No. If you go back and read the numbers of people who voted "historically" instead of by ideals/agendas ... BHO benefited of being the first black presidential candidate on the November ballot.
The majority of people voted for "history," not for agenda.
I had to shut off the news to keep from puking from the number of idiots who were voting BHO just so they could tell their kids they voted for the first black president.
I believe this is what happened. I remember reading that young, white people are the ones who voted him in. Hopefully, they are now getting an 'education', and realize what they have done, and maybe, just maybe, it will be made better next election.
The thing fair taxation or flat taxation or national sales tax share one thing in common ... they will never ever happen.
As our political model drifts further into the arena of "Socialist Republic" all we are going to do is end up like the UK. Half the population on the dole, jobs being scarce and why would somebody want one anyway since we wiull be under such a heavy tax burden that it isn worth it to get out of bed in the morning.
We'll get free health care though!
Wow what amazing facts. I didn't know half of the UK didn't get out of bed in the morning because the are on the dole. The streets would really be crowded if every one got up.
Wow what amazing facts. I didn't know half of the UK didn't get out of bed in the morning because the are on the dole. The streets would really be crowded if every one got up.
I was making a point. not delivering statistics. Why would I want to work and earn a living so the government can, against my will and without my consent take what I earn with my education and effort and give it to some oxygen breathing no-load who is too lazy to get up and get a job.
National sales tax! You buy stuff...you pay taxes. You buy more expensive stuff....you pay more taxes. You buy smart and cheap...you pay less taxes. Everyone who spends money, pays taxes. No loopholes. No illegals not paying their share. No hiding money and not paying into the system.
I think this is an interesting proposal, but I have a few questions about it.
In most Fair Tax models I’ve seen proposed taxes are paid at the retail level. Taxes are not assessed for whole sale purchases or non-retail purposes. Therefore businesses essential pay no taxes. I’m not sure if that’s a good idea.
I like the fair tax in that it doesn’t tax second hand purchases or purchases between private individuals. That relieves the poor of tax burden.
But here’s my REAL concern. The point of purchase becomes a legally policed process. To ensure that taxes are indeed being paid, businesses will have to allow the government to monitor and audit all purchases. The government isn’t going to just trust “Irv’s Hardware” to police itself. Irv is going to have to produce meticulous records of all purchases to demonstrate that he indeed charged the tax at the retail level. Not too comfortable with this.
My biggest issues with most laws and proposals aren’t the theories behind them. Most of the time I agree somewhat. Where I get real uncomfortable is when we begin to talk about how something is enforced, monitored, audited, etc. But I’ve heard worse plans than the Fair Tax.
Personally, I like the Flat Tax proposal with family exemptions for children (which all Flat Tax models propose.
No deductions period! None! Everyone that has income pays the same percentage.
But that isn’t very just. Here’s why… the cost of living is the same regardless of what one makes. Let’s say you make $100,000 a year and we have a Flat Tax of 17%. You’ll pay $17,000 in taxes leaving you a remaining $83,000. You can live comfortably on $83,000 even with current cost of living. But then you have Christina (an actual friend of mine) who makes $24,960 a year working as an administrative assistant in a Medical Office. If you tax her 17% she’s paying $4,243.20 in taxes leaving her only $20,716.80 to live on… and the cost of living is essentially the same for her as it is you. While you’re both paying the same percentage… who’s shouldering more of a burden when it comes to paying taxes? Of course the woman who is only bringing home $20,716.80. She’s the one who is truly almost taxed to homelessness. Of course, most conservatives don’t care if taxes tax a person into homelessness as long as it isn’t businesses and corporations. So yes, Christina is being burdened by the taxes far more than anyone bringing home $83,000 dollars. But she has a hope. She can work a second job. So yes, she’s forced to work around the clock to pay her taxes and survive.
Now, add onto this…
Let’s say that Christina is taking care of two kids who of course don’t pay taxes or bring in any income. Now how is she supposed to survive? Two jobs? Of course, that’s the magic answer. But that places money as a greater value than family and raising children because with two jobs she’s not going to be able to parent or mother adequately. Some say, “Yeah, well I survived.” Yes, they “survived”. Most of our problems today are latch key kids who have no parents at home or involved in their lives because their parents are chasing drugs or the almighty dollar. So, this is why CLASSICAL CONSERVATIVES favor at least a family exemption for children. It’s to relieve families and at least maintain a sense of justice.
You see laws can be “fair” but not “just”. For example, you have little Johnny. He’s a straight “A” student with a bright future ahead of him. His mom accidentally packed a metal fork in his lunch box while she was distracted by a ringing phone and a crying baby. The school Johnny attends has a “no exception no tolerance” policy regarding metallic sharp objects. Little Johnny is expelled. Now…what happened to Johnny is “fair”… but is it “just”? Did Johnny bring a knife? No. Is Johnny a problem kid? No. Was Johnny threatening anyone? No. Did he try to hide it? No. In fact, did Johnny even know it was in his lunch box? No. Guess what… it’s not “just”. Let’s say you have three kids and you bought the first two bicycles on their 12th birthdays. Your third child, Bobby, is looking forward to his 12th birthday and his turn to have a bicycle. But being Bobby’s father you know that Bobby isn’t as mature as his brothers and in fact you worry about his safety. So you decide not to get him a bicycle on his 12th birthday. What’s little Bobby going to say? You guessed it… “THAT’S NOT FAIR!” Guess what, he’s right. But it is “just”. Bobby’s not ready for a bike.
When writing laws we can’t become drooling idiots. We can’t become salivating fundamentalists for “fairness”. Because when we do we often neglect “justice”. So I’m not interested in the whiney little voice that creeps out of conservative mouths, “That’s not fair!” I’m not impressed with fairness. I’m more interested in justice.
The thing fair taxation or flat taxation or national sales tax share one thing in common ... they will never ever happen.
As our political model drifts further into the arena of "Socialist Republic" all we are going to do is end up like the UK. Half the population on the dole, jobs being scarce and why would somebody want one anyway since we wiull be under such a heavy tax burden that it isn worth it to get out of bed in the morning.
We'll get free health care though!
You just don’t have much faith in God do ya John? LOL Things are going to be alright no matter what happens. Why? Because all things work to the good for those who love God and are called according to his purposes.
I was making a point. not delivering statistics. Why would I want to work and earn a living so the government can, against my will and without my consent take what I earn with my education and effort and give it to some oxygen breathing no-load who is too lazy to get up and get a job.
John I am joking. Lighten up. How about we go back to the tax rate under old Ronnie? Would that make you happy?
But that isn’t very just. Here’s why… the cost of living is the same regardless of what one makes. Let’s say you make $100,000 a year and we have a Flat Tax of 17%. You’ll pay $17,000 in taxes leaving you a remaining $83,000. You can live comfortably on $83,000 even with current cost of living. But then you have Christina (an actual friend of mine) who makes $24,960 a year working as an administrative assistant in a Medical Office. If you tax her 17% she’s paying $4,243.20 in taxes leaving her only $20,716.80 to live on… and the cost of living is essentially the same for her as it is you. While you’re both paying the same percentage… who’s shouldering more of a burden when it comes to paying taxes? Of course the woman who is only bringing home $20,716.80. She’s the one who is truly almost taxed to homelessness. Of course, most conservatives don’t care if taxes tax a person into homelessness as long as it isn’t businesses and corporations. So yes, Christina is being burdened by the taxes far more than anyone bringing home $83,000 dollars. But she has a hope. She can work a second job. So yes, she’s forced to work around the clock to pay her taxes and survive.
Now, add onto this…
Let’s say that Christina is taking care of two kids who of course don’t pay taxes or bring in any income. Now how is she supposed to survive? Two jobs? Of course, that’s the magic answer. But that places money as a greater value than family and raising children because with two jobs she’s not going to be able to parent or mother adequately. Some say, “Yeah, well I survived.” Yes, they “survived”. Most of our problems today are latch key kids who have no parents at home or involved in their lives because their parents are chasing drugs or the almighty dollar. So, this is why CLASSICAL CONSERVATIVES favor at least a family exemption for children. It’s to relieve families and at least maintain a sense of justice.
You see laws can be “fair” but not “just”. For example, you have little Johnny. He’s a straight “A” student with a bright future ahead of him. His mom accidentally packed a metal fork in his lunch box while she was distracted by a ringing phone and a crying baby. The school Johnny attends has a “no exception no tolerance” policy regarding metallic sharp objects. Little Johnny is expelled. Now…what happened to Johnny is “fair”… but is it “just”? Did Johnny bring a knife? No. Is Johnny a problem kid? No. Was Johnny threatening anyone? No. Did he try to hide it? No. In fact, did Johnny even know it was in his lunch box? No. Guess what… it’s not “just”. Let’s say you have three kids and you bought the first two bicycles on their 12th birthdays. Your third child, Bobby, is looking forward to his 12th birthday and his turn to have a bicycle. But being Bobby’s father you know that Bobby isn’t as mature as his brothers and in fact you worry about his safety. So you decide not to get him a bicycle on his 12th birthday. What’s little Bobby going to say? You guessed it… “THAT’S NOT FAIR!” Guess what, he’s right. But it is “just”. Bobby’s not ready for a bike.
When writing laws we can’t become drooling idiots. We can’t become salivating fundamentalists for “fairness”. Because when we do we often neglect “justice”. So I’m not interested in the whiney little voice that creeps out of conservative mouths, “That’s not fair!” I’m not impressed with fairness. I’m more interested in justice.
Well just off top of my head...
Christina could move to somewhere where the cost of living is much cheaper, go to school and learn a new trade (Gov provides plenty of allowances and help for people going back to school) or indeed work a second job like thousands of people do.
Christina could move to somewhere where the cost of living is much cheaper, go to school and learn a new trade (Gov provides plenty of allowances and help for people going back to school) or indeed work a second job like thousands of people do.
Christina has two kids. And she’s divorced. She can’t move too far away because the courts have granted her ex with visiting rights. She might be able to get money to go to school but in order to pay her bills she’s has to work two jobs. That’s not conducive to going to back to school; it’s very rare that anyone can pull something like that off. That’s why we admire them so. And the two jobs are already cutting into her parenting (her ex isn’t much help sadly) and her parents are in California. All she really can do right now is work two jobs. But it breaks her heart because she wants to be there for her kids.
Sadly, kids don’t matter in our society. This debate is a perfect example. We who call ourselves Christian pride ourselves with being pro-life because we supposedly care about the lives of children. But when it comes to the most important thing kids need (which is an available and present parent) we growl, “Get a second job.”, “Go back to school.”, or “Just move!” In most conservative minds the kids aren’t worth a couple thousand dollars in tax exemption. After all…we’re talking money and they’re just kids, right? Oh well. So her oldest son’s grades have been falling since she started working a second job and isn’t home to help him or supervise him with homework. Her younger son just entered Middle School and he seems to be doing okay…so far. All we care about is that she pay cold hard cash. We don’t care that her kids need a parent. Maybe the next thing you’ll here a conservative growl at her is, “If you can’t parent, put ‘em up for adoption!” God knows if her oldest gets mixed up in drugs and commits a serious crime conservatives will be growling, “Where was the kid’s parent!” I’ll tell you where she was… working two jobs to keep a roof over their heads and food on their table. And nobody argues for her and her kids to have an exemption that might lessen the hours she needs to work so she can be there with them more. Pathetic.
Doing the right thing is costly. Having a just and equitable society isn’t free. People want it…but nobody wants to pay for it. Everyone talks about “family values” but when it comes down to it…the family values conservatives represent are measured in cold hard cash. We say we are pro-life because we care about kids…but the moment they cost society a little cash we’d rather throw them under a bus and put the parent to work 12 or more hours a day.
That is why, though I could support a Flat Tax, like most classical conservatives who do I also support an exemption for dependents. I’d argue that the law would apply equally to you. If you want the exemption, have some kids and if you can’t, tough luck. You’ll survive. Working two jobs without kids isn’t going to hurt anyone really. Families need a break not more hurdles. It's time we put more value on families than the almighty dollar.
Linear Mode
