Political Discussion

[banca rotta]

So now, the question is: Can the Democrats do the job? They have a better chance as they are actually willing to RAISE taxes AND cut spending. Which is what is NEEDED to deal with the debt issue. If Clinton's tax increases had been left alone, we would not be where we are now.

The answer is NO! They can't do it just as the republicans can't do it.

I absolutely cannot understand how you can say they are willing to cut spending and raise taxes when they extended the Bush tax cuts and put us 5 trillion deeper in debt since they took control of all 3 houses with the republican minority unable to stop them.

Snap out of it helpmeout!!! Your heart is in the right place sometimes, but your head isn't.

[Meatstick]

Yeah just what this country needs, four more years of Obama and everything will be fixed.

[shark66]

You are the one who needs additional education if you really believe what you wrote.

I'm a strong believer in continuing one's education until deathbed. Having said that...

a The Democrats were the ones who came up with a balanced budget. It was the Republicans who unbalanced it.

Coming up with balanced budget on paper is one thing, transforming that paper into reality is another.

You seem to focus a lot on Dems vs. Reps. I don't. To me, they're two just heads of an extremely dangerous monster.

b Yes, rasing taxes and cutting spending is the solution. A new tax code? All we need to do is get rid of the loopholes in the one that exists. Something that the Republicans fought when President Obama wanted to close loopholes and cut even more spending.

Good luck to anyone attempting that debacle, which would resemble closing holes in a wheel of Swiss cheese. Closing one hole inevitably opens up three new ones. By the time you're finally done - guess what - you've just invented cheddar. Why not switch to cheddar in the first place?

c With Clinton's budget, we would have been in a better position to survive the Bush presidency. BTW, with more revenue coming in, we would not be in the same spot we are in now.

That's why I said that we'd be one trillion less in a hole...but let's not forget that "more revenue" can be a debatable term - especially since we're debating fictional outcomes...even with tax cuts, the big businesses had outsourced just about every job they could...heavier tax burden would only had made it happen faster...

Simply put, there's too many different aspects that need to be addressed on a variety of levels...and taxing more while spending less would only prolong the agony...

There's no doubt in my mind that we'll get to see four more years of Obama, and that nothing - but nothing - will get resolved, even if the Dems keep the Senate.

We'll be worse off than we were in 2008. When we were worse of than in 2001...and so forth and so on, until we hit the end of Eisenhower's era...

And the very same would happen with any "out of the box" Republican candidate, even if they were to take over the Senate, and keep majority in the House.

Regardless of whatever campaign slogans each side can throw at us, *none* of them (save for a couple of principled hotheads on each side) has ANY interest in any real change...

The cause of death on Europe's certificate will be negative birth rate.

The cause of death of the U.S. will be political correctness.

Good luck to us all.

[helpmeout]

You might need some additional educating if you really believe what you wrote above...

a) Democrats will raise taxes, and continue spending like it's their last day on Earth. In all fairness, vast majority of Republicans would do the same - spending wise.

b) Raising taxes - with or without cutting spending - is not the solution. We need an entire new tax code.

c) We might have been a trillion less in debt if Clinton's tax rates had been kept, but all jobs lost during his own second term, along with the disastrous Bush/Obama presidencies would still land us in the same spot...

Approach to taxes is an important part of the solution, but resolves nothing without *major* work on several other fields...

Good luck.

You are the one who needs additional education if you really believe what you wrote.

a The Democrats were the ones who came up with a balanced budget. It was the Republicans who unbalanced it.
b Yes, rasing taxes and cutting spending is the solution. A new tax code? All we need to do is get rid of the loopholes in the one that exists. Something that the Republicans fought when President Obama wanted to close loopholes and cut even more spending.
c With Clinton's budget, we would have been in a better position to survive the Bush presidency. BTW, with more revenue coming in, we would not be in the same spot we are in now.

[shark66]

So now, the question is: Can the Democrats do the job? They have a better chance as they are actually willing to RAISE taxes AND cut spending. Which is what is NEEDED to deal with the debt issue. If Clinton's tax increases had been left alone, we would not be where we are now.

You might need some additional educating if you really believe what you wrote above...

a) Democrats will raise taxes, and continue spending like it's their last day on Earth. In all fairness, vast majority of Republicans would do the same - spending wise.

b) Raising taxes - with or without cutting spending - is not the solution. We need an entire new tax code.

c) We might have been a trillion less in debt if Clinton's tax rates had been kept, but all jobs lost during his own second term, along with the disastrous Bush/Obama presidencies would still land us in the same spot...

Approach to taxes is an important part of the solution, but resolves nothing without *major* work on several other fields...

Good luck.

[helpmeout]

People seriously educate yourself

The problem with that statement is that the person who states something like that usually means to educate oneself to that person's point of view.

I have educated myself. Ron Paul is not the answer. He will only make it worse. The tea baggers are not the answer, the recent debt debacle clearly shows that they are clueless. Republicans aren't the answer. They have shown that they will cave to the extreme.

So now, the question is: Can the Democrats do the job? They have a better chance as they are actually willing to RAISE taxes AND cut spending. Which is what is NEEDED to deal with the debt issue. If Clinton's tax increases had been left alone, we would not be where we are now.

Just cutting spending isn't going to do the job. And that is something that some people will never acknowledge.

[sguerra923]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...FPaePPQ#at=185

People seriously educate yourself because time is not on our side and there is no end in site unless we do something about it. You can ignore it all you want but it will creep up to every person. Just go outside and look around, everything is going in the wrong direction for the "regular people". Look at other countries as examples of what this country is turning. If you choose to ignore and not believe who is fighting for you then I will respect your choice as a free person but please be peaceful when things start changing around you. You are the resistance.

[banca rotta]

Ron Paul's Urgent Warning!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FHCkFPaePPQ#at=185

[shark66]

Paul runs for President so he can pad his Congressional campaign account which can be transferred from his Presidential account.

An excellent train of thoughts...

With one "small" oversight...

Dr. Paul has announced that he would NOT seek re-election for Congress...

So he'll be either our next President or a retiree...

Good luck to us all.

[jacko]

The real reason he does not stand a chance of the nomination is that he does not per take in retail campaigning like knocking on doors and press the flesh. Have you seen Paul actually campaign? He does show up at the debates and has last minute advert runs while his campaign coffers are bulging. You guys have been had. Paul runs for President so he can pad his Congressional campaign account which can be transferred from his Presidential account.

The main reason that Dr. Paul will not get nominated is the simple fact that he sounds honest enough in his quest for a *real* change of how things are done in this country...

Nothing is scarier than change, especially when you've got a lot to lose...

Banksters and their pawns in Washington know they would have plenty to lose.

Misguided sheep think that they would have something to lose, not realizing that the road they're currently on - courtesy of the way things have been done for the past fifty years - is the one leading them to the slaughterhouse.

Good luck to us all.

[banca rotta]

The main reason that Dr. Paul will not get nominated is the simple fact that he sounds honest enough in his quest for a *real* change of how things are done in this country...

Nothing is scarier than change, especially when you've got a lot to lose...

Banksters and their pawns in Washington know they would have plenty to lose.

Misguided sheep think that they would have something to lose, not realizing that the road they're currently on - courtesy of the way things have been done for the past fifty years - is the one leading them to the slaughterhouse.

Good luck to us all.

This has been done throughout history. It's why hundreds of years ago it was illegal in America to educate a slave. No different today.

[shark66]

The main reason that Dr. Paul will not get nominated is the simple fact that he sounds honest enough in his quest for a *real* change of how things are done in this country...

Nothing is scarier than change, especially when you've got a lot to lose...

Banksters and their pawns in Washington know they would have plenty to lose.

Misguided sheep think that they would have something to lose, not realizing that the road they're currently on - courtesy of the way things have been done for the past fifty years - is the one leading them to the slaughterhouse.

Good luck to us all.

[banca rotta]

Because he is too extreme. And his policies would do far more damage. Low taxes? Get real, we need to raise taxes not lower them. And the different tax rates for the different income levels IS fair. Get rid of social security? Not happening. And if that did manage to get by, well, what happens to the elderly? The helpless? I have no problem with spending cuts (especially with foreign aid, we need to take care of our own first) as long as there are tax increases, especially in eliminating the loopholes that allow major corporations to pay no tax. The poor and middle class should not be the only ones asked to bear the pain of dealing with the debt.

And that is something that the tea baggers just don't get. But they will when we go into default and they get voted out as a result.

I happen to agree with a lot of what you are saying regarding the tax loopholes and ridiculous foreign aid and taking care of ourselves first.

Exactly why didn't Obama and the democratic controlled congress get this done before the "tea baggers" took control of congress???

It just sounds to me like you are proving Meatstick correct! As I stated before the majority of voters cast their votes right down the party line.

Why else would you support someone that expanded Bush's wars and all the money spent on them?

[helpmeout]

I'm just trying to figure out why people are saying that Ron Paul will not win the nomination.. Shark and everyone else why do you say he won't win? Is it due to not hearing Dr. Paul on the main stream media news? Or is it the so called "status quo" forces doing everything in their power to lessen his chances? I want to gather as much respones why because it seems like people say that he doesn't have a chance but they don't back it up with facts. Thanks!

Because he is too extreme. And his policies would do far more damage. Low taxes? Get real, we need to raise taxes not lower them. And the different tax rates for the different income levels IS fair. Get rid of social security? Not happening. And if that did manage to get by, well, what happens to the elderly? The helpless? I have no problem with spending cuts (especially with foreign aid, we need to take care of our own first) as long as there are tax increases, especially in eliminating the loopholes that allow major corporations to pay no tax. The poor and middle class should not be the only ones asked to bear the pain of dealing with the debt.

And that is something that the tea baggers just don't get. But they will when we go into default and they get voted out as a result.

[banca rotta]

Well said banca rotta! I agree to everything you said and I WAS in the same boat in regards to family and friends. About a year ago, my family thought I was just being paranoid even though I would explain things in a normal tone but after they sat down and really looked around they are starting to wake up from the deep sleep. I believe it's hard for people to realize what's going on because they feel that government will take care of them and that this is just a economic trend that will pass.

…

I hear ya! I talk to people and they all repeat "oh social security won't be there when I get old" as if it's a small issue. For crying out loud if these people really feel this way why on earth aren't they educating themselves???????

Speaking of education I watched videos like this and read Rich Dad Poor Dad and felt he's a doom and gloomer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOKn7tiUMyc

This was made in late 2007.

(Not trying to push gold & silver just showing anyone that wants to learn.)