Upcoming US Elections

[enysse]

One of the reasons European citizens can live like they do is the social systems put in place for them. Those systems come at a very high cost to the working citizen and the government. In Germany the average income tax paid is nearly 35%. In exchange for those taxes you get good roads, medical insurance, college for your kids, and an economy that has had adapted to the costs. Compensation is much higher when employers aren't burdened with social expenses ie medical insurance. Not many Americans pay anything near 35% income taxes to subsidize such a system and our free market system isn't very conducive to making the adjustments required to support a European type social economy.

I think the Europeans have a rewarding system. I don't think it will ever be accepted in the USA.

 

[sestoppelman]

So only some people should get the vote, some of the time, on only some issues ?

If you read what I said its not that broad. Simply that issues of raising taxes on people without the same consquences for yourself is what I dont like. People without a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of should not be able to vote to raise OTHER PEOPLES PROPERTY TAXES. Its a fairly simple concept once you understand it.

 

[Wolverine67]

If you read what I said its not that broad. Simply that issues of raising taxes on people without the same consquences for yourself is what I dont like. People without a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of should not be able to vote to raise OTHER PEOPLES PROPERTY TAXES. Its a fairly simple concept once you understand it.

Sounds like having the horse to guard the sack of hay.....

 

[sestoppelman]

Sounds like having the horse to guard the sack of hay.....

Well thats basically it. I am all for an equal voice on matters of public policy etc, but when it comes to raising other peoples taxes, thats where I draw the line. It isnt fair to those who pay the taxes, for those that dont to have a say in how much tax someone else must pay when they dont pay anything. Its a fact that some 40 percent of Americans pay no Federal income tax due to low wages, deductions etc. Then our illustrious president runs around saying the the evil rich "have to pay their fair share"! The top earners in this country pay the vast majority of the taxes, while as I said the low earners pay nothing or next to it. But guess who takes the most from the system? Yep! Those who pay the least into it. I dont blame Obama for this problem, its been going on since before he was born. He is just adding to the problem. Since he took office more people have been getting food stamps (welfare) than ever before. Why anyone would want him for 4 more years is beyond my ability to comprehend. I would also say that the veterans of this country ( I am not one) did not fight and die for anything other than our Constitution and Freedom.

 

[Macs B]

Code4, not speaking for sest here, but I don't think that is what he was saying at all, his statment was somewhat tame in my mind.

Since you brought it up though. In the US you cannot vote if you are a felon (you loose that right) it was decided in the courts years ago. "I" feel that there are certain people in this country besides felon's who should also not have that right. #1 if you have been convicted of a drug charge (felony or not) you loose the right to vote. #2 if you are not a US citizen, you don't get to vote. #3 if you receive a welfare check (you loose your right to vote, until you find employment). These are only a few, but, whether you are a US citizen or not you should be able to see how allowing these people to vote, places candidates in charge who are going to cater to these folks and make it harder on the working class. It goes back to socialism again, you have the people busting their butts forced to support those who don't contribute to the society.

What happens when the people who are busting their a$$es every day get tired of supporting these people who don't want to take care of themselves??? Then they opt for the easy way out and you have more and more folks who are going to let the government take care of them. Then once the country can no longer take care of these people, the US becomes a third world country.

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

This is what the current "President" of the US is trying to do, if you don't understand, then sorry, we see it happening...


sest, I don't think we are going to turn into a pumpkin, would have already happened.

I was perfectly content just reading thru this thread until I got to your post.

All I can say is "Wow"! Let me see if I am following your logic. If I am a felon I loose my right to vote, got that. If I have been convicted of a drug crime of any type, I should loose my right to vote, got that. Finally if I am unemployed or collecting a welfare check I loose my right to vote, got that.

