Email of the Day

Actually this was a thread I had on facebook after posting the audio interview where Obama practically admits he's a socialist.

BA wrote
Dude, the O is sooooooo far from socialism that I am only voting for him because I do not want anymore of my civil liberties curtailed by thieves, crooks, and liars like rethuglicans. I also like the idea of having a president who has read the Constitution and understands how it should work.
Report - Delete

Hockey Dino wrote
That's pretty funny actually. I would never say Bush cared about the Constitution, let alone Mccain. The Patriot Act speaks for itself. But to say Obama is not a socialist that's borderline being blind to the truth.

Obama is for bigger government, and that is not Constitutional. He wants the supreme court to amend the Constitution so the government can tell you what it can do for you. That is not By the People, Of the People, For The People.

Your money is part of your civil liberties. McCain's budget plan is 6.7 billion more than Bush which is a joke. Obama is 287 billion more!. Have fun paying that out of your own pocket. Please cut me a check while you are at it too since you don't care.
Delete

BA wrote
Actually, I would have preferred if instead of bailing out Wall Street, they had just cut every citizen a check for 400K. A true economic recovery would have likely ensued, government expenditures would have declined because people could have paid for things like health care, child care, credit card debt and mortgages.

In any event, I am just really sad at how low the discourse is from contemporary conservatives. It is a shame, because we need everyone to step up their games and stop trying to make the other "side" look like complete idiots. If you're going to disagree, do it with a bit more grace and facts and let go of needing to look smart by sneering remarks. I read you posts sometimes hoping to find something to spur my thought onward, but lately, I have been disappointed.

The facts: Obama is a capitalist, who recognizes that capitalism as we know it is coming to an end and likely we need a crash pad under this careening landing. With him taking campaign money from Wall Street firms, it is oh so clear that he ain't a socialist, but rather seeking to get the economy stabilized so that capital markets may continue to work. Yes, he wants to regulate them, but in a way that is not quite as abusive to tax payers as it is now.

The size of government is not mandated in the Constitution.

The right to earn a fair wage is a civil liberty, not money. Both plans are willy nilly. It is not that Obama is a socialist, it is the desire of most of the country to have socialist policies because it is clear that money is not trickling down, rather, up. The programs that people crave and need are all about stability which will in fact equal slower growth.

Once elected, Obama will likely disappoint greatly on all the so-called socialist promises, but then it is likely workers and folks who have fallen out of the middle class will begin to demand the Change. That is what will push us to a more stable economy (socialism), not Obama/Biden. People. Demos.


Hockey Dino wrote
The power of government is mandated in intent by the Constitution. Size does matter (did I just say that???). They go hand in hand. When you have the military, government agencies, programs, and regulations expanding...that increases the role and size.

The problem is that contemporary conservatives arent truly conservatives. They are mainstream middle of the road cronies who follow special interest groups and spend like crazy.

The Bailout was wrong.

How is Obama a capitalist? You do not take from one group of income earners and penalize them more for their success, to help those who arent successful without it being a form of socialism. Welfare and "wealth"(whatever that is) distribution is just that.

We have a mixed economy. With a mixed economy you will have a disparigty of income earners more prevelant. You will have this middle class that everyone fears so much.

When Obama gets elected you will have a majority House, Senate, and President who will push what Reid, Biden, and Pelosi want. Where is the veto power? Will a filibuster even work? The people will actually have a say? Did we have a say in the Bailout? Things will get worse.
Delete

BK wrote
The bailout came from McCain's people, so how are you pinning that on Obama?
...And McCain believes in taxes, just like Obama...

He just doesn't believe in taxes for the super-wealthy (like himself). That's where they differ on tax policy...

If thinking that the rich should pay more taxes than the poor is socialist, then how the hell are we supposed to pay for our roads/schools/hospitals/etc?
Report - Delete

Hockey Dino wrote
Mccains people? his people are Arizona constituients. the majority democratic house and senate voted for the bailout.

I'm already playing property tax and state tax, so now I have to pay for you too? come on. that is socialism.

who is to decide who is rich? you? why should the rich get taxed more for being successful? they already paid taxes..now you want them to pay more?

economic justice is not what the founding fathers intended. individual liberties and freedoms are what we have...not for everyone to work for the common good. it does not work.
Delete

PA wrote
Better than a dictatorship.. which is practically what were under with the Bush administration. McCain at least has a little class, look at his shoes but his running mate is a white trash moron. Forget the Republicans and their trickle down economics.. is it working.. look around. 4 more years of a failed administration isn't going to get my vote. Obama all the way, even if he doesn't bring 360 degree change, the change that does occur at least will be in the interest of the American people not large corporations.

