what is a democrat and a republican exactly?

[Rob9874]

Originally posted by: josphII
that is just absurd. the richest 10% pay like 90% of the taxes, so how does a tax cut, where the largest % tax cut is for the poorest americans, translate into taking your money and giving it to the rich?

[Edited for Platinum]
Exactly.....let me elaborate with a simple illustration for the kiddies who might not understand:

Democrats don't think about the logic behind tax cuts. Let's say the govt collects $10 mil in taxes this year (simplified for math's sake). And the wealthy paid 40% of their income, which comes to $8 mil. And the middle and lower class paid 10%-30% of their income, which made up the other $2 mil. Now, the US decides to have a 50% tax cut, or $5 mil. Democrats say that the lower and middle class should get all $5 mil, even though they only paid $2 mil. And even if we gave the $2 mil back to the poor, and $3 mil to the rich, why should the poor not have to pay ANY taxes? Republicans say you have to distribute it fairly, with $4 mil going back to the rich (50% of what they paid), and $1 mil going to the poor (50% of what they paid).

Democrats don't believe in the "trickle down" theory either. They say giving tax cuts to the weathly and corporations won't create more jobs. Well, a friend of mine works for a very large company that has facilities in a few states, including Washington. Washington just imposed a huge export tax, which creates a new $100 million/yr expense for the company. The company is currently trying to lobby state officials to have the tax removed or lowered. Critics will say that Washington should NOT give another large corporation more tax breaks. However, if they don't, this company is going to pull out of Washington altogether, and do business in a state without such high taxes. So the state of Washington will be to blame for a huge loss of jobs. Now do you see how tax breaks for corporations can help the economy?

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: Rob9874

Originally posted by: josphII
that is just absurd. the richest 10% pay like 90% of the taxes, so how does a tax cut, where the largest % tax cut is for the poorest americans, translate into taking your money and giving it to the rich?

Democrats don't think about the logic behind tax cuts. Let's say the govt collects $10 mil in taxes this year (simplified for math's sake). And the wealthy paid 40% of their income, which comes to $8 mil. And the middle and lower class paid 10%-30% of their income, which made up the other $2 mil. Now, the US decides to have a 50% tax cut, or $5 mil. Democrats say that the lower and middle class should get all $5 mil, even though they only paid $2 mil. And even if we gave the $2 mil back to the poor, and $3 mil to the rich, why should the poor not have to pay ANY taxes? Republicans say you have to distribute it fairly, with $4 mil going back to the rich (50% of what they paid), and $1 mil going to the poor (50% of what they paid).

Democrats don't believe in the "trickle down" theory either. They say giving tax cuts to the weathly and corporations won't create more jobs. Well, a friend of mine works for a very large company that has facilities in a few states, including Washington. Washington just imposed a huge export tax, which creates a new $100 million/yr expense for the company. The company is currently trying to lobby state officials to have the tax removed or lowered. Critics will say that Washington should NOT give another large corporation more tax breaks. However, if they don't, this company is going to pull out of Washington altogether, and do business in a state without such high taxes. So the state of Washington will be to blame for a huge loss of jobs. Now do you see how tax breaks for corporations can help the economy?

Uhhh, rob, the guy you quoted favors Republicans and the Republican way of life.

btw, your analysis is soo simplistic that it isn't even worth replying too. i just found it ironic that you quoted the wrong person.

 

[djheater]

The easiest way to describe it would be to say that:

nick1985 = republican
moonbeam = democrat

Everyone else falls somewhere in the middle.

 

[Rob9874]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Uhhh, rob, the guy you quoted favors Republicans and the Republican way of life.

btw, your analysis is soo simplistic that it isn't even worth replying too. i just found it ironic that you quoted the wrong person.

Uhhh, Platinum, I know exactly who I quoted. I was agreeing with him, and adding more to his statement.

btw, I purposely made my analysis simplistic, so liberals might be able to understand it. Obviously, people that think Republicans are for greater tax cuts for the rich need a simpler explanation. With a minor in Economics, I don't need a lesson on complex economic analyses.

Maybe next time you won't assume who I was trying to quote, and you'll avoid looking like such a moron, you noob.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: Rob9874

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Uhhh, rob, the guy you quoted favors Republicans and the Republican way of life.

btw, your analysis is soo simplistic that it isn't even worth replying too. i just found it ironic that you quoted the wrong person.

Uhhh, Platinum, I know exactly who I quoted. I was agreeing with him, and adding more to his statement.

btw, I purposely made my analysis simplistic, so liberals might be able to understand it. Obviously, people that think Republicans are for greater tax cuts for the rich need a simpler explanation. With a minor in Economics, I don't need a lesson on complex economic analyses.

hehehe, you must be very smart. I have an masters and econ and yet i know that the models don't explain reality very well.

btw, if everything was so simple cause and effect, why do so many people live in Beaverton Or, vs Vancouver WA??

i'm assuming you live in Washington because you mentioned it in your post, if you don't know the area than that question won't make any sense to you.

Bottom line, NO one has made any attempt to refute my basic premise that over the last 15 years, the REPUBLICANS are the ones that have been Spending and increasing taxes and not the democrats.

ON a purely theoretical level, i agree, Laissez Faire economics is the ultimate, Perfect Competition model is a work of art. I would LOVE to see those things come to pass and our economy become TRULY free of undue influences (no monopolies, no robber barons, no huge corporate conglomerates, moderate unemployment primarily due to friction, etc etc etc). Who wouldn't. EVERYONE knows that communism and a GOVT controlled economey is doomed to failure.

But it is the REPUBLICANS and not the democrats that are driving us to a welfare state. Unfortunately republicans aren't bestowing this welfare on the poor people but on the LARGE INDUSTRIES. Why is it that EVERY time a republican gets in office our Federal Budget Deficits Double and Triple? because they INSIST on putting WAYY Too much money in the Military.

WAR is money, i realize this, unfortunately it leaves our economy more and more dependent on this industry. FEDERAL Spending right now accounts for 40% of GNP. Federal, State and Municipal Spending account for 60% of our GNP. OVER 50% of our earned income goes in taxes to one of the three entities, Federal, State and Municipal. that 10% difference is our deficit year in and year out (Yes, the figures are approximated).

Year in and Year out that % has been growing. Federal government is the SINGLE largest employer in the US.

How long do you think our economy can support this?

 

[Rob9874]

Um....you're smarter than I. You win.

[EDIT] Except for one point. It's the democrats that spread the false idea that a national debt/deficit is such a bad thing. I don't think the goal of the economy should be to eliminate the deficit. The US govt has always had debt, and it always will. It's part of the system. It's just that those numbers have increased over time, and it sounds scarier than it is.

 

[Tom]

"you have to be a democrat to believe this crap. not lazy = hard work-> success -> money. so tell me again how theres more lazy middle class ppl than poor ppl... "

people aren't poor because there're lazy, they're poor because they made bad choices or didn't have good choices to make or aren't educated properly because of substandard education. Lots of middle class and rich people think hard work means sitting on their ass posting in forums and every once in awhile they shift some papers around or answer the phone.

But my point isn't that middle class and rich are lazy, it's that poor people aren't lazy either. Poor people aren't the enemy, poverty and ignorance are the enemy.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: Rob9874
Um....you're smarter than I. You win.

[EDIT] Except for one point. It's the democrats that spread the false idea that a national debt/deficit is such a bad thing. I don't think the goal of the economy should be to eliminate the deficit. The US govt has always had debt, and it always will. It's part of the system. It's just that those numbers have increased over time, and it sounds scarier than it is.

you must be too young to remember.

IT was RONALD REAGAN that ran on a ticket of DEFICIT IS EVIL. before reagan federal deficit was not really an issue as there almost never was one.

not to the scale that Reagan created anyway.

Ironically it was RONALD REAGAN that ran the GREATEST federal deficit up until that time.

since then it has gotten totally out of control.

but to say its the democrats that spread it is ludicrous. it has ALWAYS been republicans that have run on the platform of fiscal responsibilities.


BTW, i agree to an extent, the worst form of government is one that runs a surplus. that i have no problem with.

HOWEVER, when you look at the budget for the federal govt, (doesn't matter whethor it is democrat budget or republican one) the TOTAL amount is just staggering.

There is an issue with the system. at some point we will have to stop policing the world OR get a world mandate and have the rest of the world PITCH in.

the system as it is, is bound for bankruptcy.

 

[josphII]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: Rob9874
Um....you're smarter than I. You win.

[EDIT] Except for one point. It's the democrats that spread the false idea that a national debt/deficit is such a bad thing. I don't think the goal of the economy should be to eliminate the deficit. The US govt has always had debt, and it always will. It's part of the system. It's just that those numbers have increased over time, and it sounds scarier than it is.

you must be too young to remember.

IT was RONALD REAGAN that ran on a ticket of DEFICIT IS EVIL. before reagan federal deficit was not really an issue as there almost never was one.

not to the scale that Reagan created anyway.

Ironically it was RONALD REAGAN that ran the GREATEST federal deficit up until that time.

since then it has gotten totally out of control.

but to say its the democrats that spread it is ludicrous. it has ALWAYS been republicans that have run on the platform of fiscal responsibilities.


BTW, i agree to an extent, the worst form of government is one that runs a surplus. that i have no problem with.

HOWEVER, when you look at the budget for the federal govt, (doesn't matter whethor it is democrat budget or republican one) the TOTAL amount is just staggering.

There is an issue with the system. at some point we will have to stop policing the world OR get a world mandate and have the rest of the world PITCH in.

the system as it is, is bound for bankruptcy.

well the only point you have made is you think republicans spend too much on the military. well if protecting the country means going into debt then that is a consequence we have to live with. Reagan is regarded as one of the greatest US presidents, and for good reason. His devotion to national security and democracy is one reason the US is the worlds lone superpower. while russia fell, the US prospered. can you imagine what state this country (and the world) would be in if democrats had control during the 80's? one of the major differences between democrats and republicans is republicans value national security far more than democrats. democrats seem to be under the impression that the world is all fine and dandy, when its not. and if giving money back to the ppl and increasing national security mean going into debt then thats something we're just gonna have to live with.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: josphII

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: Rob9874
Um....you're smarter than I. You win.

[EDIT] Except for one point. It's the democrats that spread the false idea that a national debt/deficit is such a bad thing. I don't think the goal of the economy should be to eliminate the deficit. The US govt has always had debt, and it always will. It's part of the system. It's just that those numbers have increased over time, and it sounds scarier than it is.

you must be too young to remember.

IT was RONALD REAGAN that ran on a ticket of DEFICIT IS EVIL. before reagan federal deficit was not really an issue as there almost never was one.

not to the scale that Reagan created anyway.

Ironically it was RONALD REAGAN that ran the GREATEST federal deficit up until that time.

since then it has gotten totally out of control.

but to say its the democrats that spread it is ludicrous. it has ALWAYS been republicans that have run on the platform of fiscal responsibilities.


BTW, i agree to an extent, the worst form of government is one that runs a surplus. that i have no problem with.

HOWEVER, when you look at the budget for the federal govt, (doesn't matter whethor it is democrat budget or republican one) the TOTAL amount is just staggering.

There is an issue with the system. at some point we will have to stop policing the world OR get a world mandate and have the rest of the world PITCH in.

the system as it is, is bound for bankruptcy.

well the only point you have made is you think republicans spend too much on the military. well if protecting the country means going into debt then that is a consequence we have to live with. Reagan is regarded as one of the greatest US presidents, and for good reason. His devotion to national security and democracy is one reason the US is the worlds lone superpower. while russia fell, the US prospered. can you imagine what state this country (and the world) would be in if democrats had control during the 80's? one of the major differences between democrats and republicans is republicans value national security far more than democrats. democrats seem to be under the impression that the world is all fine and dandy, when its not. and if giving money back to the ppl and increasing national security mean going into debt then thats something we're just gonna have to live with.

and republicans CREATE wars where there shouldn't be one, in order to continue the spending.

 

[tokamak]

Originally posted by: Ornery
See where you stand compared to others by taking this test at Political Compass. My results here.

Conservatives are actually liberals who have been "mugged by reality."

Adlai Stevenson once described a liberal as "one with both feet firmly planted in the air."

I'm like a combination of Nelson Mandela and the Dalai Lama

btw, original poster, you're going to get everything BUT a straight answer in this thread.

 

[Ornery]

Yikes! I'm middle of the road around here!

I gave jinduy a straight answer. All he has to do is answer the questions in that test, and he'll know what the difference is.

 

[LongCoolMother]

Originally posted by: yukichigai
I'll add to the growing pile of info. I can't define Democrat and Republican exactly, but I can give you some key points that seem to run common with all of them.

Democrats: Most democrats tend to support expanding societal freedoms, the most obvious examples being gay marriages/partnerships, medicinal marijuana, and abortion. A noteable exception from this is gun ownership, which they feel should be carefully regulated. They typically support a "freedom from" standpoint, i.e. passing legislation to restrict acts that would in turn restrict societal freedoms. An example of this is the previously mentioned gun control laws, the reasoning being that someone with a gun who shoots you is infringing on the right of people in society to not get hurt by other people. Democrats also support a more centralized government, namely more universal, federal legislation and regulations, as well as regulating businesses. They also tend to favor equal treatment among all people save for when it comes to the poor and/or unfortunate, in which case they favor donations/handouts/whatever you want to call it.



Republicans: Republicans tend to favor what has been reffered to as "legislating morality", i.e. laws banning practices which are not considered bad from any scientific standpoint but instead from a moral standpoint. (Gay marriages the most obvious example) Republicans favor the "freedom to" approach to laws, advocating deregulation of acts they find favorable rather than outlawing acts which run counter to those they wish to promote. They also favor personal, individual freedoms as opposed to societal freedoms, an example being gun ownership, and a more hands-off approach to businesses. Republicans believe in the theory that you reap what you sow, and thusly if someone is poor they should not be afforded handouts and a "free ride"; instead they should simply be offered chances to get back on their feet through hard work and effort.


EDIT: Another interesting difference between Republicans and Democrats: Democrats tend to favor (innovation/reckless experimentation) while Republicans (are content to stay with what works/fear change). (Choose the statements which apply to your personal point of view)

MAN! now i feel like i belong to neither. i agree with the republicans that the rich deserve to be rich and shouldnt give anything to the poor. but i agree with the democrats on abortion and that things should be made according to science, not religion. but then i do not agree with gay marriages or medicinal marijuana. i agree with the republicans though, in that you reap what you sow.

so im stuck in the middle. im neither!! that sucks.