Go Back   Android Forums > Android Community > The Lounge > Politics and Current Affairs
Politics and Current Affairs All things political.

Find everything you need for the Galaxy S5 and discuss it in our S5 forum!
Have you seen that OnePlus One's awesome camera?? The forum is over here!

Like Tree1Likes

test: Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old May 26th, 2012, 03:53 PM   #1 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
as439726's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 439
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 11
Thanked 43 Times in 41 Posts
Default Mitt Romney and the Cayman Islands

Is anyone else confused as to why Mr Romney isn't having more problems since ABC exposed his undeclared hidden bank accounts in the Cayman Islands?
I find it hard to believe that we can trust that he knows what the 99% feel in their everyday lives.

as439726 is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old May 26th, 2012, 04:24 PM   #2 (permalink)
TxGoat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Default

We shouldn't, he doesn't, but there are too many stooges out there that are part of the religious right that think our government should preoccupy itself with policing morality over policing the people that fleece the American public.

Not that I'm naive enough to think that Obama nor the democrats don't practice similar strategies in their own personal life.

When you have "representatives" rig the system to benefit themselves, and select members of their party, it's only a matter of time before enough people get flat out tired of it and decide to take matters into their own hands. Facebook was a perfect example of how corrupt the system is. You have Morgan Stanley offer up information only to its most "privileged" clients so they can make money off the backs of everyone else. And when Morgan Stanley was confronted, they claim they were playing by the rules. Granted it's most likely rules that were set up by people knowing it would allow them to cheat the system.

And then you have the sheep of the Tea Party that claim if you strip regulation away, it will encourage growth. The only growth it would encourage is a growth in corruption.

But to answer your original question, I'm sure the powers that be are perfectly fine with burying that story as deep as possible. Wouldn't you want that story buried if the candidate you were pulling for represented even more policies that favored your tax bracket?
OutofDate1980 likes this.
 
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 05:52 PM   #3 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
as439726's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 439
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 11
Thanked 43 Times in 41 Posts
Default

The Tea Party is a joke that will end up costing the Republicans the election. The whole system needs an over haul. That said, I wish the Republicans would stop their crap and let real reform happen
as439726 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 07:51 PM   #4 (permalink)
TxGoat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by as439726 View Post
The Tea Party is a joke that will end up costing the Republicans the election. The whole system needs an over haul. That said, I wish the Republicans would stop their crap and let real reform happen

They are a joke, but the joke is on us (make that the U.S.). When the tea party candidates held the U.S. debt ceiling hostage and thus wrecked the country's credit, that's exactly the result that the tea party was looking for. They will attempt to do the same again by putting more tea party candidates in office come November.

If you ever take the time to listen to a tea bagger, it's actually like watching Faux news without the commercials and with a little more colloquialism in their voice. But, for whatever reason a lot of people swallow up what Fox News says as gospel. God bless America, indeed....
 
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 08:01 PM   #5 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 87
 
Device(s): HTC EVO 4G CM 7.2, Tiamat SBC
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 55
Thanked 40 Times in 21 Posts
Default

Yeah, it blows me away that rush Limbaugh is the #1 radio personality. Statistics like that make me understand why our country is in the shape it is in.
Targaryen is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 08:47 PM   #6 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Limbaugh has been #1 for decades. Nothing has changed there.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 09:07 PM   #7 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
as439726's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 439
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 11
Thanked 43 Times in 41 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TxGoat View Post
They are a joke, but the joke is on us (make that the U.S.). When the tea party candidates held the U.S. debt ceiling hostage and thus wrecked the country's credit, that's exactly the result that the tea party was looking for. They will attempt to do the same again by putting more tea party candidates in office come November.

If you ever take the time to listen to a tea bagger, it's actually like watching Faux news without the commercials and with a little more colloquialism in their voice. But, for whatever reason a lot of people swallow up what Fox News says as gospel. God bless America, indeed....

You are a brilliant human being. THANK YOU !! I couldn't have said it better myself.
as439726 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 09:11 PM   #8 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
as439726's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 439
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 11
Thanked 43 Times in 41 Posts
Default

What confuses me more is that so many middle to lite income Americans are Republicans. I wonder if they realize that the party doesn't give a rat's butt about them. The party IS for and about the 1%.
If you don't believe me, check out the Romney expose that ABC did about all his undeclared assets in the Cayman Islands.
He should be locked up for tax evasion.
as439726 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 09:55 PM   #9 (permalink)
TxGoat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by as439726 View Post
What confuses me more is that so many middle to lite income Americans are Republicans. I wonder if they realize that the party doesn't give a rat's butt about them. The party IS for and about the 1%.
If you don't believe me, check out the Romney expose that ABC did about all his undeclared assets in the Cayman Islands.
He should be locked up for tax evasion.

There are a lot of people that vote Republican because they think they're just a few financial moves here and there from being in that 1%. What they don't realize is that the system is rigged to keep the 1% on top.

I equate it to those people that suck up to the boss hoping that the boss will give them that one raise, that one project that will rocket them up the corporate ladder. The only problem is that managers don't promote based on talent or hard work. They promote based on who they like, but they'll keep letting that one brown-noser continue to suck up. It helps stroke their ego.

And then you look at what the Democrats have to offer, and there's not much there. They're like an estrogen version of the GOP IMO. Some people actually think that Democrats are all about handouts, and in all honesty, they haven't done much to shed that reputation. I've heard some people in the media claim that there are many people that vote GOP not because they like what the GOP have to offer, but because the Democrats only represent the welfare cases.

I know I wish there was a party out there that represented me.....
 
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 10:14 PM   #10 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by as439726 View Post
What confuses me more is that so many middle to lite income Americans are Republicans. I wonder if they realize that the party doesn't give a rat's butt about them. The party IS for and about the 1%.
If you don't believe me, check out the Romney expose that ABC did about all his undeclared assets in the Cayman Islands.
He should be locked up for tax evasion.
The Democrats don't care about the middle class either. Don't kid yourself.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old May 26th, 2012, 10:23 PM   #11 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
as439726's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 439
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 11
Thanked 43 Times in 41 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
The Democrats don't care about the middle class either. Don't kid yourself.

I agree the system needs an overhaul, but matched up proposal to proposal the Democrats do offer more for the average person than Republicans. The problem imo is that they need to fight harder and expose every person who fights real change in America.
as439726 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 10:48 PM   #12 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
copestag's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,306
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 238 Times in 188 Posts
Default

Im going to ask that the mods close the thread......as the only way to respond to this is by ridiculing and making sheeple realize their idiocy.
copestag is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 10:52 PM   #13 (permalink)
TxGoat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by as439726 View Post
I agree the system needs an overhaul, but matched up proposal to proposal the Democrats do offer more for the average person than Republicans. The problem imo is that they need to fight harder and expose every person who fights real change in America.

The March of Ides with George Clooney is a decent flick about how a politician is forced to make deals with the devil and how those deals turn what he believes in into the perversion that is our political process. Granted, it's a Hollywood version of what goes on in Politics, but I would bet that it's not too different than what really takes place in our political system.


Also, these types of statements from Romney are enough to get me to vote against him.

Mitt Romney doesn't care about poor people - YouTube


And these types of statements SHOULD scare most Americans since what he's saying is that if you're in decent financial shape he's concerned for you, but an illness, a loss of a job, any other loss that will cause you financial ruin, then he's not that concerned with you because we have a "safety net". This guy is severely out of touch.
 
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 10:58 PM   #14 (permalink)
TxGoat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Default

I swear some posts just read like this to me....


 
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 11:08 PM   #15 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
copestag's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,306
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 238 Times in 188 Posts
Default

which by the way was at a democrats rally.... wtg on proving my point
copestag is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 11:28 PM   #16 (permalink)
TxGoat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Default

And yet you prove our point. No one here is claiming the Democrats are any better, yet the name callers come out when some people refuse to drink the GOP koolaid.
 
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 11:41 PM   #17 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
as439726's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 439
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 11
Thanked 43 Times in 41 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TxGoat View Post
The March of Ides with George Clooney is a decent flick about how a politician is forced to make deals with the devil and how those deals turn what he believes in into the perversion that is our political process. Granted, it's a Hollywood version of what goes on in Politics, but I would bet that it's not too different than what really takes place in our political system.


Also, these types of statements from Romney are enough to get me to vote against him.

Mitt Romney doesn't care about poor people - YouTube


And these types of statements SHOULD scare most Americans since what he's saying is that if you're in decent financial shape he's concerned for you, but an illness, a loss of a job, any other loss that will cause you financial ruin, then he's not that concerned with you because we have a "safety net". This guy is severely out of touch.

Thanks. I'll definitely watch it
as439726 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 11:44 PM   #18 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
as439726's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 439
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 11
Thanked 43 Times in 41 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TxGoat View Post
And yet you prove our point. No one here is claiming the Democrats are any better, yet the name callers come out when some people refuse to drink the GOP koolaid.

Ding ding ding. You win. My point exactly. I am coming from the avenue of " if you are asking which is the better choice of two". I am definitely NOT saying the while system isn't broken.
as439726 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2012, 08:50 AM   #19 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by as439726 View Post
Ding ding ding. You win. My point exactly. I am coming from the avenue of " if you are asking which is the better choice of two". I am definitely NOT saying the while system isn't broken.
Picking between the two is like choosing whether you want your right arm chopped off or your right leg chopped off. Neither decision is particularly palatable and both are enough to make you vomit.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2012, 10:31 AM   #20 (permalink)
TxGoat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Picking between the two is like choosing whether you want your right arm chopped off or your right leg chopped off. Neither decision is particularly palatable and both are enough to make you vomit.


It is, but then you get the rabid followers from one side that are so disillusioned in their hyperbolic description of a candidate that it makes you want to vote against that one person just as a vote against stupidity.

For instance, when someone claims that Obama is the most "radical president in our history". "Yeah he's a radical Muslim that's not even "mericun!" (You have to pretend that I'm breathing through my mouth as I say this btw) He's not the most radical president. If that were true, wouldn't he already have pulled our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan? Look at his cabinet appointments, they're some of the same people that were insiders when Wall Street started to tank.

All this current president is doing is continuing things per the status quo, which is par for course IMO. Granted, he's not the same color as other presidents, so he's obviously "the most radical president in the U.S. history!"

Personally, I think it's the right wing's way of exciting the part of their base that's preoccupied with skin color. And if there's a large enough portion of your base that's ignorant enough to judge someone based on their color of their skin, well that's enough to get me to vote against your party. Sadly though, that doesn't leave me much of a choice come November.
 
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old May 27th, 2012, 12:52 PM   #21 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Honestly, I don't think the vast majority of Republicans care about Obama's race. Certainly some of them do, but they're probably the same percentage as the Democrats who vote for Obama just because he's black.

Obama is fairly liberal which is probably why the base hates him more than anything. Both guys are in the pocket of the corporations. Romney makes no secret about it. You can tell by who Obama appointed to the cabinet that he's in their pocket too.

I don't know which is worse. The guy who makes no secret about being in the corporation's pocket or the guy who is but won't admit it. Be nice if none of them were, but apparently that's asking too much.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2012, 08:15 PM   #22 (permalink)
TxGoat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Default

If you remove yourself from the rhetoric from both sides, and remember Clinton's 2nd term, we had a budget surplus, unemployment was low (hell we were worried about inflation), and hell there were even MIDDLE EAST PEACE TALKS, I don't see how anyone except the wealthy would not want to go back to that type of prosperity.

When the middle class have more wealth then there is more demand placed on goods and services. Employers then have to pay more than meager wages to their employees in order to meet demand (and in order to ensure they have good employees) and demand goes up even more with a well paid middle class. If our middle class earns better wages then corporations don't earn as much per good/service sold, but they earn money by having more demand.

Of course the GOP would rather have low middle class wages because then it means more to the company's bottom line. Why anyone that's not earning over $200,000 a year would vote for the GOP is beyond me. Granted, there are a lot of brainwashed idiots out there that believe the whole, "we must make the 'job creators' MORE rich so that they can hire more minimum wage employees".

The Democrats aren't the answer, but the GOP isn't the answer by a long shot.
 
Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2012, 08:53 PM   #23 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Actually, the deficit went UP during the Clinton year. No surprise though as it's gone up during every single President since FDR and probably further back than that. I've seen some economists argue that Clinton's economic policies set the stage for the recession that stated under Bush. I've seen others argue that the recession actually started under the Clinton years and merely continued under Bush. I'm no economist so I can't say. I will say that things have not gotten any better under Obama so if the Democrats are a solution, they're not a good one.

Instead, the Democrats seem to think the proper solution is to further punish the wealthy and those foolish enough to become successful. Never mind that this drives people like Eduardo Saverin to leave the country and drives companies to headquarter their business off shore to avoid taxes. The Democrats solution to that is simply to punish them more on the flawed reasoning that corporations won't pass those costs on to either their employees or customers. Not that the Republicans fiscal policy is any better but pretending that either party has any answers at all is insanity IMO.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2012, 09:30 PM   #24 (permalink)
TxGoat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Default

The Democrats definitely haven't provided much substance for their cause I agree.

And some people will say that the prosperity under Clinton's 2nd term happened because of the internet boom (which turned bust around 2000).

If you look at what each side has championed recently, the Democrats wanted to extend unemployment benefits (which you can say was to attempt to let the jobless continue to put food on their table, or provided the jobless less incentive to find a job and suckle on the government teet) while the Republicans championed extending the Bush tax cuts (which everyone tends to claim benefits the wealthy, which the GOP argues will create jobs, which subsequently didn't really create jobs when it first passed), thus the Democrats seem to want to champion the poor, while the GOP want to champion the rich job creators. Thus, the middle class get the shaft.

Thus, you have to consider other things when voting since it's obvious that neither side is championing middle class issues. What really irritates me about the GOP is their constant assault on individual freedoms. They have no problem giving corporations person-hood (if you've ever met a person that doesn't have a moral compass), but when it comes to individual freedoms, they want to limit it. A person's sexual preference and a person's reproductive health is their own business.

On this topic, I have never understood how the GOP can claim they want less government unless it's the government enforcing someone else's morality. I'm a heterosexual male that does NOT believe in abortion, but who the hell am I to tell someone else how they should live their life? I don't believe in gluttony when you consider how many people in the world are starving, but that doesn't mean that I want my government to start mandating how much food each person is allowed to eat. It's called personal responsibility and I wish the GOP would afford the same consideration for individual citizens that they extend to large corporations and campaign contributors.

The Democrats actually have the right idea on this one topic, it's no one's business, least of all the government's business. I wish people would learn to mind their own business when it comes to gay/lesbian rights and reproductive rights. We should all have the right to live our life as we see fit as long as it does not infringe on someone else's right and that includes two guys or two girls marrying if that's what they wish or a woman using abortion as a form of birth control because her and her lover were too irresponsible to practice safe sex, even though I personally think it's irresponsible to use an abortion as a form of birth control, but as I stated, it's not my business.

But sadly, that's one of the few issues that I wholeheartedly agree with the Donks on, as far as economic issues, I don't see them fighting for the middle class, but I don't see the GOP fighting for the middle class either.
 
Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2012, 11:36 AM   #25 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
as439726's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 439
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 11
Thanked 43 Times in 41 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Actually, the deficit went UP during the Clinton year. No surprise though as it's gone up during every single President since FDR and probably further back than that. I've seen some economists argue that Clinton's economic policies set the stage for the recession that stated under Bush. I've seen others argue that the recession actually started under the Clinton years and merely continued under Bush. I'm no economist so I can't say. I will say that things have not gotten any better under Obama so if the Democrats are a solution, they're not a good one.

Instead, the Democrats seem to think the proper solution is to further punish the wealthy and those foolish enough to become successful. Never mind that this drives people like Eduardo Saverin to leave the country and drives companies to headquarter their business off shore to avoid taxes. The Democrats solution to that is simply to punish them more on the flawed reasoning that corporations won't pass those costs on to either their employees or customers. Not that the Republicans fiscal policy is any better but pretending that either party has any answers at all is insanity IMO.

I still agree that the system is broken, but I do believe that the Dems are dead on about the fact that those who make over 200k should not post a lower tax rate than those making 60 k.
Case in point: Mitt Romney openly stated his tax rate is no more than 15%. Yet his worker making 45k pays a higher rate and can barely cover supporting a spouse and 3 children. That, my friends, is one reason just on it's own to never vote Republican.
Just ask Warren Buffet. He has the right idea on the disparity between the classes.
as439726 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2012, 04:05 PM   #26 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
copestag's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,306
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 238 Times in 188 Posts
Default

I agree..... everyone should pay the exact same tax rate...... its about time the freeloaders actually pay some....... as for his worker making "45K" she paid ZERO in taxes is my guess (Id have to know more about her to state that as fact.... but based on policy my guess is she actually received a higher refund than she actually paid in) ....... so her rate was probably much lower in reality.... like zer0
copestag is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2012, 06:24 PM   #27 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
as439726's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 439
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 11
Thanked 43 Times in 41 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by copestag View Post
I agree..... everyone should pay the exact same tax rate...... its about time the freeloaders actually pay some....... as for his worker making "45K" she paid ZERO in taxes is my guess (Id have to know more about her to state that as fact.... but based on policy my guess is she actually received a higher refund than she actually paid in) ....... so her rate was probably much lower in reality.... like zer0

I agree on a national sales tax. Then it is actually fair and equal. The poor buy less dollar value, so they would pay less. The rich spend more and would pay more
as439726 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2012, 11:01 PM   #28 (permalink)
TxGoat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by as439726 View Post
I agree on a national sales tax. Then it is actually fair and equal. The poor buy less dollar value, so they would pay less. The rich spend more and would pay more

The only problem with a national sales tax is that if you make $200,000+ a year, buying something like a car is going to affect you less than if you made $50,000 a year.

The other way I tend to view candidates is if they are from old money or new money. Someone that grew up from old money can't relate to the average Joe. Romney claims that if you want to get ahead, just borrow a few hundred thousand from your relatives to go to school. It would be nice if we all had rich relatives that could give us low interest loans....
 
Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2012, 11:11 PM   #29 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
as439726's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 439
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 11
Thanked 43 Times in 41 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TxGoat View Post
The only problem with a national sales tax is that if you make $200,000+ a year, buying something like a car is going to affect you less than if you made $50,000 a year.

The other way I tend to view candidates is if they are from old money or new money. Someone that grew up from old money can't relate to the average Joe. Romney claims that if you want to get ahead, just borrow a few hundred thousand from your relatives to go to school. It would be nice if we all had rich relatives that could give us low interest loans....

You make good points. Just keep in mind the $50,000 guy buys a less expensive car than the $200,000+ guy, so less tax spent
as439726 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 30th, 2012, 03:12 AM   #30 (permalink)
TxGoat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by as439726 View Post
You make good points. Just keep in mind the $50,000 guy buys a less expensive car than the $200,000+ guy, so less tax spent

Well, a car isn't the best example, figure a dish washer, a microwave oven, clothes, etc. Guy making more money is going to pay a smaller percentage of tax. Add to that, the fact that it might discourage some spending which isn't good for the economy. But you are right, the tax laws need to be updated to ensure people pay their share. I personally would like to see wall street execs pay a high enough tax rate to repay for all the bailouts from Bush's last year in office, which ironically is the biggest act of socialism in our country's history, yet it's Obama who's the out of control socialist....... Go figure.
 
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old May 30th, 2012, 08:18 AM   #31 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by as439726 View Post
I still agree that the system is broken, but I do believe that the Dems are dead on about the fact that those who make over 200k should not post a lower tax rate than those making 60 k.
Case in point: Mitt Romney openly stated his tax rate is no more than 15%. Yet his worker making 45k pays a higher rate and can barely cover supporting a spouse and 3 children. That, my friends, is one reason just on it's own to never vote Republican.
Just ask Warren Buffet. He has the right idea on the disparity between the classes.
Those guys pay different taxes because they have different income streams. Guys like Buffet make the lion's share of their money (if not all of it) off capital gains. Those are taxed at much lower rates. You start raising rates on capital gains and you shoot retirees in the foot. That's not going to endear you to anyone.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 30th, 2012, 08:20 AM   #32 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Also, I'm continuing to look for an explanation on what someone's "share" or "fair share" is. I see those tossed around all the time and they seem to usually translate to "tax rich people more."
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 30th, 2012, 06:34 PM   #33 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
as439726's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 439
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 11
Thanked 43 Times in 41 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Also, I'm continuing to look for an explanation on what someone's "share" or "fair share" is. I see those tossed around all the time and they seem to usually translate to "tax rich people more."

Very true. It's a murky pond defining it.
I still think the best solution is a national sales tax.
as439726 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 31st, 2012, 03:05 AM   #34 (permalink)
TxGoat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Default

I know the GOP talks about "entitlement spending" and likes to look down their nose at the poor and the elderly when it comes to medical expenses and day to day living expenses (food shelter etc), but I don't understand how they can judge those that have no power nor control over their situation (I'm not referring to the ones that cheat the system because there are plenty of welfare cases that do in fact cheat the system) but they feel that people making over 250K should be "entitled" to lavish lifestyles while many people are trying to survive day to day.

I personally find it a little backwards that a person can put an honest 8 hours (most likely more than 8 hours) worth of work and gets taxed more than someone that is enjoying a life of leisure via the luxury of vulture venture capitalism or any other income that does not require actual work. I find that sense of entitlement to be about the same as the welfare case that believes he "deserves" to have money to eat.

Of course, the GOP will try to convince people that those living off of the backs of others are some sort of royalty that deserve our adoration else they'll leave our shores for countries that give them a pass on their gluttonous wealth.

If people like that Facebook idiot want to leave this country to avoid paying taxes on the money they earned while here then I say good riddance. This country was founded in defiance of the tyrannies being levied on its people by the English. The English also felt they were entitled to the spoils of all the hard work being done by the colonials. History has taught us what happens when those in power siphon all the wealth and prosperity for themselves.

Of course, you still have those people that will follow blindly because they've been brainwashed to believe that they're on the verge of breaking through that glass ceiling and participating in the spoils of victory. Once they've figured out that the ceiling isn't made of glass, but concrete, I believe the phrase "going postal" will apply.

Hell, now that I think about it, it can't be a coincidence....



 
Reply With Quote
Old May 31st, 2012, 11:43 AM   #35 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

You do realize that those earning $250k a year didn't just wake up and find themselves there. They worked to get there. Was some of it being in the right place at the right time? Sure. But you don't earn that much a year while simultaneously being a complete moron. If you're stupid, it'll catch up to you. Why should they not be entitled to the fruits of their labors?
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 31st, 2012, 12:08 PM   #36 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 315
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 24
Thanked 52 Times in 37 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TxGoat View Post


If people like that Facebook idiot want to leave this country to avoid paying taxes on the money they earned while here then I say good riddance.
did you know that the "facebook idiot" hasn't lived in the US since 2009 and has no plans to return. His life is in Singapore now. He didn't decide to leave to avoid paying taxes ... he left 3 years ago. And he wasn't born in the US either.
JimmyRayBob is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 31st, 2012, 12:56 PM   #37 (permalink)
AF Contributor
 
Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Austin, Texas area
Gender: Male
Posts: 848
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy Nexus 32GB. Nook Tablet w/CM10.
Carrier: Verizon

Thanks: 69
Thanked 144 Times in 114 Posts
Default

Decision 2012: Anyone but Obama.
__________________
"A free American means just this: individual freedom for all, rich or poor, or else this system of government we call democracy is only an expedient to enslave man to the machine and make him like it.” - Frank Lloyd Wright
Mayhem is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 31st, 2012, 03:31 PM   #38 (permalink)
Member
Thread Author (OP)
 
as439726's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 439
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 11
Thanked 43 Times in 41 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
You do realize that those earning $250k a year didn't just wake up and find themselves there. They worked to get there. Was some of it being in the right place at the right time? Sure. But you don't earn that much a year while simultaneously being a complete moron. If you're stupid, it'll catch up to you. Why should they not be entitled to the fruits of their labors?

The problem lies in the reality that most of the 250k+ people pay a lower tax rate than those under 100 k. That, my friend, is where fair is not fair at all.
as439726 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 31st, 2012, 04:56 PM   #39 (permalink)
TxGoat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyRayBob View Post
did you know that the "facebook idiot" hasn't lived in the US since 2009 and has no plans to return. His life is in Singapore now. He didn't decide to leave to avoid paying taxes ... he left 3 years ago. And he wasn't born in the US either.

He should've renounced his U.S. citizenship 3 years ago then. Of course, he wanted to enjoy the benefits of being a U.S. citizen (granted the benefits aren't what they used to be I'm sure). It just rubs me the wrong way that as soon as he started making his money, he ran for cover.


As far as people making over 250k a year working hard to get there, that's making the same assumption that people that lost their homes, or became homeless didn't work hard. There are always exceptions to the rule, and I'm not saying that anyone making $250k doesn't work hard, but there are people that aren't actually doing any measurable work, and only live off of their money and think they're entitled to pay less tax on it than people that actually work for their income.


Here's my example. Take Joe Jackson (the father of the Jackson 5, Michael, Janet, etc), he pimps out his children who do the work of singing, performing, etc. For his "services", he takes X amount but doesn't get taxed as heavily as his children do on their income (just humor me, I'm sure they weren't getting much in the form of income while working for their slave-driver father). Why should he get to keep more of his money on top of the fact that he's not actually producing any real measurable work?
 
Reply With Quote
Old May 31st, 2012, 05:35 PM   #40 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by as439726 View Post
The problem lies in the reality that most of the 250k+ people pay a lower tax rate than those under 100 k. That, my friend, is where fair is not fair at all.
That's a flaw in the tax code. The code is so ridiculously complex and it's filled with all kinds of loopholes as well. There is not a single person on the planet who honestly understands the code. The wealthy can hire scores of people who, working together, can uncover holes in the code that can be exploited. That's not evil IMO. If someone offered me scores of people who would do the same thing and it wouldn't cost me a dime, I'd go for it. Who wouldn't? The problem isn't with the people, it's with the code and fixing the code by making it more complex ain't the answer.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Last edited by A.Nonymous; May 31st, 2012 at 05:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old June 2nd, 2012, 02:37 PM   #41 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,568
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 261
Thanked 127 Times in 111 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
That's a flaw in the tax code. ....
The flaw is how money is raised for elections, until pay-to-play, extortion/bribery campaign financing is fixed, nothing will get fixed.
OutofDate1980 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 27th, 2012, 12:02 AM   #42 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,568
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 261
Thanked 127 Times in 111 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
You do realize that those earning $250k a year didn't just wake up and find themselves there. They worked to get there. Was some of it being in the right place at the right time? Sure. But you don't earn that much a year while simultaneously being a complete moron. If you're stupid, it'll catch up to you. Why should they not be entitled to the fruits of their labors?
Romney got started with "bust out" financing from Michael Milken. Romney took no risk, money invested in takeover companies was soon repaid by taking on debt to pay Romney for the investment, plus fees. The companies were then forced to cut wages, benefits and workers to make debt payments. These tactics often hollowed out the company which resulted in bankruptcy with the government forced to cover the gutted pension funds. Romney always got his money upfront.

Romney is not a businessman, he shifts wealth from companies and workers to his bank account.

"Private equity (PE) is not about creating jobs, it’s about creating financial structures that siphon cash from portfolio companies to PE partners’ bank accounts. That’s the conclusion of an executive who has spent the last decade working for PE-owned companies."
OutofDate1980 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old July 6th, 2012, 10:29 AM   #43 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Bob Maxey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,837
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 381
Thanked 811 Times in 641 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Targaryen View Post
Yeah, it blows me away that rush Limbaugh is the #1 radio personality. Statistics like that make me understand why our country is in the shape it is in.
You do not listen to him so why comment? Most people that do not listen often go by what the libs or some bloggers report and they are always wrong.
Bob Maxey is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old July 6th, 2012, 12:36 PM   #44 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,568
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 261
Thanked 127 Times in 111 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Maxey View Post
You do not listen to him so why comment? Most people that do not listen often go by what the libs or some bloggers report and they are always wrong.
To protect the body politic from the evils of Big Fat Idiots.
OutofDate1980 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old July 6th, 2012, 12:58 PM   #45 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Bob Maxey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,837
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 381
Thanked 811 Times in 641 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OutofDate1980 View Post
How about a few facts? I refuse to visit a link with "big fat idiot" in the URL; it tells me what I need to know before I waste my time.

The problem with all Rush haters is they are reacting to what they read and nary a fact in sight. I suspect it is laziness and it is always easier to find a few handy quotes on the web to "prove" their point than actually do a little research.
Bob Maxey is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old July 6th, 2012, 02:00 PM   #46 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,568
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 261
Thanked 127 Times in 111 Posts
Default

Those poor souls with paranoid personality disorder, commonly referred to as "Dittoheads". This affliction is easily cured by avoiding facilitators of bizarre rant and reading "liberal" media such as Forbes.

"Say you’re a conservative radio host who’s losing advertisers left and right for saying some deeply misinformed and misogynistic things about the lifestyle of a highly-educated single woman, and now you need to change the conversation. How do you do that? If you’re Rush Limbaugh, you do it by attacking a different woman on the basis of her singleness, youth and education."
OutofDate1980 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old July 6th, 2012, 03:41 PM   #47 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Bob Maxey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,837
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 381
Thanked 811 Times in 641 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OutofDate1980 View Post
Those poor souls with paranoid personality disorder, commonly referred to as "Dittoheads". This affliction is easily cured by avoiding facilitators of bizarre rant and reading "liberal" media such as Forbes.

"Say you’re a conservative radio host who’s losing advertisers left and right for saying some deeply misinformed and misogynistic things about the lifestyle of a highly-educated single woman, and now you need to change the conversation. How do you do that? If you’re Rush Limbaugh, you do it by attacking a different woman on the basis of her singleness, youth and education."
Care to cite some legitimate examples? Forbes once reported that Limbaugh made fun of Michael Fox's disease by claiming Fox stopped taking his meds before he appeared before congress. When in fact, Fox did just that and he said so on Oprah's show as well as in his book.

Forbs reported that Limbaugh sold the letter written by Harry Reid and signed by a pile of Democrats for a few thousand dollars when in fact, the letter raised more than 4 million dollars.

As for ad revenue, it is up but exactly by how much is a closely guarded secret. He is doing just fine.

How about posting a few things you heard him say that you disagree with rather than digested drivel posted by the left?

Thought not, good day
Bob Maxey is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old July 6th, 2012, 04:43 PM   #48 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,568
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 261
Thanked 127 Times in 111 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Maxey View Post
... Forbes once reported that Limbaugh made fun of Michael Fox's disease by claiming Fox stopped taking his meds before he appeared before congress. When in fact, Fox did just that and he said so on Oprah's show as well as in his book.

Forbs reported that Limbaugh sold the letter written by Harry Reid and signed by a pile of Democrats for a few thousand dollars when in fact, the letter raised more than 4 million dollars.

As for ad revenue, it is up but exactly by how much is a closely guarded secret. He is doing just fine. ....
Well, since you are making these three claims, why don't you post your sources ?

Claim number one. Rush Limbaugh Trashes Michael J Fox - YouTube

Claim number two is somewhat bizarre, Limbaugh under reported income ?.

Claim number three, so you're an insider with this closely guarded secret ?

Perhaps you should start a new thread, Why I have to spend so much time pulling my Big Fat Idiot hero's foot out of mouth ?
OutofDate1980 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old July 10th, 2012, 03:28 AM   #49 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,568
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 261
Thanked 127 Times in 111 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Maxey View Post
Care to cite some legitimate examples? Forbes once reported that Limbaugh made fun of Michael Fox's disease by claiming Fox stopped taking his meds before he appeared before congress. When in fact, Fox did just that and he said so on Oprah's show as well as in his book.

Forbs reported that Limbaugh sold the letter written by Harry Reid and signed by a pile of Democrats for a few thousand dollars when in fact, the letter raised more than 4 million dollars.

As for ad revenue, it is up but exactly by how much is a closely guarded secret. He is doing just fine.

How about posting a few things you heard him say that you disagree with rather than digested drivel posted by the left?

Thought not, good day
Cat got your tongue ? Enjoying too much single malt Scotch ? Digesting your own drivel ? More than likely, still trying to remove Big Fat Idiot's foot from body cavities.
OutofDate1980 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2012, 10:05 PM   #50 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,568
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 261
Thanked 127 Times in 111 Posts
Default

Perhaps Romney's debate coach Leona Helmsley, We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes, should be outsourced.

Mitt Romney: Cayman Islands Accounts Used By Foreign Investors To 'Not Be Subject To' U.S. Taxes

"By taxes "outside of their own jurisdiction," Romney is referring to taxes imposed by the U.S. government.

"He's basically admitting here that the Bain funds are set up in the Cayman Islands to help people avoid tax," said Rebecca Wilkins, senior counsel for federal tax policy at Citizens for Tax Justice, a nonprofit tax reform group. "If you want to cheat on your taxes, boy, they're making it really easy.""
OutofDate1980 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Go Back   Android Forums > Android Community > The Lounge > Politics and Current Affairs
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:12 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.