Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
How come your posts are not rants and mine are? Because I provide PROOF POSITIVE for mine and you provide nothing but your own opinions?
I come here to provide my opinions and looking for those from others, to learn and to counter. I can find "proof positive" rants online or on television. They are good for backing up claims when necessary, not as the sole basis for an argument.
Quote:
Well if you weren't being sarcastic, then you should still read the links since it is the Progressives who have ruined the poor families in the US today. The "Black & White thing" as you term it is relevant because it is the Progressives from the LBJ Great Society that ruined the poor families by encouraging fatherless families. Destroy the family and you destroy the tax base and create an entitlement class. This is exactly what the Great Society Progressives have achieved. And these families pay no income taxes yet survive off us who do.
First of all, it won't hurt you to discuss anything by referring to people as Americans. Can't you do without emphasizing on color of the skin or ethnicity to frame your argument?
And as a progressive, I vehemently disagree. While both, conservatives and progressives are capable of seeing problems, the difference between the two is that only one chooses to do something about it. The other simply utilizes promotion of a belief system where things painlessly and automatically fall in place. This is evident in virtually every country I have visited, including many third world countries. It appalls me that a country founded on progressive ideas, my country, has people who dismiss it in favor of ideologies that have been implemented for eons and consequences visible in many other countries.
Quote:
This is how it is relevant. Furthermore, it was YOU who dragged the kids into the thread and all of a sudden YOU ask how it is relevant? My God son, you can't be that dense are you?
You mean I brought up the idea of pro-choice? Please point me to that post. Otherwise, shut up and discuss the thread at hand.
Ability is one thing, whether one goes about it or not is another. In my case, I didn’t multiply my expenses as my income multiplied. I drew a line of comfortable living, and anything else was an excess. I decided to build up my savings, and increased my mortgage payments to pay it off in less than ten years. It will be to my personal satisfaction to own a house well before I’m 40 and all on my own. I said no to car loan, and carry only one credit card at hand for emergency (and reward points). I do invest, but in higher return and safer markets with help from friends.
Thats what I did.. I grew custom to living on $15K or so a year.. I bought a dirt cheap home, paid it off in 5 years, bought another dirt cheap home, paid that off in 5 years.. Sold the first one and refied the 2nd to buy the 3rd, leaving me with 2 homes of better quality, and even though the new house is 6,000 sf.. the payments are so cheap that I'll have it paid off in 7-8 years, and since it was bought in a recession, I got it at 50% of the appraised value.
I'll never understand why so many in america cant/wont settle for less, and want to max themself out for 30+ years.. I want to get liabilities paid off as fast as possible to minimize interest paid which I consider a loss.. I'd much rather max out investments for 30 years, which comes at a profit..
I think you'll find that most conservtives believe that all people who actually pay taxes pay too much. We have a spending problem which, in turn, causes a taxing problem. Solve the spending problem and we can all reduce our tax burden.
I've never seen a solution to that end. Let me start with asking for a realistic response to this question: Assuming this is year 2009, what should be the spending limit?
I'll never understand why so many in america cant/wont settle for less, and want to max themself out for 30+ years.. I want to get liabilities paid off as fast as possible to minimize interest paid which I consider a loss.. I'd much rather max out investments for 30 years, which comes at a profit..
I think I do. The key is that it is easy to get people ride the emotional horse, that can take them for a ride. You and I are on the same boat when it comes to staying off credit and loans. But when flashy deals are thrown on the TV screen, it can be tempting. Most things are made to be disposable these days. So there is that continuing demand to buy and keep buying. Fad can push the economy, and it is (unfortunately) the only thing that appears to keep it going.
It is why I don't think we need tax cuts. We got them, TWICE in the 2000s (EGTRRA and JGTRRA) but with the incomes declining, the average American has been paying a greater percentage of income, so it has been an effective tax increase in the name of tax cuts. The top income brackets have benefitted, however, with their incomes rising and lower taxes to pay. What this country needs is policies that create jobs, and un-targeted tax cuts are NOT the way to go about it.
OTOH, to make up for the lost revenue, the idea pushed is to trim social safety nets and programs that are designed to help who are most adversely affected. That is a problem, and will be a monster of our own making.
I think I do. The key is that it is easy to get people ride the emotional horse, that can take them for a ride. You and I are on the same boat when it comes to staying off credit and loans. But when flashy deals are thrown on the TV screen, it can be tempting. Most things are made to be disposable these days. So there is that continuing demand to buy and keep buying. Fad can push the economy, and it is (unfortunately) the only thing that appears to keep it going.
It is why I don't think we need tax cuts. We got them, TWICE in the 2000s (EGTRRA and JGTRRA) but with the incomes declining, the average American has been paying a greater percentage of income, so it has been an effective tax increase in the name of tax cuts. The top income brackets have benefitted, however, with their incomes rising and lower taxes to pay. What this country needs is policies that create jobs, and un-targeted tax cuts are NOT the way to go about it.
OTOH, to make up for the lost revenue, the idea pushed is to trim social safety nets and programs that are designed to help who are most adversely affected. That is a problem, and will be a monster of our own making.
I live in a modest house and paid a good down payment, but my mortgage/tax/insurance payments are a lot more than 12,500/yr, that's probably true for most people and it doesn't mean they are just spending like crazy on tons of luxuries they can't afford, some people do get in way over their head, but many people just want a basic decent life. I know a lot of people who work hard and make a lot less than 50K/yr. Something is wrong when a hard working American can't afford a modest house and to have children, increasing their taxes isn't going to help, and it may send some to welfare type services that conservatives complain so much about.
I live in a modest house and paid a good down payment, but my mortgage/tax/insurance payments are a lot more than 12,500/yr, that's probably true for most people and it doesn't mean they are just spending like crazy on tons of luxuries they can't afford. Something is wrong when a hard working American can't afford a modest house and children, increasing their taxes isn't going to help, and it may send some to welfare type services that conservatives complain so much about.
That is true. But conservatives are, by definition, reluctant to look left and right. They are about tunnel vision. They learn when kicked in the rear, then quickly settle back to the old ways. It is why, sometimes, I feel they got hold of the entire government, and put this nation to rest, so there a desire to rebuild the nation. In fact, I've started to incorporate that possibility in my plans for the future.
That would be (approximately) the bottom-50% of the tax filers in America. Are you saying that people like those should not have kids?
Yessiree. If you can't afford it, you shouldn't have it. Period.
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 register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
