Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 39 of 39

Thread: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

  1. #26
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

    Sorry Eques I'm still not buying into this. By your definition many illegal aliens in NY and CA would be considered 'middle class' by earning $32,000 (the 50th percentile). By the 'political' definition, middle class refers to today's version of the original true 'middle class' which emerged during the renaissance in the form of artists, shopkeepers, tradesmen, academics etc. whose station in life was above the 'workers' but far below that of the 'landed gentry'. By the 'political' definition of middle class, today this refers to people who are basically white collar professionals, people who own decent homes and cars, people who can afford to send their kids to college, people who can afford to spend a little extra money on a nicety or two once in a while.

    Therefore by the 'political' definition, a 'middle class' household in NY or NJ or MA or CT or RI or IL or MI or CA or WA (which amounts to more than half of all 'middle class' households) today must earn well over $100,000. By your stats this puts them above the 90th percentile. Between federal, state and local taxes, these 'middle class' people are paying out 33% of their income or more. On the other hand, today's upper class version of the 'landed gentry' like John and Theresa Kerry are able to take advantage of tax exempt/tax favorable investments, multiple residences (which allows for paying low state taxes as a legal PA resident, while actually living in high state tax MA), and other accounting and legal tricks to wind up paying less than 20% of their 'income' in total taxes.

    Please explain to me again how this is an example of the 'rich' paying the 'lion's share' of taxes ?

    In general, Democratic tax policies tend to favor the 'working class' and the poor via low income tax credits, supplementary/indirect gov't benefits such as subsidized housing and subsidized utility rates etc. In general, Democratic tax policies also favor the rich i.e. 'landed gentry', by establishing and maintaining major tax loopholes like foundations, capital gains, wind farms, tax free muni bonds etc. which allow the John and Theresa Kerryesque rich to avoid paying a significant portion of the 'official' tax rate (in the case of their $5 million dollar 'income' the official federal tax rate is 36%, yet they pay 14%). And in general, Democratic tax policies tend to stick it to the 'middle class', at least the politically defined middle class, by quickly ramping up the official federal tax rate above $60,000 income or so, by phasing out/limiting deductions above $100,000 or so, and via the dreaded AMT the Democrat's formerly best kept secret.

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 04-23-2005 at 03:52 AM.

  2. #27
    Featured Member discretedancer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,004
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

    OK, I guess we're accepting the thread is hijacked...can I suggest we create a new thread foor the topic?

    Melonie, while for once I AGREE WITH YOU (ok, maybe that is the point of the thread) regarding the middle class being a regional definition...and it seems to folllow that your point is someone living in NYC on $32,000 isn't really doing well (but where I live it aint bad)...- seems to counter our "living wage" argument of another thread...

    "How much of a 'personal burden' this is to each person is beside the point. "actually it's exactly the point. The Kerry's can write a $200,000 check with no thought...I can't write one at all....personal burden is a BIG issue.

  3. #28
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

    Discrete, we really agree deep down about many things. Unfortunately, political polarization often derails that fundamental agreement with arguments over nitpicky details, and emotions.

    I would argue that REAL tax policy is just one more liberal/democratic policy plank that I don't agree with, which is very well within the subject of this thread. It's actually a very sore point with me because of the hypocracy involved in its presentation i.e. announcing a 36% maximum tax rate which supposedly applies to millionaires, while in reality the loopholes and tax favorable options result in millionaires actually paying much much lower percentages than the 'middle class' a la the Kerrys' 14% versus a typical 'middle class' 21-28% real tax rate.

    I would also argue that some of the 'flat tax' proposals being kicked around in republican circles would, in theory at least, result in a large number of America's fiscal problems becoming non-problems, and would result in a more 'fair' distribution of the burden of paying the costs for seemingly unavoidable gov't expenditures - by requiring the millionaires to pay the same 20% or whatever tax rate as the 'middle class' and the 'working class'. Undoubtedly the 'working class' would still get tax credits or exemptions of some sort or another under these 'flat tax' proposals to avoid equal percentage taxing of those who earn less than $32,000 or so.

    As to a strict adherence to the thread's topic, I already stated that I do agree with two liberal/democratic policy planks - specifically, freedom of choice regarding (first trimester) abortions, and opposing American Imperialism.
    .
    Last edited by Melonie; 04-23-2005 at 07:17 AM.

