Politics

[roxchick93]

^THANK YOU ROSS!! =]

for setting something straight

 

some people on here are... wow.

[Atomsk]

*Giant gasp of air*

 

and here we go....

 

1. Service in the arm forces does not qualify one to be a leader of a country, that is irrelevant. His experience in the Senate in relation to how he would do as president is irrelevant. Intelligence and experience are subjective matters. Someone could be in the military and be unintelligent does that mean they would make a great president just because they were in the military?

 

2. I prefer an increase in taxes when it results in more benefits, look at France they pay much higher taxes and everyone gets free health care. No one their complains about high taxes because it results in a better life for everyone. Raising taxes slightly does not result in mass unemployment, do some research higher taxes has never resulted in higher unemployment rates its a SOLID FACT, I did personal research on this topic with my economics professor who worked for the U.S government but don't take my word for it do your own research and you will find the same result. I can not stress this enough there is no correlation between higher taxes and a raise in unemployment.

 

3. Everything in this paragraph is purely speculation and media hype. Being associated with someone does not make that person evil. If you believe in guilty by association then nobody is perfect because just about everyone knows someone who is pretty bad. Not to mention McCain spoke at an Acorn rally. Let me repeat that. One of the biggest accusations of his campaign was about Obamas association with Acorn, when McCain himself spoke at an Acorn rally hailing the people of Acorn as great people who represent what America is all about.

 

4. You say McCain would have brought our troops home with victory, so you must be some kind of military expert who knows the exact situations in Iraq and what is the best decision. The bottom line is that whole situation is not an easy solution, Obama wants to get our troops out of there but he has made it clear that we can not simply leave a mess that we have made without cleaning it up.

 

5. If you followed anything at all besides biased news sources you would see that he voted "Present" on those issues, under the rules of Illinois legislature only a vote of "yes" counts towards the passage of a bill. Voting present instead of no is a part of a strategy used when determining certain sensitive legislative issues such as abortion.

 

*yawn* anything else?

 

Noice, a political thread . Just the thing I need to waste my time x].

 

Anyhoo.. guess I'll post a retort in a similar fashion

 

1. I would argue that military experience is quite valid when considering one for the presidency. After all, we are electing sed person as, first and foremost, the Commander in Chief. I would be much more comfortable with McCain leading our troops than Obama (although McCain was not my favorite candidate; neither of them were, in fact.). Experience in the Senate does not help either candidate though. That's not an executive position. The President is not legislating laws, as Senators do. Rather, he leads our country; senatorial experience helps neither candidate. But eh, this issue was not that significant in the election anyway, seeing as most went to Obama. I'd rather not talk about the argument between two candidates, for the election has already passed.

 

2. You bring many aspects regarding taxes in here, so I guess I'll pick at them one by one.

 

a) There's no way I want the government controlling my healthcare. Ever. Oh, and as a preface, I'm coming at this ideologically. No time to reference facts, although I could find some if someone wants me to. Anyway, I would argue in complete contrast to the statement, "because it results in a better life for everyone." Socialism (yes, universal healthcare is socialism...) promises equality. However, the actual quality of that equality is not so much defined. Because let's face it, the government is not an efficient machine. Look at how bloated and inefficient the U.S. government is now. Look at how the USPS was before the introduction of private competition. Look at the problems with Medicare(sp?), and the fact that Social Security is backed by millions of IOUs, backed by the "full faith and credit of the U.S. Government!". We've put so much more on our plate than we can handle, and if I may, what was intended for our government to do. You want that in charge of your health? But back to healthcare: there is a huge, overinflated crisis that biased officials and spreading. As they report, there are currently 47 million people that are without medical insurance. Let me just say though, that that fact is a bit skewed, since some of those uninsured people choose not to get healthcare on their own prerogative, and some are illegal immigrants. But let's just use that number anyway.

 

Even with all those considered, that number is not large compared to the total U.S. population. So, it seems that it would be easier to just give all of our money to the federal government to pay for our healthcare, and then take care of those who can't pay for it, right?

 

Not so fast. If our system was to be truly universal, we would offer healthcare to all. That means everyone. Now, how many people in the U.S. don't pay taxes? some say mid 20s, others say 40%, and some claim that under Obama, it will raise to 48%. To be more realistic though, I believe the number to be at about a third of the population. So, that's roughly 33%.

 

Even considering that all the presently uninsured pay taxes, they are about 15-16% percent of the population. When comparing that to 33%, the number isn't so big anymore. And here's the beauty of universal healthcare. Everyone gets treatment! Everyone gets a doctor! Everyone gets something, even if they aren't paying all those pesky taxes. So, what, are we going to hike up our taxes to cover the third of those who don't pay them? That's gonna cost a lot more in taxes than what our parents pay annually for health insurance. Paying more money for something that will be run by the inefficient government, thus becoming a system that too will then inherently become sluggish. Economically sound? Nope.

 

We should be looking for private ways to get us out of this healthcare "crisis". Tort reform would do it. Put limits on ambulance chasers, and stop hiking up hospital prices and liability. That's only the beginning, too. (Oh, and some of those people should just trade the BMW in for the health insurance. And if they choose not to, and get sick, well then that sucks..?).

 

You also bring up the notion that taxes do not "raise unemployment".

 

Our economy is in trouble. If we don't move to lift burdens on our market, then we're toast. So let's think about it:

 

Company x has ten employees. And they're doing great. The ten employees are happy, and the company is quite pleased with their profits. Soon, the company starts handing our raises, giving broader benefits, and works to make the employees lives better. Well, the economy is in trouble now. So they're cutting back a little, which is fine, because their jobs still exist, for now. But the government comes in and says, "Well to give rebate checks to these *cough* nontaxespayers *cough* we'll need an increase in your corporate income taxes. Sounds good? No? Too bad. Fork it over." So now the company has to continue to supply a salary to these employees, and also needs to give their earned money to the government.

 

Well, the company doesn't want to go out of business. So, they axe two employees. They weren't that necessary anyway. But now those two people are without jobs. Also, the company moves to decrease production a little, just to play it safe. Well, now less productivity is injected into the markets, less people are buying goods, and more people are without jobs. Sounds like recession? Yup. 'Cause it is.

 

So, why in the world would we increase taxes on job suppliers? God only knows. Maybe it's to reward those who make poor choices. I dunno. Ask Barack.

 

3. I kind of agree. Yaknow, the whole Ayers thing is bull. So are his other associations. The only one I buy, and do so adamantly, is his relationship with Wright. There's no denying their relationship. And Barack had to have heard his ideas in church before. If my pastor started to shout that stuff, or start talking about socialism, or American terrorism, I'd leave. Barack can agree if he wishes. But that makes me not like him. As for his other associations, I think it's all bull. If the relationship is valid though, guilt by association is completely acceptable.

 

4. I don't think Obama is a military expert either, just saying. But I might be the only person around still saying the invasion of Iraq was a good idea. That's just me though. Shows national leaders not to refuse UN resolutions, and not to play pranks on the recently attacked U.S. And there are other good reasons to, but that's for another debate. Point is, we need to focus on getting the job done in Iraq, cleaning up the horrible mess we've made, and letting them run their own country. I'm kinda sick of being there too. But I think it's necessary that we stay.

 

5. We need a president who can make tough decisions. Voting present doesn't work when running a country. Done.

 

 

Well, hope that's good. Sorry if I offended anyone . I'm not trying to anyway =\

[lilley_1]

^ well i was trying to let this thread die but you very valid points and explain the problems with obamas tax and healthcare plan better than anyone i know (including myself). therefore i'm giving you rep (even though i only agree with about 90% of what you said).

[OK!doitnow]

if anyone here says free healthcare is bad, you are idiots, the only thing that will change is when you leave hospital you wont have a nice big bill to pay, rather your taxes will be raised a small amount. obama's view on taxation are a lot like what most of europe have now anyway.

[Atomsk]

^ well i was trying to let this thread die but you very valid points and explain the problems with obamas tax and healthcare plan better than anyone i know (including myself). therefore i'm giving you rep (even though i only agree with about 90% of what you said).

 

 

@_@ sorry, it seemed like the posts were recent enough to respond to. Didn't mean to bring back a thread that people wanted gone .

 

But thanks though .

[Itsgettingcloser]

@_@ sorry, it seemed like the posts were recent enough to respond to. Didn't mean to bring back a thread that people wanted gone .

 

But thanks though .

 

Don't apologize you made a good post, one of the few in here that was actually able to finally give some valid feedback to my posts.

 

Still there are a few things that I disagree with.

 

Universal health care works much of Europe uses it, granted their culture and way of life is somewhat different than ours it's not worth just completely throwing the idea under the bus. Many countries have had universal health care for decades. In my original post I was not backing the implementation so much as explaining the benefits of increased taxes, because nobody ever thinks anything good can come out of it.

 

Regarding unemployment again the statistics do not show any correlation between higher taxes resulting in higher unemployment. Unemployment is fairly cyclical but is mainly due to very poor management rather than a slight increase in taxes the statistics just do not support that argument at all and never have. It is a common and easy argument for politicians to use though. Just because 2 things sound like they should correlate does not mean that is the reason at all.

 

As for Iraq I don't care what another country has done, getting yourself involved in a war in which you have no allies or additional support is a terrible idea. Invading a country and putting peoples lives on the line has to be the absolute last resort.

 

As for voting present saying abortion yes or no is a terrible way to make a tough decision. I would rather have a president who weighs the pros and cons rather than making irrational decisions and then tote that he is "the president that can make tough decisions and get shit done" even if his decisions is not very wise or thought out.

[roxchick93]

if anyone here says free healthcare is bad, you are idiots, the only thing that will change is when you leave hospital you wont have a nice big bill to pay, rather your taxes will be raised a small amount. obama's view on taxation are a lot like what most of europe have now anyway.

 

universal health care. yea it sounds great. but its not that great.

for example people in canada have universal health care. if they have a big operation or something they come down to america to get it because in canada there is a huge line of people waiting to get something done and people cant always wait months for operations. if there is universal health care people can just go in for anything even if its not that important. big waits at hospitals and medical centers and more taxes.

they shouldnt take peoples money to pay for every one else. if i earn money. i want to keep it. not give to it to the gov.

 

heres wat i think should be done. if people like you want universal health care soo badly then donate some money. dont force people to give there money.

[Itsgettingcloser]

universal health care. yea it sounds

 

heres wat i think should be done. if people like you want universal health care soo badly then donate some money. dont force people to give there money.

 

 

 

Soooo you mean buy health insurance....

 

Oh and I am just curious, your sig says fuck obama.*leaves U.S. for 4 years* Where exactly would you move? Not Canada right cause you just said their healthcare system sucks, not Europe cause most countries over their have universal health care not to mention much higher taxes than here. Australia I think they have a very subsidized system where the government pays a lot of the costs. China, primarily communist, I dunno I guess you can go live in the Desert or something, have fun.

[roxchick93]

Soooo you mean buy health insurance....

 

Oh and I am just curious, your sig says fuck obama.*leaves U.S. for 4 years* Where exactly would you move? Not Canada right cause you just said their healthcare system sucks, not Europe cause most countries over their have universal health care not to mention much higher taxes than here. Australia I think they have a very subsidized system where the government pays a lot of the costs. China, primarily communist, I dunno I guess you can go live in the Desert or something, have fun.

 

haha. wow u seriously took that seriously?

i dont hate any country for there universal health care. im just not for it cuase i think its stupid.

if i could i would move to any where where obama isnt president. i would go to london. i mean come on they got the coolest accents ever!!

haha.

[Atomsk]

 

Regarding unemployment again the statistics do not show any correlation between higher taxes resulting in higher unemployment. Unemployment is fairly cyclical but is mainly due to very poor management rather than a slight increase in taxes the statistics just do not support that argument at all and never have. It is a common and easy argument for politicians to use though. Just because 2 things sound like they should correlate does not mean that is the reason at all.

 

 

 

Tax cuts in previous administrations have lead us out of economic downfalls. It makes sense to then assume that, if tax cuts help to lower unemployment, tax increases will thus lend to increase in unemployment

 

If you go with the notion that unemployment is just cyclical, then I suppose that statement doesn't really help my argument, though. It's strikingly interesting to me though that, when taxes were massively lifted before in history, unemployment decreased.

 

And if I may go so far, when taxes were imposed, such as in FDR's New Deal, unemployment soared. I'm not so sure if the two are related in FDR's case, but I cannot believe that tax manipulation has no correlation between unemployment, business incentive, and such of the same.

 

Bottom line though, in our present scenario, tax increases make no sense. But that just brings us to our original debate.

