I was wondering if I would see you post that video again.
That video is wrong. The Congress is not controlled by Democrats. And the debt problem is not because of Obama. It is because of Republicans like Bush, Cheney, and the ones in Congress.
As I have pointed out so many times before, there are two main ways to raise revenue: raise taxes, or cut spending. Obama inherited all of the spending from the wars Bush started, and all the tax breaks he had made. He cannot easily pull all of the troops out of the Middle East, and that makes up for the majority of spending.
About taxes: the top 1% highest incomes make 40% of the countries' wealth. Taxing them the same rate as the other 99% would still generate more revenue from the top 1%. The incomes of the top 1% have risen 18% in the last decade, and the lower class' income has fallen. Still, Republicans refuse to raise taxes on them. That is because the Republicans are in that top 1%, and as long as they perform their duties assigned by the Koch brothers, they will have a nice, soft cushion of dollars to fall back on when they are booted from office. Instead, they insist on cutting vital social nets like Social Security or Medicare. Their "reasoning" is that it is a big scheme to make money. Well, when you have Republicans dipping into it to fund wars and whatnot, it is certainly not serving its intended function.
So, since cutting spending, according to Republicans, must mean slashing vital social nets, and taxes are off the table, what do you propose? Cut those nets? Those are vital life lines to those who do not have millions to retire on. When you work, you put money in. It goes to everyone who is then retired. When you retire, you get part of the money put in by the current working generation. Medicare prevents Grandma from having to eat cat food to pay for her medication. Medicaid prevents life expectency from halting at 65. Medicare, on the other hand, helps low-income families and persons from dying because they cannot pay for help.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Intelligence is not one and the same with knowledge.
Annnnnnnd that's the sound of you missing the point.
I think chance27 was giving it a sarcastic dramatic flare when saying he spent as much if not more. :smile.gif:
Friend, please look at reports directly from the CBO and US Treasury department. According to the Treasury department, for example, the Obama administration added more debt (2.52 trillion) in the first 19 months of his presidency than any president from Washington to Regan. Further more the first two fiscal years in which Obama has served saw the two biggest federal deficits as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product since the end of World War II.
Please don't just trust one little site with a ticker... go look it all up yourself.
I think chance27 was giving it a sarcastic dramatic flare when saying he spent as much if not more. :smile.gif:
Friend, please look at reports directly from the CBO and US Treasury department. According to the Treasury department, for example, the Obama administration added more debt (2.52 trillion) in the first 19 months of his presidency than any president from Washington to Regan. Further more the first two fiscal years in which Obama has served saw the two biggest federal deficits as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product since the end of World War II.
Please don't just trust one little site with a ticker... go look it all up yourself.
edit: and THAT was not inherited by bush
1. [citation needed]
2. If you cared to check, you'll see that the site I posted takes all of it's information from the official US Treasury web site.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Vincenzo »
It's like a circle-jerk of family values, Christianity and nationalism.
obama is going to try is trying to use the "i killed bin laden" argument to get re elected. Even if he didn't a lot of people are going to give him their vote for it anyway. The sad part is that his entire part in the whole thing was to say "ok do it" then watch the operation on his little tv in the white house.
Also, there are a lot of informative videos on this channel:
The penny demonstration in the second video was kind of poorly made, but the videos were nonetheless informative. I'm not sure what conclusion to draw from them, though. Is Obama bullshitting us? Does he simply not have an understanding of economics? Of statistics, perhaps?
obama is going to try is trying to use the "i killed sadam" argument to get re elected. Even if he didn't a lot of people are going to give him their vote for it anyway. The sad part is that his entire part in the whole thing was to say "ok do it" then watch the operation on his little tv in the white house.
Uh...he did not kill Saddam Hussein. He ordered Osama bin Laden to be killed. And that is definitely not why he will probably be re-elected.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Intelligence is not one and the same with knowledge.
If I could, I'd vote for Obama. Ron Paul, I think, is considered the "grandfather" of the Tea Party movement, which as far as I'm concerned is a group of misguided people. Herman Cane is rather racist to Muslims, Bachman is way too religious, and the other two...well, they're Republican and there are very few things I agree with in that party.
I'm sixteen now, dear. By the time the election comes, I'll be about 17 and a half. I wouldn't vote anyway, though. I don't like the candidates.
The penny demonstration in the second video was kind of poorly made, but the videos were nonetheless informative. I'm not sure what conclusion to draw from them, though. Is Obama bullshitting us? Does he simply not have an understanding of economics? Of statistics, perhaps?
Why, because this country is screwed anyway, and the alternatives don't look too good. If the congress wasn't divided, things would be a lot different.
Why, because this country is screwed anyway, and the alternatives don't look too good. If the congress wasn't divided, things would be a lot different.
If this country is already in flames why would you vote for someone that just adds gasoline to out already huge flames? Your just making it worse.
The penny demonstration in the second video was kind of poorly made, but the videos were nonetheless informative. I'm not sure what conclusion to draw from them, though. Is Obama bullshitting us? Does he simply not have an understanding of economics? Of statistics, perhaps?
I take it to mean he's doing the usual politician thing, except bigger and better than all who came before. He's passing pork legislation and slapping a title on it that makes it look like he's trying to do something to help.
Would you remind me exactly which one that was? I failed to notice jobs or healthcare being destroyed.
The "healthcare" and "stimulus" bills, both of which were vessels for pork-pot spending with nice titles slapped on them. Refer to the videos posted and the following one:
If I could, I'd vote for Obama. Ron Paul, I think, is considered the "grandfather" of the Tea Party movement, which as far as I'm concerned is a group of misguided people. Herman Cane is rather racist to Muslims, Bachman is way too religious, and the other two...well, they're Republican and there are very few things I agree with in that party.
The thing about the tea party is, it's not a single, cohesive organization. Anybody can claim to be in the tea party. The tea party was supposed to be about getting away from the religious nutjobs in the Republican party, but then some of the nutjobs started calling themselves tea-partiers. So "tea party" is kind of a meaningless term now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
This enlightening post brought to you courtesy of a serious overabundance of free time.
I was wondering if I would see you post that video again.
That video is wrong. The Congress is not controlled by Democrats. And the debt problem is not because of Obama. It is because of Republicans like Bush, Cheney, and the ones in Congress.
As I have pointed out so many times before, there are two main ways to raise revenue: raise taxes, or cut spending. Obama inherited all of the spending from the wars Bush started, and all the tax breaks he had made. He cannot easily pull all of the troops out of the Middle East, and that makes up for the majority of spending.
About taxes: the top 1% highest incomes make 40% of the countries' wealth. Taxing them the same rate as the other 99% would still generate more revenue from the top 1%. The incomes of the top 1% have risen 18% in the last decade, and the lower class' income has fallen. Still, Republicans refuse to raise taxes on them. That is because the Republicans are in that top 1%, and as long as they perform their duties assigned by the Koch brothers, they will have a nice, soft cushion of dollars to fall back on when they are booted from office. Instead, they insist on cutting vital social nets like Social Security or Medicare. Their "reasoning" is that it is a big scheme to make money. Well, when you have Republicans dipping into it to fund wars and whatnot, it is certainly not serving its intended function.
So, since cutting spending, according to Republicans, must mean slashing vital social nets, and taxes are off the table, what do you propose? Cut those nets? Those are vital life lines to those who do not have millions to retire on. When you work, you put money in. It goes to everyone who is then retired. When you retire, you get part of the money put in by the current working generation. Medicare prevents Grandma from having to eat cat food to pay for her medication. Medicaid prevents life expectency from halting at 65. Medicare, on the other hand, helps low-income families and persons from dying because they cannot pay for help.
I think chance27 was giving it a sarcastic dramatic flare when saying he spent as much if not more. :smile.gif:
Friend, please look at reports directly from the CBO and US Treasury department. According to the Treasury department, for example, the Obama administration added more debt (2.52 trillion) in the first 19 months of his presidency than any president from Washington to Regan. Further more the first two fiscal years in which Obama has served saw the two biggest federal deficits as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product since the end of World War II.
Please don't just trust one little site with a ticker... go look it all up yourself.
edit: and THAT was not inherited by bush
1. [citation needed]
2. If you cared to check, you'll see that the site I posted takes all of it's information from the official US Treasury web site.
It was for the first 2 years. That's when they passed that awful legislation that destroyed healthcare and jobs.
is going to tryis trying to use the "i killed bin laden" argument to get re elected. Even if he didn't a lot of people are going to give him their vote for it anyway. The sad part is that his entire part in the whole thing was to say "ok do it" then watch the operation on his little tv in the white house.edit: fixed name
I think I just threw up a little.
I won't be able to vote!
I'm sixteen now, dear. By the time the election comes, I'll be about 17 and a half. I wouldn't vote anyway, though. I don't like the candidates.
The penny demonstration in the second video was kind of poorly made, but the videos were nonetheless informative. I'm not sure what conclusion to draw from them, though. Is Obama bullshitting us? Does he simply not have an understanding of economics? Of statistics, perhaps?
You heard that, green and red.
Would you remind me exactly which one that was? I failed to notice jobs or healthcare being destroyed.
Uh...he did not kill Saddam Hussein. He ordered Osama bin Laden to be killed. And that is definitely not why he will probably be re-elected.
thx i used the wrong name- Im not very good with names.
i didn't say that's why he would be elected; i said he'd try to use it for support.
I don't think he understands anything.
Why, because this country is screwed anyway, and the alternatives don't look too good. If the congress wasn't divided, things would be a lot different.
If this country is already in flames why would you vote for someone that just adds gasoline to out already huge flames? Your just making it worse.
It gets a result.
I take it to mean he's doing the usual politician thing, except bigger and better than all who came before. He's passing pork legislation and slapping a title on it that makes it look like he's trying to do something to help.
The "healthcare" and "stimulus" bills, both of which were vessels for pork-pot spending with nice titles slapped on them. Refer to the videos posted and the following one:
The thing about the tea party is, it's not a single, cohesive organization. Anybody can claim to be in the tea party. The tea party was supposed to be about getting away from the religious nutjobs in the Republican party, but then some of the nutjobs started calling themselves tea-partiers. So "tea party" is kind of a meaningless term now.
Someone's going to make it anyway. Might as well vote for a guy that can delay the end of America.
:sleep.gif:
if anything he accelerated the end.