rushmc 23 #126 August 14, 2012 Quote Being thwarted at every turn by a Republican House whose primary stated goal is to make him a one term president, rather than to do what's best for the country, is hardly an indictment of the president. STOP IT PleaseSurely you dont think everyone as stupid as Obama mustKnock if off"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #127 August 14, 2012 Quote Quote Being thwarted at every turn by a Republican House whose primary stated goal is to make him a one term president, rather than to do what's best for the country, is hardly an indictment of the president. STOP IT PleaseSurely you dont think everyone as stupid as Obama mustKnock if off Anyone who is not a multi-millionaire who thinks Romney has their interests at heart is REALLY REALLY STUPID.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #128 August 14, 2012 Quote Quote Quote Being thwarted at every turn by a Republican House whose primary stated goal is to make him a one term president, rather than to do what's best for the country, is hardly an indictment of the president. STOP IT PleaseSurely you dont think everyone as stupid as Obama mustKnock if off Anyone who is not a multi-millionaire who thinks Romney has their interests at heart is REALLY REALLY STUPID. Looks way better than Comrad Obama Now, please Keep it coming I love you and Biden on the Dem side Cant get any better than that"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 444 #129 August 14, 2012 Quote Being thwarted at every turn by a Republican House whose primary stated goal is to make him a one term president, rather than to do what's best for the country, is hardly an indictment of the president. You must not have read the entire post where I ended with: "And before you go on caterwauling about an intransigent Republican party may I remind you that Obama had both the House of Representative AND a filibuster proof Senate for nearly half of his term." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #130 August 14, 2012 QuoteQuote Being thwarted at every turn by a Republican House whose primary stated goal is to make him a one term president, rather than to do what's best for the country, is hardly an indictment of the president. You must not have read the entire post where I ended with: "And before you go on caterwauling about an intransigent Republican party may I remind you that Obama had both the House of Representative AND a filibuster proof Senate for nearly half of his term." That's an indication of that blind spot they all seem to have. It's always someone else's fault. And if you don't agree with them, they call you an idiot and try and parse your words or twist the meaning of what you said. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #131 August 14, 2012 Opinion? Ryan is intended to pull in the fiscal tea party (the original intent, not the hijackers) and hold them. Not much, but guaranteeing them is a predictable move. they already have the social conservatives no matter what, they are as fanatical as the social libs. So Mitt needs a position to appeal to the social center. This helps. Now Mitt can be a bit more aggressive in the expected move to center for the general election. Maybe even try to appeal to some social centrist positions. (short answer, Ryan aboard will mitigate the voter impact of the fiscal hawks, allowing Mitt to floats talk about some spendings to appeal to the less fiscally responsible voters that want their cut for the vote) will it work? I dunno. but it's a strategy as good as many watch the speeches, Mitt will talk about 'helping' those struggling, etc etc etc, while simultaneously, Ryan will stay on mission about budgets and cutting spending. Obama will try to buy votes as usual (high visibility), Biden will try to not do maximum damage in any speech (minimize visibility) - SOP for the left, now to be balanced (attempt) by Mitt. So the fiscal swing vote is whats in play now. I find it sad that the real message we need (spending control) will be relegated to focus from a VP candidate to contain a demographic that politicians just don't want to give attention to. Nothing new here - another boring social battle over who gets to overspend on their favorite impotent and bankrupting issues. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #132 August 14, 2012 QuoteAnyone who is not a multi-millionaire communist who thinks Romney Obama has their interests at heart is REALLY REALLY STUPID. .People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites normiss 893 #133 August 14, 2012 Like all sides, people believe what they want to. We're fucked I tell you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites brenthutch 444 #134 August 14, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4-AKcH3eC8&feature=related Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DaVinci 0 #135 August 14, 2012 Quote He gives Romney a real chance at a win The problem is with Ryan's budget, not even whats in it, but the fact he actually has one. This gives the other side plenty of ammo to use against Romney/Ryan. Never mind that the left has not really put out a budget in three years.... People want to vote 'ideas' not data it seems. Quotethen it may turn out that the GOP treats 'fucking with medicare' the same way Democrats have treated gun control legislation since the 2000 election And ignoring a MAJOR problem. QuoteExciting stuff for the spectators Makes me sick to my stomach.... I don't think Ryan is actually going to help. Rubio might have carried FL. The chances of a "R" victory is very slim given the electoral system. Liberal strong holds: 172 EC Likely Liberal: 99EC Conservative strong: 139 Likely: 42 So right there we have: 271 to 181. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #136 August 14, 2012 Well, at least he's smarter than Bush. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites brenthutch 444 #137 August 14, 2012 Biden just told a largely minority audience that Romney and Ryan "want to put you back in chains” I was heretofore unaware of that plank in the republican platform. I will now have to reevaluate my politics. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites StreetScooby 5 #138 August 14, 2012 Quote "For example, Mr. Romney wants to keep all the Bush tax cuts, then cut taxes much further, particularly for the rich, but he says the plan won’t grow the deficit by a dime." I've been reading the Tax Policy Center (TPC) article that David Firestone seems to have based his critique of Romeny's tax plan on: ON THE DISTRIBUTIONAL EFFECTS OF BASE-BROADENING INCOME TAX REFORM, along with referenced articles. The article is very well done, with assumptions clearly spelled out, and many references provided to boot. All of the referenced material is similarly well done. I'm still forming an opinion on it, but in the meantime, the WSJ came out today with an AEI analysis covering that TPC article. Thought I'd post it here, as they do a much better job than I can hope to (at this point in time ;): For what it's worth, the numbers being thrown out by various liberal pundits I've read seem to be those derived from the static analysis done by TPC. The entire purpose of the Romney plan is to grow the economy. That's the only way we have any hope of getting out of this fiscal mess. It's also clear that TPC is very pro-progressive tax structure, and anything that messes with that will be viewed negatively in their eyes. Simply reading over Romney's tax plan shows that the progressive character of our tax system will change, independent of the numbers bantered about. Mathematically Possible I've posted the entire article below, for your reading pleasure. Enjoy. ======================================= Mathematically Possible Correcting the false assumptions of Obama's tax gurus. It isn't easy being the intellectual frontmen for President Obama's re-election campaign, as the boys at the Brookings-Urban Institute Tax Policy Center are discovering. Their ballyhooed study of Mitt Romney's tax plan looks worse with each new examination. Mr. Romney's tax plan would cut income tax rates across the board by 20%, while cutting loopholes that mostly benefit those in the highest income classes. The Tax Policy Center claims it is "mathematically impossible" to finance the rate cut without jacking up taxes by $86 billion on the middle class and poor. Mr. Obama has jumped on the study to support his claims that Mr. Romney would raise taxes, though the Republican has proposed no such thing. (See "The Romney Hood Fairy Tale," August 8.) The study's biggest distortion is its raw assertion that Mr. Romney would refuse to close certain loopholes. In the appendix, the Tax Policy Center lists, among others, two giant tax deductions that it says would go untouched: the exclusion of interest on tax-exempt municipal bonds, and the exclusion of interest on life insurance savings. The study claims that Mr. Romney won't close these because they are incentives for saving and investment. One problem: Nowhere do Mitt Romney or his advisers say that these deductions can't be touched. Senior economic adviser Glenn Hubbard says these deductions are definitely "on the table." And by the way, the municipal bond interest exclusion mainly serves to encourage states and cities to borrow and spend more, which is the opposite of a saving incentive. Many reform plans dating to Dick Armey's flat tax in 1995 have recommended eliminating both of these exemptions. Scholars at the American Enterprise Institute examined what happens to the Tax Policy Center math when this error is corrected. AEI economic research associate Matt Jensen found that "Both of these exclusions largely benefit the wealthy, and, according to the Treasury Department, added together their repeal would net upwards of $90 billion that could be redistributed to lower-income individuals. That would go a long way towards balancing the supposed $86 billion windfall for the rich and tax hike on the middle class and poor, and it could make the impossible suddenly possible." The AEI analysis warns that these numbers change from year to year, but it concludes that by eliminating these two deductions and a few other smaller ones, Mr. Romney can make his math add up. In other words, poof, no tax hike on the middle class. This won't stop the Obama campaign from making its false claims, but it ought to at least embarrass the media into questioning them. It should also embarrass the analysts at the Tax Policy Center who claim to be nonpartisan, above-the-fray economists but somehow always seem to provide analysis that serves those who want to raise tax rates.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #139 August 14, 2012 This is what I have been trying to get them to see. The blind spot is just too large. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sundevil777 102 #140 August 14, 2012 QuoteThis is what I have been trying to get them to see. The blind spot is just too large. A blind spot is caused by something getting in the way that you can't do anything about. This is just not wanting to look.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,465 #141 August 14, 2012 Quote I do not think Obama thinks he needs a budget Why? Because no one built anything buy themselves so, by extension, it is all the governments to start with Quote Obama: "A New Vision Of An America In Which Prosperity Is Shared" Equality of outcome http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/08/13/obama_a_new_vision_of_an_america_which_prosperity_is_shared.html From the same link, Obama:"I believe we have to keep working to create an America where no matter who you are, no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, no matter what your last name is, no matter who you love, you can make it here if you try." I too believe prosperity should be shared. As in prosperous companies providing jobs within the same country. Companies using profits to invest back into the same country. Banks providing loans to stimulate growth. Hard work that pays off and provides money that doesn't get stored off shore. Throw in some nobless oblige and one is actively sharing prosperity. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites brenthutch 444 #142 August 14, 2012 "A blind spot is caused by something getting in the way that you can't do anything about." Speaking metaphorically; you could adjust your mirrors. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites normiss 893 #143 August 14, 2012 Shared prosperity = success penalty. It used to be a driving force. Success. We're forgetting what it means to succeed. Riding the coat tails of others is no way to succeed in life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,147 #144 August 14, 2012 QuoteOpinion? . The analyst on NPR yesterday reckoned that unless Mitt comes out with his own fiscal plan details REAL SOON he will by implication have bound himself to the Ryan plan. I suspect this is an accurate assessment.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,147 #145 August 14, 2012 Quote Scholars at the American Enterprise Institute examined .... Well, there's a nice non-partisan analysis.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites StreetScooby 5 #146 August 14, 2012 Quote "I believe we have to keep working to create an America where no matter who you are, no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, no matter what your last name is, no matter who you love, you can make it here if you try." I think a lot of people, myself included, see a significant mismatch between Obama's word and his deeds. He is widely perceived as the most anti-business president we've had since FDR, and rightfully so, IMO. What Obama doesn't realize (...and how could he, since he's never really had a real job) is how much hard work actually goes into being successful in a competitive market environment. It's not easy.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites brenthutch 444 #147 August 14, 2012 QuoteQuoteOpinion? . The analyst on NPR yesterday reckoned that unless Mitt comes out with his own fiscal plan details REAL SOON he will by implication have bound himself to the Ryan plan. I suspect this is an accurate assessment. Your mean this budget? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbzpuqWo6yU Looks like Obamas own guy likes the Ryan budget better than the Obama one. (Or lack thereof) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,147 #148 August 14, 2012 QuoteQuote "I believe we have to keep working to create an America where no matter who you are, no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, no matter what your last name is, no matter who you love, you can make it here if you try." I think a lot of people, myself included, see a significant mismatch between Obama's word and his deeds. He is widely perceived as the most anti-business president we've had since FDR, and rightfully so, IMO. Must be why the stock market is up some 80% since he's been president.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,465 #149 August 14, 2012 QuoteShared prosperity = success penalty. Not quite sure how you figure that. It would appear that those who are most succesfull get the most beneficial treatment as well, specially in the US. QuoteRiding the coat tails of others is no way to succeed in life. Yet we all do it to some extent. We ride the coattail of those who have gone before us and have opened doors. Have developed new tools, new processes, those who have mentored or hired you. Those who were willing to invest in a pipe dream, etc. And that is only if you are equating success and wealth as being identical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites StreetScooby 5 #150 August 14, 2012 Quote Must be why the stock market is up some 80% since he's been president. That's widely acknowledged, by those who make their living picking stocks, to be the result of the Fed's QE policies.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next Page 6 of 10 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
normiss 893 #133 August 14, 2012 Like all sides, people believe what they want to. We're fucked I tell you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 444 #134 August 14, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4-AKcH3eC8&feature=related Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #135 August 14, 2012 Quote He gives Romney a real chance at a win The problem is with Ryan's budget, not even whats in it, but the fact he actually has one. This gives the other side plenty of ammo to use against Romney/Ryan. Never mind that the left has not really put out a budget in three years.... People want to vote 'ideas' not data it seems. Quotethen it may turn out that the GOP treats 'fucking with medicare' the same way Democrats have treated gun control legislation since the 2000 election And ignoring a MAJOR problem. QuoteExciting stuff for the spectators Makes me sick to my stomach.... I don't think Ryan is actually going to help. Rubio might have carried FL. The chances of a "R" victory is very slim given the electoral system. Liberal strong holds: 172 EC Likely Liberal: 99EC Conservative strong: 139 Likely: 42 So right there we have: 271 to 181. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #136 August 14, 2012 Well, at least he's smarter than Bush. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 444 #137 August 14, 2012 Biden just told a largely minority audience that Romney and Ryan "want to put you back in chains” I was heretofore unaware of that plank in the republican platform. I will now have to reevaluate my politics. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #138 August 14, 2012 Quote "For example, Mr. Romney wants to keep all the Bush tax cuts, then cut taxes much further, particularly for the rich, but he says the plan won’t grow the deficit by a dime." I've been reading the Tax Policy Center (TPC) article that David Firestone seems to have based his critique of Romeny's tax plan on: ON THE DISTRIBUTIONAL EFFECTS OF BASE-BROADENING INCOME TAX REFORM, along with referenced articles. The article is very well done, with assumptions clearly spelled out, and many references provided to boot. All of the referenced material is similarly well done. I'm still forming an opinion on it, but in the meantime, the WSJ came out today with an AEI analysis covering that TPC article. Thought I'd post it here, as they do a much better job than I can hope to (at this point in time ;): For what it's worth, the numbers being thrown out by various liberal pundits I've read seem to be those derived from the static analysis done by TPC. The entire purpose of the Romney plan is to grow the economy. That's the only way we have any hope of getting out of this fiscal mess. It's also clear that TPC is very pro-progressive tax structure, and anything that messes with that will be viewed negatively in their eyes. Simply reading over Romney's tax plan shows that the progressive character of our tax system will change, independent of the numbers bantered about. Mathematically Possible I've posted the entire article below, for your reading pleasure. Enjoy. ======================================= Mathematically Possible Correcting the false assumptions of Obama's tax gurus. It isn't easy being the intellectual frontmen for President Obama's re-election campaign, as the boys at the Brookings-Urban Institute Tax Policy Center are discovering. Their ballyhooed study of Mitt Romney's tax plan looks worse with each new examination. Mr. Romney's tax plan would cut income tax rates across the board by 20%, while cutting loopholes that mostly benefit those in the highest income classes. The Tax Policy Center claims it is "mathematically impossible" to finance the rate cut without jacking up taxes by $86 billion on the middle class and poor. Mr. Obama has jumped on the study to support his claims that Mr. Romney would raise taxes, though the Republican has proposed no such thing. (See "The Romney Hood Fairy Tale," August 8.) The study's biggest distortion is its raw assertion that Mr. Romney would refuse to close certain loopholes. In the appendix, the Tax Policy Center lists, among others, two giant tax deductions that it says would go untouched: the exclusion of interest on tax-exempt municipal bonds, and the exclusion of interest on life insurance savings. The study claims that Mr. Romney won't close these because they are incentives for saving and investment. One problem: Nowhere do Mitt Romney or his advisers say that these deductions can't be touched. Senior economic adviser Glenn Hubbard says these deductions are definitely "on the table." And by the way, the municipal bond interest exclusion mainly serves to encourage states and cities to borrow and spend more, which is the opposite of a saving incentive. Many reform plans dating to Dick Armey's flat tax in 1995 have recommended eliminating both of these exemptions. Scholars at the American Enterprise Institute examined what happens to the Tax Policy Center math when this error is corrected. AEI economic research associate Matt Jensen found that "Both of these exclusions largely benefit the wealthy, and, according to the Treasury Department, added together their repeal would net upwards of $90 billion that could be redistributed to lower-income individuals. That would go a long way towards balancing the supposed $86 billion windfall for the rich and tax hike on the middle class and poor, and it could make the impossible suddenly possible." The AEI analysis warns that these numbers change from year to year, but it concludes that by eliminating these two deductions and a few other smaller ones, Mr. Romney can make his math add up. In other words, poof, no tax hike on the middle class. This won't stop the Obama campaign from making its false claims, but it ought to at least embarrass the media into questioning them. It should also embarrass the analysts at the Tax Policy Center who claim to be nonpartisan, above-the-fray economists but somehow always seem to provide analysis that serves those who want to raise tax rates.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #139 August 14, 2012 This is what I have been trying to get them to see. The blind spot is just too large. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #140 August 14, 2012 QuoteThis is what I have been trying to get them to see. The blind spot is just too large. A blind spot is caused by something getting in the way that you can't do anything about. This is just not wanting to look.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #141 August 14, 2012 Quote I do not think Obama thinks he needs a budget Why? Because no one built anything buy themselves so, by extension, it is all the governments to start with Quote Obama: "A New Vision Of An America In Which Prosperity Is Shared" Equality of outcome http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/08/13/obama_a_new_vision_of_an_america_which_prosperity_is_shared.html From the same link, Obama:"I believe we have to keep working to create an America where no matter who you are, no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, no matter what your last name is, no matter who you love, you can make it here if you try." I too believe prosperity should be shared. As in prosperous companies providing jobs within the same country. Companies using profits to invest back into the same country. Banks providing loans to stimulate growth. Hard work that pays off and provides money that doesn't get stored off shore. Throw in some nobless oblige and one is actively sharing prosperity. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 444 #142 August 14, 2012 "A blind spot is caused by something getting in the way that you can't do anything about." Speaking metaphorically; you could adjust your mirrors. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 893 #143 August 14, 2012 Shared prosperity = success penalty. It used to be a driving force. Success. We're forgetting what it means to succeed. Riding the coat tails of others is no way to succeed in life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #144 August 14, 2012 QuoteOpinion? . The analyst on NPR yesterday reckoned that unless Mitt comes out with his own fiscal plan details REAL SOON he will by implication have bound himself to the Ryan plan. I suspect this is an accurate assessment.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #145 August 14, 2012 Quote Scholars at the American Enterprise Institute examined .... Well, there's a nice non-partisan analysis.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #146 August 14, 2012 Quote "I believe we have to keep working to create an America where no matter who you are, no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, no matter what your last name is, no matter who you love, you can make it here if you try." I think a lot of people, myself included, see a significant mismatch between Obama's word and his deeds. He is widely perceived as the most anti-business president we've had since FDR, and rightfully so, IMO. What Obama doesn't realize (...and how could he, since he's never really had a real job) is how much hard work actually goes into being successful in a competitive market environment. It's not easy.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 444 #147 August 14, 2012 QuoteQuoteOpinion? . The analyst on NPR yesterday reckoned that unless Mitt comes out with his own fiscal plan details REAL SOON he will by implication have bound himself to the Ryan plan. I suspect this is an accurate assessment. Your mean this budget? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbzpuqWo6yU Looks like Obamas own guy likes the Ryan budget better than the Obama one. (Or lack thereof) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #148 August 14, 2012 QuoteQuote "I believe we have to keep working to create an America where no matter who you are, no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, no matter what your last name is, no matter who you love, you can make it here if you try." I think a lot of people, myself included, see a significant mismatch between Obama's word and his deeds. He is widely perceived as the most anti-business president we've had since FDR, and rightfully so, IMO. Must be why the stock market is up some 80% since he's been president.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #149 August 14, 2012 QuoteShared prosperity = success penalty. Not quite sure how you figure that. It would appear that those who are most succesfull get the most beneficial treatment as well, specially in the US. QuoteRiding the coat tails of others is no way to succeed in life. Yet we all do it to some extent. We ride the coattail of those who have gone before us and have opened doors. Have developed new tools, new processes, those who have mentored or hired you. Those who were willing to invest in a pipe dream, etc. And that is only if you are equating success and wealth as being identical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #150 August 14, 2012 Quote Must be why the stock market is up some 80% since he's been president. That's widely acknowledged, by those who make their living picking stocks, to be the result of the Fed's QE policies.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
