bicranium Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Best part of the AMA... By the way, if you want to know what I think about this whole reddit experience - NOT BAD! Referencing this picture for those who don't know... http://i.imgur.com/yrl7y.png Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty2Hotty Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 I miss Ross Perot. He's about 5 miles away from me. SRSLY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 We could debate the issues all day long and take this thread another 144 pages like it's destined to go, but in the end, it's Pointless. Again, after 4 years of Obama, if we're all still asking these questions, it's clear, he's not the guy to keep in office. Is Romeny perfect? Again, let's start a 144 page thread to discuss. However, let's keep it simple and ask ourselves if we' rather roll the dice on a great orator that hasn't proven anything or listen to another successful businessman and learn from the mistakes of not doing so in the past. I don't like either side this year but my money is on a business man. The country and our finance system need saved. Clearly not a job for Obama. I see it similarly in that neither are perfect and on strictly economic terms. Obama cannot stand up and make an argument to save his ass, literally. Strip away the social issue bullshit (on which I skew far left) and make this only about the economy. It becomes an argument of who you believe drives economic progress; the "job creating" upper class or a strong middle class. People like me believe that job creation is a function of demand, not regulations or tax codes. Demand is created by an empowered middle class. An empowered middle class can ONLY exist in a market with significantly less income inequality. The shift of wealth from the many to the very few has created the reality in which we live. If you truly believe that Mitt Romney believes in free markets, and not: markets in which those who have write the rules- that's just foolish. If you believe that rigging the tax code in such a way that the "job creators" are able to hold and accumulate more wealth and that this will suddenly cause them to magically create jobs out of the goodness of their hearts, than supply side economics is your ship. Buy your ticket at the booth. A majority of economists and MarcCuban agree that further giveaway to the top 1% will not impact job creation and only exacerbate the income inequality issue. So it goes. I'll go vote in your best interest (speaking to a majority of CR) while voting against mine, while you do the opposite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Again, is Obama worthy of another term? How many remember this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LtbLEKHsi0&feature=related Yup. And Guantanamo, the patriot act, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeitgeist57 Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 I thought it was pretty cool to see him taking a social media site like reddit serious. I bet that bought him some votes. and he uses a mac. Even if you don't like the guy i think its a cool gesture. Shit Mccain couldn't have done it. That was the most amazing thing I've seen this year. Looking forward to him wearing horn-rimmed glasses and drinking a PBR. Maybe Obama can stimulate the economy by opening up a food truck business, biking around D.C. on a "fixie" :masturboy: Reddit = intarnet = super srs bizness. It's important this be his focus. HAI IT WORKED FOR WOODY HARRELSON :dumb::dumb::dumb: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 It becomes an argument of who you believe drives economic progress; the "job creating" upper class or a strong middle class. For me it boils down to which candidate has want it takes to create strong economic progress and again, I don't believe it's Obama. People like me believe that job creation is a function of demand, not regulations or tax codes. Demand is created by an empowered middle class. An empowered middle class can ONLY exist in a market with significantly less income inequality. I'm with you. I don't buy tax breaks for the rich will create anything. However, just the same, I know that as a business owner, if I'm forced to pay more taxes, I'm going to take what's mine (that money) back in some fashion from the people who work for me. So that too won't help either. In terms of inequality, Obama is worried way too much about the people below middle class. I'm not worried about the gap between the very rich and very poor. What needs fixed is the gap he's creating between the middle class and the rich. There will always be poor people. They need to begin helping themselves. They aren't the contributors thus focus on those that keep the world going, the middle class and up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 For me it boils down to which candidate has want it takes to create strong economic progress and again, I don't believe it's Obama. I'm with you. I don't buy tax breaks for the rich will create anything. However, just the same, I know that as a business owner, if I'm forced to pay more taxes, I'm going to take what's mine (that money) back in some fashion from the people who work for me. So that too won't help either. In terms of inequality, Obama is worried way too much about the people below middle class. I'm not worried about the gap between the very rich and very poor. What needs fixed is the gap he's creating between the middle class and the rich. There will always be poor people. They need to begin helping themselves. They aren't the contributors thus focus on those that keep the world going, the middle class and up. I agree with everything you said (!). My only caveat is that the economy is improving as I type, I'm not willing to give Supply side economics another shot to F that up. I wholeheartedly agree that far too much attention is paid to the very poor... on both sides. People here complain disproportionately about the freeloaders while missing the bigger picture which is, as you said, the gap between the middle class and the the top .5%, (top 1% is $358k+ W2 income which I do not consider to be part of the problem). Before I get called a flaming liberal again it should be known that on http://www.isidewith.com Obama is 3rd on my list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bicranium Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 http://i.imgur.com/Q852L.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10phone2 Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 something that my dad said the other day while visiting was interesting regarding his taxes. I use the same roads, air, schools, and electricity as everyone else but I pay more in taxes then what most people make in a year. Grant it, he doesn't mind it because he can afford it and considers it a good problem to have but it was an interesting statement. If you listen to the media, he isn't paying his fair share in taxes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 something that my dad said the other day while visiting was interesting regarding his taxes. I use the same roads, air, schools, and electricity as everyone else but I pay more in taxes then what most people make in a year. Granted, he doesn't mind it because he can afford it and considers it a good problem to have but it was an interesting statement. If you listen to the media, he isn't paying his fair share in taxes. Did his accumulation of wealth or income rely disproportionately on those resources? Example: I have 5 employees who all went to public schools, drive on public roads, and access the internet to serve my business. I make roughly a 50% margin on the gross pay they receive from me. Have I not consumed and benefited, as an aggregate, more than a single individual? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 I agree with everything you said (!). that's can't be. I'm going to bed as I must be delusional & tired :gabe: My only caveat is that the economy is improving as I type, I'm not willing to give Supply side economics another shot to F that up. Meh.....The dead grass in my lawn is growing faster: Time to put new puppets in the house. http://business.financialpost.com/2012/08/29/u-s-gdp-shows-economy-growing-but-slowly/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty2Hotty Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 96% Republican. Not surprised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 something that my dad said the other day while visiting was interesting regarding his taxes. I use the same roads, air, schools, and electricity as everyone else but I pay more in taxes then what most people make in a year. Grant it, he doesn't mind it because he can afford it and considers it a good problem to have but it was an interesting statement. I'm with your dad and to a point so is Mitt who I do likely believe has money in off-shore accounts. However, is that really such a wrong thing? I mean he's out to protect his millions just like all the rest of us so why not? We all pay too much in taxes. The money we pay is mismanaged and with the rash of levies that just got shot down, I think the majority see it that way too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 96% Republican. Not surprised. Not exactly something to be proud of. Most people have nuanced views that don't rigorously line up with a party trying to get 51% of people under a tent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty2Hotty Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Not exactly something to be proud of. Most people have nuanced views that don't rigorously line up with a party trying to get 51% of people under a tent. I'm in line with 50% of the voters in Texas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8 Beast Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 In before Romney gets voted in, nothing changes, and Romney supporters blame Obama....Just after Obama supporters vote him in and people blamed Bush for his problems... Long after Bush supporters vote him in and people blame Clinton... Way after Clinton fucks bitches, plays the saxophone, and Gore invents the internet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10phone2 Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 ninja edit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10phone2 Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Did his accumulation of wealth or income rely disproportionately on those resources? Example: I have 5 employees who all went to public schools, drive on public roads, and access the internet to serve my business. I make roughly a 50% margin on the gross pay they receive from me. Have I not consumed and benefited, as an aggregate, more than a single individual? good point, but I am on the fence about it. Yes he may have consumed more than an individual, but he has paid a skewed amount of taxes for the services. The taxes he has paid, did not allow any additional benefits from the city/government and his tax bracket supports a portion of the population. Here an interesting scenario. So if he does consume more than an average individual, should he not be rewarded for generating funds from the employees that there taxes support our cites, towns, etc? At some point, why should a person be penalized for being successful? you will have to excuse my randomness, it's been a few beers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10phone2 Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 I'm with your dad and to a point so is Mitt who I do likely believe has money in off-shore accounts. However, is that really such a wrong thing? I mean he's out to protect his millions just like all the rest of us so why not? We all pay too much in taxes. The money we pay is mismanaged and with the rash of levies that just got shot down, I think the majority see it that way too. your sir are correct. Our government spending has gotten out of control and will use any specialist group, event, minority class, rouge nation to justify the spending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 I'm in line with 50% of the voters in Texas. Mine said 51% agreement with Alabama, the reddest state there is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copperhead Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 People like me believe that job creation is a function of demand, not regulations or tax codes. I disagree. In growing a