View Full Version : 2012 Elections in the USA
Casey Stengal used to get questions about Mickey Mantle and Whitey Ford concerning their supposed drinking and staying out all night. Finally Casey said 'why are guys always criticizing the guys who are winning me ball games'
Same with esten. Why is esten always criticizing the people who are keeping our country afloat i.e. The private sector
However, I expect this to change now that we know that esten secretly is an admirer and probably a cash contributing supporter of Mitt Romney
I'm not american but saw this on FB and thought I would share it with you guys here.
28422
...would likely have been calling for Romney to release more tax returns...Here's BO's record on releasing his personal records:
1. Occidental College records. SEALED.
2. Columbia college records. SEALED.
3. Columbia thesis paper. SEALED.
4. Harvard college records. SEALED.
5. Selective Service registration. SEALED.
6. Medical records. SEALED.
7. Illinois state senate schedule. SEALED.
8. Illinois state senate records. SEALED.
9. Law practice client list. SEALED.
10. Certified copy of original birth certificate. SEALED.
11. Signed, embossed paper certification of live birth. SEALED.
12. Baptism record. SEALED.
Any yet the leftists and their allies in the media just can't stop crying about not seeing MR's old tax returns.
Member #4112
07-27-12, 12:30
The typical liberal attitude:
Do as I say not as I do.
I think Esten takes this election way too seriously. The fact is, when you are riding a 3 legged horse (Obama) in the Kentucky Derby there is not much you can do but complain about the other jockeys.
Gato Hunter
07-27-12, 20:22
I was going to post some dumb ass comment but instead I'm talking to a chica that's going to fuck me all night long. You guys need to get laid more. Stop being so tense about shit you can't control. Acting like a fucking campingn staff when your nothing that's going to affect the vote. Cll fuckin rush and vent to him.
Big Money buys politicians and politicians legislate the laws in favor of Big Money. So, sooner or later, these Big Money will strip clean the middle class in the country quite legally. A modern form of slavery is being created. Actually, it has already happened and will continue. Just make sure you can navigate the minefield, and not get suck in by the glamour and easy comforts. The other option would be to join the ranks of the slave drivers.
Regardless of what a person say, they will vote with their wallet, not with what is in their heart.
Gato Hunter
07-27-12, 23:10
Big Money buys politicians and politicians legislate the laws in favor of Big Money. So, sooner or later, these Big Money will strip clean the middle class in the country quite legally. A modern form of slavery is being created. Actually, it has already happened and will continue. Just make sure you can navigate the minefield, and not get suck in by the glamour and easy comforts. The other option would be to join the ranks of the slave drivers.
Regardless of what a person say, they will vote with their wallet, not with what is in their heart.Being highly educated and employeed by the enemy is the way. I make the fuckers money. But hate them
Daddy Rulz
07-28-12, 10:46
Being highly educated and employeed by the enemy is the way. I make the fuckers money. But hate themMy best friend does the same. I wish I had started my education earlier in life.
It appears that Mitt Romney is looking more presidential everyday. It is not hard to imagine Mitt Romney in the White house. On the other hand, it appears that
Obama is looking more like an impostor everyday. Who let Obama in the White House? Obviously a lapse of judgement on our part.
I can understand why Esten switched sides and became a supporter of Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney just looks and acts like our President.
Wild Walleye
07-28-12, 15:37
Here's BO's record on releasing his personal records:
1. Occidental College records. SEALED.
2. Columbia college records. SEALED.
3. Columbia thesis paper. SEALED.
4. Harvard college records. SEALED.
5. Selective Service registration. SEALED.
6. Medical records. SEALED.
7. Illinois state senate schedule. SEALED.
8. Illinois state senate records. SEALED.
9. Law practice client list. SEALED.
10. Certified copy of original birth certificate. SEALED.
11. Signed, embossed paper certification of live birth. SEALED.
12. Baptism record. SEALED.
Any yet the leftists and their allies in the media just can't stop crying about not seeing MR's old tax returns.If he started to reveal that information, he might have to explain his stolen social security number.
Being highly educated and employeed by the enemy is the way. I make the fuckers money. But hate themYou are currently on some sort of short term disability coverage that lets you to hang in BA. Who paid for that policy GH. I bet it was a benefit that your employer provided you at virtually NO COST to you. It wasn't something you organized or even had a hand in planning or paying for. If you hate your employer so much I suggest you take a few chances, put up your own dime and show us your skills as a small business owner. The fact that the work you perform at your company, generates income and profit for the company that pays your salary, is somehow reason to HATE THEM!
Your comment does not support you being highly educated BUT does support your lack of understanding of the big picture. Why sleep with the "enemy" dude? Put that education and IQ to work and become your own boss. Ooops. Then you might become what you so dearly HATE!
"THE ENEMY". It must suck to be you. LOL. Monger On GH. Toymann
SnakeOilSales
07-28-12, 20:25
Here's BO's record on releasing his personal records:
1. Occidental College records. SEALED.
2. Columbia college records. SEALED.
3. Columbia thesis paper. SEALED.
4. Harvard college records. SEALED.
5. Selective Service registration. SEALED.
6. Medical records. SEALED.
7. Illinois state senate schedule. SEALED.
8. Illinois state senate records. SEALED.
9. Law practice client list. SEALED.
10. Certified copy of original birth certificate. SEALED.
11. Signed, embossed paper certification of live birth. SEALED.
12. Baptism record. SEALED.
Any yet the leftists and their allies in the media just can't stop crying about not seeing MR's old tax returns.Several of these claims have been revealed as complete bullshit; the birth certificate issue has long since been settled. Also, Obama's activity as an Illinois state senator is a matter of PUBLIC RECORD. On the other hand, the wise word circulating around the accounting community is that Romney utilized (prior to 2010) abusive tax shelters that were later ruled illegal by the IRS AND he participated in the IRS sanctioned amnesty which allowed him to repatriate previously undeclared funds in Switzerland without facing criminal penalties and with reduced IRS penalties and interest.
Member #4112
07-28-12, 22:40
Snake, what total be / s, Obama has not released anything. While his voting record is public everything else is still sealed.
The public knows almost everything beginning with his birth to present about Romney.
The public knows almost nothing about Obama because its SEALED except for his books which are proving to be a mix of lies and invention.
Obama is not running on his record that's for damn sure because it's so bad.
If all he can say is "we are moving in the right direction" after 5 trillion in spending, a stagnant economy, a shrinking workforce and unemployment still above 8% only proves he is a freaking idiot.
I'm waiting for the Labor Dept to declare another reduction in first unemployment claims and for the unemployment rate to fall below 8% even thought the very definition of growth precludes such events occurring when GDP growth is below 3% much less 1. 5%
Obama is a fraud at best.
SnakeOilSales
07-28-12, 23:21
Snake, what total be / s, Obama has not released anything. While his voting record is public everything else is still sealed.
The public knows almost everything beginning with his birth to present about Romney.
The public knows almost nothing about Obama because its SEALED except for his books which are proving to be a mix of lies and invention.
Obama is not running on his record that's for damn sure because it's so bad.
If all he can say is "we are moving in the right direction" after 5 trillion in spending, a stagnant economy, a shrinking workforce and unemployment still above 8% only proves he is a freaking idiot.
I'm waiting for the Labor Dept to declare another reduction in first unemployment claims and for the unemployment rate to fall below 8% even thought the very definition of growth precludes such events occurring when GDP growth is below 3% much less 1. 5%
Doppelgänger is a fraud at best.Why do you and the other Romneyphiles in this thread fail to acknowledge that your candidate very likely engaged in (now) ILLEGAL tax avoidance schemes and HID his money overseas in an action that DEFRAUDS the US government of its rightfully owed revenue? NO ONE other than Fox News pundits care about Obama's college grades, medical records, law clients etc etc. However, the public certainly will be interested in Romney DEFRAUDING the IRS via (now) ILLEGAL tax avoidance schemes and how he participated in the IRS amnesty after HIDING his money in Switzerland for many years.
Big Boss Man
07-29-12, 00:00
Snake, what total be / s, Obama has not released anything. While his voting record is public everything else is still sealed.
The public knows almost everything beginning with his birth to present about Romney.
The public knows almost nothing about Obama because its SEALED except for his books which are proving to be a mix of lies and invention.
Obama is not running on his record that's for damn sure because it's so bad.
If all he can say is "we are moving in the right direction" after 5 trillion in spending, a stagnant economy, a shrinking workforce and unemployment still above 8% only proves he is a freaking idiot.
I'm waiting for the Labor Dept to declare another reduction in first unemployment claims and for the unemployment rate to fall below 8% even thought the very definition of growth precludes such events occurring when GDP growth is below 3% much less 1. 5%
Obama is a fraud at best.I thought they would be an interesting read. I don't care whether or not he is baptized. What I found is that Romney graduated summa cum laude and Obama graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law. Usually when you graduate with honors from somewhere they publish your name in the graduation program. So Romney is definitely either smarter or a harder worker or both.
Why do you and the other Romneyphiles in this thread fail to acknowledge that your candidate very likely engaged in (now) ILLEGAL tax avoidance schemes and HID his money overseas in an action that DEFRAUDS the US government of its rightfully owed revenue?Obviously you are just poor trailer trash dude. Please pay attention! When you have Romney's kind of money (self-made I might add) , there is absolutely NO UPSIDE to the type of activity you elude to in your goofy post. Ignorant and stupid is no way to go through life fella. Oh, I forgot. You are just a liberal political shill anyway. Better to be thought a fool SnakeBoy and remain silent, than open your mouth and remove all doubt. IALOTFLMAO! Tick Tick Tick. Happy Mongering All but SnakeBoy. He has little game and should hunt pussy in chicago! LOL. Toymann
Let me get this straight. Romney graduated summa cum laude from Harvard Law School, was exceptionally, or should I say really exceptionally successful in the business world, was elected governor of the most liberal state in the union and as governor respected and worked with the opposition party, single handedly saved the 2002 Winter Olympics from a total meltdown and had tax accountants who understood the complexities and vagueness of our ridiculous tax system.
Why does Romney sound like Secretariat while Obama sounds like a donkey?
SnakeOilSales
07-29-12, 06:44
Obviously you are just poor trailer trash dude. Please pay attention! When you have Romney's kind of money (self-made I might add) , there is absolutely NO UPSIDE to the type of activity you elude to in your goofy post. Ignorant and stupid is no way to go through life fella. Oh, I forgot. You are just a liberal political shill anyway. Better to be thought a fool SnakeBoy and remain silent, than open your mouth and remove all doubt. IALOTFLMAO! Tick Tick Tick. Happy Mongering All but SnakeBoy. He has little game and should hunt pussy in chicago! LOL. ToymannMore name calling and personal attacks from the thread's top Ignoramous, Mr Toymann himself. Toymann wants everyone in the USA except for him to work at Wal-Mart or Burger King for $9 / hour. If you actually did some research and payed attention once in awhile Romney himself has admitted that he has / had off shore bank accounts in both Switzerland and the Cayman Islands. He also admitted to closing the Swiss bank account in 2009, at the same time Switzerland began to roll over on it's US clients and the IRS offered an tax dodger amnesty. The accounting community is now leaking information that Romney engaged in (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes AND participated in the amnesty, which is why Romney REFUSES to release pre-2010 tax returns.
More name calling and personal attacks from the thread's top Ignoramous, Mr Toymann himself. Toymann wants everyone in the USA except for him to work at Wal-Mart or Burger King for $9 / hour. If you actually did some research and payed attention once in awhile Romney himself has admitted that he has / had off shore bank accounts in both Switzerland and the Cayman Islands.All of which are legal activities, so what exactly is your complaint?
He also admitted to closing the Swiss bank account in 2009, at the same time Switzerland began to roll over on it's US clients and the IRS offered an tax dodger amnesty. The accounting community is now leaking information that Romney engaged in (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes AND participated in the amnesty, which is why Romney REFUSES to release pre-2010 tax returns.Pure speculation, without a single shred of evidence, postulated by the leftists and their allies in the media in their attempt to insinuate that these allegations are somehow meritorious.
Member #4112
07-29-12, 15:03
It does not matter if Snake is an Obama Shill, the whole point of Team Obama's campaign is to get folks talking about totally untrue BS about Romney so they won't start talking about what a idiot Obama is and what a wreck he has made of the economy.
Again Snake, where are Obama's records, don't deflect the question saying no one cares because they do. If the liberal media can attempt to bring up some alleged incident from high school, which was later proved false by the alleged 'victims' family no less, Obama's past is in play as well.
As people do the fact checking on Obama's two books they are finding he took 'literary license', a polite way to say he lied, on many 'facts' in his books. He has misrepresented both himself and his family origins in his books.
I've searched the web to find "the accounting community" leaking information about Romney. First of all there is no "accounting community" when it come to Romney since he has his own accountants / accounting firms to handle his filings and it would be a gross breach of confidentially to do so, but then Team Obama and liberals have never been formally introduced to such concepts as evidenced by the White House Staff leaks of classified information to make Obama look tough.
The economy is chugging along at 1. 5% growth which will not even produce enough jobs to satisfy the number of people just entering the work force much less reduce unemployment . Which takes at least 3+% to get there. Unemployment remains above 8. 2% and at 1. 5% GDP growth should be going higher.
OBAMA BUILT THAT FOR YOU.
The accounting community is now leaking information that Romney engaged in (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes AND participated in the amnesty, which is why Romney REFUSES to release pre-2010 tax returns.You must work at a Burger King to come forward with this golden nugget! IALOTFLMAO dude!
I will continue to kick you around like a silly ***** as long as you continue these types of fabrications, distortions and just plain old fashioned lies. Most of the fellas on this thread aren't that stupid fella. That said, keep the crazy stuff coming. The entertainment value is prices!"Accounting community"? Just about pissed myself laughing about that one. It is certainly obvious to me that your profession resume doesn't extend much longer than "just graduated highschool" and "it only took me 6 years"! LMAO. Happy Mongering All. Toymann
Big Boss Man
07-29-12, 16:20
It does not matter if Snake is an Obama Shill, the whole point of Team Obama's campaign is to get folks talking about totally untrue BS about Romney so they won't start talking about what a idiot Obama is and what a wreck he has made of the economy.Obama is trying to rip Romney a new asshole. Duh yeah. Thanks for the information Doppelganger. Relax. Romney will pull ahead after the Republican convention in late August or early September when he starts laying out his plan. You will hear nothing but bullshit until then. The tax bullshit plays to the uneducated Democrats. The college transcripts play to the uneducated Republicans.
It is just like the Clintons and Whitewater. The story played to people without money. Most people with money have had a business deal go sour on them in their lifetime and that is what Whitewater was.
SnakeOilSales
07-29-12, 17:19
It does not matter if Snake is an Obama Shill, the whole point of Team Obama's campaign is to get folks talking about totally untrue BS about Romney so they won't start talking about what a idiot Obama is and what a wreck he has made of the economy.
Again Snake, where are Obama's records, don't deflect the question saying no one cares because they do. If the liberal media can attempt to bring up some alleged incident from high school, which was later proved false by the alleged 'victims' family no less, Obama's past is in play as well.
As people do the fact checking on Obama's two books they are finding he took 'literary license', a polite way to say he lied, on many 'facts' in his books. He has misrepresented both himself and his family origins in his books.
I've searched the web to find "the accounting community" leaking information about Romney. First of all there is no "accounting community" when it come to Romney since he has his own accountants / accounting firms to handle his filings and it would be a gross breach of confidentially to do so, but then Team Obama and liberals have never been formally introduced to such concepts as evidenced by the White House Staff leaks of classified information to make Obama look tough.
The economy is chugging along at 1. 5% growth which will not even produce enough jobs to satisfy the number of people just entering the work force much less reduce unemployment. Which takes at least 3+% to get there. Unemployment remains above 8. 2% and at 1. 5% GDP growth should be going higher.
OBAMA BUILT THAT FOR YOU.The accounting community I am referring to are the private conversations I have had with upper level CPA's currently and formerly employed by Ernst and Young, Deloitte, and others. The oligarchs on this thread might dismiss this issue is being talked about all over the internet.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2012/08/investigating-mitt-romney-offshore-accounts
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/19/mitt-romneys-offshore-tax-accounts_n_1686742.html
SnakeOilSales
07-29-12, 17:24
All of which are legal activities, so what exactly is your complaint?
Pure speculation, without a single shred of evidence, postulated by the leftists and their allies in the media in their attempt to insinuate that these allegations are somehow meritorious.The point is that these are shady and deceptive tactics used to defraud the US Treasury out of millions of dollars; tactics that are unfitting for a man who claims he loves the USA so much that he aspires to be POTUS and he obviously shows this by paying as little as possible through (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes, keeping his money in non-American banks, and betting against the currency of the nation he aspires to lead. Offshore bank accounts, tax avoidance schemes, currency hedges, etc are perfectly fine for you, me and Gordon Gekko to utilize, but none of us are ever going to be POTUS.
More name calling and personal attacks from the thread's top Ignoramous, Mr Toymann himself. Toymann wants everyone in the USA except for him to work at Wal-Mart or Burger King for $9 / hour. If you actually did some research and payed attention once in awhile Romney himself has admitted that he has / had off shore bank accounts in both Switzerland and the Cayman Islands. He also admitted to closing the Swiss bank account in 2009, at the same time Switzerland began to roll over on it's US clients and the IRS offered an tax dodger amnesty. The accounting community is now leaking information that Romney engaged in (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes AND participated in the amnesty, which is why Romney REFUSES to release pre-2010 tax returns.The United States Congress and the IRS in their magnificent wisdom have passed and implemented laws such that tax exempt USA institutions, like pension funds, may only invest in foreign private equity and hedge funds. In addition, most foreign investors will not invest in U.S. funds because they would have to comply with the ridiculously complex U.S. tax code.
USA fund managers can defer personal income tax by channeling their management and performance fees from these foreign funds through places like the Cayman Islands. This is the way the business works. George Soros and many other Democrats have taken advantage of it. Democrat politicians, like Chuck Schumer until recently, have fought tooth and nail to keep this system in place. It's probably why Romney has accounts in the Cayman Islands. EVERYBODY DOES THIS, fund managers who are Democrats and fund managers who are Republicans.
I know someone who participated in the "tax dodger amnesty" you refer to. He had a bank account in Canada for several years that had a maximum account balance of about $11, 000. He failed to report the account and the interest income to the IRS. He underpaid his taxes by $6. 00. The IRS fined him $3, 000, and he paid twice that in legal and accounting bills.
If Romney had participated in voluntary disclosure, that would have undoubtedly been leaked by the Obama administration by now. Maybe he hasn't released his returns because he doesn't want Democrat nut cases poring over his returns trying to find where his accountant screwed up. Given the size and complexity of the USA tax code, anyone preparing a return as complicated as Romney's is going to screw up.
I'm afraid to even contribute to Romney's campaign. This is the kind of thing that happens to people who do:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444464304577537233908744496.html
The accounting community I am referring to are the private conversations I have had with upper level CPA's currently and formerly employed by Ernst and Young, Deloitte, and others.IALOTFLMAO! Based on your past posts there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that YOU would be having conversations with upper level CPA's from well known firms, around the water cooler I'm guessing. Keep the blather coming SnakeBoy! You are getting better with each post. I should start a survey with the membership on the chances of anyone believing you have even had a single conversation with a CPA at all, in your entire sad deluded life! LOL! However, I already know the results of said poll. Keep the material coming dude. It's all good. Toymann.
Ps. Whats next SnakeBoy, you'll be reporting that you are having an affair with Ann Romney and she told you over some pillow talk that her husband is a travesti! LMAO
You must work at a Burger King to come forward with this golden nugget! IALOTFLMAO dude!
I will continue to kick you around like a silly * as long as you continue these types of fabrications, distortions and just plain old fashioned lies. Most of the fellas on this thread aren't that stupid fella. That said, keep the crazy stuff coming. The entertainment value is prices!"Accounting community"? Just about pissed myself laughing about that one. It is certainly obvious to me that your profession resume doesn't extend much longer than "just graduated highschool" and "it only took me 6 years"! LMAO. Happy Mongering All. ToymannThere are a lot of professional, and other,"communities" in the USA. The dues paying members of the professional "communities" are represented by organizations such as the AICPA, ABA, AMA, SNAME, etc, etc. These "communities" talk among themselves, go to conventions, have trade publications, etc, etc. Are the posters on this board that obtuse?
Tres3
SnakeOilSales
07-29-12, 17:39
You must work at a Burger King to come forward with this golden nugget! IALOTFLMAO dude!
I will continue to kick you around like a silly * as long as you continue these types of fabrications, distortions and just plain old fashioned lies. Most of the fellas on this thread aren't that stupid fella. That said, keep the crazy stuff coming. The entertainment value is prices!"Accounting community"? Just about pissed myself laughing about that one. It is certainly obvious to me that your profession resume doesn't extend much longer than "just graduated highschool" and "it only took me 6 years"! LMAO. Happy Mongering All. ToymannYes, you are absolutely correct in that I have been working at Burger King since the age of 16 and have continued my long and distinguished career at BK even after I obtained my GED at the age of 27. The excellent pay, $9 / hour, affords me the luxury of flying to Buenos Aires in J where I spend about half the year at my other career, which is managing and directing a unit of motorcycle based Colombian sicarios whose primary work includes torturing, carving up and decapitating contracted targets at my command and for relatively little compensation (by US standards). Generally the contracted targets are mid-level dealers who didn't pay up but lately the prey has grown to include gringos who bring large sums of US cash to Buenos Aires as a way of beating the official exchange rate. Ironically, and perhaps not surprisingly, it is the "cueva" owners themselves who have become our biggest clients.
Yes, you are absolutely correct in that I have been working at Burger King since the age of 16 and have continued my long and distinguished career at BK even after I obtained my GED at the age of 27. The excellent pay, $9 / hour, affords me the luxury of flying to Buenos Aires in J where I spend about half the year at my other career, which is managing and directing a unit of motorcycle based Colombian sicarios whose primary work includes torturing, carving up and decapitating contracted targets at my command and for relatively little compensation (by US standards). Generally the contracted targets are mid-level dealers who didn't pay up but lately the prey has grown to include gringos who bring large sums of US cash to Buenos Aires as a way of beating the official exchange rate. Ironically, and perhaps not surprisingly, it is the "cueva" owners themselves who have become our biggest clients.Good one SnakeBoy. That was pretty funny. Glad you have a sense of humor. This is a trait rarely found in wild-ass liberals. There might be hope for you yet, BUT I DOUBT IT! LOL. Happy Mongering All. Toymann
Question: What do Obama supporters and sperm have in common?
Answer: One in 50,000,000 has a chance of becoming a human being
Member #4112
07-29-12, 21:36
Ok Snake, you are conversing with certified public accountants who are telling you Romney did something wrong without seeing any documentation or filings other than those which have been released so far?
They must be expressing POLITICAL opinions as they would probably be terminated for expressing such opinions professionally based on what is out there now. I doubt their employers would be thrilled having CPA's expressing their considered professional opinions with total lack of information.
If having an offshore account were a crime, as you seem to believe, then we need look no further than the senior White House staff for culprits. Valarie Jarrett would be one of the first ones on the list. As you seem so concerned about folks defrauding the government, why aren't you more concerned about welfare fraud and other federal handout program fraud? Even more to the point how about all of Obama's 'green' friends getting so much money from the Fed for companies in which they are major investors?
Ah, I see it now, you are only interested in pointing the finger at conservatives. If you do a little checking some of the worst offenders are LIBERALS and those DIRTY RICH LIBERALS who always back causes to give away other people's money but never their own.
SnakeOilSales
07-29-12, 22:04
Ok Snake, you are conversing with certified public accountants who are telling you Romney did something wrong without seeing any documentation or filings other than those which have been released so far?
They must be expressing POLITICAL opinions as they would probably be terminated for expressing such opinions professionally based on what is out there now. I doubt their employers would be thrilled having CPA's expressing their considered professional opinions with total lack of information.
If having an offshore account were a crime, as you seem to believe, then we need look no further than the senior White House staff for culprits. Valarie Jarrett would be one of the first ones on the list. As you seem so concerned about folks defrauding the government, why aren't you more concerned about welfare fraud and other federal handout program fraud? Even more to the point how about all of Obama's 'green' friends getting so much money from the Fed for companies in which they are major investors?
Ah, I see it now, you are only interested in pointing the finger at conservatives. If you do a little checking some of the worst offenders are LIBERALS and those DIRTY RICH LIBERALS who always back causes to give away other people's money but never their own.I have never stated or implied that having an offshore bank account is a crime; I have repeatedly stated that utilizing (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes and hiding money in offshore accounts is conduct unbecoming of someone aspiring to be POTUS; Romney has conducted himself along these lines for years. Obama has never been personally accused of welfare fraud, tax avoidance schemes, hiding money off shore, or any other potentially illegal or unbecoming activity. For all practical purposes, this election is a one on one between Romney and Obama and not any of the other people you mentioned so whatever they did or did not do is irrelevant.
SnakeOilSales
07-29-12, 22:11
Ok Snake, you are conversing with certified public accountants who are telling you Romney did something wrong without seeing any documentation or filings other than those which have been released so far?
They must be expressing POLITICAL opinions as they would probably be terminated for expressing such opinions professionally based on what is out there now. I doubt their employers would be thrilled having CPA's expressing their considered professional opinions with total lack of information.What occurred is exactly what I stated in the earlier post: in private conversations with high level CPA's who formerly and currently work / worked for Ernst and Young and Deloitte it was revealed to me that Romney utilized (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes and participated in the IRS amnesty prior to 2010 to repatriate funds held in a Swiss bank account. I can tell you that the Ernst and Young conversations took place in Buenos Aires within the past ninety days.
...is conduct unbecoming of someone aspiring to be POTUS...And yet somehow befriending Weather Underground founder Bill Ayers and attending radical racist Jeremy Wright's church for 20+ years (to name a few) is acceptable conduct of someone aspiring to be POTUS?
Member #4112
07-29-12, 23:51
Snake, there is no way they could know any of these details unless they worked on his account. As far as amnesty, again unless they were working on the his accounts they could not have this information. You have already precluded their working for the IRS. If these so called sources did work on his accounts and are now discussing this matter with unrelated third parties they have committed profession malpractice, a civil tort, and in many states a criminal offense as well.
You keep noting it is "now illegal", so what is the problem you have with engaging in legal conduct at the time the transactions occured?
Because a statute changes it does not make prior legal conduct now becomes suddenly illegal.
SnakeOilSales
07-30-12, 00:08
You keep noting it is "now illegal", so what is the problem you have with engaging in legal conduct at the time the transactions occured?
Because a statute changes it does not make prior legal conduct now becomes suddenly illegal.I think I have made it clear that I am not accusing Romney of engaging in any illegal activity; only shady, sleazy, and deceitful activity meant to defraud the US Treasury, conduct that is unbecoming of an aspiring POTUS. As I have said, it is just fine if Jackson, myself, Toymann or any other fat cats engage in this sort of thing because we are not running for POTUS. Romney, on the other hand IS running for POTUS and thus is judged on a higher standard. I am pretty sure a 10 year old child or even a golden retriever can understand this.
SnakeOilSales
07-30-12, 00:15
And yet somehow befriending Weather Underground founder Bill Ayers and attending radical racist Jeremy Wright's church for 20+ years (to name a few) is acceptable conduct of someone aspiring to be POTUS?The Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers issues are old news and Obama was already elected AFTER those issues had been brought to light so clearly, at least in the eyes of the voting US public, associating with those figures was not judged as conduct unbecoming of an aspiring POTUS. I tend to think that Romney's association with the Wall Street Masters of the Universe, the same guys who through their greed and riverboat gambling caused (in part) the current undesirable economic situation, will be much more damaging among Ohio and Florida working class voters who are underwater on their mortgages than Obama's past association with some obscure unimportant religious figures.
I think I have made it clear that I am not accusing Romney of engaging in any illegal activity; only shady, sleazy, and deceitful activity meant to defraud the US Treasury, conduct that is unbecoming of an aspiring POTUS. As I have said, it is just fine if Jackson, myself, Toymann or any other fat cats engage in this sort of thing because we are not running for POTUS. Romney, on the other hand IS running for POTUS and thus is judged on a higher standard. I am pretty sure a 10 year old child or even a golden retriever can understand this.Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Shady, sleazy, deceitful activity by a USA President? Whoever heard of that?
Lyndon Baines Johnson
Richard Milhous Nixon.
William Jefferson Clinton.
Barrack Hussein Obama.
It's a prerequisite for the office. Not only for president of the United states, but USA Congressman and Senator too. Our elected politicians are running Ponzi schemes like Social Security, Fannie and Freddie that make what Bernie Madoff did look small. If Romney oversaw similar accounting manipulations as CEO of Bain, he'd be in jail.
Speaking of which, in this day and age when the USA is about 10 or 20 years away from being like Greece, I can't think of a better person to turn it around than a private equity guy who successfully restructured bankrupt companies. Well, maybe Ernesto Zedillo. But he's a Mexican.
The Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers issues are old news and Obama was already elected AFTER those issues had been brought to light so clearly, at least in the eyes of the voting US public, associating with those figures was not judged as conduct unbecoming of an aspiring POTUS. I tend to think that Romney's association with the Wall Street Masters of the Universe, the same guys who through their greed and riverboat gambling caused (in part) the current undesirable economic situation, will be much more damaging among Ohio and Florida working class voters who are underwater on their mortgages than Obama's past association with some obscure unimportant religious figures.As observed in your past responses, you once again changed the focus of your objections.
We weren't talking about whether the questionable conduct occurred before or after BO was elected, and we weren't talking about whether the public thought BO's questionable conduct was relevant. What we were talking about, at your initiation, was the acceptable conduct of anyone who aspired to be the POTUS, period.
SnakeOilSales
07-30-12, 01:01
As observed in your past responses, you once again changed the focus of your objections.
We weren't talking about whether the questionable conduct occurred before or after BO was elected, and we weren't talking about whether the public thought BO's questionable conduct was relevant. What we were talking about, at your initiation, was the acceptable conduct of anyone who aspired to be the POTUS, period.You are the one flagging BO's associations with Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers as "questionable conduct"; clearly the US voting public judged that BO's association with these figures was in fact NOT questionable conduct and NOT conduct unbecoming of an aspiring POTUS, as BO was comfortably elected even after your alleged "questionable conduct" of associating with these figures was brought to light and replay ad nauseum on Fox News. As BO is the current president, and his pre-electoral conduct has already been vetted and deemed acceptable by the voting US public, the only debate is really about whether Romney's (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes, hidden offshore accounts and participation in the IRS amnesty program will in fact be viewed as acceptable conduct by the US voting public, namely the working class voters in Ohio and Florida (who are the only ones who will decide this election).
the only debate is really about whether Romney's (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes, hidden offshore accounts and participation in the IRS amnesty program will in fact be viewed as acceptable conduct by the US voting public, namely the working class voters in Ohio and Florida (who are the only ones who will decide this election).I did a little looking on the internet. An account held by the Romneys at a Swiss bank was disclosed publicly in 2007 when he was running for president. The UBS / Voluntary Disclosure amnesty program wasn't until 2009. He disclosed the account 2 years before the amnesty program. So why would he publicly disclose the existence of the account to the public but not the IRS? That's nuts. It's very unlikely he had HIDDEN offshore accounts or knowingly participated in illegal tax schemes.
Let's call a spade a spade. What you wrote above are lies.
SnakeOilSales
07-30-12, 01:42
I did a little looking on the internet. An account held by the Romneys at a Swiss bank was disclosed publicly in 2007 when he was running for president. The UBS / Voluntary Disclosure amnesty program wasn't until 2009. He disclosed the account 2 years before the amnesty program. So why would he publicly disclose the existence of the account to the public but not the IRS? That's nuts. It's very unlikely he had HIDDEN offshore accounts or knowingly participated in illegal tax schemes.
Let's call a spade a spade. What you wrote above are lies.Wrong. Romney's Swiss bank account was closed by his LAWYER in 2010, not coincidentally several months AFTER the initiation of the IRS amnesty program. You claim Romney's account was declared in his 2007 tax returns. Where are his 2007 tax returns? Oh I forgot, nobody has seen them because Romney refuses to release anything before 2010.
Wrong. Romney's Swiss bank account was closed by his LAWYER in 2010, not coincidentally several months AFTER the initiation of the IRS amnesty program. You claim Romney's account was declared in his 2007 tax returns. Where are his 2007 tax returns? Oh I forgot, nobody has seen them because Romney refuses to release anything before 2010.Yep, and the Jews were behind 9/11. The United States government bio-engineered the AIDS virus to wipe out homosexuals and Africans. And Freemasons run the world.
Wild Walleye
07-30-12, 03:48
I have never stated or implied that having an offshore bank account is a crime; I have repeatedly stated that utilizing (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes and hiding money in offshore accounts is conduct unbecoming of someone aspiring to be POTUS; Romney has conducted himself along these lines for years. Obama has never been personally accused of welfare fraud, tax avoidance schemes, hiding money off shore, or any other potentially illegal or unbecoming activity. For all practical purposes, this election is a one on one between Romney and Obama and not any of the other people you mentioned so whatever they did or did not do is irrelevant.Stop stating things as fact, when you are way out of your depth. Every, repeat EVERY, private equity fund, venture capital fund and hedge fund, that has any foreign investors (and most that don't), have offshore entities and bank accounts. The entities are offshore for many reasons including the over-litigious nature of the US (thanks to no tort reform) and the prevention of taxes being withheld from the profits of foreign investors, who are supposed to be free from US taxes.
Romney has conducted himself along these lines for years.With all due respect, you are talking out your ass.
Wild Walleye
07-30-12, 03:54
Wrong. Romney's Swiss bank account was closed by his LAWYER in 2010, not coincidentally several months AFTER the initiation of the IRS amnesty program.Since you know this to be fact, you won't mind sharing the proof that: 1) it happened as you state and 2) that it wasn't a coincidence.
You claim Romney's account was declared in his 2007 tax returns. Where are his 2007 tax returns? Oh I forgot, nobody has seen them because Romney refuses to release anything before 2010.Why on earth should he release tax returns for years that are not required? To satisfy you and your ilk? That's a fool's errand. He is better off spending his time and energy focusing the debate on what a miserable failure the Marxist in Chief has been (that is if you look at his tenure from the perspective of someone who loves the USA).
SnakeOilSales
07-30-12, 05:18
Since you know this to be fact, you won't mind sharing the proof that: 1) it happened as you state and 2) that it wasn't a coincidence.Romney will be pressured into releasing several more years of tax returns before the November election; the proof will be in the pudding.
SnakeOilSales
07-30-12, 05:21
Stop stating things as fact, when you are way out of your depth. Every, repeat EVERY, private equity fund, venture capital fund and hedge fund, that has any foreign investors (and most that don't) , have offshore entities and bank accounts. The entities are offshore for many reasons including the over-litigious nature of the US (thanks to no tort reform) and the prevention of taxes being withheld from the profits of foreign investors, who are supposed to be free from US taxes.
With all due respect, you are talking out your ass.I am well aware of the reasons for having off shore bank accounts and the functions / utilities they provide; I personally have / had almost a dozen off shore bank accounts (between personal and business) in three countries (outside) the USA over the years. As I stated, these sorts of tactics are perfectly fine for Jackson, me, Toymann, and any other fat cats who are not running for office but are unbecoming of a man aspiring to be POTUS.
What occurred is exactly what I stated in the earlier post: in private conversations with high level CPA's who formerly and currently work / worked for Ernst and Young and Deloitte it was revealed to me that Romney utilized (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes and participated in the IRS amnesty prior to 2010 to repatriate funds held in a Swiss bank account. I can tell you that the Ernst and Young conversations took place in Buenos Aires within the past ninety days.You need to go away dude. The past 90 days in BA? The gift that keeps on giving! Even esten will not come to your rescue! You are nothing more than entertainment dude. Keep rolling! Please site the high level CPA conference that is going on in BA right now? Please! Enquiring minds want to know! Happy Mongering All. Toymann
I did a little looking on the internet. An account held by the Romneys at a Swiss bank was disclosed publicly in 2007 when he was running for president. The UBS / Voluntary Disclosure amnesty program wasn't until 2009. He disclosed the account 2 years before the amnesty program. So why would he publicly disclose the existence of the account to the public but not the IRS? That's nuts. It's very unlikely he had HIDDEN offshore accounts or knowingly participated in illegal tax schemes.
Let's call a spade a spade. What you wrote above are lies.You are dealing with an IDIOT! He couldn't even respond in the argentine cell phone thread in an intelligent manner! Enough said. Monger on All BUT SnakeBoy! Toymann
SnakeOilSales
07-30-12, 08:27
You need to go away dude. The past 90 days in BA? The gift that keeps on giving! Even esten will not come to your rescue! You are nothing more than entertainment dude. Keep rolling! Please site the high level CPA conference that is going on in BA right now? Please! Enquiring minds want to know! Happy Mongering All. ToymannI have never said anything about the private conversations taking place at a "high level CPA conference" or any other sort of conference. Ernst and Young has an office in Buenos Aires; Ernst and Young staff from NYC fly down quarterly to train / supervise the local staff. That's as detailed as I will get.
http://www.ey.com/AR/es/Home/Article
I think Earnst and Young needs a little discipline. Not only are they blabbering about clients confidential tax returns at the home office. They violate client confidentiality throughout the world. This must comfort Earnst and young clients worldwide. That everyone from the receptionist to the guy who delivers pizza to Earnst and young is given detailed reports on the tax returns of Earnst and young clients.
Anyway, this is b***s***. Every quarter accounting firms, including earnst and young, have access to every companys quarterly results before they are released. A heads up to this information is invaluable to investors. Knowing the quarterly results before they are released could easily make you a fortune. Does that information ever leak from the accounting offices to investors. Never as in never, never, ever.
My guess is that some wantabe nobody is claiming to have access to information which is more tightly guarded than the gold in Fort Knox. Why does anybody listen to this nonsense. Patently absurd. Whoops, patently absurd to everyone but an Obama supporter who has a 1 in 50, 000, 000 chance of becoming a human being. Same as a spermatazoa.
I have never said anything about the private conversations taking place at a "high level CPA conference" or any other sort of conference. Ernst and Young has an office in Buenos Aires; Ernst and Young staff from NYC fly down quarterly to train / supervise the local staff. That's as detailed as I will get.
http://www.ey.com/AR/es/Home/ArticleAP is letting me post today. Couldn't log in yesterday, no matter how many times I tried.
Just because the E&Y may be saying it doesn't make it true. Unless MR's return is done out of the NYC office, the information you would have gotten is at best 3rd or 4th hand. I wasn't impressed with the higher ups when I worked at the company. My favorite example of big company idiocy was when they decided that reviewers were taking too long on tax returns. The new policy was to look at the totals at the bottom of each page and if it matched the amount on the tax return, send it on for processing. No exceptions.
Not too long after that, I was given a return prepared by a sophomore in college (intern). The return had oil & gas property and other complex tax issues. The totals matched so I sent the return on. The partner comes in to my office wanting to know what in the hell was going on. Told him the new rule. They had a meeting and the rule was no longer enforced for our office.
Closing out the UBS account was likely done for political reasons. I read the first page of the MR article yesterday and didn't see anything useful. The guist of page one was that it would have been smarter to overpay his taxes. Since MR ran for president in 2008, does anyone really believe he would have kept undisclosed funds in a Swiss bank account at that time? Considering that he already had other legal offshore trusts set up elsewhere, what they are insinuating is insulting to our intelligence.
I can see the confession from MR:
"Yes, even though I could have legally sheltered my income in my other offshore accounts, I hid money in a UBS account to evade taxes. Why did I do it? Just for the hell of it. If Tim Geithner can openly commit tax fraud, why can't I?"
Wild Walleye
07-30-12, 12:13
Snakeoil is another Obama propagandist like Move-On. At least there was proof that Esten is a real, however delusional, human being.
The US action against the Swiss Banks emanated from the findings of the Volker and Bergier Commissions, of the mid-late 90's and early '00s which were charged with piercing the Swiss banking secrecy, as it related to accounts that could have potentially belonged to victims of the Holocaust. The US has always wanted to find away to tear down the secrecy of the Swiss Banking industry (except as it relates to liberal members of Congress, Hollywood and the media). What the US saw was that if enough pressure was brought to bear upon the Swiss, they would eventually crack like a coconut. Further, they (the Swiss) were at their weakest (politically) on the heels of the Commissions' findings (they were two separate commissions) , because they showed that at best, the Swiss were complicit in institutionalized graft from the victims of genocide. The US didn't start pressuring the Swiss in 2010 or 2009 or even 2007. The pressure was a continuation, although realigned, of the Commissions' (I. E. From the 90s).
I think that Snakeoil can concede that Romney was an international financier, with fiduciary responsibilities to many constituencies, and therefore probably had more than a passing familiarity with this enforcement movement, which the government did not keep secret. Further, this same Romney fellow ran for POTUS in 2008 and as a candidate would have been made acutely aware of the depths of depravity of Opposition Research. No one (except liberals like Ted Kennedy, Gary Hart, John Edwards and their ilk) , expects to get a pass or to be able to keep anything secret. All you have to do is look at the abuse of IRS powers in auditing Obama's opposition or the main stream media's embargo of the information about John Edward's love-child, to see what can happen. Therefore, it is unreasonable to expect that a relatively intelligent individual, who was aware of the risks, would have preceded to put himself in the white-hot spotlight with the sole strategy of whistling past the graveyard.
As for Snakeoil's 'inside info' from E&Y...I just have to laugh. I think that the BS-factor of this canard has been nicely exposed in the prior posts.
What is most glaring is the absolute hypocrisy of virtually everything that Snakeoil posts: transparency, tax evasion and criminal innuendo. If you were on the shrink's couch, he'd be jotting down the word "transference" over and over again. Obama has provided little to no transparency on many issues of great importance. Being a tax cheat was a requirement for his cabinet appointees and he and/or Eric Holder are complicit if not directly culpable in more than 300 murders. You know what? Now that I think of it, if I was an Obama supporter (I'd have to be lobotomized, first) I don't think that I would focus on the 'achievements' of my candidate. Just as the Alinsky/Obama/Axelrod/Emanuel-doctrine states "when you've got nothing, attack the opposition with lies."
Now that I think of it, if I was an Obama supporter I don't think that I would focus on the 'achievements' of my candidate. Just as the Alinsky/Obama/Axelrod/Emanuel-doctrine states "when you've got nothing, attack the opposition with lies."That's a pretty good summary of what's going on with the Obama campaign.
Big Boss Man
07-30-12, 15:14
That's a pretty good summary of what's going on with the Obama campaign.What do you think Putin is going to do? Putin sat three seats from Bush as his army invaded Georgia at the last Olympics. Georgia sent troops to Iraq. Fairly brazen in my opinion. US could do nothing to help an ally.
Wild Walleye
07-30-12, 18:10
What do you think Putin is going to do? Putin sat three seats from Bush as his army invaded Georgia at the last Olympics. Georgia sent troops to Iraq. Fairly brazen in my opinion. US could do nothing to help an ally.Don't worry about Putin, tell Vlad that Obama will be much more flexible, after the election. He must have been referring to his ability to bend over. We've not been in a position (since about '00) to do much regarding Putin meddling in the former republics looking for "Chechen Rebels" or other boogey men. With Afghanistan and Iraq on the front burner, we have been in no position to commit to anything other than a stern warning. With Obama in office, we don't even do that. Obama is intentionally doing to the US, what the US did to Russia when Reagan was in office. Causing the country to implode upon itself do to its runaway spending. I guarantee you that the team Obama was rooting for, didn't win the Cold War.
Like radical Islam, Putin will never respect or fear weakness. Obama bowed to him before he was even elected, so Putin has known all along that the US is not a factor in his foreign policy (Russian naval base in Cuba?). If Obama gets a second term, the missile shield is toast and Putin will be free to expand his sphere of influence.
Nothing new here. Hungary in 1956 and Prague in 1968, and much more before that. Why? What happened? Too much bear there, no profits.
Laos, the most bombed country in world history. Discarding bombs every 8 minutes for years. The secret war that nobody talks about. They were shooting at the jets with sling shots. Lots of profit here. Hands stained with blood in Washngton is nothing new. Now with the defense cuts coming into play if there is no budget agreement, Cheney has dragged his drugged body to Washington once again. His face is the face of the military industrial complex, the face of war & profits.
According to Robert Gates, the US battle fleet is larger than the next 13 navies combined. 11 of whom belong to our allies and partners. Our geography is part of our defense. Imagine if China was as close as Hawaii, then we would be wetting our shorts.
Nothing new here. Hungary in 1956 and Prague in 1968, and much more before that. Why? What happened? Too much bear there, no profits.
Laos, the most bombed country in world history. Discarding bombs every 8 minutes for years. The secret war that nobody talks about. They were shooting at the jets with sling shots. Lots of profit here. Hands stained with blood in Washngton is nothing new. Now with the defense cuts coming into play if there is no budget agreement, Cheney has dragged his drugged body to Washington once again. His face is the face of the military industrial complex, the face of war & profits.
According to Robert Gates, the US battle fleet is larger than the next 13 navies combined. 11 of whom belong to our allies and partners. Our geography is part of our defense. Imagine if China was as close as Hawaii, then we would be wetting our shorts.Does this post make any sense to anyone? I get the whole " I hate America theme". I was not born in the US dude, in fact I didn't even arrive in the US till 1992. Please elaborate on your point please.
Very confused Toymann
PS: I have been a US citizen for over a decade now!
Wild Walleye
07-31-12, 03:12
Nothing new here. Hungary in 1956 and Prague in 1968, and much more before that. Why? What happened? Too much bear there, no profits.
Laos, the most bombed country in world history. Discarding bombs every 8 minutes for years. The secret war that nobody talks about. They were shooting at the jets with sling shots. Lots of profit here. Hands stained with blood in Washngton is nothing new. Now with the defense cuts coming into play if there is no budget agreement, Cheney has dragged his drugged body to Washington once again. His face is the face of the military industrial complex, the face of war & profits.It depends upon your perspective. Of course, mistakes are made all the time. Didn't Clinton bomb the Chinese (his biggest contributors) Embassy in Belgrade? There is a fine line between honest / earnest beliefs and zealotry.
The USA, while one of the greatest forces for goodness that mankind has ever seen, MUST prioritize its best interests above those of all other nations. That doesn't relieve anyone (almost anyone) from their responsibilities to God and Country (I. E. The Law). If bombing the sh*t out of the Ramen Noodle Valley is key to an imperative national interest (in my opinion, it needs to be crucial security interest) , then bombs away and may God have mercy on their souls (both the bombees and bombers). The US government exists SOLELY to protect and ensure America's best interests.
According to Robert Gates, the US battle fleet is larger than the next 13 navies combined.Relevance?
11 of whom belong to our allies and partners.Relevance?
The modern US navy has cut the number of ships it has by 66%. We are no longer equipped to fight two simultaneous wars (that aren't with third rate sand fleas), which has been the standing policy since the wane of WWII. Great security policy "If we are engaged in one conflict, feel free to do whatever you want, 'cause we can't do anything about it. That's like having the police tweet their unavailability to all the criminals.
Our geography is part of our defense.Seemed to be a rather ineffective defense on 911. Further, since the the advent of the ICBM, geography hasn't meant sh*t.
Imagine if China was as close as Hawaii, then we would be wetting our shorts.No need to imagine. They can reach out and touch us, today. Let the Soviets. Err. I mean our friends the Russians put a naval base in Cuba and you'll get some real pucker-factor.
SnakeOilSales
07-31-12, 03:17
Does this post make any sense to anyone? I get the whole " I hate America theme". I was not born in the US dude, in fact I didn't even arrive in the US till 1992. Please elaborate on your point please.
Very confused Toymann.
PS: I have been a US citizen for over a decade now!WOW Toymann! You MUST be an IDIOT! How can a TIGHT-ASS conservative like yourself not understand International Political Economy? ROTFLMAO! ROTFLMAO! ROTFLMAO! You might want to leave your job as the school nurse at Bob Jones University and go get a real job! What an IDIOT! ROTLLMAO! ROTFLMAO!
SnakeOilSales
07-31-12, 03:21
Is this the real reason that almost everybody on this thread hates Obama?
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/president-obama-related-country-first-enslaved-man-220215114.html
Wild Walleye
07-31-12, 03:34
Is this the real reason that almost everybody on this thread hates Obama?
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/president-obama-related-country-first-enslaved-man-220215114.htmlNot at all. Our opposition to Obama is just good old fashion racism. Of course, we aren't allowed to have valuable opinions of our own.
Is he related to the first slave just like his grandpa was tortured by the Brits? Every black experience that Obama ever had was made up. All of the seminal moments that he describes in his books are fakes. The name of a popular cookie in the US has been coined to describe blacks like Obama (by other blacks). I've got a better chance of being related to the first slave than he does.
While we are on the subject, I'm guessing that Obama has little or no testosterone and is either...wait, that is probably racist for me to say about a guy who wears mom jeans and who's every action is dictated by Michelle and Valarie (are they ---hags?).
Welcome back Move On.
WOW Toymann! You MUST be an IDIOT! How can a TIGHT-ASS conservative like yourself not understand International Political Economy? ROTFLMAO! ROTFLMAO! ROTFLMAO! You might want to leave your job as the school nurse at Bob Jones University and go get a real job! What an IDIOT! ROTLLMAO! ROTFLMAO!WW has it right. New name same old horseshit! You education level has been exposed in the past to be just slightly higher than primary education (on a good day). Go away MoveOn or snakeBoy or whatever your next handle will be. At the end of the day you add nothing but nonsense to the discussion. Tick Tick Tick. November is just around the corner. Unlike you dude I grew up in socialism, got the hell out of dodge, and have lived the american dream. Thats the concept you're boy Obomanation hates with a passion and you either don't understand OR just hate because it passed you bye. Happy Mongering All but SnakeBoy aka moveOn.
Not at all. Our opposition to Obama is just good old fashion racism. Of course, we aren't allowed to have valuable opinions of our own.
Is he related to the first slave just like his grandpa was tortured by the Brits? Every black experience that Obama ever had was made up. All of the seminal moments that he describes in his books are fakes. The name of a popular cookie in the US has been coined to describe blacks like Obama (by other blacks). I've got a better chance of being related to the first slave than he does.
While we are on the subject, I'm guessing that Obama has little or no testosterone and is either. Wait, that is probably racist for me to say about a guy who wears mom jeans and who's every action is dictated by Michelle and Valarie (are they.hags?).
Welcome back Move On.If only we were FREE THINKERS like snakeboy / Moveon. It's our cross to bear WW. Monger On Dude. Toyamnn
Is this the real reason that almost everybody on this thread hates Obama?
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/president-obama-related-country-first-enslaved-man-220215114.htmlAbsolutely the stupidest post ever made on this board. Congratulations SnakeBoy / MoveOn. I thought you had blown your wad in your recent idiotic posts. Guess NOT! LOL. Happy Mongering All. Toymann
ps. I have been on this board for quite a few years newbie. You will remain a legend in your own mind!
SnakeOilSales
07-31-12, 04:17
Romney stumbles again:
http://news.yahoo.com/first--he-came-for-seamus--why-won-t-mitt-romney-watch-ann-s-horse-in-the-olympics-.html
Just what the US voting public wants: another George W Bush invade-every-country-in-sight neo-con. NOT
Does this post make any sense to anyone? I get the whole " I hate America theme". I was not born in the US dude, in fact I didn't even arrive in the US till 1992. Please elaborate on your point please.
Very confused Toymann.
PS: I have been a US citizen for over a decade now!That's right, you have been confused since you came to America, but you did not know it. Give yourself a few more years. Right now, you are a kid in a candy store.
America is the best place in the world to fulfill your dreams. It is a rich country, it is young, it is big & free, and it is democratic. But it does not mean that it does not have any problems. Sometime, not too long ago, it started to have it's values confused by money big time. Money, even lots of money is not bad or evil. It is when you become a slave to money, and it begins to interfere with your values of decency and honesty that it becomes a negative issue.
I do not hate America. Hate is a extremely negative word, I rarely use it. But we are talking about elections issues here. There are alot of lies, half-truths, mis-quotes, rumors, exaggarations, slanders, insults to scare the "ignorant & undecided". In reality, whoever becomes the president from either party will be similar in about 80-90% of their policies. For example, every president will emphasize education, health and family, yet, we have been going downhill in those issues.
So Toyman, it is good that you acknowlege your confusion. I like your humility. You will go far.
It depends upon your perspective. Of course, mistakes are made all the time. Didn't Clinton bomb the Chinese (his biggest contributors) Embassy in Belgrade? There is a fine line between honest / earnest beliefs and zealotry.
The USA, while one of the greatest forces for goodness that mankind has ever seen, MUST prioritize its best interests above those of all other nations. That doesn't relieve anyone (almost anyone) from their responsibilities to God and Country (I. E. The Law). If bombing the sh*t out of the Ramen Noodle Valley is key to an imperative national interest (in my opinion, it needs to be crucial security interest) , then bombs away and may God have mercy on their souls (both the bombees and bombers). The US government exists SOLELY to protect and ensure America's best interests.
Relevance?
Relevance?
The modern US navy has cut the number of ships it has by 66. We are no longer equipped to fight two simultaneous wars (that aren't with third rate sand fleas) , which has been the standing policy since the wane of WWII. Great security policy "If we are engaged in one conflict, feel free to do whatever you want, 'cause we can't do anything about it. That's like having the police tweet their unavailability to all the criminals.
Seemed to be a rather ineffective defense on 911. Further, since the the advent of the ICBM, geography hasn't meant sh*t.
No need to imagine. They can reach out and touch us, today. Let the Soviets. Err. I mean our friends the Russians put a naval base in Cuba and you'll get some real pucker-factor.The spin you put on the defense budget. Vietnam repeats itself, spending years in Afganistan and Iraq and throwing money away. Do we actually have a success story in those places? But if you were in the military / defense industry, yeah, very successful, lots of public dole in your pocket.
Greetings Everyone,
I am hereby invoking the Canitas Guy rule wherein at least 10% of SnakeOilSales's posts must posted in other AP threads.
We wouldn't want anyone to get the idea that SnakeOilSales is a purely political blogger, would we?
I'll leave it to SnakeOilSales to count his reports and determine if no more than 90% of his posts are in the political threads.
Thanks,
Jackson
This is a new low. More likely a sign of desperation. People are voting against Obama because they are racist?
About 10 million people who voted for Obama is 2008 will vote for Romney this election. Did all 10 million become racists during the last 4 year.
Almost all blacks will vote against Romney, even though Obama has eliminated any prospect that blacks, or anyone, will find jobs. Do you think this may be racism?
Let's face it. It doesn't matter whether Obama is green, yellow, blue, white or black. Obama has been a total disaster for our economy and our country in general. That is the reason people want that shiftless moron Obama out of the White House.
Member #4112
07-31-12, 10:11
I love the way Snake likes to harken back to the Nam, which he knows nothing about and was probably before he was even born / hatched.
Partner, they were not using sling shots in Laos unless you consider something called SAM's or SPAAG's and made in either China or the old Soviet Union a "sling shot".
This, like so many of your posts demonstrate, you don't have a clue as to what you are talking about.
Maybe you should Google the two listed items above and get some idea of what our air crews were facing, God knows the ground troops had it much worse.
One thing US politicians need to under stand about war, the first rule of war is there are no rules.
Wild Walleye
07-31-12, 12:48
The spin you put on the defense budget. Vietnam repeats itself, spending years in Afganistan and Iraq and throwing money away. Do we actually have a success story in those places? But if you were in the military / defense industry, yeah, very successful, lots of public dole in your pocket.I dance like I speak Spanish.
It is for the lazy and intellectually dishonest to lump Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq together, as if they were the same thing. It is also a liberal crutch / canard to trot out the Military Industrial Complex as a boogey man.
Wild Walleye
07-31-12, 12:56
This is a new low. More likely a sign of desperation. People are voting against Obama because they are racist?Yup. That is the only reason why people could possibly vote against the Commie in Chief. That is one of the fundamental tenets of Alinsky, to attack the opposition with lies in order to discredit his truthful statement. If Alinsky / Obama / Wright / Aires, et al weren't Marxists activists, they would be great defense attorneys for rapists.
About 10 million people who voted for Obama is 2008 will vote for Romney this election. Did all 10 million become racists during the last 4 year.
Almost all blacks will vote against Romney, even though Obama has eliminated any prospect that blacks, or anyone, will find jobs. Do you think this may be racism?Yup. Those people don't really care about losing their homes; getting divorced because they are broke (money is the #1 factor in divorce) ; loosing their self esteem because they have no job and facing a bleak future because there is less opportunity for them to succeed. What they really care about is that the Marxist that is helping to perpetuate and aggravate all those problems happens to have dark skin.
The true racists are the people who define others by the color of their skin, ergo, liberals.
Let's face it. It doesn't matter whether Obama is green, yellow, blue, white or black. Obama has been a total disaster for our economy and our country in general. That is the reason people want that shiftless moron Obama out of the White House.If his Marxism and sh*tty presidency have anything to do with race, I am all for a Constitutional amendment that would bar blacks from running for president. However, as I mentioned many, many times (since this charlatan came onto the stage) race has nothing to do with it.
Wild Walleye
07-31-12, 13:00
Greetings Everyone,
I am hereby invoking the Canitas Guy rule wherein at least 10% of SnakeOilSales's posts must posted in other AP threads.
We wouldn't want anyone to get the idea that SnakeOilSales is a purely political blogger, would we?
I'll leave it to SnakeOilSales to count his reports and determine if no more than 90% of his posts are in the political threads.
Thanks,
JacksonMove On Part Dos has been trying to avoid such a sanction by posting BS stuff, highlighting his knowledge of local cell phone nomenclature and the like. Guys like MOPD / Snakeoil are too busy being browbeaten by women with hairy armpits, to go mongering in Latina Paradises. They are like their Glorious Leader, surrounded by f*ghags who tell them what to do and devoid of testosterone. When will the press cover the fact that Obama lacks most of the characteristics and qualities that define hetero men?
Greetings Everyone,
I am hereby invoking the Canitas Guy rule wherein at least 10% of SnakeOilSales's posts must posted in other AP threads.
We wouldn't want anyone to get the idea that SnakeOilSales is a purely political blogger, would we?
I'll leave it to SnakeOilSales to count his reports and determine if no more than 90% of his posts are in the political threads.
Thanks,
JacksonSeeing as SnakeBoy claims to have lived in Argentina for many many years, all he would have to do is attend a dinner party at the clubhouse to clear his name. I think the chance of that is very small as I am quite sure he has never even been to Argentina. Gauntlet has been thrown down dude, now prove me wrong. The Thursday / Friday dinner parties are great and a very good value. That is, if you really exist in Argentina. The ball is now in your court SnakeBoy. Happy Mongering All. Toymann
I dance like I speak Spanish.
It is for the lazy and intellectually dishonest to lump Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq together, as if they were the same thing. It is also a liberal crutch / canard to trot out the Military Industrial Complex as a boogey man.Just follow the money trail. They say that when you are lost in the wilderness, just find a stream and follow the flow.
SnakeOilSales
07-31-12, 16:29
I love the way Snake likes to harken back to the Nam, which he knows nothing about and was probably before he was even born / hatched.
Partner, they were not using sling shots in Laos unless you consider something called SAM's or SPAAG's and made in either China or the old Soviet Union a "sling shot".
This, like so many of your posts demonstrate, you don't have a clue as to what you are talking about.
Maybe you should Google the two listed items above and get some idea of what our air crews were facing, God knows the ground troops had it much worse.
One thing US politicians need to under stand about war, the first rule of war is there are no rules.Please point out the post where I mentioned anything about Vietnam.
Wild Walleye
07-31-12, 16:35
Please point out the post where I mentioned anything about Vietnam.Everyone please note that SOS ("Save our Sycophant") is correct. I won't be holding my breath for the next time.
It was in fact Black Shirt who trotted out the revisionist version of the activities in French Indochina. While I may not agree with Black Shirt, he has contributed to the forum, which is in stark contract to SOS/MOPD.
Wild Walleye
07-31-12, 16:43
I was laughing my ass off reading that bull sh*t. The article (at the end) even points out that they have no proof of any of their alleged findings. It is a genealogical website trying to promote their business with this fantastic fairytale. Like I said, I have more slave blood in my than has Obama. I also have a legally-obtained SSN, which was acquired immediately after my birth in my birth state (where I resided for the first 21 years of my life).
SnakeOilSales
07-31-12, 16:44
Seeing as SnakeBoy claims to have lived in Argentina for many many years, all he would have to do is attend a dinner party at the clubhouse to clear his name. I think the chance of that is very small as I am quite sure he has never even been to Argentina. Gauntlet has been thrown down dude, now prove me wrong. The Thursday / Friday dinner parties are great and a very good value. That is, if you really exist in Argentina. The ball is now in your court SnakeBoy. Happy Mongering All. ToymannGood idea. I'll wait for you to arrive outside, put you in a choke hold, dump some chloroform on your face (which I will have obtained from my sicario boys at the Colombian restaurant next door) and drag you comatose a block and a half to the Kansas City to have my way with you for an hour or two. Sounds like a plan!
Wild Walleye
07-31-12, 16:46
Good idea. I'll wait for you to arrive outside, put you in a choke hold, dump some chloroform on your face (which I will have obtained from my sicario boys at the Colombian restaurant next door) and drag you comatose a block and a half to the Kansas City to have my way with you for an hour or two. Sounds like a plan!Who was the AP member who used to suggest Kansas City as his preferred venue for fighting other forum members? It was circa 2007.
SnakeOilSales
07-31-12, 16:53
According to this, the numbers look dismal for Obama.
http://news.yahoo.com/add-it-up--the-prediction-models-look-dismal-for-obama--can-he-still-win-.html
Big Boss Man
07-31-12, 17:38
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/07/31/opinion/brooks-dullest-campaign-ever.xml
Article explains why we are talking birth records and tax returns instead of the economy. I like Brooks. He is fiscally conservative but moderate on social issues. I am actually fiscally conservative but liberal on social issues. Too much God in the Republican party for me. And wierdly I have done better financially under Clinton and Obama than I did under Reagan and the two Bushes. Sometimes I think I am out of synch with the whole fucking world.
Silver Star
07-31-12, 17:41
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/07/31/opinion/brooks-dullest-campaign-ever.xml
Article explains why we are talking birth records and tax returns instead of the economy. I like Brooks. He is fiscally conservative but moderate on social issues. I am actually fiscally conservative but liberal on social issues. Too much God in the Republican party for me. And wierdly I have done better financially under Clinton and Obama than I did under Reagan and the two Bushes. Sometimes I think I am out of synch with the whole fucking world.Big Boss Man.
By the way you sound, your closest candidate to your views might be Libertarian Gary Johnson (better than BO social liberties, and better than MR on pocketbook issues)
You might have a new political home (Libertarian)
Fred
Matt Psyche
08-01-12, 05:18
You are libertarian- for small government for both social and economic policies. The opposite would be populists- large gov interventions both in social and economic policies. The party / ideology of the president is unlikely to be related to the economic performance. Budget and fiscal bills must be passed by both the chambers of Congress and signed by the president. Most of the time, the government has been divided government. So nobody can significantly change the content of the budget from the previous year's budget. Monetary policy is run by the Fed, an independent agency insulated from the chief executive and Congress. Plus, the Federal govt spending only accounts for 25% of GDP. How could they influence the whole economy? We just need competitive labor force and innovative industries.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/07/31/opinion/brooks-dullest-campaign-ever.xml
Article explains why we are talking birth records and tax returns instead of the economy. I like Brooks. He is fiscally conservative but moderate on social issues. I am actually fiscally conservative but liberal on social issues. Too much God in the Republican party for me. And wierdly I have done better financially under Clinton and Obama than I did under Reagan and the two Bushes. Sometimes I think I am out of synch with the whole fucking world.
Member #4112
08-01-12, 10:28
Snake you can not possibly be that stupid.
The bombing campaign of Cambodia and Laos from 1965 to 1970 was to counter supply and support facilities located in those countries during the war in Nam. Those interdiction sorties were flown in direct support of the war in Nam and are one in the same with that conflict.
Again your posts display your lack of knowledge and ability to address the topic in an intelligent manner.
SnakeOilSales
08-01-12, 14:36
Snake you can not possibly be that stupid.
The bombing campaign of Cambodia and Laos from 1965 to 1970 was to counter supply and support facilities located in those countries during the war in Nam. Those interdiction sorties were flown in direct support of the war in Nam and are one in the same with that conflict.
Again your posts display your lack of knowledge and ability to address the topic in an intelligent manner.Doppelganger you are obviously the one bordering on stupid. Clearly reading comprehension is not your strong suit, as I have never mentioned Vietnam, Cambodia or Laos in this thread or any other on this forum.
SnakeOilSales
08-01-12, 14:43
Obama leads Romney in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-leads-romney-three-battleground-states-poll-shows-103942709.html
I guess those working class voters in these states really DO care that Romney utilized (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes, offshore bank accounts, and shorted his own national currency.
Wild Walleye
08-01-12, 15:46
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/07/31/opinion/brooks-dullest-campaign-ever.xml
Article explains why we are talking birth records and tax returns instead of the economy. I like Brooks. He is fiscally conservative but moderate on social issues. I am actually fiscally conservative but liberal on social issues. Too much God in the Republican party for me. And wierdly I have done better financially under Clinton and Obama than I did under Reagan and the two Bushes. Sometimes I think I am out of synch with the whole fucking world.It is possible that Brooks may make sense, every once in a while, but there is nothing Conservative about him.
That Conservatives are religious zealots is a deliberate distortion built upon Soviet style disinformation. I am a hardcore Conservative and God has nothing to do with my politics, excluding, of course His role in guiding the Founders (as described by them, not me) and that whole concept of God-given rights imbued upon us by our Creator (understanding that different folks believe in different creators) thingy. In fact, never in my life have I encountered a true Conservative trying to force religion on others. To the contrary, uniformly across all of the Conservatives that I know, they are for religious as well as personal freedom, even if that means having no religion. The best example of who is for religious freedom and who is against it can be found in Obamacare denying religious institutions and individuals their First Amendment rights to practice their faith. True Conservatives believe in upholding the Constitution, which stipulates the LIMITED role of the federal government and is incompatible with institutionalized discrimination against any Americans (gay, black, trans, latino, even people from San Fran).
Wild Walleye
08-01-12, 16:12
You are libertarian- for small government for both social and economic policies.I believe that is called Conservatism. Libertarian is slightly different.
The opposite would be populists- large gov interventions both in social and economic policies.In the US that is the Democrat party.
The party / ideology of the president is unlikely to be related to the economic performance. Budget and fiscal bills must be passed by both the chambers of Congress and signed by the president.Not so. The US Senate has not passed, nor has the President signed, a budget in years. I might also direct your attention to the $5T of additional debt that the current POTUS has burdened us with, in addition to the $20T of quantitative easing and FED giveaways and not including the expected trillions of additional debt to be forced upon us by Obamacare.
Most of the time, the government has been divided government. So nobody can significantly change the content of the budget from the previous year's budget.Obama, Reid and Pelosi ring any bells? See above.
Monetary policy is run by the Fed, an independent agency insulated from the chief executive and Congress.Just like the SCOTUS is immune from politics?
Plus, the Federal govt spending only accounts for 25% of GDP. How could they influence the whole economy? We just need competitive labor force and innovative industries.The annual deficit (amount the federal government spends minus the revenue the feds bring in) becomes part of the cumulative federal debt. The deficit, over the past several years has grown from $161B (2007) to $489B (2008) to around $1.3T - $1.6T (2009-2011). In 2011 the annual deficit ($1.56T) was around 8.6% of GDP ($15.09T) , while federal spending ($3.834T) which is about 26% of GDP, which is outrageous. State plus local plus federal spending accounts for 40% of GDP. The total Federal debt is about $15.6T, which makes it about 100% of GDP.
Measuring this stuff against GDP is a reasonable way to view historical relationships between the numbers, however, it is irrelevant in setting them. Spending exceeds revenues by $1.5T. Therefore, spending is $1.5T too high. We are spending $27,000 per working American per year (about $13K/man, woman & child).
Wild Walleye
08-01-12, 16:15
Obama leads Romney in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-leads-romney-three-battleground-states-poll-shows-103942709.html
I guess those working class voters in these states really DO care that Romney utilized (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes, offshore bank accounts, and shorted his own national currency.Seems to me that those folks are a little more concerned about finding and keeping a job, putting food on the table and keeping their homes from foreclosure.
Obama leads Romney in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-leads-romney-three-battleground-states-poll-shows-103942709.html
I guess those working class voters in these states really DO care that Romney utilized (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes, offshore bank accounts, and shorted his own national currency.You are so gullable dude! Are you aware of the hidden constructs that many of these polls are based on. The only polls that currently show Obamantion ahead are those that model the results after the voter turnout of 2008, in which registered democrats outnumbered registered GOP voters by about 6-7% based on what reference you use. For a simple minded clod like yourself I will be happy to elaborate. These polls asssume a similar voter turnout this year, thus romney starts about 5-6% points down once they normailze the polls assuming high liberal turnout in 2012. Do you think this will happen in 2012? If you do I have some swamp land in florida you need to look at. LOL. The more interesting data to review is the change in the polls per state over the past 3 months. You will find that YOU cannot find a single poll that shows Obomantions numbers higher today than they were several months ago. Thus he is losing ground in all battleground states as each month passes. Thus ends today's lession. Lets just call it "politics for dummies", LIKE YOU! IALOTFLMAO. Keep it coming, your entertainment value is outstanding! Happy Mongering All. Toymann
Daddy Rulz
08-01-12, 17:02
Do you guys even think about what opposing people write before responding or do you just discount it and blaze away?
Wild Walleye
08-01-12, 17:14
Do you guys even think about what opposing people write before responding or do you just discount it and blaze away?I've been a student of this subject for a long, long time. I do comprehend what is being preferred and respect everyone's right to state their opinions. That said, I will dive in head first to rebut propaganda, lies and misinformation.
Big Boss Man
08-01-12, 17:45
I prefer Progressive Republican like my childhood heros Senator Kuchel and Supreme Court Justice Warren. I actually do believe that government has a role in the economy like the great water projects that helped in the development of LA.
Do you guys even think about what opposing people write before responding or do you just discount it and blaze away?Don't let my "flare" get in the way dude! At the end of the day its all fun anyway. Been in the US for 20 years and had a great run. Being born in a socialist country it really drives me a tad nuts to hear all this wild-ass liberal misinformation, distortions and in general ignorance. I grew up with this stuff, got the tee shirt and often wonder if SnakeBoy, WT69, Esten, etc. Really know what they are so longing to get. Sometimes you better be careful what you ask for as YOU JUST MIGHT GET IT! LOL. Socialism allows virtually no movement between the classes because there is no "american dream". What you are born into you stay at! You get national healthcare BUT north of 50% tax rate for virtually everybody. NICE! Monger on Dude. Toymann
Daddy Rulz
08-01-12, 19:05
Just seems like this argument has been going on forever. From the left EVERYTHING the right does is wrong and the same from the right. I think as long as Fox and MSNBC can keep both sides polarized the more money they will make. I don't think dialog between opposing viewpoints has ever been more important than it is right now. We have serious problems and as long as we allow elections to hang on non native born, socialist, muslim v idiotic fat cat oligarch they can get away with ducking real issues.
I want to see a debate moderated by Jon Stewart
Big Boss Man
08-01-12, 23:01
You are libertarian- for small government for both social and economic policies. The opposite would be populists- large gov interventions both in social and economic policies. The party / ideology of the president is unlikely to be related to the economic performance. Budget and fiscal bills must be passed by both the chambers of Congress and signed by the president. Most of the time, the government has been divided government. So nobody can significantly change the content of the budget from the previous year's budget. Monetary policy is run by the Fed, an independent agency insulated from the chief executive and Congress. Plus, the Federal govt spending only accounts for 25% of GDP. How could they influence the whole economy? We just need competitive labor force and innovative industries.I just think that we need to pay for the government we have. Obamacare front-loaded all the benefits and back-loaded the taxes. When Romney wins he is going to have a very difficult time pushing back on those benefits. Bush led us into war with Iraq while keeping the expense of the war out of the budget. I think we all would have accepted a tax increase to take down Hussein.
I read Johnson's view on Obamacare and don't necessarily agree. Whose freedom are we protecting anyway? Some of the shooting victims in Aurora had no health insurance. I am sure in the end the taxpayers will cover their costs. Isn't it an infringement on my freedom since I already have good health insurance that I have to cover for these victims? In some ways everybody is already insured and not everyone is paying which does not seem fair. I think that is what Chief Justice Roberts meant that the government has the right to tax for the common good. Are we really ready to watch people bleed to death if they do not have medical coverage? In a libertarian society you need to be willing to let people fail. I do not think I am willing to go to that extreme so you need to make compromises in a libertarian society also.
100 days to BA and I promise I will quit writing this nonsense although the election is over by the time I get there.
SnakeOilSales
08-02-12, 00:28
You are so gullable dude! Are you aware of the hidden constructs that many of these polls are based on. The only polls that currently show Obamantion ahead are those that model the results after the voter turnout of 2008, in which registered democrats outnumbered registered GOP voters by about 6-7% based on what reference you use. For a simple minded clod like yourself I will be happy to elaborate. These polls asssume a similar voter turnout this year, thus romney starts about 5-6% points down once they normailze the polls assuming high liberal turnout in 2012. Do you think this will happen in 2012? If you do I have some swamp land in florida you need to look at. LOL. The more interesting data to review is the change in the polls per state over the past 3 months. You will find that YOU cannot find a single poll that shows Obomantions numbers higher today than they were several months ago. Thus he is losing ground in all battleground states as each month passes. Thus ends today's lession. Lets just call it "politics for dummies", LIKE YOU! IALOTFLMAO. Keep it coming, your entertainment value is outstanding! Happy Mongering All. ToymannThe poll was conducted by Quinnipiac University / NYTimes / CBS news, institutions that correctly predicted Obama's victory in the 2008 election. You clearly are lacking in your understanding of politics and voting patterns as you cannot see outside your own socioeconomic level ($250k+/year I'm guessing). OF COURSE highly monied individuals such as yourself would want Romney as your president; he will cut your taxes and look out for your interests above those of the masses. Unfortunately for you, the working class voting population in Ohio and Florida (the only states that matter in this election) see Romney for what he really is, which is an aloof, awkward, out of touch Wall Street take no prisoners raider whose only interest is helping the rich get richer at any cost. Working class voters in Ohio and Florida simply cannot relate to Romney at all; they don't have off shore bank accounts, (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes, or Bermuda shell corporations.
I know there has been conjecture that snakeoilsales has never been to Argentina is not a legitmate contributor to argentinaprivate. I don't think we have to worry about that. I think snakeoilsales is an argie and the policies snakeoilsales advocates are the same policies that took Argentina from a prosperous country to third world status.
Furthermore, snakeoilsales policies would take the United States from a position of economic strength to second and third world status in short order.
Unfortuneately, listening to snakeoilsales is like listening to a box of rocks.
I just think that we need to pay for the government we have. Obamacare front-loaded all the benefits and back-loaded the taxes. When Romney wins he is going to have a very difficult time pushing back on those benefits. Bush led us into war with Iraq while keeping the expense of the war out of the budget. I think we all would have accepted a tax increase to take down Hussein.
I read Johnson's view on Obamacare and don't necessarily agree. Whose freedom are we protecting anyway? Some of the shooting victims in Aurora had no health insurance. I am sure in the end the taxpayers will cover their costs. Isn't it an infringement on my freedom since I already have good health insurance that I have to cover for these victims? In some ways everybody is already insured and not everyone is paying which does not seem fair. I think that is what Chief Justice Roberts meant that the government has the right to tax for the common good. Are we really ready to watch people bleed to death if they do not have medical coverage? In a libertarian society you need to be willing to let people fail. I do not think I am willing to go to that extreme so you need to make compromises in a libertarian society also.
100 days to BA and I promise I will quit writing this nonsense although the election is over by the time I get there.
Finally, a man who can see beyond his own nose.
Wild Walleye
08-02-12, 14:02
SOS / MOPD:
Would you mind adding a little commentary or other color (other than Red) to your posts? I mean, the best propaganda is the kind that isn't obviously propaganda. Also, rote transcription from talking points gets long in the tooth, after a while.
The poll was conducted by Quinnipiac University / NYTimes / CBS news, institutions that correctly predicted Obama's victory in the 2008 election.What is that they say about past performance not being indicative of future performance? Better yet, what is it that they say about a broken clock?
For the most part, these polls are constructed to deliver a result as opposed to actually measure a particular phenomenon. As Toyman pointed out, most all US political polls way over sample democrats. It is usually 8%.16, but I seen it as high as in the 30% range. Just because a poll indicated the eventual winner doesn't mean that it was accurate. The odds are 50/50 of picking the winner. There isn't a casino on earth that will give you those odds.
Why bother looking at the polls, anyway? Just do some independent thinking (sorry, I forgot to whom I was speaking). Let's look at some key constituencies (that democrats insist on treating as monolithic blocks) and Obama's popularity with each:
Hispanics: Obama, less popular with Hispanic voters.
Obama has given them backdoor amnesty and the dream act (via executive order) which has removed virtually all of our abilities to enforce the border. These things may have made him with illegal aliens and criminals. However, US citizens of LatAm origins are more concerned with their own socioeconomic situation and (predominantly Catholic) aren't too fond of the gay-marriage thing.
Blacks: Obama less popular with black voters.
Black unemployment is out of control. Things have gotten much worse for the black community, during Obama's reign of terror. Gay marriage is very unpopular with black voters.
White working class men: Obama is less popular with white working class men.
Nearly 17% of the people who want to work in this country can't find work. When it comes down to feeding your family and putting a roof over your family's heads these voters will most definitely go towards the candidate whom they feel will be better for the economy (not even Obama thinks he is that guy).
White women: Obama is less popular with white women.
White women, like black women like their men better when they are bringing home a paycheck.
Jewish voters: Obama is less popular with Jewish voters.
Just look at how rich, Jewish donors have stopped giving to Obama. They are starting to get the picture. It is difficult for even partisan Jews to reconcile Obama's support for groups bent on the destruction of Israel (since long before he was elected to office) and his claim that he isn't antisemitic (he is).
Gay, lesbian and transgender: Obama is MORE popular with GLBT voters.
They love the fact that he is denying Catholics and other religious groups their first Amendment rights and of course they like the gay marriage thing, which does nothing for them other than make them feel good. Representing approximately 1% of the US population, it is hard to figure how this block, which went overwhelmingly for Obama in 2008, can alone increase Obama's chances of success in 2012.
You clearly are lacking in your understanding of politics and voting patterns as you cannot see outside your own socioeconomic level ($250k+/year I'm guessing). OF COURSE highly monied individuals such as yourself would want Romney as your president; he will cut your taxes and look out for your interests above those of the masses.
What a load of patronizing, leftist crap. Obama has raised taxes on every single American - including those who pay no taxes at all (by deflating the value of the dollars in their pockets). Romney has never stated that he would impose regressive or progressive changes to the tax code. Nice try, though.
The rich elite in America, especially those who didn't earn it (hmmm?), have always been on the side of the democrats.
Unfortunately for you, the working class voting population in Ohio and Florida (the only states that matter in this election) see Romney for what he really is, which is an aloof, awkward, out of touch Wall Street take no prisoners raider whose only interest is helping the rich get richer at any cost. Working class voters in Ohio and Florida simply cannot relate to Romney at all; they don't have off shore bank accounts, (now) illegal tax avoidance schemes, or Bermuda shell corporations.
You are out of your mind if you think that working class people are better prepared to survive the economic destruction that Obama has wrought upon us, than are the rich. That is preposterous. The working man and woman in the USA are getting killed by Obama and they know it. They will punish him at the voting booth.
SnakeOilSales
08-03-12, 00:24
SOS / MOPD:
Would you mind adding a little commentary or other color (other than Red) to your posts? I mean, the best propaganda is the kind that isn't obviously propaganda. Also, rote transcription from talking points gets long in the tooth, after a while.
What is that they say about past performance not being indicative of future performance? Better yet, what is it that they say about a broken clock?
For the most part, these polls are constructed to deliver a result as opposed to actually measure a particular phenomenon. As Toyman pointed out, most all US political polls way over sample democrats. It is usually 8. 16, but I seen it as high as in the 30% range. Just because a poll indicated the eventual winner doesn't mean that it was accurate. The odds are 50/50 of picking the winner. There isn't a casino on earth that will give you those odds.
Why bother looking at the polls, anyway? Just do some independent thinking (sorry, I forgot to whom I was speaking). Let's look at some key constituencies (that democrats insist on treating as monolithic blocks) and Obama's popularity with each:
Hispanics: Obama, less popular with Hispanic voters.
Obama has given them backdoor amnesty and the dream act (via executive order) which has removed virtually all of our abilities to enforce the border. These things may have made him with illegal aliens and criminals. However, US citizens of LatAm origins are more concerned with their own socioeconomic situation and (predominantly Catholic) aren't too fond of the gay-marriage thing.
Blacks: Obama less popular with black voters.
Black unemployment is out of control. Things have gotten much worse for the black community, during Obama's reign of terror. Gay marriage is very unpopular with black voters.
White working class men: Obama is less popular with white working class men.
Nearly 17% of the people who want to work in this country can't find work. When it comes down to feeding your family and putting a roof over your family's heads these voters will most definitely go towards the candidate whom they feel will be better for the economy (not even Obama thinks he is that guy).
White women: Obama is less popular with white women.
White women, like black women like their men better when they are bringing home a paycheck.
Jewish voters: Obama is less popular with Jewish voters.
Just look at how rich, Jewish donors have stopped giving to Obama. They are starting to get the picture. It is difficult for even partisan Jews to reconcile Obama's support for groups bent on the destruction of Israel (since long before he was elected to office) and his claim that he isn't antisemitic (he is).
Gay, lesbian and transgender: Obama is MORE popular with GLBT voters.
They love the fact that he is denying Catholics and other religious groups their first Amendment rights and of course they like the gay marriage thing, which does nothing for them other than make them feel good. Representing approximately 1% of the US population, it is hard to figure how this block, which went overwhelmingly for Obama in 2008, can alone increase Obama's chances of success in 2012.
What a load of patronizing, leftist crap. Obama has raised taxes on every single American. Including those who pay no taxes at all (by deflating the value of the dollars in their pockets). Romney has never stated that he would impose regressive or progressive changes to the tax code. Nice try, though.
The rich elite in America, especially those who didn't earn it (hmmm?) , have always been on the side of the democrats.
You are out of your mind if you think that working class people are better prepared to survive the economic destruction that Obama has wrought upon us, than are the rich. That is preposterous. The working man and woman in the USA are getting killed by Obama and they know it. They will punish him at the voting booth.Everything you just retorted with (with the exception of your assertion that less white males will vote for Obama in this election than in the prior election, I agree with this prediction) is wrong and just a bunch of eloquent bloviating. Blacks and Hispanics are going to vote for Obama en masse, no question about it.
SnakeOilSales
08-03-12, 00:27
Apparently the Romney campaign is so worried about the attacks on his tenure at Bain Capital that he is resorting to hiring an infamous gun for hire PR specialist:
http://news.yahoo.com/romney-hires-pr-vet-bite-back-bain-attacks-224525572--abc-news-politics.html
Big Boss Man
08-03-12, 00:34
SOS / MOPD:
What a load of patronizing, leftist crap. Obama has raised taxes on every single American. Including those who pay no taxes at all (by deflating the value of the dollars in their pockets). Romney has never stated that he would impose regressive or progressive changes to the tax code. Nice try, though.
The rich elite in America, especially those who didn't earn it (hmmm?) , have always been on the side of the democrats.Hubbard came out today with Romney's plan.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443687504577562842656362660.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
His tax will be more regressive according to the article. There is a case too be made that taxes are too progressive right now. The reason Romney will not win in California is that this tax plan will raise taxes on taxpayers who have high deductions such as mortgage interest, property taxes and state income taxes. 25% times $30000 is greater than 30% times $0.
Inflation has been low under Obama. The dollar fell against some currencies like the real, reminimbi and baht but I think that Romney has spoken that the reminimbi is was artificially low against the dollar and would take steps to reduce the discrepancy. Dollar is up against the euro. Gas and food are up but services like house cleaners and gardeners are getting paid the same as what I paid 5 years ago. Mortgage interest is down for everybody that can refinance.
Matt Psyche
08-03-12, 02:43
You are liberal- pro gov activities in economic policy and anti gov interventions in social policy. Have fun in BA!
I just think that we need to pay for the government we have. Obamacare front-loaded all the benefits and back-loaded the taxes. When Romney wins he is going to have a very difficult time pushing back on those benefits. Bush led us into war with Iraq while keeping the expense of the war out of the budget. I think we all would have accepted a tax increase to take down Hussein.
I read Johnson's view on Obamacare and don't necessarily agree. Whose freedom are we protecting anyway? Some of the shooting victims in Aurora had no health insurance. I am sure in the end the taxpayers will cover their costs. Isn't it an infringement on my freedom since I already have good health insurance that I have to cover for these victims? In some ways everybody is already insured and not everyone is paying which does not seem fair. I think that is what Chief Justice Roberts meant that the government has the right to tax for the common good. Are we really ready to watch people bleed to death if they do not have medical coverage? In a libertarian society you need to be willing to let people fail. I do not think I am willing to go to that extreme so you need to make compromises in a libertarian society also.
100 days to BA and I promise I will quit writing this nonsense although the election is over by the time I get there.
SnakeOilSales
08-03-12, 03:37
[Report Deleted by Admin]
This 'report' was deleted by Admin because SnakeOilSales is not permitted to post rumors, leaks, gossip or any other unsubstantiated political wet dreams.
I like to remain relatively hands off of the political thread, but SnakeOilSales had demonstrated a propensity towards repeatedly posting innuendo after innuendo, supposition after supposition, and thus I've decided that I'm not going to let him continue to lob these unsubstantiated hand grenades into the discussion.
Like Joe Friday said: "Just the facts, ma'am"
Thanks,
Jackson
Why aren't we interested in Obama's income taxes? Whoops, forgot, nobody is interested in tax returns consisting entirely of welfare checks and food stamps.
Why aren't we interested in Obama's income taxes? Whoops, forgot, nobody is interested in tax returns consisting entirely of welfare checks and food stamps.I often wonder where is your source of information.
Somebody close to Obama said the following.
"He's never even had a real job for [God's] sake. And I can tell you from my dealings with him, he has no idea how the real world, that we actually live in, works."
It is worse than we thought. Obama is clueless, a moron living in NeverNeverLand
Somebody close to Obama said the following.
"He's never even had a real job for [God's] sake. And I can tell you from my dealings with him, he has no idea how the real world, that we actually live in, works."
It is worse than we thought. Obama is clueless, a moron living in NeverNeverLandAs I thought all along, it is your milkman.
Canitasguy
08-03-12, 13:02
The words are. El Alamo! Seeing as your selective outrage and editorial standards are pure horse shit! Why have we never seen this [Report Deleted by Admin][/blue]
This 'report' was deleted by Admin because EL ALAMO is not permitted to post rumors, leaks, gossip or any other unsubstantiated political wet dreams.
I like to remain relatively hands off of the political thread, but EL ALAMO had demonstrated a propensity towards repeatedly posting innuendo after innuendo, supposition after supposition, and thus I've decided that I'm not going to let him continue to lob these unsubstantiated hand grenades into the discussion.
Like Joe Friday said: "Just the facts, ma'am"
Thanks,
Jackson[/QUOTE]
Hubbard came out today with Romney's plan.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443687504577562842656362660.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
His tax will be more regressive according to the article. There is a case too be made that taxes are too progressive right now. The reason Romney will not win in California is that this tax plan will raise taxes on taxpayers who have high deductions such as mortgage interest, property taxes and state income taxes. 25% times $30000 is greater than 30% times $0.
Inflation has been low under Obama. The dollar fell against some currencies like the real, reminimbi and baht but I think that Romney has spoken that the reminimbi is was artificially low against the dollar and would take steps to reduce the discrepancy. Dollar is up against the euro. Gas and food are up but services like house cleaners and gardeners are getting paid the same as what I paid 5 years ago. Mortgage interest is down for everybody that can refinance.The only thing that makes taxes progressive at the moment is the temporary suspension of the Social Security tax. When the average citizen pays this FEDERAL tax, the TOTAL Federal tax burden becomes very regressive.
Tres3
Wild Walleye
08-03-12, 14:45
Hubbard came out today with Romney's plan.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443687504577562842656362660.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
His tax will be more regressive according to the article. There is a case too be made that taxes are too progressive right now. The reason Romney will not win in California is that this tax plan will raise taxes on taxpayers who have high deductions such as mortgage interest, property taxes and state income taxes. 25% times $30000 is greater than 30% times $0.I must have missed the part where he describes the regressive nature of the potential reforms. I know Glenn, so I will give he a call and ask.
Inflation has been low under Obama. The dollar fell against some currencies like the real, reminimbi and baht but I think that Romney has spoken that the reminimbi is was artificially low against the dollar and would take steps to reduce the discrepancy. Dollar is up against the euro. Gas and food are up but services like house cleaners and gardeners are getting paid the same as what I paid 5 years ago. Mortgage interest is down for everybody that can refinance.Inflation, as reported by the federal government, is a nearly useless factoid which has been crafted for political and not economic purposes. What two things do you rely more heavily upon, for your survival, other than food and fuel? Further, the Treasury has been printing trillions of dollars which decreases the value of the dollars that you hold, making the commodities that you purchase more expensive (sounds like inflation to me). This dilution of the value of the dollar and anemic interest rates combine to make investment in the dollar less attractive, therefore depressing the value of the dollar versus other major currencies. Free trading FOREX is a pretty straight forward example of supply and demand, although the calculation is fairly complex. If it were not for the perceived security of the dollar (in the face of many types of risk, not the least of which is the deterioration of the Eurozone) , it would have dropped further. One of the things Obama doesn't tell you is that by destroying the value of the dollar, our exports should be less expensive which, under normal circumstances, would increase the volume of our exports (stimulative to the economy). But, like every other parlor trick that this amateur has tried, it has failed. This is due mostly to the complete lack of knowledge and experience from the president on down through all of his sycophants and toadies. In order for that trick to work, there has to be some global economic growth. I am not a fan of deflating the dollar, regardless of the party doing it. I, to this day, would like to hang Nick Brady by his toes (metaphorically, of course. Plus, he is deceased) for doing exactly that.
Wild Walleye
08-03-12, 15:07
The only thing that makes taxes progressive at the moment is the temporary suspension of the Social Security tax. When the average citizen pays this FEDERAL tax, the TOTAL Federal tax burden becomes very regressive.
Tres3Are you saying that the current taxation regime is regressive?
I believe that we agree that the social security tax is quite regressive, so its suspension is progressive.
However, the US tax system is anything but regressive. In the US, the bottom 50% of the economic ladder pays no taxes at all. The next 25% of wage earners pay around 13% of all income taxes and the next 25% of wage earners pay 87% of all income taxes. As the amount of income increase, so does the applicable tax rate. That is the definition of progressive taxation. From the IRS, itself (IRS SOI Stats 2009) , published during the reign of our supreme leader:
The United States has a progressive income tax structure, meaning that different portions of taxable income are taxed at different rates with the “last” income received being taxed at the highest or marginal tax rate. From the inception of the individual income tax in 1913, tax rates have varied from as low as 1 percent to as high as 94 percent. Since 1916, the IRS has been publishing income and tax statistics based on information reported on federal tax returns filed by U.S. individual taxpayers.This bullet is buried a little deeper, after multiple bullets trying to create supporting evidence for the 99%:
For returns reporting positive adjusted gross income, the top 1 percent of taxpayers had an average tax rate of 24 percent; the top 10 percent of taxpayers had an average tax rate of 18.1 percent; and the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers had an average tax rate of 1.9 percent.
SnakeOilSales
08-03-12, 15:15
[Report Deleted by Admin]
This 'report' was deleted by Admin because SnakeOilSales is not permitted to post rumors, leaks, gossip or any other unsubstantiated political wet dreams.
I like to remain relatively hands off of the political thread, but SnakeOilSales had demonstrated a propensity towards repeatedly posting innuendo after innuendo, supposition after supposition, and thus I've decided that I'm not going to let him continue to lob these unsubstantiated hand grenades into the discussion.
Like Joe Friday said: "Just the facts, ma'am"
Thanks,
JacksonDon't be such a biased hypocrite. I posted a link to a legitimate news story about a current event from a legitimate source (yahoo) to back up the leak. You allow the other participants of this thread to post unsubstantiated nonsense about Obama (birthers, Obama collects food stamps, everyone that supports Obama is subhuman, Obama has destroyed US economy, Obama's goal is the destruction of the USA) without even a link to a legitimate news story to back it up, yet when I post a link to a legitimate source containing pertinent information that MAY play an ENORMOUS role in the outcome of this coming election, you delete it.
Perhaps it is becoming increasingly clear to you that Romney is a terrible candidate and, barring an unforeseen calamitous event before November, has no chance of beating the current POTUS. You are probably exasperated by this and your reaction is to "shoot the messenger"
Wild Walleye
08-03-12, 15:21
Somebody close to Obama said the following.
"He's never even had a real job for [God's] sake. And I can tell you from my dealings with him, he has no idea how the real world, that we actually live in, works."
It is worse than we thought. Obama is clueless, a moron living in NeverNeverLandI saw that, too. I have long said that no matter where Obama is, he is the least qualified and least experienced and least knowledgeable person in the room. I believe that comment has been attributed to John Boehner (R-Ohio) and current Speaker of the House, who is not a Conservative, but is a great improvement over Pelosi, who willing helped lead the rape and pillage of the American taxpayer and our Constitution. Despite Boehner's position, within the opposition, he is absolutely right.
I was saying this stuff before he knocked Hillary out of the primaries. I usually don't read contemporary political books, however, I recently read "The Amateur" by Ed Kline (someone left it at our Dacha). While I was familiar with much of the information contained in the book, it was an excellent read (finished it over a span of 24 hours). He puts a myriad of excellent examples of his amateurism together in one place. It isn't focused on stuff like giving the Queen of England and iPod, preloaded with his own speeches. It is focused on actions and events that illustrate just how unfit for office he really is.
Another thing that you never hear is the fact that the only election he has actually won (without unsealing confidential court documents and using them (illegally) to disparage his opponent) was 2008.
Are you saying that the current taxation regime is regressive?
I believe that we agree that the social security tax is quite regressive, so its suspension is progressive.
However, the US tax system is anything but regressive. In the US, the bottom 50% of the economic ladder pays no taxes at all. The next 25% of wage earners pay around 13% of all income taxes and the next 25% of wage earners pay 87% of all income taxes. As the amount of income increase, so does the applicable tax rate. That is the definition of progressive taxation. From the IRS, itself (IRS SOI Stats 2009) , published during the reign of our supreme leader:
This bullet is buried a little deeper, after multiple bullets trying to create supporting evidence for the 99%:Read the entire post! I said, in capital letters, TOTAL. That means Social Security, Medicare, and Income taxes. Only a small portion of the tax paying population pays 87% of their income in tax. Most of the wealthy can afford good tax planners and advisers, so they pay far less than 87. I agree that the rate increases, but that is only the statutory rate, NOT the actual, effective rate paid. There are quite a few millionaires who pay NO federal taxes. I was one of the "Best and Brightest" who helped them pay no, or very little, Federal tax, and was well compensated for doing so.
I stand by my original post, that without the suspension of the Social Security tax, the TOTAL Federal tax actually paid by the tax paying public is regressive. Many of the poor people who pay no income tax still pay Social Security and Medicare tax. You can call the taxes what you want, but they are still income taxes collected by the Federal Government.
Tres3
The only thing that makes taxes progressive at the moment is the temporary suspension of the Social Security tax. When the average citizen pays this FEDERAL tax, the TOTAL Federal tax burden becomes very regressive.
Tres3What you wrote above is absolutely not true. This is from a recent study by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, and shows the average tax rate paid by people in various income groups. If you want to check me, go to http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43373 and click on the first supplemental table. The figures below include ALL federal taxes, including social security tax:
Top 1%: 28.9% average federal tax rate.
Top 5%: 24.1% average federal tax rate.
Top 20%: 23.2%
Fourth Quintile: 15.1%
Third Quintile: 11.1%
Second Quintile: 6.8%
Bottom 20%: 1.0%
Your belief is common. I believe it stems from two things:
1. Democrats like Obama knowingly lie because they think it will get them more votes. This is why Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer favor only raising taxes on those making more than $1 million per year. Because they realize the "tax the rich" thing is populist bull shit, and a $1 million threshhold gets them more votes than a $250,000 threshhold. There are a lot of people who make in the $250,000 to $1,000,000 range in San Francisco and Manhattan, and Nancy and Chuck want their votes.
2. The desire of the majority to steal from the minority. People bend the truth to suit their beliefs and desires. They don't realize there are unintended consequences (on businesses, savings and investment) of stealing a large share of income from the wealthy.
If you download the Excel table I describe above on the CBO's web site, you'll see that your argument that the federal tax system would be regressive if not for the 2% reduction in social security tax doesn't wash. There's data there from 1979 to 2009, and the federal tax system is steeply progressive in all years.
Tres, a question, since you believe it's appropriate to include social security and medicare contributions in a person's total federal tax rate. Do you believe people who make over $250,000 a year should pay for the retirement and medical expenses of those less fortunate? And how do you expect this would work, since increasing their taxes enough to do this would potentially bankrupt many of them?
Please note in my reply below, I did include social security and medicare contributions in the total federal tax rate, and even then the federal system is steeply progressive.
Member #4112
08-03-12, 17:12
Before you get excommunicated from the board I wished to post this for your edification Snake.
I wrote the Nam missive right after reading a post from you denigrating the 'Great Satan' for bombing the poor folks in Laos who had only slingshots to defend themselves. I have gone back over your prior posts and have been unable to find that particular post again. Did you delete it?
If anyone remembers this post by Snake please confirm it if you recall it.
Otherwise, I may have confused Snake's ranting with another liberal hate American numskull on a different site and I would owe Snake an apology.
See, Conservatives are always willing to admit if they are mistaken, while liberals never admit they are wrong.
Before you get excommunicated from the board I wished to post this for your edification Snake.
I wrote the Nam missive right after reading a post from you denigrating the 'Great Satan' for bombing the poor folks in Laos who had only slingshots to defend themselves. I have gone back over your prior posts and have been unable to find that particular post again. Did you delete it?
If anyone remembers this post by Snake please confirm it if you recall it.
Otherwise, I may have confused Snake's ranting with another liberal hate American numskull on a different site and I would owe Snake an apology.
See, Conservatives are always willing to admit if they are mistaken, while liberals never admit they are wrong.Let me volunteer my despicable self as the "liberal hate American numskull". So Conservatives are all righteous and will all go to heaven. It is a relief to know, as I consider myself a conservative.
Vietnam, like the Cultural Revolution for China, is a chapter in our history that tends to embarass us and is best forgotten. This is not intended to disparage any Vietnam Vets.
Wild Walleye
08-03-12, 17:34
Don't be such a biased hypocrite. I posted a link to a legitimate news story about a current event from a legitimate source (yahoo) to back up the leak.What do you call someone who says one thing and does another?
It is almost like Saul Alinsky is here in the room with us. I think that it is important to make a distinction between what SOS / MOPD is and run of the mill democrats and / or liberals. SOS / MOPD is not an independently-minded democrat or liberal. He is, to the discussion, what dysentery is to a toilet. He isn't here to engage in the free exchange of ideas, he is here as a propagandist trying to further Marxist ideology and contribute, knowingly or not, to the destruction of many of the things that most of us love about the US.
In a public forum that falls under the auspices of US law most people have the right of free speech, even if what they have to say is idiotic or deleterious to the Country, its institutions and certain individuals (certain public figures). However, this forum is neither public nor subject to US law, (despite the fact that its owner may be). Jax has been pretty consistent that AP members need contribute to the primary mission of the forum, the gentleman's pursuit of the finer things in Argentina. Further, Jax has been pretty consistent in trying to eliminate personal attacks. You have not contributed to the pursuit of the finer things in Argentina and you have distributed lies about an individual. By joining Harry Reid in your attempt to smear Romney with lies, you are participating in perpetuating a lie and an unfounded personal attack. Harry Reid is a despicable human being who, despite never having a real job (I. E. Private sector) and coming from a poor family, has amassed an extraordinary amount of wealth. Harry Reid also has never publicly disclosed his own tax returns, despite holding public offices for the past 44 years. I'the like to know how a public servant, whose boyhood home didn't have an indoor toilet, has become a multimillionaire. I'the like to see Harry Reid's tax returns. I question whether or not you understand the definition of hypocrisy.
I have no problem with democrats or liberals. In fact, while I may disagree with them, I fully support their right to express themselves. I welcome the spirited exchange of ideas and the art of debate. However, the liberal minority (of the US population) is driven by a core of Leftists, who are not independently-minded, self-described democrats and liberals. That Leftist core can't advance its agenda through the truthful articulation of what it is, because America has repudiated it, many times during her history. The Leftists don't engage in debate, don't articulate and support arguments and won't intentionally reveal its fundamental tenets to the full American public, for fear of becoming an even smaller minority. Therein lays the difference between Conservatives and the Leftist. That is in fact a double-edged sword of freedom. The genuine exploitation of freedom must coexist with the expected abuse of freedom, even when those abuses are harmful to the nation, because any alternative construct, whatever it may be, is not freedom. In essence, we must hold the door open for SOS / MOPD and his ilk and allow them to try their best to damage the country. I feel that it is important for us to defend the country and repudiate Marxism, in all of its forms, manifestations and derivatives on the battlefield of ideas, where we have an enormous advantage, the truth. The left knows this and has known this since one of its grandfathers, the seditious Aaron Burr, assassinated one of the Founders. That is why they need the tactics of Alinsky, derived from their heroes of thought Mao, Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Gini and Engels. The Leftist Obama has never engaged in a truthful, public debate or discussion of his philosophy. When he goes off-script (off-teleprompter) he gives us a glimpse at the man behind the curtain. Look at how fast they pull the curtain back to hide the reality.
So is SOS / MOPD immune to reason? Why is he unwilling to make and support arguments? Is it because he doesn't understand, chooses to ignore or is afraid to reveal what lies beneath his ideology? SOS / MOPD has the right to be a cool aid drinker, if he so chooses. However, furthering his ideology at all costs, without regard for the country, its institutions or any specific individual, reveals his true identity. My question: is damaging the nation his intent, or is he just a useful idiot? So, SOS / MOPD, are you a committed Marxist or mindless sycophant?
Doppelganger, You may be right about Snake. You've confused Esten and me. While Esten would probably be great to have a beer with, we're usually polar opposites on this board.
Member #4112
08-03-12, 17:39
Let me volunteer my despicable self as the "liberal hate American numskull". So Conservatives are all righteous and will all go to heaven. It is a relief to know, as I consider myself a conservative.
Vietnam, like the Cultural Revolution for China, is a chapter in our history that tends to embarass us and is best forgotten. This is not intended to disparage any Vietnam Vets.No Black Shirt all conservatives are NOT going to heaven and all liberals are NOT going to hell, this was only about admitting when you are wrong.
Hell, I'm not going heaven since I wouldn't know a damn person there.
You know what they say you go to heaven for the climate and to hell for companionship
Member #4112
08-03-12, 17:41
Tres, are you aware the great majority of employees only pay HALF of the Social Security and Medicare Payroll Taxes? Employers pay the other half unless the employee is self employed, then they get the privilege of paying both sides, employer and employee payroll assessments.
I would assume you wish to include Social Security & Medicaid in the "Total" tax payersis so the 49+% of folks who do not pay federal income taxes can now be included as "tax payers" for your argument regarding the tax system.
This premise is false on its face as those who pay Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes will benefit far beyond the amounts they contribute into these partially self funded Direct Benefit systems. It falls to the 50% of the citizens who do pay FEDERAL INCOME TAXES to make up the short fall in the Medicare and Social Security systems as well as the totally UNFUNDED welfare, food stamp, Medicaid and myriad of other Federal give away programs.
Do the math, the increases Obama wants will not even begin to pay for the deficit spending Obama has run up THIS YEAR much less pay off the debt. This pure class warfare at its worst.
What do you call someone who says one thing and does another?
It is almost like Saul Alinsky is here in the room with us. I think that it is important to make a distinction between what SOS / MOPD is and run of the mill democrats and / or liberals. SOS / MOPD is not an independently-minded democrat or liberal. He is, to the discussion, what dysentery is to a toilet. He isn't here to engage in the free exchange of ideas, he is here as a propagandist trying to further Marxist ideology and contribute, knowingly or not, to the destruction of many of the things that most of us love about the US.
In a public forum that falls under the auspices of US law most people have the right of free speech, even if what they have to say is idiotic or deleterious to the Country, its institutions and certain individuals (certain public figures). However, this forum is neither public nor subject to US law, (despite the fact that its owner may be). Jax has been pretty consistent that AP members need contribute to the primary mission of the forum, the gentleman's pursuit of the finer things in Argentina. Further, Jax has been pretty consistent in trying to eliminate personal attacks. You have not contributed to the pursuit of the finer things in Argentina and you have distributed lies about an individual. By joining Harry Reid in your attempt to smear Romney with lies, you are participating in perpetuating a lie and an unfounded personal attack. Harry Reid is a despicable human being who, despite never having a real job (I. E. Private sector) and coming from a poor family, has amassed an extraordinary amount of wealth. Harry Reid also has never publicly disclosed his own tax returns, despite holding public offices for the past 44 years. I'the like to know how a public servant, whose boyhood home didn't have an indoor toilet, has become a multimillionaire. I'the like to see Harry Reid's tax returns. I question whether or not you understand the definition of hypocrisy.
I have no problem with democrats or liberals. In fact, while I may disagree with them, I fully support their right to express themselves. I welcome the spirited exchange of ideas and the art of debate. However, the liberal minority (of the US population) is driven by a core of Leftists, who are not independently-minded, self-described democrats and liberals. That Leftist core can't advance its agenda through the truthful articulation of what it is, because America has repudiated it, many times during her history. The Leftists don't engage in debate, don't articulate and support arguments and won't intentionally reveal its fundamental tenets to the full American public, for fear of becoming an even smaller minority. Therein lays the difference between Conservatives and the Leftist. That is in fact a double-edged sword of freedom. The genuine exploitation of freedom must coexist with the expected abuse of freedom, even when those abuses are harmful to the nation, because any alternative construct, whatever it may be, is not freedom. In essence, we must hold the door open for SOS / MOPD and his ilk and allow them to try their best to damage the country. I feel that it is important for us to defend the country and repudiate Marxism, in all of its forms, manifestations and derivatives on the battlefield of ideas, where we have an enormous advantage, the truth. The left knows this and has known this since one of its grandfathers, the seditious Aaron Burr, assassinated one of the Founders. That is why they need the tactics of Alinsky, derived from their heroes of thought Mao, Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Gini and Engels. The Leftist Obama has never engaged in a truthful, public debate or discussion of his philosophy. When he goes off-script (off-teleprompter) he gives us a glimpse at the man behind the curtain. Look at how fast they pull the curtain back to hide the reality.
So is SOS / MOPD immune to reason? Why is he unwilling to make and support arguments? Is it because he doesn't understand, chooses to ignore or is afraid to reveal what lies beneath his ideology? SOS / MOPD has the right to be a cool aid drinker, if he so chooses. However, furthering his ideology at all costs, without regard for the country, its institutions or any specific individual, reveals his true identity. My question: is damaging the nation his intent, or is he just a useful idiot? So, SOS / MOPD, are you a committed Marxist or mindless sycophant?Politically, AP is a conservative think tank?
Wild Walleye
08-03-12, 18:09
Read the entire post! I said, in capital letters, TOTAL. That means Social Security, Medicare, and Income taxes. Only a small portion of the tax paying population pays 87% of their income in tax.I think that you may misinterpreted that first group of statistic. I was illuminating the fact that the poor pay no taxes, at all.
Most of the wealthy can afford good tax planners and advisers, so they pay far less than 87. I agree that the rate increases, but that is only the statutory rate, NOT the actual, effective rate paid.You are correct about the progression. Just to be clear, the statutory marginal income tax rates run from 10% to 35%. When you add up the marginal impact on an W-2 income of $1 million, the actual rate, with no deductions is 41.2%. Good tax planning can help to reduce the rate, but it isn't that simple.
There are quite a few millionaires who pay NO federal taxes. I was one of the "Best and Brightest" who helped them pay no, or very little, Federal tax, and was well compensated for doing so.There are plenty of ways to legally reduce taxes and in some cases it can result in little or no tax being owed on significant income. If all of one's income comes in the form of capital gains, you can start off with a 15% rate, which is a pretty big head start on reducing the 41.2%. Big lefty Bill Gates has always had a relatively small salary. I wonder if he overpaid his taxes to make up for the disparity. However, if you are doing this legally, you need to have legitimate items to offset almost all of the positive numbers that contribute to adjusted gross income. I'm not saying that it is impossible, but a return with $1 million of income, but no taxable income is a red flag at the IRS.
I stand by my original post, that without the suspension of the Social Security tax, the TOTAL Federal tax actually paid by the tax paying public is regressive.You are absolutely entitled to your opinion.
Many of the poor people who pay no income tax still pay Social Security and Medicare tax. You can call the taxes what you want, but they are still income taxes collected by the Federal Government.
Tres3FICA is 7.65% (6.2% for social security and 1.45% for medicaid) , which is significantly below the average paid by high income earners. If you are calculating taxation of the poor, you need to net out the total value of fungible government benefits received (food stamps, welfare, free healthcare, etc.). Further, a significant portion of the recipients of such assistance report no income to the government and therefore are being paid by the government, which continues the progressive nature of the system onto non-earners.
Wild Walleye
08-03-12, 18:25
Politically, AP is a conservative think tank?Not at all. Most of the AP'ers that I have met in person don't agree with me on most political topics. Unless they enjoy political debate, it isn't part of our interaction. Like I have said many times before, I stand for the rights of everyone to express their beliefs, if they feel compelled to do so. Most of my friends (I have a couple) , probably fall into the middle of the political morass and a couple of them are hardcore leftist (who openly admit that they are for socialism and Marxism). I generally find that I have to spend a fair amount of time explaining what being a conservative means to me. That is in large part thanks to our leftist activists and the media (is that redundant) , who have been deliberately misinforming the public about conservatism and anything related to it. They paint it all with a religious brush and scream guns and abortion at the top of their lungs.
I was drawing a clear distinction between individuals who are self-described democrats or liberals and political operatives like SOS / MOPD.
Tres, a question, since you believe it's appropriate to include social security and medicare contributions in a person's total federal tax rate. Do you believe people who make over $250, 000 a year should pay for the retirement and medical expenses of those less fortunate? And how do you expect this would work, since increasing their taxes enough to do this would potentially bankrupt many of them?
Please note in my reply below, I did include social security and medicare contributions in the total federal tax rate, and even then the federal system is steeply progressive.As I said earlier, an income tax is still an income tax. It does not matter what you call it. If you wish to call the tax that an employed person, his employer, or the self-employed a "contribution" call it what you want, but it still walks like a duck, talks like a duck, flies like a duck, swims like a duck, etc, etc. The tax "contribution" is levied, by statute, as a percentage of a person's INCOME, with a statutory limit on the amount of income on which the "contribution" is assessed. This limit is what makes the "contribution" regressive.
I noted with interest that your CBO quote: 1) Neglected to mention the percentage of total Federal tax revenue paid by each group, only the effective rate; and. 2.) That none of the groups you mentioned paid more than 30% of their income in Federal income taxes. How "steep" is 30% It still leaves 70% of income untaxed at the Federal level. Do you remember when the top Federal bracket was 90% of taxable income?
You brought a new argument to the table with your $250, 000 per year question, and I will not argue a hypothetical question. I posted only the facts as stated in existing law. What I personally believe with regard to proposed law is not material. It is not yet law, and may never become law. The fact is, under present law, an individual making more than $250, 000 per year exceeds the statutory limit on that person's "contributions" to Social Security and Medicare.
Tres3
Wild Walleye
08-03-12, 18:45
Let me volunteer my despicable self as the "liberal hate American numskull".I don't think that most democrats and / or liberals hate America. I do think that there is a significant core that is bent on destroying many of the things that have contributed to making America great. I have no idea if they are motivate by hate or any other emotion. I also hope that you recognize that my harshest, sharp-tongued commentaries are reserved mostly for SOS / MOPD, his prior handle Move On and Esten. Although, I respect the fact that Esten personally subscribes to a Marxist / socialist philosophy and is not an operative just here to distribute propaganda.
So Conservatives are all righteous and will all go to heaven. It is a relief to know, as I consider myself a conservative.Much of that depends on whether or not you see it coming. I know that I will need a little lead time, since I'll probably have some explaining to do.
Vietnam, like the Cultural Revolution for China, is a chapter in our history that tends to embarass us and is best forgotten. This is not intended to disparage any Vietnam Vets.I think that the subject of Vietnam has been so politicized, since LBJ was in office, that it is difficult to reconcile the millions of different agenda-driven snippets into any form of discernible mosaic. However, it is a very important part of our recent history replete with crucial lessons, many of which we forgot long ago. It is also the figurative birthplace of the contemporary leftist movement. That element is very interesting, yet rarely discussed. Who were we fighting in French Indochina? Was Charlie the enemy or a proxy for our true enemy. The true enemy, had a history of nearly 50 years of trying to infiltrate and destabilize the US. That true enemy found very fertile ground to sow its seeds of dissent and to grow dreams of Marxist utopia. After all, in the wake of McCarthyism a Marxist was nearly untouchable. What was it that I was saying about that Alinsky guy? I feel like I am going in circles, I'm getting dizzy. I think I am going to lie down.
1) Neglected to mention the percentage of total Federal tax revenue paid by each group, only the effective rate; and. 2.) That none of the groups you mentioned paid more than 30% of their income in Federal income taxes. How "steep" is 30% It still leaves 70% of income untaxed at the Federal level. Do you remember when the top Federal bracket was 90% of taxable income?Tres,
1.) That's irrelevant to progressivity, but it doesn't paint a pretty picture for your side. The top 1% pay 35% to 40% of total federal income taxes. Admittedly that doesn't include social security and medicare contributions, but irregardless you'll find higher income groups pay far more in federal taxes per capita, however you define taxes.
2.) Add state and local income taxes, property taxes, sales taxes and you're probably getting to 40% to 50%. I don't understand your argument. Are you proposing to increase the Federal tax rate to 100%? Do you think certain people should be milked for every dime they've got? Or only 90%?
Matt Psyche
08-03-12, 19:31
Is not about de jure rate for "taxable" income. It is about a ratio of tax paid to de facto income, which includes income in tax heaven.
What you wrote above is absolutely not true. This is from a recent study by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, and shows the average tax rate paid by people in various income groups. If you want to check me, go to.
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43373
And click on the first supplemental table. The figures below include ALL federal taxes, including social security tax:
Top 1%: 28. 9% average federal tax rate.
Top 5%: 24. 1% average federal tax rate.
Top 20%: 23. 2%
Fourth Quintile: 15. 1%
Third Quintile: 11. 1%
Second Quintile: 6. 8%
Bottom 20%: 1. 0%
Your belief is common. I believe it stems from two things:
1. Democrats like Obama knowingly lie because they think it will get them more votes. This is why Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer favor only raising taxes on those making more than $1 million per year. Because they realize the "tax the rich" thing is populist bull shit, and a $1 million threshhold gets them more votes than a $250, 000 threshhold. There are a lot of people who make in the $250, 000 to $1, 000, 000 range in San Francisco and Manhattan, and Nancy and Chuck want their votes.
2. The desire of the majority to steal from the minority. People bend the truth to suit their beliefs and desires. They don't realize there are unintended consequences (on businesses, savings and investment) of stealing a large share of income from the wealthy.
If you download the Excel table I describe above on the CBO's web site, you'll see that your argument that the federal tax system would be regressive if not for the 2% reduction in social security tax doesn't wash. There's data there from 1979 to 2009, and the federal tax system is steeply progressive in all years.
Matt Psyche
08-03-12, 20:00
I think there was a poll on AP members last year. Surprisingly, majority of respondents were liberal. I cannot locate the post of the poll results. If somebody could, please repost the poll results. Thanks.
BTW, why the name of Black Shirt? Reminds me of the Italian facist party.
Politically, AP is a conservative think tank?
I think there was a poll on AP members last year. Surprisingly, majority of respondents were liberal. I cannot locate the post of the poll results. If somebody could, please repost the poll results. Thanks.
BTW, why the name of Black Shirt? Reminds me of the Italian facist party.When registering, my designated nick "blackshirt" failed the name-check requirements, so it became Black Shirt. I have to thank the Honorable, Sir Jackson, OBE, VC, BOAC, SPCA, AARP, YWCA for that correct intervention.
No, I am not one of Mussolini's dandy boys. For you guys that follow college football, the blackshirts are the famed Cornhusker defense that terrorizes and maimed a whole host of great & mediocre offenses. No, I do not go around wearing a black shirt, I think I only have 1 black t-shirt.
Big Boss Man
08-03-12, 21:33
I must have missed the part where he describes the regressive nature of the potential reforms. I know Glenn, so I will give he a call and ask.I would very surprised if Romney came out with a tax program that is more progressive than the current tax system. If his tax plan is more progressive then the one we currently have then I really do not understand the tenor of his campaign. Progressive and regressive are relative terms not defining terms. They do not inform if the tax policy is good or bad. The terms just explain the relative tax burden of different income classes. I think it is fair to say that Romney's tax plan is more regressive than Obama's. The purpose is to reward the job creators to give them incentive to work harder which will improve the economy. I read "Atlas Shrugged." I get it. Wild Walleye give me some love.
It has been a topic of discussion how Hitler, in a few short years, was able to convince Germany to become openly anti semitic, condone armed conflicts with neighboring countries and plunge the world into WWII.
In the future we will be wondering how Obama was able to convince his goose stepping supporters to support class warfare and declare that entrepreneurs are despicable and should be ostracized for their success.
Obama is a known quantity. A moron and there is nothing Obama can do about that. What I don't understand is how seemingly rational people support this moron. Whoops, need to be careful. Don't want Obama to send his Brown Shirts after me.
Hitler plunged his country into a world war and Obama is plunging our countrry into economic chaos.
Wild Walleye
08-03-12, 22:05
When registering, my designated nick "blackshirt" failed the name-check requirements, so it became Black Shirt. I have to thank the Honorable, Sir Jackson, OBE, VC, BOAC, SPCA, AARP, YWCA for that correct intervention.
No, I am not one of Mussolini's dandy boys. For you guys that follow college football, the blackshirts are the famed Cornhusker defense that terrorizes and maimed a whole host of great & mediocre offenses. No, I do not go around wearing a black shirt, I think I only have 1 black t-shirt.I thought that you were Johnny Cash.
Matt Psyche
08-03-12, 22:11
What do you mean by a known "quantity"? Thanks.
Obama is a known quantity. A.
Known quantity.
Someone whose character, personality, and behavior are recognized and understood. We need not worry about how John will behave. He is a known quantity. Lisa is a known quantity and I am sure she will not surprise us by voting with the opposition.
See also: known, quantity.
I am available for english lessons, for free, if english is not your native language. Of course, you need to catch me when I am sober
Wild Walleye
08-03-12, 22:17
I would very surprised if Romney came out with a tax program that is more progressive than the current tax system. If his tax plan is more progressive then the one we currently have then I really do not understand the tenor of his campaign.I agree completely. I probably wasn't clear in my point. Romney is not proposing a regressive tax regime, which would have lower income earnings paying a higher percent of their income than higher wage earners. I believe that the point of his campaign vis a vis taxes, is to reduce taxes on all taxpayers and particularly on companies (whose taxes are paid by their customers, not by the corporation). Reducing taxes on everyone, or making taxes more fair (like a flat tax) and therefore less progressive, in my opinion, does not necessarily make those alterations regressive (although the Left would want us to believe that is true).
Progressive and regressive are relative terms not defining terms. They do not inform if the tax policy is good or bad. The terms just explain the relative tax burden of different income classes.I think that progressive taxation is bad and unAmerican. I also do not believe that we have a caste system in the US.
I think it is fair to say that Romney's tax plan is more regressive than Obama's. The purpose is to reward the job creators to give them incentive to work harder which will improve the economy.You've probably noticed that I like to split hairs. I would agree that any Romney tax plan is likely to be less progressive (and less radical) than anything that Obama proffers.
I read "Atlas Shrugged." I get it. Wild Walleye give me some love.Was it good? I'm functionally illiterate. I've got lots of love for everyone.
Wild Walleye
08-03-12, 22:31
Is not about de jure rate for "taxable" income. It is about a ratio of tax paid to de facto income, which includes income in tax heaven.I know this wasn't directed at me, but I figured I throw in that the numbers from my post came directly from the IRS website, including the percentage of income paid by level of income stats. There is very little opportunity for US citizens to legally avail themselves of tax havens, as perceived by most of the public. Regardless of where the money is, US citizens are required to report every penny of income, except those types explicitly exempted from taxation. Any corporate tax filing requires disclosing if the company has any foreign accounts, regardless of whether or not there is foreign income.
I thought that you were Johnny Cash.Yes, I knew we had to have something in common, Folsom Prison. Something to talk about in the future, right!
Walleye, That is indeed grasping at straws. Faced with irrefutable proof that the USA federal tax system is progressive, the best Psyche and Tres can come up with is that the wealthy must be hiding income in "tax heavens". Except for politicians, I've been inclined to give the left the benefit of the doubt. But I'm starting to think that Jackson is right.
Matt Psyche
08-04-12, 01:46
Thanks for copying and pasting from the freedictionary. Com, and representing it as your answer.
I will take English lessons from you.
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/known+quantity.
Known quantity.
Someone whose character, personality, and behavior are recognized and understood. We need not worry about how John will behave. He is a known quantity. Lisa is a known quantity and I am sure she will not surprise us by voting with the opposition.
See also: known, quantity.
I am available for english lessons, for free, if english is not your native language. Of course, you need to catch me when I am sober
WorldTravel69
08-04-12, 03:05
I have been too busy watching Americans trying to do their best for our Country at the Olympics.
It is too bad our Republicans you voted for can't do the same for You and Us, I am saying US.
The Republicans don't help Us or the unemployed. The Rich Republicans have not created ANY JOBS. Since the 1950s.
Trickle Down Has Proven Not to Work.
Romney said he will create 12 million new jobs. But in What Country?
It says that Mormons don't do Alcohol as part of their Religion.
George Bush had more sense, Have a few drinks and keep your mouth shut about Foreign Policy.
ROMNEY put His Foot Into His Mouth on His Europe, African Tour.
Are You Really Sure You Want Him As YOUR PRESIDENT?
I know from talking to You that You Have More BRAINS than That?
New Jobs Went Up Last Month.
Romney made a great first impression on our most valuable ally, Great Britain. Questioning the readiness of the London Games? Way to step in it. Not surprisingly he got hammered in the British press, with headlines that have made him a laughing stock:
"Mitt the Twit"
"Who invited party-pooper Romney?"
"'Nowhere man' Romney loses his way with gaffe about the Games"
Some papers called him a "wazzock", which has variously been defined as "a daft know-it-all", or less flattering "a fool, esp. One who makes gross mistakes by negligence or incompetence".
What a phuck-up! Even Krauthammer agrees!
Don't want to rain on your parade but Romney has about a 2 to 1 edge on handling the economy over Obama. Of course my dog Rocky would have a 2 to 1 edge over Obama on handling the economy.
Until recently, Obama had an edge over Romney in foreign affairs but after Romney's impressive visits to England, Isreal and Poland this has changed. Now it is 44% Obama. 44% Romney. Guess we are getting used to our new President.
Obama has a big problem. Without a telepromptor Obama meets every criteria of a moron. On the other hand we have Romneys college transcripts. Impressive. Summa cum laude at the Harvard Law School. Quite a contrast with Obama's 1.7 GPA and Obama being on academic probation numerous times for lack of intelligence. I can see it now. In the upcoming debates we will have to lob softballs to Obama such as " in what country is London, england" or " does a $3 BigMac cost more or less than $100 dollars" or "is our round world round or flat". We wouldn't want to expose Obama's IQ which is about the same IQ as a potted plant - and in an IQ test Obama would run a close second to a table top.
SnakeOilSales
08-04-12, 19:48
Obama has a big problem. Without a telepromptor Obama meets every criteria of a moron. On the other hand we have Romneys college transcripts. Impressive. Summa cum laude at the Harvard Law School. Quite a contrast with Obama's 1. 7 GPA and Obama being on academic probation numerous times for lack of intelligence. I can see it now. In the upcoming debates we will have to lob softballs to Obama such as " in what country is London, england" or " does a $3 BigMac cost more or less than $100 dollars" or "is our round world round or flat". We wouldn't want to expose Obama's IQ which is about the same IQ as a potted plant. And in an IQ test Obama would run a close second to a table top. Obama graduated from Harvard Law Magna Cum Laude, which, according to Harvard's own website cites a minimum GPA requirement of 3.756.
Big Boss Man
08-05-12, 00:01
This is a BookTV program where Hewitt makes the case against Obama. For all you fence sitters I think this will pull you over to Romney. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWY1tgqelPk I also think that Hewitt is honest about how a Romney administration could fail. It's going to be a real high wire act. Conservatives want to reverse all the Defense cuts that that Obama has already made. Of course he wants to get deficit down to 20% of GDP while he is increasing military spending. Even though some of us are ready for change, we are not as enthused about Romney as the the true blue Conservatives seem to be. Hewitt admits that the Republicans failed in 2004. If they get a second chance Hewitt thinks that they have only a small window to succeed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWY1tgqelPk
WorldTravel69
08-05-12, 12:11
Romney has proven time and time again, he the one who needs a Teleprompter.
It was Obama that was Magna cum Laude at Harvard.
http://www.eduinreview.com/blog/2008/10/barack-obamas-gpa-and-college-records/
You have been listening to Rush too much.
Don't want to rain on your parade but Romney has about a 2 to 1 edge on handling the economy over Obama. Of course my dog Rocky would have a 2 to 1 edge over Obama on handling the economy.
Until recently, Obama had an edge over Romney in foreign affairs but after Romney's impressive visits to England, Isreal and Poland this has changed. Now it is 44% Obama. 44% Romney. Guess we are getting used to our new President.
Obama has a big problem. Without a telepromptor Obama meets every criteria of a moron. On the other hand we have Romneys college transcripts. Impressive. Summa cum laude at the Harvard Law School. Quite a contrast with Obama's 1. 7 GPA and Obama being on academic probation numerous times for lack of intelligence. I can see it now. In the upcoming debates we will have to lob softballs to Obama such as " in what country is London, england" or " does a $3 BigMac cost more or less than $100 dollars" or "is our round world round or flat". We wouldn't want to expose Obama's IQ which is about the same IQ as a potted plant. And in an IQ test Obama would run a close second to a table top.
Interesting that Obama graduated from Harvard Law School magna cum laude. Information straight from the journal of irreproducible results. Nobody, and I mean nobody has seen Obama's transcipts from Harvard and nobody, absolutely nobody has seen Obama's diploma from Harvard. The idea that Obama graduated magna cum laude is an urban myth. An urban myth is a completely false notion that gains credibility from countless repeating of the urban myth. Guess what, let's see Obama's Harvard transcripts or Obama's diploma from Harvard. Shouldn't be that hard, should it.
In is also interesting why Obama is so modest about his so called achievements at Harvard. In fact, Michelle as well as Obama never want to talk about their time at Harvard. Why, because Obama's time and accomplishements at Harvard were a complete fabrication. Starting with him being Magna Cum Laude.
However, some of Obama's professors at Harvard have comments about Obama such as 'dumber than a doorknob' 'How does this moron Obama cross the street by himself' and ' this miserable student Obama was able to do D level work after he reduced his drug dealing and reduced his personal dependence on drugs'
This is a BookTV program where Hewitt makes the case against Obama. For all you fence sitters I think this will pull you over to Romney.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWY1tgqelPk
I also think that Hewitt is honest about how a Romney administration could fail. It's going to be a real high wire act. Conservatives want to reverse all the Defense cuts that that Obama has already made. Of course he wants to get deficit down to 20% of GDP while he is increasing military spending. Even though some of us are ready for change, we are not as enthused about Romney as the the true blue Conservatives seem to be. Hewitt admits that the Republicans failed in 2004. If they get a second chance Hewitt thinks that they have only a small window to succeed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWY1tgqelPkReally good post and link BBM. Maybe one of the best posts in the political thread of all time. Loved the link and enjoyed the speakers presentation. The wild-ass moon howling liberals like SnakeBoy, WT69 and especially Esten will hate this link. Esten especially, because he is by far the smartest of the three and has already figured out whats coming in November. I realized long ago when Esten didn't take me up on the same bet we made in the October primaries two years ago. That was a push because the senate stayed democrat. I know you are out there fella. I've already asked to renew our bet of two years ago, LONG AGO on this thread and NO RESPONSE. Like Clint Eastwood used to say " do you feel lucky"! The bet is still out there dude. Why not pony up? I am betting on Romney plus a GOP controlled senate after the November elections. If I am right on both I win. If you are right and the senate and Obomantion stay in place, YOU WIN. If it's a split decision either way, IT'S A PUSH. What say you dude, at the end of the day we can both afford to treat the other to a night at Madahos (lets say 2000 peso max). At the current blue rate, hell thats less than a 300 dollar bet. Come out, come out, where ever you are! I am waiting and looking forward to you repeating our bet of 2010. Enough said. Happy Mongering All. Toymann
Canitasguy
08-05-12, 16:41
Hugh Hewitt attacks ObamaHewitt was Nixon's ghostwriter back when the all time evil snake oil salesman was screwing the country, shredding the constitution and living large on the taxpayer's dime. He is as biased as el Jefe isn't! Get ready all you O'haters and rejoice. You may have 4 more years to keep pulling your hair out (those of you who have any left!
One of the links was to a story CRITICIZING Obama for (more than likely) sending the DOJ after Sheldon Adelson (who is an outspoken Romney supporter).It was interesting, that the Department of Justice is looking at criminal charges against Adelson's company. But they're not looking at Stephen Wynn or Kirk Kerkorian or any other casino companies.
This is a potential way of bankrupting Adelson's company. At least that's what happened when Arthur Anderson, the accounting firm, was convicted of criminal charges.
The primary charge is that the Chinese owner of a Mexican pharmaceutical firm gambled at the Venetian. What the Venetian didn't know is that in addition to selling legitimate pharmaceuticals, the guy was also selling raw materials to narcotraficantes who were manufacturing methamphetamines. When he got busted Guadalajara police discovered $200 million in cash in his swimming pool.
While the DOJ is probably going to charge Adelson's company with money laundering, apparently the gambler ended up owing money to the Venetian. He lost more than he ran through the casino. The Venetian extended a line of credit to him and got burned. How's that money laundering? Only if you're a supporter of a political opponent of Barrack Obama. By the way, the DOJ has dropped the charges against the pharmaceutical owner for lack of evidence for money laundering, but they're still going to pursue Adelson! The DOJ can't come up with enough evidence to show he was laundering money, but somehow the Venetian should have seen that was happening and stopped it!
Snake, the web site owner has graciously provided this playground to us free of charge. Respectfully, you might want to think about that, and edit your post.
Snake, the web site owner has graciously provided this playground to us free of charge. Respectfully, you might want to think about that, and edit your post.SnakeBoy's frustration appears to be peaking! Similar to many of his wild-ass liberal buddies, as their mesiah Obomanation reveals his true colours and heads towards his slaughter in November. Tick. Tick. Tick. Monger on Tiny. Toymann.
Ps. STILL WAITING ESTEN
[QUOTE=WorldTravel69; 424863]Romney has proven time and time again, he the one who needs a Teleprompter.
I hope this quote by WT is supposed to be humorous. If not, we might need some intervention.
Obama uses a telepromptor because Obama cannot put sentences together that have both a subject and a verb without a telepromptor. In fact, telepromptors were more or less unknown in politics until we wound up Obama with Duracell batteries and put a telepromptor in front of him. Take out the batteries and remove the telepromptor and what are left with. A moron who makes the Duracell bunny look like Einstein.
In fact, there is a rumor that Obama requires a telepromptor to ask if he may go to the bathroom. Things get pretty messy when Obama's telepromptor is not working.
Member #4112
08-05-12, 21:11
Snake, you don't go to a dinner party where the host has provided dinner and drinks then slap the host as you eat his food and drink his booze. Jackson is pretty tolerant of knot heads on this site, myself included, if you are having such a problem with the site, I invite you to leave and find a site more to your liking. This site and thread are voluntary no one makes you post here and if the moderator deletes anything, it's his site and his rules.
WorldTravel69
08-05-12, 21:22
Maybe you can find something wrong with this one.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/choice2008/obama/harvard.html
Interesting that Obama graduated from Harvard Law School magna cum laude. Information straight from the journal of irreproducible results. Nobody, and I mean nobody has seen Obama's transcipts from Harvard and nobody, absolutely nobody has seen Obama's diploma from Harvard. The idea that Obama graduated magna cum laude is an urban myth. An urban myth is a completely false notion that gains credibility from countless repeating of the urban myth. Guess what, let's see Obama's Harvard transcripts or Obama's diploma from Harvard. Shouldn't be that hard, should it.
In is also interesting why Obama is so modest about his so called achievements at Harvard. In fact, michelle as well as Obama never want to talk about their time at harvard. Why, because Obama's time and accomplishements at Harvard were a complete fabrication. Starting with him being magna cum laude.
However, some of Obama's professors at Harvard have comments about Obama such as 'dumber than a doorknob' 'How does this moron Obama cross the street by himself' and ' this miserable student Obama was able to do D level work after he reduced his drug dealing and reduced his personal dependence on drugs'
WT I am beginning to worry about you more and more.
Where are the college transcripts? Where is the diploma? You are propogating unfounded urban myths.
Besides, any nitwit can tell Obama would have a hard time ordering french fries much less being magna cum laude at Harvard.
I hope you have not lost all your money listening to financial advisors who probably know less about the economy than a shoe shine boy. Whoops, forgot, the shoe shine boy isn't that bad. The shoe shine boy probably knows a lot more about the economy than Obama
Obama graduated from Harvard Law Magna Cum Laude, which, according to Harvard's own website cites a minimum GPA requirement of 3.756."Just because he graduated from Harvard Law School magna cum laude doesn't mean BO had a high GPA. It just means that after subtracting the students who graduated summa cum laude, of the remaining students, he graduated in the top 10% of his class. Theoretically, he could have had a C average. http://www.law.harvard.edu/ocs/employers/HLS_Grading_System.htm"
http://www.law.harvard.edu/academics/handbook/2011-12handbookofacademicpolicies.pdf
All magna cum laude means is that he he was in the 10% of his class below summa cum laude. No specific grade point is a requirement. So, a C student could be a magna cum laude. Since summa cum laude have to have a 4. 75 grade or higher, HLS does not use the standard 4. 00 grade scale, so a 3. 75 would be above average, but nowhere near an A.
I have said it before and I will say it again. This election is over. The toss up states will be Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Nevada, New Jersey and New Mexico. Obama will lose all the so called tossup states. Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Ohio, Iowa, Colorado.
Obama is an election day nightmare. Hillary beat his butt in all the final primaries in 2008. An incarcerated prisoner beat Obama's butt in the primaries this year.
This is not 2008 when Obama was hope and change and outspent the opposition 10 to 1.
Anyway, Obama is a miserable person plunging our country into economic chaos. Obama barely won in 2008 when he should have won by a landslide.
Read it and weap, this election is over.
I could be dead wrong but I doubt it.
Toyman, Do you want to do a three way with Esten? I'd bet on Obama and a Republican Senate. I hope Romney wins. But I don't think the American public is smart enough to recognize we need someone like him to restructure the federal government before we go bankrupt,
WorldTravel69
08-06-12, 04:23
I hope you woke up tonight and watched it.
Better yet buy the Series and Judge for Your self, Not these dumb f__kers BSers on this Site. Exon Where Are You?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnArJ76iZo8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=XPzfLoV08Ok&NR=1
http://cartermatt.com/28509/the-newsroom-review-a-picture-of-osama-bin-ladens-demise/comment-page-1/#comment-50989.
Bush did not get him. He actually said to forget about him, because he did not know where he and Intelligence department knew where he was.
I heard that Obama has not paid taxes for over 10 years. However, Obama has no income. Obama doesn't know how to cash his welfare checks and Obama doesn't know how to fill out his food stamp application.
I hope you woke up tonight and watched it.
Better yet buy the Series and Judge for Your self, Not these dumb f__kers BSers on this Site. Exon Where Are You?I'm open minded. I'll make a deal with you. I'll watch 3 episodes of the Newsroom if you'll watch 3 episodes of Stossel on Fox Business News network.
Do you seriously believe Romney didn't pay taxes for 10 years? Do you believe anything a politician (like Harry Reid) tells you, as long as he's a democrat? If it comes out that Romney paid less than $10 million in taxes over the last 10 years, I'll contribute $1,000 to the Democratic National Committee.
Silver Star
08-06-12, 20:43
I'm open minded. I'll make a deal with you. I'll watch 3 episodes of the Newsroom if you'll watch 3 episodes of Stossel on Fox Business News network.
Do you seriously believe Romney didn't pay taxes for 10 years? Do you believe anything a politician (like Harry Reid) tells you, as long as he's a democrat? If it comes out that Romney paid less than $10 million in taxes over the last 10 years, I'll contribute $1, 000 to the Democratic National Committee.Stossel rocks, one of my favorite shows. He is an awesome communicator for individual libery, and free markets. If you like Stossel, Gary Johnson (Libertarian Party) is likely the candidate closest to your views. Much better choice for those who want change than Romney, who is a country club Republican, and is for big government on so many issues (pro gun control, pro tarp, and the father of Romney / Obamacare)
www.garyjohnson2012.com
Fred
Don't want to rain on your parade but Romney has about a 2 to 1 edge on handling the economy over Obama. Of course my dog Rocky would have a 2 to 1 edge over Obama on handling the economy.
USA Today/Gallup poll
July 19-22, 2012
n=1030
Candidate perceived as better on the economy:
Romney 51%
Obama 41%
Pew Research Center poll
June 28–July 9, 2012
n=2973
Which candidate would do the best job of improving economic conditions?
Obama 48%
Romney 42%
CNN poll
June 28-July 1, 2012
n=1517
Who would better handle the economy?
Obama 48%
Romney 47%
El Alamo "facts" turn out to be just more crap. Romney has usually led on this question, but not by a 2:1 margin. Some recent polls show Obama catching up. This trend will likely be sustained with the report of 172,000 private sector jobs created last month. El Alamo should stick to his Dennis Miller imitation, even his dog Rocky would agree.
Conservatives want to reverse all the Defense cuts that that Obama has already made.CORRECTION:
Congress (mainly House Republicans) are responsible for the defense cuts.
They're required by the Budget Control Act, which came about because Republicans insisted that any increase to the debt limit be matched dollar-for-dollar in spending cuts and reforms. I give them credit for that. Boehner was in talks with Obama on a grand $4 Trillion debt deal, but House Republicans pulled him away over their objections to any tax increases. Then the "Supercommittee" failed to negotiate a deal, triggering sequestration (automatic cuts), again due to Republican opposition to any tax increases. The cuts are actually a good, but small step (~ 10%) in reducing our bloated $700 Billion annual defense spending.
When you hear Republicans speak of "Obama's defense cuts", they are lying. When Romney refers to "Obama's massive defense cuts", he is telling a double lie.
USA Today / Gallup poll
July 19-22, 2012.
And=1030.
Candidate perceived as better on the economy:
Romney 51%
Obama 41%
Pew Research Center poll.
June 28–July 9, 2012
And=2973.
Which candidate would do the best job of improving economic conditions?
Obama 48%
Romney 42%
CNN poll
June 28-July 1, 2012.
And=1517.
Who would better handle the economy?
Obama 48%
Romney 47%
El Alamo "facts" turn out to be just more crap. Romney has usually led on this question, but not by a 2:1 margin. Some recent polls show Obama catching up. This trend will likely be sustained with the report of 172, 000 private sector jobs created last month. El Alamo should stick to his Dennis Miller imitation, even his dog Rocky would agree.Dude, you can't post this shit and not accept my bet. I await your response. Monger On Dude. Toymann.
Ps. No threeways with Tres, you are not that open minded. LOL
Pps. As they say in my part of the world "put your money where you mouth is dude!". Enough said!
The bet is still out there dude. Why not pony up? I am betting on Romney plus a GOP controlled senate after the November elections. If I am right on both I win. If you are right and the senate and Obomantion stay in place, YOU WIN. If it's a split decision either way, IT'S A PUSH. What say you dude, at the end of the day we can both afford to treat the other to a night at Madahos (lets say 2000 peso max). At the current blue rate, hell thats less than a 300 dollar bet.Even easier for you to win the bet. Only Romney has to win. We didn't talk details before, but I thought the focus was on the Presidential race. I'm just not following the Congressional races much and have much less interest in them.
I'll make a simple bet with you on who wins the Presidency. I win if Obama wins. You win if Romney wins. 2000 peso max night at Madahos.
Just say "Deal" and we are on buddy.
Even easier for you to win the bet. Only Romney has to win. We didn't talk details before, but I thought the focus was on the Presidential race. I'm just not following the Congressional races much and have much less interest in them.
I'll make a simple bet with you on who wins the Presidency. I win if Obama wins. You win if Romney wins. 2000 peso max night at Madahos.With one sweetener. If the republicans win the senate, we start with a meal on YOU at Parilla Pena (with all the fixings and wine)! Just say DEAL and we on on like DONKEY KONG! Monger On Dude. Toymann.
Just say "Deal" and we are on buddy. Toymann
Eston you forgot one.
CSPR poll
Sept 15-18.
Who would better handle the economy?
Romney 79%
Rocky 18%
Obama 3%
By the way, the 3% who favored Obama were immediately committed to mental institutions as being a danger to themselves and society
My question to all who think MR is assured of victory is why? I am for anyone other than BO, but he is still leading in almost all the swing states and he already has a 30 electoral vote lead in the other states. Forget the national averages, as Al Gore found out, it is electoral votes that matter.
Wild Walleye
08-07-12, 12:20
My question to all who think MR is assured of victory is why? I am for anyone other than BO, but he is still leading in almost all the swing states and he already has a 30 electoral vote lead in the other states. Forget the national averages, as Al Gore found out, it is electoral votes that matter.
Nothing is assured. Obama was likely to lose to McCain, up until the financial meltdown and McCain's poor handling of his campaign during that period.
I've gone on at length about the polls and the fact that they are crafted for an outcome not that they independently measure and expected outcome. So, I place little to no value in the polls. They are in large part creations of the left-leaning media to support their narrative in favor of a second (God save us) Oboma term.
As I have stated before, my belief that, were the election held today, Romney would win handily is based solely upon the fact that I can't see any constituency of any material size with which Obama has increased his popularity, since 2008. On the other hand, I can think of at least 6, major constituencies, with which he has lost considerable support. The 2008 election was much closer than the media portrayed it to be. The notion that people vote with their wallets, is generally accurate, in times when people are uncertain about their wallets.
I think that an equally relevant question is: "how could Obama possibly win a second term?"
For Obama to win a second term, he will have to overcome his complete lack of results, over the past 3. 5 years, results that cost the taxpayers $5T in additional debt. He never highlights specific achievements of his first term. He hasn't mentioned his legacy / signature legislative feat (Obamacare) , while on the campaign trail (because he knows it is hugely unpopular). He has perpetrated one of the greatest "bait 'and Switch" frauds in history. He promised civility, transparency and post racial politics. He has delivered the exact opposite. He has proven himself to be a bigoted, marxist ideologue who acts capriciously and spitefully with no regard for those who may be harmed by his actions. He has sold out some of our key allies and has weakened the nation in virtually every aspect of national security and the projection of strenght, internationally. Additionally, he will have to overcome the dismal state of the economy, rampant, long-term unemployment, record foreclosures, tight credit markets and the fact that to the public, there is no foreseeable change (I. E. Recovery) under an Obama second term. To wish these factors away, in the key "swing states," is pure folly. They are hurting every bit as much as the rest of us.
If voters ask themselves: "Am I better off than I was four years ago?" The answer will be a vote for Romney with a majority of the nation.
If voters ask themselves: "Is the America that Obama envisions the same America that I envision?" The answer will be a vote for Romney with a majority of the nation.
If voters ask themselves: "Who is more likely to lead us out of this morass? The guy who has proven to be ineffectual and has made matters worse or anyone else?" The answer will be a vote for Romney with a majority of the nation.
Other than that, it's a toss-up.
The outcome of this election can be predicted with a mathmatical certainty by evaluating the make up of the voting population.
50% of the population is below the IQ of a moron.
The other 50% has an IQ higher than a moron.
Given that all morons will vote for Obama and all non morons will not vote for Obama, on the surface, it looks like a dead heat.
The variable that dooms Obama is that Obama supporters, being morons, frequently pull the wrong lever.
Member #4112
08-07-12, 13:16
Here are some factors to consider about the upcoming election.
Several of the swing states have Republican governors, their state debt has either been reduced or they are running a surplus, unemployment is below the national average and they have employed the same economic strategies Romney will use – ie reduced spending, cutting programs, smaller government – showing it really does work.
Romney has raised more cash for each of the last three months than Obama, while Obama is spending more on his campaign than he has coming in. Maybe he really believes his own B / S about spending and will have nothing left come October. We can only hope.
Obama's rallies are sliding, in 2008 they SOLD seats to the rallies but in 2012 they are worrying about filling the venues.
Last but not least is the Oprah Winfrey factor, Oprah is no long enamored with Michelle and Barak Obama and has decided to sit this one out as far as lending her considerable personal appeal, financial backing and television reach to his campaign. Oprah's OWN network is not doing well and she no longer has the reach she did in 2008.
Obama has done everything he can to distract the public from his lack of accomplishments, dismal unemployment record and near stalling economy. Instead he has attempted to tarnish Romney for the last three months and the polls, even the liberal ones, show the race is still tight after all the B / S indicating this tactic has been a failure.
Now exactly what do you think is going to happen after the conventions and Romney brings Jobs, the Economy and our lack of Standing in the world community to the campaign?
By the way Snake, did you see the report Ernest & Young published regarding Obama's tax the rich idea. The short version is it would further wreck the economy. Snake, I thought these were you buddies who were giving you all the dirt on Romney, how did this one slilp past you?
SnakeOilSales
08-07-12, 15:26
Here are some factors to consider about the upcoming election.
Several of the swing states have Republican governors, their state debt has either been reduced or they are running a surplus, unemployment is below the national average and they have employed the same economic strategies Romney will use – ie reduced spending, cutting programs, smaller government – showing it really does work.
Romney has raised more cash for each of the last three months than Obama, while Obama is spending more on his campaign than he has coming in. Maybe he really believes his own B / S about spending and will have nothing left come October. We can only hope.
Obama's rallies are sliding, in 2008 they SOLD seats to the rallies but in 2012 they are worrying about filling the venues.
Last but not least is the Oprah Winfrey factor, Oprah is no long enamored with Michelle and Barak Obama and has decided to sit this one out as far as lending her considerable personal appeal, financial backing and television reach to his campaign. Oprah's OWN network is not doing well and she no longer has the reach she did in 2008.
Obama has done everything he can to distract the public from his lack of accomplishments, dismal unemployment record and near stalling economy. Instead he has attempted to tarnish Romney for the last three months and the polls, even the liberal ones, show the race is still tight after all the B / S indicating this tactic has been a failure.
Now exactly what do you think is going to happen after the conventions and Romney brings Jobs, the Economy and our lack of Standing in the world community to the campaign?
By the way Snake, did you see the report Ernest & Young published regarding Obama's tax the rich idea. The short version is it would further wreck the economy. Snake, I thought these were you buddies who were giving you all the dirt on Romney, how did this one slilp past you?Jackson has been deleting everything I post in this thread. As such, I am not going to bother formulating a response only to have it deleted shortly thereafter.
Its sad the republican choice for president. When he loses there will be many explanations but the bottom line he just is not a viable choice
Member #4112
08-07-12, 17:31
And Obama is?
Jackson has been deleting everything I post in this thread. As such, I am not going to bother formulating a response only to have it deleted shortly thereafter.Not only are you a wild-ass liberal shill dude BUT also an idiot. You mean the moderator is moderating YOU since YOU called him out as a "racist". Really, no way! What a prickly jerk he must be! I can hardly believe you are being subjected to such unfair treatment. IALOTFLMAO! Dumb, ignorant and stupid is no way to go through life fella! LMAO Toymann
Its sad the republican choice for president. When he loses there will be many explanations but the bottom line he just is not a viable choiceHowever, like many liberals (notice I didn't say wild-ass) , he just doesn't see the tsunami coming. I'll buy ya a cold one in November to console you dude. Monger On Kevin. Toymann.
Ps. Waiting for my bet confirmation Esten. This should be fun!
'Jackson has been deleting everything I post in this thread. As such, I am not going to bother formulating a response only to have it deleted shortly thereafter. ' comrade snakeoilsales.
I knew there was something I liked about Jackson. Jackson is protecting us from absurd posts that induce migraine headaches. The human mind has a limit to how much nonsense it can endure
With one sweetener. If the republicans win the senate, we start with a meal on YOU at Parilla Pena (with all the fixings and wine)! Just say DEAL and we on on like DONKEY KONG! Monger On Dude. Toymann.
Just say "Deal" and we are on buddy. ToymannNo deal, no sweeteners especially the one-sided kind! Just a simple bet on the presidential race. Though if we are in town at the same time I am definately up for dinner.
Its sad the republican choice for president. When he loses there will be many explanations but the bottom line he just is not a viable choiceI believe the most common explanation for Romney's defeat will be that he was a Wall Street guy.
No deal, no sweeteners especially the one-sided kind! Just a simple bet on the presidential race. Though if we are in town at the same time I am definately up for dinner.WE ARE ON LIKE DONKEY KONG. Let the games begin. I will not be in Argentina in November BUT will be back after my fall trip in the spring. Mid-March to mid-April. We'll try to connect in March / April. I know you will be good for it, so start saving now. In fact, when I win the bet I'll buy dinner at parilla pena. How's that for non-partisan politics. Monger on Dude. Toymann
ps. I do find it interesting Esten that your actions confirm my position that the senate wil go GOP. Very interesting! Very interesting!
I sort of get the gist of things now. Democrats hate Romney. Fair enough. We cannot stand Obama.
If I had a business and I had to leave for several months and needed someone to run the business I would put a gun to my head before I would let Obama anywhere near the business. Obama, like it or not, is a f******* moron. However, if romney was put in charge, the business would probably be in great shape when I returned.
I know this is a subject that is taboo to the AP Glee Club, but it would be interesting to hear your comments. ObamaCare is complicated. It is not clear what is really involve because of the shouting and screaming. And it would be nice to discuss the issue outside the context of socialism vs capitalism.
Papa Johns Pizza announced that they would raise each pizza by 11-22 cents if they were to offer their employees health coverage. Their employees are for the most part, young, low level of education and transient, and may not care? If I was to buy from Papa Johns, this amount of price increase would not bother me. I do not know why the CEO had to make this political, he is going to be a loser. There are so many pizza choices.
If this price increase occur across the board, it will have an impact on some classes of people's spending. But again, that might be a positive side effect. As consumers, Americans need to study their spending habits. Eating out is a luxury and a convenience, but it might not be best for you, healthwise. All 3 major groups, whites, blacks and latinos have significantly high overweight issues.
I still have a superb health plan from my former employer, but it only comes into play under emergency care as I live abroad. Even then, it would be subject to approval for reimbursment. Fortunately, the standard of medicare care in Bangkok is very high and very reasonable for routine health problems. If you are paying customer, it is very convenient with alot of choices. For peace of mind, this is very assuring. It is my wish that we have basic universal health coverage in the US with options for people who can afford to pay for even better coverage.
Wild Walleye
08-08-12, 21:34
I believe the most common explanation for Romney's defeat will be that he was a Wall Street guy.Why would that bother a plurality of the voting public? I'm willing to bet that they are ready to put a guy in charge who has made a profit, in the real world. Americans are hurting financially, I think the American experiment, with a guy who can lose $5T in 3. 5 years, is drawing to a close.
I think that is pretty pathetic as the only thing that makes you think that your candidate will win is that his opponent is a successful businessman. I can assure you that more Americans dream about obtaining wealth than do fantasizing about a socialist utopia. Good luck with that thrust."Vote for Obama, he doesn't know what profits are!" "Vote for Obama, he's never worked in the private sector!" or "Vote for Obama, he hates Wall Street, except for the billions that Wall Street heavyweights donate to him and his pacs!"
I hope you don't think that OWS was anything more than AstroTurf. OWS was a zit on an elephant's ass. The Tea Party, on the other hand, is the elephant. 2010, anyone?
WE ARE ON LIKE DONKEY KONG. Let the games begin. I will not be in Argentina in November BUT will be back after my fall trip in the spring. Mid-March to mid-April. We'll try to connect in March / April. I know you will be good for it, so start saving now. In fact, when I win the bet I'll buy dinner at parilla pena. How's that for non-partisan politics. Monger on Dude. Toymann.
Ps. I do find it interesting Esten that your actions confirm my position that the senate wil go GOP. Very interesting! Very interesting!Another reason not to have made dinner part of the bet, there won't be any requirement to be in town at the same time. As I said I'm up for dinner but who knows when we'll be in town at the same time. I am hoping to come out in late November, will confirm later. If I win that is when I would prefer to collect my prize.
PS. I have no prediction on the Senate, I haven't been following the races. But Dems have more seats at stake and I know guys like Karl Rove will be spending $$$$$ to win as many as possible.
I think that is pretty pathetic as the only thing that makes you think that your candidate will win is that his opponent is a successful businessman.Wrong.
Romney has far more experience in business than Obama and is more qualified to run a business than Obama. If I owned a business and had to choose someone to run it, I'd pick Romney over Obama.
The problem, something many conservatives easily forget, is that a business is DIFFERENT from a government. A business exists to make a profit. A government exists to represent and serve the people. There is overlap but they just aren't the same thing.
Romney's policies will be good for business owners and investors (big and small) , but that is not enough. We also need a focus on keeping the middle class strong. That is the balance we need in government. Romney subscribes to the Republican theory that if we help the guys at the top, prosperity will trickle down to everyone else. But, more and more people are realizing that trickle down economics is a hoax and a failure. THAT is why Obama will win and Romney will lose.
