Obama's State of the Union remarks

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well I’ve read all this Thread so far—what I have observed so far:
· Fox News is evil :rolleyes:
· PBS News is good :rolleyes:
· George W. Bush is dumb even though he’s a Harvard Grad
· I’m stupid because I talk the way G.W. Bush does and I’m from Michigan :eek:
· We’re in debt but left-wingers still want to spend oh sorry—INVEST
· No one has blamed Sarah Palin yet
· I too like [the new] Battlestar Galactica have all the DVD’s so there is hope for some of you 😛
 
· George W. Bush is dumb even though he’s a Harvard Grad
One can afford to be pretty dumb and still get into and graduate from Harvard. I always thought conservatives knew this best.

Edit: i.e., John Kerry; the fallibility of Harvard is, I suppose, something we can all agree on.

2nd Edit: I’m stupid; Kerry went to Yale. Must’ve been rejected by Harvard.
 
This post fails to grasp the real issues Republicans have with some of the left’s ideology.

We all want the same things for our country, but disagree with how to achieve it. Your demonizing people who disagree with you reflects the shallowness of the thought process of some on the left. :(:mad:
You know, if you really thought about what you just said…chastising someone for demonizing people while demonizing people in the very same sentence. Wow. The mental contortions necessary to do that must be impressive. Is there a class on how to do this?

To be honest, I think that on our level, the regular everyday, working lay person, yes. We all want the same things for our country. We want our country to be safe and prosperous for ourselves and for our children and we disagree on how to get there. On that, we’re on the same wavelength.

The question for me is, who benefits the most when you think about these issues in the long term. For example, the Republicans always say, cut taxes for the rich and the economy will boom. Well, taxes were cut for the rich early in Bush’s first administration and I’ve yet to see the economy boom for the working class. Real wages are down and debt is up. Tax cuts is the basis for the economic theory favored by Republicans (got a deficit, cut taxes; got a surplus, cut taxes; an emergency? cut taxes…if the Republicans got their way, there’d eventually be negative taxes), but let’s ask the question, who benefits the most? Working class people who are seeing their wages eroding and jobs disappearing to other countries year after year? I don’t think so. Yet, give the rich more money and they’ll put it in the bank or invest it in the aftermarket (stocks, etc.) so they can make more money. No real economic activity is really created as money is removed from the economy.

The Democrats say raise taxes on upper portions of the rich’s income (increase marginal tax rates) for different reasons, but ones that are also thought of economically. It’s not simply about gaining more revenue, but about keeping the money flowing in the economy. A CEO who knows that he has to pay higher taxes on his income will probably take a smaller paycheck, keeping the money in the corporation for reinvestment. A corporation that knows it has to pay a higher rate and knowing that the market can only bear such and such a price will, instead of taking so much profit, take a smaller profit and use the funds for R&D or more production, producing…JOBS. Everyone benefits under this economic schema.

Unfortunately, the Democratic party has married itself to pro-choice-on-abortion and the Republicans have married themselves to pro-life. It’s something that disturbs me greatly because I actually, honestly believe that we prosper more economically when our tax policies are more Democratic than Republican, but I’m forced to vote against my own economic interest because the Republicans flog “pro-life.”
 
You know, if you really thought about what you just said…chastising someone for demonizing people while demonizing people in the very same sentence. Wow. The mental contortions necessary to do that must be impressive. Is there a class on how to do this?
I didn’t demonize anyone, I critiqued the post.
The Democrats say raise taxes on upper portions of the rich’s income (increase marginal tax rates) for different reasons, but ones that are also thought of economically. It’s not simply about gaining more revenue, but about keeping the money flowing in the economy. A CEO who knows that he has to pay higher taxes on his income will probably take a smaller paycheck,** keeping the money in the corporation for reinvestment. **
Corporations pay taxes on their income. Reinvesting the money does not exempt it from income. The US has the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world.
A corporation that knows it has to pay a higher rate and knowing that the market can only bear such and such a price will, instead of taking so much profit, take a smaller profit and use the funds for R&D or more production, producing…JOBS. Everyone benefits under this economic schema.
That’s not how the tax system works.
Unfortunately, the Democratic party has married itself to pro-choice-on-abortion and the Republicans have married themselves to pro-life. It’s something that disturbs me greatly because I actually, honestly believe that we prosper more economically when our tax policies are more Democratic than Republican, but I’m forced to vote against my own economic interest because the Republicans flog “pro-life.”
Lowering taxes raises income.
 
Lowering taxes raises income.
For whom?

It’s certainly not the government, not always. And considering Republican ideological mover Grover Norquist’s famous desire to drown government in a bathtub, I don’t buy Republican claims that cutting taxes increases tax revenue. How can you claim to be working to increase tax revenue while your ideology demands that you demolish as much of the government as possible. It’s illogical.

I’m not saying that the government should be a behemoth (I believe that the government consists of the People to serve the People), but I am saying let’s not pretend to be for something we’re not, okay?
 
For whom?
For the person paying the taxes. If you take less of it away, he/se has more of it to keep, invest, spend, save, stuff in a matress, whatever. Its pretty simple.
It’s certainly not the government, not always. And considering Republican ideological mover Grover Norquist’s famous desire to drown government in a bathtub, I don’t buy Republican claims that cutting taxes increases tax revenue. How can you claim to be working to increase tax revenue while your ideology demands that you demolish as much of the government as possible. It’s illogical.

I’m not saying that the government should be a behemoth (I believe that the government consists of the People to serve the People), but I am saying let’s not pretend to be for something we’re not, okay?
Who said all of us want to increase tax revenue? I want tax revenue to go DOWN, but I want spending to go down even more. So, yes, I want to disassemble as much of the federal government as possible, since most of it is redundant with state or local agencies and the beaurocratic mechanism to keep it alive doesn’t really provide much end user value for the amount spent. $1,000 given to a charitable organization to feed the hungry provides about $950 worth of realized benefit. $1,000 taken by the government and processed through its beaurocracy provides about $300 worth of realized benefit. I don’t see how spending $700 to provide $300 worth of value as being effective to the donor (in this case the involuntary donors, aka taxpayers).
 
For the person paying the taxes. If you take less of it away, he/se has more of it to keep, invest, spend, save, stuff in a matress, whatever. Its pretty simple.

Who said all of us want to increase tax revenue? I want tax revenue to go DOWN, but I want spending to go down even more. So, yes, I want to disassemble as much of the federal government as possible, since most of it is redundant with state or local agencies and the beaurocratic mechanism to keep it alive doesn’t really provide much end user value for the amount spent. $1,000 given to a charitable organization to feed the hungry provides about $950 worth of realized benefit. $1,000 taken by the government and processed through its beaurocracy provides about $300 worth of realized benefit. I don’t see how spending $700 to provide $300 worth of value as being effective to the donor (in this case the involuntary donors, aka taxpayers).
Trim the fat, make a lean govt…
 
For whom?

It’s certainly not the government, not always. And considering Republican ideological mover Grover Norquist’s famous desire to drown government in a bathtub, I don’t buy Republican claims that cutting taxes increases tax revenue. How can you claim to be working to increase tax revenue while your ideology demands that you demolish as much of the government as possible. It’s illogical.

I’m not saying that the government should be a behemoth (I believe that the government consists of the People to serve the People), but I am saying let’s not pretend to be for something we’re not, okay?
You have a flawed understanding of how economics works.

If the government is smaller, it won’t need as much money to run itself. Therefore tax rates won’t need to be raised. The federal government is extremely inefficient and bureaucratic.

If you want a taste of what healthcare by the feds will be like, go to your local car registry office. UGH. 😦
 
You have a flawed understanding of how economics works.

If the government is smaller, it won’t need as much money to run itself. Therefore tax rates won’t need to be raised. The federal government is extremely inefficient and bureaucratic.

If you want a taste of what healthcare by the feds will be like, go to your local car registry office. UGH. 😦
Or go to a VA hospital.
 
You have a flawed understanding of how economics works.
No, I just don’t believe in trickle-down economics, which is the popular economic theory among right-wing Republicans.

So, as a right-wing Republican, maybe you can explain to me how cutting taxes on rich people is going to help the economy. Bush did it and we’re still waiting for an economic boom.
If the government is smaller, it won’t need as much money to run itself. Therefore tax rates won’t need to be raised. The federal government is extremely inefficient and bureaucratic.
All large entities are like that. Try getting money out of your insurance company when you have a claim.
If you want a taste of what healthcare by the feds will be like, go to your local car registry office. UGH. 😦
Apples =/= Oranges
 
No, I just don’t believe in trickle-down economics, which is the popular economic theory among right-wing Republicans.

So, as a right-wing Republican, maybe you can explain to me how cutting taxes on rich people is going to help the economy. Bush did it and we’re still waiting for an economic boom.

All large entities are like that. Try getting money out of your insurance company when you have a claim.

Apples =/= Oranges
Easy to forget that we had full employment for the first 6 years of Bush’s presidency. Also easy to forget when you attack corporations that the majority of Americans work for small business’s of which many of those exist because large corporations exist.

Depending on who you ask, or how you look at it a majority of the population works for small business’s.

Funny that you don’t believe in trickle down, because it certainly will not trickle up. Poor people do not provide jobs. Billionaires/Millionaires employ thousands. Government does not provide a product to offset the cost of the “work” they dream up so that’s a losing battle.

I work for a family run business, my father is the boss and he saw my tax return and his jaw hit the floor. If he didn’t have to pay so much in taxes I could make more, but when he knows what my tax return looks like he has no incentive to directly pay me more.

The system’s a joke and it’s scamming those who do pay taxes to pay those who do not. Our tax system is another form of welfare that’s destroying society.
 
So, as a right-wing Republican, maybe you can explain to me how cutting taxes on rich people is going to help the economy. Bush did it and we’re still waiting for an economic boom.
I dislike playing the class warfare game. I don’t think you should punish people for making money.
All large entities are like that. Try getting money out of your insurance company when you have a claim.
I’m one of those people who like my health insurance. I haven’t had any trouble getting benefits applied to my account before I get billed by the healthcare provider.
Apples =/= Oranges
They’re both FRUIT 😃
 
Since when is being asked to pay your fair share punishment?
I agree, I pay nothing at all.

The rich foot the bill, they pay their fair share.

We got two options, force them to pay more or cut back on taxing/spending and ask everyone who can to pay a fair share. I wouldn’t mind one bit as long as they would also cut back on the fair share they ask my father to pay.
 
bbarrick8383: “the average liberal thinks so highly of themselves that they see all conservatives as intellectually below them”

Rich Olszewski: “That’s no more accurate than saying that the average conservative sees all liberals as fit targets for shooting. A bit too emotional, I think.”

Flashback time! … (see HERE)

“A Fortiori 33” said:
** I feel your pain! Sometimes I am floored by some of the comments. But, I think it’s about how different people are hard-wired. Have you read Conservatives Without A Conscience by John Dean. He explains the phenomenon of the conservative brain. It’s interesting reading. Of course there has also been the study that proved progressive thinking is about 5 IQ points ( on the average)higher than conservative thinking.** so don’t be discouraged. I hear you.
Rich Olszewski:
I shall read that, which I haven’t.

Gee…only 5 points? I would have figured at least 15.
 
bbarrick8383: “the average liberal thinks so highly of themselves that they see all conservatives as intellectually below them”
Just from reading many of these forums, there is no shortage of disdain for liberals expressed by conservatives (not by all, but many). One doesn’t need to be a liberal to notice this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top