So companies that have to compete in a global economy should not be able to send jobs overseas if it is beneficial to the company? That is suicide. Yes, if a company can have American workers, that is preferred, but if the alternative is the failure of the company, that is not good.
Originally Posted by FyredUp
Why cant someone who has already paid income tax on his money keep his money somewhere to keep from paying extra taxes? Lets change the tax code so people will keep their money here.
Agreed. Both Dems and Reps are responsible.
For the most part we have not had a TRUE free market economy in quite a long time. The immense difference between the rules the little guys have to play buy and the rules the mega-corporations play by unfairlytilt the scales to big business. Subsidies abound thorugh all facets of our economy from industry all the way to farming.
I agree with you on spending too much on other countries, but am not for money going to establish new Federal entitlements.
I don't disagree with this premise. But I believe that the government has a responsible to care for itscitizens before the rest of the world. We supply foreign aid in the hundreds of billions dollars all over the world while our very own citizens live in poverty, suffer from lack of medical care, substandard housing, and unemployment.
Agreed. Romney's tax plan is much closer to this than Obama's.
I believe in a straight percentage tax, no matter what your income is. No deductions, no loopholes. If the rate is 10%, you pay 10% if you make $20K or $200 billion.
I have no issue with gay people having civil unions or another means to secure the same benefits that married people have. Marriage is a religious rite. I dont believe the government should have anything to do with marriage either. I think two people who love each other should have a ceremony performed by an official (pastor, justice of the peace, etc) and then apply to the state to have that union recognized for benefits.
Frankly, it is a none of your businss issue. Why do YOU or anyone feel they have the right to tell people who they can or can't fall in love with and marry. Many claim it is a religious issue, and for some ultra right wing "Christians" I am sure it is, but to me the greater issue is financial. Look at how many more people would have to be covered by spousal benefits by companies out there. Frankly, with the scandals continuously rocking religions over and over maybe they need to spend some time cleaning their own house before judging others. And NO, I am not gay. I just believe fair is fair.
I dont have homophobia and agree that discrimination based on issues like race, sex, religion, etc is wrong. I dont have a problem discriminating against people who make poor choices such as the druggie that wants a job in the FD.
Discrimination is a dirty, ugly thing not to be condoned for any reason and homophobia is discrimination.
I think abortion after more than a few weeks of gestation is murder. I feel I have the right to tell others that it is wrong to commit murder. How come those who are for abortion arent standing up for those murderers who kill a pregnant women when that murderer is charged with two murders?
Again, this is a none of your business issue. Unless you are the father or the mother why do you fel you have the right to tell a woman what she can or can'tdo with her body?
Frankly, I have stated for years, if all you anti-abortionists would set up a registry saying you would adopt all of these to be aborted children then I would believe your convictions were anything more than being busybodies with nothing better to do with your time.
There are plenty of religious organizations and people who adopt children, but your analogy of having someone else take an extreme, life-altering responsibility for 18 or more years because someone else made poor choices is silly. That is like saying that people who want legalized abortion should have to bury the body of the child that is aborted.
I agree except about the second part. Who says it has to be equitable throughout the country? It is not now. If I want to live in a state that has higher tax rates, but also has a huge welfare system, I can do that. If I want to live in a state that wants to get its people off the welfare rolls and back to work, I can do that. Perhaps in 50 different ways, the best way can be found.
I believe that if the greater incentive was to wean people off from welfare than to keep them on the system would work on its own.
The odds of having anything close to equitable systems in all 50 states if assistance was run by the individual states is almost nil.
I am all for getting the government out of a gay person's life.
Funny how the right always talks about getting government out of your life, well, unless you are gay or want an abortion...