Hillary for President

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

High tax rate that aren't pointed toward a single rate and profligate spending are enemies, I agree.

Ronnie Reagan wove a good tale, but couldn't deliver. David gave a great speach that first year in Congress.

I don't understand why you tend to vote Republican. The greatest increases in the national debt have all come during Republican administrations (and with W, with a Republican House and Senate as well). When Bush came to office, the national debt was approximately $5.5 trillion. It now stands at over $9 trillion. A $4 trillion dollar increase in his presidency when it tooks us our entire nation's history to get to $5.5 trillion.

And how did we get to $5.5 trillion? At the end of Carter's presidency, it was at about $890 billion. At the end of Bush I? Approximately $4.5 trillion. Under Clinton, it went up about $1 trillion (still not a small number, but much smaller than the others in comparison).

As the debt increases, the amount of taxes we require to service that debt increases. We also now have about 50% of that debt held by foreigners- an unsettling thought that raises many national security concerns.

Sure- people can blame Democrats for taxing and spending. But history demonstrates that the biggest spenders (leading to the highest taxing) are Republicans.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

I don't know about not having a job. I had one when Bill was president. He is going to be a good advisor to her. I consider myself a Libertarian, so I'm not really a fan of the Socialist Democrats or the Fascist Republicans. There is no doubt in my mind that Bush is a rabid Fascist. I'm just hoping that the Socialist will pull us back to the middle somewhere. It's amazing to me how numb the country is to the assault on our civil rights. I guess people are happy as long as gay people can't marry.

A libertarian looking to socialists for salvation. Interesting.

From time to time I hear about Bush's assault on civil rights, so I'm curious about the details of how that is affecting the day to day lives of Americans. Has the place suddenly turned into a police state? Which rights has Bush the Fascist turned back? Are we talking about the NSA's practice of listening in on calls from suspect overseas phone numbers? Or is there something more sinister going on?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I don't understand why you tend to vote Republican. The greatest increases in the national debt have all come during Republican administrations (and with W, with a Republican House and Senate as well). When Bush came to office, the national debt was approximately $5.5 trillion. It now stands at over $9 trillion. A $4 trillion dollar increase in his presidency when it tooks us our entire nation's history to get to $5.5 trillion.

And how did we get to $5.5 trillion? At the end of Carter's presidency, it was at about $890 billion. At the end of Bush I? Approximately $4.5 trillion. Under Clinton, it went up about $1 trillion (still not a small number, but much smaller than the others in comparison).

As the debt increases, the amount of taxes we require to service that debt increases. We also now have about 50% of that debt held by foreigners- an unsettling thought that raises many national security concerns.

Sure- people can blame Democrats for taxing and spending. But history demonstrates that the biggest spenders (leading to the highest taxing) are Republicans.

Democrats hate the rich. I am not rich, but I don't hate them. And I believe Reps are more economy friendly.

In a perfect world, we would have low taxation, low regulation, libertarian representatives who didn't pass many lawas. We would also provide a very low level of services at low cost to the taxpayer, avoiding expansionist tendencies unless the spoils of war could be returned to the general populace. Neither party fits the bill, but the class warfare of the Dems is the most offensive. And my political coming of age was during the sixties, when Dems were the tax and spend ones, they controlled Congress by large margins and the White House. Top marginal tax rates were in the seventies, but we did have a few good loopholes.

[Detroitdad]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I don't understand why you tend to vote Republican. The greatest increases in the national debt have all come during Republican administrations (and with W, with a Republican House and Senate as well). When Bush came to office, the national debt was approximately $5.5 trillion. It now stands at over $9 trillion. A $4 trillion dollar increase in his presidency when it tooks us our entire nation's history to get to $5.5 trillion.

And how did we get to $5.5 trillion? At the end of Carter's presidency, it was at about $890 billion. At the end of Bush I? Approximately $4.5 trillion. Under Clinton, it went up about $1 trillion (still not a small number, but much smaller than the others in comparison).

As the debt increases, the amount of taxes we require to service that debt increases. We also now have about 50% of that debt held by foreigners- an unsettling thought that raises many national security concerns.

Sure- people can blame Democrats for taxing and spending. But history demonstrates that the biggest spenders (leading to the highest taxing) are Republicans.

You make a solid point. Last I read 16% of tax receipts were required to service the debt alone. Surely that has to have gone up since Bush came into office.

[BlueHair]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

A libertarian looking to socialists for salvation. Interesting.

From time to time I hear about Bush's assault on civil rights, so I'm curious about the details of how that is affecting the day to day lives of Americans. Has the place suddenly turned into a police state? Which rights has Bush the Fascist turned back? Are we talking about the NSA's practice of listening in on calls from suspect overseas phone numbers? Or is there something more sinister going on?

I don't think he's suddenly turned us into a police state, it's taken six years. I also don't think that my day to day life has changed that much. I doubt that most non-Jewish German's lives would have changed much in the early Hitler years either. My biggest complaints are: The centralized police force he created (the Germans called it the Gestapo, we call it Homeland Security), his belief in torture, invading the wrong country, the Patriot Act, domestic spying, habeas corpus issues, declaring an open ended war on a non-specific enemy (the war on terror is too broad), and cronyism. I'm sure I forgot a few.

[Detroitdad]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

A libertarian looking to socialists for salvation. Interesting.

From time to time I hear about Bush's assault on civil rights, so I'm curious about the details of how that is affecting the day to day lives of Americans. Has the place suddenly turned into a police state? Which rights has Bush the Fascist turned back? Are we talking about the NSA's practice of listening in on calls from suspect overseas phone numbers? Or is there something more sinister going on?

I'll let someone else tackle the civil rights issue, but it boggles my mind that after living in France you would ever call any Democrat a socialist. Hillary ain't even close to a socialist. In fact, the Democratic and Republican party are considered to be the same type of party by political scientists, both liberal (in the European sense). The only differences between the parties are the types and intensity of the policies of the parties.

[Detroitdad]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Democrats hate the rich. I am not rich, but I don't hate them. And I believe Reps are more economy friendly.

In a perfect world, we would have low taxation, low regulation, libertarian representatives who didn't pass many lawas. We would also provide a very low level of services at low cost to the taxpayer, avoiding expansionist tendencies unless the spoils of war could be returned to the general populace. Neither party fits the bill, but the class warfare of the Dems is the most offensive. And my political coming of age was during the sixties, when Dems were the tax and spend ones, they controlled Congress by large margins and the White House. Top marginal tax rates were in the seventies, but we did have a few good loopholes.

You know you are not going to have fun for the next few decades. I predict that this level of taxation is the lowest I will ever experience, since all of the entitlement programs (which along with the military and debt service accounts for approximately %80 of all spending) are about to explode.

I know that you believe that Dems hate the rich. But look at the evidence and you will find that the more fiscally responsible party has been the Democratic party when in power.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Detroitdad

You know you are not going to have fun for the next few decades. I predict that this level of taxation is the lowest I will ever experience, since all of the entitlement programs (which along with the military and debt service accounts for approximately %80 of all spending) are about to explode.

I know that you believe that Dems hate the rich. But look at the evidence and you will find that the more fiscally responsible party has been the Democratic party when in power.

Not exactly true. The party not in power is fiscally responsible and the Dems hate the military. The problem with Bush is he didn't hate the entitlement programs as I do. He wanted to enrich the military and the entitlement programs.

The Dems will dismember the military, raise taxes (to be fiscally responsible BIG DEAL, it means I still don't get to keep anything, and continue to build up entitlements.

I will not enjoy the future, unless I can stash enough aware to move to Monaco where I can laugh at dumb Americans for killng their economy with taxes and entitlements.

Whichever party is in power wants the spoils of war. The difference Reps hate taxes and Dems love them. If I have to make the Pyrrhic Choice of low taxes with consequences later or high taxes and no money now, I'll take the former before the latter, because there is no promise of a better future under the latter. I have confidence in myself if I can have something extra. I have no confidence in others to do it for me.

[Detroitdad]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Not exactly true. The party not in power is fiscally responsible and the Dems hate the military. The problem with Bush is he didn't hate the entitlement programs as I do. He wanted to enrich the military and the entitlement programs.

The Dems will dismember the military, raise taxes (to be fiscally responsible BIG DEAL, it means I still don't get to keep anything, and continue to build up entitlements.

I will not enjoy the future, unless I can stash enough aware to move to Monaco where I can laugh at dumb Americans for killng their economy with taxes and entitlements.

Whichever party is in power wants the spoils of war. The difference Reps hate taxes and Dems love them. If I have to make the Pyrrhic Choice of low taxes with consequences later or high taxes and no money now, I'll take the former before the latter, because there is no promise of a better future under the latter. I have confidence in myself if I can have something extra. I have no confidence in others to do it for me.

Would you really want to live in Monaco? A little claustrophobic and exclusive for my taste.

I see where you are coming from, but I disagree with your assumptions. More importantly I believe in keeping a clean balance sheet for the future. But that may owe to my youth.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Detroitdad

Would you really want to live in Monaco? A little claustrophobic and exclusive for my taste.

I see where you are coming from, but I disagree with your assumptions. More importantly I believe in keeping a clean balance sheet for the future. But that may owe to my youth.

Monaco is great, nestled in between France and Italy, with great cuisine, a half Ironman in September, plenty of hills for climbing, great tax rates, access to Nice for an airport.

Yes I could live very comfortably as a Monacoan resident. Sign me up, as soon as I have my 25 million. IOW, it doesn't look at this rate that I'll make it. I don't believe you could reside there for less.