I'm having trouble following this. Perhaps you could explain what you mean about Obama's healthcare and economic plans being an unfair redistribution of wealth.

For that matter, I challenge you to tell me exactly where each involves a any redistribution of wealth, either fair or unfair.

As far as taxes being kept low, taxes for people in my income bracket would be lowered. Taxes for those in upper incomes would be increased.

What do taxes pay for? Answer: Government programs. The money to fund a national healthcare program is going to have to come from somewhere. IMO I feel that it is unfair for any one group of people to be responsible for another group's well-being. I have never understood why people are not held accountable for their own decision making. If you cant afford healthcare, why is it my problem? I just dont see why a portion of my hard earned income should have to go to another person. I'm not sure what your tax bracket is, but I know that my taxes will increase based on Obama's plan.

It's just an age old difference of opinion. I find it unfair.

Edited August 11, 200817 yr by Casey008

I'd like to chime in on this because I fail to see how shifting the tax policy in any way is going to result in a redistribution of wealth. The idea of taxing people who make more money is nothing new nor has it ever resulted in people living below the poverty line suddenly becoming wealthy. Even the welfare system does not lead to wealth for the individuals who participate in it.

It may seem unfair but having a tax scale based on income brackets makes some degree of sense when you consider that 20 percent of the lowest income on the scale is a big chunk to someone making a little amount of money who isn't able to take advantage of loopholes or doesn't make enough to hide in another country.

"Redistribution of wealth" is just a phrase that describes moving money from someone that has earned it, to someone that hasn't. It's not meant to be interpreted literally. I didn't mean that the poor would become wealthy. Furthermore, having advantages, which you call "loopholes" and "enough [money] to hide in another country" are examples of someone who has worked and earned that privaledge. Do really think that it is beneficial to our country as a whole to punish or look down upon success? Personally, my motivation to work hard and succeed is diminished by this. I know it's not a new concept, but Obama's nationalized healthcare plan would be a HUGE leap in the direction of socialism. IMO it is just scary!

I'm not following what you mean by this: "when you consider that 20 percent of the lowest income on the scale is a big chunk to someone making a little amount of money"

Edited August 11, 200817 yr by Casey008

Obama will low raise taxes on the rich. McCain has no plans to help the middle class.

So all the millions who can't pay for healthcare should just die or as McCainn says join the Milltary?

I don't mind paying taxes if it actually goes to the programs it should go to....

Not some BS like spending a half billion dollars in Alaska for a bridge to a 5 mile stretch of land.

And, I personally can't always say that everything is everyone else's problem. Especially the elderly, who have put so much into this country.......so, I can't sit there and say "If you can't afford your medicine and your groceries, how is that my problem?"

That's just my opinion, though.

"Redistribution of wealth" is just a phrase that describes moving money from someone that has earned it, to someone that hasn't. It's not meant to be interpreted literally. I didn't mean that the poor would become wealthy. Furthermore, having advantages, which you call "loopholes" and "enough [money] to hide in another country" are examples of someone who has worked and earned that privaledge. Do really think that it is beneficial to our country as a whole to punish or look down upon success? Personally, my motivation to work hard and succeed is diminished by this. I know it's not a new concept, but Obama's nationalized healthcare plan would be a HUGE leap in the direction of socialism. IMO it is just scary!

I'm not following what you mean by this: "when you consider that 20 percent of the lowest income on the scale is a big chunk to someone making a little amount of money"

So, granting universal healthcare will lead to socialism.

Is that what they have in Great Britain? Because they have universal health care.

I mean, I'm just asking.

I don't mind paying taxes if it actually goes to the programs it should go to....

Not some BS like spending a half billion dollars in Alaska for a bridge to a 5 mile stretch of land.

And, I personally can't always say that everything is everyone else's problem. Especially the elderly, who have put so much into this country.......so, I can't sit there and say "If you can't afford your medicine and your groceries, how is that my problem?"

That's just my opinion, though.

So, granting universal healthcare will lead to socialism.

Is that what they have in Great Britain? Because they have universal health care.

I mean, I'm just asking.

Yes, that is exactly what they have in GB! The name use over there is Socialized Medicine. Nationalized healthcare is a term used in the US to try to distance it from what it really is...socialized medicine. Several European countries have very strong socialist parties. France, Germany, Italy, and now GB. I do not want the US to go down that path. We already have programs for the elderly. We have Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security. I dont see a need for a nationalized healthcare system. I haven't heard of any elderly citizens dying because they cant gain assistance from the government. Do you really want your doctor to be a government employee? Let me put it this way...how many people will go through the long and hard process of becoming a doctor, only to work for the government? Not many.

Younger generations have been forwarned that SS might not be there when they retire. I see no excuse why people can not save for themselves.

Obama will low raise taxes on the rich. McCain has no plans to help the middle class.

So all the millions who can't pay for healthcare should just die or as McCainn says join the Milltary?

Of course he will! When did it become a bad thing in this country to be rich? Isn't that what America is about? Work hard and make something out of yourself. I think too many people (I will use your number, MILLIONS) are not striving to succeed because they know the government will be there to bail them out. I just wish those millions of people would do more for themselves instead of relying on the government to take money from others.

McCain wants to continue with the current tax cuts. They have undoubtably helped the middle class.

Edited August 11, 200817 yr by Casey008

I would like to know what exactly are the "changes" that Obama is going to enact. I can not find any Obama supporter that can explain that to me. Much like their candidate, they have little substance behind their favorite word. "CHANGE"

I know this much.

At least Obama has a plan you can agree or disagree with.

McCain nether has a plan, or is too busy flip-flopping on everything he believed in.

I don't know where McCain stands on any issue, so let's get that out of the way first.

Yes, that is exactly what they have in GB! The name use over there is Socialized Medicine. Nationalized healthcare is a term used in the US to try to distance it from what it really is...socialized medicine. Several European countries have very strong socialist parties. France, Germany, Italy, and now GB. I do not want the US to go down that path. We already have programs for the elderly. We have Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security. I dont see a need for a nationalized healthcare system. I haven't heard of any elderly citizens dying because they cant gain assistance from the government. Do you really want your doctor to be a government employee? Let me put it this way...how many people will go through the long and hard process of becoming a doctor, only to work for the government? Not many.

Younger generations have been forwarned that SS might not be there when they retire. I see no excuse why people can not save for themselves.

Of course he will! When did it become a bad thing in this country to be rich? Isn't that what America is about? Work hard and make something out of yourself. I think too many people (I will use your number, MILLIONS) are not striving to succeed because they know the government will be there to bail them out. I just wish those millions of people would do more for themselves instead of relying on the government to take money from others.

McCain wants to continue with the current tax cuts. They have undoubtably helped the middle class.

And the plan that the current president came p with crashed and burned when BOTH parties turned away from it.

The elderly are our responsibility. Anyone who thinks they aren't is someone I just don't have any faith in.

Period.

I know this much.

At least Obama has a plan you can agree or disagree with.

McCain nether has a plan, or is too busy flip-flopping on everything he believed in.

I don't know where McCain stands on any issue, so let's get that out of the way first.

And the plan that the current president came p with crashed and burned when BOTH parties turned away from it.

The elderly are our responsibility. Anyone who thinks they aren't is someone I just don't have any faith in.

Period.

Who is not taking care of the elderly?

Who is not taking care of the elderly?

I'm trying to figure out where your point is at.

You said that if someone doesn't have health care, why is that your problem?

There are many elderly Americans without healthcare, and by your thinking, why is that your problem, right?

I'm trying to figure out where your point is at.

You said that if someone doesn't have health care, why is that your problem?

There are many elderly Americans without healthcare, and by your thinking, why is that your problem, right?

My point is that the elderly already have several government programs geared directly for them. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicade. I was saying there is no need for a socialized medicine program in the US.

Your taxes will not increase under Barack Obama unless your rich! Plain and Simple.

My point is that the elderly already have several government programs geared directly for them. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicade. I was saying there is no need for a socialized medicine program in the US.

And that is where we disagree, because I feel there is a need for universal health care.

Younger generations have been forwarned that SS might not be there when they retire. I see no excuse why people can not save for themselves.

Of course he will! When did it become a bad thing in this country to be rich? Isn't that what America is about? Work hard and make something out of yourself. I think too many people (I will use your number, MILLIONS) are not striving to succeed because they know the government will be there to bail them out. I just wish those millions of people would do more for themselves instead of relying on the government to take money from others.

McCain wants to continue with the current tax cuts. They have undoubtably helped the middle class.

[

Some people cannot afford to save for themselves. Quite a few Americans pay is not that well. Casey sounds like your rich yourself. May cannot live on what little they might get in 401K. Since the stockmarket has gone down, thanks to high oil/gas prices (thanks to W, Dick and big oil), quite a few Americans are losing money.

Noone said it is a bad thing to become rich. But everyone should pay their fair share. W and his cronies (and sounds like you do yourself) think that tax breaks for the rich and big oil and other big corporations are fine and dandy. Most people (not even many) do not try or work hard just because the government is "there to bail them out". That's elitist conservation Republican pure and unadulterated crap imho.

The current tax cuts have helped big corporations and the rich more than anything. The econony is horrible, some of the worst economic indicators since George Bush Sr. administration and some even the Depression. This country's deficit is at a record high (breaking George Bush Sr.'s) thanks to W's tax refund checks and tax cuts

Your taxes will not increase under Barack Obama unless your rich! Plain and Simple.

I would love to know when he said he would raise taxes for the working class.

This is the usual BS you hear from his opponents. Because he's a Democrat, he'll raise your taxes.

And what did John McCain say? First he wouldn't raise taxes, then he said nothing was off the table on This Week.....THEN he said he would raise taxes.

Damn! Which is it?!

"Redistribution of wealth" is just a phrase that describes moving money from someone that has earned it, to someone that hasn't. It's not meant to be interpreted literally. I didn't mean that the poor would become wealthy. Furthermore, having advantages, which you call "loopholes" and "enough [money] to hide in another country" are examples of someone who has worked and earned that privaledge. Do really think that it is beneficial to our country as a whole to punish or look down upon success? Personally, my motivation to work hard and succeed is diminished by this. I know it's not a new concept, but Obama's nationalized healthcare plan would be a HUGE leap in the direction of socialism. IMO it is just scary!

We have different definitions of what successful is since I don't see it as anything material, although I know many people do. But if I equate success with being rich then I'm not begrudging anyone the right to be rich. I think the rich should pay their fair share of taxes and not hide their money with the specific purpose of avoiding paying their fair share or using loopholes to avoid the same. I don't think anyone earns the privilege to not pay their fair share of taxes. By saying they've earned the right by making more money, you;re seemingly saying that people who are poor should be penalized for being poor.

I'm against people manipulating the system whether they are well off or not. Unfortunately society is set up so that some people who would otherwise take care of themselves are at a disadvantage and unable to do so.

There are people that are motivated and work hard and don't make much money. Everyone can't pursue high paying jobs or even get them. Teachers, for instance, are vital but don't generally make a whole lot of money. Not everyone making a whole lot of money is motivated or hard working. The point is there are probably people that are as motivated as you are if not more and who work as hard if not harder, and still are not as successful as you consider yourself. They probably have their own set of concerns about taxes and the fact that they can't hide their money any where.

I'm not following what you mean by this: "when you consider that 20 percent of the lowest income on the scale is a big chunk to someone making a little amount of money"

Basically if someone makes $20,000 a year then giving up their 20 percent for taxes makes more of an impression than someone making ten times that, even though that person would clearly lose a bigger chunk of their money. If you're living on the edge of poverty then paying your fair share makes it even worse for you so I can't buy into the privilege of loopholes for the wealthy.