[Kyuu]

kahad, on 04 September 2012 - 12:22 PM, said:

Answer me this: if Obama is so good, why did the Democrats get hammered in 2010?

Because many Democrats stayed home, while many Republicans are fresh from the anger and hysteria related to RomneyCare. Yea, call it "Obamacare", but they're basically the same damned thing.

If there is one disappointment I've had with Obama -- it is this. Obama did not clamp down hard enough on the very same individuals, who were involved in collapsing the economy.

[YoungBirdcall]

For all those wondering "What has Obama done?" and for all those claiming that Obama has not done enough, check this out:

http://pleasecutthec...ry-20-2009.html

This is a detailed layout of all of his accomplishments since taking office, and it includes citations.

[The Fujoshi]

Valkyrie, on 04 September 2012 - 12:18 PM, said:

Now that you mention it, I'm curious about something.

Speaking hypothetically, if the wealthy manned up and had taxes just like the rest of us, wouldn't that in itself help our economy? Or at least put a dent in our national debt?

It's not going to happen; the rich like to be richer and rather leech off of the poor and they don't care what happens to them. Humans are selfish and self centered to a fault and only go in their best interest that directly affect them.

Example: When I worked, the CEO used to make on call visits, where the whole store would glamorize for one day. I always wondered WHY he didn't just act like a customer or as a fellow worker to see the inside of the store and I realized that he doesn't care about how the store runs, how fair it is, how we are treated, etc. as long as they make money and don't go in the red/make him lose money and false image.

I realized then the gap, the very big gap.

@Kahad: Thanks; the more you know~

@YoungBirdcall: Wow....I didn't know that. It is true though; many times with Republican presidents they only were in the interest in the wealthy and upper class, not the lower/middle class.

This post has been edited by The Fujoshi: 04 September 2012 - 03:24 PM

[Prayer Police]

The Fujoshi, on 04 September 2012 - 03:24 PM, said:

It's not going to happen; the rich like to be richer and rather leech off of the poor and they don't care what happens to them. Humans are selfish and self centered to a fault and only go in their best interest that directly affect them.

Example: When I worked, the CEO used to make on call visits, where the whole store would glamorize for one day. I always wondered WHY he didn't just act like a customer or as a fellow worker to see the inside of the store and I realized that he doesn't care about how the store runs, how fair it is, how we are treated, etc. as long as they make money and don't go in the red/make him lose money and false image.

Most cases, that's true but watch Undercover Boss. Your faith in humanity may be restored.

[minecraftsmurf]

YoungBirdcall, on 04 September 2012 - 12:22 PM, said:

Theoretically, yes it would. Check this out:

"GE paid no taxes [in 2010]; Goldman Sachs paid $14 million last year. The GAO reported in 2008 that “two out of every three United States corporations paid no federal income taxes from 1998 through 2005.”

Companies have become all too astute at paying for loopholes which allow them to shift profits abroad, or move their gains (on paper) to foreign low-tax/no-tax nations.

[Let's] look at the overall tax payments corporations have made. As the graphic below shows, the change in corporate taxes — not merely rates, but what they actually paid — over the past half century is astounding.

Corporate Taxes as a Percentage of Federal Revenue
1955 . . . 27.3%
2010 . . . 8.9%

Corporate Taxes as a Percentage of GDP
1955 . . . 4.3%
2010 . . . 1.3%

Individual Income/Payrolls as a Percentage of Federal Revenue
1955 . . . 58.0%
2010 . . . 81.5%

Anyone who is serious about closing the US deficit should consider the changes in what corporations pay in taxes and the rise of the deficit."


That should answer your question, yes?

Romney thinks that corporations and wealthy individuals should not have to increase their (already incredibly lax) tax contributions.

Lol, the top 10% of the 2/3’s of Americans are actually productive individuals and thereby pay taxes, pay roughly 58% of the entire nations total tax burden… In Cali the top 1% of the 2/3’s pays 60% of the entire states tax burden…

That is more than two fair shares. That 17% some millionaire pays is far more than an average person’s 30%... If ones 30% is nowhere near that 17% in actual real money not percentage… they have absolutely no right to cry, moan, and complain… it’s not their money in the first place.

I types 16 pages… non-double spaced size 10 Arial ranting about motiveless sheeple more concerned about when the next episode of Tuff girls, or Jerry Springer comes out or the next iphone than they are about their growing $10,000 debt. Or 23 year old college graduates with arts degree feeling entitled to a $50,000 a year job with absolutely no prior work experience… not even a part time job during HS summer. Etc. But hey… I guess it all boils down that not enough people are paying for everything they feel entitled to… free healthcare… free education… the feeling of safety to go to the store… etc. Horrible rich people only paying a few million dollars a year when they could pay more!! They are only paying like 15% of their total income while I’m stuck paying 30%... Horrible people!! If I was rich I would help out everyone I would pay like 50% of my income in taxes!

“Yeah…. Sure you will bud.”

Edit: We are all greedy (stingy) and jealous in one way or another. However, there are two types of people.
1) People who are so jealous of the successful they decide to point their finger at them and blame them for their problems... their incompetence... their failure.
2) People are are jealous of the successful... and strive to be successful themselves... actually trying... failing and trying again... pushing forward.

I am the type 2 person. Therefore, I follow conservative ideals. I am not a victim. I do not think that others should pay for me regarding anything... I do not want to be a dependent person. I enjoy working. I enjoy striving for a better future... that is my American dream. Thus far I am strolling along quite well.

This post has been edited by minecraftsmurf: 04 September 2012 - 05:36 PM

[sentinel28a]

Would love to debate more. Can't.

Broke hand over weekend.

Ben Da Mad Irishman
"Who says politics isn't dangerous"

[XenoBlade]

sentinel28a, on 04 September 2012 - 07:30 PM, said:

Would love to debate more. Can't.

Broke hand over weekend.

Ben Da Mad Irishman
"Who says politics isn't dangerous"

You didn't punch your keyboard now Sent did ya?

[Dark Stranger]

I hate Obama. And I don't trust Rommey. But I'll vote for the man who will take us out of our horriable finacial and job situation we are in. That comes first. Social views comes second.

[sentinel28a]

XenoBlade, on 04 September 2012 - 08:05 PM, said:

You didn't punch your keyboard now Sent did ya?

My stove by accident after I slipped on the tiles. Stove won.

I can also type pretty good with 1 1/2 hands. Vote for me! I can do more with less!

Ben Da Mad Irishman
"Must be a political joke in there somewhere"

[The Fujoshi]

sentinel28a, on 04 September 2012 - 09:36 PM, said:

My stove by accident after I slipped on the tiles. Stove won.

I can also type pretty good with 1 1/2 hands. Vote for me! I can do more with less!

Ben Da Mad Irishman
"Must be a political joke in there somewhere"

I swear this is the first person I was thinking when you said that about your hand:



@Dark: Good luck with that, considering that Obama is hated right now and people are talking about killing him off if he wins and Rommey is thinking about the rich and hated right now.

EDIT: just vote for Sent or don't vote at all. Everyone wins.

This post has been edited by The Fujoshi: 04 September 2012 - 09:42 PM

[minecraftsmurf]

Dark Stranger, on 04 September 2012 - 08:56 PM, said:

I hate Obama. And I don't trust Rommey. But I'll vote for the man who will take us out of our horriable finacial and job situation we are in. That comes first. Social views comes second.

I agree, I disagree with Romney on many issues; however, he has the qualifications and experiences to make a positive change in our nations economy (including job growth and national debt reduction) as well as reducing the over sized federal government, giving back some powers rightly to the states, and taking us in progressive direction.

I feel that Obama's methods are not working, and I feel they will continue to not work in the future. Obama should stick to running committees... it's time for a businessman man to take lead.

[sentinel28a]

The Fujoshi, on 04 September 2012 - 09:41 PM, said:

I swear this is the first person I was thinking when you said that about your hand:



@Dark: Good luck with that, considering that Obama is hated right now and people are talking about killing him off if he wins and Rommey is thinking about the rich and hated right now.

EDIT: just vote for Sent or don't vote at all. Everyone wins.

And Fujoshi is now my VP candidate.

Sentinel/Fujoshi 2012. Because why the hell not?

Ben Da Mad Irishman
"A catgirl in every home, an Eva in every garage"

[kahad]

The Fujoshi, on 04 September 2012 - 09:41 PM, said:

EDIT: just vote for Sent or don't vote at all. Everyone wins.

I was seriously considering voting for Sentinel if Bachmann or Palin won the Republican nomination.

Or Cthulhu.

[rondo]

Hey, I thought political discussions where people are picking sides is no-no territory..you know, that non-profit lingo.

[kahad]

rondo, on 05 September 2012 - 04:11 AM, said:

Hey, I thought political discussions where people are picking sides is no-no territory..you know, that non-profit lingo.

I do not think there is anything wrong with us having a friendly political debate. Just as long as ACen/MAPS does not officially endorse a candidate or give them money.

[rondo]

kahad, on 05 September 2012 - 08:29 AM, said:

I do not think there is anything wrong with us having a friendly political debate. Just as long as ACen/MAPS does not officially endorse a candidate or give them money.

Wasn't that the problem though? If someone on ACen/MAPS-owned forum endorses a candidate, then that could be construed as on behalf of ACen/MAPS? I vaguely remember a stink being raised about something like this before.

This post has been edited by rondo: 05 September 2012 - 09:24 AM

[rondo]

Prayer Police, on 04 September 2012 - 04:05 PM, said:

Most cases, that's true but watch Undercover Boss. Your faith in humanity may be restored.

I take reality shows with a mountain-sized grain of salt.

Wanna know what chaps me about this whole nonsensical process? Look at the money being spent hand over fist. Hundreds of millions of dollars for what essentially boils down to a popularity contest at the end of an overblown reality show. Politics is not about doing what is right for the country, for the people. It is all about money and legacy and it pushes me closer to just not voting for people anymore, just on issues..which typically comes from those very people..what a nasty circle.

This post has been edited by rondo: 05 September 2012 - 09:34 AM

[XenoBlade]

kahad, on 05 September 2012 - 02:16 AM, said:

I was seriously considering voting for Sentinel if Bachmann or Palin won the Republican nomination.

Or Cthulhu.

I'd vote a half torn sheet of paper before id vote for them. Lol

Also quick question Mine. In your tax division post, are we or are we not including off shore accounts into the equation?

[The Fujoshi]

sentinel28a, on 04 September 2012 - 11:49 PM, said:

And Fujoshi is now my VP candidate.

Sentinel/Fujoshi 2012. Because why the hell not?

Ben Da Mad Irishman
"A catgirl in every home, an Eva in every garage"

Sorry been reading....waay too much manga lately. So my brain is in 2D mode.

Not with in real life topics but....

[sentinel28a]

Kyuu, on 04 September 2012 - 01:50 PM, said:

Because many Democrats stayed home, while many Republicans are fresh from the anger and hysteria related to RomneyCare. Yea, call it "Obamacare", but they're basically the same damned thing.

If there is one disappointment I've had with Obama -- it is this. Obama did not clamp down hard enough on the very same individuals, who were involved in collapsing the economy.

Since I can sort of type now (new cast)...

He's not likely to clamp down hard on those indivduals, Kyuu. The economy downturn (not collapse) was caused by housing-lending practices. Both parties supported it, but the lead guy on that was Barney Frank--a Democrat. Moreover, if you're thinking "Wall Street fat cats," take a look at who is funding Obama's reelection and who funded his election.

In other words, no way is Obama going to bite the hand that funds him.

Ben Da Mad Irishman
"Back to our regularly scheduling screaming match"

[Kyuu]

sentinel28a, on 05 September 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:

Since I can sort of type now (new cast)...

He's not likely to clamp down hard on those indivduals, Kyuu. The economy downturn (not collapse) was caused by housing-lending practices. Both parties supported it, but the lead guy on that was Barney Frank--a Democrat.

Agreed, and it's unfortunate. Don't get me wrong; I'm no Democrat, but I find myself siding against Republicans these days. Also, shame on Clinton for signing the repeal to vital parts of the Glass-Steagall Act, especially the parts separating commercial and investment banking.

sentinel28a, on 05 September 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:

Moreover, if you're thinking "Wall Street fat cats," take a look at who is funding Obama's reelection and who funded his election.

In other words, no way is Obama going to bite the hand that funds him.

And, I am well-aware of that. So, it's unreasonable to expect Obama to even clamp down on these financial criminals. Regardless, I don't see Obama "feeding them" either.

May we live to see the day when -- Campaign Financing is funded publicly. So, that way, politicians won't even have to worry about raising money, and focus more on... oh... I don't know... their jobs?

Unfortunately, the Citizen's United decision pretty much turned our political system into this giant money game. Until THAT gets fixed, no politician will survive without big money support. So, indeed, this is some corrupt crap, that we're dealing with. Nevertheless, it was interesting the past year when Obama started taking the side of Occupy. So, at the very least, he was riling the feathers of the very same people, whom he's receiving money from.

[sentinel28a]

My biggest problem with Occupy was that the movement didn't really seem to have a plan. It wanted to tear down the status quo and replace it with...what? It reminds me of Marxism in that it thought that something magical would happen, when people are people and everyone wants to get rich. Making getting rich a crime never works.

Other than that, I agree with you, Kyuu--though I still support Romney. We've had too many lawyers as President, and lawyers don't seem to know how to balance a checkbook (mainly because they've never had to). Romney's a businessman, and maybe that's what we need right now.

Ben Da Mad Irishman
"We need something"

[Valkyrie]

Romney may be a businessman, but that doesn't mean he'll be competent and fix the economy. I'm sure a good chunk of us have worked for people who shouldn't be allowed to run a business, or even be in business at all. (I certainly have.) Plus, like it or not, the economy is just one issue that he'll have to face. Abortion, gay marriage, etc. are all issues that he'll be expected to contend with if he gets elected. And because the economy is not - I repeat, NOT - going to be fixed very quickly at all, nor can he focus on it 24/7, the more immediate issues will be the "smaller" but very very crucial ones. (They may not seem crucial, but they are.) This is the point Fujoshi and I are trying to make.

[The Fujoshi]

Valkyrie, on 06 September 2012 - 09:19 AM, said:

Romney may be a businessman, but that doesn't mean he'll be competent and fix the economy. I'm sure a good chunk of us have worked for people who shouldn't be allowed to run a business, or even be in business at all. (I certainly have.) Plus, like it or not, the economy is just one issue that he'll have to face. Abortion, gay marriage, etc. are all issues that he'll be expected to contend with if he gets elected. And because the economy is not - I repeat, NOT - going to be fixed very quickly at all, nor can he focus on it 24/7, the more immediate issues will be the "smaller" but very very crucial ones. (They may not seem crucial, but they are.) This is the point Fujoshi and I are trying to make.

^Pretty much this.

You explain things so much better than me :/

[sentinel28a]

I agree. The guy currently running the business (the government) is not doing a very good job. So I intend to help fire him.

The economy is the most important thing; actually, the deficit is. $16 trillion now, not counting state deficits. How many times have the Democrats addressed the deficit at the DNC? Very little, if at all, from what I've read. The emphasis has been mainly on abortion--an issue that shouldn't be that much of a concern, since not even the most pro-life Republican is going to get it repealed, and contraception being cheap and easy to get.

It doesn't really matter that Obama had help in running up that deficit. What does matter is that one, he promised to cut it (not add $5 tril to it) and two, he doesn't seem to have a plan or interest in reducing it. And I really don't like being told that "I belong to the government." The government belongs to me, and Fujoshi, and Kyuu, and everyone else.

Gay marriage and abortion aren't going to matter if the government goes bankrupt. At that point, the only thing that's gonna matter is survival. If Obama comes up with a better deficit cutting method than "tax the rich more" (which won't work even if we tax them 100%) and "cut defense" (which won't work even if we disarmed the entire military), then I seriously want to see it.

Even the Republicans haven't been completely honest about this. Medicare is only going to survive with a complete revamping of medical care, namely in tort reform. Social Security is dead. We can save it for the Boomers, but Gen X and Millenials will never see a penny of it. Politicians need to be honest about that. Again, I don't think Ryan's plan is perfect by any means, but it's something to build on. They need to be honest with us and hit us with tough knowledge. We can handle it. Most of us are grownups. Quit screwing the cameras and tell us straight.

My vote comes down to this: Obama had four years to do his work. He didn't. He blamed other students for not getting his work done. He refused to work in groups. He blew the midterm. So I am failing him.

Ben Da Mad Irishman

[Valkyrie]

But therein lies the problem - it's going to take more than four years to resolve the deficit issue. Everyone knows this. It's not just affecting us; it's a global issue that's been bouncing between nations (hence the reason it's taken longer than predicted for us to recover). By your logic, at this rate, you'll be electing a new guy every election year until the task is done. Who knows, maybe that tactic will help a little, and who knows, maybe someone will come up with a strategy that everyone likes. But that's not going to happen this year. I wish I could trust Romney and Ryan more, but I don't.

[Evil_Nerd]

sentinel28a, on 06 September 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

The emphasis has been mainly on abortion--an issue that shouldn't be that much of a concern, since not even the most pro-life Republican is going to get it repealed, and contraception being cheap and easy to get.

Wait what?

And someone correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the House the ones who are supposed to to initiate budget bills or laws? The Senate must vote on those laws, President too, but aren't budgets the House power?

I remember when the budget deadlock happened it was in the House of Representatives, was it not?

I do know that President Obama established a Committee to review the budget before the crisis, but their measure was never voted on. I also know that John Boehner and Obama are trying to work together, despite the hostilities in both parties.

[The Fujoshi]

sentinel28a, on 06 September 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

I agree. The guy currently running the business (the government) is not doing a very good job. So I intend to help fire him.

The economy is the most important thing; actually, the deficit is. $16 trillion now, not counting state deficits. How many times have the Democrats addressed the deficit at the DNC? Very little, if at all, from what I've read. The emphasis has been mainly on abortion--an issue that shouldn't be that much of a concern, since not even the most pro-life Republican is going to get it repealed, and contraception being cheap and easy to get.

It doesn't really matter that Obama had help in running up that deficit. What does matter is that one, he promised to cut it (not add $5 tril to it) and two, he doesn't seem to have a plan or interest in reducing it. And I really don't like being told that "I belong to the government." The government belongs to me, and Fujoshi, and Kyuu, and everyone else.

Gay marriage and abortion aren't going to matter if the government goes bankrupt. At that point, the only thing that's gonna matter is survival. If Obama comes up with a better deficit cutting method than "tax the rich more" (which won't work even if we tax them 100%) and "cut defense" (which won't work even if we disarmed the entire military), then I seriously want to see it.

Even the Republicans haven't been completely honest about this. Medicare is only going to survive with a complete revamping of medical care, namely in tort reform. Social Security is dead. We can save it for the Boomers, but Gen X and Millenials will never see a penny of it. Politicians need to be honest about that. Again, I don't think Ryan's plan is perfect by any means, but it's something to build on. They need to be honest with us and hit us with tough knowledge. We can handle it. Most of us are grownups. Quit screwing the cameras and tell us straight.

My vote comes down to this: Obama had four years to do his work. He didn't. He blamed other students for not getting his work done. He refused to work in groups. He blew the midterm. So I am failing him.

Ben Da Mad Irishman

But that's the problem; no matter who we vote for, unless it's you, it's going to take more than four+ year to fix it. It wasn't fixed in both of Bush's term; it got worse, and it wasn't fixed in Obama's FIRST term. It wasn't fixed in Clint's term either, which is when it started to go down. We always had this issue since the 50s, from what my mom has told me, about America owning money and being in the red.

But meanwhile it would take less than a year to restrict abortion or like New Mexico has shown, to make it so that it's very hard to get a job if you are Hispanic.

Actually...this might matter depending on your sex and race; men don't have to worry about having babies =_= They can make them and not worry about issues like abortion (or in some bias, stupid ways, rape. who the hell had the idea that men can't be rape and if it is it's not rape. And if you are white/black you don't have to worry about immigrant laws than if you were Hispanic/Asian.

[Evil_Nerd]

The Fujoshi, on 06 September 2012 - 02:31 PM, said:

But that's the problem; no matter who we vote for, unless it's you, it's going to take more than four+ year to fix it. It wasn't fixed in both of Bush's term; it got worse, and it wasn't fixed in Obama's FIRST term. It wasn't fixed in Clint's term either, which is when it started to go down. We always had this issue since the 50s, from what my mom has told me, about America owning money and being in the red.But meanwhile it would take less than a year to restrict abortion or like New Mexico has shown, to make it so that it's very hard to get a job if you are Hispanic.Actually...this might matter depending on your sex and race; men don't have to worry about having babies =_= They can make them and not worry about issues like abortion (or in some bias, stupid ways, rape. who the hell had the idea that men can't be rape and if it is it's not rape. And if you are white/black you don't have to worry about immigrant laws than if you were Hispanic/Asian.

The Federal government shut down in 1995 and 1996 over the budget, what I found interesting was Newt Gingrich was House Speaker at that time.

[sentinel28a]

Evil_Nerd, on 06 September 2012 - 02:23 PM, said:

Wait what?

And someone correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the House the ones who are supposed to to initiate budget bills or laws? The Senate must vote on those laws, President too, but aren't budgets the House power?

I remember when the budget deadlock happened it was in the House of Representatives, was it not?

I do know that President Obama established a Committee to review the budget before the crisis, but their measure was never voted on. I also know that John Boehner and Obama are trying to work together, despite the hostilities in both parties.

The President submits a budget. House and Senate look at it. If they like it, they make a few changes and vote on it. If they hate it, they pitch it and submit their own.

Obama's last budget was rejected unanimously in the Senate 93-0. I'm not sure if the House ever voted on it. The House drew up its own budget and passed it. The Senate refused to vote on it and tabled it. Right now, we have no budget, and haven't in nearly 3 years. The Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, says we don't need a budget. (Apparently, the budgets passed for the other 230 years of US history were unnecessary.)

The budget committee that Obama formed--Simpson-Bowles--was voted down in Congress because of cuts. The Republicans claimed it sliced too much off of the military and the Democrats too much in social programs. It also raised some taxes (namely on gasoline). It didn't get out of committee, so Obama never voted one way or the other on it.

Given that the Democrats' platform includes nearly $700 million in new spending...I'm not confident of their committment to budget reduction. Especially since a good portion of that is apparently on a new stimulus.

Ben Da Mad Irishman
"Because the last one worked so well"