Bill Kristol: 'It Won't Kill The Country If We Raise Taxes' On Millionaires

[Grindelwald]

If you don't think your tax dollars should fund abortion, you hate women.
If you think marriage is a religious ceremony that is between a man and a woman, you hate gay people.

Doesn't mean you hate them, but you are certainly surpressing their freedoms.

Do I have it right? It's so tiring really....

It is tiring to continue to hear the same BS being whined out by the right wing.

[Anne68]

Doesn't mean you hate them, but you are certainly surpressing their freedoms. It is tiring to continue to hear the same BS being whined out by the right wing.

I'm far from right wing. I'm actually pro choice. But I'm not a hypocrit. I totally get why someone wouldn't want their tax dollars to fund abortion. I saw my baby's heartbeat at 7 weeks. It didn't change my position on the legality just because I wouldn't do it.

I pay for my own birth control, too. Why would I expect the productive members of society to pay for my contraceptives.? This whole "war on women" is insulting to me. Everyone is free to go to the drug store and purchase their own condoms. Not only will it prevent pregnancy, it prevents STDs.

Funny, conservative values are whining and hate speech; it's never about personal responsibility/freedom.

[Grindelwald]

That line will not work with me. Taxes are high.

Whoa I was browsing through this thread and saw this doozy. You are 100% wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Taxes are pretty low right now. Obama has not raised taxes and doesn’t plan to. Now I have a couple of questions for you. What will happen to the debt if taxes are cut further? Why don’t the Republicans take Obama’s offer of keeping middle class taxes down and raising upper income taxes instead of raising everyones?

[Grindelwald]

. I totally get why someone wouldn't want their tax dollars to fund abortion.

That's something else altogether. That's not what you said in your first post. Most everyone pays for their own abortions, it's the ones (very miniscule number) that can't afford it is where the debate on that is. You realize that the amount of money government spends on abortions is microscopic compared to everything they spend money on?

[Anne68]

Whoa I was browsing through this thread and saw this doozy. You are 100% wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Taxes are pretty low right now. Obama has not raised taxes and doesn’t plan to. Now I have a couple of questions for you. What will happen to the debt if taxes are cut further? Why don’t the Republicans take Obama’s offer of keeping middle class taxes down and raising upper income taxes instead of raising everyones?

What happens to the debt as Obama continues to spend ~ $1.25 Trillion more than tax revenue? Raising taxes on the "rich" reduces that to about $1.2 Trillion more than tax revenue. Treasonous.

[Grindelwald]

What happens to the debt as Obama continues to spend ~ $1.25 Trillion more than tax revenue? Raising taxes on the "rich" reduces that to about $1.2 Trillion more than tax revenue. Treasonous

I won't argue that spending cuts need to be made.

[Anne68]

That's something else altogether. That's not what you said in your first post. Most everyone pays for their own abortions, it's the ones (very miniscule number) that can't afford it is where the debate on that is. You realize that the amount of money government spends on abortions is microscopic compared to everything they spend money on?

That is true. You are correct - I said something different.

But I stand by what I initially said. If you oppose abortion, then Dems say you hate women. Rubbish.

[Anne68]

I won't argue that spending cuts need to be made.

But they won't be.

Just like when Reagan gave 3 million illegals amnesty; then we were going to enforce immigration laws. How did that turn out?

We can't cut any spending.

If you cut SS, you hate old people.
If you cut education, you hate children, teachers, unions, etc.
If you cut Medicaid, you hate poor people.
If you cut welfare, you hate poor people.

It goes on and on and on....

No politician has the stomach to cut anything because it will cost them their job. And who would give up that Cush gig????

[atomic]

At the end of the day who funds government?

No one. They just print more money.

[songfourone]

But they won't be.

Just like when Reagan gave 3 million illegals amnesty; then we were going to enforce immigration laws. How did that turn out?

We can't cut any spending.

If you cut SS, you hate old people.
If you cut education, you hate children, teachers, unions, etc.
If you cut Medicaid, you hate poor people.
If you cut welfare, you hate poor people.

It goes on and on and on....

No politician has the stomach to cut anything because it will cost them their job. And who would give up that Cush gig????

How about military cuts?

[Anne68]

How about military cuts?

Then you're a RWNJ. Whatever. It's never going to happen. We will print more money which taxes the poor more than anyone else.

[musicmd]

Nope. The 'country' did not provide anything. It was the funds of the 'tiny minority' that you wish to further enslave that provided those things. Now, if you want to suggest that the 'country' did a masterful and good job in extirpating the natives... I would agree with that.

Yea, right.

[Mom49of4]

For the country to provide anything who funds it?

[musicmd]

For the country to provide anything who funds it?

Tell us, is this a question answer board.

[Mom49of4]

We the taxpayers fund the government.

[Phineas Finn]

But they won't be.

Just like when Reagan gave 3 million illegals amnesty; then we were going to enforce immigration laws. How did that turn out?

We can't cut any spending.

If you cut SS, you hate old people.
If you cut education, you hate children, teachers, unions, etc.
If you cut Medicaid, you hate poor people.
If you cut welfare, you hate poor people.

It goes on and on and on....

No politician has the stomach to cut anything because it will cost them their job. And who would give up that Cush gig????

Could you possibly fit more oversimplifications into one post?

All of your if-you-cut statements are nothing more that the right-wing's pat answer to questions that would require actual thought.

• Welfare as most Americans define it does not exist -- and hasn't since the mid-90s;
• Medicaid will be cut slowly as the Affordable Care Act covers more Americans who currently don't have insurance;
• Education will not be cut because it's the last thing we can afford to do if we want to address our long-term unemployment problems;
• Social Security will be "cut" by increasing the eligibility age and/or means testing (although that will cause major whining by people like you who "want everything I paid in"; and
• And we will address the immigration problem, and it will involve a degree of amnesty because we had the damn Help Wanted Sign up at the border for decades. Those people are here, and the contribute to our society. They'll be citizens.

All of these things can and will be done if Mitch McConnell can put his re-election concerns aside (He's up for re-election in two years, and he's afraid of a challenge from the Right) and let the grownups get on with helping the Nation.

[Phineas Finn]

We the taxpayers fund the government.

Do they charge you by the word?

[Mom49of4]

PF, I guess you would be nicer to everyone if they always agreed with you.

[Phineas Finn]

PF, I guess you would be nicer to everyone if they always agreed with you.

It's not so much that you disagree -- it's the lack of thought behind your one-line posts.

There are a few posters that I disagree with and am polite when I respond to their posts -- but I respect them.

[musicmd]

It's not so much that you disagree -- it's the lack of thought behind your one-line posts.

There are a few posters that I disagree with and am polite when I respond to their posts -- but I respect them.

I notice only certain posters get the thrill of receiving one liners.