What if I get busted for abusing cough syrup as an 18 year old high school student? Vote or No Vote.
What if I am a stay at home Mom raising my kids and my family qualifies for assistance even though my husband works, Vote or no vote?.
What iabout people like my grand mother who never worked a day of her life because she didn't need to? Vote or no vote?
What if I pay twice the taxes you do? Shouldn't I get two votes?
What if I smoked dope in college but didn't inhale? Sorry Pres Clinton no vote for you.
What if I'm a starving artist wrestling out the last chapters of my great American novel? Vote or no vote?
Here's one of my favorites, how about no vote unless you honorably served your nations military for four years, that would reduce the pool by a few million.

Or better yet, how about if I fail to demonstrate a working knowledge of the US Constitution and the laws of our land, vote or no vote?

Everyone claims that the nation's founders were smarter than we give them credit for, and their intent was that the constitution would last throughout the test of time. Somehow or another they didn't see a need to take the vote away from American citizens. Why do you want to? You sir are a fool and you are demonstrating that by making comments such as the ones you make here.

 

[Wolverine67]

I see you point, but all of this people who are getting food stamps, I guess they dont do it because they like it, but because they need it. Are you willing to see starvation flurrish in US?

 

[sestoppelman]

I see you point, but all of this people who are getting food stamps, I guess they dont do it because they like it, but because they need it. Are you willing to see starvation flurrish in US?

If anyone is starving in America its their own fault. No one is talking about starving. If you were here you would see what I am talking about. Yes, some people actually need assistance from time to time. Many, many people take stamps, welfare etc forever because they can. They have more kids because they get more "free" money with more kids. Right now people can have up to 99 weeks of unemployment compensation. What is the incentive to really look for work when you can collect UC for 2 years? Recently there was a photojournalist standing outside a major city welfare office asking people going in and out what they thought about the whole thing. They love it. Several said they wanted "Obamamoney". And they expect it! Absolutely no pride in self whatsoever. Take all you can from the system and put nothing back. This is quite common now. Most of the so called poor people in this country are overweight, have two TV's and at least one car, DVD, video console, smokes, booze and pets (they eat too) so dont give me any baloney about "starvation flurrish" please.

 

[35bore]

I was perfectly content just reading thru this thread until I got to your post.

All I can say is "Wow"! Let me see if I am following your logic. If I am a felon I loose my right to vote, got that. If I have been convicted of a drug crime of any type, I should loose my right to vote, got that. Finally if I am unemployed or collecting a welfare check I loose my right to vote, got that.

What if I get busted for abusing cough syrup as an 18 year old high school student? Vote or No Vote.
What if I am a stay at home Mom raising my kids and my family qualifies for assistance even though my husband works, Vote or no vote?.
What iabout people like my grand mother who never worked a day of her life because she didn't need to? Vote or no vote?
What if I pay twice the taxes you do? Shouldn't I get two votes?
What if I smoked dope in college but didn't inhale? Sorry Pres Clinton no vote for you.
What if I'm a starving artist wrestling out the last chapters of my great American novel? Vote or no vote?
Here's one of my favorites, how about no vote unless you honorably served your nations military for four years, that would reduce the pool by a few million.

Or better yet, how about if I fail to demonstrate a working knowledge of the US Constitution and the laws of our land, vote or no vote?

Everyone claims that the nation's founders were smarter than we give them credit for, and their intent was that the constitution would last throughout the test of time. Somehow or another they didn't see a need to take the vote away from American citizens. Why do you want to? You sir are a fool and you are demonstrating that by making comments such as the ones you make here.

Your opinion is always welcome,

If you truly believe what you have posted, and Obama gets re-elected, please inform me ahead of time which bread line you plan on frequenting, I will come there with you and you can call me a fool there as well. Pretty strong term "fool" thanks.

 

[35bore]

I will try to lighten the mood with a "foolish joke" but a great example:

The $50 Lesson

Recently, while I was working in the flower beds in the front yard, my neighbors stopped to chat as they returned home from walking their dog.

During our friendly conversation, I asked their little girl what she wanted to be when she grows up.

She said she wanted to be President some day.

Both of her parents, liberal Democrats, were standing there, so I asked her, "If you were President what would be the first thing you would do?"

She replied... "I'd give food and houses to all the homeless people."

Her parents beamed with pride!

"Wow...what a worthy goal!" I said. "But you don't have to wait until you're President to do that!" I told her.

"What do you mean?" she replied.

So I told her, "You can come over to my house and mow the lawn, pull weeds, and trim my hedge, and I'll pay you $50. Then you can go over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out, and you can give him the $50 to use toward food and a new house."

She thought that over for a few seconds, then she looked me straight in the eye and asked, "Why doesn't the homeless guy come over and do the work, and you can just pay him the $50?"

If you don't understand my point then so be it, good luck to ya. Macs B, don't really like words being put in my mouth, but, serving in the military, heck that's not a bad idea, maybe make it a requirement for Presidency anyway.

 

[Macs B]

That's a great old joke, I get it.

Funny thing is that I'm a life long republican and a thirty year veteran of the US Army, although just recently retired. Voted against Obama in the last election and most likely will do so again. You see politics and careers have little to do with any of this, this is a question of citizenship.

The argument to strip the right to vote from certain citizens is offensive to me, and I honestly don't know why it isn't offensive to all people. You see this subject in the political forums on several websites and its the same argument every time, "Why do people who I don't feel are deserving have an equal voice to my own"? The reason is because you live in a country that can survive despite the best efforts of it's elected officials to derail it. We live in a country that needs the opinion of anyone willing to voice it. That was one of the fundamental principals of our founders, equal voice under the law. To begin a process of removing or limiting these most basic liberties is an erosion of our entire principal of government. We were founded on the principal that each man has a voice and a vote, and that it didn't matter who that man was, (despite historical arguments pertaining to suffrage, the two thirds rule, and slavery), no restrictions to those rights or requirements levied in order to exercise it can be tolerated.

If I offend by my use of the word fool then so be it, because the insinuation that one man has more right to a voice than any other is offensive to me. I wish you well. Good day to you sir.

 

[sestoppelman]

That's a great old joke, I get it.

Funny thing is that I'm a life long republican and a thirty year veteran of the US Army, although just recently retired. Voted against Obama in the last election and most likely will do so again. You see politics and careers have little to do with any of this, this is a question of citizenship.

The argument to strip the right to vote from certain citizens is offensive to me, and I honestly don't know why it isn't offensive to all people. You see this subject in the political forums on several websites and its the same argument every time, "Why do people who I don't feel are deserving have an equal voice to my own"? The reason is because you live in a country that can survive despite the best efforts of it's elected officials to derail it. We live in a country that needs the opinion of anyone willing to voice it. That was one of the fundamental principals of our founders, equal voice under the law. To begin a process of removing or limiting these most basic liberties is an erosion of our entire principal of government. We were founded on the principal that each man has a voice and a vote, and that it didn't matter who that man was, (despite historical arguments pertaining to suffrage, the two thirds rule, and slavery), no restrictions to those rights or requirements levied in order to exercise it can be tolerated.

If I offend by my use of the word fool then so be it, because the insinuation that one man has more right to a voice than any other is offensive to me. I wish you well. Good day to you sir.

Macs B, Not trying to be offensive here myself but I do have two questions. Is there any circumstance in which you feel the right to vote should be removed from a citizen or is it so sacrosanct that one cannot lose the right?
And while equal voice under the law sounds good, how is it equal, to my earlier point; for those with no skin in the game to be able to vote to raise other peoples taxes but not their own? Respectfully.

 

[Mike70560]

Macs,

While at times I can be contentious I try to live by three rules on a forum.

1) Never post on the Political Forum
2) Never post on the Political Forum
3) Never Post on the Political Forum

That being said there are things that I find offensive. One of them is seeing my tax dollars going to third and fourth generation welfare recipients who will never work. A doctor friend of mine told me a few days ago that 60-70% of the children he sees are on government assistance. I find it offensive that people are not responsible enough not to have children if they cannot afford to. Why should I pay for it? There was a time when people were responsible for their own actions. I find it offensive that low or no income people can receive cellular phones paid for by me. I find it offensive that I have to drug screen people to DOT regulations but I pay welfare to people who refuse to work and it is against their civil rights to take a drug screen. The list of abuse goes on.

There was a time that I felt if you are on welfare for more than two years you lost your right to vote.

But then we could get in to special interest and corporate abuses. They are plenty. These groups spend millions of dollars to make certain the "right" candidate is elected. No different than the fourth generation welfare recipient.

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

Ineptocracy_****(in-ep-toc?ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

For the record. I am the son of two high school graduates. I am a public school graduate without a college degree. I have never drawn any form of welfare, nor have I collected a day of unemployment in over 30 years of working.

And Macs thanks you for your service. It is greatly appreciated.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

One of the reasons European citizens can live like they do is the social systems put in place for them. Those systems come at a very high cost to the working citizen and the government. In Germany the average income tax paid is nearly 35%. In exchange for those taxes you get good roads, medical insurance, college for your kids, and an economy that has had adapted to the costs. Compensation is much higher when employers aren't burdened with social expenses ie medical insurance. Not many Americans pay anything near 35% income taxes to subsidize such a system and our free market system isn't very conducive to making the adjustments required to support a European type social economy.

I think the Europeans have a rewarding system. I don't think it will ever be accepted in the USA.

I think the Europeans have a rewarding system too, but as Macs points out, it comes at a cost. At this point if you believe our news channels, 50% of this country does not pay any income tax at all. Even somewhat modest incomes, or at least the level that one would think you'd need here in the U.S. to afford a trip to Africa get taxed quite severely in Germany. Even very mediocre salaries are taxed at 14%.

Take a look: Germany Tax Laws Tax System Germany Tax Rates 2012, WorldWide-Tax.com

Furthermore while most states have some sort of sales tax, we don't have a Federal sales tax akin to what I believe most Europeans pay in the form of VAT. Although we do pay lots of excise taxes for various things such as ammuntion, gasoline and toll roads.

Take another look: Germany V.A.T and other Taxes - The WorldWide-Tax.Com

And then there's medical care, which is probably the biggest threat to the long term economy of this country. What really is the reason(s) for the costs skyrocketing? I can't say what they all are, but what I am sure of is that the profit margins for health insurance companies have been running flat for a number of years at around 5%. Naturally if costs go up and they take in more money the profits will also grow, but they're growing at the same profit margin. So I'm not buying that. Perhaps the cost of "defensive medicine" and malpractice insurance would go a long way to providing health insurance for those that don't have it.

Again, read here: How Much Does Defensive Medicine Cost? One Study Says $46 Billion - Health Blog - WSJ

And finally defense spending. We here in the U.S. somehow assumed the role of security force for the world following WWII. To some degree I get that, but why it continues to this day I don't know. I'm for a strong defense. However when we're spending 6 times the amount of the second place country of China and significantly more than that then the rest of Europe, I'm inclined to believe things are out of balance.

U.S. Military Spending vs. the World, RealClearWorld - The Compass Blog


The problem as I see it when we compare Europeans to Americans is that many Americans want to have their cake and to eat it too. Europeans understand better than we do as a whole that you can't get something for nothing and it has to be paid for. President Obama would have us believe we just need the rich to pay their "fair" share however the hell he explains that very subjective term.

Even if we were to raise taxes per Obama's plan, we're still spending more than we would be taking in. It's an unsustainable path as Greece has proven and other's perhaps will too.


Dang it.....just when I thought I'd put this thread behind me I get sucked into it again!

 

[sestoppelman]

Phil, Dont forget that in this country the federal govt spends much more on domestic stuff than military, much more.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Phil, Dont forget that in this country the federal govt spends much more on domestic stuff than military, much more.

Not forgotten, but only so much time to post on the many sources of wasteful spending in this country and other disasters by our gov't. Social Security, USPS, Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac to name a few.

......gotta go do some reloading for that shoot coming up!

 

[Macs B]

Macs B, Not trying to be offensive here myself but I do have two questions. Is there any circumstance in which you feel the right to vote should be removed from a citizen or is it so sacrosanct that one cannot lose the right?
And while equal voice under the law sounds good, how is it equal, to my earlier point; for those with no skin in the game to be able to vote to raise other peoples taxes but not their own? Respectfully.

I can think of no social circumstance that would justify taking away a person's right to vote. By social circumstance I am addressing the question of property ownership, welfare recipient, etc etc. If you violate the laws of the land and lose your right to vote due to felony convictions, acts of rebellion etc as specified in the constitution, I absolutely support that.

Don't mistake my position, I don't necessarily like the distortions and problems within our system of government that so many of you have pointed out, but I'm not willing to sacrifice the constitution to change them. I believe in our constitution, and I believe it is a living breathing document that has changed over time for the better. The amendment process was designed for that very reason. The question of voting rights has been addressed through amendment to the constitution no less than four times, each and every time affirming the right of the citizens of the United to states to vote shall not be infringed or impeded by the Federal, State, or local government. (Amendments 15, 19, 24, and 26). Those amendments are no less important than the 2nd (right to bear arms) or the first (freedom of speech, religion, assembly). There is a process that exists and works to change our foundation of government. If you feel strongly about limiting an individual's rights then propose the amendment to your legislature and seek change through the process designed by our founders. Let the people decide who will have a voice and who will not.


"1) Never post on the Political Forum
2) Never post on the Political Forum
3) Never Post on the Political Forum" Damned good advice but what else would we do during lunch? Cheers!

 

[sestoppelman]

Macs, Thanks for coming back on this. Afraid we will have to agree to disagree just a bit over the voting on tax issues. While it would as you say require changing the law, extremely unlikely, I still dont agree that its OK for some people to vote to raise other peoples taxes without raising their own. I think most of us will agree that getting rid of Obama is job 1. This will be my last post on this thread. Thanks again Macs.

 

[RickB]

I can think of no social circumstance that would justify taking away a person's right to vote. By social circumstance I am addressing the question of property ownership, welfare recipient, etc etc. If you violate the laws of the land and lose your right to vote due to felony convictions, acts of rebellion etc as specified in the constitution, I absolutely support that.

Don't mistake my position, I don't necessarily like the distortions and problems within our system of government that so many of you have pointed out, but I'm not willing to sacrifice the constitution to change them. I believe in our constitution, and I believe it is a living breathing document that has changed over time for the better. The amendment process was designed for that very reason. The question of voting rights has been addressed through amendment to the constitution no less than four times, each and every time affirming the right of the citizens of the United to states to vote shall not be infringed or impeded by the Federal, State, or local government. (Amendments 15, 19, 24, and 26). Those amendments are no less important than the 2nd (right to bear arms) or the first (freedom of speech, religion, assembly). There is a process that exists and works to change our foundation of government. If you feel strongly about limiting an individual's rights then propose the amendment to your legislature and seek change through the process designed by our founders. Let the people decide who will have a voice and who will not.


"1) Never post on the Political Forum
2) Never post on the Political Forum
3) Never Post on the Political Forum" Damned good advice but what else would we do during lunch? Cheers!

17th amendment also.

I do agree with you Macs B that the constitution is a living doc. I feel the founders new there was stuff they couldn't possibly think of. That is why they allowed us to amend it. But also made it hard to do so. I disagree with the thought of using the surpreme court, or various other shady ways to circomevent the constitution.

 

[Buff-Buster]

Thanks to all that responded to this post. 78 posts and eight days later, It made for some very interesting reading!

 

[bashaw]

can we say Mozambique or Zimbabwe, no the communist's didn't come across borders with machetes and AK 47's but they have been infiltrating our elected offices and bureaucracies since the 60's we cant drill our own oil, cut our timber, mine for coal, and they are tightening rules on farmers everyday trying to cripple that industry. Obama does not like people like me that just want to be left alone and be responsible for themselves, if I fail or succeed at what I do thats all on me. I don't want any handouts but if I give to the mission that's my prerogative, the govt wants to steal my money to give to these drug addicts and welfare moms. I don't like seeing the U.S.A the way it is now, with 4 more years of obama I really think we're headed towards being another Mozambique of the 70's or Zim of today.