RealTalk: Your President Wants To Raise My Taxes to Close to 60%

[sputnik]

thats what we get for electing a democrat

 

[martin and co]

I love how this thread turned into a rich vs poor thing with people chanting how the rich have been getting one over on the poor since the beginning of timelike they have some sort of concise view of history since the middle ages and before that...

Lets get something straight, the order in which the world's groups rank is the following, from highest to lowest:



THE MONARCHY



THE RICH



THE POOR





The rich screw the poor ( to be realistic, actually are the only source of income for poor, besides the army)

And the Monarchy screws EVERYONE, only the thing is, when you're poor and have nothing, its a lot easier on ones soul to be constantly kept at a certainlevel of lacking, versus building you wealth, living lavishly, then having it taken away.


The Monarchy decides to wage a war, the Rich are sometimes forced (sometimes happily) lend money for these wars, the wars don't go so well, so the Monarchyimposes a tax to further fund the war since the rich can't raise any more money for them. Who gets taxes? The Rich, or the peasants who own nothing? 40% ofnothing is still nothing.

This taxation destroyed some of the wealthiest families in Europe, who built unbelievable fortunes and lived so lavishly that the largest house in MTV cribs isprobably small than a wing of their house. Granted, I'm not saying this lavishness was right, but my point is that history can and usually will repeatitself.


For anyone wishing to point out that the Monarchy doesn't exist, all I can tell you is that it just changed its name to democracy or whatever free or no sofree form of government is being run by kings and emperors calling themselves presidents and prime ministers.

If the Monarchy so chooses to, it will have absolute power regardless if its a democracy.

Russia isn't a great (or even good) example of democracy, but you have a guy like Mikhail Khodorkovsky, makes almost 20 BILLION dollars, then gets sent tojail for 10 years by some guy with a $3,000 networth aka President Putin. The Rich can try to buy influence, but they can often fail, and in the end themonarchy dictates peoples lives.

As long as the rich are doing good that means the companies they own are doing good. As long as the companies as doing good, the people that work for them cando OK at least. Then those workers can take their wages, spend them, and aid in making colgate, volvo, Hovnanian, mcdonalds, wholefoods, dell, nike, etc.shareholders' richer, which then continues the cycle that allows people to earn and live. Thats just the way it works folks. Now do you really want therich to be doing bad? In an era of globalization?

If you think that people won't get tired of it all and move away, its only a matter of time. Kenneth Dart, the heir and now owner of the DART group ofcompanies (the plastic containers, the Styrofoam cups, etc) willingly renounced his US citizenship and moves to the Bahamas to not pay taxes. He sees hisfamily in Florida because Nicaragua, a country that give him citizenship and diplomatic status, eventually built an embassy in his hometown. If you spend morethan a certain amount of days in the US, you will get taxed as a resident, even if you aren't one, so as a diplomat that doesn't apply to him, so hesin Florida as often as he likes to be.


This isn't about the govt raising NY'ers taxes from like 10 to 15 percent. Its from 40 to 60 percent. Its no joke. Its ok to spend taxpayer money onthings that not abstract and straightforward, like improving infrastructure. However, when you try to "fix an economy" with a "stimuluspackage", the only thing so far that has been consistent is the bailout money recipients using that money to hire lobbyists to get them unfair (for thepublic) terms on that money.

Oh and for the record you know when doctors are overpaid when you get billed 150 dollars for a 30-40 minute visit where they do virtually nothing. Pay topspecialists all the money you want, but when "average joe" doctors make enormous salaries, its just wrong. Its not like they're all geniuses byan means either. The idiots at one of the top hospitals in the country needed 3 days and 2 ER visits to confirm that antibiotics were not the right course oftreatment for my father's viral Pneumonia. It took malpractice suit threats for them to actually realize the reason he could barely breath was because hislungs were filled with liquid the body produced, not because of his age. These are the geniuses who can't even properly treat and diagnose stupid freakingpneumonia, and they think they're not overpaid? Please. Oh, and when one of the real doctors (not nurses, because doctors are far too busy and underpaid tobe taking care of their patients) visits him in his room for 15 minutes, that costs 700 dollars! amazing!

Edit:

Team Ио

 

[i be john mayer]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa25

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Originally Posted by kidposite

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Originally Posted by kidposite

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat and was for distribution of all wealth. She felt deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican which she expressed openly.

One day she was challenging her father on his beliefs and his opposition to higher taxes on the rich & more welfare programs. In the middle of her heartfelt diatribe based upon the lectures she had from her far-left professors at her school, he stopped her and asked her point blank, how she was doing in school.

She answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain. That she had to study all the time, never had time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend and didn't really have many college friends because of spending all her time studying. That she was taking a more difficult curriculum.
Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Mary."
She replied, "Mary is barely getting by", she continued, "all she has is barely a 2.0 GPA" adding, "and all she takes are easy classes and she never studies." But to explain further she continued emotionally, "But Mary is so very popular on campus, college for her is a blast, she goes to all the parties all the time and very often doesn't even show up for classes because she is too hung over."

Her father then asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your 4.0 GPA and give it to her friend who only had a 2.0." He continued, "That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair equal distribution of GPA."

The daughter, visibly shocked by the father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair! I worked really hard for mine, I did without and Mary has done little or nothing, she played while I worked real hard!"

The father slowly smiled and said, "Welcome to the Republican Party."

just felt like this is relevant to this post

I do not feel that this example is as relevant to the real world as you or a Republican might think. In the above example, you have one girl who worked hard for a 4.0 while her friend was getting a 2.0 while not working hard at all. In the real world, you'll have your share of "4.0 students"...people who work really hard and earn very good money. However, where this example falls short is by portraying all "2.0 students" as lazy, stay-at-home bums who do not have the desire to become financially successful. Poverty is often cyclical, one might work 60+ hours a week and barely struggle to survive. It is extremely naive to believe that recipients of wealth distribution are all lazy people who just leach off of the "4.0 students'" earnings.

obviously there are exceptions to both but you can't try and say that most of the the people living in poverty are always trying there hardest and spending their money wisely

Ofcourse you are right...there those who live in poverty who really are "lazy"...but republicans often forget that a great amount of those in poverty are actually comprised of the working poor. I was just pointing out the weakness of the "4.0 vs. 2.0 student" analogy. It portrays all wealthy people has hard-workers who deserve every penny they get while all poor people are lazy and who survive by leaching off of the wealthy.

I agree and disagree with you to a certain point. I do believe that there is a certain percentage of low income people who try as they might, will forever be stuck in the lower class. However, I also believe that there is decent sized percentage of people that have the aptitude to achieve more, such as going to school at night to get a degree or learning a trade, who chose not to pursue these options. I feel like some are under the mindset that they would rather another person else pay more taxes and get a handout than to make a personal sacrifice for their own benefit.





How did you come to this conclusion?

Originally Posted by Joseph Camel Jr

people geitting way off track here

prime example: i be john mayer, rambling about how garbagemen work as hard as lawyers. lol. try to stay on topic big guy.

Ok. My position on the topic has been stated many times. I agree thatsuch a tax hike on those making only 350k is excessive, but if you're making more than say 20 million then I could care less if half of your income istaxed in the name of wealth distribution. All the other stuff, including the fact that a garbageman does work as hard as a lawyer, was just replies toquestions, rebuttals, etc. And I think it's sick to think that if someone isn't rich that means they're dumb or lazy. That's something thatrich people and self-hating middle class people tell eachother to feel better than others. But i guess somebody's gotta be better than somebody, right?

 

[kix4kix]

Originally Posted by MARTIN AND CO

I love how this thread turned into a rich vs poor thing with people chanting how the rich have been getting one over on the poor since the beginning of time like they have some sort of concise view of history since the middle ages and before that...

Lets get something straight, the order in which the world's groups rank is the following, from highest to lowest:



THE MONARCHY



THE RICH



THE POOR





The rich screw the poor ( to be realistic, actually are the only source of income for poor, besides the army)

And the Monarchy screws EVERYONE, only the thing is, when you're poor and have nothing, its a lot easier on ones soul to be constantly kept at a certain level of lacking, versus building you wealth, living lavishly, then having it taken away.


The Monarchy decides to wage a war, the Rich are sometimes forced (sometimes happily) lend money for these wars, the wars don't go so well, so the Monarchy imposes a tax to further fund the war since the rich can't raise any more money for them. Who gets taxes? The Rich, or the peasants who own nothing? 40% of nothing is still nothing.

This taxation destroyed some of the wealthiest families in Europe, who built unbelievable fortunes and lived so lavishly that the largest house in MTV cribs is probably small than a wing of their house. Granted, I'm not saying this lavishness was right, but my point is that history can and usually will repeat itself.


For anyone wishing to point out that the Monarchy doesn't exist, all I can tell you is that it just changed its name to democracy or whatever free or no so free form of government is being run by kings and emperors calling themselves presidents and prime ministers.

If the Monarchy so chooses to, it will have absolute power regardless if its a democracy.

Russia isn't a great (or even good) example of democracy, but you have a guy like Mikhail Khodorkovsky, makes almost 20 BILLION dollars, then gets sent to jail for 10 years by some guy with a $3,000 networth aka President Putin. The Rich can try to buy influence, but they can often fail, and in the end the monarchy dictates peoples lives.

As long as the rich are doing good that means the companies they own are doing good. As long as the companies as doing good, the people that work for them can do OK at least. Then those workers can take their wages, spend them, and aid in making colgate, volvo, Hovnanian, mcdonalds, wholefoods, dell, nike, etc. shareholders' richer, which then continues the cycle that allows people to earn and live. Thats just the way it works folks. Now do you really want the rich to be doing bad? In an era of globalization?

If you think that people won't get tired of it all and move away, its only a matter of time. Kenneth Dart, the heir and now owner of the DART group of companies (the plastic containers, the Styrofoam cups, etc) willingly renounced his US citizenship and moves to the Bahamas to not pay taxes. He sees his family in Florida because Nicaragua, a country that give him citizenship and diplomatic status, eventually built an embassy in his hometown. If you spend more than a certain amount of days in the US, you will get taxed as a resident, even if you aren't one, so as a diplomat that doesn't apply to him, so hes in Florida as often as he likes to be.


This isn't about the govt raising NY'ers taxes from like 10 to 15 percent. Its from 40 to 60 percent. Its no joke. Its ok to spend taxpayer money on things that not abstract and straightforward, like improving infrastructure. However, when you try to "fix an economy" with a "stimulus package", the only thing so far that has been consistent is the bailout money recipients using that money to hire lobbyists to get them unfair (for the public) terms on that money.

Oh and for the record you know when doctors are overpaid when you get billed 150 dollars for a 30-40 minute visit where they do virtually nothing. Pay top specialists all the money you want, but when "average joe" doctors make enormous salaries, its just wrong. Its not like they're all geniuses by an means either. The idiots at one of the top hospitals in the country needed 3 days and 2 ER visits to confirm that antibiotics were not the right course of treatment for my father's viral Pneumonia. It took malpractice suit threats for them to actually realize the reason he could barely breath was because his lungs were filled with liquid the body produced, not because of his age. These are the geniuses who can't even properly treat and diagnose stupid freaking pneumonia, and they think they're not overpaid? Please. Oh, and when one of the real doctors (not nurses, because doctors are far too busy and underpaid to be taking care of their patients) visits him in his room for 15 minutes, that costs 700 dollars! amazing!

Edit:

Team Ио

 

[the fame]

Originally Posted by kix4kix

Originally Posted by MARTIN AND CO

I love how this thread turned into a rich vs poor thing with people chanting how the rich have been getting one over on the poor since the beginning of time like they have some sort of concise view of history since the middle ages and before that...

Lets get something straight, the order in which the world's groups rank is the following, from highest to lowest:



THE MONARCHY



THE RICH



THE POOR

You do realize Monarchy is a form of government not a class right?

I was thinking the EXACT same thing.

 

[essential1]

Originally Posted by cguy610

Originally Posted by malikdagoat

obviously there are exceptions to both but you can't try and say that most of the the people living in poverty are always trying there hardest and spending their money wisely

News flash genius. Most people DONT wanna stay in the hood, trap, ghetto, w/e you wanna call it. Stop basing your assessment of impoverished people based on the news.

Repubs always act like there aren't lazy rich people that just sit around and live off of the income from their passive investments. (which may have even been inherited)



and we have a good point +1

 

[comebackkid]

Thus far in my life I haven't payed too much attention to the American economy and political system. For the first fifteen years of my life I was uppermiddle class and I definitely took it for granted. For the last few years, and especially now I find myself questioning things a lot more since my financialsituation has changed, but there are just some things I can't wrap my head around as far as our economic system and lifestyle. With the way things areright now I cant see how we can ever find a quick fix to our problems. Here are a few of the thoughts that pop into my head as I sit here:

1. American people consume wayyy beyond their needs. Not just the rich but even average and lower middle class
2. Unregulated labor markets (ie china) have taken what were once well paying stable manufacturing jobs and given us service industry jobs
3. The world as well as our country is starting to get overpopulated and we have only so many resources (not to mention we now have to compete with India andChina for these resources)
4. Our lack of exports compared to the goods we import has set us up with a huge trade deficit. We are too reliant on other countries for everyday things
5. Is it possible for the USA to remain on top for so long? History has shown all great empires come to an end, or at least decline so how can we expect ourcountry to just keep getting better and better
6. The basis of of capitalism (also in a way the stockmarket) is to make more and more money. But with our economy so heavily rooted in consumer spending andone of the biggest problems we have being excessive consumption how can there continue to be an expectation of corporations prospering more and more. Creditcards are a perfect example of this exploitation.
7. Our government is so obviously influenced (if not controlled) by big business how can we ever expect them to truly look out for OUR needs. Ex. privatelobbyists and campaign contributions
8. Health care providers are corporations. How can a business that is expected to turn ever increasing profits possibly provide fair health care that withoutvaluing the dollar over our health

I could go on forever but I'll stop there. I know some of these problems are stupid, its just stuff that pops into my head, and some draw on each other butbasically what I'm trying to say is we are #$%@#$ on so many different levels I cant ever see a a true quick and easy fix. But after all is said and done,I keep coming back to this conclusion. No matter how messed up the system is, why not take advantage of it. One thing our country does provide is opportunity,there is no shortage of success stories. IF YOU CAN'T BEAT EM, JOIN EM

 

[jagshemash]

I can't help be a little skeptical about any article from Fox News/NY Post. Notice the language - may,could. They're using 'The Tax Foundation' as their source who is funded by the Koch Foundation amongothers.

Here's a little info about the Koch Foundation:

Koch Family Foundations[1] consist of the David H. Koch Foundation, the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, and the Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation.

Funding for the foundations comes from the conglomerate Koch Industries, the "nation's largest privately held energy company, with annual revenues of more than $25 billion. ... Koch Industries is now the second largest family-owned business in the U.S., with annual sales of over $20 billion."

"The company is owned by two of the richest men in America," David H. Koch and Charles G. Koch (described as 'reclusive billionaires'), who have a combined personal fortune estimated at more than $3 billion and who have emerged as major Republican contributors in recent years. ... Both David and Charles Koch are ranked among the 50 richest people in the country by 'Forbes'."

The Koch brothers control the three family foundations that have "lavished tens of millions of dollars in the past decade on 'free market' advocacy institutions in and around Washington."[2] --'The Nation', "What Wouldn't Bob Dole Do for Koch Oil?"

The foundations are financed via the oil and gas fortunes of Fred G. Koch, a founding member of the John Birch Society. David is a libertarian who "provides a significant amount of funding for the Cato Institute's $4 million annual budget."

I wonder what their motivation is....

 

[rexanglorum]

Originally Posted by Jagshemash

I can't help be a little skeptical about any article from Fox News/NY Post. Notice the language - may, could. They're using 'The Tax Foundation' as their source who is funded by the Koch Foundation and the Earhart Foundation.

Here's a little info about the Koch Foundation:

Koch Family Foundations[1] consist of the David H. Koch Foundation, the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, and the Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation.

Funding for the foundations comes from the conglomerate Koch Industries, the "nation's largest privately held energy company, with annual revenues of more than $25 billion. ... Koch Industries is now the second largest family-owned business in the U.S., with annual sales of over $20 billion."

"The company is owned by two of the richest men in America," David H. Koch and Charles G. Koch (described as 'reclusive billionaires'), who have a combined personal fortune estimated at more than $3 billion and who have emerged as major Republican contributors in recent years. ... Both David and Charles Koch are ranked among the 50 richest people in the country by 'Forbes'."

The Koch brothers control the three family foundations that have "lavished tens of millions of dollars in the past decade on 'free market' advocacy institutions in and around Washington."[2] --'The Nation', "What Wouldn't Bob Dole Do for Koch Oil?"

The foundations are financed via the oil and gas fortunes of Fred G. Koch, a founding member of the John Birch Society. David is a libertarian who "provides a significant amount of funding for the Cato Institute's $4 million annual budget."

I wonder what their motivation is....

 

[omgitswes]

Originally Posted by welcometothetonezone

Originally Posted by Ralf Loran

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by bhzmafia14

http://www.youtube.com/v/x1C_NWMRs8Q&hl=en&fs=1&http://www.youtube.com/v/x1C_NWMRs8Q&hl=en&fs=1& http://www.youtube.com/v/x1C_NWMRs8Q&hl=en&fs=1&http://www.youtube.com/v/x1C_NWMRs8Q&hl=en&fs=1& The Minister wrote:

---

WTH? When did this happen and where?

Obama got schooled in Russia. Got lectured like a little boy by Putin for an hour.
When someone in Russia lectures you for an hour that basically means they think pretty low of you.

Not surprised he got snubbed here.� Obama's "hope" and "change" means nothing there.
They're explouiting Obama's psychology. Putin prob had an entire volume drawn up on Obama's entire (real) history.

Stop overreacting. It's just a handshake.

wait i remember seeing this on TV. wasn't he just introducing people?
could of been something else

 

[ThaxbyChamblis]

Damn.

 

[rockybalboa25]

Originally Posted by I Be John Mayer

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa25

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Originally Posted by kidposite

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Originally Posted by kidposite

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat and was for distribution of all wealth. She felt deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican which she expressed openly.

One day she was challenging her father on his beliefs and his opposition to higher taxes on the rich & more welfare programs. In the middle of her heartfelt diatribe based upon the lectures she had from her far-left professors at her school, he stopped her and asked her point blank, how she was doing in school.

She answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain. That she had to study all the time, never had time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend and didn't really have many college friends because of spending all her time studying. That she was taking a more difficult curriculum.
Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Mary."
She replied, "Mary is barely getting by", she continued, "all she has is barely a 2.0 GPA" adding, "and all she takes are easy classes and she never studies." But to explain further she continued emotionally, "But Mary is so very popular on campus, college for her is a blast, she goes to all the parties all the time and very often doesn't even show up for classes because she is too hung over."

Her father then asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your 4.0 GPA and give it to her friend who only had a 2.0." He continued, "That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair equal distribution of GPA."

The daughter, visibly shocked by the father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair! I worked really hard for mine, I did without and Mary has done little or nothing, she played while I worked real hard!"

The father slowly smiled and said, "Welcome to the Republican Party."

just felt like this is relevant to this post

I do not feel that this example is as relevant to the real world as you or a Republican might think. In the above example, you have one girl who worked hard for a 4.0 while her friend was getting a 2.0 while not working hard at all. In the real world, you'll have your share of "4.0 students"...people who work really hard and earn very good money. However, where this example falls short is by portraying all "2.0 students" as lazy, stay-at-home bums who do not have the desire to become financially successful. Poverty is often cyclical, one might work 60+ hours a week and barely struggle to survive. It is extremely naive to believe that recipients of wealth distribution are all lazy people who just leach off of the "4.0 students'" earnings.

obviously there are exceptions to both but you can't try and say that most of the the people living in poverty are always trying there hardest and spending their money wisely

Ofcourse you are right...there those who live in poverty who really are "lazy"...but republicans often forget that a great amount of those in poverty are actually comprised of the working poor. I was just pointing out the weakness of the "4.0 vs. 2.0 student" analogy. It portrays all wealthy people has hard-workers who deserve every penny they get while all poor people are lazy and who survive by leaching off of the wealthy.

I agree and disagree with you to a certain point. I do believe that there is a certain percentage of low income people who try as they might, will forever be stuck in the lower class. However, I also believe that there is decent sized percentage of people that have the aptitude to achieve more, such as going to school at night to get a degree or learning a trade, who chose not to pursue these options. I feel like some are under the mindset that they would rather another person else pay more taxes and get a handout than to make a personal sacrifice for their own benefit.

How did you come to this conclusion?



You are saying that you don't know a single person who has the ability to do more than they are currently doing? Every person in the lower,middle, and upper class are maxed out as far as their potential is concerned? Like I previously said, I realize that some people may be doing everything thatthey possible can and are still stuck in the lower class, but you can't be serious if you are saying that everyone in the lower class can't advance ifthey put more effort into it.

 

[lazyj10]

Martin and CO still posts? I thought after one of the many volumes of the jewelry thread he went MIA?

 

[j burner]

Originally Posted by GTEK

NT is so inconsistent..
One min we got someone asking why is there poverty...
And now we got a thread with people who make over $250,000
who dont want to pay taxes to help those in need.
You not paying obama your helping your country.
U know? How that 21 year old is going out there in foreign countries
to get shot for you? The least you could do is help his mom out with healthcare.

It seems you are confused as to what country we are talking about. We are talking about America. In America, INDIVIDUAL rights are the backbone of ourconstitution and society; Citizens are to be viewed as individuals, not as a collective whole. So save the socialist crap about "you're helping yourcountry," we are not a socialist country (yet) In America if you don't want to help, you don't have to, thats called being an individual with theright to decide what YOU want to spend YOUR money on. There are plenty of Charities one can donate as much money as one pleases, should one DECIDE that theywould like to spend their money that way. You see, telling someone who worked hard for their money that they MUST give up half of their paycheck to benefitsomeone else who doesn't have it as good is nothing short of UTTER BS. The idea that your money is not your money, and would be better off being takenfrom you so that the government can spend it on people who they think need it more than you is disgusting. FORCING someone to become a charity by making thempay more taxes in order to benifit those who do not pay any taxes is ridiculous. This country exists because colonists were SICK AND TIRED of being TAXED tono end by the English. Yet here we are with a president who would love to tax everything in existence so that he can spend trillions and trillions of dollarsturning the country into the UK.

 

[i be john mayer]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa25

Originally Posted by I Be John Mayer

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa25

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Originally Posted by kidposite

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Originally Posted by kidposite

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat and was for distribution of all wealth. She felt deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican which she expressed openly.

One day she was challenging her father on his beliefs and his opposition to higher taxes on the rich & more welfare programs. In the middle of her heartfelt diatribe based upon the lectures she had from her far-left professors at her school, he stopped her and asked her point blank, how she was doing in school.

She answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain. That she had to study all the time, never had time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend and didn't really have many college friends because of spending all her time studying. That she was taking a more difficult curriculum.
Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Mary."
She replied, "Mary is barely getting by", she continued, "all she has is barely a 2.0 GPA" adding, "and all she takes are easy classes and she never studies." But to explain further she continued emotionally, "But Mary is so very popular on campus, college for her is a blast, she goes to all the parties all the time and very often doesn't even show up for classes because she is too hung over."

Her father then asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your 4.0 GPA and give it to her friend who only had a 2.0." He continued, "That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair equal distribution of GPA."

The daughter, visibly shocked by the father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair! I worked really hard for mine, I did without and Mary has done little or nothing, she played while I worked real hard!"

The father slowly smiled and said, "Welcome to the Republican Party."

just felt like this is relevant to this post

I do not feel that this example is as relevant to the real world as you or a Republican might think. In the above example, you have one girl who worked hard for a 4.0 while her friend was getting a 2.0 while not working hard at all. In the real world, you'll have your share of "4.0 students"...people who work really hard and earn very good money. However, where this example falls short is by portraying all "2.0 students" as lazy, stay-at-home bums who do not have the desire to become financially successful. Poverty is often cyclical, one might work 60+ hours a week and barely struggle to survive. It is extremely naive to believe that recipients of wealth distribution are all lazy people who just leach off of the "4.0 students'" earnings.

obviously there are exceptions to both but you can't try and say that most of the the people living in poverty are always trying there hardest and spending their money wisely

Ofcourse you are right...there those who live in poverty who really are "lazy"...but republicans often forget that a great amount of those in poverty are actually comprised of the working poor. I was just pointing out the weakness of the "4.0 vs. 2.0 student" analogy. It portrays all wealthy people has hard-workers who deserve every penny they get while all poor people are lazy and who survive by leaching off of the wealthy.

I agree and disagree with you to a certain point. I do believe that there is a certain percentage of low income people who try as they might, will forever be stuck in the lower class. However, I also believe that there is decent sized percentage of people that have the aptitude to achieve more, such as going to school at night to get a degree or learning a trade, who chose not to pursue these options. I feel like some are under the mindset that they would rather another person else pay more taxes and get a handout than to make a personal sacrifice for their own benefit.

How did you come to this conclusion?

You are saying that you don't know a single person who has the ability to do more than they are currently doing? Every person in the lower, middle, and upper class are maxed out as far as their potential is concerned? Like I previously said, I realize that some people may be doing everything that they possible can and are still stuck in the lower class, but you can't be serious if you are saying that everyone in the lower class can't advance if they put more effort into it.


all i did was ask how you came to your conclusion. how did you come to this conclusion? do you think those working hard for less are the minority ormajority? do you think the majority of poor people are just sitting around expecting a handout?

Please keep in mind that in 2005 70% of the U.S. population was making under 55k a year. that's a pre-recession number.

 

[8tothe24]

After reading this thread, I can't believe anyone that would step in here trying to defend Obama's spending and taxing plans. Dude will never do nowrong in your eyes and he will lead you straight off a cliff. Between the Bailouts, Fed Gov. buying Corporations, Cap and Tax, Healthcare and the 1 or 2things I am forgetting... ... ... This country is screwed. Even the Chinese are getting nervous with us. Dude will go down as one of worst Presidents everright there with Bush (hurts you sheep to hear that I know). Straight tanking the U.S. economy.

Forgot: You think businesses and corporations are going to sit by and take in the backside from this administration? All that cost is going to be offset onthings that contribute to cost of living to all of us. So for the guy that was proud to be making only 30k, get ready. I worked hard to get where I am at(worked 2 full-time jobs to get through college) and it is not close to some of the $$$$$$ some of you are pulling. As for other guy saying some people willnever have an opportunity, I say BS! Complacency is not an excuse, if you want something bad enough then go get it.

 

[718stylez]

as i progress through the workforce i often think how i will pay for my health care under the current system? does anyone else ever think about that? whateverside of the current debate ur on.

they say that 80% of the total amount of money you spend on medical will come due in the last 10 years of your life. By that time i'll be out of the workforce and there's no such thing as pensions. Seemingly your 401k is not about retirement income and will most likely become a glorified medical savingsaccount. I think its impossible for the younger generation to retire and have any sort of decent medical coverage. unfortunately, young people don't reallytalk about this.

 

[mexicansoul]

Originally Posted by Joseph Camel Jr

people geitting way off track here

prime example: i be john mayer, rambling about how garbagemen work as hard as lawyers. lol. try to stay on topic big guy.

maybe you're just too fickle to understand what everyone else did.

 

[justscoreda100]

The Chief of the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) a non- partisan group, just testified before a senate committee that both health care bills are projected toincrease government liability and will not curb the rising cost of health care.

So they're raising taxes which could cause job losses for a bill that's looking more and more like a spending bill instead of a reform bill.

 

[718stylez]

^ By mandate the CBO cannot account for any of the planned efficiencies in those plans either. I think its important for the CBO to remain objective and notspeculate about what efficiencies are achievable beforehand, but at the same time you have to think there are some cost saving measures. especially consideringthe concessions that drug makers and hospitals have made towards the plan. these concessions can't be taken into account by the CBO. not trying to pull youeither way on this, just wanted to clarify how the CBO gets its numbers.

 

[heliumclinton]

What it all comes down to is this to me, if you can give than give point blank. It's cool if you want to be on your high horse and have that "I gothere alone so they could do the same" mentality but realize those same people who you said nah I'm not giving jack *##$ to you will be the same thatwill rob you when you walking out of the bank

. Desperate times call for desperate measures and we have to survive.

Real talk it's bigger than $$ no problem don't give up your money but atleast GIVE a solution, a answer, a job. Let us know how we could get whereyou're at or help us start somewhere but just saying no because you're selfish and greedy isn't going to get you nowhere because you live in thesame world as me.

 

[p0tat0 5alad]

Originally Posted by heLiumcLinton

What it as comes down to is this to me, if you can give than give point blank. It's cool if you want to be on your high horse and have that "I got here alone so they could do the same" mentality but realize those same people who you said nah I'm not giving jack !!%+ to you will be the same that will rob you when you walking out of the bank

. Desperate times call for desperate measures and we have to survive.

Real talk it's bigger than $$ no problem don't give up your money but atleast GIVE a solution, a answer, a job. Let us know how we could get where you're at or help us start somewhere but just saying no because you're selfish and greedy isn't going to get you nowhere because you live in the same world as me.

Real talk, I hate to hear people complain but then don't have a solution. Basically they are complaining to be complaining. For all you guysagainst it, could you atleast explain an alternative that would help out. I'm not saying I agree with taking half of someones paycheck but maybe that willhelp curb people from spending beyond their means.

 

[joseph camel jr]

Originally Posted by p0tat0 5alad

Originally Posted by heLiumcLinton

What it as comes down to is this to me, if you can give than give point blank. It's cool if you want to be on your high horse and have that "I got here alone so they could do the same" mentality but realize those same people who you said nah I'm not giving jack !!%+ to you will be the same that will rob you when you walking out of the bank

. Desperate times call for desperate measures and we have to survive.

Real talk it's bigger than $$ no problem don't give up your money but atleast GIVE a solution, a answer, a job. Let us know how we could get where you're at or help us start somewhere but just saying no because you're selfish and greedy isn't going to get you nowhere because you live in the same world as me.

Real talk, I hate to hear people complain but then don't have a solution. Basically they are complaining to be complaining. For all you guys against it, could you atleast explain an alternative that would help out. I'm not saying I agree with taking half of someones paycheck but maybe that will help curb people from spending beyond their means.

spend less tax less? hasn't that been said a million times?

 

[daytona 5000]

At da end of da day, it is only money yo

 

[wawaweewa]

Originally Posted by Ralf Loran

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by bhzmafia14

http://www.youtube.com/v/x1C_NWMRs8Q&hl=en&fs=1&http://www.youtube.com/v/x1C_NWMRs8Q&hl=en&fs=1& The Minister wrote:

---

WTH? When did this happen and where?

Obama got schooled in Russia. Got lectured like a little boy by Putin for an hour.
When someone in Russia lectures you for an hour that basically means they think pretty low of you.

Not surprised he got snubbed here.� Obama's "hope" and "change" means nothing there.
They're explouiting Obama's psychology. Putin prob had an entire volume drawn up on Obama's entire (real) history.

Stop overreacting. It's just a handshake.


Jokes on you because I didn't only talk about the handshake.
Comprehend much?

Go read some of the Russian media regarding the two incidents.
Obama got schooled because they have no respect for him.