Obama invokes Teddy Roosevelt in speech attacking GOP policies

[cubby1223]

Obama gave a speech attacking GOP policies.

Okay? What is this, the 10,000th such speech?

Kind of hard to muster the effort to care about what he says anymore.

So, Ausm, yes, this speech will fall on deaf ears. Your "progressives" blew your chance to change this country. And don't get mad at me for speaking the truth.

 

[Howard]

Interesting how Obama is invoking past presidents while failing to mention Obama. Hmmm...

Well, he isn't Craig234.

 

[hal2kilo]

Obama gave a speech attacking GOP policies.

Okay? What is this, the 10,000th such speech?

Kind of hard to muster the effort to care about what he says anymore.

So, Ausm, yes, this speech will fall on deaf ears. Your "progressives" blew your chance to change this country. And don't get mad at me for speaking the truth.

When the admitted main goal of your opponent party from the very beginning of your term is to make him a one term president, do you expect him to just lay down an give up?

 

[Agfadoc]

I've never seen so many lies combined with class warfare and rhetoric in any speech given by a standing president.. Well, that is if you exclude Venezuela.

Pathetic excuse for leadership. The drivel socialists spew, especially when they try to mask their agenda, is not very becoming and clearly obvious to the rational thinking people.

 

[Agfadoc]

Let's look at "Fair Share".. If 47% of the American people do not pay federal taxes, then according to this socialist (Quoting Maxine Waters) the other 53% who DO pay taxes need to pay MORE taxes in order to fulfill their "Fair share".

But, lest we forget about "Equality" in the view of the socialist.. Equality to a socialist means, those who work hard and make sacrifices need to give more to those who make NO sacrifices, put in zero effort.

The argument is flawed at so many levels that only the dumbest of our society would believe any of that BS.

Fair share to me means, I'll help you but you have to do something in return of my help, this isn't a one way street, you have to move towards being responsible for yourself to obtain any more help from me... Not endless assistance to keep you sitting at home watching MSNBC...

I can't believe you lefties can even argue for this guy with a straight face.

 

[Agfadoc]

"You know, if we tell them that we only want to take from the 1% then we might be able to fool the other 52% from realizing that we'll be taking from them too" brilliant!

"It just might work, comrade. It just might work, if it wasn't for those pesky conservatives, we just might get away with it."

Sent from my Supercharged Asus Transformer

 

[Londo_Jowo]

AWESOME speech made by the POTUS invoking a much needed populist tone but I am afraid it will fall on def ears, in regards to the GOP in Congress and the payroll tax extensions.

I wish he could have conveyed these thoughts to a National audience. I wish really surprised at the resounding applause he got throughout this speech especially being in Kansas.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...gop-policies/2011/12/06/gIQAEf3yaO_story.html

There's blood in the water, you must have spilled some of the Tiger's Blood you're drinking

 

[Ausm]

There's blood in the water, you must have spilled some of the Tiger's Blood you're drinking

Crack kills....

 

[Ausm]

I've never seen so many lies combined with class warfare and rhetoric in any speech given by a standing president.. Well, that is if you exclude Venezuela.

Pathetic excuse for leadership. The drivel socialists spew, especially when they try to mask their agenda, is not very becoming and clearly obvious to the rational thinking people.

Please list the lies so we can analyze them and also the parts which would equate to Socialism.

 

[Agfadoc]

#1 capitalism has “never worked” — not in 1920′s, the 1950‘s and 60’s, nor in the 1980′s — Complete lie... Cars, Radio, and TV all come to the forefront in the 20's, which then promoted the need for more energy. Even though these items were invented years prior, they never really took off until.. Wait for it.. Wait for it.. "The ROARING 20's"

The average salary went up 37% between 1920 and 1929.
Ford gave wages to people that were well beyond prevailing wages at the time

Here is some proof for you... a letter written by a foreigner living in the U.S. in 1917. The impressed man wrote:

“We rented an apartment in a worker’s district. That apartment, at $18 a month, is equipped with all sorts of conveniences that we Europeans were quite un-used to: Electric lights, gas cooking-range, bath, telephone, automatic service-elevator, and even a chute for the garbage.”
​

The author was devout Marxist Leon Trotsky... Go figure.


#2 So Barack Obama is saying is that competition is bad. After all, we can’t have winners because not everyone can be a winner. Instead, it’s up to government to come in and make sure we are all equal. We can all reach and stay in the middle class. The lowest will rise and the highest will fall – until we’re all in the middle. And equal – we have to all be equal (Note – there is NO socialist rhetoric in that at all! None! Right?)


There are no losers! We all win! We all get a trophy. Yay? That's not how the real world works. In every job even in the unions, you work your way up and nothing is equal. Does the 20 year union worker have the same pay and salary as the 2 year worker? Nope. Does he have the same rights when layoffs are coming? Nope.. Does he have the same rights when a lucrative jobs comes in.. Nope.. We are not all the same and never will be.


That's just a start...


This President is using tactics that any half way intelligent person can see right through, but I guess his followers may fall somewhere below average.. after all, they spend all their time trying to bring people down instead of lifting people up.

 

[cybrsage]

Crack kills....

Then please stop doing it.

 

[CLite]

Let's look at "Fair Share".. If 47% of the American people do not pay federal taxes, then according to this socialist (Quoting Maxine Waters) the other 53% who DO pay taxes need to pay MORE taxes in order to fulfill their "Fair share".

An honest question for you

Person A makes 40 grand, pays state tax, payroll taxes, property tax, sales tax, but with all those considered pays no federal tax. Let's make up a number and call his tax burden 23%.

Person B is a multi-millionare with long-term capital gains, some of his payroll taxes have been capped, he pays property/sales, and some federal. Let's say his tax burden is 30%.

Are you honestly going to call Person A a free-loader? A person who works hard, pays an incredible % of his/her earning in taxes, but just doesn't have enough to contribute to the federal level? If so then you are a moron, if not then STFU about the 47% statistic, it's incredibly disingenuous.

If you look at charts of overall tax burden, when you fairly count everything even the very bottom of the spectrum is paying upwards of 18% of their income. Payroll taxes never go away, state taxes are applied at very low income levels, property taxes are paid (even renters pay their landlords who pay property), and then you have sales tax. Anyone who uses the 47% statistic as a rallying cry show their true colors as an incredibly uneducated simpleton.

 

[Genx87]

An honest question for you

Person A makes 40 grand, pays state tax, payroll taxes, property tax, sales tax, but with all those considered pays no federal tax. Let's make up a number and call his tax burden 23%.

Person B is a multi-millionare with long-term capital gains, some of his payroll taxes have been capped, he pays property/sales, and some federal. Let's say his tax burden is 30%.

Are you honestly going to call Person A a free-loader? A person who works hard, pays an incredible % of his/her earning in taxes, but just doesn't have enough to contribute to the federal level? If so then you are a moron, if not then STFU about the 47% statistic, it's incredibly disingenuous.

If you look at charts of overall tax burden, when you fairly count everything even the very bottom of the spectrum is paying upwards of 18% of their income. Payroll taxes never go away, state taxes are applied at very low income levels, property taxes are paid (even renters pay their landlords who pay property), and then you have sales tax. Anyone who uses the 47% statistic as a rallying cry show their true colors as an incredibly uneducated simpleton.

We are discussing federal income tax. Why are you bringing in property taxes(local), sales tax(local), and state taxes(local)?

Who pays for the federal govt? The numbers dont lie. The middle and lower class exposure has lowered in the past year due to the feds cutting the rate on the employee SS contribution.

 

[cybrsage]

I think the problem is that the "some federal" is not realistic. That "some" is around 35%. We then add that 35% to the 23% (they both have to pay the same local taxes, after all) and we find the rich guy is paying 57% vs the 23% of the poor guy.

If we keep it at federal only, it is 35% vs 0%

 

[CLite]

We are discussing federal income tax. Why are you bringing in property taxes(local), sales tax(local), and state taxes(local)?

Who pays for the federal govt? The numbers dont lie. The middle and lower class exposure has lowered in the past year due to the feds cutting the rate on the employee SS contribution.

I would like to engage in a rational discourse Genx87, a person's tax burdens severely effect his/her ability to pay for the basic necessities of life and any federal tax code has to be cognoscente of their other obligations. We can't tax people into starving because it's "fair" to make them contribute at a federal level. Btw, Payroll taxes are federal, I realize they are to pay for program that benefit the person, but let's say the person dies at the age of 65, all the money he has paid does him no good.

Anyways, the top level bracket tax burden (percentage-wise) has fallen precipitously as opposed to the middle class. I am fully aware that the elimination of loopholes counter-balance this fall in top tax rate. However, the reason their share has grown so quickly is not because of freedom-hating democrats with a love affair of taxes, but rather because income disparity has exploded. I'm quite sure if someone applied inflation to past tax bracket definitions and you compare them to current day the lower and middle class have seen no real relief from taxes. Instead you have the top-end of the country swimming in wealth and yes they are paying more than people but that's a symptom of their wealth and not any burdensome tax code.

 

[Agfadoc]

An honest question for you

Person A makes 40 grand, pays state tax, payroll taxes, property tax, sales tax, but with all those considered pays no federal tax. Let's make up a number and call his tax burden 23%.

Person B is a multi-millionare with long-term capital gains, some of his payroll taxes have been capped, he pays property/sales, and some federal. Let's say his tax burden is 30%.

Are you honestly going to call Person A a free-loader? A person who works hard, pays an incredible % of his/her earning in taxes, but just doesn't have enough to contribute to the federal level? If so then you are a moron, if not then STFU about the 47% statistic, it's incredibly disingenuous.

If you look at charts of overall tax burden, when you fairly count everything even the very bottom of the spectrum is paying upwards of 18% of their income. Payroll taxes never go away, state taxes are applied at very low income levels, property taxes are paid (even renters pay their landlords who pay property), and then you have sales tax. Anyone who uses the 47% statistic as a rallying cry show their true colors as an incredibly uneducated simpleton.

You sure are an angry guy aren't you.. but you don't scare me tough guy. You think this is about Millionaires who provide the majority of the taxes that are paid? This is about socialism and tearing down everyone who has the drive and determination to move forward. You want to equalize everyone and emaciate us all so that your dumb ass can feel significant.

Lets keep it simple. You CHOSE not to get an education, or if you did get an education you CHOSE not to use it or you CHOSE to study something that is completely useless...you CHOSE to not take the risks, YOU CHOSE to work a 40k a year job and YOU CHOSE to sit here and think that someone else OWES YOU SOMETHING.

Nobody owes you squat, pal. Now lets take a look at the other side...

I CHOSE to join the military to get me out of poverty.
I CHOSE to forgo nightlife and fun and partying so I could get an education at night
I CHOSE to pay for the child that I brought into this world
I CHOSE to cut my hair and read the right books on interviewing and the words to say to excel in life.
I CHOSE to invest in technology when I was eating top ramen every night
I CHOSE to work long hours and sacrifice my family life so that I could provide more for them...Not YOU.

These are sacrifices that ARE NOT EQUAL.

What gives you the right to try and impose your menial sense of morality on me and my family when you haven't taken the risks or the sacrifices? Why should I give you more and my child less?

I do not oppose taxes, I have a full and complete understanding of the nature of taxes and society dipshit, what I appose is parasites like you, trying to take from those that have worked harder, smarter, and fought their way to a half way decent life only to be thought of as a breeding cow to keep your sense of dignity in tact. You jealous little man..

When you have walked the same distance, and fought the same battles then we can talk about what I owe you, but right now, I don't owe you a damned thing.

 

[cybrsage]

I would like to engage in a rational discourse Genx87, a person's tax burdens severely effect his/her ability to pay for the basic necessities of life and any federal tax code has to be cognoscente of their other obligations. We can't tax people into starving because it's "fair" to make them contribute at a federal level.

I agree.

 

[CLite]

I think the problem is that the "some federal" is not realistic. That "some" is around 35%. We then add that 35% to the 23% (they both have to pay the same local taxes, after all) and we find the rich guy is paying 57% vs the 23% of the poor guy.

If we keep it at federal only, it is 35% vs 0%

cybrsage, the top level people rarely pay more than 35% total effective tax. You have to consider a variety of factors.

1) Payroll taxes hit limits
2) Property tax effects top earners less than low earners
3) Sales taxes effects top earners less than low earners
3) Income tax is progressive (i.e. their entire amount is not hit by 35%, only the value of the money earned above the bracket value).

I will try to find a chart but it basically has lower end people at an effective rate of 18%, the middle-upper hitting 33%, and then the top 1% dipping down to 31% because of capital-gains/etc.

 

[cybrsage]

Lets keep it simple. You CHOSE not to get an education, or if you did get an education you CHOSE not to use it or you CHOSE to study something that is completely useless...you CHOSE to not take the risks, YOU CHOSE to work a 40k a year job and YOU CHOSE to sit here and think that someone else OWES YOU SOMETHING.

If the economy was not so crappy, I would agree with you. Right now, many people do not choose to be unemployed.

 

[cybrsage]

cybrsage, the top level people rarely pay more than 35% total effective tax. You have to consider a variety of factors.

1) Payroll taxes hit limits
2) Property tax effects top earners less than low earners
3) Sales taxes effects top earners less than low earners
3) Income tax is progressive (i.e. their entire amount is not hit by 35%, only the value of the money earned above the bracket value).

I will try to find a chart but it basically has lower end people at an effective rate of 18%, the middle-upper hitting 33%, and then the top 1% dipping down to 31% because of capital-gains/etc.

The chart would be great (always like to learn). What you say sounds like you are correct, so I believe you. Still, if you could find the chart I would be appreciative.

EDIT: For some reason I temporarily forgot that payroll taxes are SS taxes. Yeah, they are definately capped.

 

[CLite]

You sure are an angry guy aren't you

Quite hypocritical and you are quick to make assumptions. I have a masters in engineering and together with my wife we are in the top bracket of the federal code, although not by a land-side by any means. I also live in the Hudson county area of NJ and pay exorbitant property taxes so I'm quite sure my effective tax burden %-wise is higher than 99.9% of the people within the USA.

I'm having a discussion about a realistic tax code and the things it must consider. When someone spouts off about 47% not paying taxes it upsets me because I am a very logical person that gets very annoyed when people say stupid shit.

 

[Agfadoc]

Good for you. When you stop trying to steal from my pantry, then we can have a logical discussion. When you tell me to STFU, then you're asking for a response in kind.

 

[Agfadoc]

A flat tax is the best solution for all of it. You pay your 17, I pay mine and there is no further discussion.

 

[cybrsage]

You are from the 1%! BURN CLite!!!!!!

 

[cybrsage]

The Fair Tax is a better solution. A consumption based tax. The more disposable income you spend, the more taxes you pay. You decide how much you pay in taxes based on how much you spend.