Off Topic USA 2012 Elections Thread

[gymgal]

And the hoops interfere with certain guaranteed freedoms. I'm an Atheist. To get help from many, if not most, of the charitable groups where I grew up, you had to have the right religious affilliation or be able to fake it. Many charitible groups discriminate-officially or not-on all sorts of grounds, philosophical, flat out bigoted, etc.

Good people aren't abundant enough. Safety nets are important. They certainly don't stop the private sector from doing their thing, but they can be the difference between life & death for some people. I want an America where no one dies of treatable diseases or hunger or exposure.

It is certainly true that there needs to be more secular charities to assist those who are not of any faith. This has been an issue for a long time. There are more today, but still not enough and not in the areas of real need, such as food pantries, shelters, financial assistance.

As for not enough good people in the world, I disagree. I think there are plenty. They just don't think its their job to help anymore. The government programs do that now. All they have to do is pay their taxes and be on their way.

 

[gymgal]

No, they are taxed almost half of what they make after the first $250,000. And I think if the country has allowed them opportunities to make that kind of money, they owe it to the country to pay it forward.

As for the private sector being interested in helping the little guy, there's simply no way. The private sector is driven solely by profit. If they can make a profit by helping the little guys, they'll do it. If (as is much more often the case) they can do it at the expense of the little guys, they'll do that just as readily.

The government, to at least some extent, answers to the voters. And everybody's vote truly is equal regardless of their net worth. Granted, the government is pretty corrupt at times and politicians can be easily bought and sold (especially after the Citizens United ruling), but even after the the "little guys'" say is diluted by this corruption, it is still more influential in government than it is in the private sector.

The short version: the private sector is driven by profit, the public sector is driven by the desire to win votes. Neither is ideal, but the latter is less-worse than the former.

You make it sound like they dont pay any taxes until they hit the $250k mark and certainly isn't true. They pay the same rate at each income level as everyone else in that range pays. It's a graduated tax code. And I agree that they owe it to the country to pay forward but it should not be forced. They should have a say in where their money should be spent. The more the rich are taxed, the more protective they become with their money, and the less they donate to charity.

You are talking about for-profit private sector. I am talking about non-profit. Big difference. And I would still argue that in general, people have a very disillusioned idea of greedy for-profits. Most large companies today donate a lot of money to various charities and communities.

 

[ALgymMom]

Wow, wow & wow!


I don't understand this mentality at all. They "owe" it bc America gave them the opportunity to make that kind of money? America gave everyone the same opportunity, why should they be punished for that?
- If Joe graduates high school, is self driven and wants to be a doctor, spends 8-12 years of his life in college and training, makes $400,000 a year, I think he deserves it!! Kudos to him.
-If Bob graduates high school and eh...just doesn't feel like opening another book, gets a job at McDonalds making minimum wage or at the local gymnastics club coaching for $10 an hour, that is fine, America needs those people, my husband and I employee those people, but why in the world would Bob think Joe should give most of his earnings?!?!? Joe worked HARD!!!
-Everyone has that same opportunity to be successful, it's easier for some than others. I most certainly didn't have parents that gave me a blank check & sent me off to college. I was a full time student, worked a full time job, & paid my entire way through school. I didn't think I would ever get my student loans paid off. I most certainly took advantage of the land of opportunity though.
- If I had a dear friend named Jill that was a plastic surgeon and we had girls night out every Sat. night I would not show up to dinner with the mentality....well, she's rich...surely she will pay this dinner bill. Chances are that she would insist on doing that occasionally, but I most certainly would not EXPECT it.

No, they are taxed almost half of what they make after the first $250,000. And I think if the country has allowed them opportunities to make that kind of money, they owe it to the country to pay it forward.
As for the private sector being interested in helping the little guy, there's simply no way. The private sector is driven solely by profit. If they can make a profit by helping the little guys, they'll do it. If (as is much more often the case) they can do it at the expense of the little guys, they'll do that just as readily.

The government, to at least some extent, answers to the voters. And everybody's vote truly is equal regardless of their net worth. Granted, the government is pretty corrupt at times and politicians can be easily bought and sold (especially after the Citizens United ruling), but even after the the "little guys'" say is diluted by this corruption, it is still more influential in government than it is in the private sector.

The short version: the private sector is driven by profit, the public sector is driven by the desire to win votes. Neither is ideal, but the latter is less-worse than the former.

 

[ALgymMom]

...........

 

[skfleming255]

Kudos to ALgymMom.

Those people, who are you upper income earners, are your employers. They give you your jobs. You should be thankful that they make enough $ to afford to pay you. A lot of you, liberal democrats, are asking them to give up more of their $ by way of increasing their taxes. What happens if this goes into play and then they don't have enough $ to pay your salary?!?!?!?!? Your butt goes on unemployment.......another thing that the wealthy helps pay for. Uh oh!!!! They are still having to take care of you and the others who have 10 kids and are on welfare b/c they won't get off their lazy tails and get jobs. Why should they when they have the rich and middle income families to take care of them!!!!

Point is: Appreciate the people who make big incomes......they employ you and assure that you can afford a decent lifestyle. Don't try to take more of their $. They already pay their fair share of taxes, and they earned their $.....it's THEIRS!!!!!!!!!!!

GOP all the way!!!! P.S. I am the wife in a middle income family, and I still feel this way.

 

[gymgal]

ALgymmom,
Great post. I differ on this point though...

Of course the rich owe it to the country to give back. It's a moral obligation to keep this country strong. The faulty premise comes into play when people think ONLY the rich have this obligation. All folks have this obligation.

 

[Moxiegrl83]

-Everyone has that same opportunity to be successful, it's easier for some than others. I most certainly didn't have parents that gave me a blank check & sent me off to college. I was a full time student, worked a full time job, & paid my entire way through school. I didn't think I would ever get my student loans paid off. I most certainly took advantage of the land of opportunity though.

Student loans are a government program....one that the right is trying to stifle as we type. So many people use programs started and supported by the left, but then vote to change the programs they used to help get them where they are. I don't get it.

 

[maryRS]

Just want to say that the reality of taxpayers of 250k and above paying almost half their income is false in reality. I am a CPA and I have many high wealth clients and some of these taxpayers pay less tax than my family does.

The thing about taxes and the rich. The breaks that exist are for things such as investment income (qualified dividends, capital gains etc.) Most middle class working families, do not have the bulk of their taxable income as investment income. It is wages for most of us, with some investment income. Even with deductions from mortgage interest and property taxes, most middle class people are paying a whole lot more in taxes percentage wise, and even dollar wise in many cases than many high net worth taxpayers. That is a fact.

You are right about 250k not being rich, but it's not poor. An income of 250k will lend a taxpayer to more opportunities to invest their money than an income of 100k. In some parts of the country a family with an income of $250 is pretty well off.

Well, I'm a fiscal conservative, social libertarian, so I really don't have anyone to vote for but I will go with the lesser of two "evils" and vote for Romney. This country was founded on the sweat and tears of hard working citizens, not the government. The founders wanted to ensure that the government (federal in particular) did not gain too much power. Unfortunately, with each passing decade, it becomes more obvious that soon we will no longer have a republic of 50 independent states but rather a true national government. I do not look forward to that day.... And both republicans and democrats are to blame.

This country needs to get back to the ideals from which it was founded - individual liberties *and responsibilities*. It is not the government's job to take care of people - whether it be healthcare, welfare, unemployment, social security. What happened before these were all instated? Oh, that's right - the communities came together and assisted those in need. And why did it work? Because there was accountability for your actions.... And there was a certain amount of humility that came with the donations, which made you want to get back to work as soon as possible. The more government got involved, the less personal it became and the easier it was to become a victim of society - not try as hard to raise yourself to a higher standard.

I have no pipe dreams - I know Romney isn't the guy to fix it. I don't know if we even can anymore. But I know Obama isn't the answer. He ran on Hope and Change and essentially gave the country neither... His time is up...

And as for taxing the richest - give me a break - (no, I am not in this category - not by a long shot). $250,000 is not rich. But regardless, these folks (250K+) already pay more than their fair share in taxes. almost half their income, in fact. Paying a fair share would have EVERYONE (except those at/just above the poverty line) paying an equal rate - like in a National flat sales tax.

 

[maryRS]

But no one is asking Joe the doctor to pay most of his earnings to taxes. And the tax rate is not 50%! It caps at 35%. I have a client, a single lady who has on her tax return about 400k of dividend income. Because of how the law is written for qualified dividends, she only pays 15%, some years less on those dividends. With her deductions, she paid a little over 40k in federal taxes. All her long term capital gains are also taxes at 15% instead of 28% where they used to be. My family, with both my husband and I working, making a decent living, but with kids and 1 of them in college, housing and real estate tax deductions, well, we paid almost as much as she did in Federal income taxes. And we were barely able to afford a vacation this summer.

How is that fair? This woman has INCOME, all investment income of almost half a million dollars.Oh and the funny thing, we give away more in charity than she did also. And when she was paying more, before the cuts in these rates, she gave the same amount to charity, making those rates low did not make her give more away.



With income tax, what they are proposing is more equitable. They are proposing to increase that top rate to 39.6? or something, increase capital gains to 20% and put those damn qualified dividends back where they belong at ordinary income. I should not be paying the same amount of taxes as someone who has that much income, all of it investment. YOu would itnk with all the deductions a working family owning a home would get that it would be much less. I don't have enough money to invest and therefore create a portfolio so I can earn all those dividends.

And yes this is one case, but this is pretty much status quo with my clients, and I've worked at different type firms, but the rich do get better tax breaks than middle class, and you will never convince me that that is fair. No one is asking for the rich to give away all their money.

One more thing, which I don't think is targeted to change, but I always wondered, and if changed this would affect us, but why does Social security cap and after a 110k (for 2012) you don't pay on any additional income. No, 110k is not rich, but it just doesn't make any sense. Really, with the underfunding of SS, I think every dollar should be taxed. It just makes no sense.

Wow, wow & wow!


I don't understand this mentality at all. They "owe" it bc America gave them the opportunity to make that kind of money? America gave everyone the same opportunity, why should they be punished for that?
- If Joe graduates high school, is self driven and wants to be a doctor, spends 8-12 years of his life in college and training, makes $400,000 a year, I think he deserves it!! Kudos to him.
-If Bob graduates high school and eh...just doesn't feel like opening another book, gets a job at McDonalds making minimum wage or at the local gymnastics club coaching for $10 an hour, that is fine, America needs those people, my husband and I employee those people, but why in the world would Bob think Joe should give most of his earnings?!?!? Joe worked HARD!!!
-Everyone has that same opportunity to be successful, it's easier for some than others. I most certainly didn't have parents that gave me a blank check & sent me off to college. I was a full time student, worked a full time job, & paid my entire way through school. I didn't think I would ever get my student loans paid off. I most certainly took advantage of the land of opportunity though.
- If I had a dear friend named Jill that was a plastic surgeon and we had girls night out every Sat. night I would not show up to dinner with the mentality....well, she's rich...surely she will pay this dinner bill. Chances are that she would insist on doing that occasionally, but I most certainly would not EXPECT it.

 

[gymgal]

-Everyone has that same opportunity to be successful, it's easier for some than others. I most certainly didn't have parents that gave me a blank check & sent me off to college. I was a full time student, worked a full time job, & paid my entire way through school. I didn't think I would ever get my student loans paid off. I most certainly took advantage of the land of opportunity though.

Student loans are a government program....one that the right is trying to stifle as we type. So many people use programs started and supported by the left, but then vote to change the programs they used to help get them where they are. I don't get it.

The republicans began the student loan program, much like many of the programs in existence today. And the right doesn't want to stifle the loan program. It wants to reign in its costs and have more accountability for it.

Yes, lot of people have used the system in the young years, get ahead, and then change their ideals - that's because they grow up and realize there are better ways to do it. "Do as I do, not as I did..."

 

[gymgal]

Just want to say that the reality of taxpayers of 250k and above paying almost half their income is false in reality. I am a CPA and I have many high wealth clients and some of these taxpayers pay less tax than my family does.

The thing about taxes and the rich. The breaks that exist are for things such as investment income (qualified dividends, capital gains etc.) Most middle class working families, do not have the bulk of their taxable income as investment income. It is wages for most of us, with some investment income. Even with deductions from mortgage interest and property taxes, most middle class people are paying a whole lot more in taxes percentage wise, and even dollar wise in many cases than many high net worth taxpayers. That is a fact.