 

But my view on taxes are not purely economical; I tend to look at taxes politically as well. As in, taxes are another way for the government to get into my life and say how my earned money will be spent (10 dollars an hour man!)

 

There are appropriate roles of the government, but it's healthy to be skeptical towards any new tax, tax increase, or regulation.

 

 

*EDIT:

Wait, and regarding your Iraq comment, I believe we do have allies fighting with us. Granted, they are not in large numbers, but it is our war. But whatever, I'm not foreign policy buff. I stick to domestic issues =\

[Itsgettingcloser]

Tax cuts in previous administrations have lead us out of economic downfalls. It makes sense to then assume that, if tax cuts help to lower unemployment, tax increases will thus lend to increase in unemployment

 

If you go with the notion that unemployment is just cyclical, then I suppose that statement doesn't really help my argument, though. It's strikingly interesting to me though that, when taxes were massively lifted before in history, unemployment decreased.

 

And if I may go so far, when taxes were imposed, such as in FDR's New Deal, unemployment soared. I'm not so sure if the two are related in FDR's case, but I cannot believe that tax manipulation has no correlation between unemployment, business incentive, and such of the same.

 

Bottom line though, in our present scenario, tax increases make no sense. But that just brings us to our original debate.

 

But my view on taxes are not purely economical; I tend to look at taxes politically as well. As in, taxes are another way for the government to get into my life and say how my earned money will be spent (10 dollars an hour man!)

 

There are appropriate roles of the government, but it's healthy to be skeptical towards any new tax, tax increase, or regulation.

 

 

*EDIT:

Wait, and regarding your Iraq comment, I believe we do have allies fighting with us. Granted, they are not in large numbers, but it is our war. But whatever, I'm not foreign policy buff. I stick to domestic issues =\

 

 

People are getting really bent out of shape about this tax increase yet they have no knowledge at all about the subject. First of, historically tax cuts being better for the economy has never been more false. Secondly, which is probably the most basic concept imaginable, we cannot continue to cut taxes and spend money we do not have. There are entire books written on how higher taxes resulting in higher unemployment is a myth, I highly suggest you read one.

 

Try this for starters http://www.cbpp.org/9-27-06tax.htm Although I would recommend reading something more credible, plenty of books exist. Then you can be one of the few and informed.

 

Also our foreign policy issues can have an impact on our domestic issues.

[Atomsk]

People are getting really bent out of shape about this tax increase yet they have no knowledge at all about the subject. First of, historically tax cuts being better for the economy has never been more false. Secondly, which is probably the most basic concept imaginable, we cannot continue to cut taxes and spend money we do not have. There are entire books written on how higher taxes resulting in higher unemployment is a myth, I highly suggest you read one.

 

Try this for starters http://www.cbpp.org/9-27-06tax.htm Although I would recommend reading something more credible, plenty of books exist. Then you can be one of the few and informed.

 

Also our foreign policy issues can have an impact on our domestic issues.

 

Meh, I don't feel like posting a long response. So I'll just throw data at you now .

 

And, to clear it up, I actually do have some knowledge on this subject. I've done my fair share of reading up on taxes and the economy .

 

This one talks about the Bush Tax cuts, however basic tax cut principles are found here:

 

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/bg2001.cfm

 

And this one lays out the beautiful supply-side economic model:

 

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=1120&full=1

 

 

You can find some graphs showing economic growth in more than just a short term.

 

Also, hopefully you haven't discredited the Laffer Curve. That's basically the foundation of my arguments, at least when dealing with tax revenues.

[Sophie_*!]

I love how friendly everyone in this topic is.

I don't know anywhere near enough about American politics, but I'm glad Obama won cos McCain seemed kinda weird, and Sarah Palin scared the shit outta me. And she was a creationist. (Im just taking the piss, I have nothing against religious folk. But it's all fiction.)

And theres nothing wrong with abortion. I saw this redneck woman on tv talking about Obama saying he was a baby killer, and thats a load of shit. Just because she didn't wear a condom and has about 12 kids cos she can't control whats falling out of her, doesn't mean that people who maybe can't cope with a baby can't have an abortion.

Now, being a non American citizen and knowing fuck all about this situation, I think I win.

[Ross]

I love how friendly everyone in this topic is.

I don't know anywhere near enough about American politics, but I'm glad Obama won cos McCain seemed kinda weird, and Sarah Palin scared the shit outta me. And she was a creationist. (Im just taking the piss, I have nothing against religious folk. But it's all fiction.)

And theres nothing wrong with abortion. I saw this redneck woman on tv talking about Obama saying he was a baby killer, and thats a load of shit. Just because she didn't wear a condom and has about 12 kids cos she can't control whats falling out of her, doesn't mean that people who maybe can't cope with a baby can't have an abortion.

Now, being a non American citizen and knowing fuck all about this situation, I think I win.

 

You don't.

[Sophie_*!]

Em, shut up.

I pretty much reckon I do.

[Ross]

Pfffffffffffffffft

[lilley_1]

bump

 

possible new topics:

the bush legacy (good or bad)

obama as a presdient i.e. stimulus package , gitmo etc.

tim geithner and other cabinet picks

general issues (like gun control , education etc.)

[travel_hymn]

Obama as a President since it's happening right now XD

[Starlight]

What's Obama's plan by the way ?

 

I've heard him talk a lot on the changes he'd like to make, but not on what's he's going to do to make it happen.

[roxchick93]

obama is going to be the death of us. i mean he is going to get rid of gitmo and bring the terroist to the U.S.?!?!?!?

 

and how and he mess up getting sworn in? in 38 frickin words.

he's been pres for less than a week and he messing things up.

 

i mean. he won accept it. i was gunna give him a chance.

but i think that chance is up.

 

 

and i dont like his plan for the education.

[indabisofmisery]

What's Obama's plan by the way ?

 

I've heard him talk a lot on the changes he'd like to make, but not on what's he's going to do to make it happen.

 

exactly.

[lilley_1]

What's Obama's plan by the way ?

 

I've heard him talk a lot on the changes he'd like to make, but not on what's he's going to do to make it happen.

 

lets see :

 

1. Nationalize the banks (because of the bailouts the government now has a share in the banks)

2. Nationalize Healthcare (sounds good but means lesser quality of healthcare and the rest of us are gonna have to pay for the 45 million that aren't insured right now)

3. Close Gitmo within a year (means terrorists will end up in republican state prisions cuz no democrat will take them cuz its "unsafe").

4. Push at least an $825 pork-filled stimulus plan (most of it doesn't come into play for years where we have a 99% chance of being out of the current recession. If you read the specifics you'll realize that most of it is pork ironically).

5. Pass the Freedom of Choice Act (this act not only allows doctors to kill living breathing babies that survived botched abortions but also makes it so that pretty much everyone can perform one)

6. Appease the terrorists like Neville Chamberlain appeased Hitler (see where peace brought us)

7. Make the US eco-friendly. However it is not possible to be free of foreign oil in ten years, like Obama wants us to be, especially since he won't let us drill in Alaska.

8. Robin Hood philosophy - take from the "rich" and give to the "poor". remember when Obama said the only people to see raised taxes were those making a quarter million or more. Well, he lied. The new cutoff is $75,000. Basically hes gonna take away from middle class families (yes, $75,000 is middle class here) and give it to those on welfare and/or spend all their money and smoke and drinks (maybe if they wouldn't spend their money on drugs , they wouldn't have to have 2 jobs).

 

I'm sure theres more but thats all I can think of for now.

[Sanguis Dominus]

That's not exactly an unbias, impartial list.

 

You roughly described a few things he's going to do using your negative opinion on Obama to word them to make them sound like negative actions. Do I sense a bit of bitterness that he got voted in?

 

Yes. I think I do.

[Itsgettingcloser]

That's not exactly an unbias, impartial list.

 

You roughly described a few things he's going to do using your negative opinion on Obama to word them to make them sound like negative actions. Do I sense a bit of bitterness that he got voted in?

 

Yes. I think I do.

 

Yeh no kidding its really not that on the surface at all.

[travel_hymn]

No, I think she was being fair here, everything she said is everything he's mentioned at least once. #8 bothers me like fuck though, he kept changing the meaning of rich. =| The Republicans were smart enough to point that out, but because everyone loves Obama and thinks he's awesome anyway, no one cares about his policies and lies.

 

BESIDES, you guys both said the same thing about her post, but didn't argue about anything else Obama wants to put in.