Obama and the younger generation

poopshovel wrote:

belteshazzar wrote: You make half a million dollars a year(or more)?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA That's berkeleying cute. No, but I am technically "President and CEO" of a corporation. I probably make a little less than your average landscaper. Keep in mind, I also match Federal Withholdings on our employees, AS WELL AS MYSELF, as I'm technically an "employee" of our business. The 30% doesn't include State income tax or sales tax. So you can take your berkeleying sarcasm and stick it up your ass. I've said it before: The same dip-E36 M3s that complain about $4/gallon gas, a product that gets them to and from work (where money comes from,) have no berkeleying clue how much they paid in federal income tax (if anything,) or what those tax dollars pay for.

I wasn't being sarcastic. A U.S. citizen who is single with a taxable income of under 500k a year does not pay 30% in federal income taxes. They may pay more than that much on any additional income over 165k a year, but their total federal income tax burden is not 30%.

BTW, we agree on most things as far as I can tell.

belteshazzar wrote:

poopshovel wrote:

belteshazzar wrote: You make half a million dollars a year(or more)?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA That's berkeleying cute. No, but I am technically "President and CEO" of a corporation. I probably make a little less than your average landscaper. Keep in mind, I also match Federal Withholdings on our employees, AS WELL AS MYSELF, as I'm technically an "employee" of our business. The 30% doesn't include State income tax or sales tax. So you can take your berkeleying sarcasm and stick it up your ass. I've said it before: The same dip-E36 M3s that complain about $4/gallon gas, a product that gets them to and from work (where money comes from,) have no berkeleying clue how much they paid in federal income tax (if anything,) or what those tax dollars pay for.

I wasn't being sarcastic. A U.S. citizen who is single with a taxable income of under 500k a year does not pay 30% in federal income taxes. They may pay more than that much on any additional income over 165k a year, but their total federal income tax burden is not 30%. BTW, we agree on most things as far as I can tell.

Google: "Corporate income tax rates for small businesses," read, and agree with me on one more thing, thinking to yourself "Wow, that's f*&^ed up." Then when Bush or any other Republican proposes a cut in CORPORATE tax rates (as he did last summer,) and Democrats go "SEE, BUSH IS JUST "FOR" THOSE EVIL RICH FOLKS," punch them in the throat and say it's from me. While they're curled up in the fetal position gasping for air, explain to them that higher tax rates for their employers means less money and more "downsizing" for them. Then kick them in the balls.

thx.

GameboyRMH wrote:

Duke wrote:

GameboyRMH wrote: Oh, Mexican illegal immigrants...I didn't realize you were making such a narrow argument. Yeah, they'd probably like a president who's not concerned about those damn dirty foreigners at the construction site, and they do want something out of America.

Who said anything about Mexican illegals? Let's see - I went out to dinner last night, followed by a trip to the grocery store: My waitress was Russian, or East European of some sort. The people at the next table spoke French throughout the meal, except when they were ordering. Neither of those languages is native to the US. While at the grocery store I heard Indian and Pakistani being spoken. I heard another woman speaking to her husband in German-accented English, and another man with French-accented English. None of THOSE is native to the US, either. And that's discounting the Mexican busboys and the Puerto Rican landscape crew outside.

Chances are they're all good tax-paying American citizens (or possibly good money-spewing tourists), that want the same thing as all the other good tax-paying American citizens (or tourists). If you have a problem with good tax-paying American citizens (or tourists) who speak different languages to each other, or have funny accents, that's just xenophobia. You could even place some blame on them if they were unable to speak the official language of the country (if they're citizens), but from what you've told me, you just heard some people speaking different languages to each other. Nothing wrong with that whatsoever.

Duke wrote: And, on the subject of NOT WANTING ANYTHING FROM US, do you remember the Malaysian tsunami? Even though we gave more total money than any other nation in the world, America got criticized for not giving enough. How can we not give enough of something that supposedly nobody wants?!

See my earlier points on voluntary aid vs. other things...I agree that criticizing the US for not giving enough was uncalled for.

I dont think he was angry about accents. Besides, those koreans are making better cars all the time.

poopshovel wrote: Google: "Corporate income tax rates for small businesses," read, and agree with me on one more thing, thinking to yourself "Wow, that's f*&^ed up." Then when Bush or any other Republican proposes a cut in CORPORATE tax rates (as he did last summer,) and Democrats go "SEE, BUSH IS JUST "FOR" THOSE EVIL RICH FOLKS," punch them in the throat and say it's from me. While they're curled up in the fetal position gasping for air, explain to them that higher tax rates for their employers means less money and more "downsizing" for them. Then kick them in the balls. thx.

That's true, but lower corporate taxes for your employers means more money for them and usually no benefit to anyone else.

It's one of those cases (like companies losing lawsuits) where if money is lost, it's passed on to the little guy, and if money is saved, the fat cats soak it up.

Business owners/founders have the greatest risk and potential reward for a business' performance. There must be a "sweet spot" tax-wise where we do not stifle entrepreneurs, nor create a haven for the dishonest and greedy.

GameboyRMH wrote: Chances are they're all good tax-paying American citizens (or possibly good money-spewing tourists), that want the same thing as all the other good tax-paying American citizens (or tourists). If you have a problem with good tax-paying American citizens (or tourists) who speak different languages to each other, or have funny accents, that's just xenophobia. You could even place some blame on them if they were unable to speak the official language of the country (if they're citizens), but from what you've told me, you just heard some people speaking different languages to each other. Nothing wrong with that whatsoever.

Wow, could you have missed my point any further? Where on earth did I say that I had a problem with non-US-natives? I think perhaps you're projecting your anti-American sentiments just a little. I can't see how you possibly construed my post into me being xenophobic.

My point was: If there is nothing the US has that people from other countries want - YOUR statement - then why are so many people born outside the US making the effort to come here?

Duke wrote:

GameboyRMH wrote: Chances are they're all good tax-paying American citizens (or possibly good money-spewing tourists), that want the same thing as all the other good tax-paying American citizens (or tourists). If you have a problem with good tax-paying American citizens (or tourists) who speak different languages to each other, or have funny accents, that's just xenophobia. You could even place some blame on them if they were unable to speak the official language of the country (if they're citizens), but from what you've told me, you just heard some people speaking different languages to each other. Nothing wrong with that whatsoever.

Wow, could you have missed my point any further? Where on earth did I say that I had a problem with non-US-natives? I think perhaps you're projecting your anti-American sentiments just a little. I can't see how you possibly construed my post into me being xenophobic. My point was: If there is nothing the US has that people from other countries want - YOUR statement - then why are so many people born outside the US making the effort to come here?

I'd say there's a difference between wanting something from the US and wanting to be an American. Sorry if I missed your point and misunderstood your post, but I didn't associate the two. Also note that immigrants into America (legal or not) are a very small fraction of the population of their respective countries. Some of them want to move to a different country to get a chance at a better life, and because the image of the US from the 50s still lingers, many of them choose America...but note that America is just one of many emmigration destinations. They're not all going there. Every country has bogeyman illegal immigrants from another country, so if you look at emmigration as a stepping stone approach, the US is higher up on the list, and relatively few decide to jump straight to it.

Um, the US is still a pretty good bet when it comes to seeking a better life.

