Angry, disgruntled, furious conservatives -- See me :).

[Art]

You are not strong, you have money, you are not strong.

Our "Obligations" as you put it are what is crippling our society? It was not the mishandling of housing loans and the endless lines of credit that the "wealthy" dispensed in massive amounts as soon as they were deregulated? What are the "core" ideals that founded the nation? Are they present in the federalist papers?

The core ideals reside best in the Constitution. Read it.

The obligations are what is crippling society, yes. The housing/mortgage problem is transitory. It'll pass. It will not swell. It will run through and recover to some degree. You could largely resolve the entire issue with a stroke of a pen. Simply change the mark to market rules so banks can not mark up their assets to the current suspected market value and can not be forced to mark them down to the current suspected market value. Allow them to be valued at their purchase cost and allow real value to be shown when they are sold, for gain or loss.

Though strongly against the federal government buying up all that bad paper, in the end, when it unravels, there are houses there. Over a generation the $700 billion (excluding all the trinkets they added) could actually turn a profit. I think if they sold their AIG stake now it would nearly double, but I haven't seen AIG's share price in the last couple weeks so perhaps I'm dated on that.

Indeed, though, the continued unwillingness to pay for what we spend, thus limiting what we spend, instead borrowing on future generations, is the most crippling aspect of our society.

[Art]

We fought a civil war over this. The feds won.

The cival war was over slavery, not limits on the rights of states, which could not be removed militarily in any case.

[SnyderShrugged]

Art, I'm not sure how you felt about Ron Paul during the primary season, but you may be able to coordinate with another site that has over 100k registered members already. They share the same general goals as you are indicating.

www.campaignforliberty.com

[Titaw]

So everyone that makes 250k or less is on welfare?

The vast majority of the programs that the money stripped from the "wealthy" would not benefit those making $42K - $250K. The programs would help those under $42K and below with a good chunk going to those who don't contribute an leech off of society.

As I said before, I make well within Obama's purported "Tax Cut" range but, I myself do not believe that success should be penalized.

[Art]

So everyone that makes 250k or less is on welfare? You're not making much sense.

We're going back to the Bill Clinton system. The bush tax cuts will lapse, you will pay what you used to, the middle class will get their tax cuts and will be able to afford health care and education. There are countries where Both of those things including higher education are government controlled and they have rich people in them too. You managed to get money in your life, congratulations. There are more important things than you or I being rich and that is the stability and success of America. That will be put above me and you every single time.

First, no one in the middle class will get a tax cut. Obama has never said that. No one's marginal rates are diminishing. Thus, no one is receiving a tax cut. Obama does intend to write a check to Americans for drawing breath, paid by Americans who both draw breath AND earned the money.

The stability of America requires we hold to core American values that reject the notion of transferring money from one person to another. America's success will fade if we become France.

[Vicious]

Yes they will, you have not been paying attention.

[Art]

Art, I'm not sure how you felt about Ron Paul during the primary season, but you may be able to coordinate with another site that has over 100k registered members already. They share the same general goals as you are indicating.

www.campaignforliberty.com

Paul was/is right on taxes and government, no question.

I was against him because he's a fringe nut on foreign policy. Here is my most blatantly obvious neo-Conservative trait. I believe American ideals are greater than the ideals of anyone else. I believe it is our obligation to the world to lead them toward those core values of equality and freedom.

I heard Ron Paul essentially characterize 9-11 as the U.S. being a rape victim who was wearing a really short skirt who deserved it. Traditional conversativism is more embodied by Paul's vision in this area than my own. I just refuse to blame the rape victim for being so hot .

[Vicious]

The vast majority of the programs that the money stripped from the "wealthy" would not benefit those making $42K - $250K. The programs would help those under $42K and below with a good chunk going to those who don't contribute an leech off of society.

Where is your stats to back this up.

[Vicious]

The cival war was over slavery, not limits on the rights of states, which could not be removed militarily in any case.

You need to bone up on your history.

[Art]

Yes they will, you have not been paying attention.

Again, Vicious, no they won't.

