Axelrod: Obama Won't Rule Out Middle-Class Tax Hike

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



KidRock
http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/06/axelrod-obama-wont-rule-out-tax-hike-.html

White House senior adviser David Axelrod said the president won't rule out a health care reform bill that includes a tax hike on people making less than $250,000 a year.

Wasnt this pretty much the entire basis of his campaign?

dadudemon
Originally posted by KidRock
http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/06/axelrod-obama-wont-rule-out-tax-hike-.html

White House senior adviser David Axelrod said the president won't rule out a health care reform bill that includes a tax hike on people making less than $250,000 a year.

Wasnt this pretty much the entire basis of his campaign?

Until he actually does something, he still has adhered to his campaign rhetoric.





But, yes, if he goes against his word, I'll be disappointed. I wanted "change", not more hypocrisy.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by KidRock
Wasnt this pretty much the entire basis of his campaign?

Yup.

King Kandy
I'm in favor of this actually. Go Obama.

KidRock
Originally posted by dadudemon
Until he actually does something, he still has adhered to his campaign rhetoric.





But, yes, if he goes against his word, I'll be disappointed. I wanted "change", not more hypocrisy.

Considering the poor have already started paying more in taxes under Obama I don't know who wouldn't call him a hypocrite.

The guy is a joke, so are his economic policies and those that support them.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by KidRock
Considering the poor have already started paying more in taxes under Obama I don't know who wouldn't call him a hypocrite.

The guy is a joke, so are his economic policies and those that support them.

Poor people are basically parasites. They deserve what they get.

King Kandy
Originally posted by KidRock
Considering the poor have already started paying more in taxes under Obama I don't know who wouldn't call him a hypocrite.

The guy is a joke, so are his economic policies and those that support them.
The economic policies are good. People have this ridiculous thing about not wanting to pay taxes. Where I live our schools are a joke because nobody wants to pay any taxes to fix them up.

chomperx9
Originally posted by dadudemon
Until he actually does something, he still has adhered to his campaign rhetoric.





But, yes, if he goes against his word, I'll be disappointed. I wanted "change", not more hypocrisy. laughing i knew it to begin with he's the best actor on the planet . he keeps saying hes gonna do this and that to help everyone in this country have health insurance and hes gonna try to fix the economy. well obama we are WAITING. all it is is talk and no action with the man.

inimalist
Originally posted by King Kandy
The economic policies are good. People have this ridiculous thing about not wanting to pay taxes. Where I live our schools are a joke because nobody wants to pay any taxes to fix them up.

I think the point is more that he blatantly lied to the American people than that the policy has no legs.

Darth Jello
bring it on The Great Tax Con Job

King Kandy
Originally posted by inimalist
I think the point is more that he blatantly lied to the American people than that the policy has no legs.

I was trying to turn the conversation into something more constructive than another KidRock "could you guys start hating on Obama plz" thread.

In any case I don't see how this is any kind of proof of "blatant lies" since he never actually contradicted any campaign promises. All he said was that he was keeping all the options on the table which is a good perspective to have.

inimalist
Originally posted by King Kandy
I was trying to turn the conversation into something more constructive than another KidRock "could you guys start hating on Obama plz" thread.

In any case I don't see how this is any kind of proof of "blatant lies" since he never actually contradicted any campaign promises. All he said was that he was keeping all the options on the table which is a good perspective to have.

fair enough, though, I do remember the debates, where he quite clearly said what middle class Americans could expect from his administration.

I guess "outright lie" might be a bit harsh, so lets just say he is keeping the "outright lie" on the table? I also don't think that keeping the option of "breaking specific promises" on the table is such a good thing.

Darth Jello
summary of the article- what happens in a capitalist society when taxes are raised on the middle and lower classes? Companies are forced to pay bigger wages to make up the difference in order to maintain a workforce. It's why in social democratic countries, people pay half their income in taxes but because of the social services provided by a truly representative and well funded government and the pressure it takes off of businesses, their remaining purchasing power is equivalent to $18-$25 an hour at minimum wage. That's why those damn "socialists" (who really aren't) like the Swedes and the Danes haven't been hit too much by the depression are loaning us money even though we keep shitting all over them, their pristine healthcare, and using socialism as a derogatory expletive (mostly by people who don't know what socialism is).

King Kandy
Originally posted by inimalist
fair enough, though, I do remember the debates, where he quite clearly said what middle class Americans could expect from his administration.

I guess "outright lie" might be a bit harsh, so lets just say he is keeping the "outright lie" on the table? I also don't think that keeping the option of "breaking specific promises" on the table is such a good thing.
Really I think if he realized there were better solutions than his campaign it is a good thing. Campaigns are notably filled with ideas designed to please crowds rather than be the best solution possible. The best thing for america would be to raise our taxes to over 50% on upper income levels and nationalize services on every level like in the Scandinavian system. Of course these plans could never be part of a campaign where the knee-jerk reactions of americans is to never raise taxes no matter what.

Going against campaigns is good when the campaign promises were only designed as crowd pleasing devices. I think most people here would like it if he went back on his statements about not being in favor of gay marriage. I know I sure would have been happy if Bush had gone back on his promises to continue the Iraq war.

inimalist
Originally posted by Darth Jello
summary of the article- what happens in a capitalist society when taxes are raised on the middle and lower classes? Companies are forced to pay bigger wages to make up the difference in order to maintain a workforce. It's why in social democratic countries, people pay half their income in taxes but because of the social services provided by a truly representative and well funded government and the pressure it takes off of businesses, their remaining purchasing power is equivalent to $18-$25 an hour at minimum wage. That's why those damn "socialists" (who really aren't) like the Swedes and the Danes haven't been hit too much by the depression are loaning us money even though we keep shitting all over them, their pristine healthcare, and using socialism as a derogatory expletive (mostly by people who don't know what socialism is).

the article is great.

But, imho, the issue isn't that any particular tax policy would or wouldn't be good for America.

I don't think it is a stretch to say that Obama's guarantee that taxes wouldn't be raised on people making under 250 000 a year was a major selling point of his campaign. That it would even be on the table as a possibility shows Obama as, to say the least, a cynical politician, which was the other selling point of his campaign, change.

inimalist
Originally posted by King Kandy
Really I think if he realized there were better solutions than his campaign it is a good thing. Campaigns are notably filled with ideas designed to please crowds rather than be the best solution possible. The best thing for america would be to raise our taxes to over 50% on upper income levels and nationalize services on every level like in the Scandinavian system. Of course these plans could never be part of a campaign where the knee-jerk reactions of americans is to never raise taxes no matter what.

Going against campaigns is good when the campaign promises were only designed as crowd pleasing devices. I think most people here would like it if he went back on his statements about not being in favor of gay marriage. I know I sure would have been happy if Bush had gone back on his promises to continue the Iraq war.

???

wait

you are saying that it is ok if Obama told people what they wanted to hear in order to get into office, because now that he is there he can do the opposite? You would prefer if more politicians went back on their promises?

You live in a democracy, right?

King Kandy
Originally posted by Darth Jello
summary of the article- what happens in a capitalist society when taxes are raised on the middle and lower classes? Companies are forced to pay bigger wages to make up the difference in order to maintain a workforce. It's why in social democratic countries, people pay half their income in taxes but because of the social services provided by a truly representative and well funded government and the pressure it takes off of businesses, their remaining purchasing power is equivalent to $18-$25 an hour at minimum wage. That's why those damn "socialists" (who really aren't) like the Swedes and the Danes haven't been hit too much by the depression are loaning us money even though we keep shitting all over them, their pristine healthcare, and using socialism as a derogatory expletive (mostly by people who don't know what socialism is).
Scandinavian system >>> any other form of government on the planet. The thing is people could actually afford to have much higher taxes if they didn't have to pay for all their insurance and other services.

Though, America will never make these changes because people have been thoroughly brainwashed into thinking that any tax increase at all is the worst thing possible. Example (this honestly is what I thik would happen in this scenario):

Politician: Hey we figured out how to give out universal healthcare for only one penny each of additional taxes.

Average American: Boo no taxes!

King Kandy
Originally posted by inimalist
???

wait

you are saying that it is ok if Obama told people what they wanted to hear in order to get into office, because now that he is there he can do the opposite? You would prefer if more politicians went back on their promises?

You live in a democracy, right?
I'm saying we can't expect politicians to follow all of their campaign promises, nor should they since the promises are usually tilted to appeal to the less educated side of America. Fact is nobody could ever get elected on the basis of offering more taxes. Every candidate has to say they'll reduce taxes on some level because Americans are stupid that way. Is this a good thing? No, it's a very destructive path.

Darth Jello
He should just buy PSA airtime and start a huge campaign of honesty that says, "I know I messed up, but guess what? Paying higher taxes is only bad for serfs, slaves, and rich people."

King Kandy
Originally posted by Darth Jello
He should just buy PSA airtime and start a huge campaign of honesty that says, "I know I messed up, but guess what? Paying higher taxes is only bad for serfs, slaves, and rich people."
Yeah, that would sure work. Maybe if he could buy all the slots being used by the massive right-wing news infrastructure. In terms of propaganda republicans have their claws way too deep into mass media.

The kind of heat he'd get for that would be incredible. I'd be getting those dumb Ted Kulungoski "I lost my home because of tax boosts" ads around the clock on every station.

inimalist
Originally posted by King Kandy
I'm saying we can't expect politicians to follow all of their campaign promises, nor should they since the promises are usually tilted to appeal to the less educated side of America. Fact is nobody could ever get elected on the basis of offering more taxes. Every candidate has to say they'll reduce taxes on some level because Americans are stupid that way. Is this a good thing? No, it's a very destructive path.

so, it wold have been ok, to you, if Obama ran on ending the Iraq war, then escalated it instead?

Or, if tomorrow, instead of diplomacy, Obama invaded Iran?

Or, instead of nuclear non-proliferation, he gave nuclear materials to a third world warlord?

or, instead of being an American born patriot Christian, he was really a militant Muslim from Sudan with dreams of suicide bombing the white house.

Not to sound overly cynical, but methinks you are being a little forgiving because you are getting your way.

inimalist
Originally posted by Darth Jello
He should just buy PSA airtime and start a huge campaign of honesty that says, "I know I messed up, but guess what? Paying higher taxes is only bad for serfs, slaves, and rich people."

lol, fair enough, can't be critical of Democrats when they "play the game"

its more important to win than be righteous!

King Kandy
Originally posted by inimalist
so, it wold have been ok, to you, if Obama ran on ending the Iraq war, then escalated it instead?

Or, if tomorrow, instead of diplomacy, Obama invaded Iran?

Or, instead of nuclear non-proliferation, he gave nuclear materials to a third world warlord?

or, instead of being an American born patriot Christian, he was really a militant Muslim from Sudan with dreams of suicide bombing the white house.

Not to sound overly cynical, but methinks you are being a little forgiving because you are getting your way.
I'm not "getting my way", it is highly unlikely that this would EVER be considered seriously because it seems like the american brain shuts down whenever anyone mentions increased taxes.

Call me crazy but I don't think it is a good idea to make choices that could destroy america just because it sets a good precedent for keeping your promises.

Darth Jello
He should take a page out of the conservative play book and create a red scare centering around corporatism and fascism and completely demonizing the right just like they've always demonized the left. Reform HUAC and have them go after the right wing and discover some genuine threats to America. I really do fear that if something doesn't change radially and soon, it'll get so bad that we'll have a repeat of the first red scare, which really did lead to begrudging reforms in labor etc.

inimalist
Originally posted by King Kandy
I'm not "getting my way", it is highly unlikely that this would EVER be considered seriously because it seems like the american brain shuts down whenever anyone mentions increased taxes.

Call me crazy but I don't think it is a good idea to make choices that could destroy america just because it sets a good precedent for keeping your promises.

well then, why not just expect honesty out of your politicians in the first place?

stop electing people who think they need to lie and talk down to you

King Kandy
Originally posted by inimalist
well then, why not just expect honesty out of your politicians in the first place?

stop electing people who think they need to lie and talk down to you
Nobody can get elected in America who doesn't talk down to people. Nobody.

inimalist
Originally posted by Darth Jello
He should take a page out of the conservative play book and create a red scare centering around corporatism and fascism and completely demonizing the right just like they've always demonized the left. Reform HUAC and have them go after the right wing and discover some genuine threats to America. I really do fear that if something doesn't change radially and soon, it'll get so bad that we'll have a repeat of the first red scare, which really did lead to begrudging reforms in labor etc.

lol, run with it!

