Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 10:39 am
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

Nancy Pelosi has announced another run for Minority Leader. I'm not sure if that's a good idea or not. She's mighty polarizing.


In what way? The GOP hates her because she's effective. There's nothing about her personally that is inherently 'polarizing.'

Cycloptichorn
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 10:41 am
@Cycloptichorn,
The point is that they hate her.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 10:46 am
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

The point is that they hate her.


And? That's not a good reason not to have an effective leader. She should welcome their hate. There is no group of scoundrels in Washington DC that even compares to the House GOP delegation.

Frankly, I would be a lot more worried about a leader that the Republicans loved...

Cycloptichorn
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 10:46 am
@JPB,
Well, the GOP hates the fact that they lost the presidential election too!

They're now holding the fiscal cliff hostage. Who's to hate who?
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 10:52 am
@Cycloptichorn,
I don't want them to love him/her either. Hatred tends to cloud judgement.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 12:05 pm
@Joe Nation,
Joe Nation wrote:

Here: Some serious reading: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/news/business/0915taxesandeconomy.pdf

Spoiler Alert:

Here's the summary:

Throughout the late-1940s and 1950s, the top marginal tax rate was typically above 90%; today it
is 35%. Additionally, the top capital gains tax rate was 25% in the 1950s and 1960s, 35% in the
1970s; today it is 15%. The real GDP growth rate averaged 4.2% and real per capita GDP
increased annually by 2.4% in the 1950s. In the 2000s, the average real GDP growth rate was
1.7% and real per capita GDP increased annually by less than 1%. There is not conclusive
evidence, however, to substantiate a clear relationship between the 65-year steady reduction in the
top tax rates and economic growth. Analysis of such data suggests the reduction in the top tax
rates have had little association with saving, investment, or productivity growth. However, the top
tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top
of the income distribution. The share of income accruing to the top 0.1% of U.S. families
increased from 4.2% in 1945 to 12.3% by 2007 before falling to 9.2% due to the 2007-2009
recession. The evidence does not suggest necessarily a relationship between tax policy with
regard to the top tax rates and the size of the economic pie, but there may be a relationship to how the economic pie is sliced.


Joe(we are still waiting for the trickledown effect to take effect)Nation


A camel can sooner walk through the eye of a needle, than a rich man go to heaven!
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 12:17 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

The capital gains tax is the clincher. That's how the rich get richer--people worth millions and millions and millions of dollars aren't waiting for a paycheck.


So, we should begrudge the little old grandmother that inherited shares of stock from her hard working, and now dead, husband? Naturally, her heirs inherit that stock, and since she might be descended from those heretics that ran to the new world in the 17th and 18th century, since the European versions of Christianity persecuted her ancestors, she now is sitting pretty. I do not begrudge those who came here early enough to have a larger slice of the proverbial pie, than the often illiterate, teeming masses that came after 1850, since Europe did not even have "crumbs" for them. And today, the descendants of those illiterate, teeming masses might be ready to "take over" and redistribute the wealth that was fairly earned, by virtue of being an "early bird" in the New World.

And they say Jews "take over." Ha!
Cycloptichorn
 
  3  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 12:22 pm
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:

Setanta wrote:

The capital gains tax is the clincher. That's how the rich get richer--people worth millions and millions and millions of dollars aren't waiting for a paycheck.


So, we should begrudge the little old grandmother that inherited shares of stock from her hard working, and now dead, husband?


It's not her that anyone is worrying about, because she is making a pathetically small amount of money from those shares of stock her husband left her. It's the wealthy Financiers who make many millions of dollars a year off of their cap gains that we should be worrying about.

Cycloptichorn
Foofie
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 12:27 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

I have not been bothering to read your posts lately, but that one is short enough that i read it before i realized it was yours.


Dear Readers: In my opinion the above represents a gratuitous "put down," in that it appears to imply that the poster that is being referenced posts inconsequential thoughts, not worthy of one's time to read. In my opinion again, it detracts from thinking posters to be willing to post. In my opinion, it correlates to an attitude of territoriality, in that the forum, and its supposed concommitant social mores of civility, need not be adhered to by all persons.
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 12:28 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:

For my own peacce of mind I would like to edit something I said earlier:
In response to Finn saying that JTT and I were battling it out to be the no. 1 a*shole, I said that he was the undisputed champion.

Whether or not Finn really thinks that about me, I know that
Finn is intelligent, and that there are much bigger dullards, sociopaths and ignoramuses than Finn on this site.

And I don't expect this or intend this to make me and Finn buddies, but I don't want being caught up in the one-upping of snark to totally eclipse all my perspective and judgement.


I vote for you as Mature Poster of the Day!
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 12:35 pm
Miller, whether posting honestly as herself, or posting with her Foofie sock puppet, is a f*cking idiot. I advise ignoring her in either guise.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 12:41 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Isn't it telling how ignorant people are! The likes of Romney pays no taxes or pays 14%, and people still don't get it! They still want to advocate for the rich to pay less in taxes.

They must all be brain dead.
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 12:43 pm
@Foofie,
I am curious, do speak that way in real time in your personal life?

Quote:
its supposed concommitant social mores of civility
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 12:47 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Miller, whether posting honestly as herself, or posting with her Foofie sock puppet, is a f*cking idiot. I advise ignoring her in either guise.


"Advising"? Tsk, tsk, such command. Perhaps, you need to advise the posters that do know that Foofie is not the other poster.

You seem to be an anti-Foofite? An anti-Millerite? And, I will never allow myself to adopt the mental aberration of being an anti-Setantite.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 12:55 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:
I have not been bothering to read your posts lately, but that one is short enough that i read it before i realized it was yours.


You've always got some phony excuse, Set, or is this your sock puppet, ehBeth, or are you ehBeth's sock puppet? It's so hard to keep you two straight.

Why not just stop being a coward? Address what you what but stop making an fool of yourself with these asinine explanations.
Foofie
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 01:00 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
I have not been bothering to read your posts lately, but that one is short enough that i read it before i realized it was yours.


You've always got some phony excuse, Set, or is this your sock puppet, ehBeth, or are you ehBeth's sock puppet? It's so hard to keep you two straight.

Why not just stop being a coward? Address what you what but stop making an fool of yourself with these asinine explanations.


I do not believe his "explanations" are "asinine," in that they come from his authentic persona. In my opinion, he truly puts himself above many other people intellectually, and in self-importance. I would guess it stems from having been quite upwardly mobile in his life. [Foofie on the other hand has been downwardly mobile in his life. A cruel trick of fate.]
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 02:09 pm
Obama: Republicans ‘Should Go After Me’

Quote:
WASHINGTON (CBSDC/AP) – President Barack Obama tells Senate Republicans to come after him if they have a problem with a member of his staff.

Responding to criticism regarding the possible nomination of Susan Rice to replace Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, Obama calls out those for going after the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations because they think “she’s an easy target.”

“She has done exemplary work. She has represented the United States and our interests in the United Nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace,” Obama said during his Wednesday news conference. “As I’ve said before, she made an appearance at the request of the White House in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. If Sen. McCain and Sen. Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. And I’m happy to have that discussion with them.”

Rice has been heavily criticized for initially saying the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans was due to the anti-Muhammad film protest and not terror related.

“We will do whatever is necessary to block the nomination that’s within our power as far as Susan Rice is concerned,” Sen. John McCain, the top GOP senator on the Armed Services Committee, told reporters at a Capitol Hill news conference.

Said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.: “I don’t trust her.”

Obama called their comments on Rice “outrageous.”



“For them to go after the U.N. ambassador who had nothing to do with Benghazi and was simply making a presentation of intelligence that she had received and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous. … When they go after the U.N. ambassador apparently because they think she’s an easy target, then they’ve got a problem with me,” Obama said.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 02:16 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:
It's so hard to keep you two straight.


Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 02:23 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

It's not her that anyone is worrying about, because she is making a pathetically small amount of money from those shares of stock her husband left her. It's the wealthy Financiers who make many millions of dollars a year off of their cap gains that we should be worrying about.

Cycloptichorn


However, since those "wealthy Financiers" do not put their millions in their pillows, the millions are enhancing the economy and employment. Naturally, that does not allow the government to "redistribute" that wealth into the hands of the have nots; but who am I to begrudge the have nots from not having, since they had every chance to do their homework and do their version of Horatio Alger. Let's just not agree on who should benefit from the economy's wealth. I prefer private citizens, not big government that will put it into the hands of the have nots, who seem to often forget they have bootstraps that they can pick themselves up by. Just my opinion.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Nov, 2012 02:24 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Isn't it telling how ignorant people are! The likes of Romney pays no taxes or pays 14%, and people still don't get it! They still want to advocate for the rich to pay less in taxes.

They must all be brain dead.


Brain dead? Everyone wants to feather their own nests.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Now what, USA?
  3. » Page 16
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/23/2024 at 03:29:17