Discussion Forums > Politics
2012 US Presidential Election
Nikkoru:
--- Quote from: Burkingam on November 10, 2012, 03:07:22 PM ---
--- Quote from: Nikkoru on November 10, 2012, 01:51:15 PM ---I believe corporations do owe their employees a living -- and that the government has been making sure they get it.
--- End quote ---
Kinda. Not enough IMO. Certainly not if it was only for conservatives seeing how they are generally all about reducing or banning minimum wages.
--- End quote ---
Moreso than say, the 19th century. I suppose I'd rephrase that as "should be making sure". I think the emphasis on appeasing "job creators", toppling unions, and the globalization of the work force is going to undermine this. The standards are going to be set by private sector, and we're just going to have to live with it.
Monkeyfinger:
Leave it to Nik to speak the cold hard truth. I have nothing but scorn for republican backed farm subsidies and the like.
On the other hand, Burk and Zherok are the poster children for the democrat party. Reagan pinned their approach to governing pretty accurately - If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.
zherok:
--- Quote from: Monkeyfinger on November 10, 2012, 04:58:03 PM ---On the other hand, Burk and Zherok are the poster children for the democrat party. Reagan pinned their approach to governing pretty accurately - If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.
--- End quote ---
I've not mentioned increasing taxes outside of a single reference to the pre-Bush II level tax rates. I'm a strong believer in public education, but I don't think I'm alone in that here.
I don't really know where you got this idea I was calling for taxing the shit out of everything, but you can jaybug sure seem to love to jump to that conclusion.
Burkingam:
--- Quote from: Monkeyfinger on November 10, 2012, 04:58:03 PM ---If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.
--- End quote ---
If a conservative said, for example, "there shouldn't be any regulation regarding the use of CFC", then it's pretty easy to explain why that would be a very bad idea, but that's not what you usually hear. What you hear is "them liberals are always creating useless regulation". Notice how it's much harder to refute such a vague statements. There is a name for this kind of deliberate vagueness, it's called obscurantism.
Other than that, yeah this kind of statement is definitely what you'd expect from a republicans: short, catchy, simple enough that even an idiot would understand and completely disconnected from reality. I hope not even you are so disconnected from reality to think that there is no reason whatsoever why the left doesn't share your enthusiasm for tax cuts.
Monkeyfinger:
Hey I never said we need tax cuts, I'm fine with the status quo. If we can get people working and companies making money, and actually paying income taxes, we wouldn't have to hear about trillion dollar deficits every year.
I can name several regulations that do nothing but make life suck. Bans on indoor smoking in my home state of Washington, for example. How am I supposed to pick up chicks if I can't look cool in a bar? And New York banning large soft drinks? These are just recent examples in certain states, but its this kind of nanny state crap that just rubs me the wrong way.
edit - ok maybe I don't entirely support the status quo, America's corporate tax rate is way too high, and there are way too many loopholes and deductions. Tackling this was actually one of Romney's few strengths and I think he could have been successful. Zherok, if you support Obama, then you support taxing the shit out of businesses, because there is no way in hell Obama or the democrat senate will successfully lower the taxes American businesses pay. All the plans he's put forth come with too many strings attached.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version