you know.......I just got through filing my taxes for the last year. Both Susu and I didn't make anywhere close to a million....for that matter.....we didn't make anywhere near a hundred thousand. We were just barely lucky enough to scrape together fifty grand between the both of us. With that being said....I still do not see the need to penalize those that have actually been blessed enough to make enough money that his wife and kids didn't have to work.

That is what your plan is doing, Bobert.

It unjustly penalizes the "haves" and makes them have a mandatory responsibility for the "have nots." Why should they have to pay for someone else's retirement when they have worked their butts off and caused themselves to not have to depend on Social Security?

Now, I may be stepping beyond my bounds here but I'm going to assume that we can agree on one thing. That one thing is that both you and I have used some "worst case scenarios" in trying to prove our points. I with my "crack whore with six kids on welfare" statement and then you with your stereotypical analogy that all rich people are just like the CEO of the Pillowtex Corp. I think that the real people that we are talking about falls somewhere in the middle of these two. Therein lies the dilemma.

I believe that both the Republicans and the Democrats (not all but some) have swung a little too far to their respective sides. In order for the truly needy to get the assistance that they deserve to get back on their feet, the Democrats tend to cast the net to cover everybody, at the expense of everybody else, (by raising taxes on all) whether it be the "crack whore" or the truly needy without a plan to eventually wean everybody off of the system at some point. It's the same with our kids. We raise, protect, and feed them for probably the first 18-20 years of their life. But we, eventually, want to see our kids get out of the house and make it on their own. It makes us feel proud and have a little sense of personal responsibility when our own kids make it on their own. I believe that can go for our fellow man as well. If they need the help, then lets give them the help but let's give it to them in ways that will actually lift them out of the situation that they're in and then stop the assistance once the crisis has passed and let them practice their own personal responsibility to make their lives better. Now….. the Republicans (again not all but some) have swung too far to the right by letting the religious right sometimes drive their agenda just a little too far. So I'm not saying go right or go left but we need to do what's right or get left BEHIND. Now……what's right? I think that penalizing one for the needs of the other is not right. Taking away what is rightfully owned by an individual and giving it to someone who has not worked that hard is pure socialism. (Distribution of wealth) Let's start this with Social Security.

Let's make it to where EVERYBODY can decide on what they want to do with a portion of their social security investment. This way, by allowing people to invest in the financial vehicle of their choice, they can have a chance to live better in their retirement years that they did during their working years. If they don't have this choice and have not been lucky enough to work for somebody that let's them divert a portion of their income into a 401(k) then they are destined to live a retired life of just barely getting by. Let's stop the heavy taxing of corporations so that they will have incentives to stay in the US instead of moving overseas to take advantage of cheap labor.
Just a rogue thought here but I hope that you realize that sometimes a corporation is set up by an individual in order to protect their personal assets that they have already amassed and want them protected in the event of bankruptcy. Not all corporations are set up in boardrooms by cigar smoking, golf shirt wearing fat men with the intention of screwing the "little man". Probably more than half of all the corporations set up in the United States today make less that a million per year in sales, services, and/or profits. So increasing the taxes on these in a lump sum type of belief system is very unfair to the small corporation……..I'll continue my thoughts tomorrow but I'm interested in knowing what you think so far.

By the way……..just caught your last post…….interesting idea……..sounds good on the surface but will have to give that one some thought.


Hubby