If your that rich, then your smart enough to know how to reduce your taxes and I don't have to explain it at all.


Hockey Dino wrote
Does anyone around here do their homework????

Socialism does not work!

No one wants more Bush.
Your logic is flawed.

Trickle down would work if there were conservatives in office. There are only 3 worth a darn that understand economics.

No more taxes! The government has too much control I.e. just look at the neocons!

You don't punish the entire country because a few idiots spoiled the soup!
Delete

BA wrote
Dino, again, you resort to name calling in the face of the facts, which clearly refute your claims.

Currently, our taxation system is set up to have money trickle up to the top 2% of wealth holders, most of whom actually have never worked for their money. Someone died, they got to keep the goodies.

But back to the trickle up: the tax code has become so resoundingly complicated to hide the fact that corporations are now afforded the same rights as individuals. That used to be illegal. Shareholders needed to increase, exposing more to the risk of the corporation, but also making them feel cheated if the regulations changed to limit how the corporation works.

Spreading the wealth: while everyone is paying some sort of tax, not everyone is benefiting from those taxes. In fact, those who have more, as Alysia pointed out, can afford to figure out how to pay significantly less of a percentage of their earnings towards taxes. Those of us earning under $250K, who rent their housing, don't own an SUV, have not incorporated, do not have healthcare actually pay a steeper percentage of our money into a pot that is then unfairly redistributed. We then have to pay more money out of pocket for things that a government should (and used to) cover, like quality education, childcare (anyone remember Headstart?), hospital emergency rooms, levees, art (yes, you likely don't remember the NEA funding artists to travel around the country and the globe), protecting our food supply, etc.

The problem with trickle down is that it can only work for a short period as it assumes linear production and never-ending resources, even human resources. Stress, depression, high divorce rates, deadbeat dads, soaring diabetes--a lot of that is the result of forcing humans, who thrive in cycles, not linear chronology, to work beyond the capacity of their organism, physiological and social.
Report - Delete

Democratic socialism is alive and well in a good chunk of prosperous Europe, and no, poor folks are not allowed to lay about and just collect a check for being poor. I think you might have socialism confused, once again, with communism, which is a political system, as socialism is an economic system.
Report - Delete

Hockey Dino wrote
What name calling are you referring to? Socialism is alive in well in Europe? Hello Europe produces NOTHING. They produce no jobs whatsoever They have the highest unemployment rate in the world. There's a reason for this. What could it possibly be? In fact the only country there that is thriving is Ireland. They are thriving because at one time they had the highest unemployment rate. They cut their corporate tax from 48% to 12%. Now they have the lowest unemployment rate and their are very productive and successful. Imagine that!

Socialism steals wealth, it does not produce wealth. The premise itself is out in the open at how wrong it is. I do not have communism and socialism confused. Socialism by definition means that the government owns businesses. How is that not a system of acting government?

Our tax system is not set up to trickle anywhere. Everyone is paying different rates over and over. Property tax, state tax, income tax, sales tax. When will it end? For what? So we can build Iraq? So we can help other countries left and right? It's a joke.

Corporations should not have the same rights as individuals. Wait, we just agreed on something.

Not everyone is benefiting from taxes, and everyone cannot benefit from the taxes. That's the problem with taxes in the first place. How can you measure that? How do you take $10 from me, when you worked harder and I only take $5 from you? It does NOT WORK.

Your point about owning a house as if its some right, and the liberal left SUV stuff. Come on.

The government should NOT be in the business of education or housing. Or childcare. You really want government to take care of your kids?

Stress, depression etc is not the concern of the government. If you make that happen, then it will never stop. They will control everything, it's just a matter of time.

What we have here is a clash of ideas and philosophy. You think the government should take care of everyone. I know the government should not and cannot, because it is wrong and cannot work. History proves this.
The government is not efficient at doing anything, including collecting taxes.

As for the tax plan, you are looking at 20% of your payroll being chopped right off the bat just to pay for taxes. You call that fair? What's the point of working? I should just let the government take care of me. I've been stressing out trying to pay bills when I should just walk away...and maybe get my own bailout (like the one Obama and Mccain supported). You are looking at 44% of the workforce not paying into the tax initiative, and then getting something from the government. That's fair?

There's a reason why the stock market goes down everytime Obama goes up in the polls. There's a direct correlation to the confidence level. People want change, but they won't get it with him.