1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

"Redistribution"

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by Libsmasher, Oct 29, 2008.

  1. Libsmasher

    Libsmasher New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Messages:
    3,151
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Clarity on Obama's program for state sponsored theft:

    Most people of all political persuasions, except libertarians, think welfare is a proper function of government - that people who are helpless or down and out should receive government aid.

    Don't confuse that with Obama's "redistribution" - this is the leftwing notion that money should be taken from people who have more and given to those who have less, simply because their ideology demands an enforced economic "leveling".
     
  2. Frolicking Dinosaurs

    Frolicking Dinosaurs New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Now for a little reality about the lack of fairness in taxation levels - let's compare McCain's plan with Obama's plan.

    Note who is getting the largest % cuts in each plan. Obama's plan rolls back the increased tax burden GWB's misguided tax plan placed on the lower and middle class and rolls the burden back to the Reagen-era levels for the upper class. McCain's plan gives the richest taxpayers the largest % tax break - and that is on top of what GWB has already done.

    McCain's tax plan is a redistribution of the wealth from the lower and middle class to the upper class

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  3. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    I also think it is worthy to point out that, not in ideology, but in actual practice Palin...
    increased tax on profits of oil produced in Alaska
    committed 500million dollars of public money to support an eventually government funded pipeline in direct competition with a viable private industry project.
    Supported a socialization of energy, through direct cash payments to every eligible human in the state paid for through taxes taking earnings out of millions of Americans 401ks.

    You want to talk about redistribution, and actually having experience in that, look no further than quasi socialist Sarah Palin.
     
  4. Dawkinsrocks

    Dawkinsrocks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,281
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Why would anyone in the US want the wealth shared out?

    I mean a tiny few are immensely rich and a huge number are immensely poor.

    Those poor people wouldn't want any extra wealth would they?

    No, such a suggestion is an evil way of improving the lives of millions at the tiny expense of a few.

    And that is just pure evil.

    God told me this morning when I spoke to him, just after he told me to kill some more foreigners.
     
  5. Unite Our Nation

    Unite Our Nation New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2008
    Messages:
    560
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Interesting Dino, but I don't believe the charts as there are other charts out on the net that show it differently and it doesn't match what is written.

    The Reagan years were some of the very best our Nation has had and he managed that without "redistribution of wealth", but with actually making the Legislators stick to a budget!!

    There were two tax brackets after Reagan changed things for the better and those were 15% and 28%. The Nation thrived!

    What happens when you take money from those who earn it and hand it over to lazy, entitlement syndrome types is, you encourage them to live off of "Daddy Government".

    We proved this before in history with the huge failed Welfare system that encouraged young girls to simply get knocked up and have babies and live off the government.

    It is in human nature to feel better about ones self when we succeed. Let's not take that opportunity away from our youth!
     
  6. Frolicking Dinosaurs

    Frolicking Dinosaurs New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    First, those on welfare do not have earned income or retirement income and would be ineligible to receive the tax credits under Obama's plan as I understand it. Hmmm... tax incentives for working... now that's a plan for for doing away the idea of getting preggers and living of the dole.

    Since most Republicans feel the Reagan years tax plan was good, why are you guys so up in arms that Obama is essentially rolling taxes back to those years pretty much across the board? What is being described as 'redistribution' is very similar to the tax structure under Reagan with three exceptions:

    • it promotes college education via tax credit instead of exclusively need-based grants
    • it addresses health care within the tax structure (an inspired way to address this while keeping it in the private sector)
    • it provides tax incentives to keep jobs in the US
     
  7. Dawkinsrocks

    Dawkinsrocks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,281
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    It is nothing to do with Obama's policies it is because he is a democrat.
     
  8. Unite Our Nation

    Unite Our Nation New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2008
    Messages:
    560
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The reason folks are upset is because obama isn't taking our nation back to what worked! Far, far from it!!!!!!!!

    I happen to have a lot of family members in the middle class and I don't want them hurt by unemployment and run away inflation.

    Reagan was NOT a marxist and did not believe in "spreading the wealth around". His philosophy was MUCH different!

    I'd support any candidate, regardless of party affliation if someone wanted to bring back Reaganonmics!

    Dino, you are incorrect in thinking that "First, those on welfare do not have earned income or retirement income and would be ineligible to receive the tax credits under Obama's plan as I understand it". They would indeed receive the bogus tax credit, hence why it isn't a tax credit, but a welfare program.

    "Hmmm... tax incentives for working... now that's a plan for for doing away the idea of getting preggers and living of the dole."

    Tax incentives toward those with small business to help them grow and employ more people, and at higher wages is the clear goal. Do you agree with this method of growing not only employment, but increasing wages?
     
  9. Frolicking Dinosaurs

    Frolicking Dinosaurs New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Proof please. This conflicts with what I have read.
     
  10. Unite Our Nation

    Unite Our Nation New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2008
    Messages:
    560
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have listened to many of Obama's stump speeches and he is including everyone in those. Slip of the tongue or truth? I couldn't prove either at this moment.
     
  11. Frolicking Dinosaurs

    Frolicking Dinosaurs New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Stump speeches don't normally spell out specifics of a plan. It is my understanding that some earned income is necessary to receive most of the individual tax credits - those for child care costs and the earned income credit for sure. The college costs tax credit is available to all who can document having paid for college costs. Several of the tax credits are only available to small businesses or to both big and small businesses. These involve providing health care plans to workers and creating US jobs. The research and development credit is to bring those functions back to the US -- many have moved overseas because other countries already have such measures in place.

    I'm just not seeing any of this as welfare - helping those at the bottom - especially the single parents - to actually be able to afford to work is not welfare in my eyes - it is doing what is best for the economy overall. Hlping the workforce become better educated is also not welfare in my eyes, but wise planning for America's future. Helping bring R&D back to America is also wise planning.

    Can those who oppose Obama's plan please find the part they see as redistribution or welfare? I'm just not seeing it.
     
  12. Libsmasher

    Libsmasher New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Messages:
    3,151
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Talking aboutr changes is silly w/o talking about where we are starting from:

    According to the IRS, the top one percent of income earners in America pay 40 percent of all federal taxes. The top five percent pay 60 percent. The top fifty percent pay 97 percent of federal taxes, leaving just 3 percent to be paid by the bottom fifty percent of income earners.

    [​IMG]

    If you want to cut taxes, you really have to cut the upper income taxes, because they are practically the only one who PAY taxes!

    Obama's plan would send checks to people who paid no taxes - he'd simply use the federal income tax mechanism to effect "redistribotion".

    Get it yet? :rolleyes:
     
Loading...

Share This Page