Big Boss Man
08-08-12, 23:37
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443792604577574910276629448.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
"The plan says these cuts would be financed in a revenue-neutral way. First, by "broadening the tax base," which means reducing or eliminating tax deductions and loopholes as in the tax reform of 1986. The Romney campaign doesn't specify which deductions—no campaign ever does—but it has been explicit in saying that the burden would fall most on higher tax brackets. So in return for paying lower rates, the wealthy get fewer deductions."
Romney tax plan will increase my taxes just as Reagan's tax cut increased my taxes in 1986.
"Second, the Romney campaign says it expects to increase revenues by increasing the rate of economic growth to 4, up from less than 2% this year and in 2011."
Highest GDP forecast from the Economist Board of Forecasters is for 2. 6% growth with average being 2. 1.
"Every major marginal rate income tax cut of the last 50 years—1964, 1981, 1986 and 2003—was followed by an unexpectedly large increase in tax revenues, a surge in taxes paid by the rich, and a more progressive tax code—I. E, the share of taxes paid by the richest 1% rose."
So why is this plan better or even different than Obama's that is also increasing taxes on the richest.
Of course you need to figure how he is going to get to 20% of GDP when Romney is also going to reverse defense spending cuts.
It is probably time for change but how gullible do the Conservatives think we are? Be honest. This decrease in marginal rates is baloney. Romney should say he is going to raise taxes just like Obama to reduce the deficit. He will also probably increase fees on things we use like listening to NPR or driving our ATVs on public lands. It is what he did in Massachusetts.
Big Boss Man, Politicians have screwed up the tax system by jacking up tax rates and then offering all types of deductions, exemptions and tax credits to their favored special interests. They get campaign contributions in return. Examples:
1. Hedge and private equity fund managers like Romney are taxed on their fees at the rate of 15%, the long term capital gains rate, instead of 35% like everyone else. This is a system that Chuck Schumer (Democrat Senator from NY) fought tooth and nail to preserve until recently, to protect fund owners in New York.
2. Companies who put in alternative energy projects, like wind, geothermal, etc, receive tax credits from the government. They turn around and sell the tax credits to people and companies who can use them. They pay for their projects with tax credits.
3. Companies and homeowners deduct interest expense. O.K., maybe this is reasonable, maybe it's not. But it encourages a culture of debt. People are rewarded for borrowing instead of saving, especially with interest rates close to zero. After inflation and taxes, you're losing money big time keeping it in the bank or money market funds.
What you seem to favor is a system that makes the economy less efficient and gives politicians, Republicans and Democrats, chips to buy off special interests. It makes dealing with the tax code extremely cumbersome. Tens of billions of dollars are flushed down the drain annually doing the accounting work to prepare tax and information returns for the IRS. People and companies do all kinds of things that don't make economic sense, except to lower their taxes by taking advantage of loopholes.
In any event, if elected, it's unlikely Romney will succeed in lowering tax rates significantly, just as, I hope, it's unlikely Obama will be successful in jacking the federal income tax rate up to 40%+. Obama's emphasis on high marginal rates and the opportunities that provides politicians to hand out special favors shows why Esten is wrong. Politicians with no knowledge of how business works can screw up the economy royally.
I am hoping to come out in late November, will confirm later. If I win that is when I would prefer to collect my prize.You won't be collecting any PRIZE till we are in town together dude. What are you thinking. I come to BA on a set schedule like clockwork. Suggest you adapt your schedule after November. Like I am going to just leave you 2000 pesos to spend without me as a wingman. IALOTFLMAO. We'll be in town eventually at the same time home boy. You wild-ass liberals just seem to have little common sense. Monger on Dude. Toymann.
Ps. That said. The bet is on like donkey kong.
Big Boss Man, Politicians have screwed up the tax system by jacking up tax rates and then offering all types of deductions, exemptions and tax credits to their favored special interests. They get campaign contributions in return. Examples:
1. Hedge and private equity fund managers like Romney are taxed on their fees at the rate of 15, the long term capital gains rate, instead of 35% like everyone else. This is a system that Chuck Schumer (Democrat Senator from NY) fought tooth and nail to preserve until recently, to protect fund owners in New York.
2. Companies who put in alternative energy projects, like wind, geothermal, etc, receive tax credits from the government. They turn around and sell the tax credits to people and companies who can use them. They pay for their projects with tax credits.
3. Companies and homeowners deduct interest expense. O. K, maybe this is reasonable, maybe it's not. But it encourages a culture of debt. People are rewarded for borrowing instead of saving, especially with interest rates close to zero. After inflation and taxes, you're losing money big time keeping it in the bank or money market funds.
What you seem to favor is a system that makes the economy less efficient and gives politicians, Republicans and Democrats, chips to buy off special interests. It makes dealing with the tax code extremely cumbersome. Tens of billions of dollars are flushed down the drain annually doing the accounting work to prepare tax and information returns for the IRS. People and companies do all kinds of things that don't make economic sense, except to lower their taxes by taking advantage of loopholes.
In any event, if elected, it's unlikely Romney will succeed in lowering tax rates significantly, just as, I hope, it's unlikely Obama will be successful in jacking the federal income tax rate up to 40%+. Obama's emphasis on high marginal rates and the opportunities that provides politicians to hand out special favors shows why Esten is wrong. Politicians with no knowledge of how business works can screw up the economy royally.
Prior to investing your money in an investment that the gains will be taxed going forward at 15% WHAT WAS THAT MONEY TAXES AT PREVIOUSLY. You wild-ass liberals kill me! At current 2% of the tax payers pay 70% of the US taxes. So whats your number Tiny? 80, 85, 90 100! Please just let us know and we can settle this once and for all! All us in the 2% just want to know WHAT WILL SHUT YOU IDIOTS THE F$CK UP! Us 2% just HATE to pay our share, don't ya know. GIVE ME A BREAK! It is obvious that you have never made any investment in anyone or anything BUt yourself and have never owned a small business. DEDUCTIONS! What the heck are you talking about! Idiots like you make me sick! Happy Mongering all. Toymann
This discussion segues perfectly into a question that no liberal has ever answered directly:
The top 1% of income earners in the USA pay 40% of all income taxes.
The top 5% of income earners in the USA pay 60% of all income taxes.
The top 10% of income earners in the USA pay 70% of all income taxes.
The bottom 50% of income earners in the USA pay 2.7% of all income taxes.
So here's my question to liberals: What percentage of all income taxes do you believe should be paid by the top 10% of income earners?
In other words, what do you believe is a fair proportion?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Thanks,
Jackson
Member #4112
08-09-12, 09:45
Your right Esten, Running a Successful Business does not equal Running Government.
Any business which was run as our Federal Government is run would be bankrupt in the first year if not in the first quarter!
After $5 Trillion in spending with little to show for it perhaps it is time to start running the Federal Government as a Business!
WorldTravel69
08-09-12, 11:57
Some form of Flat Tax. I know there are some problems, but we need to start somewhere.
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-flat-tax.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax
Even some Republicans want it.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/25/perry-says-plan-will-free-americans-from-lengthy-tax-code/
This discussion segues perfectly into a question that no liberal has ever answered directly:
The top 1% of income earners in the USA pay 40% of all income taxes.
The top 5% of income earners in the USA pay 60% of all income taxes.
The top 10% of income earners in the USA pay 70% of all income taxes.
The bottom 50% of income earners in the USA pay 2. 7% of all income taxes.
So here's my question to liberals: What percentage of all income taxes do you believe should be paid by the top 10% of income earners?
In other words, what do you believe is a fair proportion?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Thanks,
Jackson
Toymann, YOU IDIOT, I agree with everything you wrote. Look up carried interest on the internet. The 15% tax on carried interest is a tax on fees received by hedge fund and private equity fund managers. It was a gift of the Democratic party to Wall Street. Remember that Wall Street used to support Democrats. After four years of Obama, it's swinging Republican. If fund managers were taxed like everyone else, they'd currently be paying 35% federal income tax, which I agree is higher than it should be.
If Romney wins the presidency and the Republicans get 60 seats in the senate, there's a good chance you'll see marginal tax rates go down and loopholes like carried interest disappear. This is what you'd expect from Romney's and Ryan's tax plans. This would be good for the economy. BTW, based on his flat tax post, WT69 sees wisdom in the idea. WT69, I'm proud of you for being willing to take ideas from both sides, and I'm not being sarcastic.
I'd prefer a progressive consumption tax to a progressive income tax. But that's not going to happen. So if we can reduce marginal rates, eliminate loopholes, and simplify the tax code all will come out ahead.
Look up carried interest on the internet.My post had nothing to do with Carried Interest dude. Where did you come up with that idea? Let me spell it out. My point was that the money I invest in the US market has already been taxed at the maximum level prior to my investment. Thus, whats is so terrible that when I reinvest, my already taxed hard earned cash, that I am rewarded with a lower rate on the gains that I may make. Are we clear now. The rest of my post about paying one's far share should be clear, even to you Tiny. Your statement that WT69 is a wise man? IALOTFLMAO. Wt69 is a great guy, but putting him the wise man category is a stretch, for sure. Some of us are planning an intervention if he ever gets back to BA. Hope you now understand my previous post. Monger on all. Toymann.
Ps. Like I don't understand carried interest, please!
I'd prefer a progressive consumption tax to a progressive income tax. But that's not going to happen. So if we can reduce marginal rates, eliminate loopholes, and simplify the tax code all will come out ahead.I agree, but you can also make a flat tax progressive by exempting a certain amount of income, which might help sell the idea to the libs.
Silver Star
08-09-12, 17:36
I agree, but you can also make a flat tax progressive by exempting a certain amount of income, which might help sell the idea to the libs.How about making the size and acope of government so small it requires neither an income nor a consumption tax? Just get rid of the socialistic welfare and warfare state. Big Government requires big taxes. Lets get the Federal Government back to doing the few things it is supposed to do, ie Constitutional Responsibilities. What this election between MR and Bo is about is who going to run big government better, vs making it dramatically smaller, less bloated and less intrusive. Heck, with all the taxes the confiscate from us now, the major parties still can't even balance a budget. (Unlike Governor Gary Johnson, who got his state in a mess, then left it a surplus after being reelected)
This election-think Libertarian Gary Johnson. There is a difference. Mitt Romney is just another big government Republican.
WorldTravel69
08-09-12, 21:56
His plan is not good.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/04/ryan_tax_plan.html
How can you tax the middle class anymore? There are almost none in existent.
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-04-07/news/30029211_1_paul-ryan-budget-proposals-plan
Toymann, YOU IDIOT, I agree with everything you wrote. Look up carried interest on the internet. The 15% tax on carried interest is a tax on fees received by hedge fund and private equity fund managers. It was a gift of the Democratic party to Wall Street. Remember that Wall Street used to support Democrats. After four years of Obama, it's swinging Republican. If fund managers were taxed like everyone else, they'd currently be paying 35% federal income tax, which I agree is higher than it should be.
If Romney wins the presidency and the Republicans get 60 seats in the senate, there's a good chance you'll see marginal tax rates go down and loopholes like carried interest disappear. This is what you'd expect from Romney's and Ryan's tax plans. This would be good for the economy. BTW, based on his flat tax post, WT69 sees wisdom in the idea. WT69, I'm proud of you for being willing to take ideas from both sides, and I'm not being sarcastic.
I'd prefer a progressive consumption tax to a progressive income tax. But that's not going to happen. So if we can reduce marginal rates, eliminate loopholes, and simplify the tax code all will come out ahead.
Wild Walleye
08-09-12, 23:27
Toymann, YOU IDIOT, I agree with everything you wrote. Look up carried interest on the internet. The 15% tax on carried interest is a tax on fees received by hedge fund and private equity fund managers. It was a gift of the Democratic party to Wall Street. Remember that Wall Street used to support Democrats. After four years of Obama, it's swinging Republican. If fund managers were taxed like everyone else, they'd currently be paying 35% federal income tax, which I agree is higher than it should be.Well, Mr. Genius, maybe you could explain to all of us what a carried interest is and how management fees magically turn into carried interests. I do not think you know what the term means. The income that partners receive via carried interest is their percentage participation in the profits of the fund. Management fees are not paid to the fund, they are paid to the management company. In a typical mirror-onshore/offshore structure, with an offshore master fund, there could be two management companies and the management would have carried interests in both the domestic and offshore funds. However, 100% of their income is taxable, regardless of it is on or offshore, in the tax year during which it is received by the employee. Carried interests are treated like investments (very similar to how founder's stock is treated) and salaries and bonuses paid by the management company to its managers are taxable at the corresponding marginal rates. By the way, the reason for having two funds (one onshore and one off) is to protect foreign investors from the US Treasury and double taxation, not to help US investors avoid taxes.
Wild Walleye
08-09-12, 23:36
If put to a vote of the American people, a flat tax would have a pretty decent chance of winning. That is precisely why the people in Washington, who oppose a flat tax (because it might de-fund some of their massive graft) will never let it get that far (I. E. To the point where the people would get to opine via ballot, on the subject.
This election-think Libertarian Gary Johnson. There is a difference. Mitt Romney is just another big government Republican.Silver Star, I prefer Gary Johnson to Mitt Romney. In fact, I prefer him to just about any US politician. However, he has about a snowball's chance in hell of winning. I may vote for him anyway, as there's about a 99. 999% probability that Romney will win my state. If I lived someplace like Ohio I'd definitely vote for Romney, as Obama is a far worse choice.
Well, Mr. Genius, maybe you could explain to all of us what a carried interest is and how management fees magically turn into carried interests.PERFORMANCE fees magically turn from ordinary income into capital gains with the wave of a politician's wand.
In your post, you fail to note that another reason for foreign funds is because U.S. tax exempt investors can't invest in domestic hedge and private equity funds. The U.S. Congress has screwed up the tax code so bad that our pension funds have to invest offshore!
You won't be collecting any PRIZE till we are in town together dude. What are you thinking. I come to BA on a set schedule like clockwork. Suggest you adapt your schedule after November. Like I am going to just leave you 2000 pesos to spend without me as a wingman. IALOTFLMAO. We'll be in town eventually at the same time home boy. You wild-ass liberals just seem to have little common sense. Monger on Dude. Toymann.Another condition from Toymann. The last thing I need is a headache from this bet so I am going to put down a condition of my own. A 2 year expiration date. My decisions on how I use my precious vacation time won't be influenced by a bet, nor would I expect that from you. Argentina is just one stop on my rotation, I have several countries I visit (or want to). Obviously the best scenario is we hit the town together on prize collection night. I'm just saying there is no guarantee that will happen, and I don't want to be following some bet for years and years. So any obligations will expire on Nov. 7 2014.
If you win I will make a good faith effort to have the 2000 pesos available for you on your next trip down to BA. If I win, I expect you will do the same in return but can't force you.
This discussion segues perfectly into a question that no liberal has ever answered directly:Actually, you asked the exact same question almost VERBATIM in December 2010. And I answered you directly. LOL.
This discussion segues perfectly into me posing a question that no liberal has ever answered directly:
The top 1% Of income earners in the USA pay 40% Of all income taxes.
The top 5% Of income earners in the USA pay 60% Of all income taxes.
The top 10% Of income earners in the USA pay 70% Of all income taxes.
The bottom 50% Of income earners in the USA pay 2. 7% Of all income taxes.
So here's my question to liberals: What percentage of all income taxes do you believe should be paid by the top 10% of income earners?
In other words, what do you believe is a fair proportion?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Thanks,
Jackson
From 2008 IRS data, the top 10% had an average tax rate of 18. 71. It should be around 35, but isn't because of lower taxes on investment income (remember Warren Buffett's secretary). Under Clinton the top tax rate was 39. 6% and the economy did just fine. I would consider it fair for the top 10% tax rate paid to double From it's current number of 18. 71, because top earners without investment income have been paying rates between 35. 39. 6% for nearly two decades. With this doubling you would obtain more tax revenue from the top 10% than is currently obtained from all taxpayers. Even an increase from 18. 71% to just 27% (even fairer) would still match all current tax collections.
So to answer Jackson's question:
It would be fair for the top 10% of income earners to pay 100% of all income taxes.
Touché!
Well, at least I got a straight answer this time.
Thanks,
Jackson
How about making the size and acope of government so small it requires neither an income nor a consumption tax? Just get rid of the socialistic welfare and warfare state. Big Government requires big taxes. Lets get the Federal Government back to doing the few things it is supposed to do, ie Constitutional Responsibilities. What this election between MR and Bo is about is who going to run big government better, vs making it dramatically smaller, less bloated and less intrusive. Heck, with all the taxes the confiscate from us now, the major parties still can't even balance a budget. (Unlike Governor Gary Johnson, who got his state in a mess, then left it a surplus after being reelected)
This election-think Libertarian Gary Johnson. There is a difference. Mitt Romney is just another big government Republican.For heavans sake Fred. What is the color of the sky in your world? You seem like a very nice fella BUT your ideas are about as disconnected with reality as charging north of 600 pesos from EZE to town when the going rate is 180 pesos, just because you have a town car. IALOTFLMAO! Your idea for leadership in the US is about as real as electing the communist party in Canada. The party exists (in a multiparty system) but no one votes for this type of pipe dream. You are asking, to totally change the US the way Obomanation is also trying to change the US (just in a different direction). Good thing you live in Argentina as your ideas would mostly be met with a rye smile by 99% of the current residents of this country. Protest votes are ok BUt at the end of the day, they are a cop-out and mean nothing. Hope it makes you feel better though. Good luck with the crazy inflated cab business dude. Some might use you but never I. Hate to throw good money after bad even if I could easily afford it. Toymann
Another condition from Toymann. The last thing I need is a headache from this bet so I am going to put down a condition of my own. A 2 year expiration date. My decisions on how I use my precious vacation time won't be influenced by a bet, nor would I expect that from you. Argentina is just one stop on my rotation, I have several countries I visit (or want to). Obviously the best scenario is we hit the town together on prize collection night. I'm just saying there is no guarantee that will happen, and I don't want to be following some bet for years and years. So any obligations will expire on Nov. 7 2014.
If you win I will make a good faith effort to have the 2000 pesos available for you on your next trip down to BA. If I win, I expect you will do the same in return but can't force you.You can be such an assh$ole Esten. I will save you the 2000 pesos and call off the bet. Period. End of story! Would not want to hamper your precious vacation time."Another condition from Toymann", Hit the road idiot! Thought we might have some fun with this BUt you are just not up to it! By the way be*tch, loved your post on top 10% earners should pay 100% of the taxes! IALOTFLMAO! I don't hang with your're kind, EVER! You just want out of the bet little girl, and I will let you off the hook. From the sounds of things you can't afford the bet anyway. Doubt we will see you in BA anytime soon. You so dissapoint me! Toymann
Esten, In 2009, the latest year for which data is available, the top 10% made $3.314 trillion, before paying federal income tax.(1)
In 2009 the federal government spent $3.517 trillion.(2)
If your idea were implemented, how would the top 10% manage to pay rent and put food on the table? How could they afford to pay state income taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes?
I believe there was a touch of irony in Jackson's response to your original post, back in December, 2010.
(1) Go to http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/indtaxstats/article/0, I'd=96981, 00. Html, download 2009 All Returns Selected Income and Tax Items, see last table on the spreadsheet.
(2) http://www.usgovernmentdebt.us/year2009_0.html
WorldTravel69
08-10-12, 05:43
A worker at Bain.
Search for morehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/beyond-the-obama-ads-joe-soptics-steelworker-story/2012/08/08/c193da80-e0c2-11e1-8fc5-a7dcf1fc161d_story.html
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/08/09/star_of_cancer_ad_joe_soptic_offered_a_buy_out_by_bain
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/08/omg-joe-soptic-the-anti-romney-cancer-ad-steelworker-admits-bain-capital-offered-him-a-buyout-video/
New Distractions,
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505245_162-57488938/adwatch-romneys-welfare-ad-relies-on-assumptions/
Every moment this Asshole thinks up a new Lie.
He Edits all Photoshop and Videos.
Come on are you that Dumb?
SnakeOilSales
08-10-12, 06:39
Why won't Romney release more tax returns?
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/18/opinion/kleinbard-canellos-romney-tax/index.html?iref=obinsite
SnakeOilSales
08-10-12, 06:51
Did Romney enable a company's abusive tax shelter?
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/08/opinion/canellos-kleinbard-romney-taxes/?iref=obinsite
Face it, Romney is simply a complete greed-driven slimebag who is clearly morally unfit to be POTUS. The 0. 1%ers such as Toymann and Wild Walleye are head over heels in love with Romney because HE is one of THEM. You two twits should read the writing on the wall that there is no way in hell the US voting public is going to elect a scumbag Wall Street snake who has used every brain cell he can harness to defraud the IRS and thus the American people out of every tax dollar possible. Romney should probably be in JAIL and not running for the highest office in the land.
Wow! Our little pinkie friends are getting worried that the Romney Presidency is in the works. So much for their plans to freeload off productive and hard working citizens. No more welfare checks, food stamps and living free in housing projects. Forget watching soaps 24 hours a day while munching on potato chips. They will actually have to do more than go the mailbox once a week looking for federal assistance. What a shock. Can their delicate little sensitivities withstand the the prospect of getting off their fats asses and finding a job. I doubt it, these fragile little crybabies will probably die of withdrawl from lack of twinkies, oreo cookies, netflix videos and not having 24 hours a day to complain how unjust it is to expect them to contribute something to society
Why won't Romney release more tax returns?
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/18/opinion/kleinbard-canellos-romney-tax/index.html?iref=obinsiteThe IRS has Romney's tax returns. If there was something so wrong, it would be public by now.
You would think our fragile little pinkie friends would be more concerned about Obama ruining the economy and eliminating any hope that they will ever find emoployment. Whoops, forgot, our fragile little pinkie friends have no intention of looking for employment as long as Obama is paying for their weekly supplies of twinkies, oreo cookies and Netflix videos.
The IRS has Romney's tax returns. If there was something so wrong, it would be public by now.And if there was anything wrong with an account he previously had at UBS, he would have been contacted by the IRS.
Member #4112
08-10-12, 11:46
Snake, in case you did not notice Reid's folks are walking back the claim made on the Senate floor by Reid regarding Romney not having paid taxes for 10 years.
FYI, Reid spoke this lie from the Senate floor and not out in public. Why? Because he is immune from being sued for anything said on the Senate floor, no matter how outrageous. That immunity does not extend outside the Senate floor, you may have noticed Reid has declined to make this allegation elsewhere and his staffers are walking it back when asked in public since there is no immunity for them.
The latest Fox poll showed Obama leading Romney by 9 points among registered voters, the first time Obama has been out of the margin of error since Romney cinched the nomination. I think all of Team Obama's lies have had some effect, but November is still a ways off. I look for Romney to come full bore at Obama after the convention.
I think Obama is losing his brand appeal. Hope and change. Obama's true colors are shining through. Obama is a miserable, mean spirited person. This in addition to being a moron. What we are left with is a miserable, mean spirited moron.
SnakeOilSales
08-10-12, 12:48
The IRS has Romney's tax returns. If there was something so wrong, it would be public by now.You must be joking. (or a fool)
SnakeOilSales
08-10-12, 12:50
And if there was anything wrong with an account he previously had at UBS, he would have been contacted by the IRS.There is reason to believe that Romney participated in the IRS amnesty program which resulted in the closure of his UBS account and repatriation of the funds in 2010.
Wild Walleye
08-10-12, 12:53
The IRS has Romney's tax returns. If there was something so wrong, it would be public by now.All you need to do is look at what is happening to Alderman to know that you are correct. Look, Leonid Obama won his state and US senate seats by leaking sealed court records (a felony, last I checked. Anyone ever investigated for this?). If there was anything within the reach of his jack-booted thugs, it would be on the front page of the NY Times and on MSNBC. Oops, no one reads / watches them, guess it would be on all of the major mainstream media outlets.
Wild Walleye
08-10-12, 12:55
There is reason to believe that Romney participated in the IRS amnesty program which resulted in the closure of his UBS account and repatriation of the funds in 2010.And that reason is what? That you are in a cubicle in an office paid for by what used to be called ACORN, putting out Soviet-style disinformation?
Where are the chica posts from SOS / MOPD? Put up or shut up.
Wild Walleye
08-10-12, 13:17
PERFORMANCE fees magically turn from ordinary income into capital gains with the wave of a politician's wand.
In your post, you fail to note that another reason for foreign funds is because USA tax exempt investors can't invest in domestic hedge and private equity funds. The USA Congress has screwed up the tax code so bad that our pension funds have to invest offshore!You are still wrong. Performance is participation in the PROFITS. They are not FEES.
The manager gets paid its fees (usually 2-2. 5% of the total FUM, annually) , regardless of performance. That income goes to the management company and is used to pay the management company's bills and for all non-transactional expenses, including paying the people who work there. Usually, the money left over at the end of the year, is distributed to the employees as bonuses. All of that income (to the employees) is taxable at the relevant marginal, income tax rate. End of story. It is not, repeat not, a capital gain.
The carried interest is similar to owning stock, for which the individual did not pay (i.e. the owner has a cost basis of $0). However, the carried interest does not receive any income if the fund does not exceed a predetermined hurdle rate (e.g. an ROI of 10% or something like that). If and when the fund out performs the hurdle rate, the manager gets to keep the carried interest percentage of the profits (above the hurdle rate). That means that the investors get everything up to 10% and on profits above that they split them between the investor and the manager (e.g. 80/20, respectively). If the individual owners of the management company own their carried interests personally, (i.e. Not through a corporate entity) , they can report that income as gains on Schedule D of Form 1040. If they are short-term gains (i.e. made during the first 18 months that the management entity existed) those would be taxed at the normal, marginal income rate. For carried interests held longer than 18 months, they would be taxed at the reduced capital gains tax rate.
While populists and commies the world over like to ***** and moan about hedge fund managers "tax break" on carried interests, that is because most of those people, like yourself, aren't actually familiar with the subject matter. Hedge fund managers are generally entrepreneurs. They start their own businesses, employ people and contribute mightily to the overall US economy. Within 5 miles of where I sit, at this very moment, there are hedge funds with more than $200B in assets under management. They employ thousands of people, here and their transactions requirements provide the opportunities for thousands of other people to be employed, by other firms, in NY, London, Tokyo and so on. When they are successful, the value of the stock of their companies increases (that is what the carried interest is part of), so why shouldn't they, like any other entrepreneur who creates a successful company, reap the benefits of his labor? Bill Gates has taken 99.99999% of his income, over his lifetime, in the form of long-term capital gains. Warren Buffet? Little secret, that is why Buffet pays a lower effective tax rate than his secretary. Another little secret is that the community of hedge fund managers is overwhelmingly liberal, as is the rest of Wall Street and the Democrat hierarchy knows it. I can just image the conversations between Obama and Jamie Diamond "Well, Jamie, we're going to create and exploit class warfare in order to force our socialist utopia on the people. To do that, we are going to make you and all my other non-Hollywood donors, into scapegoats. But don't worry, alongside the socialist utopia, we will have cronie-capitalism and I will allow you guys on Wall St. to have a banking oligarchy."
Wild Walleye
08-10-12, 13:26
You must be joking. (or a fool)So, you don't think that Obama, Holder, Axlerod, Geitner and the of the Obama-stapo would access and use confidential, private individual to harm a political rival, in furtherance of his extremist agenda? Mr. Barnum, I've found one over here.
Wow! Our little pinkie friends are getting worried that the Romney Presidency is in the works. So much for their plans to freeload off productive and hard working citizens. No more welfare checks, food stamps and living free in housing projects. Forget watching soaps 24 hours a day while munching on potato chips. They will actually have to do more than go the mailbox once a week looking for federal assistance. What a shock. Can their delicate little sensitivities withstand the the prospect of getting off their fats asses and finding a job. I doubt it, these fragile little crybabies will probably die of withdrawl from lack of twinkies, oreo cookies, netflix videos and not having 24 hours a day to complain how unjust it is to expect them to contribute something to societyOur little pinkie friends! You kill me man, first belly laugh of the day with my coffee! Monger on Dude. Toymann
And if there was anything wrong with an account he previously had at UBS, he would have been contacted by the IRS.Our little pinkie friends (LMAO El Alamo) never let intelligence, common sense or the facts get in the way. Monger On Dude. Toymann
SnakeOilSales
08-10-12, 13:57
All you need to do is look at what is happening to Alderman to know that you are correct. Look, Leonid Obama won his state and US senate seats by leaking sealed court records (a felony, last I checked. Anyone ever investigated for this?). If there was anything within the reach of his jack-booted thugs, it would be on the front page of the NY Times and on MSNBC. Oops, no one reads / watches them, guess it would be on all of the major mainstream media outlets.No one reads the New York Times? It is the third largest newspaper in the United States by circulation, and the largest in its category.
SnakeOilSales
08-10-12, 14:07
So, you don't think that Obama, Holder, Axlerod, Geitner and the of the Obama-stapo would access and use confidential, private individual to harm a political rival, in furtherance of his extremist agenda? Mr. Barnum, I've found one over here.Obama's team is far too smart to take the bait and illegally release Romney's tax returns. Strategically, they really do not need to; either Romney is going to release them, which will reveal him as the slimy Wall Street snake that he is, or, he will continue to refuse which will supply the Obama team with a barrage of ammunition to attack Romney that he can do little or nothing to refute. If Romney's tax returns were a sparkling example of transparency, he would have released the returns already so he could re-frame the electoral debate away from his shadiness, something he has clearly been unable to do up until now.
Walleye, You're a smart guy, most of the time. Read your post. It's nonsense, except the part about Warren Buffet. You're jumping through hoops to come up with the logic to call a performance fee a capital gain. You point out that these guys owe their special tax break to the money that they've contributed to liberal politicians.
I struggle with the same principal, in a different industry. I receive special tax breaks from the government, and have defended them because the marginal rate is so high. But the solution is to do what Romney and Ryan are proposing, bring down marginal rates and eliminate the loopholes. I'm surprised you're defending the status quo, business as usual, special interests paying off politicians for favors.
A related point, I can't understand why many think Romney's background is a handicap. If he's going to clean up the system, it's a big advantage. He knows how loopholes work, and he wants to get rid of them. That's apparent from his tax plan. He knows how to fix an enterprise that's bleeding red ink and about to go under, like a company, the Olympics, and hopefully the federal government.
Wild Walleye
08-10-12, 14:39
Walleye, You're a smart guy, most of the time. Read your post. It's nonsense, except the part about Warren Buffet. You're jumping through hoops to come up with the logic to call a performance fee a capital gain. You point out that these guys owe their special tax break to the money that they've contributed to liberal politicians.Carried interests are equity participation. In principal, they are no different from stock options or other forms of equity compensation, except that for the guys that start the fund, they are essentially founders' stock.
I struggle with the same principal, in a different industry. I receive special tax breaks from the government, and have defended them because the marginal rate is so high. But the solution is to do what Romney and Ryan are proposing, bring down marginal rates and eliminate the loopholes. I'm surprised you're defending the status quo, business as usual, special interests paying off politicians for favors.Maybe you could cite some of my posts defending the status quo. I am all for a flat tax. The corporate income tax should be zero, because corporations do not pay taxes. No matter how you slice it. Therefore, corporate taxes are just a means of additional taxation on the individual. Who is already over taxed. Eliminate the corporate tax and you reduce the taxes on individuals, while at the same time enabling US companies to be more competitive on a global basis.
There is nothing status quo about supporting lower taxes on investments and equity participation, in all of its forms.
A related point, I can't understand why many think Romney's background is a handicap.I don't think that the Veep pick means squat, in the bigger picture. However, what it represents is an opportunity for the media to declare war on yet another member of the Obama opposition and to try to further hamper (beyond what they are already doing) Romney's campaign.
If he's going to clean up the system, it's a big advantage. He knows how loopholes work, and he wants to get rid of them. That's apparent from his tax plan. He knows how to fix an enterprise that's bleeding red ink and about to go under, like a company, the Olympics, and hopefully the federal government.I'd like to see a veep like Ryan and a sweep of the House and Senate. Then, I'd like to see Romney take a page out of Obama's book and go full throttle with the executive branch and the legislative branch under one roof to gut the federal government. First step would be to eliminate every czar appointed by Clinton, Bush and Obama and dissolve their respective organizations. Then he should pass legislation forcing federal agencies to adhere to the Constitution and to cease and desist in creating new, extra-constitutional legislation (EPA, etc.), repeal Obamacare and every executive order he has enacted. Then, he can start to do the real work that is needed to get us back on the right path. The objective should be to reduce the actual size of government by 20% over the next 10 years.
At the end of the day, whilst standing alone in the voting booth, the American voter will have to do one of two things, vote for true hope and change or close his/her eyes and mind and pull the lever for four more years of misery and the further decline of this great nation.
Staus quo enough for you?
Wild Walleye
08-10-12, 15:00
Obama's team is far too smart to take the bait and illegally release Romney's tax returns.You are a joke. Obama and his puppet masters use proxies to do all of their dirty work and they have absolutely no quams about breaking the law. They do it all the time, with absolute impunity. Just look at the clear violation of federal election law whereby the WH, the campaign and the PAC colluded on the "Romney Killed My Wife" ad. The campaign and the PAC shot ads, both starring Joe Soptic on the same day, wearing the same clothes. Keep in mind that Obama and Holder are very likely to have been complicit in more than 300 murders, in Mexico. 2,400 felonies for knowingly shipping illegal arms across international borders (there are no exceptions to the law for the president or for law enforcement) and the deaths of two federal agents. Leaking IRS information is small potatoes. I guarantee you that Axlerod's henchmen have personally reviewed all of Romney's tax returns.
Strategically, they really do not need to;They can't release 'it' because they didn't find anything to leak. Therefore, they do it all with smears.
either Romney is going to release them, which will reveal him as the slimy Wall Street snake that he is, or, he will continue to refuseIt hasn't worked so far. I'm perfectly happy to have the Obama campaign waste its time and money on things that repulse the American public.
which will supply the Obama team with a barrage of ammunition to attack Romney that he can do little or nothing to refute.The first truthful, factual thing that you have posted.
If Romney's tax returns were a sparkling example of transparency, he would have released the returns alreadyOK, Mr. Axlerod. If SOS / MOPD didn't beat his wife, he would have already proven it. Ergo, SOS / MOPD must be a wife-beater.
so he could re-frame the electoral debate away from his shadiness,Of course, if he would just release the records, Obama, his campaign and the PACs that he illegally controls would drop the only issue his campaign has ever had.
something he has clearly been unable to do up until now.Run a poll to see who the likely voters think is a bigger scumbag and I suspect that you will see an overwhelming majority who are sickened by what a lowlife Obama is. So much so that many people, who up to this point have been afraid to say anything against Obama, are starting to vocalize their displeasure.
After you post something about a chica (that isn't just regurgitated material from other APers' posts) , we can continue this discussion. Otherwise, time for you to go.
Canitasguy
08-10-12, 15:16
Esten. I will call off the bet. Period. End of story!Guess the growing realization that the re-election of Obama is becoming more likely every day is disorienting enough for Toymann than to face the prospect of sitting across the table from a triumphant Esten one night next year and then have to pick up the tab.
Otherwise, time for you to go.Been overdue for sometime now. The shill should move on and stop deluding himself that anyone, even the liberals on the board (except maybe WT69) , can't see right through him. Been fun watching himself humiliate himself over and over with his rumor mill of deluded posts and fabrications. LMAO. It's been a fun ride. My favourite post (which he edited) was when he inferred that El Jeffe was a "RACIST". That was rich, and then he whinned for a couple days that his posts were being edited or deleted. That was totally rich and provided unending entertainment. Sadly, the enetrtainment value has really dropped off BUT I love the way he paints you and me as the 1%ers. I really appreciate that comment as I came to the US 20 years ago with barely the shirt on my back and now represent his acqusation alrightly. God Bless the American Dream! I know of no other country on earth that provides immigrants with the opportunity to get ahead like the Good Ol'USA. Only sad little pinkies like SnakeBoy howl at the moon and complain over the system they believe has passed them by. Bye Bye snakeBoy. It's been real and it's been great BUT right now it's not REAL GREAT! Monger on all. Toymann
Big Boss Man
08-10-12, 16:18
Carried interests are equity participation. In principal, they are no different from stock options or other forms of equity compensation, except that for the guys that start the fund, they are essentially founders' stock.For me there is a huge difference between equity participation and founder's stock. The hedge fund founder is not risking capital and the founder of a company is. If the hedge fund manager fails he or she just closes up shop and starts a new fund without any personal loss of capital. I think that the activities involved in running a hedge fund.raising funds, analyzing financial statements, trading and writing reports. Should all be considered as labor same as they are in other businesses. As such I think it should be taxed as income rather than a special category as carried interest. As Tiny says it distorts economic activity. Many of my favorite sell-side analysts at Morgan Stanley left to start there own hedge fund. Suspiciously now you are seeing some of them return.
There is reason to believe that Romney participated in the IRS amnesty program which resulted in the closure of his UBS account and repatriation of the funds in 2010.Again, this administration leaks like a sieve when it is convenient and they have not even insinuated this issue through any of their regular mouthpieces. MR has released his 2010 return. There has been no mention of a 2010 amended return as would have been done in such a situation. So, I am 99. 999999% sure that he was not in the IRS amnesty program. And as opposed to the guy in the commercial, that does mean I am sure.
For me there is a huge difference between equity participation and founder's stock. The hedge fund founder is not risking capital and the founder of a company is. If the hedge fund manager fails he or she just closes up shop and starts a new fund without any personal loss of capital. I think that the activities involved in running a hedge fund.raising funds, analyzing financial statements, trading and writing reports. Should all be considered as labor same as they are in other businesses. As such I think it should be taxed as income rather than a special category as carried interest. As Tiny says it distorts economic activity. Many of my favorite sell-side analysts at Morgan Stanley left to start there own hedge fund. Suspiciously now you are seeing some of them return.I don't see a difference between the two. Bill Gates put a lot of sweat equity into Microsoft, but not a lot of money. I think the amount of start up capital was $50, 000. Same for all of my business clients. Each of them may have put their respective ass (ets) on the line for the bank, but they rarely put money into the business. I believe the hedge fund operator's share of profits from customer account earnings should be taxed as earned income and at regular income tax rates. For the profits of any monies they invested themselves, I would tax as unearned income and at capital gains tax rates.
SnakeOilSales
08-10-12, 19:37
Been overdue for sometime now. The shill should move on and stop deluding himself that anyone, even the liberals on the board (except maybe WT69) , can't see right through him. Been fun watching himself humiliate himself over and over with his rumor mill of deluded posts and fabrications. LMAO. It's been a fun ride. My favourite post (which he edited) was when he inferred that El Jeffe was a "RACIST". That was rich, and then he whinned for a couple days that his posts were being edited or deleted. That was totally rich and provided unending entertainment. Sadly, the enetrtainment value has really dropped off BUT I love the way he paints you and me as the 1%ers. I really appreciate that comment as I came to the US 20 years ago with barely the shirt on my back and now represent his acqusation alrightly. God Bless the American Dream! I know of no other country on earth that provides immigrants with the opportunity to get ahead like the Good Ol'USA. Only sad little pinkies like SnakeBoy howl at the moon and complain over the system they believe has passed them by. Bye Bye snakeBoy. It's been real and it's been great BUT right now it's not REAL GREAT! Monger on all. ToymannToymann, do you have an undiagnosed case of Aspergers Syndrome?
SnakeOilSales
08-10-12, 19:54
You are a joke. Obama and his puppet masters use proxies to do all of their dirty work and they have absolutely no quams about breaking the law. They do it all the time, with absolute impunity. Just look at the clear violation of federal election law whereby the WH, the campaign and the PAC colluded on the "Romney Killed My Wife" ad. The campaign and the PAC shot ads, both starring Joe Soptic on the same day, wearing the same clothes. Keep in mind that Obama and Holder are very likely to have been complicit in more than 300 murders, in Mexico. 2,400 felonies for knowingly shipping illegal arms across international borders (there are no exceptions to the law for the president or for law enforcement) and the deaths of two federal agents. Leaking IRS information is small potatoes. I guarantee you that Axlerod's henchmen have personally reviewed all of Romney's tax returns.
They can't release 'it' because they didn't find anything to leak. Therefore, they do it all with smears.
It hasn't worked so far. I'm perfectly happy to have the Obama campaign waste its time and money on things that repulse the American public.
The first truthful, factual thing that you have posted.
OK, Mr. Axlerod. If SOS / MOPD didn't beat his wife, he would have already proven it. Ergo, SOS / MOPD must be a wife-beater.
Of course, if he would just release the records, Obama, his campaign and the PACs that he illegally controls would drop the only issue his campaign has ever had.
Run a poll to see who the likely voters think is a bigger scumbag and I suspect that you will see an overwhelming majority who are sickened by what a lowlife Obama is. So much so that many people, who up to this point have been afraid to say anything against Obama, are starting to vocalize their displeasure.
After you post something about a chica (that isn't just regurgitated material from other APers' posts) , we can continue this discussion. Otherwise, time for you to go.The latest Fox News (who would have ever thought?) poll has Obama leading by 9 percentage points, so clearly the Obama campaign strategy of portraying Romney as the greedy Wall Street weasel is working. Face it, WW, you are simply so far out of touch with the US voting public that your thoughts and analysis on this election are completely irrelevant.
Wild Walleye
08-10-12, 20:07
For me there is a huge difference between equity participation and founder's stock. The hedge fund founder is not risking capital and the founder of a company is. If the hedge fund manager fails he or she just closes up shop and starts a new fund without any personal loss of capital.I disagree. A hedge fund is like any other business. Founders have capital, opportunity costs and their reputations - which can severely inhibit their ability to make a living, in the future - at risk. I have yet to meet a landlord, utility company, administrative assistant, computer networking company or any other vendor that will provide their goods and services free, just because the business is a hedge fund. However, those costs and investments are part of the management company, which is a legal entity distinctly different and separate from the legal entity that is the "fund." Without an interest in the fund, managers would have to sell the management company in order to participate in "equity" upside. Since the management is generally what attracts investors to hedge funds, that would have a deleterious effect on AUM and in many cases is not allowed, anyhow.
I think that the activities involved in running a hedge fund.raising funds, analyzing financial statements, trading and writing reports. Should all be considered as labor same as they are in other businesses. As such I think it should be taxed as income rather than a special category as carried interest.This past year, I started a new company. I paid for it and incorporated it. On "day one" it had no assets and $450 in liabilities and $450 in equity. In every possible way, that entity had next to zero value. I owned 100%, which if I sold it after 18 months (assuming the tax rates don't go up) , I will be taxed at 15% on my profits. The same is true of a newly created hedge fund. On "day one" it has next to zero for a value. Therefore, the carried interests have zero value upon its creation. The reason that they are 'carried interests' and not straight equity is out of deference to the investors capital and potential phantom tax issues. Additionally, the management fees pay for "doing the job" while the participation compensates for outperforming the status quo.
As Tiny says it distorts economic activity.The fact that it is a financial business does not exclude it from being an entrepreneurial pursuit, replete with lots of risk. If starting a hedge fund, in your opinions, distorts economic activity, so too must all entrepreneurial pursuits and small businesses.
Many of my favorite sell-side analysts at Morgan Stanley left to start there own hedge fund. Suspiciously now you are seeing some of them return.You are proving my point. If starting a hedge fund was riskless and a guaranteed path to riches, why then are they returning to relatively safe positions at large institutions?
Wild Walleye
08-10-12, 20:16
The latest Fox News (who would have ever thought?) poll has Obama leading by 9 percentage points,A poll of "adults" (not likely voters, not even registered voters, adults?) which over sampled democrats by 9%.
so clearly the Obama campaign strategy of portraying Romney as the greedy Wall Street weasel is working.You can believe whatever you want.
Face it, WW, you are simply so far out of touch with the US voting public that your thoughts and analysis on this election are completely irrelevant.OK, I'll face it. On November 7th.
Meet you at Archibald's for a drink, after you get out of work. I imagine your cubicle isn't too far from there.
Big Boss Man
08-10-12, 20:25
Again, this administration leaks like a sieve when it is convenient and they have not even insinuated this issue through any of their regular mouthpieces. MR has released his 2010 return. There has been no mention of a 2010 amended return as would have been done in such a situation. So, I am 99. 999999% sure that he was not in the IRS amnesty program. And as opposed to the guy in the commercial, that does mean I am sure.I read one analysis today that said one plausible explanation among 4 offered is that Romney paid no taxes in 2009 because of large capital gains losses. It is hard to figure why he is not releasing tax returns given the harm it has done him in publicity. According to the article, Obama is using the Romney tax campaign tactic to target uncollege-educated white male voters in swing states. He knows that they will not vote for him but it is just as good if they do show up to vote.
It seems realistic in my experience. I have not paid capital gains tax since 2009 and still have a large capital gain loss carry forward. I am very religious about harvesting my tax losses. I always seem to make one dumb ass move. VALE is my dumb ass move for this year.
In 2009 I sold everything to harvest the capital gains loss, stayed out of the market for 6 months, then leveraged back in at the end of the year. Harvesting capital losses is fairly simplistic well-known strategy but I think if you are not in the market or all your money is in an IRA people may not be aware of it. I could see Romney using this strategy.
The blog article is from a liberal magazine so consider the source.
http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/105974/unified-theory-romney-tax-stubbornness
You can be such an assh$ole Esten. I will save you the 2000 pesos and call off the bet. Period. End of story! Would not want to hamper your precious vacation time."Another condition from Toymann", Hit the road idiot! Thought we might have some fun with this BUt you are just not up to it! By the way be*tch, loved your post on top 10% earners should pay 100% of the taxes! IALOTFLMAO! I don't hang with your're kind, EVER! You just want out of the bet little girl, and I will let you off the hook. From the sounds of things you can't afford the bet anyway. Doubt we will see you in BA anytime soon. You so dissapoint me! ToymannAs far as I'm concerned. Any attempt by you to cancel the bet, will just confirm you're a chickensh*t, who can't back up his words with action.
My only concern is you not paying up. The point of the expiration date was to avoid having to track this thing for years until we are in town at the same time (your requirement) , not for me to avoid paying. Rather self-serving you want me to adjust my travel schedule to yours, isn't it? And while you only propose ONE method of payment (in person) , I have proposed TWO (in person or not). Seems I am the one trying to make the bet work, while you're trying to make it difficult or cancel it.
Let me re-state to say I will not put an expiration date on my obligation. If I win, I'll let you off the hook if I haven't collected after 2 years. If you win, I am 100% certain I will get you the funds one way or another, and soon. So either way there will be closure.
Don't be a chickensh*t, Toymann.
Toymann, do you have an undiagnosed case of Aspergers Syndrome?No, he is just an immigrant from a former socialist country. If you ever had to queue alongside them at the airport, you know what I mean!
Just joking, Toymann, don't get a seizure.
Esten, In 2009, the latest year for which data is available, the top 10% made $3. 314 trillion, before paying federal income tax. (1)
In 2009 the federal government spent $3. 517 trillion. (2)
If your idea were implemented, how would the top 10% manage to pay rent and put food on the table? How could they afford to pay state income taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes?Tiny, income tax is only one component of federal tax revenues:
Sources of Federal Tax Revenue, FY2010
3% Excise taxes
6% Other
9% Corporate income tax
40% Payroll taxes
42% Individual income taxes
42% of 3.5 Trillion = 1.5 Trillion. That still leaves plenty for the top 10%.
Anyhow, back in 2010 I also qualified my response to Jackson, that while I believed my answer to be fair, it is not something I would actually propose. I believe there is value to having skin in the game, paying income tax if you can afford to, and there are plenty of folks below the top 10% that can afford to.
Good Point Esten. Federal revenues in 2009 were only 2.1 trillion though. And the top 10% do pay payroll taxes too.
Without going into detail, the top 10% actually only paid about $830 billion to the federal government, instead of the $1.5 trillion you calculated. The federal deficit in 2009 was 3.5 trillion - 2.1 trillion = 1. 4 trillion, which you can confirm on the usgovernmentrevenue.com web site.
If the top 10% were to have picked up the slack in 2009 so the government wasn't running a deficit, they would have paid 0.83 trillion + 1.4 trillion = 2.2 trillion. And their adjusted gross income, again, was 3. 3 trillion. They just can't do it. My point was not only the inequity of having the 10% pay everything, which you apparently recognize, but also that the size of federal government expenditures isn't sustainable. That the top 10% just don't have the money to fund government at it's current level. While 2009 was a difficult year, 2030 and 2040 and 2050 are going to be much worse, with massive increases in Medicaid and Medicare on the horizon.
When you're deciding what you think is fair, please remember the state and local income, sales and property taxes that people pay. The average 25% federal tax rate for the top 10% can morph into 40%+, depending on where they live. I also wish you realized that savings and investment in the hands of businesses and individuals do much more to promote economic growth than expenditures by the federal government on whatever it is that the federal government does.
Walleye, I hope you don't get pissed. I actually do get a kick out of your posts and agree with you most of the time. But this was too good to pass up.
I disagree. A hedge fund is like any other business. Founders have capital, opportunity costs and their reputations - which can severely inhibit their ability to make a living, in the future - at risk. I have yet to meet a landlord, utility company, administrative assistant, computer networking company or any other vendor that will provide their goods and services free, just because the business is a hedge fund. ?I understand now. Actually I always understood, honestly, that capital gains and dividends from businesses, including public corporations, should be subject to no or low rates of tax, for reasons of fairness and so capital will be allocated efficiently. But now I understand that the work of hedge funds and private equity funds is so important that part of the fees they charge should be taxed at lower rates than landlords, utility companies, administrative assistants, computer networking companies, and all other vendors. George Soros, for example, when he almost broke the Bank of England. I always hated those Limey Bastards. What they did to us in the War of 1812. Not to mention what they did to the Irish. They should pay. And how would we have ever pricked the mortgage bubble without John Paulson? Algorithmic trading, commodity speculation and trading collateralized default swaps are some of the highest of mans' callings.
This past year, I started a new company. I paid for it and incorporated it. On "day one" it had no assets and $450 in liabilities and $450 in equity. In every possible way, that entity had next to zero value. I owned 100%, which if I sold it after 18 months (assuming the tax rates don't go up) , I will be taxed at 15% on my profits. ?This is fantastic financial engineering! I don't think even old Bernie* could have come up with something like this. It's money for nothing! Now if we can only get the chicks for free.
The same is true of a newly created hedge fund. On "day one" it has next to zero for a value. Therefore, the carried interests have zero value upon its creation. The reason that they are 'carried interests' and not straight equity is out of deference to the investors capital and potential phantom tax issues. ?Can I do this too? If I pay off a few Congressmen, will they change the law so that part of the income generated from the sweat equity I'm putting into my new business will be treated as capital gains?
The fact that it is a financial business does not exclude it from being an entrepreneurial pursuit, replete with lots of risk. If starting a hedge fund, in your opinions, distorts economic activity, so too must all entrepreneurial pursuits and small businesses.This is so true. Loopholes, government subsidies, different tax rates applied to different businesses, these are the sorts of things that drive the economy and help all the tax lawyers and accountants working for the large corporations that know how to take advantage of these things.
*Pick your Bernie, Madoff, Cornfield or Sanders. Assets = Liabilities + Equity. You can't create an entity with +$450 in equity and no assets. FYI, if you've been waiting 18 months for long term capital gains treatment you don't need to. You only have to hold for 12 months and one day.
I like this ticket for what it says! Romney-Ryan = the Romney crowd must figure Florida is in the bag (I also agree with this) , no need for Rubio (he's too green anyway and the latino vote is meanless anyway). Wisconsin is now in the bag. I am liking what I see. BIG TIME. Monger On All Toymann