I'm kind of amazed. I'll start out by stating (again) that I make less than 20k/year, by no means am I wealthy, and I've had plenty of bad luck. Context and a little background never hurts.
Basically, sacrifice to get insurance. Wealthy people work hard to get where they are, but why should a middle class citizen have to sacrifice more in his life because his job pays less even though his job might be much harder to do.
"porky88" wrote:
I'm wondering if I even need to comment here, or if I'm completely missing your point. Are you implying that it's not fair that a middle class citizen needs to sacrifice a higher percentage of his income than a wealthy person to get the same service? I fail to see how such an economy would function. Why not just completely redistribute wealth evenly so everyone has the same amount of money?
Not all wealthy people work hard to get where they are, just like not all non-wealthy people work hard to get where they are. Why should a middle class citizen have to sacrifice more to get what he wants? Because he makes less money. Life's not fair, you might not catch some breaks that other people take, but the government shouldn't be allowed to tell you how much money you should make and what you should do with it. Especially not until they get their own shit together.
You say don't get cable tv as an example and I say to the rich, don't buy your fancy cars or give out vacations as bonuses and instead use the money properly in your business. Play time can wait.
Obviously, people are living in houses they can't afford and people spend to much (tv as your example) but so does the rich. They waste as much money if not more than anyone else. Well, logically, they do waste more money because they have more of it to waste. Yes, they can create jobs, but they can also be careless with their expenses. No doubt that has occurred over the last decade.
"porky88" wrote:
Play time can wait until when? Use the money properly in your business? Who determines what is an appropriate use of funds, you, or someone that's gone to college for business and run a major company for decades? A government bureaucracy? Government's sure good at running a modest profit while driving long-term growth. <_>
Regardless, your point here seems to be that rich people waste money too. I agree completely. However, why are they being taxed at 5 times the rate I am? If I make 20 grand a year and spend 6,000 a year on things I don't NEED (which I did this year, gas on travel to see family not included), why can't someone that makes 20 million spend 6 million a year on things they don't need? Why is it's government's job to tell you how much money you should make, what you should spend it on, and what you should do with the money you're not taking home out of pocket? How much money did you spend this year on things you don't need?
There is no one sided victory. Everyone is responsible starting at the top and working it's way down.
The government will always spend money as well. It's easy to bring up the stupid programs that they're spending on, but America is never going to stop trying to advance it's self whether they do it through the means of research or military, which costs money. Every President has some sort of program.
"porky88" wrote:
The last program and deficit of this magnitude was called World War II, and at least that caused industrial production to explode. I understand that every year, government wastes money. It's what government does best, I understand completely. But you can't take a look at what Obama and Pelosi have managed to spend in one year and compare it to anybody in the last 60 years.
You tax people who can afford to pay em. It's common sense.
"porky88" wrote:
It's also common sense that you don't increase taxes on the people that create jobs when you have 10% unemployment, and tack a nearly 1 trillion healthcare bill on top of the largest deficit ever. Based on this and past comments, I think you also underestimate how much money you and other people that are lower/middle class waste on shit they don't need. Is it the time to cut taxes? No. But the complete wrong time to increase them.
Obama isn't Robin Hood or not the extent that some claim he is. He's a tax and spend liberal which is by no means a good thing either. He has a ton of programs, but take out all those programs, and the end result is still bad because no matter what, as I said above, America will be America and they'll attempt to continue to evolve. Nothing today is free. A spending freeze would be nice, but in reality, it'll never happen. Even Thomas Jefferson, who could be considered the father of small government, spent money specifically the Louisiana Purchase. He did succeed in reducing debt, but he did so because he halted the army and navy or that's one way to put it.
"porky88" wrote:
A spending freeze is too drastic. The federal government is too big of a ship to turn around that fast, and that's part of why this rapid expansion of the role of government is concerning me so much. The first step is to enact reasonable healthcare reform. Strip away anti-trust exemptions if you must, increase regulation if you must, but do what you can without significantly increasing your expenses. You can get results without spending trillions.