Is it me or is the Democratic Party falling apart?

[Febo]

The tax cuts aren't ending. They are being extended and putting america another 500 billion in debt. I know noone likes taxes, but where else do you propose the government makes its money?

[Halon]

Originally Posted by Febo

but where else do you propose the government makes its money?

By eliminating waste in the system and running a lean government.

[Febo]

Originally Posted by Halon

By eliminating waste in the system and running a lean government.

Again see my refernce to home forclosure. But to specifically adress this with the same metaphore, you aren't going to save the farm by turning off a few light switches and shopping at Aldi.

One way or another this country needs more money. Wether it be higher taxes, or federalize an industry.

[1ViciousGSX]

Originally Posted by Febo

Again see my refernce to home forclosure. But to specifically adress this with the same metaphore, you aren't going to save the farm by turning off a few light switches and shopping at Aldi.

One way or another this country needs smaller government.

Fixed it for you.

[Febo]

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

Fixed it for you.

First, I am politely asking you not to "fix" my statements. I do not want my views confused with your views as they are just that, YOUR views.

Secondly, what do you define as being "smaller government." I hear this term a lot but I still do not understand exactly what it is people want to have happen?

I'm not saying the government is the right size or doing the right thing. I just think that instead of "smaller government" we need a more "responsible government"

And last but not least. I will ask AGAIN, how does it make sense to chop of the governments income when it is already in the tank? I will again bring back the metaphor of you on the brink of losing your house. You wouldn't ask for a reduction in pay. You would try to increase your income while decreasing your expenditures. It really makes no sense to hobble the government right now when we are still fighting two wars and probably about to go into a third one soon with crazy ass North Korea. Lets not weaken the government and make us more bankrupt. Instead lets all think about what will be best for America as a whole. What does this mean? It means that yes, we need to cut some social services. Yes, government should stop trying to reach so far. Yes, it should spend responsibly. But this also means that No, we should not cut taxes. No, they should not be permanent. I'm sorry people, but realize what we are to the government. We are its paycheck. We are its bread and butter. And if we cut taxes something or someone somewhere is going to lose, and lose hard.

Who wants the soap box next?

[1ViciousGSX]

Originally Posted by Febo

First, I am politely asking you not to "fix" my statements. I do not want my views confused with your views as they are just that, YOUR views.

Secondly, what do you define as being "smaller government." I hear this term a lot but I still do not understand exactly what it is people want to have happen?

I'm not saying the government is the right size or doing the right thing. I just think that instead of "smaller government" we need a more "responsible government"

And last but not least. I will ask AGAIN, how does it make sense to chop of the governments income when it is already in the tank? I will again bring back the metaphor of you on the brink of losing your house. You wouldn't ask for a reduction in pay. You would try to increase your income while decreasing your expenditures. It really makes no sense to hobble the government right now when we are still fighting two wars and probably about to go into a third one soon with crazy ass North Korea. Lets not weaken the government and make us more bankrupt. Instead lets all think about what will be best for America as a whole. What does this mean? It means that yes, we need to cut some social services. Yes, government should stop trying to reach so far. Yes, it should spend responsibly. But this also means that No, we should not cut taxes. No, they should not be permanent. I'm sorry people, but realize what we are to the government. We are its paycheck. We are its bread and butter. And if we cut taxes something or someone somewhere is going to lose, and lose hard.

Who wants the soap box next?

Don't worry, I don't think anybody would confuse your view with mine.

Smaller government means we don't need them controlling, manipulating, digging around in or messing with our daily lives. It also means we don't need a BIG BROTHER to take care of us from cradle to grave. We don't need the government starting up more entitlement programs that cost more money than they could ever develop or save. Remember the old saying, "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man how to fish, feed him for a lifetime". Right now the government wants to supply you with your fish instead of creating a market place that spurs your ability to fish for yourself. We have a bloated government that has gotten in the business of picking winners and losers. If you are UNION, you're a winner. Not union. sorry you should have joined up.

The reason to put a lock down on government spending and income is because we can't keep going like we are without a total collapse, which may be the goal if you want to put your tin-foil hat on. I know it sounds funny to say that, but if you look at the BIG picture of everything that is going on these days, something is happening that's not so good for our country. If you look past the 14 trillion we owe and add in where we are going it get's really scary. Add the interest and we could easily be staring at a 50 trillion dollar debt we'll never pay off. And when we can't, who'll come to our defense? We can't fund our own government and military without borrowed money. So what would happen if our debtors cut off our money supply, how would we defend ourselves?

If our government was run like a business, it would have been bankrupt a long time ago. Where else can you spend lavish amounts of money unchecked, always in a deficit, never turn a profit and yet stay in business?

Funny how we keep hearing America needs to tighten it's belt, suck it up and do more with less while the people we elected to SERVE in a public office live like there's no tomorrow???

You want a strong robust and booming economy??? Reduce taxes so the poor, low/middle/upper class has expendable dollars in their pockets to do and buy the things they want. That's how you fix the economy. Not socialist programs.

[tpunx99GSX]

Originally Posted by Halon

By eliminating waste in the system and running a lean government.

Thats funny being that the bush era tax cuts are the biggest waste of all. Giving rich people tax cuts is a waste because they dont spend it. If you cut taxes or give a stimulus to the lower and middle class, they are much more likely to spend the money. And the whole, "The rich create jobs" arguement is complete bullshit, They dont create jobs, they outsource, lay off, eliminate and destroy jobs to save a buck and make their stock go up a quarter of a point. If they were to incorperate the Obama Tax cycle it would still save them money on their first $250,000 a year. after the $250k their taxes would still be less than what it was under Regan (your massiah).
There is no reason that those tax cuts should be extended as it does absolutely no good. The hilarious part is that the rich seem to have all of the republican sheep doing their fighting for them. Ive never seen so many low income low educated people fighting for a group of people that dont give two shits about them. Do you really think that the guys at the top really want you to take a peice of their pie? Noooo, they just tell the drones, "If our taxes go up we wont be able to hire" HA. no thanks, sorry not drinkin that koolaid.
Honestly, their should be a law (at least on this board) that says, if you dont make over $250,000 individual salary, then you dont get to say anything about that tax bracket, or the tax breaks for that bracket.
I can guarantee 99% of you on this board dont make nearly that much.

[Halon]

Originally Posted by Febo

Again see my refernce to home forclosure. But to specifically adress this with the same metaphore, you aren't going to save the farm by turning off a few light switches and shopping at Aldi.

One way or another this country needs more money. Wether it be higher taxes, or federalize an industry.

I never said it'll save the farm. You asked "where else can the government get money". Reducing waste in the system, and running a more lean government, is "somewhere else" the government can increase it's bank account. If my home was being foreclosed, like you said I'd not only look at increasing my income, but also reducing waste (not spending on things that could be done without). I'm in a sense agreeing with you, yet you are trying to argue with me. I don't get it.

Originally Posted by tpunx99GSX

Thats funny being that the bush era tax cuts are the biggest waste of all...

Are you trying to point out some sort of irony in my statement? I didn't bring up Bush, dem/rep parties, or anything of that nature in my statement. My statement was pretty simple. It was said "where else can the government get money" and I said "by reducing waste and running a leaner government". Pretty simple statement, completely free of any name calling or party affiliation. Why do you immidiately jump to a conclusion that I'm picking a side, and my comment is directed as some sort of attack against you?

[1ViciousGSX]

Originally Posted by Halon

Are you trying to point out some sort of irony in my statement? I didn't bring up Bush, dem/rep parties, or anything of that nature in my statement. My statement was pretty simple. It was said "where else can the government get money" and I said "by reducing waste and running a leaner government". Pretty simple statement, completely free of any name calling or party affiliation. Why do you immediately jump to a conclusion that I'm picking a side, and my comment is directed as some sort of attack against you?

But that's what liberals do, they attack you when their argument fails.

Look at Chris Matthews' only rebuttal against Chris Christie is that he's fat.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/moon...isties-weight/

I loved Neil Cavuto's reply back against Chris Matthews.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/fncs...isties-weight/