Rant, Anti-Romney
10-18-2012, 04:36 PM
#261
Elite Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Anacortes, WA
Posts: 2,478
Total Cats: 144
Just wait till you don't have enough of your own capital to invest yourself and no job is available to you that will even pay enough to put food on the table. Then you can consider yourself a lazy freeloader while you still don't recognize who the real lazy freeloaders are sucking the country dry.
Last edited by bbundy; 10-18-2012 at 05:44 PM.
Reply
0
0
10-18-2012, 04:57 PM
#262
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,490
Total Cats: 4,079
I want to live in the 10s, invent the lightbulb, and have Edison steal it from me. Bankrupt me and then in return to pay off my debts, force me to work for him--so I never out invent him ever again.
Reply
0
0
10-18-2012, 10:33 PM
#265
Elite Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Anacortes, WA
Posts: 2,478
Total Cats: 144
It is funny that you act like the concept of repatriating profits at no additional tax is a new concept that is not already practiced in most other countries globally, including many that follow your ideals. This is a good thing because otherwise these companies leave billions of dollars over seas in order to avoid paying taxes on this money which is exactly what would happen if they brought it back. So you do what every other country does and let the money back into the country tax free so the companies can then reinvest it into the US economy.
You also act as if moving factories overseas is something that is negative and not just part of efficiency in the market. Highly developed countries with high and rising incomes tend to move away from traditional manufacturing jobs and into a service based economies because factory workers cannot be highly paid. Stop living in the 50's and 60's and come into the 21st century bundy.
EDIT: I also enjoy how every time someone tells you why your argument is wrong you just change the subject. Misdirection only works with those who don't know any better. Try actually picking a viewpoint you can legitimately defend.
You also act as if moving factories overseas is something that is negative and not just part of efficiency in the market. Highly developed countries with high and rising incomes tend to move away from traditional manufacturing jobs and into a service based economies because factory workers cannot be highly paid. Stop living in the 50's and 60's and come into the 21st century bundy.
EDIT: I also enjoy how every time someone tells you why your argument is wrong you just change the subject. Misdirection only works with those who don't know any better. Try actually picking a viewpoint you can legitimately defend.
I have some personal experience with how well the free money repatriation worked when Bush did it. I personally profited to the tune of about $16,000 in dividends. The company I have ties to did not use it to grow jobs they gave out dividends most of which is swallowed up by large shareholders much richer than me, they repurchased stock, laid off workers, salaries remained stagnate, and they bought into a company to shift some more engineering to India.
Here is an assessment
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/05/bu...rris.html?_r=0
Reply
0
0
10-18-2012, 10:52 PM
#266
Elite Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Anacortes, WA
Posts: 2,478
Total Cats: 144
It is probably the guy who’s company Is currently Moving a profitable businesses manufacturing to China. At the same time his tax plan calls for making it so he can repatriate the profits from moving those jobs to china tax free while small companies that employ people in the US still pay tax and the workes here pay payroll tax associated with being employed making them expensive.
Bain pays Mitt ~$450,000 a week in qualified capital gains eligible for a preferred tax rate to his blind trust. To say he has no say in the company’s actions would be naïve especially if you believe Romney’s own words on how blind trusts work.
Last edited by bbundy; 10-18-2012 at 11:35 PM.
Reply
0
0
10-19-2012, 12:19 PM
#267
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
Reality might contradict what you have been conditioned to believe. Based on actual IRS tax return info.
[IMG]https://www.miataturbo.net/attachments/current-events-news-politics-77/57669d1350424625-political-current-events-random-pics-videos-thread-nytimes_taxes_graph-gif[IMG]
[IMG]https://www.miataturbo.net/attachments/current-events-news-politics-77/57669d1350424625-political-current-events-random-pics-videos-thread-nytimes_taxes_graph-gif[IMG]
Mark is making the point that having a really high marginal bracket with enough exemptions, deductions, loopholes and lack of payment can bring the effective rate way down.
Reply
0
0
10-19-2012, 12:34 PM
#268
Other things that must be taken into account:
Tax fraud -- this argument cuts both ways, since it's impossible for either one of us to present numbers about how much tax fraud there was in the 1950's compared to now. But anecdotally, everything I read indicates tax fraud was much, much higher then.
Marginal income brackets -- it's not enough to look at what the various marginal tax rates, you also have to look, in inflation-adjusted dollars, how the brackets were applied to each level of income. No references as I can't find the article I read some weeks ago, but I believe that the highest marginal bracket now applies to a much lower level of income than it did in the 1950's. I'm pulling this number out of my memory, but the top marginal tax rate in the 1950's only applied to something like income over 2.5 million per year, in 2012 inflation adjusted dollars.
Tax fraud -- this argument cuts both ways, since it's impossible for either one of us to present numbers about how much tax fraud there was in the 1950's compared to now. But anecdotally, everything I read indicates tax fraud was much, much higher then.
Marginal income brackets -- it's not enough to look at what the various marginal tax rates, you also have to look, in inflation-adjusted dollars, how the brackets were applied to each level of income. No references as I can't find the article I read some weeks ago, but I believe that the highest marginal bracket now applies to a much lower level of income than it did in the 1950's. I'm pulling this number out of my memory, but the top marginal tax rate in the 1950's only applied to something like income over 2.5 million per year, in 2012 inflation adjusted dollars.
Reply
0
0
10-22-2012, 09:47 AM
#269
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,490
Total Cats: 4,079
Remember when the White House said this:
"I think it’s important to note with regards to that protest that there are protests taking place in different countries across the world that are responding to the movie that has circulated on the Internet...We also believe that there is no justification at all for responding to this movie with violence" - Sept 13, WH
"I have seen that report, and the story is absolutely wrong. We were not aware of any actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent. That report is false.” - Sept 14, WH
"it began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo, where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy sparked by this hateful video...We do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned" - Sept 16, WH
"... the incidents that took place, which are under investigation and the cause and motivation behind them will be decided by that investigation' - Sept 17, WH
"It is, I think, self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack. Our embassy was attacked violently, and the result was four deaths of American officials" - Sept 20, WH
"What we’ve seen over the last week, week and a half, is something that actually we've seen in the past, where there is an offensive video or cartoon directed at the prophet Muhammad. And this is obviously something that then is used as an excuse by some to carry out inexcusable violent acts directed at Westerners or Americans." - Sept 20, Obama himself
"What we do know is that the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests." - Spet 20, Obama himself
"What happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack, and we will not rest until we have tracked down and brought to justice the terrorists who murdered four Americans" - Sept 21, Clinton
"As we all know, the United States lost a great ambassador and the Libyan people lost a true friend when Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the terrorist assault on our consulate in Benghazi" - Sept 24, Clinton
"We are still doing an investigation. There is no doubt that the kind of weapons that were used, the ongoing assault, that it wasn’t just a mob action. Now, we don’t have all the information yet so we are still gathering" - Sept 25, Obama himself, not quite up to date.
"That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world." - Sept 25, Obama to the U.N.
"But it is certainly the case that it is our view as an administration, the President’s view, that it was a terrorist attack" - Sept 26, WH
and then did this:
PICKET: Anti-Muslim filmmaker detained for almost a month...next court date three days after election - Washington Times
"I think it’s important to note with regards to that protest that there are protests taking place in different countries across the world that are responding to the movie that has circulated on the Internet...We also believe that there is no justification at all for responding to this movie with violence" - Sept 13, WH
"I have seen that report, and the story is absolutely wrong. We were not aware of any actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent. That report is false.” - Sept 14, WH
"it began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo, where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy sparked by this hateful video...We do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned" - Sept 16, WH
"... the incidents that took place, which are under investigation and the cause and motivation behind them will be decided by that investigation' - Sept 17, WH
"It is, I think, self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack. Our embassy was attacked violently, and the result was four deaths of American officials" - Sept 20, WH
"What we’ve seen over the last week, week and a half, is something that actually we've seen in the past, where there is an offensive video or cartoon directed at the prophet Muhammad. And this is obviously something that then is used as an excuse by some to carry out inexcusable violent acts directed at Westerners or Americans." - Sept 20, Obama himself
"What we do know is that the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests." - Spet 20, Obama himself
"What happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack, and we will not rest until we have tracked down and brought to justice the terrorists who murdered four Americans" - Sept 21, Clinton
"As we all know, the United States lost a great ambassador and the Libyan people lost a true friend when Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the terrorist assault on our consulate in Benghazi" - Sept 24, Clinton
"We are still doing an investigation. There is no doubt that the kind of weapons that were used, the ongoing assault, that it wasn’t just a mob action. Now, we don’t have all the information yet so we are still gathering" - Sept 25, Obama himself, not quite up to date.
"That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world." - Sept 25, Obama to the U.N.
"But it is certainly the case that it is our view as an administration, the President’s view, that it was a terrorist attack" - Sept 26, WH
and then did this:
PICKET: Anti-Muslim filmmaker detained for almost a month...next court date three days after election - Washington Times
Reply
0
0
10-22-2012, 10:14 AM
#270
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,490
Total Cats: 4,079
Just a great read from a great See You Next Tuesday:
The best question at the second presidential debate came from Michael Jones, an African-American who said: "Mr. President, I voted for you in 2008. What have you done or accomplished to earn my vote in 2012? I'm not that optimistic, as I was in 2008. Most things I need for everyday living are very expensive."
To which Obama said: "Are you my half-brother?"
Actually, all Obama could say was that he had ended the war in Iraq (while pointlessly escalating the war in Afghanistan) and that Osama bin Laden is dead (and so is our ambassador). Both of which must be a great comfort to Mr. Jones as he tries to pay his bills every month.
Jones was right: Since Obama has been president, everything you own -- your home, pension, savings accounts, weekly paychecks -- are all worth less.
Meanwhile, everything you need -- gas, food, and anything else that requires fuel to be transported to you -- costs more.
Obama can't talk his way out of his record. As Romney said in response to the president's allegation that he is gung-ho about drilling for oil to lower fuel prices: "But that's not what you've done in the last four years. That's the problem."
Obama also suddenly announced: "I'm all for pipelines. I'm all for oil production." But he vetoed the Keystone pipeline.
He explained that the price of gasoline was $1.80 when he took office because the economy was in the toilet. Apparently, prices have spiked to more than $4 a gallon because all Americans are back at work now and making big bucks!
Obama said the "most important thing we can do is to make sure that we are creating jobs in this country."
So now he's going to create jobs? Because, nearly four years into his presidency, 23 million Americans are out of work and more than half of recent college graduates can't find a job.
He claimed to believe that we should reward "self-reliance," "individual initiative" and "risk-takers." And yet, a few months ago, he ridiculed these self-reliant risk-takers for thinking they were "just so smart," sneering "if you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."
Obama said we have to be "serious about reducing the deficit," calling it "a moral obligation to the next generation." But he's increased the deficit by $5 trillion -- more in four years than President Bush did in eight.
He also said he supported cutting corporate taxes. But only in odd-numbered years that don't start with "2."
The media will lie and say Obama won the debate -- he has stopped the bleeding, he's drawing huge crowds, the momentum is back! But as Romney said in response to many of Obama's promises Tuesday night, "I don't think the American people believe that."
The trend is set and Obama's voters are moving away from him in droves. People can see that Obama has to go to college campuses, the David Letterman show and "The Daily Show" to get a friendly audience these days. Even Lindsay Lohan is for Romney.
The media's campaigning for Obama isn't fooling Americans; it's just making Obama's obtuseness worse. If you're behind at halftime, you don't go to the cheerleading squad to ask what you're doing wrong.
Absolutely nothing! You're perfect! Don't change anything!
But we're behind by 7 points ...
You're great! You're the best team ever!
With Obama unable to compete in a fair fight, debate moderator Candy Crowley had to become Obama's wingman, injecting herself into the debate by declaring Obama the winner on the question of whether he had called the Benghazi attack an act of terror the day after the attack. Only after the debate, when everyone had gone home, did Crowley admit that Romney was right on Libya.
(If Obama called the Benghazi attack an "act of terror" in his Rose Garden speech, then he also said the victims of that attack were buried in the "hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery" and that he had visited them at Walter Reed -- other comments in that speech not specifically referring to the Benghazi attack.)
Crowley stopped Romney from talking about Fast and Furious on the grounds that it had nothing to do with guns. She didn't take a single question on Obamacare -- the universally loathed monstrosity that fueled the 2010 Republican landslide and continues to be a thorn in America's side.
In the media room, journalists cheered Obama's cheap shot about Romney being rich, according to The Washington Times. Say, who did the Democrats run for president right before Obama? That would be the richest man in the U.S. Senate, John Kerry. But liberals believe Kerry acquired his fortune more honestly than by building businesses and creating jobs. He married a rich woman.
For all the media cheerleading, millions of Americans still know they're out of work. They know, as Michael Jones noted, that everything is more expensive, including even-handed moderators.
To which Obama said: "Are you my half-brother?"
Actually, all Obama could say was that he had ended the war in Iraq (while pointlessly escalating the war in Afghanistan) and that Osama bin Laden is dead (and so is our ambassador). Both of which must be a great comfort to Mr. Jones as he tries to pay his bills every month.
Jones was right: Since Obama has been president, everything you own -- your home, pension, savings accounts, weekly paychecks -- are all worth less.
Meanwhile, everything you need -- gas, food, and anything else that requires fuel to be transported to you -- costs more.
Obama can't talk his way out of his record. As Romney said in response to the president's allegation that he is gung-ho about drilling for oil to lower fuel prices: "But that's not what you've done in the last four years. That's the problem."
Obama also suddenly announced: "I'm all for pipelines. I'm all for oil production." But he vetoed the Keystone pipeline.
He explained that the price of gasoline was $1.80 when he took office because the economy was in the toilet. Apparently, prices have spiked to more than $4 a gallon because all Americans are back at work now and making big bucks!
Obama said the "most important thing we can do is to make sure that we are creating jobs in this country."
So now he's going to create jobs? Because, nearly four years into his presidency, 23 million Americans are out of work and more than half of recent college graduates can't find a job.
He claimed to believe that we should reward "self-reliance," "individual initiative" and "risk-takers." And yet, a few months ago, he ridiculed these self-reliant risk-takers for thinking they were "just so smart," sneering "if you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."
Obama said we have to be "serious about reducing the deficit," calling it "a moral obligation to the next generation." But he's increased the deficit by $5 trillion -- more in four years than President Bush did in eight.
He also said he supported cutting corporate taxes. But only in odd-numbered years that don't start with "2."
The media will lie and say Obama won the debate -- he has stopped the bleeding, he's drawing huge crowds, the momentum is back! But as Romney said in response to many of Obama's promises Tuesday night, "I don't think the American people believe that."
The trend is set and Obama's voters are moving away from him in droves. People can see that Obama has to go to college campuses, the David Letterman show and "The Daily Show" to get a friendly audience these days. Even Lindsay Lohan is for Romney.
The media's campaigning for Obama isn't fooling Americans; it's just making Obama's obtuseness worse. If you're behind at halftime, you don't go to the cheerleading squad to ask what you're doing wrong.
Absolutely nothing! You're perfect! Don't change anything!
But we're behind by 7 points ...
You're great! You're the best team ever!
With Obama unable to compete in a fair fight, debate moderator Candy Crowley had to become Obama's wingman, injecting herself into the debate by declaring Obama the winner on the question of whether he had called the Benghazi attack an act of terror the day after the attack. Only after the debate, when everyone had gone home, did Crowley admit that Romney was right on Libya.
(If Obama called the Benghazi attack an "act of terror" in his Rose Garden speech, then he also said the victims of that attack were buried in the "hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery" and that he had visited them at Walter Reed -- other comments in that speech not specifically referring to the Benghazi attack.)
Crowley stopped Romney from talking about Fast and Furious on the grounds that it had nothing to do with guns. She didn't take a single question on Obamacare -- the universally loathed monstrosity that fueled the 2010 Republican landslide and continues to be a thorn in America's side.
In the media room, journalists cheered Obama's cheap shot about Romney being rich, according to The Washington Times. Say, who did the Democrats run for president right before Obama? That would be the richest man in the U.S. Senate, John Kerry. But liberals believe Kerry acquired his fortune more honestly than by building businesses and creating jobs. He married a rich woman.
For all the media cheerleading, millions of Americans still know they're out of work. They know, as Michael Jones noted, that everything is more expensive, including even-handed moderators.
Reply
0
0
10-25-2012, 02:33 AM
#272
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 122
Total Cats: 0
First post:
I would gladly vote for a third option that voiced a platform of more limited government and increased personal freedom, even if i sincerely disliked him as a person. Because it isn't just about me. It is bigger than who I like. It is more important than who I want to be seen with or who has a charming personality. It is about the freedoms that good men have died to preserve. That is what matters.
So set aside your feelings, your impressions, your biases, your loathing, and please do look at the direction each will push the country.
It isn't about you. It isn't about me. And it most certainly isn't about feelings.
I would gladly vote for a third option that voiced a platform of more limited government and increased personal freedom, even if i sincerely disliked him as a person. Because it isn't just about me. It is bigger than who I like. It is more important than who I want to be seen with or who has a charming personality. It is about the freedoms that good men have died to preserve. That is what matters.
So set aside your feelings, your impressions, your biases, your loathing, and please do look at the direction each will push the country.
It isn't about you. It isn't about me. And it most certainly isn't about feelings.
Reply
0
0
10-25-2012, 09:08 AM
#274
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,490
Total Cats: 4,079
Monday -
OBAMA: First of all, the sequester is not something that I've proposed. It is something that Congress has proposed. It will not happen.
Tuesday -
OBAMA: So when you combine the Bush tax cuts expiring, the sequester in place, ...we’re going to be in a position where I believe in the first six months we are going to solve that big piece of business.
OBAMA: First of all, the sequester is not something that I've proposed. It is something that Congress has proposed. It will not happen.
Tuesday -
OBAMA: So when you combine the Bush tax cuts expiring, the sequester in place, ...we’re going to be in a position where I believe in the first six months we are going to solve that big piece of business.
Reply
0
0
10-25-2012, 10:56 AM
#275
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
If Johnson was President of the US, how would his policies of small government affect states like New Mexico?
Reply
0
0
10-25-2012, 12:04 PM
#277
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 122
Total Cats: 0
additionally, i like the idea of abolishing the irs and implementing the "fair tax" which is based on consumption, not income...i dont think it can get more fair that that.
have you looked at johnson's website?
Reply
0
0
