|
|
The official DNC youtube stream is very well done.
|
On September 07 2012 09:01 Doraemon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:59 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:54 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:52 Souma wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". When they say "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" they mean as a percent of income. It was a quote taken from Warren Buffett himself. that's right. it's not massively exaggerated at all and very much realistic I can be ridiculous too. It's actually all Clinton's fault. He created the bubble economy of the 90's and passed it onto Bush as the commodity / housing bubble. i honestly don't think i'm being ridiculous. i gave you a real life example (myself), albeit i'm from australia, i'm just highlighting it does occur and the taxation mechanisms that exist can be VERY favourable to high income earners. in case you missed it, it is ultimately your choice to believe what i say Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:51 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". to be honest the rich are able to pay less % tax. my father earned ~$400K last year, he payed 17% effective tax, i earned <$100K and i paid 22% tax. although this is in australia, i would have thought the american system was similar? maybe i am wrong, but my point is people earning higher salary can pay less tax.
Why did he pay a lower effective tax rate? Are you ignoring double taxation? Are you ignoring foregone income (tax exempt muni bonds in US).
Moreover, the Dems are arguing not that its *possible* but that its extremely common. The rich aren't paying their 'fair share' they say.
|
On September 07 2012 09:02 sevencck wrote:
since the problems Obama is trying to fix are those that were created when Bush was in office,
For the most part "occurred during" not "created when".
|
On September 07 2012 09:02 sevencck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". Except that those arent demonstrably false as facts. Blaming everything bad as Bush's fault is a point of contention, it isn't a fact, but democrats aren't categorically wrong for contending it, since the problems Obama is trying to fix are those that were created when Bush was in office, and since it is more subjective anyway. Nor are they wrong to mock a scenario where the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries. With what Paul Ryan has in mind, there will simply be more tax money available for programs that benefit the rich, and less for programs that benefit the poor. The democrats aren't lying about what they're trying to do, nor do they deny deficit spending. By contrast, the Republicans have made claims about very specific items that are factual in nature that aren't even contextually true, some of which Clinton pointed to in his speech. So yeah, there's a big difference.
Everything bad isn't Bush's fault. That's a fact.
If you want to argue that everything bad that happens while he's in office is his responsibility then the same standard must apply to Obama as well.
|
On September 07 2012 09:04 Doraemon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 09:00 aksfjh wrote:On September 07 2012 08:51 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". to be honest the rich are able to pay less % tax. my father earned ~$400K last year, he payed 17% effective tax, i earned <$100K and i paid 22% tax. although this is in australia, i would have thought the american system was similar? maybe i am wrong, but my point is people earning higher salary can pay less tax. It is a similar situation. Long term investments (>1 year) and certain kinds of deferred bonuses (I think) are taxed at rate of 15% starting around $65k (0% below that). Normal income is taxed anywhere between 10% and 35%, where joint filers pay above the capital gains rate after around $65k. Then there are tax free municipal bonds which aren't taxed. the way my dad managed to pay signifcantly less tax was through concessions like massive negative gearing from investments which double as tax deductible items and income redistribution through trust fund. which leads me to being unsure whether either exists in the States
I'm not well versed on the entire arsenal, but that seems familiar.
|
On September 07 2012 09:07 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 09:00 JinDesu wrote:lol, people booing the "Born in the USA" song XD On September 07 2012 09:00 ey215 wrote:On September 07 2012 08:59 JinDesu wrote:
Who just led the Pledge of Allegiance, and why was she chosen? Gabrielle Giffords. She was the Congresswoman shot in the assassination attempt/shooting spree in Tucson last year. Thank you - I was confused at first, and then I saw her impaired movement. From what I remember, she's a fantastically brave woman. Eh, she was just an average politician, nothing special. What's special is the reminder to everyone that it's just politics, and the type of behavior directed towards her is unacceptable in our country.
I didn't comment on her political history, as I don't really know much about that. But her recovery from the gunshot and her pledge to continue working for the country counts as bravery to me.
|
can anyone tell me how Bush caused the crisis, do you guys even know Barney Franks?
|
We need this lady to cast starcraft or something.
|
Reminds me of Howard Dean. It's a little scary.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On September 07 2012 09:17 JinDesu wrote:
We need this lady to cast starcraft or something.
LOL. She was... something.
|
On September 07 2012 09:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 09:02 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". Except that those arent demonstrably false as facts. Blaming everything bad as Bush's fault is a point of contention, it isn't a fact, but democrats aren't categorically wrong for contending it, since the problems Obama is trying to fix are those that were created when Bush was in office, and since it is more subjective anyway. Nor are they wrong to mock a scenario where the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries. With what Paul Ryan has in mind, there will simply be more tax money available for programs that benefit the rich, and less for programs that benefit the poor. The democrats aren't lying about what they're trying to do, nor do they deny deficit spending. By contrast, the Republicans have made claims about very specific items that are factual in nature that aren't even contextually true, some of which Clinton pointed to in his speech. So yeah, there's a big difference. Everything bad isn't Bush's fault. That's a fact. If you want to argue that everything bad that happens while he's in office is his responsibility then the same standard must apply to Obama as well.
Bush took a country with a 300 billion surplus and turned it into a country with the largest national deficit on planet Earth, and racked up virtually unpayable debts in 8 years. It was advised at one point not to purchase U.S. debt since people thought it was unlikely the U.S. was goign to recover. Add to this an economic meltdown due to laissez-faire economic deregulation, and a very unpopular series of military invasions, and you have the Bush presidency in a nutshell. I don't blame Bush for everything that happened, however, in fact I always defend him against people who claim he's a war criminal.
Obama has to take responsibility for his policies, but the mess he was left isn't his responsibility, that's fully on the prior 8 years of Republican government. So again, there's a difference. Obama's policies are a reflection of the mess he's trying to clean up. It's ignorant to claim his policies engender inadvisable deficit spending when he has no alternative if he wants to get the ball rolling. He was in the red when he took office.
|
lol she was awesome... nice to see some excitement in contrast to droning rhetoric.
Foo Fighters were good, music is definately better than the RNC- of course they seem more limited since anytime they use someone's music they catch flak. :D
|
First Scarlett Johansson, now Eva Longoria.
DNC, you have my vote. Good work, aiming for my libido!
|
On September 07 2012 09:10 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 09:01 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:59 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:54 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:52 Souma wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:
[quote]
Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:
[quote]
the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". When they say "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" they mean as a percent of income. It was a quote taken from Warren Buffett himself. that's right. it's not massively exaggerated at all and very much realistic I can be ridiculous too. It's actually all Clinton's fault. He created the bubble economy of the 90's and passed it onto Bush as the commodity / housing bubble. i honestly don't think i'm being ridiculous. i gave you a real life example (myself), albeit i'm from australia, i'm just highlighting it does occur and the taxation mechanisms that exist can be VERY favourable to high income earners. in case you missed it, it is ultimately your choice to believe what i say On September 07 2012 08:51 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". to be honest the rich are able to pay less % tax. my father earned ~$400K last year, he payed 17% effective tax, i earned <$100K and i paid 22% tax. although this is in australia, i would have thought the american system was similar? maybe i am wrong, but my point is people earning higher salary can pay less tax. Why did he pay a lower effective tax rate? Are you ignoring double taxation? Are you ignoring foregone income (tax exempt muni bonds in US). Moreover, the Dems are arguing not that its *possible* but that its extremely common. The rich aren't paying their 'fair share' they say.
i explained how my dad achieved his low tax rate in my other post, which posters have confirmed the same mechanisms exist in the states.
to address your last point, i think it probably is very common. everyone has the same access to the concessions my dad utilised, it's not far fetched to think people would exploit the system as much as they can. i mean, my mum worked out that my dad would get more tax cuts if she worked 2 days a week instead 5. what kind of system incentivises less productivity so high earners can get taxed less.
|
jennifer granholm killed it, that was awesome
|
On September 07 2012 09:24 JinDesu wrote:
First Scarlett Johansson, now Eva Longoria.
DNC, you have my vote. Good work, aiming for my libido!
