Dear Mr Obama.

[QUOTE="lilburtonboy748"]

yes...but the bible requires 2 things for a good work : 1) motivation 2) the action

taxation does neither of these things because you do not even perform the action..so you have neither of these things.

god wants us to do these things with a willing heart and choose to do such things...not have our money stolen from us...not even giving us the chance to act how we wish.

oh..by the way...isn't stealing a sin? and isn't taxation stealing?

pianist

No. Jesus tells you to give unto Caesar what is Caesar's. He was referring to tax. Clearly, he didn't think it was stealing, or he would have referred to it as such. He was not hesitant to criticize the wealthy. And he tells you to pay any taxes you are required to pay, and to obey your masters. He doesn't tell you to rebel against them or call your appointed leaders thieves because you feel they're stealing from you.

Jesus doesn't want you to complain about taxation, and Jesus never states that taxation or obedience to your master is wrong. In fact, the Bible encourages the latter repeatedly. Hardly surprising, really, when the religion is demanding obedience to God, too.

The U.S economy is heavily based on Consumer spending. Obama wants the rich to pay higher taxes to pay for a universal healthcare, and help teachers. Well that is not going to work.

If you tax the rich, they cant spend money, also the middle class will have a little more taxes to pay also, thus, less spending. What happens to retail companies? If they arent getting much business than they will have to cut employees, Unemployment rates affect the economy also, when that happens, Obama will help them with welfare, meaning with high uneployment, less money will go towards healthcare, and teachers, then it will become a whole mess. So it will not work.

GDP, Gross domestic product is the economies rate of trading goods, when businesses cut employees, and dont get enough customer spendings, they close down, and most likely move to other countries, so the less activity in trading, the economy will get worse.

Why do the rich have to pay more taxes? My grandmother makes about $60,000 a year, she tells me that yearly she pays $15,000 in taxes each year, when obama comes in office, it will increase to probably $20,000 in taxes a year, right now she barely has enough money left from mortage, bills, ect...This affects even the middle class.

We will be in the same shape we were in when Bush was in office. Bush had no control over oil, Alaska has oil, but to do that, we would have to drill in ANWR, and many people oppose to drilling in ths refuge, so we have to depend on the middle east, Iraq has one of the largest oil concentrations in the middle east, and they will not give us much oil to meet demands, and plus Saddam is a horrible dictator. So by attacking Iraq, Bush thought it would help our oil crisis. So dont blame bush for everything, he has no control over what the oil companies charge, or if a business cuts employees, he can try and help, but it is more difficult than you guys think.

When you guys get old enough to pay taxes you will understand.

CWEBB04z

I am old enough to pay taxes. The only thing you understand differently is that you don't like parting with your money, because you can't see the direct physical result of what it was spent on more often than not. You hear all these stories of corruption and waste, failing to realize that most tax dollars ARE well-spent maintaining the society that you are privileged to experience.

I am baffled, really, by this attitude held by so many that you should be able to enjoy modern society - all its protections, advantages, and infrastructure - for free, or for practically nothing. Sorry, but a government can't spend if it doesn't raise more income. There's only so much money to go around. So those who take the most need to pay the most. It can't work any other way. Frankly, I'd prefer to see the middle cIass taxes stay right where they are, but the money is going to have to come from somewhere else, then, and the only logical place to turn is the wealthy.

As for Bush... don't try to cover for him. If you look at what the debt was like before he came to office and what it is like now, then figure out how much more money is being wasted every year servicing the additional debt, you'll quickly come to realize that it was his idiotic tax policies that caused it. That's his fault. And that's the most grievous thing he's done as president. Not Iraq. Not the environment. Not social services. Bleeding the national treasury white by a refusal to make people pay what they should WILLINGLY pay for their society to continue functioning.

I believe you are misinterpreting the passage. The part where he says "Give...to God what is God's" is important. He is implying that money is not important, service to God is what is important.SuperVegeta518

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Render_unto_Caesar...

The meaning is somewhat ambiguous. But it's certainly not the only place in the Bible that advocates submission to your masters - which includes your government. Now show me the passage that states that a Christian should not pay tax and should rebel against his government... or the passage which states that greed is good, and that people should look out only for themselves.

The U.S economy is heavily based on Consumer spending. Obama wants the rich to pay higher taxes to pay for a universal healthcare, and help teachers. Well that is not going to work.

If you tax the rich, they cant spend money, also the middle class will have a little more taxes to pay also, thus, less spending. What happens to retail companies? If they arent getting much business than they will have to cut employees, Unemployment rates affect the economy also, when that happens, Obama will help them with welfare, meaning with high uneployment, less money will go towards healthcare, and teachers, then it will become a whole mess. So it will not work.

GDP, Gross domestic product is the economies rate of trading goods, when businesses cut employees, and dont get enough customer spendings, they close down, and most likely move to other countries, so the less activity in trading, the economy will get worse.

Why do the rich have to pay more taxes? My grandmother makes about $60,000 a year, she tells me that yearly she pays $15,000 in taxes each year, when obama comes in office, it will increase to probably $20,000 in taxes a year, right now she barely has enough money left from mortage, bills, ect...This affects even the middle class.

We will be in the same shape we were in when Bush was in office. Bush had no control over oil, Alaska has oil, but to do that, we would have to drill in ANWR, and many people oppose to drilling in ths refuge, so we have to depend on the middle east, Iraq has one of the largest oil concentrations in the middle east, and they will not give us much oil to meet demands, and plus Saddam is a horrible dictator. So by attacking Iraq, Bush thought it would help our oil crisis. So dont blame bush for everything, he has no control over what the oil companies charge, or if a business cuts employees, he can try and help, but it is more difficult than you guys think.

When you guys get old enough to pay taxes you will understand.

CWEBB04z

I am old enough to pay taxes.

Obama will cut taxes for her and any one who makes 60,000 a year. Look at the tax plans.

The only way America got out of the great depression is people tightened their belts while the government provided more jobs. America has the opportunity to supply these jobs with new energies. Obama said he will create these new jobs leading to less unemployment. Also more unempolyment is not because of people not spending money, its because these major retail chains like wal mart take over the area and puts more people out of work, so spending money at these major chains puts more people out of jobs.

We dont depend on just the middle east. We get more oil from canada than saudi arabia.

[QUOTE="SuperVegeta518"]I believe you are misinterpreting the passage. The part where he says "Give...to God what is God's" is important. He is implying that money is not important, service to God is what is important.pianist

The meaning is somewhat ambiguous. But it's certainly not the only place in the Bible that advocates submission to your masters - which includes your government. Now show me the passage that states that a Christian should not pay tax and should rebel against his government... or the passage which states that greed is good, and that people should look out only for themselves.

[QUOTE="CWEBB04z"]

The U.S economy is heavily based on Consumer spending. Obama wants the rich to pay higher taxes to pay for a universal healthcare, and help teachers. Well that is not going to work.

If you tax the rich, they cant spend money, also the middle class will have a little more taxes to pay also, thus, less spending. What happens to retail companies? If they arent getting much business than they will have to cut employees, Unemployment rates affect the economy also, when that happens, Obama will help them with welfare, meaning with high uneployment, less money will go towards healthcare, and teachers, then it will become a whole mess. So it will not work.

GDP, Gross domestic product is the economies rate of trading goods, when businesses cut employees, and dont get enough customer spendings, they close down, and most likely move to other countries, so the less activity in trading, the economy will get worse.

Why do the rich have to pay more taxes? My grandmother makes about $60,000 a year, she tells me that yearly she pays $15,000 in taxes each year, when obama comes in office, it will increase to probably $20,000 in taxes a year, right now she barely has enough money left from mortage, bills, ect...This affects even the middle class.

We will be in the same shape we were in when Bush was in office. Bush had no control over oil, Alaska has oil, but to do that, we would have to drill in ANWR, and many people oppose to drilling in ths refuge, so we have to depend on the middle east, Iraq has one of the largest oil concentrations in the middle east, and they will not give us much oil to meet demands, and plus Saddam is a horrible dictator. So by attacking Iraq, Bush thought it would help our oil crisis. So dont blame bush for everything, he has no control over what the oil companies charge, or if a business cuts employees, he can try and help, but it is more difficult than you guys think.

When you guys get old enough to pay taxes you will understand.

pianist

I am old enough to pay taxes. The only thing you understand differently is that you don't like parting with your money, because you can't see the direct physical result of what it was spent on more often than not. You hear all these stories of corruption and waste, failing to realize that most tax dollars ARE well-spent maintaining the society that you are privileged to experience.

I am baffled, really, by this attitude held by so many that you should be able to enjoy modern society - all its protections, advantages, and infrastructure - for free, or for practically nothing. Sorry, but a government can't spend if it doesn't raise more income. There's only so much money to go around. So those who take the most need to pay the most. It can't work any other way. Frankly, I'd prefer to see the middle cIass taxes stay right where they are, but the money is going to have to come from somewhere else, then, and the only logical place to turn is the wealthy.

As for Bush... don't try to cover for him. If you look at what the debt was like before he came to office and what it is like now, then figure out how much more money is being wasted every year servicing the additional debt, you'll quickly come to realize that it was his idiotic tax policies that caused it. That's his fault. And that's the most grievous thing he's done as president. Not Iraq. Not the environment. Not social services. Bleeding the national treasury white by a refusal to make people pay what they should WILLINGLY pay for their society to continue functioning.

Clinton did a good job, getting this Country out of debt, but he didnt raise taxes like Obama wants to do, he only raised taxes to the rich by like 1%.

Also Clinton tried for universal healthcare, it did not go through and failed, even though we liked that idea, Obama wants to try for it again, but its going to fail again.

The wealthy dont have to pay for everything, the middle and lower income should contribute to society also. We cant just say, hey rich people pay the police, teachers, roads, buildings, that is too much to ask, it will be to much. Also the rich represent a small population, so how will that work? tax them more and more?

[QUOTE="CWEBB04z"]

The U.S economy is heavily based on Consumer spending. Obama wants the rich to pay higher taxes to pay for a universal healthcare, and help teachers. Well that is not going to work.

If you tax the rich, they cant spend money, also the middle class will have a little more taxes to pay also, thus, less spending. What happens to retail companies? If they arent getting much business than they will have to cut employees, Unemployment rates affect the economy also, when that happens, Obama will help them with welfare, meaning with high uneployment, less money will go towards healthcare, and teachers, then it will become a whole mess. So it will not work.

GDP, Gross domestic product is the economies rate of trading goods, when businesses cut employees, and dont get enough customer spendings, they close down, and most likely move to other countries, so the less activity in trading, the economy will get worse.

Why do the rich have to pay more taxes? My grandmother makes about $60,000 a year, she tells me that yearly she pays $15,000 in taxes each year, when obama comes in office, it will increase to probably $20,000 in taxes a year, right now she barely has enough money left from mortage, bills, ect...This affects even the middle class.

We will be in the same shape we were in when Bush was in office. Bush had no control over oil, Alaska has oil, but to do that, we would have to drill in ANWR, and many people oppose to drilling in ths refuge, so we have to depend on the middle east, Iraq has one of the largest oil concentrations in the middle east, and they will not give us much oil to meet demands, and plus Saddam is a horrible dictator. So by attacking Iraq, Bush thought it would help our oil crisis. So dont blame bush for everything, he has no control over what the oil companies charge, or if a business cuts employees, he can try and help, but it is more difficult than you guys think.

When you guys get old enough to pay taxes you will understand.

Johnny-Quest

I am old enough to pay taxes.

Obama will cut taxes for her and any one who makes 60,000 a year. Look at the tax plans.

The only way America got out of the great depression is people tightened their belts while the government provided more jobs. America has the opportunity to supply these jobs with new energies. Obama said he will create these new jobs leading to less unemployment. Also more unempolyment is not because of people not spending money, its because these major retail chains like wal mart take over the area and puts more people out of work, so spending money at these major chains puts more people out of jobs.

We dont depend on just the middle east. We get more oil from canada than saudi arabia.

[QUOTE="Johnny-Quest"][QUOTE="CWEBB04z"]

The U.S economy is heavily based on Consumer spending. Obama wants the rich to pay higher taxes to pay for a universal healthcare, and help teachers. Well that is not going to work.

If you tax the rich, they cant spend money, also the middle class will have a little more taxes to pay also, thus, less spending. What happens to retail companies? If they arent getting much business than they will have to cut employees, Unemployment rates affect the economy also, when that happens, Obama will help them with welfare, meaning with high uneployment, less money will go towards healthcare, and teachers, then it will become a whole mess. So it will not work.

GDP, Gross domestic product is the economies rate of trading goods, when businesses cut employees, and dont get enough customer spendings, they close down, and most likely move to other countries, so the less activity in trading, the economy will get worse.

Why do the rich have to pay more taxes? My grandmother makes about $60,000 a year, she tells me that yearly she pays $15,000 in taxes each year, when obama comes in office, it will increase to probably $20,000 in taxes a year, right now she barely has enough money left from mortage, bills, ect...This affects even the middle class.

We will be in the same shape we were in when Bush was in office. Bush had no control over oil, Alaska has oil, but to do that, we would have to drill in ANWR, and many people oppose to drilling in ths refuge, so we have to depend on the middle east, Iraq has one of the largest oil concentrations in the middle east, and they will not give us much oil to meet demands, and plus Saddam is a horrible dictator. So by attacking Iraq, Bush thought it would help our oil crisis. So dont blame bush for everything, he has no control over what the oil companies charge, or if a business cuts employees, he can try and help, but it is more difficult than you guys think.

When you guys get old enough to pay taxes you will understand.

SuperVegeta518

I am old enough to pay taxes.

Obama will cut taxes for her and any one who makes 60,000 a year. Look at the tax plans.

The only way America got out of the great depression is people tightened their belts while the government provided more jobs. America has the opportunity to supply these jobs with new energies. Obama said he will create these new jobs leading to less unemployment. Also more unempolyment is not because of people not spending money, its because these major retail chains like wal mart take over the area and puts more people out of work, so spending money at these major chains puts more people out of jobs.

We dont depend on just the middle east. We get more oil from canada than saudi arabia.

How? With the government creating jobs. It was just a way to speed up the economy by creating jobs. . Also look what government built in that time period. The Golden gate bridge, Tennessee valley etc.

even if human nature was relevant to this...it wouldn't matter. picking the economic theory deals with one thing. WHAT WE SHOULD DO. using human nature as part of the equation commits the naturalistic fallacy because it states that since things are this way, it's the way that they should be. you cannot use any argument that uses the way things are to arrive at the conclusion that it's the way things should be.

im done, going to bed :) sorry for rambling.

lilburtonboy748

No problem. I enjoy rambling myself. ;)

There is some truth in what you say. Human nature can not be defined, as not every person thinks or acts the same way (the two of us are a perfect example). However, there is a reason that certain economic philosophies which work on paper do not work in reality, and it is the human element that causes the failure. For instance, people tend to be greedy and lazy. So communism - which eliminates the profit motive - encourages people to be lazy and frustrated, because they can not achieve greater personal gain by working harder. Not everyone is greedy and lazy, and if you collected a group of fervent communists together and put them in a community of their own, they'd probably keep it going, because they want to keep it going. But in a general sense, humans ARE greedy and lazy, so communism doesn't work. It really has nothing to do with whether it's a philosophically moral system or not (you would most certainly believe it isn't because of the distribution of wealth). That's not why it fails.

Ultimately, what we should do is use an economic system that works in reality. There's no sense in throwing out reality to practice a system that doesn't work in reality, because in the end, the people you borrowed money from to prop up your idealism will come looking for their money, and you won't have it. If a country bankrupts itself using a 'moral' economic system, it was not the right economic system to be using in anything but a philosophical sense. Try telling that to those who are collecting on their debts!

I wholeheartedly support your decision to go to bed though. I think going to bed is an excellent notion, and I can find nothing immoral in it. So I will do the same. :P

So I should pay for their insurance? Maybe they should stop buying alcohol, cigs, HDTVs, driving anywhere unnessesary, eating to much food, going to restarants, buying soda and candy, buying computers, Wiis and Xboxs, using unnessesary electricity, going to the movies, buying and talking on the cell phone, and a **** load of other things. Its not my job to buy their healthcare.

I should pay their college? My dad didnt even go to high school and now he has millions. Quit acting like you cant succeed if you dont go to college. Maybe they should have worked harder and gotten a scholarship. A high school education can get you pretty ****ing far now days si quit complaining. Even "poor" people in America have some of the highest standards of living in the world.

For one thing, the tax increase isn't going to kill you and more or less is repealing Bush's dumb tax CUT that he gave ONLY TO THE WEALTHY!!!!

Wow, just wow. You want to whine about not getting a vacation and actually have the NERVE to try and tell people to not EAT as much?

I am going to have to inform you of something since your cushy life****has completely blinded you and made you borderline ignorant. MINIMUM WAGE IS NOT ENOUGH!!! I am on minimum wage at the moment and it is barely enough for me to scrape buy. Thing is I SHOULD be going to college but thanks to no-one helping me (gotta love how the government just assumes parents are going to pay for their kids colleges) I have to stop for a year and now I am left sitting here wondering what the hell I am going to do next year. It's nice knowing that after years of busting my ass to get good grades I have nothing to show for it.

It is also important to note that YOU WILL BE GETTING THE DAMN INSURANCE COVERAGE TOO!!! It amazes me how this little part just flies over peoples heads. They sit there and whine about other people getting something when they too will be getting it and everyone will be paying the taxes.

LMAO you do realize that a high-school diploma is neccessary to work at fast-food joints now, right?:lol:

I could win the lottery and become rich too you know! I guess I should just use that as my future finance plan since hey, other people did it!:lol:

You do realize how ridiculous your arguement is, right?

Hey I will give you a little newsflash here: Unless your in sports or never lose a single grade percentage in all of your ****s don't expect **** for scholarships. I was on the honor roll my whole life (well when there was one at the school I was on it) and I got just enough to cover 2 years of COMMUNITY COLLEGE and that was because I did excellent on the Michigan standardized tests (MEAP) which I don't even know if they are still giving that out to people as our freaking governor was trying to take that money and use it towards CASINO'S!!!

Oh I am sorry, I guess because our poor population isn't as poor as other nations poor populations we shouldn't give a damn about them, right? Oh wait, this arguement is another irellevant arguement of yours considering that EVERYONE WILL BENEFIT FROM THE PROGRAMS EVEN THE WEALTHY!!!!

I'm in the mid lower class and I have the common sense to know Obama will raise taxes on businesses and the rich. The rich pay a majority of our taxes and taxing them will hurt investments which will in turn hurt businesses. This mixed with Obama's dislike of reserve drilling will drive up the price of goods and then you will see a real recesion. You should stop eat propaganda meant to pander for votes.

Trashface

Yeah... that's what people said when Clinton took power and intentionally reversed supply side economics. You'll get lots of people claiming that the strength of the economy was a direct result of the previous use of supply side economics, and that the hardships caused by supply side economics were really Jimmy Carter's fault. Hogwash, all of it. Supply side economics doesn't work. If people didn't get the picture after Reagan and Bush 1, they certainly should have gotten the picture after Bush 2. But still, you get people claiming that supply side economics was the greatest fiscal triumph in the nation's history, or that supply side economics is the most successful fiscal strategy to ever be implemented in the US. I'd venture a guess that the people who believe that are all anti-tax and are interested in being wealthy or already are wealthy, because the only motivation a person could have for ignoring reality and history would be personal gain.

You really need to read this. Dismiss it as propaganda if you wish - lots of people do that. But the numbers don't lie, and frankly, I have a very hard time believing Reaganomics was the cause of the economic successes of the US during Clinton's years. It's just too much of a coincidence that this growth started the moment supply side economics were tossed out... after 12 years of shoddy economic progress and ballooning national debt while they were in effect.

Oh, but I forgot. That was all Jimmy Carter's fault.

Clinton did a good job, getting this Country out of debt, but he didnt raise taxes like Obama wants to do, he only raised taxes to the rich by like 1%.

Also Clinton tried for universal healthcare, it did not go through and failed, even though we liked that idea, Obama wants to try for it again, but its going to fail again.

The wealthy dont have to pay for everything, the middle and lower income should contribute to society also. We cant just say, hey rich people pay the police, teachers, roads, buildings, that is too much to ask, it will be to much. Also the rich represent a small population, so how will that work? tax them more and more?

CWEBB04z

I agree. The middle cIass especially does need to contribute their cash, because like the wealthy, they earn enough to be able to do so. The poor? They don't. We can't tax them much, because they just don't have much to give. That's why the rich already provide the government with most of its income. That's the way it should be - just to a much greater extent.

The poor are the cogs that keep society running. They pay their debt indirectly by doing the crappy work that no one else wants to do for very little money. They're the reason the wealthy can be wealthy, because again, there's only so much money to go around. If someone is rich, it's because many other people aren't, and are working to make the one person rich.

Don't think about taxation in terms of population. Think of it in terms of how much wealth is controlled. Yes, the wealthiest couple percent of tax payers already pay about 40% of the nation's tax dollars. But those people also control the vast majority of the wealth. It's totally illogical to try to tax evenly when wealth is distributed unevenly through a country. Those who take the most pie have to pay the most to keep the pie coming. That's what society does for the wealthy... and frankly, they should be eager to keep the system running, which is made possible by taxes.

Implementing nationalized healthcare in America would be very difficult right now. I think it would fail, even though I don't necessarily disagree with the idea, because it does work in other nations, contrary to what right-wing pundits would have you believe. It's easy enough to highlight the negatives of a system and espouse the best virtues of another when you're trying to garner support for the latter and scare people away from the former.

The bible can be interpreted many different ways. The bible says that there is no authority that has not been established by God. This can mean that every government ever created was the will of God. It can also mean that the only real authorities are those established by God such as the Vatican. No one is saying that greed is good. Do not put words into my mouth.SuperVegeta518

I didn't intend to put words in your mouth. It was a rhetorical challenge - because you know as well as I that there are no passages in the Bible which say it is good to be greedy or to evade taxes. The greed aspect is the desire to spend your money on yourself rather than pay your dues in tax.

If God appoints every government and every leader, he has an awfully twisted sense of humour. Putting a murderous tyrant in command of a nation, then suggesting that you bend to his will... and yet that's what scripture suggests. Scripture would also condemn the French and American revolutions, since they were rebellions against the kings of France and England respectively, and thus, rebellions against God in a manner of speaking, assuming that those kings were appointed by God.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4fe9GlWS8&feature=bz302

Man, this gave me chills. What a great guy.

GetEnTheKitchen

Respect to the guy, but that was BS

Way to go Mr. Assumptions. Whenever anyone says that National Healthcare is a bad idea they are automatically rich, right? :|
battlefront23

People don't tend to complain about programs that they'd benefit from. A rich person will be more likely to oppose National Healthcare than a poor person, because a rich person stands to pay more in tax to support it and likely suffer a decrease in service quality (because he can't pay a premium for better service which is unavailable to those who can't afford it), whereas a poorer person stands to gain from the implementation of such a program (not too poor, though, since they already receive free healthcare, and would thus receive no additional benefit).

Simply put, people who make more money tend to complain more about taxes, because they pay more in taxes. The only poor people you'll find who don't think National Healthcare is a good idea are those with an aspiration to become rich.

It means putting the country before your party and other political BS. The country stands for freedom. We support freedom. We support freedom in Iraq. Simple. Country comes before government.

GetEnTheKitchen

Wow, what epic spin. If you put your country first, you must put your country's people first. That is the most important thing about our country, our people! Instead we've spent billions of dollars on war which could have been used to help our people. Where was our "country first" slogan" duringkatrina?