Yesterday on my way to lunch at a local restaurant, I passed one of the homeless guys in that area, with a sign that read "Vote Obama, I need the money."
Once inside the restaurant, my waiter had on a "Obama 08" tee shirt.
When the bill came, I decided not to tip the waiter and explained to him while he had given me exceptional service, that his tee shirt made me feel he obviously believes in Senator Obama's plan to redistribute the wealth.
I told him I was going to redistribute his tip to someone that I deemed more in need--the homeless guy outside. He stood there in disbelief and angrily stormed away.
I went outside, gave the homeless guy $3 and told him to thank the waiter inside, as I had decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy looked at me in disbelief but seemed grateful.
As I got in my truck, I realized this rather unscientific redistribution experiment had left the homeless guy quite happy for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn.
Well, I guess this redistribution of wealth is going to take a while to catch on with those doing the work.
Once inside the restaurant, my waiter had on a "Obama 08" tee shirt.
When the bill came, I decided not to tip the waiter and explained to him while he had given me exceptional service, that his tee shirt made me feel he obviously believes in Senator Obama's plan to redistribute the wealth.
I told him I was going to redistribute his tip to someone that I deemed more in need--the homeless guy outside. He stood there in disbelief and angrily stormed away.
I went outside, gave the homeless guy $3 and told him to thank the waiter inside, as I had decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy looked at me in disbelief but seemed grateful.
As I got in my truck, I realized this rather unscientific redistribution experiment had left the homeless guy quite happy for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn.
Well, I guess this redistribution of wealth is going to take a while to catch on with those doing the work.
Surf,
Obviously, you don't recognize a joke when you read one, and take a look at the videos and links in the thread entitled "Obama Tax Q".
First it was $250,000 then $200,000. when in actuality 2 years ago 95% of Americans made less than $153,542 a year.
So whats the real number? $250,000, $200,000 or less than 95% ($153,542) of Americans.
I seriously doubt the median income of 95% of Americans has increased that much in the past 2 years.
Obviously, you don't recognize a joke when you read one, and take a look at the videos and links in the thread entitled "Obama Tax Q".
First it was $250,000 then $200,000. when in actuality 2 years ago 95% of Americans made less than $153,542 a year.
So whats the real number? $250,000, $200,000 or less than 95% ($153,542) of Americans.
I seriously doubt the median income of 95% of Americans has increased that much in the past 2 years.
No, on second thought, let me hand it to you on a silver platter, like a true liberal would expect.
Direct for the thread referenced in the previous post. Which you chose not to refute.
********
Surf,
It is no longer $250,000 it is $200,000. Keep up with current events (See the videos on page 2 of this thread)
And who cares how much SANDYCOUPLE makes, or I for that matter, perhaps we aspire to surpass what Obama thinks is "rich" this week, next week, months, or years from now for that matter (if we haven't already). Who knows what Obama's definition of "rich" will be after December 15th (if he wins).
On a side note Obama keeps saying 95% of Americans will get a tax cut. He also has stated that 95% of Americans make under $250,000 and then two weeks later it was $200,000.
Well according to the chart in this article http://www.kiplinger.com/features/archives/2007/11/taxrank.html that was published in November of 2007 when Obama was not the Democratic Nominee yet (The source of which is the IRS), and several other articles that I have seen. In 2006, the top 95% of Americans made less than $153,542 a year.
So what is it the number? $250,000, $200,000, or $153,542 a year?
***********
But of course in your book, I'm just a "typical NEO-CON", sorry Surf, but the numbers don't lie.
You further go on to state that "Here, let me help you, you can
Direct for the thread referenced in the previous post. Which you chose not to refute.
********
Surf,
It is no longer $250,000 it is $200,000. Keep up with current events (See the videos on page 2 of this thread)
And who cares how much SANDYCOUPLE makes, or I for that matter, perhaps we aspire to surpass what Obama thinks is "rich" this week, next week, months, or years from now for that matter (if we haven't already). Who knows what Obama's definition of "rich" will be after December 15th (if he wins).
On a side note Obama keeps saying 95% of Americans will get a tax cut. He also has stated that 95% of Americans make under $250,000 and then two weeks later it was $200,000.
Well according to the chart in this article http://www.kiplinger.com/features/archives/2007/11/taxrank.html that was published in November of 2007 when Obama was not the Democratic Nominee yet (The source of which is the IRS), and several other articles that I have seen. In 2006, the top 95% of Americans made less than $153,542 a year.
So what is it the number? $250,000, $200,000, or $153,542 a year?
***********
But of course in your book, I'm just a "typical NEO-CON", sorry Surf, but the numbers don't lie.
You further go on to state that "Here, let me help you, you can
Then lets not forget during the beginning of the primaries when debating Hillary he said that the uppercalss began at $97, 000.
But to answer the question posed by surf as to how Obama plans on taking money from us Middle class people. here you go.
http://scaredmonkeys.com/2008/11/02/barack-obama-audio-interview-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-the-coal-industry/
Granted, the government won't take it directly, but he openly admits that his plan will cause energy prices to "skyrocket"
Close enough to raising my taxes.
But to answer the question posed by surf as to how Obama plans on taking money from us Middle class people. here you go.
http://scaredmonkeys.com/2008/11/02/barack-obama-audio-interview-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-the-coal-industry/
Granted, the government won't take it directly, but he openly admits that his plan will cause energy prices to "skyrocket"
Close enough to raising my taxes.
I must have missed the punch line if it was a joke. What is a joke is all the talk about redistribution of wealth as something new. I see the oil companies have made another bundle and they have always asked and received tax breaks to
Right on, Max! You have summarized an example of Republican redistribution of wealth beautifully!! This is the point I've been trying to get across for weeks.
This endless "wealth re-distribution" crap is just a scare tactic that strikes a chord with some (especially when hammered home endlessly). The average person can identify with the-poor-getting-more-than-they-have-coming-to-them. They seem to feel that as long as one is making money in the name of business, how it is acquired is all fair game. The way those with money cheat the system seems to get a pass because the mechanics of the fraud are beyond their comprehension (apparently).
Great post!
This endless "wealth re-distribution" crap is just a scare tactic that strikes a chord with some (especially when hammered home endlessly). The average person can identify with the-poor-getting-more-than-they-have-coming-to-them. They seem to feel that as long as one is making money in the name of business, how it is acquired is all fair game. The way those with money cheat the system seems to get a pass because the mechanics of the fraud are beyond their comprehension (apparently).
Great post!
Well hell let's look at athletes and what they make for playing a game. They don't make a product,they perform and nobody complains what they make. Why are you complaining what that ceo makes. Now I agree it is too much but hey the stock holders ok it.
Well all we can say is we hope you liberals are RIGHT about Obama as he is now president elect of the United States and as a retired Air Force vet I will support the president of the United States. I still question his past associations and we can only hope he is a man of his word and he does make a better America. I will admit I was wrong with my prediction I am eating my crow right now.
Norm
Norm
AMPUSSY- Classy!
Today I have my flag flying at half staff to protest the "death of capitalism" hope I'm wrong hope all the hype of Obama being a socialist is all garbage but I'm venting by flying my flag at half staff. O.K. dow down nearly 500 points was it due to Obama winning? More than likely not the jobs report didn't help but I do think we have a long hard road ahead and only hope the next 2 yrs we can see some improvements because if the Obama and Pelosi crew don't improve things the repubs will be back at least in congress/senate.
Suprised no one has mentioned that Obama supporters are saying and QUOTE. he said to us that i wont have to worry how to pay my mortgage, fill my gas tank, or get my kids health insurance anymore, if i help him he will help me.
that is a direct quote and scary as hell. I am so tired of watching people take a hand out without eaven trying to do a fucking thing. when i work two jobs, and the people down the street on welfare are living a better lifesytly than me explain to me why i should give a flying fuck about them, The welfare system is SHIT, Social Security is SHIT. If i gotta pass a piss test to get a job and pay taxes, they should have to pass a piss tax to get the fucking money for free, as far as all the disability programs out there, from what i can see they fit right in with the rest of the welfare system
Ryan
that is a direct quote and scary as hell. I am so tired of watching people take a hand out without eaven trying to do a fucking thing. when i work two jobs, and the people down the street on welfare are living a better lifesytly than me explain to me why i should give a flying fuck about them, The welfare system is SHIT, Social Security is SHIT. If i gotta pass a piss test to get a job and pay taxes, they should have to pass a piss tax to get the fucking money for free, as far as all the disability programs out there, from what i can see they fit right in with the rest of the welfare system
Ryan
Fucker111
Ease up yes America made their choice and we all may not be happy about the outcome but the republicans still have the power of a fillibuster as they did not get the 60 seats needed to get all their liberal agenda passed. The handouts to those not working may have been a ploy to get the vote look at history how many past presidents actually did what they promised?
Ease up yes America made their choice and we all may not be happy about the outcome but the republicans still have the power of a fillibuster as they did not get the 60 seats needed to get all their liberal agenda passed. The handouts to those not working may have been a ploy to get the vote look at history how many past presidents actually did what they promised?
Its way, way, way to early to tell.........lets just see how it all plays out now.
B.
B.
Fucker111 - the "quote" sounded a lot like those banking folks, stock market types, mega corporate CEO's and defense contractors after George took over . . . "Fraud, waste, risks - no problem; live big and spend bigger while sending the jobs overseas and keeping pay here in the states low - if things don't work Uncle George and friends will make sure us loyal GOP types lose nothing because just like the guys that took down the Savings and Loans the government welfare for those that lay waste to the economy, environment, and workers is a promise." It's not just the poor that feed on the excess of government spending.
Somehow the idea of a minimum wage worker getting health insurance feels better than another CEO buying a fourth vacation home while his company closes another factory and demands a bigger tax break or the company will fail. Some single mother getting free education seems better than a company like Halliburton getting a no bid contract to soak us and and at the same time not provide the best for our war fighters.
Somehow the idea of a minimum wage worker getting health insurance feels better than another CEO buying a fourth vacation home while his company closes another factory and demands a bigger tax break or the company will fail. Some single mother getting free education seems better than a company like Halliburton getting a no bid contract to soak us and and at the same time not provide the best for our war fighters.
SWINGTIDE - Very, Very well said! I don't see how anyone can argue with those sentiments - yet so many can't seem to grasp the parallel. The waste/greed at the top is gargantuan, yet hard to comprehend I guess. You illustrate the point beautifully!
The problem will be if he raises "Capital Gains Tax" just look at the market people are cashing out BEFORE the raise in capital gains if Obama is smart he will say this is NOT the time to raise capital gains. It's all about JOBS and if corporations are loosing big bucks jobs will be lost in big #'s this economy is so screwed up even NASCAR teams are telling people "we have to let you go" when NASCAR starts cutting back you know the shit has hit the fan LOL.
Do you really think the big corporation and ceos will pay for healthcare and education out of their own pockets? Hell no they will just raise prices.
Highway that is EXACTLY what will happen I don't thinbk BHO is going to do 1/2 of what he said to get elected if he does he will drive this country into the GROUND! He will back pedal he has won the election now it is his time to do what all politicians do make EXCUSES as to why he can't do what he promised. Case in point "I'm going to reach across the isle" yeah right he picks the farthest to the left Chief of Staff" I'm waiting to see who he chooses as secretary of education will it be someone like "Ayers" lol.
Surf
If he roles out a "New presidential seal" then we will all know we are in for trouble! Hope the guy can do something right and help fix this country but with Pelosi&Reid I have my doubts.
If he roles out a "New presidential seal" then we will all know we are in for trouble! Hope the guy can do something right and help fix this country but with Pelosi&Reid I have my doubts.
lol
Stats below provided through the Census Bureau
Stats for 1993
98,990,000 households in the U.S.
under $27,500 38,928,000 39.3%
$27,500-$57,499 32,654,000 33.0%
$57,500-$87,499 14,355,000 14.5%
$87,500-$99,999 2,649,000 2.7%
$100,000+ 6,581,000 6.7%
2000
106,418,000 households
under $27,500 35,011,000 32.9% DOWN 6.4%
$27,500-$57,499 33,340,000 31.3% DOWN 1.7%
$57,500-$87,499 19,442,000 18.3% UP 3.8%
$87,500-$99,999 4, 364,000 4.1% UP 2.4%
$100,000+ 14,262,000 13.4 % UP 6.7%
2007
116,783,000 Households
under $27,500 32,735,000 28.0% DOWN 4.9%
$27,500-$57,499 33,103,000 28.3% DOWN 3.0%
$57,500-$87,499 21,467,000 18.4% UP .1%
$87,500-$99,999 5,864,000 5.0% UP .9%
$100,000+ 23,586,000 20.2% UP 6.8%
So According to the Census Bureau During the Era of the Democrats (Since some of you get a little anal when Slick Willie is used, we will just say Democrats instead.) The Lower class decreased in population 6.4% Lower Middle and Middle classes increased by 2.1%
Upper middle class and Upper class increased by 9.1%
Under Bush, Lower Class decereased by 4.9% Lower middle and middle classes decreased by 2.9%and upper middle and upper class increased by 7.7%
HMM seems that according to the census Bureau it was under the Democrat President that there were fewer poor, more average joe's and more well-to-do people. Under the Republican President (you know, that one guy that has sent our economy into a tailspin and gave his rich friends all this money), there were fewer poor people, fewer average people and more well-to-do people. and all that without raising taxes or spreading the wealth. How the hell did that happen?
Stats for 1993
98,990,000 households in the U.S.
under $27,500 38,928,000 39.3%
$27,500-$57,499 32,654,000 33.0%
$57,500-$87,499 14,355,000 14.5%
$87,500-$99,999 2,649,000 2.7%
$100,000+ 6,581,000 6.7%
2000
106,418,000 households
under $27,500 35,011,000 32.9% DOWN 6.4%
$27,500-$57,499 33,340,000 31.3% DOWN 1.7%
$57,500-$87,499 19,442,000 18.3% UP 3.8%
$87,500-$99,999 4, 364,000 4.1% UP 2.4%
$100,000+ 14,262,000 13.4 % UP 6.7%
2007
116,783,000 Households
under $27,500 32,735,000 28.0% DOWN 4.9%
$27,500-$57,499 33,103,000 28.3% DOWN 3.0%
$57,500-$87,499 21,467,000 18.4% UP .1%
$87,500-$99,999 5,864,000 5.0% UP .9%
$100,000+ 23,586,000 20.2% UP 6.8%
So According to the Census Bureau During the Era of the Democrats (Since some of you get a little anal when Slick Willie is used, we will just say Democrats instead.) The Lower class decreased in population 6.4% Lower Middle and Middle classes increased by 2.1%
Upper middle class and Upper class increased by 9.1%
Under Bush, Lower Class decereased by 4.9% Lower middle and middle classes decreased by 2.9%and upper middle and upper class increased by 7.7%
HMM seems that according to the census Bureau it was under the Democrat President that there were fewer poor, more average joe's and more well-to-do people. Under the Republican President (you know, that one guy that has sent our economy into a tailspin and gave his rich friends all this money), there were fewer poor people, fewer average people and more well-to-do people. and all that without raising taxes or spreading the wealth. How the hell did that happen?
Hey surf,
sounds like someone is stupid enough to believe that any politician will live up to campaign promises...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...give me a break.
sounds like someone is stupid enough to believe that any politician will live up to campaign promises...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...give me a break.
If McCain would've won, we could've said the same to you. Now that's the pot and kettle for ya.
On the contrary...I never believed ANY of them.
topfree - "HMM seems that according to the census Bureau it was under the Democrat President that there were fewer poor, more average joe's and more well-to-do people. Under the Republican President (you know, that one guy that has sent our economy into a tailspin and gave his rich friends all this money), there were fewer poor people, fewer average people and more well-to-do people. and all that without raising taxes or spreading the wealth. How the hell did that happen?"
This is a perfect example of why statistics should not be used as the sole support for anything.
1. Policies/tax laws/etc. take time to implement and even longer for the full effect to be realized - there is a time lag (who knows how long) before they take effect and the results analyzed. Remember Reagan's "trickle-down" economics? Just how long does a trickle take to make its full impact?
2. Where your statistical table is concerned - how often is the definition of "lower/middle/upper class" modified to reflect inflation? Since we are talking about a matter of a few percentage points signifying the changes you suggest, it is very important to know if the numbers have been adjusted.
Statistics are very tricky - just like a statement taken out of context.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the numbers that were posted other than I question if they are truly representative of anything (without further analysis)
That is why I prefer logic to 'support' information. It is easy to find and pluck a number from somewhere to support one's argument. Numbers may not lie but they certainly don't tell a story all by themselves.
I'll take logic over a table of numbers every time. For example, if you want to see how well people have done under Bush show them your table and see if it seems logical to them?
This is a perfect example of why statistics should not be used as the sole support for anything.
1. Policies/tax laws/etc. take time to implement and even longer for the full effect to be realized - there is a time lag (who knows how long) before they take effect and the results analyzed. Remember Reagan's "trickle-down" economics? Just how long does a trickle take to make its full impact?
2. Where your statistical table is concerned - how often is the definition of "lower/middle/upper class" modified to reflect inflation? Since we are talking about a matter of a few percentage points signifying the changes you suggest, it is very important to know if the numbers have been adjusted.
Statistics are very tricky - just like a statement taken out of context.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the numbers that were posted other than I question if they are truly representative of anything (without further analysis)
That is why I prefer logic to 'support' information. It is easy to find and pluck a number from somewhere to support one's argument. Numbers may not lie but they certainly don't tell a story all by themselves.
I'll take logic over a table of numbers every time. For example, if you want to see how well people have done under Bush show them your table and see if it seems logical to them?
Damn surf you really are a pathetic little beaner, now aren't you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
All your little feeble mind can do is call names and criticize. Well how's it feel to be called names. Should I go on and humiliate you and all around you some more or can we both just talk civil to all? BALL IS IN YOUR COURT IT IS YOUR CHOICE!!!!!!!!
All your little feeble mind can do is call names and criticize. Well how's it feel to be called names. Should I go on and humiliate you and all around you some more or can we both just talk civil to all? BALL IS IN YOUR COURT IT IS YOUR CHOICE!!!!!!!!
See you can't even come up with something on your own. You only repeat what I said. I just wish you knew how to spell so I wouldn't have to reread your shit over to figure out what you are trying to say. Why are you just now professing to be american indian? Is it just following your fearless leader Don and wanting to be like Don? All I'm asking is that you be civil and quit with the name calling, that's all.
http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032008/hhinc/new01_001.htm 2007 stats
http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032001/hhinc/new01_001.htm 2000 stats
http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/031995/hhinc/1_000.htm 1994 stats.
Gotta do your own math to get the percentages I posted.
"I'll take logic over a table of numbers every time. For example, if you want to see how well people have done under Bush show them your table and see if it seems logical to them? "
Logic over stats huh? Well that is kind of Illogical don't you think? I personally prefer an equal combination of Logic Stats and common sense. I will agree that all the stats in the world mean nothing if you don't know where they came from or have the logic to understand them. Then you inject common sense in to the mix. After I get through asking all those people you suggest I ask, I will use my common sense and continue to ask questions such as, Did you quit your job, or were you fired. Did you look for a better job that would advance you in life or were you waithing for someone to recognize your abilities and offer you the job. Were you happy where you were at before Bush took office or were you just less miserable. Alot of the reason people are unhappier or have less money is because of choices THEY made not Bush. Under GW Bush My income went up by over 25%. Under Obama it will go up considerable more than that but that is because I have made the choice and have taken the needed steps to improve my situation and my income, regardless of who is in the Oral Office. Personal Responsibility, not governmental Blame.
http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032001/hhinc/new01_001.htm 2000 stats
http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/031995/hhinc/1_000.htm 1994 stats.
Gotta do your own math to get the percentages I posted.
"I'll take logic over a table of numbers every time. For example, if you want to see how well people have done under Bush show them your table and see if it seems logical to them? "
Logic over stats huh? Well that is kind of Illogical don't you think? I personally prefer an equal combination of Logic Stats and common sense. I will agree that all the stats in the world mean nothing if you don't know where they came from or have the logic to understand them. Then you inject common sense in to the mix. After I get through asking all those people you suggest I ask, I will use my common sense and continue to ask questions such as, Did you quit your job, or were you fired. Did you look for a better job that would advance you in life or were you waithing for someone to recognize your abilities and offer you the job. Were you happy where you were at before Bush took office or were you just less miserable. Alot of the reason people are unhappier or have less money is because of choices THEY made not Bush. Under GW Bush My income went up by over 25%. Under Obama it will go up considerable more than that but that is because I have made the choice and have taken the needed steps to improve my situation and my income, regardless of who is in the Oral Office. Personal Responsibility, not governmental Blame.
Oh, his and old one that I know drives you NEO-CON