Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

Why do you assume that I am wealthy? Stop stereotyping people; just because I am of the opinion that the government takes too much money from people and wastes a lot of it does not mean I am wealthy.

[ September 16, 2003, 21:46: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Tell you what, Rex, you can send me your tax cut if you don't want it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

You can twiddle you statistics however you want, and get whatever results you want, but I know I am better off after the tax cut. Remember, what I am arguing against is the statement that Bush blatantly lied when he said he was cutting taxes for the working class. I have yet to see any proof that I didn't benefit significantly from the tax cut, so I stand by my assertion that the author of that statement has no credibility on this topic.

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You fail to see my point. You benefit from the tax system and you don't even know it.

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Most people make less than $25K a year. They probably didn't pay income tax because they made too little money so they didn't get a cut in income tax or there income tax is so small that their tax cut way negligable BUT they still paid the same payroll tax. They didn't get a tax cut. Simple as that.

[ September 16, 2003, 22:30: Message edited by: rextorres ]

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You fail to see my point. You benefit from the tax system and you don't even know it.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I know exactly how I benefit from the tax system. You are under the mistaken impression that just because some things are beneficial means that they are a good idea for the government to get involved in (either to the degree they are, or any involvement whatsoever).

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You fail to see my point. You benefit from the tax system and you don't even know it.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I know exactly how I benefit from the tax system. You are under the mistaken impression that just because some things are beneficial means that they are a good idea for the government to get involved in (either to the degree they are, or any involvement whatsoever).</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Parks!

Without taxes and govt we wouldn't have them. They aren't profitable so why would someone develop their land for that?

A private entity could probably run my local park better, but what would be their incentive? It's like that with lots of things.

Are you against public parks? What about public schools? What about public roads? Police Dept? Fire Dept? It's a slippery slope when you start going down the small govt/no tax route.

[ September 16, 2003, 22:45: Message edited by: rextorres ]

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

You mention the basic services that it is the role of government to provide. Those are not at all what I was talking about... Also, I was certainly not on a no tax road...

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">All I can say is $550B deficit. Even if we were to go back to the boom of the 90s - with the tax cut as they stand - we STILL would not get back to a surplus. So yes we are talking about basic services. What government services should be cut?

[ September 16, 2003, 22:54: Message edited by: rextorres ]

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

The defecit is not actually an issue. Most of it is in the form of bonds that can and will be repaid in time. What is more of an issue is yearly spending compared to yearly revenues. The old debts get paid off and replaced by new debts. It is how the economy works.

Some "services" that need to be cut are obselete programs that are no longer necessary. There are numerous programs dating from the Great Depression that only serve to waste money now, but are still in operation, such as the program that was made to try to help farmers hit by the "dust bowl"...

[ September 16, 2003, 23:09: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

If the deficit is not an issue then why do we have to cut anything? Why not have a trillion dollar deficit? Who buys these bonds. What happens like in Argentina or Mexico when the interest on the debt (it's already our third biggest expenditure on par with entitlements) is larger than the revenue from taxes.

Besides all those wasteful programs you're talking about are significantly less than the $87B going to Iraq i.e. Not a huge savings if you ask me.

[ September 16, 2003, 23:24: Message edited by: rextorres ]