Quote Originally Posted by stinkyattic
Yes, and doing it in ways that are more sustainable. Personal wealth is a fleeting thing; national fiscal policy lasts at least through an administration, and well-planned programs are meant to last decades.
Do we want our poor to be subject to the whims of the wealthy, who use donations as tax writeoffs when their personal fortunes are in good shape, and might not donate at all in lean times?
I see the idea of responsibility for our nation's struggling as one that needs to be a collective effort.
Financial status
The Pelosi family has a net worth of over US$25 million, primarily from investments. In addition to their large portfolio of jointly owned San Francisco Bay Area real estate, she also has millions of dollars in stock from publicly traded companies such as Microsoft, Amazon.com and AT&T. In 2003, the Pelosi family sold their eight-acre (three hectare) Rutherford vineyard. Pelosi continues to be among the richest members of Congress
Nancy Pelosi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What about when the wealthy don't apparently give a rats ass about Alzheimer's patients, hospice residents, orphans and children with AIDS? Seems that ol' Nancy likes the bucks in her pockets or donations to things that the needy could really care less about.

When people of this caliber ask for higher taxes out of everyones pockets you would think that they'd be sparing a bit of change themselves.

Quote Originally Posted by stinkyattic
Non-profit arts and education organizations are designed to be supported by donations. I feel, and I'm sure many others would agree, that while as taxpayers we should not be expected to pay for, say, an art museum in a city a thousand miles away, having wealthy philanthropists pick up the slack is a good solution.
I agree but once again I don't think that Nancy would:
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McEz2l1EvDs[/YOUTUBE]

Nice to see ya in the politics arena.....looking forward to some good debates!:thumbsup:

Have a good one!:s4: