Pages: 1 2 3 … 25

 

2008-10-19 19:48:23
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6666|USA
"spread the wealth around"   http://www.breitbart.tv/html/195153.html

This is the reason not to vote for Obama. What he wants to do is have govt. control over your money. When has it become the govts. job to seize money for the purpose of "spreading it around". Folks this is socialist/communist ideology and it goes against everything the US was meant to be.
Which is freedom to succeed, not guaranteed to succeed. Equal opportunity, not equal results.


and now we have this gallop poll which says only 13% of "national adults" are in favor of doing what Obama wants to do, yet, with the economy as the #1 concern for the voters, Obama is still leading in the polls.  http://www.gallup.com/poll/108445/Ameri … onomy.aspx

Stupidity and a lack of quality informed liberal voters comes to mind. Maybe issues and not race or good looks,or celebrity, should be what motivates voters after all, this year.

Last edited by lowing (2008-10-19 19:48:53)

2008-10-19 20:25:36
SealXo
Member
+309|6551
dude don't post fox videos!no matter how true they might be someones going to come in and go lulz faux newz is g4y


good post
2008-10-19 20:37:03
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6168|what

Reaganomics have failed. That's why your currently in recession.

The bailout plan saw the Republicans and Democrats trying to fight the disaster that was caused by a non-regulated economy.

lowing wrote:

Stupidity and a lack of quality informed liberal voters comes to mind.
Look who's talking. Do you even know anything about economics, at all?

Your right wing ideal of freedom to succeed should include freedom to fail, but if that happens, you get economic disaster.

Guess what just happened?
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2008-10-19 22:17:49
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6544|Global Command
Trickle down economics fails to account for individual greed.
2008-10-20 00:32:58
LividBovine
The Year of the Cow!
+175|6395|MN

ATG wrote:

Trickle down economics fails to account for individual greed.
So does a welfare state.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
2008-10-20 01:04:42
Catbox
forgiveness
+505|6731

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Reaganomics have failed. That's why your currently in recession.

The bailout plan saw the Republicans and Democrats trying to fight the disaster that was caused by a non-regulated economy.

lowing wrote:

Stupidity and a lack of quality informed liberal voters comes to mind.
Look who's talking. Do you even know anything about economics, at all?

Your right wing ideal of freedom to succeed should include freedom to fail, but if that happens, you get economic disaster.

Guess what just happened?
Reagonomics... is he still president? lol
and the economy faltering is in large part due to the housing crisis....
which provided people who couldn't afford to pay for a house...
the ability to buy a house with little or nothing down and non of that pesky income verification...
Love is the answer
2008-10-20 01:24:17
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6168|what

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

Reagonomics... is he still president? lol
and the economy faltering is in large part due to the housing crisis....
which provided people who couldn't afford to pay for a house...
the ability to buy a house with little or nothing down and non of that pesky income verification...
Fail more pl0x/

Reaganomics (notice I spelt it correctly) refers to the economic policies promoted by United States President Ronald Reagan. The four pillars of Reagan's economic policy were to:

   1. reduce the growth of government spending,
   2. reduce marginal tax rates on income from labor and capital,
   3. reduce government regulation of the economy,
   4. control the money supply to reduce inflation.

Please take special note of point number 3, as we'll focus on that specifically.

The Reagan era was marked by cuts to social programs, and large-scale deficit spending on the military. Reaganomics had its roots in two of Reagan's campaign promises: lower taxes and a smaller government. Reagan reduced income tax rates, with the largest rate reductions on the highest incomes; in a time of battling inflation, Reagan raised deficit spending to its highest level (relative to GDP) since World War II.

Now, do any of the above aforementioned economic policies have anything to do with the current economic decline? Considering they are still in use, YES.

Now, you said that it comes down to, no, you left that blank. You just said the housing crisis was because people were provided the ability to buy a house they couldn't afford.

Do you know who approved these loans? I'll give you a moment to think about it.... The banks.

Now, what was step 3 again in Reaganomics? That's right, reduce regulation of the economy. A perfect way to do that is allow banks to make loans to people who can't afford to pay it back. And then, to make it worse, allow banks to sell off these risky portfolio's to whom? Well who has the money...? Large businesses.

The banks were the ones who offered these tempting loans to potential home owners, and then covered their foolishness by passing on all the risk to large corporations.

Government dropped the ball when it let go of all regulation of the economy, otherwise it would have been able to see what the banks were doing.

Reaganomics are still in practice, simply because he isn't President doesn't make his flawed policy obsolete in today's economic circumstances.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2008-10-20 01:39:41
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|6825|Nårvei

Socialism never hurt anybody, your egocentric lifestyle ends with Obama *Muhahahahahahaha*

Seriously lowing, sharing is caring and makes for a better society ... just look north to Canada, their whole attitude is better than yours and you can mix capitalism with socialism you know ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2008-10-20 02:09:50
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6570
lol @ 'communism'. Apparently 'communism' these days involves abolishing capital gains taxes for small businesses and cutting the corporate tax rate for those who employ their capital within the US. Just lol.

Also America is 'meant to be' exactly what Americans 'decide it should be'. First and foremost the US is a democracy.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-10-20 02:13:02)

2008-10-20 02:14:18
GorillaTicTacs
Member
+231|6388|Kyiv, Ukraine

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

Reagonomics... is he still president? lol
and the economy faltering is in large part due to the housing crisis....
which provided people who couldn't afford to pay for a house...
the ability to buy a house with little or nothing down and non of that pesky income verification...
Someone needs to learn the difference between "prime rate mortgages" and sub-prime lending...and also how predatory lending practices were done which has nothing to do with income verification and everything to do with legalized mortgage contract fraud.  The Repug talking point about poor minorities taking out loans they couldn't afford leading to the housing bubble crisis has already been shot way out of the water.
2008-10-20 02:35:08
DonFck
Hibernator
+3,227|6646|Finland

lowing wrote:

Equal opportunity, not equal results.
Equal opportunity is given to all by distributing funds into public education, healthcare etc. The fact of the matter is that E.g. having an expensive education has more weight than a public one (for instance in job seeking/interviews), even if the content should be the same.

"Equal opportunity" means that if you're born into shitty conditions, you still have a realistic chance of rising from those conditions. What one does with that opportunity is another thing.

Equal opportunity is gained by distributing funds to those instances in the social infrastructure that need it. Those funds are aquired by collecting taxes from both companies as well as working citizens. The better the social infrastructure is, the better are also the opportunities for the unemployed to become part of the taxpaying work force -> contributing to the nations welfare -> making the need for high taxation just that much smaller. It's a long road, but I'd say it's worth it. Call me a communist.

Apparently in your opinion, the words "solidarity" and "common interest" do not exist in "US values". I think the bulk of the US population would beg to differ. Ever heard of things like "All men are created equal" and "pursuit of happiness"? That applies to all, regardless of if one's born a "have" or a "have-not".

I believe that is the general idea of Sen. Obamas politics. If that makes him a "communist that will bring us all down", then I guess there's no talking you out of it.

Yes, spread the wealth. I pay my taxes and am totally fine with it. Because I know it contributes to equal opportunities.
I need around tree fiddy.
2008-10-20 03:22:33
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6426|'Murka

ATG wrote:

Trickle down economics fails to account for individual greed.
All economic models fail to account for individual greed/human nature.

GTT wrote:

The Repug talking point about poor minorities taking out loans they couldn't afford leading to the housing bubble crisis has already been shot way out of the water.
And just how is that? Did people not sign mortgages they couldn't afford of their own free will? Did those same people not default on them? Did those defaults not cause the fucked-up mortgage-based securities being peddled in the financial markets to lose their value, thus drying up the credit markets? Did all that not actually happen?

DonFck wrote:

"Equal opportunity" means that if you're born into shitty conditions, you still have a realistic chance of rising from those conditions. What one does with that opportunity is another thing.
So what happens when you are given equal opportunity and you are still in those shitty conditions into which you were born...because of your own choices/actions? Should you keep getting a share of what's being "spread around"?

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Reaganomics are still in practice, simply because he isn't President doesn't make his flawed policy obsolete in today's economic circumstances.
People want to point to deregulation of the markets as a key fallacy of Reaganomics. Keep in mind that under Reagan, the financial markets were not deregulated to the extent they are today.

Before people start shouting that Reaganomics failed...they need to look at what Reagan inherited and how his "failed" economic policies led to the biggest turnaround and longest period of growth in our economy.


Gee...when you put it in terms of results, it doesn't sound "faily" at all.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-10-20 03:23:17
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6305|Éire
Barricade up that door lowing and get the shotgun down from above the fireplace... the Communists are coming to get ya!

There was a time on this forum when I would have debated you on the subtle differences between socialism and communism (differences that are about as subtle as a punch in the face), but now it's just more enjoyable to sit back and watch as your concept of a Judeo-Christian, cut-throat Capitalist America slowly gets 'hijacked' by a black, covert Communist with a name that wouldn't sound out of place on the roll call at a Wahabi madrasa.

Viva la revolucion lowing!
2008-10-20 03:36:54
DonFck
Hibernator
+3,227|6646|Finland

FEOS wrote:

DonFck wrote:

"Equal opportunity" means that if you're born into shitty conditions, you still have a realistic chance of rising from those conditions. What one does with that opportunity is another thing.
So what happens when you are given equal opportunity and you are still in those shitty conditions into which you were born...because of your own choices/actions? Should you keep getting a share of what's being "spread around"?
It's called a system for a reason; because it's not a matter of blindly pumping money to those that don't use it to get them out of a poverty trap. The system has and will always have its loopholes - these need to be identified and fixed continuously.

E.g. in Finland you are eligible for unemployment benefits only if you are registered as an active jobseeker and accept and perform the jobs that are offered. Educational benefits are gotten only during the time that you should graduate under normal circumstances (E.g. 5+2 years for universities, the +2 being an extension time given if applied and accepted with a justifiable reason), etc. Welfare, but with an iron fist, if you will. And yes, we have those who abuse the system, there will always be those.

Abuse of the system would naturally have to be minimized. I'm talking about welfare leading to equal opportunities, not charity leading to nowhere. Understanding the difference between these two is crucial.
I need around tree fiddy.
2008-10-20 03:42:18
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|6825|Nårvei

DonFck wrote:

FEOS wrote:

DonFck wrote:

"Equal opportunity" means that if you're born into shitty conditions, you still have a realistic chance of rising from those conditions. What one does with that opportunity is another thing.
So what happens when you are given equal opportunity and you are still in those shitty conditions into which you were born...because of your own choices/actions? Should you keep getting a share of what's being "spread around"?
It's called a system for a reason; because it's not a matter of blindly pumping money to those that don't use it to get them out of a poverty trap. The system has and will always have its loopholes - these need to be identified and fixed continuously.

E.g. in Finland you are eligible for unemployment benefits only if you are registered as an active jobseeker and accept and perform the jobs that are offered. Educational benefits are gotten only during the time that you should graduate under normal circumstances (E.g. 5+2 years for universities, the +2 being an extension time given if applied and accepted with a justifiable reason), etc. Welfare, but with an iron fist, if you will. And yes, we have those who abuse the system, there will always be those.

Abuse of the system would naturally have to be minimized. I'm talking about welfare leading to equal opportunities, not charity leading to nowhere. Understanding the difference between these two is crucial.
All systems of government has it's flaws naturally ... your last two lines pretty much sums it up real good Donnie
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2008-10-20 04:21:26
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6121|eXtreme to the maX
When has it become the govts. job to seize money for the purpose of "spreading it around".
Makes more sense than seizing money just to pile it up in the bank accounts of a small few men/few small men.
and now we have this gallop poll which says only 13% of "national adults" are in favor of doing what Obama wants to do, yet, with the economy as the #1 concern for the voters, Obama is still leading in the polls
They're voting for the lesser of two evils, you should know that by now.
Stupidity and a lack of quality informed liberal voters comes to mind.
Pot kettle?
Maybe issues and not race or good looks,or celebrity, should be what motivates voters after all, this year.
Funny considering McCain is trading on race and celebrity, as are Fox with all their 'Barrack Osama' crap.
Maybe it is the issues Lowing.
Which is freedom to succeed, not guaranteed to succeed. Equal opportunity, not equal results.
Aren't you taking govt money right now?
Someone's hard earned salary taxed to pay you?
OMG! Lowing is riding the backs of Joe Sixpack and Joe Plumber!

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2008-10-20 04:50:46)

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
2008-10-20 04:43:25
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6168|what

Braddock wrote:

Barricade up that door lowing and get the shotgun down from above the fireplace... the Communists are coming to get ya!

There was a time on this forum when I would have debated you on the subtle differences between socialism and communism (differences that are about as subtle as a punch in the face), but now it's just more enjoyable to sit back and watch as your concept of a Judeo-Christian, cut-throat Capitalist America slowly gets 'hijacked' by a black, covert Communist with a name that wouldn't sound out of place on the roll call at a Wahabi madrasa.

Viva la revolucion lowing!
Grim hope for the future?

Hunched in his bunker, in the bowels of the factory where whip wielding foremen open up the backs of the ever grateful workers, sits lowing.

Surrounded by the Republican memorabilia into which he invests the profits of his enterprise, tremblingly raises a hand from the well worn keyboard of his PC, to strike off in red another day of Obama's rule on the George Bush calendar he saved from the wreck of the former Presidents office.

It, like so many of lowings once strong Republican ideals, destined to be thrown out and forgotten, now live only through him.

He's managed to cross into the borders of Argentina, in search of one of the few remaining Conservative governments. One last desperate attempt to live out his remaining years fighting back against the left leaning tree-huggers he never thought he'd lose to.

But he must act quickly, for the Socialist empire has been eying off this last conservative stronghold, reaching forth it's Communist arm, fist clenched with the empty promise of Welfare for all, lies of equality between nations, and spreading the wealth to all men and women.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2008-10-20 04:59:39
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6426|'Murka

DonFck wrote:

FEOS wrote:

DonFck wrote:

"Equal opportunity" means that if you're born into shitty conditions, you still have a realistic chance of rising from those conditions. What one does with that opportunity is another thing.
So what happens when you are given equal opportunity and you are still in those shitty conditions into which you were born...because of your own choices/actions? Should you keep getting a share of what's being "spread around"?
It's called a system for a reason; because it's not a matter of blindly pumping money to those that don't use it to get them out of a poverty trap. The system has and will always have its loopholes - these need to be identified and fixed continuously.

E.g. in Finland you are eligible for unemployment benefits only if you are registered as an active jobseeker and accept and perform the jobs that are offered. Educational benefits are gotten only during the time that you should graduate under normal circumstances (E.g. 5+2 years for universities, the +2 being an extension time given if applied and accepted with a justifiable reason), etc. Welfare, but with an iron fist, if you will. And yes, we have those who abuse the system, there will always be those.

Abuse of the system would naturally have to be minimized. I'm talking about welfare leading to equal opportunities, not charity leading to nowhere. Understanding the difference between these two is crucial.
When you have one group in your government that wants to reform the welfare system so that it actually functions as you describe, yet you have another that fights like hell to keep it the way it is, it becomes problematic. People start throwing around terms like "racism" and "class warfare" to describe the attempts to reform the system so that it becomes a hand up instead of a handout...and the other side either cuts back on their reform initiatives or drop them all together.

Very frustrating.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-10-20 05:08:50
DonFck
Hibernator
+3,227|6646|Finland

FEOS wrote:

DonFck wrote:

FEOS wrote:


So what happens when you are given equal opportunity and you are still in those shitty conditions into which you were born...because of your own choices/actions? Should you keep getting a share of what's being "spread around"?
It's called a system for a reason; because it's not a matter of blindly pumping money to those that don't use it to get them out of a poverty trap. The system has and will always have its loopholes - these need to be identified and fixed continuously.

E.g. in Finland you are eligible for unemployment benefits only if you are registered as an active jobseeker and accept and perform the jobs that are offered. Educational benefits are gotten only during the time that you should graduate under normal circumstances (E.g. 5+2 years for universities, the +2 being an extension time given if applied and accepted with a justifiable reason), etc. Welfare, but with an iron fist, if you will. And yes, we have those who abuse the system, there will always be those.

Abuse of the system would naturally have to be minimized. I'm talking about welfare leading to equal opportunities, not charity leading to nowhere. Understanding the difference between these two is crucial.
When you have one group in your government that wants to reform the welfare system so that it actually functions as you describe, yet you have another that fights like hell to keep it the way it is, it becomes problematic. People start throwing around terms like "racism" and "class warfare" to describe the attempts to reform the system so that it becomes a hand up instead of a handout...and the other side either cuts back on their reform initiatives or drop them all together.

Very frustrating.
You are correct.

It's undoubtedly so that all to often the parties concentrate on fighting against each other instead of doing what they were elected to do -> increase and uphold the well being of the country and its people. Cooperation in order to find a solution, not "my solution is better than yours".
I need around tree fiddy.
2008-10-20 05:10:01
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6570
I don't know all that much about US taxation so perhaps someone American can answer this question: is the US taxation system not currently already banded in nature?
2008-10-20 05:15:26
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|6825|Nårvei

@FEOS: You don't have to reinvent the wheel, have a group from congress/senate tour some of the parlaments in Europe and pick up info on how we do it ... write a huge report about it and discuss that ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2008-10-20 05:24:12
DonFck
Hibernator
+3,227|6646|Finland

Varegg wrote:

@FEOS: You don't have to reinvent the wheel, have a group from congress/senate tour some of the parlaments in Europe and pick up info on how we do it ... write a huge report about it and discuss that ...
Although, I'm currently not so convinced about our Finnish system's decline in the hands of the Coalition Party..
I need around tree fiddy.
2008-10-20 05:37:30
Ajax_the_Great1
Dropped on request
+206|6661
As long as that money spreads around to me I aint complainin'.
2008-10-20 05:50:23
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6666|USA

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Reaganomics have failed. That's why your currently in recession.

The bailout plan saw the Republicans and Democrats trying to fight the disaster that was caused by a non-regulated economy.

lowing wrote:

Stupidity and a lack of quality informed liberal voters comes to mind.
Look who's talking. Do you even know anything about economics, at all?

Your right wing ideal of freedom to succeed should include freedom to fail, but if that happens, you get economic disaster.

Guess what just happened?
It does include freedom to fail, I have posted as much many times. But personal failure, should not affect the masses. Do not think for one minute that there are institutions out there poised to take over any failed companies. The bailout was not necessary. Let those thar were gunna fail do so, someone would have come along and turned their failure into a success storyo

Last edited by lowing (2008-10-20 05:51:21)

2008-10-20 05:54:59
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6666|USA

CameronPoe wrote:

lol @ 'communism'. Apparently 'communism' these days involves abolishing capital gains taxes for small businesses and cutting the corporate tax rate for those who employ their capital within the US. Just lol.

Also America is 'meant to be' exactly what Americans 'decide it should be'. First and foremost the US is a democracy.
First and foremost the US is a Republic. Why not abolish capital gains taxes? It helps business growth which eventually provided jobs. Oh thats right, liberals are not interested in jobs, only what they can claim is rightfully theirs under Obama socialism.`

 

Pages: 1 2 3 … 25

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard