DC Tom Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 Assess as in: to impose, not assess as in: to evaluate. This is not going to go well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 Hi. Roughly 2% percent of the US population makes mor than 250k. Obama wants to raise taxes on 2% of the population, and lower taxes on the other 98% (or whatever portion of the 98% actually pays taxes) And that still won't pay for obamacare, so where is the rest of the money going to come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 And that still won't pay for obamacare, so where is the rest of the money going to come from? From the rich of course. Making them pay their "fair share" will fix everything. Apparently. It's the right thing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 I declared futility and went home. Yes, stating facts such as the fact that global warming is real. What? You said what would happen? You predicted the economy would improve? Maybe you predicted Obama would be harder on immigrants and terrorism than any of his predecessors? I don't know what you predicted, but I'm sure it wasn't impressive. Right, you got smoked both on process, AND, content....and that means you won....by conner definiton. No. Actually, you didn't state that fact that often at all. You stated things that were preposterous, on a wide range of topics. That's why nobody uses Steely_Dan as an adjective, adverb, or verb. But, you will routinely hear "conneresque", "connerly", or "connering"...with no ambiguity as to their meaning. Now, is that because Steely Dan wasn't as good as you stating the facts of Global Warming? So..you're asking me to kick you around some more? Ok, but Mods, please take notice: he's asking for it. Let's start with some old standbys: 1. Conner, did The Surge work? 2. Conner, didn't I tell you in 2006-7, that if the House Democrats acted the way you were, and kept saying what you were saying, they were going to be done in no less than 4 years? Do you remember why I said that? 3. Conner, didn't I tell you that Sarah Palin will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine...if you kept up your silly attacks on her, especially if she loses the election? (Confirmation: Katie Couric is long gone out of her "what kind of books do you read?" job...and has been replaced...by guest host: Sarah Palin.) Now, that's "conneresque": unhinged, emotional idiocy leading to the diametric opposite of the intended outcome, with hefty amount of irony on the side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted August 22, 2012 Author Share Posted August 22, 2012 (edited) Maybe to try to avoid you thinking I'm crazy ... lets establish a few facts .. 1. The tax rates of the 50's ... they were much higher than they are today. 2. Obama has only talked of lowering taxes overall. Raise taxes on top earners, lower taxes on everyone else. Given these two facts JFK quotes have very little pertinence to todays situation. Thus I consider his use of the JFK quotes to be intellectually dishonest. Then his little blurb at the end "The problem is SPENDING. Spending never goes down and the Ryan plan doesn't even "cut" spending. It reduces the rate of increase. The Obamacare actually cuts medicare. Ryan plan continues to increase spending on Medicare. Allows for a current (and those age 55 at the time of enactment) recipients to continue untouched while offering choices to us younger folk to either enter into Medicare or go with a new voucher system. So, it's a bald faced lie to claim "guts medicare". The only gutting of medicare occurred with the ObamaTax." That just irritates to no end with crazy lies. Perhaps an established organization like Politifact can take over from here .. http://www.politifac...care-more-700-/ http://www.politifac...history-rob-me/ http://www.politifac...-pay-obamacare/ http://www.politifac...care-cuts-says/ People like Oxrock don't let facts get in their way. 1st bold - I see. Your response does seem less crazy now, although I don't think he was being dishonest. 2nd bold - To be fair, Obama's cutting of Medicare is just shuffling the spending around. It's kind of like my wife telling me she's reduced her spending on the Visa card when all she's done is switch to the Discover card. And a reduction in the increase is preferable to not reducing the increase IMO. BTW, speaking of intellectual dishonesty, Politifact is getting that down to a science. Edited August 22, 2012 by Rob's House Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Rob's House is the least infuriating person on this board. (hah! suffer the wrath of not being hated by me) 2nd bold - To be fair, Obama's cutting of Medicare is just shuffling the spending around. It's kind of like my wife telling me she's reduced her spending on the Visa card when all she's done is switch to the Discover card. And a reduction in the increase is preferable to not reducing the increase IMO. I'm willing to concede Obama's plan is not perfect. It takes some gambles on hoping costs will be lowered by investing more in preventative care at earlier ages. It also makes the assumptions that hospitals will make up for losses by having more patients insured at younger ages. .. I wish you would back off of your analogy though. It's a bit over the top. Obama's plan also has very intelligent and well planned adjustments that work well. The Affordable Care Act established an Independent Payment Advisory Board to almost guarantee costs are kept in control. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute is a great attempt to opimize treatments and costs. Well .. that's my opinion anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted August 22, 2012 Author Share Posted August 22, 2012 Rob's House is the least infuriating person on this board. (hah! suffer the wrath of not being hated by me) Dude, I have it on good authority that I'm the biggest ass hole on this board. I'm willing to concede Obama's plan is not perfect. It takes some gambles on hoping costs will be lowered by investing more in preventative care at earlier ages. It also makes the assumptions that hospitals will make up for losses by having more patients insured at younger ages. .. I wish you would back off of your analogy though. It's a bit over the top. Obama's plan also has very intelligent and well planned adjustments that work well. The Affordable Care Act established an Independent Payment Advisory Board to almost guarantee costs are kept in control. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute is a great attempt to opimize treatments and costs. Well .. that's my opinion anyways. You're never going to win me over with that. I really hope it does work (kind of like I hoped Jasper would be the next Ted Washington) but government bureaucracies & price controls have a really bad track record. I just don't have a lot of faith in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Romney is just like Obama in many ways politically. IF you (with middle class income) wants to pay more in taxes (currentl typical rate of 30%) and allow the wealthy to pay 10 to 15% then Vote Romney. BTW --- I thought the TEA Party was against raising taxes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Romney is just like Obama in many ways politically. IF you (with middle class income) wants to pay more in taxes (currentl typical rate of 30%) and allow the wealthy to pay 10 to 15% then Vote Romney. BTW --- I thought the TEA Party was against raising taxes? What? Bull. Show me. And try to do it without citing an Obama lackey study.Check out this video on YouTube: Sent from my iPad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Romney is also pimping to the Coal Miners ...... Why is it the the Coal Mining states are the poorest? West Virginia is 49th among the 50 states in household income Eastern Kentucky still includes 20 of the 100 poorest counties in the United States measured by median household income. Not to mention the terrible conditions the coal miners work in. Look it ip on Politifact http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/03/barack-obama/obama-romney-would-cut-millionaires-taxes/ Our ruling Obama said Romney is proposing a tax plan "that would give millionaires another tax break and raises taxes on middle class families by up to $2,000 a year." We rate the claim Mostly True. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Romney is also pimping to the Coal Miners ...... Why is it the the Coal Mining states are the poorest? West Virginia is 49th among the 50 states in household income Eastern Kentucky still includes 20 of the 100 poorest counties in the United States measured by median household income. Not to mention the terrible conditions the coal miners work in. Look it ip on Politifact http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/03/barack-obama/obama-romney-would-cut-millionaires-taxes/ Our ruling Obama said Romney is proposing a tax plan "that would give millionaires another tax break and raises taxes on middle class families by up to $2,000 a year." We rate the claim Mostly True. Mostly. But for years, you and I have been told that the social security tax isn't a tax. It's a contribution. A form of insurance like Medicare deduction. We've also been told that letting the Bush tax cuts expire isn't raising taxes, it's returning the rates to the Clinton era. Therefore returning the deductions on payroll to the previous rate is not a tax increase in name or fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 (edited) I'm willing to concede Obama's plan is not perfect. It takes some gambles on hoping costs will be lowered by investing more in preventative care at earlier ages. It also makes the assumptions that hospitals will make up for losses by having more patients insured at younger ages. .. I wish you would back off of your analogy though. It's a bit over the top. Obama's plan also has very intelligent and well planned adjustments that work well. The Affordable Care Act established an Independent Payment Advisory Board to almost guarantee costs are kept in control. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute is a great attempt to opimize treatments and costs. Well .. that's my opinion anyways. What is it going to take for liberals to understand? 1. health care is a limited resource 2. Obamacare increases, and in fact mandates additional demand for health care 3. Obamacare does nothing to increase the supply of health care, and in fact has a giant miss on things like tort reform, education grants to create more doctors, and competition across state lines...for solely political reasons(trial lawyers give campaign money, and, union insurance companies don't want to compete, because they can't). All of these things would cut cost, and make health care more affordable, bust most importantly they do that, by increasing the supply. 4. Since you are increasing demand...and either decreasing, or holding supply constant...price MUST go up. 5. Since we cannot afford the new price that Obamacare creates....the liberal plan is to artificially cut the increased price-->they created...and then ration care, instead of letting the market make the decisions. Rationing is the only way that this can work. Spare me the "Independent Payment Advisory Board to almost guarantee costs are kept in control" crap. That's code for rationing. Just call it what it is, and only can be: Rationing. Obamacare's dependencies create the conditions that can only be solved by rationing. Just come out and admit it already. Stop hiding from your own position. Look I understand why Obamacare requires rationing, and, I understand that turning 83 year-old Mrs. Jones into a science experiment for the last 6 months of her life, and spending a million dollars on that activity is probably a waste. I'm a grown up, I get it: we have to address that. We may find that rationing is the only answer...but not until we've looked at ALL the other potential answers. You can't say that you've looked at any other answers...you're just trying to push this one. That's why it's a bad law. Why can't you be a grown up, and just admit that Obamacare requires rationing for everybody...not just half-dead 83 year-olds? Edited August 22, 2012 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 What is it going to take for liberals to understand? 1. health care is a limited resource I didn't quote the rest of your rant because it all comes down to this one. So why don't they understand that health care is a limited resource? Because Progressives have the utmost faith in Government. And Government measures success in terms of money. And that's the attraction of a fiat currency. Whenever you need more you can just print it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Mostly. But for years, you and I have been told that the social security tax isn't a tax. It's a contribution. A form of insurance like Medicare deduction. We've also been told that letting the Bush tax cuts expire isn't raising taxes, it's returning the rates to the Clinton era. Therefore returning the deductions on payroll to the previous rate is not a tax increase in name or fact. Including SS and Medicare I have 33% of my paycheck dedicted. excluding my SS "deduction" I estimate that I pay approximatley 30% in taxes even with my "rebate". Romney and Ryan payed 14 and 16% after deductoins. A FLAT Tax would even the base up. What rate did the wealthy pau under Clinton? and FWIW - I thought the economy was working well under Clinton. IIRC under Clinton I could deduct all sorts if interest from credit card and car loans. -------------- Ryan Flip Flopping already From Roanoke Va to Ralrigh NC he's softened his stance on abortion http://news.yahoo.com/paul-ryan-softens-anti-abortion-stance-good-step-171207381--abc-news-politics.html In Flight Between Roanoke, Va., and Raleigh, N.C. - Although Paul Ryan has taken the position that all abortions, even in the case of rape and incest, should be outlawed, the Wisconsin congressman supports Mitt Romney's softer position now that he shares the GOP presidential ticket because it's a "good step in the right direction," he said today. Romney believes abortion should be legal in cases of abortion or incest, or when the mother's life is in danger. Ryan's previous position only extended exceptions to protecting the mother's life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Maybe his position is "evolving" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 and FWIW - I thought the economy was working well under Clinton. IIRC under Clinton I could deduct all sorts if interest from credit card and car loans. So are you saying lower taxes are good for the economy??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Romney believes abortion should be legal in cases of abortion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Too bad there's no retroactive abortion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 A FLAT Tax would even the base up. And there you have, in its simplest form, the difference between a conservative and a liberal. A conservative sees a successful, wealthy person who is LEGALLY paying 16% taxes and thinks, "Man, that's great. That person worked hard, took some chances, invested in themselves and was so individually successful that I'd like to learn from that person so I can have that kind of success in my life." A liberal sees the same person, yells something about inequality and simply accepts that the game must be rigged against their own lazy incompetence, whining that the only solution is for the government to legislate fairness. Is it any wonder more and more people see Obama for the lazy incompetent buffoon that he truly is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 and FWIW - I thought the economy was working well under Clinton. IIRC under Clinton I could deduct all sorts if interest from credit card and car loans. You could if you were cheating on your personal tax returns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts