ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
I'm fine with that as long as Job Creators get the 0% rate they deserve.
I'm fine with that as long as Job Creators get the 0% rate they deserve.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
- Thread starter joecct
- Start date
- Status
P
Priceless
Guest
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
Socialist! In my plan we give the super wealthy a negative income tax to compensate them for their backbreaking job-creating labors.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Get. Off. Soapbox.
Nobody is saying they don't gotta pay, but when is enough enough.
Fed govt has already shown us that when they get unlimited funds and no accountability they house the HQ for the coast guard in wva!
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
If you think a couple years of sarcasm about the right's worship of crony capitalism gets old, try thirty years of constant drum beating from every moron with a microphone about how the gubbmint (translation: the will of the people in a democratic society) is destroying America.
You too, son.
If you think a couple years of sarcasm about the right's worship of crony capitalism gets old, try thirty years of constant drum beating from every moron with a microphone about how the gubbmint (translation: the will of the people in a democratic society) is destroying America.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
Joke all you want. Will houses be free? Otherwise it might be hard to move. That's one of the problems with Kepler's 'vote with their feet' theory...not everyone can just pack up and move no matter what.
Go take a nap.. Rest your head.. You've had a hard day doing whatever
Joke all you want. Will houses be free? Otherwise it might be hard to move. That's one of the problems with Kepler's 'vote with their feet' theory...not everyone can just pack up and move no matter what.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
What I find funny is how punitive everyone thinks the rates from the 90's were. That's all anyone has ever asked for.
Also, I heard last night that the tax policy that everyone whines about (folks not paying income taxes at all) was a concious choice made by Republicans in lieu of raising the minimum wage. Now they lie to us about what they did. Funny, isn't it?
What I find funny is how punitive everyone thinks the rates from the 90's were. That's all anyone has ever asked for.
Also, I heard last night that the tax policy that everyone whines about (folks not paying income taxes at all) was a concious choice made by Republicans in lieu of raising the minimum wage. Now they lie to us about what they did. Funny, isn't it?
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
Remember, the poor in the red states will also have recourse to Second Amendment remedies.
Last edited:
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
Most people of working age and who are employable can. People aren't nearly as helpless as you seem to want to believe they are.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
People drone on about broken gubment, but it's always the other guy... My guy keeps going back every two/six years. Nothing changes.
People can move if they want to. They don't however. Poor people just as well. Simplistic example, but all those descendants of slaves weren't on plantations in the northern inner cities. How'd those poor move a century ago? How do the current poor from Mexico, south America, and Asia end up in Lowell mass? To sit and whine that it can't be done is stupid.
People drone on about broken gubment, but it's always the other guy... My guy keeps going back every two/six years. Nothing changes.
People can move if they want to. They don't however. Poor people just as well. Simplistic example, but all those descendants of slaves weren't on plantations in the northern inner cities. How'd those poor move a century ago? How do the current poor from Mexico, south America, and Asia end up in Lowell mass? To sit and whine that it can't be done is stupid.
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
Shame on you. Without government assistance, it's impossible for poor people to relocate or do pretty much anything. Nobody does anything on their own. Everybody does everything together. I can't wait for the massive orgies in this country as everything turns to ****.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
Mitt Romney said that if your an Olympian it took a village for you to get there. Just saying.
Shame on you. Without government assistance, it's impossible for poor people to relocate or do pretty much anything. Nobody does anything on their own. Everybody does everything together. I can't wait for the massive orgies in this country as everything turns to ****.
Mitt Romney said that if your an Olympian it took a village for you to get there. Just saying.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Shame on you. Without government assistance, it's impossible for poor people to relocate or do pretty much anything. Nobody does anything on their own. Everybody does everything together. I can't wait for the massive orgies in this country as everything turns to ****.
Still can't believe you cut your hair off
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
it sounds like a lot of people are having the "wrong" conversation from the outset....people are talking about "whether" when the problem is not "whether" instead it is "how much"?
"Should" we help people who "need" help? simplistically, "yes." Yet the discussion has become so polarized, either everyone is a freeloader or nobody cares about anyone else. yawn.
How do we determine "need" and how much "need" and for "how long"? Those are the key questions, yet they all get lost.
Set aside Social Security and Medicare, the government "promised" that if it collected taxes, invested them at interest, it would then pay the money back at interest in retirement and/or disability benefits. Maybe they screwed up the math; the idea was you'd pay in while working and then collect proportionately afterward (with the same "cap" on both calculations).
In 1962, about 6% of people received Federal benefits, in 2012 about 35% are receiving Federal benefits.
The latter seems way too high to me. Something around 10% seems more appropriate.
There is a huge apparent paradox here: the wider the so-called "safety net" spreads, the greater the level of income inequality. Many people automatically assume it's because the rich are getting richer at everyone else's expense; however it seems to me that a better case can be made by asserting that the so-called "safety net" actually has weights attached and is dragging people down instead.
Cynics say that this is part of a long-term strategy to create a permanent Democrat majority: get enough people addicted to dependency, then you add up (a) all the people with government jobs taking care of lifelong dependents, plus (b) university professors, who are never accountable in practice no matter how egregiously wrong they are in theory, and (c) the lifelong dependents, and you have over 50% of the voting public right there, all the time, every year.
I think that overstates the case somewhat, while I do believe there are some people who think that way, most of the rest are sincerely well-intentioned, yet never notice the disconnect between how they want their own children to grow up to be competent capable adults and how they claim that other people's children are unable ever to grow up that way!
it sounds like a lot of people are having the "wrong" conversation from the outset....people are talking about "whether" when the problem is not "whether" instead it is "how much"?
"Should" we help people who "need" help? simplistically, "yes." Yet the discussion has become so polarized, either everyone is a freeloader or nobody cares about anyone else. yawn.
How do we determine "need" and how much "need" and for "how long"? Those are the key questions, yet they all get lost.
Set aside Social Security and Medicare, the government "promised" that if it collected taxes, invested them at interest, it would then pay the money back at interest in retirement and/or disability benefits. Maybe they screwed up the math; the idea was you'd pay in while working and then collect proportionately afterward (with the same "cap" on both calculations).
In 1962, about 6% of people received Federal benefits, in 2012 about 35% are receiving Federal benefits.
The latter seems way too high to me. Something around 10% seems more appropriate.
There is a huge apparent paradox here: the wider the so-called "safety net" spreads, the greater the level of income inequality. Many people automatically assume it's because the rich are getting richer at everyone else's expense; however it seems to me that a better case can be made by asserting that the so-called "safety net" actually has weights attached and is dragging people down instead.
Cynics say that this is part of a long-term strategy to create a permanent Democrat majority: get enough people addicted to dependency, then you add up (a) all the people with government jobs taking care of lifelong dependents, plus (b) university professors, who are never accountable in practice no matter how egregiously wrong they are in theory, and (c) the lifelong dependents, and you have over 50% of the voting public right there, all the time, every year.
I think that overstates the case somewhat, while I do believe there are some people who think that way, most of the rest are sincerely well-intentioned, yet never notice the disconnect between how they want their own children to grow up to be competent capable adults and how they claim that other people's children are unable ever to grow up that way!
Last edited:
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
You guys do realize that the baby-boomers are old now, right? And a good percentage of them are no longer employable and probably have problems that would make moving rather difficult, especially if they lacked the monetary resources to have other people help them. People on USCHO are NOT the norm. People on USCHO are typically white, young, college-educated and fairly well off financially. These are NOT characteristics of the average American. Some of you are under the delusion that they are.
Right. I could move really easily. I would just need someone to drive me to me new place since I can't drive, pack my stuff for me since I'm not supposed to lift stuff on my own etc. Oh, and wherever I end up has to either be cheap or someone else pays my rent because I'm on a fixed income. And wherever I end up has to be within shouting distance of a world class hospital because I have this tumor in my brain...
You guys do realize that the baby-boomers are old now, right? And a good percentage of them are no longer employable and probably have problems that would make moving rather difficult, especially if they lacked the monetary resources to have other people help them. People on USCHO are NOT the norm. People on USCHO are typically white, young, college-educated and fairly well off financially. These are NOT characteristics of the average American. Some of you are under the delusion that they are.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
Easiest thing to do is just stop. Cut off Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security 100% right now and use that tax collection to pay off the debt. Once the debt has been paid off let everyone who pays payroll taxes get the tax break.
Problem solved. And it meets Grover's requirements for tax policy so everyone should agree.
Easiest thing to do is just stop. Cut off Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security 100% right now and use that tax collection to pay off the debt. Once the debt has been paid off let everyone who pays payroll taxes get the tax break.
Problem solved. And it meets Grover's requirements for tax policy so everyone should agree.
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!
The same disconnect between "whether" and "how much" applies to other government programs too.
Take the EPA; if someone says the EPA is getting carried away with itself and is over-reaching, the accusations then fly about wanting air and water to become polluted again, which is just nonsense. We really do need seriously to say "our air and water are clean enough right now that we now need to stop and think about whether getting them just a tiny bit cleaner is worth a huge additional incremental outlay."
On one hand we say want to get people to burn fewer fossil fuels and drive electric cars, on the other hand we are also crippling the ability of utilities to generate electricity, while in the meantime there already is a huge shortage of generator capacity: if even 10% of drivers had electric cars, the electricity grid would be completely overwhelmed by the additional demand and break down.
yet try to get anyone to speak with some thoughtful moderation and within minutes it's back to the "whether or not, all or none" hardline nonsense from both sides.
The same disconnect between "whether" and "how much" applies to other government programs too.
Take the EPA; if someone says the EPA is getting carried away with itself and is over-reaching, the accusations then fly about wanting air and water to become polluted again, which is just nonsense. We really do need seriously to say "our air and water are clean enough right now that we now need to stop and think about whether getting them just a tiny bit cleaner is worth a huge additional incremental outlay."
On one hand we say want to get people to burn fewer fossil fuels and drive electric cars, on the other hand we are also crippling the ability of utilities to generate electricity, while in the meantime there already is a huge shortage of generator capacity: if even 10% of drivers had electric cars, the electricity grid would be completely overwhelmed by the additional demand and break down.
yet try to get anyone to speak with some thoughtful moderation and within minutes it's back to the "whether or not, all or none" hardline nonsense from both sides.
Last edited:
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
No offense, and it's not personal...
But these welfare/social programs were created the makers would have thought that you'd be dead. And all those baby boomers would follow you to their final destination shortly rather than live until they were 80+.
So what do we do?
What can we do?
Status quo is failing.
Doing nothing to help is not an option.
- Status