Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread >Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: Will someone please answer Dereks Obama question?

Zen Peach





Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 01:08 PM
Will someone please answer Derek and his question about Obama and the taxes on the poor rich people?

Derek, please just make your question a sig so you dont have to type it over and over again. LOL.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 
Replies:

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1958
(1961 all sites)
Registered: 5/12/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 01:09 PM
quote:
Will someone please answer Derek and his question about Obama and the taxes on the poor rich people?

Derek, please just make your question a sig so you dont have to type it over and over again. LOL.


He didn't like my answer. He's very fussy.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 01:15 PM
quote:
He doesn't like any answer. Of course, he is so much smarter than us. He also has more women friends than us. He also has a tinyurl.


LOL..dont tell his ladyfriends

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 19485
(19499 all sites)
Registered: 6/9/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 01:21 PM
quote:
Will someone please answer Derek and his question about Obama and the taxes on the poor rich people?

Derek, please just make your question a sig so you dont have to type it over and over again. LOL.



quote:
He doesn't like any answer. Of course, he is so much smarter than us. He also has more women friends than us. He also has a tinyurl.



quote:
He didn't like my answer. He's very fussy.




Well, Squatch is incapable of answering the question, and OTF has not answered the question. Swifty, where is your answer? I can't find it. Bring it here..anywhere, so I know what your answer is. Thanks.

Here it is again;


Now that Obama has said he may back off taxing the rich at higher rates now because of the economic slowdown, (tinyurl.com/58yfzz) if doing so isn't good for the economy during slowdowns, why is it a good thing for the economy at any time??

DH

 

____________________

 

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1958
(1961 all sites)
Registered: 5/12/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 01:26 PM
quote:
quote:
Will someone please answer Derek and his question about Obama and the taxes on the poor rich people?

Derek, please just make your question a sig so you dont have to type it over and over again. LOL.



quote:
He doesn't like any answer. Of course, he is so much smarter than us. He also has more women friends than us. He also has a tinyurl.



quote:
He didn't like my answer. He's very fussy.




Well, Squatch is incapable of answering the question, and OTF has not answered the question. Swifty, where is your answer? I can't find it. Bring it here..anywhere, so I know what your answer is. Thanks.

Here it is again;


Now that Obama has said he may back off taxing the rich at higher rates now because of the economic slowdown, (tinyurl.com/58yfzz) if doing so isn't good for the economy during slowdowns, why is it a good thing for the economy at any time??

DH



OTF did answer the question and I agree with his answer. My answer is in the same thread as his answer.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 01:26 PM
quote:
Maybe what they're saying is that they don't make enough money to be taxed, so why should it bother them?


Thats actually part of it. Derek is afraid we might discuss any of a dozen other things so he is busy trying like hell to get us to discuss some complex economic issue that he wants to boil down to dick and jane (sorry jim, theres that word again) in hopes of finding new material to attack others with, rather than discussing other things. Most of us are on to him like a dog on a coon.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 01:34 PM
Bump for anyone or everyone to answer Dereks question.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 19485
(19499 all sites)
Registered: 6/9/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 01:37 PM
quote:
OTF did answer the question and I agree with his answer. My answer is in the same thread as his answer.




WHERE????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 02:02 PM
quote:
Saying all this i guess what i'm hearin is Barack Hussein Obama thinks that its alright to tax my buddy even more than whats hes payin now,so that it can be re-distributed to poor folks.And some that aren't worth the powder to blow their sorry ass's away.NO i'm not classifying all poor people as no counts.What i am saying is theres plenty of em out there that are bleeding the system dry. And still crying cause they aint gettin more GIVEN to em.


You entirely dont understand apparently. Its not giving money to the working poor. Its allowing the middle class to keep more of what they earn. Why is it wealth redistribution when the working poor get to keep more of their little checks but its good business to give the wealthiest 1% tax break after tax break?

You have totally mischaracterized the people that would benefit from this, but Im not surprised.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6822
(6821 all sites)
Registered: 8/11/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 02:21 PM
If he's fearful of paying more income tax as a self-employed business owner, he needs a new accountant. And just wait until the tab comes due on the additional resources McSame wants to continue to give to the military/industrial complex....er, I mean war in Iraq....Obama's tax proposal is pittance compared to that tab. I honestly don't understand how some don't connect the dots....
 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8497
(8498 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 02:23 PM
quote:
Now that Obama has said he may back off taxing the rich at higher rates now because of the economic slowdown, (tinyurl.com/58yfzz) if doing so isn't good for the economy during slowdowns, why is it a good thing for the economy at any time??

My opinion: it's all political obfuscation

On the one hand, I'll give Obama credit for knowing that you don't raise taxes during an economic downturn. It doesn't help the economy and government tax revenues don't go up.

But what he's really saying (my opinion again) is that when the economy is stronger, politicians can get away with raising taxes because if your income is going up anyway, government can take away a slightly bigger portion of that and chances are you'll still feel like you're better off than you were.

It reveals the mind of the politician: what angles can be worked to get more money so it can be spent on new stuff. That seems to be their job. Our job as citizens is to watch carefully and set the limits. Unfortunately I think the politicians are doing their job better than the citizens.

But the short answer is simple: it's never good for the economy to tax more. It may be good for government, but not for the economy. If the citizens keep asking for and/or accepting the growth of government programs, they have to accept that trade off.

 

____________________
If the Ukrainians didn't know, there ain't no quid pro quo

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1534
(5208 all sites)
Registered: 9/3/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 02:31 PM
From what i remember of my history classes in high school
anytime we are at war, we pay more taxes, buy war bonds, do whatever we can to finance it

putting 10 billion a month on your
Capitol One card may earn you lots of
bonus miles, but cutting taxes during a war
is even dumber

what's in YOUR wallet ?

if your buddy makes 250K or less under Barry O
he will not get his taxes increased

only the millionaires who are becoming billionaires
will see their taxes revert to what they were before
the Dick and the Bush got together and skrewed our kidz
with their bomb now pay later plan...

 

____________________
Loving Thoughts of those Over the Rainbow

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 10568
(10593 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 02:40 PM
I'd be happy to see status quo on the upper income earners and cut the lower income earners. But the only way to do that is to reign in Government spending, something that neither party is capable of and recent events have signaled the opposite.

If they want new tax revenue they should do it through tariffs (something else unlikely to happen).


quote:
Bump for anyone or everyone to answer Dereks question.


Humorous approach to this thread.

I've always seen it like this...higher income earners, depending on geography, have more disposable income and therefore can spend that extra money on things that keep our economy going, and not just purchasing goods and services, but investing in business as well. Perhaps that is more important situation to have in poor economic times rather than more prosperous ones. I suppose it could be a wash if you take that money and give it dollar for dollar to other people assuming they will do the same thing with it, but chances are government will take a cut to do God knows what with. But I'm certainly not in favor of taking from one group and simply giving it to another, but I don't think that is what is being discussed.

We all remember the good economic times of the late 1990s when tax rates were higher than they are now (across the board). In the abstract I think it has made sense to lower tax rates as the economy cooled. Perhaps a better economy could support higher taxes such as the late 90s, but when you take it away it is hard to get it back without a fight. Regardless of economic condition, I'm leery of seeing anyone's taxes raised, we should all keep more of our money.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9082
(9082 all sites)
Registered: 2/25/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 02:41 PM
In general, I believe both will raise taxes, one is telling you he will, the other is not. However, I view Obama's tax plan as the opposite of supply side economics (see the Laffer curve). Most of the tax credits would go to those who pay little or nothing in federal income taxes (which I see as a socialist program, just my opinion of course). The trick is to make tax credits refundable. So if the tax credit is for $1000 and the taxpayer would otherwise pay $200 in taxes, the government would give a check to the taxpayer for $800. If the taxpayer pays nothing in federal income taxes, then the government pays the whole $1000. It seems to me that Obama is thinking about creating or expanding more government spending known as "tax credits".

Unfortunately, my wife and I (2 income family who are paying our bills and scraping barely enough to save for kids college, retirement etc) are considered under Obama's plan to be one of those "poor rich" folks mentioned above. Obama's plan would not be good for us. But I guess since we are some of those "rich" people, we should share the extra burden because they want to redistribute our income to people who don't pay anything or pay very little. Why should I go to work, I could live off the new welfare program?

To be fair, I haven't read too much on McCain's plan yet, but it doesn't matter to me because it looks like its Bob Barr or Nader for me this year, as its a vote against both of these guys.

In any event, if you are not familiar with the Laffer Curve, do a search on it. Whatever you believe or whoever you are voting for, its an interesting in that it talks about how the increase in taxation can actually lead to decrease in tax revenue or vice versa. Well at least I find it interesting.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 19485
(19499 all sites)
Registered: 6/9/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 02:42 PM
quote:
From what i remember of my history classes in high school
anytime we are at war, we pay more taxes, buy war bonds, do whatever we can to finance it

putting 10 billion a month on your
Capitol One card may earn you lots of
bonus miles, but cutting taxes during a war
is even dumber

what's in YOUR wallet ?

if your buddy makes 250K or less under Barry O
he will not get his taxes increased

only the millionaires who are becoming billionaires
will see their taxes revert to what they were before
the Dick and the Bush got together and skrewed our kidz
with their bomb now pay later plan...




Then why is Obama wanting to hold off on taxing the rich right now??? That goes to my main question - please answer - Now that Obama has said he may back off taxing the rich at higher rates now because of the economic slowdown, (tinyurl.com/58yfzz) if doing so isn't good for the economy during slowdowns, why is it a good thing for the economy at any time??


quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
Saying all this i guess what i'm hearin is Barack Hussein Obama thinks that its alright to tax my buddy even more than whats hes payin now,so that it can be re-distributed to poor folks.And some that aren't worth the powder to blow their sorry ass's away.NO i'm not classifying all poor people as no counts.What i am saying is theres plenty of em out there that are bleeding the system dry. And still crying cause they aint gettin more GIVEN to em.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----



You entirely don't understand apparently. Its not giving money to the working poor. Its allowing the middle class to keep more of what they earn. Why is it wealth redistribution when the working poor get to keep more of their little checks but its good business to give the wealthiest 1% tax break after tax break?

You have totally mischaracterized the people that would benefit from this, but Im not surprised.




Which has nothing to do with this question, as Obama is holding off on specifically taxing the rich because of the economic slowdown. Hence the question - Now that Obama has said he may back off taxing the rich at higher rates now because of the economic slowdown, (tinyurl.com/58yfzz) if doing so isn't good for the economy during slowdowns, why is it a good thing for the economy at any time??

 

____________________

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5768
(6034 all sites)
Registered: 2/5/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 02:43 PM
You will never get a straight answer or an explanation of fact from the Obama fallacy.
It is a con game lead by a con man.

 

____________________
Lovin my Duane Allman music....everyday jamin' for Duane.

 
E-Mail User

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6010
(6048 all sites)
Registered: 1/27/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 02:48 PM
"if your buddy makes 250K or less under Barry O
he will not get his taxes increased

only the millionaires who are becoming billionaires
will see their taxes revert to what they were before
the Dick and the Bush got together and skrewed our kidz
with their bomb now pay later plan..."

_______________________________________________________________________
Exactly! In comparison of Dem vs Republican for the past60 years show the super richare not affected much by either side, but everyone else is better off under the dems. There was just a thread the other day about this, but I guess some don't believe anything other then their own biased beliefs.
Luke is mixing up quite a few things here but the main thing is the difference between gross income and net income. If your buddy is making a quarter of a $mil after paying his employees well, then I have no problem with him going back to pre-Bush tax breaks for the rich. But, I doubt he is netting that much in his lawn business.


 

____________________
SmilingJack

 
E-Mail User

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8497
(8498 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 03:07 PM
quote:
if doing so isn't good for the economy during slowdowns, why is it a good thing for the economy at any time??

It isn't - ever - period

But as a politician seeking higher office, he also has to find a way to finance all the promises he's making. Most all those promises means redirecting money through government, which exacts it cost, and passes it on to whatever. Government is always the unproductive element in that equation, hence the answer: it's never good for the economy.

 

____________________
If the Ukrainians didn't know, there ain't no quid pro quo

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3636
(3636 all sites)
Registered: 5/1/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 03:28 PM
Be it McCain, Obama or yours truly, the next President would be irresponsible to not raise taxes and cut spending. Drags on the economy though they will be, the deficit/debt are more dangerous.

 

____________________
Walk down on the street and leave, my blues at home

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6276
(6294 all sites)
Registered: 7/6/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 03:30 PM
Somebody has to pay for the debt Bush (s) leave behind after they serve. They run up the debt and then leave it for the next admin to deal with, Clinton paid Srs. bill and the next guy will have to deal with the aftermath of W's fiasco.Thanks George (s)

 

____________________
Life is too short! Your either a brother or another

 
E-Mail User

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9082
(9082 all sites)
Registered: 2/25/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 03:35 PM
quote:
but everyone else is better off under the dems


Was Carter a Dem?

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 9/12/2008 at 03:50 PM
LOL..Im not sure what the "Derek Approved Answer" is, but theres been some good attempts made. Now its time for Derek to tell us what its all about. Derek?

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 
 


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software

Privacy | Terms of Service | Report Infringement | Personal Data Management | Contact Us
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com