[i]When Barack Obama said he’d like to “spread the wealth around,” he was widely understood to be talking about redistributing income within the U.S. But there’s another arena in which Obama fans are waiting impatiently for the promised wealth-spreading–the United Nations…
http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2008/10/29/reform-united-nations-oped-cx_cr_1030rosett.html[/i]
[quote]100meters wrote:
dhickey wrote:
100meters wrote:
How could a vote for McCain possibly equal “caring about the economy” ? No credible economist would vote for McCain, why would any voter? Are you a serious person or just another troll?
We have already established that you have not read anything from credible economist and don’t know shit about basic economic principles. Why do you continue to make this argument?
Seriously, McCain doesn’t know anything about the economy, said he would probably rely on his veep for economic wisdom—I mean what in the hell are you talking about?
where did he say that?
What has happened to middle-class wages the past 8 years? What about the top 1%? And you’re talking about exploitation? Because they’re going to go back to the Clinton tax rate?
C’mon you really need to focus here, you vote republican cause you’re scared of teh gay and mistakenly think God cares about abortions. No republican cares about the economy! Get with it!
you’re a complete idiot. i don’t know what else to say about this garbage.
Are you saying you ARE voting for McCain on economic issues? One can assume you are also a masochist? Stunning admission.[/quote]
I am not. Obama will be much worse for the economy, which is why half of me wants him to win. The half that’s smart enough, young enough, and with enough capital to make a shit load of money off a failed economy.
Guess who loses in a failed liberal economy? It’s not the top 5%. Good luck junior. You obviously lack intellect and common sense, so I would suggest you start stock-piling canned goods.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
http://origin.barackobama.com/issues/urban_policy/
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/poverty/
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/seniors/
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/seniors/
Etc., etc. Oh, and Obama would prefer a single-payer healthcare plan. With a Dem congress, who knows.
This is socialism? I don’t think so.
"Consider the words of longtime Socialist Party of America presidential candidate Norman Thomas: “The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened.”
In addition to Medicare, Social Security, and other entitlement programs, the gathering political momentum toward single-payer healthcare – which Obama has proclaimed is his ultimate goal – shows the prescience of Thomas’s words."
[/quote]
Ok, so socialism based on no facts just the fear that he may be a socialist, even though he’s not. Just like he wasn’t born in Hawaii, or he’s a muslim etc.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
forlife wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
I work for a privately owned company.
Privately owned companies still need a competitive workforce. If you don’t offer market salaries commensurate with a person’s skills, that person is going elsewhere.
They’ll just hire a new person with the same skills fresh out of college and pay them half of what the guy who left was making.
same skills AND fresh out of college is a bit optomistic[/quote]
True.
But it’s happening.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
100meters wrote:
snipeout wrote:
Food for thought. The top 1% of wage earners earns twice as much as the bottom 50% does. The top 1% pays 13 times the amount of tax that the bottom 50 does. How much more of the burden should they carry?
I bust my ass working overtime to make 6 figures. If I can do this with no college education and only 5 years of military experience, any one can.
I have never been given anything from any one, I have always paid my bills and saved my money. I detest the fact that one party in this country thinks I need to support the “less fortunate”.
Now, because I bust my ass my wife and son have everything they need and want. Fuck anyone who wants more of my money.
Do you really think baby jesus can add all this new spending and cut taxes for 95% of sheeple?
If spending is your issue, don’t vote McCain right?
All governments spend. It is necessary for the country to survive. The point you sheeple don’t get is this guy is just going to increase government entitlements to people who won’t work just to collect these entitlements.
You are so hopelessly blinded by the MSM that you don’t even have your own opinion, you just spew liberal talking points. Try thinking for yourself with out influence from the NY times.
I believe in a strong military and simple trickle down economics. The country doesn’t get stronger from the bottom up, it gets stronger from the top down. Taking more money from those who create jobs and industry and giving it to those who won’t work doesn’t make us stronger.[/quote]
Explain how economy did not get stronger work under LBJ, JFK, and Clinton.
Explain how well trickle down worked under GWB, Bush Sr., Reagan.
In other words: stop making shit up.
[quote]100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
http://origin.barackobama.com/issues/urban_policy/
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/poverty/
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/seniors/
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/seniors/
Etc., etc. Oh, and Obama would prefer a single-payer healthcare plan. With a Dem congress, who knows.
This is socialism? I don’t think so.
"Consider the words of longtime Socialist Party of America presidential candidate Norman Thomas: “The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened.”
In addition to Medicare, Social Security, and other entitlement programs, the gathering political momentum toward single-payer healthcare – which Obama has proclaimed is his ultimate goal – shows the prescience of Thomas’s words."
Ok, so socialism based on no facts just the fear that he may be a socialist, even though he’s not. Just like he wasn’t born in Hawaii, or he’s a muslim etc.[/quote]
[quote]forlife wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Because stealing my money to pay for necessities is different than stealing it to specifically give to someone else. I guess my point is that roads benefit the people paying for them at least, welfare doesn’t.
If it’s not too personal a question, is this because you are in the top 5% that would see a tax increase under Obama? If you’re not, you would be paying the same taxes regardless.[/quote]
We already have a progressive tax rate, meaning ru=icher pays more of a percentage. I will not ignore the wrong of this because “I’m not the one being stolen from”. Just give hime some time and watch the number go down right to you…say…42,000?
[quote]dhickey wrote:
100meters wrote:
dhickey wrote:
100meters wrote:
How could a vote for McCain possibly equal “caring about the economy” ? No credible economist would vote for McCain, why would any voter? Are you a serious person or just another troll?
We have already established that you have not read anything from credible economist and don’t know shit about basic economic principles. Why do you continue to make this argument?
Seriously, McCain doesn’t know anything about the economy, said he would probably rely on his veep for economic wisdom—I mean what in the hell are you talking about?
where did he say that?
What has happened to middle-class wages the past 8 years? What about the top 1%? And you’re talking about exploitation? Because they’re going to go back to the Clinton tax rate?
C’mon you really need to focus here, you vote republican cause you’re scared of teh gay and mistakenly think God cares about abortions. No republican cares about the economy! Get with it!
you’re a complete idiot. i don’t know what else to say about this garbage.
Are you saying you ARE voting for McCain on economic issues? One can assume you are also a masochist? Stunning admission.
I am not. Obama will be much worse for the economy, which is why half of me wants him to win. The half that’s smart enough, young enough, and with enough capital to make a shit load of money off a failed economy.
Guess who loses in a failed liberal economy? It’s not the top 5%. Good luck junior. You obviously lack intellect and common sense, so I would suggest you start stock-piling canned goods.[/quote]
Not much of a scholar are you? You realize history says the opposite, right? or who are the republican presidents that have been better economically than democrats? Say, on stock market, real GDP, employment, lower and middle class wages, spending, etc.?
[quote]100meters wrote:
Explain how well trickle down worked under GWB, Bush Sr., Reagan.
[/quote]
why don’t you read just one book on economics before requesting that others spoon feed you?
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Ok, so socialism based on no facts just the fear that he may be a socialist, even though he’s not. Just like he wasn’t born in Hawaii, or he’s a muslim etc.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/10/08/will-msm-report-obama-membership-socialist-new-party[/quote]
Like I said.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
100meters wrote:
Explain how well trickle down worked under GWB, Bush Sr., Reagan.
why don’t you read just one book on economics before requesting that others spoon feed you?[/quote]
Regans tax breaks on the rich WORKED. Money trickles DOWN…through new jobs by business owners…not up. The only thing that trickles up or is built from the ground up…is a building…
[quote]dhickey wrote:
100meters wrote:
Explain how well trickle down worked under GWB, Bush Sr., Reagan.
why don’t you read just one book on economics before requesting that others spoon feed you?[/quote]
He’s been chirping the same tune for a few years. He won’t read anything that resembles the truth.
He won’t do anything to prove that every higher taxes is good for the economy, but always asks others to do it for him.
The simple fact that tax revenues ALWAYS increase when taxes are lowered escapes him.
He’s little more than a dem sycophant.
[quote]100meters wrote:
dhickey wrote:
100meters wrote:
dhickey wrote:
100meters wrote:
How could a vote for McCain possibly equal “caring about the economy” ? No credible economist would vote for McCain, why would any voter? Are you a serious person or just another troll?
We have already established that you have not read anything from credible economist and don’t know shit about basic economic principles. Why do you continue to make this argument?
Seriously, McCain doesn’t know anything about the economy, said he would probably rely on his veep for economic wisdom—I mean what in the hell are you talking about?
where did he say that?
What has happened to middle-class wages the past 8 years? What about the top 1%? And you’re talking about exploitation? Because they’re going to go back to the Clinton tax rate?
C’mon you really need to focus here, you vote republican cause you’re scared of teh gay and mistakenly think God cares about abortions. No republican cares about the economy! Get with it!
you’re a complete idiot. i don’t know what else to say about this garbage.
Are you saying you ARE voting for McCain on economic issues? One can assume you are also a masochist? Stunning admission.
I am not. Obama will be much worse for the economy, which is why half of me wants him to win. The half that’s smart enough, young enough, and with enough capital to make a shit load of money off a failed economy.
Guess who loses in a failed liberal economy? It’s not the top 5%. Good luck junior. You obviously lack intellect and common sense, so I would suggest you start stock-piling canned goods.
Not much of a scholar are you? You realize history says the opposite, right? or who are the republican presidents that have been better economically than democrats? Say, on stock market, real GDP, employment, lower and middle class wages, spending, etc.?[/quote]
You have no clue. you have not studied economics or even taken a passing interest. not suprisingly, you are oversimplifing selected criteria and completely ignoring basic economic principles.
I will say it again. You are ignoring basic economic principles. Read a book.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
dhickey wrote:
100meters wrote:
Explain how well trickle down worked under GWB, Bush Sr., Reagan.
why don’t you read just one book on economics before requesting that others spoon feed you?
He’s been chirping the same tune for a few years. He won’t read anything that resembles the truth.
He won’t do anything to prove that every higher taxes is good for the economy, but always asks others to do it for him.
The simple fact that tax revenues ALWAYS increase when taxes are lowered escapes him.
He’s little more than a dem sycophant. [/quote]
i really should just ignore him. I have a bit of character flaw that often doesn’t allow me to ignore completely illogical statements. I’m working on it.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
BillO21 wrote:
snipeout wrote:
BillO21 wrote:
snipeout wrote:
Food for thought. The top 1% of wage earners earns twice as much as the bottom 50% does. The top 1% pays 13 times the amount of tax that the bottom 50 does. How much more of the burden should they carry?
I bust my ass working overtime to make 6 figures. If I can do this with no college education and only 5 years of military experience, any one can.
I have never been given anything from any one, I have always paid my bills and saved my money. I detest the fact that one party in this country thinks I need to support the “less fortunate”.
Now, because I bust my ass my wife and son have everything they need and want. Fuck anyone who wants more of my money.
Do you really think baby jesus can add all this new spending and cut taxes for 95% of sheeple?
If you are making less thank 250K you will not have your taxes raised. So if McCain’s plan goes into law you will be paying more of the tax burden.
Your money will go to the poor no matter who is elected.
You seem to be of the sheeple. Actually just the other day BHO said 200K and then Biden stated 150K. I do fall in to the 150K, add my wife and we cross 200K. Again why should the top bear any more burden?
You really believe someone with such a blatant socialist agenda is not going to tax us into double digit interest rates and inflation. This is going to make Jimmy Carter look conservative. Do you also believe the military budget should be cut by 25%?
And If you cut taxes for the rich you are in essence raising the tax burden on the lower classes… Is that fair?
It is the same as raising taxes for the middle class.
I am not an Obama lover… I just dislike hime less than McCain. Do you really want Palin as Pres??? McCain is one lack of a heartbeat away from her taking office… Think about it, In his biggest decision he has made he chose her as his running mate…
And he has been pretty consistan that a family making below 250K will not see a tax increase.
Your question right back at you. Do you really want some one as far left and in bed with Bill Ayers(an unrepentant domestic terrorist) as your next president? Ayers is a coward and Obama is an even bigger coward for not being truthful about his relationship with him.