Burn Cato to the ground!

inimalist
Originally posted by King Kandy
Nobody can get elected in America who doesn't talk down to people. Nobody.

so your solution is to just say that this isn't a problem?

King Kandy
Originally posted by inimalist
so your solution is to just say that this isn't a problem?
It's a big problem and there is no way to solve it. To solve it you would have to educate everyone better, which people would never support because it costs money.

Darth Jello
and because the establishment doesn't want it. That's why they took civics, home economics, and comparative politics out of high school in the 80's and defined teaching them as socialism and communism

King Kandy
I think of it less as an establishment and more of ignorance breeding ignorance.

inimalist
Originally posted by King Kandy
It's a big problem and there is no way to solve it. To solve it you would have to educate everyone better, which people would never support because it costs money.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
and because the establishment doesn't want it. That's why they took civics, home economics, and comparative politics out of high school in the 80's and defined teaching them as socialism and communism

Then how does accepting this behaviour from another president, one who specifically said they were going to change the status quo in Washington, help solve the problem.

Like, I agree, rich Americans should be paying more to fund better social programs, but a political system based on lies and deceit, lobbying and money interests is never going to produce those things. The end can't justify the means, or else the endemic corruption will just flow over into the new policies. Any tax reform will be just as corrupt as the policies and programs that came before it if there are no leaders who are honest.

King Kandy
Honesty won't get you anywhere in American politics.

inimalist
because people don't vote for the honest guy, they vote for the guy who tells them what they want to hear smile

King Kandy
Originally posted by inimalist
because people don't vote for the honest guy, they vote for the guy who tells them what they want to hear smile
That's what i've been telling you the whole time...

inimalist
indeed, I've been saying it is problematic, you appear to be saying we shouldn't worry about it

dadudemon
Originally posted by inimalist
because people don't vote for the honest guy, they vote for the guy who tells them what they want to hear smile


I uh...


Wrote a 27 page paper on this. It does have flaws, but would you be interested in reading it?

inimalist
sure?

chomperx9
Originally posted by inimalist
because people don't vote for the honest guy, they vote for the guy who tells them what they want to hear smile yes

inimalist
Originally posted by chomperx9
yes

I mean you do as well

Symmetric Chaos
Unless you're a non-voter, in which case it isn't your fault for anything.

inimalist
yes, not part of the problem



..... not part of the solution either....

chomperx9
Originally posted by inimalist
I mean you do as well i was agreeing to your post but no i didn't vote for obama cause i knew from the beginning he is an actor. almost everyone that voted for him voted because they liked his speech even though none of his plans have been true yet.

chithappens
Originally posted by chomperx9
i was agreeing to your post but no i didn't vote for obama cause i knew from the beginning he is an actor. almost everyone that voted for him voted because they liked his speech even though none of his plans have been true yet.

It hasn't even been a year god damn.

What plans are you going on about anyway?

inimalist
Originally posted by chomperx9
i was agreeing to your post but no i didn't vote for obama cause i knew from the beginning he is an actor. almost everyone that voted for him voted because they liked his speech even though none of his plans have been true yet.

no, I knew you were agreeing with my post because you thought it to be anti-Obama, when it was in fact, anti-democracy. All people are subject to these problems.

dadudemon
Originally posted by inimalist
sure?

E-mail me and I'll reply with it. I don't see how I can get it to you in a simple a way as possible.

King Kandy
Originally posted by dadudemon
E-mail me and I'll reply with it. I don't see how I can get it to you in a simple a way as possible.
Can you attach text files? It should be posted here if so.

King Kandy
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Unless you're a non-voter, in which case it isn't your fault for anything.
It's your fault for allowing things to get into this state then when you could have intervened.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by King Kandy
It's your fault for allowing things to get into this state then when you could have intervened.

a) I vote
b) joke

dadudemon
Originally posted by King Kandy
Can you attach text files? It should be posted here if so.

I do know how to attach a .doc as a .txt.


Also, I don't think a .txt can be attached.

BackFire
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/03/obama.economy/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

inimalist
Originally posted by BackFire
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/03/obama.economy/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

smile

inimalist
Originally posted by King Kandy
It's your fault for allowing things to get into this state then when you could have intervened.

were you not just the one saying that the system doesn't want you to have real choices?

doesn't participation in a corrupt system engender more accountability for that system than active non-participation?

chomperx9
Originally posted by chithappens
It hasn't even been a year god damn.

What plans are you going on about anyway? he said last year his 1st plan is to make sure each and one of his citizens has health insurance if he becomes president and that he will fix try and fix the economy in our nation. before elected he didnt mention anything about racism or nothing. now that hes elected president he can spit out what he really wants to change.

King Kandy
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
a) I vote
b) joke
The "you" wasn't directed at you in particular but rather a theoretical non-voter.

King Kandy
Originally posted by inimalist
were you not just the one saying that the system doesn't want you to have real choices?

doesn't participation in a corrupt system engender more accountability for that system than active non-participation?
I never said the system was corrupt. The system is producing bad results because americans are too ignorant to make use of the well-designed republic system they've been given. If everyone who didn't vote banded together to demand the change that was best for america we'd be living in a virtual paradise by now.

I don't think american democracy is a sham and I don't think there's a conspiracy that is putting down america. The whole thing is the product of an american culture that treats ignorance as a virtue. Anything that happens in elections, the american public has no one but themselves to blame.

dadudemon
Originally posted by inimalist
were you not just the one saying that the system doesn't want you to have real choices?

doesn't participation in a corrupt system engender more accountability for that system than active non-participation?


lol

Didja like the part in my paper that talked about just that?

inimalist
Originally posted by dadudemon
lol

Didja like the part in my paper that talked about just that?

no

sick



























lol, no, it was good. I'm actually sort of at a loss, do you want it like proof read? or like, a review or critique or something? lol, I had fun reading it, just figured you probably wanted more than that

inimalist
Originally posted by King Kandy
I never said the system was corrupt. The system is producing bad results because americans are too ignorant to make use of the well-designed republic system they've been given.

my mistake

Originally posted by King Kandy
If everyone who didn't vote banded together to demand the change that was best for america we'd be living in a virtual paradise by now.

you probably shouldn't assume that the non-voting public agree on anything. not voting is still a choice.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I don't think american democracy is a sham and I don't think there's a conspiracy that is putting down america. The whole thing is the product of an american culture that treats ignorance as a virtue. Anything that happens in elections, the american public has no one but themselves to blame.

indeed they don't, but I'd say the problem is they drank the kool-aid in the first place.

King Kandy
Originally posted by inimalist
you probably shouldn't assume that the non-voting public agree on anything. not voting is still a choice.
That's why I said if they banded together.
Originally posted by inimalist
indeed they don't, but I'd say the problem is they drank the kool-aid in the first place.
The problem is that we have a culture where it's seen as a virtue to be uneducated. We saw this being exploited last campaign with those "Joe Sixpack" speeches, even though they ended up backfiring. This is the source of all the problems in america. It prevents smart people from making smart decisions out of fear of being seen as elitist.

inimalist
Originally posted by King Kandy
The problem is that we have a culture where it's seen as a virtue to be uneducated. We saw this being exploited last campaign with those "Joe Sixpack" speeches, even though they ended up backfiring. This is the source of all the problems in america. It prevents smart people from making smart decisions out of fear of being seen as elitist.

ok, but where does that culture come from?

dadudemon
Originally posted by inimalist
no

sick



























lol, no, it was good. I'm actually sort of at a loss, do you want it like proof read? or like, a review or critique or something? lol, I had fun reading it, just figured you probably wanted more than that

I already turned it in. I got a 100% on it. The professor said that this was well beyond the scope of the course. He agreed that is actually a 300 page paper, and not the horribly digested version that I had to turn in. (He didn't want too much, as his load was huge. hahahahahahahahahaha. That was unintentionally hilarious.)


Yeah, one day, I'd like to turn a huge expansion in on this paper. Maybe a book...


Critique away. In this thread, even. I'm usually the first to admit that I still have room to improve my political philosophy.

However, my reasons behind a new voting system are very pertinent to this thread.


To be honest, the entire system I outlined is much better suited on a smaller country. Not a US level. It would be better employed in like, France, or Germany...something like that.

King Kandy
Originally posted by inimalist
ok, but where does that culture come from?
Probably appealing to southerners post civil-war.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.