The Obama Thread (Merged x6)

[Mr Sparkle]

Because if you give the government too much power they become corrupt like China or Mexico or Russia.

Look at Bush. We gave him too much power after 9/11. We altered the social contract, he got more power, we got more security (or at least the illusion of it)...and he in turn used the power to enter us into an unjust war under false pretenses.

Some government programs are necessary. Some are corrupt. That is why ALL must be held under extreme scrutiny.

Dude Mexico is not corrupt because it "has too much power" if anything it's beholden to so many wealthy industrialists and interests that it has stopped serving it's country and only looks out for them.
get it? kind of like what is beginning to happen in YOUR country.
for instance, there is a huge telecom company in Mexico, and this company didn't want to lower it's prices, however, many US companies wanted to come over and compete which would've forced it's hand.
result? politicians passed a resolution to "protect" Mexican companies from foreign investment, and thus we can only choose from about oh....2 carriers in Mexico,
one of which carries my internet service and has prohibited the use of Voice over IP because it's "harmful to the system" (more like it would cost them money) this has nothing to do with government power and all to do with the power of the wealthy, example number 2?
we have about say.....2 big networks, that's it all others are minor to local, and the two major networks broadcast whatever they see fit, whatever fits their agenda the most, hence the reason why I have to go on the internet and check out the guardian UK in order to get actual news.
so actually, Mexico's corrupt politicians and police force are the example of giving way to much power to 2 things
Unions
Wealthy Industrialists
I won't get into the "foreign countries" deal because....well we all know who and what I'm talking about.
example number three? currently there is a campaign in Mexico to "modernize" the Oil industry in other words, remove it from state hands and put private investment and management in it, I'll give you three guesses where that investment and management is coming from.
did you know that the US agreed to buy oil from Mexico as long as they didn't develop the technology to refine gasoline?
that's right, Mexico sells the US oil and the US (and other countries sometimes) sell Mexico gasoline.
tell me that's the government having too much power!
people often just plop themselves in land and then later demand that this land be deemed legally theirs, while I had to pay for my damned house.
tell me that's too much power.
Government programs are necessary this isn't about "just" or not, it's about basic human decency and as I can further discuss with you, the Problems in Mexico have nothing to do with the government having "too much power".

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Socialism is distributing ownership of busiess and industry (and with that the profits). Being as our wealthy citizens contrl most of the capital, to divide up their profits (by taxing them more than others) and giving it to the poor, IS a form of socialism.

oh, so maybe you should not have said it was "socialism by definition" since I don;t remember Obama actually talking about redistribution of wealth in any form.

 

[Matt]

Um, creating a new tax for oil companies in order to give people $1000 rebates is an Obama plan and redistributing the wealth.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

check the "200 dlls" tax rebate from Bush in 2005 was it?
I guess Bush was an undercover Socialist?

 

[kainedamo]

Um, creating a new tax for oil companies in order to give people $1000 rebates is an Obama plan and redistributing the wealth.

There is just no debating this mentallity.

 

[Matt]

No, Bush is just taking loans from other countries to fund his rebates. He's not a socialist. He's just an idiot.

 

[Matt]

There is just no debating this mentallity.

Wow, what a cop-out.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

No what I mean is Tax rebates based upon your income is not redistribution of wealth by any means, specially if you deem that a given demographic would do better with disposable income in order to activate a given economy.
in other words, frankly? the lower middle class and poor are more likely to spend this money in goods that affect a local economy than a rich dude, who'd buy like a bently or something.
oversimplified yes? I'm not saying it's a perfect example, all I'm saying it's not "redistribution of wealth" by definition.

 

[Varient]

The "Poor" Family in America has an average of 2 Color TVs, Cable, a Microwave and 2 Working Vehicles and Cell Phones..

Well, I did say "Poor" Families, not individuals. Do you not own a TV or a Car and Cell Phone? You obviously have a computer and Internet.

A color TV.
A Car, (The other one is mothballed until Gas prices become resonable - to be sold off next year if Gas stays stupid.)
The rest varies as I juggle.
(Sigh, cable and home internet are on the way out because I hate paying for 75 channels I don't watch.)

 

[kainedamo]

Wow, what a cop-out.

How can I possibly debate your view that taxing certain demographics more than others is "socialism"??

 

[Kelly]

No what I mean is Tax rebates based upon your income is not redistribution of wealth by any means, specially if you deem that a given demographic would do better with disposable income in order to activate a given economy.
in other words, frankly? the lower middle class and poor are more likely to spend this money in goods that affect a local economy than a rich dude, who'd buy like a bently or something.
oversimplified yes? I'm not saying it's a perfect example, all I'm saying it's not "redistribution of wealth" by definition.

Well actually right now, those rebates are being spent on that 60.8% personal debt here...

 

[Matt]

When you take the money from those who have rightfully earned it, it is redistributing the wealth.

 

[moraldeficiency]

When you take the money from those who have rightfully earned it, it is redistributing the wealth.

so it's only rightfully earned wealth, IYO? I mean don't get me wrong there are few more ethical and good companies than oil companies.

 

[Matt]

How can I possibly debate your view that taxing certain demographics more than others is "socialism"??

No, thats not what I'm saying, as we already tax the wealthy far more than we tax the poor. What I'm saying is creating special taxes or higher tax RATES for one demographic so you can give it to the poor is socialism.

 

[Matt]

so it's only rightfully earned wealth, IYO? I mean don't get me wrong there are few more ethical and good companies than oil companies.

Okay...if they earn it within the confines of the law. If price gouging can be proven, I'd be all for fining them an distributinthe heafty fine amongsts the victims (the consumer).

 

[moraldeficiency]

No, thats not what I'm saying, as we already tax the wealthy far more than we tax the poor. What I'm saying is creating special taxes or higher tax RATES for one demographic so you can give it to the poor is socialism.

But would you also say that the wealthy have far more ways of getting out of actually paying those taxes or not paying at all due to clever accountants and hidden assests, things the poor couldn't dream of doing? If you're making things fair they have to be fair all the way and the rich have always and will always have a sizable advantage over the poor especially in terms of laws written and loopholes found, and that's assuming they only use legal recourse to keep their wealth.

And if that's the case for socialism the US has always been socialist.

Special taxes are already in place. Smokers are taxed higher and at an insane rate, a specialized group paying more. You of course find this appalling and are lobbing to change this?

 

[Matt]

But smokers have the choice to not pay those taxes by not buying the cigarettes.

As for the wealthy hiding money...while I am not denying it happens, are they not innocent until proven guilty?

 

[kainedamo]

Redistributing of wealth... how about calling it redistribution of power?

Through capitalism the oil companies and drug companies have become too powerful, paying off politicians left and right.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

When you take the money from those who have rightfully earned it, it is redistributing the wealth.

then all taxes are socialism in your view.

 

[Matt]

No, that is not my view, that is your assumption of my view.

 

[Matt]

Redistributing of wealth... how about calling it redistribution of power?

Through capitalism the oil companies and drug companies have become too powerful, paying off politicians left and right.

So you condone socialism?

 

[SuBe]

But smokers have the choice to not pay those taxes by not buying the cigarettes.

As for the wealthy hiding money...while I am not denying it happens, are they not innocent until proven guilty?

The problem is that the #1 Loophole used by the "Rich" is to keep their money in Offshore accounts to avoid Income Taxes. Darn them for sticking by the law, but what that does is not bring money back to our shores, to re-invest and be taxed. Now, there are solutions for this, and INCREASING taxes in not one of them. That gives them NO incentive to bring that money back into this country. DECREASE Income Taxes and Corporate Taxes and you will see this $11-13 Trillion dollars come back into this country.

 

[moraldeficiency]

But smokers have the choice to not pay those taxes by not buying the cigarettes.

As for the wealthy hiding money...while I am not denying it happens, are they not innocent until proven guilty?

Yeah but couldn't you say that about any item purchased? Smokers are gone after because they are a seperate group addicted to a legal drug. Notice it's not the rich makers of the cigs that get the extra tax even though they could choose to go into another buisness. Because taxing people that are addicts = good and fair government practice, taxing rich people = commies!!!.

That's true they are innocent until proven guilty, and they can afford payoffs, bribes, political pressure and out of the country accounts so that they can always be innocent. It's fairly standard practice for the rich to do this type of thing on a regular basis. They even have special prisons and names for their crimes so while they can hurt far more people than any drugged out ******* with a gun could ever dream of doing, they can serve their time (if by some miracle their high priced lawyers, jury selection firms, and talking heads fail) away from those poor types and generally keep a portion of their illegally acquired wealth.

You can railroad someone poor to fit any crime and generally get a conviction (look at the recent mess right where I live in Broward County Florida if you want thousand of examples), if you're rich the police have to have hard evidence and still kid glove the rich guy and probably loss because of the lawyers they can afford. The rich have an absurd advantage over the poor, if you want to treat them fairly with taxes then they should be treated fairly across the board. It'll never happen cause they wouldn't allow it.

So end of the day if a rich guy has to pay more taxes and can only buy two mercedes this year, it's not quite the travesty of justice you might think. Despite the taxes the rich always come out on top.

BTW, no monopoly having Bill Gates would like everyone to know if you don't like Vista, **** YOU!!, you're getting it anyway. But he shouldn't have to pay anymore taxes (proportionately) than a single mother of three, cause it's only fair.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

No, that is not my view, that is your assumption of my view.

really Matt?Taxes always take money from people who have "rightfully earned it" so unless you're going to go back and revise THAT statement, I'm not assuming anything, I'm stating something based on your interpretation of socialism, which as it happens, is deeply flawed.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

The problem is that the #1 Loophole used by the "Rich" is to keep their money in Offshore accounts to avoid Income Taxes. Darn them for sticking by the law, but what that does is not bring money back to our shores, to re-invest and be taxed. Now, there are solutions for this, and INCREASING taxes in not one of them. That gives them NO incentive to bring that money back into this country. DECREASE Income Taxes and Corporate Taxes and you will see this $11-13 Trillion dollars come back into this country.

sure you will.