Republican or Democrat?

[TH0001]

Originally Posted by Setec Astronomy

Ok, now I understand why you are so animated about this (BTW, I like to tell a story that is very similar in spirit but very different in circumstances, about a friend of a friend). But the tax changes being talked about are for people with INCOMES...i.e., people who WORK. I don't think any of the candidates since back when the primaries started has suggested that welfare and food stamps be increased.

Look, I almost voted for Perot in '92 because even though the Reagan budgets had been good for me professionally, I agreed that deficit spending was ultimately not. Clinton, probably mostly through coincidence rather than policy, was able to balance the budget and almost make the debt a moot point.

Now we have a debt and deficit that makes Reagan's work look amateurish. We sell more of our debt to China (the next superpower) every day. They have shot down a satellite and are about to orbit astronauts and perform a spacewalk. They will put a man on the moon before we get back there. Does anyone really believe that the money and jobs we send there every day will NOT result in them eclipsing us as the pre-eminent power in a matter of decades?

Our government is hemmorhaging money, and even if we somehow massively cut spending and balance the budget, this debt will bleed us dry. So we will need more tax revenue. Where is it going to come from? If you think that increasing taxes on people who make more than $603,000 will hurt your business and the economy, think what effect increasing your taxes and my taxes and the people who make $18,000 a year will have (which may be inevitable with these recent bailouts). I submit that the poor executives from Wall St. who may lose their jobs in this charade are going to be in a lot better shape than you and me unless they have been living like the King of Saudi Arabia and didn't put any money in the bank (I hope they didn't invest in Wall St. ).

Personally I'd be embarrassed to be the CEO of Merrill Lynch and be the one who was driving when the company, the "bul"wark of Wall St., had to be sold, that I was being paid 10's of millions plus 10's more in bonus and was too stupid to recognize the company was buying huge amounts of bad debt (and if you believe these CEO's didn't know what was going on, then you believe Ken Lay didn't either), or embarrassed to be the CEO of GM, when they are caught with their pants down making Suburbans (or whatever they are now) when gas is $4/gal., and when they've had since the Arab Oil Embargo of '73 to change their ways. I used to really admire GM, but honestly, there is nothing to admire in these large corporations anymore, other than their ability to showcase executive greed.

I think we've talked this to death; our children and grandchildren will have to determine who was right in this debate.

I don't think we have talked this to death because I enjoy your responses personally. I don't see us as opponents or argueeing, because in the end it is about what is best for the country as a whole. I am an American before any allegence to any party (of which I am conservative but NOT modern Republican).

We view things differently. You say you are embarrased because GM kept making Suburbans since '73. I am more embarrased that the public kept buying Suburbans.

It is similar to the morgage relief and the whole "bad banks" thing. Are people in this country that stupid that they cannot determine what they can and cannot afford? If we have gotten to the point as a country when we cannot realize we are being screwed, maybe we do need a big brother to watch over us. The only problem is that you start a slipperly slope where dependency grows more dependency.

I agree with your other post, regarding regulation of out-sourcing (though this is seperate then taxing). The problem though is that we are hypocrites (Americans). We say how outsourcing is bad, but if the TV was built in the US, with wages paid to workers that we have determined, how many of us would pony up 5k for a TV?

Americans seem to love buying things cheaply (realitively) and giving wealth to other countries so they could save a dollar. But when vote day comes, those same people will be line, voting to raise minimum wage (which only makes it harder to manufacturer in the US when more profits are avialable overseas), and give more rights to workers. BUT when it comes time to do their part (Americans) they run to the store and pick out a forgien brand for cheap, supporting low wages, poor working conditions (in other countries), and build wealth for the country who supports this behavior.

I don't really see it as a partisan issue (but I am ignorant). Something needs to change and something needed to change 5-10-15 years ago, which means both parites are to 'blame'.

As far as taxes, I think they need to go up universaly on every class.

[TH0001]

Originally Posted by Setec Astronomy

I have to disagree with you on that. When Reagan was elected, the max Federal tax rate was something like 78%, yet we didn't have huge outsourcing. We had imports, but we didn't have US companies closing their US factories to have their products made overseas.

What has changed is the modern lack of oversight and regulation, which allows the penetration of special interests that you mention. Lack of corporate governance. Consolidation of competitors or of markets that should be kept apart (the confluence of banks, brokers, and insurance, which were once all separate, is arguably at the root of the current bailout, if not in subtance, at least in depth, meaning that a smaller segment would have been affected if these companies were not so large or so overarching).

We could argue this ad infinitum but it's pointless.

I'm really ignorant on this, but when in US History did we reduce our regulation?

[jfelbab]

Originally Posted by Setec Astronomy

...We could argue this ad infinitum but it's pointless.

No, I don't think it is pointless. I find it interesting and informative. The exchange of ideas in this forum has surprised me in two ways. First, I would have never thought that we all could discuss politics in a respectful manner without getting the thread closed or people banned (LOL) and second, I find some of the exchanges of ideas to open up my mind to other solutions. Not pointless at all IMVHO.

[Setec Astronomy]

Originally Posted by TH0001

I'm really ignorant on this, but when in US History did we reduce our regulation?

Reagan began or continued deregulation of many industries, notable the airline industry. I don't recall, but the famous air traffic controllers strike may have been due to high peak workloads for ATC caused by deregulation allowing airlines to bunch all their flights at the same time.

30 years ago here in NJ, banks couldn't have branches in more than one COUNTY. Now you have nationwide banks, and industries which were kept apart to prevent shenanigans (banking, insurance, and brokerage) now all under the same roof.

GMblack3A may show up to tell you how the deregulation of the airline industry has allowed airlines to use cheap, non-domestic, and arguably unsafe maintenance, etc., and there are many other examples in the food industry, IIRC the "unsafe" toys coming out of China that are now regulated by the importer rather than the gov't, etc.

[Bluehinder]

If you're not a democrat when you are young, you don't have a heart. If you are not a republican when you get older, you don't have a brain.

[dalethompson]

To everyone who's replied to this thread (and there's been more than a few), I must say as a Canadian I've learned quite a bit just from reading everyone's points. There are some really good points made from all sides and I think this is a pretty good & healthy discussion, regardless if you don't totally agree with what's been said. No one ever said Democracy was easy or not without it's drawbacks either. There's obviously lots at stake in this particular election and by raising the issues, one gets the feeling there's a pretty close split in the population of who they want elected.

I do have to say as a non-partisan and unbiased observer of this election, I prefer Obama simply because he's the best person for the job. Whether he's liberal, conservative or somewhere in-between, if you vote based on what each person brings to the table in terms of platform, ideas, goals and experience, I honestly think Obama is going to give you the best chance to move progressively forward for the next four years. There's going to be some real challenging issues in the next few months and you'll want the toughest and most balanced person to lead your country. I actually wanted Hillary Clinton to win but realize now it wasn't because she was female that she lost... she got beat by a better candidate.

I wish Canadian politics was more interesting and discussed like the U.S. We have an election coming up and it's pretty much sealed that the Conservatives will win again and serve for another four years. Funny thing is, I'm not Conservative at all and yet I want them to win since they've lead Canada into a pretty good place right now. And, I really do believe the Conservative leader (Stephen Harper) is the best person for the job, love or hate him.

[Holden_C04]

Originally Posted by dalethompson

To everyone who's replied to this thread (and there's been more than a few), I must say as a Canadian I've learned quite a bit just from reading everyone's points. There are some really good points made from all sides and I think this is a pretty good & healthy discussion, regardless if you don't totally agree with what's been said. No one ever said Democracy was easy or not without it's drawbacks either. There's obviously lots at stake in this particular election and by raising the issues, one gets the feeling there's a pretty close split in the population of who they want elected.

I do have to say as a non-partisan and unbiased observer of this election, I prefer Obama simply because he's the best person for the job. Whether he's liberal, conservative or somewhere in-between, if you vote based on what each person brings to the table in terms of platform, ideas, goals and experience, I honestly think Obama is going to give you the best chance to move progressively forward for the next four years. There's going to be some real challenging issues in the next few months and you'll want the toughest and most balanced person to lead your country. I actually wanted Hillary Clinton to win but realize now it wasn't because she was female that she lost... she got beat by a better candidate.

We're agreed here. Obama comes across very, very well. He seems intelligent, focused, and has a firm voice.

YouTube - Barack Obama on Letterman

I wish Canadian politics was more interesting and discussed like the U.S. We have an election coming up and it's pretty much sealed that the Conservatives will win again and serve for another four years. Funny thing is, I'm not Conservative at all and yet I want them to win since they've lead Canada into a pretty good place right now. And, I really do believe the Conservative leader (Stephen Harper) is the best person for the job, love or hate him.

We're not so agreed here. I don't think Harper is honest. I don't trust him at all, actually. Unfortunately, I know nothing about Dion and Layton is not too likely a PM candidate.

[iluvspl]

Ok yeah we have all been reading this post and everyone has there point of view, and you can not really say anyone's point of view is wrong. One thing i do not care for (and for that matter understand) is why do you have to be a republican or democrat. I think both parties have very good points of view and both have there downsides. I think it should be based on the person and what they think and stand for. I hate when i hear so many people that say there voting republican or democrat because thats what they are when they know very little about that person. I also find it interesting about how close minded allot of people are about the other party. From conversations i have had with people over the years on both parties it seems that republicans seem to be much more close minded about the ideas of that are not supported by the republican way. Im not saying all are like that but every time i talk to a republican about the presidential race its a very defensive conversation. I am not going to sit here and say I know equal amount about both candidates and i bet most people do not have an equal grasp of each parties views. I just feel it should be the best person for the job that should get elected wether it be democrat or republican.

[User Name]

Originally Posted by Bluehinder

If you're not a democrat when you are young, you don't have a heart. If you are not a republican when you get older, you don't have a brain.

Already quoted in this thread and often attributed (wrongly) to Winston Churchill but it is nothing more than an urban legend, probably written by Karl Rove when he was 9. lol

[bert31]

Originally Posted by dalethompson

I prefer Obama simply because he's the best person for the job. Whether he's liberal, conservative or somewhere in-between, if you vote based on what each person brings to the table in terms of platform, ideas, goals and experience, I honestly think Obama is going to give you the best chance to move progressively forward for the next four years.

How could anyone know if Obama is the best person? He has been in the Senate for a few years and really hasn't done a whole hell of a lot in those years in terms of sponsoring bills and leading agendas. Obama can talk all he wants but I need to see more action before I will even consider to vote for him because I haven't seen much as of yet. I think we (US) should give him another 4 or 8 years in the Senate before we can even begin to try to crown him as the best option for president. With McCain, I know what he stands for and and what he has done in the past. He is not who I would prefer but I will take him any day over Obama.

[bert31]

Originally Posted by Holden_C04

You know what terrifies me? A multi-national corporation deciding what to do about my medical needs. That terrifies me to death.

Not me, if I don't like my health insurance provider, I just go look for a different one. If you don't like what your government provides you can you go find another government provider? Nope, I will take private insurance every time since competition is there.

[bert31]

Originally Posted by Holden_C04

First of all, I played hockey for over 10 years competitively (I grew up in a very athletic family) and I never broke a bone. Not once! All I did was have a very slight fracture as a result of a 6"6 guy landing on my chest. Still played tackle football that summer with the fracture...

(Sorry, I had to tease )

I also believe people should be rewarded for innovation. Tell me, what has your government done to help you get started with your small business? What did your Republican government do to help you with your business? Nothing? Or did they manage to fulfill their "business" promises. To me, I see them rewarding the rich and cutting out the middle guys like yourself.

Dependency...That's always an issue. In Canada, we have strict rules regarding welfare and such to prevent that situation. In my time in the States, I saw people cheat the system and basically live off it. It wasn't a lot but still...

It made me think Americans were lazy because I don't know of anyone in Canada that lives that kind of lifestyle.

You're right, not everyone is equal. Care to punish the single mother and prevent her from getting the education she needs to take care of her child? Oh, her fault...right.

Who says Todd wanted anyone's help to start his business? He has a brain, he has a good work ethic, he just wants the government to stay the hell out of his way and let him run his business. I think that is what seperates most Americans from the rest of the industrialized world, Americans don't expect their government to be assisting (getting in the way actually) them along the whole way, they just want to be left alone to live their lives as they want.

But if Todd did want help, the United States Small Business Administration does a pretty good job in getting business owners just starting out the financing they may need, legal advice and financial advice also.