Politics for dummies

[mr1010]

BTW, Thes, my mother is very conservative rich Long Islander and my brother and sister are conservative. I am different from all of them, except for my wife who is like me and my children who are also like me.

So we can be different than our upbringings.

But I never hate people. I don't like conservative politics, but I don't hate the people who are conservative. They can be the nicest people! I do dislike conservative politicians just as you dislike liberal ones. And I am not sure I like Hillary. Honestly she is too moderate and not so honest. I wanted my son Ben's candidate Martin O'Malley a moderate but sensible progressive.

And not all liberals want to raise your taxes. I don't! Just on those who have benefitted disproportionally under the tax cuts. And it won't hurt the economy because what will they do buy less yachts or tank their businesses because they are mad?

I consider myself a sensible liberal. I am not repeat not a socialist. I believe strongly in  capitalism, but fair capitalism. And help those in need. That is being a good person. If someone falls down in front of me and I am rushing to catch a train, do I ignore her? If someone attacks someone on a subway do I stay out of it not help. Well, some people in our society have fallen and they can't get up. Give them a hand, lift them up, get them help. Then they we will help themselves! That is my philosophy. Not handouts, a helping hand up! That is all!

I hope you still think well of me Thes. I do of you. You have to forget the politics for a moment and see the person I am. I want to help people! Keep the politics in context with who I am. I rejected my selfish parents and strived to find my own way with my own look on life. My mother does respect me, doesn't agree with me, but we talk every single week of my life! The politics is only one small part of our souls.

[Thestarider]

Oh my gosh 1010 Clinton's boom was just the internet revolution, and then subsequent bubble that burst during Bush's first term.. that is all 1010, that was boom that you speak of made his presidency.

and please do not talk about deficit spending OK.

My family became quite well off during the 80's, and not because of big oil, but just the exact opposite. My father was a wildcatter, the policy reversal of deregulation versus regulation of the Hugoton Natural Gas field, allowed him to now purchase leases on the mineral tights at a competitive price against the big oil companies, therefore allowed him to drill wells we he could have never before.

1010, I don't think of you any differently we just have different political views. that is all.

[Thestarider]

1010, we are no different in how we feel about humanity, I am a moderate as well. I have had 11 boarders in my home since the passing of my wife, all of them for counselling, for either drug abuse or alcohol abuse. I have tried to give them the path to freedom from bounds of abuse. I helped to get them gameful employment, and after a period sent them off succeed on their own. With pretty good success rate that I am very proud of, only two have fallen out of the 11. 

I have my views, and don't care what political party you are affiliated with, I care about people. I hope maybe this helps you understand the mid western republicans a little better.

[Maturin]

I'd be very interested to read your thoughts, @Thestarider, about how you think modern republicans, from Bush, Cheney and Wolfowitz onwards through Palin and the Tea Party to Trump and Cruz, differ from Regan's republican party.

[Foamy T. Squirrel]

There seems to be a huge misunderstanding of what constitutes liberals vs conservatives, and Right vs Left. These concepts are relative, and dependent upon times and the actual cultures in which they occur. There is also a difference between types of liberalism and conservatism: it can be political, financial, religious, and/or social, depending upon the views of an individual, and often these are mixed. Bush, for example, was a religious conservative, but a political and financial liberal. Palin is a flaming religious "conservative," which can make someone a political "liberal" immediately in my books.

Reagan was at heart a Goldwater conservative: but he was a operating in a huge political morass known as the Federal Government. The heart of Goldwater conservatism is based on the intent of the founders: The purpose of the Government is to maximize the freedom of the individuals as much as practically possible. Most Goldwater conservatives I know are now considered Libertarians, not big-government Democrats or Republicans.

The Tea Party is generally composed of an odd mix of Libertarians and Evangelicals who worry that their rights are being eroded. It's an odd mix because Evangelicals don't believe in gay marriage; Libertarians don't think that the Almighty government on any level has any right to tell us with whom we can sign a civil domestic contract.

Trump is clearly a political and financial liberal. That's why Buckley/Goldwater conservative magazines don't support him. Read publications such as Reason, Weekly Standard, and National Review, and you'll see why they dislike him.

Goldwater conservatism is essentially based on the work of the Founding Fathers, who, in their time, were considered "liberals" whilst the English monarchy was considered "conservative." Things change. Even Goering considered his political party to be "Leftists" (along with their International Socialist enemies), and Weimar Republicans were considered "Moderates" and the German Kaiser's aristocracy were considered "Conservative."

It is important to avoid buzz words unless they are strictly defined in their context, and this will differ between all of us. This is why this thread looks like assorted tin cans and vomited macaroni.

I'm a registered Libertarian, but not from the pot smoking branch of the party; but if this political election crap keeps going on, I may need to start toking just so my head doesn't explode.

Thank you, and have a nice day.

 

 

[mr1010]

Thes, you see I figured that about you. I always felt you were a person that cared about people! That is so impressive, you put your money where your mouth is! I cannot say I have done as much as you. 

I am happy that you are who you are. And you are opening my eyes on mid western Republicans. I never knew one.

I think we could actually discuss our views more and learn from each other. You are actually not an idealogue and have nuanced views. I believe I do also.

I am actually sick of politics honestly. And I do not think any of the people running for office still are worthy of the former great Presidents.

Our political system is broken and sucks!

I mean how many Presidents have been great really?

You make a good point about the internet bubble during Clinton's years.

I actually sense that we are not as different politically as we think. We both believe in helping people, giving them a leg up, then letting them fly on their own. We both brought up our children to learn respect and self reliance. We both believe in a strong defense and in America's role as the leader of the free world. We may differ on the strategies we want to take to accomplish our same goals and which leaders we want to do that. 

I have one question, Thes, how are you on social things like guns, abortion, women's rights, first amendment, etc.?

I am strong for right to choose in first two trimesters, though I would like more adoptions and discouragement of abortion and use of things like ru 486 early on so that the fetus in not formed much when abortion takes place. And always health of mother and rape and incest. And contraception will avoid abortions. Let it be free and readily available.

As to guns, I stated my views. For allowing a handgun in the home for self defense and a business owner in his shop and if he carries money or valuables, but against otherwise. Of course, hunting and rifle ranges should be allowed. Just rent the guns from the rifle range place or hunting preserve. And no assault rifles or semi-automatics allowed! They are weapons of war! They kill cops and could be used to attack the government and kill many civilians.

As to women's rights, I am gung ho for full women's equality. I supported the equal rights amendment and support equal pay for  women.  I have a very strong wife and daughter and I will go to bat for them any day! Don't call women and girls sluts because they want to enjoy sex the same as men! I am and was fully in favor of gay's rights.

As for the first amendment, I am actually less liberal. I believe in Canada's hate speech law. We shouldn't have the right to publicly use hate speech against groups. And names do hurt, not just sticks and stones. Of course I am for political speech and dissent.

I am actually for the death penalty in some cases. My whole family is against me there. I am tough against criminals, feel that we are not tough enough against hard core criminals and when I hear about a horrible crime I want to personally torture and kill the bad guys! My wife is horrified by that. Especailly terrorists!

On the other hand, I feel that drug abusers are victims of bad drug dealers and that they should be helped and not incarcerated (as long as they didn't rob someone or hurt some one). I am against going after victim less crimes like prostitution.

I don't  like the way juries acquit people that are so obviously guilty. 

I could go on. So actually you can see that I am a mixed bag, very nuanced. I also believe in being practical and in thinking outside the box. I am not much for  convention,  more for common sense.

[mr1010]

Foamy, I like your post. If you read my post after yours, you will see that I am very nuanced in my look at politics.

I am not a liberatrian but I don't always  like bureaucrats or government.

And none of the current people running for President are really good enough. 

I will vote Democratic, but I don't think anything will change.

[ww_watcher]

What do you folks think about eliminating the income tax and establishing a strict consumer tax?

The idea is, if you buy a Lear jet you pay a one-time tax according to it's value, but you'll also pay a tax every time you feed the beast. There will be no depreciation factor for tax breaks. If you feel your ride is getting old, you have a choice of continuing the less expensive maintenance, and respective tax, or buying a new one, which will be taxed according to its value. For those of us who can't or don't want to spend our money that way we pay a substantially lower tax on that Toyota Camry. Repairs on your consumer items will also have a tax affixed according to their value. So that Lear Jet owner will have to pay for that luxury. We would then be able to eliminate the IRS because they would be rendered unnecessary. Companies will still need accountants to keep the books and pay the taxes on the company jet. Yes a lot of IRS employees would have to find other jobs but since there is no income tax you can now open up that lemonade stand you've always wanted and don't have to pay that business tax; only a one-time tax on the equipment you purchase and the subsequent tax on its maintenance. Any business whose work force goes overseas pays a huge tax and that will encourage those businesses to keep their workforce local. Yes, your internet and cell phone bill will go up a bit but you will still have that 33% of your income you pay out now, still in your pocket. the more frugal you live, the less tax you pay out of your pocket. I am not sure about import tax because, example, the Japanese have forced the american car makers to take a closer look at the quality and value of their work. Competition is good. 

Keep in mind that going out to eat is taxable since prepared food is a consumer item. Groceries may not be taxable but cigarettes and alcohol definitely are...unless you homebrew (just kidding). 

Perhaps I haven't thought of everything but I believe this arrangememt will prove less expensive to operate within so we will have more of our hard-earned paycheck to use as we see fit. I would also like to see the Federal Reserve abolished along with interest on loans. I don't use a credit card so I am already half-way there.

[StnCld316]

1 minute ago, ww_watcher said:

What do you folks think about eliminating the income tax and establishing a strict consumer tax?

The idea is, if you buy a Lear jet you pay a one-time tax according to it's value, but you'll also pay a tax every time you feed the beast. There will be no depreciation factor for tax breaks. If you feel your ride is getting old, you have a choice of continuing the less expensive maintenance, and respective tax, or buying a new one, which will be taxed according to its value. For those of us who can't or don't want to spend our money that way we pay a substantially lower tax on that Toyota Camry. Repairs on your consumer items will also have a tax affixed according to their value. So that Lear Jet owner will have to pay for that luxury. We would then be able to eliminate the IRS because they would be rendered unnecessary. Companies will still need accountants to keep the books and pay the taxes on the company jet. Yes a lot of IRS employees would have to find other jobs but since there is no income tax you can now open up that lemonade stand you've always wanted and don't have to pay that business tax; only a one-time tax on the equipment you purchase and the subsequent tax on its maintenance. Any business whose work force goes overseas pays a huge tax and that will encourage those businesses to keep their workforce local. Yes, your internet and cell phone bill will go up a bit but you will still have that 33% of your income you pay out now, still in your pocket. the more frugal you live, the less tax you pay out of your pocket. I am not sure about import tax because, example, the Japanese have forced the american car makers to take a closer look at the quality and value of their work. Competition is good. 

Keep in mind that going out to eat is taxable since prepared food is a consumer item. Groceries may not be taxable but cigarettes and alcohol definitely are...unless you homebrew (just kidding). 

Perhaps I haven't thought of everything but I believe this arrangememt will prove less expensive to operate within so we will have more of our hard-earned paycheck to use as we see fit. I would also like to see the Federal Reserve abolished along with interest on loans. I don't use a creidt card so I am already half-way there.

Collection of Income Taxes is Unconstitutional.   It was collected during War Time in 1917 to help pay for the First World War.It was only supposed to be a Temporary Measure but Governments seen how much extra Revenue it Generated in the Billions and Governments have been Pilfering the Taxpayer with the burden of Collecting this Illegal Tax after the War was over.

[ww_watcher]

1 minute ago, StnCld316 said:

Collection of Income Taxes is Unconstitutional.   It was collected during War Time in 1917 to help pay for the First World War.It was only supposed to be a Temporary Measure but Governments seen how much extra Revenue it Generated in the Billions and Governments have been Pilfering the Taxpayer with the burden of Collecting this Illegal Tax after the War was over.

I had forgotten about that. What did we do to collect the operating expenses for our government?

 

[StnCld316]

12 minutes ago, ww_watcher said:

I had forgotten about that. What did we do to collect the operating expenses for our government?

 

Likely came from the Sales Tax of all the Goods and Services that's collected and forwarded to Government Coffers.

There are only two sure things People are Guaranteed and that's Death & Taxes.

[ww_watcher]

10 minutes ago, StnCld316 said:

Likely came from the Sales Tax of all the Goods and Services that's collected and forwarded to Government Coffers.

 

There are only two sure things People are Guaranteed and that's Death & Taxes.

So my idea is a good one considering that no one can get out of paying for their preferred lifestyle; Including the businesses. I will have to think of a comprehensive way to cap the disparity between the head honcho and the peon. One good way is to make it against the law for the golden umbrellas of the CEOs. If your business fails, you fail and you still have to pay your employees. But the CEO should still be paid according to their worth; and it is their company after all.