The Final Debate! No More! This Is IT! Last one!!

@Diest TKO,

Never heard 230,000 out of his mouth. I have heard 200k or 250k, depending upon which sentence you pick. The 40 k goes back to what he has done in the past, not what he has said for his future plans. Actions speak louder than words.

2 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

He plans to give tax breaks to businesses that will provide jobs. Thats trickle down in case you missed it.

Cutting taxes and hoping and praying that it will result in job creation is trickle down.

Tying tax cuts/credits to actual job creation is a concrete tax policy.

This may be too simple of a concept for you to understand, though.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Okie, I doubt you believe half of the crap you write on A2K. I don't see how it's possible that anyone could, given your penchant for hyperbole and over-simplification of issues to the point of idiocy.

Cycloptichorn

I believe it all. Some is speculation, and I say it is when it is that. I post my honest opinions. Do you?

I am beginning to like the name, P.T. Obama. After all, he is a showman, and his administration will be a circus, if elected. And whether P.T. said it or not, he is credited with the quote, a sucker is born every minute, and that is what you guys are that are buying tickets to the circus.

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

okie wrote:

He plans to give tax breaks to businesses that will provide jobs. Thats trickle down in case you missed it.

Cutting taxes and hoping and praying that it will result in job creation is trickle down.

Tying tax cuts/credits to actual job creation is a concrete tax policy.

This may be too simple of a concept for you to understand, though.

LOL, now you need to work for the Obama campaign if you aren't already. That post was a classic!

Yes, P. T. was right!

0 Replies

@cjhsa,

cjhsa wrote:

And thousands more should be turned away - those receiving government assistance (welfare) and not paying taxes. Those who cannot read. Those who don't speak English. Enough is enough.

Why exactly don't they have a right to take part in the political process? By this logic, I could say that your conclusion is uneducated and that being uneducated should disqualify you to vote.

If you are a citizen, you can vote.

If those receiving government assistance can't vote in your mind does that include all the families in the US that have their children in public schools? What about veterans that are in VA hospitals? While we are at it, what about people who work for companies like Walmart which receives huge government subsidies.

If you're a citizen, you can vote.

T
K
O

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

If ya'll are gonna reply to cjhsa, could you do it without the quotes? Kinda messes up the whole "ignore" thingie.

can't be said enough

(my apologies to anyone ignoring the DD)

0 Replies

@okie,

Instead of speculating I just went to Obama's site. I misspoke, the value is $250,000 for families.

T
K
O

1 Reply

@Diest TKO,

Here is what happened earlier this year:

"Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton both promise to reverse Mr. Bush's tax cuts for wealthier taxpayers, but the Democratic budget they'll be voting for would allow income tax rates to go up on individuals making as little as $31,850 and couples earning $63,700 or more."
http://www.nysun.com/national/senate-democrats-reject-bush-tax-cut-extension/72898/

Vast difference between 31,850 or 63,700 and 200K or 250K, Diest.

1 Reply

@okie,

Quote:

He plans to give tax breaks to businesses that will provide jobs. Thats trickle down in case you missed it.

No, that's not trickle down in the sense used by Reagan.
Obama's plan which can be found here
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/#small-business

Trickle down was the concept that if you cut taxes for the rich then they will invest to create jobs.
The rich are not small businesses nor do all of them run small businesses
Small business are not all rich.
Cutting taxes for small businesses is not the same as cutting taxes for the rich.

Obama's plan doesn't cut taxes for the rich with the intent of creating jobs so it is not trickle down.

I still find it interesting that you are willing to use "trickle down" as a perjorative when discussing Obama.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie wrote:

Here is what happened earlier this year:

"Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton both promise to reverse Mr. Bush's tax cuts for wealthier taxpayers, but the Democratic budget they'll be voting for would allow income tax rates to go up on individuals making as little as $31,850 and couples earning $63,700 or more."
http://www.nysun.com/national/senate-democrats-reject-bush-tax-cut-extension/72898/

Vast difference between 31,850 or 63,700 and 200K or 250K, Diest.

That's the difference between voting for someone else's plan, and for putting your own plan forth, Okie. Obama didn't write the Senate Dem legislation.

But of course, you know this. Why do you persist?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@okie,

Obama wants to increase taxes by rolling back the Bush tax cuts on people making more than $200,000 if single or $250,000 if married filing jointly.

Both numbers are used. It depends on marital status just like the tax code does.

0 Replies

I think this image from last night's debate sums things up pretty well:

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/mccaingollum.jpg

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@parados,

Nice obfuscation, parados. Several fallacies in your argument. Reagan cut taxes for more than the rich, and he cut taxes for businesses, period, with a wide range of size and wealth. Secondly, your apparent claim that cutting taxes for small business only provides jobs, not big business, which is bogus. Thirdly, defining rich or not is a totally inexact science, suited to whoever defines it, and there is no mathematical logic that once the taxcut crosses the line to a so-called "rich" business, it no longer will provide jobs, that is absolutely nonsensical logic. Obviously, businesses must have some resources greater than the people they hire, and thus it is trickle down, regardless of how far down the ladder it trickles. It will trickle from the next rung up, or it will trickle from the top rung, just logic. And for trickling down from the top rung, it affects everyone on the ladder. How many people do poor people directly hire? Not many.

And I use the term, trickle down, in regard to Obama, because I am pointing out an obvious contradiction and hypocrisy that has been out there for a very long time. Just because you don't like it does not eliminate the obvious fact.

1 Reply

@okie,

You see, Parados, all facts are obvious, when Okie is allowed to use whatever definitions for words that he likes.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

Diest TKO wrote:

If you're a citizen, you can vote.

Which is a huge part of the problem. There need to be qualifications to vote. Citizen ship of course. Literacy. And paying taxes.

1 Reply

@cjhsa,

Seems like that would lead to a lot of Democrats in office.

T
K
O

1 Reply

@Diest TKO,

Diest TKO wrote:

Seems like that would lead to a lot of Democrats in office.

T
K
O

Hardly. You know who the real Democratic base is don't you? Or are you an elitist fantasycrat?

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn
I thought I watched the whole thing, I must have missed that image, don't see how I could have.

All in all, it went pretty good for Obama. He held his cool under McCain's constant negative attacks while calmly debunking them. I found it hugely ironic for McCain to be talking about negative attacks while spending the whole night negatively attacking Obama.

I agree with Obama that it is a mistake to get too complacent, like he said sometime today,” remember New Hampshire. “

I have a feeling that the republicans are gearing up for a post election showdown in the case of an Obama win with all this talk of a ACORN and what not. It is already starting.

1 Reply

@revel,

revel wrote:

Cycloptichorn
I thought I watched the whole thing, I must have missed that image, don't see how I could have.

All in all, it went pretty good for Obama. He held his cool under McCain's constant negative attacks while calmly debunking them. I found it hugely ironic for McCain to be talking about negative attacks while spending the whole night negatively attacking Obama.

I agree with Obama that it is a mistake to get too complacent, like he said sometime today,” remember New Hampshire. “

I have a feeling that the republicans are gearing up for a post election showdown in the case of an Obama win with all this talk of a ACORN and what not. It is already starting.

It was at the very end, when McCain couldn't figure out which way to walk off of the stage.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I think this image from last night's debate sums things up pretty well:

What the hell did he think he was doing with all that jazz?

0 Replies

The Final Debate! No More! This Is IT! Last one!!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know