GOP Reality Show

[Logan Darklighter]

For whatever its worth, I'm glad Santorum is gone as well. Didn't care for the anti-gay stance. Stupid. Still doesn't excuse the juvenile use of his name. Which I think says far more about those doing it then about him. It's a good thing I'm already on-board for gay rights and marriage. Because you wouldn't be recruiting me with this pitch. 

As for you, Rev? I refuse to waste any more of my time with you. Here, or anywhere else. You want to feel all high and mighty and think you've won the argument. Be my guest and knock yourself out. But the only thing you've really accomplished here is lose a friend. 

[Rev Dark]

As for you, Rev? I refuse to waste any more of my
time with you. Here, or anywhere else. You want to feel all high and
mighty and think you've won the argument. Be my guest and knock yourself
out. But the only thing you've really accomplished here is lose a
friend.

So - does the emotional threat work for you often? Agree with me or don't be my friend? No room for agree to disagree?
I don't feel particularly high and mighty. Just disappointed.; and sad for you. That's an odd way to live a life.
Wire - sorry, no pictures on that one. Here's why.

I am game for a lot of things, but even as I stretch them - I know my limitations; and trying to rock that suit the way he does it. Not going to happen.

[LynnInDenver]

So - does the emotional threat work for you often? Agree with me or don't be my friend? No room for agree to disagree?

I don't feel particularly high and mighty. Just disappointed.; and sad for you. That's an odd way to live a life.

Quoted for truth.  A single opinion should not be the basis of decision regarding a friendship.

I disagree with my friends on some big issues. They're still my friends.

Also, while I agree that the particular weapon used is... distasteful (as well it should be), I do believe that, in the idea of which principle should be higher, rights to be oneself as long as it does no harm to others, versus being above a petty schoolyard tactic like name calling... I'm sorry, for me, the rights win out. If Santorum=Frothy keeps him from getting into a position to roll back human rights by 300 years, then I can live with it. That he hasn't given up yet says that he's so into believing it that reasoning won't win him out anyway.
--

"You know how parents tell you everything's going to fine, but you know they're lying to make you feel better? Everything's going to be fine." - The Doctor

[Logan Darklighter]

JFerio wrote:

Also, while I agree that the particular weapon used is... distasteful (as well it should be), I do believe that, in the idea of which principle should be higher, rights to be oneself as long as it does no harm to others, versus being above a petty schoolyard tactic like name calling... I'm sorry, for me, the rights win out. If Santorum=Frothy keeps him from getting into a position to roll back human rights by 300 years, then I can live with it. That he hasn't given up yet says that he's so into believing it that reasoning won't win him out anyway.

So those kinds of tactics are distasteful and wrong. But if they are used by your side, they get a pass?

I never, ever want to hear anybody badmouth conservatives for being hypocritical ever again.

You want to know WHY this makes me rage? Because I've had something very much like this happen to me back in jr high/ high school. Not on the same scale. This was pre-internet. But I shudder to think what it would have been like if it had been. (Edit: And no, I don't want to talk about it or share it. Just - I know what it's like having your name twisted and used against you by punks. Leave it at that.)

I may not like or agree with Santorum. But can you imagine what his kids are going to have to go through because of this? What they may already be going through? Have you given the slightest thought to that?

Can you imagine doing a google search on your last name only to find this crap being spread? And it's not even your fault! But kids are cruel in Jr High and High School. They'll find out about it via social websites and such. And Santorum's children will likely be in for harassment at some point using this as a weapon. Believe me, I know how cruel HS age children are. 

So I will NEVER condone it. Not even when it's done for a cause I agree with. Perhaps ESPECIALLY if it's for a cause I agree with. Because it cheapens and demeans it. Makes me feel filthy for even associating with it. Makes me sick to my stomach with unpleasant memories of my own. 

[LynnInDenver]

You want to know WHY this makes me rage? Because I've had something very much like this happen to me back in jr high/ high school. Not on the same scale. This was pre-internet. But I shudder to think what it would have been like if it had been. (Edit: And no, I don't want to talk about it or share it. Just - I know what it's like having your name twisted and used against you by punks. Leave it at that.)

Then I'll bow out of this conversation. If I had known that about you up front in this thread, I wouldn't have even bothered to post  my response. However, I would recommend therapy (if you haven't already had it) to avoid sliding past the black and white "if you support someone who's done it, I can't be your friend" with it through to "if you're not in other's faces about every single bullying incident, then I can't be your friend". Because you're going to leave a large trail of broken relationships behind you whereever you go when you get to that point.
--

"You know how parents tell you everything's going to fine, but you know they're lying to make you feel better? Everything's going to be fine." - The Doctor

[Black Aeronaut]

Don't forget, BA, you yourself are part of the 1%. Everyone on this forum is.

Uhm.  yeah.  right.
That may be true on the scope of the world-wide economy, but not for the scope of the US economy.  And this concerns the election of the President of the United States of America, and most decidedly not the Chairman of the UN Assembly.
In other words, we'll worry about fixing the world's economy once we get done fixing our own economy first.  Besides, given that most international banks trade through the US, I'm pretty sure that fixing our economy first is gonna go a long, long ways to fixing the economies of other countries.
Is someone like Romney gonna fix the economy?  Probably not.  Is someone like Obama gonna fix the economy?  Maybe if the opposition in Congress will lay off a bit and actually work with him instead of going gung ho on their insane agenda (which is/was to make sure that he doesn't get re-elected - still not sure if they've given up on that yet).

[robkelk]

In other words, we'll worry about fixing the world's economy once we get done fixing our own economy first.

I doubt that fixing only part of the economic system would do any good. We (worldwide) have to fix the whole thing, not just the part that happens to be located inside any one country.
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[CattyNebulart]

Don't forget, BA, you yourself are part of the 1%. Everyone on this forum is.

Uhm.  yeah.  right.
That may be true on the scope of the world-wide economy, but not for the scope of the US economy.

Cutoff for worldwide 1% is earning about 500'000$ per year as per the following;

United Nations researchers Davies et al. calculated in 2008 that the cutoff for the wealthiest 50% of the global income distribution was $2,138; for the top 10% and 1% the cutoffs were $61,000 and $510,000, all measured in 2000 U.S. dollars.

So as I stated above I doubt the entire forum is even in the top 10%. 61'000$ per year is a good chunk of change, more than the average American makes.

citation; http://www.policymic.com/articles/2636/ ... -all-the-1
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

[ECSNorway]

So, tell me then: In exactly what way is it so unfair that we need to raise taxes on "the rich", when the top 1% of income-earners pay 36% of the total US income tax bill, while the bottom 48% of income-earners pay exactly nothing?
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[Dartz]

Because rather than illustrating an unequal tax burden this illustrates how staggeringly unequal the gap is between the top 1% of incomes and the bottom 48 if the bottom 48 aren't even making enough money to be able to afford to pay taxes.
________________________________
--m(^0^)m-- Wot, no sig?

[Glidergun]

So, tell me then: In exactly what way is it so unfair that we need to raise taxes on "the rich", when the top 1% of income-earners pay 36% of the total US income tax bill, while the bottom 48% of income-earners pay exactly nothing?

Because you are only looking at income taxes, while ignoring all the regressive taxes like sales taxes.

And if you decide to look at wealth (i.e. how much people have as opposed to how much they take in), well...

...we're gonna need to get to taxin'.

[LynnInDenver]

One also has to look at the "other" 1%... corporations. And some of the largest of them have nice little tax breaks effectively eliminating taxes on them. And (with some overlap) some of those large impersonal corporations are squeezing the little guys who have to do business with them.

Overall, the current economic climate looks like a poorly maintained powder magazine on an 18th century warship... all we can hope is that there isn't some spark in the room.
--

"You know how parents tell you everything's going to fine, but you know they're lying to make you feel better? Everything's going to be fine." - The Doctor

[CattyNebulart]

Really the problem with the current tax system is that it is a bell curve. That is part of why the middle class is shrinking. The tax curve should never go down as you go up in income, that leads to unpleasantness like the french revolution (nobles weren't taxed or just paid less tax yet had most of the wealth.)

Also if you earn over 300 million dollars a year you can afford to pay at least as much tax as the people earning 75 thousand a year. As noted the 0.05% are most of the problem with the current system, because a disproportionate share of political contributions come from them.


E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

[robkelk]

Wow, you folks have it easy. Glidergun's charts say your total taxes are 31.3% of income or less.

I wish my tax bill was that low...
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[Foxboy]

We ARE the least-taxed first-world nation, precisely because we have idiots who think the old revolutionary slogan of "no taxation without representation" means "NOOOO! NO TAXES EVAR!"

And let's not forget that that is merely our FEDERAL taxes. Our State and Local taxes can be staggering. New Hampshire is famous for no statewide sales tax and no income tax, but the property taxes are NASTY, because the local polities need to rely on them for all of their funding.
''We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat
them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.''

-- James Nicoll

[Dartz]

Ewwww.....the US has taxes on home ownership?

People are actively fighting against the introduction of that here.

