Lying is Not Patriotic

Well thats mature. I hate neo-cons too, but have a lot of respect for guys like Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is the only one of your politicians I'll actually listen to.

I salute Ron Paul for that speech! I dont like republicans, but I admire this guy. Ron Paul for prez

ron paul is the shit

I feel like theres few other republicans on NS

you probably work for someone whos considered wealthy.
do you want to tax your employer more?

the wealthy drive our economy. its bullshit to think that its fair to overtax those who are succesful.

less government spending is the answer. although i know you don't se it that way.

lol What the fuck does this have to do with taxes. Gnarton is such a fag. Go post more shit about afghanistan.

So we should be taxing the people who do not have money more than the people that do?

Do you see anything wrong with that?

good for him. i don't agree with a lot of his economic stuff, but he sort of hit the nail on the head with this.

if they tax lets say, 10% of your income, thats 10% regardless of if its 10 grand or 100 grand, either way the government gets your money.

when you people think you shouldnt be taxed but bill gates should be taxed double what he already is, its fucking stupid

yes, every country with a progressive tax structure is a lifeless hellscape devoid of human life or an economic system outside of bartering ammunition for scraps of meat left on the bones of lucky. like denmark!

same

wheeeew ron paul just roasted america...

lawl why should you be taxed less than any other person?

dont tell me its not fair, theyre more succesful than you, why is it fair to punish them for that?

check your post count

i stand up and put my hand across my chest when the national anthems play before sports games.

i guess i would consider myself patriotic, but moreso respectful.

it's entirely dependent on your view of the role of government. i normally advocate less government, especially in social areas, but i think it's been pretty well shown that the average person is happier in a well executed semi-socialist society, like a whole bunch of countries in the E.U. a reasonable progressive tax structure doesn't disincentive success, nor is it "unfair" to expect people who have succeeded inherently at the expense of others to contribute more to a semi-communal society.

Well the republican party doesn't really stand on it's foundation anymore. The two parties have grown to do a lot of the same shit. I like with paul, that he isn't afraid to be the only one to vote no or yes. Even if everyone else votes the other way, he sticks to the constitution. It's nice to see consistency when everyone seems to vote which ever way will help them gain more power.

haha yeah, we need a perfect vacuum. i feel like a lot of the problems with capitalism in particular will exist even at the very beginning. people will always mistreat workers if given the opportunity, people will always sacrifice public safety if there isn't regulation in place. why can't people just not be dicks?

Republican is out-dated. Libertarian is the way to be.

guys its all about being a conservative. they make more money

To me it's just common sense, why have progressive taxation? It's all about a flat tax... rich are still paying more money in that system, but the poor aren't catching up to the rich because of the government's doing. Simple enough, dunno why people oppose it.

Capitalism is the social form of nature. Survival of the fittest, protect you and yours, etc. People "not being dicks" goes against instinct, and goes against their self-interest. Why is it up to the successful to take care of the weak? If you really hate your situation, you can do something about it. You just may have to work harder than others. Life isn't fair and people aren't created equal.

As far as the tax system goes, I understand the argument of a flat tax. In fact, I agree with the basic philosophy. However, if you lowered the high bracket tax, you have to raise the lower tax bracket to break even. As a percentage of income, that puts a MUCH larger burden on the lower class. I agree with the poster who said lowering spending is the key. Less taxes = less tax burden.

Neoconservaticism and Reaganomics isn't the same thing as capitalism. It's actually closer to Corporatism, which was a basic philosophy of Mussolini's Italy. The problem is the fact that it was a gradual evolution in America, along with constant distractions, that the public didn't notice or care. The "trickle-down" philosophy of the 80s was a joke, and must have had politicians laughing at us. It did boost the aggregate economy, however income disparity and poverty skyrocketed.

Socialism or socialist policies are not the right answer, though. I feel like the biggest problem with the political culture in this country is the bipolarity of thought, the idea that there are only two possible answers. It's an ingrained idea of a our bipolar political system, although it leads to radicalism and hostility. There is never one answer, and there are never only two options. A compromise on middle-ground is usually the best route. Extreme changes are NEVER good for an economy. Ever.

Sorry for the rant. I'm in finals mode, I guess.

this, all the way