Gee Jeff, I've stated my feelings on both of those so many times...I'm not really sure what you're looking for me to say that I haven't already said.
Sorry Rick....I was bored earlier and figured I would just call your ass out since I have been pretty quiet on the P&R forum here lately!
We are the only civilized country that does not provide health care for its citizens.
What does that matter? We are and will continue to be a world power without universal healthcare. As you are about to say, we are the greatest country on the planet.
I think, as the greatest country on the planet.... we should.
So you think the greatest country in the world should make a huge change like that??? We are the greatest country because of the freedoms we have. If we go to a universal healthcare system, we lose a freedom. We gain a right, but lose a freedom. All that a universal healthcare system is going to do is bring the government more in to our lives. Sounds like socialism to me, Rick. One step closer.....maybe that is what you want for us. I sure as hell DO NOT
"A government large enough to give you all you want, is powerful enough to take all you have" - Thomas Jefferson
Not to mention that we spend more money on health care per capita, than anyone else.
That should paint a pretty clear picture.
Universal Health Care
What is the population comparison between the U.S. and those other countries. I am pretty sure there is HUGE
difference. Come on now Rick. You are better than that. Get some data from a country that has a population close to ours and get back to me.
Japan is the closest....at 1/3 the population of the U.S. The others aren't even close.
On taxes, I think our system is broken and needs to be fixed.
I believe a good start could be made by closing all of the loopholes that currently exist.
The more wealthy are the ones who are in a better position to take advantage of these loopholes, while the lower income levels are not.
Loopholes are never good. I agree. They will never go away though. Someone, rich or poor, will always find one.
As I mentioned in the other thread, if I was making $5 million dollars and taxed at 35%...I could handle that much easier than you could being taxed at 35%, but only making $380K.
This is where you are wrong Rick.
A person who makes $5,000,000 is going to lose the same percentage as a person who makes $380,000. This is what I was trying to make sense of in the other thread.
Say the 35% bracket starts at $250,000. The person who makes $380,000 will be taxed 35% on $130,000 of their income. The person who makes $5,000,000 will be taxed 35% on $4,750,000 of their income. Who loses more of their hard earned money?
That may seem "unfair" to you, but it does not to me. The person who earned $5,000,000 may have worked their ass off that much more than the person who earned $380,000. The nice thing about the example you used is it worked out the same way a flat tax works (since both got taxed the same percentage of their income)....which in my opinion should be the only way income tax should work. Progressive tax is complete bull sh!t.
I've never said that there should be a war on the wealthy.
I just think there is such a great discrepancy (and it's getting bigger)...that something is not quite right.
Do you think that a logical explanation for the increase in gap size is due to the economy, job losses, etc.? Do you think that maybe because the wealthy business owners are having to pay more taxes overall that they are having to cut jobs to keep their business afloat? Is it possible that the gap is growing because unemployment has increased like it has, or people that use to have good jobs now only have mediocore jobs because they got layed off? This is where I think compassion gets in the way of logic for you, Rick. Just my opinion though.
Not counting last year, I have been in the 33% "bracket" and while not real happy about it......I also think it is my patriotic duty to pay it.
That is good to hear that you believe it to be your patriotice duty to pay it. Don't you think you think that you and everyone else would benefit from a flat tax? That way it is fair for everyone.....Everyone would lose the same percentage of their income. No one is better than anyone else, and no one is worse than anyone else. Everyone is the same regardless of income.
It would kinda be like communism, but with a free market.
It would never work though. The lower income people, along with those compassionate ones, would still see it as the wealthy come out on top. The wealthy must be punished!
To me, it is a small cost for freedom and living in the greatest country this planet has ever seen.
There you go saying it again.....THE GREATEST COUNTRY
I think we are just fine then...don't you?
I'm not saying I like how all of it is spent though..... because I'm certainly not.
I am not either. And I think a lot of people will agree on that....even the most conservative ones on this site.
Money is being spent like crazy in certain areas, and it needs to slow down....a lot.
However, I do not think our healthcare system needs to change. Government needs to shrink. Small government is what made this country great in the first place. It's headed in the opposite direction. Notice the trend over the last 100 years?
It has been proven all across the world....the bigger the government gets, the smaller the citizens get.
As far as debate, I believe my positions are "logical"
and............you aren't going to change my mind.
Of course I won't change your mind. You are a stubborn old