Not that I like Obama, though if the game of political charades was real and if I were forced to choose it would not be McCain.
If it were real, one would have to look at how Reagan and the Bushes destroyed the economy and how we had eight straight years of improved standards of living, decreasing crimes, welfare roll reductions (ultimately by 50%), no imperialistic incursions into other countries to make them safe for big oil and Haliburton, no significant losses of personal freedoms and liberty, and decreasing deficits (and ultimately budget surpluses and reduction of the debt for the first time I can remember).
I would certainly have to wonder why it is that the dirty tricks, slander and bogus messages that get slung around the internet seem to always come from one side of the aisle.
I might also consider that when Clinton took office, gas was $1.oo a gallon and when he left eight years later, it was $1.26. Bush took over at $1.26 and less than eight full years later gas topped $4.00 a gallon.
So, if it were real and I were forced to choose . . .
Since it isn't and I am free to choose, I will likely write in Ron Paul. Or else vote for Chuck Baldwin.
"this is like the third or fourth time you have posted some propoganda that has turned out to be totally false."
Post a link to the other 2 or 3 times, and we will see if you are correct. I don't recall you posting anything at the time that would change what I posted. As I recall, there were plenty of references you could have checked out.
"i should know to always check snopes when i read something you post because it seems you are on some right wing fabrication email ring. and you continually post these hysterical lies as facts."
Yes you should have, but you didn't. In fact you still wouldn't know if it hadn't been for DQ bringing it to our attention. And yet it is you that is getting hysterical.
Aside from all of that, nothing has changed except for the numbers I erroniously posted. Obama's tax plan will do nothing good for the economy, and in fact will be detrimental to the economy. This is just not me, read on
"The Tax Policy Center and the Barack Obama campaign used some sleight of hand this week in Politico. To quote Eric Tolder of the TPC, “Most small-business people, like most everyone else, are not really high-income.” While this is true, it completely and totally misses the point.
Let’s start with the definition of a “small business.” Most will tell you that small-business income constitutes income derived from sole proprietorships, partnerships and Subchapter S corporations.
The conservative argument (and that of the John McCain campaign) is that Obama’s stated plan to raise taxes on households making $250,000 or more in income is a tax increase on small business. The simple answer to this dilemma can be found in the IRS Statistics of Income Bulletin (Table 1.4, for those who are interested).
So what do the data say?
In 2006 (the latest year available), $706 billion of such income was reported to the Internal Revenue Service. Of this, about half was reported by households in the top marginal income tax rate. Interestingly, two-thirds of this income was reported by households making $250,000 per year or more — the very same households that Obama wants to increase taxes on.
"The Obama campaign maintains that the number of small-business owners is what’s important. Economists know what matters is the tax rate that’s applied to the bulk of small-business income. Make no mistake about it: Obama’s plan to raise taxes on households making more than $250,000 will raise taxes on most small-business profits in America.
What type of tax rate are we talking about? Currently, S corporations face a top tax rate of 35 percent, while sole proprietors and general partners face a tax rate of 37.9 percent (since they’re responsible for paying both income tax and the Medicare component of the payroll tax).
Under Obama’s plan to let the scheduled 2011 tax rate hikes occur, and his plan to raise the self-employment tax on those making more than $250,000, the S corporation rate would rise from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. The sole proprietor and partner rate would rise from 37.9 percent all the way up to a staggering 50.3 percent. Many Democrats in Congress have proposed making all small businesses (including S corporations) pay this 50-plus percent rate. A small business tax rate that high would be the highest marginal rate faced by them in nearly a quarter-century.
What would a world look like where two-thirds of all small-business income would be taxed at a 50 percent rate? The economic law that “taxing something more and getting less of it” would apply. Fewer Americans would be interested in opening or expanding small businesses. Tax evasion and legal tax avoidance would spike, as tax shelters would once again become a booming industry. Since small businesses create a majority of jobs in America, Main Street closing up shop will have a direct impact on the family budget, as well. Plants and equipment will go unused. Despite the misguided opinions of static scorers in Washington, federal tax revenues will likely decline as the economy staggers into a full-on recession.
What’s the alternative? One place to look is the optional alternate tax system originally proposed by Congressman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and now endorsed by McCain. It would give households (including those with small business income) a choice between the current tax code and one with a top rate of 25 percent on all income over $100,000. This would have the beneficial effect of lowering the tax rate on most small-business income by 10 percentage points. Small businesses haven’t faced a tax rate that low in quite some time and would be likely to respond with the creation of new businesses and more investment in existing businesses.
The McCain small business tax plan doesn’t end there. For those businesses that are organized as conventional corporations, the top tax rate would fall from 35 percent to 25 percent, the European average. For all businesses, technology and equipment — which now must be slowly “depreciated” over many years — would be immediately expensed in year one.
Stepping back, voters and policymakers should ask themselves whether they want two-thirds of small business income taxed at a 50 percent tax rate or if they want nearly all small-business income taxed at a 25 percent tax rate. They should ask themselves whether it’s healthier for small businesses to write off a computer over six calendar years or to simply write it off in year one. To America’s small business sector, the answer is obvious."
Grover Norquist is president of Americans for Tax Reform and author of "Leave Us Alone — Getting the Government’s Hands Off Our Money, Our Guns, Our Lives." http://tinyurl.com/68brwu
"if you dont like Obama, fine, then post something TRUE about him! then we can debate. otherwise you are wasting my time."
There are definitely other issues besides taxes to make me pass on Obama. I think he's a personable sort just like the other BSter Bill Clinton was, and we all know what a bust he, and his wife were.
Obama in my mind is no different. There's a reason all the main media are falling all over themselves to get on his plane when he takes a trip. The money is behind Obama, because I think he is bought and paid for. Any national TV, or print media that didn't show an interest would see major advertising shrink because it is those same people who are pulling the strings. They ignored Ron Paul, and now they are ignoring McCain. They need a puppet in the Whitehouse, and Obama is their guy.
Now listen to this B------T
For posting something that proved to be false, I apologise, and will make every attempt in the future to verify what I post.
"io have asked like ten times in this thread what your plan to balance the budget is and the only response i have ever gotten is "Obama is bad! a really bad man!"
good grief. i get it, you dont like Obama. but at least be willing to offer a counter solution, offer something instead, dont just complain."
I don't have to have a plan, I'm not running for president. Never said that I had a plan regarless of what I think about Obama's plan.
Also I have come to a couple of conclusions about who I am dealing with here based on some facts.
1.) You complain incessantly
2.) Never have anything worthwhile to say
3.) Feel the need to have the last word
4.) Show signs of not being able to comprehend the written word.
So my conclusion is that you are female, and if I were in Las Vegas tonight, the odds makers would give about 9 to 5 odds that you are also blonde.
Having said that, I will borrow a line from Larry the cable guy.
'Lord forgive me, I shouldn't have said that. Forgive me, and bless all the pigmies in New Guinea'
It seems to me that with all the bailouts, no matter who is elected the bubble has to burst. We are due for a huge correction - one that will really hurt. I can only hope that when we emerge it will not be with even fewer liberties and freedoms - and I surely would have liked to have Ron Paul at the helm to guide us through the correction and back to a form of government more in the founders image.
As I have oft said, I frankly cannot bring myself to vote for either one and think it is a really sad state when we are offered such poor choices to lead what is supposed to be the greatest nation on earth. Best and the brightest my fanny!