Government Gone Bad
The sorry state of the U.S. Government. From the war
with Afghanistan and Iraq to tax cuts, Israel, Iran and the FCC. What's happening to
our government? Why don't people seem to care? A look at some of the things wrong with our GOVERNMENT.
Saturday, May 31, 2003 :::
Sean Penn Should be Proud of Himself
I agree completely with the Sean Penn article in the New York Times. I hope he keeps questioning our government and speaking out when he feels our government is wrong.
On Joe Scarborough, on MSNBC, Joe Scarborough said, in his usual whine, Sean was on pot, acid and Viagra. When you don't have a valid argument start the name calling like a little child, they (the right wing) will do it every time. He also complained Sean didn't mention certain things, which apparently Joe Scarborough thinks should have been in the article. That's one of the right wing tactics, when they don't have a good argument for something someone says, they bring up something they didn't say. I've seen the tactic used many times. It happened to me, I was accused of only seeing the bad in America and not the good which is ridiculous and a really stupid argument. Of course you can't mention everything and what would be the point? Nobody mentions everything, not the right, not the left, not the middle, not Joe Scarborough, nobody. They try to discredit the person for something they didn't say and not on the basis of what they said. Just how stupid do they think the American people are?
The whining Ann Coulter (who talks through her nose) compared Sean to a drunk and she had nothing of substance or intelligents to say, so I won't even "mention" anything else she said. What a useless and ignorant crackpot she seems to be.
Sean should be proud of himself. The best argument they could make about his article is what he didn't say in the article (because they know Sean is correct). I love it. I wonder if they know how stupid they look. I don't really think so. Those right wing conservatives must be getting scared. They know some of us are on to them and they are doing everything in their power to shut us up. People like Sean have to continue speaking out and not be intimidated by these right wing nuts. They hate him and others like him whose voices can be heard. It bugs the hell out of them and it drives them nuts, if you can get any nuttier than they already are. We need more people like Sean Penn. Don't let them shout you down. Don't let them intimidate you. Keep them on the defensive. If it's repeated enough times by enough people the real truth will be heard. Way to go Sean.
::: posted by Alan at 2:00 AM
Thursday, May 29, 2003 :::
There are some striking similarities between Adolph Hitler and George W. Bush and his Administration. The scariest similarity is Hitler misled the people of Germany so that they would agree with his policies. That is exactly what seems to be taking place right now in the Bush Administration. I’m referring to the weapons of mass destruction we were told Saddam Hussein definitely possessed, the imminent threat Iraq supposedly posed to the U.S and the supposed connection between Iraq and Al Qeada. So far none of them have been proved to be accurate. The little proof the Administration says it has is actually no proof at all. Their so called proof would never stand up in a court of law and the Bush administration knows it. That’s why the administration is presently putting so much emphasis on the removal of the “brutal regime” of Saddam Hussein. President Bush and his Administration are trying to sway the public into believing that the originally stated justifications for the war with Iraq doesn’t matter as long as Saddam Hussein was removed from power, which was the original plan all along. We were more than misled we were downright lied to.
Hitler marched with the troops to win their approval and gain their respect so they would fight for his good cause. Mr. Bush gives speeches at marine bases, army bases, naval academies, coastguard academies and lands on aircraft carriers, praising the troops patrotism and their fight against evil, but very seldom holds a press conference. Is he scared the press will ask tough questions that he won’t be able to answer or that the real truth will get out? All his speeches are scripted and are patriotic in nature.
Hitler believed God was on his side just as Mr. Bush believes god is on his side. How could Bush possibly loose this war on Iraq when he had God on his side? After all God had already selected him as the chosen one to eradicate “Evil” around the world, at least Bush thinks he did.
Hitler wanted allegiance not disagreement, community not individuality. Boy does that sound like the present administration or what? When someone disagrees with this administration the name calling and put downs begin, from the republicans in congress to the conservative talk show host on radio, television, and the newspapers.
Which brings us to Hitler ending freedom of speech and the free press. When people are afraid to speak what they believe, because they’re scared of the put downs and being ridiculed, their free speech is being stifled. While Hitler banned freedom of speech and the free press outright here in the U.S it is being done more discreetly. The media in the U.S is becoming more and more monopolized. It looks like the FCC is going to loosen the regulations on the ownership of media companies on June 2, so the media will be even more monopolized by a few of the biggest media giants.
Under Hitler the people were deprived of rights and they didn’t mind. The same thing is going on in the U.S with the Patriots Act. The name of the act implies that if you’re a patriot it won’t affect you. The vague language of the Patriot Act could very easily lead to misuse of the act against you. The Patriot Act is set to expire in 5 years (unless it's made permanent like the Bush Administration wants). Even if it is allowed to expire, not the entire act will expire. Some of the laws will remain so no matter what happens we already lost some of our rights. There is talk now about Patriot Act II, where we stand to lose even more of our rights. The sad part is people don’t seem to mind.
The people of Germany wanted a leader who was strong, someone for peace and harmony, someone who would take action, someone who would save Germany. That sounds eerily close to what I’ve been hearing some people say about Mr. Bush. He has resolve they will say. So what! A bank robber can have resolve, that doesn’t make him right. Remember Mr. Bush was going to unite this Nation. It looks like we're more divided on every issue than anytime before. People believe Bush will bring peace to this country and the world. It seems to me the route he is taking is only going to bring less peace to this world in the long run. Some say at least he’s not afraid to take action. Nothing wrong with taking action if it is the right action, but lying to the people to justify your actions is wrong.
::: posted by Alan at 1:00 PM
Wednesday, May 28, 2003 :::
We Have Become the Bullies of the World
We all remember the bullies from our school days. You know the ones I’m talking about. The loud and belligerent ones, the name callers, the ones who always had to have their way, the ones always looking to pick a fight with somebody smaller and weaker than them, the ones who were never wrong. Boy they sure enjoyed their self inflated egos didn’t they?
In bullying situations, there is a power difference between the bully and the victim. The bully may be bigger and stronger or have the power to exclude others from their social group. Bullies are seeking power and prestige. They sometimes use this power to gain something of monetary value from their victims, such as threatening someone to give them their lunch money or simply just taking their lunch money.
Bullies have certain personality traits.Dr. Sam Samenow describes these as:
1. Greater than average aggressive behavior patterns
2. The desire to dominate others
3. The need to feel in control, to win
4. No sense of remorse for hurting others
5. A refusal to accept responsibility for their behavior
Let’s look at these traits of a bully as it relates to President Bush and his Administration.
The first trait, Greater than average aggressive behavior patterns, is seen in the Presidents eagerness to use force. It is witnessed in the rush to war with Afghanistan and Iraq and threats against Syria, North Korea and Iran. When was the last time the U.S. was involved in a war and threatening war with so many other countries all at the same time? Never before in our history has this occurred. The war with Afghanistan was probably justified. I’m not so sure about the war with Iraq. At the very least, war with Iraq could have been delayed to give diplomacy a chance to work, because there was no imminent threat to the U.S. as President Bush led us to believe. The Bush administration didn’t want to delay the war with Iraq, because that would have meant about a one year delay until the weather conditions were again favorable. The Bush administration seemed to be saying, why take a chance that things can be worked out peacefully when we can use our overwhelming force.
The second trait, the desire to dominate others, is plainly seen in Mr. Bush’s dealings with the U.N. When he said “you’re either with us or against us” he was really saying we’re going to do what I want, there is no room for negotiations and if you don’t go along with me there will be a price to pay so you better go along. Even our good neighbor to the North, Canada was demonized. The Bush Administration also tried to dominate the American public by calling anyone who disagreed with it un-American and using false information to get the American public to agree with the Administrations war in Iraq.
The third trait, the need to feel in control, to win, is demonstrated by Mr. Bush declaring the war in Iraq over when in reality the war is far from over and still going on. U.S troops are still dying in Iraq. More than 30 U.S troops have died in Iraq since Bush declared the war in Iraq over (8 in the last 3 days). Iraqi civilians are still being killed and injured, many are afraid to be on the streets, looting and other crimes continue. In other words Iraq is in chaos. If this is considered a win I hate to imagine a loss.
The forth trait, no sense of remorse for hurting others, is verified by Mr. Bush’s failure to show any sign of remorse for the death and injuries of innocent civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq. He has never apologized for any of these deaths or injuries and he has never apologized for the pain and suffering caused to family members of the dead and injured. He acts as if it didn't happen. As a man who believes God is on his side and regularly says God bless America, you would think he would at least ask the American public to remember the innocent victims and their families in their prayers. You think he would at least show some remorse for the pain and suffering of innocent people that he is at least partly responsible for. Nope! he would rather pound his chest and brag about how good a job he is doing eliminating "Evil" in the world.
The fifth trait, a refusal to accept responsibility for their behavior, is confirmed by Mr. Bush blaming Saddam Hussein, Al Qeada or someone else for anything that goes wrong with his war on terrorism. He has never accepted responsibility for the dead and injured American troops. Oh he might have thanked the families of the troops for their sacrafice, but he hasn't accepted responsibility for their deaths. Mr. Bush also refuses to accept any blame for the fracture of the United Nations and places the blame squarely on the United Nations, for doing just what it was set up to do. Mr. Bush sees no connection between his actions and his own behavior with the present situation with the United Nations.
Our president, Mr. Bush, meets all the criteria of a bully. Since his personality is reflected in U.S policy that makes the United States of America a bully. If you don’t believe this, just listen to what people around the world are saying about our adventures in Iraq. If you still don’t believe this is true, that makes you a bully too. Remember trait 5 is a refusal to accept responsibility for your behavior.
I never thought I would live to see the day my country would be considered the bully of the world. I never though I would live to see the day my country would invade another country under false pretenses. I never though I would live to see the day my fellow countrymen would so blindly follow its leader down the path to endless war. All I can say is God Bless America.
::: posted by Alan at 10:06 AM
Tuesday, May 27, 2003 :::
Why do They Hate Us
1993 World Trade Center bombing, six killed and 1000 injured. 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, 5 US military personnel killed. 1996 Al-Khobar towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, 19 killed 200 injured US military personnel. 1998 bombing of US embassies in Africa, 257 killed and 5,000 injured. 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, 17 killed and 3 injured. September 11, 2001 high jacked planes are flown into the World Trade Center twin towers, 3,000 killed.
These terrorist must really hate us. How many of these terrorist attacks had a connection with Iraq? How many were Iraqis? The answer is zero. There is absolutely no evidence at all that Iraq was evolved in any of these terrorist attacks. Even President Bush himself never said outright that Iraq was responsible for any of these attacks. Although he did mention 9/11 and Iraq many times, making it sound like Iraq was responsible for 9/11.
Why do these terrorist hate us so much? Is it because they hate our freedom like Mr. Bush says? Why would they hate our freedom? That doesn’t even sound logical. Why would they even care about our freedom? Our freedom has no effect on them. Do they hate us just because were Americans? That doesn’t really make any sense either. Do they hate us because of the way we live? I don’t think they hate us just for the way we live, but I do believe that if the way we live affects the way they live they might hate us.
Maybe if we didn't play one country against another we wouldn't be hated right now. The Bush Administration is talking about doing that right now, using a "terrorist" group based in Iraq to try and topple the present regime in Iran. That's the same group the State Department labled as a "terrorist group" and we declared war on. We did it in the Iran Iraq war when we supplied Iraq (our friend) with weapons to fight Iran (our enemy). That means more money spent creating more chaos in yet another sovereign country.
Maybe if we didn’t try to stuff our Big Business and our form of democracy down their throats they wouldn’t be fighting us right now. Who got the oil contracts? Suprise' A Big American Oil Company with ties to the Whitehouse. Who is telling the Iraqis who or who may not participate in the setting up of their Democracy. Suprise again' It's Big American Government.
Maybe if we showed more respect to the rest of the world we wouldn’t have as many enemies right now. Does anybody really believe that what we're doing now won't have an adverse effect on future relations with the rest of the world?
By the way how did our oil get under Iraq?
::: posted by Alan at 2:22 AM
Saturday, May 24, 2003 :::
Unfair Tax Cuts Approved By Congress
The $350 billion tax cut has been approved by congress on 5/23/03. Remember the saying if it sounds too good to be true it probably is. Well that saying is definitely true with respect to this tax cut. Everyone likes the idea of a tax cut. The only problem is we can’t afford it. Sure it sounds good, like getting something for nothing but somebody has to pay it back.
I’d be 100 percent behind tax cuts if they were done justly and if wasteful spending was being cut to pay for the tax cuts. With this tax cut that is not the case. The average worker will get $217 while someone making $1 million would receive $93,000. That doesn’t sound fair and just to me.
America is going into debt to pay for this tax cut and that is a bad idea. The Bush Administration says this will create jobs and it probably will. But how many jobs will be created and will the economic benefits from those jobs offset the price of the tax cuts and the interest incurred on the borrowed money to pay for the tax cuts? I really don’t think so.
If you really wanted to create jobs, as Mr. Bush says this tax cut will, give tax breaks to businesses that hire new employees. That way the only ones who get a tax break are the ones that actually create jobs. That would be better than giving tax breaks to all businesses and people who hold stocks in the hopes some of the money will be used to create jobs. You know as well as I do that a lot of the money from the tax breaks will never be used to create jobs. It will be used to add to the pleasures of the already over pampered life styles of the rich at the expense of the working class. You see that’s where the jobs come in, somebody has to put in those swimming pools and tennis courts, somebody has to do the remodeling and build those yachts.
What about retirees? It has been in the news lately about how a lot of senior citizens can’t afford the prescription drugs they need. The present tax cut doesn’t help senior citizens at all, unless they’re one of the minority who made enough money in their working years and had money left over after expenses to invest in the stock market. This country has sunk so low that we refuse to help our senior citizens live out their life in dignity. What a disgrace we are. We complain how other governments treat their people and we fail to see what we do to our own people. It’s a shame the way we treat our elderly and it speaks volumes of just what we have become. Our government and the people who allow this to happen are nothing but cold hearted, money grabbing, mean spirited, uncompassionate monsters. How can we be so cruel? It makes me want to cry that there is nothing I alone can do about the situation. I am thoroughly disgusted. Why can’t we at least make sure our senior citizens can afford the prescription drugs they need? Why? Why? Why?
William Raspberry has an interesting artical about the tax cuts that was published in the Washington post on Monday, May 26, 2003 titled "Does the Public Really Believe"
::: posted by Alan at 10:22 PM
Thursday, May 22, 2003 :::
America is Going Into Debt for Israel
America's national debt is being increased by 1 billion dollars so that Israel can build up its military. That’s right folks; the U.S Government is going to borrow 1 billion dollars (we don’t happen to have a billion dollars sitting around) and give it to Israel. Three quarters of which will go for weapons procurement and one quarter for weapons research. The U.S Government is also giving Israel 9 billion dollars in loan guarantees (which we the U.S taxpayer must pay if they default on the loan). The new aid package comes on top of existing U.S. commitments to Israel. Israel is already the top recipient of U.S. foreign aid, receiving close to $3 billion in mostly military assistance each year. In other words U.S taxpayers are giving money to Israel (that we can’t afford) which it in turn uses to purchase weapons from U.S. defense contractors. That’s good news if your a defense contractor but bad news if your not. So you see we (the U.S. taxpayers) are going into debt to pay for increased military spending at home and we’re also going into debt for more military spending in Israel. Guess who pays the interest on these loans? That’s right me and you the American taxpayer. I think something really stinks here and I don’t like it.
President Bush says Israel needs the money because of its bad economy. What about our economy? The stock market is in the toilet, unemployment keeps rising, the schools are falling apart, senior citizens can't afford the high price of prescription drugs, just about every state is in the red and cutting services and we're giving Israel an extra one billion dollars because of their bad economy. Give me a break please, what’s more important our economy or Israel's economy.
What's going on here? Why does Israel need to spend that kind of money for its national defense? Who and what are they defending against? Israel already has the strongest military in the Mideast. Could it be the need to defend themselves against terrorist attacks from the Palestinians? I don’t think so, how are weapons procurements going to protect Israel from terrorist attacks by the Palestinians? The truth is it won't. Israel already has enough weapons to wipe every Palestinian off the face of the earth. Why are the Palestinians attacking Israel anyway? Maybe it has something to do with Israel occupying former Palestinian land backed by weapons paid for by U.S. tax payers.
I'm not only picking on the Bush administration here because both parties support extra aid to Israel. A joint letter written by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle stated that Israel is facing severe challenges in both the economic and security spheres, and that, given the decline in the Israeli economy over recent years; the United States should provide support. The letter stated, "We are concerned that, if not addressed soon… Israel is in danger of "mortgaging" its future qualitative military edge. We cannot allow this to happen." The letter also stressed that the Israeli economy must undergo far-reaching reforms in order to extricate itself from its current malaise. Similar letters have been sent to Bush by the speaker of the House Rep. Dennis Hastertt (R-Ill) and house Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca).
Why I ask should we be "mortgaging" the future of our children so Israel doesn't have to mortgage its future military edge? I don't have an answer to that question and I don't know who does. The American public better start asking questions of their government and questioning the answers they receive for those questions before it's too late for all of us. We cannot continue going into debt giving military aid to foreign countries and attacking other nations under false pretenses for the sole purpose of controlling the world.
All real Americans need to contact their representatives in congress and let them know where they stand on the issues and start asking questions before its too late. It really amazes me that it seems more people are interested in who will be the next American idol than what's going on in their own government. Call me a pessimist if you want but the way things are going I don't have any reason to be optimistic.
::: posted by Alan at 9:54 AM
Tuesday, May 20, 2003 :::
A War That Can’t Be Won
Here we go again! Fighting another war that can’t be won by brute force alone. Remember Vietnam? We were fighting communism back then, now were fighting terrorism. We couldn’t beat communism with brute force in one small country then and were not going to beat terrorism with brute force now.
Afghanistan is pretty much in chaos. People are being killed every day in continued fighting between rival factions. There are signs that the Taliban and Al-Quada are regrouping and the drug trade is rising. We still have about 11000 troops there being shot at. In other words the environment is ripe for breeding terrorism. There will most likely be more U.S. troops killed, maimed or injured in Afghanistan as time goes by. First Mistake??? Invading Iraq when the real problem is somewhere else. By the way where is Osama Bin Laden?
That brings us to Iraq. To begin with Colin Powell used fake documents implicating Iraq with trying to obtain yellow cake (uranium) from Nigeria for their nuclear program. He used these fake documents to help persuade Congress into voting for joint resolution [S.J. Res. 23]. That’s the resolution rushed through congress authorizing the use of force against those nations, organizations, or persons he (the President) determines planned authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons. The resolution clearly states “the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.” There is not the slightest bit of evidence that Iraq had anything to do with September 11, 2001, absolutely none at all. The other pretenses for the war with Iraq, Weapons of Mass Destruction, regime change and democracy don’t meet the criteria of resolution [S.J. Res. 23]. So that means fake documents were used to start an illegal war.
Meanwhile in Iraq the killing and looting continues. Hatred and Anti American protest are growing. Iraq is looking more and more like a country in anarchy. In other words the environment is ripe for breeding terrorism. Second Mistake??? Invading Iraq when the real problem is somewhere else. By the way where is Saddam Hussein and all his Weapons of Mass Destruction?
We might just as well get used to terrorist attacks like the recent ones in Saudi Arabia and Morocco. With all the hatred we created in the Muslim population around the world by invading Iraq, terrorism is bound to continue. The Iraq war served as a rallying cry encouraging Muslims world wide to join terrorist groups and strike back at American interest. We are no safer from terrorist attacks today than we were on September 11, 2001. In other words the present administrtion has lost all credability for doing what is right for this country. President Bush said today the war on terrorism isn’t over and that it can be won. He didn’t say how long it would take to win this war, he didn’t even offer an estimate. He didn't say how this war would be won, as we have seen the present policy has not worked and will not work. Let’s see so far we went to war with Afghanistan and it is now in chaos. We invaded Iraq and Iraq is now in chaos. How many more countries do we invade and throw into chaos before terrorism ends? I have news for everyone. Throwing a country into chaos will not end terrorism but will only breed more terrorism. The present Bush Administrations policy is one of a never ending war on terrorism.
::: posted by Alan at 3:35 AM
Saturday, May 17, 2003 :::
Less Government Doesn’t Really Mean Less Government
When politicians say they want less government for the people don’t believe them. What they really mean is less government for Big Businesses. They don't say that directly but look at the record. When has there ever been less government in the lives of the average citizen? There has never been less government in our lives and in fact there is more and more government in our lives.
The recently passed USA PATRIOT Act (USAPA) is a case of more government in our lives not less. Notice the act is named so it sounds patriotic and doesn’t raise suspicions. Why didn’t they name it the anti-terrorism act? Could the law be used to spy on citizens that the government determines are not patriots? What is patriotism and who makes that determination? There seems to be a debate now-a-days about just exactly what patriotism is.
Under USAPA the government can now spy on the internet usage of innocent Americans. Watch out what you type into that search engine it could come back and haunt you in the form of a government investigation and you won’t even know you’re being investigated. You could even be arrested and held secretly without the consultation of a lawyer. It’s very frightening to me to imagine the potential misuse of this law. It's the secrecy that scares me.
The USAPA also allows the government to serve a wiretap order on any person nationwide, regardless of whether that person is named in the order. The government need not make any showing to a court that the particular information or communication to be acquired is relevant to a criminal investigation.
Also under the USAPA the government can acquire the records of patrons of libraries and book stores. The librarians and book store owners cannot release the information that the records were confiscated. No matter which books a person reads or buys it isn’t an indication of any wrongdoing, so why the law? It seems to me it’s a way for government to ban certain books without really banning the books. It’s chilling to me that my government can frighten people into not reading certain books for fear they may be investigated by the government. Most librarians and book store owners are against this law.
We have seat belt laws and motorcycle helmet laws (at least in Michigan we do). When the seat belt law was first passed a motorist could not be pulled over just because he/she wasn’t using a seat belt. If they were pulled over for some other reason only then could they be ticketed if they weren’t using a seat belt. Now the law has been changed so that a motorist can be pulled over simply for not using a seat belt. Do you see how that works? They take your rights away little by little that way people don’t complain too loudly. The only reason we have seatbelt laws and helmet laws is because of the clout of the big insurance companies and it’s a way for states to take more of our money by issuing citations. Just who is being hurt if someone decides not to use a seat belt or wear a helmet? It’s a victimless crime and the only one that might be hurt is the person not using the seat belt or wearing the helmet. Some studies even suggest helmets will only protect a rider when traveling less than 15 mph and may cause serious neck injuries because of the weight of the helmet. There are also circumstances where you would be better off if you weren’t using a seat belt. I just don’t see where it is governments business to tell people which dangerous acts (as deemed by the government) they are not allowed to do. How about skydiving do we make that illegal because it is too dangerous? What about ice fishing? Many people drown after breaking through the ice or have to be rescued by the coast guard. Do we make ice fishing illegal?
Where is the outrage? Why do we let government take more and more of our rights away without even putting up much of a fight? People tend to think that it doesn’t affect me or I can live with it, but does it really not affect you? It may affect you, if only indirectly, if for example government misuses the patriot act for political purposes. What’s to stop a corrupt government leader from spying on the political opposition? There is just too much secrecy involved in the patriot act and I don’t think our government can be trusted with that secrecy. The USAPA was rushed through congress without much debate, just as the resolution for war with Iraq or any other country that the President determines had anything to do with terrorism was rushed through congress without much debate.
The Bush Administration now wants Congress to pass the USA Patriot Act II which will even further erode our rights as a free people. We can fight terrorism without infringing on peoples rights. I urge anyone who is concerned about loosing our freedoms and our rights to contact your representatives in congress and let them know where you stand. If we don’t stop this continuous taking away of our rights one day we won’t have any rights.
::: posted by Alan at 3:06 AM
Friday, May 16, 2003 :::
I Say No To The FCC Easing Of Regulations On Media Ownership
As an American citizen and tax payer I am part owner of the public air waves. As part owner I do not want any one media company becoming so large that it infringes on my right to a free press. It’s happening right now, as was demonstrated by the media coverage of the war with Iraq and people who spoke out against the war. Americans really had to work to find both sides of the war story, most never did. The Dixie Chicks uproar (orchestrated by a certain media giant) just for speaking what they believe, comes dangerously close to censorship if it isn’t censorship already. When people are afraid to speak out we have no democracy. A true democracy depends on informed citizens to make the best political decisions. When too few media giants own all the media, big money will decide what we see, hear and read from the media. There is already too much monopoly in the media we don't need any more. Instead of making rules that will further monopolize the media and diminish competition, rules of the exact opposite should be enacted.
::: posted by Alan at 1:49 PM
Tax Cuts In Present form Are Wrong
A tax cut in the present form is wrong and insane. Eliminating the tax on dividends is unfair. Most working class people don't have money in the stock market. If they have money invested it is usually in mutual funds in a 401 K. Any dividends paid are used to purchase more shares of the mutual fund which is taxed when the money is withdrawn. So most working class people pay tax on their dividends, while those who can afford a broker and invest in the stock market directly would pay no taxes on the dividends they receive. How many working class people can afford to fully fund their IRA's plus have money left over to invest in the stock market? I believe it is just a clever way for the rich to recoup some of the losses they suffered in the stock market collapse, on the backs of the working class.
As far as the argument of dividends being taxed twice, what a lame argument, it happens all the time in other areas. Just one example; if for instance I am a used car salesman I pay federal taxes on my profits from selling used cars. The original auto maker paid taxes on their profits from selling the same car when it was new. Double taxes paid for selling the same vehicle, why is that any different than double taxes on dividends? The only difference being the person selling used cars is a working class citizen trying to make an honest living, while most of the people who would benefit from the elimination of taxes on dividends are wealthy and in control of this country. The only tax cuts on dividends should go to retirees whose income is below a certain level.
It also makes no sense to me to give the wealthy a huge tax cut while the working class gets peanuts. They say this will stimulate the economy because the wealthy will invest the money from the tax cuts thus creating jobs (trickle down theory) - I guess they don't like to call it that anymore because it sounds too much like what it really is - but that's exactly what it is, a small amount will eventually trickle down sometime in the future in the way of jobs. How much of this actually trickles down and how long does it take to trickle down? Why not give the working class a big tax cut? They will immediately spend the money and perhaps even invest some; businesses will have to ramp up production to meet demand thus creating jobs and stimulating the economy (trickle up theory). In this situation the working class wins and the enterprising business man wins (a win win situation). Of course that would mean business would have to compete for the consumers dollars and that is exactly what they don't want. They would rather have a government hand out.
In closing I'd just like to know what's wrong with my way of thinking. To me it seems more logical than the present tax cut proposal on the table. It would help people who could really use the extra money (it's called compassion as in compassionate conservative). I guess compassion for the right wing conservatives only applies to the wealthy and Big Business.
::: posted by Alan at 12:09 PM