By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Obama, a liar and a bully, all in one press conference.

Kasz216 on 05 May 2009
txrattlesnake said:
Kasz216 said:
txrattlesnake said:
Kasz216 said:
txrattlesnake said:
I really don't think the Libertarian party has the interest of most Americans at heart, and from what I've seen most people attending tea parties are wasps.

I think this past election most people in America were so fed up with the rich get richer and the poor get poorer policy of the previous eight years that if only third parties were in the election, then the communist or a true socialist party would still have won.

Once again.  Not what happened.  Bush... best president at maintaining the Gini Coefficent since WW2.

Clinton, Bush Senior, Reagan, Kennedy etc... all had bigger "Rich get rich" policys.  It'd be nice if you stopped lieing.

Bush is one of my least favorite presidents.  But outright lieing to help your political point is unconsionable.

 

       I'm not lieing.  Obama himself said he plans to redistribute a percentage of the wealth of those making over $250,000.00 to benefit those making under $250,000.00 a year.  And, I'm all for that plan.

Bush didn't have a "rich get richer" policy.  Under him the gini policy didn't really move.  His policy created a "The rich and poor stay where they are."

He was better then Clionton and others who also had plans such as Obamas.  The trick is.. they never work out that way.

Taxes have done nothing but gotten more progressive since WW2 yet the gini coeefficent rises.  Do you know why?

     Exactly and such a policy really enabled the majority of poor people to have the opportunity to rise up and become wealthy didn't it?

The majority of the poor will never have an oppurtunity to rise up and become weathly... in any administration in any government.  Because you can't have a country of nothing but rich people.

Well you can... the US is one such country... but people will always judge their wealth within their country.

Everyone has the possibility of becoming rich... any person  can become rich... who doesn't have some sort of mental illness.  Is it easier for some then others?  Sure.  But anyone does have that chance.

I'd bet the Gini Coefficent rises higher under Obama then it does Bush.

Tax policy really has little to do with it.



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 05 May 2009
ManusJustus said:
Kasz216 said:
txrattlesnake said:
I really don't think the Libertarian party has the interest of most Americans at heart, and from what I've seen most people attending tea parties are wasps.

I think this past election most people in America were so fed up with the rich get richer and the poor get poorer policy of the previous eight years that if only third parties were in the election, then the communist or a true socialist party would still have won.

Once again.  Not what happened.  Bush... best president at maintaining the Gini Coefficent since WW2.

If the GINI coefficient has anything to do with political and economic policy, then its obvious that America is doing something wrong while other developed countries are doing something right.  Also note that those other countries are much more liberal and left-leaning that Obama ever thought of being.

Some of the image was cut off, but Denmark and Japan have the best GINI coeficients.

It doesn't really.  Tax policy has little to do with the Gini Coeefficent.  As can be seen by Bush... who once again... best president for the Gini Coeefficent since WW2.

ALL Gini Coeeficents are rising... across the world.  It's fairly obvious why.  People with money, can take more risks with money... and those risks lead to more rewards. 

For example I couldn't bet 30 grand on an investment that has a 70% chance of paying off... and it pays off 10 to 1.  If I did and i failed...  I'd be bankrupt.

A rich guy however can bet on a few of these.  Raising income tax isn't really going to effect this since said investments aren't counted under income law. 

Make said taxes higher... and less people are going to be willing to invest... and gamble since the benefit to odds ration has shrunk... etc. 

Which is why such things aren't counted in income tax to begin with.  It's also why people like Warren Buffet can "cheat" the tax code and pay less then their income then there secretaries.

Raising income tax on the "rich" just penalizes upper middle class and buisnesses more then it does the investment guys who everyone is subsidizing.  Well that and all the stock funds and IRAs and such that middle america depends on for it's retirement.



CHYUII on 05 May 2009
Kasz216 said:
ManusJustus said:
Kasz216 said:
txrattlesnake said:
I really don't think the Libertarian party has the interest of most Americans at heart, and from what I've seen most people attending tea parties are wasps.

I think this past election most people in America were so fed up with the rich get richer and the poor get poorer policy of the previous eight years that if only third parties were in the election, then the communist or a true socialist party would still have won.

Once again.  Not what happened.  Bush... best president at maintaining the Gini Coefficent since WW2.

If the GINI coefficient has anything to do with political and economic policy, then its obvious that America is doing something wrong while other developed countries are doing something right.  Also note that those other countries are much more liberal and left-leaning that Obama ever thought of being.

Some of the image was cut off, but Denmark and Japan have the best GINI coeficients.

It doesn't really.  Tax policy has little to do with the Gini Coeefficent.  As can be seen by Bush... who once again... best president for the Gini Coeefficent since WW2.

ALL Gini Coeeficents are rising... across the world.  It's fairly obvious why.  People with money, can take more risks with money... and those risks lead to more rewards. 

For example I couldn't bet 30 grand on an investment that has a 70% chance of paying off... and it pays off 10 to 1.  If I did and i failed...  I'd be bankrupt.

A rich guy however can bet on a few of these.  Raising income tax isn't really going to effect this since said investments aren't counted under income law.

 

 

 

LOL You Know things are getting serious when people break out the charts.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9HN4zSriDs

Tomorrow is the day tomorrow dies.

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=69597&page=1

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=69907&page=1

TheRealMafoo on 06 May 2009
CHYUII said:
halogamer1989 said:
CHYUII said:
TheRealMafoo said:

How about a quote from someone we should all respect. The man most responsible for the creation of The United States of America.

There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.
John Adams, 1772

 

Who does he consider to be the public?
Did he have slaves?

Would he trust Lincoln to "endanger the public liberty"?

=-)

Adams was from Braintree, Mass and NE abhored slavery.

 

 

 

Either way-

His words did not ring true for the public but only a fraction of the public. So the problem is who are you in league with?

And I also wonder at the man himself because some people who hated slavery also thought that Af. Am. were still inferior.

No matter what way you see it somebody's liberty get stepped on.

Sometimes a radical thing must happen for the good of the public. Sometimes a radical thing must be stopped for the good of the public.

 

Adams never bought a slave and declined on principle to employ slave labor. Abigail Adams (his wife) opposed slavery and employed free blacks in preference to her father's two domestic slaves. He was the only founding father not to own slaves.

It's not an accident that race is not mentioned in the Constitution. Adams knew the climate of the world he lived in. The best he could do is say all men are created equal, and hope that one day society will recognize all men as men.