The worst deficit reduction plan ever!

[Peace]

So why should they extend the tax breaks for those who don't need them?

 

Wow. I mean...wow.

 

Why should lazy people get welfare? Food stamps? Unemployment?

 

If you're going to have class warfare, let's have it out. I'm on the side of the people with jobs. The people who make things. The people who pay for all the crap lots of others get for free.

 

You?

[pBills]

Wow. I mean...wow.

 

Why should lazy people get welfare? Food stamps? Unemployment?

 

If you're going to have class warfare, let's have it out. I'm on the side of the people with jobs. The people who make things. The people who pay for all the crap lots of others get for free.

 

You?

 

 

I agree. Lazy people shouldn't receive those things. Not going with class warfare at all. Saying that the tax breaks should come to an end in a staged way.

[Magox]

Would you give that wealth person the break or the person truly needing it? Personally, I would give to the person that truly needed it. And if I was in position to offer them a job or something more through incentives... great. Wouldn't you give the person needing a bit more help a little longer before you remove their tax breaks? Probably not.

So then yes, you do believe in wealth redistribution. Just wanted to make that clear.

 

Oh and I give plenty, not just in taxes, but for charitable causes. I do it voluntarily, that is the big difference.

 

Oh, and you are going to love this:

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html

 

Sixteen months ago, Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism." The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than conservatives.

 

 

If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:

 

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

 

-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.

 

-- Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.

 

-- Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.

 

-- In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.

 

-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.

 

and this

 

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682730&page=1

 

We assume the rich give more than the middle class, the middle class more than the poor. I've heard liberals care more about the less fortunate, so we assume they give more than conservatives do. Are these assumptions truth, or myth?

 

To test what types of people give more, "20/20" went to two very different parts of the country, with contrasting populations: Sioux Falls, S.D. and San Francisco, Calif. The Salvation Army set up buckets at the busiest locations in each city -- Macy's in San Francisco and Wal-Mart in Sioux Falls. Which bucket collected more money?

 

Sioux Falls is rural and religious; half of the population goes to church every week. People in San Francisco make much more money, are predominantly liberal, and just 14 percent of people in San Francisco attend church every week. Liberals are said to care more about helping the poor; so did people in San Francisco give more?

 

It turns out that this idea that liberals give more…is a myth. Of the top 25 states where people give an above average percent of their income, 24 were red states in the last presidential election.

 

Arthur Brooks, the author of "Who Really Cares," says that "when you look at the data, it turns out the conservatives give about 30 percent more." He adds, "And incidentally, conservative-headed families make slightly less money."

 

And he says the differences in giving goes beyond money, pointing out that conservatives are 18 percent more likely to donate blood. He says this difference is not about politics, but about the different way conservatives and liberals view government.

 

"You find that people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away," Brooks says. In fact, people who disagree with the statement, "The government has a basic responsibility to take care of the people who can't take care of themselves," are 27 percent more likely to give to charity.

 

[IDBillzFan]

Why should they extend these tax cuts for those people?

Let's make a deal: we don't extend tax cuts for anyone at any income level, and all that extra money goes exclusively toward paying down our debt. How's that?

[pBills]

So then yes, you do believe in wealth redistribution. Just wanted to make that clear.

 

Oh and I give plenty, not just in taxes, but for charitable causes. I do it voluntarily, that is the big difference.

 

Oh, and you are going to love this:

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html

 

 

 

and this

 

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682730&page=1

 

 

Actually I believe in moving the tax rates back to where they were before Bush put them into place.

 

Let's make a deal: we don't extend tax cuts for anyone at any income level, and all that extra money goes exclusively toward paying down our debt. How's that?

 

 

Works for me. Although then every bitchy-ass republican will cry about their taxes going up. I also believe that the unemployment benefits need to be extended. Would be nice if they could figure out who is abusing the system though.

[IDBillzFan]

Works for me. Although then every bitchy-ass republican will cry about their taxes going up.

While every bitchy-ass progressive will cry how the rich aren't giving enough and obviously hate the middle class.

 

I'd also argue that many conservatives would NOT cry so much about their taxes going up if they knew, without question, that those taxes were paying down the debt and not being used to fund yet another useless entitlement program.

[pBills]

While every bitchy-ass progressive will cry how the rich aren't giving enough and obviously hate the middle class.

 

I'd also argue that many conservatives would NOT cry so much about their taxes going up if they knew, without question, that those taxes were paying down the debt and not being used to fund yet another useless entitlement program.

 

 

Seriously I think they would cry... after all it was a main talking point prior to the midterm elections. When they promised "WE WILL NOT RAISE TAXES" there was no "unless we promise all of that tax money goes to paying down..."

 

How about another useless war? And what programs are useless exactly... what programs would you get rid of?

Edited November 19, 2010 by pBills

[IDBillzFan]

Seriously I think they would cry... after all it was a main talking point prior to the midterm elections. When they promised "WE WILL NOT RAISE TAXES" there was no "unless we promise all of that tax money goes to paying down..."

 

How about another useless war? And what programs are useless exactly... what programs would you get rid of?

Y'see, that's the problem with you progressives. You think you hear something, and then try to pass it off as gospel.

 

Conservatives didn't get into office during these midterms by promising they will not raise taxes. They did it by promising they would cut spending.

 

The first thing I'd get rid of is Obamacare, and that includes every single government person hired since the bill was passed. Then I'd cancel the rest of the stimulus bill. I also like the deficit commission's idea of cutting the federal payroll by 10%, but I wouldn't mind trying 20%. I'd make a concerted effort to really go after medicare fraud, welfare fraud, unemployment fraud, as well as companies hiring illegals, and I don't mean the surface stuff we've been doing, but a real effort to go after these with every effort possible.

 

And before you wet your Depends, I'd also want to take a close look at where we have military operations set up relative to where we really need them. It's my understanding that we have too many people in too many places that would be considered unnecessary. Close it up and bring them home.

 

Those are just a few simple things off the top of my head, and I haven't even gotten into the wasteland know as the Dept. of Education.