RRutter you cant talk about GDP, the Dems have nothing to say about economic growth ive tried to discuss it 10000 times
RRutter you cant talk about GDP, the Dems have nothing to say about economic growth ive tried to discuss it 10000 times
Enterprise Data Resources- Ecommerce Project Manager
-www.usedbarcode.net
Ok so then I have a question. And my understand here maybe wrong so dont crucify me here.Originally Posted by Total_Blender
Right after we subsidized failure?
Source: Fox News interview: Apr 27, 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vYLXZEVsz0
And he's returning the tax rates for the top 2 brackets to 36% and 39.6%, which is where they were under Clinton. Its on page 6 here:
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes...Plan_FINAL.pdf
Edit: I was sure to use an approved Fox News (tm) source so you guys wouldn't scream BIAS!! lol
If the top two tax brackets go back to that then what is the point of having an LLC or S-Corp when you are essentially going to be paying the same amount in taxes anyway? Other than the legal protection.
Epic Foxbody Thread Crew Member #10
i didnt want to taint the thread, so i removed it for another day...also it would be too much time to cover all the details....lets keep it small for now.
While i disagree with the bailout, i guess its no worse than going in to a depression which would have happened. Both suck.
Right after we subsidized failure?
Source: Fox News interview: Apr 27, 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vYLXZEVsz0
And he's returning the tax rates for the top 2 brackets to 36% and 39.6%, which is where they were under Clinton. Its on page 6 here:
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes...Plan_FINAL.pdf
Edit: I was sure to use an approved Fox News (tm) source so you guys wouldn't scream BIAS!! lol
I fail to see "Clinton's tax policy" in there. Just because he makes it the same as Clinton for the top 2 tiers doesnt mean the other shit remains. Its kind of like a magic trick.
say the "Clinton" buzzword
say "tax reform"
target "the rich"
while holding that sack of shit called socialism behind you while everyone stares at the points, but they fail to answer the question.
Comrade....believe in your views, and dont vote. Let us americans who believe in liberty and capitalism do that.
Last edited by rrutter81; 10-27-2008 at 01:22 PM.
IMO and you can call me whack
The Dems are about enslaving the poorer people (their constituents) to line their own pockets with govt provided social programs, kick backs, etc. They arent for helping anyone, they are for getting your vote so they, and their friends, can keep you from becoming wealthy, because if you become wealthy, chances are you are now smart enough to figure it all out.
Republicans are for making the poor RICHER, but in doing so, that means the RICH have to get RICHER so there is more money for them to spend.
Why do you think historically lower income families (black, white, asian, etc) vote Democrat? Why do wealthy vote Republican?
Think about that for a moment. How come the most succesfull trend toward republican. Dont tell me they are all Greedy evil people.
Why do the lower income families trend democrat?
I think its more of the poor not understanding what it takes to be rich (even though the opportunities are their for them) and less about the Rich not knowing what it means to be poor.
Marinate on that
Enterprise Data Resources- Ecommerce Project Manager
-www.usedbarcode.net
( fixed, not a good typo when trying to make an argument huh. LOL)
where do you get your facts???? poor are for democrats???
Its simple, when the middle class does well the economy does well. The democrats actually create programs to help the poor , the repulicans fight against any " help" unless it's for the rich. So it's welfare both ways.
Marinate on that
Last edited by white24d; 10-27-2008 at 08:37 PM.
you don't understand what I said read again
Enterprise Data Resources- Ecommerce Project Manager
-www.usedbarcode.net
This is the generalization that someone out there in the media has pushed republicans to think in total disregard of what the lower/middle class can be. I'm a college student, and taking away my families worth (they don't claim me anyways), I would be in the lower class due to my income. Certainly when I get out of college and have loans stacked up I'll appreciate a relief to get me jump started, and I'm not one of a few that fall into this category.
Most of you people arguing in this thread are part of the middle class, in which you will benefit from Obama's plan. I know you want to have your respective angles in trying to down grade the plan, but the words your speaking are those from the elites, and I find it impossible that if someone offered you a tax break you wouldn't take it.
Last edited by blurred visions; 10-27-2008 at 04:46 PM.
That does bring up a good point. You want a tax break if you were wealthy but you are not currently.. you could certainly use a tax break now but you're a part of the masses that are supposedly unproductive.
Strange, tax me more when I'm making less.. but tax me less when I'm making more.
Because some people disagree with the principle behind it.
Epic Foxbody Thread Crew Member #10
no chit. I'm in school full time and it is damn near impossible to find a job that will work around my schedule.
I have even tried to talk them into working around my schedule til I finish the current quarter (no more than 3 months), then I can schedule my classes to fit their schedule and it doesnt do me any good.
sigh
Ill respond later
Enterprise Data Resources- Ecommerce Project Manager
-www.usedbarcode.net
If you want to give more money to less fortunate people and/or those who are less motivated, as Obama and alot of his rich liberal friends think they and everyone else that is well off should. Do it. Noone is stopping you. It is not the role of the government to force these things on anyone.
For real for two guys wanting to "Help the little guy" there sure are doing a lot out of their own pockets. Obama I'll give credit to but Biden
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0...n_n_93353.htmlUp until recent years when their income increased sharply from book revenues and a Senate salary, Obama's family donated a relatively minor amount of its earnings to charity. From 2000 through 2004, the senator and his wife never gave more than $3,500 a year in charitable donations -- about 1 percent of their annual earnings. In 2005, however, that total jumped to $77,315 (4.7 percent of annual earnings), and to $60,307 in 2006 (6.1 percent)
McCain meanwhileWASHINGTON Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden and his wife gave an average of $369 a year to charity during the past decade, his tax records show.
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/29/...elite-schools/Between 2001 and 2006, McCain contributed roughly $950,000 to the foundation. That accounted for all of its listed income other than for $100 that came from an anonymous donor. During that same period, the McCain foundation made contributions of roughly $1.6 million.
Hell Palin even beat out Biden
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archive.../10/021684.phpAlaska Gov. Sarah Palin made considerably less money than rival Sen. Joe Biden, but the Palin family gave more to charity in the last two years than Biden has in the last eight combined, according to Palin's tax records released Friday afternoon.
Epic Foxbody Thread Crew Member #10
WOW.... bailout for school? You CHOSE to take that student loan. My wife (before she met me) specifically did NOT take out a student loan but used her credit cards to pay them off quickly. Now i just use my tax return to pay them off, however previously she would put ALL of her money in to those Credit Cards to pay them back. Also you get a TAX RETURN for schooling you pay for, why not put that toward the loan? Its practically free with that method.
While i understand/commend what you are going through, i dont agree with giving you a dime. Life is full of risks and sometimes it doesnt pay off. I went the G.E.D. route and still in the upper percentile bracket, however i want to hit the "elites" before 30.
Why even have public education at all then? I mean its a socialist program right?
comparing apples to oranges. I will pay for that kind of schooling and my tax dollars go toward it, however with our public schools the way they are, i will NOT CHOOSE to use such a shitty system.
When has the government EVER done anything better than the private sector? Hell they didnt invent their military might.... they subcontracted it, take for instance the raptor by lockheed. Or other military by boeing. List goes on and on.
So the military is inefficient? Interesting.
Also one problem with those whole tax cuts for the wealthy and tax the lower class.. the way this economy is going we are headed toward deflation, which is very scary to economists.. you perpetuate the problem when you take more from those that are already without.
Come on tony thats not what he said.
Epic Foxbody Thread Crew Member #10
typical dem... ROFL
The government is so retarded they had to subcontract the shit out to the private sector. The private sectore capitalism that made our military so great. government hasnt created shit except subsidizing ethanol which boosted corn prices and is failed. Notice how the EPA said there doesnt need to be 10% ethanol in gas anymore?
Looks good on paper, but is a failure.
You think NASA invented the apollo rocket to the moon? WOW
I thought they did.
Epic Foxbody Thread Crew Member #10
With an assist from a few "reformed" Nazi's like Werner Von Braun.
Well I knew that but I thought that he was working with what was at the time considered "nasa" even though it wasn't really nasa yet.With an assist from a few "reformed" Nazi's like Werner Von Braun.
Epic Foxbody Thread Crew Member #10
Really what its all about is much simpler than you are trying to make it. I dont know why we cant see the forrest through the trees.
Am i wealthy NOW, no i am not. Do i plan on being wealthy, yes i do.
In order for me to make more WEALTH i have to GROW my business. i mean i cant sell 230293029 seats , i have to expand into other items, parts, businesses etc.
Why would you limit my GROWTH?
Now, again, like ive said a million times, no one is saying that everyone making under $250,000 is unproductive and poor and a burden on society.
What we ARE saying is that the majority of those people, should have to make it on their own. You shouldnt take from ME, to give to them. Id much rather you let me HIRE one of them, or INCREASE someones salary that ALREADY works for me.
If you make $50,000 a year, and you are content, and have no intentions of moving up, doing better, etc, why should you get help?
look i can sit here an sell bride seats till im 50, and live comfortably. But why stop there?
Will Obamas plan help me currently more than mccain, SURE, ABSOLUTELY, but im not about the HERE AND NOW, you gotta look at the BIGGER PICTURE.
most of us arent doing that.
Has a POOR PERSON, IE someone making under $200,000 a year, EVER GIVEN ANY OF YOU GUYS A JOB?
Enterprise Data Resources- Ecommerce Project Manager
-www.usedbarcode.net
RRutter, you say you got your GED, I guess that means no high school education? I hate to take a stab at someone who took the initiative to get a GED but you are grossly ignorant on your understandings of political and economic systems and their interactions.
For one thing, you hate on socialism so much, do you know about FDR and the New Deal? Thats the closest America has ever come to socialism and I dont think our country ever will embrace it, I do think we'll head towards aspects of social democracy like what the EU has done such as protectionist economic policies towards vital domestic markets while embracing liberal free trade policies when they are beneficial to us. I'm pretty sure both candidates have made statements along these lines.
Ask yourself, which came first capitalism or democracy? Which begat the other if it can even be correlated? I know its getting a little off topic but the role of every aspect of government changes when going from a democratic/capitalist system to a democratic/socialist system to an authoritarian/capitalist system to a communist system. Is the role of the police to protect the well-being of a nation's citizens or protect the property of said citizens? What about that of the judicial system, to correct social injustices or simply to enforce business contracts? What rights do you consider intrinsic?
I'm worn out from work so this is some half-asleep rambling and not really any coherent thoughts. I'll get back on this tomorrow.
Last edited by GTScoob; 10-28-2008 at 03:36 AM.
02 WRX Sport Wagon
Hiring/staffing decisions are never so simple as "I just got a 5% tax cut... let me go out and hire 20 people." You also have to look a number of factors like the demand for your business and the cost/benefit ratio of hiring employees. I am assuming you run a speed shop from what I have seen you post in other threads, and thats a business that is entirely based on disposable income. If consumers have less disposable income due to inflation/stagnant wages/greater tax burden that means they will have less disposable income to spend on your products, ergo less demand for your products.
DO YOU OWN OR RUN A BUSINESS
Enterprise Data Resources- Ecommerce Project Manager
-www.usedbarcode.net
No, a business isnt going to hire people just because they got a tax cut, but they might forego hiring because of a tax increase, or even no change in taxes.
As I have said many times, my wife really needs to hire someone else for her business, but because of payroll taxes she cant to afford it. She can afford the salary, but the taxes push her well over her budget.
A tax break is not GIVING money, but giving RELIEF from paying higher taxes. I keep hearing republicans say this over and over, but Obama doesn't want to GIVE money, he wants to change the way taxes are pulled in, and how heavy they are pulled in depending on how much money you make.
It's really not hard to think about, tax the majority less and they'll make more purchases which will help the rich. I certainly have changed my spending habits recently, and if we continue with the way things are going then I'll keep spending less.
I don't view Obama's plan as being anything like "Robin Hood," its just a plan to help fix this economy. If we weren't having such problems then I might agree that if your making less or if you aren't doing anything with your life, then you shouldn't get a break.
I don't know if republicans have dollar signs in their eyes or just an overall rage for money, but times like these you need to just calm down, take a step back, and look at what will be best for the future. I know right now you might be taxed higher, but that is in an attempt to get the economy on the right track, and with the economy on the right track, you'll make your money.
Last edited by blurred visions; 10-28-2008 at 01:49 PM.
NO BUT I DID STAY AT A HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS LAST NIGHT! OK, MY CAPS LOCK KEY WORKS... JUST MAKING SURE.
I don't see Obama's plan as giving me money, I see it as allowing me to keep more of my money that I earned. Isn't that the major selling point of the "fair tax"... keep your whole paycheck? I'd be happy with just 10-15% more of mine.
Right BY MAKING UP THE MONEY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT JUST LOST FROM YOU BY TAKING IT FROM SOMEONE ELSE..As far as I can tell we are not upping our revenues we are simply re-structuring how we are getting it.
IMHO Obama has no clue what he is talking about when he talks about anything business related. Both candidates have acknowledged that we are bad off right now and Obama wants to move the tax burden from the majority to just a few. The very few who keep our economy afloat and keep people employed. This argument that business owners will be able to recoup any loses because of Obama's tax plan because more people will have more money to spend is ridiculous. Nobody is looking at the big picture. Everyone keeps looking at just the income tax issue which i still find in it of itself ridiculous. You guys are still failing to talk about the fact that between the hike in payroll tax, the removal of the social security cap(which BTW is just a huge proxy scheme),etc. small business owners are looking at paying in some cases 62% in taxes to the federal government. That doesn't include state taxes. I don't care who you are that is bullshit
Epic Foxbody Thread Crew Member #10
Well, he also stated he wanted to do the following:Right BY MAKING UP THE MONEY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT JUST LOST FROM YOU BY TAKING IT FROM SOMEONE ELSE.
IMHO Obama has no clue what he is talking about when he talks about anything business related. Both candidates have acknowledged that we are bad off right now and Obama wants to move the tax burden from the majority to just a few. The very few who keep our economy afloat and keep people employed. This argument that business owners will be able to recoup any loses because of Obama's tax plan because more people will have more money to spend is ridiculous. Nobody is looking at the big picture. Everyone keeps looking at just the income tax issue which i still find in it of itself ridiculous. You guys are still failing to talk about the fact that between the hike in payroll tax, the removal of the social security cap(which BTW is just a huge proxy scheme),etc. small business owners are looking at paying in some cases 62% in taxes to the federal government. That doesn't include state taxes. I don't care who you are that is bullshit
1. Go line for line and cut wasteful spending Bush has put in place.
2. Attempt to end the war.
3. Take away the tax breaks to major companies (oil).
These 3 alone will probably make up for, and even exceed the amount of money we lose by giving the middle class tax relief. You just can't say that he makes the money only by taxing the rich.
Then you need to take in account how the redistribution will work, as I stated in a previous post. By doing this, the lower/middle class are left with more money to SPEND. I don't need to explain what happens when companies gain revenue.
In the end, companies have a higher tax burden, but the added revenue from the lower/middle class spending could take its role in leveling the change. << I could be wrong, but does this not sound right?
Sounds right to me. Trickle down economics is synonymous with pyramid scheme
ok next question, what was your tax liability LAST YEAR
Enterprise Data Resources- Ecommerce Project Manager
-www.usedbarcode.net
Couple of hundred bucks. Don't remember exactly.
Epic Foxbody Thread Crew Member #10
Just about every presidential candidate has said they will do this and when you ask them to name something they would cut they all do the same thing. They all go
This is a myth. He will not be able to just go in and go ok were done2. Attempt to end the war.we are leaving. And what he has already said repeatedly is that he will shift the resources in Iraq to Afghanistan. So you are talking about spending another couple of billion JUST TO MOVE EVERYTHING(Tanks, Aircraft, Battleships, barracks, etc.) and then another few billion a month in Afghanistan. While I think the ultimate cost will go down, don't expect a dramatic decrease in spending on that front.
LOL. Yea that will be awesome. Let's take away the tax breaks oil companies get which have helped lower the price of gas ($2.09 here in Barnesville). You raise the taxes on oil companies and all they will do is pass the cost along to the consumer. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD I WILL USE THIS ANALOGY UNTIL PEOPLE REALIZE IT'S THE TRUTH. AFTER 9/11 GAS HIT THE ROOF AND WHAT DID THE AIRLINES DO? THEY PASSED THE COST OF HIGHER GAS TO CONSUMERS. IT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE AND IT WILL HAPPEN IF THIS HAPPENS. By raising those taxes it goes against Obama's plan to make the cost of living more affordable. IT'S A FACT.3. Take away the tax breaks to major companies (oil).
Maybe but probably not. Curious. Does anyone know what Obama's plan is projected to raise in revenue versus what we are currently raising. That would in it of itself be an interesting readThese 3 alone will probably make up for, and even exceed the amount of money we lose by giving the middle class tax relief. You just can't say that he makes the money only by taxing the rich.
Again most small businesses are paying close to 40% in taxes as it stands now. Under Obama it will jump to 62% in most cases. That's a 50% increase In order for businesses to recoup the additional money they are paying in taxes, people would have to get their taxes cut in half and then spend that tax cut. Obama's not proposing to cut taxes in half for those at the bottom.Then you need to take in account how the redistribution will work, as I stated in a previous post. By doing this, the lower/middle class are left with more money to SPEND. I don't need to explain what happens when companies gain revenue.
So guess what's going to happen.
Again see above.In the end, companies have a higher tax burden, but the added revenue from the lower/middle class spending could take its role in leveling the change. << I could be wrong, but does this not sound right?
Epic Foxbody Thread Crew Member #10
Your responses to the three goals of Obama are basically questioning if a candidate will follow through with everything he says, and of course, they usually never do.
I understand everything your saying and how McCain wants to cut taxes for everyone, but is that what we really need right now? I don't want to bring up the national debt, but I think we need to start thinking about the overall country and not just what people personally gain or lose.
I think it's funny how McCain wants to cut an incredible amount of taxes for HIS OWN bracket of wealth.
Ok and having a 50% tax increase on small businesses is what we need with unemployment at a Pre-Clinton level. The national debt will have to wait a little bit at this point.
Epic Foxbody Thread Crew Member #10
This still brings me back to one of my other points, if you free up money for the lower/middle class, won't that influence spending?
I think of it as the bottom falling out. Businesses are doing worse right now because the lower/middle class is spending less. Major cuts for the lower/middle class WILL influence spending, which means BUSINESS, and you can't deal with BUSINESS without EMPLOYEES.
Cutting business taxes might give them more of a budget for hiring, etc., but with people still spending less companies won't have the revenue to keep a hold of employees.
While this honestly sounds great in theory, it simply isn't the case. It's an argument that in this case unfortunately doesn't make much sense. Like I said Small businesses are looking at anywhere from 25-50%. Again this is a cost that they are having to pay out.
Example:
Business makes $100 a day
Business pays $40 a day in taxes thus making $60 in profits
Under Obama that would increase to $62 a day in taxes thus leaving the company $32 a day in profits
Now to get back to making $60 a day in profits one of two things has to happen.
1. Sales Increase
2. Costs have to be cut.(I.E. services, jobs, etc.)Jobs being the BIGGIE there.
Problem is that the tax cut doesn't justify the sales increase needed to recoup those loses.
Epic Foxbody Thread Crew Member #10
sorry ive been away since work calls and such...when it rains it pours here.
ok! on to the flaming.
Correct, I went to North Gwinnett High until my Junior year in which i moved to a different area where they did not allow "half credits". It screwed me and set me back a year so I decided to get my GED because im an impatient bastard.
It is also my "observation" that anyone who embraces socialism is superficial. Because I took my G.E.D. doesnt mean I dont know physics, economics, or psychology.
What if i were to tell you i was a convicted felon?
What if i were to tell you i lost my driver's licence for 5 years as well?
Do you think i cant make 6 figures?
This is the land of opportunity my friend. Not this superficial shit i keep seeing. If you think you had it rough try losing your licence, being a felon with a GED, 15k in fines+lawyer fees, and no place to go....only to climb up and get paid more than your own father who has a bachelor's in Network Engineering.
Ive worn the shirt so STFU if "life is too hard" on you.
As far as my stupidity toward economics goes... ROFL my nest egg is already pretty nice. How is your 401k? Did you not hedge it? awww too bad? Not that it really matters because u would have to withdraw from it to take the loss. However there are tactics to use in such situations. i have a G.E.D....what do i know?
If you didnt notice, as time progresses we are embracing socialism more and more. Once we fought to destroy it (communism /w vietnam) however more people are more empathetic, and think it isnt a bad idea. Unfortunatley history repeats itself....too many times. Europe has it's fair share of problems as well, considering they needed to make a law for people who go to the emergency room to be seen within "4 hours". Yes this is the future of stupidity and destruction of opportunity. Im assuming you hate "big oil" too? lol
If you think these rich CEO's piss you off, your in for a rude awakening. ENVY is what will push us toward this marxist style thinking. Envy (if you are a student of religion) is also as bad as greed. I like greed. I want my raise...how about you? Well why cant a rich ass CEO get it? hmmm interesting, because it is his ass if screws up. Unless he was subsidized by some marxist community reinvestment act.
Romans/Democracy (although an early form), easy enough.
As far as the rest of the questions you ask, they are rather vague. Police are to protect "said laws". Whether it be well-being of the people or their property. I dont see how you can break them up.
I took it easy however we can continue at a better time for you if you wish. Keep in mind (and i think we all do) i cant come in here at a whim due to responsibilites..
Anyway the stupidity i see from anyone of different color, race etc can kiss my ass. You werent given a bunch of lemons and made lemonade. THAT IS THE AMERICA I want to live in.
Not this government handout shit that gives minorities or females a leg up. Harder for a white guy to get in to the IT sector now because of this fairy tale people make up.
Think im racist? How about a big "F" YOU. Im married to a colombian. Think i have a right as anyone else to say your full of shit.
Last edited by rrutter81; 10-29-2008 at 12:23 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