Need I bring up Joe Biden in the presidency? The guy is a walking gaffe, why do you think you haven’t heard much from him on the trail. I am always cautious of anything the mainstream media tries to push down my throat.
Last question. What large decision has BHO ever made other than to vote present?[/quote]
True… I am simply less against Obama.
I would like someone a lot smarter than me running the country…
McCain= nothing but the bottom of his Navy class…
Palin bounced around and finally got a Journalism degree…
That’s it…
With that being said. I am very afraid because I do see the inconsistencies and smooth talking… He will say something and make it sound like he is not against it while he is.
I personally know many women a lot smarter and better suited for the pres than her… That=sad
[quote]rainjack wrote:
He’s been chirping the same tune for a few years. He won’t read anything that resembles the truth.
He won’t do anything to prove that every higher taxes is good for the economy, but always asks others to do it for him.
The simple fact that tax revenues ALWAYS increase when taxes are lowered escapes him.
He’s little more than a dem sycophant. [/quote]
He also hasn’t realized that tax policy is often lagging - it is modified after certain other economic events are set in motion - and while the tax rate certainly affects the economy, it sometimes is driven by economic events that are independent of it as well.
When an economy does well in a high(er)tax environment, it is doing well despite the high(er) tax rate, not because of it.
I’ve seen shoe polish that can put better answers together than 100meters - higher taxes don’t “improve” the economy.
[quote]100meters wrote:
snipeout wrote:
100meters wrote:
snipeout wrote:
Food for thought. The top 1% of wage earners earns twice as much as the bottom 50% does. The top 1% pays 13 times the amount of tax that the bottom 50 does. How much more of the burden should they carry?
I bust my ass working overtime to make 6 figures. If I can do this with no college education and only 5 years of military experience, any one can.
I have never been given anything from any one, I have always paid my bills and saved my money. I detest the fact that one party in this country thinks I need to support the “less fortunate”.
Now, because I bust my ass my wife and son have everything they need and want. Fuck anyone who wants more of my money.
Do you really think baby jesus can add all this new spending and cut taxes for 95% of sheeple?
If spending is your issue, don’t vote McCain right?
All governments spend. It is necessary for the country to survive. The point you sheeple don’t get is this guy is just going to increase government entitlements to people who won’t work just to collect these entitlements.
You are so hopelessly blinded by the MSM that you don’t even have your own opinion, you just spew liberal talking points. Try thinking for yourself with out influence from the NY times.
I believe in a strong military and simple trickle down economics. The country doesn’t get stronger from the bottom up, it gets stronger from the top down. Taking more money from those who create jobs and industry and giving it to those who won’t work doesn’t make us stronger.
Explain how economy did not get stronger work under LBJ, JFK, and Clinton.
Explain how well trickle down worked under GWB, Bush Sr., Reagan.
In other words: stop making shit up.
[/quote]
I will preempt this statement by noting you are from notoriously liberal Mass. and don’t expect you to think for yourself, you had plenty of legislators and professors teach you how to think.
You’re kidding right? The shit storm that Reagan inherited from Carter. Double digit inflation and interest rates. Carters infamous “Americas best days are behind us”. This country saw some of its best economic growth during Reagans admin.
Not to mention the Cold war dismantling of the USSR. Sorry bud, you don’t have a leg to stand on with Reagan.
I’ll give you Bush senior not much for the economy.
GWB also inheritted a terrorist mess from old Billary, 9-11, the stock market tumble and then the tax cuts to revive the economy and push the markets through the roof.
You have got to be kidding about LBJ.
My fondest memories of Billary include him being impeached(go figure a lying liberal).
Being a military police officer for USARPAC(head qtrs for southern pacific command) being on continous 12 hour shifts and being on 30 minute recall for 8 straight months 7 days a week all because he wagged the dog with the Sudan missile launch.
Being extremely underfunded during my deployment in Kosovo. Watching WTC 93 treated as a crime and not an act of terrorism.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
dhickey wrote:
100meters wrote:
Explain how well trickle down worked under GWB, Bush Sr., Reagan.
why don’t you read just one book on economics before requesting that others spoon feed you?
He’s been chirping the same tune for a few years. He won’t read anything that resembles the truth.
He won’t do anything to prove that every higher taxes is good for the economy, but always asks others to do it for him.
The simple fact that tax revenues ALWAYS increase when taxes are lowered escapes him.
He’s little more than a dem sycophant. [/quote]
But increase MORE with tax hikes. Bush’s tax cuts did lead to more revenue, but we always have more revenue. The problem: They don’t pay for themselves. That’s bad.Minus the Bush tax cuts, we’d have had MORE revenue.
You could of course compare real per person revenue growth between Reagan and Clinton, but you know–you’d look like a fool.
Better to just kind of make stuff up.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
rainjack wrote:
He’s been chirping the same tune for a few years. He won’t read anything that resembles the truth.
He won’t do anything to prove that every higher taxes is good for the economy, but always asks others to do it for him.
The simple fact that tax revenues ALWAYS increase when taxes are lowered escapes him.
He’s little more than a dem sycophant.
He also hasn’t realized that tax policy is often lagging - it is modified after certain other economic events are set in motion - and while the tax rate certainly affects the economy, it sometimes is driven by economic events that are independent of it as well.
When an economy does well in a high(er)tax environment, it is doing well despite the high(er) tax rate, not because of it.
I’ve seen shoe polish that can put better answers together than 100meters - higher taxes don’t “improve” the economy.
[/quote]
I’m never arguing causation, just association. You guys do the causation thing.
The fact is higher tax rates are associated with higher growth. Yes even factoring business cycles.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
100meters wrote:
snipeout wrote:
100meters wrote:
snipeout wrote:
Food for thought. The top 1% of wage earners earns twice as much as the bottom 50% does. The top 1% pays 13 times the amount of tax that the bottom 50 does. How much more of the burden should they carry?
I bust my ass working overtime to make 6 figures. If I can do this with no college education and only 5 years of military experience, any one can.
I have never been given anything from any one, I have always paid my bills and saved my money. I detest the fact that one party in this country thinks I need to support the “less fortunate”.
Now, because I bust my ass my wife and son have everything they need and want. Fuck anyone who wants more of my money.
Do you really think baby jesus can add all this new spending and cut taxes for 95% of sheeple?
If spending is your issue, don’t vote McCain right?
All governments spend. It is necessary for the country to survive. The point you sheeple don’t get is this guy is just going to increase government entitlements to people who won’t work just to collect these entitlements.
You are so hopelessly blinded by the MSM that you don’t even have your own opinion, you just spew liberal talking points. Try thinking for yourself with out influence from the NY times.
I believe in a strong military and simple trickle down economics. The country doesn’t get stronger from the bottom up, it gets stronger from the top down. Taking more money from those who create jobs and industry and giving it to those who won’t work doesn’t make us stronger.
Explain how economy did not get stronger work under LBJ, JFK, and Clinton.
Explain how well trickle down worked under GWB, Bush Sr., Reagan.
In other words: stop making shit up.
I will preempt this statement by noting you are from notoriously liberal Mass. and don’t expect you to think for yourself, you had plenty of legislators and professors teach you how to think.
You’re kidding right? The shit storm that Reagan inherited from Carter. Double digit inflation and interest rates. Carters infamous “Americas best days are behind us”. This country saw some of its best economic growth during Reagans admin. Not to mention the Cold war dismantling of the USSR. Sorry bud, you don’t have a leg to stand on with Reagan.
I’ll give you Bush senior not much for the economy.
GWB also inheritted a terrorist mess from old Billary, 9-11, the stock market tumble and then the tax cuts to revive the economy and push the markets through the roof.
You have got to be kidding about LBJ.
My fondest memories of Billary include him being impeached(go figure a lying liberal). Being a military police officer for USARPAC(head qtrs for southern pacific command) being on continous 12 hour shifts and being on 30 minute recall for 8 straight months 7 days a week all because he wagged the dog with the Sudan missile launch.
Being extremely underfunded during my deployment in Kosovo. Watching WTC 93 treated as a crime and not an act of terrorism.
[/quote]
So you got nothing. Figured.