business, there is an amount of calculated risk that they are willing to take, in order to create new markets. Right now, there is a strong uncertainty in what direction taxes will go. This is causing businesses to hold onto what they have, so that they don't overreach only to have their taxes shoot up unexpectedly. If whoever is running the circus in DC would come up with a solid tax plan for the next 10 years, regardless of what it would entail so long as its not going to change, then companies would be comfortable to start spending on more risks, therefore hiring more people. Congress hasn't passed a budget in what, 4 years now? If I were running a business I wouldn't be doing anything risky until I got clear signals as to what my expenses will be. People act like all of the money in our economy disappeared, but the reality is that the money is being sat on until things become more steady. Completely different topic, but if Romney gets elected I'll get a good laugh, considering nobody is actually for him, he's just the "safe" alternative to the guy we have now. At least I won't be ashamed to vote for him like I was with McCain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wagner Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 I disagree. In growing a business, there is an amount of calculated risk that they are willing to take, in order to create new markets. Right now, there is a strong uncertainty in what direction taxes will go. This is causing businesses to hold onto what they have, so that they don't overreach only to have their taxes shoot up unexpectedly. If whoever is running the circus in DC would come up with a solid tax plan for the next 10 years, regardless of what it would entail so long as its not going to change, then companies would be comfortable to start spending on more risks, therefore hiring more people. Congress hasn't passed a budget in what, 4 years now? If I were running a business I wouldn't be doing anything risky until I got clear signals as to what my expenses will be. People act like all of the money in our economy disappeared, but the reality is that the money is being sat on until things become more steady. Completely different topic, but if Romney gets elected I'll get a good laugh, considering nobody is actually for him, he's just the "safe" alternative to the guy we have now. At least I won't be ashamed to vote for him like I was with McCain. Game.set.match Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
87GT Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 I don't like either side this year but my money is on a business man. The country and our finance system need saved. Clearly not a job for Obama. Feel free to banter about issues here and there to kill time. Ultimately we are getting stuck with one of the two. Who stands a better chance to implement what is needed. I stand by it not being Obama. Someone who is only out for profit will not have your best interest in mind, as a business owner or not. If you think otherwise you are stupid. Please do not vote with this kind of thinking. Voting for the lesser of 2 evils is not a valid excuse. If no one did this we might have a 3rd party president. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Karacho1647545492 Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 I have a hard time believing the people who voted AGAINST John Kerry in 2004 could stomach a vote for Romney this time around. I understand the "lesser of 2 evils" argument, but come on. Is there anyone in this political landscape whose true motives are blurrier than Romney's? Dare I use the 8-year-old term "flip flopper" to describe him? The entire Bush platform of 2004 boiled down to "I know I haven't been perfect, but give me 4 more years and I can fix this thing. And do it because you truly have NO IDEA WHAT MY OPPONENT STANDS FOR". Ask yourself, Republicans, if you believed Bush when he said it, why not now? Is it really all the reasons you say? Or is it because of the color tie he wears at conventions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Someone who is only out for profit will not have your best interest in mind, as a business owner or not. If you think otherwise you are stupid. Please do not vote with this kind of thinking. Voting for the lesser of 2 evils is not a valid excuse. If no one did this we might have a 3rd party president. There's no profit to speak of here. We're in debt, spending our way into a demise and are nothing but a consumptive country that if we shut our borders would implode. A business man can see that and just like Ross noted back in the 90's can keep that from happening. Like Mitt or not for what he did in the past, he did was job entailed him to do and he did it well. Our country is in pretty much the same situation as a struggling company about read to be taken over or in dire need for a venture company to come in an clean it up. You're right they don't have the best interests of each individual in mind when doing so. That's not their charter. Their charter is to save the company. The difference is I believe Mitt knows how to do that way more so than Obama and his crackhead team ever could. If they had a clue, they'd be executing a plan that would be showing results. It's been four years and we're further in debt and about to leap frog down with his "plan". Again, don't think for a minute Mitt and the other crooks aren't looking out for themselves and the wealthy. I know that, but he's also looking to right the country and I do believe that as if it was just money he was after, he could stay in the private sector. He's going to apply what he knows to the new role which has a slightly different charter than his role at Bain. In our current system voting for the third party is pissing away a vote. As much as I'd love to see it work, I know it won't. The system needs changed but right now that's not an option and we can't afford to see Obama in office for another four years. American's were fucking dumb ass blind to have put him there. Well, perhaps not as the ones that put him there are the ones he's helping, I just don't happen to fall into the that group of needy handout asking people. /rant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.