this is the thread to not talk about canidates at all. this is the thread to discuss the most important issues at hand. before anyone can even consider to vote, they must be able to understand what is actually the problems that need to be fixed. so go ahead and discuss away
The stagnation in growth and the budget deficit will be the issues of seminal importance.
As for Americans understanding what the issues are I recommend viewing media from the other side of the fence. I would venture that a reason for the Ameican penchant for partisanism is caused by a lot of people only looking at media which correlates with their political views. Or better yet look outside of the states for this information. Sometimes an outside perspective can illuminate a topic in a way you never thought to think about before.
[quote]dude **** you XD i wasnt asking, i was requesting that people discuss the issues at hand not for you to be a dumb ***
Perhaps I should have put it in quotations to avoid confusion. My bad.[/quote] lolz
As always, the economy is a huge factor. Will it even be possible to pay off the debt of about $15,000,000,000,000? We should probably start by raising taxes (so everyone pays about the same percentage of income) and getting out of useless conflicts. Oh and we should probably stop giving government benefits to illegals considering they don't pay taxes to fund those benefits.
[quote](so everyone pays about the same percentage of income)
No.[/quote] Why not? At least have the super rich pay the same percentage as the middle class (or closer than what it is now). Even Warren Buffet wants that.
I was a little too quick with that gavel, I thought I saw "same income to pay" as in "flat tax". Didn't see that percentage there.
So this would certainly eliminate the controversy with the whole "fairness" issue, however I still think that taxes should be lowered greatly for those in poverty; we end up creating these government programs designed to help those in need, like welfare, and it's just giving money for them to spend it. You see what I'm going with here? The money given ends up being circular, and it's going nowhere. If we take this out, then shorten or eliminate entirely the taxes in poverty, they will have their money to spend and we still keep our money instead of having it going to welfare.
Why not? At least have the super rich pay the same percentage as the middle class (or closer than what it is now). Even Warren Buffet wants that.
The rich already pay a higher percentage than the middle class. It's called progressive tax.
You'll just either piss off the middle classes if you raise the tax percentage, or kill off your own tax budget if you lower the rich's. It's your choice.
The money given ends up being circular, and it's going nowhere. If we take this out, then shorten or eliminate entirely the taxes in poverty, they will have their money to spend and we still keep our money instead of having it going to welfare.
The money flow is circular my friend, in terms of leakages and injections. That's the way it works.
The rich already pay a higher percentage than the middle class. It's called progressive tax.
Considering how much of the wealth they own in the US, the amount of tax they pay is a joke.
The money flow is circular my friend, in terms of leakages and injections. That's the way it works.
Further exacerbated byt he fact that rich business owners tend to now invest much more heavily overseas due to a globalised economy, than they ever used to. Low tax for the rich was probably a good idea in the 1950s and 60s. But now, it's just the government giving free license for money to leave the US economy, and at a time when the US has such a crippling budget deficit, it's simply economic illiteracy to argue for lower tax on the rich.
Americans import a lot too, so can you blame all the money leaking out on the rich?
One is sumpomatic of the other. If the rich business owners invested in the US and produced more products there, then imports wouldn't be necessary. Alas, we live in a globalised economy, and investing in America simply isn't profitable for rich American business owners. Therefore tax them more to make up the shortfall.
One is sumpomatic of the other. If the rich business owners invested in the US and produced more products there, then imports wouldn't be necessary. Alas, we live in a globalised economy, and investing in America simply isn't profitable for rich American business owners. Therefore tax them more to make up the shortfall.
It's economically irrational to invest in USA for most of them. Though recently I read an article, I can't remember TIME or Newsweek whereby it said more and more are shifting back as the overseas market gets less attractive.
do that and they will give up thaier ABI membership and close their company on the usa stock market moving both to 1 in a other country whit a lower tax rate. then that country will get a part of that companys money and not the usa anymore.
you can compare it whit cutting of your own hand if you tax them to much.
