President Obama

[hotzester]

Orz0ski - such a maverick!

Queenie - you're being selfish. Don't spread the karma for your own personal gain. Spread the karma because it will better our standing with the other message boards on the web. That's what matters most.

I know one site that has free karma for all. They've got it going on. Sure, the site takes 40% of every point for itself, but everything the members get is free. It's a fantastic system.

[Queenie]

Queenie - you're being selfish. Don't spread the karma for your own personal gain. Spread the karma because it will better our standing with the other message boards on the web. That's what matters most.

I don't do it for my own personal gain. Where would this board be without titan? Who would you pick on? I do this for the good of all.

[plungerhand]

karma, karma, karma karma, karma chameleon....


get that out of your head....

[hotzester]

This place would be completely different without the Tit.

[0rz0ski]

This place would be completely different without the Tit.

Yeah, we might actually all get along.

Just kidding Titan. Although, you are extra stupid today, please take your meds.

[fistor!@#]

Well, this conversation has devolved nicely. :

Let's get it back on track. How long until whites can tell watermelon jokes at the same time blacks are telling white-man's overbite jokes? I should think this election should go a long way to ending this hyper-sensitive PC era we've been living in for the past 25 years or so. Basically, it's a matter of getting whitey to unclench, since a lot of cries of racism tend to come from white mouths.

[hotzester]

Well if we're lucky, with a democrat in the white house, we republicans can get in on some of that sweet, sweet reparation cash.

[sunshyne]

2. Spinners on the limos of the President's procession.

I think spinners on the limos would be cool, and paint them a cool color too, like really dark blue thats so dark it looks black.

[airhornahole]

2. Spinners on the limos of the President's procession.

I think spinners on the limos would be cool, and paint them a cool color too, like really dark blue thats so dark it looks black.

How about air suspensions? The limos can be bouncing as they drive through Washington or have one wheel off the ground as they go around a turn. SWEET.

[Howie Feltersnatch]

I think spinners on the limos would be cool, and paint them a cool color too, like really dark blue thats so dark it looks black.

How about air suspensions? The limos can be bouncing as they drive through Washington or have one wheel off the ground as they go around a turn. SWEET.

Assisnation attempts would plumet...it's hard to hit a moving target...let alone if it's bouncing around to the tune of 'Aint' Nothing but a G thang'

[plungerhand]

2. Spinners on the limos of the President's procession.

I think spinners on the limos would be cool, and paint them a cool color too, like really dark blue thats so dark it looks black.

C'mon people, keep up. Spinners are out, 24"s or twenny- foo's are the shnitz...

[Rock Monster]

2. Spinners on the limos of the President's procession.

I think spinners on the limos would be cool, and paint them a cool color too, like really dark blue thats so dark it looks black.

Wouldn't it be easier to just paint them black?

[sunshyne]

I think spinners on the limos would be cool, and paint them a cool color too, like really dark blue thats so dark it looks black.

Wouldn't it be easier to just paint them black?

nope

[airhornahole]

I think spinners on the limos would be cool, and paint them a cool color too, like really dark blue thats so dark it looks black.

C'mon people, keep up. Spinners are out, 24"s or twenny- foo's are the shnitz...

I like your idea even better. Especially if they have to put a 4" lift kit on the car to fit the wheels under it. Nothin' better than steppin' up into a limo.

[Queenie]

I think spinners on the limos would be cool, and paint them a cool color too, like really dark blue thats so dark it looks black.

Wouldn't it be easier to just paint them black?

Why they gotta be black?

[Queenie]

Well if we're lucky, with a democrat in the white house, we republicans can get in on some of that sweet, sweet reparation cash.

Touche'

[sunshyne]

if you paint it really really dark blue, when you see you'll be like "is it blue? is it black? man, I just don't know! it blows my mind with coolness!"

[0rz0ski]

Midnight Blue?

[heathman21]

Why are you guys so crabby about Obama? Why all the instant judgements on the man? He seems fine to me, and apparently the rest of the world agrees because they're out dancing in the streets and praising whomever that we didn't put another "good ole boy" in the presidency.

Give him an 'effing chance.

I would rather kick myself in the nuts then see that stupid ass Palin as VP....good lord.
PKKKEEEW PKKEEEW.

