The Economy
- Thread starter nailz
- Start date
edgeofthorns
24 Hours Ago...
Hardly. this is America. You're free to be as wrong as you want.
Yeah, yeah, yeah...
~Brian~
If you actually listen to Obama's plan, or read it, his tax plan would not only give a tax break to 95% of tax payers but he would also not even touch the taxes of the Small businesses you're so vehemently defending. He's said countless times in debates, in rebuttle to the same dredge-mccain-rhetoric you're parroting, that nearly ALL small businesses in America do not exceed $250,000 profit per year, and his tax plan does not touch them.
McCain, however, will do nothing for Small Business, but he's planning on saying "Oh, big business, you've done really well! Here's MORE money! Sorry little guy, we've got nothing for you."
Wow, I've always tried to put into words what I believe, and you've done it for me nicely. Thanks.
DAVETHEMETALGUY
Member
If you purchased $1,000 of shares in Delta Airlines one year ago, you will have $49.00 today.
If you had purchased $1,000 of shares in AIG one year ago, you will have $33.00 today.
If you had purchased $1,000 of shares in Lehman Brothers one year ago, you will have $0.00 today.
But, if you had purchased $1,000 worth of beer one year ago, drank all the beer, then turned in the aluminum cans for recycling refund, you will have received $214.00.
Based on the above, the best current investment plan is to drink heavily & recycle.
It's called the 401-Keg.
A recent study found that the average American walks about 900 miles a year. Another study found that Americans drink, on average, 22 gallons of alcohol a year. That means that, on average, Americans get about 41 miles to the gallon.
If you had purchased $1,000 of shares in AIG one year ago, you will have $33.00 today.
If you had purchased $1,000 of shares in Lehman Brothers one year ago, you will have $0.00 today.
But, if you had purchased $1,000 worth of beer one year ago, drank all the beer, then turned in the aluminum cans for recycling refund, you will have received $214.00.
Based on the above, the best current investment plan is to drink heavily & recycle.
It's called the 401-Keg.
A recent study found that the average American walks about 900 miles a year. Another study found that Americans drink, on average, 22 gallons of alcohol a year. That means that, on average, Americans get about 41 miles to the gallon.
booB
Señor Member
Both of the two main candidates are moderates. They both straddle the line between "right" and "left" in order to garner votes, and neither of them would be where they are if they were left- or right-wing nutjobs -- just look at guys like Mike Huckabee and Dennis Kucinich. Not to mention, the actual governing systems of most Republicans vs. most Democrats are not really all that different. They have different priorities, but they both follow the general tenets of a VERY strong central government using a moral value system to dictate terms to its people.
The only third-party which opposes this system is the Libertarian party, and, unfortunately, we have a nominee who is even more of a Republican than John McCain is. Needless to say, the Libertarians are in dire need of new leadership.
I'm sorry, but did you just refer to yourself as a fiscal conservative???
Obama's plan might claim to give tax breaks to 95% of Americans. Obama also wants socialized medicine, in addition to all of his other socialist programs -- all on the heels of the largest corporate bailout in our history. Where is all this money going to come from? The guy can only gouge the rich so much before the trickle-down effect starts to put people out of work across the country. And what did the rich do to deserve the ridiculous gouging that Obama wants to do to them? Just because they're rich doesn't mean they don't work very hard for their money. What right do we have to take their money from them just because "they can afford it"??
BlackRoseMetalHeart
Metal Mistress
This is what America is aching for. I have heard more and more people say it in the past few months. In fact my sister used almost your exact words when I spoke with her on the phone yesterday. The problem is that (more than likely) the person who would be the perfect fit for the job and has the good ideas, the forethought, and the strong moral character, is probably also someone who's smart enough to not want the job in the first place.
mëtålspëd
Umlauts ist Krieg
...and there is now talk of closing the WORLDS markets
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aP5mpMUORBWM
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aP5mpMUORBWM
I'm all about government spending less money on programs that are outdated and don't work. Or a War that is only continuing to benefit the Wartime contactors who signed 10 year deals worth billions of government (read: tax) dollars in a country with an 86 billion dollar surplus. I'm against corporate tax cuts that do nothing but put money back into the pocket of the wealthy, especially under the notion that said wealth will trickle down to the rest of us. Naturally this is horse shit because we all know the Wealthy have money because they don't spend it. I'm against building a 400 million dollar bridge for 50 people. I'm also not a big fan of sticking in bullshit into government bailouts granting several 100 thousand dollars to protect wooden arrow makers in Oklaholma, or Nascar tracks for policital power and gain (fucking democrats. I am an equal oppertunity hater). In fact, I don't like the fucking bailout at all. I'm against giving companies like AIG 86 billion dollars so they can go on a multi-million dollar tax funded retreat for their most well off employees before they turn around and ask for 38 billion MORE so they can do it AGAIN.
I am, however, all for nationalising a health care option, increasing funding from the government for public schools and education (especially raises for teachers), and am strongly in favor of throwing money at research and development of the green movement. I'm also intrigued by Obama's open door policy involving public viewing of White House meetings and his appointment of a CIO specifically for public interaction with the Government (being in IT, this is especially of interest).
I haven't seen anything to the contrary.
Which (the bailout) McCain also was in favor of, sadly. I was all about letting everything go to hell in a hand basket for the major reset to happen. And you say a nationalized health care option is a bad thing? Have you ever tried dealing with privatized health insurance companies on anything? They're dispicable. If there was a consenus that Doctors and Health Care Providers were going to get paid by the Government, I think there would be much less stress, hassle, and downtrodden feelings amongst health care seekers. I have not met one person who isn't scared to death of coming down with a major illness that your insurance is supposed to pay for..
Example: If I should get cancer, and lose my job because of it, I am no longer medically insured. I am now RUINED financially, and potentially not going to get the treatment that could save my life. Can you please outline how to prevent this and share it with the country, without nationalizing health care? I'm sure everyone is waiting with baited breath.
Hopefully, with the elimination of the Iraq War, line item vetos, cuts in spending to programs that can run more efficiantly for less money, elimination of programs that don't work and are a complete drain on society (no child left behind?), less tax breaks for the biggest US companies who are outsourcing many jobs anyway, and a stimulated economy due to a tax cut for 95% of the individuals and small businesses.
See above.
The rich are quite adept in protecting their money from the Government, believe me. They're not paying their fair share, not at all. They're probably paying a LESS tax percentage than someone making under $40,000 a year. I'd imagine, should they stop shielding their money the way the rest of us can't, this Country would see a budget financial increase in the billions, easily.
Yippee38
Living the dream!
Rather than subsidize companies to keep jobs here, I would rather see them penalize companies for using offshore workers. Impose tax penalties for using offshore labor. Trade imbalance is this country's #1 economic problem IMO. Just like the gov't should start taxing imports in line with how those countries tax our exports to them, we should also tax import of labor. If these other countries don't like it, they can reduce their taxes on our exports and we could reduce our taxes on our imports from them. Maybe then, foreign consumers would have a reason to buy US goods.
BTW, If you guys wanna talk politics, how about you make a separate thread? I'd rather not waste any of my time reading political discussion.
technically, everything in my post was intermingled between the 2. It's hard to seperate them right now.
edgeofthorns
24 Hours Ago...
I'm not sure why you believe that most small businesses don't exceed $250,000 per year. That's simply gross, not net income. A business owner may only net $75,000 of that, but will still fall prey to Obama's $250,000 category.
~Brian~
Diamond45
Terminate Bad Music
I disagree. McCain is conservative with liberal leanings, while Obama is very liberal.
I'm a moderate both socially and fiscially. Neither candidate falls under that catagory IMHO.
booB
Señor Member
Which is virtually all of them. In almost all cases, when government gets involved in regulating something, they muck it up to the point where MORE government regulations are put in place to put checks on the original regulations. This is how our bureaucracy gets out of control. Get rid of most, if not all, government regulation, and the free market will sort things out, people will pay little or nothing in taxes, and the system could not POSSIBLY be any worse than what we have happening now.
The war doesn't cost as much as people think it does. We just spent three quarters of a trillion dollars in one week, to maintain our doomed economic system. Compare that to the almost $600 billion we've spent in almost six years of Iraqi occupation. That works out to be about 1 or 2 percent, per week, and it looks like this bailout may just be the beginning. Granted, both are shitty ways for a government to spend money, but which one is a bigger black hole?
So THAT'S what I've been doing wrong this whole time. I always thought it was because they have more ambition and put in more hard work than I do.
The free market. I hate to sound like a broken record. Nowadays, many people who are not covered by insurance are getting major life-saving procedures done in other countries, byt perfectly competent doctors, where health care costs are much more reasonable. There are even "brokers" (for lack of a better word) popping up that will make these sorts of arrangements for you. When American companies finally wake up and realize that their health care services, pharma ceuticals, etc., are too expensive for Americans to reliably afford, they will cut back on the shitloads of money they're sinking into advertising and marketing (which is a huge part of why costs are sky-high; another reason is -- you guessed it -- government over-regulation). It doesn't help that Americans have this fucking stupid sense of entitlement to everything, including health care; in this sense, a depression might be a blessing in disguise for this country.
I'm not even going to ask why I, as a person who puts an effort into living a somewhat healthy lifestyle, should have to pay for health insurance for smokers, heroin addicts, obese people, bungee-jumpers, etc., who are far more of a risk for high health care costs than I am. That is a political debate, and belongs in another thread.
And how many government programs do you think the socialist Obama is actually going to cut? He LOVES government programs. He thinks they're the bomb.
Probably? I personally know people over the $250k threshold that are getting gang-raped out of half of their income NOW, and Obama hasn't even taken over yet. Nobody deserves that kind of treatment.
I suppose, as far as Democrats are concerned. There is plenty of room farther to the left. Look at guys like Dennis Kucinich (who didn't vote for the bailout because it actually wasn't socialist enough for him), and Ralph Nader (his proposed business regulations are the economic equivalent of the right's desire to require prayer in public schools and make abortion 100% illegal).
P.S. Does anyone know why the hell this board censors the word "pharma ceuticals"??? I have to put a space in it in order for it to show up.
mëtålspëd
Umlauts ist Krieg
My father would be one. He runs our successful small business, and the absolute last thing we need to keep being successful is Obama in the White House. McCain is no peach either....
Probably spammer controls on the boards.
How is McCain opposite of this? McCain is Pro-Choice and Pro-Open Immigration. Other than homosexual issues, on which I don't know his viewpoints, McCain is considered too liberal for the conservative base, hence Palin's nomination to excite those voters.
McCain is for smaller government, less spending, and anti-earmark -which he has never done his entire time in the Senate.
You may not agree with all of his views, but McCain is in no way the opposite of socially liberal and fiscally conservative.
How exactly do you reconcile Obama's claim that will not raise taxes and give a break to 95% of tax payers, while at the same time stating he will not renew any of the Bush tax cuts. Those tax cuts affect almost all tax bracketts except those who earn too little to pay income tax anyway. The average American family's taxes were reduced by $2000. Obama doesn't have to raise taxes, he'll just let the cuts expire and let that raise them for him.
If you look around you may notice how many small business now add LLC after their company names. LLC's pay taxes at the individual tax rate, and when the cuts expire LLC's will be paying higher taxes.
Corporate America just lost about 40% of it's net worth in the last 2 weeks. Raising taxes on them won't generate nearly the needed revenue to pay
for Obama's planned spending for a long time to come.
This is the same bait and switch Democrats have been playing at for years. In 1992 Bill Clinton, running for President, promised that he would push through Congress a tax cut for middle class Americans. In 1993 President Clinton asked for, and Congress passed, the largest tax increase in history. Not only a record tax hike, but a retroactive increased applied to money earned before the new tax law was passed. It's a lie.
Clinton was smart, and raised those taxes almost immediately upon taking office. Knowing how short the American attention span is, those hikes were long forgotten of forgiven by the time he ran for reelection. Most people have long forgotten that Clinton beat Bush 39 by pointing to his tax hike after promising "No new taxes." Yet he got away with his own even larger broken promise.
Not that the Republicans have been doing much better. They point at Dems and say "Tax and spend!" Hypocracy. At the same time they borrow and spend driving up the National Debt. It's true that I appreciate my $2000/yr tax cut, but future generations will be paying for Bush 41's own big spending. With interest. To China. Great.
Republican's have been bragging that they've reduced the deficit to $250 Billion from $500 Billion. A red herring. A deficit only counts for one fiscal year. Reducing it only means you still spent more than you took in, but less so than last year. A $250 Billion deficit doesn't mean we owe $250 Billion. It means we add $250 Billion to what we already owed from all the deficits from years past. Currently the National Dept is over $10 TRILLION. Under Bush it's increased by about $500 Billion/yr, but we should be happy that they've cut it in half for 2008.
The only answer is to reduce the size and spending of government. McCain has claimed that is what he intends to do. I have doubts about how successful he can be. The US Government loves itself too much to start cutting away pieces of itself. I'm willing to give him the chance to try, as he's the only one willing to try.
Obama, on the other hand, has promised to increase the size and spending of the government. Epic fail.
Pellaz
Tigron of Immanion
Well, shit, here I was getting all worked up to talk about tax policy and several of you have already done so for me, and probably better. Bravo!
I can think of one thing that McCain could do to galvanize the election (for good or ill), regarding tax policy. Anyone else know what it is?
Yeah, I was kinda surprised that he didn't step back into the LP.
On the other hand, his support tends to be deep, but not all that wide. His supporters are VERY fervent supporters, but as a percentage of voters, they just aren't that numerous.
That's abject horse-shit. Virtually every small business that employ workers grosses more than $250,000. Obama's plan would nail them to the wall, since they are usually Sub-chapter S corporations, sole proprietorships or partnerships and the owners' income is reported on their individual tax returns on Schedule C.
Obama has also indicated he would allow the Bush tax cuts to expire, which would raise taxes on everyone who pays them (10% bracket goes back to 15%, etc.)
His figure of 'reducing the taxes of 95% of all Americans' is complete horse-tooky, since over 45% of all Americans who file a tax return don't pay a dime in Federal income taxes (they typically get that hallowed government handout, the Earned Income Credit). The vast bulk of income taxes in the country are paid by an astonishingly small percentage of taxpayers.
It's clear that Obama has no clue about the percentages of taxes that income groups pay....or he deliberately disregards them in an effort to buy votes. It is this policy of "wealth envy" and punishing success that above all else, means I can't vote for him.
Sure he will. He'd keep the tax cuts permanent, if Congress would go along.
Considering that business drives the economy, it only makes sense to reduce their tax overhead. Less tax overhead = more capital to expend on payroll and R&D. This isn't rocket science.
Because Joe Biden thinks it's "fair."
Well, that Iraq War TV series appears to be over.
Haven't you heard? This new The Economy Sucks! series is all the rage right now. It's what we're supposed to be talking about. Until after the election, anyway.
I'm a fiscal conservative and to some degree, a social liberal (I believe everyone should be respected, but I abhor government handouts).
Obama's voting record is actually one of the most liberal in the Senate (when he hasn't voted simply "present"). In any other election cycle and with anyone else, he would never have gotten remotely close to the White House.
Hell, he wouldn't even qualify for a government security clearance! (Not being mean, here; it's just a fact.)
I can think of one thing that McCain could do to galvanize the election (for good or ill), regarding tax policy. Anyone else know what it is?
Yeah, I was kinda surprised that he didn't step back into the LP.
On the other hand, his support tends to be deep, but not all that wide. His supporters are VERY fervent supporters, but as a percentage of voters, they just aren't that numerous.
That's abject horse-shit. Virtually every small business that employ workers grosses more than $250,000. Obama's plan would nail them to the wall, since they are usually Sub-chapter S corporations, sole proprietorships or partnerships and the owners' income is reported on their individual tax returns on Schedule C.
Obama has also indicated he would allow the Bush tax cuts to expire, which would raise taxes on everyone who pays them (10% bracket goes back to 15%, etc.)
His figure of 'reducing the taxes of 95% of all Americans' is complete horse-tooky, since over 45% of all Americans who file a tax return don't pay a dime in Federal income taxes (they typically get that hallowed government handout, the Earned Income Credit). The vast bulk of income taxes in the country are paid by an astonishingly small percentage of taxpayers.
It's clear that Obama has no clue about the percentages of taxes that income groups pay....or he deliberately disregards them in an effort to buy votes. It is this policy of "wealth envy" and punishing success that above all else, means I can't vote for him.
Sure he will. He'd keep the tax cuts permanent, if Congress would go along.
Considering that business drives the economy, it only makes sense to reduce their tax overhead. Less tax overhead = more capital to expend on payroll and R&D. This isn't rocket science.
Because Joe Biden thinks it's "fair."
Well, that Iraq War TV series appears to be over.
Haven't you heard? This new The Economy Sucks! series is all the rage right now. It's what we're supposed to be talking about. Until after the election, anyway.
I disagree. McCain is conservative with liberal leanings, while Obama is very liberal.
I'm a moderate both socially and fiscially. Neither candidate falls under that catagory IMHO.
I'm a fiscal conservative and to some degree, a social liberal (I believe everyone should be respected, but I abhor government handouts).
Obama's voting record is actually one of the most liberal in the Senate (when he hasn't voted simply "present"). In any other election cycle and with anyone else, he would never have gotten remotely close to the White House.
Hell, he wouldn't even qualify for a government security clearance! (Not being mean, here; it's just a fact.)
He wasn't in the past but he's become everything that he was fighting back in 2000.
He supports Prop 8 in California aka Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry Act. Of course we can argue the semantics about civil union vs marriage but as long as states issue such things as Marriage Licenses and Certificates of Marriage Registration then I refuse to acknowledge the word as solely relating to religion.
He's Pro-life and supports Rights of Man everywhere. As of 2007 he wants to repeal Roe vs Wade despite saying he didn't want to back in 1999. He's always been pro-life but has been misrepresented by some as pro-choice including many Republicans. I'm not exactly pro-choice as I could never bring myself to do that but I do acknowledge extreme situations where someone might feel it is for the best.
The only part I do agree with him on is the immigration issue but only because I realize how much our country depends on those workers that some republicans want to kick out of the country. The amount of money that would be wasted in that effort would be ridiculous.
And every republicans claims to be for smaller government and less spending but how supporting the Bailout and now saying the government should buyout mortgages and make deals with the homeowners accomplishes that is beyond me.
LunaTEKKE
Madness Reigns
- Mar 23, 2006
- 1,220
- 8
- 38
Good for you. Gonna brush up on your piano skills!
LOL it would take a LOT of practicing before anyone would pay to hear me play. Oh, well...Im going to see Lang Lang with the Phoenix Symphony in 2 weeks, and I will probably just *sell* my piano after witnessing that performance.
There are a lot of angles to the insurance issue, and I dont think anyone has come up with a really good solution.
I agree with you in the sense that people who make lifestyle choices to improve their health (not smoking, maintaining a healthy weight, eating right, exercising, etc.) shouldnt have to subsidize those who do not. However, with any health issue, there are factors you cant control like genetics and plain old bad luck.
On the other hand, one of the concerns with McCains plan is that for companies that do provide insurance to employees, all of the younger and healthier employees will bail for cheaper plans. Because group premiums are adjusted based on claims experience, the insurance for the remaining employees will eventually become guess what? Unaffordable. So you are back to having people with major health issues and no insurance.
Also, it would be interesting to learn more about the logistics of taxing employer-sponsored insurance plans. If you have to pay the tax at the end of the year when you get the credit, thats one thing. But having to deal with smaller paychecks all year and not getting the credit until you file your taxes would be a huge setback for a lot of people.
All this political talk by both sides is just plain horse shit, it's just like a used car salesman, "I will give you this car for this amount of Money" but only between the hours of 10:00am and 10:00:30 am after that the price is doubled" They promise you the world when they know they can't deliver. So we as voters basically have to decide which is the lesser of two evils. You got to remember both parties have people that will take a statement made by the opposition and then put their spin on it or take a statistic and shape it to make it look better than it is, case in point, Bill Clinton's statement that "HE" had created over 20 million new jobs, excuse me, then why did we still have an unemployment rate? Based on the US population at the time 20 million jobs would account for over 22% of the available US workforce, and at the time we had an unemplyment rate of just over 4%, so if he created 20 million jobs why wasn't our unemployment rate 0% or a negative, why? Because it was not a true statement, it was a manipulation of numbers and stats. So folks be careful of what you hear and what you believe, and just because your democrat or republican, vote the best candiate(in your opinion) not what your told to vote. Now i can get off my soapbox and finish my coffee, thanks for listening, but remember this is my opinion and not the opinion of management or even the majority, i have just been around a long time and have been lied to by so many candiates it's hard for me to talk any of them seriously, they have to prove to me their worth, and conviction.
