Thinking about voting for Obama?

my county has about 5.___% unemployment, yet 28% in poverty. thats a lot of working poor. im sure not all of them will not fit into some tidy little package of lazy bastard.


btw, your definition of socialism is waaaaaaaaaaaay out there. sounds more like absolute communism.

i dont believe in drastic income redistribution. a basal quality of life should be guaranteed, and the utmost effort should be invested into providing adequate opportunities for socio-economic advancement for all. i dont think we're there. there are countless destitute pockets (if not chuncks) of our society that require exceptional character to escape.

many are not paying their fair share to make our society great. didnt warren buffet say that his secretary pays higher % taxes than he does?

 

The top 1% income earners paid 40% of all income taxes. The most in 40 years! How much more progressive do you want the tax system to be?

View attachment 11203

"Taxes paid by millionaire households more than doubled to $274 billion in 2006 from $136 billion in 2003. No President has ever plied more money from the rich than George W. Bush did with his 2003 tax cuts"

"If Mr. Obama does succeed in raising tax rates on the rich, we'd also wager that the rich share of tax payments would fall. The last time tax rates were as high as the Senator wants them -- the Carter years -- the rich paid only 19% of all income taxes, half of the 40% share they pay today. Why? Because they either worked less, earned less, or they found ways to shelter income from taxes so it was never reported to the IRS as income."



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121659695380368965.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

 

I just look at the "I approve, I disapprove" polls that you gave us -- http://www.pollingreport.com/CongJob1.htm

All I see from that is that the Congress is never popular to the American public, regardless of what party is in control.

Look at the "I approve, I disapprove" polls for the Republicans in Congress -- http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_rep.htm

The polls from the last ten years show that the Republicans in Congress have never been popular, and over the last two years, as well as currently, the reputation of Republicans in Congress is absolutely terrible... just like that of Bush as President.

In other words, its not just Bush that the American public currently feels is a humiliation, but also the Republicans in Congress.

Granted, it might be similar for Democrats in Congress over the last ten years, but like I said, all it shows it that the American public doesn't trust Congress -- whether it is Dem or Republican.

Now if you could show me something that the American public is actually somewhat cool with the Republicans in Congress, you might have a point... but you do realize the American public body-slammed the Republican party in the last major Congressional elections, ending their long-time reign as the rulers of Congress? It was pretty huge news (honestly, I was shocked that it happened, even though I was 100% for it).

Finally, the "I approve, disapprove" ratings for the Republicans currently in Congress are just as bad as those currently of President Bush -- http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob1.htm

The difference between Bush and the Republicans in Congress is that the American public actually liked Bush at one point. Bush was wildly popular after the big-corporation American media convinced us to rally around him after 9/11 (which was why he was able to get the USA to wage this insane war which was 100% hyped by the "liberal media," and agreed to by the American Democrats -- all of which are traitors IMO).

Also note that Bush was never popular in the polls before 9/11. In that sense, Al Quada MADE George W. Bush. In other words, George Bush owes his brief period of popularity to Al Quada... so it's not surprising that he has made so many moves in their favor. You do know who Richard Clarke is, right? The guy was the guy Bush had as his top anti-terrorism advisor, and Clarke was furious with the lack of effort Bush gave to the war against Bin Ladin. Like Clarke said "I think he's done a terrible job on the war against terrorism." (link).

How any Bush-supporter can claim that the Dem candidate for President, Barack "I'm a terrorist" Obama, is bad for America is ridiculous after how disrespectful of a job did Bush did for America's prosperity and well-being.

I was just saying that the polls showed the people had a little more faith in Congress during the Clinton years than they did during the Bush years... but the overall point is that Congress wasn't very popular during either the Bush or Clinton years. Not exactly something for a Republican to brag about being the Republicans controlled Congress for so long.

 

I'm sorry. I thought that we were supposed to have an equal opportunity to be happy, not be guaranteed it. I think the constitution says something about the pursuit of happiness. As to societies failing to make everyone feel fulfilled, why do people from all over the world send their children here to be educated in our universities, and why do doctors(just one example), from all over the world come here to work and make piles of cash, all the while bashing our country for being rotten??

Because this country is the greatest at offering opportunity for success, despite your background. No country in civilization has offered more chances to succeed for people that were born with nothing. Everyone else in the world knows it, covets it, and resents us for having it.

I am not going to feel guilty because I was born in America, and had the good sense to use this to my advantage and provide for my family. I just don't buy into that.

Why don't you apply your logic to the CFB world. Should the SEC feel guilt because it is considered the best conference? What about all those poor little schools that can't recruit as well as LSU because they don't have the budget? Should LSU go ahead and pay for scholarships to other schools, so those fans feel better about themselves and their teams are more on a par with us?? It sure would make the guys at Middle Tennessee feel better if we paid for Shepard, Loston, McFarland, and Davenport and then sent them to their school to play. Their fans sure would appreciate it, and obviously we should do this because we have more success and should be morally obligated to feel guilt about it.

Rubbish.

 

Beautiful, man. Just beautiful.

 

faulty stats. your stats are comparing apples to oranges. income to taxes. not income to income taxes. and even so, your first sentence means nothing to me because perhaps the rich's fair share would equate to the top 1% of income earners paying 40% of the taxes. that statement does not mean taxation is progressive.------as a general rule the super-rich make a small % of their $$$ through income. if anything your statement just exposes the enormous divide between the top 1% and everyone else.

do you believe that someone making $60k/yr should pay a higher % than someone making $100mil/yr?

 

glad to see you have your own peanut gallery, but i never wrote that happiness should be guaranteed

because our country is both. great and rotten, that is. this country should always strive to become greater and less rotten.

first of all, i dont think thats true. do you think that this is the only country that takes immigrants?

second of all, YIPPEEEE!. hanging your hat on some old fourth grade platitude. that means little about the reality of this society. like i just recently posted, so our society is great if you are some exceptional person living in $hit. but if you are an average person living in $hit, well, your stuck.

i have no idea what this has to do with anything. who said anything about feeling guilty about being american. you had nothing to do with it, i imagine. you should be neither guilty nor proud. be proud of your children or your career, not because you are an american or a lsu fan.

 

Significantly more resources have been used on Iraq than have been used on Afghanistan. Al Qaeda in Afghanistan was able to recuperate once we changed our focus to Iraq. Is it really your argument that we've not sacrificed the effectiveness of our campaign against those responsible for 9/11 by embarking on a complete retooling of Iraq?

This isn't the point I'm trying to make. The point I'm trying to make is that the cost of living has gone up while the average working class family's income hasn't changed. While with various breaks and the differences in taxing work earnings and investment earnings many of the richest folks pay a smaller percentage of their total income than regular working class people. The richest people have benefited from being US citizens, so their responsibility to the country that has played a large role in their success should not be ignored.

I've been thinking about the cost of embracing completely a free market economy; a pure free market economy would allow the best and worst of humanity, and do we really want to allow the worst of humanity to exist in the US without trying to combat it? That probably brings society down. I don't feel strongly about this, it's just a line of thought I've had recently.

The bottom 50% live off 12% of the income and spend a larger percentage of their income on everyday expenses, all while everyday expenses and health care is going up and benefits are going down. Shouldn't this be addressed? We are spending too much money overseas and not enough of the tax dollars are going into the US economy, which digs more immediately into the wallets of the bottom 50%.

A divisive blanket statement; just what our country needs. It isn't wrong to strive to be good. It sounds like you harbor a lot of vitriol for your fellow countrymen.

I have that same thought quite often, but when you look at private money versus public money it is probably hard to complain too much. Though I think McCain vs Obama is better than Bush vs Gore and Bush vs Kerry.

How many of those immigrants are illegal and work a wage that is low relative to the US cost of living. Even many legal immigrants work a wage that is close to the cost of living. We probably are too spoiled as a nation, but many of us are having to tighten our belts and I'd bet many of us tightening our belts aren't deserving of your scorn. I think a lot of this has to do with spending butt loads of money overseas propping up foreign nations tangential to our national defense.

Are you willing to allow segments of our society to fester? Doesn't that bring the quality of life down for all of us?

That is slowing down.

Some immigrants may bash the US, some may criticize, but many are genuinely appreciative. We shouldn't expect them to bow down and kiss our patooties, anyway, I think. This is a nation built on free thought.

No, but we should have a playoff at the end of the season that gives teams with systemic obstacles a chance to play for the national championship if they meet certain criteria, thus giving more conferences and teams a chance to work for a piece of the pie. The two-team playoff we have for the national championship is seriously flawed, as is our federal system of government. Still, 1a college football is the best game in town. :grin: