VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, [6], 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 14:16:33 10/01/07 Mon
Author: Deep Diction
Subject: Re: Getting out the vote...for the lazy among us.
In reply to: EJetson 's message, "Re: Getting out the vote...for the lazy among us." on 13:13:41 10/01/07 Mon

>>>Just an FYI for those of you who hate me (and all
>>>Republicans) because we have differing opinions.
>>>
>>>Taxes - Permanent - I'm ALWAYS in favor of tax cuts.
>>>There's WAY, WAY, WAY too much government wasted
>>>spending. Actually, I'm a proponent of the flat
>tax.
>>>15% across the board, with no deductions, tax breaks,
>>>etc. - Very important
>>
>>I'm very opposed to the flat tax for the simple reason
>>that it's basically a redistribution of the existing
>>money in the economy from the poor toward the wealthy.
>> There's already a great enough disparity between the
>>poor and the wealthy as it is.
>
>
>I disagree. I shouldn't have to pay a higher
>percentage of my income in taxes because I took steps
>in my life to be able to earn more money.
>

Ideally, that would make sense. But there just isn't enough money to fund necessary services if the rich don't contribute a larger percentage of their income than the poor do. The poor will get squeezed by a flat tax, and more of them will end up broke, and either on welfare or on the streets committing crimes, which will increase the need for police protection and social services, which will make taxes go up again.

>
>
>
>>
>>>Universal Health Care - Opposed. I don't think it
>>>would work well here. It would become even more
>>>difficult to get an appointment with a doctor than it
>>>is now. - Somewhat important
>>
>>So your opposition to everyone having health care is
>>that you'd have to wait longer for a doctor's
>>appointment? Also I think you underestimate the
>>effect that poor people suddenly having regular
>>checkups available to them will have on preventing
>>future doctor visits for more serious issues.
>>
>
>No, I haven't been to a doctor other than a dentist
>more than twice since college. This, and abortion,
>are far and away the least important of the issues to
>me. However, it will end up costing me more in taxes
>to pay for this.
>

You're extremely lucky, then. And if you've only been to a non-dentist twice, it doesn't sound like the longer wait time for appointments would impact your life at all. Even if it did, it would be a small humanitarian price to pay for the health of the disadvantaged, particularly children.

>
>>>Partial Privatization of Social Security - Favor.
>>>Government shouldn't be responsible for my
>retirement.
>>> I should. - Important
>>
>>This is basically just the government borrowing money
>>from us. If Social Security were privatized, they'd
>>just raise the federal income tax to make up for the
>>lost revenue. As it stands, it's a way for people who
>>can't afford to invest privately to avoid dying in the
>>streets once they're too old to work.
>>
>
>Thus, the term "partial" privatization. Give people
>an option to either contribute to the government run
>retirement fund or to invest privately (or both if
>they so choose). I, and no Republican that I've ever
>heard, has favored complete cancellation of the entire
>Social Security program.
>

If only poor people are contributing to Social Security, they won't have nearly enough money to live on. It's like people arguing that they shouldn't have to pay taxes for schools if they don't have kids. If only parents of school-age children were funding public schools, there wouldn't be any public schools.

>
>>>Line Item Veto - Favor. I don't understand why
>ANYONE
>>>would oppose this. Too many of the wasteful spending
>>>bills get passed by attaching them to something with
>>>overwhelming support. - Important
>>
>>This would give far, far, far too much power to the
>>executive branch. If there's a line item veto, one
>>single nutjob President can screw up our entire
>>legislative system by crossing all the parts he
>>doesn't like out of bills. There are much better ways
>>to get rid of wasteful spending, such as eliminating
>>the ability for legislators to attach earmarks
>>anonymously.
>
>
>
>Maybe "line item" isn't the proper terminology, then.
>Earmark item veto is what I'm referring to.
>

I still think it gives too much power to the executive branch. A bill, such as a budget, is the result of communication and compromise on both sides of the Congressional aisle. For an executive to be able to strike down all of the measures the opposing side favors, many of which represent conditions upon which one side will agree to the other side's needs, gives that executive far too much power. It would be like if two lawyers decided on a settlement, the terms of which were that one lawyer's client would testify against other people in exchange for immunity. Then the judge says, "Okay, I approve of this settlement. The client must testify, but I am vetoing the immunity part."

>
>It's sad that both sides disagree on only 5% or so of
>issues, but that those 5% can cause such extreme
>dislike of the other side.

I don't dislike you. I consider you a friend. There are very few people whom I actually dislike.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.