Here's how i see taxes

[serjykalstryke]

We as American's are not being taxed enough to provide the services we would like to provide for our people, on the other hand, we also get taxed quite a bit as it is, so, my solution here is that we shift all taxes to the sales tax and that should increase government revenue by quite a bit, while also giving us, as the people, more money to spend on things we want to buy.

Reply and tell me what you think,

thanks,
David Stinnett

[Rob Withers]

We as American's are not being taxed enough to provide the services we would like to provide for our people, on the other hand, we also get taxed quite a bit as it is, so, my solution here is that we shift all taxes to the sales tax and that should increase government revenue by quite a bit, while also giving us, as the people, more money to spend on things we want to buy.

Reply and tell me what you think,

thanks,
David Stinnett

That is known as the fair tax. The issue I have heard with that is that the percentage you would need to tax is much higher than the proponents claim. It is something like 50%. At such a high tax rate, a black market would form.

I am in favor of shifting all entitlements to the state/local level, reducing the federal income tax rates, aggressively reducing the federal budget to shrink the deficit, and raising taxes at the state/local level to pay for the entitlements. The amount of tax paid may be the same.

[Athenas Owl]

Render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's and unto God that which is God's.

I wanted to see I could post this time.

[Athenas Owl]

Mr. Withers,

I thought that the Modern Whig Party is supposed to be a moderate political party. Yes, there are many views in this party, but your view regarding entitlements is reactionary. Your view reminds me of the ultra conservative views of Barry Goldwater. Local and state governments could not afford to pay for entitlements even with lower federal tax rates and higher local tax rates. Moreover, I would not trust entitlements to the local or state level because there would be no uniform standard for the whole nation and conservative exstremists could try to reduce or end the much needed entitlements. There would be no equality. Remember what Jefferson said about equality? Richmond has already in the recent past been wringing its hands over how to pay for the exspansion of medicaid. Your approach is not good for the Whig party and will turn the Whig party into a fringe party. The Federal government in concert with local governments is best suited to deal with the issue of entitlements. I will get to the issue of taxes and the deficit later. I have been involved in politics for years and I think you ought to listen to my experience.

[Rob Withers]

Mr. Withers,

I thought that the Modern Whig Party is supposed to be a moderate political party. Yes, there are many views in this party, but your view regarding entitlements is reactionary. Your view reminds me of the ultra conservative views of Barry Goldwater. Local and state governments could not afford to pay for entitlements even with lower federal tax rates and higher local tax rates. Moreover, I would not trust entitlements to the local or state level because there would be no uniform standard for the whole nation and conservative exstremists could try to reduce or end the much needed entitlements. There would be no equality. Remember what Jefferson said about equality? Richmond has already in the recent past been wringing its hands over how to pay for the exspansion of medicaid. Your approach is not good for the Whig party and will turn the Whig party into a fringe party. The Federal government in concert with local governments is best suited to deal with the issue of entitlements. I will get to the issue of taxes and the deficit later. I have been involved in politics for years and I think you ought to listen to my experience.

Mr. Owl,

Entitlements make up 60% of our federal budget. 33% of our federal budget is borrowed as deficit. We must get that under control. We can cut and reduce programs out of the government departments. That will get us partway. We must do something about entitlements, these horrible programs that extend the generosity of the state, while bankrupting us at the same time and making it politically impossible to reform them.

I believe strongly in public medical care for the poor and the sick. I do not agree with SS. I do not agree with welfare. I do not agree with Medicare unless you are poor. I do agree with unemployment insurance.

The problem is that we are deficit spending to pay for entitlements. If we shift entitlements to the states, while mandating the states extend a certain amount of coverage, we will pay for them with non-deficit dollars. There is the equality.

Regards,
Rob

[Athenas Owl]

Dear Mr. Withers,

I find it interesting that you are opposed to welfare and Social security. I do not know what your life circumstance has been. However, I think that I can assume what it has been. The world of politics can be very uncivil. As a result, I will move beyond my assumptions regarding you.

Conservatives oppose welfare because they believe that it creates a disincentive for people to work. I think that is only partially true. There are some wastrals who abuse the system, but at the same time the system helps many people. The private sector also creates a disincentive for people to work. When we consider the low minimum wage, the lack of insurance, and a poor education. These are real reasons that contribute to some people being on the dole. The government and the private sector help to create the underemployed in our country as well as recessions and depressions. Furthermore, our economic system needs unemployment. Do you know how unemployment helps our system? Think about that for a bit and get back to me.
If we got rid of welfare and social security then who would the needy fall back on? Yes, yes, yes, I know they are supposed to be self reliant. Yes, that is how life is supposed to be isn't it. Can they depend on the church? No, not really. The church would not pay the rent for all of the mentally and physically disabled. Why? They could not afford to do so. We could put them in a shanty town in the city park. What about euthanasia? No concervatives would have a hard time conconciling that with their prolife stance. Could these people depend on their families. Not all the time. In this case I am talking about Supplemental Security Income. What about the retired? There is no guarantee


that anyone is going to have anything to retire on in America when they are old. What is wrong with me paying for your retirement and you paying for my retirement? I think it is good that I care about your well being. You are my fellow American. Why should you care to pay for my retirement if I am going to die for you on a foriegn battle field somewhere? I would conclude the same thing about you. We are Americans afterall. The social security system does need to be reformed to deal with 21st century problems

[Athenas Owl]

I could not finish my previous post. I have problems at times with this site. Shift the entitlement burden to the state? As I said the state and local governments could not afford that even if the Social Administration were axed tommorrow. Our increased State and Local taxes would not be able to fund the retired and the disabled. Social Security does not need to be gotten rid of. It needs to be reformed to a 21st century standard. The government ought to promote the idea of Individual Retirement Accounts. The age for retirement should be increased. Yes a tax increase should be considered as well. The future of Social Security may not look too rosey, but the system should be maintained even if Social Security is smaller in the future.

Now why do Conservatives constantly want to beat up on the poor? They are an easy target unlike the boss. People tend to lick their chops and go after the weakest. Why focus only on deficit spending regarding entitlements? The Federal government wants to spend 51 million to renovate the Poff building in Roanoke VA. Economic stimus money was spent here in Roanoke on a home that rich people own so that lead could be removed from their mansion like home. At least 1.1 million is being spent on the holly wood walk of fame in tinsel town. I say the Whig Party should cry out against all of that! What about 1.33 Billion given to Pakistan since 2001. Guess what they still hate us. Let us also consider all of the money that has also been paid to keep up the war in Iraq.

Mr. Withers your moderate politial views are moderate views that I do not want. Maybe this is why their are only 100 active Whigs in Va. I suspect Mr. Goodlatte will handilly beat Vanke in the Fall. Strangely, Vanke does not seem interested in getting rid of Social Security. I don't trust him. He is associated with all of this silliness.

Athena's Owl

[Athenas Owl]

Here is another thought regarding Social Security. I bet some of you may cringe when I write this: We ought to listen to Hillary Clintion. In her memoir Living History she said that abortion should be kept legal but we should also encourage other options besides abortion. She has a good moderate stance. I am not a pro life nut and I am not a prochoice nut. I do believe in lots of choices. Our population in America right now must at lease be a little over 300 million now. I am guessitmating. Since 1973 there have been at least 50 million abortions. It would be nice if there could have been only around 25 million. There is a moderate number. We could have today 325 million Americans. We need to be mindful of the future when we make reproductive choices. Right now because of the Great Recession Americans are cutting back on baby production. Let's produce more tax payers who recieve a livable wage, good education, as well as health insurance!

The Owl