Obama: "Spread the wealth around..."

[Snowman]

So what you're saying is basically the government is living beyond its means. Spending more money than it is taking in.

So there are two things that can be done to solve this problem.
A. Spend less.
B. Take in more.

1. Increase taxes on everybody. We are all citizens of this country so we all must step up and pay more to solve it.

2. Doing away with things like social security. After all none of us will ever be able to retire anyway.

I like you're radical thinking Rhino.

[MetaLord 9]

^^ I don't believe any of what he was saying counts as radical thinking, unlike the "two things that can be done to solve this problem" that you mentioned. Spend wisely might be the option "C" that you're looking for here. Instead of ponying up & establishing a national healthcare system, why don't we work with the private sector to stimulate a segement of the economy while making healthcare affordable. Government SPENDS LESS and citizens also SPEND LESS while economy grows.

Less is more. Less government is more money left over. More money left over trickles down.

We are all citizens of this country so we all must step up and pay more to solve it.

not that this was specifically advocated, but explain to me why this solution is any more radical than having a small percentage of the populace step up to pay more?

[Snowman]

^^ I don't believe any of what he was saying counts as radical thinking, unlike the "two things that can be done to solve this problem" that you mentioned. Spend wisely might be the option "C" that you're looking for here. Instead of ponying up & establishing a national healthcare system, why don't we work with the private sector to stimulate a segement of the economy while making healthcare affordable. Government SPENDS LESS and citizens also SPEND LESS while economy grows.

Less is more. Less government is more money left over. More money left over trickles down.

The problem I see with option “C” has to do with that fact that no one can come up with what “Spend wisely” means. The schools of thought are all over the board.

I’ve never bought into the trickle down effect theory. Not much for the trickle up ether, however it makes a little more sense to me (very little).

What spending wisely would mean to me is in the creation of better jobs, not just more.

That would require a better-trained work force, which means education.
That would require better and more efficient transportation systems, which means infrastructure.
That would require ways of powering everything from home to industry better, which means new sources of energy.
That would require a healthier work force, which means better heath care.
Etc…

Without these basic structures in place no business will succeed in a global market.

Everyone else on this board will have a different opinion on these topics.

not that this was specifically advocated, but explain to me why this solution is any more radical than having a small percentage of the populace step up to pay more?

Its not, I was being sarcastic for the most part.

However, I believe the tax system has been screwed to the point its completely unjust from top to bottom of the income scale. I have always thought a flat tax or sales tax could solve the problem of who should pay more or less in taxes. But I don’t se this coming anytime soon.

[Rhino]

So what you're saying is basically the government is living beyond its means. Spending more money than it is taking in.

So there are two things that can be done to solve this problem.
A. Spend less.
B. Take in more.

1. Increase taxes on everybody. We are all citizens of this country so we all must step up and pay more to solve it.

2. Doing away with things like social security. After all none of us will ever be able to retire anyway.

I like you're radical thinking Rhino.

Cutting the spending is key.

Social Security has been operating at a surplus for years. Just as nature abhors a vacuum, politicians abhor a surplus. It seems to cause them physical pain and they do anything to eliminate it. The excesses from SS have been "loaned out" to other programs with a promise of being returned when needed. Unfortunately, uncontrolled spending means that money is GONE. Now, just on the horizon is going to be the largest number of SS recipients as the first of the Baby Boomers reached retirement age recently. Now there is going to be more demand than supply and there is going to be less incoming. The missing money is now going to be added to the deficit.

I'm not sure what you qualify as "radical thinking". I like to think it's obvious thinking. I can't find it right now, but there is a youtube clip from Cspan right after the Bailout plan was passed. The representative took the stand and stated that unless the .gov sticks to what it is supposed to be doing (per article 8, section 1 of the constitution) that things like this will continue to happen. It fell on deaf ears as the rest of the them were patting each other's backs and comparing what pork funds they got.

I wish I knew how to do it. Heller vs. D.C. showed that we can challenge the .gov and win. How do you do it? How much does it cost? Do you think the ACLU would take my case if I said I wanted to sue the congress so they couldn't further fund welfare, medicare, foreign aid, etc. Build roads and declare war. Thats it.

Can I sue them for dereliction of duty re: immigration? They are charged with making the laws regarding it. They are also responsible for enforcement. Article 4, section 4 of the official rulebook:
Section. 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.
I'm no lawyer, but it doesn't seem too hard that I could turn that into a case, right? Hell, it says right there that we HAVE to elect McCain, as it guarantees a Republican Form of Gov.

I'm sure that would save us a bit on our budget, not paying those entitlements.


We've lost control of our representatives. We've lost our system of checks and balances. It doesn't matter that we keep hiring the same people, its that we keep electing politicians. If you don't believe it, explain how the bailout bill plan passed with a 99 to 1 against vote from the people. It should be a representative cross-section of the populus, not a bunch of lawyers and liars. Get a teacher, a bus driver, an IT guy, a HVAC foreman. Someone who has to go home and face his neighbors instead of someone who got in just for the retirement benefits and what the lobbyists are offering and then go back to their gated community mansion.



Our reps shouldn't be worried about their jobs, they should be worried about their necks stretching as they hang from lampposts in the town square.



But... we don't care. We'll pick what we feel is the lesser of 2 evils....AGAIN. And in one way or another, they will each raise our costs of living while offering us less, whether it be tax increases on us, or cost increases because they taxed someone else.


As far as the healthcare issue. Mccain wants free market. O wants "I don't care what it costs, just that everyone has it". If you are an insurance provider how would you deal with that choice?



On one hand, you are in competition with 10 other companies to get and keep customers. You have to compete on price, but also quality and value. Go to http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/...f2edb527cf.htm and see where it explains that you get the tax credit and the payments go directly to the ins. company. I don't know WTF o's camp is talking about with that being taxed. If I give you a $5k credit at the gas station, but when you fill up I send it to the gas station owner, you're still getting $5k in gas, right?



On the other, the .gov subsidizes the cost to the consumer AND makes it mandatory to employers. The ones that the .gov subsidizes have no reason to try to keep the cost reasonable. The employer has no reason to seek out quality, only most cost effective to them.




When I worked for other companies and they offered health insurance: In 2000, I worked for a company that offered 100%. I don't know what the actual cost was.
In 2001, a different company paid @ 80% and it was about $100/month ($20 to me). Then the rates skyrocketed. Same company changed carriers a few times. Ended up with me paying $160+ for insurance I never used.
2005, New company offered a choice between crap for $130 or slightly better than crap for $180/month.



Present Day. 31 non smoker, good health, self employed.... $36/month. Preventative care covered. Emergency room covered. All the usual benefits. BUT a $7500/yr deductible for things not covered. That beat the taxpayers paying if I'm uninsured and some fucktard pulls out in front of me when I'm on my bike. From my point of view, I don't need either candidates interference.


The problem with current health insurance is the cost. Not the cost of the insurance itself, the cost of medical services. At 19, I had my appendix out. In the door at 3 p.m. on the table by 6, overnight, discharged next evening. $14,000 (Did they replace it with a platinum plated bionic appendix?) How much have costs increased in 12 years? If I was paying $100/month, it would take 11.6 years for the ins. company to recoup that loss.



Now, how much did it cost when Spiderbob wrecked? (Feel free to chime in if someone knows) If I remember, he was in a coma for a few days. Airlifted? Surgery? Is the insurance company going to be able to stay in the black if he was only paying an "affordable" insurance premium? Then multiply that cost by the bikers and skaters and kids jumping off roofs on youtube. The one thing this country has a surplus of is people messing themselves up...well that and expensive medical treatment.


Meanwhile, I know a guy who has one of the biggest houses I've been in just East of Parker. New BMW's, new harley, new EVERYTHING. He sells blood diagnostic machines to hospitals. Sells them. Doesn't engineer them. Doesn't manufacture them. Doesn't repair them. Just sells. How many hospitals are out there? This guy is making millions from sales! How much does that figure goes into the development, building, repairing of them?


Until the actual cost of health care comes down, insurance is a moot point. Even if Americans are given the opportunity to have low premiums, the industry won't/can't survive, just like SS. More going out than coming in...until the .gov subsidizes it anyway and it gets passed back to the taxpayer.

[Rhino]

That would require a better-trained work force, which means education. Everyone has a perfect opportunity to get a FREE education at a public school. Most choose not to take advantage of it. Can someone cite a specific example of how you were unable to achieve a quality education from a public school? The only challenge I see currently is that the funding is being split to teach classes in Spanish.
That would require better and more efficient transportation systems, which means infrastructure. Before the gas prices this summer, did you EVER see a full RTD bus? Anyone wanna comment on light rail?
That would require ways of powering everything from home to industry better, which means new sources of energy. As long as Ted Kennedy can't see it from his ocean front patio, right?
That would require a healthier work force, which means better heath care. Maybe the Dems can ban germs. At least the one's with "the shoulder thing that goes up"
Etc…

As far as furthering education...as I understand it, student loans are given at extremely low rates. For people to say "I just finished paying off my student loans" at 40 were more than likely taking ample advantage of the low rates vs. not being able to actually pay for it.

[DFab]

"There can be no worthwhile praise of our economic system without detailed awareness of its pitfalls."

[DFab]

I don't know WTF o's camp is talking about with that being taxed. If I give you a $5k credit at the gas station, but when you fill up I send it to the gas station owner, you're still getting $5k in gas, right?

Under McCain's plan, employer provided health insurance will be considered taxable income.

[schwagman]

Remember, rich people are bad because they're not you. So let's tax 'em!

B Hussein Obama just increased the taxes of anyone making 41,000 or more a year in his home state of Illinois. So if you make 41,000 or more a year are you considered rich? He stated in the debates that if you make less than $250,000 a year that your taxes would not be raised. Did he lie? Duh!!!

[Scribbler]

As far as furthering education...as I understand it, student loans are given at extremely low rates. For people to say "I just finished paying off my student loans" at 40 were more than likely taking ample advantage of the low rates vs. not being able to actually pay for it.

Actually no. Student loan rates at a Minimum of 10% apr applies to students who come from a family that can pay it off quickly. According to studies, students who have no financial backing, yet have grades to qualify for student loans average between 25k - 35k (for low end colleges) for four years at 15-16%apr, which puts them into debt at approx 15%apr per year, which equates to about 5k per year in interest. So to overcome that you'd have to pay approx 5.5k per year just to keep ahead of interest. Not every college grad comes out of college making enough money to pay off that much extra each year to pay that off. Especially with unemployment being at such a low. And at 5.5k per year that's about $750 per year paid off...so when you have 25-35k to owe...that can equate to a long haul.

Not sayin it CAN'T be done. But there are many many people who accrue student loan debt who don't jump immediately into an income that can afford 5k per year. Ask your average Low to Middle income college graduate who's workin paycheck to paycheck how easy it is to pay off 5k per year and a lot of them will probably boggle their eyes at you.

[Rhino]

Under McCain's plan, employer provided health insurance will be considered taxable income.

http://www.johnmccain.com/content/de...f-fba8cba4c868

This is from from Mickey's website. It seems to be worded poorly. The idea of a "tax liability" in the left column... The key to this discussion is that every number in the right column is in the positive.


The Facts about the McCain-Palin Health Care Plan

Barack Obama And Joe Biden Have Consistently Lied To Americans About John McCain's Plan. Their claims have failed every fact-check – from CBS to the Washington Post. John McCain is not going to raise taxes on middle class families. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are the only ones in this race that plan to raise taxes.

Transforming The Tax Code To Create Greater Equity: The McCain plan transforms the current tax code to provide all American families – including the self-employed and the uninsured – the same tax benefit, a $5,000 refundable tax credit ($2,500 for individuals) that was previously only available to those with employer coverage. Families can use this credit to purchase insurance of their choice, including keeping their current coverage. This is an approach supported by Barack Obama's own Senior Economic Advisor Jason Furman who wrote that "we could scrap the current deduction altogether and replace it with progressive tax credits that, together with other changes, would ensure that every American has affordable health insurance."

Better Than "Members of Congress": Under the McCain Plan, your employer can provide you with health insurance as good as a "Member of Congress", and you would pay no more in taxes – regardless of your tax bracket. In fact, you would have some additional money left over from the McCain tax credit to put in a health savings account.

On The Issue Of Congressional Plan – There Are Options, But All Are Under The FEHB Program: A good example is the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Service Benefit Plan, which has combined monthly premiums for family coverage of $1027.95, for an annual cost of $12,335.40.

Income Tax Liability McCain-Palin Tax CreditTotal Tax Savings
10% Bracket (Up to $15,000) $1,200 ($12,000 x 10%) $5,000 +$3,800
15% Bracket ($15,650 - $63,700) $1,800 ($12,000 x 15%) $5,000 +$3,200
25% Bracket ($63,700 - $128,500) $3,000 ($12,000 x 25%) $5,000 +$2,000
28% Bracket ($128,500 - $195,850) $3,360 ($12,000 x 28%) $5,000 +$1,640
33% Bracket ($195,850 - $349,700) $3,960 ($12,000 x 33%) $5,000 +$1,040
35% Bracket ($349,700 and Over) $4,200 ($12,000 x 35%) $5,000 +$800

So, what I take from this: They "tax" you on that $12k. If you make less than $60k/year, that number is $1800 "tax". They give you a credit for $5k. They subtract the "tax" from your credit. You are left with a positive amount, $3200 in this case that YOU get to save in a flexible medical savings account. If they had coined it as a "Credit Deduction" there probably wouldn't be a whisper about it.


I'm only looking for insight here. I can understand O's appeal to...certain folks. But his rockstar image that has swept the middle and upper class makes no sense. I was hoping to gain insight in the last post from Vance, but there was the usual lack of substance.
I'm more right than left, but I don't follow the conservative mantra. I don't view Mc as a GREAT choice, rather the lesser of 2 evils choice. It just amazes me that in an age when so much information is at our fingertips, the level of ignorance has increased exponentially. "I heard Obama's a muslim" "Palin's baby Trig is really the daughter's" I understand the sensationalizm, but I sorely misjudged that adults on this board who not only earn enough to survive, but obviously do well enough to have toys like sportbikes wouldn't fall so easy for smoke and mirrors...or a "good speech".

Besides the fall of people's 401k in the last 2 weeks...(which I would blame on liberal lending policies) Can someone give me an example of how the "trickle down" didn't work for you? I just don't see how so many people are playing this victim card. Go to ANY intersection in the metro area. Tell me how long it takes you to count 10 cars that are older than 5 years old. (classics don't count) I sat in Gunther Toody's and watched the light at Arapahoe and Clinton and it took 4 light changes before I saw 1 older vehicle, and it was a tractor trailer.

Someone, Anyone tell me how you filled out a loan application honestly, and choose the 30 yr fixed rate on a house and now you're in trouble. It may be more common that I think, but I have yet to meet 1 person who did things right and are now in trouble. I spend a LOT of time with realtors, investors, landlords, etc. I know some who lost, but they were the ones who played the system and lost.

When interest rates are at "record" lows and you get an Adjustable Rate Loan which way do odds say it will go? And you saved what? .5% for the first year?

Someone tell me your story. I won't judge. I just think that most of this is people being told they are victims so they are seeking an "attacker" to blame. I think their is a phantom army of "victims of Bush's policies".

I live as debt free as possible. The idea of the national debt irritates me to no end. But if push comes to shove, who do we owe that money to? What happens if we tell China to suck it? I have not had any tax increase to pay for it(that I know of), and I'm sure most haven't either. They spend, they tax, they borrow, but they haven't slid anyone the check yet, just let you know they're running up the tab. What if we dine and dash?

Can someone explain it better? We've got engineers, nurses, computer techs, business owner's, and all other manner of college edumacated folks here. Please, share insight.

[Rhino]

snip

I appreciate the correction.

My step brother, who spent many years in school, but was also doing extremely well made the comment that the student loans were all he had when he was looking at a home loan. He said the rates were so low that it didn't make sense to pay it off vs. keeping them. I thought he said it was 1%, but maybe I heard wrong or times have changed.

[schwagman]

Obama Binladen in with terrorist? He has done business with them.

[MAZIN]

But come on guys I thought he would be the first US pres to read the Fed Budget as per his DNC speech (LMAO)

[MAZIN]

Here ya go

[TFOGGuys]

So what you're saying is basically the government is living beyond its means. Spending more money than it is taking in.

So there are two things that can be done to solve this problem.
A. Spend less.
B. Take in more.

1. Increase taxes on everybody. We are all citizens of this country so we all must step up and pay more to solve it.

2. Doing away with things like social security. After all none of us will ever be able to retire anyway.

I like you're radical thinking Rhino.

When an individual spends more than (s)he makes, it's called check kiting, and is punishable by civil and criminal law. When a government does the same, it's called "deficit spending". WTF? Perhaps our esteemed criminals....er...."representatives" in Washington should be required to take Accounting 101, and prove that they can count to 10 without having to take their shoes off before they are allowed to spend OUR money....

[R1chie]

The evil Rich?

My ears were burning so I had to drop in.

Seems like the polls say that most of the nation is for Obama.
Hmm that would make us an Obamanation. LOL

Just say Nobama.

[R1chie]

That would require a better-trained work force, which means education.

You can go to any college you want, you just have to be motivated to want to do that, in America, people who want to do that do, and those who don't don't. That is the way it should be.

That would require better and more efficient transportation systems, which means infrastructure.

Transportation systems workink in large compact cities. I know it does no work in Colorado Springs. I see urban sprawl and empty buses.

That would require ways of powering everything from home to industry better, which means new sources of energy.

That would be nuclear power, but our liberal tree huggers don't want that even though we know it works in other countries.

That would require a healthier work force, which means better heath care.
Etc…

We have the best healthcare system in the world. Those who can afford it can use it. Those who choose not to go to school, get good jobs, work hard, don't get to use it. That is how the world works.

Without these basic structures in place no business will succeed in a global market.

Business can succeed with none of these. The problem is that there are people in 3rd world countries that are so poor they will work for a tenth or twentyth the amount an american will work for. Businesses cannot compete with that. That is why they are sending jobs over to those places so they can compete.

Everyone else on this board will have a different opinion on these topics.
However, I believe the tax system has been screwed to the point its completely unjust from top to bottom of the income scale. I have always thought a flat tax or sales tax could solve the problem of who should pay more or less in taxes. But I don’t se this coming anytime soon.

Federal income tax is unconstitutional. It should be removed. The Fed gov can go back to the way it was before the war. Using only tariffs on goods coming from abroad.

This will help the upper middle class but the poor and lower middle don't pay income tax anyway.

[puckstr]

My ears were burning so I had to drop in.

Seems like the polls say that most of the nation is for Obama.
Hmm that would make us an Obamanation. LOL

Just say Nobama.

The polls also had John Kerry to beat GW Bush.

I hope the polls are wrong again.

[Nick_Ninja]

The polls also had John Kerry to beat GW Bush.

I hope the polls are wrong again.

No way in hell.

Unless they do the standup thing and change the ticket.

[puckstr]

^^^^^

We shall see

[JustSomeDude]

What you guys don't get, is that paying more taxes is not a penalty, it's it way of making our economy stronger so the middle and lower classes actually have money to spend on the products and services that others make and deliver.

Can't you see what the last eight years of tax cuts during a time of war have gotton us???? Sorry, trickle down economics does not work.

Obama is only talking about raising taxes on the rich 3%, or like it was during the Reagan and Clinton years.

Most rich people use all the tax loop holes and don't pay as much as you think anyways.

If you are making over 250k and you can't bare to help our country out of this mess you voted for you are some selfish bastards. Most of you dummies don't even make that much, and you are going to vote against your country and your own best interests once again. LOLOLOL

1.) 40% of the working population doesn't even pay taxes. Why should we TAKE money from the rich and GIVE it to them for FREE!?!?! Just so they can "buy more stuff and services" as you suggest?

2.) You say "trickle down economics does not work." Well, a hundred years, and the few dozen countries that gave socialism a try shows it's a total socio-economic disaster wherever it's been implemented. No, capitalism is not perfect, but it's the best system we have, faults and all. History has shown this to be true.

3.) You are right, most rich do use tax loopholes to keep as much of their money as they can. But with an ever GREATER marginal tax rate, you can be damn sure they will be working over time to pay even LESS taxes OR to KEEP MORE MONEY for themselves. That could mean less investment, small production runs, or decreased staff. That translates to less jobs, and higher costs to the average consumer.

4.) As for your final statement, you are correct - many of us probably don't make $250,000. But the fact is, many of us would like to. The incentive for hard work is success, which (in this country) translates to financial benefit. If you penalize success, or improve the quality of "failure", what would motivate anyone to better their current condition? Yes, we can all live in mediocrity equally, but that is no way to live.

Joe the Plumber... God Bless John McCain's unlikely savior:
http://www.yahoo.com/s/971720

PS: Gallup today - only a 2 point spread. Joe the Plumber saving the day!!!

[Canuck]

"Joe the plumber" is not even a licensed plumber in the state of Ohio.

[King Nothing]

And you're not a real canadian.

[DFab]

PS: Gallup today - only a 2 point spread. Joe the Plumber saving the day!!!

This poll would matter if the election was decided by national popular vote. The electoral map is currently showing a blowout, possibly by 200+ electoral votes.