• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

Status
Not open for further replies.
sangha said:
Many believe that the middle class exists to service the needs of corporations and the wealthy. Threats from the wealthy to move away to avoid paying their fair share are empty and should be mocked because the wealthy parasites and their panderers are cowards and have no intention of carrying through with the threats

that is one reason why the right loves states rights and want a huge federal government-if welfare and other handouts were left to the people as the founders intended, any rightwinger that became too greedy would quickly be hung fo treason and the wealthy would quake.

it would keep any one or a few states from becoming too greedy to the wealthy non-producers and too hostile to the workers. the right despises such a system and wants their corporate overlords to impose redistribution nationally
Click to expand...

the problem with this rant is that you make idiotic assumptions--I don't know any wealthy people who are against paying a fair share based on any OBJECTIVE assessment. right now the richest 1-5% of the population pay far more than their fair share based on any OBJECTIVE assessment

if you use share of income the top 1 percent pay almost 40% of the income tax burden (and almost all the death tax burden) yet make 22% of the income and certainly do not have 100% of the "estate" wealth

if its based on use of government services no one can honestly claim that 40% of what the income tax funds is directed to the top one percent

so the problem is your definition of "fair share" is a punitive amount that is neither honest nor realistic

so you Joe Hillesque psychobabble might resonate with those who are mad that they aren't rich but it has no objective reality
 
haymarket said:
It goes against the idea that in America, you are what you make yourself - not what Daddykins and Mumsy bestowed upon you. And that hurts America.
Click to expand...
When the state stops protecting one's right to one's property then the state must be abolished. We can rebel. And perhaps we will.
 
Taylor said:
Oh, I'm sorry dear... I was saying a little context never hurts, but silly me for rattling off so many two-syllable words at you. Though next time, don't forget you can always use the dictionary (that big book of words)!
Click to expand...

What "context"?? You thought you were refuting something or saying something of significance, but there's no there there. That's why you still can't explain the relevance of your post
 
TurtleDude said:
You are as extreme left as I am "extreme Right". Its a silly comment as is your claim of someone being delusional because they use "marxist" more loosely than you do
Click to expand...

Yes, how silly to expect anyone to use words properly. :roll:
 
Grant said:
The Democrats had the Presidency, the Senate and the Congress for TWO years and failed to pass a budget. Obama proposed his own goofy budget and it was defeated 97-0.

You want Republicans to pass a budget? Vote for them in the next election.
Click to expand...
Plus the fact that his statement is just plain stupid. The House does not have the responsibility to pass a budget that can pass in the Senate. He, often, throws the truth on its head.
 
sangha said:
Yes, how silly to expect anyone to use words properly. :roll:
Click to expand...

what is silly is the context. for example in a trade meeting involving manufacturers of paper products "Kleenex" has a specific meaning relating to a specific brand. In a hotel room asking the maid to take a box of kleenex to a guest's room means something else. If you sell office equipment telling your orders clerk to get four xerox machines is very different than me telling my secretary to xerox an extra copy of the plaintiff's motion before I go to court. we use a different brand copier (I cannot recall) but everyone knows what it means to "xerox" something
 
sangha said:
you are not being factual. many of those who are not paying federal income taxes have no disposable income
Click to expand...

That is interesting given how many of them have cell phones, tv sets, cars, etc. no disposable income to me means no TV, no Cell phone, no air conditioning, no money for booze or pot or crack etc

so one of us is not being truthful
 
Grant said:
Perhaps his relationship with Bill Ayers suggested the charges, as well as his apparent willingness to destroy the American economy.

Didn't Barrack Obama ever have any friends who weren't bat**** crazy?
Click to expand...

How in the world did you get to Bill Ayers from a discussion about raising the debt ceiling?
 
sangha said:
How in the world did you get to Bill Ayers from a discussion about raising the debt ceiling?
Click to expand...

He is a creative thinker. Its a rare talent
 
TurtleDude said:
That is interesting given how many of them have cell phones, tv sets, cars, etc. no disposable income to me means no TV, no Cell phone, no air conditioning, no money for booze or pot or crack etc

so one of us is not being truthful
Click to expand...

Yep all people not paying federal income tax have cell phones, many tv sets, several cars, and all are obviously crack heads, and hippie smoking pot heads.:roll:
 
Grant said:
It's not a 'prediction'. It's happening now.
Click to expand...

No, no one made any predicitions :roll:

Taylor said:
We have Obama for four years. When he's done, he'll leave in his wake a mountain of debt more than all 43 previous Presidents combined.
In his first 19 months alone, he made it all the way through Reagan and $335 billion into GHWB.
Click to expand...
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Yep all people not paying federal income tax have cell phones, many tv sets, several cars, and all are obviously crack heads, and hippie smoking pot heads.:roll:
Click to expand...

so you believe that none or even a few of the 47% who pay no income taxes or the 60% or so who are getting back more from the federal government than they pay in have no disposable income? I realize you are in Kansas but you must have some depressed urban areas like we do in Cincinnati and Dayton and I have spent enough time in section 8 housing interviewing witnesses to see lots of "unnecessary stuff such as wide screen tv's multiple cars, cell phones, 160 dollar designer athletic shoes (worn by people whose only athletic endeavors involve outrunning store security) etc
 
sangha said:
rightwingers think the facts have a liberal bias

It's the only time they've been right
Click to expand...

why are you making stuff up

first your crap rarely is either factual or relevant to your opinion

secondly where has anyone on the right said that? I think you (again) made it up
 
TurtleDude said:
when you say tax cuts cause deficits rather than spending you pretty much have left the realm of reality
Click to expand...

Note how the debt piles up under republican presidents who cut taxes

NewDebtAnnualy-1980-Present.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom