Some Thoughts To Ponder On Taxes

Sorry Bill, I guess I am a capitalist I invest in companies I believe in so I guess that makes me a capitalist. However I think one can be a socialist and a capitalist at the same time, look at George Soros, Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, the Google Boys, Branson of Virgin, Brad Pitt, all the new green companies springing up making lots of money yet doing good work at the same time. You see not all capitalism is bad some can be good, what I don't want is corruption and pollution, companies that steal our tax dollars like Halliburton that don't help society rather hurt society, then move to Dubai

Google which contributes enormously to our national treasruy helps society. Dow Chemical which dumps their toxins into our rivers hurts society and we have to use our tax dollars to clean up their waste, I really don't understand that? GE is mixed they're going green which is good yet they support a war economy which is bad apparently but maybe I 'm wrong here. Capitalists can be good and bad , like any people.

I like capitalism I like to invest yet I will never invest in corporations that do evil like ExxonMobil even if I could have made money investing in them. I am what you call a "green" investor and I've done quite well thank you. Solar is the new internet, dangerous but very profitable so far for investors.

I never stated France has no income tax, they do about the same as ours for the middle class though much higer for the rich, what I said was income tax is unconstitutional in America and that the corporate tax rate in France is lower than in America yet they have far better social programs than we do, how come they can do it and we can't? The answer is they spend a lot less on national defense, we spend way too much. In France corporate corruption is far better regulated, here corporations can do whatever they please, we don't have enough nearly enough inspectors or enough money to fight huge corporate legal teams, so they screw us again and again and again, sucking our treasury dry, the bad corporations anyway, the goods ones fill up our treasury so we need to protect them.

The Chinese have a 'no first strike policy' we do not, who is pushing who on the nuclear arms race. We are under Bush anyway, he is pushing us to nuclear armegeddon, and Guiliani will be worse and Romney even worse than Guiliani, Tancredo is Hitler's clone as far as I can see.

I'm sorry but no CEO administrator is worth over say 3 million dollars a year in salary, I don't care how good you are, yet if the stock holders are stupid enough to pay them 100 million dollar salaries that's their business, I don't think it should be illegal, however I personally would vote against my boards doing the same in the companies I invest in.

Today there is only one leftist dictactor in the World , Fidel Castro, all the others are right wing dictators, many put into power by our good ol CIA and financed by our oil corporations. Chavez just proved last week after losing the referendum and respecting the wishes of the people, thaat he is not a dictator cause he said he will step down after his term.

So Castro is the only left wing dictator in the World today and the people still love him so he's not all that bad, by comparison to right wing dictators whom the people fear.

Many in the World think Bush is a dictator with all his signing statements , domestic spying, the corporate press just repeating what his administration says instead of investigating further... going to war against the will of the people, lies lies and more lies concerning just about everything he does. Destroying Valerie Plame who was working covertly to keep nuclear bombs out of the hands of terrorists protecting this country from nuclear terrorism and doing a good job of it, by all accounts, being destroyed by Cheney just cause he didn't like the fact her husband told the truth about Iraq not seeking uranium for nuclear weapons.

I could go on and on here, if we are not a dictatorship we sure have come close anyway on the world scale we are certainly way down there as concerns freedom, probably somewhere in the middle.

Anyway my point is you can still be a capitalist and desire freedom and social well being for all, not all capitalists are fascists, though many are!!

Come on birdflewover...stay on topic...we are discussing ideas for improving the tax code and tax system.

I understand your diatribe against capitalism. This is not a soapbox for getting talking points out!  This constant on and on rant is like shouting someone down. 

The topic here is the tax system.  I would like people to describe how they feel about it and what they would like to see in order to get some dialog going here.  Please stay on topic.

Bill, Bill, Bill, I'm disappointed in you.  Reread the letter from birdflewover - you went off track, birdflewover just defended himself. 

Taxes are government income, much like our income.  They can not be looked at alone.  Choices to be made, just like home.  Get more income, or spend less.  Decisions have to be made.  I prefer the spend smarter approach.  I tried just raising the income, that doesn't always work enough, the world keeps getting more expensive.  And there are smart investments, and not smart investing.  Irag is not a good investment.  Giving money to those who steal is not a good invesment.  Improving life for ourselves and future generations might be. 

The problem with taxes, is that you are taking other people's money.  It needs to be done fairly, and spent wisely.  People with more money than me get tax breaks for investments, losses on those investments, etc.  I invested all my money in supporting two kids, neither one of which is a flaming success right now, I don't get a tax break on that.  As I shouldn't.  It was my decision to have those kids, why should anyone else pay for them? 

 Yes, I am saying FLAT TAX.  NO BREAKS.  Yes, the more you make, the more you will pay - the same % I pay.  The same % everyone pays.  If that makes me a Left Wing facsist, so be it.  If rich people don't want to make a lot of money anymore because they have to pay a fair amount of taxes on it, give them a shopping cart and send them on their way, they can live like I do. 

I agree to that it is other people's money. I does need to be spent wisely. I don't think that people get unreasonable breaks.

Barbara, other than 401K we do not invest. I am not comfortable with the stock market and I am not skilled enough. I do not play the odds. But you must understand that the people who do take risks, grow and strengthen the economy.

Everyone makes choices in life and sometimes they are great choices and sometimes not so great. We all make mistakes and we all recover to one degree or another. If we pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and forge on we can all be successful and fulfill our goals.

I have to say that I admire the fact that you stand up and take responsibility...and recognize the need to....something that many progressives do not admire.

Flat Tax is interesting and I at one time supported that. Thinking about it I like the national sales tax that excludes food, a stipend for shelter say up to $125,000 and not tax on clothes... Then if you spend on wide screen tv's, boats, expensive cars, services, toys, etc. you pay a percentage on everything. It would add up pretty fast and would be based on consumption. I am not so interested in a consumption tax as it applies to everything.

Rich people do pay the lion's share now but I think that the % is too low on salaries over $200,000.

Thanks for the posting Barbara....it is appreciated!

Thanks for pointing out to Bill that I was actually on topic, to tell you the truth I don't know where he dug up all those numbers but they sure seemed a bit spurious to me, Warren Buffet the second richest man in the World, who is giving 90% of his money away to help the disadvantaged around the world, said he pays on a % basis less tax on his income than his secretary who makes I believe 60K per year. He said she pays more taxes than he does proportionally so I don't see where Bill comes up with these statistics that the rich are paying the lion's share of taxes, they are not. Almost every rich person I know will Echo Warren Buffets sentiments, many rich people actually want to pay more taxes and thinks its unfair they're not doing so. They think the Bush tax cuts during war time could severly damage our economy because of the double pronged debt pressure it puts on us, that is why the dollar is crashing.

You say neither of your kids is a flaming success right now, but maybe you're being to harsh on yourself, I think since the Republicans have taken control of this country they have tried to instill a sort of nationalist fervor brainwashing our children into thinking that individual responsibility for our country and its actions is no longer important, they tell us to support our troops by going shopping or by waving the flag, they tell us that the worth of a person is in how much money he or she makes even if it was made through corruption, that it is ok to lie and lie and lie again, that killing arab people and putting young Americans in harms way, just to secure oil supplies is ok. That torture is ok. That concentration camps are ok. That spying on your neighbor is ok. This kind of moral corruption of our society and our young people will cause them to lose self-confidence in themselves, lack of self-confidence is the key to failure, self-confidence is the key to success, any successful person will tell you that. A great educational movie for teenagers I think is Robert Redford's Lions for Lambs. It inspires young people to have confidence in themselves to do the right thing and be good citizens. Great movie you should tell you kids to check it out.

Yes birdflewover, your topic was on track but devolved into talking points. As did the blog above after making a couple of points on taxes. After bantering with you on another blog they are the same talking points.....

Look, I listen to all sides of debate so that I can tell what is the truth and what is not. I would suggest that any educated individual would do the same, It may not change your mind but you would understand the debate and point of view on both sides, It may often seem to the other side that I use talking points but I research both sides first and then draw my own conclusions.

Those "FACTS" that you think are spurious, come from the Congressional Budget Office. That would make them "FACTS" and would reveal that I have done research from neutral sources, not from partisan websites where they skew the facts for political gain. The other facts came from the non-partisan Tax Foundation which supports progressive taxation and the Internal Revenue Service.

It is true that the richest pay, on a percentage basis, less in taxes than you and I. As I stated in the original blog...30% of $50,000 has a bigger impact on that individual than 40% on $200,000 BUT in the end the top tier pays the lions share of the money going into the treasury. I agree in part that they could afford more. If you do that, they would not be able to invest and it would have an effect on the economy.

Now, on to Warren Buffet, if he pays his secretary only $60,000, then he is part of the problem and not the solution. If I had the riches and was at the age of Warren Buffet, I would be giving back and giving away tons of money....to ask a family of 4 or 5 or 3 earning $100,000 to pay over 46% of their income in all taxes is ridiculous.

What rich people say to others is hearsay; I am sure that you do not know this but they have the ability in Massachusetts to pay a larger tax. John Kerry opted out of that option, by the way, while criticizing regular citizens for supporting the tax cuts (source Boston Globe).

That brings us to the rest of your blog. I know your beliefs, could you please site sources for these facts. Without those sources revealed, the facts that you use are talking points from PACS, organizations like MoveON.org, etc. They can twist facts and add opinion and are not legitimate news sources.

As far as anyones kids being a success...it has nothing to do with Republicans being nationalistic. Barbara, like many Americans took responsibility for their situation as do millions of parents without blaming others or politics or nationalism. I am absolutely sure that she is proud of her children and did a fine job bringing them up and it has nothing to do whatsoever with Nationalism. Nice attempt to spring board into diatribe however...

Nationalism was huge during the Kennedy administration, under Truman and Roosevelt. Are you aware that the peace movement before WWII dwarfs the movement today and Roosevelt threw us into war while people protested. We would all be goose stepping if we had followed the path of peace. The language of this country would be German today! Or maybe Japanese??

Everything is not related to the Bush Administration and at some point repeating the same talking points over and over again do not convince people but simply become cartoonish.

I would hope that at some point you will do some honest research and think of things in more than one dimension. Belief is one of the most wonderful things in life but belief without challenging yourself to look at both sides of the discussion is dogmatic at best.

Honestly, Bill, I could give you a long list of what Republicans and the Bush Administration have done wrong, but I honestly sincerely can't think of one thing, not one they've done right! So I am asking you who look at both sides, what they've done right? What have they done to make the middle class and poorer classes stronger the real strength of any society is the middle class I think you would agree. What they've done for the super rich I can see but what about the rest of us? Give me a couple of reasons why anyone who is not super wealthy should vote Republican again? 

What Bush ahs done right or wrong is a topic for another day and blog.

If you have any other tax ideas, let me know.

I'm sure you're going to have to really dig to find what the Bush Administration and or the Republican Congress has done right, yes I know its a Democratic congress now, but I'm talking about when the Republicans controlled congress before 2006. Find me on thing that either the Republican Congress or Bush did that strengthened the middle class, that made all our lives better, since 2000. I'll be looking forward to that new blog.

As for taxes my final word is I think we should tax only those making over 100K per year according to budget needs, if you are making less than 100K per year you are already paying your fair share of taxes, in hidden consumption taxes, hidden inflation taxes, hidden dollar weakening taxes, pollution taxes, corporate control of our watchdog regulatory agencies which is a tax in essence, abusive interest rates on credit cards which is a form of tax, unhealthy foods on the markets is a sort of tax....all those taxes which are hidden from us because they are not considered taxes but they should be.

No, as stated at the beginning at this blog...I agree with little on Bush except for the tax cuts. If you read the FACTS in this blog you will see that the middle class pays too much but I don't think that the 'middle class' is the same 'middle class' that you are talking about. A family of four is middle class if they earn $60,000-$120,000. Anything less than that and they are not middle class. Chances are, however if they earn less than that, they are not paying any income tax or get a full refund.

Bill, I would agree that one could define, in America , middle class families making over 60K but I would put the bar higher for the top end, I mean a family 4 making less than 300K is still the middle class in my opinion, yet its really not that important is it. Whether any class pays too much or too little seems to be defined by those who have the most, why don't we let those who have the least define which class is paying too much or too little. Oh Yes forget its called an election.

You just picked an arbitrary number...it does not work that way. People have a choice to sign up for high interest loans and credit cards. Yes, there are predatory lenders but not everyone who takes those loans and high interest are "victims".

100K arbitrary, of course, I admit I picked that number out of thin air just seemed fair to me that's all, that those who make less than 100K shouldn't pay income taxes cause they're already paying more than their fair share in hidden taxes. As for the "victims" deserving what they get you may be right but what happened to "personal bankruptcy" why should corporations have more rights than people?... if you're going to take bankruptcy rights away from people, as Bush recently did, its only fair to take those rights away from corporations too, but you say nothing about that???

You know Bill when lots of rich people are publicly saying that they're not paying their fair share of taxes you know something is morally wrong with Bush's tax cuts for the rich only. 

Unhealthy foods is not a "tax". Who determines what is healthy....you must support the 'food police'.

Its called the FDA , Bill, not "food police"... darn tooting I want someone inspecting our food supply and throwing people in jail who try to poisson us. However I do see Ron Paul's point if we did away entirely with the FDA then each one of us would have to be responsible for the food supply and we would no longer buy from big food companies , we'd all buy local from people we knew to be sure what we're eating is safe. Yet in that case we would eliminate entirely the FDA so we'd know, that we consumed at our own risk, the Republicans have done worse than eliminating the FDA, they put the CEOs of big food companies to run it, making sure we all get poissoned sooner or later. 

Brainwashing is a unique thing that we talk about but thanks for binging the results of that heinous practice to light in your writings.

So am I to assume here Bill, that you now admit you too are brainwashed to some extent like the rest of us humans? Also the fact you can't find one thing the Republicans have done to help the middle class, am I to assume as well you'll be voting Democratic this time around? Congratulations Bill, you're becoming a real human being, welcome to humanity, but I'm sure the dark side will miss you, however your children will respect you greatly for it when they're older, and you'll be setting a fine example for them. VERITAS = LIBERTY

Well, I knew you could do it...respond rationally without the Leftist talking points.

Two Comments.....Your previous post mentioned 'healthy food'......you meant to say 'safe food'. There is a difference......My impression was that you were judging the nutrition of food (i.e fast food, high fat, etc) If people want to choose that they should be able to but I do not subscribe to that kind of eating. Of course, the FDA is necessary for "safe food" and a guarded supply that will not make people sick.

I imagine that you are referring to genetically modified crops. There is not conclusive evidence that they do harm to us. Buying local is the best way but is not practical as not every state can produce all crops.

No, I will not vote Democratic. No, I am not brainwashed. My reality is understanding the world around me and working to make the existing system work. Constantly trying to meet a 'pie in the sky' dreamscape reality is not for me.

You worry about your children and I will worry about mine. As I explained, parents determine the path of their children and they learn values, morals and ethics from parents; not the schools, state and others who want a redefinition of the world through political correctness, etc.

You confuse humanity with self reliance, self determination and freedom of choice. Those are the most important liberties to not only our society but to the human race. People need to stay out of each others way and allow that to flourish. Your view of the world is a milk toast society reminiscent of agrarian communities of the 15th century.

Safe vs Healthy Food: In my opinion all food should be "healthy" otherwise why eat it?

Healthy food can be just as "tasty" (more so once you train your taste buds) as unhealthy food, problem is it takes time and work to make healthy food "tasty". American corporate advertizing have brainwashed people into thinking they don't have time to cook, they should work longer hours for the corporation instead...they have made the American people lazy and dependant when it comes to "health" we depend more and more on health corporations for our health more and more so everyday, that's what they want, that's how they make their money.

I agree that some people or more tolerant to "unhealthy" foods than others, due to genetic metabolic differences, exercise, etc. , yet my question is why not allow all foods to be healthy? Why make unhealthy foods in the first place? Except to make a profit... what purpose does that serve other than to make money for the producer? A fast food meal may be totally "safe" i.e., it won't kill you or make you sick right away yet for most people fast foods or franken foods are unhealthy long term..furthermore the jobs they create are bad jobs i.e., jobs that suck big time, not jobs like Google creates...interesting high paying jobs.

So why do people eat fast foods and processed foods? I'll tell you why, cause there is nothing else!!! You know how hard it is today to feed your children and husband correctly? Real hard, in America anyway, EVERYTHING is processed. Its hard to find something that is not processed...You have to pay more for organic just to make sure your kids are not injesting pesticides, did you know for boys the more pesticides injested the smaller their penis develops, i.e., more organics = larger penis.

The FDA is the police of food and drugs, their role is to put people in jail who knowingly put the public health at risk. There is no way they can stop fraud and corruption however they can act as a deterent, like the police, they can't prevent crimes, they can only put people in jail who get caught in the act, perhaps inhibiting CEOs in the future of doing more of the same, i.e., from cutting costs which result in reducing the quality of animal treatment or use of pesticides instead of more labor intensive methods of production which in the end  threaten the health of the consumer. We can set the bar to any standard we want, high or low, my experience has been the left or liberals or socialists set the bar much higher than the  Republicans.

Everytime I go to Europe or Japan on business or vacation I can't believe how so much easier it is to buy healthy foods, sure McDonald's and processed foods exist there too, but at least you have a choice, you can find healthy foods as easily as the processed garbage and the price difference is not that much in the stores, unlike here where processed "franken" foods are much cheaper than healthy "green" foods! Why can they do it and we can't? The answer is their FDAs are not run by former industry executives like ours is, they have real food police, real dogs guarding the sheep, not wolves like we have here, that's why! Republicans will always let the wolf guard the sheep at least with Democrats there's a chance if we elect someone liberal enough that we'll get some real sheep dogs guarding the sheep.

I agree with you that it is the Parent's responsibility to make sure their children are well educated, self-confident and morally upright and that it is not the responsibility of the schools or state. Totally agree...however this is a value both the left and the right share, apparently. However it just seems to me from my observations that liberal parents tend to be far more successful at raising their children than Republican parents, because their children tend to do better academically, are more stable psychologically and are generally more popular. I just look at the results , this is what studies show, but I don't trust the studies necessarily, you can make a study say whatever you want, however this is what I observe personally in my life, this is what I see around me , that the kids of liberal parents are far better balanced and happier than the kids of Republican parents. So there must be some reason as to why?

Are liberal parents just more competent? Probably not...yet is the liberal philosophy of life better for raising children? Probably so. Why is it that the vast majority of students in our top universities tend to be liberal? Why do scientists and creative people tend to be liberal? Why are the founders of Google and Apple liberal? Is it a better way? I think so. My observations confirm this, that's all.

Finally my view IS the view of choice, I want more choice, I want more inexpensive orgainc foods and meat from animals that have been treated correctly not tortured to death. I want controls and severe punishments on CEOs who want to cut costs at the expense of my health and the health of my children, so if they have to choose between less profit and prison, maybe they will choose less profit and produce something worth consuming.

Socialism is all about more choice, about improving the quality of life, be it health care, education what have you... and not just for the rich oil and military contractor execs who try to screw us at every turn but for everyone.

To see the difference between us clearly, take the issue of waterboarding, the vast  majority Republican view is that waterboarding under controlled conditions is sometimes OK if it gets us the information we need to stay safe, the liberal view is that Waterboarding is a horrible torture and should be illegal in America and everywhere, it is enormously immoral, reprehensible, and doesn't result in useful information anyway, rather it gets the prisoner to say what the torturer wants him or her to say.

I don't believe the torture of those terrorists prevented any future attacks, I believe they made those future attack stories up, where is the proof? and the little proof we do have why is it suddenly destroyed when we want to see if what they're saying is true, that torture does get results? Its all a sham..this is the difference between Republican and liberal parents , Republican parents teach their kids that torture is sometimes necessary for security, liberals teach their children that it is a sham , that torture is in reality a tool of tyranny used to scare the people into submission.

I'm sure you will vote for Romney, who has close ties with Cofer Black the father of torture in America and a founder of Blackwater, he was the one who convinced Eric Prince to found Blackwater with Daddy's money... Cofer Black will be our next Secretary of Defense or worse head of Homeland security, if Romney is elected. What a horror to contimplate. Did you know "Homeland" was the term the Nazis introduced to refer to Germany once Hitler consolidated power...coincidence? I tell you if Romney is elected I am leaving the country and taking my children with me cause its game over time, we lost.

I'm sorry to see Bill that you continue to stick to your Republican values like a stubborn old mule, despite all the truth easily available on the internet,  I hope for your children's sake that at least their mother is a liberal.

Remember Bill life is short and one day you'll have to answer for how you spent your time here on Earth...so think long and hard in your unwavering support of the dark force manifested in the Republican party here in America (with the exception of course of a few noble lights like Ron Paul trying to change the party from within, yet everyone can see that Ron Paul is in fact a liberal in Republican clothing, libertarians are liberals in essence)

Well keep teaching your children that waterboarding is acceptable under certain conditions in America Bill, I will  teach mine that it is Always wrong and unAmerican to waterboard people that it hurts us much more than it hurts the enemy. Bin Laden can't destroy America...Cofer Black, Romney and waterboarding can.

Although I agree with food being healthy, the rest of this is bogusin my opinion

What does "bogusin" mean, Bill, never heard of that word? Is this word from some kind of "Republican think"?....like "enhanced interogation techniques" or "rendition" or "collateral damage" or "death tax" or "mission accomplished" or "helluva job Brownie"...

I agree but you can not legislate what everyone eats, or thinks or how they act, etc.

Only partly correct, you can't legislate how people think, not yet anyway, as far as I know, there are no laws against "thought crime" yet, I'm sure if Romney gets elected, however, we may get some legislation in that direction.

Yet remember we've been legislating how people eat and act ever since we've had government. Ever stop at a red light, Bill? or try to smoke a cigarette in a public place? The FDA, the EPA, and similar were created for a reason to protect our health, in what we eat, drink and breathe. I'm glad they're there if managed by competent people who have the people's interest at heart, yet when Republicans put industry cronies that own or lobby for coal, food and chemical corporations at the head of these agencies, I'd rather have no agencies at all, like Ron Paul says, at least my tax dollars, that I thought were going to protect my health, will stay in my pocket instead of going into corporate welfare.

That is over the top...propaganda

If you don't believe me, fine , do your own research, yet my kids aren't going to suffer because of "corporate propaganda" or what is the normal term? oh yes, "advertizing".

So you support rounding up people who do not agree with your point of view and jailing them?

Yea sure Bill, I want to jail and why not torture everyone who does not think like me, yea Bill that's my goal in life to make sure that all people who do not think like me go to prison....poor poor Bill is this the best you can do? You are starting to bore me.

They are not true democracies.

What Europe and Japan are not true democracies? You are now really starting to bore me, I thought you were smarter than this Bill? 

I agree with you that it is the Parent's responsibility to make sure their children are well educated, self-confident and morally upright and that it is not the responsibility of the schools or state. Totally agree...however this is a value both the left and the right share, apparently. However it just seems to me from my observations that liberal parents tend to be far more successful at raising their children than Republican parents, What an elitist view.....opinion and egobecause their children tend to do better academically, are more stable psychologically and are generally more popular.I find he opposite to often be true...babies on pacifiers later in life, wetting the bed later in life, allowed to make choices more freely and it confuses them. Some of the best kids and most successful atgtend religious schools, etc.

So you think "some of the best and most successful kids attend religious schools" well, well, Bill, what kind of schools do you think our future Al Qaida terrorists are studying at? I'll tell you Bill, the most religious schools on the planet, with the exception of perhaps our very own Jesus camps.  

 That is not exactly true, have you read the Monitor progressive letter writers or listened to your progressive politicians...poisonous rhetoric and fear mongering.

 Yes I have , but I never heard any poisonous rhetoric or fear mongering, not from progressives anyway, however, from Cheney, Bush and most Republican senators and Republican media pundits I hear rhetoric and fear mongering all the time.

That is gobblygook...those educated have been propagandized and brainwashed by professors on the Left

"propagandized" is that more "Republican think"? 

"I, I, I Want, want want...in my opinion"

That's right Bill, I, I, I, Want, want want...my tax dollars to go to Peace and not to War, to helping the poor and disadvantaged and NOT to rich oil corporations, military contractors and agencies run by corporate lobbies.

 Socialism is about control of the population as well as the enforcement of political correctness.

Socialism is about being "social" a good neighbor, about following the philosophy "to whom more is given, more is demanded" or "ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country" Read the speeches of Roosevelt and Bobby and Jack Kennedy and you will understand what socialism is all about. I use the word socialism because that is the word the rest of the World uses, we in America perhaps prefer the word "progressive" but they both mean the same thing. They say "football" we say "soccer" they use the "meter" we still use the "foot" and "inch"...they say "socialism" we say "liberal" or "progressive"....I just wish we could all just use the same words at least in English anyway. You know in most European countries and in Japan the "other" party is called the "socialist party" which is the same as our Democratic party. You get to hung up on semantics...by the way "political correctness" is more "Republican think". Furthermore from what I have observed socialists, or progressives if you prefer, around the world and throughout history , including our country have always been the champions of "liberty", every time we elect a progressive like Jefferson, Kennedy or Carter... this country becomes socialist again and more "free".

Democratic leaders were aware of this since 2003...many who you idolize.

 As I said before, I don't idolize anyone, especially Democrats , who support waterboarding and the ones that were aware and didn't object publically I hope voters will put out of office at the next election. I'd rather have a Republican whom I know is a fascist than a Democrat who pretends to be a liberal.

What a croc.......to be speaking with a young child about torture at all is wrong. Maybe teens, but too young....let them be children

 I agree with you Bill, but unfortunately because of Cheney, Wolfowitz, O'Reilly, Coulter, FOX, etc. who promote torture all over the media in this country, kids talk about it at school and when mine come home and ask Mommy "why do Americans torture, Mommy?" well you've got to tell them something.

propaganda

So what I said about Romney and Cofer Black is propaganda? Go check it out for yourself , Google Gofer Black you'll get lots of info on this guy. 

Nope...she is a level headed cnservative.

 Well nobody's perfect

Evil exists and it is cloaked in the Third world

 Is this more "Republican think" Bill?

I believe that the opposite is true.

I'm sure you do Bill, I'm sure you do...

You stated "To whom more is given, more is demanded"

Exactly what is wrong with Socialism. I know very few people who are "given"anything.

Most people work hard and earn what they have. That is called self reliance and self responsibility which is now somehow a bad thing.  I know in your world you see corporations around every corner stealing your tax money. Most people earn what they have and that needs to be respected and admired.  It really is none of your business nor anyone elses what I have, Donald Trump has, John Edwards has or someone who lives across the hall from you.   It is not anyone's business.  But, it is used by politicians to pit one American against the other and create class envy.

Hence the fear mongering of the Left and agenda in which they hope to get a stranglehold on the economy and the masses.  That is Socialism!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

Here is what you really mean:

"Those who have worked their a** of should give to those who have not or who have less, because, that is the way we need to make everyone economically equal."

To Socialists, it is not about hard work or self responsibility it is about emotion and this false sense of 'fairness'. I am all for taking care of those who can't take care of themselves but in a FREE society, we all have choices that we make which determine our destiny.

Do African Americans have to join gangs in thier neighborhood in their teens? Do teens in the suburbs have to do drugs? Do people have to decide not to apply themselves in jobs? NO...they can choose otherwise BUT the LEFT decides that they are 'victims' of their circumstances and the solution in their mind is to force economic equality on everyone to make up for their poor choices.

That may sound harsh but it is reality. We all make poor choices and we are all given multiple chances. I hve made poor choices and I am sure that you have too and what is unique about living in a Democracy is that you have that CHOICE.

The LEFT is about choice when it comes to abortion but not schools. They are not for supporting a person's right to choose their path. They want to fix the mistakes through economic means...what has happened to personal responsibility.

As far as Europe is concerned, universal health care has failed in Britain and France, France is being overrun from the Middle East and their 'Socialist" experiment is in shambles. Europe is irrelevant and passe'. Not a good argument.

Please do not compare JFK's famous words with Karl Marx...that is using those words to prove a point that is pointless.

Bill, if French socialist system is so broke why was it ranked number one by the World Health Organisation? Why are Europeans coming to the US in droves to do their Christmas shopping with their super strong Euro, if socialism is so broken over there?

 You say "I know very few people who are "given"anything." I guess you don't know our President who was "given" a Yale and Harvard education did you see his SAT scores, how did he get in? and his VP five deferrements Cheney he was "given" a free pass out of Vietnam.

Speaking of Vietnam and the "realism" you so treasure, here are some quotes from Cheney's favorite advisor and one of your Republican heros the "realist" Henry Kissinger.

“Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.” Henry Kissinger, speaking to Al Haig (quoted by Woodward&Bernstein)

“I can think of no faster way to unite the American people behind George W. Bush than a terrorist attack on an American target overseas. And I believe George W. Bush will quickly unite the American people through his foreign policy.” HK — pre-9/11

“I don’t see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves.” HK — after Allende’s election, pre-Assassination & Pinochet

“Today, America would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all people of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the world government.” HK — taped by Swiss-diplomat at secretive Bilderburg-Conf., 1991

“Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the third world, because the US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries.” HK — attributed by Leuren Moret

And, lest you think such ‘Realism’ is a symptom of only ‘modern-times/problems’, compare all-above with this — from George Kennan of the U.S. State Department in 1948:

“The US has about 50% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its population. In this situation we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and daydreaming, and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford the luxury of altruism and world benefaction. We should cease to talk about such vague and unreal objectives as human rights, the raising of living standards and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.”

And we wonder why they hate us... 

Your realism sounds pretty gruesome to me Bill, I think I'll stick with socialism and vote Kucinich Obama or Edwards...I'm sure your guy Romney (whom I think is the Devil cause he lies so well) will bring Kissinger, Kennan, Dulles, Cheney "realism" to its highest art form... or perhaps you prefer the King of corruption Guiliani...

You prove my point, time and time again.  Like all progressives, when you think your point of view is weak...you name call and find conspiracy around every corner.

Progressives heroes  are those who are privileged and have made their fortunes but play the class envy and paranoia card sucking in the weak and sheep who follow inspirational phoney's

Don't assume who I am voting for or support.  I like none of the Republicans and am scared to death of the self serving Democrats.  Kucinich would sissify America...something already half way accomplished by progressives.

By the way "they" will always hate us.  Because "they" are third world cultures who have not reached the age of enlightenment.  Why progressives want to be in their favor and celebrate their cultures when they are so more regressive than the society or utopian dreamscape that progressives pine for; shows their lack of common sense.  As with most progressives, education is front and center.  Education without common sense and ability to reason with reality is worthless. 

"By the way "they" will always hate us.  Because "they" are third world cultures who have not reached the age of enlightenment." Bill Bunker, Dec. 14th, 2007 Concord Monitor

Nice quote Bill, can I use it?  Only kidding...really Bill you should be careful what you write it could come back to haunt you one day.

by the way Bill I have been to many third world countries and I can tell you from experience that in many countries their kids seem a helluva a lot better educated than the majority of our kids and a lot less brainwashed. Thanks to Republicans running this country the majority of the time since Nixon this country has gone so far right it has really hurt us...we are way way behind the rest of the World in future competivity. 

but seriously, Bill, you are becoming really really boring, if this is the best you can do.... come on can't you teach me something, can't you find something from the right, from "Republican think" that's at least thought provoking or which can make me question my socialist values, for example can't you find me an example where American socialists have hurt this country, I've given you lots of examples how American fascists, or Republicans if you prefer (since fascists now dominate the Republican party) like Kissinger, Nixon, Bush, Cheney, Perle, Wolfowitz, O'Reilly, Coulter, Limbaugh, Bush, Guiliani, Romney, Tancredo, Hunter, etc have hurt this country, yet honestly I can't see anything where American socialists have hurt this country, all their actions like reducing the work week to 40 hours or making child labor illegal or making education available to all children etc seem to be positive for America.

Hey Birdflewover,

Teach you something????  Your mind is made up.   If you want to open your mind and read an interesting book read the Politically Incorrect Guide to American History.

Boring is the right word....there is little else to be said as you keep on beating the same thoughts into the argument.

Thanks for the posts but we have said all that can be said at this stage.

For a really interesting history, try Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States." It will tell you the things they forgot to teach you in school.

Here are a few for you:

That Every Man Be Armed: The Evolution Of A Constitutional Right by Stephen P. Halbrook

New England Frontier:Puritans and Indians, 1620-1675 by Alden Vaughn

The MYTH of the Robber Barons by Burton W. Folsom, Jr.

The Coming of the Civil War by Avery O. Craven

Roosevelt and Stalin; The Failed Courtship  by  Robert Nisbet 

I have to wonder just how old some of you Socialist are. Especially birdfle. It is always so easy to sit on the sidelines and point fingers. "I could give you a long list of what Republicans and the Bush Administration have done wrong." I don't know about wrong, but I know what they have done is certainly not to the liking of Socialist in this country.

 The relevence of age, when the Socialist in this country were in power for over 40 years, this country was a social mess. Government programs coming out the wazoo sucking the life energy of the working class as they paid for every failing social program they put in place. Unions running over companies putting in the incredible perks at the expense of the capital spending for improvements, i.e. United Steel Workers. go look at the steel mills in PA, NOT.

I personally would like to stop paying any taxes until the politicians in this country stop giving my money away to other countries. No where in the Constitution does it say they can give money to other countries.

Why should anyone vote for a Republican again? Socialist in this country have one agenda, destroy this country by making it a "third world" country.

 Merry Christmas to you all.

You are on the mark on everything that you wrote Chancy but you forgot one important point:

Unions ruined the auto industry.  I travel to Detroit and even the out of work still breathe union.  They are running commercials all over the TV about "come to Michigan".....no one is signing up for that deal....they don't want to deal with the unions.

Unions were about workers rights but now they are all about keeping themselves in power.  Unions are self serving to the management of the unions.  They sponge off of the workers dues and give them peanuts in return.  Still, union members knee jerk with their unions like children hiding behind their mother's skirt.  Unions breed mediocrity.

Oh yes, the Democrats ran the government for 40 years and brought us the war on proverty...billions spent with no results.  They brought us patients rights and the mental institutions were closed and patients put out on the street...hence the homeless.  They brought us welfare spending out of control.  

Thanks Chancy...MERRY CHRISTMAS TO YOU AND TO EVERYONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

America was strong when we had import tarifs, now it is weak because of Globalisation, it is cheaper to produce steel in India and China because they use slave labor, unions did not kill our industries slave labor did. In the case of steel, Republicans blocked every democratic attempt to protect our steel industry with tarifs against steel made in third world countries with slave labor, if Republicans had not been successful we'd still have a competitive steel industry with high paying union jobs and Japan would have had to pay more money for the steel they buy from China because China would have been forced to allow unions in China (in order to sell to us), ending slave labor, making their steel more expensive for Japan and Europe and thus Japanese and European cars more expensive in the US. Tarifs work if based on principles of justice and decent working conditions that only Unions can guarantee. Competition yes but based on fair working conditions for all workers worldwide.

We need fair trade not free trade, our WTO negotiations should be aimed at leveling the playing field in favor of the worker worldwide not reducing tarifs to allow the countries with the most tyrannical working conditions, including polluting the environment, to be the most competitive.

Chancy both you and Bill should pick up the books written by Thom Hartmann and Nobel economist Josepth Stiglitz, Republicans have sold America out to the Saudis and Chinese... Japan and Europe are thriving because they still use tarifs and protect their home industries, we should do the same. Let competition exist but make it fair, we are giving the store away so our Corporations can steel our tax dollars like Exxon, Halliburton and Blackwater than move to Dubai , once we catch on. Wake up my friends you've both been had big time by corrupt Republicans, stop being chumps! Some things never change! 

If you want to know why Christmas is on the 25th of December Google "zeitgeist" and watch the movie, you'll also find it on Brasscheck TV just Google Brasscheck TV and go to the film Zeitgeist...the truth will set you free!...and perhaps keep my children free as well with luck! 

Hold on there. You can not put the blame for our failing education system at the feet of the Republicans. That my little Socialist buddy belongs only to the Socialist in this country and there stooges in the education unions. Try to put a program in place that will allow for the dismissal of bad teachers and watch the unions scream. Bad teachers equal bad learning, which in turn equals less qualified kids entering real life.

Another great point Chancy!

Birdflewover is really clueless when it comes to the facts and history.

That is because she gets it from propagandist TV and Air America.

Progressive broadcasts are reminiscent of those on Soviet TV in the 60's.

Teachers unions and the NEA have turned a "profession" into a protected job and class.  Teachers shoulkd be judged on talent and paid accordingly.

Unfortunately, just because a person graduates with an education degree does not mean they have the innate ability to facilitate and teach.

One semester of student teaching and they are thrust upon the children.

Once again, thanks for the support on this blog!!!

Bill 

I agree that teachers are too well protected by their unions as concerns whether or not they can be fired due to incompetence. However, this is a difficult issue to resolve because while I agree that teachers should be easily fired because they are bad teachers, who is to decide who is a bad teacher and who is not?

I think if only Parents had that power, then we could get the teachers union to agree that if say 75% of the parents think a math or english teacher is incompetent that the teacher can be fired. Yet only for incompetence not for political views or for reasons outside competence measures. The majority of parents will always put their children's education ahead of their personal political views, so if the teacher is an excellent math teacher, even if the teacher is a socialist and the majority of parents are corporatists, the parents will want to keep the teacher anyway. Yet if the teacher is a bad teacher and socialist and the majority of parents are socialist they will still want to fire the teacher because their kids aren't learning the math.

I strongly believe that Unions are necessary and should be protected legally as concerns anything private, they are needed to preserve our freedoms against nefarious freedom sucking corporations, however I could be persuaded to think that unions do not belong in anything public, anyone who works for the state is a public servant, they are paid for by our tax dollars, so perhaps they don't deserve the right to strike and unionize because we the people depend on their services and we pay their salaries.

This is a complicated issue I am open here whether or not public servants like teachers, police officers, soldiers, tax collectors etc should have the right to unionize, yet people who work for private schools, private police, private corporations, definitely yes, they should be able to unionize. This is not China or the USSR where unions are illegal. This is America! Unions are more responsible than any other force in our society for our freedoms today. The weaker our unions the weaker our freedoms, I want America to remain free not under corporate control like the Republicans are striving hard to achieve for their corporate masters.

Bill, you've really got it backwards, Democracy Now is keeping America Free, Fox news and Murdoch's News Corp are brainwashing us with their extreme fascist propaganda. For example take the issue of torture, waterboarding, Fox defends torture, Democracy Now condemns it.

Take  Cheney's lies leading up to the invasion of Iraq which has bankrupted our country for the benefit of Cheney's Halliburton. FOX constantly defended Cheney, Democracy Now brought his lies to scrutiny.

Take any subject whatsoever and it can easily be shown that Democracy Now is far more informative and accurate than Fox News or any of the other corporate news broadcasts.

I challenge you Bill, to find one issue where this is not the case, for example concerning Chavez's recent loss to the people of Venezuela, concerning the referendum on whether or not Chavez could be re-elected indefinitely, the Venezuelan people voted NO and Chavez said he will step down in 2012 because the people voted NO. Democracy Now defended the NO vote , it sided with the people, not Chavez.

Furthermore concerning Cuba , Democracy Now has always sided against Castro and for freedom of the press in Cuba, yet at the same time thinks the embargo is stupid and counterproductive and that if the embargo were lifted Cuba would become free much quicker.

Democracy Now is not extreme left like you think Bill, it is mainstream, yet it is mainstream that tells the truth, and the truth can sometimes seem to the left or socialist yet it is never communist or tyrannical or extreme right or fascist...the truth is always mainstream. FOX News is fascist propaganda, Democracy Now is mainstream news, any thinking human being who watches both for more than a week will clearly see that, I dare anyone to do that including Chancy and tell me differently.

Chancy I dare you to really watch Democracy Now, everyday for one week and compare that to FOX and then tell us which you find to be propaganda and which is giving us important news that we need to be good citizens and to defend our liberties. After you do that with FOX , compare Democracy Now to say the corporates, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN and see the difference and tell me which news media best defends are freedoms. 

Do it honestly Chancy, I'm interested in hearing what you have to say and I invite any other readers out there to do the same any give us your feedback.

Okay, guys, I'm cutting this off. Any more comments for this post will be deleted. I already excised one of bird's comments for going over the line of our terms of use -- it is only out of respect for Bill that I'm not deleting the entire thread.

Our terms say: "No personal attacks." Please abide by that.