|
Post by hammer on Apr 15, 2009 13:04:15 GMT -5
Fox is really playing this one up BIG today but so far they will only show tight shots of very very small groups of maybe 50 people as they rant about millions who they expect to attend. Astroturf ,there isn't any real grassroots tax revolution going on. Logically, even with all the hype from FOX, I would find it pretty surprising if there was a large turnout at any of these events. I may not have the numbers exactly correct, but 25% of U.S. families pay almost all the taxes, and of course the lion's share of that goes to the upper income brackets. Furthermore, I presume that most of the breadwinners in these families are working today -- they have jobs, and many have children. On top of that, today is really "tax day" and if any of these people are skipping work today, it is probably to finish up their tax returns. Whether Sean Hannity or FOX news are backing the tea parties is not the real issue. Tea parties are not the issue either. The real problem is the onerous nature of the US Tax code, with all its loopholes and special case awards. I'm not sure of the exact number, but I think somewhere between 12 and 14% or GDP is related to the collection of taxes (or trying to avoid their collection). Lately, we've also got into the habit of using the tax system to dole out money -- think negative tax. So if you are really poor (no income) and you submit a tax return, you get money back. And guess who is responsible for this horrible situation -- Republicans and Democrats. We need serious tax simplification -- it is long overdue.
|
|
|
Post by ladeda on Apr 15, 2009 14:54:53 GMT -5
Millions gather for Fox News Tea Bagging Party
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Apr 15, 2009 15:45:46 GMT -5
Where did they hold the Tea Party about the Treasury giving away our money and taking over financial institutions 9 months ago when the shlt really hit the fan?
It's good to hear that more people are finally insisting that the Free Market take its course and plunge us into a deep recession/depression that will take a decade to escape but will resolve with us in better shape than we will be after this socialization of debt.
If only there had been a conservative presidential cabinet in power during the last few years, this colossal bailout would have been avoided. I pray that I live to see the day that an intelligent capitalist gets elected president. Having never seen one in my lifetime, I wonder what it would look like.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2009 15:51:42 GMT -5
The Free Market has already worked wonders, hasn't it? The Free Market is not the solution, that was the problem (to paraphrase Reagan). Maybe this isn't the solution either, but God help us if we leave it up to capitalism.
What would an "intelligent" capitalist do? And who would be an example of one?
|
|
|
Post by JT on Apr 15, 2009 16:27:44 GMT -5
The Free Market has already worked wonders, hasn't it? If they'd let it work, maybe it would have. Instead, the BigGovt party decided that they couldn't let the free market punish people/companies that had made stupid decisions, because it would affect others as well. So what we now have is a situation where, if you take a risk and fail stupendously, you'll get bailed out. Well, for the auto industry, maybe it would have helped if GM had gone into a controlled bankruptcy before we threw away $25B or whatever it was. As for who is an intelligent capitalist... I'm not sure. My problem is that many politicians whom I like on economic/spending issues have stances I absolutely abhor on social/personal issues.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Apr 15, 2009 17:07:23 GMT -5
As for who is an intelligent capitalist... I'm not sure. My problem is that many politicians whom I like on economic/spending issues have stances I absolutely abhor on social/personal issues. I feel ya. I cannot for the life of me understand how it is that people who believe in economic liberty are MORE likely to want to pass laws to restrict social liberty. I feel wary even when they seem to agree with me on something, because I don't know if I can trust the underlying source of that agreement. It always ends up appearing arbitrary. I would think that the same philosophical scheme that supports individual freedom to dispose of one's personal property (wealth, land) would surely support individual freedom to operate one's most personal property - the body - in a manner of one's choosing. I don't at all understand the "reasoning" that thinks your body can be controlled by the State, but not the external products of that body like labor and capital.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Apr 15, 2009 17:47:56 GMT -5
I don't at all understand the "reasoning" that thinks your body can be controlled by the State, but not the external products of that body like labor and capital. You are missing a vital clue. It's a matter of pronouns. "The state can not control MY property. The state can not interfere in MY economic liberty. YOU can not have an abortion. YOU can not marry someone of the same sex."
|
|
|
Post by goGopherBill on Apr 15, 2009 18:00:39 GMT -5
and you use the socail movement and civil liberites that the black man fought for as your link to the same rights as GAY.
There are not linked. Marriage is a RELIGIOUS ISSUE not a social one.
Fight the church ..not conservatives.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2009 19:51:23 GMT -5
The Free Market has already worked wonders, hasn't it? If they'd let it work, maybe it would have. Instead, the BigGovt party decided that they couldn't let the free market punish people/companies that had made stupid decisions, because it would affect others as well. It's been tried all over the world. Latin America, Asia, Poland. Hell, even China and Russia tried it. Free Markets = unfettered greed. Good for the obscenely rich. Not so good for anyone else. I don't think there is such a thing, plain and simple. Milton Friedman is the one everyone puts on the pedestal and his policies are just recipes for disaster. Unless you're rich.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2009 19:52:36 GMT -5
and you use the socail movement and civil liberites that the black man fought for as your link to the same rights as GAY. There are not linked. Marriage is a RELIGIOUS ISSUE not a social one. Fight the church ..not conservatives. It's NOT a religious issue, Bill. It's a social/secular one. This is about laws, not about what religions want to do.
|
|
|
Post by goGopherBill on Apr 16, 2009 9:07:51 GMT -5
gee I want to disagree with R ..
again..go figure..
Over 2,00 years of Christianity and its doctrine in Church concerning what is sin and what is marriage..
I would say the battle is a RELIGIOUS ONE...when the church states to not put Man's laws above Gods.
Conservatives just agree more with the principles set out by religious rules and laws...even if they are impossible to follow completely...
I like how the opposition paints the tea party.
a loose bunch of people gathered on some street corner..whining about taxes.
Progressive...?
No.. WRONG...ANTI progressive.
and the anti market views.. yes compare it to what other system?
Like Sweden,Japan...CUBA....CHINA...FRANCE...RUSSIA...CANADA..
you couldn't debate a wet tea bag if you had it in your cup.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Apr 16, 2009 9:10:18 GMT -5
Millions gather for Fox News Tea Bagging Party No taxes, sure, we'd all like that. But I draw the line at "No Turn on Red."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2009 11:19:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on Apr 17, 2009 0:52:25 GMT -5
The sad thing is that people really think this is Fox's creation. CNN doesn't take it serious, USA today dismissed it. Hannity thinks it was an anti-obama rally. The only big name I heard who indicated that they understand what happened was Glen Beck.
First, for those of you who weren't paying attention (or weren't allowed because of the media) there were African Americans, there were Obama voters, there were anti-war protestors all there for the core purpose of protesting the tax and borrow and spend fiscal practices of our government - not any group, the entire government. There were also random right wingers who showed up because they finally had dance they were invited to, but bringing the abortion and gun rights signs discredited the whole thing in some people's minds.
Glen Beck said to beware of "leaders" trying to jump in front of this thing to get credit for it (Hannity and Hutchinson). The interviews with the planners that I heard they were very careful to play this in a non-partisan manner. Bush, Obama and most of congress were the villains here, and unfortunately because the planners don't have any star power themselves the supposed meaning has been assigned by the talking heads.
Sort of related - an anti-war activist who took part in the tea party challenged the movement. He asked why the anti-war rallies stopped when Obama was elected, but the war is still going on. He believes this is important but is hopeful that this movement is more genuine, and continues until there is progress, regardless of who is elected. I hope he's right, though honestly, I'd probably settle for 435 new congressman.
|
|