Skip to main content

View Diary: What's the Matter with dKos? (176 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Is it Progressive to support Dems who.... (7+ / 0-)

    ...support REGRESSIVE taxes?

    In Minneapolis and Minnesota, Dem lawmakers passed REGRESSIVE sales and gambling taxes to finance a stadium for the Vikings.  Poll after poll indicated that the people of Minnesota did not want taxpayer funds going to that stadium.

    So, if we feel so strongly against GOPers in the South voting against their economic interests, shouldn't we also call on Dems in Minneapolis and Minnesota to vote against and Dem which increased their tax burden?

    Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project. http://www1.hamiltonproject.org/es/hamilton/hamilton_hp.htm

    by PatriciaVa on Tue Jun 12, 2012 at 09:16:36 AM PDT

    •  It Might Be (5+ / 0-)

      What else do they do?

      Too Folk For You. - Schmidting in the Punch Bowl - verb - Committing an unexpected and underhanded political act intended to "spoil the party."

      by TooFolkGR on Tue Jun 12, 2012 at 09:30:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Tax burden? How invasive is GOP propaganda.... (15+ / 0-)

      when it's code words and language creep into progressive sites and speech.

      Taxes are not a burden.  They are the entry fee into civilization.

      If you don't think that Dems should have financed the stadium with those particular taxes and maybe should have taxed the Vikings, the wealthy and those who would benefit the most from the stadium, that is fine.  But don't call taxes a burden.

      They are a necessity for living in a decent society.

      Tax and Spend I can understand. I can even understand Borrow and Spend. But Borrow and give Billionaires tax cuts? That I have a problem with.

      by LiberalCanuck on Tue Jun 12, 2012 at 09:34:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Who defines "burden" (10+ / 0-)

        Taxes to subsidize billionaire NFL owners and millionaire NFL players aren't a burden?

        OK.

        But on the other hand, most Kossacks think that high regressive taxes on imported goods (tariffs are taxes) aren't a burden either.

      •  With median wages having stagnated for over 12... (11+ / 0-)

        ..years, with wealth and income inequality at its sharpest since the late 20s, yes,

        REGRESSIVE TAXES ARE A BURDEN.

        How can any center-lefter argue otherwise.

        Either you believe that wealth and income equality isn't a problem, and you'll support regressive taxes which will exacerbate this inequality.

        Or you believe that it is a problem, so you oppose any fiscal policy which worsens it.

        TooFolkGR asks,

        What else do they do?
        Why not let them leave.  Study after study has shown that professional teams end up costing more than they contribute to a city.

        Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project. http://www1.hamiltonproject.org/es/hamilton/hamilton_hp.htm

        by PatriciaVa on Tue Jun 12, 2012 at 09:45:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  If only taxes would go to the common good (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        goodpractice

        but they don't.

        They go to make war.

        THey go to bail out billionaires.

        They get wasted on roads to nowhere.

        They get abused by parasites while the truly needy have less.

        THey go to fight a losing "war on drugs".

        Therefore, they are a burden.

        The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

        by ctexrep on Tue Jun 12, 2012 at 10:36:43 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yeah cause my taxes never paid the (7+ / 0-)

          EMS people who probably saved my life, or at least my life as a non-vegetable.  They don't pay the firemen or the cops, or pave the roads or do anything worthwhile, they are all funneled into nefarious sidetracks.  

          We need to change a lot of how we spend our tax dollars, but this is reminiscent of something you'd see on a RW site.

          I'm not looking for a love that will lift me up and carry me away. A love that will stroll alongside and make a few amusing comments will suffice.

          by I love OCD on Tue Jun 12, 2012 at 11:03:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I think you're reaching (5+ / 0-)

            The poster mentioned the burden of taxes in connection with regressive taxation used to pay for a stadium.  Need I state the obvious?

            Regressive taxation is always a burden- it places a greater cost (or burden) on those least able to afford it.  Full stop.

            Furthermore, many are struggling to stay afloat at dead end jobs with low pay.  I would not begrudge that people in this position would feel their taxes are a burden (particularly given our tax structure).  

            You simplistically conflate labelling a specific tax or taxes a burden with the concept that all taxes are a burden.  I don't think the poster implied anything of the sort.

            •  Minnesota was once a liberal haven (4+ / 0-)

              where this would never have happened.  We need to face some harsh truths here.  We dropped the ball.  Republicans organized, we complained.  They own city councils and school boards and legislatures in areas where they should have been laughed out of town.  They have a solid bench, we have crickets.

              My fear is that the left will keep complaining as the right organizes harder, because we don't know how to translate outrage into action, we just vent.

              Maybe I'm in the wrong venue.  Maybe the blogosphere is a rest stop for activists between battles.  As soon as my other leg works I'll be out there talking to voters not just inputting data occasionally.  I think more time with actors is the ticket for me.      

              I'm not looking for a love that will lift me up and carry me away. A love that will stroll alongside and make a few amusing comments will suffice.

              by I love OCD on Tue Jun 12, 2012 at 12:18:02 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  All I can say is (0+ / 0-)

            when you go to the florist - they doesn't make you buy two bags of manure to get a boquet of flowers....and I don't think you would pay pay them if they charged you for it.

            Why should WE expect less from OUR Government?

            That's not RW - that's commin sense.

            All the graft just re-enforces the RW.  When you're out there talking it up for candidates, make sure they are going to clean up some of the mess and not just keep it going.

            The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

            by ctexrep on Tue Jun 12, 2012 at 01:57:29 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Let's face it. (6+ / 0-)

      We need the Dems in the short term, if only because they have, historically, offered a kind of holding pattern in which the damage to the republic is minimized (not eliminated), after which we can regroup to exert pressure on said Dem.

      With President Obama, no matter how people feel about him on the left, we can at least have an argument. Even that may be changing, but he is at least theoretically open to our ideas.

      With Bush, we could yell at him lots, and that made us feel better, but in the meantime, he was installing his cronies in every branch of government; firing US Attorneys on the basis of political ideology/personal connections; launching elective wars; gutting financial regulations (the Dems do that too, though), and doing everything possible to return the US to the days of the robber barons.

      It really is a "lesser evil" argument -- and I say that as someone who likes President Obama very much at the level of personal appeal, rhetoric, etc. It's not even always his fault: he has been hampered by an intransigent Congress, and he is subject to the inertia of the office of the President -- like almost everyone else who had been in his shoes.

      But we shouldn't kid ourselves. Voting for Dems in this political environment, where even our favorite Senators get massive infusions of cash from the financial sector, is essentially an exercise in damage control.

      Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of non-thought. -- Milan Kundera

      by Dale on Tue Jun 12, 2012 at 10:14:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Are you a single issue voter? (11+ / 0-)

      Then  sure, vote against those Democrats. But when you find that Republicans take over and do the whole panoply of ghastly things that Republicans do, you won't have any basis to complain.

      The reason many Republicans vote against their economic interests is that they are single issue voters too: anti-abortion, homophobia, etc.

    •  Billionares Deserve Tax Funds & Working People Do (0+ / 0-)

      NOT.  The whole point of the rich running this country is so they can legally steal from us all in a thousand different ways.  

      But you of you peasents need something?  Fuck you they say.  You're a freeloader.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site