• 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 to call for middle class tax cut extension

Carleen said:
Turtle, take your head out of your shell. Pull the rich down? Are you serious? The just keep getting richer and I wouldn't refer to people who are out of work and can't find a job as the lower class. Bad choice of words don't you think? Sort of condesending to those who are suffering.
Click to expand...

ok what is your solution

post it up

and tell me why leftwing solutions actually help those who are suffering
 
TurtleDude said:
That is an interesting change of position from you given how much time you spent denying the existence of natural rights and dismissing the premises upon which our Constitution was based and now you talk about this

the fact is Haymarket-your posts are that of a hard core statist-someone who elevates the state to the position of God and demands that the masses bow down and worship that Lord and Master
Click to expand...

There is no change of position.

What change of position?

Yet again - for a time beyond count or calculation - you make baseless and irresponsible allegations completely devoid of not only merit but any tangible form of evidence to support your silly claims.

Your reading comprehension skills are abysmal. Giving thanks to a higher power is entirely separate and apart from believing that a higher power worked some magical illusions in providing you with rights hundreds of years ago.

But why confuse you with facts.
 
MoSurveyor said:
If the Rich cry long enough and hard enough that they're poor, their lapdogs and servants will start to believe them.
Click to expand...

and I keep hearing ENVY has nothing to do with these sort of comments--its always funny coming from those who think others have a duty to fund their existence
 
TurtleDude said:
ok what is your solution

post it up

and tell me why leftwing solutions actually help those who are suffering
Click to expand...

The "final solution" is to get about 60% of the voters paying little or no FIT, thus all FIT increases effect only the tiny (but vocal) minority that actually must pay FIT, which has no real chance of convincing the majority, that get ever more free stuff, that it is wrong to take their "fair share" of the nation's vast wealth for proper redistribution. Yes they can!
 
haymarket said:
There is no change of position.

What change of position?

Yet again - for a time beyond count or calculation - you make baseless and irresponsible allegations completely devoid of not only merit but any tangible form of evidence to support your silly claims.

Your reading comprehension skills are abysmal. Giving thanks to a higher power is entirely separate and apart from believing that a higher power worked some magical illusions in providing you with rights hundreds of years ago.

But why confuse you with facts.
Click to expand...

still trying to figure out what the constitution was premised on

Its amusing-I don't need others to pay for my existence

I don't demand others be taxed more to fund what I need
 
MoSurveyor said:
If the Rich cry long enough and hard enough that they're poor, their lapdogs and servants will start to believe them.
Click to expand...

The really pathetic thing to witness is the sycophants and toadies of the wealthy suck up to them against their own economic and political interests.

I had a prof in college who once asked what the fundamental difference was between a man and a dog? He told this story so we could figure it out:

Back in the days of kings and queens and medieval kingdoms the titled and rich used to hold lavish banquets at their castles involving the other swells to gorge themselves on food and drink for days at a time. And European manners being rather primitive, they would bring their dogs with them who would hang out under the massive table hoping for scraps and bones. Now some of these dogs were a bit faster and quicker than others and some learned quickly which noble threw the meatiest bone and learned to hang out at their feet. And some dogs ate very well at the expense of others who did not eat very well.

But at the end of the night, not one of those dogs - even the most well ged and quickest among them - believed for a second that they were one of the nobles and jumped up on the table to take a seat.

And that in a nutshell is the difference between men and dogs. Some men do not have the good sense that nature or God gave animals.
 
haymarket said:
The really pathetic thing to witness is the sycophants and toadies of the wealthy suck up to them against their own economic and political interests.

I had a prof in college who once asked what the fundamental difference was between a man and a dog? He told this story so we could figure it out:

Back in the days of kings and queens and medieval kingdoms the titled and rich used to hold lavish banquets at their castles involving the other swells to gorge themselves on food and drink for days at a time. And European manners being rather primitive, they would bring their dogs with them who would hang out under the massive table hoping for scraps and bones. Now some of these dogs were a bit faster and quicker than others and some learned quickly which noble threw the meatiest bone and learned to hang out at their feet. And some dogs ate very well at the expense of others who did not eat very well.

But at the end of the night, not one of those dogs - even the most well ged and quickest among them - believed for a second that they were one of the nobles and jumped up on the table to take a seat.

And that in a nutshell is the difference between men and dogs. Some men do not have the good sense that nature or God gave animals.
Click to expand...


an interesting bit of envy laced with the defeatist attitude that if you aren't rich you will never be and you should vote against the rich because the welfare socialist agenda is the best for those who have not yet made it


Have you ever considered that telling people not to try is why they never make it?
 
TurtleDude said:
still trying to figure out what the constitution was premised on
Click to expand...

Thats easy. Providing one knows the difference between the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence - )which you did not know and had to be school on it earlier by me) - the answer can be found in the Preamble. It tells us why the wrote it and what the aims and goals of it were.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Click to expand...

The underlying premise was we better find a government that works or its back to King George and company.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
an interesting bit of envy laced with the defeatist attitude that if you aren't rich you will never be and you should vote against the rich because the welfare socialist agenda is the best for those who have not yet made it


Have you ever considered that telling people not to try is why they never make it?
Click to expand...

That is absurd and again you cannot discuss these matters without resorting to the lazy mans playing of the ENVY CARD.

I know of nobody who pushes a "welfare socialist agenda". - what ever in the hell that may mean. Can you cite some here please.
 
haymarket said:
That is absurd and again you cannot discuss these matters without resorting to the lazy mans playing of the ENVY CARD.

I know of nobody who pushes a "welfare socialist agenda". - what ever in the hell that may mean. Can you cite some here please.
Click to expand...

envy is quite evident in the posts that whine about people with "silver spoons" and such

do you think people really believe your comments that the rich should be on their knees begging to keep what they have made was inspired by something else?
 
MoSurveyor said:
You want REAL job creation instead of political bullchit? Get the housing industry back on track. Romney will be subsidizing the rich bastards anyway - we may as well make sure some Americans get employed with that money.
Click to expand...
I am delighted to see you recognize that the next president will be Romney.
 
Karl said:
Yes, the U.S. declared war on the British and mostly got their ass handed to them, including getting their capitol sacked. Personally I don't see the hilarity in that.

I will, however, await the hilarity of you joining TurtleDude in explaining just exactly how the British invasion of the U.S. precipitated the war of 1812, and just exactly where and when this war-causing British invasion happened. Let's review the original goalpost, which some seem to be tugging upon:


However, I will now readily concede one error -- TurtleDude was serious, and it appears he wasn't the only one :doh
Click to expand...

You claimed the US hasn't been invaded since the Declaration of Independence. There is a very great deal to laugh at about that claim, oh yes indeed.
 
TurtleDude said:
envy is quite evident in the posts that whine about people with "silver spoons" and such

do you think people really believe your comments that the rich should be on their knees begging to keep what they have made was inspired by something else?
Click to expand...

You don't think the rich engage in envy politics? What do you think the attacks on public worker pensions are? The whining about people who don't pay income taxes or get government assistance? And what do you make of the many millionaires who agree their taxes should be raised?
 
Harshaw said:
You claimed the US hasn't been invaded since the Declaration of Independence. There is a very great deal to laugh at about that claim, oh yes indeed.
Click to expand...

rather than conceding his mistake he tried to justify it



self pwnage at its best
 
TurtleDude said:
and I keep hearing ENVY has nothing to do with these sort of comments--its always funny coming from those who think others have a duty to fund their existence
Click to expand...
:lamo :lamo :lamo

No economics thread would be complete if TD didn't play the Envy Card!
 
TurtleDude said:
envy is quite evident in the posts that whine about people with "silver spoons" and such

do you think people really believe your comments that the rich should be on their knees begging to keep what they have made was inspired by something else?
Click to expand...

You confuse me with somebody who give a tinkers damn about what people BELIEVE.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The "final solution" is to get about 60% of the voters paying little or no FIT, thus all FIT increases effect only the tiny (but vocal) minority that actually must pay FIT, which has no real chance of convincing the majority, that get ever more free stuff, that it is wrong to take their "fair share" of the nation's vast wealth for proper redistribution. Yes they can!
Click to expand...
And what share of this "free stuff" are you taking? What share do you qualify for?

If the answer to both is zero then you are either Rich or a liar - which is it?
 
Somerville said:
You really should read a bit more of your links and a bit about the author of the linked article. Prof Reinhardt says the primary reason for the high cost of healthcare in America is administrative costs, which at present take 24%+ of every dollar spent. This is twice the rate spent in Canada, yet those who oppose Obamacare have complained about the 20% maximum administration rate in the plan because it takes money away from investors.

OnPBS's Frontline show, Prof Reinhardt said that if administrative costs were cut in half, down to Canada's rate, enough money would be saved to pay for all of the uninsured.
Click to expand...
Do the administrative costs come from compliance with the vast numbers of government rules and regulations?
 
Somerville said:
A small redo of the comment that I think more accurately reflects reality

Yes, doctors offices and hospitals need a whole administrative staff to keep up with and make sure they are following all the red tape that INSURANCE COMPANIES laid upon them. And yet people think it is ONLY Private businesses that are the answer, when they have mostly been the problem.


also, one's political bias does tend to make one post silly comments: "Administrative costs" in this instance are primarily those of the insurance industry, 22-25% of total cost of private insurance. In contrast, government-funded health care, VA, Medicare, Medicaid, administrative costs run between 3% and 7%
Click to expand...
I bet if one dug just a bit the insurance administrative costs are a result of them having to comply with massive numbers of government rules and regulations.

The busybody bureaucrats create a problem with their rules and regulations on private companies and then come to the rescue. Convenient?
 
Somerville said:
How many "family farms" are worth $10 million dollars? This is an argument that has been used against "death taxes" since the beginning of the debate and yet so far not one example of a forced farm sale has been found.
Click to expand...
As long as we are all about class warfare maybe we need a different kind of tax. How about the billionaires tax where upon death, foundations or not, one half of their wealth will be stolen by the government not for its purposes but to be given to 10,000 randomly selected taxpaying citizens?
 
haymarket said:
The really pathetic thing to witness is the sycophants and toadies of the wealthy suck up to them against their own economic and political interests.

I had a prof in college who once asked what the fundamental difference was between a man and a dog? He told this story so we could figure it out:

Back in the days of kings and queens and medieval kingdoms the titled and rich used to hold lavish banquets at their castles involving the other swells to gorge themselves on food and drink for days at a time. And European manners being rather primitive, they would bring their dogs with them who would hang out under the massive table hoping for scraps and bones. Now some of these dogs were a bit faster and quicker than others and some learned quickly which noble threw the meatiest bone and learned to hang out at their feet. And some dogs ate very well at the expense of others who did not eat very well.

But at the end of the night, not one of those dogs - even the most well ged and quickest among them - believed for a second that they were one of the nobles and jumped up on the table to take a seat.

And that in a nutshell is the difference between men and dogs. Some men do not have the good sense that nature or God gave animals.
Click to expand...
That is really an incredibly dumb analogy. Comparing the rich of today with the rich of the Dark Ages is just plain ignorant.
 
Fletch said:
That is really an incredibly dumb analogy. Comparing the rich of today with the rich of the Dark Ages is just plain ignorant.
Click to expand...

Rich is rich is rich. No matter in what era of history you lived in.

And not rich is not rich is not rich. No matter what era of history you lived in.

Just plain ignorant seems to describe what you wrote. The prof was saying that people fool themselves into believing that they can identify with the rich when they are clearly not rich.

Apparently your skills in obtaining the lesson from a parable are sorely out of shape.

But I can see why a right libertarian would hate it.
 
Last edited:
Somerville said:
Which would you rather have as income - 60% of $1,000,000 or 97% of $20,000?
Click to expand...
We do get to choose our income levels. I prefer more. That is why I prepared myself to benefit the company I work for more...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom