JustaLocal
Beach Fanatic
You are right.
I just don't have quite enough faith in my fellow man to go completely Libertarian.
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
-
Hello all! We will be performing a website & forum update soon. You may get logged out so now is the time to make sure your email address in your account is correct - go to your account to check it and update it now. Send us a message with your username and/or email address if you need help.
Another day older and deeper in debt
- Thread starter 30ashopper
- Start date
You are right.
I just don't have quite enough faith in my fellow man to go completely Libertarian.
scooterbug44
SoWal Expert
Want things to change?
Make responsible spending a big issue in the upcoming elections and let your elected representatives/candidates KNOW that it is a big priority.
Then put YOUR money where your mouth is and start living debt free and spending wisely yourself.
The government is doing the same thing MANY Americans are doing - spending more money than they have and financing it or putting it on their Chinese credit card. :angry:
Make responsible spending a big issue in the upcoming elections and let your elected representatives/candidates KNOW that it is a big priority.
Then put YOUR money where your mouth is and start living debt free and spending wisely yourself.
The government is doing the same thing MANY Americans are doing - spending more money than they have and financing it or putting it on their Chinese credit card. :angry:
LuciferSam
Banned
There is no universal truth when it comes to values or opinion. Morality is a creation of man's intellect, or in some cases lack thereof.
Last edited:
traderx
Beach Fanatic
LS, come on now. This is an unwarranted insult. While I may disagree with 6th on many social situations, we generally agree on the economy and war. And while you may diagree with 6th, his intellect is obvious.
LuciferSam
Banned
You are right. I retract the last half of the last sentence. That was uncalled for and not true. Update: That post has already been edited to be not insulting, so I'm not sure that this post is going to make sense at this point!! They'll have to read your post to see my original statement. In any event, 6th is knowledgeable and smart despite my disagreements.
Last edited:
elgordoboy
Beach Fanatic
Agreed. But you left out "towering" .
LuciferSam
Banned
I'm not sure I would go that far.
6thGen
Beach Fanatic
Thanks for the kind words. I don't have time to debate this now, but bring it up in a few weeks. It will be an interesting discussion. Also, before you start your research, I'll agree that most of CS Lewis' argument has a ton of holes in it. It's tough to logic faith, but he gives it a college try.
Rita
margarita brocolia
.
Excerpt from Fiscal Poison Pill by Paul Krugman 6/16/08:
“.................... As I read the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center’s analysis of the presidential candidates’ tax proposals, I realized that the tax cuts enacted by the Bush administration are, in effect, a fiscal poison pill aimed at future administrations.
True, the tax cuts won’t prevent a change in management — the Constitution sees to that. But they will make it hard for the next president to change the country’s direction.
Exhibit A of the poison pill in action is the sad case of John McCain, part of whose lingering image as a maverick rests on his early opposition to the Bush tax cuts, which he declared excessive and too tilted toward the rich.
Since then the budget surpluses of the Clinton years have given way to persistent deficits, and income inequality has risen to new heights, vindicating his opposition.
But instead of pointing this out, Mr. McCain now promises to make those tax cuts permanent — and proposes further cuts that are, if anything, tilted even more toward the wealthy. And how is the loss of revenue to be made up? Mr. McCain hasn’t offered a realistic answer............................................
.......... Barack Obama’s tax plan is more responsible than Mr. McCain’s: relative to current policy, the Tax Policy Center estimates, the Obama plan would raise revenue by $700 billion over the next decade, compared with a $600 billion loss for Mr. McCain.
The Obama plan is also far more progressive, sharply reducing after-tax incomes for the richest 1 percent of Americans while raising incomes for the bottom 80 percent.
But while $700 billion may sound like a lot of money, it’s probably not enough to pay for universal health care, which was supposed to be the overriding progressive priority in this election....................................”
Link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/16/o...14280000&en=cb5a963b0a3b88d2&ei=5070&emc=eta1
.
Excerpt from Fiscal Poison Pill by Paul Krugman 6/16/08:
“.................... As I read the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center’s analysis of the presidential candidates’ tax proposals, I realized that the tax cuts enacted by the Bush administration are, in effect, a fiscal poison pill aimed at future administrations.
True, the tax cuts won’t prevent a change in management — the Constitution sees to that. But they will make it hard for the next president to change the country’s direction.
Exhibit A of the poison pill in action is the sad case of John McCain, part of whose lingering image as a maverick rests on his early opposition to the Bush tax cuts, which he declared excessive and too tilted toward the rich.
Since then the budget surpluses of the Clinton years have given way to persistent deficits, and income inequality has risen to new heights, vindicating his opposition.
But instead of pointing this out, Mr. McCain now promises to make those tax cuts permanent — and proposes further cuts that are, if anything, tilted even more toward the wealthy. And how is the loss of revenue to be made up? Mr. McCain hasn’t offered a realistic answer............................................
.......... Barack Obama’s tax plan is more responsible than Mr. McCain’s: relative to current policy, the Tax Policy Center estimates, the Obama plan would raise revenue by $700 billion over the next decade, compared with a $600 billion loss for Mr. McCain.
The Obama plan is also far more progressive, sharply reducing after-tax incomes for the richest 1 percent of Americans while raising incomes for the bottom 80 percent.
But while $700 billion may sound like a lot of money, it’s probably not enough to pay for universal health care, which was supposed to be the overriding progressive priority in this election....................................”
Link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/16/o...14280000&en=cb5a963b0a3b88d2&ei=5070&emc=eta1
.
Last edited: