Pat,
I currently cannot get onto my site's comments to respond to you there. I am not calling you out but want to address some things with you.
The topics you bring up sound good in theory but when you actually analyze what is being said and the facts and figures it doesn't add up.
You seem to try to dismiss Tiffany's response, which I asked her to post on my behalf because I can't access that page at this time, by saying you don't understand her point. Clearly you either truly don't understand what an analogy is, which is worrisome in itself or you're just being facetious.
Obama's economic plan is not a plan at all but a theory. It's a theory based on Marxism and Tiffany's story uses a story to illustrate Obama's economic theory. But I am sure you did understand that.
I want the middle class to grow too. But the reality is that it doesn't grow by taxing the rich even more. This didn't work under Carter and infact it had devistating results. Long long gas lines, high inflation and unemployment rates that were high.
Even Charlie Gibson (see earlier post on my site for youtube video) pointed this out in the debates between Obama and Clinton, that by lowering the capital gains taxes (usually only people with some kind of money pay) that the revenues in this country went up. It went up under Bill Clinton and G.W. Bush.
Tiffany's story shows just what the reality is when you impose the ideology to charge one group more so that another can be given a bigger piece of the pie.
The only reality that comes from Marxist/socialist policies is that to even the playing field MORE people have less. AND an even smaller amount have more than they do now. Further dividing the economic classes.
If socialism works so well, please tell me why most of the Americas are full of extremely poor people?
Now I know it's a tactic by Obama insiders, to come to as many blogs such as mine at the last hour to try to take over the topics and persuade McCain supporters that we should not vote the way we are. I know you are paid to do this. So I am telling you I won't allow my site to be a part of this. I'll let a little debate happen but what you want is something altogether different. You know it and I know it too!
Monday, November 3, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.jpg)
6 comments:
I dont understand why wealth redistribution is such a dirty word. Taxation itself is a form of wealth distribution. You put money into a common pool which is then redistributed to provide wealth and/or facilities to the common public.
Do you really believe that people that support Obama want their hard-earned money to be taken and be part of the government as in a marxist regime?? I, for my part can say that I definitely dont.
The question is how much will a re-arrangement of taxation rates help/hurt the respective groups?
For that matter, how do we know the current tax rates are suitable for energizing the economy? Maybe its time to revisit? I am not saying it should definitely be changed, but its worth looking what will give the biggest demographic (middle class) greater purchasing power.
Wow! Tiffany, I asked before I posted on your blog because I didn't want to post if you just wanted opinions that agree with yours. And that's fine, that's your right, it's your blog.
I am not affiliated in any shape or form with the Obama campaign or any organization tied to the Obama campaign. No one is paying me to do anything.
I tried to respond point by point to tiffany, but hers was a long post without a summary of the point. That's why I stated I'm not 100% sure of the point, but I responded to what I thought she was trying to get at. I was not being dismissive. I do feel you are being dismissive by writing me off as a paid supporter. (If I am, I'm missing some checks! Who do I contact?)
Since you are writing me off, I won't respond point by point to your post. Like I said, call me a dreamer, but I want the country to come together. If you don't want any debate, I think that's sad. You shut me down after I made what I thought were two respectful comments. I don't see what we can fix if everybody stays in their corner pissed and calling the other side names.
I just wanted to debate and discuss the issues, I really don't expect any of you to change your vote this close to the election.
I will close with one thing. Why do McCain supporters reference Carter when the last Democratic president was Clinton? We had massive job growth under him, and that's the tax rate Obama wants to return to.
I don't expect you to post this comment. I just wanted you to know what my intentions were.
Peace!
Even on the 13th hours, we won't be swayed. Just one more day.
Pat: The reason Carter is referenced is because he initiated the debacle that became the mortgage mess. Clinton expanded it, and sadly, Bush did not thwart it, although attempts by McCain were kiboshed by Franks andcompany.
To All: Some here asked me why vote for McCain:
because of Sarah Palin. She started out in the PTA, worked her way up through local government, and eventually ran for governor of Alaska and won. She cleaned up corruption, saw oil as a vital resource for the nation, and she has more executive experience than anybody on either ticket. She is a common, regular person. She is not from the Ivy League. She is not a lawyer. She's someone who has risen through the ranks outside of how Washington says you're supposed to do it. The mainstream media and the elitists don't like her because she is not one of them. She brings something that was missing on both sides of the aisle, and that is authenticity.
John McCain has pledged to keep the Bush tax cut permanent, instead of letting it expire in 2010. cutting the corporate tax, the income tax and the capital gains tax. As we're heading into another Great Depression, this is not a time when we should be raising taxes. I believe that socialistic policies, like Barack Obama's, raise taxes and extend the depression. We should let the American people decide what to do with their money-individuals are far better equipped to know how to spend it than the government.
We are in a war, and our enemies are serious. John McCain is feared by our enemies. Barack Obama is liked by our enemies. Joe Biden himself said that within the first six months of an Obama presidency, he would be tested. He's going to be tested because our enemies don't respect or fear him. They didn't fear George W. Bush either, but they do now. So when you see Europe, the Middle East and Hamas all supporting Barack Obama, that is alarming. McCain, on the other hand, has already proven his mettle. John McCain has been through more than Barack Obama can imagine, and he's not going to let American get rolled-not on his watch.
Regarding the "question" of wealth distribution: first it's TWO words not one!
Second it's NOT the same as taxing people as we have always done. If it were then he wouldn't be billing himself as CHANGE.
Third, taxes are used to pay for services, roads, schools, military. DISTRIBUTION of wealth is the idea that I take money from you based upon how much you earn soley to give to someone I deam less able to achive the same wealth to level the playing field. Which is why Tiffany's story was a perfect thing to post today on the comments in the post before this one. It was a brilliant illustration of that idea and how it just doesn't work to help people rise up but instead has the opposite of the desired result.
I think it's important for the commenters today to realize something about me and my regular commenters...we all want the same things as you. What we oject to is the idea that Obama can get us there. His "plans" while possibly well-meaning will ABSOLUTELY have the opposite result.
Never before has any government besides the U.S. ever been able to allow regular people to become something out of nothing. NEVER, none, zero. WHY WHY WHY would you want to CHANGE that system? It is and always has been THE ONLY one in modern history to do this. It is NOT perfect. But it is the best one there is. Don't take that away from us by voting for the candidate with the least experience of knowledge of economics and foreign policy in the history of our great nation.
VOTE John McCain on November 4, 2008.
I responded to most of this in the previous discussion that started this whole conversation, but let me just add a reply to Chandrakant:
Yes, I'm against the current tax system. You're correct, it is progressive and in itself a form of redistribution of wealth. I am for the fair tax.
Pat: Just so you know...this isn't my blog...it's Lauren's. I just posted that one reply for her b/c she could access it. I have enjoyed our discussion even if I haven't managed to convince you that I'm right....yet :)
Post a Comment