When Joe Biden said last night in the vice presidential debate that he thought the bankruptcy courts should not only be allowed to adjust the interest rate, but adjust the balance as well, my jaw nearly dropped.
We actually had to rewind the DVR to hear him say it again because I thought I heard incorrectly. I couldn’t wait until it was time for Sarah Pailin to respond, because I thought she was going to stand up for some sort of principles, but she didn’t.
Unfortunately there was no camera on Sarah Palin’s face to see if she even heard it, but I was completely stunned when she let it slide by completely.
I’m sorry, but what country are we living in again?
Joe Biden believes that the court should be able to come in and renegotiate not only the terms of the loan but the actual amount of the loan is for in the first place? Are you serious?
The fact that Mrs. Penguin ignored this completely tells me that she either didn’t hear it, or that the Republican Party has lost all will to live completely, and she was instructed not to, because it’s a safe bet that she doesn’t believe that personally. We seem to be acquiescing to the lowest common denominator in our country.
Another question I would like to have seen asked, was “How do you define the wealthy?”
Clearly this matters where you live, and nobody has yet brought up the fact that you cannot possibly raise a family of four on $250,000 if you live in New York City or San Francisco. Yet they are supposed to be wealthy?
How about, “what should that top tax level be?”
How about, “Why not continue to tier the tax levels beyond $250,000?”
Are we really calling anyone that makes more than a quarter million dollars a year “the super wealthy”? That’s absurd, and the fact that nobody mentioned it is just pathetic.
If we are going to continue the progressive tax system, I believe the tax rates should have additional brackets, perhaps over the 2 million mark, over the 5 million mark, over the 10 million mark, and so on.
Whose place is it to say how much someone “needs”?
The “needs” of someone in suburban Montana are quite different from those elsewhere, but if we are going to have a progressive system then it damn sure needs to continue to “progress” far further than a quarter million dollars a year, and much farther past 375k like George Bush has it now.
Why should the top tax rate max out where it does, if a progressive system is what were using? Why has nobody called bullshit on this?
While I do believe that at some point you may “have enough money”, the fact that someone who makes one million dollars is taxed at the same maximum rate as someone who makes 10 million or 100 million is completely absurd – (unless of course you buy into the radical philosophy that all Americans should pay the same flat rate, like I do, with a reasonable minimum where you just pay nothing)
But then that would do away with all of the bureaucracies in red tape of the IRS and the accounting profession combined, and we can’t have that can we?
This is a very sad time in American politics, and for the American people in general.