Political & Elections

pima · Guru

RE: Fair Share is Obama's 2012 slogan

winchester · Guru

Analysis: 'Fair share' in taxes? Not by the numbers

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/20/analysis-fair-share-in-taxes-not-by-numbers/#ixzz1n0qzroNb?test=latestnews

And what do liberals want? More. More, more, more. Always more. And if you resist; if you say enough already! You’re accused of being heartless; of not “CARING.” What a crock.

There is nothing in the least bit "fair" about 10% of the people paying 70% of the money taken by the government, and 70% of the people getting back more than they put in. It's crazy. The world is totally upside down. It's just wrong; morally, ethically, any way you look at it. It's flat out wrong.

The problem is too much spending, it is not, not enough taxes.

And the reason the problem is spending, is the mentality that looks to the government for relief from every ill, real or imaginined.

As Americans sit down to file their federal tax returns, a simple question comes to mind -- what's a "fair share" to give the federal government in taxes?

For half the working population, fair means paying almost no income taxes at all.

"The top 10 percent income earners pay about 70 percent of federal income taxes," says Will McBride of the Tax Foundation. "The bottom 50 percent of tax filers have, they pay almost no federal income tax. They pay about 3 percent of federal income taxes."

President Obama’s phrase that everyone should “pay our fair share of taxes” has become something of a political mantra. He has used the expression in dozens of speeches, beginning back in his State of Union address in January. More recently, he told University students in Virginia, "we do expect everyone to do their fair share.”

But for many of the people who pay no taxes, the government also allows tax credits, which end up providing refunds.

"Close to a hundred billion in checks sent out by the IRS (go) to folks who have no tax liability," McBride said. "So the IRS is becoming a spending agency."

Arthur Brooks, head of the American Enterprise Institute, put it this way: "Half of the people who don’t pay anything in federal income taxes -- about half of them pay less than zero."

But Brooks says the system is tilted even more toward those in the middle class and below because they also get services from the federal government. As a result the per capita value of government spending exceeds what those individuals pay in federal taxes.

"Right now about 70 percent of Americans take more out of the tax system than they put into it, according to the Tax Foundation," Brooks said."That's something that should really alarm a lot of Americans."

The policies that left so many people paying no income taxes have been supported by presidents of both parties, and despite what Americans tell pollsters they believe is fair, that’s not how it shakes out.

"The interesting thing is that about two-thirds of Americans think that everybody should pay something,” Brooks said, "so they remember that our government isn't free."

-- Edited by winchester on Tuesday 21st of February 2012 07:10:49 AM

-- Edited by winchester on Tuesday 21st of February 2012 07:16:49 AM

hope · Guru

That was a joke....nevermind.

blankstare

Cartera · Guru

Nothing to argue about - just a difference of opinion. I think she's great - favorite first lady in my lifetime.

hope · Guru

It's not the vacations, it's the vacations in these times, and in relation to what her husband is blabbing about. He's out there working the class divide for his own political gain, talking about the one percent, blah, blah, blah; meanwhile Michelle is giving off a very privileged vibe. A little sensitivity is in order. You would not catch Laura doing this. In addition she's out there telling us what to eat, dancing and showing off her jumping jacks and push-ups prowess. Her secret wish is to be a tv star--I have no doubt. Way to put those degrees to good use. Good thing she has her mom to help her take care of the kids. I wouldn't want her to be overburdened.

Our first reality tv first lady--perfect for the times. Declasse, Michelle.

Just venting: I have no intention of arguing about it. NIOAAI

Cartera · Guru

I don't remember my last vacation because my business has been really down. I have lots of friends and acquaintances who are quite well off and I don't begrudge them their vacations. I guess I just lied because a wealthy friend of mine sent me a plane ticket last January to join her and some friends at her home in Florida for a few days. I'll have to say I haven't paid for a vacation in years.

I don't begrudge the Obama family their vacations either. I think it is important that they get out of the fishbowl that is DC now and then. This is particularly important for the kids.

hope · Guru

Last vacation we took as a family was when my oldest was twelve. Truly.

Michelle--clothes, dinners out, vacations, let-them-eat-arugula attitude is not appropriate to these times. But we have to adore her anyway.

And, as the saying goes, I don't want to argue about it. wink

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

I would love to have 1 vacation a year. It hasn't happened in many years for my family.

CelticClan07 · Senior Member

Transition on the Fair Share issue:

http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/washington-secrets/2012/02/michelles-ski-trip-marks-16-obama-vacations/294051

I want my Fair Share of their 16 fabulous vacations on my hard-working dollars!!! When do I get to go???? They are the Chicago Hillbillies.

winchester · Guru

The people in the tall columns on the Kerry map are the ones Obama is appealing to with his "fair share" line; where "fair" is the liberal interpretation in the poker game analogy.

If he can get enough of them to vote for him he might be able to turn the state blue on the electoral map.

The Red State / Blue State meme is just not true. If there's red/blue anything it is in the counties within the states.

Razorsharp · Guru

winchester wrote:

Apparently I have to spell it out for you.

Then we agree.

winchester · Guru

Apparently I have to spell it out for you.

Most welfare recipients vote democrat.

Most welfare recipients live in large cities.

Look at the Kerry map. If we could make a similar kind of map of number of welfare recipients I think it would look essentially the same as the Kerry map.

Welfare is a great vote buying scheme for democrats.

It's not really states that are blue, its counties, and possibly by such wide margins that it tips the electoral result for the state to blue.

If not for that, arguably democrats might never win a presidential election.

This explains the fear mongering by democrats, in practically every election, that those mean nasty republicans are going to take away your entitlements.

pima · Guru

I like that analogy, because I think that is the truth.

Look at Clinton and Bush43 regarding their education program.

Clinton's was Goals 2000.

There were no gateway yrs., just lots of hugs and warm feelings. Every child was told they were special in some manner, with no regard to their academic abilities. Retaining a student was not allowed unless you could swear on your own life they couldn't succeed, and even than you still had parental rights to over rule the teacher.

Bush43

Was all of you will be tested, the same test within the state, on the same day, it was not about teachers playing favorites. Either the child knew the info or didn't. If they failed, they were tutored and a few weeks later given the test again. If they failed they went to summer school and tested again. If they failed than they were retained.

Dems hated No Child left behind, and impo as someone who worked in the educational field, it was because they had to face the facts that it wasn't personal, it was factual, your child did not master that grade. People would say the teachers were teaching the test. I am biased, but I never saw that at all, I saw that always come from people who had children on the cusp. At my kids schools (KS, VA, and NC), these kids still did Art, Music, PE, etc. They still learned science through unique experiments. They still learned about history. They still had field trips. Teachers didn't pull out old tests and created lesson plans with them just learning what would be on the test like SAT/ACT Kaplan

geeps20 · Senior Member

"Let's say we have a weekly poker game. I always lose and you always win.

To conservatives, if everyone follows the rules of poker and nobody cheats then the game is fair.

To lliberals, if you are so much better than I am that I have practically no chance of ever winning then the game is NOT fair."

good analogy....the more intelligent will always have the advantage in society. Libs don't like this fact for some reason.

geeps20 · Senior Member

makes sense ..sounds better than income redistribution

Razorsharp · Guru

winchester wrote:

1) Where do most welfare recipients reside?
2) How do they vote?
3) Look at the maps below.

You are trying to tell me that welfarer recipients are Republicans? I have a bridge to sell you.

-- Edited by Razorsharp on Wednesday 8th of February 2012 01:26:01 PM

winchester · Guru

Fair share is liberal code for taking money from people who earn it and giving it to people who don't because those people who don't earn it vote for democrats

1) Where do most welfare recipients reside?
2) How do they vote?
3) Look at the maps below.

Just sayin.....

http://bigpicture.typepad.com/writing/2004/11/where_did_their.html

-- Edited by winchester on Wednesday 8th of February 2012 10:32:28 AM

Razorsharp · Guru

Fair share is liberal code for taking money from people who earn it and giving it to people who don't because those people who don't earn it vote for democrats.

winchester · Guru

The problem, Winchester, lies in the fact that liberals often believe the rich and powerful cheat, flagrantly and unabashedly---as in "stack the deck" cheat. Those who have the money have the power, and those who have the power makes the rules, and those rules invariably advantage them. Simple fact.

I think you're right about the liberal view of things, and I think you are right that it is a problem.

Liberalism is good hearted in its intent. It has each individual’s best interests at heart. It believes it is altruistic in its core; that it is, truly, doing “good.”

The problem is that in the name of altruistic good, liberalism uses money and power to “stack the deck” every bit as much as anyone else does - it is every bit as unfair and oppressive as those it accuses of being unfair and oppressive - and it does not realize it.

And because it does not realize it, it takes the high road, and, resting on the core belief of altruism, demonizes those who dare question its good intentions.

longprime · Guru

http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1285480-what-middle-class-families-really-paying-ivy-league-school-admissions.html

Gtbguy1 said,

I've talked to a few parents with kids thinking about or already enrolled in both Ivy and non Ivy league schools and it's difficult to determine what people are actually paying for college. As we all know these schools cost about the same, mid to high $50K/year. I don't know of any middle class families that can really afford this kind of money every year. Like most middle class we have a mortgage, car payments, and the typical household bills. The school calculators I use to get an idea always come back with you are getting zero dollars in the way of help. I'm hoping to get an idea from others out there who are paying for colleges back East who are in the same situation we are in.

Our situation is as follows:
$200K in yearly salaries (my wife and I),
mortgage,
some rental properties,
minority daughter from New Mexico interested in applying for both Ivy and non Ivy league schools but not a URM,
daughter is currently a junior in high school so we don't what scholarships she'll get

Of course she has to get accepted and we're fairly confident she'll likely get into at least one or two of the schools back East.

I said, that this thread kinda wanna make you want to change your political party. evileye

-- Edited by longprime on Tuesday 7th of February 2012 04:37:55 PM

-- Edited by longprime on Tuesday 7th of February 2012 04:38:36 PM

-- Edited by longprime on Tuesday 7th of February 2012 04:39:52 PM

catahoula · Guru

In response to the OP, there simply isn't anything, economics included, that can't be reduced to a social issue to run on.

Both dishonest and non-productive for the very people you're trying to pull along but it's a living.

-- Edited by catahoula on Tuesday 7th of February 2012 08:44:44 AM

Poetsheart · Senior Member

To conservatives, if everyone follows the rules of poker and nobody cheats then the game is fair.

The problem, Winchester, lies in the fact that liberals often believe the rich and powerful cheat, flagrantly and unabashedly---as in "stack the deck" cheat. Those who have the money have the power, and those who have the power makes the rules, and those rules invariably advantage them. Simple fact.

-- Edited by Poetsheart on Tuesday 7th of February 2012 01:15:40 AM

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

Fair Share doesn't surprise me. It's...what many of us expected, based on the campaign and the last three years.

Perhaps he should just run with Occupy DC as the slogan. wink

hope · Guru

I'm pretty sure that most people think they are already paying their fair share. In this economy if they're not paying it in taxes, they've been hit somewhere else. Hmm...my fault for not paying Obama enough money or Obama's fault for screwing up..."Fair Share" v "Believe in America." And many people will resent being told they are slackers when it comes to concern for their fellow man. Obama has no clue how the middle class thinks.

pima · Guru

I laugh at him doing this because wasn't Obama the President that would unite us?

Fair share to me is divisive.

busdriver11 · Guru

Yep, that's his new campaign slogan. I don't think it's a winner, but he doesn't seem to have anything else. I think that will only catch the people who were there anyways. It's pretty pathetic, and I doubt it will get people too riled up because they've been hearing that garbage for a long time.

pima · Guru

Anybody else notice that these 2 words are popping up everytime he speaks?

FAIR SHARE.

Hope and change are gone.

winchester · Guru

The problem, or maybe the insidious brilliance, of the slogan "fair share" is that liberals and conservatives have entirely different connotations its meaning.

Conservatives, generally speaking, tend to think fair means that there is one set of rules that applies, and is applied, to everyone equally.

Liberals, generally speaking, tend to think fair means that everyone has a more or less equal chance of a positive outcome.

Let's say we have a weekly poker game. I always lose and you always win.

To conservatives, if everyone follows the rules of poker and nobody cheats then the game is fair.

To lliberals, if you are so much better than I am that I have practically no chance of ever winning then the game is NOT fair.

The word, "fair," has two very different, and arguably mutually exclusive, meanings.

-- Edited by winchester on Monday 6th of February 2012 01:06:26 PM