Hahha, the benefits of having a strong women's issues platform. :D
|
On September 07 2012 09:25 Deathmanbob wrote:
jennifer granholm killed it, that was awesome
"You know what I'm sayin! You know what I'm sayin!" Yeah, she's super sayin.
|
On September 07 2012 09:22 sevencck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 09:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 09:02 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". Except that those arent demonstrably false as facts. Blaming everything bad as Bush's fault is a point of contention, it isn't a fact, but democrats aren't categorically wrong for contending it, since the problems Obama is trying to fix are those that were created when Bush was in office, and since it is more subjective anyway. Nor are they wrong to mock a scenario where the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries. With what Paul Ryan has in mind, there will simply be more tax money available for programs that benefit the rich, and less for programs that benefit the poor. The democrats aren't lying about what they're trying to do, nor do they deny deficit spending. By contrast, the Republicans have made claims about very specific items that are factual in nature that aren't even contextually true, some of which Clinton pointed to in his speech. So yeah, there's a big difference. Everything bad isn't Bush's fault. That's a fact. If you want to argue that everything bad that happens while he's in office is his responsibility then the same standard must apply to Obama as well. Bush took a country with a 300 billion surplus and turned it into a country with the largest national deficit on planet Earth, and racked up virtually unpayable debts in 8 years. It was advised at one point not to purchase U.S. debt since people thought it was unlikely the U.S. was goign to recover. Add to this an economic meltdown due to laissez-faire economic deregulation, and a very unpopular series of military invasions, and you have the Bush presidency in a nutshell. I don't blame Bush for everything that happened, in fact I always defend him against people who claim he's a war criminal. Obama has to take responsibility for his policies, but the mess he was left isn't his responsibility, that's fully on the prior 8 years of Republican government. So again, there's a difference. Obama's policies are a reflection of the mess he's trying to clean up. It's ignorant to claim his policies engender inadvisable deficit spending when he has no alternative if he wants to get the ball rolling. He was in the red when he took office.
The economic meltdown had little to do with "laissez-faire economic deregulation" - that's a fact.
I have no idea what you are talking about with "racked up virtually unplayable debts in 8 years."
|
On September 07 2012 09:24 Doraemon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 09:10 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 09:01 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:59 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:54 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:52 Souma wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:
[quote]
Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling.
[quote]
If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". When they say "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" they mean as a percent of income. It was a quote taken from Warren Buffett himself. that's right. it's not massively exaggerated at all and very much realistic I can be ridiculous too. It's actually all Clinton's fault. He created the bubble economy of the 90's and passed it onto Bush as the commodity / housing bubble. i honestly don't think i'm being ridiculous. i gave you a real life example (myself), albeit i'm from australia, i'm just highlighting it does occur and the taxation mechanisms that exist can be VERY favourable to high income earners. in case you missed it, it is ultimately your choice to believe what i say On September 07 2012 08:51 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:On September 07 2012 07:02 sevencck wrote:
I'm Canadian, but I've always followed U.S. politics a little more closely than Canadian politics, and I've always despised Republicanism in the U.S.A. (the philosophy mainly, I don't really hate on people).
Bill Clinton's speech was top notch, magnificent, so full of substance and passion. It's easy to feel his deep understanding and commitment to improving the situation in the U.S.A. It actually makes me feel proud to identify with the Democrats, and I'm not even capable of voting in the U.S. election. In contrast, the Republican campaign has been a dispassionate and largely dishonest smear campaign, filled with many baseless claims, and an economic platform that doesn't even hold water numerically as determined by a third party group (that Romney now accuses of liberal bias, despite holding them up as third party a year ago). The past several months have also highlighted Romney as a flipflopper on important American sociopolitical issues. The trite response the Republicans gave Clinton's speech was nothing less than totally embarrassing.
I've always had a difficult time understanding why people vote Republican in the U.S.A., as an outside observer, it's not difficult to see that they're truly a terrible option for that country right now. the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". to be honest the rich are able to pay less % tax. my father earned ~$400K last year, he payed 17% effective tax, i earned <$100K and i paid 22% tax. although this is in australia, i would have thought the american system was similar? maybe i am wrong, but my point is people earning higher salary can pay less tax. Why did he pay a lower effective tax rate? Are you ignoring double taxation? Are you ignoring foregone income (tax exempt muni bonds in US). Moreover, the Dems are arguing not that its *possible* but that its extremely common. The rich aren't paying their 'fair share' they say. i explained how my dad achieved his low tax rate in my other post, which posters have confirmed the same mechanisms exist in the states. to address your last point, i think it probably is very common. everyone has the same access to the concessions my dad utilised, it's not far fetched to think people would exploit the system as much as they can. i mean, my mum worked out that my dad would get more tax cuts if she worked 2 days a week instead 5. what kind of system incentivises less productivity so high earners can get taxed less.
The tax system in Australia is different from the US. And it sounds like you are ignoring things like double taxation.
|
On September 07 2012 09:29 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 09:24 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 09:10 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 09:01 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:59 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:54 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:52 Souma wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
[quote]
There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". When they say "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" they mean as a percent of income. It was a quote taken from Warren Buffett himself. that's right. it's not massively exaggerated at all and very much realistic I can be ridiculous too. It's actually all Clinton's fault. He created the bubble economy of the 90's and passed it onto Bush as the commodity / housing bubble. i honestly don't think i'm being ridiculous. i gave you a real life example (myself), albeit i'm from australia, i'm just highlighting it does occur and the taxation mechanisms that exist can be VERY favourable to high income earners. in case you missed it, it is ultimately your choice to believe what i say On September 07 2012 08:51 Doraemon wrote:On September 07 2012 08:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 08:31 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 08:15 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 07 2012 07:13 sevencck wrote:On September 07 2012 07:07 Gorsameth wrote:
[quote]
Simple, Brainwashing. The american news system is designed to indoctrinate both sides really. It stops them from being able to objectively view the situation and determine the better outcome. Agreed. There are probably a number of other factors involved, but this election will be much closer than it should be. It's totally baffling. On September 07 2012 07:12 Chocolate wrote:
[quote]
the Republican party tends to have values that coincide very closely with lots of Christians, and as you know, Christianity and Christianity and religion in general are much more important in everyday life here than in Canada, Europe, Aus, etc. Also, if you grow up watching Fox news your whole life, you don't really have any perspective: Republicanism is the only thing that makes sense to you, and liberals are those lesbian hippies who kill babies. If I'm going to be totally honest, there is far more ignorance and stupidity on the side of the republicans. In fact, there are even some subtle currents of anti intellectual pride associated with that party. I realize ignorance and stupidity will impact an election return, but it can't possibly be enough to account for a 50:50 result that really shouldn't be so close. Mitt Romney is practically made of wood, and in a nutshell Paul Ryan seems to want nothing more than to disassemble all social services. I don't see how this can compete with Obama to the extent that the return is close to 50%. There's lots of stupidity in the Democratic party as well. Case in point - some supporters of the Democratic party try to paint the other side as being a bunch of brainwashed morons. Can you believe it? I mean really, how stupid can people be? Perhaps. But then again, when people are parroting the things they've heard from the Republican candidates or Fox News -- things that are demonstrably either distorted or completely false -- without personally examining their validity, I don't know of many other words that fit the bill quite as well as brainwashed. Nevertheless, I will concede there is some definite goofiness on the left in the U.S. as well, I just feel like the right has so much more. Have you seen Chuck Norris's latest gem? 1000 years of darkness? Really? Right back at you with the Democrats. How many times have they repeated blatantly false, or massively exaggerated claims like "the rich pay lower taxes than their secretaries" or blaming everything bad as "Bush's fault". to be honest the rich are able to pay less % tax. my father earned ~$400K last year, he payed 17% effective tax, i earned <$100K and i paid 22% tax. although this is in australia, i would have thought the american system was similar? maybe i am wrong, but my point is people earning higher salary can pay less tax. Why did he pay a lower effective tax rate? Are you ignoring double taxation? Are you ignoring foregone income (tax exempt muni bonds in US). Moreover, the Dems are arguing not that its *possible* but that its extremely common. The rich aren't paying their 'fair share' they say. i explained how my dad achieved his low tax rate in my other post, which posters have confirmed the same mechanisms exist in the states. to address your last point, i think it probably is very common. everyone has the same access to the concessions my dad utilised, it's not far fetched to think people would exploit the system as much as they can. i mean, my mum worked out that my dad would get more tax cuts if she worked 2 days a week instead 5. what kind of system incentivises less productivity so high earners can get taxed less. The tax system in Australia is different from the US. And it sounds like you are ignoring things like double taxation.
fair enough. i did caveat that at the beginning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
