• 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%

I would love to see some proof that all the poor waste their money like that.

And no one here has said anything about taking anything from the rich.
That may just be the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen you post here. Mind you...theres been a bit to choose from...but still...

Oh no...the poor dont waste their money in cigarettes, alcohol, video games, lottery tickets, etc.

Just curious...ever actually BEEN in poor neighborhoods or are you just one of those upwardly mobile liberals that pretend to actually care about the poor but couldnt actually find them with a map and 2 instructor assists?
 
That may just be the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen you post here. Mind you...theres been a bit to choose from...but still...

Oh no...the poor dont waste their money in cigarettes, alcohol, video games, lottery tickets, etc.

Just curious...ever actually BEEN in poor neighborhoods or are you just one of those upwardly mobile liberals that pretend to actually care about the poor but couldnt actually find them with a map and 2 instructor assists?

I live in one of the poorest areas of Chicago. Now supply a study that shows that peoples incomes are wasted on those items, or move on with another argument that could actually be proven.
 
Last edited:
I live in one of the poorest areas of Chicago. Now supply a study that shows that peoples incomes are wasted on those items, to move on with another argument that could actually be proven.

Lord :roll:

http://www.cspinet.org/booze/taxguide/lowerincome.pdf
Terry Sanford Institute of Public Policy: Duke Policy News
http://www.frbatlanta.org/filelegacydocs/wp0719.pdf
Association between concurrent alcohol and tobacco use and poverty - DE SILVA - 2010 - Drug and Alcohol Review - Wiley Online Library
http://www.marshall.edu/jrcp/Maring and Braun.pdf
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/efan04014-3/efan04014-3e.pdf

You need to widen your resource library a bit. There are tons of resources on this sort of argument, you need to actually make an effort to look for them. Im sure there are pro and con studys, but to argue that there are none is not a smart argument.
 
Wow, you just helped my argument, thanks!
 
I live in one of the poorest areas of Chicago. Now supply a study that shows that peoples incomes are wasted on those items, or move on with another argument that could actually be proven.
Then you really SHOULD get out of the house more. Go check out your nearest behavioral health units, emergency rooms, Domestic Violence shelters and treatment centers. Amazing how many people with no income for several years are still pack a day smokers and manage to access alcohol and illegal drugs. Check out stats on reservations. Comorbid diagnosis of mental D/O, DV, SA, all relatively common in low income communities, regardless of country of study. Of course...this just all feeds your argument that the rich are stealing from the poor...
"Tobacco smoking, alcohol, cannabis and polysubstance use are common behaviors among young adults, particularly those experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage. Interventions aiming to decrease substance abuse and reduce socioeconomic inequalities in this area should be implemented early in life."

http://www.ok.gov/odmhsas/documents/A GENERAL CAUSAL MODEL GUIDE - PIRE.pdf
Alcohol and Drug Problems - Topic Overview - Addiction | Alcoholism | Drugs - MSN Health
http://www.marshall.edu/jrcp/Maring and Braun.pdf
Neighborhood Income and Income Distribution and the Use of Cigarettes, Alcohol, and Marijuana
ScienceDirect.com - Drug and Alcohol Dependence - Tobacco, alcohol, cannabis and other illegal drug use among young adults: The socioeconomic context
 
Last edited:
Then you really SHOULD get out of the house more. Go check out your nearest behavioral health units, emergency rooms, Domestic Violence shelters and treatment centers. Amazing how many people with no income for several years are still pack a day smokers and manage to access alcohol and illegal drugs. Check out stats on reservations. Comorbid diagnosis of mental D/O, DV, SA, all relatively common in low income communities, regardless of country of study. Of course...this just all feeds your argument that the rich are stealing from the poor...
Tobacco smoking, alcohol, cannabis and polysubstance use are common behaviors among young adults, particularly those experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage. Interventions aiming to decrease substance abuse and reduce socioeconomic inequalities in this area should be implemented early in life.

http://www.ok.gov/odmhsas/documents/A GENERAL CAUSAL MODEL GUIDE - PIRE.pdf
Alcohol and Drug Problems - Topic Overview - Addiction | Alcoholism | Drugs - MSN Health
http://www.marshall.edu/jrcp/Maring and Braun.pdf
Neighborhood Income and Income Distribution and the Use of Cigarettes, Alcohol, and Marijuana
ScienceDirect.com - Drug and Alcohol Dependence - Tobacco, alcohol, cannabis and other illegal drug use among young adults: The socioeconomic context

If somebody stole all my money I'd take what I had left and buy smokes, drinks and cannabis.
 
If somebody stole all my money I'd take what I had left and buy smokes, drinks and cannabis.
Well sure...since that IS after all what is happening.
 
Well sure...since that IS after all what is happening.

The ultra rich who run industries and rely on consumption realize that if they absorb an excess of the funds, that the profit machine (consumer and business sales) will stop.
If they let sheer greed allow them to keep taking beyond what is healthy for the economy it will cost them more in the medium term. So it's actually a self balancing model though there will be offsets here and there.
 
The ultra rich who run industries and rely on consumption realize that if they absorb an excess of the funds, that the profit machine (consumer and business sales) will stop.
If they let sheer greed allow them to keep taking beyond what is healthy for the economy it will cost them more in the medium term. So it's actually a self balancing model though there will be offsets here and there.
Omigish...the ultrarich are targeting the poor...stealing their pennies? You have GOT to be kidding...right? See...I was being sarcastic a few posts ago...and I know sometimes sarcasm doesnt translate well. Please tell me you are joking and we can have a good laugh at your comments and move forward. Please. Cuz if not...well...there will still be LOTS of laughter...just..not at your comments...
 
Then you really SHOULD get out of the house more. Go check out your nearest behavioral health units, emergency rooms, Domestic Violence shelters and treatment centers. Amazing how many people with no income for several years are still pack a day smokers and manage to access alcohol and illegal drugs. Check out stats on reservations. Comorbid diagnosis of mental D/O, DV, SA, all relatively common in low income communities, regardless of country of study. Of course...this just all feeds your argument that the rich are stealing from the poor...
"Tobacco smoking, alcohol, cannabis and polysubstance use are common behaviors among young adults, particularly those experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage. Interventions aiming to decrease substance abuse and reduce socioeconomic inequalities in this area should be implemented early in life."

http://www.ok.gov/odmhsas/documents/A GENERAL CAUSAL MODEL GUIDE - PIRE.pdf
Alcohol and Drug Problems - Topic Overview - Addiction | Alcoholism | Drugs - MSN Health
http://www.marshall.edu/jrcp/Maring and Braun.pdf
Neighborhood Income and Income Distribution and the Use of Cigarettes, Alcohol, and Marijuana
ScienceDirect.com - Drug and Alcohol Dependence - Tobacco, alcohol, cannabis and other illegal drug use among young adults: The socioeconomic context

You are using the wrong correlation. IT isn't booze and cigs that make people poor, or booze and cigs that keep them there. As you can see from the first link CP posted it showed that at increasing level of incomes people drink more.

Its an argument with no statistical evidence in your favor. Try again.
 
You are using the wrong correlation. IT isn't booze and cigs that make people poor, or booze and cigs that keep them there. As you can see from the first link CP posted it showed that at increasing level of incomes people drink more.

Its an argument with no statistical evidence in your favor. Try again.
DO 'the poor' spend their money on such things and can they afford to? No one said that is what CAUSED their failure. Usually that is attributed to mother and father and a dismal level of preparation for a future. NOT rich people stealing their sheckels.
 
DO 'the poor' spend their money on such things and can they afford to? No one said that is what CAUSED their failure. Usually that is attributed to mother and father and a dismal level of preparation for a future. NOT rich people stealing their sheckels.

I was simply responding to you saying that they should stop smoking and drinking your own link showed that isn't what makes them poor.

From your link:

"By far, most of the alcohol is bought by people in the upper-income brackets. People in the bottom quintile consume only about eight percent of alcoholic beverages.

Alcohol purchases among those consumers in the lowest income quintile are highly concentrated in a relatively small percentage of families."

http://www.cspinet.org/booze/taxguide/lowerincome.pdf
 
I was simply responding to you saying that they should stop smoking and drinking your own link showed that isn't what makes them poor.

From your link:

"By far, most of the alcohol is bought by people in the upper-income brackets. People in the bottom quintile consume only about eight percent of alcoholic beverages.

Alcohol purchases among those consumers in the lowest income quintile are highly concentrated in a relatively small percentage of families."

http://www.cspinet.org/booze/taxguide/lowerincome.pdf

Nowhere did I SAY that is what 'made them poor'. And by your continued dodge you fully accept that in fact they DO spend resources they don't have on such things. So...the rich didn't rob them, no one else created their situation, and they are digging their own holes deeper. Looky there...common ground.
 
Nowhere did I SAY that is what 'made them poor'. And by your continued dodge you fully accept that in fact they DO spend resources they don't have on such things. So...the rich didn't rob them, no one else created their situation, and they are digging their own holes deeper. Looky there...common ground.

I never said the rich robbed them, and I would disagree that their situations aren't "Created" by someone else, and having a few drinks for living a life where you have to work or have no leisure is completely acceptable. **** if I was poor I would probably drink a bit more.
 
Tax expert: Paul Ryan’s ‘smoke and mirrors’ budget would increase deficit

"I just got off the phone with Robert McIntyre, the director of Citizens for Tax Justice. His criticism of Paul Ryan’s new budget was unsparing: He ripped it as “smoke and mirrors,” and claimed it would increase the deficit.

“He’s a phony,” McIntyre said of Rep. Ryan. “But he’s always been a phony.”

Here’s how McIntyre reached his conclusion. He compared the amounts the Ryan budget predicts in revenues and expenditures for fiscal years 2013-2022, with the same numbers the Congressional Budget Office projects under current law.

(The Ryan numbers are on page 87 of his budget; the CBO numbers are on page 20 of its recent fiscal outlook.)

Bottom line: By McIntyre’s calculations, the Ryan budget cuts taxes by $4.3 trillion over 10 years; and it cuts spending by $4.2 trillion over the same period. Since the former is larger than the latter, the deficit would marginally go up.

And it’s much, much worse than this, McIntyre says, because he doesn’t believe that the Ryan budget would only cut taxes by $4.3 trillion. His budget doesn’t specify any of the deductions and loopholes he’d close to offset the huge cost of the tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, McIntyre points out — meaning the overall tax cut would likely be far larger than he says, and that the deficit would likely soar.

“He thinks he can get the corporate and personal rate down to 25 percent and not lose money,” says McIntyre, whose group is liberal leaning but nonpartisan and doesn’t hesitate to criticize Democrats. “He waves his hands, and says, `There must be something to cover it.’”

McIntyre says the plan would proably result in a “huge” deficit increase, even though there isn’t enough information in the proposal to calculate it.

“This is all smoke mirrors and no deficit reduction,” McIntyre concludes. “Have you seen the cover? It’s beautiful. That’s the best part. But he is proposing to increase the budget deficit over the long term.”

McIntyre’s conclusion: “He should have titled it `Blueprint for Financial Disaster.’”

Tax expert: Paul Ryan’s ‘smoke and mirrors’ budget would increase deficit - The Plum Line - The Washington Post
 
McIntyre’s conclusion: “He should have titled it `Blueprint for Financial Disaster.’”

Since the trajectory of the debt is lower in the Ryan budget than that proposed in BHO's 2011-12 budget can we thusly define his as 'Bigger Blueprint for Financial Disaster'?
 
“In 2010, average real income per family grew by 2.3% … but the gains were very uneven. Top 1% incomes grew by 11.6%, while bottom 99% incomes grew only by 0.2%. Hence, the top 1% captured 93% of the income gains in the first year of recovery. Such an uneven recovery can help explain the recent public demonstrations against inequality.”

The 10 page update offers a clear picture of how income shares have varied over different business cycles, as well as the long-term trends since 1917. Top income shares fell dramatically after World War II, stayed flat, then began to rise in the early 1980s and have returned to their pre-War levels.

The top 10% in the US take now take home about 47% of all income, but this is driven by the top 1% who account for 20%.

The difference between the business cycle of the 1990s and the 2000s is that the incomes of the bottom 99% grew by 20% between 1993 and 2000, but only by 6.8% between 2002 and 2007.

Saez suggests that this “may … help explain why the dramatic growth in top incomes during the Clinton administration did not generate much public outcry while there has been a great level of attention to top incomes in the press and in the public debate since 2005.”

Over 90% of the income gains in the first year of the recovery went to the top 1% « Economics for public policy

Can't make a true aristocracy by ensuring that everyone gets their share.
 
Since the trajectory of the debt is lower in the Ryan budget than that proposed in BHO's 2011-12 budget can we thusly define his as 'Bigger Blueprint for Financial Disaster'?

The experts say the GOP's plan increases the deficit more than the Democrats over the next decade.

So thanks, but no thanks!
 
Only the most gullible of fools would believe that Obama isn't helping his 1% posse members.

As I noted some of the 1% do better when there is less government, less parasites and less income stealers in office. And then there are those in the 1% who are parasites, big government leaches and income stealers. Like Obama's supporters

Of course Obama helps his 1% members. No doubt about it. He also attempts to implement policies to help the 99% as well. And there in lies the difference between he and Romney.
 
Can't make a true aristocracy by ensuring that everyone gets their share.

Fair share based on...what exactly? Amount of investment or just because they exist? How exactly does this gig work?
 
The experts say the GOP's plan increases the deficit more than the Democrats over the next decade.

So thanks, but no thanks!

Experts....EXPERTS???? Can you not read the tables? Look up the projections on the last budget proposed by BHO and look at those listed in the PTP (Ryan plan). Anyone can speculate that either is wrong based on whatever but the tables were prepared, presumably, by intelligent folks (expecting ad hom) on both.
 
Last edited:
Tax expert: Paul Ryan’s ‘smoke and mirrors’ budget would increase deficit

"I just got off the phone with Robert McIntyre, the director of Citizens for Tax Justice. His criticism of Paul Ryan’s new budget was unsparing: He ripped it as “smoke and mirrors,” and claimed it would increase the deficit.

“He’s a phony,” McIntyre said of Rep. Ryan. “But he’s always been a phony.”

Here’s how McIntyre reached his conclusion. He compared the amounts the Ryan budget predicts in revenues and expenditures for fiscal years 2013-2022, with the same numbers the Congressional Budget Office projects under current law.

(The Ryan numbers are on page 87 of his budget; the CBO numbers are on page 20 of its recent fiscal outlook.)

Bottom line: By McIntyre’s calculations, the Ryan budget cuts taxes by $4.3 trillion over 10 years; and it cuts spending by $4.2 trillion over the same period. Since the former is larger than the latter, the deficit would marginally go up.

And it’s much, much worse than this, McIntyre says, because he doesn’t believe that the Ryan budget would only cut taxes by $4.3 trillion. His budget doesn’t specify any of the deductions and loopholes he’d close to offset the huge cost of the tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, McIntyre points out — meaning the overall tax cut would likely be far larger than he says, and that the deficit would likely soar.

“He thinks he can get the corporate and personal rate down to 25 percent and not lose money,” says McIntyre, whose group is liberal leaning but nonpartisan and doesn’t hesitate to criticize Democrats. “He waves his hands, and says, `There must be something to cover it.’”

McIntyre says the plan would proably result in a “huge” deficit increase, even though there isn’t enough information in the proposal to calculate it.

“This is all smoke mirrors and no deficit reduction,” McIntyre concludes. “Have you seen the cover? It’s beautiful. That’s the best part. But he is proposing to increase the budget deficit over the long term.”

McIntyre’s conclusion: “He should have titled it `Blueprint for Financial Disaster.’”

Tax expert: Paul Ryan’s ‘smoke and mirrors’ budget would increase deficit - The Plum Line - The Washington Post


In reality a far left tax propagandist who wants the rich to pay more

from Wiki

CTJ was founded in 1979 in response to the growing anti-tax movement’s recent passage of California’s Proposition 13

I cannot find any evidence that the guy referenced in your propaganda piece is an "expert"

we do know that the spin center claims it wants the "rich to pay their fair share"

they lose all credibility with that crap
 
Of course Obama helps his 1% members. No doubt about it. He also attempts to implement policies to help the 99% as well. And there in lies the difference between he and Romney.

Opinion noted not shared. Obama promotes crony capitalism and works to help the crony capitalist billionaires by making more and more people dependent on the government which these uber rich types run
 
Experts....EXPERTS???? Can you not read the tables? Look up the projections on the last budget proposed by BHO and look at those listed in the PTP (Ryan plan). Anyone can speculate that either is wrong based on whatever but the tables were prepared, presumably, by intelligent folks (expecting ad hom) on both.

"TPC found that repealing the AMT and cutting rates by 20 percent would increase the deficit by more than $3 trillion over the next 10 years, even after the 2001/2003/2010 tax cuts are extended."

Romney's Tax Plan Would Add $3T To Deficit Over A Decade - Forbes

"In Ryan’s “Path to Prosperity,” he proposes reducing the deficit over the next decade, but according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Ryan’s plan will add more to the deficit than if Congress maintains the status quo.

Republicans Pass Blame For Their Own Deficit Failures On To The Poor


What experts can you reference that claim the GOP deficit will be less than the presidents?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom