Republicans outraged over a Sikh praying at the RNC

[Alceste]

A sentence beginning with these words is almost always wrong.
Remember that most people are below average intelligence.

True enough, but swing voters tend to listen to pundits to make their minds up, and I think most of the talking heads apart from Fox know that the US can't afford any more tax cuts for billionaires.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

A sentence beginning with these words is almost always wrong.
Remember that most people are below average intelligence.

... while believing just the opposite.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Any particular reason you totally ignored the substance of my comment? They will reject him because he wants more tax cuts for the rich, paid for by the middle class. Most people realize that is a catastrophically bad plan.

Why must we demonise success? The people who do succeed should not be canabilized. We have too many freeloaders who feel entitled.

The government does not need more money, we need less dependance on the government.

 

[Revoltingest]

.....most of the talking heads apart from Fox know that the US can't afford any more tax cuts for billionaires.

You say this so often, that I begin to wonder if you actually
believe this caricature of our tax policy debate, eh?

 

[Alceste]

You say this so often, that I begin to wonder if you actually
believe this caricature of our tax policy debate, eh?

Did you read Rev Rick's last post? I'm well aware of the opinions of most republican voters, and I recognize they're out of step with the commentary I see in most American news outlets, which is to recognize that tax cuts for billionaires have to be paid for somehow, and it's going to be the shrinking middle class picking up the tab. I don't think swing voters are going to want to lose public services and pay higher taxes so Romney and his friends can have a few hundred thousand dollars a year of extra fun money, no matter how much lifelong Republican voters demonize people who use public services.

 

[Revoltingest]

Did you read Rev Rick's last post? I'm well aware of the opinions of most republican voters, and I recognize they're out of step with the commentary I see in most American news outlets, which is to recognize that tax cuts for billionaires have to be paid for somehow, and it's going to be the shrinking middle class picking up the tab. I don't think swing voters are going to want to lose public services and pay higher taxes so Romney and his friends can have a few hundred thousand dollars a year of extra fun money, no matter how much lifelong Republican voters demonize people who use public services.

I saw RR's post.
Hmmm....so you aren't deliberately caricaturizing the tax discussion, eh?
Some things you should know:
- Barry prolly has as many ultra-wealthy buddies as Willard.
- The tax debate is not about billionaires, although it includes them.
- Pubs are very much in favor of public services, & often increase spending on them. The debate is about allocation.
- Creating incentives & avoiding disincentives for investment is an important issue & should not be ignored in favor of demonizing the wealthy or the entrepreneurial.

 

[Alceste]

I saw RR's post.
Hmmm....so you aren't deliberately caricaturizing the tax discussion, eh?
Some things you should know:
- Barry prolly has as many ultra-wealthy buddies as Willard.
- The tax debate is not about billionaires, although it includes them.
- Pubs are very much in favor of public services, & often increase spending on them. The debate is about allocation.
- Creating incentives & avoiding disincentives for investment is an important issue & should not be ignored in favor of demonizing the wealthy or the entrepreneurial.

I have not demonized anybody. I have simply pointed out that tax cuts have to be paid for, and that I suspect swing voters will understand that. As far as I can see, most voters realize there is a problem with the US deficit and debt, and that haphazardly reducing government revenue is going to exacerbate that problem, no matter how much Americans in general idolize and want to pamper their economic elites.

 

[idea]

Remember that most people are below average intelligence.

huh, and here I thought only 49% were below average intelligence...

in any event, I don't know why everyone is talking about tax cuts, instead of talking about where our current taxes are going... why is the debt so high? why was this country able to pay for military/schools/police/welfare etc. etc. with such a smaller budget in the past?

 

[Revoltingest]

huh, and here I thought only 49% were below average intelligence...

You're just too generous a person.

in any event, I don't know why everyone is talking about tax cuts, instead of talking about where our current taxes are going... why is the debt so high? why was this country able to pay for military/schools/police/welfare etc. etc. with such a smaller budget in the past?

Unfortunately, I don't think any real tax cuts are being proposed. Moreover, if any are, I doubt they'd
be of the really productive kind, ie, lowering the marginal rate & ditching personal deductions.
We're paying for much more than in the past couple decades, eg, nation building, foreign wars, bail-outs,
stimulus....might as well call it "crony corporate welfare".

 

[Father Heathen]

Why must we demonise success? The people who do succeed should not be canabilized. We have too many freeloaders who feel entitled.

The government does not need more money, we need less dependance on the government.

Is "success" always good, even if it achieved through exploitative, coercive, dishonest means?

 

[Revoltingest]

Is "success" always good, even if it achieved through exploitative, coercive, dishonest means?

That doesn't sound like "success"....more like "crime".

 

[Father Heathen]

That doesn't sound like "success"....more like "crime".

Except that what's unethical isn't always illegal.

 

[Revoltingest]

Except that what's unethical isn't always illegal.

True dat.
Has this some bearing on "success" in general?

On second thought, scratch that last question.
I ain't gots any useful discussion in me tonite.
No need to burden you with a whole bunch'a lame.

 

[Alceste]

huh, and here I thought only 49% were below average intelligence...

in any event, I don't know why everyone is talking about tax cuts, instead of talking about where our current taxes are going... why is the debt so high? why was this country able to pay for military/schools/police/welfare etc. etc. with such a smaller budget in the past?

Short answer: it wasn't. Your taxes used to be way higher, and the military spending spree still always created more and more debt. Bush just took it to a new level by combining huge tax cuts with completely uninhibited military spending and unconditional handouts to the private sector. Yet another of his policies that Obama continued after taking over his job.

 

[Falvlun]

I hope both candidates run on their records.
(How's that for a highly partisan jab?!?!)

Ha! We can only hope.