Townhall Debate..

benzocaine · Post by **benzocaine** » Mon Oct 11, 2004 9:47 pm

I've never met Ian, but judging him from his political positions, I too would say he's intelligent

One thing I wanted to mention earlier, before a crying baby interupted me, was that it seems the people who are defending Bush are really worried about someone who somehow didn't work hard enough in life may get gov't sponsored healthcare. Big whoop. look at the billions we've given to haliburton.. that we didn't have to if only our stuborn president had allowed France and Germany to help rebuild. But no let's punish them.. yeah right. No let's heap a huge defecit onto our children's shoulders.. oh but that's OK, we get our tax break now. God forbid those who preach sacrifice actually do it in the form of fiscal responsability. I didn't think it was smart when I got that 350 dollar check from Uncle sam a couple years ago, and I think it's even more stupid to continue to cut taxes. We've gone from 236 billion surpluss to 200 billion defecit

I think our govenrment should save money and spend it as needed. Not run up our debt to the point our bonds will be junk bonds. We can run from the defecit but we can't hide.

PS. Think about the billions it'd take to fund a trip to mars.

PPS. Doesnt' Bush want to naturalize illegal aliens? Doesn't that make your blood boil?

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Mon Oct 11, 2004 9:56 pm

You didn't respond to my query about the Laffer curve, Ben. If you understood it, you wouldn't be making the statements you are.

Big whoop. look at the billions we've given to haliburton

Everyone and their grandmother has refuted this Kerry/Edwards line, and they keep making it. Like Moore, they keep throwing the lie out and hope that it sticks.

Haliburton was the ONLY contractor that was able to meet the specifications of the bid. Good for Haliburton, and to heck with any company that can't step up to the plate. Check it out yourself on factcheck.org. Also listen to NBC commentary after the debates. They also called both Kerry and Edwards on it.

Germany and France can go to hell. They didn't sacrifice their lives before, and they continue to say that they will not do so in the future, no matter who is president. They are pissed because we found the evidence that they were being bribed.

What, so we're supposed to stick it to our allies and reward the slimebags? No way, Jose. B.F. Skinner needs to have a talk with anyone who thinks like this.

I'll take Great Britain, Japan, South Korea, or Poland any day. They deserve all the contracts that they can win.

Perhaps France and Germany can start paying us back for some of the WWII debt that they still owe...

- Bill

benzocaine · Post by **benzocaine** » Mon Oct 11, 2004 10:04 pm

You didn't respond to my query about the Laffer curve, Ben. If you understood it, you wouldn't be making the statements you are.

I read it Bill, It's just that there is no real indicator that we were on the wrong end of the curve pre Bush. I understood it just fine. Besides; it's just a statistical graph.. and you of all people know statistiacl graphs have a margin of error.

RACastanet · Post by **RACastanet** » Mon Oct 11, 2004 10:04 pm

Bill said: "You didn't respond to my query about the Laffer curve, Ben. If you understood it, you wouldn't be making the statements you are."

Bill is correct Ben. You need to take a few courses in economics, especially market dynamics and supply and demand. Also, with little Ben around, you clearly need a sound fiscal advisor to make sure 18 years from now you can help him through college. Not being snotty here, but offering advice to someone in need of it.

Rich

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Mon Oct 11, 2004 10:05 pm

Kerry Ad Falsely Accuses Cheney on Halliburton

- FactCheck.org

benzocaine · Post by **benzocaine** » Mon Oct 11, 2004 10:24 pm

Bill is correct Ben. You need to take a few courses in economics, especially market dynamics and supply and demand.

OK well here's a little real worldequation. Debt to income ratio.

It's a real equation done by banks and other lending institutions. Basically the more you owe the less you'll be able to borrow in the future.

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Mon Oct 11, 2004 10:31 pm

You still miss the point, Ben.

The Laffer curve shows that there is a "sweet spot" in taxation. Go beyond that rate, and you LOWER your revenue.

Nobody argues that revenue is zero at 0% and 100% taxation. The only argument is where the sweet spot is. And that is complex, and varies depending on the situation.

Rich and I already gave you anecdotal evidence for Bush's wishes.

1) Bush increased revenue by dropping the tax rate on my dad and on the 14 trusts he managed.

2) Rich gets hurt by a Kerry tax increase (at $40K income) in spite of his promise to the camera that he wasn't going to do that.

My own understanding of economics comes from formal Econ training in school (3 courses) and living a life with a professional stock broker and financial advisor. And on the latter front, we vote both parties.

This isn't a partisan issue. It's an economic issue.

- Bill

RACastanet · Post by **RACastanet** » Mon Oct 11, 2004 11:46 pm

Ben said: "OK well here's a little real world equation. Debt to income ratio.

It's a real equation done by banks and other lending institutions. Basically the more you owe the less you'll be able to borrow in the future."

Good rule. Self limiting in fact. But, not in all cases.

Interesting departure from that is in the case of large sums of money. If you owe the bank $100,000, they own you. If you owe them $100,000,000, you own them.

Case in point: Donald Trump. Banks will pretty much do whatever 'The Donald' needs to stay afloat, no matter how badly he is in debt. the banks will risk millions more $$ before cashing in on a large bad debt!

As for the US, the annual deficit while huge in size standing alone, it is very small compared to our annual GDP. That is why economists such as Greenspan keep an eye on it but do not go into a panic over it. I need to find what the percentage is. I'll do a search.

The real budget buster is the large 'baby boom' generation getting near retirement age. I fear most have not planned and saved as well as I have and will demand 'their share'! Tough choices ahead down the road.

I personally have never planned on SS or any other entitlement program to be there for a comfortable old age. I built a very sturdy three legged economic stool that does not depend on any govt handout. If I get any SS, that will be a bonus!

Kerry is selling and banking on the perceived gloom and doom of the 'less well off' to buy into his programs of wealth redistribution.

By the way, by using assorted tax loopholes of their own, the Kerry's fed tax burden last year was about 12% (per the WSJ), about half of the average middle income family. How abaout that. Maybe his plan is to share his tax loopholes with the rest of us so we too can cut out taxes in half. Actually, his rate should be 36% so his accountants and lawyers found a way to protect about 2/3 of the families (actually Teresa's) income. Talk about elite!

Also, at about 10% of the Kerry income, George and Laura Bush paid a 30% rate. Hmm... They need to get Kerry elected. They'd get quite a tax break under his 'personal' plan.

Any response to that?

Rich

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:07 am

My response, Rich, is the facts.

One can view the tax returns for Pres. Bush, VP Cheney and Sens. Kerry and Edwards at http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/thpwebsit ... enDocument

According to the tax returns themselves and White House press releases on the subject, in 2003 the President and the First Lady (Filing jointly) paid $227,490 in taxes on $822,126 in adjusted gross income. Tax rate of 28%. For 2002, they paid 268,719 in taxes on $771,940 in adjusted gross income, for a tax rate if 35%.

Sen. Kerry (filling single) paid $102,153 in taxes on $346,664 in adjusted gross income in 2003, for a tax rate of 30%. In 2002 he paid $29,946 on $144,091 in adjusted gross income, for a tax rate of 21%.

In 2003, Bush's income was higher than Kerry's by 238%. In 2002 his income was higher than Kerry's by 536%...Not anywhere close to what the WSJ alleges.

I wonder where the 12% rate the WSJ came up with? Clearly it probably is wrong.

Theresa Heinz Kerry is a private citizen with absolutely no requirement for her to release any of her tax returns to anyone. The fact that she is wealthy is no secret. She inherited her money from her late husband. And no one knows what her income or tax status is...including the WSJ.

Gene

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:28 am

Theresa Heinz Kerry is a private citizen with absolutely no requirement for her to release any of her tax returns to anyone. The fact that she is wealthy is no secret. She inherited her money from her late husband. And no one knows what her income or tax status is...including the WSJ.

Well...up to a point. Wherever Kerry goes, things seem to get mucked up. Pretty soon, "inquiring minds" end up wanting to know more. Stuff gets out.

See Kerry's divorce papers: A ticking time bomb.

First of all, I cannot tell you how deeply I respect the belief about life and when it begins. I'm a Catholic, raised a Catholic. I was an altar boy. Religion has been a huge part of my life.

Whatever you say, John...

- Bill

sarosenc · Post by **sarosenc** » Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:32 am

Gene

Who cares if you piss off the church? And as for the rest of that paragraph ... Here is something I think you need to read.

Religion and the American Constitutional Experiment: Essential Rights and Liberties.
John Witte jr.

Maybe then you will understand a little better the role the 'church' has played and continues to play in the town square and how necessary it is as a balance to government.

benzocaine · Post by **benzocaine** » Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:09 am

You still miss the point, Ben.

The Laffer curve shows that there is a "sweet spot" in taxation. Go beyond that rate, and you LOWER your revenue.

You insinuate that Kerry will take us on the down on the curve.

No Bill I thought I conveyed I understood when I said "It's just that there is no real indicator that we were on the wrong end of the curve pre Bush. I understood it just fine.

Maybee we were in the "sweet spot" before? We sure were doing better before.. but I admit there were things like the dot com bubble burst and 9/11 that really rocked the economy hard. Hell before 9/11 I was FOR a tax cut. But I'm funny.. I like money in the bank.. it makes me feel good. I want MY government to have a nest egg too so it won't come to me later for more. Oh well the wad has been shot, and we'll have to pay, but just how much more. I just can't see how the current leader will be a good steward of my government. If I had a bookkeeper like him he'd be fired. I vote to fire him this election.

benzocaine · Post by **benzocaine** » Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:13 am

Since we are posting personal dirt like stories of divorce..

A T shirt I've seen says.. "While Kerry was shot at in Vietnam, Bush was getting bombed in the states".

RACastanet · Post by **RACastanet** » Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:18 am

I said: "the Kerry's fed tax burden last year was about 12% (per the WSJ),"

Note The Kerry's, not John Kerry. Also, the tax year is for 2003.

Do not know where the WSJ got the info but it stated: "According to Kerry's own tax records, and they have not released all of them, the couple had a combined income of $6.8 million and paid $725,000 in income taxes. That means their effective tax rate was a whopping 12.8%."

Unlike liberal media like the New York Times or CBS, the WSJ is not known for being creative with the fact.

Rich

Mills75 · Post by **Mills75** » Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:12 am

I'm really opinionated out now guys and once again I respect all your views and it's a good debate so thanks and Ian thank you for your response especially and for understanding though i'm uneasy with the relationships I sincerely value the person and hope for some kind of adequate solution for it all.But anyhow thank you .you are a good dude and I think alot of you for keeping it above board and knowing i meant no disrespect I just like asking questions sometimes uninformed yes but still I like asking them from my gut and I understand your position well thank everyone and hey may the best man win and may everyone find some middle of the road including me if bush doesn't win lol kidding see ya guys thanks..

Jeff