McCain or Obama CC General Election Vote

College Confidential Community
81

<p>
[quote]
unfortunately that attitude is far too common--people hate taxes, but they want all the programs that the government provides? Ain't gonna happen.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I agree, and it's a symptom of immature selfishness and lack of understanding of the world. There are some real brainy conservatives out there with an entire scientific explanation for why taxes are bad, but most young people against taxes just want to have their cake and eat it too so that they can afford that BMW and thus, suddenly become the chick magnets they always thought they deserved to be (haha, j/k).</p>

82

<p>Hey, I'm not saying all taxes are bad - taxes are needed to run the government, which is necessary to protect this country and the rights of its citizens. However, we should not be taxed to pay for massively expensive and worthless welfare programs, universal healthcare, and any number of other things that should not be paid for with public funds.</p>

83

<p>Not that would be true of current tax revenue, but Obama wants to increase the amount of taxes (at least for 250K+), but also the way the budget is done, leads to alot of mismanagement so that excessive taxes are not needed for any other the things that you mention, but for universal healthcare that would be placing an undue burden on certain individuals for the sake of others (i.e. ppl who cannot afford healthcare), when ppl can already provide for themselves.</p>

84

<p>
[quote]
However, we should not be taxed to pay for massively expensive and worthless welfare programs, universal healthcare, and any number of other things that should not be paid for with public funds.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>But tax money should be used to those those Muslamic terrists who's boss right, even if it means engaging in pointless wars?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Not that would be true of current tax revenue, but Obama wants to increase the amount of taxes (at least for 250K+)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Obama has repeatedly advocated a middle-class tax cut. Those that make $250 000 and above are not the middle-class; they are the elite. You are looking out on behalf of the wealthiest 5% of America.</p>

85

<p>
[quote]
Many ppl don't like taxes, bc they work hard for their money and every paycheck the government takes some, not bc the government did anything but bc the government can. That gets frustrating, so obviously ppl don't want tax hikes.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ok... As many people have told you above and as I'm sure you already know, taxes in this country, whether they be federal, state, or municipal, pay for most of the things you apparently take for granted. Public schools across the country still gain most of their funding from taxes. Don't have kids? How about the roads that you drive on? I live in Minnesota where our infrastructure, as with the rest of the country, has deteriorated to the point where bridges are no longer stable. Taxes are what pay for their improvement, but unfortunately they are being used for other things (read on). Don't drive? How about the parks that scatter our great country that millions of people visit everyday. Taxes are our way to help our community grow and prosper. </p>

<p>Still think taxes are too high? Let's take a quick look at how are taxes are being spent<em>. Of the federal taxes that you pay, 31% (almost 1 out of every 3 dollars) goes to the Pentagon. Yes, we need a strong military to protect what we cherish, but take a look at the numbers</em><em>. The U.S. spends about 583 billion dollars on the military. The closest "supposed" rivals are China at 59 billion dollars and Russia at 41 billion dollars, and they're 4th and 7th in military spending, respectively! We spend about 10 times more than our closest rival. In between are (expenditures in billions) France (74), Britain (69), Japan (49), and Germany (46). All of these countries could be considered our allies. Now take a look at total, global military expenditure - 1.2 trillion; that means the U.S. spends nearly as much on our military as the rest of the world combined, literally. Perhaps we carry too big of a stick compared to our voices? Please don't use the tragic events on September 11th or the "War on Terror" to justify our spending. 20 more squadrons of Raptors or 5 more nuclear carriers could not have prevented the attack, only better intelligence. But let's get back to your hard earned tax dollars. Military is first. Second are Social Security (close behind military) and Medicare. Yes the system has flaws, but I think you'll agree with me in that we do need some form of medical aid and support for the elderly? Just behind Medicare is... interest on our national debt. At 15% of our federal taxes, our national debt has become a huge albatross around our collective necks. Why do we have all this debt and where is the money going? Same place as much of the military spending... Iraq. If you look at the national debt under President Bush (and many other Republican presidents), the numbers are beyond ridiculous</em>. Since president Bush has entered office, he has instituted lowering taxes, but for people earning over $250,000! Do you earn that much? If you do, congratulations, and enjoy the extra few thousand dollars, but if you're like the rest of us, "please, sir, [we'd] like some more..." Senator Obama proposes ending those tax cuts for the super-wealthy, and that promise has been contorted into raising **your taxes. I'd laugh if it didn't hurt economically. Rather, Senator Obama has pledged to lower taxes for low and medium income families. This is definitely something that I (and many of you, I'm sure) can get behind. Please, please don't let the Republicans and right-wing media scare you into voting for them again. They've gotten really good at it for the past 20 years, and its really the only thing going for them this year. Think critically about each candidate, do some research and see for yourself.</p>

<p>Sources:
* How</a> Uncle Sam Spends Your Tax Money
** List</a> of countries by military expenditures - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
*** Increases</a> in the National Debt Chart</p>

86

<p>When i said the government doesn't do anything i was refering to the actually work that you do i.e. the government doesn't come and do your work ergo you own your own money. That is how many ppl feel, and in regard to taxing the super wealthy i think that is bad too, if i am not mistaken it was reported that the top ten percent of income earners pay 70% of taxes in america. Well how much do you think they should pay? Bc 70% is a heck of alot.</p>

87

<p>As far as military spending, that would just be an example as to how the tax money is not being effectively used. So instead of suggesting an increase in tax prices, why not make adjustment in the budget to more effecitently use the present tax.</p>

88

<p>Ok a few things. You're right, the actual percentage is about 70.30% of the taxes are paid by the top ten percent of Americans. On the other hand, that same ten percent, or those making over $100K, also make approximately 45-50% of all income in the U.S. In addition, the top 10% of Americans also make approximately 3.5 times more than the bottom 50% of the same group. Its true that the firefighters don't come to your house proportionally to how much tax you pay, but you have to notice and agree that the income gap between the rich and the poor is reaching unprecedented conditions. In 2005, "the top [300,000 income earners] received 440 times as much as the average person in the bottom half earned, nearly doubling the gap from 1980." In that same period, while the income for those making more than 1 million dollars rose almost 10%, the income for the poor actually fell! History has shown us over and over again that a drastic difference between the rich and the poor leads to a very unstable state. Even if its not the top 10%, can't we agree that the top 1% or top 0.1% can share some of their tax breaks with those who can't even make ends meet? Using your logic that the top income earners contribute such a ridiculous amount to total taxes, a reduction in their tax cuts (note the difference between decreasing a tax cut and increasing one's taxes) by even 1% could help the poor immensely. The same money which sits in the bank accounts of the super-wealthy accumulating interest could help the super-poor buy food, send their children to a safe school, or get some sense of economic security. I'm not a fan of absolute redistribution of wealth, but we have to be practical in what will help our society. How much do I think they should pay? Obviously there's not definitely number that I can give you because that would lead to a never-ending debate on how much wealth is necessary to obtain absolute economic security. And of course we should try to effectively use the present taxes. I think we should reduce the size of government to a degree but put more money into education at all levels and never pass a deficit budget until we can pay off a significant portion of our debt. I think we should curb our military spending, but I also guarantee you certain members of Congress will not allow the reduction in military spending and will demonize all who try (unpatriotic, soft on crime, and not fit to fight the War on Terror are words that come to mind).</p>

<p>I accidentally close my source, which was a NY Times article and a report by the Tax Foundation... haha. If you don't believe my numbers, call me a liar and I'll find them for you again.</p>

89

<p>
[quote]
On the other hand, that same ten percent, or those making over $100K, also make approximately 45-50% of all income in the U.S

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Then shouldn't the top 10 percent just be paying 45-50% of the taxes?</p>

<p>Some of our tax money doesn't even go to our country coughcoughIsraelcoughcough. Which makes me pretty mad since I don't support anything they do. I pay taxes..for MY protection..for MY benefits, not some random citizen 5000 miles across the effing ocean.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The same money which sits in the bank accounts of the super-wealthy accumulating interest could help the super-poor buy food, send their children to a safe school, or get some sense of economic security.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That money was earned. There is absolutely no reason why he should give it to some random "super-poor" person. Buy food? Safe school? Economic security? Economic security? Are you serious? Like actually serious? </p>

<p>WHOAAA!</p>

<p>
[quote]
Those that make $250 000 and above are not the middle-class; they are the elite. You are looking out on behalf of the wealthiest 5% of America.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>What a statement.....So we're not supposed to look out for the top 5 percent of our population? Let them die, take their money....why do we care..they're not American citizens either. We're all not equal in front of the government right? We're supposed to just treat rich people with disgust and contempt while taking as much money from them as we can, because hey, we should never look out on their behalf.</p>

<p>
[quote]
we should not be taxed to pay for massively expensive and worthless welfare programs, universal healthcare, and any number of other things that should not be paid for with public funds.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Snaps-fingers <em>respekt</em></p>

<p>
[quote]
but they want all the programs that the government provides? Ain't gonna happen.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>NO, We don't want those damn programs the government provides, and we don't want to give them money out of our income either.</p>

<p>Income Tax = Epic Failure</p>

90

<p>McCain 14
Obama 26
Barr 1 (possibly 2)
Other 3</p>

91

<p>
[quote]
Some of our tax money doesn't even go to our country coughcoughIsraelcoughcough. Which makes me pretty mad since I don't support anything they do. I pay taxes..for MY protection..for MY benefits, not some random citizen 5000 miles across the effing ocean.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Spoken like a true republican bigot. I have news for you as5hole, the world (I know this is gonna sound foreign to you) does NOT revolve around America and the world does NOT revolve around your petty existence. You're concerned that every cent of your "earned" money doesn't go directly to you? As if you actually worked hard for that money. That random citizen 5,000 miles across the effing ocean works hard. You sit on your ass and rake in your upper tax bracket wages.</p>

<p>You want YOUR protection? Protection from what? Are you referring to the one attack the United States has endured in the last 60 years? Yea, so let's sh1t on Israel and not give them any money, because it's not as if they've endured any attacks within the last 60 years. . . except of course for three wars, all of which sought the genocide of the entire Israeli people, and too many terrorist attacks to count. But yea, let's worry about your extra $100 per year so YOU can be protected.</p>

<p>So according to your world: The 4.5 million Jews of Israel should be killed, poor people should die, public schools should fall into disrepair, the economy should go to hell for the middle class, and every country besides the United States should not be an issue for Americans, all so you can keep a little bit more of your "hard earned" money.</p>

<p>It's pointless for me to get angry at you, or insult you, or express my disgust, because a) you've probably heard it all before, and b) there are a lot more like you. Your #1 concern in life is your money, which you don't even deserve. It's just pathetic.</p>

92

<p>mr. bob, do you support the wars america is in right now? (serious question).</p>

93

<p>
[quote]
Then shouldn't the top 10 percent just be paying 45-50% of the taxes?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Isn't there a simple economic concept known as marginal returns or something? The more money one has, the less valuable each dollar becomes to them. So if the government needs some extra cash, it's better to take a little bit more from the wealthy, who can already easily afford food, shelter, and almost every luxury except for their own rollercoaster in their backyard, than from the poor. It's like that Biblical parable of the poor woman who gives two gold coins to the church, and the many wealthy people who give a lot more. Yet Jesus appreciates the poor woman's contribution more because that money was a lot more valuable to her.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Some of our tax money doesn't even go to our country coughcoughIsraelcoughcough.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The Republicans and conservatives are the ones that have effectively made Israel the 51st state of the America; the Democrats are merely spinelessly following their lead. Most liberals want to end excessive aid to Israel and broker a peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians, while many conservatives would rather use Israel as a puppet in the Middle East, or have it be ground zero for the upcoming Armageddon.</p>

<p>
[quote]
That money was earned. There is absolutely no reason why he should give it to some random "super-poor" person. Buy food? Safe school? Economic security? Economic security? Are you serious? Like actually serious?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>People like you are typical. The vast majority (like 95%) of your taxes DO NOT go to anti-poverty programs. There's no horde of mythical black welfare queens that the likes of Ronald Reagan tricked you into believing in. The vast majority of taxes go to help senior citizens, children, veterans, infrastructure, and the military. So do you hate old people, babies, war heroes, strong bridges, and GI Joe?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Income Tax = Epic Failure

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Extremely convincing argument.</p>

94

<p>McCain 14
Obama 27
Barr 1 (possibly 2)
Other 3</p>

<p>
[quote]
I actually expect most CC'ers to go for McCain. The people attracted to this website tend to be the successful, go-getter types. The ones who don't need or want government handouts.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Wait, is it that the go-getters on CC are smart enough to vote for Obama? Or is it that CC is actually chock full of people who need or want govt. handouts?</p>

<p>I like McCain, I just can't imagine anyone would think he's a good choice for president.</p>

95

<p>
[quote]
Spoken like a true republican bigot. I have news for you as5hole, the world (I know this is gonna sound foreign to you) does NOT revolve around America and the world does NOT revolve around your petty existence. You're concerned that every cent of your "earned" money doesn't go directly to you? As if you actually worked hard for that money. That random citizen 5,000 miles across the effing ocean works hard. You sit on your ass and rake in your upper tax bracket wages.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>-i'm not a republican</p>

<ul>
<li><p>Yes, im concerned that every cent of my EARNED money doesn't somehow support me directly.</p></li>
<li><p>i work hard for my money</p></li>
<li><p>i dont rake in my upper tax bracket wages...my family does not make very much money at all..</p></li>
<li><p>I dont care if that citizen 5000 miles away works hard, let his country take care of him, i really couldn't care less. I don understand why in the world america should have to support the rest of the world when our own economy and our own citizens are doing pretty ****tie.</p></li>
</ul>

<p>
[quote]

You want YOUR protection? Protection from what? Are you referring to the one attack the United States has endured in the last 60 years? Yea, so let's sh1t on Israel and not give them any money, because it's not as if they've endured any attacks within the last 60 years. . . except of course for three wars, all of which sought the genocide of the entire Israeli people, and too many terrorist attacks to count. But yea, let's worry about your extra $100 per year so YOU can be protected.

[/quote]
</p>

<ul>
<li><p>yes, i want my protection, and im happy im getting it..why not have ZERO attacks in 60 years, there's no reason we should have any attacks at all.</p></li>
<li><p>i really could not care less about israel, like i said before ...why not protect somalia and zimbabwe and put our troops in sudan while we're at it? Our job is not to protect the WORLD it's to protect the united state of america.</p></li>
<li><p>Yes, I will worry about that 100 dollars per year to protect me, put that 100 dollars a year from all of us citizens together and maybe that ONE attack doesn't happen.</p></li>
</ul>

<p>
[quote]
</p>

<p>So according to your world: The 4.5 million Jews of Israel should be killed, poor people should die, public schools should fall into disrepair, the economy should go to hell for the middle class, and every country besides the United States should not be an issue for Americans, all so you can keep a little bit more of your "hard earned" money.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>-Actually that's according to YOU...i never said that.</p>

<p>
[quote]

It's pointless for me to get angry at you, or insult you, or express my disgust, because a) you've probably heard it all before, and b) there are a lot more like you. Your #1 concern in life is your money, which you don't even deserve. It's just pathetic.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>alright, so you're basically just going to personally attack me? go ahead.</p>

<p>
[quote]
People like you are typical. The vast majority (like 95%) of your taxes DO NOT go to anti-poverty programs. There's no horde of mythical black welfare queens that the likes of Ronald Reagan tricked you into believing in. The vast majority of taxes go to help senior citizens, children, veterans, infrastructure, and the military. So do you hate old people, babies, war heroes, strong bridges, and GI Joe?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, I don't hate them.....</p>

96

<p>
[quote]
mr. bob, do you support the wars america is in right now? (serious question).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>God no. Bring the troops home ASAP is what I believe.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Most liberals want to end excessive aid to Israel and broker a peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians, while many conservatives would rather use Israel as a puppet in the Middle East, or have it be ground zero for the upcoming Armageddon.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Good point. That's why we need another Democrat in charge of foreign policy. Now that Yassar Arafat is dead, another Camp David Accord would probably work, and Obama would be just the right person to do something like that. He's actually willing to negociate with the Palestinians, Iran, etc. And while, according to the New York Times, 70-80% of Palestinians support continued terrorism, negociation is really the only solution. Terrorism is not a last resort, it's a very, very effective way of getting things done, and unfortunately we (we being the international community) really have no way to combat it, other than sitting down at the bargaining table with the leaders of terrorist organizations who target innocent people. </p>

<p>
[quote]
So do you hate old people, babies, war heroes, strong bridges, and GI Joe?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'd say he hates all of the above (special emphasis on the latter), as well as the poor, the middle class, Blacks, Jews, foreigners, intellectuals, and, judging by his infatuation with his pay check, himself.</p>

<p>
[quote]
-i'm not a republican

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Wasn't expecting that one. What are you then?</p>

<p>
[quote]
- Yes, I will worry about that 100 dollars per year to protect me, put that 100 dollars a year from all of us citizens together and maybe that ONE attack doesn't happen.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I have news for you. There is not a $100 limit on our taxes. You can (dare I say it) pay $200 per year and have half go to national security and the other half go to other countries that need the money. I'm not saying one attack every 60 years is good, I'm saying that compared with other countries' vulnerability, ours is diminutive. I'm also saying our tax dollars can do BOTH. And if you're still pms'y about losing your money, how about we take that crapload of money out of funding the Iraq War? (Now that you've said you're not a Republican, I don't actually know if you support the War, so if you don't, then don't take this as an attack).</p>

<p>
[quote]
i really could not care less about israel, like i said before ...why not protect somalia and zimbabwe and put our troops in sudan while we're at it? Our job is not to protect the WORLD it's to protect the united state of america.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It's true we cannot protect the world. But does that mean we should become isolationist? Just because our recent endeavors on foreign soil (Iraq, Vietnam, etc.) have been catastrophes, doesn't mean that isolationism is correct. Iraq and Vietnam were wars for personal gain (personal as in American), not for humanitarianism. We SHOULD involve ourselves in Sudan, because the crisis there is a humanitarian one. There are 2.5 million Sudanese refugees in their own country, and to intervene there would benefit the world a lot more than our involvement in Iraq (since which time 4,000 US troops and 90,000 Iraqi civilians have lost their lives), and cost you no more money. </p>

<p>And since when has life become a "whose country is better" contest? It may seem natural to want to make our country "the best" and help our people "the most," but take a step back for a minute. Are you really contending that one random person "5000 miles accross the effing ocean" is somehow inferior, or "worth less" than one random person in the United States? You think that your $100 is worth more, not just than his $100, but than his life? Than his and 100 of his countrymen's lives? Do have some master chart in your office that weighs the lives of people from other countries in comparison to Americans'? How many Sudanese refugees is an American worth? Better yet, how many Sudanese refugees is a White American worth? I'm not claiming you should donate your entire paycheck to Somalia, but I think you can spare a few extra % on your taxes.</p>

97

<p>What I would like to hear is where both candidates stand in reducing wasted tax dollars! Tell me what programs are wasteful and what plans they have to eliminate them! Stop telling me how you plan to spend on this or that! Show me you can budget like every other responsible American! Or is this an unreasonable request to ask of our candidates? ( excluding war spending )</p>

98

<ul>
<li>I'm a "libertarian" </li>
</ul>

<p>
[quote]
I'd say he hates all of the above (special emphasis on the latter), as well as the poor, the middle class, Blacks, Jews, foreigners, intellectuals, and, judging by his infatuation with his pay check, himself.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>ad hominems for the win right? I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't act so rude.</p>

<ul>
<li><p>i dont support the war...</p></li>
<li><p>my family isn't even america...i was born here, but my parents and my relatives weren't...</p></li>
</ul>

<p>
[quote]
I'm not claiming you should donate your entire paycheck to Somalia, but I think you can spare a few extra % on your taxes.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>All I would want is to give that money going to maybe somalia or sudan instead of israel. I dont agree with what israel is doing..there should be no reason why someone should force me to "help" their cause.</p>

<p>If you keep talking sh1t about me, I'll stop replying....just so you know</p>

99

<p>McCain 14
Obama 28
Barr 1 (possibly 2)
Other 3</p>

<p>Obama is more disciplined than McCain and the electorate is ready for change and a fresh face. Moreover, although McCain is doggedly loyal to most of the Bush dogma, he is running as an "experience" candidate in the wrong year.</p>

100

<p>^Godfatherbob
You are naive about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. You can't just snap your fingers, go to Camp David, and then magically get peace. What you don't understand is that Abbas has been consistently losing power and refuses to create a Palestinian state that doesn't include East Jerusalem. I don't know if you remember the fierce opposition in Israel to the withdrawal from Gaza (which wasn't traditionally isn't even part of Israel) and the even larger amount of Israelis that regret pulling out of Gaza (becuase parts of Southern Israel are being bombarded by rockets, and becuase Hamas violently took over Gaza).
Although your solution sounds very nice, it won't work. For a peace process to succeed (although this may not work also) you have to give alot of time on both sides and make slow but gradual progress.</p>