You are right about 250k not being rich, but it's not poor. An income of 250k will lend a taxpayer to more opportunities to invest their money than an income of 100k. In some parts of the country a family with an income of $250 is pretty well off.

I was wondering when this would pop up... Yes, this is true. Because the tax code is set up as wage income vs. all income. Here's the thing that people with this argument never like to bring up - Money used for investment (and therefore the income generated by that) has already been taxed when it was first earned by the person in wages. If you want to tax it again (which is already is - through capital gains), then it's double taxation, which is just plain wrong! The reason why the corp execs have lower tax rates than the average wage earner is because you are comparing their capital gains rate (which is where they are earning most of their money) to the wage earners' wage tax rate. - apples to oranges.

Now, we can argue that it is still unfair and the capital gains rates should be graduated, like the wage rates. I personally am against this, as like I said, it's double taxation on income. I would much prefer a national sales tax where the more wealthy will naturally end up providing more taxes, since they spend more in general.

but this is a moot point because as someone else pointed out - it is not tax revenue that is the issue - it is the outrageous increase in governmental spending over the past 75 years, without proper accountability to the tax payers. Followers of Dave Ramsey will know this one - Comparing the national debt to an average household finances, using the same ratios of income (which the government doesn't actually have - it's all tax revenue) to debt (2011 figures):

If a household income was $55,000 per year, they’d actually be spending $96,500—$41,500 more than they made! That means they’re spending 175% of their annual income! So, in 2011 they’d add $41,500 of debt to their current credit card debt of $366,000!

What family would be able to survive this scenario for long? And yet, we have no problem letting out government to it with our money - and the answer from the left (and many from the right too)? force the rich to pay more to increase the revenues so we can continue to spend like crazy people.... what's wrong with this picture?

 

[CoachGoofy]

I pay more taxes than corporations. I make little enough from my job & student loans that I get food stamps, without which I would be choosing monthly between eating & having a roof.

My father, who is on SSDI, ALSO pays more in taxes than said corporations.

How do people not have a problem with this?

 

[Geoffrey Taucer]

The phrase "job creators" always makes me laugh.

Corporate profits are at an all-time high right now. If giving corporations and top-earners more money led to the creation of more jobs, we'd be DROWNING in jobs right now.

Yet somehow it isn't working that way.

It has been shown time and time again that when you make the richest people richer, they DO NOT pay it forward to their employees, they hoard it.

 

[gymgal]

I pay more taxes than corporations. I make little enough from my job & student loans that I get food stamps, without which I would be choosing monthly between eating & having a roof.

My father, who is on SSDI, ALSO pays more in taxes than said corporations.

How do people not have a problem with this?

Again, apples and oranges - Corporations don't pay taxes. They pass them on through increased prices of their products/services. The more you raise taxes on them, the higher the prices go, which affects the consumer, not the corporation.

For the record, I don't believe in taxing SSI, disability, or unemployment. That just defeats the purpose of the benefits.

Goofy, this is not directed to you personally. I don't know your situation. but since you put it in your note, I am touching on it. In the field in which I work, I come across many/many families on food stamps, welfare, unemployment and I just do not buy into the notion that a completely capable adult cannot find enough work to manage their basic bills. Is it hard? yes. Will the work be what one really wants to do all their life? no. Does that mean working more than 40-50 hours a week? maybe... but it can be done and frankly, if one wants to make a better life, he/she has to do everything in their power to make it work. Get roommates, work 3 jobs, sell all of your possessions you can do without.... It's just a different mentality than what most people today have. We all make choices... Sometimes you have to make the real tough ones in order to have more/better choices in the future.

 

[gymgal]

The phrase "job creators" always makes me laugh.

Corporate profits are at an all-time high right now. If giving corporations and top-earners more money led to the creation of more jobs, we'd be DROWNING in jobs right now.

Yet somehow it isn't working that way.

It has been shown time and time again that when you make the richest people richer, they DO NOT pay it forward to their employees, they hoard it.

Corporation profits are not at an "all-time" high in terms of ratios. But regardless, corporations will not begin to hire again until they have some feeling of security about the future of this nation. Know how I know? I'm a small business owner and I want to expand my company but won't until I have a better idea of what Obamacare and new taxes will have on my ability to hire and MAINTAIN these new workers.

 

[MaryA]

I just went to an interesting website... Isidewith.com. It asks you a bunch of questions about your political views and tells you which candidates official stance most closely matches your own. I wasn't sure if I'd come up Democratic or Green, but it turns out I side with the Democrats 95% and with the Green party on only 87% (though to be fair the questions were very black and white... If there was a wider range of potential answers, my results may have been different.) I was 24% in agreement with the Libertarians and only 7% republican. I think my tree-hugging, "we shall overcome" singing status is confirmed.

 

[CoachGoofy]

Again, apples and oranges - Corporations don't pay taxes. They pass them on through increased prices of their products/services. The more you raise taxes on them, the higher the prices go, which affects the consumer, not the corporation.

For the record, I don't believe in taxing SSI, disability, or unemployment. That just defeats the purpose of the benefits.

Goofy, this is not directed to you personally. I don't know your situation. but since you put it in your note, I am touching on it. In the field in which I work, I come across many/many families on food stamps, welfare, unemployment and I just do not buy into the notion that a completely capable adult cannot find enough work to manage their basic bills. Is it hard? yes. Will the work be what one really wants to do all their life? no. Does that mean working more than 40-50 hours a week? maybe... but it can be done and frankly, if one wants to make a better life, he/she has to do everything in their power to make it work. Get roommates, work 3 jobs, sell all of your possessions you can do without.... It's just a different mentality than what most people today have. We all make choices... Sometimes you have to make the real tough ones in order to have more/better choices in the future.

The area in which I live? There are not enough jobs to go around with people working 1, much less 3.

It's also mighty presumptive to assume everyone who struggles it's an instance of "won't". I come from a family where everyone, EVERYONE, is dealing with some level of disability. Working multiple jobs is not an option for anyone related to me, or for a number of other people near and dear to me--even if there were 3x as many jobs as there are people.

And of course that's logistically impossible for many poor people. Not everyone can afford a car. Transiting place to place is pretty much a 2nd/3rd/8th job.

*insert thing on how opportunity is not exactly equal here*

 

[gymgal]

The area in which I live? There are not enough jobs to go around with people working 1, much less 3.

It's also mighty presumptive to assume everyone who struggles it's an instance of "won't". I come from a family where everyone, EVERYONE, is dealing with some level of disability. Working multiple jobs is not an option for anyone related to me, or for a number of other people near and dear to me--even if there were 3x as many jobs as there are people.

And of course that's logistically impossible for many poor people. Not everyone can afford a car. Transiting place to place is pretty much a 2nd/3rd/8th job.

*insert thing on how opportunity is not exactly equal here*

My post specifically said "a completely capable adult". Obviously, I was not including those with disabilities (mental or physical). And I was not being presumptive. I was stating my experience, which is vast in this area.

If an area is so destitute of jobs, then move to a different area. Why stay somewhere where there's no future?
No car? save up for a clunker or a moped. Or work out a deal with someone who has one - barter your services for transportation. Ride a bike, use public transportation.
Most often, the thing that defeats people in these situations is the "victim mentality". It's not because they don't want to work. In fact, most really do but they don't want to put out the immense effort involved to make it happen. If it is too much work, then it's not worth their time. And that's exactly why governmental programs don't work - people get assistance with no expectation of having to give in return.

 

[gymgal]

I just went to an interesting website... Isidewith.com.

thanks for the site! I side with Ron Paul for 95% not surprising, though we differ on foreign policy significantly. What surprised me was that the general public agreed with me 85% of the time... Considering I'm a libertarian, I'm a bit confused...

 

[CoachGoofy]

Not everyone CAN drive. Not everyone has the spare pennies to save up. And moving? Ridiculous expensive. Public transit? Already covered it.

I guess my problem with Romney is that he's a white multimillionaire dude who cannot grasp what it is to be anything else. My America is more diverse than his in terms of race, ability, sexuality, gender, religion or lack thereof, class, etc. He's never struggled. Most of us have. I won't vote for anyone who sincerely states that this is a WASP, bootstrappin' country.