rudy on taxes

Aug 06, 2007 13:22

I have no idea why this is broken into two vids, but here is another reason why I want this guy to be President so badly. He understand fiscal conservatism and he can back it up with real results.

Sing it, Rudy.

Rudy on Lowering Taxes, 1 of 2

image Click to view



Rudy on Lowering Taxes, 2 of 2

image Click to view

PS: There are a lot of other good vids on youtube from that same ( Read more... )

rudy, taxes, politics

Leave a comment

Comments 12

clayfoot August 6 2007, 18:54:55 UTC
So far, Guiliani's campaign is the only one I've heard use the term "the terrorists' war on us." I find this an intriguing word play, because I think of the war on terror much like the war on drugs. It makes me wonder if anyone has tried to use the term, "the drug pushers' war on us."

Reply

caspian_x August 6 2007, 18:59:59 UTC
First of all, I agree, it is interesting word play. But by interesting, I also mean brilliant. Dems dislike the phrase "war on terror". They call it nothing more than a bumper sticker. Fine. It would be insane to deny that we have a terrorist problem, particularly when they have attacked us on our own soil and plan to do so again. You hear lots of criticism for "war on terror". Perhaps it's because it's not widespread in use, but I haven't seen much criticism against "terrorists' war on us" because to do so would be akin to denying that they have and plan to attack us. It's brilliant.

Second, I dislike the idea of a "war on drugs" or "war on poverty", especially in comparison to an actual war. You can't really compare a "war on drugs" to real military action. So while I find Rudy's verbiage of "the terrorists' war on us" to be inspired, I would find "drug pusher's war on us" to be inane.

Reply

ikkarus01 August 6 2007, 19:54:48 UTC
I don't see any real difference between the "War on Terror" and the "War on Drugs". They are both just phrases meant for media consumption with little relation to the Real World. "The terrorsists' war on us" has arguably a little more realistic value, but not much. And it's still just political theater in the end.

Reply

caspian_x August 6 2007, 20:35:05 UTC
I don't see any real difference between the "War on Terror" and the "War on Drugs".

Except that the former is an actual military war and the latter is not. Just because we're attacking groups of people spread across many countries instead of a single country doesn't mean it's any less of a war than WWII.

"The terrorsists' war on us" has arguably a little more realistic value, but not much.

I'd say it has a lot more realistic value and that seems to be a big deal when you have people calling it nothing more than a bumper sticker.

Reply


kaali_thara August 6 2007, 21:09:58 UTC
I read a short analysis of the debates on slate.com. Yes it's liberal. But it also fact checks. That thing about $45 billion is inaccurate. The closest thing the campaign could get to make that statement not a lie is that he meant to say it (whatever it was) was down 44%.

Reply

caspian_x August 6 2007, 21:41:36 UTC
Meh, perhaps he misspoke. The point is still valid. You increase capital gains taxes, you lose tax revenue. I think politicians (as well as pundits) should be allowed to get make a mistake now and then. Perhaps I wouldn't be so forgiving if it was Hillary making the mistake, but I never claimed to be unbiased.

Reply

kaali_thara August 6 2007, 21:51:38 UTC
I'm not saying that I blame him for making a mistake. Just pointing out that one was made. When queried about it later his spokesman acknowledged that the statement was inaccurate - and proposed the 44% as what he was thinking of ( ... )

Reply

caspian_x August 6 2007, 22:01:20 UTC
Acknowledged. I'm glad you pointed that out so I don't parrot that mistake later when discussing, as I like to call him, "my man Rudy".

The justification for lowering capital gains taxes? Well first of all, not every government action has to be about helping the little guy. There should be a damn good reason for the government forcibly taking your money whether you are a little guy or an obscenely rich guy. Doesn't matter. The money is YOURS. The death tax, from what little I understand about it, makes no sense. It creates an undue burden on the people it affects. I don't really care if that percentage of people is only 1.5%. The government spends way too much money and the way to cut back is to eliminate unnecessary taxes.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up