Dubya and the Truth

[Tigermike 3,711]

I think if you truly believe that and are against tax cut then you should send it back.

I've told you before, I checked and you can't send it back.

I also don't think it is the Federal Governments place to have to fund education. The states and local governments should do that.

State and local government DOES do that. Federal education funding for Alabama accounts for less than 10% of the total education expenditure. About 60% is from the state and about 30% is local.

Is it your contention that this modest tax cut is completely responsible for the financial hole that education systems all over the nation find themselves?

Bush's tax cut was anything but modest, weighing in at a cost of $674 billion over ten years vs. the Democrats plan which cost a total of $114 billion over that same time period. And, again, the bulk of Bush's plan went to folks who aren't going to spend it. The top 2% of taxpayers have an average income of just over $1 million and received a tax cut of about $53,000. Contrast that with the lowest 60% of taxpayers who have an average income of $23,000 and they got a cut of about $350 and then, only about 50% of them even got that!

And, here's an interesting little tidbit for you: Eight of the top twelve states, five of the top five, with the highest percentage of taxpayers that got NO tax cut at all in 2003 are in the south, (Alabama was 5th @ 39%) but, Bush will probably win in all eight of those states in November and he'll be singing the praises of his tax cuts to them while he waves his little flag! This was the one where Bush was quoted as saying, "Didn't we already give money to the rich people?"

I think if you truly believe that and are against tax cut then you should send it back.

I've told you before, I checked and you can't send it back.

Yes you can send it back. There are any number of ways you can give money to the Fed govt.

I also don't think it is the Federal Governments place to have to fund education. The states and local governments should do that.

State and local government DOES do that. Federal education funding for Alabama accounts for less than 10% of the total education expenditure. About 60% is from the state and about 30% is local.

Read the threads Al, ib4au stated:

No, of course you are correct. I did not send my "tax cut" back; I used it to pay my increased property tax which was necessitated by lack of adequate federal funding for education,

That is what I was referring to.

[rexbo 104]

I think if you truly believe that and are against tax cut then you should send it back.

I've told you before, I checked and you can't send it back.

I work for the Federal Government, so you can just send it to me TigerAl, I won't refuse it.

[Tigermike 3,711]

I think if you truly believe that and are against tax cut then you should send it back.

I've told you before, I checked and you can't send it back.

I work for the Federal Government, so you can just send it to me TigerAl, I won't refuse it.

See there is one way I had not even thought about. Get your checkbook out.

[Donutboy 0]

That site is pretty laughable.

Economy: Clinton passed on his Economic Failures to Bush. We were in recession before Bush even took office.

SS: We will have to move toward a free market based finance of SS. There is no real chance of anything else working. We make a whopping 2% return now. With COLA running around 4%+ we are actually losing ground.

Jobs: Clinton-Gore Recession is only just ending. Thse jobs havent made a huge comeback yet. Want to bet what they look like in a few months?

Environment: We justy had the cleanest bill of health on 30+ years on Air in America. Sounds great to me. Better than under all the previous Presidents.

Education Reform: The Legislation was pushed by Bush and Ted Kennedy. It is not perfect but it's far better than the 30 years of mediocrity we have been having.

MOveOn.Org.....are they still around making their Kiss of Death Endorsements?

Economy..... Clinton presided over the longest economic expansion in US history. His tax increase of 1992, passed without a single Republican vote, turned around the record budget deficits of the first President Bush and had created a budget surplus before he left office. Dubya Bush's tax cuts and increased spending have created budget deficits that make his Father's seem small by comparison.

SS..... Social Security would be a lot more fiscally sound if Congress would simply leave the funds alone and stop borrowing against them to fund their spending on other projects.

Jobs: HUH???? Clinton's economic policy created 22.4 million jobs!! Here's the government figures!! The Clinton-Gore Economic Record: The Longest Expansion In History And Over 22.4 Million New Jobs

Dubya will become the first president since Herbert Hoover to preside over an economy that lost jobs!! Here's his record of futility thus far. 3.2 million jobs lost under Bush

Environment: Since it takes years for environmental policy to show signs of change (cleaner air, water, etc....), you're patting the wrong president on the back. Wait a few more years until Bush's new deregulations take hold and you'll see what his policy does.

Education reform: No Child Left behind is untested and underfunded. The "30 years of mediocrity" has provided us with todays scientists, doctors, and most of the people on this forum. We live in a world that has seen such technological leaps and bounds that a person who grew up two decades ago would be lost if he stepped from 1984 to 2004. Myself, I don't see anything wrong with our educational system other than the politicians who try to drag it down.

MoveOn.org..... Yes, they're still around, waiting to see which Democratic candidate gets their millions of dollars worth of support in the form of advocacy ads.

[Tigermike 3,711]

MoveOn.org..... Yes, they're still around, waiting to see which Democratic candidate gets their millions of dollars worth of support in the form of advocacy ads.

Ohhhh I'm sure those ads will work great.

[Donutboy 0]

MoveOn.org..... Yes, they're still around, waiting to see which Democratic candidate gets their millions of dollars worth of support in the form of advocacy ads.

Ohhhh I'm sure those ads will work great.

Well, The ads aren't the "Vote Kerry" type ads. Let me tell you about the one CBS refused to air during the Super Bowl but will allow during the heat of the campaign. It shows our kids, busy at their jobs, flipping burgers, bagging groceries, etc.... The narration goes something like this..... George W. Bush's economic policy has created record budget deficits and is creating trillions of dollars in debt. Guess who is going to pay for this debt? You are!! It then zooms in on the shocked faces of the teenagers making minimum wage but facing trillions of dollars of debt. Today's younger voters are more liberal than their fathers and mothers but are less likely to vote. This is but one of the target ads to provide them with a reason to vote and change the direction this country has taken under Dubya.