  4. #29
    Veteran Member Eques's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    205
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie
    Sorry Eques I'm still not buying into this. By your definition many illegal aliens in NY and CA would be considered 'middle class' by earning $32,000 (the 50th percentile). By the 'political' definition, middle class refers to today's version of the original true 'middle class' which emerged during the renaissance in the form of artists, ……

    -snip-

    …. at least the politically defined middle class, by quickly ramping up the official federal tax rate above $60,000 income or so, by phasing out/limiting deductions above $100,000 or so, and via the dreaded AMT the Democrat's formerly best kept secret.
    Frankly what you are saying is that making 80k doesn’t make you rich. Sorry. It does. Period. May not make you a member of the top .01% Gentry like Kerry but it certainly makes you wealthy. It may not even give you a high standard of living, in New York, but it still makes you wealthy. The top 10% pay 65.73% of the taxes. To me that says the burden is placed on the wealthy. That means I am most definitely defining anyone who makes 92k+ as Wealthy, Upper Class, maybe not Elite, but definitely Upper Class. You can call those people ‘middle class’ and I can call them ‘wealthy’ and we still are talking about the same people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Discretedancer
    "How much of a 'personal burden' this is to each person is beside the point. "actually it's exactly the point. The Kerry's can write a $200,000 check with no thought...I can't write one at all....personal burden is a BIG issue.
    Bollox. ‘Personal burden’ has no impact on who carries the burden. 4 men are carrying a rather heavy log. 1 guy is rather skinny and hasn't eaten in days, 2 are just average guys and the 4th is a guy who works out the gym daily and is on steroids. The guy on steroids is carrying almost all of the weight of that log. It’s easier for him. He can do it. He’s not even bothered. The skinny guy is breaking a sweat and trying his hardest to carry what little he can. The guy on steroids is still carrying most of the weight and bearing most of the burden of that weight. In that same way the rich are still carrying most of the burden of taxes. And they’re apparently carrying it at a rate higher than their share of the income. 65.73% of taxes vs 41.77% share of income…

    And once again for both of you, on the topic of ‘regional variance.’ We choose where we live. And where you live makes up a decent amount of what class you are. You earn 100k, you choose to live in New York. You’re upper class. You’ve decided that living in New York is worth not having the 3,500 sq. ft marble laden mansion you could have in Phoenix for the same price as your somewhat seedy apartment in New York. You can pretend to be middle class and have a 100k income, the person earning 30k won’t be swallowing that particular tonic.
    Never stand begging for that which you have the power to earn.

    The truth lies in a man's dreams... perhaps in this unhappy world of ours whose madness is better than a foolish sanity.

    Miguel de Cervantes (1547 - 1616)

  5. #30
    Featured Member discretedancer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,004
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

    "4 men are carrying a rather heavy log. 1 guy is rather skinny and hasn't eaten in days, 2 are just average guys and the 4th is a guy who works out the gym daily and is on steroids. The guy on steroids is carrying almost all of the weight of that log."

    Physically untrue. Gravity is constant over the whole log...though the other guy may position himself differently to help more (don't think many wealthy do that on purpose) if they're spaced evenly it's not imbalanced.

    Though your point works RE taxes (except it takes a smaller percentage (of income to taxes) of $1MM salary to equal the samme dollar value as it would from a $29,000 salary. THAT's the difference in burden.

  6. #31
    Veteran Member Eques's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    205
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

    Quote Originally Posted by discretedancer
    "4 men are carrying a rather heavy log. 1 guy is rather skinny and hasn't eaten in days, 2 are just average guys and the 4th is a guy who works out the gym daily and is on steroids. The guy on steroids is carrying almost all of the weight of that log."

    Physically untrue. Gravity is constant over the whole log...though the other guy may position himself differently to help more (don't think many wealthy do that on purpose) if they're spaced evenly it's not imbalanced.
    Its physically true...

    ============
    ..||..||...||...||
    100 200 400 100

    The numbers are the amount of weight being carried by each guy. Just because gravity acts equally along the log doesn't mean the 4 guys holding it up have to act equally. In this case the three 'slackers' are being made up for by the 3rd guy whose making up the difference between the other guys efforts and the weight of the log. And yes it most defintely works this way, I've moved more than enough beds, posts, planks of wood and doors to know.

    Though your point works RE taxes (except it takes a smaller percentage (of income to taxes) of $1MM salary to equal the samme dollar value as it would from a $29,000 salary. THAT's the difference in burden.
    The tax data seems to state that the wealthy are paying higher tax rates. The Gentry class aside. That difference is the personal burden to each individual. Ie if you earn 1 million writing that 200k tax check hurts, but doesn't exactly stop you from buying that vintage 356 Speedster you've been thinking about. Meanwhile when you make 35k that 5k check you write (well, have deducted from your paycheck) hurts a lot. That’s the 'personal burden' and to me it is inconsequential when talking about whom actually bears the burden of keeping this country running.
    Never stand begging for that which you have the power to earn.

    The truth lies in a man's dreams... perhaps in this unhappy world of ours whose madness is better than a foolish sanity.

    Miguel de Cervantes (1547 - 1616)

  7. #32
    God/dess Deogol's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,493
    Thanks
    120
    Thanked 50 Times in 35 Posts

    Default Re: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hello~Kitty
    I am wondering if any of the Conservative, Republican or conservative Libertarians (which seems like the wrong party for that... but whatever) posters are able to point out ANYTHING on the liberal or Democrat platform that they agree with ......If so , what are those issues or platform positions ?

    I have begun to wonder because it appears to me from reading this section from cover to cover over that (for the most part anyway) this is not the case. It looks like if an issue is part of the liberal or Democratic point of view then it is immediatly unacceptable to the Conservative or Republican people posting here. While I have not noticed the same thing from the liberal leaning posters which is why my question is geered towards conservative leaning people.

    Personaly, I can pick out things from all three political parties in the US which I can agree with but I am not seeing the same thing from many of the more conservative folks

    So it leaves me asking : Can they find some middle ground ?
    Well, I will just re-hijack the list.

    I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

    If a 300 pound person wants to walk around naked in their yard, I'll say "Ugh" but I will NOT try to call the police on them.

    If a government is stealing money to pay off China "over exuberance" in borrowing - then I call BS on that.

  8. #33
    God/dess Deogol's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,493
    Thanks
    120
    Thanked 50 Times in 35 Posts

    Default Re: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eques
    from your paycheck) hurts a lot. That’s the 'personal burden' and to me it is inconsequential when talking about whom actually bears the burden of keeping this country running.
    Yea... the rest of us are just squatters.

    Lately the rich - being all those millionaires in Congress and big earners in the white house - have been pretty fast and loose with other people's money.

  9. #34
    Veteran Member Eques's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    205
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

    OPM is a very powerful drug. And as far as us being squatters. We are. I'm a student. My income is virtually nothing. When I work in the summers I make maybe 3k a month. I haven't done much to build our roads, our libraries, our military or the 'public' college I pay fees to attend. I'm essentially a squatter when it comes to government services.
    Never stand begging for that which you have the power to earn.

    The truth lies in a man's dreams... perhaps in this unhappy world of ours whose madness is better than a foolish sanity.

    Miguel de Cervantes (1547 - 1616)

  10. #35
    God/dess onlythebest's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Hurricane Wasteland,Louisiana
    Posts
    8,088
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 23 Times in 19 Posts

    Default Re: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

    My boyfriend is within the wealthiest 1%.He pays over 200K in taxes every year.The rich does carry the most burden with taxes.
    One of woman's cardinal rule: Body parts can be fake,everything else has to be real.

    一个女人的枢机规则:肢体可以伪造,一切必须真实.

    中国大CHINESE BIG BOOBS!!!中国大




  11. #36
    Featured Member discretedancer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,004
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

    OTB/...what % of his income is the 200k? 10%, 20?

    last year I lost nearly 30% to taxes....

  12. #37
    God/dess onlythebest's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Hurricane Wasteland,Louisiana
    Posts
    8,088
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 23 Times in 19 Posts

    Default Re: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

    Hmmm,I'm not sure.I don't think he'll tell me either because he doesn't want me to know how much he makes.I'm gonna figure it out one day though.
    One of woman's cardinal rule: Body parts can be fake,everything else has to be real.

    一个女人的枢机规则:肢体可以伪造,一切必须真实.

    中国大CHINESE BIG BOOBS!!!中国大




  13. #38
    God/dess Deogol's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,493
    Thanks
    120
    Thanked 50 Times in 35 Posts

    Default Re: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

    Quote Originally Posted by onlythebest
    My boyfriend is within the wealthiest 1%.He pays over 200K in taxes every year.The rich does carry the most burden with taxes.
    huh huh.

    When I was working in California, nearly 50% of my income went to taxes - figuring federal, state, sales, vehicle and gas taxes.

    That is called a burden.

    Needless to say - I know longer live in Kalifornia.

  14. #39
    Featured Member Amethyst's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    795
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 14 Times in 7 Posts

    Default Re: Cons or Rep. posters~ can you agree with ANY liberal or Dem stance ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Susan Wayward
    Not to be a crank, but, well, I am totally one of those elitist liberals who thinks that redneck Pentecostal Christians will drag this country back into the Middle Ages given a chance. There are few things I find to agree with in the Republican Party platform, especially their tendency to let the bills of this country be paid on the backs of the middle class. You profit in this country, you render unto Caeser.
    Hear, f*cking hear!!

    I consider myself independent, but I definitely lean to the left. I can hang with CONservatives on some issues like affirmative action, abortion (to an extent) and taxes (again, to an extent),but I think the majority of their representatives are insane, if not downright evil.

    I like to think of myself as REASONABLE.


Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Drinkin and druggin at work: whats your stance on it
    By tempest666 in forum Stripping (was Stripping General)
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 07-13-2010, 01:24 AM
  2. Do you agree?
    By pookie in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-14-2007, 10:27 AM
  3. Russian President Toughens Nuclear Stance
    By Adelina in forum Member Boards
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-07-2007, 07:50 PM
  4. Who Agree's?
    By tampafldancer in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 09-20-2005, 08:01 AM
  5. do you agree? If not, why? If so, why?
    By discretedancer in forum Political Poo
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: 05-10-2005, 10:42 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •