GreenKitty Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Did I miss this somewhere? http://www.breitbart.tv/html/195153.html “It’s not that I wanna punish your success I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you That they got a chance at success too When you spread the wealth around It’s good for everybody” http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/13/obama-plumber-plan-spread-wealth/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vida Winter Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 I absolutely believe this is what Obama thinks. Our founding fathers would not have supported this. I do not support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pam "SFSOM" in TN Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Did I miss this somewhere? http://www.breitbart.tv/html/195153.html “It’s not that I wanna punish your success I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you That they got a chance at success too When you spread the wealth around It’s good for everybody†Yeah, I hear you. Thumbs down, indeed. I mean, just a couple weeks ago, congress, at the urging of Bush, Paulson, McCain, Berneke (sp?), and with the complicity of Obama and a whole bunch of others, spread my wealth and that of my great-grandchildren around to banks and publicly traded industries. I guess the whole "let's give more tax cuts to the richest among us" doesn't do it for me. Corporate welfare and bailouts of irresponsibility, less so. I'm thankful that those who are successful are giving me a chance (via subsidized student loans). And for my children, who are receiving Pell grants and financial aid. Anyway, thanks, successful people, for giving us a chance. Oh, and for my grandmother, widowed with five children who was given $40 a month in welfare back in the 40's. I appreciate the help to keep her and my mother and her siblings from starving. Grateful. She still plowed the fields and harvested and kept the house and raised the young un's and worked herself into an early grave. But at least the spread out wealth kept her from absolute destitution. Oh, and the free schoolbooks and public schools that allowed my mother to finish school. I could go on and on for the stuff I'm grateful for with money that's come down. I hope the corporate and financial heads are as grateful to be able to continue their lives almost as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phathui5 Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 I think we could really use a "Year of Jubilee" Bible style. Which I guess you could say is spreading the wealth around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle in MO Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 but the year of Jubilee, Biblical style, referred to the cancelling of debts and allowing all slaves to be freed. Not quite the same as a redistribution of wealth, but certainly a way to forgive debts and allow the poor to start over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Great post, Pam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LilyK Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 I'm thankful that those who are successful are giving me a chance (via subsidized student loans). And for my children, who are receiving Pell grants and financial aid. Anyway, thanks, successful people, for giving us a chance. Who do you mean by "successful people?" Do you mean people like my husband who works two jobs and averages 5 hours a sleep a night? With my 3 12-hour shifts plus my husband's 2 jobs, we still live off of spaghetti and cream of mushroom soup w/ rice, and both our cars are 150K + in mileage because we are supporting 2 parents in long-term care and are trying to save up for 4 college educations because our kids won't qualify for pell grants. Are we the successful people you want to thank? The one's who will be hit by Obama's tax hike? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Our founding fathers would not have supported this. Our Founding Fathers were extremely wealthy and owned slaves. I don't know how the Founding Fathers felt about this, but I'll be frank and say that I don't agree with everything that the FF thought was right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OhM Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 a chance. Who do you mean by "successful people?" Do you mean people like my husband who works two jobs and averages 5 hours a sleep a night? With my 3 12-hour shifts plus my husband's 2 jobs, we still live off of spaghetti and cream of mushroom soup w/ rice, and both our cars are 150K + in mileage because we are supporting 2 parents in long-term care and are trying to save up for 4 college educations because our kids won't qualify for pell grants. Are we the successful people you want to thank? The one's who will be hit by Obama's tax hike? :thumbup: Kudos to you for your hard work! At least if Pres. Obama takes away the incentive to work harder to meet your own responsibilities and goals, you'll get what sounds like a much needed rest! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melinda in VT Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 but the year of Jubilee, Biblical style, referred to the cancelling of debts and allowing all slaves to be freed. Not quite the same as a redistribution of wealth, but certainly a way to forgive debts and allow the poor to start over again. Didn't it also return property to the original owners? Not sure how that would work here in the U.S. How far back do we go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherE Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 a chance. Who do you mean by "successful people?" Do you mean people like my husband who works two jobs and averages 5 hours a sleep a night? With my 3 12-hour shifts plus my husband's 2 jobs, we still live off of spaghetti and cream of mushroom soup w/ rice, and both our cars are 150K + in mileage because we are supporting 2 parents in long-term care and are trying to save up for 4 college educations because our kids won't qualify for pell grants. Are we the successful people you want to thank? The one's who will be hit by Obama's tax hike? It sounds like you have many responsibilities and kudos to you for caring about the future of your children, and for stepping up to support your parents. I have to say, though, that you are the first family that I have heard of making over a quarter million dollars a year and having to survive on cream of mushroom soup. I think yours may be an exceptional case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LilyK Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Kudos to you for your hard work! At least if Pres. Obama takes away the incentive to work harder to meet your own responsibilities and goals, you'll get what sounds like a much needed rest! You know it sister! We have already decided that if Obama's tax increase goes through, my husband's quitting that second job quicker than you can blink. He's the one that will be getting the much-needed rest. Plus, it will not be worth it to work an extra 20 hours a week at a $25,000 job, to only take home an extra $6000 after taxes. I kid you not. If we are understanding the tax increase correctly, that is where we stand. That job is outta here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sleepy Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Our Founding Fathers were extremely wealthy and owned slaves. I don't know how the Founding Fathers felt about this, but I'll be frank and say that I don't agree with everything that the FF thought was right. Not all of them. John Adams, perhaps our most influential Founding Father, was by no means wealthy, and he never owned any slaves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gailmegan Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Have any of you actually seen Obama's tax plan? Or seen it next to McCain's? Here is an analysis of both, side-by-side from the Washington Post. According to the chart, only those making more than $600,000 will get a hike - and those making less than $111,000 will get more tax relief with Obama than McCain. And even the hikes Obama is proposing are no higher than percentages under Reagan, and what historically in America (once income tax was enacted) has been the mean for the higher tax brackets. What was normal until Bush cut them by more than 10%. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Mom Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 I liked your pithy post Pam (that's a compliment, not a slam ;)), but IMO redistribution of wealth is a completely separate issue from the bailout of corporate irresponsibility. With regard to redistribution, I just have to ask where is the incentive to small business owners or people who wish to start a business? Why would you risk, or choose to continue to risk your own capital investment and personal assets in a business if your returns, which are meager for most small business owners, are taken away and re-distributed to others who do not put forth that risk or effort? I don't get it. A free market capital market system does.not.work.that.way. We own a small business. We employ alot of people in a small town where good employment is hard to find and we feel a responsibility to our employees. We treat them well because they work for us. I'm all for paying a fair tax, for everyone, but redistribution is not fair nor does it enhance a strong market economy. It is a terrible thing to do to small businesses in particular, it harms the ones that are already in business, and doesn't give much incentive to new start-ups. Our house and all of our personal assets are listed with our bank on our business loans. Where is the incentive to us as a business owner? My dh could easily find an excellent job, making a heck of alot more than he does now, we'd probably have to move but we'd have health insurance, more money and have no risk of our personal assets. So why doesn't he? It's the American Dream. It's what America is built on. It's our dream and also the dream of providing work to others in a small market economy where work is desperately needed. Increased taxes and high capital gains destroy small business. Our goal is pay ourselves and our employees who work hard and pay our fair share of taxes. We reinvest any excess earnings into our business with the hope of keeping it healthy, growing it and selling it someday which we hope will make all the risk taking worth it. With a high capital gain all of that potential return the day we sell the business will go to who, the government? Yep, throw those increased taxes at us with a jack to the capital gains and it will give us pause and alot to think about for sure. And those families that work for us? Well, I guess maybe it'll be time to start thinking of ourselves more rather than those poor saps. They can always go on unemployment and welfare, right? Paid for by......well I guess it wouldn't be us any longer. Pretty sad. High taxes are a contradiction to small business, increased employment and ironically, increased tax revenues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LilyK Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 I have to say, though, that you are the first family that I have heard of making over a quarter million dollars a year and having to survive on cream of mushroom soup. I think yours may be an exceptional case. I'm sensing some sarcasm here. Did you read my post? I said we are supporting 2 parents in long-term care. Do you have any idea what that costs if it is not paid for by the government? $5700 per person. We have 2 of these bills that we pay. We prefer not to put them in disgusting homes where MRSA runs rampant, thank you. But these are by no means luxury homes. That is just the average cost. Neither of them even have a private room. I am not going to go into further detail about my finances, or give you my monthly income, but you can do some guestimating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TraceyS/FL Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 I'm sensing some sarcasm here. Did you read my post? I said we are supporting 2 parents in long-term care. Do you have any idea what that costs if it is not paid for by the government? $5700 per person. We have 2 of these bills that we pay. We prefer not to put them in disgusting homes where MRSA runs rampant, thank you. But these are by no means luxury homes. That is just the average cost. Neither of them even have a private room. I am not going to go into further detail about my finances, or give you my monthly income, but you can do some guestimating. :grouphug: And living in So Cal.... ya..... well..... LOL, i'm almost thinking if you aren't from there or live there you can't relate to how far money doesn't go for basic needs...... your parents are fortunate to have you and your DH. :grouphug: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherE Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 I'm sensing some sarcasm here. Did you read my post? There was no sarcasm intended whatsoever. I tried to frame my response by acknowledging how hard you are working for your parents and children- I think it is commendable. I meant what I said about yours being an exceptional case. I don't think it is the norm for a family making over a quarter million dollars a year to subsist on cream of mushroom soup- that isn't a slam against you or your family. I just don't think it is typical. I'm sorry if my comments were offensive- they truly weren't meant to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Not all of them. John Adams, perhaps our most influential Founding Father, was by no means wealthy, and he never owned any slaves. You're correct about John Adams, though he wasn't exactly poor, either. Regardless, my point stands that the "Founding Fathers," which people like to use as though they all thought alike, as a group didn't always stand for the best of things and certainly weren't perfect. The fact is that the Founding Fathers weren't ominscient and couldn't possibly imagine the world in 2008. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saille Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 LilyK, I earnestly believe that your situation is quite likely to get worse under McCain, who plans to deregulate health care, than it will under Obama, who (as stated above) is unlikely to hike your taxes, prioritizes higher education funding, and fully grasps the vice elder care cost has you in. My elder care plan is to finish the unfinished room of our house in time for a parent or two, if needed, to live in it, and pray that their particular health issues make home care feasible. I cannot imagine how hard this must be for you, but I'm sure I'm not the only person on this thread, regardless of partisan politics, who sympathizes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheryl Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 You know it sounds very compassionate to "help" our fellow neighbor. However, that is "socialism". So, no way....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LilyK Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 your parents are fortunate to have you and your DH. :grouphug: __________________ Thanks so much. DH is the real hero here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcconnellboys Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 This is the problem I have with all this, as well. The "elite class" never compromises their wealth for the good of all. (Have the assets of all the top exec players in the bail-out been seized yet? I'm waiting....) The only folks who get the wonderful opportunity to "share" are us, the folks already breaking our backs to put food on our tables, clothes on our backs, and who are, for the most part, already sharing all we feel we can..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle in MO Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Didn't it also return property to the original owners? Not sure how that would work here in the U.S. How far back do we go? The Year of Jubilee in the OT was not a redistribution of wealth, but a way to forgive debts, release slaves, and yes--return property to its original owners. I wasn't arguing for a return to OT law. I don't think anyone can figure out how to do that in the U.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TN Mama Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 but the year of Jubilee, Biblical style, referred to the cancelling of debts and allowing all slaves to be freed. Not quite the same as a redistribution of wealth, but certainly a way to forgive debts and allow the poor to start over again. But if we could all have a jubilee spirit and forgive people's debts against us, forgive those who have sinned against us, and offer help to those in need... now *that might really turn things around. And I'm not speaking of the government here. I'm speaking of individuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PiCO Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 And even the hikes Obama is proposing are no higher than percentages under Reagan, and what historically in America (once income tax was enacted) has been the mean for the higher tax brackets. What was normal until Bush cut them by more than 10%. Here's a link from the Tax Foundation showing tax freedom day and average tax burden in the US from 1900 through 2008. Taxes were lower during Reagan than during Clinton, and wavered back down again during the current Bush. But you're right- they haven't changed much overall since 1969. What I would like to see are tables like these, showing the % of income tax paid compared to the % of income for people for more than the last 20 years. I don't understand how Obama is planning to finance all his new "spread around the wealth" programs without raising taxes on more that the top 5% of Americans. On the other hand, I'm no fan of the current administration or the republican ticket, so who knows what I'll do. I really don't want to see another pro-life justice on the Supreme Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle in MO Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 people could take this spirit and attitude in their giving, maybe there would be less need for government legislation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TN Mama Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 people could take this spirit and attitude in their giving, maybe there would be less need for government legislation. :iagree: I am also a SEMO girl. Born & raised (well, until I was 10) and headed there next week to visit family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halftime Hope Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 It sounds like you have many responsibilities and kudos to you for caring about the future of your children, and for stepping up to support your parents. I have to say, though, that you are the first family that I have heard of making over a quarter million dollars a year and having to survive on cream of mushroom soup. I think yours may be an exceptional case. Did I miss something? ThatGirlOverThere, she said their two cars had over 150K+ each in mileage. Is that where you came up with the quarter million--maybe a misread of dollars instead of mileage? Thanks for clarifying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizzyBee Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 Oh, and for my grandmother, widowed with five children who was given $40 a month in welfare back in the 40's. The amount of the welfare benefits stuck out at me because that's more than my grandfather earned then. In the 40's my grandfather worked in the coal mines for only $1 day. He had a wife and 8 children to support (there were 11 children, but the oldest 2 left home by the time #9 and 10 were born, and the 11th was born in the 50's), and they were not eligible for assistance. The children often went to bed hungry. When there was no milk, they'd give the baby a rag dipped in sugar water to suck on. Those were hard times and I'm thankful I've never known that kind of poverty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizzyBee Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 Did I miss something? ThatGirlOverThere, she said their two cars had over 150K+ each in mileage. Is that where you came up with the quarter million--maybe a misread of dollars instead of mileage? Thanks for clarifying. I think she got the figure from Obama's tax plan. The OP said Obama's plan will raise their taxes, and I think the plan is supposed to raise taxes only for families making > $250,000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phathui5 Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 but the year of Jubilee, Biblical style, referred to the cancelling of debts and allowing all slaves to be freed. Not quite the same as a redistribution of wealth, but certainly a way to forgive debts and allow the poor to start over again. Not exactly. It also required a return of all lands to their original owners, basically creating a situation in which land was never really owned, only leased and resources got evened out because no one could acquire tons of land as decades went by. Since their "currency" was crops, land was how they made their money. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yovel Another article says: "The Jubilee legislation had as an underlying principal that other people and not self-possessions are important. Man, created in God’s image (Gen 1:26) is to be safeguarded, cared for and looked after. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phathui5 Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 But if we could all have a jubilee spirit and forgive people's debts against us, forgive those who have sinned against us, and offer help to those in need... now *that might really turn things around. And I'm not speaking of the government here. I'm speaking of individuals. :iagree: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soph the vet Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 I think she got the figure from Obama's tax plan. The OP said Obama's plan will raise their taxes, and I think the plan is supposed to raise taxes only for families making > $250,000. Which will hit many small business owners very hard. There will be no incentive to grow a business beyond that amount. When Obama said (in the most recent debate) that the percentage of small businesses making over that amount was extremely small I about gagged and wanted to yell "Liar" at him through the TV. I was watching the debate from the vet clinic after appointments were over, the very small business that most definitely makes over that amount and definitely not all profit. It is all used to pay employees, buy inventory, etc. If he thinks most small businesses are making less than $250,000 a year he's crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
percytruffle Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 :iagree: Yes, that truly would be a beautiful thing, like a bit of heaven on earth. But, I fear, as the op, a situation where this process is controlled and enforced by the government though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soph the vet Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 Our Founding Fathers were extremely wealthy and owned slaves. I don't know how the Founding Fathers felt about this, but I'll be frank and say that I don't agree with everything that the FF thought was right. I think that is a common misconception until really investigated. No doubt, Jefferson owned slaves. Franklin and Rush began the first abolitionist society in the 1770's. The overwhelming majority of the signers of the Declaration did not own slaves. We only learn about Jefferson and his slave ownership in school. Here is a link to an article citing a plethora of original quotes and sources as well as a good indepth history of the relationship of the Founders to slavery: http://wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=120 Of course Washington had slaves that he inherited at age 11. Sounds like most of the Founders who did have slaves let them go upon Independence. Also, the Declaration itself addresses the issue of slavery in its grievances against King George III who wanted the colonies to continue slavery. Hope you or anyone else finds this helpful. Soph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herbalgirl Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 You know it sounds very compassionate to "help" our fellow neighbor. However, that is "socialism". So, no way....... Amen to that!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ma23peas Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 It's very simple...we either want the government to have MORE control over our lives or LESS... How did those families survive before welfare? My great grandfather lost his home and all the clothes on his family's backs during a tornado in 1910...my other great grandfather had all his investments in the bank in 1929 and lost his life's savings (his wife died and he was left with 6 children from infant to 14)..he was a limestone carver and carved the famous fountain in the Peabody hotel in Memphis, TN...as well as the Lord's Supper relief on a major university building in Pennsylvania..a HARD working man and a skilled man. He had to sell his home and move into a home with dirt floors...he couldn't afford to send my grandmother to college...but ya know what? They ALL survived and went on to rebuild their lives on their own, they were helped by churches, family members, but NOT the government. I have more faith in myself than the government, give me back MY money so I can make the decisions with where I want it spent instead of the government. Tara Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PiCO Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 When Obama said (in the most recent debate) that the percentage of small businesses making over that amount was extremely small I about gagged and wanted to yell "Liar" at him through the TV. I was watching the debate from the vet clinic after appointments were over, the very small business that most definitely makes over that amount and definitely not all profit. It is all used to pay employees, buy inventory, etc. If he thinks most small businesses are making less than $250,000 a year he's crazy. But we aren't taxed on gross income, we are taxed on net income. Payroll, utilities, and most other expenses are tax deductible- you deduct that amount from your income before you figure taxes. So your profit needs to be over $250,000 for the tax increase to affect you (suposedly... I'm not confident that the limit will remain that high.) Inventory can be a problem for small business owners, because you do have to pay taxes on the money you spend on inventory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phathui5 Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 They ALL survived and went on to rebuild their lives on their own, they were helped by churches, family members, but NOT the government. They may have survived, but not everyone did. Infant and child mortality was much higher, whether from lack of good nutrition, disease or access to medicine. People did starve, freeze because they couldn't afford wood to heat their houses, stayed sick because they couldn't get to a doctor. While I want the government to leave me alone, I don't think the "good old days" were better in terms of poverty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pam "SFSOM" in TN Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 But we aren't taxed on gross income, we are taxed on net income. Payroll, utilities, and most other expenses are tax deductible- you deduct that amount from your income before you figure taxes. So your profit needs to be over $250,000 for the tax increase to affect you (suposedly... I'm not confident that the limit will remain that high.) Inventory can be a problem for small business owners, because you do have to pay taxes on the money you spend on inventory. And he has addressed this point specifically, gross vs. net. And I can't link it, because I heard it in a speech instead of reading it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean too Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 Spreading the wealth, or as he often calls it, building fom the bottom up, either way it's socialism pure and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiku Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html Ok, I must be an idiot, because it seems like I am missing something very profound here. I looked at this chart. Seven of nine income brackets will receive a tax cut under the Obama plan (and the 8th and 9th income brackets start around $600,000). More than 60% of taxpayers will get more money from Obama's plan than from McCain's. And yet the Republicans, the party that generally harangues us nonstop and about lowering taxes ... opposes this? What am I missing here? Tara Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kokotg Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 Spreading the wealth, or as he often calls it, building fom the bottom up, either way it's socialism pure and simple. If it's socialism, then nearly every country in the world is socialist, and the US has a long and proud history of socialism. A progressive tax structure is not a radical idea. It's a system favored by the vast majority of US economists. He's talking about weighting tax cuts more heavily to the middle classes than to the wealthy. You can argue that that's socialism, but to do so is to call Teddy Roosevelt a socialist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest janainaz Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 Wow. I just don't get it. When my son was born, I quit my job. I told my dh I would live anywhere if I could stay home. We sold one of our cars, moved from So. Cal. to Arizona, got a 1 bedroom apartment and lived on the edge. My dh went to school to be a pastor, so when he decided to go a different direction, he was new in his field and making $36,000 yr. He has moved up since then, but we still live on the edge with his income - and it went down this last year. I'm not whining. We have saved as much as we can in 401k, but it's not much on that salary. As for college, how can i let this be the center of my concern when all I am promised is today? Yes, my boys need to go college, if at all possible. But, maybe, they will be attending community college for a while. I will work and do whatever it takes, but I am not going to become a slave in this country and lose my life while doing it. I don't expect our government to run smoothly and soundly - we are on earth - we are NOT in heaven. This society will not determine the course that my life takes. It has all it's "rules" set up and everyone is miserable anyway!! People have become slaves! We raise our kids to go to college, get big jobs and become.............slaves to it all. No thanks! I'm starting to really be aware of this insanity. Knowlege, knowlege, knowlege. More, more, more - and the number one prescribed drug in this country is for depression medication. I don't have health insurance, we have one car, blah blah blah - I'm tired of hearning people whine and complain about "how hard they work" and the feeling they are entitled to a life that was never promised to us. My dh is in school at night two nights a week. It's too much with a full time job. We are choosing to live for TODAY. I only have TODAY with my kids and my loved ones. Tomorrow can worry about tomorrow. God is surely big enough to handle the circumstances in my life, but I am NOT going to sit and whine because of our taxes and yada yada. The rich should be taxed more because they are NOT going to dig their hands into their pockets to help anyone, because their motto is usually "I earned it". Sure, God put the brain in their head and they take all the credit. I'm tired of it. The poor, the TRUE poor are persecuted for it. They are considered lazy and given the same opportunity for the American Dream. Not true. That is simply not true. Life is not equal for everyone. Not everyone is born into the same circumstances and family line. No one is content, a roof and food for our kids is simply not enough. Our sense of entitlement is totally off-base. I'll give up my house if I have to - if it save my husband from stress that is going to take away days of his life. What is all of this worth? The economy has eveyrone in this big uproar and everyone is worrried and fearing for their lives, for their futures. It's a faithless generation - living for a future they were never promised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penny from Tenny Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 You know it sounds very compassionate to "help" our fellow neighbor. However, that is "socialism". So, no way....... :iagree:"Economic Justice" is Obama's codeword for socialism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nestof3 Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 But if we could all have a jubilee spirit and forgive people's debts against us, forgive those who have sinned against us, and offer help to those in need... now *that might really turn things around. And I'm not speaking of the government here. I'm speaking of individuals. I hear what you are saying, but as a small business, I think a little differently. If a person hires my husband to mow the lawn, they should be prepared to pay. We too have to pay our own bills. If they