A trenchant observation from the Corner’s John Hood:
Speaking in front of a huge audience at downtown Raleigh rally yesterday, Barack Obama threw off a humorous line about John McCain’s accusation that the Obama tax plan is redistributionist:
McCain has “called me a socialist for wanting to roll back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans so we can finally give tax relief to the middle class,†Obama said. “I don’t know what’s next. By the end of the week he'll be accusing me of being a secret communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten.â€Â
Ha ha.
Only, in this passage Obama revealed precisely why he is vulnerable to such charges: he can’t seem to tell the difference between a gift and a theft. There is nothing remotely socialistic or communistic about sharing. If you have a toy that someone else wants, you have three choices in a free society. You can offer to trade it for something you value that is owned by the other. You can give the toy freely, as a sign of friendship or compassion. Or you can choose to do neither.
Collectivism in all its forms is about taking away your choice. Whether you wish to or not, the government compels you to surrender the toy, which it then redistributes to someone that government officials deem to be a more worthy owner. It won’t even be someone you could ever know, in most cases. That’s what makes the political philosophy unjust (by stripping you of control over yourself and the fruits of your labor) as well as counterproductive (by failing to give the recipient sufficient incentive to learn and work hard so he can earn his own toys in the future).
Government is not charity. It is not persuasion, or cooperation, or sharing. Government is a fist, a shove, a gun. Obama either doesn’t understand this, or doesn’t want voters to understand it.
Precisely right.
Not that someone of my pedigree (let’s face it, I’ve never lunched with a former Weathermen member, nor do I have the orgasmic support of a bunch of former Carter administration flunkies) should presume to deconstruct Senator Obama’s “oh, SNAP!” moment, but as Hood points out, for Barack’s analogy to hold, it would more honestly be conveyed thusly: ” “I don’t know what’s next. By the end of the week Senator McCain will be accusing me of being a secret communist because, as a kindergarten teacher, I took toys away from the rich kids who brought them to class and handed them over to the kids who didn’t have toys of their own to bring. Because of the Fairness. Then, at the end of the day, I kept the toys of the capitalist bourgeois oppressor class, placing them in the kindergarten’s lockbox toy bin, to be doled out in accordance with my idea of social justice. For the Greater Good.
‖ Oh, and don’t give me any of that bullshit about the kids with toys having them because their parents worked a second job, or, like, saved. Because that’s just racist. Somehow. If you think through it.
“Cracker.”
Bingo.
Way too nuanced for those children who don’t have all the latest toys.
But that’s not fair!! I want the LEGO Star Wars Ultimate collection Millennium Falcon, too!
Once again illustrating the great asymmetry of the problem at hand: Loosely paraphrasing what a conservative said recently, it takes oceans of blood to create democracy; it takes a single election to destroy it.
That’s not a symmetrical dynamic and it must not be treated as one. Theft just isn’t an ideal worth entertaining. The Democrat party, first to go too far by caving to this encroaching tyranny, deserves no further discussion on its terms and it’s good to see they’re not getting it.
Also from The Corner.
It’s also about breaking down traditional human relationships, creating the new soviet person.
Family ties get in the way of selfless collectivism.
He doesn’t like watermelon, fried chicken or chitlins, either, kelly.
I was not around this place when Clinton was a president.Or Reagan, Bush sr…
Were those guys called socialists, Marxists too for having progressive tax system in the USA?
I lived for some tome through the real socialism, I have seen many real, REAL marxists indoctrinated assholes.
Obama is NOT A MARXIST/SOCIALIST.
Not even close, and certainly not closer then all other presidents I just mentioned.
That’s my new name. Selfish-anti-collectivist spice.
Way to miss the point sashal. You remind me of those jokers who defend the theory of communism because Soviet style communism wasn’t real socialism.
Find the differences in this platform and Obama’s, sashal.
http://www.slp.org/pdf/platforms/plat1887.pdf
You don’t have to live in a sty to know what a pig looks like. Obama is socialist to the fucking core.
Remember in Ace Ventura when he was bent over and talking and pulling on his butt cheeks to make it look like his ass was talking? Remember that?
It’s a warped messianic marxist pastiche he peddles, Sashal. With an attractive crumb-coating.
He was raised to believe ideals of liberty and self-government are scam and hooey.
“and certainly not closer then all other presidents I just mentioned.”
This line does you in, sashal. Of course he’s closer. How close to the actual realization of marxism? Probably still pretty far. But the creepin on ah come up it is. I think Jeff has made the case, repeatedly, for this and you have yet to make a counter. Time to step up.
Sashal, you had your opportunity to defend O!s tax plan a few posts down. I don’t remember seeing your name.
Al…people are looking at me funny (funnier than normal) now for literally LOL. Keep em coming. Please. I need it in this moribund place.
11. Try it again. With more sense
12. BS. What that has to do with Obama?
I found more similarities to Bush, btw, ignorant
Ayn Rand was a fucking prophet.
So is Jonah Goldberg.
I dunno; I could get interested in thor sharing his trust fund with me. Even if it’s only enough to buy another beer.
14 which messianic shit he peddles? Come again?
Nobrain and J.Goldberg are the stupidest humans on the planet, but Jonah is liar on top of it
Comment by sashal on 10/30 @ 12:02 pm #
Do you get a stiffy staring at ol’ Joe Stalin’s picture, sashweight?
O just feels like home, doesn’t he, Sashal.
Jonah Goldberg isn’t stupid at all he’s just in an unchallenging work environment I think.
“Jonah is liar on top of it”
Howso, sashweight?
Any……proof?
Any……linkys?
I thought not.
“Jonah Goldberg isn’t stupid at all he’s just in an unchallenging work environment I think.”
Yeah, hf, defending your book against the attacks of herd of reactionary leftists is no challenge at all.
Sashal is typing with one hand. He’s had a lot of practice.
“Comment by cranky-d on 10/30 @ 12:09 pm #
Sashal is typing with one hand. He’s had a lot of practice.”
Oh.
Playing “yankee-my-wankee while reading insults hurled at him.
A true masochist troll.
carin,dear, how many times it has to be discussed.
Even little kids know Obama’s tax plan by now.
And it will be even good for your husband, even if he maked more then 250000.
More paying customers who can afford more services will be beneficial for the upper class…
27 very good , nobrain, at least you do not question the stupidity part
Again sashal avoids defining the words “enumerated powers.”
Sashal, have you read the man’s book?
More paying customers who can afford more services will be beneficial for the upper class…
Tongue in cheek or a serious comment?
And again sashal avoids explaining how lots of entitlement deficit spending balances budgets and pays national debts.
$250,000! $200,000! $150,000! $75,000! Wait, by Wednesday it’ll be $32,000.
21 I’ll get you a beer.
Nov 5th at MGM Grand I am thowing a party. Come over to celebrate the rebirth of the new GOP…
Fouad Adjami in the WSJ on “Obama and the politics of crowds”.
I’m on to you, Sdeferr. ;D
oops, must be extra “e” day.
36. where was the discussion of confiscatory socialism in your post?
Or you finally become serious and want to talk issues without throwing BS labels ?
Who said about deficit that it does not matter-Reagan?
But anyway, if you truly, truly interested why don’t you check Obama’s website. It is too much to type and talk in the high speed discussion with so many participants for my limited English
What? I’ve been reading the damn thing since 10:00am and I’m still not sure I get it, maggie! :-)
Money quotes from the WSJ article:
“The coalition that has propelled his quest — African-Americans and affluent white liberals — has no economic coherence.â€Â
-Best watch out for that silent majority, Bitches.
“In recent days, those vast Obama crowds, though, have recalled for me the politics of charisma that wrecked Arab and Muslim societies.â€Â
-Riots win or lose
sure, sure, just, um, watch yourself. I don’t think this is the first time it’s happened.
sashal, your unidireced nuancing has obviously led you to delusion. So you’d best try very hard to explain to yourself why you so desperately want to reproduce what you claim to have escaped from – pronto.
That is, assuming you are not just a mere flak.
O’Brain – HP just doesn’t like NRO.
O! said he was a child when the Weathermen set those bombs.
As it turns out, he’s still a child.
So, that’s that, then.
Thanks for posting about this. I’ve been looking all over the blogosphere this morning to see if someone else had picked up on that Obama quote as I did when I heard it on the radio. Not only does the Obama quote conflate “gift and theft” as John Hood puts it, but it misrepresents the goals and methods of socialism as though they were the same thing as charity. What’s more, by making a joke out of the label, it appears to address McCain’s criticism, but instead it slyly steps around responding to it, instead offering us a lie about the nature of socialism.
35, guess who are the majority of the customers in my store and in the majority of stores in the USA?
Middle class.
Do you know where are they?
Do you know why the stopped shopping ?
Jobs less secure?. Prices higher? Instability? Real estate? Other issues?
Do you even know there is crisis in our economy? Are all of you live in some kind of bubble here?
Are all of you some kinda of geeks who goes by the simplest staples?
OR all of you here are extremely rich and insulated?
Republicans are going to be destroyed this election, deservedly so.
People( majority) knows who is to blame. They will give democrats the chance on Nov 4th.
No matter your scaring them with “socialism”, Ayers, birth certificates and other pathetic smears.
But I truly hope( seriously, I swear) republicans/conservatives with consciousness and intelligence and honesty will assess this defeat properly and will work on the restoration of the GOP .
I do want 2 strong parties with diverse platform in contention. I do. It is good for the country.
Sashal seems to think O! has any intention of actually following thru with his rhetoric of “250,000 those are the bitches Imma going to tax dig it?”. It is too laugh. What we betting again Sash? 50 bucks to Jeff’s tip jar will work for me.
PS the guy pulled the 250 number out his ass.
carin,dear, how many times it has to be discussed.
Even little kids know Obama’s tax plan by now.
Only “little kids” would say it would not be a disaster. Or Communists. Or “Teh flat-out stupid“.
And, Sashal, when O! raises taxes on businesses, who then let more employees go … there will be even FEWER people in your shop. Come visit Michigan. We’ve been doing this a tad longer than the rest of the nation.
OT – but you know what I could REALLY use? Some Kwame Kilpatrick prison diaries…
just saying.
I’ll even figger out what’s wrong with my credit card and slip some cash your way Jeff. I intended on doing it anyway, but I’ll be much more earnest.
guess who are the majority of the customers in my store and in the majority of stores in the USA?
I don’t believe you even have a store, sashal. What do you do?
My dear P.W., the point is not that Obama doesn’t know the difference between sharing and communism,but that McCain doesn’t. Is there any doubt?
BMoe #12: Find the differences in this platform and Obama’s, sashal.
I’m no sashal, though sometimes I wish I were (being dense to the point of being bulletproof is a cool superpower). Even so, I took a look at that platform, and the thing that stuck out the most to me was that unlike Obama, the Socialist Workers Party believes in the secret ballot. It’s a change I can believe in!
In Venezuala Sash, Chavez set the “lets get em those rich assholes” bar at what 5 grand a year US? In Mexico it is probably 10. Here in America we are so well off our demagoges have to choose astronomical numbers like 200 thousand.
I talked to a friend of mine the other day who just came back from Germany and under their socialist healthcare sytem doctors by law can not make over 45 thousand euros a year starting out. If their doctors can not be burned at the stake over there in actual socialist la la land, you can take it to the bank that the 200 number that he made up will be much lower after the election. It will be down to 50 grand a year in no time.
sashal, you of all people should have transcended naivete by now.
“#
Comment by J. Peden on 10/30 @ 12:42 pm #
guess who are the majority of the customers in my store and in the majority of stores in the USA?
I don’t believe you even have a store, sashal. What do you do?”
Freelance socialist, aka a mugger.
Who’s going to buy your $1000 suits when no one is allowed to make over 150K sasha?
How was your biz in 2001. Did it go into the shitter after Bush’s tax cut? Do you think Chet and Leroy are going to buy a suit from you with their $500 check from the gubmah?
This is totally IMHO but I have a feeling that 250 number was polled by O!s crack research team. Probably the exact number that could be demagoged with the least amount of risk. After a heaping helping of some jerrymanderring, with a sprinkle of Fairness Doctrine, and a side of Amnesty for all that number will be MUCH lower.
Tell me about the enumerated power Obama has to redesign the federal system, sashal. Last I checked, he was creating a new national police force and funding it to the tune of $500,000,000,000.00. I do not exaggerate. Probably has to do with his hostility to the second amendment, a little snag in his robe that is, actually, enumerated.
I also suspect that little program is but of one of the things redistributionists are electing him for.
So, sashal: American much?
Jesus, sashal. Is english like, your third language, or something? It’s bad enough I have to put up with this shit at the gas stations here in Mexifornia. I CERTAINLY don’t need to live with it on the intertubes. STFU, already.
I just heard that the O!bama campaign has come up with a new campaign slogan:
“Why should I care about posterity? What’s posterity ever done for me?”
Mr. Pink, the number will be much lower because O! has made so many promises, and oil profits are down, he either has to tax more or take back some of those promises.
Or jewelry.
Barney Frank already has it at $75k.
Four days to go. Bets?
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it.”
-H.L. Mencken
sashal
So a serious comment then. I take it you actually believe that the way out of our current economic issues is to take more from “the rich” and give it to others. It is an idiotic thing to believe, but then you seem to believe that Obama won’t actually be increasing spending to go along with all that new “income”. I guess you also believe that “the rich” are some static entity who can’t or won’t respond in any way to this new situation, and at the same time the recipients of this new government largess will find free money an incentive to make their own. So you can rant all you want about fairness or mislabeling, but at some point you are going to have to come to grips with cold, hard reality about the way free markets actually work, or admit that what you are advocating for is socialism.
Or shoes.
Only not by name. That would require an underpinning philosophy of which sashal apparently has none.
A stirring vindication of the great human justice of making it a law to steal, that. And to use race and probably sex as political fodder. If not for their cries for more, the socialist’s silence about being spiteful thugs would be be deafening.
“I guess you also believe that “the rich†are some static entity who can’t or won’t respond in any way to this new situation, and at the same time the recipients of this new government largess will find free money an incentive to make their own.”
That’s because sashwieght’s understanding of economics is….primitive
carin,
If trickle down worked, tax cuts for the rich would result in increases in employment rates and median incomes, the actual data shows the opposite. check page 11 of this report which shows, the rate of increases in the median income and it has has remained largely unchanged from the late 60s until 2000.
http://www.census.govprod/2006pubsp60-231.pdf
and look at this chart as well:
with socialistic Clinton tax rate we had the smallest unemployment numbers:
http://www.miseryindex.us/urbyyear.asp
We pretty much had the same if not less unemployment numbers under Bush too and that doesn’t seem to stop anyone saying this is teh worst economy evah!!!111!!!!
My dear P.W., the point is not that Obama doesn’t know the difference between sharing and communism,but that McCain doesn’t. Is there any doubt?
Well, there’s no doubt you’ve been spending too much time around Crisco, “stilletto“, and skulls full of mush.
Yes, it will be good. Good for all. Good for his soul to give another 4% to the state.
Let’s analyze this. Husband maked more then $250,000, gives more money to the state, who take a cut off the top (for the children of the Administration), then give a bit back to the proletariat, who can then buy more goods from husband, who can pay more tax on that profit. So the way I see this, husband pays tax twice, prole pays tax once, everybody pays pays pays.
70, good discussion
pretty soon we will see who is right.
And markets will work perfect with Obama as president. And consumers will have the means to make the rich richer, even though the rich will pay-gasp!-3% more in taxes ( and marginal mind you) just like when Clinton was president…
How about letting a guy keep most of what he earns? Is that like a novel concept to you?
“Comment by sashal on 10/30 @ 1:01 pm #
carin,
If trickle down worked, tax cuts for the rich would result in increases in employment rates and median incomes, the actual data shows the opposite.”
What’d I tell you?
“Comment by sashal on 10/30 @ 1:10 pm #
70, good discussion
pretty soon we will see who is right.
And markets will work perfect with Obama as president.”
Oh, great.
We’re going to have a depression.
“even though the rich will pay-gasp!-3% more in taxes ( and marginal mind you) just like when Clinton was president…”
Hey Sash do me a favor. O! pulled that 250 number out his ass how about you give me a percentage number of what is “fair” to take out of someones earnings.
Patrick
Don’t forget to add that Husband raises prices on everything in order to be able to pay the increase in taxes which ends up decreasing the buying power of the proletariat rather than increasing it.
“Even little kids know Obama’s tax plan by now.”
This will be about the third time, but here it goes anyhow. Sashal, explain Obama’s tax plan. I’ll trust you that you’re keeping a straight face.
Makewi,
Point taken.
“Even little kids know Obama’s tax plan by now.â€Â
Tax plan and Tax policy are two different things entirely, but what the hell, at least his “plan” is so simple that his followers can take off the child proof cap to get to it.
“And markets will work perfect with Obama as president. And consumers will have the means to make the rich richer, even though the rich will pay-gasp!-3% more in taxes”
Explain how.
79, Pink, I am fine with this. I am flat tax guy.
But that is not going to happen.
Out of the 2 main candidates running Obama is 1000 times better then the one from the failed republican party. His program is better, his realistic views on foreign policy is better, etc, etc,
plus the Palin atrocity should’ve taken all the questions away about who to vote for every honest American
“his realistic views on foreign policy is better,”
While I realize that is just your opinion that is some jawdropping stupid right there.
Pink, I think he means that we won’t be helping “that shitty little country” anymore.
sashal is obviously wrong about trickle down because his house is the wrong color and he doesn’t even own a brick bat, as evidenced by these graphs and charts:
http://www.physics.uwo.ca/~harwood/phys1/mechanics/mech3_15_graphs.png
http://www.scisoftware.com/products/aquachem_details/AC_Pie.jpg
sashal, trying to get people to waste their time has never worked out too well. Say-hey, just take a look at yourself!
O! hasn’t even articulated a coherent foreign policy. He has waffled and aired rhetoric. The only thing he has been clear on is his desire to withdraw from Iraq regardless of conditions on the ground and “talk” to our countries enemies, whatever the hell that means. I take the talking part as just more rhetoric because it is not like we are not “talking” to them now. He just wants to pat their shitty regimes on the back and legitamize them with face to face presidential meetings, ala Arafat, and we all know how good that story turned out.
Hope and change are not a fuckin foreign policy. Acting like George Costanza in Seinfeld and saying “Well everything I have been doing for the last couple years hasn’t worked out like I wanted so I am just going to do the exact opposite.” is not in any way rational. The only thing I can make of that stupid sentence is that O! saying he wants to withdraw from Iraq yesterday trumps everything else he has ever done or said…… I am lost here that was just mind boggling.
OK, I know sashal is an ignorant douchebag with a tenuous grasp of the English language, but, in the interests of facilitating communication, I’ll try and spell it out for him.
Sarah Palin: I’d drag my balls over ten miles of broken glass just to hear her piss into a tin cup over a field phone. She is orders of magnitude better than ANYONE in the Democratic party, and a sizable number of Republicans.
Barry O!: If he were rolling around on the ground with his guts on fire, I wouldn’t deign to piss on him to put it out.
The double reference to urine is purely coincidence.
That pie chart made me think of Abba.
plus the Palin atrocity should’ve taken all the questions away about who to vote for every honest American
Yeah, agreed: putting both Obama and Biden to shame at once was not just your average mean feat.
Hey guys, you’re forgetting a critical point of O!s $250K number, it was for “working families”. He’s already saying if you and your wife make a combined $250,000 your taxes will go up. He’s not talking about the successful lawyer-type who is single and rolling in dough. He’s talking about two people, married with kids, working hard at their jobs (small businesses mostly) and nailing them to the wall.
When Biden moved it to $150K and Barney Fife to $75, do they mean “working families”? I haven’t heard.
Guys…sashal hates. He emotes. That seems to be the extent of his decision making process. Plus, he’s probably just another old Eastern European sexist. NOT all Eastern Europeans are sexist. Not in the least, but I do know far too many. And his reasons for voting for Obama usually include ripping on palin and hating the neo-cons. He’s a hater.
It was “transformative”.
Sashal,
I think it would be better for everyone’s comprehension and temper if you would write your posts in Russian.
Please.
ginsocal.
thanks for ignorant douche bags like you republicans will be swept out of power this year. keep it on, moron
Slashal, you’re only allowed to call somebody a moron if you yourself have an IQ higher than room temperature. Your calling Palin’s nomination for veep an “atrocity” pretty much deprives you of the right.
keep it on, moron
Anyone else getting the “Let us go cruise some chicks with their big American breasts! We are two wild and crazy guys!” image?
Stiletto: Sharing is voluntary. Taxation is not. If you want to give your time and property to “the less fortunate”, go for it. When you try and use the state’s guns to reach into my pocket, I reserve the right to chop off your hand.
If your and Sashal’s brains were turned to antimatter there wouldn’t be enough to blow a gnat’s nose.
Pull the glass out of your balls, you need those things to think with.
Sashal, keep the fuse lit, my man. You may not be able to penetrate the armadillo shells of too many of the Cold War warriors but trust me, your wisdom is your charity. Keep giving, when you’re able.
Blow ’em over, knock ’em cold, crack their shells and swallow ’em whole. Shake ’em out of the victim world and choke ’em with their cultured pearls. The world they know is nothing more than a pawn shop. Give ’em colonialists a glimpse.
Peace.
O!
102
you do not even realize how stupid your post is.
That’s fine, keep self- fucking.
Enjoy the slaughter of the republicans at the poll.
And you can only blame yourself, the way you turned the party into the party of morons, ignorants, assholes, neocons, liars, smear masters etc….
When does this meeting for the GOP rebuilding start? Right after the election?
thor, I am really amazed and am laughing at the stubbornness and ignorance of many.
I guess it really has to hit hard on their moronic heads to penetrate? Or it could be too late for this?
hoot,
You and Sashal need to go to remedial English classes. Stat.
You know I know what you’re doing. Right thor?
Obama plainly said MCCAIN thinks a kid sharing his toys is communism.
So you’re saying that Obama’s tax plan is like kids sharing their toys. Windex the spit-guard on your keyboard and break out another gem.
You’re a moron.
Comment by hoot on 10/30 @ 2:14 pm #
Oh, look, the free-lance socialist shows up yet again.
It’s working thor.
In Obama’s hypothetical, who was suggesting they are the same? McCain.
Anybody else hear Foghorn Leghorn say “That boy ain’t rite.” when you read that?
“Comment by hoot on 10/30 @ 2:19 pm #
No response, eh? Not surprised.”
Why should anyone respond to a moronic thief?
Pretty cut and dried.
The only thing cut and dried is the dope you’re smoking. “I don’t know what’s next. By the end of the week he’ll be accusing me of being a secret communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten.â€Â
Do you have trouble reading the Chosen One’s words?
In Obama’s hypothetical, who was suggesting they are the same? McCain. Pretty cut and dried.
Here’s a hypothetical – Obama style, “hoot eats his own boogers. Does that mean he won’t go hungreh after I ram my cap gains dong up Uncle Sam’s ass?” *crowd cheers*
You will never be able to convince someone like hoot that redistributionist policies are anything other than sharing, so he will just try to argue around the margins. He is a believer.
Thor, on the other hand, is just an asshole. He simply can’t help himself.
let’s share…u first
Forced sharing is, indeed, communistic. Can either of you shallow, in-bred twits demonstrate how the “forced” sharing of O!’s plan is NOT socialist/communist? And claiming W is doing the same thing doesn’t count. We never supported that idiocy either.
BTW, I’m a CONSERVATIVE (look it up), NOT a Republican.
well and see, next hoot will be saying that we’re all stupid because we don’t know who Phil Graham is.
In Obama’s hypothetical, who was suggesting they are the same? McCain. Pretty cut and dried.
I gotta double down on this comment. Just let it marinate.
Hey trolls, sadly you’ve forced me to lose all hope of ever being able to create life from scratch. How could I possibly make it so stupid?
You only argue with the voices in your head hoot. You don’t bother arguing against actual positions or facts because that would require you to take off your training wheels. We all know the last time you tried to do that you ended up bruising your ass and running home to mommy crying about how mean the world was to you.
Why are you clowns still going on about redistributionist policies? What the fuck? How is sharing a toy communist?
You really don’t get it, do you? Is there a pill, or something, that you could take?
Listen up, fool. This place doesn’t work that way so take it back to St Pete or Outer Freezing Slobokiyou and that that mental midget thor with you.
So again, idiot: Show me the authority to convert the place into a collective. I don’t give a shit if you think Obamaland socialism works. Show me how you’d pull it off in this particular system. Assuming, that is, that the SCOTUS remains intact long enough to stop the Manchild.
We already know you don’t know why you’d want such a thing. I mean, you’ll just give it a whirl and we’ll all see, eh?
All that trickle down that dripped on their foreheads caused a Chinese water torture-like dementia.
After cracking their heads open I expected to find candy and gum drops, but all I saw was Sarah Palin’s go-go boots and flagpins in there.
Except for Alp, his is full of monkey crackers. Mmm, made myself hungry.
They tend to protect themselves with their ignorance, whether profane or religious, and then carp and cavil.
NOOOOOOO!!!!!!! I feel deprived.
Why are you clowns still going on about redistributionist policies? What the fuck? How is sharing a toy communist?
QED.
I’m pretty sure #3 is a fact. but whatevs.
“Comment by hoot on 10/30 @ 2:25 pm #
Why are you clowns still going on about redistributionist policies?”
Why are you still here?
I just noted that the pw.com regu-tards can’t understand the English language. And I’m right.
If I didn’t have good bladder control, I could have embarrassed myself right there.
Here’s a fact halfwit. Obama doesn’t want to share his toys, he wants to share the toys of others. Oh, and a liar. Pretending that the Bush tax cuts provided no “relief” for the middle class.
Hoot: “Yes I can”…..
HAHAHAHAHA
but a “That’s what Obama said McCain said” is? pssst, Obama wasn’t quoting McCain.
And I’m a Killer Whale, not a Orca, actually.
Your webbed feet give you away, just so you know.
I’ve yet heard a fact in this thread.
I really do hear Foghorn Leghorn when I read your posts. That is a fact.
“Comment by hoot on 10/30 @ 2:34 pm #
I’m at a different location. I’m not using any proxy and will not do so for posting purposes (anymore). Jeff is free to ban this IP as well.”
HE has already banned you.
You’re a bandwidth thief.
No wonder you support O!bama.
Birds of a feather and all that.
nuh uh
He’s not a thief, NO’B.
He’s “sharing”.
A pithy “QED†is not a useful rebuttal
QED.
If Yosemite Sam cursed:
“Ooooooooo I hates them fuckin’ trolls!!!!!”
Self-hate can lead to self-mutilation. Keep on, P’Brain.
and that supports your argument how? Obama can hypothetically read McCain’s mind, therefore McCain obviously doesn’t understand the difference between socialism and communism and sharing?
Here’s a fact, hoot: you can suck mah balz. Sure, thor’s an over-inflated ego with curious yet indestructible self-regard who’s inches away from going postal. And sure, sashal is a vodka-sotted nimrod with barely a scintilla of knowledge of the US. But at least they’re somewhat intelligent. You, on the other hand, clearly don’t have the smarts to wipe the drool off your face and yet you still show up and embarrass yourself. It’s a wonder. Well, not really.
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. for Phil Graham.
I mean really, “spreading the wealth around” via the government? NOT SOCIALISM!!!
#Comment by thor on 10/30 @ 2:39 pm #
Do you speak English?
Inquiring minds want to know.
One thing I don’t understand is how people can ignore BASIC ECONOMIC PRINCIPLES! (And I’m sure that these have been spewed forth time and time again here…but I want my turn!
Raise taxes on the rich to give money to the working class. Assuming it works as Obama has said it will (which I doubt).
Okay, that sounds nice.
I work for a small LLC company. So now taxes are raised on my employer and I get some of that money. Well, he has 100 employees working under him, but because of the hike in taxes, he can only afford 90 employees at the same rate, and keeping on the whole 100 would drop his profit margin too much, so 10 get laid off. Now 10 people have just been laid off because Obama wanted to “help” them. Now, take this nationwide, unemployment grows, which means more hands in the “free money” pot, which means higher taxes to pay for them, which means more lay offs, etc.
Now, Obama also wants to tax “big oil”. Again, sounds great! But that assumes that “big oil” will take the loss on the chin, which they won’t.
As in all things, the tax hike will be passed on to the consumer, which causes gas prices to rise. “Big Oil” will still have record profits at our expense, the government will just make more off of it. Keep in mind that because of the increase in gas prices, food and every other consumer good will increase as well.
Now, combine these two ideas together, as Obama has done, and you get mass amounts of lay offs combined with higher priced goods. That’s the fast track to being a 3rd world country.
I guess my point is that Trickle down Economics might not have worked as some people envisioned it, but what Obama is proposing is most definitely the exact opposite of an answer…
Stupidity doesn’t count as a handicap, thor. Go park someplace else.
“I work for a small LLC company. So now taxes are raised on my employer and I get some of that money. Well, he has 100 employees working under him, but because of the hike in taxes, he can only afford 90 employees at the same rate, and keeping on the whole 100 would drop his profit margin too much, so 10 get laid off.”
Tell your boss to lay off the ones with Obama stickers on their cars.
Fuggit, I going to quit my job and luv me some O! that sharing.
Ya’ll can pay my way.
Because it’s fair.
so, um, no argument then.
156,
hey, Kelly,
I prefer Cabernet
N. O’Brain
There’s only 1 person, that I know of, who actively supports Obama. Most of my cohorts are conservative by nature, as most on the left would classify us as “Bible-Thumpers”.
but the thing is… Obama messed up the hypothetical, because “sharing” is not the same when it’s voluntary and when it’s coerced by the government. which is what the post is about, but you’d rather just flail around and insult everyone, as always.
You’re not worthy of licking the English off a cue ball.
Obama plainly said MCCAIN thinks a kid sharing his toys is communism.
But McCain has neither said nor indicated he believes any such thing, you drooling fucking nit wit. How about you and Obama argue with what people actually say. You know, in out loud, in English. What Obama has said is he is going to tax the wealthy and give the money to poor people. Not ask people to share, but take their money whether they like it or not. That is Goddamn socialism. Period. Own it or shut the fuck up.
Socialism, like theft, is taking my money at the point of a gun. Only I can kill the fucking thief and get it back. The government… not so much, they just add jail time for my trouble…
so terran 154,
explain to us how Obama taxes will be different then socialists Clinton’s ones and how bad we had it in the 90th.
“I don’t know what’s next. By the end of the week he’ll be accusing me of being a secret communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten.â€Â
In case the terminally dull is still reading this, what logical fallacy has the enlightened O! committed? Or has the penny not dropped yet? Mother love a duck.
Way to go, sash. So do I.
yeah, B. Moe. You know big words.
Clueless
But if a company is able to pass off higher taxes simply as higher COGS then why would they lay off anyone?
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh.
Thanks for sharing your eco-stupid toy.
No, that’s not the point at all. The point is that Obama believes using the power of government to “spread the wealth around” isn’t socialistic, so it’s no surprise that he would misunderstand sharing your toys isn’t communistic.
I really don’t feel the need to breakdown the mechanics of the joke, but the suggestion that there was some kind of meta-ironic attribution to McCain’s faulty beliefs is giving Obama far more intellectual credit than he deserves. He appeals to Chris Matthews and that ilk; real academics on the left merely find him useful insofar as he has that kind of appeal and can be used accordingly. They wouldn’t grant that he had any kind of many-layered effect on display here.
Oh, and hoot has been banned repeatedly, like datadave. So they can come back, post all they’d like under new IP addresses, then bitch when I delete their comments that they’ve been “silenced,” but really all that’s happening is that they’re trespassing, having worn out their welcome (after being given every possible consideration).
Bob the Communist, who has used somewhere in the neighborhood of 9 names, is also gone.
sashal
I never claimed that Clinton was socialist, or Obama, for that matter is socialist, so please quit putting words in my mouth.
And his tax cuts won’t be /that/ different from Clinton’s, though Clinton was riding the economic /boom/ brought on by the policies of Reagan and Bush Sr.,and the fact that Clinton didn’t spend nearly as much as Obama is proposing. Coupled with the tax increase on big oil, and the subsequent raise in gas, will hurt the economy further.
But if a company is able to pass off higher taxes simply as higher COGS then why would they lay off anyone?
Because fewer people will purchase the higher priced widget, duuuuuuuuuuhmbass.
Can we roll out the electric pet fence for trolls? Seems some McCain supporters are putting them to good use. http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1274504.html
But more people will be able to purchase a higher priced widget once there’s a balanced budget because that would lower interest rates which would stimulate the economy from the utter outhouse the Republican dumbasses, who obviously don’t know how to balance a fuckin’ budget, collared America with.
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuh.
Eat your tax-hike like good little boy
And because a tax increase doesn’t go against COGS…. The tax increase is an expense AFTER Net Income which is what the tax increase is calculated on, so the tax increase is actually a larger hit to the bottom line than an increase to COGS would be. So a tax increase causes the rise in the price to occur at a higher amount than a rise in the cost of one component of a widget used to make the product. Double whammy to the consumer…
thor
An Economic Principle. If you raise the price of a given good, less people are inclined to buy it. If less people buy it, then you don’t make as much money. Hence people getting laid off.
In a “perfect” market, supply and demand would find an equilibrium where the price will be raised to the opportune amount to maximize profits, while still finding its niche market. Unfortunately, the market isn’t perfect, and is constantly in a state of flux. Any outside influences, as a raise in tax, would exasperate the issue and cause the producers of goods to move to cut costs quickly, and the easiest way to do that is to cut overhead, in this case, employees. And when more people are having a money crunch, the target market for any given product shrinks, which causes less sales of that product, which, in turn, causes more lay offs.
That make absoulutley no sense whatsoever. You take Econ from sashal?
terran, I remember the economic boom actually started about two years AFTER Clinton was elected.
Was he still riding in coattails of Bush Sr and Reagan?
thor
Interest Rates are already at 1%, how much lower do you think they’ll go?
170, terran. that is very primitive Randish view. Which even Greenspan does not stick so hard to…
There is no correlation, much less a causative relationship, between marginal tax rates and employment or median incomes. This isn’t an opinion, it’s well established fact. Look at employment and median income numbers for the entire postwar era, cross reference with tax increases and tax cuts, and you’ll see that there is no pattern at all.
Lower the interest rate from 1% to what? There’s not much room to go down to make that argument hold much water there Thor…
So you are saying that consumers are willing to pay 5% more on the price of a good to save 1% in interest on that good… great economic policy there, dumbshit.
Seems I heard similar diatribes in my first semester business classes in college.
If higher taxes cause layoffs, then why were there so many layoffs after Bush lowered taxes?
Please, dumbed-down arguments don’t do much for me.
Primitive Randish view? Seems to be one of the premises on the questions on the National Economics Test…http://ecedweb.unomaha.edu/ecedweek/quiz.htm
Bet most of the O! voters fail the test…
174 Comment by sashal on 10/30 @ 3:22 pm
Dude if you are going to cut and paste other peoples stuff at least attribute it so we will know who we are arguing with. Or did your English just suddenly get flawless?
I would also be interested in hearing what your definition of socialism is, if I am that wrong about it I would like to know.
If higher taxes cause layoffs, then why were there so many layoffs after Bush lowered taxes?
Yeah, remember how the unemployment rate skyrocketed back then? Oh… wait….
Comment by thor on 10/30 @ 2:53 pm #
Derivative, imitative and unoriginal.
And you’re a sociopathic dick, also.
Great combo you got working there, fucknozzle.
There is no correlation, much less a causative relationship, between marginal tax rates and employment or median incomes.
sashal’s mystery advisor @ 174 disagrees with you also, thor.
First of all that is Ms. to you, you assumptive little misogynist.
Second of all… it is not a 1:1 comparative; otherwise, it would not be done.
Third of all, I majored in economics and didn’t think you wanted to be swamped in a discussion down to the micro level, but if you want to get into a discussion of Kaldor-Hicks and the Paretian norm, knock us over with your brilliance…. dickhead.
“Comment by thor on 10/30 @ 3:16 pm #
But more people will be able to purchase a higher priced widget once there’s a balanced budget…”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!
Oh, thaw, you jokster, you’re really a funny guy.
“balanced budget”…socialist Obama…….
BWAAAAAHHHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!elevnty111!!!!
Now 10 people have just been laid off because Obama wanted to “help†them.
Isn’t that the whole point? If they can’t work, they’ll wan heat assistance and food stamps and Obamacare, and guess who will be there to promise it?
Can’t deliver, but the promise is the important part.
Now would be a great time thor, you insufferable prick, for you to lay out the plan to save the country by adjusting an entire national economy by executive proclamation. I do so look forward to your doing precisely that.
I realize this will be a great — and unique — gift you bestow, so please, take your time.
First off, in my five year plan, would be to kill all the Reaganomic parrots.
And here’s some historical data to help, thor. I’m more than amenable to your forthcoming, full analysis.
http://nowandfutures.com/key_stats.html
Come on thor, where is your fucking economic brilliance? I thought you were gonna school us on the finer points of micro-economics, since we were all Eco-tards and all. I even gave you a google point to get you started (cause I’m such a giver)…. or are all the big words and concepts too much for your brilliance?
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/mccain-in-2000.html
Ah! It has become clear-thor, sashal and hoot are sharing a brain, in accordance with the O!gram! It is, unfortunately, a very small, exceedingly smooth brain. Probably from some sort of rodent.
Yeah, sashal, McCain is a dumbass. We know that. He is just less a dumbass than Obama.
Why don’t you answer my request and explain what socialism is? I don’t give a shit what you or Obama or McCain say it is if you can’t explain why you feel that way.
Assuming you can meaningfully define Reaganomics, moron, what didn’t you like about it? What failed?
Beside the party affiliation, I mean.
I’m exponentially more advanced in micro and macro economics than, as far as I can tell, anyone here.
You do realize that exponents can be negative?
It didn’t turn Michael Vick into a good man, JHoward.
‘Nuff said.
Aw, hell… looks like Thor has become a good little conservative and taken his ball and gone home. I demand O! get that ball for me, I want to play some more…
are you serious?
Go open and fucking research any Enciclopedia on the term socialism.
You can start with the links below.
About taxes and socialism:
http://ataxingmatter.blogs.com/tax/2008/10/progressive-taxation–socialism-or-just-standard-usa-tax-policy.html
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008294130_webcampsocialism21.html
http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/columnists/mayo/blog/2008/10/since_when_does_taxation_socia.html
you know where is socialism now?
In Alaska, when the profits from the opil companies are redistribuited to all citizens of this state.
Here if you are lazy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
Sachal just let the cat out of the bag about all those Hollywood leftists supporting O! Royalties are socialism….
Poor Sachal defining royalties one record company at a time?
Thor, you’ve been reduced to (or maybe it’s your natural state) a partisan leftard dumbass. Sashal has never demonstrated any cognitive ability, yet you’re cheering him on? You’re a fraud. But, most progs are, so it’s no surprise.
#170
hence outsourcing.
Except for that’s all political cover, sashal. Opinion. Bullshit.
Obama is going to nationalize healthcare. Institute universal daycare. Rework state education. Pay the private sector to do stuff deemed beneficial to, to, to whomever and for whatever arbitrary purpose.
He’s going to REDISTRIBUTE WEALTH, not revamp the freaking tax code, you ignorant hairball.
From sashal’s wiki link:
Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital and creates an unequal society. All socialists advocate the creation of an egalitarian society, in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly, although there is considerable disagreement among socialists over how, and to what extent this could be achieved.
Socialism is not a discrete philosophy of fixed doctrine and program; its branches advocate a degree of social interventionism and economic rationalization, sometimes opposing each other. Another dividing feature of the socialist movement is the split on how a socialist economy should be established between the reformists and the revolutionaries. Some socialists advocate complete nationalization of the means of production, distribution, and exchange; while others advocate state control of capital within the framework of a market economy. Social democrats propose selective nationalization of key national industries in mixed economies combined with tax-funded welfare programs…
Sound familiar?
Now, can we stop nit-picking about what it is called, and debate the programs themselves?
Also,
In Alaska, when the profits from the opil companies are redistribuited to all citizens of this state.
Only the oil from public lands. Much of Alaska hasn’t been homesteaded, and is owned by the state. The state gets royalties just like any private landowner with mineral rights- what would you have the government do? Keep all the money? Or distribute it to the citizens who, yes collectively, own it?
Let’s not forget his promise to get people working rebuilding infrastructure. In Russian, didn’t have do dig a river or something?
FTR, I haven’t started drinking, so I have no excuse for the above typo.
So…if we drill in ANWR, THEN we get these resource payments, right? Shouldn’t we, “the owners” of the FEDERAL lands…be receiving resource payments on any profits companies derive from operations on FEDERAL land?
look it perfectly acceptable in the case of Alaska…
Have the “owners” of this land paid into the risk? Or do they receive this money solely due to geographic concerns?
Socialism, big time, and S.Palin is beneficiary of it…
Nothing you can do about it…
Actually needle dick, that is just what is proposed for ANWR and the areas opened up for drilling in FL LA GA NC CA… of course the states own the off shore rights, so the states will benefit not the federal government. Or are you gonna go all Kelo on poor ole Louisiana and distribute the royalties to all 50 states?
As to risk… what fucking risk does any landowner incur when they lease their land to another entity with a royalties’ clause attached? None… the leaseholder assumes all risk. The landowner gets the royalties…
Jeez… bring some capacity to think through results of your comments instead of just dropping shit-piles on the thread like some bovine squatter claiming rights to the grass he just shat upon.
Hey, bmeuppls. He at least tried there. I’ll give him half a point.
sashal, start by defining and then defending the concept of federal land. If this were a snake, as we used to say, it’d bite you on the nose.
So…if we drill in ANWR, THEN we get these resource payments, right? Shouldn’t we, “the owners†of the FEDERAL lands…be receiving resource payments on any profits companies derive from operations on FEDERAL land?
It depends on the contract negotiated by the government, the Federal Government has always kept the money as far as I know. If you want a piece of it, elect Sarah Palin to a Federal office and sic her on them.
Have the “owners†of this land paid into the risk? Or do they receive this money solely due to geographic concerns?
No, typically the owner assumes no risk, but depending upon the lease agreement receives a percentage, usually 1/8 off the top, for allowing the oil company to drill. Do you think the owner of the property, and the oil, should receive no compensation for it?
Socialism, big time, and S.Palin is beneficiary of it…
Nothing you can do about it…
The people of Alaska are the beneficiaries of it, and what would you want done about it? Are you suggesting the oil companies should just be able to take the oil and pay the property owners nothing?
See, what normal people realize, sashal, is that if you took govt out of all this, let private, competitive enterprise go drill wherever the heck it reasonably could simply by economic variables and means and a modicum of environmental balance, then costs would drop through the floor and all boats would rise.
All boats would rise.
All boats. Would. Rise.
Too simple? Can’t handle the notion of there being no federal “sacred lands”? Well, you asked for it: Once you start the layering and the market manipulations, minor intellects get all upside down trying to reason the after effects.
Start with an unnatural system and reap the unnatural consequences. By whatever technical definition you give it, “socialism” is good a name as any to define redistributionist plans. Giving Alaskans rights to the profits of private enterprise because they share a state is indeed a social-ist plan. Giving American’s Obama’s merciful table scraps is too.
Eh, I can’t concede the 1/2 point as this entire line of drivel forms the basis for his justification for his voting for the dem party ideological platform. That he doesn’t have the foundational concepts down to build his platform and rationale upon, only confirms the perceptions that his argument is shallow and little more (probably less) than a rote recitation of the current fad as defined by his peers.
Well, hell, don’t go going all rational on me. I was feeling charitable.
Gonna finally show daddy by pissing on Reagan by voting against the exiting president by hating on McCain by installing a socialist and never admitting having no ideological platform except the coveting part? Makes perfect sense.
I own all your concepts. Ebay is fun.
Hey, it was worth a guess, rohr.
If only you owned your own concepts, thor. I keep asking.
“She’s always a woman to me.” Billy “O!” Joel
OI… First rule of troll play
Never give charity to a troll… it starts to think it’s entitled.
If only you owned your own concepts, thor. I keep asking.
Exactly.
Coveting other’s ideas leads to having none of your own.
I hear the polls support O!. Imagine the impending righteousness of The Fifty-One Percent.
With a bad dose of a Castroan 7% solution, if Ayers has his way. Of course the polls supporting O! is much different than the people supporting O! but that is just semantics or as Fidel would say, “Viva la Revolucion! The people have spoken!!”
#172,
Clinton elected 1992 takes office 1993.
Republicans win majority in Congress 1994, take office 1995. Boom follows after.
Thank you for noticing that the Gingrich Congress got that boom going. Bill Clinton then both took credit for it and ran it over a cliff called the “tech. stock bubble”.
If, as in Alaska, it results in a net subdget surplus, I’d expect it.
If not, then no.
Comment by thor on 10/30 @ 4:00 pm #
First off, in my five year plan, would be to kill all the Reaganomic parrots.
Thor? Come get me. I’ve had enough of you. 2 walk in, I walk out.
Thor will just try to read you some Celine and then try to suck your cock, Blitz. He may have nice lips. So that’s that, if you’re so inclined.
I have no idea who John Hood is by the way. Not the slightest idea. I think this is the first I heard of him. I wonder if he talks about Kathleen Parker behind her shallow snotty cooze back? I’m just saying cause I would.
the U.S. “has the most progressive tax system and collects the largest share of taxes from the richest 10% of the population
Suck it, sashal!
You can whup all you want, but I still can’t understand why what I’ve heard of Obama’s economic proposals are so dastardly. Why so upset over tax proposals, which are fungible and subject to congressional approval?
You don’t read the links anyway, so why would anyone give you the satisfaction of an answer.
Maybe because they’re subject to Congressional approval, trusting one. And the second paragraph of #201.
But if you’re cool with all that too, no big deal. I’m sure it’ll work out fine.
Sorry, Mossberg…
#229
A congress that has no idea how economics works coupled with a president who has no idea how economics works, well, you get the idea. As much as I dislike Mccain, he IS a grownup, and even you’ll have to admit the job needs, at least, some maturity.
For thor; It would be like giving a couple of hookers your dads credit card.
No good can come of it.
Yeah, and corp tax rates second only to Japan, Mossberg. O! wants forty-five percent as part of the hopeful new progressive system that shall not be named socialistic. I’m already — and I kid you not — preparing to close one of my business concerns. It simply makes no sense to suffer through all that.
This rate is, on the bright side, because we’re so conscious of our national image abroad. Probably they like us destitute.
(Ever feel like blog comments are exercises in futility?)
(Ever feel like blog comments are exercises in futility?).
Not really I don’t think. No. Except datadave person sometimes.
I’ll be honest. I just tried to go to the Obama website and was sent to his money-grubbing site and then some cheerleader site. Nothing obvious on tax reform. Not copacetic.
Mossberg500: I take it that you are one of the richiepies: what’s your issue here? How will Obama steal your money?
How will Obama steal your money?
The weapon will say ☭ FORM 1040 ☭ at the top.
And if you think only the “rich” are going to be affected by this…
In the first place, I don’t buy that retiring the rich tax cuts will cause financial disaster. In the second place, I don’t think people will have any income to tax in the next couple of years at least. So it’s a wash.
First it was only over $250,000 would get soaked. Then it was $200,000 and recently it’s $150,000.
I figure that it’ll be down to $50,000 before 2 years in.
Yes, RTO, it’s apparent that Obama can’t keep his numbers straight. That has caught my attention.
I don’t buy that retiring the rich tax cuts
Hint: Obama. Is. Lying. To. You. He is a politician. That’s what he does. That’s all he does.
O.K., Spies, sell me. How is Barak “swarthy” Obama lying to me? Besides your politician behavioral shit. Because that’s all they all do, in your squinty-eyed world.
Cynn, almost 40% now I think of American people do not pay taxes and a lot of them actually get “refunded” money they didn’t have taken out of their checks at all in the first place. Baracky and his NPR are lying about 95% of Americans getting a tax cut. It’s simply not possible. It’s wrong for them to lie but they do it anyway.
How is Barak “swarthy†Obama lying to me?
Because he is promising massive spending increases and massive “tax cuts” at the same time. All while reducing the deficit.
And you can keep your innuendos that I am a racist to yourself, thanks.
Cynn, can you reduce your income, spend more money, and avoid going into debt?
No?
Then why on earth would you believe Obama can do it?
Spies, is he really promising all those things? And are they theoretically mutually exclusive?
To be fair SBP, I don’t think Obama plans to reduce income. He figures the “rich” can be shaken down (more) for enough to finance his dreams.
Going to have that goose squeezing out golden eggs til it’s ass explodes is what he’s going to do.
Spies, you have perfectly described our current micro and macro economic climate. And there is no easy cure. It’s the worst gastric stapling the economy has ever had, and yep, Obama makes the most sense.
He figures the “rich†can be shaken down (more) for enough to finance his dreams.
I don’t think he actually figures anything of the sort. He knows that the truly rich can always find a way to shelter their money. Most likely by moving it overseas.
He’s lying, and he knows he’s lying.
yep, Obama makes the most sense.
If Obama gets elected, you’re in for a big, big suprise, cynn.
Too bad that you’ll be taking the rest of us down with you.
Also, his promise to give every citizen (nationality optional) a kitchen to cook the free chicken in will be balanced out by de-funding the military and suspending all nuclear programs, weapons/tactics research, and such
Cynn, if you didn’t hear, thinks this is a good plan.
Probably thinks our enemy’s will be inspired to follow The Ones example, and we will have a thousand years of peace and prosperity.
So it is written, so it will be done.
Heh, whether he believes it or not isn’t important, what’s important is getting
cynnuseful idiots to believe it. For whatever reason, he seems to be the Pied Piper to useful idiots.So you’re saying I should work on my subservient squat position.
Lee, the supreme irony is that I would rather have a squishy Obama than a hardass lee in power any old day.
Can you please explain where the irony in that is? I confess to missing it.
But yes, compared to Obama, I am a hardass. Compared to Obama, Frasier Crane’s younger brother Niles is a hardass.
You really want a “squishy” Commander in Chief?
OT:
From Gateway Pundit and LGF,
LA Times: Barack Obama’s Friends Are So Dangerous That Revealing Our Source Would Put Him In Jeopardy
The irony lies broadly in all the fucking bluster and fulmination that blows from the right, insisting that Our Enemy engages in horrific attacks, and then launches the same.
oops, that was kind of circular, wasn’t it? never mind.
Soooo…you’re saying our invasion of Iraq was the same as, say, Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait?
Or that our possession of nuclear weapons is as globally destabilizing as, say, Iran possessing nuclear weapons?
lee, baby, neither made nor make any pronouncemtns on the MidEast. Why do you righties abruptly cleave to this Mideast/Israel issue?
Oh, sorry sweety, I guess when you said “insisting that Our Enemy engages in horrific attacks, and then launches the same.” confused me. I was talking about a “squishy” CIC that wants to dismantle the military and inspire Iran to quit it’s nuke program by abandoning ours.
I’ll shut up now, obviously I just don’t get you tonight cynn.
cynn: do you realize that if the oil stopped flowing tomorrow, you and everyone in your family would likely be dead by spring?
Of course you don’t. You’ve never even thought about it.
if i could tax richie riches forehead i’d do it/cuz it looks like a fivehead to me-
and a little less forehead would be good for the country
but then all the money would move to the casper..of ghosts-
and he’s kinda white
shifty white
boo
Mossberg500: I take it that you are one of the richiepies: what’s your issue here? How will Obama steal your money?
Where does it end?
cynn, you comment here often enough to have seen several of the articles I’ve linked regarding Senator Obama’s “tax reform” that doesn’t add up. You’ve chosen not to follow the links. I’m not going to waste Jeff’s bandwidth by copying entire articles into the comment section.
You want to save the world, fine, do it on your own dime. I give to the charities I find credible, and that is a very short list. Few charitable organizations actually give the majority of the donations to the people or cause they profess to care about. Most of the contributions go to the bureacrats who “administer”(at a premium) the donations. I trust the govenment less than I do charitable organizations because there are more bureacrats.
BTW, I don’t know what a richiepie is? I tried looking it up on the internet, but I only get hits of some weird reference to people who use that as a screen name. Urban Dictionary didn’t list it either.
Mossberg500,
It means, silly, that you have obviously won life’s lottery, and therefore must be
punishederassrapeduh.. re-educated.therefore must be
punisheder assraped uh.. re-educated.Anyone trying to re-educate me is certainly welcome to try, but may take heed of my screen name prior to that endeavor.
assraped#206 sashal:
The owners do receive the payments. It goes into the treasury. That is where our elected representatives have sent it. Sort of like the monies received from the sale of surplus government property (real and personal).
It seems clear that many commenters do not understand the U.S. federal tax system. The $250,000 figure roughly reflects the breaking point for the top quintile of income earners in the United States. One way of defining the middle class is that it is the three quintiles in the middle of that distribution, with the lower class being the bottom quintile. Although there is a fairly significant portion of the lower two quintiles that pay no federal income tax, those groups do pay the payroll taxes (medicare and social security). The income tax is nominally progressive, in that there are several rate brackets. The payroll taxes are regressive, in that they are paid only by people with salary income and not by those with capital income, and they are capped, so that they are only paid on about the first $100,000 of salary income. There are hedge fund managers and CEOs making many tens of millions a year, and they pay these payroll taxes only on the first $100,000 of their payroll income. (By the way, it is those payroll taxes, paid mainly by the middle class, that have kept the federal government programs going, along with borrowing, since they have been used to fund the enormous military spending since Reagan took office, in spite of the enormous reductions in government revenues. Reagan cut taxes his first year in office, his staffers realized quickly that he’d created a monster deficit and tremendous borrowing, so then he increased taxes annually. Much of the increase was in payroll taxes, paid primarily by the little guys. Read what David Stockman has to say about that era, for example, or Lou Gannon.)
Furthermore, much of our tax system includes “tax expenditures” that redistribute upwards–that is, they primarily benefit those in the top two quintiles. Funny how the use of funds for safety nets at the bottom gets labelled “socialism” but the use of funds for the wealthy is disregarded…..A good example is the interest deduction for home mortgage loans, which is a significant tax break for multimillionaires with multiple homes and not of any benefit to most ordinary Americans, since about 70% don’t have enough deductions to itemize and only itemizers benefit from the mortgage interest deduction. Progressive taxation (higher rates for higher incomes) is economically reasonable, because of the marginal utility of the dollar: for a person who is living on $15,000 a year with a family of four, every single dollar is enormously important and goes for necessities like food, shelter and clothing. For a person who is living on $15 million a year with a family of four, the last dollar received is worth very little–it is difficult for such a multimillionaire to spend all of the annual income. Because of this marginal utility of the dollar, a tax policy that attempts to tax all individuals based on their ability to pay a fair share of the taxes needed to raise revenues (the tax policy that has long been espoused in the US) should tax the wealthy more than the poor, to be sound economically.
Many commenters seem also to have very little genuine understanding of economics. Regretably, the “free market” talk that many hear repeated over and over doesn’t work the way Milt Friedman thought it would. There’s lots of proof, from Argentina, and Brazil to Enron and the recent “bailout” of the big banks. The result of trying to apply this “free market” ideology over several decades of Republican political dominance is the systemic financial system failure that we are living through today. That’s because no market can exist and work without the checks and balances provided by a stable governmental context. There is no such thing as a free lunch, and there’s no such thing as a “free” market the way these propaganda-oriented “think” tanks would have you believe. Read Mills, Keynes, even Hayek. You’ll see that this “free marketarian” ideology is a distorted view of the way human social systems work.