<p>“What do you have against the people who have the funds to buy such extravagant luxury items to make them give more than their fair share ?”</p>
<p>Don’t get me started on “fair share”. Why do you think people shouldn’t have more funds to buy yachts as a result of my stimulus package? (especially as both Dems and Reps are about to propose we have a whopper of one?)</p>
<p>“As I said, you want a piece of those profits you think are too much, most pharm companies are public. Buy a piece.”</p>
<p>I already paid for the research. Why should I have to pay twice? They already owe me a piece of the company.</p>
<p>Now that we know how one “destroys” public education, may we ask what could be done to save it from the “predators.”</p>
<p>Fwiw, isn’t a system build on the notion that local citizens should decide the level of expenses through a voting process the basis for our education funding? Can someone who has been “victimized” by property taxes under Romney please express the cost of property taxes in absolute dollars and easily understandable terms such as: my house is worth $400,000 and I pay this much. Is it 12,000 per year, or 18,000, or a fraction of that. </p>
<p>And, while it is true that the “After all, the money has to come from somewhere.” that is usually translated into “After all, the money has to come from someone else’s pockets.” and is a direct result of our education funding system that lulls citizens in believing that is fine to keep spending more --as long at other pay-- for diminishing results for the sole protection of a system of public education that is imposed on 90% of our population, and protected by political forces that have little interest in performance, let alone what is best for students.</p>
<p>Our country tends to believe that all ills are cured by throwing more money at problems. Spending wisely and efficiently is rarely part of the jargon of school systems that never had to show much accountability. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, the limits of such a system are starting to show everywhere.</p>
<p>mini, your "stimulus plan " echoes of Hilary’s plans to take profits from Big Oil companies and eliminate tax cuts " for the common good "
My husband and I own a small business and neither of us want the government to take more of our profits for what they deem to be the common good, or to support less enterprising individuals.
It is that " someone owes me mentality " that I cannot grasp.</p>
<p>"compared to a person that earns $ 50,000 a year receives more from the government in terms of services and infrastructure ?</p>
<p>If not, why do you think that they should pay higher taxes ? Or is it resentment towards people that have more money than you do and you feel that they should hand over theirs to you because they just have more ?</p>
<p>If there was a straight income tax ( i.e. 10% for all ) the wealthy would already be paying more than someone less fortunate or who earns less."</p>
<p>lje62 -its called PROGRESSIVE taxing.</p>
<p>what people like you can’t grasp is the situation of other people whose conditions is far worse then you and will become much worse if you continue voting republican to save some more tax money. </p>
<p>mini feels far from resentment for those who are rich- infact she is the only person on this thread who is actually thinking about this issue from the point of welfare of the whole world and of all of us in the long run. </p>
<p>“What we need is a political party that will raise taxes on the rich, create an assets tax, create national health care (though that wouldn’t cost a penny more than we are spending now), put an end to the U.S. being the leading sponsor of state-sponsored terror in the world, put an end to the aggressive, hostile occupation of Iraq, provide aid for the next two decades to the four million refugees it created, and cut the military budget by two-thirds. Oh, and put an end to NAFTA, the WTO, and support for the World Bank.</p>
<p>In other words, put an end to bipartisan-supported corporate socialism.</p>
<p>Fat chance.”</p>
<p>^ you have put into words exactly what I feel. You are revoking my faith in humans- or rather Americans-which i have lost ever since Bush became elected for the second term.</p>
<p>xiggi, I agree that the reliance on property taxes is a real problem. But you don’t solve the problem by changing a single part of the equation and then touting that you’re a “reformer”. (And note, I didn’t say he “destroyed” the educational system; I was quoting another poster.)</p>
<p>I’m not a believer that “throwing money” at all problems will solve them. But when buses cost $500/year, sports cost $300 to play or are cut entirely (yes, it happens), drama, music and art programs are cut, foreign language in elementary schools is eliminated - how do you get those back without money? The biggest parts of our town’s school budget are health insurance costs, which the town has no power to “spend more efficiently” due to contract negotiations, and special education programs which are federally and state mandated and also can’t be “managed efficiently.” </p>
<p>" what people like you can’t grasp is the situation of other people whose conditions is far worse then you and will become much worse if you continue voting republican to save some more tax money. "</p>
<p>By " people like me", you are going on the assumption :</p>
<p>a ) I voted republican
b) that I am in the wealthy minority of the USA</p>
<p>the US economy , though I know the world waits and watches what happens here is what we are talking about here, , I thought the discussion was of the American Democratic party, not global economic issues.</p>
<p>That being said, again I disagree with the concept. Seems to support a regressive tax.</p>
<p>And I have been in conditions far worse than what I am in now, so please do not assume I am a blue blood , dyed in the wool republican.</p>
<p>And while I feel fortunate to have what I do and the opportunities my country has allowed to get us to where we are, I give back a lot and have raised my family to do the same. We are a very community service and volunteer oriented family. That goes for projects on the local,national and global level…we do it voluntarily and to the capacity we can…not because our government demands or dictates it.</p>
<p>“mini feels far from resentment for those who are rich- infact she is the only person on this thread who is actually thinking about this issue from the point of welfare of the whole world and of all of us in the long run.”</p>
<p>No, mini isn’t the only one. :)</p>
<p>Mini’s asset tax policies will lead to a depression and I don’t see how those policies will help the masses in the long run or the short run.</p>
<p>We can argue about the benefits of the stimulus package but that package isn’t free. The American people are going to get a tax cut and where is that tax cut coming from? The American people.</p>
<p>“I already paid for the research. Why should I have to pay twice? They already owe me a piece of the company.”</p>
<p>Mini, How much did you pay for the research?</p>
