First, if you think I was condescending, I apologize... not what I was trying to be.

If you know about the FairTax you wouldn't be saying what you have. I did not say you don't read. I said you haven't read the FairTax books. You would not be referencing "cliff notes" from the media if you had. lol I will bet my life you've never read a single word of either book. I know you haven't. I am sure you read... just not from the source.

Sure you can voice an opinion and I respect your opinion, but know what you are talking about. I could spend an hour and tear those articles above apart, but why? You won't read the actual material to know what I am talking about anyway, so what would be the point? In your opinion we don't need an answer to our problems now, we should keep and maintain the IRS as well as the Federal Income Tax, despite the fact we are the only country still with one, and it makes no sense to increase peoples paychecks by 20% to 28% while being able to fund fully SS. That's your opinion and you're sticking to it. Fair enough.

I am talking about something that actually exists (bill in Congress), whereas you were answering with something non-existent, just a term that has multiple meanings to a multitude of people. This country does not need more terms and ideas to debate. We need people who will actually take an action.

Last, as I pointed out before, don't listen to me, and most certainly, don't start googling other people and websites to see what they say about it, or any other topic.
What is so hard about the idea of reading the material in order to learn and know what this is about?

Like I said...and again say... read and learn on your own...don't depend upon others to tell you what to think. We could sit here all night googling pros and cons on any topic...senseless... try reading the material, the FairTax Books, and then the other BS if you want, and make up your own mind. THAT was my point.

Too many people do what you just did. You read what someone else has to say about the topic. ... no substance, no facts... just google the latest sound bites from the left or right, whomever you lean towards, to make you feel better about your "decision". That is lazy. Kind of like "Cliff Notes" in school... nice shortcut, no substance.

Again, I am not trying to offend you or anyone. It is insulting to me to pretend to know what one is talking about, obviously don't, and then try referring me to material that is based on some person's agenda, one sided, and incorrect... usually because they too have never read the material and do not know what they are talking about. That pretty much defines todays mass media. Take care. I'm done.

The only thing I will respond to is that yes I googgled but I googled both sides. I read about both for and against. I only posted the above links because they do give some information and it had nothing to do with trying to change your mind or refer you to anything. And you can't possibly say there isn't any good truthful information on the internet or on certain websites. There is tons of good info. To call it a shortcut with no substance is not right at all. Again you have tried to downgrade because someone doesn't agree with you. And I can assure you that I am not lazy.

Oh yes, I do believe we do need a an answer to the problem right now, but For me if its a choice between the tax system we have now and fair tax then, yes I want it to stay the way it is. There is not much I care about in the fair tax book.

Just so you know I never take anyones word for anything. I always make up my own mind and do the research. I spend countless hours researching numerous things. Not just politics. So I do definitely have a mind of my own and I do make up my own mind. I don't even listen to talk radio much or spend alot time watching those on tv. I know they all have their own agenda.


And by the way, you have "no" idea what I have read or anyone else for that matter. To constantly say I have not read something or someone else has not read something is awfully presumptuous of you. Just because someone doesn't agree doesn't mean they haven't read it. I also don't need anyone to make me "feel" better about any decision I make. I make them for a reason and I make them because that is the way I believe.

Then prove it wrong.Your opinion is not disputing facts or showing facts about Obama's socialist tax plan.

Because the people who make less the 250k are the ones who spur the economy. In order for the economy to work and for jobs to be created, the masses have to go and out buy things. They can buy more things and therefore create more jobs oppurtunities (and more investment oppurtunities for businesses) if they have more money in their pockets.

Since when have trust fund kids made something of themselves? You want to give them tax breaks for being lazy asses and sitting around the pool all day waiting for the dividend check, which will be taxed at less than half the tax rate you pay on our earned wages? So you want to use the tax code to penalize a custodial worker who doesn't make much money and hasn't "made much" of himself because he doesn't make a lot of money?

You must be talking about trust fund kids like Paris Hilton (what's her education level) or Sam Walton's kids. Walton's kids and many others have been collecting massively from the NAFTA program adn other "free" trade programs. I'm too am tired of footing the bill for the handouts to NAFTA participants and for Exxon Mobile's research program, etc.

I missed characterized you. My apologizies.

Me too. That's why I vote Democratic. I am sick and tired of paying for handouts to the Duponts, and being taxed to death at a rate higher than Dick Cheney's, and working my butt off for some greedy corporate bastard that doesn't even want to pay taxes much less work.

So a couple of moms who have had wretched and abusive lives, and whose only support and hope is welfare, and who's cost to govnmt is so small it's a joke, bothers you more the b/millions in republican welfare to the wealthy?
What a guy.

So you would rather see the kid of a welfare Mom begging on the streets with open sores on his body because he was lazy and didn't make "much" of himself rather than make Paris Hilton pay taxes at the rate AT LEAST as high as what a truck driver pays. That's not an America I want to live in.

Yes. You pay the bills to support America's infrastructure that Sam Walton's kids dont' want to pay.

[/quote]I get reality every day when my husband does the same, and I get reality every year when I pay taxes at ridiculous rates to fund government programs.[/quote]

I aggree with you there.

Simply not true.

Certainly not the "free" market Republicans.

So becuase Obama & co. don't want to help enough, you vote for republicans that want to help out not at all?

I believe you. But obviously from you posts you have listened only to what "free" market-libertarian republicans have to say. Just different variations on the same theme. There is no left/center view readily available in large parts of the country. Name a liberal talk show host you listen to.

And you believe the Republicans? How 'bout those spending cuts? You still believe that after 30 yrs of republican rule? When exactly is that going to be happening? How 'bout McCain? he has flip flopped so much that no one could possible believe him on anything.

How so?

Come now. Anyone who makes more than 250k/yr doesn't "work" for a living.

Really? He was raised on food stamps for part of his life and voluntareed to work on the south side of Chicago helping poor people for little or no pay when his academic credentials garanteed him a job and pay check among the elites.

And McCain has a clue about a working man? He is the a Navy brat. The son of an Navy Admrial. If wasn't for hwo his father was he would neve even been flying airplanes to begin with. He has never worked a day in his life. Never been around working people. With the execption of his unfortunate experience in Vietnam,he has had life's skids greased for him.

Say what? How bout leaving the cushy job he could have had in the n. east to help the poor in s. chicago for next to no pay at all? How 'bout teaching law for 12 years at Univeristy. I am positive that is less than 250/yr. I've been to s. chicago and believe me it's as "real" as life gets.

Well. He was. That is not debatable; that is a fact. He got into the best schools because he worked his butt off. Unlike McCain who got into good schools because of his birthright.

You engage in good honest debate. You actually discuss issues. Unusual on this board.

I do try to debate without attacking people and I try to be as honest as possible.

Now, about that statement of people making over 250,000. do not work. rest assured yes they do. I know dozens of doctors and dentist, construction workers, nurses, veterinarians and reps for companies that "do" work their butts off. As a matter of fact they work alot harder than I do. Put in way more hours than I do, and just about run themselves to death trying to help the people you want to help. They get paid good for it but in the end they still "work" very hard.

Don't get me wrong about trusting republicans. Hardly. Not a chance. I don't trust any of them. I just don't support many of "his" issues. I don't agree with most of his views and I certainly don't want any more government programs. I want less. Far less.

Now you know darn well I am not talking about the people that truly need welfare to get back on their feet. I'm talking about the 85% that sit on their butts and consider it a paycheck. And believe me they are out there in full force. As a matter of fact I know one that lives down the street from me. 2 totally able adults that can work and 2 kids and are on section 8 housing and welfare. You tell me, should they be living in a a house that would sell for over 300,000.00 in a country neighborhood with acreage. Meanwhile we worked our butts off to buy the house we have. No one on welfare should be on more than a year and they certainly should not be living in a 300,000.00 house. Way back when welfare was designed to help. Now its a paycheck. They even get little credit cards instead of food stamps so they are not embarrassed when they go shopping. These are the majority of the people on welfare screwing the system. Those are the ones I am talking about. The Dem's just want to keep it going. I do not.

The other big difference between you and I is that I have nothing against rich. They made their money. Some inherited it. Either way it was made by working by someone. I do not hate them because of it and do not have anything against them. Do I wish it was me? Hell yeah. But its not so I continue to work.

About those kids you speak of on welfare. There shouldn't be that many of them if the government would be a bit more strict on who they hand out to. Why do people that are on welfare keep having more kids? I know, because they don't have to pay for them. We do. BS The majority of people on the welfare system are there because they choose to be. Do I feel bad for the ones that really need it. Yes. I wasn't exactly rich growing up and not poor. But the difference is that I never expected anything from the government and I made it on my own. They way people have been doing things for hundreds of years until big government came in and started handing out free money. Only problem is the money ids not free. The average American worked for it.

I believe everyone has to vote their conscience. Mine is telling me now way on BHO.

Yes. I do know that. The republicans have done nothing about this problem either. Corps. want cheap labor; corps control our govnmt. We need get corps out of govnmt.


[quoe]Less than 3% of Americans work for minimum wage.[/quote]

That is becuase for 30 years conservative have fought/refused to let the minimum wage keep up with inflation.

I aggree. the conservatives (both democratic and republican conservatives) have made a joke of minimum wage.

No. It increases purchasing power when it is raised to a level that actually matters in the real world. McCain voted against this.

The more money people have, the more money they spend, the more moeny they spend, the more jobs are created. The economy is based on lots and lots of people spending money. When the mass of people have their wages lowered and stop spending, the economy shriks and people get laid off. This is why Buch & co. are borrowing money and cutting checks to mail to you and me. Does that make any sense? Use Nafta, de-unionization, anti-minimum wage laws to lower our wages and than borrow money from the Chinese and the Saudis to give to us so we will go out and spend it? you want to vote for more of that??????????????


[quote]Social Security a negative return on investment that needs a massive overall.[quote]

Social Security is not an investment. It is pay as you go. Current working people pay into it to help those who currently can't work, either because of poor health or age and who are not independly wealthy.

Social Security is just fine and does not need an overall. It is Republican fear mongering. If Bill Gates had to pay the same Social Security tax that you and me have to pay, Social Security would have huge surplusses.

Really? It's odd that idea didn't work in the 1930s. Most households have negative saving -- owe money to credit cards for the rest of their lives, becuase their wages will not support a middle class lifestyle in the same way that their parent's wages did. How are they going to save? They can't even pay off their cards or thier perpetual auto loans? Social Security is fine. So fine that the borrow-and-spend Republicans use it to lower the national deficits they run ever year.

Great comeback. But not true.

So becuase the Dems are not for the working man enough, you are going to vote for Republicans who have been attacking the working man's wages for 30 years? The Dems don't do enough to stop the Cons, therefore you vote for the cons????????

SAY WHAT? Becuase corps have stripped all the wealth off of America that means they never controled America? Come now.

The banks WERE deregulated. It is just nonsense to say the weren't. The majority of the risky loans were given to people who didn't meet Fannie May's for Freddy Mac's terms for loan qualification. I know becuase I got one of those risky loans after the feds disqualified me on a fixer upper house I bought in the mid 90s. It didn't have central heat so fanny may refused it and my credit was too young for freddy mac. so a fly-by-night mortgage company loaned me the money. If you goggle this you can find out what presentage of loans were below fanny may standards. It is less than 10% if I remember right.

Trying to help poor, uneducated people who don't know how things work -- that's just awful. So unamerican. Let them live and die in the streets; the lazy bastards. They diserve it; they are poor.

Thanks to deregulation, they COULD make money on bad investments. That is the hole point of deregulation, allow people to hoodwink other people and get away with it. It is temporarily good for business. It makes rich people in the know fantasticly wealthy, and other people fantasticaly poor.

How is making rich people pay their fair share of supporting our infrastructure and thereby spreading the wealth of America (which is created by American infrastruture and made possible by America infrastuture to everyone who uses American infrastructure, most notably the wealthy to creat more wealth) going to leave you with change?