Everything else is taxed and double-taxed and triple taxed (Petrol anyone?) but thus far the home has remained inviolate.
________________________________
--m(^0^)m-- Wot, no sig?

[Rev Dark]

Wow, you folks have it easy. Glidergun's charts say your total taxes are 31.3% of income or less.

I wish my tax bill was that low...

Yes, but we walk into a hospital without worrying about being bankrupted.

[CattyNebulart]

yes, but in the US you need to pay for health-insurance and far more for education. if you add those the US pays more because the healtcare system is so inefficient, and the expensive education makes it really hard for poor families to do better in the next generation, and the deck is already stacked against them.

Many of my friends from highschool choose to go into the armed services to pay for college, another friend of mine pays more to his student loans repayment than I pay in mortgage, water, electricity and real-estate taxes combined.

Overall civilised countries have it better than the US. Hell I'm happier paying twice the tax in Denmark than I am with the tax here, mostly due to the paperwork burden.
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

[Black Aeronaut]

And that's pretty much what we want to fix here in the USA, and why a lot of people are calling bullshit on the Upper Class. Honestly, a person can live a vastly comfortable life on a million or two USD per year... I can understand, in a way, why they cry out about having all that money taken from them, but then you have to realize that it's the system that is set up here in this country that allowed them to make so much. In that sense, they owe the system a greater due than anyone in the Middle Class is able to pay.

The funny thing is, in the end, I don't see this one thing alone leveling the playing field.

Scary version of the story? This is but one battle, a single skirmish, in a war that is going to be long and exhausting. To gain even a semblance of equality, we are going to have the fight the Upper Class over trade deficit, medical care, education, jobs, welfare, insurance, copyright, and just about anything else that ties into corporate interests. The sad fact is that over the last few decades the Upper Class has gained control over our government, and have been solidifying that control through things such as the Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission. This essentially gave corporations no limit to how much money they can spend on their favorite candidate, thus turning elections into a game of "Who's pockets are deeper?"

The Republican Party knows this and their leaders support this. It's what keeps them in power and that's where they want to stay. A prime example of Republicans making similar power grabs is how they redrew the electoral districts in Texas. And let me tell you, that is one huge ratscrew that's being dragged out in the courts. LA Times article here: http://articles.latimes.c...s-redistricting-20120121

So, should we raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans? Even though, by the straight Dollars, they pay more in taxes than any of us can ever dream of making on our salaries? Hell yes. It'll be the first of many victories we'll need in order to win this war.

[robkelk]

We ARE the least-taxed first-world nation, precisely because we have idiots who think the old revolutionary slogan of "no taxation without representation" means "NOOOO! NO TAXES EVAR!"

Well... if you wait until the IMF has to bail you out, you'll be forced to change that. (Better to change that without being forced.)

And let's not forget that that is merely our FEDERAL taxes. Our State and Local taxes can be staggering. New Hampshire is famous for no statewide sales tax and no income tax, but the property taxes are NASTY, because the local polities need to rely on them for all of their funding.

Ouch.

Although Glidergun's chart says it includes state and local taxes...
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[ECSNorway]

We ARE the least-taxed first-world nation, precisely because we have idiots who think the old revolutionary slogan of "no taxation without representation" means "NOOOO! NO TAXES EVAR!"

And let's not forget that that is merely our FEDERAL taxes. Our State and Local taxes can be staggering. New Hampshire is famous for no statewide sales tax and no income tax, but the property taxes are NASTY, because the local polities need to rely on them for all of their funding.

The least-taxed first-world nation? Only on the direct, personal level.
Corporate taxation in the US ranges between 40 and 50 percent, varying slightly by state. It is the single highest corporate tax rate in the world. And every penny of that gets passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices, while corporations move overseas in order to take advantage of vastly lower labor costs in Asia and lower corporate tax rates in many countries.
You want to see the US economy get back to the juggernaut that won World War 2 by out-producing the entire world? Start working on bringing that back to us. And the only way to do -that- is to make it economical for companies to operate here. To show them that they can make, and keep, more by operating here than in some third-world hellhole.
You want to equalize our trade imbalance with China? Start exporting something we have far too many of already: union organizers. China, especially, needs them badly.
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[Black Aeronaut]

The least-taxed first-world nation? Only on the direct, personal level.
Corporate taxation in the US ranges between 40 and 50 percent, varying slightly by state. It is the single highest corporate tax rate in the world. And every penny of that gets passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices, while corporations move overseas in order to take advantage of vastly lower labor costs in Asia and lower corporate tax rates in many countries.
You want to see the US economy get back to the juggernaut that won World War 2 by out-producing the entire world? Start working on bringing that back to us. And the only way to do -that- is to make it economical for companies to operate here. To show them that they can make, and keep, more by operating here than in some third-world hellhole.
You want to equalize our trade imbalance with China? Start exporting something we have far too many of already: union organizers. China, especially, needs them badly.

My view on these matters:
Yeah, maybe we should be easing up on the corporate tax rates... but only in the form of generous tax credits to companies that keep their interests in the country.  The point is if we're gonna let them keep more money, then they need to be doing things with it that benefit the nation.
Oh, and I see what you did there with the whole unions thing.  Chill.  We do need unions, but I think they should be carefully regulated as well.  The answer is not to throw the baby out with the bath here.
Also, there is plenty we can trade to China.  Raw materials for one thing.  They don't have the same lumber industry we do here, and are so badly in need of lumber that one company has started selling chopsticks to China with "Made in USA" stamped on them.  No joke, here's the article: http://money.cnn.com/2011...opsticks/index.htm  Gasoline would get them on our good side, too.  Just imagine the business we'd drum up if instead of refining oil for ourselves we did it for China instead.  Or even just selling our crude oil straight to them.  Of course, that requires us to become energy independent, first.  Something else we gotta fight the Republicans over.  (Said it once and I'll say it again: clean coal is a joke.)
And that, people, is part of how we resolve the deficit issue.  The other part is that we need to make careful and judicious cuts in government spending.  Welfare needs to be streamlined and optimized towards getting people back to work instead of giving them a handout.  Taxes against the wealthiest Americans need to be levied.  Fat needs to be trimmed from the Military.  Contractors must be severely penalized for not meeting their obligations.  Debts must be repaid to our creditors.

[CattyNebulart]

The least-taxed first-world nation? Only on the direct, personal level.
Corporate taxation in the US ranges between 40 and 50 percent, varying slightly by state. It is the single highest corporate tax rate in the world.

Lol. That is the pretend tax rate for suckers, if you know what you are doing and properly invested into congress like GE then you would be paying nothing or even getting money from the government. The tax code is so riddles with loopholes and special rules that a) it's an expensive nightmare to fill out all the paperwork correctly. b) you can exploit loophole to taxdodge your way into negative taxes.

Total corporate federal taxes paid fell to 12.1% of profits earned from activities within the U.S. in fiscal 2011, which ended Sept. 30, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That's the lowest level since at least 1972.

while corporations move overseas in order to take advantage of vastly lower labor costs in Asia and lower corporate tax rates in many countries.

Taxes are a minor concern, one is labor cost, the second and for many industries more important cost is that you can just dump the toxic waste outside, and if your workers get sick from the hazardous substances or working environment then you can just fire them. To be fair for many people in those countries that is still an improvement over what they had before, but all the same I don't want the chemical plant 100 miles upriver to dump their waste into what will become my drinking water. Yes that means that many essential industires will not be in my backyard, like mining. Eventually everyone will be richer and tougher standards will be everywhere at which point it becomes cost effective to operate cleaner mines. We will all pay a bit more, but that is unavoidable if no-one wants to live in a toxic wasteland.

And the only way to do -that- is to make it economical for companies to operate here. To show them that they can make, and keep, more by operating here than in some third-world hellhole.

Agreed, but as long as they are willing to allow the dumping of toxic waste in the river then it's very hard to undercut them. The environmental movement is gaining strength in china and they have been improving their standards and safety, but they are still lagging way behind. That said the USA is still the #1 manufacturing nation in the world, they just don't make much in the way of low margin consumer goods, but expensive high margin items like artificial hearts.

EDIT: Hell even fox news disagrees with ECSNorway; http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/06/ ... aise-them/

Ussualy I would find this a compelling argument for ECSNorway rather than against, but in this case I'll make an exception.
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

[robkelk]

Corporate taxation in the US ranges between 40 and 50 percent, varying slightly by state. It is the single highest corporate tax rate in the world. And every penny of that gets passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices, while corporations move overseas in order to take advantage of vastly lower labor costs in Asia and lower corporate tax rates in many countries.

Perhaps you could explain why prices in the USA are lower than prices in Canada, Japan, and the UK, if this is true...
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[Black Aeronaut]

Corporate taxation in the US ranges between 40 and 50 percent, varying slightly by state. It is the single highest corporate tax rate in the world. And every penny of that gets passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices, while corporations move overseas in order to take advantage of vastly lower labor costs in Asia and lower corporate tax rates in many countries.

Perhaps you could explain why prices in the USA are lower than prices in Canada, Japan, and the UK, if this is true...

Probably has more to do with access to resources than anything else.