Answering to my post about Eisenhower and the 90% tax rate being good for America:
"Statics do not show that growth. 2.9% unemployment when he was elected. When he left, it was 4.2%. That is job growth? At the peak of his presidency, he had a 1.6% job growth. How is that job growth?"
Yes, and we would be very happy with a 4.2% unemployment rate at anytime in the last 3-5 years wouldn’t we? When he started in office we were still building munitions for Korea, and a significant part of our work force was locked in combat on that peninsula, correlation of history Dave, the two went hand in hand. I see you using the word growth, but putting a small number. This is another issue with the American people. We have come to expect instant gratification. You can’t use a word like growth, and then ask where it is. It was growth either way whether 1/4% or 200% it is growth. Unlike the average workers rate of pay in the last 10 years where we have lost $1500 on average as well as the buying power our dollar used to carry, but the CEO has gained 430%. Now if you post there was job loss to the tune of 250,000 a month then he would have been a failure. Unfortunately for modern Republicans he presided over one of the greatest economic times in this country’s history, and you should be proud of that since he was a Republican, even though he was not a Trickle Down Republican.. Thus the reason those days are so fondly remembered by all of our parents and grandparents. 1 job per household, and you lived like Wally and the Beaver, or at least could afford to live. We produced our own TV’s (Curtis Mathis anyone, Crosley Radios anyone else?) and they were the best on the planet. We made everything. Those jobs are gone forever due to corporate greed, and consumer fickleness.
Where and why President Obama is blaming the previous President:
"Sparky the Dog, I blame both, but I have a problem when one President cannot own up to his doings. Get off the Bush Blaming and put blame where it lies, Obama and the Democrats over the last 2 1/2 years. That is my point. Obama has not offered anything, yet people say he has a plan. If he has one, present it!!!!"
You are right, Bush never blamed Clinton. They blamed him for 9/11 during his whole Presidency which is mind boggling. Cheney and Rove almost had Clinton training the terrorists to fly the planes, and then piloting them all the way to the river, then jumping out and parachuting to safety in his Harlem office secret roof hatch.
Clinton did it to the first Bush, the first Bush did it to “God”… I mean Reagan, Reagan did it to Carter… do we need to go any further? My hand is tired of typing these names. I am pretty sure any plan needs to originate in the house according to the Constitution, but I may be wrong. Obama has talked with the “leader” Boehner and they are willing to compromise, but he can’t lead his rag tag bunch of “baggers” into the light because they think they understand the law better than the Constitutional lawyer sitting in the CEO office now. Because a Constitutional lawyer doesn’t understand the Constitution as well as God.lol
Earning and taxation:
"I am not in the top 5%! But, I am a firm believer that if you bust your ass to make something of your life, you deserve what you get. I believe that no one person or govt. has the right to come in and take the bulk of what you worked your ass off for. Now, with the top 5%....you honestly believe that they need to pay more? The U.S. Govt gets $200 Billion a month in tax revenue. That is $1.2 Trillion a year. That is an enormous amount of money. Is it really fair for the Fed. Govt. to take from one person and give to another, especially if that other person is capable of working and making a life of their own?" "I have no issues with reducing benefits for the rich, when they retire, but have an issue taking their money. A person once said, "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." That is where this nation is heading. That philosophy does not work, and that has been proven. This person was Karl Marx."
Even at a 50% rate on the rich, it is still not bulk. It is half, and honestly, if I made $2million a year, I could survive on one of them comfortably. That would be half, but we are nowhere near that. I agree, $1.2 trillion is a lot of money, and if we didn’t give $100billion of it to corporations for sending our jobs overseas and closing facilities in the US every year, or closed out the billions in subsidies to the oil industry who is making hand over fist record profits off your gas tank and mine, or stopped paying farmers not to farm. So, my fundamental question remains: if taxes have not gone up in the last 10 years, but in fact have gone down and stayed down then: WHERE ARE THE JOBS? If TDE works, then we should be basking in the glory of the rich peeing all over us for being able to keep more of their money than at any time in the last century. PERIOD! Again, they are not taking from one to give to another. Corporate welfare is 1000 times what personal welfare is. Again PERIOD!!! They are taking from people and giving back to corporations, those are your “drunks down the street”. They are drunk off your money. That is the way it is. The Marx philosophy was never tried, no matter how hard you try to call Socialism Communism it is like saying a Democracy is a Representative Republic. No, they are not the same. Socialism is living for the society, Communism is living for the state and the military the state supports. I work with at least 5 former eastern bloc residents who will tell you this difference, and agree I hit the nail on the head.
"My situation: Not top 5%, but maybe close to top 10%. I have busted my ass to get to where I am at, taken chances, and things have paid off. Did the Fed. Govt. help me get there? No! It was all me. Now, for what I have done for myself, I should be ok with the Fed. taking a large chunk of my pay? I think not. I am no better than someone making 50,000/yr. The difference is the choices you make in life, and how you chose to live it. I wanted more, and I took chances and worked hard for it. Do I owe the drunk down the street money to pay for a place to live? No. Do I owe the drug addict money to allow them to live their lifestyle? No. Do I owe the person, who refuses to work, money to live on? No. If I lose my job, I take what I can get. I do not believe in mooching off someone who has money. This is my life, I take my own responsibilities. I have seen, at some point, more than half of my paycheck to out in taxes. Hard to work hard when you see that much going out in taxes. There is no incentive to work any harder if the more you work, the more they take. I hold nothing against those who make more, especially if they worked hard to get to where they are."
All of your complaints can be answered by 2 or 3 nearly 20 year old articles:
I have busted same ass. I worked full time through school with a stay home mom and 2 sick kids in tow. I used Grants, loans (I have paid back), and medical coverage for my children who needed $1million in surgeries before they were 5. Now I make way too much for any help, and now would be when I need a single payer system that was killed by Republicans to protect the insurance lobby. We all took chances, I did too, and won. Not everyone is playing on or from the same field though. You are not parsing out your tax dollars. I write a check to the government every year, and I am not crazy enough to think that I personally pay for the “drunk down the street”. In fact, if I was smart enough to do simple math, I would know that in reality my tax dollars go mostly to corporations, than to social programs. Actually about 1000 times OUR tax dollars go to corporations than personal welfare. So, I may be giving the “drunk down the street” about a quarter of a cent per year. However, I am paying huge corporations (Archer Daniels Midland) and farmers not to grow food, I am subsidizing the oil industry (Exxon, BP etc…), the military contracts industry (Rockwell, Lockheed, HALIBURTON) the drug companies (Pfizer, Squibb, Bristol Meyers), Wall Street and pretty much any other corporate entity. You lived this when you watched GM leave Norwood owing millions in taxes and saying “who cares”. The schools immediately suffered, roads, police and fire all suffered because a corporation was given a great deal to keep jobs, instead they chose to send them to other states and eventually Mexico. So, I will ask this: Do you owe the corporation down the street who can self sustain and make billions in profits every quarter to keep the share holders happy, but refuse to cut you a deal on gas? Do you owe Wall Street Billions of dollars to make sure they don’t fail and can continue to rape the entire nation? Do you owe the top 1% who control 80-90% of all wealth and refuse to trickle these magic jobs down to any of us more breaks so they can get richer and build bigger bunkers and compounds for when the end of this nation come and chaos hits the streets in your town? If working hard to get where they are was the case, then maybe I would agree a bit on cutting a break that they are already getting by having the lowest tax rates in the HISTORY OF THE US. In most of these instances however, that is not the case, or at least in the Fortune 500 world (my former world of employment). One CEO puts a “friend” on the board of directors because he just purchased a 5% share of the company, then that “friend” turns around and puts that same CEO on his board of directors for purchasing 8% of the stock in his company… and so on and so on. No more cracking the good ole boys network for us, and they will play with your money like Monopoly money while protecting theirs at all costs. Funny though, now they are even eating each other, and Piranhas aren’t supposed to eat other Piranhas: http://www.todayonline.com/Business/EDC110628-0000397/Goldman-Sachs-to-add-1,000-jobs-in-Singapore
Your job may be next, and you don’t even care to protect it.
I look forward to comments.
No comments:
Post a Comment