2008 Presidential Candidates
- Thread starter Valerie
- Start date
V.V.V.V.V.
Houses Ov Mercury
If you threaten to close it, CAIRATH will have a big fit saying you're not approaching moderation correctly. 
Close it.
Close it.
V.V.V.V.V.
Houses Ov Mercury
I know, just taking the piss. CC was like "dude don't threaten to close threads." Then I realized kinda that it could seem like I was doing it unjustified in that case. 's'all good.
cookiecutter
Proceed to Ultraslamming
Matt
Active Member
- Aug 29, 2005
- 6,765
- 4
- 38
ShredHeadJHJ
oh noes itz a opinionn
I really can't read through everything in this thread, but I agree with you here. That is somewhat what we have going on now though, only it probably should be upped a bit for the rich & lowered for the poor.
Some people would argue that poor people should just get better jobs, but it's not always that easy. Sometimes you have to be in a good situation to get a great paying job. School helps a lot, but what if you're poor, you must work 65 hours a week just to survive, & you can't qualify for any student loans?? I'm in a similar situation right now, only I have yet to apply for any loans. I don't think I will have very much time for school with my schedule, & on the fun side of things I'm working on possibly forming a band shortly.
I believe that our Country needs to put an end to illegal immigration as soon as we can wrap things up in Iraq. We need to make it easier for Americans to make a fair living by doing away with what we don't need so we can form a stronger Country from within.
The Ozzman
Melted by feels
ShredHeadJHJ
oh noes itz a opinionn
Honestly, if you were brought up in a comparatively poor environment you wouldn't say that. Besides, paying taxes is not the same as giving money to the poor. Even poor people pay taxes.
The Ozzman
Melted by feels
You don't know this for sure
I agree, but who's to say how the government would allocate the income derived from taxing the rich more? Would some kind of committee be formed? Just because you tax people more doesn't mean the money is going to be used for that specific purpose. Look at social security. The government takes money from that fund all the time, which is why the government is paying out more than the people are putting in (which is why social security should be abolished anyway).
Only if you make above 8,750 dollars a year (and are single).
cookiecutter
Proceed to Ultraslamming
Umm, experienced legislators and policy makers? Most of the bills passed in Congress are all about allocating money. Unfortunately our president vetoes domestic spending while wasting massive amounts of your precious money on some shithole in the middle east.
This is wrong and what everyone wants to change. That's why we're complaining. Remember which party set up social security and which party regular rapes it.
So you have a problem with this? There is no way you could live on 8750 dollars or really even double that.
ShredHeadJHJ
oh noes itz a opinionn
I'm pretty sure
Dude, that's like working the drive through at McDonalds part time. You can't even pay apartment rent with that kind of cash.
The Ozzman
Melted by feels
Umm, experienced legislators and policy makers? Most of the bills passed in Congress are all about allocating money. Unfortunately our president vetoes domestic spending while wasting massive amounts of your precious money on some shithole in the middle east.
Yeah, I can't help what the president does when he's in office.
I'm pretty sure both parties take from the kitty for pork barrel spending and whatnot.
From Wiki: The poverty threshold is adjusted each year. In 2006, in the United States of America, the poverty threshold for a single person under 65 was US$10,488; the threshold for a family group of four, including two children, was US$20,444.
You could live off twice the 8,750, just not comfortably and that term is, of course, dependent on the individual's definition of comfortable.
Matt
Active Member
skeptik
Member
- Feb 7, 2003
- 24,413
- 71
- 48
And, more importantly, WHERE in the country you're living.
And BTW cookiecutter, the president doesn't touch a dime. Congress has the power of the purse. All money allocated to anywhere is approved of by the Congress.
cookiecutter
Proceed to Ultraslamming
I know. What I was referring to was his veto of a domestic spending bill passed by Congress and his passage of bills funding the war he started.
EDIT: Also until 06 he basically had a Congress that did what he wanted
Similar threads