<p>Bull. Romney turned a deficit into a surplus, cut taxes, brought jobs back to this failing state, fixed a great deal of corruption within the state and more, all of which is pretty hard to do in a state completely controlled by democrats, and even harder to do after having inherited the position from the awful Jane Swift.</p>
<p>Romney was in Massachusetts plenty, although to a lesser extent his last year, but you can say the same about any other Presidential candidate. (Obama has only been in attendance in congress like 60% of the time, a very similar figure to that of a dead man). Even in his last year, he was in the state more then our terrible terrible current governor Deval Patrick, who spends quite of bit of the time out of State (campaigning for Obama who he endorsed [what a surprise]) and even outside of the Country. Patrick is the worst Governor since Dukakis.</p>
<p>Romney was a very good Governor, and you have to give him credit for actually getting positive stuff done whilst facing the hostile and corrupt, democrat controlled state legislature.</p>
<p>Romney knows the economy better then anyone else, and he will clean up Washington.</p>
<p>…and btw, I am a lower income American living in Massachusetts, a state which is extremely close minded to those with opposing viewpoints.</p>
<p>Romney is the only candidate who will not be taking marching orders from lobbyists, etc, and he is by far the most intelligent and overall he is the best candidate.</p>
<p>Can you in any way back up your position, because as it stands you provide zero evidence as to why Romney was a bad Governor, nor do you show how any other candidate is any better.</p>
<p>"what people like you can’t grasp is the situation of other people whose conditions is far worse then you and will become much worse if you continue voting republican to save some more tax money. "</p>
<p>Here in the United States, much of the entrenched poverty is caused by lifestyle choices of some type. Either the truly, permanently poor (as opposed to young, temporarily employed) are illegal immigrants or people who have some serious problems in their lives such substance abuse, teen motherhood. We’ve seen from NY’s experience that helping those people to get jobs is the best way to lift them out of poverty. That’s the difference, republicans want to help those people to have dignity by working, whereas many democrats want to just throw money at their problems and keep them entrenched and dependent. Also, I have no interest in paying my tax money for any services for people who are here illegally. Take those people out of the equation and see how the national fiscal situation is. And before you call me names, I’ve been spending my own time weekly for over twenty years teaching literacy to people who are mostly illegals from Mexico and Guatemala. What I do personally and what I think the government should take my money to do are vastly diferent things. I don’t want my government enabling the ethnic cleansing of the Mexican government and elite. The government makes nothing and creates no wealth. It is not entitled to any taxpayer money and should utilize that which it is given carefully and respectfully.</p>
<p>OP: This not a problem. Try being a Republican and 7 years ago, you say in a gathering, “Bush is an Idiot.” Of all the candidates both Republican, Democrats, Independents, or Liberatians, few, would now strenuously argue this point.</p>
<p>Personally, I think (blindly) that if the Republicans would say, We need to raise taxes else, we all go bankrupt, could restore faith in our system.</p>
<p>“That’s the difference, republicans want to help those people to have dignity by working, whereas many democrats want to just throw money at their problems and keep them entrenched and dependent”</p>
<p>That’s nonsense. Really it is.</p>
<p>Where does this stuff come from? The republicans could not care less about these people.</p>
<p>“Where does this stuff come from? The republicans could not care less about these people.”</p>
<p>That is nonsense. Really it is. Where does this stuff come from? Who are you to speak for millions of people? There have been several surveys that have found that republicans and religious conservatives are more generous than liberals. By the way, I’m a republican and I spend a great deal of time and money, as do my husband and children, in helping those less fortunate. We care very deeply and I am enormously proud of the gift of literacy that I have helped to share with scores of people over the decades.</p>
<p>I disagree dstark. I think pro-business policies are good for people. It’s a shame that you can’t disagree on policy without impugning motives and making outrageous statements. This may come as a shock to you, but most republicans are actual human beings, too. I know, I know that population of demons skews the demographic, but . . . Seriously, though, I fundamentally disagree with you about policy. I think much democratic policy is anti-people and is harmful and attempts to leave groups of people in squalor in order to keep them dependent on the largesse of democrats who want to keep getting their votes. I find that evil, but I’m pretty careful to never say that democrats don’t care about people because I think many do care. Why is it that so much of the real nastiness on this site comes from the left?</p>
<p>How long did it take to raise the minimum wage under republican rule? Where is universal health care? How did we get social security and medicare? Not from republicans.</p>
<p>We have economic problems right now. The democrats want to give people more money for food. They want to increase the time to get unemployment benefits.</p>
<p>The republicans want to make the tax cuts permanent. The republicans want to let businesses depreciate expenses faster.</p>
<p>Under republican rule, we got fed fund rates set at 1% for a year. We had out of control lending with no safeguards. We now have housing all over the country worth less than the loans. Foreign countries are buying our banks and other financial companies. We have oil prices at $90. We are subsidizing ethanol which has led to large increases in corn and other commodities with the prices of food rising at the fastest rate since the Carter years. Gold is at 28 year highs. The dollar is at decade old lows. Trade deficits at all time highs. Ninety percent of the income gains in the last 30 years went to the top 5% of the population. We are nation building and are involved in two wars that are going to cost us $2 trillion. We have homosexual bashing. We have illegal immigration bashing as if that is really one of America’s big problems. BS. We are running deficits at a time when the demographics of our country are at its most productive. Our companies are shipping jobs overseas and these same companies pay little if any income tax. We have people making hundreds of millions in private equity firms and for some reason, they get to pay taxes at the capital gains tax rate. </p>
<p>Makes me proud to be a republican. (I used to be a republican).</p>