HardRadio.com Main Page

HardRadio HardBoard
The Heavy Metal Supersite
    FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

George W Bush and the Real State of the Union
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic    HardRadio HardBoard Forum Index -> Free For All Forum
Digg it Stumble it Submit to Del.icio.us Reddit it Slashdot it  
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message

Joined: 15 Sep 2000
Posts: 896
Location: Minneapolis

PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:12 pm    Post subject: George W Bush and the Real State of the Union Reply with quote

Yeah, repealing the tax cuts bush passed will do us all a lot of good. The "little guys" are getting screwed and the "rich" are not paying their fair share of the taxes right?

Let's look at that:

It seems nearly everywhere I look, I hear the media driven buzzwords “tax cuts for the rich” being repeated over and over. Democratic presidential hopeful Al Sharpton confirmed that even he doesn’t understand what American taxpayers really pay in taxes or what the so called “rich” actually pay in taxes in his interview with ABC’s John Stossel. According to presidential candidate Al Sharpton, "The top one percent in this country pays very much less than ten percent, very much less than five percent” said Sharpton. Sharpton went on to say he felt that the “rich” should pay somewhere around 15%. The truth of the matter is that the top 1% of American taxpayers, as defined by those making more than $300,000 per year, actually pay 34% of all the income taxes collected. This is more than twice the amount of taxes that Sharpton felt should be paid by those defined as “rich.” Those families with an income of over $125,000 (the top 5%) pay 50% of all of the federal income taxes in the country. The fact that a presidential candidate can be so far off from the truth of when it comes to what Americans truly pay in income taxes, only serves to show the power and influence the media has over the American people’s perception of what is defined as “rich” and what people truly pay in taxes. Bush’s tax cuts have only served to put more money in the pockets of the real “middle class.” According to a nonpartisan analysis by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, nearly 75% of all families are getting a tax cut this year from the two tax bills signed into law by President Bush in 2001 and 2002. This amounts to an average of $1,217. Even families making only $20,000 to $30,000 a year are getting an average cut this year of $638. And 98.4% of that group -- "middle-class" by almost anybody's standards -- are getting some tax reduction. The amount of money is significant -- it increases their after-tax income an average of 2.7 percent above what it would have been before the Bush tax cuts. And for those farther up in the middle-class hierarchy -- making $75,000 to $100,000 a year -- the Bush tax cuts are worth an average of $2,543 this year. More than 20 million American families earn $75,000 a year or more, and will be getting tax cuts in the thousands of dollars this year.

Outside of the argument as to what is really defined as “the middle class,” as well as “wealthy” by most left leaning politicians and the media, American’s are benefiting from the Bush tax cuts, especially the “middle class.”

Americans need to better educate themselves about this issue so as not to continue to believe the rhetoric of the left wing. The “rich” and the true “middle class” are paying more than their fair share of the taxes in this country. The truth of the matter is that many Americans continue to succumb to the redefinition of the middle class as “rich” by the media and left wing politicians, as well as believe that these so called “rich” are not paying their “fair share” of taxes.

The whole "rich" and taxes argument appeals to the worst in people. It is a simple manipulation of peoples need to feel like it is unfair if someone makes more than you do.

I for one, would like to feel like there is no limit to what I can achieve. I dont want to feel like government will decide what to do with my money, and at a certain point I will be punished for it.

That is where the government is "insinuating" themselves into my life. That is where the most freedoms are taken from me. My ability to control my own destiny and do what I want with my money.

I would love to see what happens if companies didn't withhold taxes from peoples' checks and everyone had to write out a check each month for those taxes. I would be willing to bet people would pay alot more attention to taxes then.

It is a big lie to believe that conservatives are "taking freedoms" away. It happens on both sides. For me, the ability to choose what I do with my money is the biggest freedom one can have.

Redistribution of wealth has gotten us no where, and won't do anything positive for anyone.

I think the pres has done a pretty damn good job of putting this economy in the position it is considering he took over when we were in an economic downturn and then the terrorist attack. Anyone that knows economics knows that job creation is the last thing that happens after economic recovery. I deal with business every single day and the industries I deal with are the SLOWEST to hire. So far, there are very positive things happening.

I realize that there are people that are just going to blindly hate George Bush or conservatives no matter what statistics or the truth is, but the fact is that there is no democratic candidate right now that would make the economic picture better. They are all saying "repeal" right now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Joined: 28 Nov 2000
Posts: 1564
Location: Pennsylvania

PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2004 9:25 pm    Post subject: George W Bush and the Real State of the Union Reply with quote

Horace, why do you say you don't trust Tom Ridge?

He was our Governer before he took this post. I am hoping he runs for President in 2008. The guy we have now, Ed Rendell [b](D)[/b] is killing us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 19 Feb 2000
Posts: 603
Location: portland

PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2004 10:57 pm    Post subject: George W Bush and the Real State of the Union Reply with quote

heres how you creat jobs,you all write your congressman and demand that their respective state eliminate taxes on companyies who employ 50 or more,and if your corp headquarters are in the US then 75 percent of your manufacturing must reside in the US not a piecemeal basis like what boeing is doing with china where part of a plane is made there and here..for instance you build a widget it must be 100 percent manufactured here..THE REASON jobs are being lost is that companies like nike,reebok continue to outsource workers in china,indonsia ect and when you ask why they dont make those 100 buck shoes here is that they would cost more?this is where the job are going wake up...it started with NAFTA
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 05 Apr 2002
Posts: 3526
Location: Pittsburgh,PA

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 12:48 am    Post subject: George W Bush and the Real State of the Union Reply with quote

Published on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 by the Boulder Daily Camera
Connect the Dots, Folks: Bush Tax Cuts for Rich
by Molly Ivins

AUSTIN, Texas — I just love the fine print in the president's tax-cut plan. I grant you, the overall effect is pretty spectacular, too — a plan that has almost no stimulative effect but still opens a future of zillion-dollar deficits to drag down the economy. That's the back-asswards of what we need, but it's not the fun part.

Look at these goodies:

Think because you have money in the stock market you might have a stake in eliminating the dividend tax, the centerpiece of the president's tax cut — $300 billion over 10 years? (You probably think you have money in the stock market because your 401K keeps going down — that would be 40 million Americans.) But no! This tax break doesn't apply to your dividends! The money in your 401K from both savings and dividends are tax sheltered until you withdraw the money — then all of it gets taxed as ordinary income. You don't get any tax break on your dividends — that only goes to the investor class. According to Kevin Phillips, 1 percent of investors pocketed 42 percent of the stock-market gains between 1989 and 1997, while the top 10 percent of the population took 86 percent. These people need a tax cut! They haven't been getting their share!

According to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, the effect of eliminating dividend taxation is that the average benefit for those making less than $10,000 would be $6, and average benefit for those making more than $1 million would be $45,098. Quick, high-schoolers, let's practice up for the those SATs by figuring out by what percentage $45,098 is bigger than $6.

Bush also wants to accelerate the income-tax cuts slated for 2006. Look at this folly. The top 5 percent of taxpayers would get 70 percent of the benefits on that one. The bottom 80 percent would get 6.5 percent of the benefits. Ditto with accelerating the 2004 tax cuts: 64.4 percent to the top 5 percent of taxpayers; 7.7 percent to the bottom 80 percent.

One of those people who can't handle numbers, need something visual to work with? Find the Urban-Brookings charts published in the Jan. 7 New York Times showing who gets how much of this tax cut. You can bareley see the lines that measure the relief until you get above the 99th percentile.

Naturally there will be a lot of spinning on these tax cuts in the weeks ahead, with numbers being tossed around like confetti. We'll probably need John Paulos, the innumeracy guy, to referee. I recommend the Center for Tax Justice (www.ctj.org), whose computer model is widely respected.

Speaking of damn lies and statistics, one of the little games being played in Washington is that the Republicans want to switch to Enron accounting on the economy. They're leaning on both the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation to change the way they make their economic estimates. According to the R's, "static scoring" — as opposed to your "dynamic scoring" — overestimates the cost of tax cuts by ignoring their role in boosting economic growth. Why, claim the R's, tax cuts pay for themsleves! If that's so, why are all the states going broke? Bring on Arthur Andersen and mark-to-market accounting — that'll perk up the economy.

The only good part of the Bush's tax cut plan is the $400 increase in the tax credit per child — at least that spreads it around a little. Naturally, that's the one part of the plan right-wingers hate.

As we all wade into these numerical battles over exactly how much of this tax cut goes to the very rich, the more fundamental question is whether it's a good idea — either economically, or in terms of social justice, to have the very rich get very much richer than they already are.

Contrary to the paranoid fantasists on The Wall Street Journal's editorial page, populists are not motivated by some burning resentment of the rich — we don't spend our lives in an envious funk that someone else is better off than we are. "No skin off my nose" is the general attitude, with others coming in at "Lucky them" or "Good for them." The problem is that the rich are screwing up our democracy. Less than 0.1 percent of the U.S. population gave 83 percent of all itemized campaign contributions for the 2002 elections, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. According to the Houston Chronicle, just 48 wealthy Texas families provided more than half the campaign funds for the major Republican state candidates this fall.

How dumb do you have to be not to be able to connect the dots here? Law, policy and regulation are consistently shaped to favor the rich over the rest of us, and that, dammit, is not fair, it is not right, it is not the country we want and for which we are asked to sacrifice.

Copyright 2003, The Daily Camera

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Scott McWhinnie

Joined: 03 Feb 2003
Posts: 27
Location: Berwyn IL

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 3:03 am    Post subject: George W Bush and the Real State of the Union Reply with quote

Iwarrior, you impress, you back your arguments up with research that I think you have conducted yourself. On the other hand,it does sound like the bullet points right off of the liberal play book.

Look, the "rich" pay over 90% of federal income taxes. That's fact. Redistribution of wealth is called Communism and has a 100% failure rate.

In our country, as someone mentioned before, you can make your own job and make as much money as you want.

On that note, you should not be penalized for being a success.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 05 Apr 2002
Posts: 3526
Location: Pittsburgh,PA

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 2:47 pm    Post subject: George W Bush and the Real State of the Union Reply with quote

In our country, as someone mentioned before, you can make your own job and make as much money as you want.
Bull. That doesn't work for most of us. Horatio Alger is dead.

On that note, you should not be penalized for being a success.
As opposed to being penalized for NOT being a success.

The rich are doing fine. They don't need any help.

Poor rich people. [img]images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

Joined: 28 May 2000
Posts: 1367
Location: A step away from crazy

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2004 12:59 am    Post subject: George W Bush and the Real State of the Union Reply with quote

How much I pay in taxes doesn't bother me. What bothers me is the taxes I do pay this administration wants to use for crap like marrage therapy for people in a rut. I mean he wants to cut social programs that help feed kids and train law abiding unemployed so he can shuffle our tax dollars into programs to help people hold together a crumbling marrage and train ex cons to go back to work.

One of the things that has always disgusted me about our counties polacies is our creepy need to reward "bad" behavior through the state. And it doesn't matter whether a republican or a dem is in office because it's happened and continues to happen no matter which party is in control.

I've seen it first hand. If your a drug addict the state will pay for your treatment and living expenses till you get "well." But may the gods help you if you have done the right thing stayed in school not poped out one kid after another and are not a drug addict, but you get sick.

This country needs to start rewarding "good" behavior. Everything from tax breaks for companies that keep jobs here and employ Americans to helping people who haven't been arrested to go to school.

I gotta say the one thing I have become seriously sick of seeing in the last 2 years is all this Rep vs Dem bullcrap. Both parties have their good points and bad. Both are corrupt, no party is perfect. But it right down sick to see these factions split us into opposing groups. I mean isn't anyone else sick of hearing the tired Dem= libral treehugging pansy anti american wuss
and the ever so wonderful
republican= warmongering elitist jack booted nazi powerfreaks

It's disgusting!! I have actually found myself at times embarassed to have to admit to being an American. Not because I hate this country, but because I am sick to death of being judged a certain way just because I refuse to step into line with any one "party."

I don't like Bush... but that doesn't make me a treehugging libral. It just makes me someone who doesn't like his administration.

Sometimes it sucks being a moderate. I think both our major parties suck. They do nothing but trash each other most of the time. [img]images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Joined: 03 Apr 2002
Posts: 316
Location: USA

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2004 8:03 am    Post subject: George W Bush and the Real State of the Union Reply with quote

Originally posted by JosephC:

At least the market has been making me a boatload of money in the last 18 months or so. Can't complain about that! I've been told not to expect a 30+% return on my investments in 2003, but I still can expect to make in the area of 12%. 12%, I can live with that! I just saw a Gallup pole that consumer confidence is WAY up, so things are looking pretty good. It's nice to see that the economy is just kicking a## right now.

Were you going broke under Clinton? It's nice to know that you are making a "boatload" of money, however, there is this thing called a deficit, which Bush has increased more than any president in history. Simple logic says that you cannot have it both ways: Spend a fortune on expensive (and unneccesary) wars, cut breaks for mega-corporations, AND deliver massive tax cuts. Btw, what do you think the average person did with their $200-$600 bucks? Bought a TV or VCR? That will really save the ecomomy. But hey, Dick Cheney saved over $100,000 and I'm sure he's hiring a couple of extra illegal aliens to clean his house as I write this.

Also of interest: this quote from today's New York Post business section:

"One market watcher says the public mistakenly believes that Wall Street fares better under Republicans.

["Historically, the markets have performed much better under Democrats than Republicans, going all the way back," said Jeff Hirsch, editor of the Stock Market Almanac. "There's a great misconception that the GOP is the political party of business."]"

Full story: [url=http://nypost.com/business/15765.htm]http://nypost.com/business/1 5765.htm[/url]

Before I hear the usual "liberal spin" attack, I'll note that the New York post is one of the most rabidly right wing rags in existence. Just check out their Op-Ed pages. The NY Times it isn't.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Joined: 15 Sep 2000
Posts: 896
Location: Minneapolis

PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2004 3:28 pm    Post subject: George W Bush and the Real State of the Union Reply with quote

This is why I don't like making these points because most people dont spend the time to try and do real research.

On another issue...Rockangel, what would you propose we do with the illegals? The point is that most of them are law abiding individuals that come here looking for jobs and opportunity. The presidents idea is to address the issue by creating a system where we track who is coming in and who isn't. If illegal immigrants feel like they can get in legally by checking in it decreases the likelihood that they would use "coyotes" to help them get in illegally. These "coyotes" are how some recently discovered arab terrorists got in. The fact is, the issue needs to be addressed. We aren't in a position to completely close our borders so by tracking those individuals that are only here to work, and are otherwise law abiding, we cut down on the illegal immigrant trafficking.

The dems are moving us closer to socialism and communism then we ever were before, and it is true as one pointed out, that it doesn't work. Republicans are also sliding to the left as well. They are closer to the old democratic positions of the late 60's. The country was built on principles of capitalism and individualism, these principles are being systematically eliminated as we move towards a globalized government.

Politicians serious about preventing another Sept. 11 should listen to the leader of Hizballah, and then read an indictment unsealed this month in Detroit.

"Let the entire world hear me," said Sheik Hassan Nasrallah on Sept. 27, 2002. "Our hostility to the Great Satan is absolute."

There's good reason to take this sheik seriously. In 1983, his Iranian-backed Lebanese terrorist group attacked the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241 Americans. According to the opinion of U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth in the case of Peterson v. the Islamic Republic of Iran, Nasrallah attended the meeting in Baalbek, Lebanon, where the 1983 attack was planned. Until Sept. 11, it remained the deadliest terrorist strike ever against the United States.

The sheik's Sept. 27, 2002, rally in Beirut celebrated the Palestinian intifadah. It was broadcast live on Lebanese TV and monitored by the BBC.

"Regardless of how the world has changed after 11 September," Nasrallah said that day, "Death to America will remain our reverberating and powerful slogan: Death to America!"

Six months later, according to the BBC, Nasrallah warned Americans that if the U.S. invaded Iraq, "The region's people will receive you with rifles, blood, arms, martyrdom and martyrdom operations."

Now, turn to May 3, 2003. That's when FBI agents searched the Dearborn, Mich., residence of Mahmoud Kourani, a 32-year-old illegal alien from Lebanon.

In a statement submitted last week in federal court, Assistant U.S. Attorney Kenneth Chadwell revealed words the FBI found on audiotapes there: "You alone are the sun of my lands, Nasrallah! Nasrallah!/. . . your voice is nothing less than my jihad."

"We offer to you Hizballah, a pledge of loyalty," said a tape. ". . . Rise for Jihad! . . . I offer you, Hizballah, my blood in my hand."

Kourani pleaded guilty to harboring an illegal alien. A judge sentenced him to six months. On Jan. 15, a second indictment was unsealed, charging Kourani with conspiracy to provide material support to Hizballah.

"Kourani was a member, fighter, recruiter and fundraiser for Hizballah," said the indictment. "Operating at first from Lebanon and later in the United States, Kourani was a dedicated member of Hizballah who received specialized training in radical Shiite fundamentalism, weaponry, spy craft, and counterintelligence in Lebanon and Iran."

"Kourani," Chadwell added in his statement, "is charged with conspiring with individuals at the highest levels of the terrorist organization, including one of his brothers who is the Hizballah chief of military security for southern Lebanon."

Kourani got to America, the prosecutors allege, with the help of a Mexican official.

"On approximately Feb. 4, 2001, Kourani surreptitiously entered the United States by sneaking across the U.S./Mexico border in the trunk of a car," wrote Chadwell. "He reached Mexico by paying $3,000 used to bribe an official in the Mexican Consulate in Beirut, Lebanon, to give him a Mexican visa."

Do prosecutors believe that official was Imelda Ortiz Abdala, the one-time Mexican consul in Beirut who was arrested by Mexico in November, according to the Associated Press, "on charges of helping a smuggling ring move Arab migrants into the United States from Mexico"? "They are not sure if that is the person that received the money," said Sandy Palazzolo, a spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney Jeffrey G. Collins of Detroit. "They have information that she worked there during this time frame, but they don't know if that is in fact the person that he did bribe."

In a sentencing memorandum in Kourani's alien-harboring case, Chadwell told the court Kourani's "offense of conviction was part of a continuing scheme to bring illegal aliens to the United States from Lebanon through Mexico."

Kourani has pleaded not guilty to providing material support to Hizballah. I asked his attorney, Nabih Ayad, about the claim in the indictment that Kourani was a member, fighter, recruiter and fundraiser for Hizballah. "He denies all that," said Ayad. Kourani also contests the government's assertion that he bought a Mexican visa for $3,000 in Beirut. "My client told me specifically," said Ayad, "that he got it legitimately through the Mexican consulate."

Why did Kourani come to America? "I think why millions of Americans, the immigrants, come to the United States," said Ayad. "Basically, to make some money. . . . According to his statements to the FBI agents, he was here to make some money to go back with $10,000 for his wife and children."

Whatever the eventual outcome in this case, simple prudence demands that a question be asked of our political leaders: If they don't secure our borders against illegal immigration, how can they secure our country against Hizballah?

And Hizballah, as Sheik Nasrallah says, seeks "Death to America!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    HardRadio HardBoard Forum Index -> Free For All Forum All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group