don't pay us, we cannot honor our own debts. I also think it is time for those who take out loans and such to see them in the serious light that they are and honestly live meagerly enough to pay their debts to the best of their ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kokotg Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 An interesting chart on the history of socialism in America: http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php At least Obama's not as socialist as Eisenhower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Indeed Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 Wow. I just don't get it. When my son was born, I quit my job. I told my dh I would live anywhere if I could stay home. We sold one of our cars, moved from So. Cal. to Arizona, got a 1 bedroom apartment and lived on the edge. My dh went to school to be a pastor, so when he decided to go a different direction, he was new in his field and making $36,000 yr. He has moved up since then, but we still live on the edge with his income - and it went down this last year. I'm not whining. We have saved as much as we can in 401k, but it's not much on that salary. As for college, how can i let this be the center of my concern when all I am promised is today? Yes, my boys need to go college, if at all possible. But, maybe, they will be attending community college for a while. I will work and do whatever it takes, but I am not going to become a slave in this country and lose my life while doing it. I don't expect our government to run smoothly and soundly - we are on earth - we are NOT in heaven. This society will not determine the course that my life takes. It has all it's "rules" set up and everyone is miserable anyway!! People have become slaves! We raise our kids to go to college, get big jobs and become.............slaves to it all. No thanks! I'm starting to really be aware of this insanity. Knowlege, knowlege, knowlege. More, more, more - and the number one prescribed drug in this country is for depression medication. I don't have health insurance, we have one car, blah blah blah - I'm tired of hearning people whine and complain about "how hard they work" and the feeling they are entitled to a life that was never promised to us. My dh is in school at night two nights a week. It's too much with a full time job. We are choosing to live for TODAY. I only have TODAY with my kids and my loved ones. Tomorrow can worry about tomorrow. God is surely big enough to handle the circumstances in my life, but I am NOT going to sit and whine because of our taxes and yada yada. The rich should be taxed more because they are NOT going to dig their hands into their pockets to help anyone, because their motto is usually "I earned it". Sure, God put the brain in their head and they take all the credit. I'm tired of it. The poor, the TRUE poor are persecuted for it. They are considered lazy and given the same opportunity for the American Dream. Not true. That is simply not true. Life is not equal for everyone. Not everyone is born into the same circumstances and family line. No one is content, a roof and food for our kids is simply not enough. Our sense of entitlement is totally off-base. I'll give up my house if I have to - if it save my husband from stress that is going to take away days of his life. What is all of this worth? The economy has eveyrone in this big uproar and everyone is worrried and fearing for their lives, for their futures. It's a faithless generation - living for a future they were never promised. :iagree: Yes and Amen! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amy in NH Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 I think some people are SO stuck on Obama's race (even if they don't want to admit it), or his party affiliation, or his lack of trying to legislate religion on people, that they'll twist every other policy into something they disagree with instead of taking it at face value. They've already made a judgment and aren't willing to consider that he has some good ideas that might benefit people. Or maybe they truly are "wealthy" and are also greedy and don't want to share the wealth with the community in which they are supported in that wealth. Do a little googling about the concentration of wealth in this country. The middle class is getting squeezed out. I don't think a little spreading of the wealth would be a horrible thing. But I think it's silly to call it socialism. If "building up from the bottom up" is socialism, then what is it when the government gives money to rich people? I do think that we would all be better off if we weren't so darned greedy and egocentric. I can't begin to imagine that families making $250,000/year would consider themselves middle class, nor be really hurt by paying their fair share of taxes. Live simply that others may simply live. And all that. I don't care what it's called; helping one's neighbor is the compassionate and *right* thing to do. That's called being a community. It is the moral and ethical thing to do. I always find it ironic that the Christians are the ones with the least Christian attitude toward their fellow man. (I'm not talking all of you, but you know who you are.) So many people cite the Bible and religious doctrine, unless it doesn't fit into the ideology they are spouting. Thanks for this, phathui5 phathui5 wrote: 'The Jubilee legislation had as an underlying principal that other people and not self-possessions are important. Man, created in God’s image (Gen 1:26) is to be safeguarded, cared for and looked after. ' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts