Third Party & Independents: Archives

I am just glad we have a compassionate conservative in office.

1) Jobs are a lagging indicator. Most economic indicators are showing a real turnaround.

2) The tax cuts certainly couldn’t have an effect on **2002** poverty rates since they didn’t kick in until this year.

Do you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how economics work?

Oh well, just keep rambling…

Lets start with your views on taxes…
Remember, noone that lives within the poverty line pays any taxes at all, whatsoever. In fact the top 50% of wage earners in the United States pay 96.09% of all taxes.

You can’t cut taxes for the people who do not pay any taxes. Namely the bottom 50% of wage earners in the U.S. or HALF of the country. The top 1% is paying more than ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%! Isn’t that enough for you liberals?

“link to the IRS spreadsheet (you must have excel to view it)”

“Bureau statistician Daniel Weinberg said the changes between 2001 and 2002 were consistent with changes following past recessions.”

“The highest point in the cycle of poverty and the lowest point in income tend to come in the year after a recession,” he said at a news conference at bureau headquarters in Suitland, Md.”

In 2002, 12.1 million children were in poverty, or 16.7 percent of all kids, up from 11.7 million, or 16.3 percent, the previous year. [That is 4/10 of one percent higher.] The Census Bureau said the increase in the child poverty rate was not statistically significant.”

You left that part out too.

Almost half of the country and the 2002 poverty rate reported today is still close to the 2000 mark, its lowest level in more than 25 years.

I like what this guy had to say, do you know him?…
Bill Spriggs, director of research and public policy at the National Urban League, said the numbers were frightening. “This may become one of the worst downturns in income in 30 years,” he said.

He is talking about an increase in poverty that is by the admission of the Census Bureau “not statistically significant”.
I am sure it is significant to anyone who grew up as dirt poor as I did. But if you want to talk numbers it really isn’t a dramatic upturn whatsoever and the notion that it is doesn’t pass the laugh test.

here is an interesting read from 1997

“In fact the top 50% of wage earners in the United States pay 96.09% of all taxes.”

Not true. It’s 96.09% of INCOME taxes. Of course, without knowing what percentage of income the top 50% earn, it’s a hard statistic to use.

Ugh. I mistyped while correcting. It’s of Federal Income taxes, not just income taxes, and not of “all taxes”

Lawnboy, you are correct it is FEDERAL INCOME taxes…I should have been more specific.
Got anything else? Is that enough for you Liberals or should we pay even more taxes?

I’m willing to bet V. Edward doesn’t pay income tax.

no, we liberals don’t want to pay more in taxes, at least i don’t…however i would like it explained to me how the current conservative administration is spending way more than they have to spend….and yet the majority of us working folk can barely pay our bills. and you still blame liberals….

the right say one thing, the left say another….i want someone to come up with a sensible tax plan that will allow our government not to be in deficit spending, keep our military strong, make sure that huge corporations are not abusing tax loopholes, and yes, give the vast majority of working-class a break….

pete, on several occasions you have talked about how wonderfully wealthy you are….congradulations…you beat the system. how’d ya do it?

i am discouraged by your attacks on liberal america, those of us struggling to survive anyhow, liberals spend more on social programs, conservatives spend more on programs like the military, but it’s still money coming from the taxpayers….so to say that liberals are the cause of all our financial woes is a bit incorrect…or if it isn’t please tell me that the correct answer is.

the bush administration is spending more money than they have…and yet they give huge tax cuts, most of which benefit folks like pete, apparently.

on another note, they say that the unemployment rate is currently on the decline…my question is, are they polling people who are just collecting unemployment, or are they polling everyone, including those for whom unemployment insurance has run out….just because they can’t collect the federal check, does’t mean they have magically found work…i’d love to see that poll.

i look forward to your thoughts.

Richard, that would be a fools bet; and a suckers bet as well…

What’s your tax rate, V?

None of your business R.

I think the real problem that needs addressing is Welfare.

I live in Alaska, and though I am only a mere 30, I have witnessed abuse of this system that is so atrocious it sickens me.

eg. My mother is the postmaster of Willow and the Day after a welfare recipient opens a new mailbox, their welfare checks/medicare and p/pwk start coming in… but it takes three weeks for regular mail to get routed to the right location.

Those of us doing well for ourselves pay through the nose so these freeloaders can sit at home and play Vatican Roulette to get higher paychecks.

It cracks me up that the financially challenged feel that just because I can afford to pay 40k in taxes a year, that it is my duty to do so.

As far as Bush-Bashing, it’s funny how little most Democrats investigate the finer points of economics. Clinton is widely regaled for how well our economy did during his administration, but none credit the work that Reagan did that built that foundation.

It is easy to go on a spending spree to boost the economy when you load up on debt - hey, it is the next president that will have to deal with the debt and deficits. That was Ronald Reagan, thank god his term expired or we’d all be bankrupt.

rob,

unemployment is defined as the percentage of Americans seeking employment. So, if you’ve lost your job and have given up finding a new one, you don’t count as unemployed

pete,

I wasn’t saying that anyone should pay more taxes. I’m just sick of that particular statistic from the Rush Limbaugh’s front page, given without context or explanation. I didn’t want the way he portrays the numbers to spread here unchalleneged.

Well then why don’t you read the friggin numbers and then tell me why it is fair?
You liberals cannot fight the facts so you just say BS and try to derail the truth.
The reason is this…
You cannot debate the numbers. No matter how many times we post the actual statistics, you can’t argue with them.

If you want to debate the tax system then do so. Otherwise put up or shut up.
You can’t because it is impossible to defeat.

“In general, the art of government consists in taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other.” — Voltaire (1764)

“Common Sense is not so Common.” -Voltaire

The wealthiest nation in the world should have only voluntary poverty. Those who renouce worldly goods and affairs of free volition.

I find it interesting that 1) the majority of persons in this country below poverty level are white, and 2) there are now political moves to remove race as a measure in government collected data.

Is there a correlation? Don’t know. But, I will be watching these events for interactive relationships.

Previous Presidents and Congresses have shown both the ability and willingness to create jobs when industry can or will not. What does this say about the current administration and Congress?

The wealthiest nation in the world should have only voluntary poverty.

I’m sure the people of Luxembourg will be glad to know that. See this chart to learn how countries rank in per-capita GDP.

Yukon—

The welfare card is played out; welfare is not nearly the burden on the tax payer it used to be, or ever was for that matter. The next time you start feeling disgruntled about paying taxes so that children don’t have live on the street, recite the Preamble to the Federal Constitution to yourself. In case you don’t know it, allow me:

We the People of the United States of America in order to form a more prefect Union establish justice and ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessing of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America…

Republicans in their all consuming rush to enrich themselves at the expense of the rest of us, seem to forget that the United States was formed for the benefit of ALL her citizenry, not just the well-to-do.

Oh, I’m sorry, there I go letting my idealism and belief in American principles as embodied in the our Constitution and Declaration of Independence get in the way of capitalist lock-stepping…

I did a little analysis of Rush’s number on http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/irsfigures.guest.html that is probably the source of pete’s numbers that the top 50% pay 96% of the taxes.

There’s a very good reason for that number: The top 50% earn 87% of the adjusted gross income!

So, where’s the big disparity? It’s only 9% more than if we had a pure flat tax! Don’t throw around numbers like 50% for shocking comparison when 87% is the much more relevant comparison. And these numbers don’t even include sales tax and a lot of other more regressive taxes.