Lots of folks take stock in theories of supply side/trickle-down/voodoo economics. Lots don't.

 

:lol:

If you think the Obama tax hikes will not effect you, then I think your crazy.

 

 

I'm certain, 100% certain, that income tax hikes that Obama proposes will not hurt me. I'd have to be myself almost 5 times, working the same job, at the same salary before I'd be affected in any significant way. :lol:

 

Don't give me the whole "the wealthy creat the jobs, thus should be protected" stuff either; or the whole "they worked hard for it" stuff. That could be a whole 'nother thread. :lol:

Why, then, is the economy now in a worse shape after the Bush tax cuts then it was before?

Much of the blame goes straight to Greenspan and his manipulation of the economy.

Why, then, is the economy now in a worse shape after the Bush tax cuts then it was before?

 

Because economies go through expansion and recession, and in all likelihood we are in a recession. I'd actually say that without tax cuts, we'd be in worse shape. Also because our primary energy source is dwindling, and we aren't allowed to increase the supply, as well as the fact that speculators have too much market control.

I'm certain, 100% certain, that income tax hikes that Obama proposes will not hurt me. I'd have to be myself almost 5 times, working the same job, at the same salary before I'd be affected in any significant way. :lol:

 

Don't give me the whole "the wealthy creat the jobs, thus should be protected" stuff either; or the whole "they worked hard for it" stuff. That could be a whole 'nother thread. :lol:

Say you sell watermelons for $10 and the government takes $3. Then one day the government says they are going to start taking $5. What do you do? You either raise your prices (making the CONSUMERS pay more) or you fire some employees (making the WORKERS lose jobs, draw unemployment, and either require more taxation or more government spending).

 

Simply put- the Democrats' strategy of getting votes is class warfare. Pit the poor against the rich. It is telling the poor that the Dems will help at them at the expense of a smaller group. I know I will come under fire for this (and people will say "two different scenarios" "apples to oranges" etc.), but you know what it sounds similar to? Hitler targeted a small group of people, the Jews, and had the support of the Germans. The government should not get to pick on a small group of people because they are a small group, whether it is based on race, religion, or wealth.

I'm certain, 100% certain, that income tax hikes that Obama proposes will not hurt me. I'd have to be myself almost 5 times, working the same job, at the same salary before I'd be affected in any significant way. :lol:

 

Don't give me the whole "the wealthy creat the jobs, thus should be protected" stuff either; or the whole "they worked hard for it" stuff. That could be a whole 'nother thread. :lol:

I'm certain they will.

What a clown! This is the same man who fought to preserve abortion provider's practice of allowing babies fortunate enough to survive botched abortions to die with no medical treatment. Now, he is attempting to appeal to moderates by moving just to the right of NARAL.

 

If anybody believes that Obama has changed his position, I guess this qualifies as a flip-flop. However, I just think he is saying what he believes will fool a few more people into voting for him. And I thought John Kerry was so desperate to get elected that he would say anything to get into the White House...Obama is on a record breaking pace.

 

Obama: Mental distress can't justify late abortion

 

Jul 3, 6:01 PM (ET)

 

By JIM KUHNHENN

 

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama says "mental distress" should not qualify as a health exception for late term-abortions, a key distinction not embraced by many supporters of abortion rights.

 

In an interview this week with "Relevant," a Christian magazine, Obama said prohibitions on late-term abortions must contain "a strict, well defined exception for the health of the mother."

 

Obama then added: "Now, I don't think that 'mental distress' qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term."

What a clown! This is the same man who fought to preserve abortion provider's practice of allowing babies fortunate enough to survive botched abortions to die with no medical treatment. Now, he is attempting to appeal to moderates by moving just to the right of NARAL.

 

If anybody believes that Obama has changed his position, I guess this qualifies as a flip-flop. However, I just think he is saying what he believes will fool a few more people into voting for him. And I thought John Kerry was so desperate to get elected that he would say anything to get into the White House...Obama is on a record breaking pace.

 

Obama: Mental distress can't justify late abortion

 

Jul 3, 6:01 PM (ET)

 

By JIM KUHNHENN

 

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama says "mental distress" should not qualify as a health exception for late term-abortions, a key distinction not embraced by many supporters of abortion rights.

 

In an interview this week with "Relevant," a Christian magazine, Obama said prohibitions on late-term abortions must contain "a strict, well defined exception for the health of the mother."

 

Obama then added: "Now, I don't think that 'mental distress' qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term."

 

McCain is right on pace with Obama at this point.

Say you sell watermelons for $10 and the government takes $3. Then one day the government says they are going to start taking $5. What do you do? You either raise your prices (making the CONSUMERS pay more) or you fire some employees (making the WORKERS lose jobs, draw unemployment, and either require more taxation or more government spending).

 

Simply put- the Democrats' strategy of getting votes is class warfare. Pit the poor against the rich. It is telling the poor that the Dems will help at them at the expense of a smaller group. I know I will come under fire for this (and people will say "two different scenarios" "apples to oranges" etc.), but you know what it sounds similar to? Hitler targeted a small group of people, the Jews, and had the support of the Germans. The government should not get to pick on a small group of people because they are a small group, whether it is based on race, religion, or wealth.

 

Why even say something like that? Honestly that's a very very bad comparison.

 

The government does not "pick" on the wealthy because they are rich. I think the "wealthy" should pay the same percentage of their earnings in taxes as I do. No difference what-so-ever.

McCain is right on pace with Obama at this point.

Not even close. McCain is in the middle he does not have to "move" there. Obama is on the far left wing of the Democratic Party and he has to convince moderates that he is one of them. McCain will throw a few scraps to conservatives but he knows that our alternatives are limited. Liberals are used to seeing Democrats make phony moves to the middle and they know where he really stands.

Not even close. McCain is in the middle he does not have to "move" there. Obama is on the far left wing of the Democratic Party and he has to convince moderates that he is one of them. McCain will throw a few scraps to conservatives but he knows that our alternatives are limited. Liberals are used to seeing Democrats make phony moves to the middle and they know where he really stands.

 

McCain has flip flopped on many issues. Have you not been made aware of those flip flops or did you just choose to ignore them?

 

McCain isn't quite in the "middle". He's closer to the middle than some conservatives might like, but that doesn't mean he's a moderate. Not by a long shot IMO.

Why even say something like that? Honestly that's a very very bad comparison.

 

The government does not "pick" on the wealthy because they are rich. I think the "wealthy" should pay the same percentage of their earnings in taxes as I do. No difference what-so-ever.

Agreed that they should pay no more, no less than you. A flat tax with less deductions would be fair because everyone would pay the same percentage.

 

Things like the death tax really, really bother me.

Agreed that they should pay no more, no less than you. A flat tax with less deductions would be fair because everyone would pay the same percentage.

 

Things like the death tax really, really bother me.

 

The death tax doesn't seem to make a ton of sense. I'm not all that familiar with the details of it though.

McCain has flip flopped on many issues. Have you not been made aware of those flip flops or did you just choose to ignore them?

 

McCain isn't quite in the "middle". He's closer to the middle than some conservatives might like, but that doesn't mean he's a moderate. Not by a long shot IMO.

McCain is as moderate as anybody in the US Senate with the possible exception of some of the New England Republicans and Obama is a liberal as anybody in the US Senate. That means that Obama must repackage himself much more carefully to appeal to moderates who are paying attention.

 

As for McCain flip-flopping on issues I will agree that over the course of his career, McCain has changed his position on many positions. However, a fair minded person must acknowledge that a person who has a quarter century of Senate experience should be expected to have changed his position many times more than a green, first term Senator like Obama.

I'm looking forward to quite a few on here that keep saying that Obama won't raise their taxes, come back in a year and hear them complaining about how high their taxes are, and how terrible life is if Obama is elected. I won't feel sorry for you guys, but rather say I told ya so...Sorry, but if you're willing to make the mistake, I hope you're willing to live with the consequences.