[POLL] - Liberals, how much is a "fair share?" - Taxes

[itfitzme]

Clinton didn't pay down a dime of the National debt.

He did. And if Bush had maintained his policies he would have paid off our entire debt.

No he didn't and I explained the facts to you.
You believe what you want to believe based on ideology only.
Clinton did not pay down one cent of the national debt. It rose every year he was in office.

Here's a question for you.

What economic entity, in your opinion, should carry debt regularly? Govt? Individuals? Businesses?

 

[Iceman]

0% sounds good to me. FEDGOV doesn't deserve a dime. The sooner the default happens the better.

 

[ShawnChris13]

Which is faulty reasoning. A simpler reason is that he just hasn't bothered to.

A search on Obama's college grades yields that he graduated with top honors. So your conclusion is further faulted.

That whole Birther thing lends credance to the concept that this "transcript" issue of yours is simply another meaningless pursuit.

Even so, there is no college requirement for the Presidency of the US.

So, what's your point?

I don't care about him graduating with honors so let me further spell out for you what your crayons cannot show you. He's hiding his college records. Which means he has something to hide. I give no credence to birthers or the forgers or the other hooplah.

I only raise the question of what is he hiding. I'm sorry that I didn't just say that, as it appears the concept of someone hiding something for a reason fails to reach past the ROY G BIV mindset you place on everything.

No it doesn't. If you are so convinced that it does, then prove that it does. Surely you can site some accepted principle in psychology. I can site one that suggests you have a habit of hiding things.

I simply have a realistic mindset.

You want me to prove psychologically that a guy hiding things has something to hide?

Can I instead postulate, again, that you follow blindly? Just learn to question the obvious things. Then you can ask me to begin citing whatever it is you think I should prove.

What do I have to hide by the way? I'm a sailor we are pretty open people.

 

[itfitzme]

I don't care about him graduating with honors so let me further spell out for you what your crayons cannot show you. He's hiding his college records. Which means he has something to hide. I give no credence to birthers or the forgers or the other hooplah.

I only raise the question of what is he hiding. I'm sorry that I didn't just say that, as it appears the concept of someone hiding something for a reason fails to reach past the ROY G BIV mindset you place on everything.

No it doesn't. If you are so convinced that it does, then prove that it does. Surely you can site some accepted principle in psychology. I can site one that suggests you have a habit of hiding things.

I simply have a realistic mindset.

You want me to prove psychologically that a guy hiding things has something to hide?

Can I instead postulate, again, that you follow blindly? Just learn to question the obvious things. Then you can ask me to begin citing whatever it is you think I should prove.

What do I have to hide by the way? I'm a sailor we are pretty open people.

I have no idea what you have to hide. You have, though, managed to hide every shred of intelligent thought so far. You have yet to actually say anything of substance.

 

[Gadawg73]

And your point being what? That he didn't release them? Try to be specific.

"Obama not releasing his transcripts means" [blank].

Fill in the blank. Try hard to not get distracted by thoughts of bondage, rape, and illegal drugs.

You're captain my captain you so blindly follow obviously has something to hide by hiding his past. If you could think past ding fries are done you would reach the same conclusion. Sorry if my question couldn't be answered by you as it was obviously too complicated. Enjoy your coloring books.

He did. And if Bush had maintained his policies he would have paid off our entire debt.

No he didn't and I explained the facts to you.
You believe what you want to believe based on ideology only.
Clinton did not pay down one cent of the national debt. It rose every year he was in office.

You need to learn what inflation is, nominal vs real dollars. In fact, between Bush I and Clinton, the real dollar government debt did stop climbing, even reversing when examined on a per capita basis.

In fact, some monetaryist suggest that the recession that followed was caused by this.

Dude, I have a BBA, a MBA and own 3 corporations.
The claim was not that national debt "did stop climbing". The claim was Clinton LOWERED the national debt.
And that claim is FALSE.

 

[PMZ]

You're captain my captain you so blindly follow obviously has something to hide by hiding his past. If you could think past ding fries are done you would reach the same conclusion. Sorry if my question couldn't be answered by you as it was obviously too complicated. Enjoy your coloring books.

No he didn't and I explained the facts to you.
You believe what you want to believe based on ideology only.
Clinton did not pay down one cent of the national debt. It rose every year he was in office.

You need to learn what inflation is, nominal vs real dollars. In fact, between Bush I and Clinton, the real dollar government debt did stop climbing, even reversing when examined on a per capita basis.

In fact, some monetaryist suggest that the recession that followed was caused by this.

Dude, I have a BBA, a MBA and own 3 corporations.
The claim was not that national debt "did stop climbing". The claim was Clinton LOWERED the national debt.
And that claim is FALSE.

Your claim is false. He did lower the public debt.

"Now let's look at Clinton's tenure. Using the public debt figures, we see that the debt rose year by year during the first four fiscal years of Clinton's stewardship, then fell during each of the following four fiscal years, from a 1997 peak to a 2001 trough."

"So using this measurement, Clinton is correct that "we paid down the debt for four years," though he did overestimate the amount that was paid down when he said it was $600 billion. The actual amount was $452 billion -- which was equal to about 12 percent of the existing public debt in 1997."

From: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...linton-says-his-administration-paid-down-deb/

 

[johnwk]

I don't know what fixing government even is. .

Then why did you tell us that Obama has "... fixed all that government can of the wreck that Bush left. And addressed our biggest national economic competitiveness anchor, health care."

The truth is, Obama has repeatedly ignored the rule of law and has imposed his will upon the people without their consent, impinging upon their inalienable right to make their own medical and health care decision.

If you disagree, I am sure you will defend your opinion and cite to us when the American People debated granting power to our federal government to regulate their fundamental right to make their own medical and healthcare decisions and choices! And, after having this debate, you will explain how this regulatory power was granted within the limits of Article V of our Constitution, which is the only way for our federal government to exercise new powers. Without this part of our Constitution being adhered to in passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act it cannot be said to be a law passed in “pursuance” of our Constitution, which our Constitution requires under Article VI

Additionally, there is another question which you may be willing to answer since you defend Obama’s actions, What specific tax mentioned in our Constitution is being levied as the “shared responsibility payment”?

JWK




Obamacare by consent of the governed, Article 5, our Constitution`s amendment process. Tyranny by a majority vote in Congress or a Supreme Court's majority vote

You really don't understand the difference between "fixing government" and "fixed all that government can"?

No wonder you're so easily manipulated.

What I do know is you told us that Obama has "... fixed all that government can of the wreck that Bush left. And addressed our biggest national economic competitiveness anchor, health care."

But the truth is, Obama has repeatedly ignored the rule of law and has imposed his will upon the people without their consent, impinging upon their inalienable right to make their own medical and health care decision.

If you disagree, I am sure you will defend your opinion and cite to us when the American People debated granting power to our federal government to regulate their fundamental right to make their own medical and healthcare decisions and choices! And, after having this debate, you will explain how this regulatory power was granted within the limits of Article V of our Constitution, which is the only way for our federal government to exercise new powers. Without this part of our Constitution being adhered to in passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act it cannot be said to be a law passed in “pursuance” of our Constitution, which our Constitution requires under Article VI

Additionally, there is another question which you may be willing to answer since you defend Obama’s actions, What specific tax mentioned in our Constitution is being levied as the “shared responsibility payment”?

JWK




Obamacare by consent of the governed, Article 5, our Constitution`s amendment process. Tyranny by a majority vote in Congress or a Supreme Court's majority vote

 

[PMZ]

Then why did you tell us that Obama has "... fixed all that government can of the wreck that Bush left. And addressed our biggest national economic competitiveness anchor, health care."

The truth is, Obama has repeatedly ignored the rule of law and has imposed his will upon the people without their consent, impinging upon their inalienable right to make their own medical and health care decision.

