Regarding Redistribution of Wealth.
 

I keep hearing people say that Obama and democrats in general are about redistribution of wealth. Taxing the rich and giving to the poor. Aren't taxes by their very nature designed to redistribute wealth from ANYONE that pays taxes? What funds welfare for example? Don't ALL administrations tax citizens and send it to poor countries? Is this really only democrats that do this? Isn't "redistribution of wealth" done by ALL administrations for decades and decades?

it was taxes that paid for the goverment funding of the internet's creation.

Its just more bullshit designed to confuse and scare people, just as everything that comes from republicans are intended.

Obama's tax changes does nothing more than bring it back to what they were during the Clinton years.

I really did not follow politics when Clinton was running for office. Was he accused of this as well?

Exactly

In actuality Obama's tax plan is more conservative than the Bush administrations

There are gradations of redistribution

IRS=Redistribution Of Wealth :2 cents:

:2 cents::2 cents:

Clinton promised to lower taxes for the middle class and seniors and ended up raising them for both.

Obama will do this as well.

He has to...

McCain would have to do the same..

The economy is so fucked up that its going to require tax increases on all levels to fix it..

It's all in the wording, you need to read between the lines and determine who's for the good and who's up to no good . The Republican brand's wording is... when the rich get the money its a tax cut, when the middle class get it, it's a hand-out/welfare/socialism. They say that the richer that the rich get, the better off the middle class will be (even though there is no evidence to prove it and much evidence to the contrary, especially in the last 8 years).
How long exactly does it take a trickle down economy to start trickling down? It hasn't yet under GWB so if I/people vote for McCain, how much longer does the middle class have to wait to benefit from it? Will it start trickling in McCain's first term or second? Will I have to wait to vote for Palin in 2012 so that It will start trickling down then? Answer is... IT DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER. They say whatever they need to say to get what whatever it is they want and when it doesn't come true, what fucking difference does it make? None. When the next election comes, all they have to do is say, "we love jesus and guns and we hate abortion and taxes" and they're right back in the race.

One thing is for sure, the US goverment needs to bring in more money and spend less.
Will be interesting to see how Obama will do it.

The traditional american way except Clinton is the spend more and tax less. A pathway to disaster.

What is a BUSH stimulus check ????

It's rather amusing to read some boards where republicans are all up in arms about how they refuse to have their hard earned money go to someone else.

They obviously have no clue how taxes work to begin with, and they certainly have no clue about tax levels.... they go on and on about this $250k ($200k now) level as if they're now going to go bankrupt... meanwhile they earn $40k.

And there's no reasoning with them either. Their mind is set. They're losing everything if Obama wins.

They are fucking morons. The middle class pays most taxes. What's wrong with the upper crust paying a fair percentage of taxes too? They are fucking morons if they think it's okay to pay less taxes than everyone else

You have to love the idiocy of republicans..

The want

1. Bail out of airlines.
2. Bail out of banks.
3. Bail out of wall street
4. Bail out of US auto industry
5. Tax breaks for the oil industry
6. Continue the war on terror.
7. Increased military, and global defense spending

But they do not want to PAY for any of it.

Classic comedy...

http://www.newsmeat.com/fec/power_rank.php

Blue blue blue blue blue blue blue blue blue blue blue blue blue blue blue blue blue blue blue...

Fuck reasoning with them, they are beyond help. Most of them don't even know how businesses pay tax yet they go around spewing shit like 'small businesses will have to lay off people because they will pay to much tax'. What they are to stupid to realize is tax is only applied to profit AFTER expenses, higher tax on business profit actually encourages a business to hire more people, buy more equipment, etc, thus stimulating the economy. I firmly believe this was one of many reasons the economy under Clinton flourished. It encourages people with large incomes to put more money back in the system rather than hoard it, which is what happens under Republican policy.

Clinton was accused of being a commie by Bush Senior because he had traveled to the Soviet Union for a week while he was in college.

Redistribution Of Wealth is simply a bad way phrase he used when talking to someone. It isn't actually "Redistribution Of Wealth" in any way. It's just changes in the tax system.

Seriously, I'm so sick of hearing the term "Redistribution Of Wealth".

Technically taxes are a sharing of the wealth. The top 5% of income earners in this country pay 80% of the taxes (total tax dollars collected). These dollars are then used to pay for things like the military, roads, schools, police, fire, rescue and many other things. Many of these things are used by everyone on a disproportionate level. For example. A guy making 45K a year who is married and has 3 kids will not pay that much in federal taxes. But his kids will get free educations up through high school, they will all drive on good roads and have a police force and military to protect them. These are all things that alone they could not afford.

Sure you can argue that most people can't afford to employ their own police force or military so even if you leave that out the average cost of private school in this country is around $3,100 a year per kid so that guy would have to come up with around $9,300 a year for private school for his kids. The average cost per kid in public school is around $6,800 a year per kid. So in the end you can argue that this guy is getting somewhere between 9K and 18K worth of education for his kids each year and even if he doesn't own his home or have any write-offs the guy is only going to pay around $2000 a year in taxes. So you could say for sure this guy is getting far more from the system then he is paying into the system and that is a sharing of the wealth.

i think you have the private/public school costs flip flopped.... regardless i hate paying taxes but at the same time i like having good roads, police (even tho i hate them), military, etc etc so i pay my taxes and dont cry. if people dont want to pay fuck them move to some 3rd world place and dont pay shit and let your house get robbed and children raped

:2 cents:

I spoke with someone about this just yesterday. They complained that Obama was "redistributing the wealth" and she "didn't like that our tax money would go to support lazy black folks".

A simple reply, "did you have a choice with the bailout?" -- enough said.

Unless you're in favor of a flat tax then you support the redistribution of wealth.

Last I checked, McCain is not now, nor has he ever been, in favor of a flat tax.

As for Obama's "spread the wealth around" comment......he wasn't talking about "spreading your wealth"
What he was saying is that if the government is going to give tax cuts, let's say $300 billion worth....then he wants to "spread that around" to as many people as possible, which means targeting it to the middle class.
As opposed to the Bush tax cuts, where the vast majority of the tax dollars that were cut, went to the wealthiest 1%.

So what he wants to do is undo the Bush tax cuts for the top bracket, and redo the tax rates below the top bracket, so that middle class people get a bigger break.

The idea that you're taking money from the rich and giving it to the not-so-rich is absurd, when you consider the fact that the people getting tax breaks under the Obama plan will still owe taxes to the government at the end of the year.
It's not like he's raising taxes on the rich so he can increase welfare and food stamps....he just wants to have a do-over on the Bush tax cuts, and target them to middle and lower income earners.

I'm not arguing against taxes. We all benefit from the things that taxes fund. My point is that all taxes are a redistribution of wealth. The rich provide around 80% of the tax dollars that are spent and most of that money is spent on lower income people. It is a redistribution just with goods and services not with actual cash.

As for the school thing, actually I am right on. The cost of putting kid through public school is around twice as much as a private school. It is the major argument people that want the voucher program use. I think the main reason is that with public schools they have a lot of overhead that private schools don't have. My local school district employs around 20 people that have nothing to do with the actual teaching of kids and they sit around and talk policy and implement rules and draw a nice salary, private schools don't have all that extra bureaucracy.

Please cite your source that the middle class pays most of the taxes.

Is there more to say? fucking hypocrites

http://img.allvoices.com/thumbs/even...6/22106770.jpg



url: http://www.allvoices.com/contributed...image/22106770