• 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!

Over 90% of the income gains in the first year of the recovery went to the top 1%

One of the main strategies of the socialist left is pretending everything they want is for the "benefit of society" or

"the greater good"


or to "promote democracy"


its all horsepoop of course-lefties are just as self centered and greedy as anyone and often more so since they demand OTHERS pay for the stuff they want to take credit for

So you have no concern for how important economic issues do indeed impact the greater good?

You have no concern for how important economic issues do for or work against our democratic values?

You have no concern for how important economic issues are or work against the greater good?
 
So you have no concern for how important economic issues do indeed impact the greater good?

You have no concern for how important economic issues do for or work against our democratic values?

You have no concern for how important economic issues are or work against the greater good?

I have no concern for what far leftwingers say is good for the country because I know what they want is bad for the USA and bad for our freedom
 
I have no concern for what far leftwingers say is good for the country because I know what they want is bad for the USA and bad for our freedom

That is NOT what I asked you.

So you have no concern for how important economic issues do indeed impact the greater good?

You have no concern for how important economic issues do for or work against our democratic values?

You have no concern for how important economic issues are or work against the greater good?
 
That is NOT what I asked you.

So you have no concern for how important economic issues do indeed impact the greater good?

You have no concern for how important economic issues do for or work against our democratic values?

You have no concern for how important economic issues are or work against the greater good?

I have massive concern for the pestilence of socialism that has been inflicted on our great nation and I worry about how America is deteriorating since the scourge of the New Deal infected this once great nation
 
Most of us on the right from a fiscal perspective were against the stimulus. I dont know what point you are trying to prove other than we shouldn't have spent it. Corporate cronyism is rampant in both parties.

The far left thinks more government in everything is good, which means more cronyism or lessen the impact of government so its got its hand in fewer things.

Oh and look the top 10% makes up 70% of the income taxes on 45% of the AGI.
View attachment 67123408

... which is as expected under a progressive tax system.
 
I have massive concern for the pestilence of socialism that has been inflicted on our great nation and I worry about how America is deteriorating since the scourge of the New Deal infected this once great nation


Socialism???? you call the pathetic, flimsy safety net that we have socialism?.... the 10 strongest economies in the world all have much more socialism than the US.
 
Socialism???? you call the pathetic, flimsy safety net that we have socialism?.... the 10 strongest economies in the world all have much more socialism than the US.

we are the strongest economy in the world and we are infected with the creeping crud of socialism but not as much as others
 
All these record profits.. Where are these jobs?

If the record profits were being derived strictly from increased production we would see the jobs. One can not expect a business to hire based upon increased income due to inflation.

If McDonalds sells 20,000 hamburgers at $1.00 each and then start selling 20,000 hamburgers at $1.25, their income has went up but their production has not. No need for new employee's.
 
And that is suppose to pass for a long term economic plan for a nation of 311 million people!?!?!?!?!

Amazing. Simply amazing.

Tell it to Timmy and Bernie.
 
Your response in now way shape or from makes any sense with my post in front of it.

I stated very clearly that while profit without jobs may indeed be a goal of business it could NOT be the goal of a sustainable society for 311 million people.

Your reply attacking me made no sense at all.

Well, that's because I didn't read, and had no interest in, anything you posted previously. I wasn't addressing you; my post had nothing to do with you; I had no reason to look back, and don't care to. My point had zero, that is, nothing, to do with anything you posted.

Your addressing ME is what "made no sense at all."
 
Huh? The OP states:



So let me get you point straight. The author references income growth IN 2010 THE FIRST YEAR OF THE RECOVERY under the current administration and you blame Reaganomics, an administration from 20-25 years ago. And somehow the ramifications of the ‘80’s policies ‘jumped’ the ‘90’s which saw 20% income growth (per OP link). How does that work? I’m going to need a more detailed explanation of this as it appears you are reverting into your customary ‘Reagaonomics/supply side/trickle-down’ mantra is the reason for all that is bad today

Since 1981, except for a period during the 90's, we have been operating under supply side economics, deregulation and increased military spending (coined Reaganomics). These are the very same policies Romney is trying to sell in this election - supply side economics, deregulation, and increased military spending.

Thanks but no thanks! Been there, done that!
 
Last edited:
So is Romney not a moderate? He pisses off the fringe on both sides of the aisle and hardcore right-wingers call him a liberal. I don't recall Democrats saying the same thing about their candidate back in 2008.

Romney is proposing the same policies Bush did, I suppose some thought Bush was a moderate conservative.
 
Last edited:
Isn't Obama in the top 1% too?

For me, hearing conservatives drone about morality and gays and contraception and religion, in this day and age, is more damning than their personal wealth. Personal wealth is an expression of freedom, their primitive opposition to social freedom is what's outrageous.

Yes, while not near as rich as Romney, Obama is in the top 1%. Fortunately, he and many others in the top 1% are smart enough to understand that when too much wealth is concentrated at the top, out of reach of consumers, the economy cannot prosper.
 
Yes, while not near as rich as Romney, Obama is in the top 1%. Fortunately, he and many others in the top 1% are smart enough to understand that when too much wealth is concentrated at the top, out of reach of consumers, the economy cannot prosper.


actually people like him realize that pandering to people like you is how he got to the top one percent and its how he stays up there
 
Romney and Obama are pretty much indistinguishable in their actual actions. They may tell a different story but the one that ends up on paper is pretty much one and the same.

For many of the biggies for me, they are very different.

Financial regulation.

Supply side economics

military spending

Climate change

alternative energy

health care reform

And protection of SS and Medicare
 
For many of the biggies for me, they are very different.

Financial regulation.

Same

Supply side economics

Same

military spending

I've seen nothing here to make me think they are not the same. (remember, we are speaking about Romney, not Gingrich or Santorum)

Climate change

He might wish to be able to do some things different but this is similiar to voting for Ron Paul because you want a return to the gold standard. It's not going to happen.

alternative energy

Romney will be just as happy to shovel buckets full of money to campaign donors as Obama.

health care reform

LOL, Romney was doing health care reform back when Obama was still wet behind the ears.

And protection of SS and Medicare

eh? Obama has been argueing for continued reductions in the S.S. tax further bleeding it dry. I think you are just gullible.
 
I'm still shocked by how many people support the president and his big spending plans in the name of the little guy, when reports like this prove that big spending has the opposite effect.Here, top earners are benefitting from government spending and yet every liberal and socialist is jumping on the grenade, screaming see it works!
 
I'm still shocked by how many people support the president and his big spending plans in the name of the little guy, when reports like this prove that big spending has the opposite effect.Here, top earners are benefitting from government spending and yet every liberal and socialist is jumping on the grenade, screaming see it works!

the uber rich benefit when money is concentrated in the hands of a government they control
 

Wrong. "Senate Republicans, united in opposition to the Democrats’ legislation to tighten regulation of the financial system, voted on Monday to block the bill from reaching the floor for debate."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/27/business/27regulate.html



Wrong again. "Obama Unveils Deficit Reduction Plan, 'Buffett Rule' Tax On Millionaires"

New Romney Plan: Even More Tax Cuts For The Rich


I've seen nothing here to make me think they are not the same. (remember, we are speaking about Romney, not Gingrich or Santorum)

You haven't been keeping up with the news then:

"Obama announces Pentagon budget cuts"

"Mitt Romney: Grow military spending, build new ships, planes"





He might wish to be able to do some things different but this is similiar to voting for Ron Paul because you want a return to the gold standard. It's not going to happen.

I prefer the guy that is taking steps to combat AGW rather than one that refuses to admit it exists, but that's just me.


Romney will be just as happy to shovel buckets full of money to campaign donors as Obama.


Thankfully, most do not suffer from your bias here.


LOL, Romney was doing health care reform back when Obama was still wet behind the ears.

Really, Romney is for a single payer system???



eh? Obama has been argueing for continued reductions in the S.S. tax further bleeding it dry. I think you are just gullible.

The kind of reform Obama is planning is to raise the FICA cap and cut payroll taxes. Romney wants to raise payroll taxes and decrease benefits.

Thanks, but no thanks!
 
I'm still shocked by how many people support the president and his big spending plans in the name of the little guy, when reports like this prove that big spending has the opposite effect.Here, top earners are benefitting from government spending and yet every liberal and socialist is jumping on the grenade, screaming see it works!

Romney has proposed more spending than Obama, I don't know why you would be surprised people would want the smallest spender.
 
Romney has proposed more spending than Obama, I don't know why you would be surprised people would want the smallest spender.


Its almost as funny as people who whined about bush's spending while slurping Obama
 
Wrong. "Senate Republicans, united in opposition to the Democrats’ legislation to tighten regulation of the financial system, voted on Monday to block the bill from reaching the floor for debate."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/27/business/27regulate.html

We've discussed this. 1. Romney isn't a Senator and 2. when Obama could have done something he did nothing. Just like Romney will do. Nothing.


Obama has been all for keeping the Bush tax cuts on the rich. Obama says many pretty things but then does the opposite.

You haven't been keeping up with the news then:

Obama is itching to pull the trigger in Iran. He knows that if he does, it means he loses in November so I imagine it will wait until after the election. That will mean nothing getting cut. (you will likely cheer this on also)

I prefer the guy that is taking steps to combat AGW rather than one that refuses to admit it exists, but that's just me.

$50 lightbulbs only take steps to fill Obama's campaign coffers, not do anything for the ecology.

Thankfully, most do not suffer from your bias here.

Most can read the news.

Really, Romney is for a single payer system???

LOL. Again, he talks a pretty picture but ends up finger painting.

The kind of reform Obama is planning is to raise the FICA cap and cut payroll taxes. Romney wants to raise payroll taxes and decrease benefits.

Thanks, but no thanks!

Obama plans lots of things. You can bet that once the SCOTUS shoots down Obamacare, anything left of Obama will be pure lame duck.
 
We've discussed this. 1. Romney isn't a Senator and 2. when Obama could have done something he did nothing. Just like Romney will do. Nothing.

Romney says right on his website his plan is to cut regulations. Obama has done something, and Romney badly wants to undo it.





Obama is itching to pull the trigger in Iran. He knows that if he does, it means he loses in November so I imagine it will wait until after the election. That will mean nothing getting cut. (you will likely cheer this on also)


Obama has shown restraint with Iran, while McCain and Romney rattle sabers. Obama withdrew all the troops from Iraq last December, while both McCain and Romney said we should have left them there.


$50 lightbulbs only take steps to fill Obama's campaign coffers, not do anything for the ecology.

And the CAFE standards, and tighter tailpipe emissions restrictions, and the tighter smokestack restrictions for power plants, and the largest investment in alternative energy than by any president in history.

Compared the zero, zip, nada that Romney has planned.


Obama is leading in the direction the country wants to go. This will become more apparent to you in November.
 
It will be interesting to hear Catawba's spin if the GOP retains the house and picks up the senate as many think it will

I guess he will say that is the direction the country wishes to go
 
Back
Top Bottom