Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 48 of 48

Thread: Latest Gallup Poll tough news for Obama...

  1. -41
    rob19's Avatar
    Soul Rebel

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2006
    Posts:
    6,834
    vCash:
    3241
    Loc:
    Georgia
    Thanks / No Thanks
    1972 Dolphins Logo
    Quote Originally Posted by Buddy View Post
    What you don't understand, my friend, is that although the focus was on "the 1%", anyone who makes enough to pay taxes will come to regret this election. In time, most all Americans will regret this unfortunate decision except those who are completely dependent and only interested in "getting theirs." About 3-4% of households here in the US make $250K+/year and about 47% don't pay any taxes so that leaves roughly 1/2 of the household supposedly not affected by any of this. How long do you think it will be before $100K is the new $250K? Is Washington all of a sudden going to wake up and be fiscally responsible? We just reelected a president, senate, and house that haven't passed a budget in four years and wonder why our country is broke. The answer is to just tax more money in and redistribute it? Do you think the leches will be satisfied in the next election with just pillaging the system? Heck no, their vote will be far more expensive the next time around and taxes will be on the rise again. People have grown accustomed to government handouts and nothing short of cataclysmic collapse will wean them, I fear.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
    "But since I write about tax and budget issues, let me make a few serious points about the 46.4% of American households who paid no federal income taxes for 2011. First of all, according to the Tax Policy Center, more than 60% of those non-income tax paying households did pay federal payroll taxes—meaning Social Security and Medicare taxes. (Considering all Americans households, including those that owed income tax, 62% paid more in payroll taxes than in federal income taxes.)

    What of the 18.1% of U.S. households that paid neither income nor payroll taxes? More than half of them were headed by a senior–in other words, by someone who paid payroll taxes and likely some income taxes too, in the past. (No, the amount the elderly have paid in does not cover the cost of the Medicare benefits they are now getting. And that is true despite the fact that in a Romney TV ad attacking Obamacare’s cuts to the growth in Medicare spending"

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/janetnov...pay-taxes-too/
    Quote Quote  

  2. -42
    trojanma's Avatar
    FinHeaven VIP

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Sep 2010
    Posts:
    1,586
    vCash:
    3571
    Loc:
    Magic City
    Thanks / No Thanks
    2013 Dolphins LogoTannehill 17Dolphins Homer
    Are honestly trotting out the 47% dont pay taxes drivel. Which has been debunked.

    The percentage of working age people who don't pay ANY taxes is 6.9% not 47%
    Quote Quote  

  3. -43
    irish fin fan's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2010
    Posts:
    1,158
    vCash:
    1133
    Thanks / No Thanks

    Latest Gallup Poll tough news for Obama...

    Quote Originally Posted by Buddy View Post
    What you don't understand, my friend, is that although the focus was on "the 1%", anyone who makes enough to pay taxes will come to regret this election. In time, most all Americans will regret this unfortunate decision except those who are completely dependent and only interested in "getting theirs." About 3-4% of households here in the US make $250K+/year and about 47% don't pay any taxes so that leaves roughly 1/2 of the household supposedly not affected by any of this. How long do you think it will be before $100K is the new $250K? Is Washington all of a sudden going to wake up and be fiscally responsible? We just reelected a president, senate, and house that haven't passed a budget in four years and wonder why our country is broke. The answer is to just tax more money in and redistribute it? Do you think the leches will be satisfied in the next election with just pillaging the system? Heck no, their vote will be far more expensive the next time around and taxes will be on the rise again. People have grown accustomed to government handouts and nothing short of cataclysmic collapse will wean them, I fear.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
    I'm here listening to Fox News and all I'm hearing is how the "getting theirs" now wins the elections due to their numbers. Whatever, call it blowback from Bush destroying the economy.

    The Republicans in their current form will not win an election. They need to throw out the extreme right, become more moderate and cross the isle for the good of the country to solve the fiscal issues affecting this country. The tax rates in the country are the lowest since the 1950's and to hear people moan about taxes going up is laughable. Would I enjoy paying mores taxes? Hell no. Would I pay more for getting the country fiscally balanced, a proper educational system, investment in infrastructure and r&d, grudgingly yes.

    Obama ran for his second term in the worst economy for generations and the republicans still couldn't beat him. Republicans, give us a choice because right now you do not offer a choice but a look into a family asylum full of crazies only the crazies would vote for.
    Quote Quote  

  4. -44
    TheWalrus's Avatar
    1/7/14

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Dec 2011
    Posts:
    6,745
    vCash:
    18799
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Buddy View Post
    What you don't understand, my friend, is that although the focus was on "the 1%", anyone who makes enough to pay taxes will come to regret this election. In time, most all Americans will regret this unfortunate decision except those who are completely dependent and only interested in "getting theirs." About 3-4% of households here in the US make $250K+/year and about 47% don't pay any taxes so that leaves roughly 1/2 of the household supposedly not affected by any of this. How long do you think it will be before $100K is the new $250K? Is Washington all of a sudden going to wake up and be fiscally responsible? We just reelected a president, senate, and house that haven't passed a budget in four years and wonder why our country is broke. The answer is to just tax more money in and redistribute it? Do you think the leches will be satisfied in the next election with just pillaging the system? Heck no, their vote will be far more expensive the next time around and taxes will be on the rise again. People have grown accustomed to government handouts and nothing short of cataclysmic collapse will wean them, I fear.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
    "I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization."

    -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
    Quote Quote  

  5. -45
    JamesBW43's Avatar
    You're standing on my neck

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Nov 2005
    Posts:
    3,334
    vCash:
    2865
    Loc:
    Gainesville, Florida
    Thanks / No Thanks
    You would think even the most delusional person could recognize reality when basic mathematics is involved. Governor Romney had such a small margin of error in this election. There was no way around it. The math was simple. Anyone who honestly thought Romney was a sure thing, or even a favorite, needs to look in the mirror and wonder just how far gone are you. And if you can't even see simple numbers clearly, how can you think you see something as complex as public policy clearly?
    Not every human is a manipulative, opportunistic, letch... or at least that's what I'm told.
    Quote Quote  

  6. -46
    CRAZYDOLFAN305's Avatar
    We Are Still Going To The SB

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2002
    Posts:
    4,782
    vCash:
    1270
    Loc:
    MIAMI, FL
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Buddy View Post
    What you don't understand, my friend, is that although the focus was on "the 1%", anyone who makes enough to pay taxes will come to regret this election. In time, most all Americans will regret this unfortunate decision except those who are completely dependent and only interested in "getting theirs." About 3-4% of households here in the US make $250K+/year and about 47% don't pay any taxes so that leaves roughly 1/2 of the household supposedly not affected by any of this. How long do you think it will be before $100K is the new $250K? Is Washington all of a sudden going to wake up and be fiscally responsible? We just reelected a president, senate, and house that haven't passed a budget in four years and wonder why our country is broke. The answer is to just tax more money in and redistribute it? Do you think the leches will be satisfied in the next election with just pillaging the system? Heck no, their vote will be far more expensive the next time around and taxes will be on the rise again. People have grown accustomed to government handouts and nothing short of cataclysmic collapse will wean them, I fear.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
    C'mon Buddy now that the election is over you're still going to continue to spew their talking points, which has been proven to be factually wrong. And you seem so mad about who is grown accustomed to government hand outs. This is False, And I don't want to get in a back and forth with you. You seem intelligent enough. I already showed you were all your tax dollars are allocated. You're not paying for anyone's hand out.



    Breakdown3-06-17-11.gif
    Quote Quote  

  7. -47
    irish fin fan's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2010
    Posts:
    1,158
    vCash:
    1133
    Thanks / No Thanks

    Latest Gallup Poll tough news for Obama...

    Quote Originally Posted by Statler Waldorf View Post
    How is my logic flawed? Please demonstrate your assertion to be true.
    Because you lost the election or are you going to apply your powers of "logic" arguing that is not the case?
    Quote Quote  

  8. -48
    CRAZYDOLFAN305's Avatar
    We Are Still Going To The SB

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2002
    Posts:
    4,782
    vCash:
    1270
    Loc:
    MIAMI, FL
    Thanks / No Thanks

    Socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor!

    Quote Originally Posted by rob19 View Post
    "But since I write about tax and budget issues, let me make a few serious points about the 46.4% of American households who paid no federal income taxes for 2011. First of all, according to the Tax Policy Center, more than 60% of those non-income tax paying households did pay federal payroll taxes—meaning Social Security and Medicare taxes. (Considering all Americans households, including those that owed income tax, 62% paid more in payroll taxes than in federal income taxes.)

    What of the 18.1% of U.S. households that paid neither income nor payroll taxes? More than half of them were headed by a senior–in other words, by someone who paid payroll taxes and likely some income taxes too, in the past. (No, the amount the elderly have paid in does not cover the cost of the Medicare benefits they are now getting. And that is true despite the fact that in a Romney TV ad attacking Obamacare’s cuts to the growth in Medicare spending"

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/janetnov...pay-taxes-too/
    And this is one of the primary reasons why they really thought they would win, even after the facts, they will still continue to spew the talking points..SMDH..

    What they don't understand or ever will is Socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor is a classical political-economic argument, stating that in the advanced capitalist societies state policies assure that more resources flow to the rich than to the poor, for example in form of transfer payments. The term corporate welfare is widely used to describe the bestowal of favorable treatment to particular corporations by the government. One of the most commonly raised forms of criticism are statements that the capitalist political economy toward large corporations allows them to "privatize profits and socialize losses.The argument has been raised and cited on many occasions.

    The phrase may have been first popularized by Michael Harrington's 1962 book The Other America in which Harrington cited Charles Abrams, well-known authority on housing.
    Andrew Young has been cited for calling the United States system “socialism for the rich and free enterprise for the poor”, and Martin Luther King, Jr. frequently used this wording in his speeches. Since at least 1969, Gore Vidal used the expression “free enterprise for the poor and socialism for the rich” to describe the U.S. economic policies. Vidal used it as well since the 1980s for expressing his critique of Reagonomics.

    In winter 2006/2007, in response to criticism about oil imports from Venezuela, that country being under the leadership of Hugo Chávez, the founder and president of Citizens Energy Corporation Joseph P. Kennedy II countered with a critique of the U.S. system which he characterized as “a kind of socialism for the rich and free enterprise for the poor that leaves the most vulnerable out in the cold”. Also Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has become known for expressing to large audiences that the United States is now a land of “socialism for the rich and brutal capitalism for the poor”.

    Economist Dean Baker expressed similar views in his book The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer, in which he pointed out several different policy areas in which government intervention is essential to preserving and enhancing wealth in the hands of a few.

    Linguist Noam Chomsky has criticized the way in which free market principles have been applied. He has argued that the wealthy use free-market rhetoric to justify imposing greater economic risk upon the lower classes, while being insulated from the rigours of the market by the political and economic advantages that such wealth affords. He remarked, "the free market is socialism for the rich—[free] markets for the poor and state protection for the rich."

    Arguments along a similar line were raised in connection with the financial turmoil in 2008. With regard to the federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Ron Blackwell, chief economist of AFL-CIO, used the expression “Socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor” to characterize the system. In September 2008, the US Senator from Vermont, Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders said regarding the bailout of the U.S. financial system: “This is the most extreme example that I can recall of socialism for the rich and free enterprise for the poor”. The same month, economist Nouriel Roubini stated: “It is pathetic that Congress did not consult any of the many professional economists that have presented […] alternative plans that were more fair and efficient and less costly ways to resolve this crisis. This is again a case of privatizing the gains and socializing the losses; a bailout and socialism for the rich, the well-connected and Wall Street”.

    Former U.S. Secretary of Labor Robert Reich adapted this phrase on The Daily Show on October 16, 2008: "We have socialism for the rich, and capitalism for everyone else."
    Journalist John Pilger included the phrase in his speech accepting Australia's human rights award, the Sydney Peace Prize, on 5th November 2009: "Democracy has become a business plan, with a bottom line for every human activity, every dream, every decency, every hope. The main parliamentary parties are now devoted to the same economic policies - socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor - and the same foreign policy of servility to endless war. This is not democracy. It is to politics what McDonalds is to food."

    U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders referenced the phrase during his eight-and-a-half-hour speech on the senate floor on December 10, 2010 against the continuation of Bush-era tax cuts, when speaking on the federal bailout of major financial institutions at a time when small-businesses were being denied loans.

    http://bit.ly/16QxUY

    They don't see things like this, they are just so focus on hating the so call free-loaders! When the real free-loaders are big business!
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. Obama, Palin get bad news in Florida poll
    By BAMAPHIN 22 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-13-2011, 12:40 AM
  2. Fox News Poll: Clinton 41% Obama 20% Gore 16%
    By Blitz in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 04-21-2007, 09:18 PM
  3. Gallup Poll fraud?
    By ILikeMcMike in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-30-2004, 05:03 AM
  4. GALLUP POLL: New low at trust in media
    By Bling in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-23-2004, 05:37 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •