Newt or Mitt VS Obama. Can either of 'em beat him?

[Turboguy]

In fact some pay no federal income tax at all!!!
Basic Math Gator, That is my point...

Lets play monopoly!!!!
Basic Capitalism

Now if we only had a progressive income tax to redistribute wealth...
It's the only way to keep the game going or it ends... That's real life. 

If we are to give tax breaks for the rich it should be only for creating American jobs in this country,,, That's it!!!

Sounds more like basic Communisim to me or at least Socialism.   My suggestion is that you move to Cuba where the ideas of Marx et all are still followed that everyone can share in their poverty equally.  If you get into what Basic Capitalism really is then it rewards those who work hard, create, produce and add value to their lives and their country not those who sit home watching the boob tube and keep checking their mailnbox every 30 minutes to see if their welfare check has arrived.
If we are to give tax breaks for the rich it should be only for creating American jobs in this country,,, That's it!!!
I am at a bit of a loss as to why you quote this and then complain in other posts because the tax breaks that are designed to create jobs lower the taxes for those who have the lower tax rates because of the tax breaks that create jobs.   I do personally believe that the capital gains tax should be at the lower rate for the first $ 100,000 of capital gains and then should increase progressivly to the standard tax rate.  This would go a long way to protecting the slob who worked all his life and added to his 401K and wants to live a decent life in retirement and tax guys like Buffet who have more money than they know what to do with at a more realistic rate.

[TheTraveler]

Under the current U.S. tax system, a number of millionaires pay a smaller percentage of their income in taxes than a significant proportion of middle class families. Warren Buffett, for example, pays a lower effective tax rate than his secretary, and that’s not fair.

Warren Buffett's secretary makes about $400K per year.  That makes her part of the 1% that you rail against.  And with a $400K income, she pays a higher percentage in taxes than you do.  Where's the fairness there?
 
Should we lower her tax rate?  Or raise yours?
 

[Muzh]

My, what a bunch of reactionary nonsense being spewed here.

Boe, right now I'm keeping my distance.

It is like talking existentialism with a born again.

[Gator]

I now understand why Obama ignores the heart of the problem and instead focuses on a 0.05% solution.  There are many voters such as represented here who do not make a critical examination and instead drink the Kool-Aid. 
 
Yes, that Obama knows how to lead a nation.  Divert attention away from his record and instead blame Bush and the wealthy.   Meanwhile keep pushing us towards a social welfare state.
 
Does anyone disagree that in many respects we are on the same path as the failed social welfare state of Greece, just 10 or so years behind?  Every Greek is adversely affected by the country's default.  Guess what group is most adversely affected in Greece.  Young people such as you Darth.  Do not believe me?  Look at Spain who is next in line behind Greece.  Unemployment in Spain is 24%, and among young workers who still live with their parents, it is over 40%.  Imagine if 4 out of 10 of your friends had no job.
 
The difference between Greece and the USA is that we are so large we can monetize the debt and thereby bring down the whole world a few notches while we slip many notches.   Or we could address the source of our debt problem, namely spending and jobs.  Doing the latter will require leadership, a proven turnaround guy.

[Muzh]

I now understand why Obama ignores the heart of the problem and instead focuses on a 0.05% solution.  There are many voters such as represented here who do not make a critical examination and instead drink the Kool-Aid. 
 

You have no clue how correct you are. 

[Gator]

You have no clue how correct you are. 

I know what you are implying.  I try to limit myself to a critical examination of facts.  Heck, I almost voted for Obama because our country certainly needed some changes and I thought he would be best.  I changed my mind when I felt Obama was a phony, saying anything to get elected and then doing something else. 

While you are staying out of this, I am trying to understand why Obama hides his record prior to entering his office.  Perhaps you can help me understand his reasoning. 
 
I am not talking about where he was born because I believe he has earned his right to run for office.   I am not talking about his Social Security number either. 
No, I am talking about some other steps that make him seem like a phony.  Why do all the schools Obama attended unanimously  refuse to release transcripts, records, or other bits of evidence  concerning Obama’s presence in their institutions?
 
I will ignore the schools.  Let us focus on his claimed qualifications as an attorney bother me because I worked as a licensed professional and I have respect for such professions.   Is the following true (I don't know one way or the other):
 
1.  Obama, former editor of the Harvard  Law  Review, is no longer a “lawyer”.    He surrendered his license back in 2008 possibly to escape charges that   he “fibbed” on his bar application.

2.  Michelle Obama   “voluntarily surrendered” her law license in 1993, supposedly to avoid a charge of insurance fraud.  Voluntarily surrendering is not a good action.  It usually suggests you are guilty but plead to a deal.

3.  A senior lecturer is one thing.    A   fully ranked law professor is another.  According to the Chicago   Sun-Times, “Obama did NOT ‘hold the title’ of a University of Chicago   law school professor”. Barack Obama was NOT a Constitutional Law   professor at the University of Chicago.

4. The University of   Chicago released a statement in March, 2008 saying Sen. Barack Obama   (D-Ill.) “served as a professor” in the law school, but that is a title   Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never held, a spokesman for   the school confirmed in 2008.

5.   “He did not hold the title of professor of law,” said Marsha  Ferziger  Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in  Law at  the University of Chicago School of Law.

6.      The  former  Constitutional senior lecturer cited the U.S. Constitution  recently  during his State of the Union Address.  Unfortunately, the  quote he  cited was from the Declaration of Independence, not the  Constitution.   In the State of the Union Address,   President Obama said: “We find unity in our incredible diversity,   drawing on the promise enshrined in ourConstitution: the notion that we   are all created equal.”   The promises are not a   notion, our founders named them unalienable rights.  The document is  our  Declaration of Independence and it reads:  We hold these truths to  be  self-evident, that all men are created equal,that they are endowed  by  their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are   Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
 
And this is  the  same guy who claims to be a constitutional attorney?   And who lectures the Supreme Court?   He did it moments later in the same speech.

[GQBlues]

I guess I must be like Rip VanWinkle and slept through his administration.  I totally missed him abolishing welfare, giveaways and ending big government.   I sure never knew we didn't have any big government during his administration.    Although I think the good things that happened then were more a product of a robust economy based on the growth of computers and the changes that microprocessors enabled that increased product demand, I do think he did a pretty good job and I would be honored to smoke his used cigars whereever they had been.  If I had to list good Presidents over the last half century Reagan would be at the top of my list followed by Clinton.

Wake up TG! It's 2012!   
 
Technically, you're right, but blame that on Bill, "...I promised to “end welfare as we know it,” . Abolish seem a bit of a stretch as reform is likely the better term. Such are DC politico lingo.
 
Abolished as we know it.
 
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/22/opinion/22clinton.html?_r=1
 
>>....The results: child poverty dropped to 16.2 percent in 2000, the lowest rate since 1979, and in 2000, the percentage of Americans on welfare reached its lowest level in four decades. Overall, 100 times as many people moved out of poverty and into the middle class during our eight years as in the previous 12. Of course the booming economy helped, but the empowerment policies made a big difference.
 
Regarding the politics of welfare reform, there is a great lesson to be learned, particularly in today’s hyper-partisan environment, where the Republican leadership forces bills through Congress without even a hint of bipartisanship. Simply put, welfare reform worked because we all worked together. The 1996 Welfare Act shows us how much we can achieve when both parties bring their best ideas to the negotiating table and focus on doing what is best for the country.
 
The recent welfare reform amendments, largely Republican-only initiatives, cut back on states’ ability to devise their own programs. They also disallowed hours spent pursuing an education from counting against required weekly work hours. I doubt they will have the positive impact of the original legislation....<<<
 
 

Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, 1996

    Even the title of the Law has such a nice 'ring' to it.  *Personal Responsibility*. Such an alien term to millions of Americans and the (SLSA) Social Leeching Society of America.

[Turboguy]

Granted there were some good things going on in America and in the economy at that time.  My point was more that I personally think it was not so much because of the actions Clinton took as it was that he didn't do much to destroy the country.    We had a robust econony more because of computers and microprocessors than because of government actions.    Prosperity can be affected by many things.   For example the economy in Russia has been pretty decent but much of that is because of oil and if there was no oil in Russia the economy there would be in the toilet or close to it.

[BC]

I now understand why Obama ignores the heart of the problem and instead focuses on a 0.05% solution.  There are many voters such as represented here who do not make a critical examination and instead drink the Kool-Aid. 

Par for the course Gator.. works for either side.
 

Yes, that Obama knows how to lead a nation.  Divert attention away from his record and instead blame Bush and the wealthy.   Meanwhile keep pushing us towards a social welfare state.
 

Much of politics is about principles, the common man that is part of a majority can understand such.  When folks thrown into prisoners have better healthcare than the common citizen, something is wrong.  It's a principle..

Does anyone disagree that in many respects we are on the same path as the failed social welfare state of Greece, just 10 or so years behind?  Every Greek is adversely affected by the country's default.  Guess what group is most adversely affected in Greece.  Young people such as you Darth.  Do not believe me?  Look at Spain who is next in line behind Greece.  Unemployment in Spain is 24%, and among young workers who still live with their parents, it is over 40%.  Imagine if 4 out of 10 of your friends had no job.

Apples and oranges.  The fiscal aspects of Greece entering in the EU monetary system were well known but ignored at the time.  Both Greece and Spain and even Italy have huge 'black market' economies that allow them to thrive even though official figures cannot incorporate it on their official balance sheets.  Welcome to the Med.  Sure, throw Greece, Spain and Italy out of the EUR... it will do them nothing but good.. that's the real challenge.  Need food for thought? Just compare un employment in Spain with their debt......
 

The difference between Greece and the USA is that we are so large we can monetize the debt and thereby bring down the whole world a few notches while we slip many notches.   Or we could address the source of our debt problem, namely spending and jobs.  Doing the latter will require leadership, a proven turnaround guy.

No, the difference between Greece and et al is that true consumer debt is limited.  Compare the average household credit card debt and you'll get an idea of what is really going on.

The US IMHO has only begun to address the debt problem at a very high level.  There are a few years of turbulence going forward, but household debt will be the deciding factor in the end.  In this respect, problems in EU may end up being a winning factor in the end.  Whether or not the US will end up winning in the end will be directly correlated with banks being able to write off bad debt.  We're talking a  huge amount that is almost equal to government debt.

[Darth_Budda]

Warren Buffett's secretary makes about $400K per year.  That makes her part of the 1% that you rail against.  And with a $400K income, she pays a higher percentage in taxes than you do.  Where's the fairness there?
 
Should we lower her tax rate?  Or raise yours?

balance the budget,, raise both of ours at a progressive rate...
slash the military budget until we get the finances in order.

we could just have a nice fair flat tax but,, as the American saying goes
"you can't get blood from a stone"

the people on the bottom need a higher percentage of their income to survive...
i bet the poor pay a far larger share of their income in taxes?
we are forgetting about a lot of other taxes..
like taxes on gas or sales tax...

in new york we pay taxes on gas that are suppose go for fixing the roads but the ny government spent the money... now we are in trouble.
lets look at who is in government? how many come from the working class??

I now understand why Obama ignores the heart of the problem and instead focuses on a 0.05% solution.  There are many voters such as represented here who do not make a critical examination and instead drink the Kool-Aid. 
 
Yes, that Obama knows how to lead a nation.  Divert attention away from his record and instead blame Bush and the wealthy.   Meanwhile keep pushing us towards a social welfare state.
 
Does anyone disagree that in many respects we are on the same path as the failed social welfare state of Greece, just 10 or so years behind?  Every Greek is adversely affected by the country's default.  Guess what group is most adversely affected in Greece.  Young people such as you Darth.  Do not believe me?  Look at Spain who is next in line behind Greece.  Unemployment in Spain is 24%, and among young workers who still live with their parents, it is over 40%.  Imagine if 4 out of 10 of your friends had no job.
 
The difference between Greece and the USA is that we are so large we can monetize the debt and thereby bring down the whole world a few notches while we slip many notches.   Or we could address the source of our debt problem, namely spending and jobs.  Doing the latter will require leadership, a proven turnaround guy.

main difference is we print paper money that is backed by nothing... if another country such as china became the world reserve currency we would be in a lot of trouble...

i think more small business's would be good for the country than a few large ones..

Sounds more like basic Communisim to me or at least Socialism.   My suggestion is that you move to Cuba where the ideas of Marx et all are still followed that everyone can share in their poverty equally.  If you get into what Basic Capitalism really is then it rewards those who work hard, create, produce and add value to their lives and their country not those who sit home watching the boob tube and keep checking their mailnbox every 30 minutes to see if their welfare check has arrived.
If we are to give tax breaks for the rich it should be only for creating American jobs in this country,,, That's it!!!
I am at a bit of a loss as to why you quote this and then complain in other posts because the tax breaks that are designed to create jobs lower the taxes for those who have the lower tax rates because of the tax breaks that create jobs.   I do personally believe that the capital gains tax should be at the lower rate for the first $ 100,000 of capital gains and then should increase progressivly to the standard tax rate.  This would go a long way to protecting the slob who worked all his life and added to his 401K and wants to live a decent life in retirement and tax guys like Buffet who have more money than they know what to do with at a more realistic rate.

i agree,, i never said we should all be paid the same... some people do work harder than others...

companies do not add jobs because of tax breaks.... they hire because they have a jobs that needs to be done...

[ML]

companies do not add jobs because of tax breaks.... they hire because they have a jobs that needs to be done...

They always have potential  jobs to be done.  Taxes can change the projected profit analysis to either make  the project a go or nix the project.

Right now, I am selling parcels of land because of the temporarily lower capital gains rate.  I wouldn't be selling otherwise.

Government lowers the tax rate; I sell; construction starts; unemployed construction workers start to work; materials are bought; unemployed lumber mill workers start to work, etc., etc.

Even with my temporarily lowered tax bill, I am still paying much more than my fair share;  given that close to half the people pay zero income tax.  And yet these same people get to vote for a congress that can give them more handouts financed by actual taxpayers.

Not talking about taking benefits away  from the elderly and those who really cannot support themselves due to some type of real disability.  No one begrudges helping these folks.

[Darth_Budda]

They always have potential  jobs to be done.  Taxes can change the projected profit analysis to either make  the project a go or nix the project.

Right now, I am selling properties because of the temporarily lower capital gains rate.  I wouldn't be selling otherwise.

Government lowers the tax rate; I sell; construction starts; unemployed construction workers start to work; materials are bought; unemployed lumber mill workers start to work, etc., etc.

Are these homes for speculative resale or homes for families who need homes now?

If you were building to make a buck I can see how taxes might influence you to build, but if you need a home you need a home. A lot of markets must be flooded Not sure low taxes will help those areas out...

The Amish have been moving into my area last few years. They have bought up most of the homes.. So now if you want some were to live you got to hire us,,

We do a lot of business on a few private lakes... prices their are going up all the time. 500K to 1mil+,,, We get a lot of city folk now, most are real nice to work for.. Any one looking for a lake house? 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=6D76Yl2NP5E

Look no Skyscrapers!! lol

[Eduard]

So now we have it - Obama versus Romney. Let us pray, but don't forget to vote!!! My wife is not a political person and her attitude is that her vote won't mean anything. But I'm gonna make sure that she participates in the political process in November if I have to drag it to the voting booth!
Remember, if Obama wins we can kiss America as it once was, good bye, if not forever, then at least for the next 30 or 40 years.

[Turboguy]

Even the title of the Law has such a nice 'ring' to it.  *Personal Responsibility*. Such an alien term to millions of Americans and the (SLSA) Social Leeching Society of America.

Did you ever notice that the worse the law, the better "Ring" the name of it has.  The one you mentioned, "No child left behind,  VAWA, etc.   Probably the reverse it true as well.  If they ever come up with a law "Destroy America and its way of life" that will probably be the law that corrects all that is wrong with the country.

[Darth_Budda]

So now we have it - Obama versus Romney. Let us pray, but don't forget to vote!!! My wife is not a political person and her attitude is that her vote won't mean anything. But I'm gonna make sure that she participates in the political process in November if I have to drag it to the voting booth!
Remember, if Obama wins we can kiss America as it once was, good bye, if not forever, then at least for the next 30 or 40 years.

What happens if you drag her to the polls and she votes for Obama? 

Just picking on ya...

[Eduard]

What happens if you drag her to the polls and she votes for Obama? 

Just picking on ya...

she is smart and she grew up in the FSU so socialism is not an option for her ;-) just saying

[Darth_Budda]

she is smart and she grew up in the FSU so socialism is not an aoption for her ;-) just saying

But Obama is a wall street/ insurance corporatist!

Their is no way he is a socialist or communist...

If he was a Socialist he would be in my party, not the democrats. At least until we kicked him out for collision with big corporations and the insurance industry.

[happyandstable]

To be totally correct here the FSU was never a socialist state. It was a communist state. There is a big difference between the two. 

[Darth_Budda]

To be totally correct here the FSU was never a socialist state. It was a communist state. There is a big difference between the two. 

It was a Authoritarian Communist State, That employed State Capitalism... 

[happyandstable]

It was a Authoritarian Communist State, That employed State Capitalism... 

    Sure you did not mean to do this

[Darth_Budda]

    Sure you did not mean to do this

No that's the the USA if we don't fix things or if the radical right wing types ever get in power..

 

[BC]

Did you ever notice that the worse the law, the better "Ring" the name of it has.  The one you mentioned, "No child left behind,  VAWA, etc.   Probably the reverse it true as well.  If they ever come up with a law "Destroy America and its way of life" that will probably be the law that corrects all that is wrong with the country.

TG,

you are a prophet.  One day it will come down to exactly that.

Unlike many other countries the US has not been required to rebuild in the last few hundred years.  The results of stagnation and consolidation of power and wealth is showing.

Only a matter of time when discontent in any political system reaches a critical mass.

There are advantages to being able to start from scratch rather than keep building on the old heap.

[Darth_Budda]

TG,

you are a prophet.  One day it will come down to exactly that.

Unlike many other countries the US has not been required to rebuild in the last few hundred years.  The results of stagnation and consolidation of power and wealth is showing.

Only a matter of time when discontent in any political system reaches a critical mass.

There are advantages to being able to start from scratch rather than keep building on the old heap.

We can only hope this does not come in a form of increased Fascism/corporatism..

The idea that we are still a true democracy is absurd. Your voice can only be heard if you have the money to back it. This shows by the fact that See below... It does not surprise me in the least that these are the people who pay the least taxes. Taxes that go to support their wars of corporate interest. But it's the lower class who fights and dies in these wars of American imperialism. If the sons and daughters of the wealthy had to fight I am sure they would think twice before starting another war. But as it is they want the poor and whats left of the middle class to do the fighting and pay for the debt they have accumulated since WWII. Not only that but they want tax breaks to send more jobs overseas. Complete craziness!!!!

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/03/93358/congress-where-44-percent-are.html

One point Ron Paul has that I agree 100% with is the fact that if we want to end terrorism, we need to stop supporting our own terrorism. No more south American or African backed coupes and end our support of the Zionist state if Israel. Let me be clear, we should support the Jewish people in Israel. Zionism is wrong just like Naziism is wrong in fact they are based on the same ideology. Hitler after all was the biggest supporter of Zionism before WWII. The Zionist in the middle east even offered Hitler a Alliance during WWII. I never understood why they treated the Palestinians the way they do until i read about the truth. 

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v13/v13n4p29_Weber.html
 

 

[Kokopelli]

1) I am really against Large corporations... I think we would be better of with more small business, I also think they would produce more jobs than corporations can... Sure one small business's does not add 1,000 jobs but 100 small business will...

2) TR would consider most of the large corporations trusts these days. No business should be to large to fail, except the government...

3) People who make all their money from stocks need to pay more.. I really dislike that the stock market is a for of legalized gambling. Gambling could be considered a Social evil...

EDIT:
Corporate tax rate is different than personal income tax..
Remember after citizen united corporations are people!!
they get their own taxes.. My family business is a corporation which my dad owns 100% of the stock.
The yearly board meetings that are required by law are very short!! lol

What would Obamacare do to small businesses?
Any particular Large corporation you dislike?
The last I saw regarding the percentage of those employed by small business was just over 50%. I believe it was closer to 80% in the 1980s.
What has killed small businesses?

Would TR really feel that way? You may want to look at that conflict more closely.
How much power does Bill Gates have? He is the richest of the rich as was J.P. Morgan at that time.
I'm also pretty sure TR wouldn't have Buffett (2nd) and Soros (7th I think) over for tea and crumpets.

So, you dislike the stock market, OK.
They need to pay more? More than just above 50% because in the worse case scenario that is what they pay.

How is personal tax different than corporate?
The money still goes to same place. 

[GQBlues]

I'm elated to know even nations of the Americas aren't duped by all this 'Hope and Change' BS either...