Connecting Singles^® Forums100% Free Online Dating

Maybe americans should go to college if that's the problem.

I respect your views and opinion on McCain versus Obama.

But what I still struggle with is the American paranioa that any person who has muslim ancestory, visited a country which has a predominately muslim religion, or expresses a view that is slightly favourable towards the religion etc, has to be suspected or implied to have a case to answer, including Obama. Why should any of these issues affect his presendency credentials?

I've been to Oman, Egypt, Dubai etc and the people and muslims from these countries are beautiful people, yet because of their religion are put in the same bucket as the terrorists from 9/11, Iraq, and Afganastan?

There are a lot of reasons jobs go overseas...since the US has the 2nd highest corporate tax rate, that's part of the equation. And...if we're one big global community, what's wrong with jobs going overseas? PS: If we start drilling offshore and Anwar, (or if congress approves it) you will see prices go down immediately. I'll bet on it.

Why is this an issue, if McCain had said he will stand with white muslims, chistians, catholics if the political wind turned, then would you promote his policy and presidential credentials. There are heaps of decent black muslim citizens within the US and around the world who diserve as much support as any other race, religion or colour.

I find your comment absolutely narrow minded.

"Be assured I will stand with the Black Muslims should the political-winds shift in an ugly direction." ObamaWow. That's a scary enough sentence on it's own. Hard to believe he is even a candidate for President. Thanks.

Opal,

We were talking about income taxes not McCains desire to decrease coorporate taxes or Bush's record on shipping jobs overseas.

I'm willing to discuss those as well but I would like to hear your thoughts/answer to my last post before we go off in another direction.

Why the hell would you decrease the corporate tax cut 10% when Bush's tax cut's haven't created jobs. To pass it down to the consumer who doesn't have a job.

The jobs have been getting outsourced since LONG before Bush came into office. There are a lot of unhappy reasons for this. I fail to see how you can think that raising corporate taxes is going to help the situation.

The only thing not working here is your argument. Give us an answer, please!

Opal, it's not a nice idea, it's a fact. How many times do you see a notice from a company saying they are going to have to raise their prices because the gas is going up? When their costs increase, it gets pssed down to the consumer.

Once again, you did not address the subject, which you brought up to begin with. If Bush were to raise corporate taxes, it would only benefit the government and hurt the consumer.

McCain wants to decrease coporate tax from 35% to 25% and make it permanent. This is what's happening to America's job's in the process...

The Bush Record on Shipping Jobs Overseas

http://www.aflcio.org/issues/jobseconomy/exportingamerica/upload/bushrecord_jobsoverseas.pdf

There really is no such thing as corporate taxes. Anything they have to pay gets passed DOWN TO THE CONSUMER. Don't you get it?

Thanks for the reply Opal.

It's a confusing article and I think somewhat misleading.

They state later on that

People in the top 20 percent of incomes, averaging $182,700 a year, saw their share of federal taxes decline from 65.3 percent of total payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year, according to the study by congressional budget analysts. This seems to state that 20% of the taxpayers in the US which includes the top 1% of earners, are paying 63.5% of the nations federal taxes.

In contrast, middle-class taxpayers — with incomes ranging from $51,500 to $75,600 — bear a greater tax burden. Those making an average of $75,600 had the biggest jump in their share of taxes, from 18.5 percent of all payments in 2001 to 19.5 percent this year This seems to state that the middle class is paying 19.5% of the nations federal taxes.

It doesn't give what precentage of people in the US fall into the middle and lower classes but it seems clear that there's only room for 36.5% of federal tax to be collected after the governemnt collects 63.5% from the wealthy. So to break it down:

20% of the nations population (The wealthy) are paying 63.5% of the nations federal taxes.

80% of the nations population (The middle and lower income classes) are paying 36.5% of the nations federal taxes.

This seems more than fair to the middle and lower income taxpayer(s) Granted, taxes, finance, etc... are complicated and this article. Perhaps I am missing something.

I do agree with the idea that the wealthy should contribute more but at the same time, I think they are already doing a lot more than a majorty of the nation is. At what point is it enough?

Opal,

Can you clarify this. The web site you cited does not include the text you wrote. I'm thinking you may have cited to wrong site by mistake.

What the article does say on page 2 is:

There have been three tax cuts for individuals under President Bush. The top tax rate on compensation was trimmed twice and is now 35 percent, from 39.6 percent when President Bush took office. Most compensation also faces a 1.45 percent Medicare tax, which is matched by the employer, making the effective federal tax rate on high earners 37.9 percent.

Then, the top rate for most investment income was reduced to 15 percent in 2003, from the 39.6 percent for dividends and 20 percent for profits on asset sales that were in effect when Mr. Bush took office.

A result is that the wealthiest Americans now pay much higher direct taxes on money they work for than on money that works for them.

This doesn't match what you posted (Current 26.7%). Also, if you cut and pasted that from an article they made an error. It states the tax was 33% to 26.7% for a decrease of 19%. This is ofcourse an error since 33 - 26.7 is 4.3 or 13% (4.3/33)

Anyway, taxes are pretty damn confusing. Just trying to figure this one out.

Where is the terrorism, Opal? Here? No major attack here since 9/11. And many many failed and compromised attacks have been tried. That is defending your country and mine, yes? Think or have evidence that those attacks would not develop if Iraq did not occur? Yes, absolutely none are saying that.

Obama saw exactly the same intelligence on Iraq that all the rest did.
Yet has this inate ability to mind read Sadam.... and comes to the conclusion Sadam does not have WMDs and will not support terrorism with funds? He just did not want to pull the trigger on a brutal dictator and oppressor, Opal. He was afraid of the consquences and afraid of the world opinion.

He would still have those kurd and shia tasting chemical weapon from Chemical Ally and facing helo gunships Opal. That is exactly what his no vote said. It cannot say anything else.

Your Senator Obama......wants to have peace...he will pay any price for it. Sacrifice your countries honor and it is dignity......so he can win an election and have the world see him as a peace maker. Like all elitist, he seeking approval. Frist of the American voter. Then from the world. So the Dudes of this world can go around and say......I got Obama elected and the world is a better place. But the Presidency is not that kind of job. Noone likes you when you are there. You need a thick skin and a good sense for motives of world leaders. He has neither.

The world is better place for millions of Iraqs because Sadam is buried 6 feet deep. The world will be a better place when politcal novices like Obama....learn their trade prior to getting into the big time.

Gee Opal, all I know is that my tax bill was over $20,000 last year, and hat was after all the standard deduction in my paycheck. You know, the onles people are always bitching about?

What did you pay?

Ummm.... About those tax cuts for the rich.....Check the facts. You don't get that rebate if you make OVER a certain amount of money.

Get in the debate Opal...give us YOUR opinion....not some rehashed youtube stuff that you feel is is apporaite. I made direct attack on him.
One that is both factual and critical. Cannot you give some real words and defend him?

CHANGE! Because when I am done with you, that is all you will have left..