Do Obama supporters really, truly

[Cindyluwho]

Where exactly are we involved in the governments of any european countries exactly?

Just off the top of my head, how about Ukraine and Belarus? Our government sticks our nose into their elections, critisizes their governments and do everything they can to get them to change to "our" way of thinking.

 

[Master Mason]

A nation as rich and powerful as America should have no working poor. I believe that if an American works hard he has a right to a living wage, a roof over his head, enough food to eat, and good health care should he get sick.

I'm glad that you believe that, however none of the above is a right. Who determines if somone is working hard? Also, who defines what a living wage is exactly, becuase it varries depending upon where you live. Also, what constitutes "enough" food to eat. Or "good" health care. Everything you have listed is subjective, and subjective is almost if not impossible to legislate.

Just off the top of my head, how about Ukraine and Belarus? Our government sticks our nose into their elections, critisizes their governments and do everything they can to get them to change to "our" way of thinking.

Cites please

 

[SeeVee]

Instead of taking what some left wing nut posted on a web site as the gosphel, do a little research yourself. The EITC was started in 1975 (under Nixon Correction - FORD) as a temporary measure to assist families to offset ss taxes. In 1978 (under Carter) it was made permanent. In 1986, Reagan continued it and declared that millions of "poor" families had been help as a result. It was expanded even more in 1993 and 1998

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=1000524

In my opinion, it was wrong from the beginning and gets "wronger" everytime it gets expanded. Just by virtue of the fact that it keep getting expanded is proof positive that it did not/does not work.

<crickets chirping>

 

[SeeVee]

<crickets chirping>

Crickets STILL chirping...

 

[djm99]

Instead of taking what some left wing nut posted on a web site as the gosphel, do a little research yourself. The EITC was started in 1975 (under Nixon Correction - FORD) as a temporary measure to assist families to offset ss taxes. In 1978 (under Carter) it was made permanent. In 1986, Reagan continued it and declared that millions of "poor" families had been help as a result. It was expanded even more in 1993 and 1998

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=1000524

In my opinion, it was wrong from the beginning and gets "wronger" everytime it gets expanded. Just by virtue of the fact that it keep getting expanded is proof positive that it did not/does not work.

You were correct - it was Ford that started this program - a REPUBLICAN president. If Republicans put into practice their campaign rhetoric, then the Republican control of the Congress for the last ten of 12 years should have resulted in at least a reduction of the EITC program, if not its outright elimination. Such has not been the case, however, for the program now costs more than the federal AFDC budget, and has even spread to the states. Seventeen states now offer tax credits for "working families" based on the federal EITC.

Like any other government program, the cost of the EITC has gone up every year. The maximum available payout has increased from a modest $400 in 1975 to a whopping $4,204 for 2003.

 

[JR6ooo4]

What about those that work just as hard, in a position that is not respected by the public and politicians. By that I mean those careers that are not compensated proportionately to the value added to society.

I do not mind the guy making millions (by selling caffeine drinks to teenagers) giving a little more of his profits to help pay teachers and law enforcement (etc) a little more respectable (read liveable) wage.

another example is the illegal price fixing by real estate agents. How many years were they paid 6% of the sale no matter how much or how little service they provided? Compared that to the fees for the service of guaranteeing the structural integrity of the home, or guaranteeing that the land you are buying actually exists. They receive maybe $300-500 for a typical home in my area.

When greed overcomes fairness, what do you suggest be done?

Mikeeee

 

[Sk8Leigh]

And now we're selfish if we don't want to have our taxes raised to give money to the poor.

 

[Mrs.Toad]

Instead of taking what some left wing nut posted on a web site as the gosphel, do a little research yourself. The EITC was started in 1975 (under Nixon Correction - FORD) as a temporary measure to assist families to offset ss taxes. In 1978 (under Carter) it was made permanent. In 1986, Reagan continued it and declared that millions of "poor" families had been help as a result. It was expanded even more in 1993 and 1998

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=1000524

In my opinion, it was wrong from the beginning and gets "wronger" everytime it gets expanded. Just by virtue of the fact that it keep getting expanded is proof positive that it did not/does not work.

I don't get this. Yea, she got the president wrong, but her point still stands. It started under a Republican president. Though it was made permanent under a Democratic president, it was later expanded under both Republican and Democratic presidents. Maybe the crickets were "chirping" because your post didn't really prove anything.

 

[nataliesdaddy]

Think it's okay to take money (increase taxes) from those more wealthy to give (decrease taxes or give tax credits) to people less wealthy?

This is just mind boggling to me, that anyone would agree with it.

Do these people really think it's okay?

What's the incentive to do better financially under the Obama plan, as your increase will be lessor so that others can "share your wealth"?

regardless of obama's give aways, or McCains give aways, or The current tax structure and give aways. I am actually for the first time in my life looking at other places for my family to grow and live. It has nothing to do with this election, ...Obama or McCain.... that isn't the issue. The issue has become for me that my wife's and my skilll sets look like they may be better rewarded elsewhere where people have greater respect for the training and effort that went into building our careeers. God, for my wife, in the medical profession ... it is as though with each passing year people treat her more and more as if her services are owned them.

 

[SeeVee]

I don't get this. Yea, she got the president wrong, but her point still stands. It started under a Republican president. Though it was made permanent under a Democratic president, it was later expanded under both Republican and Democratic presidents. Maybe the crickets were "chirping" because your post didn't really prove anything.

Because it is a left wing talking point. Everytime the discussion of EITC comes up, someone one the left likes to say that Reagan started it. (In fact, I heard it three times this wee- once on the dis.)

And like most "facts" that people "hear," they never bother to check them out.

 

[SeeVee]

You were correct - it was Ford that started this program - a REPUBLICAN president. If Republicans put into practice their campaign rhetoric, then the Republican control of the Congress for the last ten of 12 years should have resulted in at least a reduction of the EITC program, if not its outright elimination. Such has not been the case, however, for the program now costs more than the federal AFDC budget, and has even spread to the states. Seventeen states now offer tax credits for "working families" based on the federal EITC.

Like any other government program, the cost of the EITC has gone up every year. The maximum available payout has increased from a modest $400 in 1975 to a whopping $4,204 for 2003.

Since to me like you want to assume I subscribe to the republican platform. I dont. I despise all politicians on both sides of the aisle as I firmly believe they are only out for their own self interest.
And then you resort to the tried and true defeatist argument of pointing out bad behavior to support bad behavior.

My post speficially said that it was wrong at the beginning and was wrong all along the way.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

When my older son was 3 years old, I took him with me to go vote. He asked lots of questions. I tried to sum up the differences between Republicans and Democrats like this:

They both want to make the world a better place and to help people. Republicans think, in general, that you do so by letting people decide for themselves how to make the world a better place and by letting them spend their money however they choose. Democrats think that we should all agree on what needs to be done to make the world a better place and then they take some of your money to spend it on those improvements.

I thought that I had been pretty even handed, but my son was skeptical. He wanted to know what would happen if you didn't let the Democrats use your money. I explained that once we all decided it how much they should get and what they should do with it, everyone had to give them that money or they would go to jail. That didn't sit well with him.

The next day, he was at the zoo with his mother. She wanted to buy him a snowcone. When she got to the booth, she discovered that she had no cash. He immediately started crying a screaming that the Democrats had taken our money. He's hated them ever since.

Some people seem to be wired to believe in collective (even coercive) actions for the common good and others seem to be wired to believe in individualism. He's definitely in the latter camp.

 

[AndyLL]

Because it is a left wing talking point. Everytime the discussion of EITC comes up, someone one the left likes to say that Reagan started it. (In fact, I heard it three times this wee- once on the dis.)

And like most "facts" that people "hear," they never bother to check them out.

Then why don't you give us the facts?

1975 - Ford ( a republican) created it.
1986 - Reagan ( a republican ) expanded it
1990 - Bush I ( a republican ) raised it
1993 - Clinton raised it
2001 - Bush II ( a republican ) raised it.

Sounds like the socialist republicans are the major players in the EITC