From: jcburt@cs.wm.edu (John Burton)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: I will vote for Clinton if ...  [REPOST]
Date: 14 Oct 92 14:00:52 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: The College of William and Mary

In article <1992Oct13.205054.27002@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov> mulac@daystrom.lerc.nasa.gov (Richard Mulac) writes:
>[Since previous attempts to get the Clinton campaign and it's supporters to
>answer this question have failed, this is a repost of the original article]
>
>  My family of four epitomizes the middle class.  Our income is nowhere
>near six figures.  My main concern this election is not to have my taxes
>raised in the future.  I will pledge my vote to Clinton this November IF
>someone can give me evidence that under a Clinton administration all people
>making less than $200,000 WILL NOT pay more in taxes.  This is something
>Clinton and his advisors have steadfastly refused to do.  Now to save some
>bandwidth before the posts come rolling in, here are some quotes I do not
>consider as evidence:
>

Try substituting "Bush" for "Clinton" in your question...Can "Bush"
guarentee that all people making less than $200,000 WILL NOT pay more
in taxes. From past record ("read my lips...") Bush cannot be trusted
to do so. Clinton has a better record concerning minimizing taxes on
the middle and lower classes...

I think it is extremely short-sighted of you to only be concerned with
"how much taxes will I have to pay..." I don't know about you, but
when I spend my money, I expect to get something in return for it. My
main concern is NOT how much I will have to pay, its WHAT I get in
return for my money. The presidential elections will
NOT significantly change how much the average person is paying in
taxes. Regardless of who wins  I think what I will be paying in taxes
will increase slightly. I am VERY concerned about what I get for my 
money with Bush. I see my tax dollars going to the rich and the
corporations, with virtually none "trickling down" to me. I see
my tax dollars being spent for "black projects" for the military
and the security services. I see my tax dollars going to bail out
the collapsed Savings & Loans while the people responsible for
their collapse are walking around, free, and much richer. I see
my tax dollars going to guarentee loans to Iraq, and then more
dollars going to fight a war against a country who's military
strength was significantly INCREASED from the loans WE guarenteed.
I see 1/3 of my tax dollars being spent on the interest on the
4 trillion dollar national debt (the rich few in this country
"own" the majority of the loan)

I don't like what I see my tax dollars being spent on...

The ONE thing I DON'T see is my tax dollars going toward anything
that will help improve the condition of the average person. I would
LIKE to see my tax dollars going to reduce the cost of health care
for everyone and to insure EVERYONE has access to preventive and
reactive health care. I would like to see my tax dollars going to
improve the education system so that EVERYONE can get a quality
education, not just a privledged few. I would like to see my
tax dollars going to allow everyone to have a chance to have
a reasonable life...

I don't see a chance of this happening with Bush, I see the
possibility of this happening with Clinton...

John





>"The rich are going to have to pay their fare share"
>"People making over $200,000 will have to pay more in taxes"
>"We are targeting people making over $200,000 for a tax increase" - These
>statements do not exclude people making less than $200,000 from having
>their taxes raised.
>
>"We are planning on giving the middle class a tax cut" - An old trick.  
>Lower your taxes in 1993, raise them to a higher point in 1994.
>
>ALL I WANT IS A DEFINITIVE
>
>      "NO ONE MAKING < $200,000 WILL HAVE TO PAY MORE IN TAXES"
>
>Give me this and you'll have me and others on the net marching to
>the polls for Clinton in November.  If you don't come up with a direct
>promise you'll probably lose some of the support you have now.  I'll keep
>reposting this until the election or until there is an adequate response.
>And if Clinton does make this promise and winds up lieing after he's in
>office, well, I guess he'll be bounced out in four years like Bush.
>Since the Clinton campaign uses "The rich are going to have to pay their
>fare share" as their lead in advertising and stump speeches, I believe they
>owe it to the voters to clear up the ambiguity.
>
>-- 
>Richard Mulac                                     mulac@daystrom.lerc.nasa.gov
>NASA Lewis Research Center, 21000 Brookpark Road, MS 5-9, Cleveland, OH  44135
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>        "There's a simple explanation for all           | These pontifications
>              of this." - Bill Clinton                  |      are my own!    
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,alt.rush-limbaugh