DAS Posted August 16, 2012 Author Share Posted August 16, 2012 You're as specific as Obama. It's a clear case of believing campaign adds. No one would ever come to the conclusion Republicans were out to get the middle class unless the Democrats told them that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 ^ Yeah, there's no record of that happening! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted August 16, 2012 Author Share Posted August 16, 2012 ^ Yeah, there's no record of that happening! Quite simply every party and most politicians are not out to get anyone. They only care about promoting self. They don't want to hurt or help anyone. In terms of actual policy history seems to vindicate the idea the Republicans are better for the economy as a whole, including the middle class, than the Democrats. The whole tax the rich, get votes from the poor doesn't work. Tax REFORM is what we need. But cuts for everyone is the right way to go until then and tax cuts starting at the top with investors and corporations help the economy has a whole because they will expand and create more wealth among the lower brackets. To only cut taxes for the rich is wrong but too many people have the idea that not taxing the rich into poverty is somehow evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Uh, what? Well, the Bush tax cuts have been in place throughout the economic downturn, so where's the job creation? Yes, both parties are in it to serve their own base(campaign donors), but with billionaire upon billionaire pumping money into romney's campaign, you don't think he will completely turn everything towards benefitting them and in return himself? Even Ryan's plan includes giving $300,000 in tax breaks to the ultra wealthy, will middle class Americans' taxes will increase on average of $2,000. It's not about reallocating wealth in this country either. That is a ridiculous proposition to me. The division of wealth continues to get wider in this country and not because of the 1% working harder than everyone else, it's because they are continually getting the rules and laws to benefit them most. This will only increase under a Romney/Ryan administration at the expense of the rest of the country. Plus, as we have already experienced, the economy as a whole will go in the tank again - as it has at the end of the last few GOP presidencies. There is no easy answer to the problems that face this nation, even though some make it sound that way, but taking money from SS and turning it over to Wall Street investors, giving huge tax breaks to billionaires and not touching the defense budget doesn't seem to be the right direction for the majority of people in this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypeO Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Things are going downhill fast. The sad part is this Toure' idiot is so totally off-base. He argues that Romney is trying to rally what he sees as the Republican base - whites who are racist/bigoted. Romney doesn't need to rally those people, they would vote for WHOEVER was running against Obama. The voters Romney needs are the moderate undecideds who voted for Obama last election. This guy is just a liberal hit man doing Obama's dirty work - in other words, he's "got Obama's back". http://newsninja2012...ation-of-obama/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypeO Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Even Ryan's plan includes giving $300,000 in tax breaks to the ultra wealthy, will middle class Americans' taxes will increase on average of $2,000. Proportionally, it's the same. But throwing big numbers around makes it "sound" unfair. Someone making $50K a year getting $2,000 back is the same as someone making $7.5M getting back $300K. I'm less concerned about millionaires who pay taxes getting tax refunds than I am about people who don't even PAY income tax getting tax refunds. That IS redistribution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted August 17, 2012 Author Share Posted August 17, 2012 I don't think it's fair when people say millionaires/billionaires pump money into Republican campaign efforts. Is it true? Yes. But it's also misleading considering the millionaires/billionaires that are pumping money into the Democrats efforts also. It's not a one way street at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted August 17, 2012 Author Share Posted August 17, 2012 I'm less concerned about millionaires who pay taxes getting tax refunds than I am about people who don't even PAY income tax getting tax refunds. That IS redistribution. Do you have a particular tax reform idea you favor to replace the current system? I'd like to know what you think. I personally am torn between the fair and flat taxes but the most gorgeous woman I've ever seen in my life told me she was a fairtax volunteer so I think it wins on that basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebk Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Proportionally, it's the same. But throwing big numbers around makes it "sound" unfair. Someone making $50K a year getting $2,000 back is the same as someone making $7.5M getting back $300K. I'm less concerned about millionaires who pay taxes getting tax refunds than I am about people who don't even PAY income tax getting tax refunds. That IS redistribution. No, you read that wrong. The incredibly rich get another $300K and the rest of us poor schlubs have to pony up another $2K. Because that's the way to fix everything... make it so no one can afford to buy anything that the mega corporations are producing. And the whole cycle starts again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebk Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Uh, what? Well, the Bush tax cuts have been in place throughout the economic downturn, so where's the job creation? Yes, both parties are in it to serve their own base(campaign donors), but with billionaire upon billionaire pumping money into romney's campaign, you don't think he will completely turn everything towards benefitting them and in return himself? Even Ryan's plan includes giving $300,000 in tax breaks to the ultra wealthy, will middle class Americans' taxes will increase on average of $2,000. It's not about reallocating wealth in this country either. That is a ridiculous proposition to me. The division of wealth continues to get wider in this country and not because of the 1% working harder than everyone else, it's because they are continually getting the rules and laws to benefit them most. This will only increase under a Romney/Ryan administration at the expense of the rest of the country. Plus, as we have already experienced, the economy as a whole will go in the tank again - as it has at the end of the last few GOP presidencies. There is no easy answer to the problems that face this nation, even though some make it sound that way, but taking money from SS and turning it over to Wall Street investors, giving huge tax breaks to billionaires and not touching the defense budget doesn't seem to be the right direction for the majority of people in this country. Thank you Walter for again putting things out there so clearly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docron Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 nevermind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cryingbluerain Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Well, the Bush tax cuts have been in place throughout the economic downturn, so where's the job creation? Ask Obama, he agreed to extend those tax cuts at the end of 2010 so that the expiration of the cuts wouldn't hinder the fragile recovery. Plus, as we have already experienced, the economy as a whole will go in the tank again - as it has at the end of the last few GOP presidencies. Yeah, everything comes up roses only under Democrats I presume? The economy was going into the tank at the end of Clinton's second term if I remember correctly. Remember the dot com bust? There is no easy answer to the problems that face this nation, even though some make it sound that way, but taking money from SS and turning it over to Wall Street investors, giving huge tax breaks to billionaires and not touching the defense budget doesn't seem to be the right direction for the majority of people in this country. Neither does taking taxpayer money to fund boondoggles like Solyndra, subsidizing vehicles consumers don't want like the Chevy Volt, or bailing out companies like GM (which is possibly headed back into bankruptcy, which will again cost taxpayers billions). And GM is considered such a success story by 0 that he wants to do the same thing for all industries: “Now I want to do the same thing with manufacturing jobs, not just in the auto industry, but in every industry.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted August 17, 2012 Author Share Posted August 17, 2012 Plus, as we have already experienced, the economy as a whole will go in the tank again - as it has at the end of the last few GOP presidencies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted August 20, 2012 Author Share Posted August 20, 2012 I think he's right. If the Republicans ever take control of all three like they have many times before including just a few years ago we're done. I mean last time they had control the economy was great and the stock market was reaching record highs, illegal immigrants were still illegally immigrating, no drones, the poor were not thrown onto the streets or murdered, the failing medicare and social security were still running themselves into the ground without money being taken away, no one was lynched and society not only didn't suffer but benefited but I'm sure this time the exact opposite will happen. In a more rational note he talks about how evil and tyrannical Republicans are and then says he wants to decapitated people for being successful. That's called super socialism. A regular socialist steals money from people with more. Super Nazi Cooder wants to kill them. Very nice. How is it that no one has ever cared what this revolutionary thinker has had to say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/23/us/texas-judge-warning/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bingo Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 And I’ll never go to Texas anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypeO Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Is there a more despicable, reprehensible and unabashed liar than Debbie Wasserman Schultz? (That's a rhetorical question, there are quite a few possibilities that come to mind.) Kudos to Anderson Cooper for holding Debbie Wasserman Schultz - a confirmed and unapologetic Lying Liar Who Lies - accountable for blatantly misquoting an LA Times source. This woman lies even while being plainly exposed as a liar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sagittarius Rising Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 I agree, she is a liar like all politicians. However, that being said, when the head of the RNC says the published opinion of the republican party is not "necessarily" the same as that of the Romney-Ryan ticked it makes one go, Hmmmmm. Ryan has in the past supported the party position on abortion, yet now he is ready to abandon that principal in support of what exactly? Neither Romney nor Ryan have come out and stated their position on abortion, then again neither have really stated their opinion on much only that Obama is bad and they are good, that has pretty much been the gist of their argument. Oh, and that they can balance the budget with a plan that the finance director under Reagan called "absurd and ridiculous" on Fox News. So, taking all that into consideration coupled with the announcement in 2008 that the republicans would do "whatever it takes" to ensure Obama is a one-term president, and having Rush himself state if they had to destroy America in the process, so be it as long as Obama is not re-elected in 2012. I would have to say Schulz is the lesser of the two evils in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted August 26, 2012 Author Share Posted August 26, 2012 neither have really stated their opinion on much only that Obama is bad and they are good, that has pretty much been the gist of their argument. They must have been taking campaigning lessons from Obama. I think we're ready for another idea man and not all these empty suits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypeO Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 I agree, she is a liar like all politicians. However, that being said, when the head of the RNC says the published opinion of the republican party is not "necessarily" the same as that of the Romney-Ryan ticked it makes one go, Hmmmmm. Ryan has in the past supported the party position on abortion, yet now he is ready to abandon that principal in support of what exactly? Neither Romney nor Ryan have come out and stated their position on abortion Truth is, the Republican position on abortion hasn't changed much since the 70s. Every Republican candidate has opposed abortion and supported overturning Roe v. Wade. It's only being made to seem like it matters more this election because the Democrats are so desperate to keep the dialog away from Obama's actual performance (or lack thereof). If Romney is elected, Roe v. Wade isn't going to be overturned. Abortion is a red herring issue because while it stirs deep emotion, it's not going to actually be changed regardless of who is elected. It's only made it front and center because a nobody candidate made a poorly-phrased comment about abortion, and the Left seized the opportunity to make it a major "issue". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docron Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 I've posted some pretty shitty shit in my day, but I think I've just found my limit... .had to edit this one out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom kid Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 I see belief in the trickle down effect is still alive and well, even if it has been disproved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted August 26, 2012 Author Share Posted August 26, 2012 If by trickle down you understand it to be I automatically get money because rich people have money of course it's false. However, anyone who knows anything about economics knows you can't grow an economy very well by taking money away from investors. Not all rich people having their taxes cut will benefit us. But the rich investor does help us regardless of how much the Democrats have told you they are stealing your food and trying to eat your soul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anjin-san Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 If by trickle down you understand it to be I automatically get money because rich people have money of course it's false. However, anyone who knows anything about economics knows you can't grow an economy very well by taking money away from investors. Not all rich people having their taxes cut will benefit us. But the rich investor does help us regardless of how much the Democrats have told you they are stealing your food and trying to eat your soul. Don't bother,...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypeO Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 I see belief in the trickle down effect is still alive and well, even if it has been disproved. Oh, look! Someone posted a humorous photo. That certainly proves the point. I see belief in the trickle down effect is still alive and well, even if it has been disproved. "Disproved" when? During the Reagan recovery? Lest people forget, those "evil corporations" are where the vast majority of Americans have their wealth and savings tied up via 401Ks. When they are profitable, everyday Americans benefit. And don't forget - big corporations don't pay taxes or penalties. You tax corporations more, and it's simply passed along to the consumer through increased prices. THAT's why Obama's bullshit doesn't add up. All the people who cheer wildly when he talks about going after those big corporations buy into it so willingly, yet don't make the connection when they see prices continue to increase while their salaries don't. Should have paid more attention in school. Sure, Economics was boring. Who knew it would actually apply in your daily life? lulz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.