Re: Sarah Palin

On Sep 6, 4:08 am, Get Pickr <getpi...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 5, 8:04 pm, walki...@xxxxxx (hank alrich) wrote:





Greg Thomas <gjtho...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 5, 4:04 pm, walki...@xxxxxx (hank alrich) wrote:
Greg Thomas <gjtho...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On the other side of the aisle, the Dems ticket
frightens me economically. One thing I learned from Milton Freidman,
and believe deeply, is that political freedom is an illusion without
economic freedom.

That confuses me, Greg, because what evidence is there beyond the
Republican posture that they're good for business, that they are
actually good for business? With them in the White House we have
repeatedly driven the nation further in debt by "cutting taxes", i.e.,
eschewing essential revenue, while failing to restrain spending. In
fact, the spending careens almost out of accountability (how much money
sent to Iraq on pallets has actually disappeared?) and absent adequate
revenues our way out is via inflation.

Look to the debt numbers under Reagan and Bushes I & II. The bulk of our
national debt was nurtured under their 'leadership".

As a CPA why would you cut them slack on those issues?
Hank -

Don't be confused. I don't think there's a whole lot of difference
between the two parties. They're different facets of the same rock.

I agree in many ways with that, but I also wonder why then is it under
the Republican leadership we find something 70% of our national debt
created? Is this mere coincidence?

The problem with our government, IMHO, is not that taxes are too low,
but that spending is too high. Government spending and mandated
government spending is, IIRC somewhere slightly over 50%. That is just
plain wrong, and I don't care which party is in office. The Dems
frighten me on this issue in this election because 1) they're upfront
about raising taxes, and 2) they'll probably effectively control both
the legislative and exectutive branches of the government.

We either raise taxes to pay our bills or we print money and ultimately
render our currency worthless. We have done the spending without
mustering the balls to come right out and say, as you and I would have
to were we up to our chins in debt, "Maybe we better generate some
revenue". Can we continue to tolerate abysmal business practices in the
Federal branch, from either party?

The impact of severe inflation will be much worse for a majority of our
citizens than would raising taxes, over which a relative handful of the
better-off among us will whine incessantly as if their own entitlements
were threatened.

We "enjoy" wars of foreign "adventure", throwing vast sums into the
pockets of those who make a business of war. Meanhwile back at home we
haven't the resources to maintain our infrastructure, like highways and
bridges, our educational systems, our environment or the health of our
general, as in not wealthy, populace.

What kind of priorities are these?

-----

Witness:

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

U.S. NATIONAL DEBT CLOCK

The Outstanding Public Debt as of 05 Sep 2008 at 11:39:25 PM GMT is:
$ 9 , 6 7 0 , 2 5 8 , 8 7 1 , 7 5 4 . 3 4

The estimated population of the United States is 304,674,556
so each citizen's share of this debt is $31,739.63.

The National Debt has continued to increase an average of
$1.93 billion per day since September 28, 2007!

-----

Here's a graph of how much and when it was incurred:

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

-----

McCain votes alike with Bush's priorities and wants to sell us on the
fraudulent idea that he is some kind of reform candidate. He is a shill
for the powerful interests that have driven us to war under false
pretenses, for the anti-tax crybabies driven exclusively by greed, for
the rabid reactionaries that would have us return to the Dark Ages
spiritually and morally and economically.

I'm no big fan of Obama, but I do feel he at least has a few priorities
set differently from those put forward by the Republicans over the
previous eight years, and I think there is at least the possibility that
such a shift in priorities could bring change in some measure.

I am fully disgusted with both parties and I think if people want to
talk serious bipartisanship we ought to be able to vote for a Paul and
Kucinich ticket. The extremes meet somewhere on the backside of the
circle of views, and those are the elements we need to bring into
balance. The so-called middle is nowhere to be found for real in the
present offerings, which are more of the same.

I wonder how long it'll be before somebody comes out of nowhere to run
for the Oval Orifice, using only the Internet for communcation with the
masses?

--
ha
Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Are you people talking about raising taxes? Sorry, but are you nuts?
It hurts my mouth to even say that! Do you live in the USA?  If you
do, I’d like to know where.  IF your taxes are not “high enough”, then
I need to move there for some relief!  Where we live, we are taxed
every time we take a *** and the sewage systems are still screwed
up.  And that is to say the VERY least!
Raising taxes isn’t going to do anything but give the government more
money to waste; put people out of business and out of work, and then
the government will give it to people who hate us and who wants to
destroy us.  It’s that plain.
People who know the value of money and know how to manage their money
correctly have money.  Even with the price of gas higher now than
ever, the people who are living within their means, watching and
managing their money are doing fine and not feeling the pain like the
folks not smart enough to put something away when stormy weather hits.
When the US becomes energy independent, and controls the flow of
illegal’s that enter, increases the strength and size of its military,
grows its own food, and stops sending money overseas to the mother f%?
kers that hate us, things WILL get better for all.  No pun intended,
but you can bank on that.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You sound like one of them "Isolationists". It's not going to happen
so your argument, right or wrong, is moot.

.