msnbc.com Video Player (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27183164#27183164)

You righties talk about socialism being a Democrat trait, but it's a Republican President's appointees who bring Socialism to America.

Congratulations. :clap::yahoo::buddies::dye:

msnbc.com Video Player (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27183164#27183164)

You righties talk about socialism being a Democrat trait, but it's a Republican President's appointees who bring Socialism to America.

Congratulations. :clap::yahoo::buddies::dye:


If Nobama gets into office, and you start the whinning about how bad you have it then I am going to be the first one to say


I TOLD YOU SO

If Nobama gets into office, and you start the whinning about how bad you have it then I am going to be the first one to say


I TOLD YOU SO

then when the TAX INCREASE hits you

I TOLD YOU SO

msnbc.com Video Player (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27183164#27183164)

You righties talk about socialism being a Democrat trait, but it's a Republican President's appointees who bring Socialism to America.

Congratulations. :clap::yahoo::buddies::dye:


Being a conservative ... I have to tend to agree. Don't have the patience to watch the video, but I think I know what it will say. Everything about the bailout ... both morgage and stock market .... smells of socialism.

Well ... Europe is kind of trendy and sheek ... guess we're one of them now

If Nobama gets into office, and you start the whinning about how bad you have it then I am going to be the first one to say



I TOLD YOU SO


then when the TAX INCREASE hits you


I TOLD YOU SO


And both of you believe John McCain won't raise taxes now?

If you believe that, ok.



I have a bridge I'm selling.

Wanna' buy it? :jet:



Socialism in America: YAY BUSH :dye:

Being a conservative ... I have to tend to agree. Don't have the patience to watch the video, but I think I know what it will say. Everything about the bailout ... both morgage and stock market .... smells of socialism.

Well ... Europe is kind of trendy and sheek ... guess we're one of them now
The video is just a standard news report - with a scathing intro by Brian Williams congratulating the American people for becoming new bank owners.

And both of you believe John McCain won't raise taxes now?

If you believe that, ok.



I have a bridge I'm selling.

Wanna' buy it? :jet:



Socialism in America: YAY BUSH :dye:

With the bail out, you are correct but at least with McCains tax program he will not be giving out *tax credits* to people THAT PAY NO TAXES TO BEGIN WITH........in other words the handouts will be bigger and my tax dollars will be supporting some smuck milking the system. Why should he work when he is getting a free ride........and when Obama starts taxing small businesses watch how many in this area fold........

The video is just a standard news report - with a scathing intro by Brian Williams congratulating the American people for becoming new bank owners.

Was that before or after William's let the American people know as soon as the socialists let Bush's tax cuts expire, they'll be nailed yet again with another tax increase?

With the bail out, you are correct but at least with McCains tax program he will not be giving out *tax credits* to people THAT PAY NO TAXES TO BEGIN WITH........in other words the handouts will be bigger and my tax dollars will be supporting some smuck milking the system. Why should he work when he is getting a free ride........and when Obama starts taxing small businesses watch how many in this area fold........
Businesses don't pay taxes.

They pass them down to the consumer.

On the flip side:

And you think cutting taxes for big oil and big businesses brings down costs? Nope, just more money for them.

Was that before or after William's let the American people know as soon as the socialists let Bush's tax cuts expire, they'll be nailed yet again with another tax increase?
IF




and that's a big IF





IF McCain/Palin win and let the Bush tax cuts expire (and they will and you're an idiot if you believe their promises given the current economic meltdown), I'll make you righties eat it.

Businesses don't pay taxes.

They pass them down to the consumer.

On the flip side:

And you think cutting taxes for big oil and big businesses brings down costs? Nope, just more money for them.

You are partially correct there dipstick, However, isn't paying higher prices because small businesses pass on their tax increase just another form of tax?

Doesn'T the money still come out of the taxpayers pocket? And you are happy with this??

IF




and that's a big IF





IF McCain/Palin win and let the Bush tax cuts expire (and they will and you're an idiot if you believe their promises given the current economic meltdown), I'll make you righties eat it.

If McCain-Palin win it will still take Congress to continue the Bush tax cuts, and a Congress run by Pelosi, Reid are hardly likely to allow the Bush tax cuts to continue, therefore it would not be Bush-Palin at fault in anybody's mind but yours an a few other diehards.

McCain could be for the Bush tax cuts, doesnt mean he can get them extended with a Dem Congress.

Businesses don't pay taxes.

They pass them down to the consumer.
On the flip side:

And you think cutting taxes for big oil and big businesses brings down costs? Nope, just more money for them.


:shocking::twitch::twitch: Please tell me that you are not old enough to vote.....

Businesses don't pay taxes.

They pass them down to the consumer.



Raising taxes on the businesses affects you and me. Duh.

If McCain-Palin win it will still take Congress to continue the Bush tax cuts, and a Congress run by Pelosi, Reid are hardly likely to allow the Bush tax cuts to continue, therefore it would not be Bush-Palin at fault in anybody's mind but yours an a few other diehards.

McCain could be for the Bush tax cuts, doesnt mean he can get them extended with a Dem Congress.


:yay:

IF




and that's a big IF





IF McCain/Palin win and let the Bush tax cuts expire (and they will and you're an idiot if you believe their promises given the current economic meltdown), I'll make you righties eat it.

Wow, Andy. You sure do like to talk the talk. Too bad you can't walk the walk.

:shocking::twitch::twitch: Please tell me that you are not old enough to vote.....

Kinda skeery, huh? :lol:

If Nobama gets into office, and you start the whinning about how bad you have it then I am going to be the first one to say



I TOLD YOU SO


Oh, if Obama sucks for four straight years and the nation goes straight to the crapper, they will NOT whine and complain about Obama. They will do what they have done for as far back as I can remember.

They'll blame Bush (or Republicans, or Reagan, or ....).

You would have thought happy days were here again when the Democrats took both houses of Congress. They've had it for two years and have at least as much to blame for our current mess if not more.

And they blame Bush - and the Republicans.

If there was only one Republican in Congress, they would blame him. They are incapable of accepting that themselves. Witch hunt, it's only sex, ##### set me up - they just can't. This is why Foley leaves office because of a few emails, and Jefferson stays in office even with cash in the freezer.

If McCain-Palin win it will still take Congress to continue the Bush tax cuts, and a Congress run by Pelosi, Reid are hardly likely to allow the Bush tax cuts to continue, therefore it would not be Bush-Palin at fault in anybody's mind but yours an a few other diehards.

McCain could be for the Bush tax cuts, doesnt mean he can get them extended with a Dem Congress.

Are you saying it doesn't matter who gets elected?

Why vote then?

:rolleyes:

Psst...McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts.

If Nobama gets into office, and you start the whinning about how bad you have it then I am going to be the first one to say


I TOLD YOU SO

I guess that would make you feel better after getting the "I told you so" for 8 years with Bush in office, huh?

Oh, if Obama sucks for four straight years and the nation goes straight to the crapper, they will NOT whine and complain about Obama. They will do what they have done for as far back as I can remember.

They'll blame Bush (or Republicans, or Reagan, or ....).

You would have thought happy days were here again when the Democrats took both houses of Congress. They've had it for two years and have at least as much to blame for our current mess if not more.

And they blame Bush - and the Republicans.

If there was only one Republican in Congress, they would blame him. They are incapable of accepting that themselves. Witch hunt, it's only sex, ##### set me up - they just can't. This is why Foley leaves office because of a few emails, and Jefferson stays in office even with cash in the freezer.

If America hated Republicans SOOOOO much like you claim, why would they vote for Republicans approximately 50% of the time? Somehow I think you watch Fox News too much.

Are you saying it doesn't matter who gets elected?

Why vote then?

:rolleyes:

Psst...McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts.

No sense at all, Andy, If I were you , I would stay home .

If America hated Republicans SOOOOO much like you claim, why would they vote for Republicans approximately 50% of the time? Somehow I think you watch Fox News too much.

??? Where did this come from? I never said, suggested or intimated that *Americans* hate Republicans. Democrats blame Republicans. Period. All I heard from Bill Clinton during his not too successful first two years was that everything was the fault of "the previous twelve years of Republican administration". I got so tired of that phrase.

Of course, after those rocky years, he ended up with a Republican Congress. Then he could just blame THEM, and he did.

And dammit, for about the millionth time, I probably watch less than two hours of FOX each *year*. Why do people bring that up? Nothing relevant to say?

Businesses don't pay taxes.

They pass them down to the consumer.

On the flip side:

And you think cutting taxes for big oil and big businesses brings down costs? Nope, just more money for them.

Have you taken marketing 101 at community college yet?

:shocking::twitch::twitch: Please tell me that you are not old enough to vote.....

Andy is correct, businesses do not pay taxes, they collect them from the consumer and then give them to the government. :shrug:

IF




and that's a big IF





IF McCain/Palin win and let the Bush tax cuts expire (and they will and you're an idiot if you believe their promises given the current economic meltdown), I'll make you righties eat it.

And you lefties have sidestepped the question again. Two items in particular will expire Jan 1, 2009, before any President is inaugurated, the dividend and capital gains tax cuts. Is Obama taking this into account when he says 95% of Americans will not see a tax increase?

Or is Obama going to be the second coming of Hoover?

And you lefties have sidestepped the question again. Two items in particular will expire Jan 1, 2009, before any President is inaugurated, the dividend and capital gains tax cuts.
Bush better hurry up and take his bill before Congress then. :popcorn:










YI know he's already tried. And if you look back at my previous posts on here, you'd realize I've been equally as harsh on the 110th Congress.

The Democrats on this forum hate me for it. They hate me as much as the Republicans hate me.

It doesn't matter who gets elected. Given the current financial meltdown and collapse of modern day economics, taxes are going to go up. Taxes are going to go up when our government's spending over a trillion dollars bailing out various enterprises.

A quarter of a trillion dollars ... gone.











I better not get charged any fees to use the ATM at 7-11 anymore since I own these banks.

:smile:

The Democrats on this forum hate me for it. They hate me as much as the Republicans hate me.


Bipartisan hatred... you must be proud...:patriot:

So you believe the Hoover approach is the best one Andy?


How about something different, such as, maybe, cutting spending?


Naw, the Democrats still believe that doing the same thing, over and over again and expecting different results is the way to go.

So you believe the Hoover approach is the best one Andy?


How about something different, such as, maybe, cutting spending?


Naw, the Democrats still believe that doing the same thing, over and over again and expecting different results is the way to go.
I'd like to see them cut spending.

But seeing as that ain't gonna happen either.

John McCain had his chance to prove me wrong about him. He had his chance to prove he'd stand up to Washington and do what's best for America.

Instead, he voted for the bailout. :ohwell:

And he agreed with Bush on this half-trillion dollar war.

The Democrats on this forum hate me for it. They hate me as much as the Republicans hate me.




:smile:

Don't underestimate yourself. At the RU meeting last night it was pretty clear we hate you WAY more than they do.

And you lefties have sidestepped the question again. Two items in particular will expire Jan 1, 2009, before any President is inaugurated, the dividend and capital gains tax cuts. Is Obama taking this into account when he says 95% of Americans will not see a tax increase?

Or is Obama going to be the second coming of Hoover?


Capital Gains: Families with incomes below $250,000 will continue to pay the capital gains rates that they pay today. For those in the top two income tax brackets – likewise adjusted to affect only families over $250,000 – Obama will create a new top capital gains rate of 20 percent. Obama’s 20% rate is equal is the lowest rate that existed in the 1990s and the rate that President Bush proposed in 2001. It is almost a third lower than the rate that President Reagan signed into law in 1986.

Dividends: The top dividends rate for people making over $250,000 would be set at 20 percent.
Dividends will not return to being taxed at ordinary income tax rates. Obama’s 20 percent rate on dividends will be 39 percent lower than the rate President Bush proposed in 2001, and would be lower than all but 5 of the last 92 years we have been taxing dividends.

Estate Tax: The estate tax would be effectively repealed for 99.7 percent of estates. For the remaining 0.3% of estates over $7 million per couple, Obama will retain a rate of 45%. This policy would cut the number of estates covered by the tax by 84 percent relative to 2000.

Average Tax Rates Below the 1990s: Overall, the top 1 percent of households – people with an average income of $1.6 million per year – would see their average federal income and payroll tax rate increase from 21 percent today to 24 percent, less than the 25 percent these households would have paid under the tax laws of the late 1990s.

###


- Eliminating Capital Gains Taxes for Entrepreneurs and Investors in Small Business. Barack Obama understands that small businesses are the engines of our economy, and he will eliminate all capital gains taxes on investments in small and start up firms.

- Cutting Corporate Tax Rates for Firms that Create Jobs in America. Barack Obama will repeal tax breaks and loopholes that reward corporations that retain their earnings overseas, and will use those savings to lower corporate tax rates for companies that expand or start operations in the United States.

- Offering a Small Business Healthcare Tax Credit: To help small businesses compete in the global economy while still providing quality health insurance, Barack Obama will offer a new refundable 50 percent health tax credit on employee premiums paid by employers. His comprehensive healthcare plan will
relieve health costs for all firms by bringing down national healthcare costs by $2,500 per family, annually.

- Making the R&D Tax Credit Permanent. Barack Obama will make the Research and Development tax credit permanent so that firms can rely on it when making decisions to invest in domestic R&D over multiyear timeframes.
Obama Tax Plan Fact Sheet (http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Factsheet_Tax_Plan_FINAL.pdf)

Andy,
your mistake is equating Conservatism with Republican

Yeah... Take Sen. Chuck Hagel for example. Chuck consistantly ranked high in Conservative Union ratings... And then he opposed the Iraq War.
Conservatives branded him a RINO (Republican In Name Only) because he refused to march in lockstep.

Independent thought is NOT a "conservative" virtue.

Independent thought is NOT a "conservative" virtue.Says one of the cut & paste bozo's. :killingme

Yeah... Take Sen. Chuck Hagel for example. Chuck consistantly ranked high in Conservative Union ratings... And then he opposed the Iraq War.
Conservatives branded him a RINO (Republican In Name Only) because he refused to march in lockstep..

He enjoys a higher approval rating among Democrats in Nebraska, than among Republicans. And there's a good chance he will get a spot as Sec Def under Obama.

His primary disagreement may be over the war - but it doesn't end there, and his criticism of the President has been frequently more nasty than even the Democrats.

There's definitely a difference. George Bush is not much of a conservative.

Yeah... Take Sen. Chuck Hagel for example. Chuck consistantly ranked high in Conservative Union ratings... And then he opposed the Iraq War.
Conservatives branded him a RINO (Republican In Name Only) because he refused to march in lockstep.

Independent thought is NOT a "conservative" virtue.

And when Lieberman supported the war, gosh, what happened to him?

And when Cindy Shehan decided to run against Pelosi, what happened to her?

Shows me independent thought is NOT a 'progressive' virtue.

And when Cindy Shehan decided to run against Pelosi, what happened to her?
That's like picking between the maniac and the psycho. :crazy:

Shehan is about as anti-American as they come.

And Pelosi's a barking moonbat who single-handedly almost destryoed our economy with one antagonist speech.

And Pelosi's a barking moonbat who single-handedly almost destryoed our economy with one antagonist speech.

Any bets she'll still be speaker in the new House?

Capital Gains: Families with incomes below $250,000 will continue to pay the capital gains rates that they pay today. For those in the top two income tax brackets – likewise adjusted to affect only families over $250,000 – Obama will create a new top capital gains rate of 20 percent. Obama’s 20% rate is equal is the lowest rate that existed in the 1990s and the rate that President Bush proposed in 2001. It is almost a third lower than the rate that President Reagan signed into law in 1986.

Capital Gains: Rates will rise to 10 or 20 percent, depending upon income, on January 1, 2009. This is current law set to expire soon. Obama says families with incomes below $250,000 will continue to pay the capital gains rates that they pay today. Does he mean "today' or January 2, 2009? As the top rate if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire is 20% anyhow, just what is Obama changing? The bill President Reagan signed into law was radically different (Zorro is old enough to remember) than what he proposed. The Democrats controlled Congress.

Reagan's original 1985 proposal would have cut the capital-gains tax. He had reduced the rate from 25 percent to 20 percent in his 1981 tax cut and wanted to reduce it to 17.5 percent in his new tax reform. In his televised address unveiling the plan, Reagan proclaimed: "To marshal more venture capital for new industries — the kind of efforts that begin with a couple of partners setting out to create and develop a new product — we intend to lower the maximum capital-gains tax rate to 17-1/2 percent.

Be precise, Senator Obama! Misleading statement at best, and I'm being kind.

John Berlau on Bush's and Reagan's Tax Reforms on National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/berlau200504150800.asp)

Actually, I don't have the time to refute every point of Obama's shell game. For those interested here are a couple links for analysis, without all the rhetoric that isn't accurate:

Competing Tax Plans: Two Perspectives - Freakonomics - Opinion - New York Times Blog (http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/16/competing-tax-plans-two-perspectives/)

The Impact of the Presidential Candidates' Tax Proposals on Effective Marginal Tax Rates (http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=411759)

Economists For McCain (http://www.economistsformccain.com/ObamaStatement.html#Signatories)

There is also a link embedded in the last article to a PDF of McCain's plan.

That's like picking between the maniac and the psycho. :crazy:

Shehan is about as anti-American as they come.

And Pelosi's a barking moonbat who single-handedly almost destryoed our economy with one antagonist speech.

I don't control who the progressives choose as candidates, I just amusingly observe.

Capital Gains: Rates will rise to 10 or 20 percent, depending upon income, on January 1, 2009. This is current law set to expire soon. Obama says families with incomes below $250,000 will continue to pay the capital gains rates that they pay today. Does he mean "today' or January 2, 2009? As the top rate if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire is 20% anyhow, just what is Obama changing? The bill President Reagan signed into law was radically different (Zorro is old enough to remember) than what he proposed. The Democrats controlled Congress.

Reagan's original 1985 proposal would have cut the capital-gains tax. He had reduced the rate from 25 percent to 20 percent in his 1981 tax cut and wanted to reduce it to 17.5 percent in his new tax reform. In his televised address unveiling the plan, Reagan proclaimed: "To marshal more venture capital for new industries — the kind of efforts that begin with a couple of partners setting out to create and develop a new product — we intend to lower the maximum capital-gains tax rate to 17-1/2 percent.

Be precise, Senator Obama! Misleading statement at best, and I'm being kind.

John Berlau on Bush's and Reagan's Tax Reforms on National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/berlau200504150800.asp)

Actually, I don't have the time to refute every point of Obama's shell game. For those interested here are a couple links for analysis, without all the rhetoric that isn't accurate:

Competing Tax Plans: Two Perspectives - Freakonomics - Opinion - New York Times Blog (http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/16/competing-tax-plans-two-perspectives/)

The Impact of the Presidential Candidates' Tax Proposals on Effective Marginal Tax Rates (http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=411759)

Economists For McCain (http://www.economistsformccain.com/ObamaStatement.html#Signatories)

There is also a link embedded in the last article to a PDF of McCain's plan.

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't George H. Bush refer to supply-side economics as "voodoo economics"?

For every proponent that claims supply-side economics works... You find an opposite opinion.
I believe Reagan's final take can be summarized as "Should of, could of, would of..."

This is current law set to expire soon. Obama says families with incomes below $250,000 will continue to pay the capital gains rates that they pay today.

Enlighten me... How much does the average American family pay in capital gains tax?

When they sell their home so they can retire?

When they sell their home so they can retire?

From BankRate:
What's the best tax break available to Jane and John Q. Public? If they're homeowners, it's selling their house.

When you sell your primary residence, you can make up to $250,000 in profit if you're a single owner, twice that if you're married, and not owe any capital gains taxes.
Additional Information (http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/real-estate/20041018a1.asp)

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't George H. Bush refer to supply-side economics as "voodoo economics"?



So we're establishing George H. W. Bush as the guru of economics, then? Just so we're clear.

Enlighten me... How much does the average American family pay in capital gains tax?

Which average American families are you talking about? The ones who don't pay any tax at all and receive Demogrants disguised as a 'tax cut' or those American families that pay the taxes to fund those Demogrants?

One can have disagreements on what is best for the country regarding economic policy. To keep changing the subject as you can't defend your position either means you're intellectually dishonest or don't want to debate from a losing position. That is your prerogative.

:buddies:

Which average American families are you talking about? The ones who don't pay any tax at all and receive Demogrants disguised as a 'tax cut' or those American families that pay the taxes to fund those Demogrants?

One can have disagreements on what is best for the country regarding economic policy. To keep changing the subject as you can't defend your position either means you're intellectually dishonest or don't want to debate from a losing position. That is your prerogative.

:buddies:

I posted Obama's stand on capital gains and dividends. You can interpert them as you please but that doesn't make your claims true.

I then moved forwarded to establish who benefits from a reduction in the capital gains tax.
The average American family is just that. I contend that very few average income familys (including Joe Six-pack) even have capital gains. This just another BS argument that ultimately rewards the well-to-do.

But that's what you want... Isn't It?

The average American family is just that. I contend that very few average income familys (including Joe Six-pack) even have capital gains.

But it doesn't mean it's only for the very rich. Your average family isn't an elderly person selling their home to bankroll their retirement or pay for medical costs, but quite a lot of them do this, not having had enough put away while they were raising families.

It doesn't matter. You can't keep soaking the rich. Sooner or later, they're gonna take their marbles and go somewhere else. If the government needs money to fund programs, they should find some other means, or cut back on spending.

If Joe Biden tells me I'm unpatriotic, I'll tell him to try me for treason in Costa Rica and good riddance. Patriotism is citizens serving their country; tyranny is compelling the people to serve it.

I posted Obama's stand on capital gains and dividends. You can interpert them as you please but that doesn't make your claims true.

I then moved forwarded to establish who benefits from a reduction in the capital gains tax.
The average American family is just that. I contend that very few average income familys (including Joe Six-pack) even have capital gains. This just another BS argument that ultimately rewards the well-to-do.

But that's what you want... Isn't It?

You post Obama's claims without analysis. I posted independent analysis which was a straight up analysis without conclusions and the analysis of 384 economists against Obama's plan. You didn't refute the analysis, instead changed the subject. At that point I deduce you either concede the argument or need to change the subject.

Almost all American families who own homes (70% as of 2006), will realize capital gains. The percentage of American families who own stock is between 49 and 51 percent, depending upon the year. There were 23Million businesses in 2002. The numbers stand for themselves, unless you believe 70% of American families are above average.

And yes, eventually I would like to become well-to-do. Unfortunately, the Democrats are trying to ensure that none of us will be able to accomplish that.

Don't underestimate yourself. At the RU meeting last night it was pretty clear we hate you WAY more than they do.


:lol:

Yeah... Take Sen. Chuck Hagel for example. Chuck consistantly ranked high in Conservative Union ratings... And then he opposed the Iraq War.
Conservatives branded him a RINO (Republican In Name Only) because he refused to march in lockstep.

Independent thought is NOT a "conservative" virtue.

...Like we didn't know what RINO meant:coffee:

...Like we didn't know what RINO meant:coffee:

It's in my generous nature to give you the benefit of the doubt.