If you disagree, I am sure you will defend your opinion and cite to us when the American People debated granting power to our federal government to regulate their fundamental right to make their own medical and healthcare decisions and choices! And, after having this debate, you will explain how this regulatory power was granted within the limits of Article V of our Constitution, which is the only way for our federal government to exercise new powers. Without this part of our Constitution being adhered to in passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act it cannot be said to be a law passed in “pursuance” of our Constitution, which our Constitution requires under Article VI

Additionally, there is another question which you may be willing to answer since you defend Obama’s actions, What specific tax mentioned in our Constitution is being levied as the “shared responsibility payment”?

JWK




Obamacare by consent of the governed, Article 5, our Constitution`s amendment process. Tyranny by a majority vote in Congress or a Supreme Court's majority vote

You really don't understand the difference between "fixing government" and "fixed all that government can"?

No wonder you're so easily manipulated.

What I do know is you told us that Obama has "... fixed all that government can of the wreck that Bush left. And addressed our biggest national economic competitiveness anchor, health care."

But the truth is, Obama has repeatedly ignored the rule of law and has imposed his will upon the people without their consent, impinging upon their inalienable right to make their own medical and health care decision.

If you disagree, I am sure you will defend your opinion and cite to us when the American People debated granting power to our federal government to regulate their fundamental right to make their own medical and healthcare decisions and choices! And, after having this debate, you will explain how this regulatory power was granted within the limits of Article V of our Constitution, which is the only way for our federal government to exercise new powers. Without this part of our Constitution being adhered to in passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act it cannot be said to be a law passed in “pursuance” of our Constitution, which our Constitution requires under Article VI

Additionally, there is another question which you may be willing to answer since you defend Obama’s actions, What specific tax mentioned in our Constitution is being levied as the “shared responsibility payment”?

JWK




Obamacare by consent of the governed, Article 5, our Constitution`s amendment process. Tyranny by a majority vote in Congress or a Supreme Court's majority vote

Don't worry, if you live long enough, you'll see Republicans recovered and back in power, and then you can use your collection of pre Constitution, debate floor sweepings to support another attempt to destroy America. We can hope that the next one else will be less successful than the last one.

In the meantime I'm sure that your musings will continue to entertain with a never ending recital of "If I Were King".

 

[P@triot]

Then why did you tell us that Obama has "... fixed all that government can of the wreck that Bush left. And addressed our biggest national economic competitiveness anchor, health care."

The truth is, Obama has repeatedly ignored the rule of law and has imposed his will upon the people without their consent, impinging upon their inalienable right to make their own medical and health care decision.

If you disagree, I am sure you will defend your opinion and cite to us when the American People debated granting power to our federal government to regulate their fundamental right to make their own medical and healthcare decisions and choices! And, after having this debate, you will explain how this regulatory power was granted within the limits of Article V of our Constitution, which is the only way for our federal government to exercise new powers. Without this part of our Constitution being adhered to in passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act it cannot be said to be a law passed in “pursuance” of our Constitution, which our Constitution requires under Article VI

Additionally, there is another question which you may be willing to answer since you defend Obama’s actions, What specific tax mentioned in our Constitution is being levied as the “shared responsibility payment”?

JWK

Obamacare by consent of the governed, Article 5, our Constitution`s amendment process. Tyranny by a majority vote in Congress or a Supreme Court's majority vote

You really don't understand the difference between "fixing government" and "fixed all that government can"?

No wonder you're so easily manipulated.

What I do know is you told us that Obama has "... fixed all that government can of the wreck that Bush left. And addressed our biggest national economic competitiveness anchor, health care."

But the truth is, Obama has repeatedly ignored the rule of law and has imposed his will upon the people without their consent, impinging upon their inalienable right to make their own medical and health care decision.

If you disagree, I am sure you will defend your opinion and cite to us when the American People debated granting power to our federal government to regulate their fundamental right to make their own medical and healthcare decisions and choices! And, after having this debate, you will explain how this regulatory power was granted within the limits of Article V of our Constitution, which is the only way for our federal government to exercise new powers. Without this part of our Constitution being adhered to in passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act it cannot be said to be a law passed in “pursuance” of our Constitution, which our Constitution requires under Article VI

Additionally, there is another question which you may be willing to answer since you defend Obama’s actions, What specific tax mentioned in our Constitution is being levied as the “shared responsibility payment”?