Not a SINGLE person's marginal tax rate has been proposed to be lowered by Obama. Not one. Bush made a fatal error removing so many people from the income tax rolls in his tax cuts. Obama won't even remove people from it.

This is a fact of Obama's campaign and position on this matter. He has never suggested anyone will get a lower marginal tax rate. He's not cutting anyone's taxes. He merely proposes passing through of money from one group to another and he's calling that a tax cut, which it is not.

[Art]

You need to bone up on your history.

I think you'll discover the whole world knows our cival war was over slavery, not states rights. It touched on states rights such that the federal government declared a state could not own a person, but not in any other way. And the constitution with the equal protection clause assured this to be so.

[Art]

Where is your stats to back this up.

Be more specific.

The Top 10 percent pay a majority of the federal income tax bill. Thus it's true they pay for the majority of the problems. Most federal programs phase out once you start moving above $110,000 in earnings, though some are available from $42,000 to those numbers and slightly above depending on which program.

[SnyderShrugged]

Paul was/is right on taxes and government, no question.

I was against him because he's a fringe nut on foreign policy. Here is my most blatantly obvious neo-Conservative trait. I believe American ideals are greater than the ideals of anyone else. I believe it is our obligation to the world to lead them toward those core values of equality and freedom.

I heard Ron Paul essentially characterize 9-11 as the U.S. being a rape victim who was wearing a really short skirt who deserved it. Traditional conversativism is more embodied by Paul's vision in this area than my own. I just refuse to blame the rape victim for being so hot .

You have totally mischaracterized the 9/11 views from Paul, and please note that he was one of the first to call for war on afghanistan and in fact raised hell because we werent moving in there fast enough to get OBL. He was right.

But, his foreign policy stance is probably a subject for another thread. As to you idea, Its gonna be hard to propose a group that wants to stay strict to constitution, but only when its on matters non-military.

not bashing, but just my general thoughts.

[JohnLockesGhost]

I think you'll discover the whole world knows our cival war was over slavery, not states rights. It touched on states rights such that the federal government declared a state could not own a person, but not in any other way. And the constitution with the equal protection clause assured this to be so.

The 14th Amendment wasn't passed and ratified until after the Civil War. :2cents:

[Art]

The 14th Amendment wasn't passed and ratified until after the Civil War. :2cents:

I understand. Which is why I stated that it exists assuring states can never again think they can own a person because they want to.

[JohnLockesGhost]

I understand. Which is why I stated that it exists assuring states can never again think they can own a person because they want to.

Well that's in the 13th Amendment.

[Titaw]

Where is your stats to back this up.

More money will go to people that aren't contributing than those who are. You don't need stats, what you need is common sense.

[Art]

You have totally mischaracterized the 9/11 views from Paul, and please note that he was one of the first to call for war on afghanistan and in fact raised hell because we werent moving in there fast enough to get OBL. He was right.

But, his foreign policy stance is probably a subject for another thread. As to you idea, Its gonna be hard to propose a group that wants to stay strict to constitution, but only when its on matters non-military.

not bashing, but just my general thoughts.

I'm not sure Paul's views on the military are actually a strict reading of the Constitution, but, whether they are or not, the use of military or neo-cons versus traditional conservatism would not really be the focus of my thoughts.

But, I watched Paul, in his entirity, go over his foreign policy views and he said, in no uncertain terms, by being in the Middle East we brought 9-11 on ourselves. I think at the time I even wrote about this here. I'll see if I can find it.

In any case, that is a better area for another thread.

[Art]

Well that's in the 13th Amendment.

That's true .

[novascotiadiesel]

success? is 5% of the population controlling 95% of the wealth sucess? people here going without healthcare is a success, the crime and poverty and disparity between the rich and poor is sucess? horrible performance of the public school system is sucess?, ya for you and me I guess, we're all right so every thing is a sucess,

I guess a good use of my intellect and influence is to fight to make sure I get an extra 4% on my income and to make sure that in no way could that money be used for the betterment of our society as a whole, that is basically what you are saying, and you have now managed to gather a group with significantly less intellectual power to rally behind you, Art Please use your powers for good!!!

[DarrellsMyHero28]

Don't you think you should at least wait until Obama is actually president before banning together to stop the 'spreading of the wealth'?

:2cents:

[Destino]

With a flat tax no deductions should be allowed, but, those in charge, if they ever utilized a flat tax, would screw it up by having deductions.

The U.S. Tax Code, literally, should be about six words. Deductions are a form of social engineering. Have children, credit. Buy a house, credit. Green car, credit. Marry, credit.

Credit none of it. Pay 15 percent of your income.

Again, I don't believe in income taxes on the federal level at all, but a flat tax would be better than what we have.

This is one of the problem areas I see with the flat tax.

1 - No tax deductions removes incentives to do a lot of the things that grow the economy, help those in need, and otherwise spend money in beneficial ways (like buying a home).

2 - No tax deductions removes the ability of government to direct spending to areas of need. After hurricanes for example tax incentives can be set up to boost reinvestment in the hardest hit areas speeding up the rebuilding efforts significantly.

Both of these significantly weaken our government ability to respond to changing economic conditions. The other side of the coin is to allow deductions, and suddenly the upper end of the scale will be paying next to nothing in taxes in no time at all.

Flat tax sounds like a great idea... but there are some very serious problems with it.

[Vicious]

More money will go to people that aren't contributing than those who are. You don't need stats, what you need is common sense.

The middle class does not contribute? Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

[Art]

success? is 5% of the population controlling 95% of the wealth sucess? people here going without healthcare is a success, the crime and poverty and disparity between the rich and poor is sucess? horrible performance of the public school system is sucess?, ya for you and me I guess, we're all right so every thing is a sucess,

I guess a good use of my intellect and influence is to fight to make sure I get an extra 4% on my income and to make sure that in no way could that money be used for the betterment of our society as a whole, that is basically what you are saying, and you have now managed to gather a group with significantly less intellectual power to rally behind you, Art Please use your powers for good!!!

The American Dream is a simple concept. If you take risk and do something people like or need, you can become rich. With that wealth, as with Bill Gates for example, you may help thousands with your billions. American values do not uplift equalling out earned income so all people hold a relatively equal share. Those values exist, but spoken by an American they should not be.

Our public school system fails despite more funding than ever before. Fund it more, or require it to be accountable and compete for students, compelling it to do better to retain funding? The incentive of seeing the existence of very wealthy people, or a uniquely American story like Barack going from state Senator to President in four years, inspires others to achieve, fight, work.

It does not assure the same accomplishment.

There is no evidence that our federal government uses our money to the betterment of society beyond, perhaps, the effectiveness of our military which achieves better than other governmental agencies largely due to the fact you can die if you suck.

It is not a group that would follow me that would be intellectually lacking to acknowledge the systemic catastrophe of government and to hesitate to continue allowing it to increasingly manage our lives. It does precious little well and does almost nothing better than an incentive driven private sector.

In another thread I suggested there be no SEC. Rather, empower 10 regional companies with authority over specific businesses entrusted to find fradulent business practices and receive a portion of the fines/break up. Believe that a private business would have found the Enrons of the world where the SEC sat quiet for years of abuses in the late 90s and early 2000s.

That is but one example of many where governmental authority to mandate and direct can be given the private sector for application and attention and succeed with limited funding and higher results. This would not, obviously, work in all cases but would work in many.

Tell me environmental groups would not eagerly find polluting companies if empowered to do so

[Vicious]

Again, Vicious, no they won't.

Not a SINGLE person's marginal tax rate has been proposed to be lowered by Obama. Not one. Bush made a fatal error removing so many people from the income tax rolls in his tax cuts. Obama won't even remove people from it.

This is a fact of Obama's campaign and position on this matter. He has never suggested anyone will get a lower marginal tax rate. He's not cutting anyone's taxes. He merely proposes passing through of money from one group to another and he's calling that a tax cut, which it is not.

It is for the middle class. Not the 1.5%.