Barack wants your money

[HowardRoark]

Rather harping on the fairness thing, we need to emphasize that increasing taxes dampens the economy and harms everybody. We also need to emphasize that Obama's $250,000 threshhold for his redistribution scheme does NOT merely bring down the rich, but harms small business, the main job creating engine for the economy. We also need to emphasize that any business tax increase--which Obama's redistribution thing absolutely is, along with high corporate taxes--is passed along to consumers, harming the people he claims to seek to help. Furthermore, we need to emphasize the fact that these business taxes contribute severely to sending jobs overseas by making American companies at a competitive disadvantage.

So get off the fairness thing already. It plays right into the hand of Obama and his class warfare promoters.

That's what we are saying.

[texaspackerbacker]

Tex, your focus is correct, but it requires a bit of time to explain. I'd like McCain to make that argument - especially the idea that Obama wants to keep jobs in America, but is doing exactly the thing that will drive jobs away. If McCain can draw the parallel between what happened to jobs in Ohio and Michigan to Obama's plan for America (Obama will give us Michigan and Ohio nationwide), that might work. But I heard Rasmussen talking about the polling, and people are still choosing Obama, even those who understand Obama's tax proposals. 47% of Americans agree that the tax increase on those making 250K or more will be good for the economy. It will be very hard for McCain (who is terrible talking about the economy) to educate the American public in one debate, especially since 1) he is trying to compete with Obama on the entitlement front and 2) Obama is much better at sounding and appearing confident and authoritative on economic issues.

I think right now there is a very good chance we're going to get to see if Maxi and Bobble are right about re-energizing the conservatives with an Obama presidency, and a supermajority, fillibuster proof Democrat congress. Will an Obama presidency pull the country to the left, or will there be a strong pull back reaction? Should be a wild ride.

Howard, that may be what you're saying, but it sure seems to me that your real passion is limited to the "it ain't fair" rhetoric.

Aynrand, don't be so surprised at those Rasmussen figures. The way those 47% perceived it--and more importantly, the way the LEFTIST MAINSTREAM MEDIA is framing/spinning it--is SELF-INTEREST--Us against Them. And if the "Us" is people making less than $250,000--even with small business owners included, there are a helluva lot more of "us" than "Them". People need to be told--a lot more forcefully--the downside of tax increasing--even (maybe especially) of the "wealthy")--and I mean the downside for their own situations, not merely because "it ain't fair". And you guys--and probably most of McCain's people and much of the conservative hierarchy in general--are ill-equipped to do that, being either non-Keynesian or very unenthused Keynesian.

If politics is a game--and to a great extent it is, the Bad Guys are playing that game a lot better than the Good Guys--and of course, playing the game is a helluva lot easier when the OFFICIALS--the MEDIA, to continue the metaphor is all for the other side.

And this doesn't even address the concept that emphasizing the economy over the far more important issues, SECURITY AGAINST TERRORISM and MILITARY/DEFENSE and maintaining American dominance is a flawed way to attack an opponent that is so likely to literally flush our dominant position in the world and our prosperity at home down the toilet.

Aynrand, the idea that we would be better off in the long run LOSING and letting Obama JIMMY CARTER-IZE the country--as you seem to be talking about--has been around for a long time. The question is, will we even have a country left--will the country be so damaged by Obama and the left that we will be forever CHANGED--there's that ugly word again?

[mraynrand]

Aynrand, the idea that we would be better off in the long run LOSING and letting Obama JIMMY CARTER-IZE the country--as you seem to be talking about--has been around for a long time. The question is, will we even have a country left--will the country be so damaged by Obama and the left that we will be forever CHANGED--there's that ugly word again?

Maxi and Bobble want it to happen to usher in a strengthened, more conservative GOP. I think it's just as likely, if not more likely, that the GOP will see it as a message that they need to move even more to the left.

[texaspackerbacker]

Aynrand, the idea that we would be better off in the long run LOSING and letting Obama JIMMY CARTER-IZE the country--as you seem to be talking about--has been around for a long time. The question is, will we even have a country left--will the country be so damaged by Obama and the left that we will be forever CHANGED--there's that ugly word again?

Maxi and Bobble want it to happen to usher in a strengthened, more conservative GOP. I think it's just as likely, if not more likely, that the GOP will see it as a message that they need to move even more to the left.

If we lose, I suppose I will be chasing that band wagon down the road trying to jump on also.

When you combine the fact that we have (and will have more so) a horrendously left wing Congress--and the higher tax implications of that regardless of who wins for president--with the relative meaninglessness of many of the issues being discussed--education, health care, abortion, etc., and add in the fact that there's hardly a dimes worth of difference between McCain and Obama on the economy--other than tax policy, and you could easily make a case for letting Obama "Carter-ize" the country--screw things up royally, then hope for a dramatic movement toward goodness and conservativism.

The one issue that GLARINGLY IGNORES, however, is the STRONG PROSPECT of Obama allowing repeats of 9/11--damage to the country that will be difficult if not impossible to recover from.

The other flaw in the position of Maxie, Bobblehead, and others is two-fold:

First of all, Ronald Reagan, the Great Communicator, was UNIQUE to the extent that it is extremely unlikely we could ever find somebody who could totally defy the leftist propaganda of the media as Reagan did. Secondly, even if a clone of Reagan himself came along, the damned despicable elitist leftist media would NOT let down its guard again. They took Reagan too lightly, assuming the American people would choose the shit put out by the left over the pro-American rhetoric of Reagan. They won't make that mistake again. The impossible dream of suffering through 4 or 8 years of Obama, and then having a new rebirth of conservative dominance is just that ....... impossible. By that time, the leftist media will have literally canonized Obama and anointed his equally far left successor--unless, of course, the country is ruined by terrorist hits--and that's just too big a price to pay.

[Tarlam!]

Income Tax in Germany for a non-married person earning 250 K USD is 45%.

Just saying.

[Scott Campbell]

Income Tax in Germany for a non-married person earning 250 K USD is 45%.

Just saying.

That is seriously, seriously F'd up.

[texaspackerbacker]

Income Tax in Germany for a non-married person earning 250 K USD is 45%.

Just saying.

That is seriously, seriously F'd up.

That is seriously, the model that Obama is trying to follow.

[Tarlam!]

Income Tax in Germany for a non-married person earning 250 K USD is 45%.

Just saying.

That is seriously, seriously F'd up.

I believe it's higher in Denmark, but you'd have to ask Micheal to confirm.

[hoosier]

Income Tax in Germany for a non-married person earning 250 K USD is 45%.

Just saying.

That is seriously, seriously F'd up.

Does that mean Germany is not on the list of countries you'd consider moving to?

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Income Tax in Germany for a non-married person earning 250 K USD is 45%.

Just saying.

That is seriously, seriously F'd up.

Does that mean Germany is not on the list of countries you'd consider moving to?

They'll all move there..how can they not? Food, fun and da fuhrer!

[Partial]

Income Tax in Germany for a non-married person earning 250 K USD is 45%.

Just saying.

I work with a german guy who moved to Wisconsin, land of insane taxes, to get rid of the German taxes. Now I see why!!!

[mmmdk]

Income Tax in Germany for a non-married person earning 250 K USD is 45%.

Just saying.

I work with a german guy who moved to Wisconsin, land of insane taxes, to get rid of the German taxes. Now I see why!!!

Rather insane taxes than insane people with guns.

[mmmdk]

Income Tax in Germany for a non-married person earning 250 K USD is 45%.

Just saying.

That is seriously, seriously F'd up.

...u don't get out much do ya?

[Scott Campbell]

Income Tax in Germany for a non-married person earning 250 K USD is 45%.

Just saying.

That is seriously, seriously F'd up.

...u don't get out much do ya?

I travel pretty much every week. But not out of the US.

[mraynrand]

Income Tax in Germany for a non-married person earning 250 K USD is 45%.

Just saying.

I work with a german guy who moved to Wisconsin, land of insane taxes, to get rid of the German taxes. Now I see why!!!

Rather insane taxes than insane people with guns.

He agrees with you