Go to Wavy Davy's Politics
- Add a comment
- Go to Bush And Congress Are Ready To Battle Over The Budget
Re: Re: Re: Until the government...
superflymom119: I'm sorry about your husband. How about no income tax with a lower sales tax rate?
posted by
WavyDavy
on October 26, 2007 at 7:24 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Until the government...
Let me give you the example that might change your view on who qualifies as wealthy, it's not as simple to classify people based on reported incomes as some might think. We make about 150,000 (or used to before my husband lost his leg), but as small business owners/self employed people, that is before deductions. Realistically, we bring home far less than that after business expenses, payroll etc. We are lumped in with people who earn 150,000 while working for someone else, but they bring home far more of their earnings than we do. That's also a huge part of the problem. Wealth is a matter of circumstance not just dollar amounts. A flat tax rate or no income tax with a higher sales tax would make much more sense in today's society...in my view anyway. Interesting post, later...
posted by
superflymom119
on October 19, 2007 at 10:01 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Until the government...
Superflymom119: That is a good point that you are making here. Everyone's definition of rich, middle class and poor. To most of these multi-millionaires in Washington, D.C., people making $100,000 per year or more are considered to be ''middle class.'' To me, that is someone who is wealthy. It all depends on who you associate with and your values.
posted by
WavyDavy
on October 18, 2007 at 4:19 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: WavyDavy
Ex Turpi: If SCHIP includes children whose parents make up to $83,000 per year, he was right to veto it. Why don't they expand Medicaid and forget about SCHIP. SCHIP wouldn't be needed if Medicaid was expanded to include families that are just slightly above the poverty level but can't afford private medical insurance.
Everyone could save more if taxes and spending at all levels of government were reduced in addition to increasing wages. Taxes increase, spending increases, the cost of living increases but wages don't increase enough or at all for many people. How in the world can you save anything? You can't save what you don't have.
Thanks for your comments! I appreciate comments from everyone. I consider you all to be my friends although we may disagree from time to time on policy issues.
posted by
WavyDavy
on October 18, 2007 at 4:13 PM
| link to this | reply
Until the government...
finds a realistic definition of "rich" and "upper class" the budget and taxation will continue to be a mess. Those who are counted as rich on the one hand, are also counted as poor or middle class when the arguments are made for socialized health care coverage and other such ideas. If it ever gets nailed down, then we'll finally see some intelligence come out of Washington, otherwise it's all for the votes, anyway, and doesn't really matter in concrete terms.
posted by
superflymom119
on October 18, 2007 at 4:07 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: Bush and his advisors are a bunch of fucking moronic robber barons,
Saul Relative: Bush is an adherent of supply-side economics which means that giving tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations will give them incentive to start up new businesses. Unfortunately, they set up shop outside of the United States and the so-called trickle down economics doesn't trickle down to the middle class and poor.
posted by
WavyDavy
on October 18, 2007 at 4:05 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: What happened to the Social Security lockbox?
Corbin: Oh, that's what happened to it. Bill and Hillary took so many things for themselves the final last days of the Administration. I understand that Al just had to take something for himself. Thanks for the update!
posted by
WavyDavy
on October 18, 2007 at 4:01 PM
| link to this | reply
WavyDavy
I do not think he should have vetoed SCHIP. Forty three (43) governors, many republican senators, and the general populace support it as passed. This may be one of the Democrats' strongest campaign issues.
In respect to the deficit, it should not be evaluated in isolation. Yet, there may be substance in the fact that it is shrinking. But, does the deficit iclude spending for the war?
No party is willing to do the right things to save Social Security. Privatization may be ideal if we could trust everyone to save. Americans are not good at that. The government would probably have to subsidize many of us when we retire.
It may be a trifle too late for the President to take his present posture. Most of the electorate may not credit him for any good it does. They will treat it with utter cynicism. And, of course, members of his own party are avoiding all association with him.
posted by
EX_TURPI
on October 18, 2007 at 8:00 AM
| link to this | reply
Bush and his advisors are a bunch of fucking moronic robber barons,
grabbing what they can while they can. Bush's bushit about the budget is sleight of hand, attacking Democrats as uncooperative or whatever while he devastates our future with increasing debt and a crushing deficit. He talks about increased tax revenue, but he doesn't go into the astronomical numbers that could have been collected had that cronyist ass not reduced or eliminated upper echelon taxes...
posted by
saul_relative
on October 17, 2007 at 9:50 PM
| link to this | reply
What happened to the Social Security lockbox?
Al Gore took it home with him..........
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on October 17, 2007 at 4:27 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: wavydavy
Soul Builder101: You're absolutely right.
posted by
WavyDavy
on October 17, 2007 at 4:02 PM
| link to this | reply
wavydavy
It is known that lobbyists and behind the scenes deals that affect the budget most. Our cold logic matters nought!
posted by
Soul_Builder101
on October 16, 2007 at 8:30 PM
| link to this | reply
hi WavyDavy
posted by
Amanda__
on October 16, 2007 at 6:32 PM
| link to this | reply