Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin

[clement]

The bulk of taxes are spent on 3 things. Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, and Defense. All the emotional things that people complain about (welfare, handouts, foreign aid, earmarks, pork, etc.) are all very small by comparison.

[JL21]

I pulled 500K out of my butt.

I wish I could do that.

[clement]

I pulled 500K out of my butt.

I wish I could do that.

Diddy, if I were you, I'd be worried.

[JL21]

I pulled 500K out of my butt.

I wish I could do that.

Diddy, if I were you, I'd be worried.

Heh... I mean my own butt, wisenheimer.

[Leroy]

They can raise taxes on the very wealthy...I have no problem with that.

What I do have a problem with is the way that the earned income credit has turned out. It is basically taking the money paid in taxes and given to the poorer people. At least that is how it was designed. But here is my problem...a girl who worked in our office had two kids by two different fathers and was unmarried. She made enough money to entitle her to over $3,000 in EIC. She stayed unmarried simply because of the EIC. That's gaming the system and I do have a problem with that. A good chunk of my tax bill went right into her pocket. Fair?

Not fair. But what's the alternative? Any program that is designed to help those truly in need will be abused by people who choose to do so. All you can do is try to prevent as much abuse as possible. Aside from that, I try not to lose any sleep over it. Her gaming the system really doesn't impact me unless I choose to let it.

Yeah, I'll just throw my hands up and say everything is cool.

That's better than complaining about it without providing any other solution (unless you're suggesting we just get rid of all welfare programs).

I never said that. My solution would be better controls and checks and balances, but with the understanding that is the government we are talking about.

[clement]

I never said that. My solution would be better controls and checks and balances, but with the understanding that is the government we are talking about.

Sure, that's what I said too. But what if putting tighter controls to prevent abuse costs taxpayers more than the abuse itself? Or what if it prevents people who legitimately need the aid from getting it? I just think it will be impossible to completely prevent all kinds of abuse without it impacting the actual aim of the program.

I guess I'm just saying that at the end of the day these kinds of abuses are so tiny in the grand scheme of the overall tax budget that from a purely self-interest point-of-view, it's not worth it to me getting upset about. But it's unfortunate that someone games the system and if someone can find a way to prevent it from happening, then I'd be all for it.

[Leroy]

I never said that. My solution would be better controls and checks and balances, but with the understanding that is the government we are talking about.

Sure, that's what I said too. But what if putting tighter controls to prevent abuse costs taxpayers more than the abuse itself? Or what if it prevents people who legitimately need the aid from getting it? I just think it will be impossible to completely prevent all kinds of abuse without it impacting the actual aim of the program.

I guess I'm just saying that at the end of the day these kinds of abuses are so tiny in the grand scheme of the overall tax budget that from a purely self-interest point-of-view, it's not worth it to me getting upset about. But it's unfortunate that someone games the system and if someone can find a way to prevent it from happening, then I'd be all for it.

I believe there has to be a better way. Whatever happened to 'Yes We Can'! ?

[KyCardinalFan]

The bulk of taxes are spent on 3 things. Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, and Defense. All the emotional things that people complain about (welfare, handouts, foreign aid, earmarks, pork, etc.) are all very small by comparison.

The federal government spends over 50% of the budget on defense/military.

That is flat out ridiculous.

I think this is, in part, what Joe Biden meant by paying taxes is patriotic. And if not, that's how he should spin it. I really had hoped that when Palin mocked him for that comment he would've pointed out that the taxes paid were supporting and protecting his and her (respective) sons.

[Freed Roger]

I just dont see how its right to take something from someone who worked for it and give it to someone else who screwed up. Maybe if we have some accountability people woudlnt be needing handouts from people who make over 250K.

And i guess thats just what it comes down to to me. Not eveyone can have everything, were not a socialist country yet . We need to go back to being happy with what we have and working hard for more, not being unhappy with what we dont have. We have to teach accountability to people, people have to learn how to manage their own money. Their are people that need help, im not opposed to that, i just think we throw a blanket over anyone with debt and say look at all these people. How many of them would the proposed projects (either parties) have prevented from being in the position that they are in now? I feel strongly that its a small number. If you bail people out and give them money they are just going to spend more and get into a bigger hole next time because someone else will just bail them out again. Well bail them out and they will be right back in the sam position because there is no accountability.

You keep mentioning "bailing people out"...I don't understand what you are talking about. Raising taxes (if I am correct) would be bailing out Bush and his failed economic policies. Not some welfare mother on the street.

no bailing out is bailing out all of the people making 35K that decided that they have to buy a 500K house or are in debt way beyond their means because of their own choices.

what im saying is that i believe most americans earn enough to support themselves without further tax brakes or hikes for the upper class. IF they live within their means. Im saying most dont live within their means and thats why they need a tax cut.

Life, as you know is not fair. I'm not worried about making it more fair for the treasured upper class. They have plenty of allies in government and law to help make it fair for them. They also apparantly they do well in marketing this "poor overburdened overtaxed wealthy folk" scheme to the masses.

I don't buy into the notion that all good things come from the upper class. Before I'm accused of stirring up class warfare (another lame overused tactic of the wealthy) . I firmly believe that there are about the same amount of good and bad, hard-working or lazy, people in all classes. But the concept of trickle down economics is that only the wealthy are good, only the wealthy work hard, only the wealthy create.

I just don't buy it.

I agree with Strat - a lot of the plans bandied about by the candidates are just pipe dreams right now. They would raise my opinion of them by admitting this. Right now our govt is hamstrung - they lowered taxes (in top-heavy fashion) and increased spending commencing in 2001. They've kept interest rates down low. They've even sent us checks a couple times. So now, when we NEED that sort of stimulus in our economy, there's not much available. They blew it all thinking this trickle down economy would make us eternally prosperous, when all it really did was build a house of cards.

[Freed Roger]

I find all of this very ironic considering that the huge bailout that just happened took money away from pretty much everybody- not just the $250k and over crowd- and was aimed at "bailing out" a bunch of Wall Street execs. It was the exact opposite scenario that you describe.

Ya and that was a big kick in the balls to most people if you ask me.

yeah and it seems your less worried about the corporate welfare and more worried about the relatively few people that scam a few extra food stamps or play the disability game. I'm willing to bet that the former costs us more than the latter.