Republicans have a long history of adding to the national debt. Why should we trust they will not ad

people who are getting more from the government than they pay in taxes are benefitting. Most leftists never understand the difference between the market and the government. They figure if people fail to do well in the market, we need to tax the rich more to make up for that failure even if those losers are actually winning in terms of what they pay in taxes vs what they get. . Why are you calling yourself a conservative democrat when your argument sounds a lot like communism. of course FDR was re-elected he pandered to class envy and greed

 

I love the left-when we pointed out that the GOP won more counties and states than the Dems-the dems correctly note that it's voters who count, not states. But when it comes to taxation, the left pretends that everyone in a state that voted Blue, most be blue and everyone in a state that voted Red, has to be republican. They ignore the fact that many people who paid taxes for years did so in blue states and retire to the south and that skews the calculations because those retirees are receiving SS in a red state. Or that red states tend to have higher proportions of veterans

 

I agree with you. I do not believe either party in Congress has the courage to balance the budget.

 

Nice try, but these aren't retirement states. They are just poorer Red States with a lot of residents on the government dime.

 

Why shouldn't people with crummy, low paying jobs resent those who earn vast sums of money doing what they would do for free?

Generally speaking I am liberal on economic and environmental issues, and conservative of social issues. Franklin Roosevelt is my favorite president.

Think of me as a Southern Democrat of the old school. The New Deal was popular among Southern whites and among the white working class.When the Democrats advanced their economic interests and social concerns the Democrats dominated the United States.

Communism proves that a dictatorship is an inappropriate government for a command economy. It does not prove that democratic socialism cannot work.

 

The top earners have to exercise leadership.
“For of those to whom much is given, much is required.”
― John F Kennedy, from Luke 12.48

 

Turtledude, you are writing the way Republican politicians and commentators talk to each other when they do not think anyone else is listening.

Get a job writing campaign speeches and campaign literature for Republican politicians. I want the voters to learn what the Republican Party really stands for, because I want the Republican Party to go out of existence.

 

of course you do, the hard left wants no opposition. I laugh at your claim of being conservative though.

 

That is a nice thought but not a grounds for government coercion

 

There is a difference between economic and social issues. I am liberal on economic issues, and conservative on social issues.

I am consistently in favor of a large, powerful, expensive government paid for with high taxes on rich people and corporations. Public opinion surveys indicate that most of the voters are too.

 

try me-we should discuss our educations in political science. and I dislike the religious right in the GOP

 

Since 1980 I have followed the religious right with interest and a degree of sympathy. The religious right never wanted to create a theocracy in the United States, At most the religious right wanted to restore the moral ethos that prevailed in the United States during the 1950's.

During the 1950's most Americans were affiliated with a church or s synagogue. Most Americans opposed sex outside of marriage. Rates of divorce and illegitimacy were low. I like all of that.

Nevertheless, this did not exist because of government actions. It was the way most Americans felt because of the combined influence of the Great Depression, the Second World War, and the Cold War.

In a country like the United States there is little the government can do to influence religious and sexual behavior. This is why the religious right failed. The only effect the religious right had was to give the GOP the power to skew things more in favor of the rich.

 

so it's class envy that motivates you not the bible thumping attacks on gays and abortion?

 

What you say is true. It is preposterous for those who are not rich to support political policies that preserve and increase the wealth of the rich.

-----------

How Income Inequality Is Damaging the U.S.
Frederick E. Allen
Former Staff
I am the Leadership Editor of Forbes.

New research indicates that growing income inequality isn't just unpleasant; it is seriously hurting the U.S. economy. And economists are figuring out just how the damage is done, according to a fascinating new article by the journalist Jonathan Rauch in National Journal. This challenges a long-standing consensus that, as Rauch puts it, "inequality is the price America pays for a dynamic, efficient economy. . . . As long as the bottom and the middle are moving up, there is no reason to mind if the top is moving up faster."

He begins by pointing out that we have learned in recent years that a rising tide does not necessarily lift all ships. The Congressional Budget Office recently reported that between 1979 and 2007 the top 1% of households doubled their share of pretax income while the share of the bottom 80% fell. Then came the great recession. Economists including David Moss of the Harvard Business School noticed that "the last time inequality rose to its current heights was in the late 1920s, just before a financial meltdown. . . . In 2010, Moss plotted inequality and bank failures since 1864 on the same graph; he found an eerily close fit."

But does that imply a cause-and-effect relationship? It looks that way, Rauch writes. Economists have been tracing the following chain of causality. Those who make the least consume the most of their income; those who make the most tend to save a great deal, and for that reason, according to the economist Christopher Brown, at Arkansas State, "income inequality can exert a significant drag on effective demand."

But does that imply a cause-and-effect relationship? It looks that way, Rauch writes. Economists have been tracing the following chain of causality. Those who make the least consume the most of their income; those who make the most tend to save a great deal, and for that reason, according to the economist Christopher Brown, at Arkansas State, "income inequality can exert a significant drag on effective demand."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/freder...equality-is-damaging-the-u-s/?sh=1cb17a2c63d9

 

giving the government the power to try to make things more equal is the most worrisome of all

 

When the government did more of that recessions were milder.

 

No, but as the most fortunate among us, the self-interest of the top earners points to leading the population in paying enough to actually pay for the government we consume.

 

I prefer a sales tax or in the alternative a flat tax with food, medicine being exempted. why-because both castrate congress and its extra constitutional power to pander it gets from a progressive income tax (which was the main reason for its passage over a century ago)

 

I don't think you can prove causation

 

I don't have a theological position on which taxes should be preferred, although I note that consumption taxes are generally regressive. My point is that we're not taxed enough.

 

These partisan hack threads are incredible. A liberal claims that Republicans are the reason our national debt is at 33 trillion dollars or so. It’s as if the Democrats have never been in control of the budget process.

How do you reason with people like them?

 

You can’t substantiate that factually.

 

speak for yourself. Not only am I hit with high income tax rates-my wife and I pay over 9000 dollars each year for a surcharge on Medicare Part B to cover those who didn't pay enough into the system. that's a form of income tax

 

As you wish.

 

and of course my parents were hit with the death tax though we were able to avoid some of it. that's another surcharge on the rich that most of the parasite supporters and class warfare advocates don't account for with the bullshit that the top one percent don't pay enough. why don't you tell me who should be paying more taxes and why