Are you going to vote for .....

[jackfaire]

Any politician that said he didn't want the tax cuts for corporations ending. That said they would rather gut social programs than make anyone over a certain tax bracket pay more in taxes?

Ignore age, location, or party lines.

There was a person that went on CNN and said, "We should not end tax cuts for corporations because they are not owned by some guy up in a big mansion on the hill but rather by you the American people you all own a portion of everyone of those companies."

I really wish I had written down his name because it seems his comments kind of slipped through the cracks of those days.

Are you going to vote for people that insist giving money to businesses is what will revitalize the economy when no matter how much you give to businesses big or small if the consumer can't afford to buy from those businesses then jobs will not be created.

Jobs are created by demand. If 100 people want a blanket and It takes 5 people to make that many blankets in the time limit and you only employ 2 people you will hire the other 3 to make those blankets.

I have never thought things like trickle down economics and investing in businesses made much sense. You can give the car company all the money you want but that didn't suddenly make me and a bunch of other people who couldn't afford to buy cars want to buy them.

It just all seemed to me like what they did was say, "Here is some fish!"

I thought the saying was if you teach a man to fish he can eat forever.

Well take a bunch of money put it in the form of a car only check, can only be used to buy a car from a manufacturer where X amount of the money will cycle back into the American consumer by being paid to American workers. Then see how quickly those car companies start working to get everyone to buy from them.

Make them work for the money. Didn't we do that with DTV? I mean think about it we took a bunch of money said every household gets two gift cards good for 40$ each towards the purchase of a converter box. Then the converter box companies had to compete for that money.

Hell we could have even said, "Okay we will give you (the manufacturer) X dollars but in turn you have to give out W cars for free (including covering the taxes and licensing fees) to families in need."

Instead it feels like we made a bad Disney movie but we said screw the young kid and made Hands and Feet the star.

So are you going to vote for people that keep pushing methods that don't work, say blatantly crazy things, or even things that make it clear they do not like you nor care about you?

[Kheldarson]

I actually agree with gutting social programs, but that's because I think they need to be more discriminating anyway.

As for taxes, problem is, there's no real good way to set up taxes anyway. The poor tend to take the brunt either way.

[jackfaire]

I had a friend who suggested an annual income cap. Each year you can make no more than a certain amount of money. The amount being enough to buy one Mansion one large boat etc. Any money you make over your limit is funneled into programs to help the less fortunate who had to qualify for programs by the same things needed for a job, drug testing etc.

If you donate money to charity then you can earn up to your limit plus what you paid in charity.

So if your limit is 50,000 dollars a year and you gave 5000 in charity after making your limit and so profit was now 45,000 you could earn another 5,000 dollars.

Also I think having assets in other people's names should be considered fraud. If your getting financial help and normally your assets would disqualify you but you sign your assets over to other people and it's found out it should be classed as fraud.

[Kheldarson]

Agree on the fraud idea.

As for the cap, that's not so good. First of all, that drains away motivation to try and succeed to a certain extent. (IE: you have a really great idea that might even make you millions, but what good is it to put it out there if you know you'll never truly know how well it does?)

Not that donations shouldn't be made and limits can't be had (like making CEO's stop raising their salaries when their employees haven't had raises in years), but some of the guys at the top make money just by breathing thanks to investments. So do we limit those too?

Mostly, it just doesn't seem fair to me that somebody else can tell me what I get to do with my profits once I've worked for them.

[smileyeagle1021]

I actually agree with gutting social programs, but that's because I think they need to be more discriminating anyway.
.

ditto, if we were to cut out a lot of the abuse that would do a lot to balance the budget and make sure those who deserve it (the ones who have been mooching) are shouldering a large part of the burden.
It won't be enough though, taxes will have to be reworked, which isn't easy, but it is obvious that when there are multi billion dollar corporations paying less taxes that I am, it is clear that there is a problem.

As others have mentioned, it does no good to give huge tax breaks and bail outs to big companies if nothing is being done to increase demand... if no one has the money to buy products and services from the businesses, then it won't matter.

[mikoyan29]

Agree on the fraud idea.

As for the cap, that's not so good. First of all, that drains away motivation to try and succeed to a certain extent. (IE: you have a really great idea that might even make you millions, but what good is it to put it out there if you know you'll never truly know how well it does?)

In many cases, the patent makers do not get to benefit from their product because it was invented on company time. But that's another matter entirely.

Personally, I do not have a problem with a guy like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Steve Allen, Steve Wozniak or others who have built up a company from nothing profiting from that company. Nor do I really have a problem with the people that put up the initial capital for said company making money off that company. These are the people that take real risk and put alot in to making those companies succeed. Where I start to have a problem is with the modern rent a goon CEO whose only function in life is to bleed a company dry and throw the hulk on the ground. Youl would think that the Boards of Directors would put a cap on their salary...but in many of cases those Boards of Directors are CEOs of other companies that are doing the same crap.

[Akasa]

I have a real problem with corporations getting tax REBATES. Screw not only getting out of paying taxes, but getting millions in rebates when they were highly profitable. I have issues with some millionaires not paying taxes, while middle class do. Its income tax, you have more income you should pay more taxes.

I vote against anyone who says they should pay less in taxes than me.