• 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 On Executive Actions: ‘I’ve Got A Pen And I’ve Got A Phone’

Status
Not open for further replies.
What am I your Google??? Look it up yourself.

Is that how debate with you works? You make accusations, don't source it, then blame everyone else for not taking your word for it?
 
Yep. That is happening to day. Both parties use the politics of divide and conquer in their search for votes. They turn us against one other, they use fear or install fear while dividing us. One can say we are now legally politically segregated. A very legal and IMO a more destructive for of segregation that what occurred in the deep south between reconstruction and the civil rights movement.

Both parties have their hands opened to anyone, anywhere for campaign cash. Both parties do not care that by accepting all those millions from corporations, lobbyist, wall street firms, they become no more than indentured servants to them. These moneyed folks now are now the ones running our government and determining our laws behind the faces of the politicians of the two major parties. Talk about Rome it her last days, I fear ditto for the U.S.

I'm down about our government but I'm not in fear of Rome in her last days though. I think we have a rebounding/restructuring ability that Rome didn't even if we do hit rock bottom.
 
I'm down about our government but I'm not in fear of Rome in her last days though. I think we have a rebounding/restructuring ability that Rome didn't even if we do hit rock bottom.

I don't know. I hope you're right but I have my doubts. I think we have already gone too far. It is just a matter of time.
 
Yes. Talking about an issue isn't class warfare.

Being the source of division, dividing the electorate and claiming that 'the millionaires and billionaires aren't paying their fair share' is in fact raising the 'class warfare card' when in fact:
Buried inside a Congressional Budget Office report this week was this nugget: when it comes to individual income taxes, the top 40 percent of wage earners in America pay 106 percent of the taxes. The bottom 40 percent...pay negative 9 percent.

You read that right. One group is paying more than 100 percent of individual income taxes, the other is paying less than zero.

It's right there in Table 3 on page 13 of the report. The numbers are based on 2010 IRS and Census Bureau figures.
The rich do not pay the most taxes, they pay ALL the taxes

Now sure, there are some user fees and sales tax, but federal income tax, well, that's rather one sided. Still, how exactly does this add up to the claimed 'not paying their fair share'? It doesn't.

The 'us vs. them' mentality that it causes, is most definitely class based warfare (without the shooting of course [at least right now] - thank God).

The entire argument is based on the idea that the economy is a zero sum gain game, which is incorrect. How does your neighbor's bonus cause you to lose income? It doesn't.

If the economy was zero sum gain, how is it that national economies, as well as the world economy, have grown since their inception? Clearly they have, so the zero sum gain is again, proven false.

Chart of the greatest and most remarkable achievement in human history, and one you probably never heard about | AEIdeas

So Yes, class warfare, and yes based on an economic fallacy, and yes enabled by the loud trumpet of the Biased Lame Stream Media, to the exclusion of any more reasoned discussion of the matter.
 
Being the source of division, dividing the electorate and claiming that 'the millionaires and billionaires aren't paying their fair share' is in fact raising the 'class warfare card' when in fact:

The rich do not pay the most taxes, they pay ALL the taxes

Now sure, there are some user fees and sales tax, but federal income tax, well, that's rather one sided. Still, how exactly does this add up to the claimed 'not paying their fair share'? It doesn't.

The 'us vs. them' mentality that it causes, is most definitely class based warfare (without the shooting of course [at least right now] - thank God).

The entire argument is based on the idea that the economy is a zero sum gain game, which is incorrect. How does your neighbor's bonus cause you to lose income? It doesn't.

If the economy was zero sum gain, how is it that national economies, as well as the world economy, have grown since their inception? Clearly they have, so the zero sum gain is again, proven false.

Chart of the greatest and most remarkable achievement in human history, and one you probably never heard about | AEIdeas

So Yes, class warfare, and yes based on an economic fallacy, and yes enabled by the loud trumpet of the Biased Lame Stream Media, to the exclusion of any more reasoned discussion of the matter.

That mantra has been covered many times. Federal taxes are not the only taxes, and much of the very rich do in fact avoid taxes through the many loopholes available. So, the 40% number is a little misleading. However, I would bet not one of the 40% would trade places with the 60%.

However, defining fair, have a different view than another on what is fair, isn't class warfare. Any saying the tax system isn't fair is certainly no worse than referring to the moocher class. Better I would suggest.
 
REALLY?????

"The unstoppable American economy is stopped cold in its tracks"...which is very true IF you completely ignore the fact that our economy was in free fall, losing 800K jobs per month when Obama took over, but last year the Dow hit record highs FIFTY times!
On monthly Fed steroid injections. It's not real. It's as fake as a hookers smile, and will evaporate once the steroids are withdrawn. Just the rumor of the Fed withdrawing the steroids caused a drop.

"Our GDP is in quicksand."...which is very true IF you completely ignore the provable facts and hard numbers:
View attachment 67160261

"The great American jobs juggernaut is in reverse."...which is very true IF you ignore the provable facts and hard numbers:
View attachment 67160262

"We have chronic unemployment."...never mind that the Republican-controlled House refuses to even take a vote on jobs bill submitted by the Obama administration...and any GOP jobs bills consist almost solely of tax cuts.

Care to guess how many jobs related bills are in this list?
Senate sitting on 290 bills already passed by House; tension mounts | TheHill

372 Bills That Have Been Passed by the House & Not Yet the actual list of bills, and yes, many job related that passed the house with bi-partisan support no less. Just reading the titles looks like there are 10 jobs bills in there, and yup. All held up and killed on old Dirty Harry's desk.

It's clear to me that it takes two parties to gridlock congress, just as it takes two parties to compromise. Seems there isn't and wasn't enough compromises, but blaming only of the parties is far from being honest. Can you be that honest?

"The lowest work force participation rate in 35 years."...see the above.

"Massive deficit and debt."...never mind that Obama's cut the deficit in more than half since he took office - note the crap sandwich that the Bush administration had left him:
View attachment 67160263

Wasn't Bush's **** sandwich. At least not solely. The causes of the housing bubble were had many sources, many contributors, one of which is the leaning on banks to originate mortgages to people who couldn't possibly pay them back, and excessive risk exposure of those toxic mortgages to Fannie and Freddie, by congressional edict. There is no single party to blame in this, they are a number of parties to blame for this.

After taxes are record highs, and he's still running deficits? That's a spending problem.

The public has a much different view of reality.

_nznqqj5m0w1erbq74lrfq.png

More Americans Worse Off Financially Than a Year Ago

durafifro0uidwklob6eqg.png

Government Itself Still Cited as Top U.S. Problem
 
That mantra has been covered many times. Federal taxes are not the only taxes, and much of the very rich do in fact avoid taxes through the many loopholes available. So, the 40% number is a little misleading. However, I would bet not one of the 40% would trade places with the 60%.

However, defining fair, have a different view than another on what is fair, isn't class warfare. Any saying the tax system isn't fair is certainly no worse than referring to the moocher class. Better I would suggest.

Seems to me that everyone should some sort sort of skin in the game, even if it's a little bit, but what we have here is the successful and hardest working being punitively punished for their success to enable nearly 1/2 of the population to receive checks from the government without sending any money in. Are we really in this together? It this really shared sacrifice?

Hardly seems so. Seems pretty one sided to me, all at the behest of the 'food stamp president', no telling how much fraud, as the government seems to have pretty much given up on that.
 
Being the source of division, dividing the electorate and claiming that 'the millionaires and billionaires aren't paying their fair share' is in fact raising the 'class warfare card' when in fact:

The rich do not pay the most taxes, they pay ALL the taxes

Now sure, there are some user fees and sales tax, but federal income tax, well, that's rather one sided. Still, how exactly does this add up to the claimed 'not paying their fair share'? It doesn't.

The 'us vs. them' mentality that it causes, is most definitely class based warfare (without the shooting of course [at least right now] - thank God).

The entire argument is based on the idea that the economy is a zero sum gain game, which is incorrect. How does your neighbor's bonus cause you to lose income? It doesn't.

If the economy was zero sum gain, how is it that national economies, as well as the world economy, have grown since their inception? Clearly they have, so the zero sum gain is again, proven false.

Chart of the greatest and most remarkable achievement in human history, and one you probably never heard about | AEIdeas

So Yes, class warfare, and yes based on an economic fallacy, and yes enabled by the loud trumpet of the Biased Lame Stream Media, to the exclusion of any more reasoned discussion of the matter.

:agree: The disgusting thing about this is that the envy and hatred are being deliberately cultivated and encouraged to further an agenda of pitting people against each other! The Obama duo are millionaires, too, but you never hear about that when the wealthy are being denigrated! :naughty:

Greetings, eohrnberger. :2wave:
 
Seems to me that everyone should some sort sort of skin in the game, even if it's a little bit, but what we have here is the successful and hardest working being punitively punished for their success to enable nearly 1/2 of the population to receive checks from the government without sending any money in. Are we really in this together? It this really shared sacrifice?

Hardly seems so. Seems pretty one sided to me, all at the behest of the 'food stamp president', no telling how much fraud, as the government seems to have pretty much given up on that.

Again, there are other taxes, so there's plenty of skin in the game. Taxes for that 40% have largely shrank! and not grown. In the process, less people are making enough to join them (that is part of the problem). Cutting taxes by and large hasn't brought about nirvana. And no one is punished fir hard work. Those of us doing well live quite well. There's no burden, no hardship. That's why there's no trading places going on.
 
I'm down about our government but I'm not in fear of Rome in her last days though. I think we have a rebounding/restructuring ability that Rome didn't even if we do hit rock bottom.

That's optimistic anyway. :)
 
:agree: The disgusting thing about this is that the envy and hatred are being deliberately cultivated and encouraged to further an agenda of pitting people against each other! The Obama duo are millionaires, too, but you never hear about that when the wealthy are being denigrated! :naughty:

Greetings, eohrnberger. :2wave:

Greetings, polgara (call me Erik). :2wave: Seems that we are 'birds of a feather' so to speak.
 
The idea that rich people are being persecuted or denigrated in this country is weapons-grade bull****.
 
Seems to me that everyone should some sort sort of skin in the game, even if it's a little bit, but what we have here is the successful and hardest working being punitively punished for their success to enable nearly 1/2 of the population to receive checks from the government without sending any money in. Are we really in this together? It this really shared sacrifice?

Hardly seems so. Seems pretty one sided to me, all at the behest of the 'food stamp president', no telling how much fraud, as the government seems to have pretty much given up on that.

Again, there are other taxes, so there's plenty of skin in the game. Taxes for that 40% have largely shrank! and not grown. In the process, less people are making enough to join them (that is part of the problem). Cutting taxes by and large hasn't brought about nirvana. And no one is punished fir hard work. Those of us doing well live quite well. There's no burden, no hardship. That's why there's no trading places going on.
 
Again, there are other taxes, so there's plenty of skin in the game. Taxes for that 40% have largely shrank! and not grown. In the process, less people are making enough to join them (that is part of the problem). Cutting taxes by and large hasn't brought about nirvana. And no one is punished fir hard work. Those of us doing well live quite well. There's no burden, no hardship. That's why there's no trading places going on.

As hard as cutting spending is resisted by this administration, it's clear that fiscal responsibility isn't going to have even a chance until the next president, and perhaps not even then.
 
As hard as cutting spending is resisted by this administration, it's clear that fiscal responsibility isn't going to have even a chance until the next president, and perhaps not even then.

Well, both parties resist cutting spending. If there us any difference, it's what they spend on. But that's another issue.
 
The idea that rich people are being persecuted or denigrated in this country is weapons-grade bull****.

the denial that the Democratic party panders to the losers and the have nots by bashing the successful is equal tsunami level garbage
 
As hard as cutting spending is resisted by this administration, it's clear that fiscal responsibility isn't going to have even a chance until the next president, and perhaps not even then.

Problem is mainstream economist don't agree with you or the TP crowd.

"This view contrasts with that held by most economists, which will be referred to as “mainstream economics.” Mainstream economics relies on a basic theory regarding policies to expand the economy in a downturn. This theory can be found in economics textbooks and is used by government and private forecasters to project the path of the economy.3 This view has been the basis for fiscal and monetary policy interventions to stimulate the economy for many years, under both Republican and Democratic administrations. Chairman Bernanke of the Federal Reserve was referring to this view when he cautioned against large and immediate spending cuts.4 The basic thrust of the model for fiscal policy is that increasing the deficit (whether by increasing spending or cutting taxes) expands an underemployed economy, and decreasing the deficit (cutting spending or raising taxes) contracts it. https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41849.pdf
 
It's not.

bottom line-rich liberals pander to the masses by bashing rich people. Its funny watching people who get rich through public office (like the Clintons and the Obamas) bashing people who normally got rich by working hard and smart
 
Problem is mainstream economist don't agree with you or the TP crowd.

"This view contrasts with that held by most economists, which will be referred to as “mainstream economics.” Mainstream economics relies on a basic theory regarding policies to expand the economy in a downturn. This theory can be found in economics textbooks and is used by government and private forecasters to project the path of the economy.3 This view has been the basis for fiscal and monetary policy interventions to stimulate the economy for many years, under both Republican and Democratic administrations. Chairman Bernanke of the Federal Reserve was referring to this view when he cautioned against large and immediate spending cuts.4 The basic thrust of the model for fiscal policy is that increasing the deficit (whether by increasing spending or cutting taxes) expands an underemployed economy, and decreasing the deficit (cutting spending or raising taxes) contracts it. https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41849.pdf

....continued

At any rate, Obama's biggest mistake as Krugman often points out, is cutting spending too soon. He holds a tight fiscal policy at a time we need spending to occur.
 
Is that how debate with you works? You make accusations, don't source it, then blame everyone else for not taking your word for it?

No, that had nothing to do with debate at all. That was dealing with an asinine request.
 
Well, to be fair, you are attempting to move the goalpost. The OP and others are saying that the actions that the President is implicitly threatening to take would be Unconstitutional, and your response seems to be that it has not yet been ruled so. That's like saying that it's not wrong of me to plan to rape someone because I haven't been convicted yet.
It's perfectly legal for you to plan to kidnap someone as long as you don't do it. There aren't many crimes you can be convicted of re: just planning to do it without actually doing it.

Likewise it's perfectly fine for Obama to talk about doing whatever he likes as long as he's not doing anything illegal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom