Printable View
No, I'm not confusing anything. Surely you must see the two sides of the coin — those who revel in knowledge and learning, and those who eschew it in favour of, as we see here, Fox News and images downloaded from the web? I'm making no point beyond that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Just like any other country, then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Fox news is not a bad thing. Much of the content is neutral. (Notice I didn't say "all" or "most".) It provides needed balance with the other main news outlets - ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS - which all lean somewhat to the left. But Fox is just like these other four networks, in that you can't just buy into it as your only source of information. Take all of them, Fox included, with a grain of salt.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Now THAT is funny.Quote:
Just like any other country, then.
I need no lectures on this subject, thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Really? Maybe I should have added some sort of caveat such as 'democratic country'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
I though that the overall tone of the Vice-Presidential debate was far more civilised than the Presidential one. That's probably because the role of Vice-President is far less stressful, though some commentators are trying to pin this on Jim Lehrer.
Basically as far as I can gather, the Vice-President only has three jobs:
1. Take over if the President dies, or is in some other way unable to serve
2. Vote in a deadlock in the Senate
3. Preside over the Electoral College votes
Considering that most presidents (36/44) survive their full term, you have a roughly 80% chance of never having to fulfill No.1 on the job description; and heck, I could do numbers 2 and 3.
4.Attend a funeral of other leaders.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
I think it was ok debeate,much of the same slogans,VP needed to push and young congressman held his own against seasoned veteran, and VP showcased great dental work. Looks like politicians have a good dental insurance coverage.Nothing earth shaking really.
.
Joe Biden was worse than I thought he would be. He is clearly making a name for himself and the administration and its not a good one. He is being dubbed "The Joker"...lol
What Biden did lastnight was completely unprofessional. He laughed, smirked, made cheap comments and constantly interrupted Paul Ryan. He spat out lies, deceivement, and changed topics to get off of the cold hard truth. He was very rude to both Ryan and the moderator. He clearly showed that he does not want to work with Republicans on anything.
The issues being discussed were very important but yet he can keep a smirk on his face and laugh throughout the whole thing. Pretty arrogant and ignorant to do that to America. He kept talking about helping middle class, well, his administration has had 4 years to help and they have done nothing but make it worse. He is the same as Obama, I dont believe a word that comes out of his mouth.
Ryan showed much more class and restraint and America saw that. I am beginning to think Biden is Romney's best political ally. With Biden saying things that he does and acts the way he does, it only helps Romney get more votes.
But I guess as Biden saw it, he knows thier administration is flawed, thier policies failed, and he has nothing to stand on. So, he will just go out and attack, be rude, and try to paint a bad picture of the opponents who will actually do good for America.
Your implying that education and learning is normally associated with certain political views is questionable, to say the least.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Nowhere in my statement did I refer to this having anything to do with political views at all. It wasn't implied and it isn't meant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy Tamasz
Ah but there you risk the tired non-sequitor from "the usual suspects' that " Merikuh ain't a Democracy, itssa Respublik".Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
And if I hear that one more time I will blow my brains out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Oi, mate, you're in a minefield now....there are as some here have pointed out, locally understood implied meanings in words and concepts, and you were unintentionally edging toward the "dividing line'...as understood and perpetuated by the side "that doesn't".
To "them", it does.
Tavarich Rudski, in some subtle ways, it is. What parties concerned with holding static, or worse, nostalgic retrograde policies, one could say that the point for "those people' is not education per se, eg "learning MORE, incorporation ( in the original sense in-corpus---to take the new ideas "into the body") of what you have learned to synthesize new ideas, new possible solutions"Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy Tamasz
but rather in accumulation of rhetorical ammunition to rationalise the "return to the glory days of......"
So in some ways education is linked to some political views.
" Merikuh ain't a Democracy, itssa Respublik".Quote:
Originally Posted by janvanvurpa
" Merikuh ain't a Democracy, itssa Respublik".
" Merikuh ain't a Democracy, itssa Respublik".
" Merikuh ain't a Democracy, itssa Respublik".
" Merikuh ain't a Democracy, itssa Respublik".
Did it work? :)
One can argue that with the crash in the American educational system brought about by liberal policies led directly to the entitlement class.Quote:
Originally Posted by janvanvurpa
Then you can also look at many countries with poorer educational systems in which continually vote in people who are destructive to their very nation. There are many examples of this in Latin America such as Venezuela, Argentina and Bolivia compared to a nation with an excellent educational system like Chile.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 was a half-brained policy signed into law by whom? Oh, a half-brained President named Bush. If a public school does not achieve a certain level of success on a test, then their school funding is taken. So what have the teachers done? Teachers have forgone the entire learning process and are strictly teaching how to beat a test, and in worse cases teachers have been caught cheating to raise their kids' scores on these tests!Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
What's worse now is that the GOP and Christian right is desperately trying to pull public funds into private schools, so kids can get brainwashed about invisible fairies in the sky. This is now under the guise of "voucher programs," but it has had a funny backlash.
Louisiana has a voucher program that now allows public funds to go to private religious schools. The problem is that the Christian's forgot that they're not the only religion in America, so now there are going to be Islamic schools being funded via public tax dollars. Now the Christians are pissed off because they believe that their religion is the only "right" one, which it isn't because all religions are a money-making hoax, and Islamic schools are now going to be targeted to make sure radical Islamists aren't bred in America.
You'd think Louisiana's citizens would have had the foresight to this little conundrum, but it's now an un-Constitutional law (separation of church and state) that's going to be challenged in the near future.
The gun nuts are out in full swing over these elections.
GOP zealot fired a shot into Obama's campaign office in Colorado.
Odd. Wasn't there just a massive shooting in CO recently?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gloomyDAY
Odd you should mention Lousy-anny and unintended consequences.. Remember Willard schmoozing with his peers at that $50,000 a plate dinner where he was ranting about those horrible people that pay less taxes than he does? The 47% he mentioned with such contempt? The entitlement people..
No place in the country matches all those thing better than Lousy-Anna... And they've voted solid Republigoon since gawd knows when......decades...
And you're spot on about the Private school thing... Here in my fair state, we'll be voting for
"Charter" schools in November... I say it's intentionally the thin edge of the wedge for those religious kooks who bitch piteously about "Welfare Cadillac driver filling their SUV with lobsters and steak" who want to have all of us pay so the can teach their little--in my opinion---mentally abused---childred that the earth is 6437 years old and Adam sat around blissed out with the dinosaurs.
Do you remember the whole discovery of the real creator of the universe? The Flying Spaghetti Monster?
That was a response to a similarly myopic Kansas law regarding "equal time for creationsism and Intel-u-gunt Deesign"
What are we supposed to do?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._Appendage.jpg
I personally believe that religion has no place in schools. It's a big issue in the UK too.
Agree with that 100%.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
But every time I watch Treme New Orleans looks so, well, interesting.
RoboRomney
Proof that Romney will say anything to get elected.
Where's the liberal press?Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain VXR
"In the long run it is only to the man of morality that wealth comes... We, like the Psalmists, occasionally see the wicked prosper, but only occasionally. Godliness is in league with riches.”Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
- William Lawrence, 1891 (attributed)
JP Morgan served as the Treasurer to Lawrence's church pension fund; William Lawrence was referred to as "The Banker Bishop.
I suppose that you could argue that the "crash in the American educational system" "directly to the entitlement class" but arguments against the so called "idle rich" had been made as far back as the 1880s when there wasn't even a national educational system.
I dismiss your argument as not being grounded in historical fact. "The entitlement class" has always been with us, both at the very richest and the very poorest of society and is a function of everyone acting out of self-interest.
True. The "idle rich" have been around almost forever. But I think you will find that those people are the second, third or more generations. The first generation weren't idle as they were the ones who worked to acquire the riches. In many cases that's true of later descendants too. Sooner or later though someone comes along and says " I've got it made, I don't have to work. The same happens at the bottom too. Some are always lazy and/or unmotivated. Fortunately those people are in the minority. Otherwise we'd still be in the stone age.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
Formerly the only people that felt "entitled" were the extreme few, then-times 1% whose Daddies owned everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
One could argue that once the progressive side in America managed to pass enough laws to benefit everybody and the famous "American middle class" grew to be the norm everywhere, and 80% owned something, and managed some education, and transformed the country, they felt a right of ownership in what they had built, or "entitlement" in other words..
But we know this is yet another code-word that side loves to use to draw in the gullible and distract them: by pointing out a few poor, and powerless and you know those _____________ (fill in the blank with the group you hate-du-jour), they hope to distract people from their actions which the record shows, which countless graphs show, are intended to enrich and further gorge the class originally called "the entitlement class"
Guys like Willard Romney whose daddy ran a business making things.
G.W. Bush, whose Daddy and Granddaddies ran business pumping a real substance out of the ground
Indeed the eminently readable American JK Galbraith who in the 50s wrote such classics as "The Affluent Society" and "the New Industrial State", by the 90s wrote a book about this generation of pampered, useless, airheaded, greedy twerps called "The Culture of Contentment"
The Culture of Contentment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Culture of Contentment is an essay by economist John K. Galbraith, analyzing the situation of the Western industrial world, which was first published in 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Prof Galbraith traces the growth of a stultifying contentment in the western industrial world represented by the G7 group of countries. He pays particular attention to the self serving economic comfort achieved by the fortunate and politically dominant community and contrasts this to the condition of the underclass which he sees as being for the first time in these countries stalled in poverty.
Any man that has such an vast array of pthy quotes is OK in my book:
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
"There's no question that this is a time when corporations have taken over the basic process of governing." in a PBS television interview on The Newshour shortly before his death.
Yep, same boring drum of old liberal tune blaming rich guy for my misery because my party faitful told me so. Yep i want that money that his father or family made by working hard and left him. Some people live in dissolution that if you drive a nice car ,have nice home and own the business life is easy and enjoyable, therefore more tax is the answer to make everyone pay fair share .Every time owner of small business is forced to pay more, he needs to cut somewhere else, and is always employee who just want a job with benefits, that pays the piper .Why not give incentive to those who can and know how to expend their buisness here ,and employ 23 mil therefore they can aford nice home ,good school and open new buisness.
An interesting question for everyone. Define what "fair share" means in the context of a discussion on taxes.Quote:
Originally Posted by FIAT1
I'll start with an example:
Romney at an income of, oh say, ten million a year and rate of 14% 10,000,000 x 14% = $1,400,000.
Joe Blow at income of, lets say, 50,000 a year and tax rate of 20%. 50,000 x 20% = $10,000.
In this case, Romney would pay 28 times in taxes what Joe MAKES in a year.
Who exactly is paying their fair share?
Joe.
Not sure .Example:Other type of Joe is working two jobs and overtime for years. He is paying 30% taxes and after 20 years of sacrifise he invests his savings or opens the buisness, and is taxed again 14% on his hard earn money and work. Everyone likes to see 14%,but is not fair assessment . I don't know who is paying more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
Joe, specially if the $50,000 also includes all his offshore "capital gains income" :bandit: :p
OK. In this case how much does Romney have to pay to get to his "fair share"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
20%
A very reasonable answer. I'll buy that assuming we over here close all tax breaks and loopholes so it's a level playing field for all. Hmm, I think we just arrived at the "Flat Tax".Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
You can tax everyone 50% or more and it would solve nothing until you stop the waste, and create environment where business can stay in the country, flourish and have people working. Playing robin hood is good rhetoric to get a vote ,but after you rob peter to pay paul than what? Direction of the country have to be to encourage investment and developent to stay here and move economy.People wan't good jobs and Im afraid gifted sandwich is not good enough anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
20% because that's the example you gave. I think it's fair to say that if you are wealthy then the percentage of your income collected as tax should be at least the same proportion as anyone earning less than you. This is how a progressive system works.
Fiat1--you offend with your massive obtuseness---I did not blame anybody---that is putting words to my keys or whatever---it is a lie that I blamed anybody--it is a lie that I used "the same old liberal tune".Quote:
Originally Posted by FIAT1
Those lies are offensive and harassing.
The rest is the usual incomprehensible mish-mash.
Stop with the offensive false attributions.
In case you're curious---which I doubt---- I described something. Completely neutrally and cited further references.
There are several things to take note of in your little example:Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
1. Joe Blow at income 50,000 a year is in all likelyhood deriving his entire income from wages. This means to say that he has personally "worked" for his money. Whereas Romney at an income of ten million a year is more likely to have derived the vast bulk of his income from dividends, interest, etc. The generation of that income (since all income is essentially derived from real work and the production of goods and services), has been been a deduction for the firms that paid the wages but taxed in the hands of those that received it.
Fairness would suggest that the taxation rate on the income from non-personal sources should either equal or above that of the taxation rate on the income in the hands who actually performed real work in generating that income; in this case which Romney did not.
2. If things like the Department of Defence are seen as a collective insurance system, then the stability of the economy should also be seen as a collective insurance system. People who benefit the most from the economy's stability, should therefore be liable for the greatest proportion of premium because they derive the greatest benefit from the stability of the economy.
If we take an example of equivalency, should a person driving a $10,000,000, gold plated, Bugatti Veyron pay a higher insurance premium than a person driving an Opel Insignia?
3. People on lower incomes have a higher marginal propensity to consume. Their incomes are already more likely to be directed to private firms through retail spending. By giving people on lower incomes a concession, the economy is effectively permanently stimulated.
As incomes increase, the marginal utility of money decreases along with the marginal propensity to consume. Because the marginal utility of money decreases the actual burden of taxation is less as incomes increase.
4. Due to economies of scale, the larger an investment is the higher the likely return on that investment. Since governmental policy is largely shaped by either trying to attract investment or through forces to do with political donations, it follows that the wealthiest people in society also have the greatest degree in shaping governmental policy.
I ask you, in this example, which of these two people is more likely to actually shape government policy or lobby government officials to change governmental policy?
Good question. Please tell me more about your theoretical economy so that I can play with some actual numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
What's an Opel Insignia?
I know the Ascona and Manta A series, and have built a good hot motor for the only Ascona B in USA, and supplied gear sets from Tran-X to several guys, and of course suspension, and I'm familiar with the Ascona and Manta 400s---great cars!
I even know fairly well just how nice the Kadett GSI and Astre GTE with the marvelously versatile XE engine, but never even heard of an Opel Insignia?
What class do they run in?
Re above excellent post:
I am just a poor old man, I've no time for law-breakers. My legs are gray, my ears are gnarled, my eyes are old and bent ... ....
And I seem to remember the so called Conservatives alleging that the reason we give lower tax percentage to the ultra-rich is
because they "are the job creators"....but being old and gnarled and gray I seem to recall a time when the ON PAPER
tax rates for uber-rich and corporations was far far higher....it's thrown about that it was "90%".
Of course that was after all the myriad of deductions....but it seems that during that time investments in plant, and machinery, and Reasearch
was at equally high levels, all those things being expenses and just like the chrome-moly steel and 6061 aluminum
and seals and springs and fuel I buy to make my Soooper Bitchin Rally Suspension, they are a "cost of doing business', and reduce my tax liability to near zero,
just as most corporations paid nothing---or as Exxon and many others now, generated refunds...
The result seemed to have been huge reduction in the unit cost through massively improved production efficiency.
So it seems that there is a precedent for higher tax on unearned income,ie dividends, stocks, wheeler-dealer type schemes that are not in any way productive.
Or, was the phenomenal growth in USA post WWII just an abbe ration?
Sorry to disappoint and I know you can't resist ,but reply was not meant for you. Have a great day!Quote:
Originally Posted by janvanvurpa
Once again, a reply that has nothing to do with what is written, what is quoted..Quote:
Originally Posted by FIAT1
Why do you come and disrupt conversations if you aren't goping to do anything other than post random, confused postings?