U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 11-11-2012, 01:03 PM
 
561 posts, read 184,365 times
Reputation: 311

Advertisements

Personal disposable income has grown nearly 6 times more under Democratic presidents
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has grown 7 times more under Democratic presidents
Corporate profits have grown over 16% more per year under Democratic presidents (they actually declined under Republicans by an average of 4.53%/year)
Average annual compound return on the stock market has been 18 times greater under Democratic presidents (If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democrat administrations you had $3.9M at the end)
Republican presidents added 2.5 times more to the national debt than Democratic presidents
The two times the economy steered into the ditch (Great Depression and Great Recession) were during Republican, laissez faire administrations


just a note from the article in case you didn't want to, you know, spend the time to read it all.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-11-2012, 01:04 PM
 
769 posts, read 222,850 times
Reputation: 219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill61 View Post
We shall see, shan't we.
Someone told me this is a blatant LEFTIST Forum. There's a tip-off to that fact I spotted when I first joined. Libs have almost equal amount of 'rep' points as posts. - You're doing quite well, Jill61
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2012, 01:06 PM
 
7,341 posts, read 1,946,569 times
Reputation: 1926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill61 View Post
You would be exactly correct. The Right Wing pays a lot of lip service to returning us to the philosophies of our Founders, without ever specifically identifying in what ways that would be, let alone quoting their actual words. If they did, their ideology would crumble.
“Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for the profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.” ~ John Adams, Founding Father and 2nd President; Thoughts on Government, 1776

“The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust.” ~ James Madison, Founding Father and 4th President; Federalist Papers, No. 57, February 19, 1788

“‘Political writers,’ says a celebrated author, ‘have established it as a maxim, that, in contriving any system of government, and fixing the several checks and controls of the constitution, every man ought to be supposed a knave, and to have no other end, in all his actions, but private interest. By this interest we must govern him, and by means of it make him co-operate to public good, notwithstanding his insatiable avarice and ambition. Without this we shall in vain boast of the advantages of any constitution, and shall find, in the end, that we have no security for our liberties, and possessions except the good-will of our rulers—that is, we should have no security at all.’” ~ Alexander Hamilton, Founding Father and 1st Secretary of the Treasury, Citing David Hume, February 5, 1775
Our Founding Fathers Established 'The Common Good'
Republican Senator Tom Coburn disagrees with you. See above.

The thing is most republican voters think the wealthy should pay higher tax rates. This is not even up for debate. Ronald Reagan was for a progressive tax.

In fact every Republican President and presidential candidate since Teddy Roosevelt has been for a progressive tax.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2012, 01:13 PM
 
Location: DC area
1,649 posts, read 1,564,837 times
Reputation: 572
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMM05 View Post
Someone told me this is a blatant LEFTIST Forum. There's a tip-off to that fact I spotted when I first joined. Libs have almost equal amount of 'rep' points as posts. - You're doing quite well, Jill61
That's BS. It comes and goes in cycles on this board. What you don't get on the board is ton of moderates. A great many of them stepped back after the last election. Make of that what you will.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2012, 01:16 PM
 
9,334 posts, read 3,293,030 times
Reputation: 2300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post
You managed to not address anything I wrote other than a vague and irrelevant reference to your grandfather and President T. Roosevelt.
There is nothing to address in your cut and paste post.
I'm not for the I.R.S. so your arguments of who should
pay what to whom and for whom, will be on my
deaf ears.

I don't work for you. I don't work for the federal government.
But I will work to make taxes the smallest footprint in my life.
You will either be a casualty of that,
or you will come to the realization no one else owes you a living.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2012, 01:21 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 18,539,137 times
Reputation: 14469
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronic65 View Post
tell me where I am making a mistake in my thinking?
The price of all goods and services are not elastic so passing off costs, particularly when it comes to individual income isn't as easy as you assume it to be. For example, if you have two producers A and B, A may value market share over personal profit while B prefers personal gain. As a result, A may be willing to to realize a marginal decrease in income thus keeping the price for his goods at a lower point, while B raises his prices to maintain his income. Who wins and who loses in the market? A or B?

Remember show your work.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2012, 01:22 PM
Status: "Loving life." (set 24 days ago)
 
Location: Redondo Beach, CA
7,140 posts, read 4,420,094 times
Reputation: 7016
Quote:
Originally Posted by pollyrobin View Post

I know exactly who Americans are. I pay federal tax. I come from a military family that has
served this country, and more importantly I know "leeches" when I see/pay for them.
They are something you just can't scrap off your boot and it grows under large shade trees
like mold

Don't ever think the rich don't care about the poor. You could not be further from the
truth. I won't apologize for wealth and I won't cow down to arrogance. I certainly
won't be hijacked to pay "my fair share" for that.

You know, poverty has always been a dirty word in my book, but laziness, well I
could swear all day on that one.
And in speaking out, you remove all doubt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post

You managed to not address anything I wrote other than a vague and irrelevant reference to your grandfather and President T. Roosevelt.
A practiced tactic. Note how the Party representatives do that every time they're asked a question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMM05 View Post

Someone told me this is a blatant LEFTIST Forum. There's a tip-off to that fact I spotted when I first joined. Libs have almost equal amount of 'rep' points as posts. - You're doing quite well, Jill61
LOL. Ok. And thanks!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post

The thing is most republican voters think the wealthy should pay higher tax rates. This is not even up for debate. Ronald Reagan was for a progressive tax.

In fact every Republican President and presidential candidate since Teddy Roosevelt has been for a progressive tax.
Until George W. Bush.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2012, 01:23 PM
 
7,341 posts, read 1,946,569 times
Reputation: 1926
Quote:
Originally Posted by pollyrobin View Post
There is nothing to address in your cut and paste post.
I'm not for the I.R.S. so your arguments of who should
pay what to whom and for whom, will be on my
deaf ears.

I don't work for you. I don't work for the federal government.
But I will work to make taxes the smallest footprint in my life.
You will either be a casualty of that,
or you will come to the realization no one else owes you a living.
The point of the cut and paste was to show the thinking of Teddy Roosevelt and his rationale for a progressive tax. It was addressing the question of the thread.

Taxation has very little to do with the IRS other than that it is the agency that collects the taxes.

The federal government has the right to tax based on our constitution. I have made no arguments about who should pay.

Again the question was why should the wealthy pay more in taxes. I supplied the reason that was given for progressive taxation.

The rest of your post is just strange and irrelevant.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2012, 01:24 PM
 
7,341 posts, read 1,946,569 times
Reputation: 1926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill61 View Post
And in speaking out, you remove all doubt. A practiced tactic. Note how the Party representatives do that every time they're asked a question. LOL. Ok. And thanks! Until George W. Bush.
Bush supported a progressive tax system. Its right there in the tax rates.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2012, 01:25 PM
Status: "Loving life." (set 24 days ago)
 
Location: Redondo Beach, CA
7,140 posts, read 4,420,094 times
Reputation: 7016
Quote:
Originally Posted by pollyrobin View Post

But I will work to make taxes the smallest footprint in my life.
How patriotic of you.

"The Remissness of our People in Paying Taxes is highly blameable; the Unwillingness to pay them is still more so. I see, in some Resolutions of Town Meetings, a Remonstrance against giving Congress a Power to take, as they call it, the People's Money out of their Pockets, tho' only to pay the Interest and Principal of Debts duly contracted. They seem to mistake the Point. Money, justly due from the People, is their Creditors' Money, and no longer the Money of the People, who, if they withold it, should be compell'd to pay by some Law. ...


"All the Property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other Laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition. He that does not like civil Society on these Terms, let him retire and live among Savages. He can have no right to the benefits of Society, who will not pay his Club towards the Support of it." ~ Benjamin Franklin, Founding Father
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top