[Biff]

i'm curious who you voted for. did you tell us before? i have no idea, i hardly pay attention to political stuff.

I didn't vote for anyone.

[fetusfacedwindbag]

Either way, there are going to be some "I told you so's" thrown out there.

Neither McCain or Obama could fix what's going on right now immediately. It's going to take a while to get things back on track.

If McCain would've won, he would be blamed for how things will end up in four years, but since Obama was elected, he will be blamed.

I think that Obama may not be the best guy for the job, but it's time to take the money supply and put it into other people's hands.

[hotzester]

Why are you guys so crabby about Obama? Why all the instant judgements on the man? He seems fine to me, and apparently the rest of the world agrees because they're out dancing in the streets and praising whomever that we didn't put another "good ole boy" in the presidency.

Give him an 'effing chance.

I would rather kick myself in the nuts then see that stupid ass Palin as VP....good lord.
PKKKEEEW PKKEEEW

Because I disagree with his policies. I don't believe that the key to success lies in the hands of the government. I believe that we, as Americans, are capable of making as much as little out of our lives as we wish. We've all got the same opportunities, some just choose to capitalize on them, and for doing so, they're demonized.

I think that Obama may not be the best guy for the job, but it's time to take the money supply and put it into other people's hands.

Well you're in luck - because that's exactly what President Obama is going to do.

EDIT: And by the way, I don't give a rat's ass who other countries want to lead us. If they want me to care, they should all move here (legally, incidentally) and cast a vote. If anything, I'm concerned that other countries are celebrating this decision.

[fetusfacedwindbag]

I think that Obama may not be the best guy for the job, but it's time to take the money supply and put it into other people's hands.

Well you're in luck - because that's exactly what President Obama is going to do.

[/quote]

I think it's time to do that. You have to move the money supply around if you want to keep the ball rolling. I could go into more detail about how I feel about it, but it would take way too long...and you'd probably say, "no, you're wrong".... (However, you're one of the few people that I have spoken to that will give an educated reply when talking about these sorts of things. I live in TN - a die hard red state - and most people here just say, "you're wrong" without giving a good explanation other than, "He'll make it ta where gays can marry" or "He'll take our guns" or "It's not fair to take money from the rich to give to the poor")

[fetusfacedwindbag]

well i screwed something up in my post above....

[Biff]

I'd actually like to read your reasoning for moving the money supply around. In fact, I'm going to have to go ahead and say that I am extremely eager for the rationale. I promise I'll retort with more than "you're wrong".

[heathman21]

i'm curious who you voted for. did you tell us before? i have no idea, i hardly pay attention to political stuff.

I didn't vote for anyone.

HAHA!
I like the "WE'RE SCREWED '08" banner!

I didn't vote.

[Howie Feltersnatch]

Give him an 'effing chance.

I would rather kick myself in the nuts then see that stupid ass Palin as VP....good lord.
PKKKEEEW PKKEEEW.

When did you give her a chance? Was she VP last term?

[hotzester]

When did you give her a chance? Was she VP last term?

+1

I think it's time to do that. You have to move the money supply around if you want to keep the ball rolling. I could go into more detail about how I feel about it, but it would take way too long...and you'd probably say, "no, you're wrong"....

I'll gladly debate the issue with you, and I'll try my best to not just throw out a blanket "you're wrong" card. I hate when people do that to me, so I try to avoid playing that way myself.

But first, can you send me some of your paycheck so I can pay some bills this month? With a baby on the way, things are going to be tight.

[motorboatking]

How much karma do you need to be considered karma rich?

[hotzester]

4 points.

[fetusfacedwindbag]

I'd actually like to read your reasoning for moving the money supply around. In fact, I'm going to have to go ahead and say that I am extremely eager for the rationale. I promise I'll retort with more than "you're wrong".

It's totally from a macro stand point, but it's how I look at the picture. I'm not very good at explaining my views about the economy, but I'll try.

I don't mind you telling me how I'm wrong.

I look at it like this: For the past eight years, the Rep tax setup has been in place. It's more fair because those who earn more money get to keep more of the money that they've earned. I agree with that in trying to keep everything "fair". A flat tax would be fair, but I don't think it works in the best interest of the economy as a whole.

There is obviously a limited size to the money supply (considering that if we continuously printed more money we would decrease the spending power of a dollar, blah blah blah - insert more economic rhetoric). If the people that are earning massive amounts of money are paying the same percentage of their income as the lower earners, they are keeping a good bit of the money supply out of circulation (I say that because these people spend a lot of money, but they also SAVE a LOT of money). taking this money out of circulation slows business in general (I know that it helps the business to an extent on the securities side of things, but I'm talking about where business truly keeps things rolling: retail, services, etc.).

If we (being the higher earners) give a portion of our income back to the lower earners, they tend to spend more than they tend to save. This allows business to continue to thrive, and will in turn help us earn more in the future. Right now, many of the top earners in the country aren't making as much money because their industries aren't earning as much. If we can give a portion of our income to the lower earners, it will not only help us out in the future to earn even more money, but it will help those in need out right now. Sometimes an extra $500 to someone who makes very little is more valuable than $10,000 to someone who earns quite a bit. I'm not naive to think that there aren't people out there that take advantage of the system, but there are plenty of people out there who take the government help and use it to genuinely help their family survive. I'm willing to give a portion of my money to help these people.

I see it as a cyclical thing. You can't keep a Rep in the office for too long, and you can't keep a Dem in office for too long. You need to continuously move the money supply from one demographic to the other.

Keep in mind that I'm still very young, and I don't know all the ins and outs of politics. This is, however, how I look at the big picture. There are tons of smaller issues that I see differently.

Does this explanation make sense?

[hotzester]

The problem as I see it, is that the "rich people" of which you speak aren't really keeping money out of circulation. They spend some, and anything they amass in savings is being invested by banks, etc. They're also putting money into their portfolios, and that, in turn, is also being invested. It's not truly out of circulation until they're cramming it under their mattresses, doing nothing.

I have no problem with the wealthy (and I'm HARDLY even remotely close to that category) doing as they wish with their money. Many of them also privately donate to charities, so it's not as though those in the lower tax brackets aren't receiving the money already.

For me, here's what it all comes down to - if you, or me, or anyone else is in that "lower end" of the pay scale, guess what? We can go to school, further our education, get a second (or third) job, start a business, or do anything else we want to do in order to bring ourselves up to the level at which we wish to be. That's not government's responsibility.

So if you find yourself in a position where $500 means the difference between paying rent or not paying rent, eating or not eating - and here's a secret: I'm hardly a fat cat myself - I took ONE college class before deciding I was bored out of my mind and not continuing further - but if you find yourself in that position, take the initiative to do what YOU need to do in order to change that.

We live in the greatest country in the world. We all have opportunities to make our own destinies. Do it. Don't let the government do it for you.

[fetusfacedwindbag]

When did you give her a chance? Was she VP last term?

+1

I think it's time to do that. You have to move the money supply around if you want to keep the ball rolling. I could go into more detail about how I feel about it, but it would take way too long...and you'd probably say, "no, you're wrong"....

I'll gladly debate the issue with you, and I'll try my best to not just throw out a blanket "you're wrong" card. I hate when people do that to me, so I try to avoid playing that way myself.

But first, can you send me some of your paycheck so I can pay some bills this month? With a baby on the way, things are going to be tight.

Actually right now, you would probably be a higher earner than me, so I'm going to need some of YOUR paycheck to help me out. My transmission went out last week, and I had to put it on my credit card. And while you're at it, throw some Karma my way, you've got enough to spare.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

[bigdaddy]

Did anyone see Dan Rather's coverage of the election? He was on some HD channel (HDnet, I think) and all he said was "We're not about to be as hasty as the self-proclaimed 'major networks' in calling some of these states..." i think he was telling the american people "eff off and watch some other election coverage" so that's what I did

[Biff]

Dan Rather is clothed in humility.

[fetusfacedwindbag]

The problem as I see it, is that the "rich people" of which you speak aren't really keeping money out of circulation. They spend some, and anything they amass in savings is being invested by banks, etc. They're also putting money into their portfolios, and that, in turn, is also being invested. It's not truly out of circulation until they're cramming it under their mattresses, doing nothing.

I have no problem with the wealthy (and I'm HARDLY even remotely close to that category) doing as they wish with their money. Many of them also privately donate to charities, so it's not as though those in the lower tax brackets aren't receiving the money already.

For me, here's what it all comes down to - if you, or me, or anyone else is in that "lower end" of the pay scale, guess what? We can go to school, further our education, get a second (or third) job, start a business, or do anything else we want to do in order to bring ourselves up to the level at which we wish to be. That's not government's responsibility.

So if you find yourself in a position where $500 means the difference between paying rent or not paying rent, eating or not eating - and here's a secret: I'm hardly a fat cat myself - I took ONE college class before deciding I was bored out of my mind and not continuing further - but if you find yourself in that position, take the initiative to do what YOU need to do in order to change that.

We live in the greatest country in the world. We all have opportunities to make our own destinies. Do it. Don't let the government do it for you.

The thing about it is that not everyone in the US TRULY has the opportunity to get out and get great jobs. I've had an extremely blessed life.

I could say this: When I was younger, I lived in a duplex, and I ate Ramen noodles four days a week, we never knew if our car would start in the morning, my mom worked three jobs to keep me in clothes and under shelter. I put myself through college, working two jobs the entire time, graduated cum laude, and now I have a great job with plenty of room to excel.

BUT

I didn't grow up in a bad part of town where drugs ran rampant and people didn't know how to get ahead in life. I've seen this side of the world now. I've seen that people who live in conditions where it's ok to do drugs, get knocked up and live on welfare. There is much of America where people just aren't taught that they truly can have a better life. And if they ARE taught that, they aren't always shown how. It's difficult to say that it's their fault that they live where they live and they live HOW they live. To them it's ok, and it's just something that they have to expect and live with.

These are the people that I wouldn't mind giving up more of my income to help survive. Of course some of them are going to take advantage of the system, but on the other hand, there are LOTS of people who take advantage of the system - rich AND poor.

If you don't feel like helping these people out, be stingy. Give them your money to benefit yourself in the future.

As far as investment money goes, if you take any economics class, they'll show you three different ways to look at the money supply (M1 M2 M3 blah blah blah). This money isn't considered part of the money supply if it is invested. Also, right now, many investors are liquidating their investments to try to take advantage of the inefficiancies in the market. They've also removed it from the market because the dollar (true cash) is a better investment than many investments, ie HFs PE RE VC, etc.

[hotzester]

So you think that by giving the people in the lesser advantaged neighborhoods a check for $500, that will be their golden ticket into the yacht club? Wouldn't these people rather have jobs? Or maybe that money could be spent on educating them on how they can get out of their situation?

By taxing the "wealthy" (which let's call them who they are - they're the business owners who offer jobs to the rest of us), that discourages them from growth. If I'm a business owner (as I'd like to be one day), and I'm hovering on that $240,000 mark, why would I put in those extra hours to boost my revenue and subsequently need to hire more staff, if I know I'm just going to have more money taken away from me?

I think people should donate as much as they want to charities. Donate time, resources, money, whatever. I've done it - it feels great. But when government swoops in and just takes some of your money to give to a poor person, just because they're poor, that doesn't feel as good.

Second, we can't ALL be PhD's. We're not all going to be lawyers. It sounds mean, but it's reality. We'll always need people to carry the lower paying jobs. If someone doesn't have the motivation to write their own future, then that's where they'll forever dwell. That's the CHOICE they've made.

It's the same choice I've made. My wife and I make a combined income of around $60k a year. She's got an associate's degree, I've got 3 credits of college. We own our own house in a beautiful suburban subdivision, two SUVs, a boat, and I have a motorcycle. We've got 2 dogs and three cats, and a baby due in about 2 weeks. How did we do it? We lived within our means. That's the key to getting where you want to go.

Just live within your means. And if you want MORE, work MORE. It's not rocket science. Trust me, if I can do it, anyone can.

[Howie Feltersnatch]

So you think that by giving the people in the lesser advantaged neighborhoods a check for $500, that will be their golden ticket into the yacht club? Wouldn't these people rather have jobs? Or maybe that money could be spent on educating them on how they can get out of their situation?

By taxing the "wealthy" (which let's call them who they are - they're the business owners who offer jobs to the rest of us), that discourages them from growth. If I'm a business owner (as I'd like to be one day), and I'm hovering on that $240,000 mark, why would I put in those extra hours to boost my revenue and subsequently need to hire more staff, if I know I'm just going to have more money taken away from me?

I think people should donate as much as they want to charities. Donate time, resources, money, whatever. I've done it - it feels great. But when government swoops in and just takes some of your money to give to a poor person, just because they're poor, that doesn't feel as good.

Second, we can't ALL be PhD's. We're not all going to be lawyers. It sounds mean, but it's reality. We'll always need people to carry the lower paying jobs. If someone doesn't have the motivation to write their own future, then that's where they'll forever dwell. That's the CHOICE they've made.

It's the same choice I've made. My wife and I make a combined income of around $60k a year. She's got an associate's degree, I've got 3 credits of college. We own our own house in a beautiful suburban subdivision, two SUVs, a boat, and I have a motorcycle. We've got 2 dogs and three cats, and a baby due in about 2 weeks. How did we do it? We lived within our means. That's the key to getting where you want to go.

Just live within your means. And if you want MORE, work MORE. It's not rocket science. Trust me, if I can do it, anyone can.

$500 isn't going to buy them a 4 year degree? It won't 'teach them to fish'? They'll only go out and buy dubs for there '86 CrownVic.

I really really want a new Tundra pickup, but I only make in the lower $30k and my wife is currently a stay at home mom for our baby girl and 6 yo son. We have a house 2 cars and 5 acres on a land contract. We're right at our means so thats where i lie with the new Tundra. Maybe when she goes back to work but most likely not. If I wanted, I could get the loan, buy a Tundra and new garage and hope for a buy out of sorts ???

[fetusfacedwindbag]

I'm not saying that this will give them the boost that they need to get into a different social class. I'm saying that it will give them enough to not have to live in extreme poverty conditions. I don't think that anyone should have to live like that.

I don't buy it that someone will keep from growing their compnay in order to not hit that $250K mark. Why would you really do that. If you want to get to the $500K mark, you have to get up there anyway. And personally, I'd rather get taxed higher on $500K than keep my business below the $250K mark. Maybe it's not "fair" that you'd get taxed at a higher rate, but life's not fair, and why not help out the rest of the nation that supports your growing business?

I think that people should donate to charity as well. Time, money, etc, but how many people do you know that make over $250K per year really give to charity to help people. I don't know many at all. Mostly, they're trying to stay within one st. dev. of the amount the majority of high earners give so that they can lower their adjusted gross income on their income taxes at the end of the year.

I think that you're totally right about living within your means though. I hate seeing someone that lives on welfare roll around in a $60k escalade that has $20K in accessories, but that's an example of someone who is taking advantage of the system.

....lost my train of thought.... sorry... quite busy today....

[landmammaldolphin]

I am a business owner and there is a slight problem with the continued rhetoric about taxes. First of all the corporate rate for taxes on the federal level is not changing and therefore our business taxes will not increase. The increase in taxes that are being spoken of are for personal incomes. That being said, there are some crossovers due what's called an S-Corp designation. When a company is an S-Corp, the income of the business is combined with the personal income of the principals and therefore can show that the individuals make more than the $250,000 that will result in higher taxes. The funny part of this is that most of those individuals end up with a nice fat return at the end of the year and the increase that is being proposed will simply lower the amount of the return. Our company is an S-Corp and the increase in the personal tax will have absolutely no effect on our products, employees, or any other factor that would involve hiring or pricing. I have talked to a number of other business owners that I know and all of them are in the same boat.

As for those in the higher income brackets, Barack Obama carried the majority of people making over $250,000/year and that speaks volumes. Most of the people in the higher tax brackets have no problem with a little extra tax being taken out because as FFWB has stated, the more disposable income in the hands of the middle class, the more consumption/spending will occur. The more consumption/spending that occurs the more the demand for the products that those same companies make will increase. The higher the demand becomes the production follows and job creation is the next step. To give money to companies with little to no demand on their products and hoping that the savings will "trickle down" into job creation is, IMO, a false notion. If those companies have nobody who can afford to buy their products, they have no need for more employees.

Ultimately, however, we will see which theory is best, trickle up or trickle down. After the last 8 years, I'm willing to at least give trickle up a try.