How Many of Us in OT Think
 

That none of the candidates represents us. Man I feel like I am in a lifeboat adrift in the sea and no one is looking for me. All of the candidates seem to be catering to some social welfare group of the other. I see dark days ahead for ALL taxpayers, not just the rich.

none of them represent my interests, including the ones that have already been elected to do so

For example, I have had nobody representing me in the Senate for many years

I totally agree with you, Kurt.

But if there were a candidate for "us" then some other demographic would feel alienated. Hard for one candidate to be all things to all people.

...and don't worry the way things are going we will one of those social welfare groups :)

It's just a matter of mathmatical certainty that we will either see massive tax hikes, massive cuts in government services, or both in the near future. Our deficits are not sustainable and we can't grow out of this budget problem the way we did in the early 90s unless Al Gore invents a new internet. We're entering a recession where it would be suicide to raise taxes or cut spending, but we can't afford not to. The government is broken regardless of who takes over in 2009.

QUOTE: "...massive cuts in government services,"
_________________

I guess Superman is still asleep in the Fortress of Solitude.

But he will soon awaken and explain to all of you how this is impossible and how efficiently things are running.:)

Totally agree. I think Washington is so busy pandering to the special interest groups that they've totally lost touch with the average American. Those that work, and work hard, are currently squarely in the crosshairs. This isn't a party issue, it's business as usual on both sides. I feel like the current choice is between bad and worse.

Something has to be done, because the course we are on cannot be sustained. However, I worry that we don't have anyone in office with the balls to do what needs to be done. I don't think we have anyone who will cut back the glutton of government spending, but it has to happen.

One can only hope

So who/which entity do we see pushing spending cuts?

McCain - no
Clinton - that's funny
Obama - Stop it my sides hurt
Dem House - It's Party Time!
Dem Senate - Whooo Hoooo

Bush spent like a housewife at Walmart where as this next run will be Paris Hilton on Rodeo Drive.

That's the problem len, Bush turns out to be a big spending Repub, McCain and any Dem will only be worse.

I thought I read somewhere that for every dollar spent on social programs, only 30 cents acutally make it to the recipients.

70% overhead?!?! If that was a charity, you wouldn't donate to it. Then if you add in all the fraud that is a part of every government program, you see how much waste there actually is.

Seems like we could do something there.

We've all read about the $1000 toilet seats and $400 hammers that the military routinely buys. How about a little exposure for the other wasteful government agencies?

What gets me about gov't. representing this or that demographic more than the others is that so many people view it as a zero-sum game, which it is not. No poor person's life will change for the worse if rich people are taxed less. But pandering pols use class warfare and envy to whip up voter sentiment. However, raising taxes on what pols call rich people WILL affect those taxpayers. So many people think the estate tax is fine because it will never affect them. Just wait until the small business they work for has to lay people off or close down because the owner died and his heirs have to sell the place off to pay Uncle Sam. Class envy is going to make tax hikes easier to pass and politicians, since they only care about the immediate political benefit, will never bother telling people that we'd all be better off with lower/less taxes. The only option for me is to become well off enough that I either don't have to care or can hide my money elsewhere. It's a long-term goal and for now I only view taxes as protection money I have to pay to our mafia gov't. to stay out of jail.

Dark Days. It is all a money game.

We can't pay for the boomers and we can't pay for the future bills for the kids and parents of those let in to prop up the the boomers.

Special interests and the drive to get reelected trumps everything else at this point. Seems like it has reached critical mass. When listening to various radio talk programs around SoCal, I frequently hear callers comment they feel the way I do - disallusioned. I never heard that before.
Remember that all of the entitlement programs have gone through many decades of empire building to become the behemoths they have today.

Thank you! Uh . . . er . . . um, okay. :)

Seriously, I would not expect any tax reform from Obama, Clinton or McCain. :(

Best,

Kurt

Kurt's are gettin' to be a dime a dozen around here. :p

As has been predicted by many for 50+ years now, entitlement spending is what will eventually take this country down.

It is currently 70% of our budget, after the next president (whichever of these losers it is going to be), it will probably be 80%.

The Democratic candidate is going to win the presidency, will enlarge entitlement programs and raise taxes to try to pay for it. That will kill an already weak economy.

Darkest Days (also a good album by Stabbing Westward. . .)

Honest, hardworking Americans who value self-advancement through education, risk-taking, enterprising ventures and motivation are going to be punished worse than ever before to support and prop up the legions of deadbeat, slacker, grunt labor baby factory types.

I have a number in my head - a percentage of total income. If my "payout" into our stupid gubmint redistribution of wealth programs exceeds that, I'm packing up my stuff, my family and I'm moving overseas. Seriously. I love this country and it would break my heart to do it, but I believe you have to go where the opportunities are. If we get to a point where the opportunities are no longer in America due to an influx of thieving illegals, resident deadbeats and ghetto trash, I leave. Sadly, I see us going rapidly in that direction. Hard work, risk-taking and education are punished and marginalized. Staying at home and sucking off the government teat and being a sheep-like follower is rewarded.

Very sad.

I love sailing and boats too, but I wouldn't stay on board a sinking one. If that number I have in my head ever gets met, I walk. I don't care how "good" my situation is or how good my job is. It's not anything I can't get elsewhere. It'd be difficult, it'd be painful and it'd be a gigantic PITA, but ultimately it'd beat staying on board and seeing my efforts go to prop up a society of pathetic deadbeats and users - and a government that rewards/encourages/condones it.

At least Mac does have Steve Forbes endorsing him, which may or may not mean Forbes' views on taxes and spending will have an impact on Mac. Hopefully it means something positive.

Best,

Kurt

This poll makes no sense. Thus I didn't vote.

The title asks if any of the candidates represent me.

The polls ask if the next 4 years will be better or worse than the last 4.

These are completely different questions.

Some of the candidates could represent me just fine, but I could still be pessimistic about the next 4 years based on problems created in the last 8 years.

I wish guys who post polls would think them through a little more.

I can't afford to do it for a while, but I've been heavily researching what it takes to emmigrate to Switzerland.

I think you mentioned that - isn't Switzerland the place you mentioned where you can own full-autos? :)

Switzerland would be nice, but a tad cold for my taste. My in-laws visited there a few years ago and couldn't stop raving about what a remarkable country it was. I'd love to know what you find about how feasible it is to move there.

I was going to say the first choice should have been something different, but I think now it was correct I see dark days ahead for ALL taxpayers if you actually pay taxes, you'll see more of them. I've been trying to think what I've gotten back personally from the government, eve,r in terms of entitlements, handouts, and for the life of me I honestly can't think of any, ever. By that, I don't mean police, fire, education, everyone gets those. But welfare, fuel oil assistance, housing assistance, food stamps,, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, unemployment(which you pay into as an insurance of sorts anyway). Not one dime.

I noticed that both Hillary and Obama in large part measured their "success" by how many entitlements/handouts they helped create.

Bravo! no matter which side gets in, there's some pain coming to deal with the impacts of the last eight years.

What are the options? More taxes or fees?... fewer or elimination of many government services? An even bigger deficit? Gee, what a great set of choices. Undoubtedly we'll get ALL THREE...a soup sandwhich.

Obviously, it ain't cheap to move anywhere nicer than here with the weak dollar. It does cost money. But the high taxes there, if I understand it correctly, are paid to the state or canton in which you live, while the national taxes are pretty reasonable. Obviously, this makes some cantons more expensive than others. I believe they have a net worth tax, but of course, it's very easy to hide money there. Honestly, I can handle high taxes IF I'm getting something for it. The people who pay the high taxes in the U.S. get nothing but politicians' scorn and derision for it. It's especially insulting that people who pay NO fed. income tax are getting these rebates, while those who pay the most fed. income tax get none. WTF? This kind of inverted logic and morality can't go on forever.

Geez Rick, I didn't think we had THAT much in common! You're not thinking of running for office by chance, are you? :)

If they only gave us reduced government services I would be ecstatic.
the federal government should be small, not huge.

That's how it used to be when our country was still relatively young.
People took care of each other, charity was a private sector concept with people, neighbors, and churches feeding the hungry and housing the homeless. People worked hard or went without. We didn't encourage laziness or irresponsibility.
It should have never been allowed to change and this country is stilll headed down that slippery slope.
Welfare for anyone who doesn't want to work or hasn't put enough effort into developing a valuable skill, rewards for failure, punishment for success, if we don't turn that around it will kill this country and there are waaaay too many people pushing us in that direction. Either the lazy who want a hand out or ther bleeding hearts who feel guilty, it doesn't matter. They are destroying the US despite their alleged good intentions.

For those who are well off, the option to get out of the country is indeed there. But for the majority of taxpayers, they have no where else to go. They will have to live with who we get. I see more and more people becoming closet criminals. That is figuring out ways to cheat on taxes, hide assets, etc.

i see dark days ahead, but not nessacarily because of the next guy(gal). I am afraid of what the current idiot will start before he leaves..OR worse, he envokes the patriot act and stays...which he CAN do

Sammy, I don't disagree with you at all about how things SHOULD BE, I just disagree about how to get back to that way of being. Or maybe I disagree with how fast that could actually happen. Believe me, I am not in favor of raising taxes and I am not in favor of rewarding people that actually don't want to improve themselves. My worry is that I don't think you can cut all or many government services for the poor and the elderly, etc cold turkey and expect that there will somehow be enough "...people, neighbors, and churches feeding the hungry and housing the homeless".

I know there should be an accurate way to assess if someone wants to work, but I'm not sure there is. As for, "People worked hard or went without"...that's well and good but are we really prepared for what would come with the numbers of people that would "go without" if a wholeseale cut in government services took place? I think not. Many, many more whole families out in the streets begging or stealing, in some parts of the country dying of exposure or God knows what? People dumping the elderly because they can't or don't want to care for them? I'm not saying these things would be the rule, they might well be the exception. What I'm saying is it didn't get the way it is overnight and it can't go back to the way it was overnight either. A difficult, but I think true scenario.

Good points.
Wasn't it FDR who decided to feed people by putting them to work?
That would be a good place to start. How about if every able-minded and able-bodied person on welfare is given a chance to work at rebuilding our infrastructure, basically providing manual labor. No, I'm not talking about doubling the post office ;)
If they go to work, they get paid AND they get health care. if they don't, they are dropped from the welfare ranks and not eligible for free health care for 5 years.
That would help them set a positive example for their children, instead of sitting around on their fat a$$es collecting checks for a living. It would also provide them with some sort of skill that they might want to use later in life.

And no more raises for spitting out babies. If they are too dumb to use birth control it isn't my problem and I shouldn't have to pay for their irresponsibility.

There's a start, once we get that going I can think of a whole bunch of things to do next.

I agree. I no longer have any compunction whatsoever about doing to the gov't. exactly what they do to me. No guilt at all. The more gov't. becomes about stealing what's mine to give away to others, the more it becomes an extortion racket which we just have to pay protection money into to stay out of jail.

Don't think. FEEL. It is like a finger pointing away to the moon. Do not concentrate on the finger or you will miss all that heavenly glory.

Sam, I've got no problem with your proposal. Does it create a big bureaucracy? Of course...like we don't have an enormous one already in the Welfare system as it is? I think some people DO need a helping hand and I've got no problem with a government that provides for this...sue me. On the other hand, I get up to go to work everyday (and I frequently don't to) , why the hell can't everyone who is not independently wealthy and has at least a modicum of health in exchange do the same for continued assistance? I've got NO tolerance for the able bodied person who gets relief and STAYS on relief....that person is a parasite and needs a good knock on his a$$. Don't get me started on the woman who has multiple children to gain additional AFDC....is it called that anymore? By the way, when we announce a date for cutting the additional-payments-for-additional kids-benefit? Make sure it is well less than 9 months from the day of announcement!

What is that number? Where will you go?
 

What is that number? Where will you go?

Does anyone else remember the CCC and the WPA?

Tom

Anyone physically able to work, should do so. PERIOD. No excuses or sob stories. If you are not physically able to work, then I see no problem with the rest of society assisting you and making your life as comfortable as possible.

Excuses that shouldn't fly:
Kids: did that happen by no fault of yours? Am I responsible for your child/children?
Mild physical disability: most large stores have employees in wheelchairs. Far worse than those who have "back pain" and draw disability.
Race/gender: not a valid excuse in today's society. For example, there's an exponential number more college scholarships available to minorities and women.

Don't feel like working? You should struggle. Still, thanks to private charities, you would not starve, nor would you freeze outside at night. However, maybe you wouldn't be able to sit at home, drink beer, and play X-Box all day.

I don't think, so I voted no. Ask anyone here...