Bush or Kerry

[bnhcomputing]

Both are poor choices! Neither is an average Joe who earned $50,000 last year. They are both millionaires who worry about themselves and how to keep what they have.
Lets examine the facts:

Bush:
Did give tax cuts, but not nearly enough to the fast food or convenience store workers most of the benefit did go to the "œwell to do."� Once you make more that $80,000 in a year, you no longer pay SS tax, but you reap the benefits when you retire. A per child tax credit is great, but we already have way to many people who can"™t take care of the five kids they have, and now they have a reason to have another. His friends at the oil companies are having record profits on the back of the average working man. Takes jobs away from legal American citizens and gives them to the illegal aliens.

Kerry:
Wants to repeal the tax cuts and increase the welfare rolls. Votes right along with the rest of the politicians when its time for them to get a pay raise, but has no plan for helping the convenience store workers. Plans on leaving the SS deduction the way it is, thus the "œwell to do"� are still better off. Says he"™s a hunter, but wants to limit our gun rights. Says he"™s a Christian, but will force anti Christian beliefs on all of us. Wants healthcare for everyone, but has no good plan to pay for it.

So here"™s how I see it:

Modify income tax so everybody pays equally. The flat tax is STILL a good idea. Modify SS so all pay is taxed, not just the first $80,000. Let"™s have the salaries of ALL politicians set by the IRS. Pay them twice the median income in the US, and not a penny more, when our economic situation improves, so will theirs.

Change the way primaries are held. Using the farmers"™ almanac let"™s divide the country into seven regions. Elect one candidate from each region during the spring primary. Have campaigning and debates during the summer, a September primary to whittle them down, and then a national election in November. This would open up the election process and give us better choices than the two status quo options.

The majority, of Americans, has just given up and doesn"™t care. Complacency will be our downfall.

[oldelkhunter]

Modify income tax so everybody pays equally. The flat tax is STILL a good idea. Modify SS so all pay is taxed, not just the first $80,000. Let"™s have the salaries of ALL politicians set by the IRS. Pay them twice the median income in the US, and not a penny more, when our economic situation improves, so will theirs.

Change the way primaries are held. Using the farmers"™ almanac let"™s divide the country into seven regions. Elect one candidate from each region during the spring primary. Have campaigning and debates during the summer, a September primary to whittle them down, and then a national election in November. This would open up the election process and give us better choices than the two status quo options.

The majority, of Americans, has just given up and doesn"™t care. Complacency will be our downfall.

And like you say Neither of these 2 will make any wholesale changes to the way things get done. Out of the 2 Kerry will be the one that hits my wallet harder and that will cause me to vote for Bush all the time holding my nose. I agree with the Complacency statement very true.

[JagMagMan]

I would not say that both are poor choices!
One, GW Bush, has done a decent job, especially with the problems the country has had to deal with since 9/11!
The other choice is a sleazy, lying, flip-flopping, Klintoon clone! What more need be said about Heinz-kerry!!!???

In this case, GW is very strong on national defense! Which in the perilous times we live in, trumps any other card on the table!
I feel that our economy would have come out of its natural slump much sooner if not for the threat of terrorism! Also, GW will not give our sovereignty away to the UN. And while he is not the strongest pro-gun president we've ever had, he DID NOT get the "F" rating on guns that Heinz-kerry did!
Lastly, the tax cut is good! Any time you put money back in the peoples pockets, they have more to spend!
And BTW, when you have a tax cut of say 10%, the 10% of 80,000 is going to be more than the 10% of minimum wage, which is still more than the 10% of nothing, which is zero- which is what those who paid no taxes got!

No choice this year you say!!??? I think not! On the contrary, with national security, and our Second Amendment on the line, we may have the biggest choice we have ever had, in front of us today!

[DougMD]

Stopping SS payments at $80k is reasonable. Else, you're saying that in addition to paying higher income taxes, successful people should also subsidize the poor and working via SS too. Sounds too socialistic for my liking. One big problem with this country is penalizing success and rewarding mediocrity. People with years until retirement will never get out of it what they paid in, and now you're saying they should pay more in. I say it was set up because big government didn't trust people to save for themselves, so forced it on us. Then that government spent the money without saving it like it was intended and put IOU's where the money should have been. So who's not to trust, the governement or the people?

[JagMagMan]

Doug, don't forget the capitol gains taxes that the dummycraps never want to repeal, discourages investing too!

[DougMD]

Yes, it does. And most Americans own stock now, if only through their IRA's.

[j3k2c1]

Once you make more that $80,000 in a year, you no longer pay SS tax,

That is bull. How can you say that? What info do you have to prove that? My dad makes between $700-800K and he pays SS tax!

[bnhcomputing]

Taken right from the IRS web site:

If you have more than one employer and your wages were over the annual social security wage limit of $87,000.00 for 2003, you probably had too much social security tax withheld. (There is no wage limit for Medicare tax.)

Let everybody pay the same. I agree with JagMagMan, 10% is 10% so lets let everybody, the little guy, the middle class, and the top all pay the same percentage. The rich would not be penalized for earning more, they would pay the same percentage as the rest of us. Why stop at a certain level? If I make 25K I pay X% but if I make 250K I pay Y% that isn"™t right. Why not have a FLAT tax period.

Why give a bigger discount to the larger family. Families are the size they are by choice! If you want 15 kids, fine but why should I be penalized for not having any?

As for capital gains tax, again lets look at the fast food or convenience store worker. First, they don"™t have 401K"™s. Second, they can barely survive only a few dollars above the poverty level. Third, because they don"™t have any money to begin with, they can"™t invest and make more. Now I"™m not saying we should be socialists, but lets go back to 10% is 10%. If you invest and make money, that is income. Pay your percentage of the profit and get on with it. Arguing about the tax code doesn"™t change anything. We will still have a socio-economic cap and THAT was my point. Electing Bush or Kerry will have little affect on this.

If the Bush tax cut were repealed, the "œhaves"� will still have plenty, and the "œhave-nots"� will not have any. Either way the politician will still vote himself a pay raise and get a better retirement package than most of us.

Yes, Kerry will sell us out, or set us up for it, to the UN. However, let"™s not forget the GW did sign the patriot act, and that infringes on my liberty. GW has us in a religious war oversees, but will not fight for our religious rights here at home.

In the end, I don"™t believe Kerry can win, and GW is the lesser of two evils.

[JagMagMan]

My reference to the 10%, was to address the falsehood that the talking heads in the media, that were saying that the tax breaks were not fair! To them, the "poor" did not get as much of a break! Not exactly a lie, but certainly not the truth either! Using 10% as an example, those who paid little or no taxes, got what they paid in for,- 10% of little or nothing! The "working"people did get a tax cut!
As for a flat tax rate, it does sound good, but it does need a ceiling! Otherwise, you are punishing people for making more money, instead of giving them an incenive to save or invest.
However, a FOURTH party candidate will be in the White House, long before you ever see a flat tax! The IRS and private accounting lobbies will see to it that taxes will never be simple! Too many unemployed accountants!
As for your assessment of the capitol gains taxes, taxing capitol gains, only discourages investing! Of which, investing IS very good for the economy, and everyone as a whole! Even many lower income workers have 401k plans! taxing capitol gains is good for no one!

As for Heinz-kerry selling us out to the UN comparing to the flaws in the patriot act, I'll take our chances with the patriot act any day, than to give our sovereignty to the UN! (Not that I am in favor of the flaws, but that CAN be fixed, once our sovereignty is given to the UN, we have NO freedom!)

Again, if you think there is not a choice to vote for, or that President Bush is ONLY the lesser of the two evils, you need to look at the candidates and the parties again! There is a big difference, and GWB is far better than only the lesser of two evils!
Heres a little trivia for you, historically the biggest majority of the "tax raising, and spending has come from the Dummycrap party! The party of "the working man!"
And BTW, we are not in a "religious war," except for the fact that the war on terror that we fight, is against radical religious terrorists!

[farmcntry]

Sorry guys. I refuse to vote this year!


Good ol edwards can't even get his NC "friends" to vote for him!