[ib4au 0]

TigerMike:

"Of course I'm not sending mine back."

Never thought you would!

"But you must admit that it is the democrats mantra "Bush gave tax cuts to the wealthy!" I think if you truly believe that and are against tax cut then you should send it back."

Isn't the US wonderful. You can think whatever you wish, but you cannot extrapolate it onto the canvas of the universe and get everyone to agree with what you think!

"The tax cuts that the democrats hate actually put a little money back in the pockets of the people who earned it, I don't see that as bad. I also don't think it is the Federal Governments place to have to fund education."

And therein lies much of the problem. Until the fed gets more involved with education and the Republicans stop trying to abolish the Dept of Education, then we will have under-funded schools in states like Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, etc

"Is it your contention that this modest tax cut is completely responsible for the financial hole that education systems all over the nation find themselves?"

Modest tax cut(s) are your words; not mine nor are they the words of a great number of American citizens.

But, to answer your question, no I do not think the tax cuts are "completely responsible" for the financial hole that education systems all over the nation find themselves. But it is my position that Dubya has no idea how to get our economy moving. The AP said recently that the recession began in 2001. This is 2004 and Dubya has tried tax cut after tax cut....basically playing a one string musical instrument over and over, and we still have an uncertain economy with literally thousands (millions?) out of jobs.

Is that your idea of a strong economy?

In December we created 1000 jobs; read it! 1000 jobs. Tax cuts should have been given only to those living from paycheck to paycheck. They would have taken that money from tax cuts and spent it on food, clothes, appliances, homes and automobiles putting that money back into the economy. Poor people and to some degree middle income people have no choice: They must spend the money they get. The wealthy, on the other hand, have a choice. They simply pocket the money from tax cuts until the proper undervalued investment comes along!

[AUloggerhead 2,516]

Well, ... look here. Neil Cavuto & I are on the same page: Neil Cavuto

They call it class warfare. For the life of me, I don't know why.

There's nothing classy about pitting one group of people against another.

There's nothing classy about telling the rich in this country that their gains are somehow ill-gotten.

There's nothing classy about saying the rich get back more money but never saying boo about the simple fact they pay more money – a lot more money.

And there's nothing classy about lying. Because truth be told, this isn't about us and what we're paying. It's about the government and what it's keeping.

Some people really like the government, trust the government and want to give more money to the government. I am not in that camp. I am in the camp that says I'd much sooner trust you with your money than any bureaucrat with your money.

But it's more fundamental than that. The reason why I find myself throwing things at the television every time I hear Democratic candidates speak is that they all but say they hate rich people. Rich people are greedy. Rich people are selfish. Rich people don't deserve a break.

Well, give me a break! Look, I've known rich people who were fools and poorer people who were fools. Trust me on this one, charlatans know no pedigree, and decency knows no salary range. You can make a lot of money and have zero scruples or make no money and have no scruples.

But I'll tell you this: Most rich people I've known are good, hard-working, start-from-scratch people. Contrary to the impression that they've somehow come into this world with silver spoons in their mouths, government statistics show the vast majority of John Kerry's targeted $200,000-and-over crowd is self-made. If they have a silver spoon, they bought it with their own money and their own sweat.

You know, not once in my life has a poor person hired me. Rich guys, or at least richer guys, did. Trust me, they weren't all saints, but all the ones I've known were willing to give this Italian-Irish kid from working-class roots a chance ... whether it be scooping ice cream in a shop or churning out perfume in a factory.

Poor people get their breaks from rich people. The government can hand out a check. But the rich guy makes an investment. There's a fundamental difference here that marks the very essence of capitalism. The best way out of the gutter isn't a payment from a bureaucrat but an opportunity from a businessman.

The class of our system of government is that it doesn't distinguish between classes at all. All can share in the American dream if they toil long enough and sacrifice enough. Some have neither the appetite nor work ethic to bother with this, but that doesn't mean we abuse those who do.

Only in America can we turn on those who made this country great and tear them down precisely because they are. Look, I'm not saying we have to all shout a big thank you, but they're due a hell of a lot more than a screw you!

There's nothing classy in that argument, just as there's nothing classy in saying that the rich don't already more than foot the bill. The top 1 percent of wage-earners in this country account for more than a third of the taxes collected in this country. The top 5 percent pay more than half. If that's getting off lightly, what's considered getting hosed?

You make more in this country, you pay more in this country. It was that way before the president's tax cuts. It's been that way since the president's tax cuts. It's amazing to me that bureaucrats who suck off the system are bashing the guys who give 'em the milk!

That's the real class story.

Pity there's not a politician with the class to report it.

[TitanTiger 21,238]

Nice article from Cavuto. Man makes sense. I was just reading some info on America's millionaires. I can't quote the exact stat, but somewhere around 85-90% of all millionaires in this country are first generation...meaning they didn't inherit Daddy Warbucks millions to make them fabulously rich. They earned it.

I'm still waiting for the stunningly brilliant liberal answer to how rich people don't deserve tax cuts when they are the ones footing the bill in this country. I mean, the top 1% of wage earners account for over 33% of income tax collected. The top 5% account for over half of the income tax collected. And the most devastating statistic of all of them: the top half of wage earners pay 96% of all the income taxes. In other words, half the wage earners are sucking on the government teat, reaping benefits that rich people provide...but when tax cuts are discussed, those "providers" don't deserve a dime. They should send their money in and shut the hell up because a bunch of liberals say they don't deserve to keep more of their money.

What a crock.

[Tigermike 3,711]

And therein lies much of the problem. Until the fed gets more involved with education

There is the big difference. You and the democrats want larger and larger government. More govt is always preferable for the libs. Is that not a fair statement? :roll:

Great article Titan!