MonroeTalks.com > Categories > Politics and Government > Divided America


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5   Go Down

Author Topic: Divided America  (Read 1579 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ducksoup

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8663
Divided America
« on: July 25, 2012, 01:30:16 PM »

I hear daily that we are divided more than ever before and wonder why, or if it is real. 

Currently, from the right there is expression of a deep non logical hatred for President Obama. Almost completely it is based on lies and false assertions and is just an emotional state not tied to reality.  I am not saying what he has or has not done, but generalities that are not true.  Take “he is more liberal than any other President” or ‘making us socialist.”  Which things has he done to do that?  I can guess only at Healthcare Reform.  Now, not agreeing with a program is valid, I am talking about the guttural hatred.  However, healthcare reform was a Republican origination plan, it was instituted by a Republican Governor in a state and that was where it started.  Filibustering and posturing made it even more of a Republican plan.  Yet, those on the right call it socialist and worse than ever.  How can it be?  It is mostly using the current insurance companies.  Look back to the Bush years when the Republican’s instituted the senior pharmacy plan that allowed little or no Democratic debate.   They just did it with NO WAY TO PAY FOR IT.  That little puppy put the cost on the government alone.  That was far more “socialist” than healthcare reform. 

The “remedy” that the right seems to propose as the cure to the divide is to elect RMoney and other Republicans.  Were we divided when Bush was President?  Yes, maybe to a lesser degree, but still very divided.  Were we divided when Clinton was President, yeah, almost as much as with Obama.  So, does the prospect of a RMoney presidency say that the divide will somehow go away?  No, it may lessen, but not go away.  What does that say though?  Outwardly it would seem that conservatives/Republicans are less willing to work with the other side.  But still the divide stays no matter what.  How is electing RMoney going to change anything other than whose side hates the President?

The stance of JBS comes to mind.  Sorry, I am not picking on you J, I am using the example.  He has promoted a flat tax plan for years.  The part where it goes bad is he cannot accept that it does not stay 100% intact his way.  He has agreement with a lot on parts, but for him it seems to have to be all or nothing.  One part is the elimination of the tax codes, take away all loopholes credits - the whole thing and just have a simple taxing.  I think I can say definitively that most, if not all, of us left right and center like that idea.  The ones that want that to stay are the very wealthy and big corporations that benefit from that mess.  Long ago J and I talked about this and the only thing we disagreed on was that I felt a progressing tax was still needed.  Basically his structure, eliminate all loopholes etc. and a simplified tax.  I like having even lower wage workers paying a small percent, maybe only 1% but having a hand in the pie.  I also think that those that make millions benefit more from what the government does and should shoulder more of the burden.  It wasn’t a lot of a progression either.  Maybe something like 15, 20, 25 or something.   The main point is, we were really close.  A lot of his idea is good and would be great.  Yet, he can’t allow that anyone disagrees with even a part.  My way or the highway has got to stop.  I am not directing that at JBS but everyone.

For most things I look to history and track record for whether it will work or might.  Like tax cuts for the rich.  Trickle down economics has proven itself as a bad thing.  It supposedly would increase jobs and pay and did not do that and it can even be argued that it made things worse.  Aside from the fact that the Laffer curve would assign a overall taxation at around 70% for it to work.  With taxing far far below that, it is a non starter. 

The opposite for a stagnant economy is stimulus, which has shown to work many times in the past.  Even Bush and the R’s used it.  While I still think some stimulus would help, I am beginning to think it is not going to be good in the long run.  The problem, as I see it, is that stimulus works great in a cyclical downturn.  It has been used hundreds or thousands of times and has shown to work.  However, the question is... are we cyclical?  Is this just a down trough in an up or down economy, or is this a permanent state?  Did we just lose several million or more jobs PERMANENTLY?  Did wages fall permanently?  Did the quality of jobs reduce to lesser quality permanently? 

There has been a progression from better wage jobs to service type jobs with far less pay for decades.  The better paying jobs were exported and low paying jobs took up the slack.  I see no plan left or right to try to increase better paying jobs again.

Business is based on making a profit.  They cut costs or spending to help make profit.  However, the biggest spending they can cut is wages.  So, while given big tax cuts, they still reduce spending but cutting labor costs either with wages or amount employed.  Then those people have less to spend on those companies so they have to cut wages and employee spending to increase profit (while still getting nice tax cuts for themselves).   As long as this country is all about profit and not the people that make it, then the downward spiral will continue.

Anyone notice that spending by people is down and yet the cost of living still goes up?  People are being paid less but costs still rise.  Gas consumption is way down, but gas prices are still very high.  The law of supply/demand says when demand goes down, then prices fall, yet they don’t.  Why?

With the majority of the country still hurting, why are prices still rising when demand is down?  Why isn’t there the required deflation that should exist when demand is down?  The answer is all of that big money in the commodities markets gambling to make money and artificially inflating prices.

Anyway, I got off track as usual.  My point is that we are divided because of petty stupid junk and not what is real.  The talking heads and idiots with microphones stir the pot and create enmity on purpose.  Frankly, it is so see through it is amazing, and yet it still goes on.

Look to what ISN’T an option, what ISN’T discussed.  Just like with the tax codes, why ISN’T wiping out the mess an option?   Why isn’t that debated?  I mean by those that actually can do it.  Why was nothing done to prevent big banks and Wall Street from doing exactly what they did to create the collapse?  They still are doing the same things.  They are immoral and wrong, but dang it they are legal so full steam ahead.  Why is that off the table?  Why are dropping wages not even whispered about?  Why are rising prices not considered?  Why is there no mention of the broken commodities markets that no longer set prices, but inflate them for gambling winnings?  I suppose too, why in the world is education a bad thing? 

So, when you complain about the country being divided, don’t look to the leaders in Washington, or the State, look to yourself.  Look at how YOU are creating the divide.

How can we work together instead of help those that keep us divided?
Logged
After one taste, you'll duck soup the rest of your life ... Groucho Marx.

Frenchfry

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 27194
Re: Divided America
« Reply #1 on: July 25, 2012, 02:35:19 PM »

A few things are skewing the perception of Obama....First, the obstructionist righties adopted the make everything worse for political gain agenda with the ultimate goal of placing blame on Obama.
Second, many disapprove of the affordable healthcare act primarily because of the mandate....which is a Republican creation.

I've talked to many people that are disappointed with Obama because he became a centrist.

And to that point I say the other candidate is far worse.

The partisan divide will increase if Romney wins...may even worsen.

Moving on to the taxation part...a flat tax would only allow the rich to get richer......progressive taxation is absolutely required...with those at the top that paying more.

Advocating loophole elimination may sound nice but what that really means is eliminating tax credits and deductions.....and those are needed to incentivize behavior so they'll never go away...nor should they...unless they're actual loopholes that allows the rich to escape taxation.
Taxes on unearned income ought to be higher than earned income as well.
And I'd like to see sky high taxes on firearms....especially ammo.

As for the supply/demand thing....perhaps the decline in the value of our currency plays a role.
Logged
WARNING! Reading Republican/Conservative/Tea Party comments will lower your intelligence quotient!

The new motto of the obstructionist Republican Party/Conservative-right/Tea Party...refuse to legislate, just investigate.

jbs49238

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5201
Re: Divided America
« Reply #2 on: July 25, 2012, 03:15:15 PM »

Well I have advocated for a flat RATE tax which is much different than the flat tax that others claim I am looking for.

A flat rate setup is by default a progressive tax system.  It is as simple as understanding that the more you make the more you pay, both in dollars and as a percentage of your income.  The rate is the same on ALL income regardless of how it is earned, and there is no need for the left's precious credits and deductions because the threshold is high enough to accomodate a persons needs prior to being subject to any taxation.

I do agree with duck that much of what causes our divide politically is purely noise created as a diversion, however where we mildly disagree, is that I believe the noise is mostly coordinated (why it is almost "by the playbook") between the two parties to keep us bickering at aggrivated with each other so they can continue their work of siphoning dollars into their and their rich handlers pockets.

I also agree with duck that our commodities are being driven not by demand but by greed, this has played a major role in slowing the economic recovery because consumers just do not have the dollars to spend outside of the needs, the pries of which are mostly DIRECTLY tied to commodities.  Once the value of commodities moved from being dictated on the demand of consumption (which they should be) to being valued based on the demand of speculation, is when we lost our "free market system" IMHO.

Our monetary system is a mess and the Federal Reserve is out of control, on that Ron Paul is correct.  His solution however is not correct.  You cannot have a country of our size and population have a currency that is based on a finite material, that again is traded as a greed based economy.  It cannot and will not work.
Logged

Frenchfry

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 27194
Re: Divided America
« Reply #3 on: July 25, 2012, 03:35:02 PM »

Whether it's flat rate or a flat tax....it cannot be progressive.

Progressive taxation is entirely different.

LOL @ trying to pin credits and deductions on the left.

And look who sides with Ron Paul on auditing the Fed:

Dennis Kucinich "We Have Banks Getting Uncalculated Amounts Of Money From The Federal Reserve!"
Logged
WARNING! Reading Republican/Conservative/Tea Party comments will lower your intelligence quotient!

The new motto of the obstructionist Republican Party/Conservative-right/Tea Party...refuse to legislate, just investigate.

Monrover

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 832
Re: Divided America
« Reply #4 on: July 25, 2012, 03:52:26 PM »

Whether it's flat rate or a flat tax....it cannot be progressive.

Progressive taxation is entirely different.

LOL @ trying to pin credits and deductions on the left.

And look who sides with Ron Paul on auditing the Fed:

Dennis Kucinich "We Have Banks Getting Uncalculated Amounts Of Money From The Federal Reserve!"

^^ Dennis is a real fiscal powerhouse...











Afterall, he WAS mayor of Cleveland when it defaulted and declared bankruptcy.
Logged
Never argue with an idiot.
They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

“A government with the policy to rob Peter to pay Paul can be assured of the support of Paul”

jbs49238

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5201
Re: Divided America
« Reply #5 on: July 25, 2012, 04:13:04 PM »

Whether it's flat rate or a flat tax....it cannot be progressive.

Progressive taxation is entirely different.

LOL @ trying to pin credits and deductions on the left.


Well when you are wrong you are wrong, and here... you are wrong.

A flat rate tax is clearly progressive both in dollar amount and percentage, you can play with the words all you want, math does not lie.  Fry your version of "progression" is just redistribution.  You call it progressive, I call it socialist.  That is right, our current tax system as it stands is grounded in a socialist model.  A flat tax rate system, though also somewhat socialist, is at least fair and puts everyone on EQUAL footing.

The battle cry of those opposed to a flat rate system is always about how the lower income people will lose their credits.  That is why you shouldn't have to pay on anything up to a certain amount (which would cover the credits and deductions, etc, etc).  The reason people like Fry don't favor a flat rate tax system is because they know that instead of using the system to try and push all the taxation on "the rich" they would actually have to pay in more than THEY THINK THEY SHOULD.  Everyone wants to be a part of the American dream, just not everyone wants to pay for it I guess.

PS: I admire anyone who agrees we need to audit the FED, regardless of their political affiliation.  I guess my message is... nice try.
Logged

Frenchfry

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 27194
Re: Divided America
« Reply #6 on: July 25, 2012, 04:50:51 PM »

Well when you are wrong you are wrong, and here... you are wrong.

A flat rate tax is clearly progressive both in dollar amount and percentage, you can play with the words all you want, math does not lie.  Fry your version of "progression" is just redistribution.  You call it progressive, I call it socialist.  That is right, our current tax system as it stands is grounded in a socialist model.  A flat tax rate system, though also somewhat socialist, is at least fair and puts everyone on EQUAL footing.

The battle cry of those opposed to a flat rate system is always about how the lower income people will lose their credits.  That is why you shouldn't have to pay on anything up to a certain amount (which would cover the credits and deductions, etc, etc).  The reason people like Fry don't favor a flat rate tax system is because they know that instead of using the system to try and push all the taxation on "the rich" they would actually have to pay in more than THEY THINK THEY SHOULD.  Everyone wants to be a part of the American dream, just not everyone wants to pay for it I guess.

PS: I admire anyone who agrees we need to audit the FED, regardless of their political affiliation.  I guess my message is... nice try.
Clearly you were absent or not paying attention when your school taught about Socialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

A progressive tax is a tax by which the tax rate increases as the taxable base amount increases.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax


In a study published in 2011, which included the use of data from 54 countries, the authors stated, "our results showed that progressive taxation was positively associated with the subjective well-being of nations", later adding, "we found that the association between more-progressive taxation and higher levels of subjective well-being was mediated by citizens’ satisfaction with public goods, such as education and public transportation."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax
Logged
WARNING! Reading Republican/Conservative/Tea Party comments will lower your intelligence quotient!

The new motto of the obstructionist Republican Party/Conservative-right/Tea Party...refuse to legislate, just investigate.

ducksoup

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8663
Re: Divided America
« Reply #7 on: July 25, 2012, 05:41:00 PM »

Flanders, I am sorry you feel that way.  I was not trying to create divide but show how that many things we are so close on and the demand to be 100% my way gets in the way.  As per JBS’s part.  You may not get that we used to talk, really talk, not argue.  We can agree on most and each want the fine tuning a little different.  Would JBS be okay with 98% or me 98% yeah. 

What it seems you failed to see is that I said BOTH sides are a fail on economic improvement.  Supply side trickle down DOES NOT WORK, but the opposite of stimulus isn’t going to work either if we are in a systemic down instead of a down cycle.  If we have permanently lost millions of jobs and many of the remaining are low paying, there is no amount of stimulus that will help that.  It means a new idea needs to happen, one that does not do either.  Frankly, one that cares about the working man instead of JUST the ones at the top.

I disagree with FF about the usefulness of tax credits etc.  Once upon a time they did that, but the tax code is such a huge mess of credits and loopholes that are designed as tax dodges and not doing any good.  I think tossing the whole thing lock stock and barrel is better.  Some would be hurtful, like not being able to spread a loss, but oh well. 

And JBS nailed it.

Quote
I do agree with duck that much of what causes our divide politically is purely noise created as a diversion, however where we mildly disagree, is that I believe the noise is mostly coordinated (why it is almost "by the playbook") between the two parties to keep us bickering at aggrivated with each other so they can continue their work of siphoning dollars into their and their rich handlers pockets.


I also agree that there seems to be far too much coordination to the manipulations.  Maybe that is some kind of personal paranoia but it really does seem to be a concerted coordinated plan.  It does seem to me that the ones that OWN the politicians of both parties are pulling OUR strings.
Logged
After one taste, you'll duck soup the rest of your life ... Groucho Marx.

jbs49238

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5201
Re: Divided America
« Reply #8 on: July 25, 2012, 05:46:47 PM »

Even by your wiki def.  Explain how a flat rate tax is not progressive.  You can't because it is.  It just isn't "progressive" enough to keep you from paying "your fair share" which is why you don't like it.

If you don't think there are Socilaist aspects to our Republic and that our taxes pay for those things, then I cannot help you.
Logged

jbs49238

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5201
Re: Divided America
« Reply #9 on: July 25, 2012, 05:47:20 PM »

For the record... I do not feel that you "called me out" duck.  Just pointed out a point of discussion we have had in the past.
Logged

Flanders

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2172
Re: Divided America
« Reply #10 on: July 25, 2012, 07:09:29 PM »

Sorry duck, a bit too quick to judge..
Logged

ducksoup

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8663
Re: Divided America
« Reply #11 on: July 25, 2012, 08:17:17 PM »

Sorry duck, a bit too quick to judge..
Thanks
Logged
After one taste, you'll duck soup the rest of your life ... Groucho Marx.

ducksoup

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8663
Re: Divided America
« Reply #12 on: July 25, 2012, 08:18:40 PM »

Well when you are wrong you are wrong, and here... you are wrong.

A flat rate tax is clearly progressive both in dollar amount and percentage, you can play with the words all you want, math does not lie.  Fry your version of "progression" is just redistribution.  You call it progressive, I call it socialist.  That is right, our current tax system as it stands is grounded in a socialist model.  A flat tax rate system, though also somewhat socialist, is at least fair and puts everyone on EQUAL footing.

The battle cry of those opposed to a flat rate system is always about how the lower income people will lose their credits.  That is why you shouldn't have to pay on anything up to a certain amount (which would cover the credits and deductions, etc, etc).  The reason people like Fry don't favor a flat rate tax system is because they know that instead of using the system to try and push all the taxation on "the rich" they would actually have to pay in more than THEY THINK THEY SHOULD.  Everyone wants to be a part of the American dream, just not everyone wants to pay for it I guess.

PS: I admire anyone who agrees we need to audit the FED, regardless of their political affiliation.  I guess my message is... nice try.


I want to take your one sentence, maybe it will go out of context, but I like it as a start.

“Everyone wants to be a part of the American dream, just not everyone wants to pay for it I guess.”  Grammar Nazi says semicolon not comma, LOL.

What American Dream.  Honestly can anyone get there anymore?  I see where wages have been stagnant or dropping for decades, the share of wealth of the average worker has gone down.  It isn’t even a good gamble to get a college degree because even that does not mean you can attain the American dream.  For decades the wealth has gone more and more to the top and less and less to the working people.  That is one reason that the government has stepped in and helped the workers with food stamps etc. 

We have tried supply side economics, giving the wealthy a bigger and bigger share and they have cut workers, reduced wages and exported good jobs.  Part of that wealth was created by reducing their spending in one area, wages.  That means for the wealthy to get a bigger share you must get less.   If we return to demand side policies, giving the vast majority better wages and conditions, then spending goes up because - gosh - people would have some to spend and not need social services like food stamps.  Yeah, that is just my opinion, but it is based on facts.  The wealthy have gotten far richer in comparison to the rest of the people.  Wages HAVE gone down.  Good jobs have been exported.  The remaining jobs are often low wage jobs, and often part time.  If the commodities were not being artificially inflated then maybe with deflation then the lower wages would again be sufficient (probably not, but closer).  And before someone assigns what I mean... I do not mean I want a 90% tax on the wealthy.  I want what I said, wages that the majority of workers can live on, and some attain the American dream.  I do not know how to accomplish it.  I see the problem but no easy solution.  Mostly just a mindset change from “the rich are gods” to the working people deserve living wages.

On the part of "not wanting to pay for it"  See, the wealthy are keeping a bigger share by not wanting to pay the wages for it.
Logged
After one taste, you'll duck soup the rest of your life ... Groucho Marx.

Mike Ingels

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2882
    • Expatriate Monroe
Re: Divided America
« Reply #13 on: July 25, 2012, 11:48:27 PM »

There used to be a lot more of a fudge factor in the system.  Redistricting was not the absolute science that it is today, so you could have moderate candidates and moderates had something to vote for.  Now, you kind of have to take sides.

And it doesn't stop with redistricting.  The parties pick winners with budget cuts, tax policy etc.  So, a person might be a moderate politically, but the other party raises their taxes, or cuts their favorite program and they are pushed harder into one or the other side.

And then we see things like the voter id laws which are, essentially, attempts to suppress certain groups of voters.  If you are a member of one of those groups, you probably are now more extreme - if you can vote - because the other side tried to write you out of the equation.

And, of course, we see the parties using extreme and often nonsensical ballot initiatives and constitutional amendments to try and drive up voter turnout and enthusiasm among certain groups.  These are never meant to keep voters moderate and thinking logically.  They are meant to encite emotion and get people to the polls.

So, I think that it is as difficult today to keep friends from different parties than it has ever been.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2012, 12:04:32 AM by Mike Ingels »
Logged
The world is basically good.

jbs49238

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5201
Re: Divided America
« Reply #14 on: July 26, 2012, 02:07:39 AM »

There used to be a lot more of a fudge factor in the system.  Redistricting was not the absolute science that it is today, so you could have moderate candidates and moderates had something to vote for.  Now, you kind of have to take sides.

And it doesn't stop with redistricting.  The parties pick winners with budget cuts, tax policy etc.  So, a person might be a moderate politically, but the other party raises their taxes, or cuts their favorite program and they are pushed harder into one or the other side.

And then we see things like the voter id laws which are, essentially, attempts to suppress certain groups of voters.  If you are a member of one of those groups, you probably are now more extreme - if you can vote - because the other side tried to write you out of the equation.

And, of course, we see the parties using extreme and often nonsensical ballot initiatives and constitutional amendments to try and drive up voter turnout and enthusiasm among certain groups.  These are never meant to keep voters moderate and thinking logically.  They are meant to encite emotion and get people to the polls.

So, I think that it is as difficult today to keep friends from different parties than it has ever been.

So in two thoughts you are CRYSTAL CLEAR on the REAL PROBLEM, then in the middle you sandwich in a piece of complete Democrat BS.

You understand the problem yet continue to bring up issues of and are admittedly completely bought into one half of the problem.

I guess the solution is more painful than the problem then?  The majority of America agrees every time they "vote".
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5   Go Up