Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Predictions
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
75Owl Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,956
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 7
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Predictions
What a problem he will have when can not blame Bush anymore.
Ultimately, Obama will end up being blamed for the mistakes he will make himself in his administration.

erice Wrote:
Owl-madeus Wrote:While that is certainly the higher road to take, at this point, I just can't take it. I fully intend to come up with a laundry list of diminutives and derogatory names for our President-Elect. The treatment that Bush has received during his tenure in office by his detractors has been completely over the top, and IMHO, unjustified. Historically, we've had a number of far worse Presidents who didn't have to endure nearly as much $#*&.

Replace "Bush" with "Clinton" and that's exactly how I felt 8 years ago. In retrospect, it didn't make me feel any better.
11-05-2008 12:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
texd Offline
Weirdly (but seductively) meaty
*

Posts: 14,447
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 114
I Root For: acorns & such
Location: Dall^H^H^H^H Austin

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlCrappiesDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #42
RE: Predictions
Owl-madeus Wrote:While that is certainly the higher road to take, at this point, I just can't take it. I fully intend to come up with a laundry list of diminutives and derogatory names for our President-Elect. The treatment that Bush has received during his tenure in office by his detractors has been completely over the top, and IMHO, unjustified. Historically, we've had a number of far worse Presidents who didn't have to endure nearly as much $#*&.

The first two highlights are debatable. The last, however, ignores this country's 220-year history of ****-giving.
11-05-2008 02:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gsloth Offline
perpetually tired
*

Posts: 6,378
Joined: Aug 2007
Reputation: 51
I Root For: Rice&underdogs
Location: Central VA

Donators
Post: #43
RE: Predictions
S.A. Owl Wrote:P.S. OptimisticOwl - good call on the Russia test. Medvedev didn't even wait a day.

Let's forget the intelligence briefings for Obama starting tomorrow. He needs to ditch his basketball workouts and start training for Russian aggression by studying judo with Vladimir Putin. You must understand your enemies and friends.

(This is not a joke. At least, the DVD isn't.)
11-05-2008 03:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 33,772
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 875
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #44
RE: Predictions
Fort Bend Owl Wrote:You know, McCain and Cornyn are only running at about 54 percent in Texas right now. Instead of obsessing about Obama and the democrats, maybe the republicans should take a hard look at their own party for a change and figure out what they need to fix.

Because I've got news for you, it's only going to get tougher in the future as minority populations continue to grow.

I voted for Obama in the primaries because I felt he had a better chance than Clinton to win tonight (still do and I think I was right - I'm not so sure Hillary would have won but maybe she would have). I voted for Obama in this election because I want America to have hope again and I want the world to respect America again. And despite what you think, it's clear that the majority of Americans feel the way I do.

Maybe you should respect our victory and for the good of the country, respect our new president.

I respect our President. President Barack Obama.

I DON'T respect "our" victory... because I don't believe it is "our" victory... unless you are saying that Bush was ALSO "our" victory. America spoke, and we elected a President. That is a victory for our system. If you are speaking of the Democrats, then you're missing (imo) the most important thing about BEING an American. It's the whole us/them mentality that SOME (not saying you) people in this country have that is the problem.

One approach won out over the other... and if that is what you mean by "our", then fine... but that doesn't mean to me what I think it means to you.

The Republican Party... at its core... is about smaller government. It is about getting out of people's way so that they can get things done... including helping each other. The Democratic Party... at its core... is about the government helping those who need help... BOTH are worthy ideals.

The problem is... at least in my opinion... that we have an increasing number of people who can't tell the difference between a want and a need... and don't want to get things done themselves. It is easier to vote themselves a pay raise (in some fashion or another) than to earn it. In the simplest, and most crass (for effect) example... Some people on government assistance (I'm thinking of Obama's aunt who lives in public housing, yet gave iirc 300+ to his campaign) just invested $300 of someone else's money and 4 hours at the polls... expecting to get back as much as $2,000 in tax credits... not to mention healthcare etc... all paid for by just a small percentage of the population. Not the rich, mind you... or at least not the top 2%... but instead, the 3rd-5th percentile. That's a tremendous return on her investment... and an amazing hourly rate.

Does it not say anything to us that there are more people unemployed than are expected to pay for all of the unemployment benefits? Not to mention all the other social services. That's a winning combination. You tax those earning 250, 200, 150... whatever the number is... Keep the deductions that allow people like Ms. Kerry, Perot, Ms. McCain, Buffet and the like from paying even as much in taxes as the AMT that was specifically designed to "catch" them... and you offer assistance not only to those who NEED it, but also to those who just WANT it.

I'm sorry, but in government you get more of what you encourage, and less of what you tax. We are taxing success and encouraging people to vote for the biggest handouts.

It's like putting out a sign at a college that says free beer. Some people (like you) support the policies and will vote for the party because they believe in the principles... SOME people will think its a smart strategy and be drawn to the novelty/ingenuity... and SOME people (I'm betting a decent number) will just go for the beer... MORE than enough to sway an election.

And we wonder why even Republicans are Pork fans. You can't win an election without offering something for nothing.
11-05-2008 06:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 66,138
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1766
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #45
RE: Predictions
I respect the office of the presidency.

I do not respect the current occupant. He has violated just about every precept of the republican party, as Hambone has enumerated them, and in the process has nearly destroyed (if not actually destroyed) that party. He told me that he was going to cut the size of the federal government and get us out of the nation-building business, and has proceeded to do anything but either one.

Nor at this point do I respect Obama. I will give Obama the same opportunity to earn my respect that I gave Bush, and I will be open-minded in my evaluation. Bush blew it. Obama may or may not. Time will tell, but I'm not optimistic at this point. He's not off to a great start with me. The difference between Bush and Obama is that I'm disappointed with Bush because he didn't do what he said he was going to do, whereas I'll be disappointed in Obama UNLESS he doesn't do what he said he was going to do.

Our economy is well on the road to cratering. It has been in trouble since at least the 70s. Reagan managed to dodge a bullet by lowering taxes dramatically. Ross Perot warned us of many of the problems in 1992, but we have done nothing to address them, and they have gotten worse. Clinton got by on one part skill, one part having the republicans control congress, and one part luck. Bush has been simply asleep at the wheel. There's just no other way to describe it.

Neither Obama nor McCain has an economic plan worth the paper (or the computer screen) that it may be written on. The current mortgage crash is the tip of the iceberg. Somebody needs to quit arguing about how to arrange the deck chairs and get down to the engine room and start patching holes.
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2008 08:31 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
11-05-2008 08:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gsloth Offline
perpetually tired
*

Posts: 6,378
Joined: Aug 2007
Reputation: 51
I Root For: Rice&underdogs
Location: Central VA

Donators
Post: #46
RE: Predictions
I think Jim Hoagland may have summed up George W. Bush's governing style better than I've seen any do it in the lede to his 9/27 column: "George W. Bush governs by crisis interspersed with long periods of not governing at all. Only when disaster threatens or arrives does this president summon himself, Congress and the nation to act -- in haste and extremis rather than in reasoned unison." And this from the first MBA president. (I'm guessing he didn't retain much from that MBA training.) The one exception to that that sticks out in my mind was his attempt at Social Security reform that failed because he couldn't even get his own party on board with what was being proposed.

And unfortunately, this scattershot and reactive style has branded the Republican party pretty badly. (Not to say that it is undeserved. But I'm not sure I see anything better offered by the Democrats during the George Bush years, either.) Offering solutions at the last minute to real or perceived problems just doesn't cut it. We'll see what comes of the next decade - and I say that because the Republicans are going to find themselves on the outs when it comes to redistricting after the 2010 census. Across many states, the Democrats are on a path to take control of the state legislatures again just in time for the redistricting headaches/battles.
11-05-2008 08:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WoodlandsOwl Offline
Up in the Woods
*

Posts: 11,807
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 113
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #47
RE: Predictions
I expect the Israelis to attack Iranian nuclear facilities within the next year.

The Israelis won't let the Iranians come anywhere close to getting a nuclear capability.

In their counter-strike, the Iranians WILL hit US targets in Iraq or in the Persian Gulf area.

Then its "GAME ON'... and I hope Obama has the balls to do what it takes to win.
11-05-2008 08:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl75 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,003
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Owls
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #48
RE: Predictions
A nice piece from Michael Novak of NRO on what it is like to have one of your own elected President:

"So what does the election of Sen. Barack Obama as the new president of the United States mean?

I will never forget the moment in January 1961, when John F. Kennedy was sworn in as president. I was watching his inaugural address in the cafeteria of the Harvard Law School, when I was startled by feeling warm tears streak down my cheeks. I was caught by surprise; I had not expected that. Yet it was so astonishing to witness a Roman Catholic becoming the public face of our nation, as presidents always do. It had seemed impossible to imagine, in this very Protestant country. In the Harvard graduate schools, a Catholic felt like a man with green hair—an oddity. But not any more, not after John F. Kennedy became president.

Thus, it is easy for me to imagine the immense jubilation in the hearts of America’s African-American population. Many eyes will be shining with joy tomorrow. Many will feel arise in their breasts a great new sense of pride, accomplishment, and public dignity. They will feel validated as never before.

That is one great blessing of this election"
11-05-2008 09:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 45,205
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 606
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #49
RE: Predictions
erice Wrote:
Owl-madeus Wrote:While that is certainly the higher road to take, at this point, I just can't take it. I fully intend to come up with a laundry list of diminutives and derogatory names for our President-Elect. The treatment that Bush has received during his tenure in office by his detractors has been completely over the top, and IMHO, unjustified. Historically, we've had a number of far worse Presidents who didn't have to endure nearly as much $#*&.

Replace "Bush" with "Clinton" and that's exactly how I felt 8 years ago. In retrospect, it didn't make me feel any better.

The only derogatory name I have ever used for Clinton is "perjurer". "Slick Willie" came from Arkansas with him, a label hung on him by those who knew him best, bpth Dempcrat and Republican, it was not concocted for our President-elect, it pre-existed. During the primary campaign, he came close to being called a racist, but that was by Democrats. I'm not sure of what other diminutives and derogatory names you are thinking off.
11-06-2008 09:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
erice Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 773
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Rice
Location: Chicago

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #50
RE: Predictions
OptimisticOwl Wrote:
erice Wrote:
Owl-madeus Wrote:While that is certainly the higher road to take, at this point, I just can't take it. I fully intend to come up with a laundry list of diminutives and derogatory names for our President-Elect. The treatment that Bush has received during his tenure in office by his detractors has been completely over the top, and IMHO, unjustified. Historically, we've had a number of far worse Presidents who didn't have to endure nearly as much $#*&.

Replace "Bush" with "Clinton" and that's exactly how I felt 8 years ago. In retrospect, it didn't make me feel any better.

The only derogatory name I have ever used for Clinton is "perjurer". "Slick Willie" came from Arkansas with him, a label hung on him by those who knew him best, bpth Dempcrat and Republican, it was not concocted for our President-elect, it pre-existed. During the primary campaign, he came close to being called a racist, but that was by Democrats. I'm not sure of what other diminutives and derogatory names you are thinking off.

Owl-madeus didn't say he's making a laundry list of names because people called Bush names. He said he's doing it because of "the treatment that Bush has received during his tenure in office by his detractors." The "Impeach President Clinton... and her husband too" bumper stickers pretty much came out on day 1 of Clinton's presidency, and it got worse from there.
11-06-2008 10:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl75 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,003
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Owls
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #51
RE: Predictions
I recall people regularly refered to Clinton as "Bubba." The Clinton hating industry was pretty broad (not among anyone on this board that I know of) recall the books about how the Clintons murdered Vince Foster as an example that was a bit over the top. In light of that it was a little jarring to read the article in the WSJ recently by Arthur Laffer (of the famous Laffer Curve) praising Clinton's econonic program.

Here is a prediction: Republicans thought Maureen Dowd was very funny when she was skewering the Clintons. Then Bush was elected and she got a lot less funny. But I predict an uptick in her readership by Republicans again, since her targets will once more be Democrats.
11-06-2008 10:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
75Owl Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,956
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 7
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #52
RE: Predictions
In the old days, Obama would have been expected to help out his aunt instead of her having to depend on the government dole. He should be able to give her something on his senatorial pay. Also, Obama is not helping out his Kenyan relatives who live in poverty. My opinion about the difference between conservatives and liberals is that conservative would take care of matters themselves and liberals will try to push it off on government. Also, liberals think someone else should have to pay the taxes. When I have prepared tax returns, it is usually the liberals who want the most aggressive tax positions, but liberals think they ought to be congratuated for making others pay more taxes.

Hambone10 Wrote:
Fort Bend Owl Wrote:You know, McCain and Cornyn are only running at about 54 percent in Texas right now. Instead of obsessing about Obama and the democrats, maybe the republicans should take a hard look at their own party for a change and figure out what they need to fix.

Because I've got news for you, it's only going to get tougher in the future as minority populations continue to grow.

I voted for Obama in the primaries because I felt he had a better chance than Clinton to win tonight (still do and I think I was right - I'm not so sure Hillary would have won but maybe she would have). I voted for Obama in this election because I want America to have hope again and I want the world to respect America again. And despite what you think, it's clear that the majority of Americans feel the way I do.

Maybe you should respect our victory and for the good of the country, respect our new president.

I respect our President. President Barack Obama.

I DON'T respect "our" victory... because I don't believe it is "our" victory... unless you are saying that Bush was ALSO "our" victory. America spoke, and we elected a President. That is a victory for our system. If you are speaking of the Democrats, then you're missing (imo) the most important thing about BEING an American. It's the whole us/them mentality that SOME (not saying you) people in this country have that is the problem.

One approach won out over the other... and if that is what you mean by "our", then fine... but that doesn't mean to me what I think it means to you.

The Republican Party... at its core... is about smaller government. It is about getting out of people's way so that they can get things done... including helping each other. The Democratic Party... at its core... is about the government helping those who need help... BOTH are worthy ideals.

The problem is... at least in my opinion... that we have an increasing number of people who can't tell the difference between a want and a need... and don't want to get things done themselves. It is easier to vote themselves a pay raise (in some fashion or another) than to earn it. In the simplest, and most crass (for effect) example... Some people on government assistance (I'm thinking of Obama's aunt who lives in public housing, yet gave iirc 300+ to his campaign) just invested $300 of someone else's money and 4 hours at the polls... expecting to get back as much as $2,000 in tax credits... not to mention healthcare etc... all paid for by just a small percentage of the population. Not the rich, mind you... or at least not the top 2%... but instead, the 3rd-5th percentile. That's a tremendous return on her investment... and an amazing hourly rate.

Does it not say anything to us that there are more people unemployed than are expected to pay for all of the unemployment benefits? Not to mention all the other social services. That's a winning combination. You tax those earning 250, 200, 150... whatever the number is... Keep the deductions that allow people like Ms. Kerry, Perot, Ms. McCain, Buffet and the like from paying even as much in taxes as the AMT that was specifically designed to "catch" them... and you offer assistance not only to those who NEED it, but also to those who just WANT it.

I'm sorry, but in government you get more of what you encourage, and less of what you tax. We are taxing success and encouraging people to vote for the biggest handouts.

It's like putting out a sign at a college that says free beer. Some people (like you) support the policies and will vote for the party because they believe in the principles... SOME people will think its a smart strategy and be drawn to the novelty/ingenuity... and SOME people (I'm betting a decent number) will just go for the beer... MORE than enough to sway an election.

And we wonder why even Republicans are Pork fans. You can't win an election without offering something for nothing.
11-06-2008 06:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 45,205
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 606
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #53
RE: Predictions
erice Wrote:
OptimisticOwl Wrote:
erice Wrote:
Owl-madeus Wrote:While that is certainly the higher road to take, at this point, I just can't take it. I fully intend to come up with a laundry list of diminutives and derogatory names for our President-Elect. The treatment that Bush has received during his tenure in office by his detractors has been completely over the top, and IMHO, unjustified. Historically, we've had a number of far worse Presidents who didn't have to endure nearly as much $#*&.

Replace "Bush" with "Clinton" and that's exactly how I felt 8 years ago. In retrospect, it didn't make me feel any better.

The only derogatory name I have ever used for Clinton is "perjurer". "Slick Willie" came from Arkansas with him, a label hung on him by those who knew him best, bpth Dempcrat and Republican, it was not concocted for our President-elect, it pre-existed. During the primary campaign, he came close to being called a racist, but that was by Democrats. I'm not sure of what other diminutives and derogatory names you are thinking off.

Owl-madeus didn't say he's making a laundry list of names because people called Bush names. He said he's doing it because of "the treatment that Bush has received during his tenure in office by his detractors." The "Impeach President Clinton... and her husband too" bumper stickers pretty much came out on day 1 of Clinton's presidency, and it got worse from there.

Oh, come now, there was no call to impeach President Clinton on day 1 or even soon thereafter. Impeachment for what? Before impeachment could even be considered, he had to commit the perjury. When was the testimony in the Paula Jones lawsuit taken? I am sure we can research and find the precise day. That is when impeachment became possible. Before that he was just lying, to his wife and daughter, his supporters, the American people, and the press, none of which are illegal or impeachable. It is even understandable, but when you raise your hand and take the oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, it is time of fess up. He crossed that line.

As for the "..and her husband" stuff, I don't know when that came out, but I thought Hilary had an undue amount of influence in the first couple of years. After '94, it seemed like Bill took control, and I was glad to see it. But tell me, if she wasn't seriously involved in policy decisions and other important things, how did her 8 years of First Lady qualify as experience that we could count on? Pick one or the other, not both.
11-06-2008 11:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl75 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,003
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Owls
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #54
RE: Predictions
[quote=75Owl]
" My opinion about the difference between conservatives and liberals is that conservative would take care of matters themselves and liberals will try to push it off on government. Also, liberals think someone else should have to pay the taxes. When I have prepared tax returns, it is usually the liberals who want the most aggressive tax positions, but liberals think they ought to be congratuated for making others pay more taxes. "

I can't comment on your personal experience, but it is different than mine. I have been in the highest bracket for many years, thanks to this great country we live in, and I still vote for who I think will be best for the country, even if it doesn't benefit me personally, or even causes me to pay higher taxes. I will just also note that people making over $200,000 voted in favor of Obama, by some 6% IIRC, according to exit polls, so they are apparently willing to pay higher taxes also. Maybe we would rather pay some now instead of pushing it all to our children and grandchildren. Is it still "redistribution" if you are just printing the money? Only forward to the next generation, as I see it.
(This post was last modified: 11-07-2008 01:47 AM by Owl75.)
11-07-2008 01:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Old Sammy Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,609
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 25
I Root For: truffles
Location: Houston

New Orleans BowlDonators
Post: #55
RE: Predictions
OptimisticOwl Wrote:Oh, come now, there was no call to impeach President Clinton on day 1 or even soon thereafter. Impeachment for what? Before impeachment could even be considered, he had to commit the perjury.

Never underestimate the ability of idiots on either side of the spectrum to do something ridiculous:

http://www.obamaimpeachment.org/

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Impeach_Ob..._1105.html
11-07-2008 05:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
erice Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 773
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Rice
Location: Chicago

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #56
RE: Predictions
OptimisticOwl Wrote:Oh, come now, there was no call to impeach President Clinton on day 1 or even soon thereafter. Impeachment for what?
I was talking about bumper stickers, not serious calls for impeachment. Yes, "Day 1" was a little exaggeration (even the people who put them on their cars weren't literally calling for impeachment... yet.) but it was during the first year -- basically about as soon as Hillary got involved in the health care planning, those bumper stickers started showing up. And that's just one example -- Bill Clinton was a target of condescension from a segment of the far right before took the oath. The point is, Bush is not the first president to get more disrespectful comments than was deserved from the other side (nor was Clinton), hence my comment about feeling the same way Owl-madeus feels back when Bush came into office.

75Owl Wrote:I can't comment on your personal experience, but it is different than mine. I have been in the highest bracket for many years, thanks to this great country we live in, and I still vote for who I think will be best for the country, even if it doesn't benefit me personally, or even causes me to pay higher taxes.
+1
11-07-2008 11:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
75Owl Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,956
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 7
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #57
RE: Predictions
This is usually the time when a President-elect is allowed the benefit of the doubt.
He (no she yet) has to make mistakes before it time to criticize them.
11-07-2008 12:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gravy Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,392
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 101
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #58
RE: Predictions
Owl75 Wrote:I can't comment on your personal experience, but it is different than mine. I have been in the highest bracket for many years, thanks to this great country we live in, and I still vote for who I think will be best for the country, even if it doesn't benefit me personally, or even causes me to pay higher taxes.
My personal experience is different but produces a similar result.

For several years I worked a job that put me somewhere right around the poverty limit. I didn't live in luxury but I wasn't uncomfortable by any stretch. I didn't starve. I didn't miss a payment on my share of the mortgage. I continued to pay off my school loans. I was able to treat myself occasionally. Through it all I had some money left over to save. And contrary to what some claim, I did pay taxes (admittedly at a low rate).

Result for me: I don't feel sorry for those who are working and supposedly struggling to make ends meet, like the Democrats want me to. Anybody in that category is trying to live beyond their means, which is their own fault. I also don't feel sorry for those who are making 10 to 100 times what I was making, like the Republicans want me to. Anybody in that category is well past the point of having it easy.

I am now back in the engineering business. I'm in a higher tax bracket, but that hasn't changed my outlook one bit.

What I really don't like is that our government is putting us into massive debt with unknown but potentially disastrous consequences for the future. To stop that we are probably going to have to cut spending AND increase taxes. If that means you have to drive a Honda instead of a Lexus, or you have to make do with one less car entirely, well, I don't feel sorry for you.
11-07-2008 03:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 33,772
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 875
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #59
RE: Predictions
Owl75 Wrote:I will just also note that people making over $200,000 voted in favor of Obama, by some 6% IIRC, according to exit polls, so they are apparently willing to pay higher taxes also. Maybe we would rather pay some now instead of pushing it all to our children and grandchildren. Is it still "redistribution" if you are just printing the money? Only forward to the next generation, as I see it.

I'd like to see a real study done on that. You're assuming they are telling the truth about what they earn and whom they voted for... IF they answered at all.

I certainly wouldn't if asked....
11-07-2008 03:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 33,772
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 875
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #60
RE: Predictions
Gravy Owl Wrote:
Owl75 Wrote:I can't comment on your personal experience, but it is different than mine. I have been in the highest bracket for many years, thanks to this great country we live in, and I still vote for who I think will be best for the country, even if it doesn't benefit me personally, or even causes me to pay higher taxes.
My personal experience is different but produces a similar result.

For several years I worked a job that put me somewhere right around the poverty limit. I didn't live in luxury but I wasn't uncomfortable by any stretch. I didn't starve. I didn't miss a payment on my share of the mortgage. I continued to pay off my school loans. I was able to treat myself occasionally. Through it all I had some money left over to save. And contrary to what some claim, I did pay taxes (admittedly at a low rate).

Result for me: I don't feel sorry for those who are working and supposedly struggling to make ends meet, like the Democrats want me to. Anybody in that category is trying to live beyond their means, which is their own fault. I also don't feel sorry for those who are making 10 to 100 times what I was making, like the Republicans want me to. Anybody in that category is well past the point of having it easy.

I am now back in the engineering business. I'm in a higher tax bracket, but that hasn't changed my outlook one bit.

What I really don't like is that our government is putting us into massive debt with unknown but potentially disastrous consequences for the future. To stop that we are probably going to have to cut spending AND increase taxes. If that means you have to drive a Honda instead of a Lexus, or you have to make do with one less car entirely, well, I don't feel sorry for you.

I'd prefer that, too... which is why I wanted McCain. He's far from ideal for me, but was IMO closer... and Palin was effective at cutting waste in Alaska as well. Sure, not 100% of it... but a move in the right direction.

This is caused by the "what is in it for ME" part of our electorate I was referring to. Only saying this because its how it was sold... 90+% of the country will be better off under Obama than now... either a tax break or a cut in their taxes... So it is LITERALLY an appeal to 90% of the population. That's a winning story-line... because if one guy runs on... I'm going to cut what I feel are unnecessary services but continue to charge you the same because we need to pay off the debt... and THAT will be good for you in 5-10 years... you'll beat him.

I've never seen a candidate run on the platform of "your children will thank you"

I simply wish our tax system worked like it is supposed to... where what you earn to live off of (whether it be income or the sale of assets or corporate perks) was taxed... i.e. a VAT or something else. Keep deductions, and phase them out at higher brackets, OR ACTUALLY have an AMT... where people who live extremely well CAN'T pay a smaller percentage in taxes than people who don't live particularly well. I'm saying it this way because a VAT or something is an obvious, but dramatic change. You could still be more fair under our current system... and likely at a lower rate (or take in much more at the same rate).

I mean if the top 1% actually paid 30+% of their income in taxes... then perhaps the next 5% could be dropped down to 25 and you'd STILL take in more money.

I've got no problem paying more than someone who is barely making ends meet... but Perot/McCain/Kerry/Gates etc don't HAVE any ends... and they paid a smaller percentage than I.
11-07-2008 03:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.