If you are going to compare the two candidates plans, please get your facts straight. Obama paid $162,074 in taxes (not 10,694 which was his taxable interest income) plus $172,130 in charitable contributions.

Redistribution goes both ways in our current tax system. Frankly the subsidies given to wealthy people through targeted deductions (see Gov. Romney's tax returns for 2010 & 2011, sorry that is all we voters will get.) and oil companies with record profits far outweigh any "redistribution from Robin Hood-type policies". Also, I really object to the broad category of "charity" being applied to the required tithing of his income given to the Romney's LDS church; it doesn't seem voluntary to me. I agree that this is too complicated a subject for bumper stickers and sound bites. It is also too complicated a subject to discuss with only two years of Gov. Romney's tax returns. He refuses to tell us that his tax plans will (do the math!) result in the elimination of the home mortgage deduction for all levels of taxpayers as well as any of his other changes to the tax code. So all we have to go on is how he filed his own returns which he refuses to give more than 2 years to the voters as every other candidate has done and as he himself did for Sen. McCain. Gov. Romney has been running for President for the last seven years (or more) and should provide his returns for those years when he sought public office. Or does he think the rules don't apply to him?

If I was that rich, I wouldn't expect to be paid for being governor. I believe that independent Mayor Bloomberg of NY City takes $1 a year as his salary, and as we know he is also extremely wealthy.

Many people who are not as rich as Romney put in multiple hours per month in their own personal contributions to committees and boards of not-for-profit organizations, and (in many states) boards of education, to which they are elected but unpaid members.

That says more than tithing contributions for their respective churches.

Contributions to directly aid the needy, of course, are much more important than contributions to any religion, as those funds may - or may not - partially get to the truly needy.

Interesting - Romney’s 2011 tax return shows charitable contributions totaling a little over $4 million, meaning he donated 30 percent of his income and paid 14% of his investment income in taxes. That totals over $7,000,000, much of which is supporting less fortunate people.

Yet many continue to criticize him for being successful (he did not inherit his wealth) and being faithful to his church. Not many Mormons are receiving government support because the LDS church tends to take care of members in a meaningful and truly helpful system.

Check this out - a WSJ article about the Mormon welfare program:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204792404577227173888056682.html

Or search "Mormons receiving welfare" and see how many are on governmment support. Our politicians could learn a lot about the effective support of those in need by emulating the Mormon programs.

Trickle down economics is just as ineffective as Trickle Up Economics. Trickle up worked in the Depression, because people were willing to except jobs that were created by the government that helped the national infrastructure. They learned a trade that could be used for manufacturing/manual labor. Our society has moved away from a manufacturing economy.
Both Romney and Obama's plans are severly flawed. It is because of the experts they choose to look at the problem are experts in their fields, but like all people who gravitate to what we know. The "teams" to determine how to fix the problem were not diverse enough. That goes to the pay masters of the two candidates.
If a plan to help fix the corporate tax code which is being pushed by many S&P 500 companies was excepted, then the corporate tax percentage would drop to 18% but remove just about all the tax loop holes. Meaning that all companies would pay there fair share.
If we went to a flat tax it would also even the burden of the average american. The upper and lower class play on average 14% of the income to taxes (that includes all donations). The average middle class tax payer pays 30% of their income to taxes. The upper class may pay a large percent of the total dollars, but there 14% doesn't hurt them as much as the middle classes 30%. A flat tax of 18% would put us in a position to eliminate the deficit and pay down the debt. Which neither candidate is truly willing to do.

Taxes are what we all pay in form or another to maintain our civil society. Historically we adopted a system that calls on the those of our society who are more able to contribute at a higher rate than those who are less able. That is the nature of a progressive system of taxation. When looking at an individual's income tax return please keep in the words of Will Rogers - The income tax has made liars out of more Americans than golf.

These "conversations" alwatys go the along the same lines - obviously everyone is an expert on some facet of politics, the economy, religion, choice, the constitution, taxation, regulation, environment and every other discipline that could possibly affect our lives.

It appears that everyone has made up their mind whether they want redistribution increased or decreased and that is indeed what it all comes down to. Neither party is going to change the status quo significantly - but those taking a side are sure that we are doomed if the other side "wins."

Where has redistribution gotten us? Are we better off today than we were four years ago? 47 years ago? Consider this:

1964: Black out of wedlock birthrate 18%, white 3%. Enter the Great Society Welfare State: 2010: Black, 73%, White 29%, Hispanic 53%. Our politicians blindly put in ADC and then TARF. Moral bankruptcy was the end result, and a catastrophe for the children and families in the inner city (and for that matter, in many rural states like West Virginia). Generations of people unable to care for themselves: that is a moral bankruptcy.

Good Topic, I have a few ideas which I will post later!

Harvey A. Smith wrote"
10:17 am on Tuesday, September 25, 2012
"...I would much rather have a devout Christian church member - of any flavor - as President than one who is not."
=================================
So a Jewish president, for example, would be unacceptable to you?

Talk about redistribution, here's a good example of redistribution, a woman is voting for Obama cause he gave her a free Obama phone, God Help Us All this is mentality with the current State of the Union we are faced with....

Government redistribution of wealth is certainly occurring, but most of the wealth is being redistributed from the middle class to the wealthy corporations. Last year, Citizens for Tax Justice found that 30 major corporations had made billions of dollars in profits while paying no federal income tax between 2008 and 2010. These major corporations include General Electric, Boeing, Verizon, and Mattel. It is corporate welfare and their beliefs in government entitlements that are really costing us taxpayers. Corporate welfare comes in many forms including an endless list of IRS corporate tax deductions purchased by corporate lobbyists, the sense of entitlement to taxpayer bailout money for corporations including those on Wall Street, the taxpayer subsidies of Big Oil and defense contractors, and the multi-billion dollar annual farm subsidies to the Agribusiness industry. Redistribution of wealth from the working class to the big corporations is the biggest redistribution problem that we face in this country.

The debt we incur cannot be reasonably expected to be repaid by the current working/taxpaying generation, so it is truly left to our children and yes, our grandchildren. Much of this debt has been and will be incurred to support those who cannot or choose not to support themselves and/or their families.

My business has been here in Dunedin since 1947 and we have seen them come and seen them go. Leaders, business, snowbirds and residents, through it all I can't remember anyone ever being excited about paying taxes. I do know that when you made plenty of money you paid more taxes and even though you did not like paying the tax you were proud cause it meant you were doing well. Its only in the last couple of decades that our greed has overcome so many. Our greed has let corporations replace our government and place us in the position we are in right now. Do we need redistribution? Yes! Our world has finally come full circle, if corps are people then its time to pony up! If you make more than $250,000 per year then yes, you should gladly pay 35-40% in taxes and quit whining. Trickle down was, is and always will be a joke. Tax breaks don't make me want to hire hire and expand, tax breaks make me want to pocket the money for a rainy day. Quit trying to sell Ice at the North Pole!

Morning Dee, yeah I think that is the heart of it all, with the Corps, kinda the 800 lb gorilla in the corner laughing all the way to the bank. Mrs/Mr Jasminetea I am 48, you do not step into a family business, your earn and work your way in. Family business does not mean you are set for life. Every generation has to remake and rebuild the business to fit the times and fit the person running it. Which is why family business are much rarer than times past. My family has paid it's fair share, more than it's fair share and less than it's fair share. It really depends on the year. Over the years we've had a variety of help from family, friends, the city, the county and the govt in general. All which helped keep us in business. I don't like writing checks for $150,000.00 or $15.00 in taxes but I know it's the right thing to do until the system evolves into something better. And no, I don't whine about it regardless of who is in the White House. The shoe for me has been on the other foot many times, which is all just part of life. Sometimes your up sometimes your down. But without everybody's help we would've been out of business a long time ago. American's all support each other and scratch out a life together. Clearly we don't all get along 100% of the time but this has been and always will be a lot better than anywhere else in the world that I can think of. Make no mistake, our systems are far from perfect but together we'll fix it and move ahead, apart we'll just be alone.

Dee, I have one word for you......exactly! lol Don't you just love the promises lol What all of them should be saying is, " I will promise to do everything within my power to get along with my fellow politicians and always put the best interest of the American people first and also do my best to seek peace first in the world" now that's a promise, however that's not wins elections. People want a death match aired on Fox news and want ratings lol As for the debates, I don't put much stock in them because it's more of a chess game than a debate. We learn in school how to debate somewhat but rarely do the teachers take the arguing to the final level which is taking the content debated and figuring out compromise and application. This is the most important part of a real debate. Just screaming out talking points and saying "so there!" as if the words were a punch is what is done in 1st grade at P.E. I continue to hope every 4 years but have yet to see a real debate. Sit Obama and Romney down in a room by themselves and record it. That would be worth watching.

Dee as for any freeloaders (as some refer to them, not you) there will always be those who scam the system, the difference is when one Corp scams us it's for billions and when John Doe scams us for some food stamps it hundreds or thousands. the entire food stamp program is budgeted for 80 billion, Military budget is 929 billion. If you could get $400 worth of Food stamps per month for a family of four that's around 5 grand a year(which would really help a family), for 1 million people that's $500 million or $1 Billion every 2 million people. if the budget is $80 billion and there are 46 million on food stamps clearly not many are getting $400 a month so before we look down on (not saying you) on 46 million as dead beats or scam artists lets face the fact their not really getting much help on average. I do know it all adds up so we have to look at it but Corp tax theft or Corp welfare makes the food stamps program look like pocket change.