONEY IS GOING. We are spending BILLIONS on computers trying to figure out were the money is. It doesn't make sense. IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WANT CHANGE ; THEY WONT VOTE FOR CLINTON. SHE IS THE BIGGEST INSIDER OF ALL THE INSIDERS THAT ARE RUNNING ! I don't know who I'm going to vote for ? I might be like the majority of the American People and not vote for anyone. Stupid is as stupid does .

 

[Chadman]

The "choosing" not to make it, or succeed, if you will, really is not a blanket discussion, I don't think. To say that everyone starts out in life with the same opportunities and ability to improve themselves just is not true.

To what extent they try to get past their problems and excel is more of a personal thing and can be measured somewhat, although those scenarios rarely continue to be even for all.

Some start out with a better shot, period. Some "succeed" or choose to succeed simply because it is easier for them than others, and they don't have to do as much or try as hard. Are these people any more of value than others? Hardly. And even less so in many situations.

Very few absolutes in life, no matter how one tries to paint it.

 

[smurphy]

SHE IS THE BIGGEST INSIDER OF ALL THE INSIDERS THAT ARE RUNNING !

at least she's a competent insider

 

[bryanz]

This is a very loaded question in a couple ways. Most governemnt spending is NOT used on people who simply choose not to make it on their own. BY FAR, our largest expenses are defense and social security. Am I to assume that you don't like these programs? Am I to assume that you feel it's OK for our defense and social security to continue to operate at a loss? ..Or do we a responsibility to be financially CONSERVATIVE and balance these budgets?

Also, would you say that life/economy is composed of winners and losers? When someone makes a great investment (as you say yours have "flourished"), doesn't that usually mean someone else somewhere is losing? In reality, this is true. Sometimes everybody wins, but usually when someone profits it means someone else is losing. ...Not because the choose to lose, but rather because they simply didn't win. So, do you (as DTB has clearly stated he feels) have absolutely no sympathy for those that put forth the effort but simply haven't been able to come out ahead?

If someone makes an investment and wins or loses, it's not our business. This is not socialism this is America. I'm all for a hand up but not mass hand outs like we give our people in government. We can help the poor with a fraction of the waste. The tax payers of America help the criminals that steal from us. That's what happens when we get into a discussions like this. The have nots start going at each other while the real money goes out the back door !

 

[bryanz]

at least she's a competent insider

and your competence went out the door with that evaluation.

 

[smurphy]

???

Good comeback. I'm just looking at this realistically.

 

[IntenseOperator]

I agree, we do not need to raise any taxes. Let's take care of the mass waste and fraud and criminal activity in government before we waste more hard earned money. I can't remember his name but some ****ing idiot in this forum tryed to tell me that he didn't mind paying more taxes because most of it went to the right place after the waste. When I read that response, I shook my head and could not muster a reply. Go back and look it up !! There are some in our government that say BILLIONS ARE BEING WASTED. I could see if the basics were being met, but they are not. NO NEW TAXES UNTIL WE FIND OUT WHERE THE MONEY IS GOING. We are spending BILLIONS on computers trying to figure out were the money is. It doesn't make sense. IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WANT CHANGE ; THEY WONT VOTE FOR CLINTON. SHE IS THE BIGGEST INSIDER OF ALL THE INSIDERS THAT ARE RUNNING ! I don't know who I'm going to vote for ? I might be like the majority of the American People and not vote for anyone. Stupid is as stupid does .

less government

less waste

less taxes

 

[bryanz]

???

Good comeback. I'm just looking at this realistically.

realistically, we had bush 41 / clinton 42/ bush 43/ do we really need or want clinton 44 ?

 

[smurphy]

How can anyone who wants less government and less waste ALSO continue to support the Iraq occupation? Major contradiction in philosophy.

Having a hard time finding TRUE conservatives, but they sure don't seem to be in Republican party anymore.

 

[smurphy]

realistically, we had bush 41 / clinton 42/ bush 43/ do we really need or want clinton 44 ?

Given the REALISTIC choices, yes - I will happily take Clinton 44.

Are you saying you would rather see Obama or Edwards? I know you can't possibly want another Republican, giving them 4 more years of "political capital" to smugly waste on the already wealthy folks, can you?

 

[bryanz]

How can anyone who wants less government and less waste ALSO continue to support the Iraq occupation? Major contradiction in philosophy.

Having a hard time finding TRUE conservatives, but they sure don't seem to be in Republican party anymore.

you are right, true conservatives & true Americans are starting to call themselves independents. You can't be for bush and be for America. I realized this two or three yrs into the first term. I have been castrated by my party for my early objection to this war.

 

[smurphy]

you are right, true conservatives & true Americans are starting to call themselves independents. You can't be for bush and be for America. I realized this two or three yrs into the first term. I have been castrated by my party for my early objection to this war.

I'll put it this way. If Ron Paul wins the GOP nomination, then he has my vote.

If Romney, Giuliani, Thompson, or McCain gets the nod, then I enthusiastically vote for Clinton.

If Tancredo or Huckabee miraculously slip through, then I'll look further at them.

...AND YES, I would love to see Independents become stronger. Unfortunatley, thus far they have only managed to take votes from the side that is most like their beliefs: Perot took Doles votes and Nader took Gore's - the latter costing Gore the election and giving us 8 years of the worst president in my lifetime.

 

[AR182]

Perot took Doles votes and Nader took Gore's - the latter costing Gore the election and giving us 8 years of the worst president in my lifetime.

in 1992 perot took bush sr.'s votes & gave the presidency to clinton (who i voted for).in 1996 clinton beat dole rather easily...

 

[smurphy]

in 1992 perot took bush sr.'s votes & gave the presidency to clinton (who i voted for).in 1996 clinton beat dole rather easily...

OK, I guess I mixed that up. I do remember poor General Stockdale in 1992. Wow, that VP debate was hard to watch. That was a great guy who just was never meant to be in politics.

 

[AR182]

OK, I guess I mixed that up. I do remember poor General Stockdale in 1992. Wow, that VP debate was hard to watch. That was a great guy who just was never meant to be in politics.

yes that was indeed painful to watch....it's a shame that most americans will remember stockdale for his poor showing in the debates instead of his great service to our country...

 

[bryanz]

It's not just the war ! I know you can't blame everything on the last watch but, if the people in the poll were talking about being happy with politics. Whats up with the infrastructure, education, water, price of gas, Iraq, the dollar, street crime, food, toys, health care,and patriotism. The only patriots I see are, our fighting force. Where is the American first in the private sector when we are at war. Our Soldiers can sacrifice, put in a honest days work but corporate Americana can't ???? Like I said before, make all the money you want but give the people what they pay for.

 

[The Sponge]

OK, this is good. This is an actual issue, and not just the standard unsubstantiated Hillary bashing.

Mrs. Clinton would not like to extend Bush's tax cuts beyond 2010. Bush cut the capital gains tax down from 20% to 15%. So - worst case scenario - capital gains will return to the 20% they were at with Mr. Clinton. .....What's so bad about that? Bush has been operating the national budget at an extreme defitcit. This cannot continue much longer without serious financial consequences.

When capital gains were 20% instead of 15% during the Clinton years, the economy was healthy, the budget was at a surplus, and no reasonable person was complaining. There are very few people that actually cash enough capital gains profits to have benefitted significantly from this cut. Are you saying that simply returning this tax to the Bill Clinton days of balanced budgets would hurt you? Seriously?

You' will never win this argument with these guys. They would rather believe a 5 second sound bite then what is really costing them money. 1/3 of our taxes go to these huge republican deficits and debts. It doesn't say this in our checks and they sure as hell are not gonna hear this on nitwit neocon radio as well as Fox news. All they hear is Bush saying the democrats are going after your wallets. Same old con game and same old results with these nuts. 1/3 being pissed away for absolutely nothing. That is why you have to fund budgets because of these creeps who created this mess. A trillion dollars for a ridiculous con job of a war where a select few people (war profiteers, defense contractors) made a helluva lot of money once again on the tax payers backs. There is no money in peace. And there is no surplus because the steal and spend Neocon Republicans ripped it all off.

 

[bryanz]

How do these people in corporate America go home an look their children in the eye? What do they teach them ? My father was a hard working guy in management and he taught me about hard work and giving people what they pay for. You don't do it for them, you do it for your self. If you do your service the right way, it will come to you. If you don't ,you will never catch up and you will have to cheat your self and the people you serve to the end. It's hard to do it the right way in the beginning, but it's so much easier 10, 15 yrs down the road. Big picture !! Haven't used those words in a while.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

My My --we have a few here that aren't too happy

Can understand Bryanz life not getting any better--but surprises me that you have such a negative outlook Smurph:shrug:

other than disagreeing with war--can't see where you would be upset with past 8 years.

- tort reform--not a big hit with edward I'm sure

As far as my getting desperate--while I have preferences in 08--the outcome does not matter a whole lot--fortunately I am at stage in life not much will effect me either way--I as my parents and theirs was fortunate to grow up in the 80/20 period--it is those in your age group Smurph that will face the unfortunate inevitable down the road--it will be you footing the bill not only for the deadbeats--but the babyboomers with their nests eggs sheltered from the taxman--leaving --guess who to pay the taxes the soon to be 60-40 ratio
of tax payers--and with gov whose base and objective to please is the 40%.

In fact I would somewhat relish the thought of Dems winning in 08--would be nice to kick back and blame every disaster-natural or otherwise on the otherside--but will save the smileys for when they start pecking you with the taxes--as I'd expect you and Chad to be in the minority of the dem base that actually pay taxes.

Be careful what you wish for my friend.