Should we all hide our wallets? What do you think?

I'm guessing you were more thinking of stuff like this though:

A Lone Voice wrote:

For the last couple of years, liberals have told us that we are right wingers, out of the mainstream, a far right branch.....

Well guess what? We are the mainstream!

I've always said that the libs, the media, both coasts, and the rest of the liberal elite have no clue about what is real in America.

The Democratic Party is on its last leg, just barely twitching.

That, however, serves as a fair warning to us too. If Obama wins and one of us posts something on 6 November about how the Republican Party is mortally humiliated and down for at least a decade, for example, then do copy and paste this to remind us about how easily one ends up looking foolish making pronouncements like that.

1 Reply

@nimh,

Indeed, nimh.

1 Reply

@blatham,

There might be a certain type of conservative who is all for an Obama landslide to let the resultant hubris have its last fling.

Not everybody thinks of the here and now. That's the way of the ancient Greeks. Four years, or even eight, is a mere moment in historical time.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Spendi, as a group we are thinking about 15 minutes ahead over here...

Rolling Eyes

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

One might sympathise with any young children you might have under your care in that case.

0 Replies

You know, the compelling rationale for Reagan-style trickle down economics can really be put quite simply.

The very wealthy are being hard done by. Conversely, the poor have too much money. This hurts the middle class because poverty becomes incentivised...the middle class will want to become poor so that they can have too much as well. They won't want to become very wealthy because then they would be hard done by too.

1 Reply

@blatham,

Actually, the compelling case is that it is perfectly natural and congruent with Darwinian evolutionary principles and there is nothing that can be done about it. The Dictatorship of the Proletariat ended up having the roads cleared by their trusties so that they could drive to and from their country dachas without the botheration of other road users or traffic regulations.

There are few things more ludicrous than seing a proponent of evolutionary principles engaging in hand-wringing social engineering. It is rank populism of the very worst sort.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Wallets, guns, ammo, chickens, molded jello recipes, ...

0 Replies

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson has just pegged the middle class as those making $120,000 and under.

1 Reply

@H2O MAN,

H2O MAN wrote:

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson has just pegged the middle class as those making $120,000 and under.

$120,000 is about two and a half times the median household income, and four times the median individual income.

About 80% of the US population earns less than a $120,000 family household income.

So yeah, as a criterium for the middle class, that sounds fairly reasonable.

Question is, what does this actually have to do with anything?

2 Replies

@nimh,

Quote:

Question is, what does this actually have to do with anything?

Logical connection/relevance might be criteria 2much 2ask of 2O. I expect the answer will be that it somehow has to do with everything.

1 Reply

@blatham,

Stupidity on your part prevents you from making the connection.

1 Reply

@H2O MAN,

It's the only criteria the materialist has. Everything has to have a money value. It makes things easy to understand you see.

The only thing "spreading the wealth" means is that there's a sly attempt to give an impression which is not exactly being given going on. It sort of patronises the listener or makes him titter. The irony is that no sooner does a listener of the first type get the wealth spread to him that he immediatly ceases to be in favour of spreading the wealth.

The conservative is much more likely to actually spread the wealth because that's how conservative voters are created out of liberals.

Every sucker knows that. Mrs Thatcher did it so good that the Labour Party lurched further to the right than she had been. And won three elections on the bounce. So far.

1 Reply

@spendius,

What I meant was that Mr Obama was taking the piss out of his most fervent supporters.

0 Replies

@nimh,

nimh wrote:

H2O MAN wrote:
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson has just pegged the middle class as those making $120,000 and under.

$120,000 is about two and a half times the median household income, and four times the median individual income.

About 80% of the US population earns less than a $120,000 family household income.

So yeah, as a criterium for the middle class, that sounds fairly reasonable.

Question is, what does this actually have to do with anything?

Governor Richardson was stumping for Barack Obama when he said it. So now we have Obama citing $250,000 and up as "rich" with the "Middle Class" below that number--then in another stump speech $200,000 was the figure cited--Biden comes in at $150,000--and now Richardson brings it down to $120,000.

Mark my words, if Obama is elected next Tuesday, he will fairly quickly have to admit that he can't give everybody under $250,000 a tax cut AND implement his grand plan to produce Utopia in the USA by raising taxes on the rich. But we can't say that we weren't warned. He meant those lower numbers all along you see--and it isn't as if we weren't informed.

Also, we who have been paying attention know that our taxes are going up as soon as the Bush tax cuts expire unless Obama reneges on his promise to allow that to happen.

Oh, and Obama also informed us today that if we don't want to pay more in taxes, we are 'selfish'.

3 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Quote:

Oh, and Obama also informed us today that if we don't want to pay more in taxes, we are 'selfish'.

Pretty typical assertion.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if the facts of life fitted everybody's assertions?

1 Reply

@spendius,

Face it.
Obama considers anyone with a job "rich" and he will tax every single person that earns a paycheck.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Governor Richardson was stumping for Barack Obama when he said it. So now we have Obama citing $250,000 and up as "rich" with the "Middle Class" below that number--then in another stump speech $200,000 was the figure cited--Biden comes in at $150,000--and now Richardson brings it down to $120,000.

So the fact that Richardson, stumping for the Democratic candidate, defines the middle class as being up to $120,000 proves that Obama will change his whole tax plan and no longer give tax cuts to those earning upward of $120,000? Is that the logic here?

Ohkay...

If any of your prognoctisations dont actually come true, will you acknowledge it here, I wonder?

2 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Oh, and Obama also informed us today that if we don't want to pay more in taxes, we are 'selfish'.

The day's echo room talking point, reliably passed on by Foxfyre.

This is what Jake Tapper reported Obama as saying. He seems to think it's just an awful, awful thing to say. Personally, I think Eisenhower would have approved - it was certainly his policy - but I'll leave it up to y'all to judge for yourselves ...

Quote:

"The reason that we want to do this, change our tax code, is not because I have anything against the rich," Obama said in Sarasota, Fla., yesterday. "I love rich people! I want all of you to be rich. Go for it. That’s the American dream, that’s the American way, that’s terrific.

"The point is, though, that -- and it’s not just charity, it’s not just that I want to help the middle class and working people who are trying to get in the middle class -- it’s that when we actually make sure that everybody’s got a shot " when young people can all go to college, when everybody’s got decent health care, when everybody’s got a little more money at the end of the month " then guess what? Everybody starts spending that money, they decide maybe I can afford a new car, maybe I can afford a computer for my child. They can buy the products and services that businesses are selling and everybody is better off. All boats rise. That’s what happened in the 1990s, that’s what we need to restore. And that’s what I’m gonna do as president of the United States of America.

"John McCain and Sarah Palin they call this socialistic," Obama continued. "You know I don’t know when, when they decided they wanted to make a virtue out of selfishness."

0 Replies

@nimh,

nimh wrote:

If any of your prognoctisations dont actually come true, will you acknowledge it here, I wonder?

If McCain ends up winning the election , will all of you Obamabots acknowledge your mistakes here on A2K, I wonder?

0 Replies

Should we all hide our wallets? What do you think?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know