END welfare for the wealthy

END 'welfare for the wealthy'. why bush continues to slash their tax rates and give the rich elite economic favors is beyond reason or affordability.

bush's actions have devalued the USD by over 25% since his election. he has cost us millions of jobs and billions of dollars. american unemployment and underemployment have become epidemic. reported unemployment figures do not count those who are underemployed, and only count those receiving benefits while searching as 'unemployed'. but they still don't have good jobs, or jobs at all in many cases.

this jobs situation, combined with abysmal federal minimum wage laws, still at $5.15/hr, ensure poverty for too many americans.

bush is simply a butterfingers who puts on a stern face. he may be decisive, but all his 'decisions' are wrong. sticking with the wrong moves does not help.



Enron/Halliburton 2004

[Compugasm]

Prove it.

[bishop]

wasn't this a cut and past from one of his previous posts?

[Seeker_Of_Sins]

Welfare is supposed to be a safety net for those who fall victim to lifes misfortunes, not a hammock for those who cannot be bothered.

The psychology of welfare dependency follows a predictable progression, from grudging acceptance, to gratitude, to pleasant satisfaction, to expectation, to demand with the conviction of right;at the same time accompanied by pitiful self justification, founded on an ever increasing sense of inadequacy.

To take ever more from those who have vision and purpose, and who desire and strive to better themselves, and to give ever more to those who do not share these ambitions or motivations, is not sustainable.

Taxing the rich and the industrious so that the lazy and the self pitying are not required to work is not sustainable.

[Technosoul]

Welfare only takes a slim slice out of the total federal budget, so the above debate has it's apparent faults based on real facts (just check what percentage of the total budget is used for helping mothers with dependant children and you will see this is so). The taxes collected from the rich folks (and everyone else) is used for a lot of purposes, for schools, police and fire departments, to help states with speical needs, for national parks, for all the departments that regulate things, for the military (equipment to support the troops), for Congress and other people doing governmental work, the court systems, the jails, and for roadways and other public transportation projects, and little things like when Bush gave three millions of our tax monies to a Texas Oil company so they can explore for new resources. Etc.

So taxing the wealthy to help pay for all those things is not about giving all that money to non-working people (and most of those are women with children who were dumped after they spent their early life as a housekeeper with no outside employment background).

Such is a false impression that is not founded in the economic facts of the governmental budget. (impression that Liberals want to take money from the rich and hand it out to the lazy bums). Not so at all, most unmarried men cannot even get a penny from the Welfare system and that is why you see them asking for spare change or why they go to a privetly funded Mission for some food.

What the original post was speaking about was when Bush and Republicans take taxes from the working poor and middle class and then give it to the wealthy few and to large companies, leading to the new term "Coorperate Welfare". It is not fair that those gaining the most from our country should gain more in the way of special interest tax breaks or plain hand-outs resulting from the policy making of the government. It is not fair if they gain more from the economic systems of our country that they should not chip in more to keep up the highways and the other community projects of our nation.

Technosoul.

i am not talking even a little about welfare for the poor. i am talking about forking over huge amounts of money to the rich for no good reason.

[LiveAndLetLive]

Originally posted by Technosoul, Welfare only takes a slim slice out of the total federal budget, so the above debate has it's apparent faults based on real facts (just check what percentage of the total budget is used for helping mothers with dependant children and you will see this is so). <snipped> What the original post was speaking about was when Bush and Republicans take taxes from the working poor and middle class and then give it to the wealthy few and to large companies, leading to the new term "Coorperate Welfare". It is not fair that those gaining the most from our country should gain more in the way of special interest tax breaks or plain hand-outs resulting from the policy making of the government. It is not fair if they gain more from the economic systems of our country that they should not chip in more to keep up the highways and the other community projects of our nation. Technosoul.

You're quite right that most of the Federal budget doesn't go to the needy. The question is, why is the government involved in all these extra-Constitutional activities in the first place?

While I would have cut taxes differently, the fact is the "rich" pay way more in taxes than all other income categories. The thing to do now is to cut discretionary federal spending, much of which IS corporate welfare.

THAT's the road back to prosperity and freedom, which IS our inalienable right, after all.

Live

[bishop]

i'd rather see payroll taxes cut before income taxes. everyone has to pay payroll taxes.