JWK

Obamacare by consent of the governed, Article 5, our Constitution`s amendment process. Tyranny by a majority vote in Congress or a Supreme Court's majority vote

Shhh... you can't talk about the Constitution with Dumbocrats. They don't understand such a "complicated" document. You have to dumb it down to their level (think pre-school...colors...shapes...talk softly...etc.).

 

[PMZ]

You really don't understand the difference between "fixing government" and "fixed all that government can"?

No wonder you're so easily manipulated.

What I do know is you told us that Obama has "... fixed all that government can of the wreck that Bush left. And addressed our biggest national economic competitiveness anchor, health care."

But the truth is, Obama has repeatedly ignored the rule of law and has imposed his will upon the people without their consent, impinging upon their inalienable right to make their own medical and health care decision.

If you disagree, I am sure you will defend your opinion and cite to us when the American People debated granting power to our federal government to regulate their fundamental right to make their own medical and healthcare decisions and choices! And, after having this debate, you will explain how this regulatory power was granted within the limits of Article V of our Constitution, which is the only way for our federal government to exercise new powers. Without this part of our Constitution being adhered to in passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act it cannot be said to be a law passed in “pursuance” of our Constitution, which our Constitution requires under Article VI

Additionally, there is another question which you may be willing to answer since you defend Obama’s actions, What specific tax mentioned in our Constitution is being levied as the “shared responsibility payment”?

JWK

Obamacare by consent of the governed, Article 5, our Constitution`s amendment process. Tyranny by a majority vote in Congress or a Supreme Court's majority vote

Shhh... you can't talk about the Constitution with Dumbocrats. They don't understand such a "complicated" document. You have to dumb it down to their level (think pre-school...colors...shapes...talk softly...etc.).

I, for one, am a strict Constitutionalist. Exactly as it's written.

 

[PMZ]

Pretty much the oldest extreme right propaganda trick, is the idea that the Constitution doesn't say what the interpretation that it authorizes, the Supreme Court's, says, but rather what they wish was true. And as proof they offer talking points that some of the debaters spoke, that led up to discussions that they lost in the Constitutional Convention.

For instance, many were States (Colony) righters. They wanted a weak Union of powerful States. The extreme right would like to reinterpret their words as favoring weak government. Which simply is not something that existed in those times in any models that the founders considered, which were essentially only somewhat recent graduates of feudalism.

The real world does not entitle right wingers to what they feel is their due. So they've built and are trying to sell, like real estate moguls, an alternative world, that recreates the aristocracy that they crave.

Just say no. Over and over. And keep the America that's always been successful.

 

[Iceman]

Pretty much the oldest extreme right propaganda trick, is the idea that the Constitution doesn't say what the interpretation that it authorizes, the Supreme Court's, is not as as accurate as what they wish was true. And as proof they offer talking points that some of the debaters spoke, that led up to discussions that they lost in the Constitutional Convention.

For instance, many were States (Colony) righters. They wanted a weak Union of powerful States. The extreme right would like to reinterpret their words as favoring weak government. Which simply is not something that existed in those times in any models that the founders considered, which were essentially only somewhat recent graduates of feudalism.

The real world does not entitle right wingers to what they feel is their due. So they've built and are trying like real estate moguls, an alternative world, that recreates the aristocracy that they crave.

Just say no. Over and over. And keep the America that's always been successful.

Real Americans support high taxes! lol.

I like your appeal to patriotism there.

 

[PMZ]

Pretty much the oldest extreme right propaganda trick, is the idea that the Constitution doesn't say what the interpretation that it authorizes, the Supreme Court's, is not as as accurate as what they wish was true. And as proof they offer talking points that some of the debaters spoke, that led up to discussions that they lost in the Constitutional Convention.

For instance, many were States (Colony) righters. They wanted a weak Union of powerful States. The extreme right would like to reinterpret their words as favoring weak government. Which simply is not something that existed in those times in any models that the founders considered, which were essentially only somewhat recent graduates of feudalism.

The real world does not entitle right wingers to what they feel is their due. So they've built and are trying like real estate moguls, an alternative world, that recreates the aristocracy that they crave.

Just say no. Over and over. And keep the America that's always been successful.

Real Americans support high taxes! lol.

I like your appeal to patriotism there.

By what actual real world measures are our taxes high? If they were, wouldn't you expect people like you to be leaving?

 

[Iceman]

Pretty much the oldest extreme right propaganda trick, is the idea that the Constitution doesn't say what the interpretation that it authorizes, the Supreme Court's, is not as as accurate as what they wish was true. And as proof they offer talking points that some of the debaters spoke, that led up to discussions that they lost in the Constitutional Convention.

For instance, many were States (Colony) righters. They wanted a weak Union of powerful States. The extreme right would like to reinterpret their words as favoring weak government. Which simply is not something that existed in those times in any models that the founders considered, which were essentially only somewhat recent graduates of feudalism.

The real world does not entitle right wingers to what they feel is their due. So they've built and are trying like real estate moguls, an alternative world, that recreates the aristocracy that they crave.

Just say no. Over and over. And keep the America that's always been successful.

Real Americans support high taxes! lol.

I like your appeal to patriotism there.

By what actual real world measures are our taxes high? If they were, wouldn't you expect people like you to be leaving?

They aren't high enough, moar taxes, moar patriotism!

 

[bripat9643]

What I do know is you told us that Obama has "... fixed all that government can of the wreck that Bush left. And addressed our biggest national economic competitiveness anchor, health care."

But the truth is, Obama has repeatedly ignored the rule of law and has imposed his will upon the people without their consent, impinging upon their inalienable right to make their own medical and health care decision.

If you disagree, I am sure you will defend your opinion and cite to us when the American People debated granting power to our federal government to regulate their fundamental right to make their own medical and healthcare decisions and choices! And, after having this debate, you will explain how this regulatory power was granted within the limits of Article V of our Constitution, which is the only way for our federal government to exercise new powers. Without this part of our Constitution being adhered to in passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act it cannot be said to be a law passed in “pursuance” of our Constitution, which our Constitution requires under Article VI

Additionally, there is another question which you may be willing to answer since you defend Obama’s actions, What specific tax mentioned in our Constitution is being levied as the “shared responsibility payment”?

JWK

Obamacare by consent of the governed, Article 5, our Constitution`s amendment process. Tyranny by a majority vote in Congress or a Supreme Court's majority vote

Shhh... you can't talk about the Constitution with Dumbocrats. They don't understand such a "complicated" document. You have to dumb it down to their level (think pre-school...colors...shapes...talk softly...etc.).

I, for one, am a strict Constitutionalist. Exactly as it's written.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

You're a laugh riot, worm.

You've already admitted you believe the Constitution says whatever the Supreme Court says it says. That's the opposite of a strict constructionist.

 

[bripat9643]

Pretty much the oldest extreme right propaganda trick, is the idea that the Constitution doesn't say what the interpretation that it authorizes, the Supreme Court's, is not as as accurate as what they wish was true. And as proof they offer talking points that some of the debaters spoke, that led up to discussions that they lost in the Constitutional Convention.

For instance, many were States (Colony) righters. They wanted a weak Union of powerful States. The extreme right would like to reinterpret their words as favoring weak government. Which simply is not something that existed in those times in any models that the founders considered, which were essentially only somewhat recent graduates of feudalism.

The real world does not entitle right wingers to what they feel is their due. So they've built and are trying like real estate moguls, an alternative world, that recreates the aristocracy that they crave.

Just say no. Over and over. And keep the America that's always been successful.

Real Americans support high taxes! lol.

I like your appeal to patriotism there.

By what actual real world measures are our taxes high? If they were, wouldn't you expect people like you to be leaving?

No because we're hoping we can elect a more rational gang of politicians. However, many people are preparing to leave. Check out this:

The incredible mile-long floating CITY - complete with schools, a hospital, parks and an airport for its 50,000 residents | Mail Online

 

[bripat9643]

Pretty much the oldest extreme right propaganda trick, is the idea that the Constitution doesn't say what the interpretation that it authorizes, the Supreme Court's, is not as as accurate as what they wish was true. And as proof they offer talking points that some of the debaters spoke, that led up to discussions that they lost in the Constitutional Convention.

For instance, many were States (Colony) righters. They wanted a weak Union of powerful States. The extreme right would like to reinterpret their words as favoring weak government. Which simply is not something that existed in those times in any models that the founders considered, which were essentially only somewhat recent graduates of feudalism.

The real world does not entitle right wingers to what they feel is their due. So they've built and are trying like real estate moguls, an alternative world, that recreates the aristocracy that they crave.

Just say no. Over and over. And keep the America that's always been successful.

Real Americans support high taxes! lol.

I like your appeal to patriotism there.

That seems to be the latest Democrat meme. Joe Biden inaugurated it when he started talking about having "skin in the game."

It's all horseshit, of course.

 

[bripat9643]

You really don't understand the difference between "fixing government" and "fixed all that government can"?

No wonder you're so easily manipulated.

What I do know is you told us that Obama has "... fixed all that government can of the wreck that Bush left. And addressed our biggest national economic competitiveness anchor, health care."

But the truth is, Obama has repeatedly ignored the rule of law and has imposed his will upon the people without their consent, impinging upon their inalienable right to make their own medical and health care decision.

If you disagree, I am sure you will defend your opinion and cite to us when the American People debated granting power to our federal government to regulate their fundamental right to make their own medical and healthcare decisions and choices! And, after having this debate, you will explain how this regulatory power was granted within the limits of Article V of our Constitution, which is the only way for our federal government to exercise new powers. Without this part of our Constitution being adhered to in passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act it cannot be said to be a law passed in “pursuance” of our Constitution, which our Constitution requires under Article VI

Additionally, there is another question which you may be willing to answer since you defend Obama’s actions, What specific tax mentioned in our Constitution is being levied as the “shared responsibility payment”?

JWK




Obamacare by consent of the governed, Article 5, our Constitution`s amendment process. Tyranny by a majority vote in Congress or a Supreme Court's majority vote

Don't worry, if you live long enough, you'll see Republicans recovered and back in power, and then you can use your collection of pre Constitution, debate floor sweepings to support another attempt to destroy America. We can hope that the next one else will be less successful than the last one.

In the meantime I'm sure that your musings will continue to entertain with a never ending recital of "If I Were King".

How will abolishing the Department of Education destroy America? If anything, the ACA is destroying America. Thanks to all the Obama fluffers for that.

 

[boedicca]

Pretty much the oldest extreme right propaganda trick, is the idea that the Constitution doesn't say what the interpretation that it authorizes, the Supreme Court's, is not as as accurate as what they wish was true. And as proof they offer talking points that some of the debaters spoke, that led up to discussions that they lost in the Constitutional Convention.

For instance, many were States (Colony) righters. They wanted a weak Union of powerful States. The extreme right would like to reinterpret their words as favoring weak government. Which simply is not something that existed in those times in any models that the founders considered, which were essentially only somewhat recent graduates of feudalism.

The real world does not entitle right wingers to what they feel is their due. So they've built and are trying like real estate moguls, an alternative world, that recreates the aristocracy that they crave.

Just say no. Over and over. And keep the America that's always been successful.

Real Americans support high taxes! lol.

I like your appeal to patriotism there.

By what actual real world measures are our taxes high? If they were, wouldn't you expect people like you to be leaving?

Medieval serfs rebelled when their taxes exceeded 30%...

Our Progressive Income tax system retards growth by punishing success..which never works out very well.

 

[PMZ]

Real Americans support high taxes! lol.

I like your appeal to patriotism there.

By what actual real world measures are our taxes high? If they were, wouldn't you expect people like you to be leaving?

They aren't high enough, moar taxes, moar patriotism!

Why must you avoid my question?