|
|
Post by jgaffney on Oct 18, 2008 12:52:14 GMT -5
It's not that people want to pile on this guy, but if he can't pay taxes under Bush's plan (which he doesn't owe much), what makes him think he can pay under Mccain's? He's paying more money for gas, food, utilities, healthcare...etc as are all of us, now. With the financial mess we are all in, we all have a shaky future, save the top less than 10%. Is it really feasible or smart for a guy in his position to start a business? You folks are missing the point entirely. By continuing to focus on the background of this man, the Left is ignoring the content of Obama's reply. When a politician is working the rope line, that's the worst time for him and his handlers. His replies to the people are unscripted and reveal more about the politician that his handlers would like. That's why Obama's remark about spreading the wealth around has gotten so little play. That remark revealed more than the campaign would like to have known about the candidate's views on the economy. Think about it - 50% of taxpayers pay only 4% of the taxes. Almost 30% of filers don't pay any taxes at all, but receive rebates in the form of tax credits. How will Obama give those people a tax credit? This is welfare by a different name. Obama has said before that he sees the tax code, not so much as a generator of income for the government, but more as a leveller of the playing field for the taxed. That's just fine, as long as you believe that you will be on the receiving end of the levelling. However, I think we will all find that the level playing field that Obama envisions will be a couple of rungs lower than we thought. Change - yes. Prosperity - probably not. |
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Oct 18, 2008 20:51:03 GMT -5
You folks are missing the point entirely. By continuing to focus on the background of this man, the Left is ignoring the content of Obama's reply. Gaffney, I speak for myself and not for others (unless they ask me to). I didn't start this thread, therefore, I am really not focused on this guy. Personally, i think he was an implant, but that is neither here nor there. As for what Obama said in an unrehearsed setting, I have no problem with it. You see, because he also intends on creating jobs. Personally, "spreading wealth" doesn't scare me like it does you or some others, but what I have seen with most Republican presidents is a bad economy follows. It takes a disciplined Democrat to call the tough shots, but they are the ones that get the economy strong again. When Bush gave tax cuts to the top 2-3 %, he said that extra money would create jobs, it would benefit everyone. Did it? I say look around you....... |
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Oct 19, 2008 16:40:27 GMT -5
As for what Obama said in an unrehearsed setting, I have no problem with it. You see, because he also intends on creating jobs. Personally, "spreading wealth" doesn't scare me like it does you or some others, but what I have seen with most Republican presidents is a bad economy follows. It takes a disciplined Democrat to call the tough shots, but they are the ones that get the economy strong again. Mink, here you show your liberal training: Government doesn't "create" jobs, except for more government workers, exactly what we don't need right now. Government instead creates the regulatory and fiscal environment that allows the private sector to create jobs. That's the Republican point of view. The government stumbles a lot, mostly because it is an unwieldly behemoth that gets a new brain (Congress) every two years. If by "look around you" you mean the local economy, I can understand why you feel that the Bush tax cuts had a misplaced emphasis. However, when you look at the national scene, the real focus of the tax cuts, I'd claim that they were a success. Except for the recent crisis in the subprime mortgage market, brought about by a Democrat policy focused on letting anyone buy a home, the employment picture under Bush has been very good. Unemployment was below 5%, the traditional "full employment" benchmark until just recently when the downturn in home construction put a lot of people out of work. This table will show you that non-farm employment has been rising in the US since the recovery from the double whammy of the Clinton recession and the 9/11 attacks. If you just look at private-sector jobs, the Bush policies have added 5 million new jobs since 2001. The most recent data available is 2007, so it won't reflect the current drop in employment attributable to the subprime mortage meltdown and its consequences. This time, the data has dispelled another liberal myth. |
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Oct 20, 2008 10:56:41 GMT -5
Bloverk: "How funny that everyone wants to pile on Joe the Plumber now, or Samuel if you prefer. Oh, he owes $1,200 in back taxes to Ohio. And he has a $1,200 debt with a hospital." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It's not that people want to pile on this guy, but if he can't pay taxes under Bush's plan (which he doesn't owe much), what makes him think he can pay under Mccain's? He's paying more money for gas, food, utilities, healthcare...etc as are all of us, now . With the financial mess we are all in, we all have a shaky future, save the top less than 10%. Is it really feasible or smart for a guy in his position to start a business? That is not the point. Taxes are the point. How can anyone justify increasing taxes in this economy? They can't. And if you vote for Obama and he raises taxes, are you going to be happy when the price of everything else increases? |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Oct 20, 2008 11:50:49 GMT -5
Bloverk: "How funny that everyone wants to pile on Joe the Plumber now, or Samuel if you prefer. Oh, he owes $1,200 in back taxes to Ohio. And he has a $1,200 debt with a hospital." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It's not that people want to pile on this guy, but if he can't pay taxes under Bush's plan (which he doesn't owe much), what makes him think he can pay under Mccain's? He's paying more money for gas, food, utilities, healthcare...etc as are all of us, now . With the financial mess we are all in, we all have a shaky future, save the top less than 10%. Is it really feasible or smart for a guy in his position to start a business? That is not the point. Taxes are the point. How can anyone justify increasing taxes in this economy? They can't. And if you vote for Obama and he raises taxes, are you going to be happy when the price of everything else increases? Actually, it's easy to justify a tax increase for the rich in this economy. Over the past 8 years the divide between rich and poor has grown under the Republican administration and we've begun to lose our middle class. Giving a tax cut to 95% of Americans while raising taxes for the rich (back to what it was under Clinton) will reestablish our middle class and help bring America back into balance. |
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Oct 20, 2008 12:12:01 GMT -5
It's utterly ridiculous to even attempt to justify any tax increase in this economy. Your bantering about the "divide between rich and poor" is jus tsom much more class warfare, cum socialist pablum.
Bring America "back into balance". Since when did anything have to do with "balance" or "fairness". This is utopian bilge that has never worked any time it has been tried across the breadth of history.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Oct 20, 2008 12:24:16 GMT -5
It doesn't have anything to do with "socialist pablum," it is reality. People are struggling out there and they need help now! The McCain campaign has abandoned trying to argue the issues and have focused their efforts on character assassination against Obama. That in itself shows you that things will get worse for the average American under a McCain administration. They're desperate and have no vision for the future that's different from Bush.
|
|
|
|
Post by maxsawdust on Oct 20, 2008 13:23:57 GMT -5
It doesn't have anything to do with "socialist pablum," it is reality. People are struggling out there and they need help now! The McCain campaign has abandoned trying to argue the issues and have focused their efforts on character assassination against Obama. That in itself shows you that things will get worse for the average American under a McCain administration. They're desperate and have no vision for the future that's different from Bush. It ABSOLUTLEY Has EVERYTHING to do Socialist pablum. You have been proven wrong time and again by FACT. I know you hate FACT. Funny you run and hide and change your tune everytime FACT comes around. You do EXACTLY what you are blaming JMC of here. You were calling 10% OBSCENE profit..then FACT came..and well you went down another path entirely.. LOL |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Oct 20, 2008 13:41:34 GMT -5
I'm not changing my tune on anything. When an oil company makes more than $40 billion in profit and their CEO takes home $21 million while the average American is being screwed at the pump it is obscene!
A study by Equilar found that the 12 CEOs of the largest U.S.-based, publicly traded oil companies made a median total compensation that increased by more than four times the rate of that of executives in the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index as a whole. That is OBSCENE, is it not?
Are you saying the divide between rich and poor hasn't grown under Bush? Which of my FACTS are you disputing?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Oct 20, 2008 14:14:04 GMT -5
And what did that same oil company pay in taxes before any profit was taken?
You keep railing about "OBSCENE" compensation and profits. In case you happen to have not been paying attention in Poli Sci when it was discussed, that is always one of the key arguments of the socialist / progressive. It is class warfare, pure and simply, meant to stir up people who don't have as good a concept of the realities of economy into voting for massive re-distributions of wealth.
Which, as we have seen, Barack is saying is tantamount to our patriotic duty.
The argumenet about the divide between rich and poor is yet another page from the socialist playbook. Everyone is equal, no one should have more than the next person and everyone must contribute as much as possible to the state since government knows best how to spend everyone else's money.
You are preaching socialism, Saunterelle whether or not you know it or accept it. That is what Barack is promising, and what an increased Democrat majority in both houses of Congress is poised to give us.
I have to believe you are not so stupid or naive to not know, so presuming I am correct that would make you yet another of the propagandists doing anything, saying anything to just get your man elected so that you can advance the socialistic cause for which he stands.
As far as disputing facts... I haven't seen you bring any into this particular thread. If you have some, please feel free to post them and we can dance.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Oct 20, 2008 14:23:44 GMT -5
Bush has reluctantly resorted to a form of "socialism" to rescue our banking system from an imminent crisis, has he not? If socialism works (it seems to be working for Europe) and it will pull us out of the mess we're in, then why not experiment with it responsibly?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Oct 20, 2008 14:36:45 GMT -5
Yes he has.... and a lot of conservatives (both Democrat and Republican) are really, really pissed off about it.
Please show, with examples how socialism is "working for Europe". Many of the countries across Western Europe practicing it are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. The only question left is whether or not those nations will survive long enough to be taken over by the astronomical birth rates in their Muslim communities.
For your information this nation has experimented several times with socialism and progressivism. See Woodrow Wilson in WW I, FDR's New Deal, LBJ's Great Society, the wage and price controls of the Ford/Carter era. All of those were "responsible experiments", and none of them have really ever succeeded across the board and in large measure. Some portions have been abject failures that we continue to pour money into right through to today.
Now I am sure you will take this comment wrong, but I mean it in all sincerity. Do some real research and some honest analysis of 20th century American history. There are very interesting parallels in history to the rise of Barack, including in American history. I don't expect any of it will change your mind, but you'll at least have a much better understanding when what is going to happen, happens.
|
|
