Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Click Here to Login

Reply
Old 03-25-2012, 02:57 AM  
Senior Member
 
Sideways's Avatar

Houston, Texas
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 980 | Kudos: +33
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldognewtrick

Mine to..they seem to never have a big enough tax base. Seems to me I remember that the revolution was because of taxes, wasn't it?
Sorry to disappoint you but nowhere in the Constitution does it mention anything about "taxation without representation". Just FYI.
__________________

__________________
"Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal. Never forget that everything the Founding Fathers did was not." Martin Luther King, Jr.
Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2012, 08:13 AM  
Senior Member
 
oldognewtrick's Avatar

Nashville, TN
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 493 | Kudos: +74
Our representation is part of the problem, they don't represent the average citizen, their loyalty lies with the special interest/ lobbyist groups. Didn't we have a little party in Boston about heavily taxed tea?
__________________

Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2012, 09:08 AM  
Senior Member
 
Sideways's Avatar

Houston, Texas
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 980 | Kudos: +33
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldognewtrick
Our representation is part of the problem, they don't represent the average citizen, their loyalty lies with the special interest/ lobbyist groups. Didn't we have a little party in Boston about heavily taxed tea?
Well, yes you are correct about Boston. But, I think maybe you are missing the point in this case. My point is that taxation without representation is a myth. There never has been any such thing. Does not and never has existed. Whatever representation you believe you have is simply appeasement, pacify the public. You are correct about lobbyist and special interest groups. Who has the money after all? Personally I would like to see lobbyist abolished and special interest groups banned from government at any level. I would also like to see a clause in the Constitution that grants representation. Not much chance of either of those happening though.
__________________
"Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal. Never forget that everything the Founding Fathers did was not." Martin Luther King, Jr.
Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2012, 10:14 PM  
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,892 | Kudos: +92
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedJeepXJ View Post
we would be well on the way to balanced budget if the republicans didn't cry and refuse to do anything unless the rich got to keep the bush tax cuts.............
Don't kid yourself, the democrats (and republicans) were nowhere near being on the way to a balanced budget (and still aren't).
__________________
I remember when power tools and small appliances had flexible cords.
Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2012, 07:46 AM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sideways View Post
Well, yes you are correct about Boston. But, I think maybe you are missing the point in this case. My point is that taxation without representation is a myth. There never has been any such thing. Does not and never has existed. Whatever representation you believe you have is simply appeasement, pacify the public. You are correct about lobbyist and special interest groups. Who has the money after all? Personally I would like to see lobbyist abolished and special interest groups banned from government at any level. I would also like to see a clause in the Constitution that grants representation. Not much chance of either of those happening though.
What would legitimate representation look like, and what is fundamentally different about the legitimate form you're speaking of and the form you observe to exist?
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 09:34 PM  
Senior Member

Bristol, Tennessee
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062 | Kudos: +48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie_T View Post
Don't kid yourself, the democrats (and republicans) were nowhere near being on the way to a balanced budget (and still aren't).
and yet reality says otherwise, don't you hate it how facts always work against you. Those bush tax cuts really paid for themselves.............. The democrats had it, if we had continued those policies we would have been better off debt wise.
__________________
Please help babies...... http://www.intactamerica.org/
Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2012, 11:40 PM  
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,892 | Kudos: +92
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedJeepXJ View Post
and yet reality says otherwise, don't you hate it how facts always work against you. Those bush tax cuts really paid for themselves.............. The democrats had it, if we had continued those policies we would have been better off debt wise.
The democrats claim they had it but it was smoke and mirrors as the debt rose during the Clinton years. It didn't rise much but it did rise, however we are talking about your claim which was for the current era after the Bush and Obama spending sprees . . .

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedJeepXJ View Post
we would be well on the way to balanced budget if the republicans didn't cry and refuse to do anything unless the rich got to keep the bush tax cuts.............
__________________
I remember when power tools and small appliances had flexible cords.
Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2012, 06:38 PM  
Senior Member

Bristol, Tennessee
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062 | Kudos: +48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie_T View Post
The democrats claim they had it but it was smoke and mirrors as the debt rose during the Clinton years. It didn't rise much but it did rise, however we are talking about your claim which was for the current era after the Bush and Obama spending sprees . . .

Quote:
it's not a democrats claim, it was according to the CBO above, it even says that yes the debt was increasing but it was slowing dramatically and ended with a surplus, so yes over the entire course the debt did increase but that was taking a heavy budget deficit created by a bush and reducing over his entire term. if the budget had been left as it was we would have continued lowering the deficit. Did you even look at that chart? understand it?

The republicans at that time said it was bad economic policy to not run a debt and the money was to be given back in tax cuts.
__________________
Please help babies...... http://www.intactamerica.org/
Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2012, 07:31 PM  
Senior Member
 
oldognewtrick's Avatar

Nashville, TN
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 493 | Kudos: +74
Gee, who was the Speaker of the House that pushed through Bill's balanced budget? And wasn't that a Republican controled congress he had to deal with?
Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 06:47 PM  
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,892 | Kudos: +92
I understand the chart, how about adding Obama's record to it!
__________________

__________________
I remember when power tools and small appliances had flexible cords.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Bookmark this Page!

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Suggested Threads

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.