[purplewings]

Gee, that's the nicest you've ever answered anything I've posted here. I'm in shock

[NeedKarma]

I'm a nice guy, but one of my idiosyncrasies is I hate to see people posting crap unchallenged.

[speechlesstx]

And I hate seeing crap challenged with more crap. :D

[TexasParent]

Oh yes Carol. Socialism is wonderful. Even Hitler thought so back in his day. 'Let's knock those rich Jews down and take their stuff. We deserve it as more than they do' So what if they were the ones who worked for it.

How could anyone interested in this election NOT have read up on Socialism? Some are still around that remember living it....(no, not me)

Is that all you conservatives can do is spread fear? It must be mighty uncomfortable living in your skin scared all the time, no wonder you need your guns; y'all are the most paranoid frightened little babies.

Progressive tax policy isn't socialism and as is typical you had to play the Hitler card, how can you sleep at night and when does it ever end for you lot?

Here is an article on tax policy:

Progressive Taxation--Socialism? or Just Standard USA Tax Policy?

My colleague Jim Maule has a good post (Taxes, Bailouts, and Socialism, Mauled Again for Oct. 22, 2008) about a topic that is being raised by the McCain-Palin team quite frequently these days, since the interaction of "Joe the Plumber" (who is not really a plumber (not licensed, anyway), not actually making more than $250,000 a year, and not really Joe) with Obama about tax policies. Obama, as is his wont, answered a set question from Joe with an articulate defense of progressive taxation policies, especially during times of financial crisis when those in the lower income distributions find it increasingly hard to make ends meet and those in the upper echelons (we're talking about the very top few percentages of mostly multimillionaires) still have plenty. By spreading the wealth around, everyone ultimately benefits.

The topic, for anyone that has not been following the fantastic lurches of the last few days of the McCain-Palin campaign, is socialism. The Republican team has taken Obama's phrase, labeled it socialism, and essentially smeared the Democrat as unAmerican. The campaign is building on a decades-long effort by various interest groups, from organizations like Grover Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform to the Cato Institute and the Tax Foundation, to paint progressive tax policies as downright unAmerican, all in support of "flat" wage-based or sales taxes that shift much more of the ultimate burden for supporting government activities to the people who are least able to shoulder that burden. These efforts are proclaimed to be in favor of individual liberties, but actually support the corporatist agenda.

As far as progressive taxation representing socialism, nothing could be further from the truth. Note first that McCain himself acknowledged that tax cuts should be provided to the lower income taxpayers, not the wealthiest (in his brief preriod as a Maverick on tax matters, prior to his current incarnation as Bush reincarnate). But aside from that, America's congressional representatives and presidents and leaders have almost uniformly supported progressive taxation throughout our history, and in fact enacted essentially progressive taxation policies into law since the beginning of the income tax. Similarly, American taxpayers have consistently supported progressivity in the tax system when questioned in surveys.

This consistent support evidences at heart a genuine understanding of three key aspects of taxation and spending:

- the benefits of government spending in large part adhere to the wealthier and permit them to acquire and retain that wealth,

- government spending for public goods and infrastructure is essential to broad-based growth that lifts all boats and

- government provision of a safety net for its citizens who have fallen on exceptionally difficult times is an appropriate way that the community acts collectively to take care of its own.

After a period when aggressive deregulation has been combined with aggressive reduction of tax revenues, especially from the wealthy, the US has experienced a financial crisis that will take both time and suffering before it is over. One result of pushing extensive tax cuts for the top income Americans at the same time that deregulation and other factors enhanced wealth-accrual is a period of increasing income disparity: the wealthier, that is, have been getting much wealthier, and the vast majority of Americans have been finding it harder and harder to make ends meet. See, e.g., the general interest in this issue, as shown by this Russ Sype post: Let's Talk About Redistribution of Wealth. The financial crisis can be laid at the feet of the deregulation fought for by the very institutions that are now feeding hungrily at the public trough and their managers and owners who engaged in a frenzy of profitable speculation that created systemic risk. it's worth quoting a paragraph from Jim Maule on this issue.

The tag of "socialism" is an easy piece of red meat (pun intended) for those who want to stir up fears not unlike those afflicting the nation during the "red menace" days. The irony is that just as Communism (with the capital "C") wasn't really communism (with the lower-case "C"), so, too, imposing higher income taxes on the wealthy isn't socialism. Revoking undeserved and economy-damaging tax cuts for the wealthy isn't socialism. If anything, it reflects the fact that the wealth is built on the backs of those who produce it, not those who grab it, manage it, mismanage it, or gamble with it when it belongs to others.

***

[T]here are, and have been for decades, valid arguments for imposing higher taxes on those on whom America has bestowed better opportunities and greater fortune. Undoing the mistaken tax cuts, and fixing the problems caused by trying to fight a war without raising taxes, isn't socialism. It's an attempt to undo the problems caused by welfare for the wealthy.


[corrected 102708 to reflect author's correction of original post]

-----------------------------------------

Oh, you might be interested in how the rich cheat their taxes:

http://www.forbes.com/2008/10/21/tax...21beltway.html

[Skell]

???
Being "large grassroots" has nothing to do with what's good, right or true.

So you're saying if Obama wins the election vote the majority of the people are bad, wrong and false simply because they don't agree with you? Sounds like it to me.

[inthebox]

Texas Parent:

Revoking undeserved and economy-damaging tax cuts for the wealthy isn't socialism. If anything, it reflects the fact that the wealth is built on the backs of those who produce it, not those who grab it, manage it, mismanage it, or gamble with it when it belongs to others.

Exactly who determines what is deserved or what belongs to someone?

If someone went to professional school for years, or worked out and practiced their craft [ athletics, acting, investing ] to be at the top of their field, don't you think they ahould deserve the fruits of their labor?

Who determines whether Oprah or Bill Gates is worth billions?


In capitalism - you do. Millions of consumers determine what the market is willing to pay.

In socialism, or communism - it is what? a hundred or so government bureaucrats that determine this.

Do you trust this power in your politician or in milllions of consumers?

Two examples:

Government - medicare part D
Free market - $4 dollar monthly rx from Walmart
Which cost the taxpayor more?

Gas prices and vehicles sold:
Free market - gas prices up, less suvs and gas hogs bought, more fuel efficient vehicles bought.
Government - impose café standards - not needed.

[TexasParent]

Texas Parent:



Exactly who determines what is deserved or what belongs to someone?

If someone went to professional school for years, or worked out and practiced their craft [ athletics, acting, investing ] to be at the top of their field, don't you think they ahould deserve the fruits of their labor?

Who determines whether Oprah or Bill Gates is worth billions?


In capitalism - you do. Millions of consumers determine what the market is willing to pay.

In socialism, or communism - it is what?, a hundred or so goverment bureaucrats that determine this.

Do you trust this power in your politician or in milllions of consumers?

Two examples:

Government - medicare part D
free market - $4 dollar monthly rx from Walmart
Which cost the taxpayor more?

Gas prices and vehicles sold:
Free market - gas prices up, less suvs and gas hogs bought, more fuel efficient vehicles bought.
Government - impose cafe standards - not needed.

Warren Buffet Says: I Pay Less Tax Than My Cleaning Lady, Or When I Was Paper Boy -- McCain/Palin Have Even Worse Deal in Store For Middle Class

Warren Buffet may be the last of the giants of the business world that is still seen nearly unanimously as a statesman, a corporate citizen, and a man who will not claw over the less-fortunate for his own gain. He has avoided the greed pitfalls and short-sighted selfishness that left many other magnates a-hoist on their own petards. As a result, he has the credibility as both trusted financial authority, where fewer than ever remain, and voice of reason countering the McCain campaign's claims about Obama's tax plans and their own.

It is one thing for me, decidedly a denizen of that middle class being hurt by the Republican philosophy, to complain about the unfairness of my dwindling real income. It is one thing also, for me, to resent that smaller income being taxed-away even more to subsidize lower taxes for the wealthy already, and even more if McCain were elected. It is another thing entirely for a whistle-blower inside the economic elite to point out the crime of asking struggling families to pay more tax, just so that oil companies can pay less, in spite of their record-profits. When one adds price-gouging, and collusion by these firms that have abrogated all responsibility as corporate citizens, the policies of Bush and the would-be policies of John Mccain become all the more inappropriate. This system is the definition of perverse incentives: rewarding behavior by citizens or corporations that is damaging to society. But as I say, it is one thing for me, an ordinary American, to be angry since I am directly hurt like most Americans, but is it truly a detriment to the economy as a whole?

The McCain philosophy, like Bush's is to have the tax code we have now, with the middle class paying more and the wealthy getting away without paying their fair share, and giving tax breaks to the worst corporate citizens, while the good guys cover the cost. Don't take my word for it if you don't want. Warren Buffet will, perhaps, be more convincing than me to certain of those voters whose first impulse is to buy-into McCain's version of events. Buffet says it all when he recently stated that as a mega-billionaire he pays the lowest tax rate of his life; lower than when he delivered newspapers on a bike as a kid. Now that was years ago, what about now?

Right now, under the Bush tax policies which have given a bonanza to the richest of the rich shifting burdens to the rest of us, Warren Buffet's cleaning lady pays a higher rate of tax than he does, as do I, and as does almost anyone who may read this page. Why aren't we calling for an end to this nonsense? For one thing, McCain tells everyone that Democrats will raise tax on families (Sure, John, sure they will... like when Bill Clinton fought for the Earned Income Tax Credit, temporarily evening things out a little for us). McCain tells us and even though the fact-checks tell us different, some of us believe him, like some of us believe Obama is a muslim, or that he is the most liberal Senator (all proven to be inaccurate by objective sources). We are told also that tax breaks for the rich and for oil companies will come back to us, even if it is a trickle. But we haven't gotten a trickle more, we have fallen behind, and we haven't see a dime of the tax cuts help lower prices at the pump or for heating oil. Instead we pay more, as much more as the amount by which profits have gone up for big oil, but I am sure that is just a coincidence, right Senator McCain?

That is the reality out on Main Street, on Wall St, on my street, and on every street; the GOP has promised again and again that if the rich were cut a break, they could and would make us all rich along with them. If we all sacrificed to pay more than our share to allow the rich to keep more than their share, the Republicans told us that a rising tide of prosperity would raise us all. The problem is that, the money did not trickle down, it pooled at the top. The investments were not funneled back into America, but increasingly sent to China and elsewhere along with the lost jobs. We are like victims of a batterer who tells us that next time it will be different, and offers us tacky bouquets of empty rhetoric and sophistry. "Subsidizing the rich to help the poor" joins "Destroying the village to save it" in the annals of lies told to the American people by the right wing of the modern Republican party.

The GOP, and John McCain especially, love to tell stories. One of the oldest chestnuts that is dusted-off for every election is the old "Democrats raise your taxes and make deficits" line. Obama will significantly lower taxes, not raise them, for almost every single American, as well as many small businesses. Obama offers tax incentives to individuals and companies that invest in jobs, clean energy, and other positive steps which help us all. The last Democratic President gave us the Earned-Income Tax Credit, to help the middle class, and still did away with budget deficits and paid down more of the National Debt in one year than any Republican has paid-down in their entire life. McCain offers policies which will lead not only to more debt, but to a starvation of cities, towns, and state-aid which can only lead to even higher tax burdens than now for the middle-class who will see state and local taxes hiked, and local services pared back at a further loss of jobs and property values.

Obama plans to get the revenue needed for the jobs, energy, and recovery plans by closing the loopholes which have rewarded firms for sending jobs and capital overseas. He would adjust the tax code so that the most wealthy pay their fair share and working people, the middle class backbone of this country can survive and get ahead again. McCain wants to permanently enshrine the Bush tax code which has brought about the largest re-distribution of wealth in our Nation's history, from the poor and middle-class to the top 1% of the economic pyramid. Buffet deserves credit for telling it like it is, even though he has reaped billions that he does not need from these flawed policies. The scarier thing is that now, nobody is doing very well--not even the rich. Oh, they're still rich, but with this crisis, there really is is no net wealth being generated, rather it is dwindling away as the house of cards crashes down.

It is time to end the fiction that McCain and his cronies perpetuate, before it is too late to save this country. Without a break from the destructive policies and practices that the greed culture has enshrined the last years, we will see the continued decline of the middle class, and of what once made America great. We need the plan Barack Obama is offering, so that we can reclaim this country's strength as an economic giant, capable of driving innovation and progress around the world. Yes we can do it, Barack Obama and Joe Biden Believe it, Warren Buffet believes it, I believe it, and so should you.

[purplewings]

You are right on. I can't stand the Bush administration. This country is screwed up almost beyond recognition. Patriot Act=government power. We need to take it back. Osama Obama is not the answer. Is it me or does it seem that this whole election thing seems to be a farce anyway. Seems to me that the media has primed us for an Obama admin.

It's not just you, believe me. Everyone could see the media flow from the beginning. Media is the 'deciders'. While knowing the sheep won't take time to look too deeply they bring out only what's convenient to their cause.

Bush sucks as a leader, but then what other president has had to deal with an in-country terrorist attack like we had on September 11th? Perhaps if Bill Clinton had done something when he had Bin Laden, it wouldn't have culminated into this mess.

Perhaps the Democrats who demanded that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac not be regulated should be held responsible for the market crash - not Bush or McCain who tried to get it regulated back in 2004.

It's easy to make Bush responsible for everything and forget that Congress had to approve, even though when it turned sour, they tried to pretend they had nothing to do with it.- as usual.

The Democrats don't smell like roses, but they're trying to make people believe that's the case - and some actually do believe it.

[inthebox]

Warren Buffet Says: I Pay Less Tax Than My Cleaning Lady, Or When I Was Paper Boy -- McCain/Palin Have Even Worse Deal in Store For Middle Class


It is one thing for me, decidedly a denizen of that middle class being hurt by the Republican philosophy, to complain about the unfairness of my dwindling real income. It is one thing also, for me, to resent that smaller income being taxed-away even more to subsidize lower taxes for the wealthy already, and even more if McCain were elected. It is another thing entirely for a whistle-blower inside the economic elite to point out the crime of asking struggling families to pay more tax, just so that oil companies can pay less, in spite of their record-profits. When one adds price-gouging, and collusion by these firms that have abrogated all responsibility as corporate citizens, the policies of Bush and the would-be policies of John Mccain become all the more inappropriate. This system is the definition of perverse incentives: rewarding behavior by citizens or corporations that is damaging to society. But as I say, it is one thing for me, an ordinary American, to be angry since I am directly hurt like most Americans, but is it truly a detriment to the economy as a whole?

The McCain philosophy, like Bush's is to have the tax code we have now, with the middle class paying more and the wealthy getting away without paying their fair share, and giving tax breaks to the worst corporate citizens, while the good guys cover the cost. Don't take my word for it if you don't want. Warren Buffet will, perhaps, be more convincing than me to certain of those voters whose first impulse is to buy-into McCain's version of events. Buffet says it all when he recently stated that as a mega-billionaire he pays the lowest tax rate of his life; lower than when he delivered newspapers on a bike as a kid. Now that was years ago, what about now?

Right now, under the Bush tax policies which have given a bonanza to the richest of the rich shifting burdens to the rest of us, Warren Buffet's cleaning lady pays a higher rate of tax than he does, as do I, and as does almost anyone who may read this page. Why aren't we calling for an end to this nonsense? For one thing, McCain tells everyone that Democrats will raise tax on families (Sure, John, sure they will...like when Bill Clinton fought for the Earned Income Tax Credit, temporarily evening things out a little for us). McCain tells us and even though the fact-checks tell us different, some of us believe him, like some of us believe Obama is a muslim, or that he is the most liberal Senator (all proven to be inaccurate by objective sources). We are told also that tax breaks for the rich and for oil companies will come back to us, even if it is a trickle. But we haven't gotten a trickle more, we have fallen behind, and we haven't see a dime of the tax cuts help lower prices at the pump or for heating oil. Instead we pay more, as much more as the amount by which profits have gone up for big oil, but I am sure that is just a coincidence, right Senator McCain?

That is the reality out on Main Street, on Wall St, on my street, and on every street; the GOP has promised again and again that if the rich were cut a break, they could and would make us all rich along with them. If we all sacrificed to pay more than our share to allow the rich to keep more than their share, the Republicans told us that a rising tide of prosperity would raise us all. The problem is that, the money did not trickle down, it pooled at the top. The investments were not funneled back into America, but increasingly sent to China and elsewhere along with the lost jobs. We are like victims of a batterer who tells us that next time it will be different, and offers us tacky bouquets of empty rhetoric and sophistry. "Subsidizing the rich to help the poor" joins "Destroying the village to save it" in the annals of lies told to the American people by the right wing of the modern Republican party.

The GOP, and John McCain especially, love to tell stories. One of the oldest chestnuts that is dusted-off for every election is the old "Democrats raise your taxes and make deficits" line. Obama will significantly lower taxes, not raise them, for almost every single American, as well as many small businesses. Obama offers tax incentives to individuals and companies that invest in jobs, clean energy, and other positive steps which help us all. The last Democratic President gave us the Earned-Income Tax Credit, to help the middle class, and still did away with budget deficits and payed down more of the National Debt in one year than any Republican has paid-down in their entire life. McCain offers policies which will lead not only to more debt, but to a starvation of cities, towns, and state-aid which can only lead to even higher tax burdens than now for the middle-class who will see state and local taxes hiked, and local services pared back at a further loss of jobs and property values.

Obama plans to get the revenue needed for the jobs, energy, and recovery plans by closing the loopholes which have rewarded firms for sending jobs and capital overseas. He would adjust the tax code so that the most wealthy pay their fair share and working people, the middle class backbone of this country can survive and get ahead again. McCain wants to permanently enshrine the Bush tax code which has brought about the largest re-distribution of wealth in our Nation's history, from the poor and middle-class to the top 1% of the economic pyramid. Buffet deserves credit for telling it like it is, even though he has reaped billions that he does not need from these flawed policies. The scarier thing is that now, nobody is doing very well--not even the rich. Oh, they're still rich, but with this crisis, there really is is no net wealth being generated, rather it is dwindling away as the house of cards crashes down.

It is time to end the fiction that McCain and his cronies perpetuate, before it is too late to save this country. Without a break from the destructive policies and practices that the greed culture has enshrined the last years, we will see the continued decline of the middle class, and of what once made America great. We need the plan Barack Obama is offering, so that we can reclaim this country's strength as an economic giant, capable of driving innovation and progress around the world. Yes we can do it, Barack Obama and Joe Biden Believe it, Warren Buffet believes it, I believe it, and so should you.

And now for the facts:

2007 Federal Tax Rate Schedules

Notice how the more you make the greater the percentage taken by the government.



http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/f...l%20charts.swf

under Percent of federal income tax paid by each group:

top 1% = 37%
top 10% = 68%
top 25% = 85%
bottom 50% = 3%

under percent of total AGI earned by each group

top 1% = 16%
top 10% = 42%
top 25% = 64 %
bottom = 14 %

so... the top 1 % pay 37% though they have 16 % of AGI
the bottom 50% pay 3% though they have 14 % of AGI

THIS CONTRADICTS YOUR CLAIM THAT THE RICH DO NOT PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE - if anything they pay much more.


As to Warren Buffet - that is what he says. I would actually like to see his tax returns compared to that of his cleaning lady - just the facts and the proof - talk is cheap.
If he feels this is true - did he not act in good conscious and pay his fair share by sending the IRS more of his money?


As to gas prices : A Primer On Gasoline Prices

Notice how taxes are the same or more than the % profit per gallon. And what exactly has the government done to provide this product?

As to supply side or trickle down have you ever heard of trickle up? How does a poor person provide a job?

How does Obama plan to get revenue - confiscatory tax policy.
Why would multinational corp stay in the US and pay 36-39% tax under Obama when they can move to Ireland - along with their American jobs and tax base revenue - and pay less than 15%?

[BABRAM]

What do you think about that incredible spending from a man claiming to be a cost cutter?

Much of what Obama, and all candidates, past and present, have spent is contributions that was given them for the sole purpose to campaign. I'm sure if John McCain would just wave the white flag of surrender tomorrow, instead of about 8 pm on November 4th, the Obama campaign wouldn't have to buy up more commercial spots.

[asking]

Does it seem wrong to anyone other than myself, that Obama who preaches to spread the wealth in taxing certain groups of citizens, retired persons, persons with stock funds, small businesses making over $200,000.......and giving this money to people who won't or can't work (We already pay welfare from our taxes) but has just spent in excess of $5 million for a half hour infomercial on several channels prime time, as well as continuous campaign ads throughout the day. Even if this money is legitimate as part of his campaign chest, so are my stocks and annuities that he wants me to spread around. What do you think about that incredible spending from a man claiming to be a cost cutter?

I think it means he's serious about running for president. He's not doing anything wrong in spending campaign funds in the course of campaigning. In this country, that's how it's done. If you want campaign finance reform, you should tell your elected officials that you want that and work towards it. McCain is using his budget differently.

(And I don't think Obama wants to give your stocks to someone else. That's just silly, like saying he wants to take your house, or give your dog or cat away. He's a politician, not a criminal. Unless your annual income after deductions is over $200,000, why would you worry? And if it is that high after all your deductions, why would you worry? :))

[Skell]

You whinge about $5million, yet probably don't have a problem with the hundreds of billions of dollars the US economy is in debt for, or the trillions of dollars your man Bush's two wars have cost... Weird!

[Wondergirl]

Socialism is wonderful. Even Hitler thought so back in his day. 'Let's knock those rich Jews down and take their stuff. We deserve it as more than they do' So what if they were the ones who worked for it.

How could anyone interested in this election NOT have read up on Socialism? Some are still around that remember living it....(no, not me)

Socialism includes the creation of an egalitarian society that says all people are to be treated as equals and have the same political and civil rights. In the early days of our nation, only propertied white men, the wealthy and educated ones, were allowed to vote. After Andrew Jackson's presidency, there was a push to give all white freemen the vote, even if they didn't own property. How long did it take before people of color and women were allowed to vote?

Doesn't Christianity practice socialism? For background, read Amos and the Gospels and the Book of Acts. The perfect socialist community is a monastery. A friend was hysterical the day she found out that a criminal who turned to Christ on his deathbed would get to heaven just as quickly as she would after spending her entire life in the service of her church.

[tomder55]

about our "progressive tax system";a European group has determined that the US already has the most "progressive " tax system in the free world .

.. a new study on inequality by researchers at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Paris reveals that when it comes to household taxes (income taxes and employee social security contributions) the U.S. "has the most progressive tax system and collects the largest share of taxes from the richest 10% of the population."

.. the U.S. collects more household tax revenue from the top 10 percent of households than any other country and extracts the most from that income group relative to their share of the nation's income.
Of course, these measures do not include the litany of other taxes households pay in each country, such as Value Added Taxes, corporate income taxes and excise taxes, but they do give a good indication that our system places a heavier tax burden on high-income households than other industrialized countries.

The study also shows that while most countries rely more on cash transfers than taxes to redistribute income, the U.S. stands out as "achieving greater redistribution through the tax system than through cash transfers

The Tax Foundation - News To Obama: The OECD Says The United States Has The Most Progressive Tax System

Re: spending his campaign money.

I see nothing wrong with it either. Part of me is pleased that McCain is being burnt by the anti-free speech reforms he introduced into the process with McCain/Feingold "reforms" .

However I think it is very telling that one of Obama's 1st pledges in this campaign was to live by the rules of Federal Matching limits .He swiftly broke that pledge ;and most likely will do "a Clinton" on his proposed middle-class tax cuts also.

[purplewings]

And now for the facts:

2007 Federal Tax Rate Schedules

Notice how the more you make the greater the percentage taken by the government.



http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/f...l%20charts.swf

under Percent of federal income tax paid by each group:

top 1% = 37%
top 10% = 68%
top 25% = 85%
bottom 50% = 3%

under percent of total AGI earned by each group

top 1% = 16%
top 10% = 42%
top 25% = 64 %
bottom = 14 %

so.... the top 1 % pay 37% though they have 16 % of AGI
the bottom 50% pay 3% though they have 14 % of AGI

THIS CONTRADICTS YOUR CLAIM THAT THE RICH DO NOT PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE - if anything they pay much more.


As to Warren Buffet - that is what he says. I would actually like to see his tax returns compared to that of his cleaning lady - just the facts and the proof - talk is cheap.
If he feels this is true - did he not act in good conscious and pay his fair share by sending the IRS more of his money?


As to gas prices : A Primer On Gasoline Prices

Notice how taxes are the same or more than the % profit per gallon. And what exactly has the government done to provide this product?

As to supply side or trickle down have you ever heard of trickle up? How does a poor person provide a job?

How does Obama plan to get revenue - confiscatory tax policy.
Why would multinational corp stay in the US and pay 36-39% tax under Obama when they can move to Ireland - along with their American jobs and tax base revenue - and pay less than 15%?

This is a wonderful explanation. I posted it on my 360 blog but the Obamamites don't want to hear what actually is happening. They live in lalaland.

[NeedKarma]

That's an awful lot of people in lalaland!

[RickJ]

So you're saying if Obama wins the election vote the majority of the people are bad, wrong and false simply because they don't agree with you? Sounds like it to me.

Bad or False? No.

Wrong? Well, I'm not sure that's the right answer either.

If Obama wins, that simply means that an agenda leaning towards socialism has been decided upon by the electoral college... and probably by a majority of voters.

[NeedKarma]

I guess you'll have to suck it Rick, just like the people did when you guys voted him into power.

[inthebox]

Socialism includes the creation of an egalitarian society that says all people are to be treated as equals and have the same political and civil rights. In the early days of our nation, only propertied white men, the wealthy and educated ones, were allowed to vote. After Andrew Jackson’s presidency, there was a push to give all white freemen the vote, even if they didn’t own property. How long did it take before people of color and women were allowed to vote?

Doesn't Christianity practice socialism? For background, read Amos and the Gospels and the Book of Acts. The perfect socialist community is a monastery. A friend was hysterical the day she found out that a criminal who turned to Christ on his deathbed would get to heaven just as quickly as she would after spending her entire life in the service of her church.

Christianity practices charity.

In order for Acts 4:32 to be possible
- The US would be acknowledged Christian - something against the establishment clause and can you imagine the uproar - we can't even utter God in the pledge or have 10 Commandments in courtrooms.

Certainly - in each Church community- this can be practiced.

Instead of the gov and taxpayors bailing out banks and the foreclosures, why don't collections be taken for those in the flock that are in financial trouble - this happens at my church:)

And for those outside the church - Salvation Army - God's Pantry to name some.

For me to bless others because God has blessed me, comes from the heart; not from government mandate.

[asking]

Instead of the gov and taxpayors bailing out banks and the foreclosures, why don't collections be taken for those in the flock that are in financial trouble - this happens at my church:)

That's what taxes are, collections for those in financial trouble. They pay for unemployment insurance, social security, medicare, etc. Of course, taxes are also used to support our military and to build roads, airports, the internet, etc--things that everyone benefits from, not just those in need. Paying taxes is patriotic and also christian. You don't have to choose. :)

As for the bailout, it's not clear yet how much will go to mortgages. Of the $700 billion given to financial institutions so far, $40 billion is going to a handful of executives who are owed various bonuses and deferred compensation. They are apparently getting paid right off the top, so they don't have to wait or worry about not getting their "due."

You read it right. Forty billion dollars to just a few people whose bad decisions helped wreck our economy. Hopefully, we can at least agree that's pretty offensive.