American Politics during the Obama Presidency

[QUOTE=Jackson; 429438]Yada, yada, yada.

All you're doing now is trying to [u]convince[/u] [u]yourself[/u] That liberal policies will solve the world's problems.

The die is cast.

All we're going to be doing now is waiting and watching as the liberals drive the country over the cliff.

Of course, liberals don't care if they drive the country over the cliff, so long as [i]they're driving[/i].

Anyway, the only question for me now is what do I need to do to avoid getting hurt in the inevitable (and entirely predicitable) crash.

Thanks,

Jackson[/QUOTE]Get some precious metals. Bernake can't print gold out of thin air. Get ready for another soveriegn credit rating downgrade also.

[QUOTE=Jackson; 429438]Yada, yada, yada.

All you're doing now is trying to [u]convince[/u] [u]yourself[/u] That liberal policies will solve the world's problems.

The die is cast.

All we're going to be doing now is waiting and watching as the liberals drive the country over the cliff.

Of course, liberals don't care if they drive the country over the cliff, so long as [i]they're driving[/i].

Anyway, the only question for me now is what do I need to do to avoid getting hurt in the inevitable (and entirely predicitable) crash.

Thanks,

Jackson[/QUOTE]The fact is, historically, Liberal Keynesian policies have proven to be better catalysts for economic growth than the Conservative ones have ever been. The data is quite unambiguous on that score. You Righties and Libertarians are very good about repeating Mantras about cutting taxes being the cure for everythingt that ails the Economy, but none of you have ever actually made the case with data. And when the data is compiled and analyzed and ends up discrediting your mantra, all you can do is whine about it.

[QUOTE=Member #2041;429467]The fact is, historically, Liberal Keynesian policies have proven to be better catalysts for economic growth than the Conservative ones have ever been. The data is quite unambiguous on that score. You Righties and Libertarians are very good about repeating Mantras about cutting taxes being the cure for everythingt that ails the Economy, but none of you have ever actually made the case with data. And when the data is compiled and analyzed and ends up discrediting your mantra, all you can do is whine about it.[/QUOTE]There eventually comes a day of reckoning for all of the borrowing to artificially prop up an economy. It's all good until you run out of credit. Want to take me up on the S&P Credit Rating Bet? I bet it goes down before up before Jan 2017.

[QUOTE=Silver Star;429481]There eventually comes a day of reckoning for all of the borrowing to artificially prop up an economy. It's all good until you run out of credit. Want to take me up on the S&P Credit Rating Bet? I bet it goes down before up before Jan 2017.[/QUOTE]That's pretty far out for a bet. Good luck collecting your winnings over 4 years later.

[QUOTE=Silver Star;429481]There eventually comes a day of reckoning for all of the borrowing to artificially prop up an economy. It's all good until you run out of credit. Want to take me up on the S&P Credit Rating Bet? I bet it goes down before up before Jan 2017.[/QUOTE]Unfortunately, as long as there are enough wackos in the Congress who have taken Grover Norquist's pledge, to throw the USA into disarray, there is no way to be sure Obama will be able to get any of his policies implemented.

[QUOTE=Member #2041;429495]Unfortunately, as long as there are enough wackos in the Congress who have taken Grover Norquist's pledge, to throw the USA into disarray, there is no way to be sure Obama will be able to get any of his policies implemented.[/QUOTE]OK, I understand your reason for declining, maybe we can do the bet in 2014 if Democrats get full control of government.

[QUOTE=Mountaineer;429490]That's pretty far out for a bet. Good luck collecting your winnings over 4 years later.[/QUOTE]Chances are I can collect quicker than that, with Democrats and Republicans running the show together, it should not be too long before we get ANOTHER S&P downgrade.

[b]TOP-10 "Only In America" Observations ~ by a Canadian:[/b]

1) Only in America, could politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000.00 a plate campaign fund-raising event.

2) Only in America, could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when they have a black President, a black Attorney General, and roughly 18% of the federal workforce is black while only 12% of the population is black.

3) Only in America, could they have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Timothy Geithner, the head of the Treasury Department and Charles Rangel who once ran the Ways and Means Committee, BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.

4) Only in America, can they have terrorists kill people in the name of Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims might be harmed by the backlash.

5) Only in America, would they make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege while we discuss letting anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just 'magically' become American citizens.

[b]6) Only in America, could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country's Constitution be thought of as "extremists."[/b]

7) Only in America, could you need to present a driver's license to cash a check or buy alcohol, but not to vote.

8) Only in America, could people demand the government investigate whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas went up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. oil company (Marathon Oil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes (Nike).

9) Only in America, could the government collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars more than it has per year - for total spending of $7-Million PER MINUTE, and complain that it doesn't have nearly enough money.

[b]10) Only in America, could the rich people - who pay 86% of all income taxes - be accused of not paying their "fair share" by people who don't pay any income taxes at all.[/b]

[QUOTE=Jackson;429621][b]6) Only in America, could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country's Constitution be thought of as "extremists."[/b][/QUOTE]Nonsense! Those criteria alone are not generally what is considered extreme. It's the balancing of budgets strictly by slashing spending, including popular government programs, without raising any revenue, that is considered extreme.

[QUOTE][b]10) Only in America, could the rich people - who pay 86% of all income taxes - be accused of not paying their "fair share" by people who don't pay any income taxes at all.[/b][/QUOTE]LOL, I love how those who sympathize with the "poor rich", who pay so much in taxes, always fail to mention how much income and wealth the "poor rich" have.

Only in America, could some people think it's fair for a wealthy investor like Romney to pay a 14% effective tax rate, while many others who actually work for a living, pay north of 25. Thank goodness those people are in the minority.

[QUOTE=Esten; 429625]Nonsense! Those criteria alone are not generally what is considered extreme. It's the balancing of budgets strictly by slashing spending, including popular government programs, without raising any revenue, that is considered extreme.

LOL, I love how those who sympathize with the "poor rich", who pay so much in taxes, always fail to mention how much income and wealth the "poor rich" have.

Only in America, could some people think it's fair for a wealthy investor like Romney to pay a 14% effective tax rate, while many others who actually work for a living, pay north of 25. Thank goodness those people are in the minority.[/QUOTE]You're taking a special case. The press wasn't giving Romney any credit for his charitable contributions and other itemized deductions when they came up with the 14% effective rate. That would have raised the rate a bit. Also the guy was in private equity. I've read, but haven't verified, that he was paying long term capital gains rates on his share of performance fees received from Bain funds. This is a tax loophole that Democrats and Republicans have kept in effect through the years.

Looking at the IRS tax statistics from 2009, the most recent year, those who made over $200,000 per year paid 50.2% of the income tax, received 25.8% of the income, and paid at a tax rate, as a % of taxable income, of 26.8%. They represented 3.7% of the 140 million tax individual tax returns filed. Based on what you read in the press they'd represent about 2% of taxpayers.

If you want to go up the income chain a little, those making over $500,000 paid 29.8% of the income tax, received 13.9% of the income, and paid at an average tax rate of 28.6%. They were 0.9% of tax returns filed.

The median tax rate for all 140 million returns was 10.0% and the average was 17.8%.

I believe that those making over $200,000 per year, who apparently the Democrats intend to depend on to balance a $1 trillion budget deficit, are already paying their fair share. They're paying 2.7 times more as a % of their income than the median.

Please remember that people are paying state income taxes, sales taxes, and property taxes on top of their federal income tax.

You've got a point in your Romney example. Crony capitalism does contribute to inequality. While I believe raising tax rates on business and investment from current levels is stupid, eliminating the carried interest loophole, bailouts of shareholders and bondholders in financial institutions, payments to wealthy farmers, subsidies for renewable energy, etc, are good ideas. I'd argue though that some of the popular government programs you refer to must be slashed or properly funded. And the top 2% can't afford to pick up all the slack in medicare and pensions. You'll bankrupt them, especially if medical costs continue at 17% of GDP. If the middle class and upper middle class want to continue with their entitlements the way they're structured now, they'll have to pay for it. There's no other option, mathematically. We must get entitlements and government debt under control. Otherwise we'll end up like Greece someday, with no money to pay for education, help to the truly needy, etc. And rioting in the streets.

[QUOTE=Esten;429625]Only in America, could some people think it's fair for a wealthy investor like Romney to pay a 14% effective tax rate, while many others who actually work for a living, pay north of 25.[/QUOTE]Your talking percentages specifically to obfuscate the facts.

Let's talk numbers.

Last year Romney wrote a check to the IRS for $1.9 million.

How big was the check you wrote?

[QUOTE=Esten;429625]Thank goodness those people are in the minority.[/QUOTE]Congratulations. With a liberal government permanently in place in DC, that miniority of successful individuals will inevitably get even smaller.

Thanks,

Jackson

Tiny - I'm fine cutting spending, if need be even some of the big government programs, as along as there is also a corresponding significant revenue increase.

I say let's go back to the Clinton-era tax rates for everyone. First the top brackets, then maybe in a couple years the other brackets. I suspect this is Obama's plan and the "fiscal cliff" agreement will involve only a 2 year extension for the other brackets.

BTW, I bet that Top 10 list wasn't written by a Canadian. It sounds too plugged into American politics, especially the right wing view. What Canadian follows the tax history of Geithner and Rangel? The giveaway is when it says "responsible for our tax code". And look at point #8, it's dumb downed to make the oil companies look innocent and have us forget about oil speculators. This is just more right wing propaganda, and the author put "by a Canadian" in the title to try to give it some independent credibility. There is no end to what these guys will come up with to influence opinion. Based on the election results, most people see this kind of crap for what it is.

[QUOTE=Jackson; 429662]Your talking percentages specifically to obfuscate the facts.

Let's talk numbers.

Last year Romney wrote a check to the IRS for $1. 9 million.

How big was the check you wrote?[/QUOTE]LOL!
You're pulling my leg Jackson, I know it...

[QUOTE=Jackson;429360]I disagree with everything you've written, but there's no reason to argue because the country has passed the tipping point and there's nothing I can do about it.[/QUOTE]I agree with your analysis, but I hope the Journal is right on this one:

[QUOTE=WSJ]"These columns have viewed this election as more consequential than others for a single reason—ObamaCare. Tax rates do economic damage when they rise, but they can be cut again. Regulations can be adapted to or phased out. Spending can be cut. But the Affordable Care Act will spread like termites in the national economy and public fisc. Mr. Obama will no doubt use his second term to consolidate this liberal entitlement dream, with its ultimate goal of single-payer health care.

Some of our conservative friends will argue that Mr. Obama's victory thus represents a decline in national virtue and a tipping point in favor of the "takers" over the makers. They will say the middle class chose Mr. Obama's government blandishments over Mr. Romney's opportunity society. We don't think such a narrow victory of an incumbent President who continues to be personally admired justifies such a conclusion.

Perhaps this fear will be realized over time, but such a fate continues to be in our hands. There are few permanent victories or defeats in American politics, and Tuesday wasn't one of them. The battle for liberty begins anew this morning."[/QUOTE][url]Http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204349404578102971575770036.html[/url]

[QUOTE=Chicago Guy; 429721]I agree with your analysis, but I hope the Journal is right on this one:

[url]Http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204349404578102971575770036.html[/url][/QUOTE]You can never win a game if you continue to be in the wrong formation, jump off-side, fumble the ball, throw interceptions, run wrong routes, punts blocked, kick shanked, or worse, run the wrong way towards your own goal after being getting hit in the head. Keep firing the coaches, it won't do any good. Texas, USC, Notre Dame, Alabama, etc, all had to spend a long time in the wilderness before reaching the top of the mountain again.

So because of ObamaCare, Papa John's CEO, John Schnatter (a big GOP donor) threatened to raise per pizza. 11-14 cents. That's peanuts. I drop more than that the in taxi seats all the time.