Wow Duke, you sound retarded. There's a HUGE difference between countries receiving aide/asking for help/not asking for help/whatever and individuals seeking a better life. I don't think that anyone here has ever said that people from other countries don't want the opportunities that Americans have. I'm pretty sure that's universally recognized. I'm pretty sure what some people said here, was basically that other countries don't want our help and don't want us meddling in their business. At least that's the way I read it.

poopshovel wrote: Google: "Corporate income tax rates for small businesses," read, and agree with me on one more thing, thinking to yourself "Wow, that's f*&^ed up." Then when Bush or any other Republican proposes a cut in CORPORATE tax rates (as he did last summer,) and Democrats go "SEE, BUSH IS JUST "FOR" THOSE EVIL RICH FOLKS," punch them in the throat and say it's from me. While they're curled up in the fetal position gasping for air, explain to them that higher tax rates for their employers means less money and more "downsizing" for them. Then kick them in the balls. thx.

I'm familiar with all that. I was initially correcting you on what, for most people, would have been an exaggeration.

The statement given was that there is nothing America has that the world wants. That's what I was working with. If you want to call something retarded, start at the beginning.

I guess that if you want to take a sentence someone has written and not put it in any kind of context I guess I could see how you could think tha...nah, never mind, it still seems kinda retarded. Seriously man, take a lesson in context, and you'll realize what your saying is way out of it.

16vCorey wrote: I guess that if you want to take a sentence someone has written and not put it in any kind of context I guess I could see how you could think tha...nah, never mind, it still seems kinda retarded. Seriously man, take a lesson in context, and you'll realize what your saying is way out of it.

Here is the post in question in its entirety:

GameboyRMH wrote: ATTENTION EVERYONE WHO THINKS THE OUTSIDE WORLD WANTS SOMETHING FROM THE USA. We do not want anything from you, most never did. We want you to stop berkeleying with us, nothing more. You could say we literally want NOTHING from you. There are many valid points to argue in this thread, but this idea's been thrown around too many times, it's silly and downright insulting.

And you're saying... ahhh, skip it.

And the moral of the story is... if you make an Absolute Blanket Statement, it's not going to take much for someone to prove you wrong.

Absolute Blanket Statement

ABS FTL!!!!

Wow, anything remotly political here goes off on all possible tangets, and some impossible ones. About the only thing not brought up is the DaVinci Code, and I would be scared if it got to that.

I'm going back to the Da Lorean thread

belteshazzar wrote:

poopshovel wrote: Google: "Corporate income tax rates for small businesses," read, and agree with me on one more thing, thinking to yourself "Wow, that's f*&^ed up." Then when Bush or any other Republican proposes a cut in CORPORATE tax rates (as he did last summer,) and Democrats go "SEE, BUSH IS JUST "FOR" THOSE EVIL RICH FOLKS," punch them in the throat and say it's from me. While they're curled up in the fetal position gasping for air, explain to them that higher tax rates for their employers means less money and more "downsizing" for them. Then kick them in the balls. thx.

I'm familiar with all that. I was initially correcting you on what, for most people, would have been an exaggeration.

The question still stands - How much is enough?

DILYSI Dave wrote: The question still stands - How much is enough?

Again, the government needs to collect as much in taxes as it spends. I say that we need to be taxed as much as it takes to cover all the things we need to pay for.

This will, of course, cause people to freak out over how much they're being charged. They will freak out and demand that the government cut spending. Eventually the government will pare itself down to a level that the voters will accept, or we'll break out into civil war.

Or we can just say X% cuts to everything across the board. "But you can't cut [military/education/social security/whatever]!" "Yes I can. I just did. Deal."

Dr. Hess wrote: Phone, water, sewer (septic), electricity: all private enterprise here.

Same here. And whom do you think made sure that such services are available to all no matter if at a loss or not?

Roads: County infrastructure.911, well, of limited use in many parts of the country as it is. School: entire other subject and in most cases, an example of the failures of socialism and I would gladly disconnect from that system if given the opportunity (that is, if there wasn't a gun pointed at me forcing me into it). A safe work environment is not socialism. My employer and I negotiate in a free market for my wages. If the government told my boss how much they could get away with paying me, that would be socialism. Oh, don't worry, Wes, we're on the way to socialism/totalitarianism. I don't see much way to stop it. After that will come a dictatorship. We'll all be dead by then, so only the children will have to live through it. Smile and ask for more taxes.

I agree with you there, my Idea of what socialism is does not really match the dictionary term of the word. "The government provides all" sounds more like Communism than Socialism to me. I see socialism as things in society that are for the greater good of all people, they usually have some direct connection to the government and not private parties. Things like the laws and services I have mentioned along with things like parks and recreational areas, hospitals that are not allowed to turn people away that need help, social services, money, food, counseling, etc. Yes, these programs have a high failure rate, I don't care because I know there are a small percentage who are genuinely helped by these programs.

I disagree with your theory that were all going to hell. It sounds like a lack of patriotism to me. Have you lost your faith that this is the greatest country on earth? Are there flaws in what hte founding fathers built? I believe America is a place where all people will always be free and treated as equals. For America to continue to uphold this value that keeps us on top sometimes requires the use of force be it by laws or taxation or what I would call socialism.

Salanis wrote:

DILYSI Dave wrote: The question still stands - How much is enough?

Again, the government needs to collect as much in taxes as it spends. I say that we need to be taxed as much as it takes to cover all the things we need to pay for. This will, of course, cause people to freak out over how much they're being charged. They will freak out and demand that the government cut spending. Eventually the government will pare itself down to a level that the voters will accept, or we'll break out into civil war.

But if you only collect from money from the minority, in order to pay for the will of the majority, then critical mass on the number of people freaking out isn't ever reached, and a correction is skipped in favor of collapse.

What happens when the most productive members of society all say "berkeley it"?

DILYSI Dave wrote: But if you only collect from money from the minority, in order to pay for the will of the majority, then critical mass on the number of people freaking out isn't ever reached, and a correction is skipped in favor of collapse. What happens when the most productive members of society all say "berkeley it"?

Except that, you don't need to please the majority of the population. You need to please the majority of voters.

When the productive members say "berkeley it", the system collapses. If we should too much debt for the future to bear, our country will collapse anyway.

I never said that you only collect money from a minority. I believe the majority of citizens in this country pay taxes. Raise everyone's taxes to cover all our governments expenses. We can make things get uncomfortable for everyone really quickly...

But our politicians don't want to make everyone uncomfortable in order to actually get anything done. They want us all stupidly happy so that we'll reelect them.

Have you lost your faith that this is the greatest country on earth?

Yes.

Are there flaws in what the founding fathers built?

Some, but not nearly as many as modern interpretation of what they built has led us to. If we were running the nation in the spirit of the constitution, I'd be 100% on board. We are not.

I believe America is a place where all people will always be free and treated as equals.

I believe you are naive. We already are not treated as equals. I am punished for making more money than average Joe. I don't have equal access to jobs, services, etc.

Salanis wrote: I never said that you only collect money from a minority. I believe the majority of citizens in this country pay taxes. Raise everyone's taxes to cover all our governments expenses. We can make things get uncomfortable for everyone really quickly...

You might not have said it, but that is SOP these days. The bottom 50% of income earners pay something like 3% of taxes. Of course these folks are going to vote for the shiny happy persons promising them more stuff - they don't have to pay for it!

I will gladly take 500k at 50% over the 30k @ 15% I am paying now. The interest on 250k is almost as much as I make now, I could put almost all of it in the bank!

I guess my counter question is "How much do you need to live a happy healthy life?"

DILYSI Dave wrote: You might not have said it, but that is SOP these days. The bottom 50% of income earners pay something like 3% of taxes. Of course these folks are going to vote for the shiny happy persons promising them more stuff - they don't have to pay for it!

I'm not buying that figure. That's a weird statistic that sounds like it could have been spun any number of ways.

I'm pretty sure I'm below the median income level (I am for my state), and I certainly pay my share of taxes.

I'd happily raise my tax level to help pay off the national debt if the increase occurred across the board, and my taxes dropped off again once we were rid of our current massive debt.