don't get your pathetic little conservative panties in a bunch, kid.

Obama plans on cutting the taxes for those below the $250,000 range and raising it for those above... i've heard so many conservatives make the same argument you did, that Obama is somehow going to be taxing the shit out of the middle class. look, if $250,000+ is the middle class then i'm not worried about the middle class, lol. i'm more concerned about the people making less than $10,000 a year, and about re-establishing the middle class that your president destroyed.

and what i'm DEFINITELY not concerned about is terminology. the difference between socialism and a liberal economic policy is the degree in which money is redistributed. a liberal economic plan like obama's concerned with helping people, and money is not going to be re-distributed NEARLY to the level where people are going to start becoming un-motivated to work hard, etc. (another argument i've heard ignorant ass conservatives like yourself make).

less then 10,000 a year is middle class? lmao....


i think obama would win a lot more votes if he planned on taking that tax money...and instead of redistributing it to people who don't make shit.....redistribute it to the cities with poor economies....clean up the cities...put it into schools...pay teachers...police force...create an enviroment that gives people less of an excuse not succeed in....instead of just giving people money who might not necessarily deserve it.


Just my 2 cents

__________________

Time is not long, and indecision is hells cemment. So the well is rented, untill heaven is relevant. Untill then, to be eloquent, sex cells, so le'ts cellibate.

"watch what you watchin...fox keeps feedin' us toxin's..stop sleepin' start thinkin outside of the box and unplug from the matrix doctrine....but watch what you say cause big brother is watchin" - nas - sly fox

The I.H.C.J.S.F.M.T.R.H.P.M.M.W.T.S.M.S.I.T.F.F.W.A.S. O Crew

of course $10,000 a year isn't middle class. thats not what i was saying, i was saying a person making $250,000 a year isn't the main concern of the Obama campaign. people making $10,000 a year, for example, AND the middle class are the concerns of the Obama campaign.

I wont lie, i've never really thought about doing that.


But after thinking about it, i would say that your prob. right. N that idea is much better idea than just giving money to people. Make people motivated, and give them the surroundings to suceed, for live long sucession, isntead of momentarily being successful


props V

__________________

You're more worried about people making less than $10,000 a year and I'm more worried about keeping a capitalistic economy intact. Now we've reached a point where the debate ends because there's nothing you can say to me and there's nothing I can say to you that is going to change either of our values or beliefs.

And you should be worried about terminology if you're going to start saying Obama's tax policies aren't socialist. They are. The degree that money is redistributed, and the meaning/purpose/plan behind it, doesn't change the fact that it is socialism. At the core it's still the redistribution of wealth.

And once again, we're reaching a point where the debate is going to end because now we're predicting the future. In my opinion, if you start taxing the people who make 250k a year, they will be less motivated to do the things that they're doing. In your opinion they won't be. The difference between our two opinions is that history backs mine up, and not yours.

Calling me ignorant is stupid and inaccurate. I'm ignorant about some things, much like everybody else, as ignorant is just defined as the lack of knowledge of something, but the economy isn't one of those things. May I ask what makes you think I'm ignorant? In fact, what makes you think you're not ignorant? You stated repeatedly in this thread that McCain will only help the top 1% of this population, which implies ignorance to me. You stated that taxing the shit out of people making 250k a year isn't socialism, which also implies ignorance to me. So, what brings you to the conclusion that you're not ignorant? What was your major in college? What was your GPA? What learning or knowledge do you have that makes you not ignorant, despite the ignorant posts you've made in this thread?

all i can say is....

i've taken...basic economic courses...as they are not needed for my major....but my roommate is a business finance major.....and he's come home and explained to me the many intricacies of micro/macroecomics...

and i can tell ALL of you this..when it comes to economic debate...someone who hasn't had the type of instruction that goes into micro/macroec........can't legitimately or successfully debate with someone who has.

those courses are no joke.

I've taken political science courses....so i know a thing or two about politics....so i can debate on politics reasonably...but...i already know mimesis knows more about economic issues then i probably ever will....and i know more then most of my peers...those courses are just on a completely different level.

__________________

Time is not long, and indecision is hells cemment. So the well is rented, untill heaven is relevant. Untill then, to be eloquent, sex cells, so le'ts cellibate.

"watch what you watchin...fox keeps feedin' us toxin's..stop sleepin' start thinkin outside of the box and unplug from the matrix doctrine....but watch what you say cause big brother is watchin" - nas - sly fox

The I.H.C.J.S.F.M.T.R.H.P.M.M.W.T.S.M.S.I.T.F.F.W.A.S. O Crew

Thought about it and no. I won't be voting for John McCain this fall. But Obama just seems too inauthentic for me as well. I'm looking at Bob Barr.

__________________


this post brought to you by..
Maleficent

V for president!!!

__________________

i hope your the only one

__________________

"the loudest one in the room is the weakest"- frank lucas..

May I ask why?

And I forgot the figures that disprove the "Bush's tax cuts for the rich" theory in my locker again, but I'll make sure to post them up tomorrow.

Meh. This is my direct reason that I tell anybody who asks why I'm not voting for McCain.

"Both presidential candidates suck, McCain says one thing and goes for the other, best example is trying to insult Obama over experience, then giving vice president position to Palin, using her capability to have a fucked up family and look decent as an excuse, he doesn't release his medical information and when that's what people expect of a person his age, he's hiding shit, & he wants to keep us in a war that has ruined our country far worse than anything in history."

it doesn't come down to what he's offering.

It comes down to truth, morals, and secrecy.

Do I want a man who lies, uses cheap tactics, twists his story around and keeps things secret from the public, in office? I can understand if he wants to hide his dick size 'cuz that's irrelevant, but otherwise, I should give a fuck if some know-nothing broad is going to be 44th president of the United States when McCain dies from the same medical problems he chose to hide from me for obvious reasons. It's not like he'll get abducted so people can torture his cancerous tumor. "OMG CAN WE TRUST A PRESIDENT WHO CAN'T PISS IN A TOILET CORRECTLY?" .............. who the fucks gonna do that? He's just being secretive.

I find these to be very correct reasons to not vote for a human being. My favorite absolute choice... Decency.

__________________
██â€-█████████▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓██████▓▓▓▓██████████████████ ██↑
██‡████████▒▓▓█████▓▓██████▓▓▓█████████████▓▓▓██ ██|
██‡███████▒▓▓██████▓▓▓███████▓▓███████████▓▓█▓▓█ ██|
██‡███████████████▓▓▓▒███▌████▓▓█████████▓▓███▓▓ ██|
██‡█████████████▓▓▓▒████▌▌▌████▓▓███████▓▓████▓█ ██|
██‡███████████▓▓▓▒█████▌▌▌▌▌▄███▓▓█████▓▓███████ ██|
██‡█████████▓▓▓▒█████████████████▓▓███▓▓████████ ██|
██‡███████▓▓▓▓▒███████████████████▓▓█▓▓█████████ ██|
██‡███████▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌████████████▓▓▓██████████ ██|

As promised, here is the data that shows how Bush's tax cuts (supposedly for the rich) actually affected rich people. I'm going to break the data down into two sections.

Richest 1% of the population:

In 1990, the top 1% made 14% of the country's income. They paid 25% of the country's taxes.
In 2000, at the end of Bill Clinton's term, the top 1% made 21% of the country's income. They paid 37% of the country's taxes.
In 2007, after Bush's "tax cuts for the rich" were implemented, the top 1% made 21% of the country's income. They paid 39% of the country's taxes.

So, the tax cuts obviously haven't helped the richest 1% of the population. They're making the same amount of income as they were making when Bill Clinton was president, but now they're paying a little more taxes.

Richest 5% of the population:

In 1990, the top 5% made 27% of the country's income. They paid 44% of the country's taxes.
In 2000, the top 5% made 35% of the country's income. They paid 56% of the country's taxes.
In 2007, the top 5% made 36% of the country's income. They paid 60% of the country's taxes.

And so the trend continues. With the "help" of President Bush, the richest 5% make 1% more of the income, but pay 4% more of the taxes. The data actually seems to suggest that Bush's "tax cuts for the rich" aren't helping the rich all that much.

If you doubt the figures I just posted, all of the data is available at the Bureau of Economic Analysis (www.bea.gov), so feel free to have a look yourself.

Hey Blay, next time you want to start saying I'm the one buying into all of this political bullshit, you might want to make sure you know what the fuck you're talking about first. Thanks buddy!

why dont u post what they had to pay in 2003, 04, 05, 06, and the expected '08.... because i feel like there is a high probability that it was raised and raised during his presidency, and balooned to say 42%/62% and he cut them from there.... i dont feel as if that makes him a bad man, but i feel like there is some missing information here..... i also would be hesitant to accept alot of these stats just from personal experience... my family fit into the group that was supposed to either get a tax cut or get a check from the government from Bush... and neither happened... they honestly just as easily could Say they did something and Not do it... they are the government after all...

btw 3.99 gpa with only one A-.... cool dude, we're both smart

__________________
Cash Money Mill eon air

Fucka Katrina Gustav

I didn't post that data because I didn't gather that data when I did the research last year. I know I could get it for you, but I'm not seeing the point. If taxes ballooned, then wouldn't that also support my theory that Bush is not helping the rich? Even if he provided the tax cuts after taxes ballooned (which I highly doubt happened because taxes don't increase that fast), the end result was that rich people were still paying more taxes then they were during Bill Clinton's presidency. That hypothetical situation still doesn't justify saying, "Bush is only helping rich people!"

What was/is your major and what school did you/are you going to?

Regardless of who wins, I'm just going to miss Bush.