African Americans voting for Obama w/out knowladge

[little_red_cherokee]

http://www.bpmdeejays.com/upload/hs_sal_in_Harlem_100108.mp3

not trying to offend anybody. not trying to be raciest, just a fact of life.

[joey-nac]

Sad isn't it

[Marlon_JBT]

OK it's really time for me to keep my mouth shut this time.

[yamamama]

OK it's really time for me to keep my mouth shut this time.
Marlon
CONSIDER THE SOURCE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Marlon_JBT]

Marlon
CONSIDER THE SOURCE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am Joanie....

I'm gonna keep this to myself though. I have a 2 page paper ready to be written though. :D

[Tomster]

I dare say that there is just as great a percentage of White people who will vote for McCain without knowing anything about his positions on issues, just because he is White.

It is very sad, but I think very true, that many people will vote strictly based on race.

If I end up not voting for Obama, it will not be because of the color of his skin.

Tomster

[amp]

I am basing my vote based purely on taxes/business.

I don't care what color they are.

With that said, Obama is NOT getting my vote.

[joey-nac]

I dare say that there is just as great a percentage of White people who will vote for McCain without knowing anything about his positions on issues, just because he is White.

It is very sad, but I think very true, that many people will vote strictly based on race.


I am going to have to respectfully disagree. Just about every black person I work with or am friends with is voting this year and everyone that I talked to said they probably would have not voted this year had there not been the chance to put a black man in office.

[skisad]

I dare say that there is just as great a percentage of White people who will vote for McCain without knowing anything about his positions on issues, just because he is White.

This is probably true, but have they voted before? This sounds bad but many African American are now just voting for the first time and that is a fact. I’m not sure about my question.

[Don]

I think people vote for a lot of reasons, and most of the reasons have little, if anything to do with knowledge, or logic. Example, my Father-n-law never saw a Democrat that he didn't like. Why did he like Democrats? Because his Union told him that Democrats are for the "working man" and that is all my Father-n-law needed to hear. People vote based upon who the media says will win, or based upon party affiliation (like my Father-n-law). I am sure there were a lot of people who would have voted for Hillary solely based upon her being a female. Like wise, I am sure that there are people that will vote one way or the other based upon skin color, or how the Candidate voice sounds, etc.,. All this is very sad, but unfortunately, it is a fact of life.

Most people don't realize how a minor change can greatly effect the intelligence and logic input into a situation. Example, jury duty. In my area, in the past years, you had to be a "property owner" to sit on a jury. When it became difficult to get people to serve on a jury, they changed the requirement from "property owner" to "resident of the Community". Change doesn't sound like much. However, instead of having people who have worked and earned something sitting on a "Jury of your peers", you now have homeless people, welfare Momma's, and the like sitting as your peers. If this doesn't scare you, there is a problem.

[keg2881]

I am going to have to respectfully disagree. Just about every black person I work with or am friends with is voting this year and everyone that I talked to said they probably would have not voted this year had there not been the chance to put a black man in office.


:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:


This is just plain Ignorance!!!!!!

[little_red_cherokee]

OK it's really time for me to keep my mouth shut this time.


speak your mind man i wont be offended i'd like to hear your opinion.

i know that this is happening on both sides.

people voting for Obama because hes black
people voting for McCain because hes white

that being said, i know many whites voting for Obama, I have yet to see a black persone say they are supporting McCain. I hear more from black people saying that white people are raciest because they wont vote for Obama...i dont think they understand that that statement is raciest.

IMHO Gov Palin should be running. Shes got more experience than the other 3 combined. most of what time Obama has spent as a senator hes spent on the campaign trail.

this is kinda a side note but still related to the election:

I'm tired of people saying they aren't voting for McCain because it'll be another 4 years of Bush. IMHO I don't think Bush was a bad president. How many other Presidents had to deal with something like 9/11? Sure he made some bad decisions regarding the war, and where to go and why. But we are already there. Whats going to happen if we pull out and put someone else in power? same thing that happened last time we went over there only worse. Do you really think we can just completely pull out of the middle east and everything stay stable? do you really think that if we pull out we wont be going back? do you think Obama really knows what the troops are going through. don't you think McCain, former POW, would sympathize slightly more with what the troops are going through?

history has, and will, repeat its self. if we pull out, we will be going back. I know it sucks, I dont want our troops fighting over there anymore than the next guy, but unfortunately we are committed and pulling out now would have bad reprecutions in the future.

speak your mind... its a free country, for now, and we all have the right to our own opinions. id like to know how you guys feel

http://www.youtube.com/themouthpeace

pretty interesting video ^^

[joey-nac]

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:


This is just plain Ignorance!!!!!!


I agree. The fact of the matter is that they are all really good people. They are not prejudice against white people they just all see this as a chance "to get whats coming to them". It is scary more than anything.

[John]

I'm voting for McCain simply because I want 2 MILFs in the White House.:D

Who cares about all this Economy crap. I think it's just right-sizing.

[Paul E]

The VP doesn't live in the White House. ;) They live in a house on the grounds of the National Observatory. :)

[Marlon_JBT]

that being said, i know many whites voting for Obama, I have yet to see a black persone say they are supporting McCain.
I have. Several, actually. It helps to be around a lot of us I guess.

[Don]

I have. Several, actually. It helps to be around a lot of us I guess.

HOW DID YOU DO THIS?

The message that I see only says

"I Have"

Yet when I hit "quote", rest of the text appears. :confused: Now your message has changed.....

Marlon is correct. If you asked three men to give their opinion, it really doesn't mean much. However, if you asked 1,000 men their opinion, you may come away with a different point of view depending upon which bar you were standing outside of while asking the questions :rolleyes:

[Marlon_JBT]

HOW DID YOU DO THIS?

The message that I see only says

"I Have"

Yet when I hit "quote", rest of the text appears. :confused: Now your message has changed.....

Marlon is correct. If you asked three men to give their opinion, it really doesn't mean much. However, if you asked 1,000 men their opinion, you may come away with a different point of view depending upon which bar you were standing outside of while asking the questions :rolleyes:
I accidentally clicked Submit Reply a bit too quick, so I edited the post a few seconds later. :)

I will also say this too, if Obama was on the republican ticket, you wouldn't see the "black turnout" that you see. Most blacks have historically voted democratic.

[axehead]

speak your mind man i wont be offended i'd like to hear your opinion.

i know that this is happening on both sides.

people voting for Obama because hes black
people voting for McCain because hes white

that being said, i know many whites voting for Obama, I have yet to see a black persone say they are supporting McCain. I hear more from black people saying that white people are raciest because they wont vote for Obama...i dont think they understand that that statement is raciest.

IMHO Gov Palin should be running. Shes got more experience than the other 3 combined. most of what time Obama has spent as a senator hes spent on the campaign trail.

this is kinda a side note but still related to the election:

I'm tired of people saying they aren't voting for McCain because it'll be another 4 years of Bush. IMHO I don't think Bush was a bad president. How many other Presidents had to deal with something like 9/11? Sure he made some bad decisions regarding the war, and where to go and why. But we are already there. Whats going to happen if we pull out and put someone else in power? same thing that happened last time we went over there only worse. Do you really think we can just completely pull out of the middle east and everything stay stable? do you really think that if we pull out we wont be going back? do you think Obama really knows what the troops are going through. don't you think McCain, former POW, would sympathize slightly more with what the troops are going through?

history has, and will, repeat its self. if we pull out, we will be going back. I know it sucks, I dont want our troops fighting over there anymore than the next guy, but unfortunately we are committed and pulling out now would have bad reprecutions in the future.

speak your mind... its a free country, for now, and we all have the right to our own opinions. id like to know how you guys feel

http://www.youtube.com/themouthpeace

pretty interesting video ^^

obama wants to change the focus from iraq to afghanistan & maybe even pakistan. that's not pulling out of the middle east.

[admar2]

geez, there are more than plenty ignorant people of any and every color.

[admar2]

The VP doesn't live in the White House. ;) They live in a house on the grounds of the National Observatory. :)


Naval Observatory. ;)

[admar2]

Marlon is correct. If you asked three men to give their opinion, it really doesn't mean much. However, if you asked 1,000 men their opinion, you may come away with a different point of view depending upon which bar you were standing outside of while asking the questions


its called anecdotal evidence, and its definitely by no means accurate.



please tell me this isn't the first clip you've heard like this. letterman has done it in the past, and so has leno. they ask all kinds of SIMPLE questions, and there are people that are COMPLETELY clueless.

[admar2]

I have. Several, actually. It helps to be around a lot of us I guess.


same here. I know a handful of black guys personally, and they're all voting for mccain.


HOWEVER, that being said, if you look at the primaries obama was consistently getting 90+ percent of the black vote.

now seriously, if mccain was getting 90% of the white vote, there would be people screaming racism on every street corner.

[admar2]

obama wants to change the focus from iraq to afghanistan & maybe even pakistan. that's not pulling out of the middle east.


I really think the tide has turned in Iraq, and most all combat troops will be out of there by the end of 09.

that being said, you don't surrender a war on one front to try and fight it on another front. Iraq HAS to be finished in victory.

pouring more troops into Afghanistan isn't the answer at this point. I think small, specialized, highly mobile, highly lethal type units is what we need there. (SOF assets) finishing up Iraq would free up lotsa UAV assets to be brought to bear in AFG first of all.

Pakistan has to be made to believe we are not f'ing around anymore. either they get their forces into waziristan area and clean that safe haven out, or we are going to. one GPS guided bomb at a time.

[axehead]

I really think the tide has turned in Iraq, and most all combat troops will be out of there by the end of 09.

that being said, you don't surrender a war on one front to try and fight it on another front. Iraq HAS to be finished in victory.

pouring more troops into Afghanistan isn't the answer at this point. I think small, specialized, highly mobile, highly lethal type units is what we need there. (SOF assets) finishing up Iraq would free up lotsa UAV assets to be brought to bear in AFG first of all.

Pakistan has to be made to believe we are not f'ing around anymore. either they get their forces into waziristan area and clean that safe haven out, or we are going to. one GPS guided bomb at a time.

they are 2 seperate wars, how many more billions of $ are we gonna have to dump into iraq? they have a surplus, why can't they fund the bill? we can't continue to do that without making a sincere effort to capture/kill bin laden.

[admar2]

they are 2 seperate wars, how many more billions of $ are we gonna have to dump into iraq? they have a surplus, why can't they fund the bill? we can't continue to do that without making a sincere effort to capture/kill bin laden.


you can't seriously believe they are seperate wars.



the reconstruction dollars we are putting in there are administered by the UN. yes, now that they are getting surpluses, (due to the spike in per barrel oil the last 2 years) they should start shouldering the reconstruction burden.


however, I suspect you are hinting at the 10billion a month that always seems to come from libs mouths when they talk about Iraq. first off, the 10-12billion a month number that is thrown around includes Iraq AND Afghanistan. that money is what its costing to have the military on the ground. that's personnel costs, equipment replacment, overhaul, operations and maintenance budgets, COSTS OF FUEL (which the gov is buying on the open market) cost of designing, building and using those little UAV's that everybody loves so much. costs of fielding new material to replace stuff that has been ground to dust.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/04/20/MNGGOIBTNQ1.DTL&hw=10+billion+iraq+month&sn=004&sc=092

[fjmf]

<TRUTH> Voting for Obama because he's black is RACIST!!!! </TRUTH>

I'm Not voting for Obama not because he's black, because he's full of it! I wouldn't vote for anyone that was that full of crap.

I'm thinking of not voting for McCain because I'm thinking he might be full of crap also not because he's white.

I think senators make lousy presidents! I think they all live in lollipop land and don't understand the real world....!

[little_red_cherokee]

I have. Several, actually. It helps to be around a lot of us I guess.

True that we live in different places and there is a pretty large difference in color but, most of the blacks i am around are voting obama and just for that reason. i also see rednecks where i live, that still think the south will rise :rolleyes: , that are voting mccain just b/c he's white.

as far as 'universal health care goes'

i personally dont want my health being put in the hands of the same people that are throwing away my social security $.

idk... def gonna be interesting to see what happens over the next few years

[Marlon_JBT]

200 more years, there probably won't be such a thing as race in this country at least.

Why?

Dang near everybody's gonna be mixed with SOMETHING down the line.

I'm also a good example. I'm mixed as well.

But before this happens, the "Traditionalists" as I like to call them... won't be here anymore, if you know what I mean.

[Jeeprocks86]

Remember, they didn't show anyone who didn't realize what they were saying. Since it was one sided, it helped their radio show better.

[little_red_cherokee]

200 more years, there probably won't be such a thing as race in this country at least.

Why?

Dang near everybody's gonna be mixed with SOMETHING down the line.

I'm also a good example. I'm mixed as well.

But before this happens, the "Traditionalists" as I like to call them... won't be here anymore, if you know what I mean.


lol i think south park did an episode on this where everybody was the same color and nobody had anything to ***** about b/c they were all the same.


thats considering the human race doesnt destroy itself in the next 200 years

[axehead]

you can't seriously believe they are seperate wars.



the reconstruction dollars we are putting in there are administered by the UN. yes, now that they are getting surpluses, (due to the spike in per barrel oil the last 2 years) they should start shouldering the reconstruction burden.


however, I suspect you are hinting at the 10billion a month that always seems to come from libs mouths when they talk about Iraq. first off, the 10-12billion a month number that is thrown around includes Iraq AND Afghanistan. that money is what its costing to have the military on the ground. that's personnel costs, equipment replacment, overhaul, operations and maintenance budgets, COSTS OF FUEL (which the gov is buying on the open market) cost of designing, building and using those little UAV's that everybody loves so much. costs of fielding new material to replace stuff that has been ground to dust.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/04/20/MNGGOIBTNQ1.DTL&hw=10+billion+iraq+month&sn=004&sc=092

just because they are funded from one source doesn't mean that they are one war, i get one paycheck & pay various different bills from it.

the link you provided says that there are 52,000 contractors over there, that shows that there is lot of our tax dollars going to them. lets put that toward capturing/killing bin laden.

[axehead]

True that we live in different places and there is a pretty large difference in color but, most of the blacks i am around are voting obama and just for that reason. i also see rednecks where i live, that still think the south will rise :rolleyes: , that are voting mccain just b/c he's white.

as far as 'universal health care goes'

i personally dont want my health being put in the hands of the same people that are throwing away my social security $.

idk... def gonna be interesting to see what happens over the next few years

under obama if you already have healthcare that will not change, if you don't have healthcare or lose your existing plan you will be covered.

[StoneyRedneck]

People vote for Democrats just because their registered Democrats. People vote for republicans just because they are registered republicans. Why not vote for a black man just because you are black.

I think all three of these scenarios are ridiculous. I know people are going to say that if you are registered to that party, you are going to share most of their beliefs, but do you not think that if you are black you are going to share some beliefs of another black man (I am white so I can only assume). I think political parties are a bogus part of our government that not only keeps anything from actually getting done, it also makes elections next to pointless. Someone else is making up your mind for you.

I hate politics and just want this election to be over. We should be a democracy and with the technology we have now, I don't see any reason we're not.

[kennyfrncs]

<TRUTH> Voting for Obama because he's black is RACIST!!!! </TRUTH>

I'm Not voting for Obama not because he's black, because he's full of it! I wouldn't vote for anyone that was that full of crap.

I'm thinking of not voting for McCain because I'm thinking he might be full of crap also not because he's white.

I think senators make lousy presidents! I think they all live in lollipop land and don't understand the real world....!

RIGHT ON RB!!! THATS WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT!!!! THIS SUMS IT UP

[admar2]

Dang near everybody's gonna be mixed with SOMETHING down the line.



truth be known, we are just about all mixed with something already. ;)

[admar2]

the link you provided says that there are 52,000 contractors over there, that shows that there is lot of our tax dollars going to them. lets put that toward capturing/killing bin laden


those contractors run the gamut, things like food services, vehicle maintenance and overhaul and various things that our military contracts out these days.

its not just trigger puller security guys.

just because they are funded from one source doesn't mean that they are one war, i get one paycheck & pay various different bills from it.


here's a hint, its the same folks we are fighting in both places. two fronts of the same war. you do realize the nazi's we were fighting in france during WWII were the same nazi's the Russians were fighting in their backyard, right?

and if you believe that killing 1 guy is more important than killing the thousands of terrorists we have killed in Iraq, then you truly are misinformed.

[Marlon_JBT]

truth be known, we are just about all mixed with something already. ;)
That is true.... but it's not to the point where it's really NOTICEABLE.

Heck, I'm mixed too! Not too much darker than Obama, lol... :p

[fjmf]

jthe link you provided says that there are 52,000 contractors over there, that shows that there is lot of our tax dollars going to them. lets put that toward capturing/killing bin laden.

I would love to here what the army guys would say about losing there contractors....

I don't think that would make them very happy...

[Metz]

under obama if you already have healthcare that will not change, if you don't have healthcare or lose your existing plan you will be covered.

So what you are saying is, if you work hard and have a good job with good medical coverage, everything stays the same- your taxes just go up.

If you have made poor CHOICES throughout your life, and have a crappy job- with no coverage- BIG GOVERNMENT will take care of you at my expense?

I find it hard to believe that people CAN'T get medical coverage (with the exception of the disabled). Full time McDonalds employees can get medical and dental. I'd be willing to bet that the problem is more that those people are "too good" - or more realisticly - too lazy for that job or some BS along those lines.


We all make choices starting in high school that determines our path.

I CHOSE to shove coke up my nose instead of going to class- thus dictating that I cannot go to college. SO- i made a CHOICE to join the army to better myself. Right now I am living like a poor man so I can pay for my college as due to my FASFA form I do not qualify for jack. I had the CHOICE to take unemployment for 6 months after getting out of the army (which would have paid 4X what i make at autozone) but decided not to abuse the system.

I've never understood the dems "we are for the working man" BS.

THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS FOR THE UNEMPLOYED/LAZY/IGNORANT- EVERYONE ELSE GETS SCREWED.

I am not asking for all social programs to be eliminated. JUST LIMITED.

There is NO REASON for someone to be able to be on welfare from birth until death. 5 years is more than enough time to get a degree and a good job. There are a TON of people at my school who are welfare babies and because mommy and daddy "can't" make money- he/she gets to go to college for free. Where as I, the WAR VET, and a TAXPAYER have to kick out $21,952 just to get the same education as I only qualified for $7,000 in gov' student loans due to my income while in the military, and do not qualify for other loans (private loans) due to my current income.

GEE THANKS DEMOCRATS. I thought your were for the WORKING man?

/////rant off\\\\\\

[axehead]

truth be known, we are just about all mixed with something already. ;)

yep, i'm a heinz 57! :-) italian, irish, indian, & german

[axehead]

those contractors run the gamut, things like food services, vehicle maintenance and overhaul and various things that our military contracts out these days.

its not just trigger puller security guys.




here's a hint, its the same folks we are fighting in both places. two fronts of the same war. you do realize the nazi's we were fighting in france during WWII were the same nazi's the Russians were fighting in their backyard, right?

and if you believe that killing 1 guy is more important than killing the thousands of terrorists we have killed in Iraq, then you truly are misinformed.

so bin laden gets away scott free?

we can't successfully fight terror while "hanging out" in iraq, terrorists are in 80 countries. it must be a diversified effort, maybe that would cost more than 11 billion $ a month. but it would not take 7+ years to accomplish.

[axehead]

I would love to here what the army guys would say about losing there contractors....

I don't think that would make them very happy...

the guys that i have talked to that have served in the army in iraq suggest that they are more in a policing type role than actual fighting. the marines that i have talked to are the one's that are more in a combat type role. maybe we need more marines involved rather than these contractors who build bridges, schools, & cell phone towers.

i would like to talk to someone that has been in afghanistan, but i have yet to meet someone that has served there.

[tmurk684]

please don't get me started on the contractors here.

[axehead]

So what you are saying is, if you work hard and have a good job with good medical coverage, everything stays the same- your taxes just go up.

If you have made poor CHOICES throughout your life, and have a crappy job- with no coverage- BIG GOVERNMENT will take care of you at my expense?

I find it hard to believe that people CAN'T get medical coverage (with the exception of the disabled). Full time McDonalds employees can get medical and dental. I'd be willing to bet that the problem is more that those people are "too good" - or more realisticly - too lazy for that job or some BS along those lines.


We all make choices starting in high school that determines our path.

I CHOSE to shove coke up my nose instead of going to class- thus dictating that I cannot go to college. SO- i made a CHOICE to join the army to better myself. Right now I am living like a poor man so I can pay for my college as due to my FASFA form I do not qualify for jack. I had the CHOICE to take unemployment for 6 months after getting out of the army (which would have paid 4X what i make at autozone) but decided not to abuse the system.

I've never understood the dems "we are for the working man" BS.

THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS FOR THE UNEMPLOYED/LAZY/IGNORANT- EVERYONE ELSE GETS SCREWED.

I am not asking for all social programs to be eliminated. JUST LIMITED.

There is NO REASON for someone to be able to be on welfare from birth until death. 5 years is more than enough time to get a degree and a good job. There are a TON of people at my school who are welfare babies and because mommy and daddy "can't" make money- he/she gets to go to college for free. Where as I, the WAR VET, and a TAXPAYER have to kick out $21,952 just to get the same education as I only qualified for $7,000 in gov' student loans due to my income while in the military, and do not qualify for other loans (private loans) due to my current income.

GEE THANKS DEMOCRATS. I thought your were for the WORKING man?

/////rant off\\\\\\

i said nothing about welfare, but since you brought it up i agree that it is badly in need of reform. and keep in mind that welfare has been the way that it is under both democrats & republicans.

your taxes only go up if you earn more than $250k under obama's plan.

abuse the system by not taking unemployment compensation? its taken out of our paychecks, if you pay it in you have rights to it. you are just getting your money back.

and what about the disabled, don't they have needs?

and sometimes things happen to people that didn't make bad choices but just had some bad luck.

even though the democratic party serves the lower class better than they do the middle class, the left is still a better choice for the middle class than the right. the right is a better choice for the upper class. i wish for a functional 3rd party that could be the "best" choice for the middle class.

[little_red_cherokee]

as far as dems serving the 'lower class' better... why would anybody think that giving poor people money would help anything? im not saying poor people dont matter or that i am better than somebody with less money than i have. what i am saying is that why not help the middle class? why not give the help to those who want to start up a biz. helping those who want to create more jobs is helping everybody. who is it helping to raise taxes causing small biz owners to cut jobs?

as far as walfare... just because you pay into it does not mean you should take advantage of it. what if everybody thought they had a right to that money and everybody took it? due to medical reasons, if i chose to not work i could get $$ from the gov. but im not gonna be a lazy a@@ and sit at home and take others hard earned money. my room mate is just out of the airforce and gets $1500 a month in unemployment. why? hes a perfectly healthy grown man that could get a job but instid takes advantage and chooses not to work.

i have respect for people like metz who know they made bad CHOICES, and decided to make a change and work hard.

as far as health care under obama. i didnt know that i would keep my coverage if i already had it but would get gov. help if i was dropped. all i have to say is ***?! how could anyone think that is the right thing to do?! ok so i have to bust my ***, work full time, keep ahead in school and pay for my own coverage AND yours? just about every job ive had has offered health coverage. knowing that that is obamas plan for health care makes me not want to vote for him even more.

ive been waiting tables for awhile. alot of servers i know are democrats. there are a few i can think of that want to vote for obama so they can get health coverage.... why cant they afford health insurance? they spend all their money on drugs and alcohol. they dont have the $$ because they go out drinking every night... so hard working americans should pay to give them health insurance? PLEASE PLEASE explain to me why you think that is ok

[jeepercreeper]

so bin laden gets away scott free?

we can't successfully fight terror while "hanging out" in iraq, terrorists are in 80 countries. it must be a diversified effort, maybe that would cost more than 11 billion $ a month. but it would not take 7+ years to accomplish.

"hanging out" in Iraq???

[admar2]

yep, i'm a heinz 57! :-) italian, irish, indian, & german


LOL, same here. 50% italian, 50% everything else.

[axehead]

as far as dems serving the 'lower class' better... why would anybody think that giving poor people money would help anything? im not saying poor people dont matter or that i am better than somebody with less money than i have. what i am saying is that why not help the middle class? why not give the help to those who want to start up a biz. helping those who want to create more jobs is helping everybody. who is it helping to raise taxes causing small biz owners to cut jobs?

as far as walfare... just because you pay into it does not mean you should take advantage of it. what if everybody thought they had a right to that money and everybody took it? due to medical reasons, if i chose to not work i could get $$ from the gov. but im not gonna be a lazy a@@ and sit at home and take others hard earned money. my room mate is just out of the airforce and gets $1500 a month in unemployment. why? hes a perfectly healthy grown man that could get a job but instid takes advantage and chooses not to work.

i have respect for people like metz who know they made bad CHOICES, and decided to make a change and work hard.

as far as health care under obama. i didnt know that i would keep my coverage if i already had it but would get gov. help if i was dropped. all i have to say is ***?! how could anyone think that is the right thing to do?! ok so i have to bust my ***, work full time, keep ahead in school and pay for my own coverage AND yours? just about every job ive had has offered health coverage. knowing that that is obamas plan for health care makes me not want to vote for him even more.

ive been waiting tables for awhile. alot of servers i know are democrats. there are a few i can think of that want to vote for obama so they can get health coverage.... why cant they afford health insurance? they spend all their money on drugs and alcohol. they dont have the $$ because they go out drinking every night... so hard working americans should pay to give them health insurance? PLEASE PLEASE explain to me why you think that is ok

it is an investment in our future, if people are healthy they are more productive. if there are more productive people in the work force both employees and employers will benefit.

have you checked on the price of healthcare? i haven't in a while as i'm covered at work, but a few years ago it was astronomical.

as i've stated in an earlier reply, welfare goes on under both a democratic president as well as a republican. 20 of the last 28 years we have had a republican president, welfare took place during the whole time.

my thoughts are once we create more jobs while strengthing the economy, we reform welfare to its original purpose. if we don't have jobs available we can't take people off of welfare.

evidently neither the right or left wants to reform welfare as i haven't heard any discussion on it.

[axehead]

"hanging out" in Iraq???

poor choice of words on my part, but the emphasis should be in the pursuit of bin laden & other top terrorists. we should be more mobile as opposed to being stationary in iraq.

[fjmf]

the guys that i have talked to that have served in the army in iraq suggest that they are more in a policing type role than actual fighting. the marines that i have talked to are the one's that are more in a combat type role. maybe we need more marines involved rather than these contractors who build bridges, schools, & cell phone towers.

i would like to talk to someone that has been in afghanistan, but i have yet to meet someone that has served there.

You really need to talk to people in the military! You don't have any idea how this stuff works. There are many skilled jobs in the military that are better served by contractors.

Alot of this discussion (healthcare etc) is based on FAIR,

The ?'s being do you think life should be fair? Whos job is it to make you job fair? If your answers are Yes,and the Government then voting for Obama is the right thing (either that or moving to a Communist Country) Socialism has been tried in many places, it just doesn't work. The more we add it to our gov. the worse off all of us will be.

[axehead]

You really need to talk to people in the military! You don't have any idea how this stuff works. There are many skilled jobs in the military that are better served by contractors.

Alot of this discussion (healthcare etc) is based on FAIR,

The ?'s being do you think life should be fair? Whos job is it to make you job fair? If your answers are Yes,and the Government then voting for Obama is the right thing (either that or moving to a Communist Country) Socialism has been tried in many places, it just doesn't work. The more we add it to our gov. the worse off all of us will be.

so now obama is a communist?

you are right, a complete socialist system does not work. but just realize that we have had some socialism even under republicans like fire depts, police depts, & primary schooling systems that still exist today.

capitalism without regulation is part of what got us in this mess, its a blend of capitalism (with regulation) & limited socialism that could be the key.

[Metz]

i said nothing about welfare, but since you brought it up i agree that it is badly in need of reform. and keep in mind that welfare has been the way that it is under both democrats & republicans.

Welfare was instituted by a democratically controlled congress, not by a republican pres. Besides- any time they have tried to limit, or "reform" it- they are called racist, elitist, whatever. The left wing has made trying to fix a broken and abused system a political no-no.


your taxes only go up if you earn more than $250k under obama's plan.

So you are saying that if my wife and I are hard working and successful we should "spread the wealth around" to those who have not worked as hard?


abuse the system by not taking unemployment compensation? its taken out of our paychecks, if you pay it in you have rights to it. you are just getting your money back.

If I am healthy- capable of working and can find a job- no matter how little it pays, YES it would be abuse IMHO.


and what about the disabled, don't they have needs?

My point was, that anyone physically or mentally capable of taking care of themselves should HAVE to do it. They should not be allowed to have daddy Obama take care of them.


and sometimes things happen to people that didn't make bad choices but just had some bad luck.

I've had bad luck- and yet have been able to make the best of things. It is all about desire to succeed. I cannot think of anyone who truthfully cannot make a better life for themselves (to be PC- they must not be mentally disabled or have another disability) If they have the desire, and drive to FIND the necessary ways to a better future. Nobody should expect to have a better life handed to them.


even though the democratic party serves the lower class better than they do the middle class, the left is still a better choice for the middle class than the right. the right is a better choice for the upper class. i wish for a functional 3rd party that could be the "best" choice for the middle class.

This is more of a matter of opinion. Obama likes to harp on McCains tax cuts for big business. THAT IS A GOOD THING. When companies have more money- they spend it. When they spend it, they create jobs. When they create jobs, more tax payers are made, and WALA- more tax revenue while not raising taxes on private citizens. CRAZYNESS I KNOW.


And just a side note, but I wanna know how he is going to give tax cuts to 95% of Americans when 40% DON'T PAY TAXES. Is he just going to give the non-tax payers more money?

[Marlon_JBT]

Here's something nobody has ever said in this thread...

I don't mean to be all... "Gimme Gimme" in this thread, but...

1. I'm a student.
2. I also work part time.
3. The time I have on my parents' health insurance is running out and quickly. (I think after I turn 24 or 25, I am screwed, whether I'm in school still or not)
4. Part Time workers don't usually get health insurance benefits.

So exactly what is a person like me supposed to do?

[Metz]

If i am not mistaken you have until you are 25 if you are a full time student.

There are some companies that give part time workers health care bennies, but I understand there are not many.

As a full time student, I am able to work full time hours. It sucks, but is worth it.

Mon-Fri work 7:30-1:30 school from 2:20-9:05 Sat work 8-6 Sun off.

Like I said, it blows, but you do what you have to.

As for your health coverage running out- Most people grad college by the age of 23ish. Are you in a longer program of some sort?

Just a quick edit- I am not trying to poo poo your point of view, given I do not know the full extent of your situation. Just sharing some thoughts.

[Gordon]

I’ve been staying out of most of all of this political heyday, but I’ll toss in a few things -

so now obama is a communist?

No, I think the intent was that BO is a hardline socialist.

………..capitalism without regulation is part of what got us in this mess, its a blend of capitalism (with regulation) & limited socialism that could be the key.

Good statement!

In a civilized, modern society, the TRUE needy should be helped, but by whom??? How was it done years ago – mainly before LBJ – family, churches, friends, - not “entitlements”.

Here's something nobody has ever said in this thread

I don't mean to be all... "Gimme Gimme" in this thread, but...

1. I'm a student.
2. I also work part time.
3. The time I have on my parents' health insurance is running out and quickly. (I think after I turn 24 or 25, I am screwed, whether I'm in school still or not)
4. Part Time workers don't usually get health insurance benefits.

So exactly what is a person like me supposed to do?

The more people have given to them, the more they want – it’s human nature.

Some folks have been proud to have had the opportunity to complete a higher education, in 4 years even, and worked full time, and did not have any help from “outside sources”. But everyone’s formula is different, so generalization is not good.

Now, for a thought that I pull out of the dusty corner every now & then – just opinion, no verification of authorship.

How Long Do We Have?

About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government."

"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury."

"From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the
beginning of history, has been about 200 years."

"During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage"

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some 40 percent of the nation's population already having reached the governmental dependency" phase.

[Metz]

So we are currently at stage 6 or 7.

fun times ahead lol....

Great post by the way.

[admar2]

nice post gordon. spot on.


I fancy this qoute also.

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.

[axehead]

Welfare was instituted by a democratically controlled congress, not by a republican pres. Besides- any time they have tried to limit, or "reform" it- they are called racist, elitist, whatever. The left wing has made trying to fix a broken and abused system a political no-no.



So you are saying that if my wife and I are hard working and successful we should "spread the wealth around" to those who have not worked as hard?



If I am healthy- capable of working and can find a job- no matter how little it pays, YES it would be abuse IMHO.



My point was, that anyone physically or mentally capable of taking care of themselves should HAVE to do it. They should not be allowed to have daddy Obama take care of them.



I've had bad luck- and yet have been able to make the best of things. It is all about desire to succeed. I cannot think of anyone who truthfully cannot make a better life for themselves (to be PC- they must not be mentally disabled or have another disability) If they have the desire, and drive to FIND the necessary ways to a better future. Nobody should expect to have a better life handed to them.



This is more of a matter of opinion. Obama likes to harp on McCains tax cuts for big business. THAT IS A GOOD THING. When companies have more money- they spend it. When they spend it, they create jobs. When they create jobs, more tax payers are made, and WALA- more tax revenue while not raising taxes on private citizens. CRAZYNESS I KNOW.


And just a side note, but I wanna know how he is going to give tax cuts to 95% of Americans when 40% DON'T PAY TAXES. Is he just going to give the non-tax payers more money?


just because someone makes less money doesn't mean that they don't work hard, i for one make more money now but don't work as hard as i did when i made less.

you've had bad luck just as most have had at one point in our lives, but what about the people that have had it even worse than we have? doing to much for someone is better than doing nothing for them.

remember when bush cut taxes? he told us in his speeches that "the tax cuts worked", my question is for who? we are still losing jobs, we have home foreclosures, & $11 trillion debt. the tax cuts didn't work, what the upper class wants is not more important than what the middle class needs.

[Marlon_JBT]

like I said, I'm not sure how long i've got to go on her coverage... but it would be nice to have something if I get screwed over, you know?

[axehead]

I’ve been staying out of most of all of this political heyday, but I’ll toss in a few things -



No, I think the intent was that BO is a hardline socialist.



Good statement!

In a civilized, modern society, the TRUE needy should be helped, but by whom??? How was it done years ago – mainly before LBJ – family, churches, friends, - not “entitlements”.



The more people have given to them, the more they want – it’s human nature.

Some folks have been proud to have had the opportunity to complete a higher education, in 4 years even, and worked full time, and did not have any help from “outside sources”. But everyone’s formula is different, so generalization is not good.

Now, for a thought that I pull out of the dusty corner every now & then – just opinion, no verification of authorship.

How Long Do We Have?

About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government."

"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury."

"From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the
beginning of history, has been about 200 years."

"During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage"

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some 40 percent of the nation's population already having reached the governmental dependency" phase.



do you think that obama is a hardline socialist?

as far as helping my friends, i'd like to help all my friends. i consider everyone a friend. churches, family, & friends couldn't possibly help everyone, it would be overwhelming. in today's society most are to selfish to provide any kind of help whether it be money or time.

[admar2]

like I said, I'm not sure how long i've got to go on her coverage... but it would be nice to have something if I get screwed over, you know?


so its the governments job to provide that for you, instead of you providing it yourself?

[little_red_cherokee]

numbers dont lie. look at the vid link i posted ( i think its posted here) gov. lowers taxes, they actually bring in more money... raise taxes....revenue lowers. if you want to help the lower class..... lower taxes for those starting businesses.... lower taxes for the rich... im not rich but i know if rich people have more money to invest then it will ' trickle down ' to me. rich people have money to eat, they tip better. just a fact. people say bushes tax cuts didnt work and were in debt... were at war no s*** were in debt, when everybody wanted to fight the middle east did you think we'd make a profit on it? and it takes time for tax cuts to show if they worked or not. if obama gets elected and wants to raise taxes on the rich, what is he going to do to 'spread the wealth' ? cut us all a check of money we didnt earn?

the rich people in america are the ones with all the money... if you raise their taxes, and they stop spending, whats that going to do for the lower class? to get money flowing into the economy you have to get rich people to spend their money. just a fact. the lower class isnt going to have enough cash flow to get the economy running again.

[baracuda]

just because someone makes less money doesn't mean that they don't work hard, i for one make more money now but don't work as hard as i did when i made less.

you've had bad luck just as most have had at one point in our lives, but what about the people that have had it even worse than we have? doing to much for someone is better than doing nothing for them.

remember when bush cut taxes? he told us in his speeches that "the tax cuts worked", my question is for who? we are still losing jobs, we have home foreclosures, & $11 trillion debt. the tax cuts didn't work, what the upper class wants is not more important than what the middle class needs.

i guess i must be upper class then, cause the tax cuts helped me and my family.:rolleyes:

and the losing jobs, i guess high corporate taxes dont have any influence on that huh?

and home forclosures huh?, when i was in high school, we were told that to figure how much you should spend on a home, double your annual salary and that is you maximum you can afford.
so how do poeple making $50k - $80k think they can afford a $250k or $300k house?

now, marlon. my advice. get a part time job at UPS term. part time UPS employees get full benefits.

[admar2]

careful david, you are treading on dangerous ground promoting supply side economics. ;)

[Marlon_JBT]

so its the governments job to provide that for you, instead of you providing it yourself?
Nowhere in my posts did I say that it was the government's job to provide health insurance for me. But it would be nice to have it. I'd get my own when possible because I wasn't raised to just take anything given to me unless absolutely necessary. Basically I work for anything and everything I want and need and NO I am NOT a welfare baby either. On the other note, I'll pass on going with UPS. That would be a pay cut. :p And my job really isn't that bad. I could go on but stuff like this is the reason why I originally wanted to keep my mouth shut in this thread.

[admar2]

didn't mean to point that directly at you necessarily marlon.


btw,

have you looked at any of the HDHP's? (high deductible health plan)

assuming you are young, single and in relatively good health, the HDHP with an HSA might be an affordable way for you to be covered. the HSA allows you to put money for medical expenses away tax free. the HDHP provides a much lower premium, while still retaining the coverage for expensive procedures, like something catastrophic. its a much higher deductible than "traditional" healthcare plans. your deductible is meant to be covered by money out of your HSA.

its catastrophic insurance basically. everything else is paid out of your HSA money.

[Gordon]

do you think that obama is a hardline socialist?

as far as helping my friends, i'd like to help all my friends. i consider everyone a friend. churches, family, & friends couldn't possibly help everyone, it would be overwhelming. in today's society most are to selfish to provide any kind of help whether it be money or time.

Yes, I do believe that Barack Obama is indeed a socialist – but that term has a wide range of subjectivity associated with it, as do most such labels.

Stewardship is helping others using what resources are available to each individual – it may be money, talent, skills, friendship – whatever one has to give, he/she should share it because they desire to, not because they are forced to.

You are dead right about the “me-first” selfishness rampant in society today.

I also do not completely equate “money in dollars” to “rich”. I truly believe that a man can be wealthy in many ways, yet be dollar poor. Please note, I am not suggesting that everyone/anyone here is dollar greedy, BUT – the trend towards the “almighty dollar” seems to be getting stronger over my lifetime, and the trend has seemed to get away from the other.

It is not money that can be evil, it is the LOVE of money that can be

[BrianM]

I don't know about you, but I'll probably vote for Obama because that is what the liberal media and all the stars are doing(Jk). As far as healthcare is concerned, I think there needs to be a happy medium, you can not have a true socialist type of system because that does not solve the problem and in some cases it makes it worse. For an example, in France, which is pretty much a socialist country, there are always riots in their ghettos becuase everything is pretty much handed to them and they are still not happy. Another example of would be Canada which has a government sponsered healthcare program, ask those canucks how it is and how many of them come down here to the U.S. for healthcare because of the long wait in the hospitals. There reports of people actually dying in the emergency waiting rooms while waiting for a doctor. At the same time, I see a problem with so many millions of people in such an industrialized super power of a country that we know live in with out healthcare. I for sure don't know the best way of doing things, but I think that it lies in somewhere in the middle.
As far as contractors in Iraq and other places, I find it kind of wierd how the Gov't pays two different sets of people for doing the same job, while one of them (the contrators), get payed some cases almost twice as much as a soldier doing the same job. Granted contractors do make the jobs of the soldiers easier, I was a blackhawk crewchief and without the help of the experienced contractors, we would have been swamped when it came to keeping up with the aircraft maintenance. IMHO it would be better to up the pay of one them(the soldiers) a little bit more so that they won't want to get out and work for a private company to twice as much $.
Technically though I have already vote with the absentee ballot, and yes I voted for McCain. Not because he is white, I think Obama will make a fine President too, but because I think he'll take care of the military, and since I am in the military and whoever is in the office directly affects my pay I am voting for someone to look after me and my family. However, since I raised my hand to support the president and defend the constitution, I'll be a professional and server whoever gets into office. I really think either candidate will do a fine job.
The only REAL concern though if Obama makes it, is some nutcase, crazy redneck taking a shot at him and being stuck with Biden.

[axehead]

numbers dont lie. look at the vid link i posted ( i think its posted here) gov. lowers taxes, they actually bring in more money... raise taxes....revenue lowers. if you want to help the lower class..... lower taxes for those starting businesses.... lower taxes for the rich... im not rich but i know if rich people have more money to invest then it will ' trickle down ' to me. rich people have money to eat, they tip better. just a fact. people say bushes tax cuts didnt work and were in debt... were at war no s*** were in debt, when everybody wanted to fight the middle east did you think we'd make a profit on it? and it takes time for tax cuts to show if they worked or not. if obama gets elected and wants to raise taxes on the rich, what is he going to do to 'spread the wealth' ? cut us all a check of money we didnt earn?

the rich people in america are the ones with all the money... if you raise their taxes, and they stop spending, whats that going to do for the lower class? to get money flowing into the economy you have to get rich people to spend their money. just a fact. the lower class isnt going to have enough cash flow to get the economy running again.


can you give us a working example of trickle down? i have yet to witness one, if the middle class makes more money won't that trickle up? we've all seen money trickle up even to the upper class.

[axehead]

i guess i must be upper class then, cause the tax cuts helped me and my family.:rolleyes:

and the losing jobs, i guess high corporate taxes dont have any influence on that huh?

and home forclosures huh?, when i was in high school, we were told that to figure how much you should spend on a home, double your annual salary and that is you maximum you can afford.
so how do poeple making $50k - $80k think they can afford a $250k or $300k house?

now, marlon. my advice. get a part time job at UPS term. part time UPS employees get full benefits.


baracuda? is this Sarah Palin? :-)

high corporate taxes, why hasn't bush cut their taxes? was that not part of "the tax cuts"?

foreclosures, people that did what you say were wrong. but what were the lenders thinking by loaning them that much money with a small income? that's wrong as well.

[axehead]

Yes, I do believe that Barack Obama is indeed a socialist – but that term has a wide range of subjectivity associated with it, as do most such labels.

Stewardship is helping others using what resources are available to each individual – it may be money, talent, skills, friendship – whatever one has to give, he/she should share it because they desire to, not because they are forced to.

You are dead right about the “me-first” selfishness rampant in society today.

I also do not completely equate “money in dollars” to “rich”. I truly believe that a man can be wealthy in many ways, yet be dollar poor. Please note, I am not suggesting that everyone/anyone here is dollar greedy, BUT – the trend towards the “almighty dollar” seems to be getting stronger over my lifetime, and the trend has seemed to get away from the other.

It is not money that can be evil, it is the LOVE of money that can be

do you believe that there are both positive & negative socialistic systems?

[little_red_cherokee]

can you give us a working example of trickle down? i have yet to witness one, if the middle class makes more money won't that trickle up? we've all seen money trickle up even to the upper class.


i did. give money to richer, smarter people who want to reinvest. the investments they make grow giving them more money to make and invest and start company's.. what do company's need? employees... :eek: ....

for any tax cut to be seen it takes years to show. the main reason bush's tax cuts were never seen as a benefit is because of the war(s). not to mention 9/11 and all the natural disasters that came through while he was in office (mostly what im talking about is hurricanes). all that has caused speculation and caused fuel costs to rise. no matter how much money you have people freak when there is talk of a gas shortage and people start spending less and less and effs up the entire economy.

who are you helping by giving the lower class more more money besides wal-mart?

how many lower class people do you know that want to invest in starting a company. not trying to sound like an a@@ but typically the lower class doesn't have the knowledge to start a company. even if they did, no amount of tax cut is going to give them the money to do it. they already dont make much (or pay much in taxes) they're not going to gamble what little they have. even if the lower class payed no taxes it still wouldnt give them much to invest or re distribute. the wealth upper class however has plenty to distribute.

where do you work? does the person who owns the company you work for have a lot of money? do you think they would be able to keep you employed if they had their taxes raised?

here is an example of 'trickle-down' :

i work at a Ghengis Grill, a franchised restaurant. the type of restaurant it is makes it cheap (compared to a larger place like a chili's or something) to start. the cheapest you can get one going is around $650,000, that includes your first months overhead (approx). So this guy invests his $650,000, gives me and about 30 others a job and chance to make money. I make money, which i spend on jeep parts, the jeep companies i spend my money at are small companies started by guys like the guy that opened up my restaurant. my money trickles to them, they spend the money they make, which trickles to someone else and so on.

trickle down ^^

now id be willing to bet the guy that owns Ghengis makes more than $250,000/year. (the store brings in a lot of biz.)

do you REALLY think if obama raises his taxes, he will continue to invest and open up another store (creating more jobs and more trickle)? if they get to high do you REALLY think he'll be able to afford to keep all his employees (im just part time id be the first to go).

if youd watch that video i posted you'd see the casino example.

where has there ever been a trickle up?

[little_red_cherokee]

foreclosures, people that did what you say were wrong. but what were the lenders thinking by loaning them that much money with a small income? that's wrong as well.

that i do believe. and the companies that loaned them the $$ shouldn't get government protection for making stupid business decisions

[axehead]

i did. give money to richer, smarter people who want to reinvest. the investments they make grow giving them more money to make and invest and start company's.. what do company's need? employees... :eek: ....

for any tax cut to be seen it takes years to show. the main reason bush's tax cuts were never seen as a benefit is because of the war(s). not to mention 9/11 and all the natural disasters that came through while he was in office (mostly what im talking about is hurricanes). all that has caused speculation and caused fuel costs to rise. no matter how much money you have people freak when there is talk of a gas shortage and people start spending less and less and effs up the entire economy.

who are you helping by giving the lower class more more money besides wal-mart?

how many lower class people do you know that want to invest in starting a company. not trying to sound like an a@@ but typically the lower class doesn't have the knowledge to start a company. even if they did, no amount of tax cut is going to give them the money to do it. they already dont make much (or pay much in taxes) they're not going to gamble what little they have. even if the lower class payed no taxes it still wouldnt give them much to invest or re distribute. the wealth upper class however has plenty to distribute.

where do you work? does the person who owns the company you work for have a lot of money? do you think they would be able to keep you employed if they had their taxes raised?

here is an example of 'trickle-down' :

i work at a Ghengis Grill, a franchised restaurant. the type of restaurant it is makes it cheap (compared to a larger place like a chili's or something) to start. the cheapest you can get one going is around $650,000, that includes your first months overhead (approx). So this guy invests his $650,000, gives me and about 30 others a job and chance to make money. I make money, which i spend on jeep parts, the jeep companies i spend my money at are small companies started by guys like the guy that opened up my restaurant. my money trickles to them, they spend the money they make, which trickles to someone else and so on.

trickle down ^^

now id be willing to bet the guy that owns Ghengis makes more than $250,000/year. (the store brings in a lot of biz.)

do you REALLY think if obama raises his taxes, he will continue to invest and open up another store (creating more jobs and more trickle)? if they get to high do you REALLY think he'll be able to afford to keep all his employees (im just part time id be the first to go).

if youd watch that video i posted you'd see the casino example.

where has there ever been a trickle up?

but after a period of time Ghengis (i hope that this doesn't happen to you) will downsize its operations. workers will be laid off & new employees will be hired at a lower rate of pay. ask me how i know? its happened several times to me & my friends.

oh, the reagan tax cuts didn't work either.

the lower class is going to get their's under a righty or a lefty, so that's a wash.

the rich invest it & we get jobs? bush has cut their taxes & we as a country have lost a ton of jobs. it happened under reagan also.

i work at delphi, its a division of GM. they have claiming losses for over 2 years now. big corporations don't pay a lot in taxes, they know the loopholes, shelters, & tax breaks to use.

[admar2]

reagan's economic policies pulled the country out of the recession that the carter administration left this country in.

do you really need a history lesson as to what kind of shape the country was in when reagan was elected?

[axehead]

reagan's economic policies pulled the country out of the recession that the carter administration left this country in.

do you really need a history lesson as to what kind of shape the country was in when reagan was elected?

sure, i'll take a lesson. how long did that recession last?

[little_red_cherokee]

but after a period of time Ghengis (i hope that this doesn't happen to you) will downsize its operations. workers will be laid off & new employees will be hired at a lower rate of pay. ask me how i know? its happened several times to me & my friends.

oh, the reagan tax cuts didn't work either.

the lower class is going to get their's under a righty or a lefty, so that's a wash.

the rich invest it & we get jobs? bush has cut their taxes & we as a country have lost a ton of jobs. it happened under reagan also.

i work at delphi, its a division of GM. they have claiming losses for over 2 years now. big corporations don't pay a lot in taxes, they know the loopholes, shelters, & tax breaks to use.

if companies get more taxes than sure i can see people getting layed off.

i live in franklin but consider myself 'lower class' because i only work part time and couldn't support my self without my parents while in school.

small business are the heart and soul of the american economy. they are what creates jobs and push money through the economy.

lay offs and down sizes might be true with large companies (IMHO due to unions, but thats just from what little i know i havnt really looked into why large companies down size)

but with a small business, im not gonna get laied off unless the owner cant afford to keep the place open. i only make 2.13 an hour i cant get a pay cut lol. if it was what i really wanted i could work there for years. no retirement plan but i could do it if i wanted.

and the reason big companies use loop holes is because they cant afford to pay all the taxes their supposed to and turn a profit.

obama is wanting to raise taxes on a small % of small biz. 10%.. only a whoppin 2.9 MILLION business

we are loosing jobs because companies are out sourcing to countries with LOWER TAXES. look at dubi (sp?) has 0% taxes on biz and they've exploded over the past 10 years.

[Marlon_JBT]

The only REAL concern though if Obama makes it, is some nutcase, crazy redneck taking a shot at him and being stuck with Biden.
Agreed 100%.

... what I made bold kinda made me laugh. :D

Oh, and this thread has gone seriously off topic. I think it's time for it to retire, personally.

Yeah, I'm editing again. I forgot to mention (I got sick of typing that post on my phone) that I hate government leeches. I absolutely cannot stand people who walk into grocery stores with $300 outfits paying for food with WIC and EBT Cards. (Food Stamps). IF YOU CAN AFFORD $300 TO SPEND ON CLOTHES WHICH DO NOTHING BUT GET DIRTY, YOU CAN AFFORD TO FEED YOUR FAMILY FOR A MONTH!!!!

[little_red_cherokee]

Agreed 100%.

... what I made bold kinda made me laugh. :D

Oh, and this thread has gone seriously off topic. I think it's time for it to retire, personally.

Yeah, I'm editing again. I forgot to mention (I got sick of typing that post on my phone) that I hate government leeches. I absolutely cannot stand people who walk into grocery stores with $300 outfits paying for food with WIC and EBT Cards. (Food Stamps). IF YOU CAN AFFORD $300 TO SPEND ON CLOTHES WHICH DO NOTHING BUT GET DIRTY, YOU CAN AFFORD TO FEED YOUR FAMILY FOR A MONTH!!!!


of topic but interesting

and yeah i cant stand that either.

[Marlon_JBT]

Now I understand completely if you were going through hard times.

Then it's acceptable.... and you're just trying to get back on your feet.

But the people that I'm talking about I see almost each time I go to the grocery store.

[little_red_cherokee]

its these same people that make me against universal health care.

so the US doesnt have health coverage for all of its citizens. that does NOT prevent those in need from getting help. federal law gives access of emergency equipment (ambulances, ER,fire, etc) to EVERYONE regardless of whether they have coverage or not.

the US already has coverage programs for elderly, disabled, and vets.

do we REALLY want the same people who wrote our tax code to deal with something as complex as health care?

like it or not health care is a market commodity. the free market is why we have such good health care and tech in the medical industry.

Canada has universal health care yet oddly enough canadians come to america to get treated.. why? long lines, doctors are overwhelmed and dont have time to treat everyone.

people that b**** about tax increases but want health care provided for them are cRaZy... where do you think the money to fund health care is going to come from. do you know how much canadians pay in taxes?

i don't want to pay for some jack a@@ to get a lung transplant for FREE because he decided to smoke a pack a day. :mad:

i don't want to pay for some jack a@@ to get a new heart valve at the age of 35 because he decided to do meth. :mad:

our country is in debt... universal health care will bankrupt it.

and lastly because its socialism

[fjmf]

Here's my ? how many of you that believe in these socialist programs actually give out of your own pocket? Everyone I talk to like this tells me it's up to "big biz, CEO's, etc". I'm willing to bet most that are against these entitlement programs pay more in charity then the people who do believe in them!!!

BTW GM downsized because of bad biz practices, they don't run the company well and it will cause them to go out of biz at some point... (that goes for all 3 from Detroit).

[admar2]

Here's my ? how many of you that believe in these socialist programs actually give out of your own pocket? Everyone I talk to like this tells me it's up to "big biz, CEO's, etc". I'm willing to bet most that are against these entitlement programs pay more in charity then the people who do believe in them!!!

BTW GM downsized because of bad biz practices, they don't run the company well and it will cause them to go out of biz at some point... (that goes for all 3 from Detroit).

funny you mention that. If I remember correct, over 10years biden averaged donating less than 2/10th's of 1% of his salary to charity.

[axehead]

its these same people that make me against universal health care.

so the US doesnt have health coverage for all of its citizens. that does NOT prevent those in need from getting help. federal law gives access of emergency equipment (ambulances, ER,fire, etc) to EVERYONE regardless of whether they have coverage or not.

the US already has coverage programs for elderly, disabled, and vets.

do we REALLY want the same people who wrote our tax code to deal with something as complex as health care?

like it or not health care is a market commodity. the free market is why we have such good health care and tech in the medical industry.

Canada has universal health care yet oddly enough canadians come to america to get treated.. why? long lines, doctors are overwhelmed and dont have time to treat everyone.

people that b**** about tax increases but want health care provided for them are cRaZy... where do you think the money to fund health care is going to come from. do you know how much canadians pay in taxes?

i don't want to pay for some jack a@@ to get a lung transplant for FREE because he decided to smoke a pack a day. :mad:

i don't want to pay for some jack a@@ to get a new heart valve at the age of 35 because he decided to do meth. :mad:

our country is in debt... universal health care will bankrupt it.

and lastly because its socialism

where did you get this information on "long lines"?

[baracuda]

where did you get this information on "long lines"?

thats 1 of the many complaints I have personally heard from the majority of canadians I have met and talked to.

just trying to get in to see a dr can take weeks or months. and thats if you are sick when you try to get in.

[fjmf]

From the best I can gather about canadian health care the reason you hear some many different stories is because you CAN doesn't have a federal Healthcare system. Each province (much like our states) has there own ,different system.

You think the gov should take care of this for us? The do such a good job handling the rest of the big budget items, SSI, Vet's, ETC. The best federal program in the US is the post office! (and guess how they run?)

[baracuda]

From the best I can gather about canadian health care the reason you hear some many different stories is because you CAN doesn't have a federal Healthcare system. Each province (much like our states) has there own ,different system.

You think the gov should take care of this for us? The do such a good job handling the rest of the big budget items, SSI, Vet's, ETC. The best federal program in the US is the post office! (and guess how they run?)

x2x2x2

[Gordon]

do you believe that there are both positive & negative socialistic systems?

I would say there are degrees of it, as opposed to positive and negative. There needs to be a balance between “left” and “right” – a civilized society needs to reach out to the less fortunate, certainly, but entitlements should not be rampant and implementation of them should not be used to buy votes. Refer to my post about the evolution of a society.

…… big corporations don't pay a lot in taxes, they know the loopholes, shelters, & tax breaks to use.

Corporations do not pay taxes, the consumers (end users) pay the taxes, corporations simply collect it. Taxes are buried in the cost of goods sold.

…… i havnt really looked into why large companies down size)

It is because of the “bottom line” – more for less – payroll (human resources for the P.C.) is huge liability – corporations (I use that term for all business models). The larger the corporation, the less compassionate. Bottom line is what stockholders want (return on investment).


I'd just like to add here that I am glad this thread is developing some discussion without bashing one another. At least in the USA we CAN discuss and we CAN implement change through our votes, no matter how difficult it can seem now and then. Study a Communist model and see just how well those commoners (what we all are) fare.

[little_red_cherokee]

where did you get this information on "long lines"?

read up on the canadian health care system and you'll see

[BrianM]

I would say there are degrees of it, as opposed to positive and negative. There needs to be a balance between “left” and “right” – a civilized society needs to reach out to the less fortunate, certainly, but entitlements should not be rampant and implementation of them should not be used to buy votes. Refer to my post about the evolution of a society.



Corporations do not pay taxes, the consumers (end users) pay the taxes, corporations simply collect it. Taxes are buried in the cost of goods sold.



It is because of the “bottom line” – more for less – payroll (human resources for the P.C.) is huge liability – corporations (I use that term for all business models). The larger the corporation, the less compassionate. Bottom line is what stockholders want (return on investment).


I'd just like to add here that I am glad this thread is developing some discussion without bashing one another. At least in the USA we CAN discuss and we CAN implement change through our votes, no matter how difficult it can seem now and then. Study a Communist model and see just how well those commoners (what we all are) fare.
I agree

[admar2]

companies, and specifically corporations, don't exist to provide jobs. they exist to make a profit and a provide a benefit to their investors.

[axehead]

thats 1 of the many complaints I have personally heard from the majority of canadians I have met and talked to.

just trying to get in to see a dr can take weeks or months. and thats if you are sick when you try to get in.

i have a friend that has traveled to germany & canada for a very long time & he tells me that he hasn't heard those complaints.

[fjmf]

And I'll say once again that Canada does not have nationalized medicine...

[Metz]

baracuda? is this Sarah Palin? :-)

high corporate taxes, why hasn't bush cut their taxes? was that not part of "the tax cuts"?

foreclosures, people that did what you say were wrong. but what were the lenders thinking by loaning them that much money with a small income? that's wrong as well.

To address the bold part directly...

The Clinton administration pressured the mortgage industry (though a combo of regulations and political pressure) to seek out low income and minority groups and get them into homes as part of the whole "home ownership is a right" nonsense.

Please read: http://www.progressivehistorians.com/2007/11/bill-clintons-role-in-mortgage-crisis.html

Under the new lending rules came the "sub-prime" market and adjustable rates.

Now these new lending standards could not be limited to one race, so of course all those who could not qualify for a typical loan, or could not come up with a down payment generally fell into the sub-prime bracket.

My parents are a perfect example of both unintelligent borrowing and pseudo-predatory lending.

My parents combined income was less than 70k/year. They had JUST come out of bankruptcy not 3 years prior to trying to buy this $210,000 home. There was NO WAY they could afford the home if the interest rate when up even .5%

They were initially turned down for the loan as they had no cash to put down, a 500ish credit score, and couldn't qualify for the second loan to pay the "down payment"

So there loan officer told my father to go get a credit card and max it out. Pay on it for three months and come talk to him again.

He did it, and WALA- loan approved.

of course, not 12 months later their rate started climbing and I started getting phone calls to bail them out (i was in the army at that point in time and had the money to help). 3 years from the day of closing, they were kicked out by the town sheriff.

Hind sight being 20/20 my father knows he made a dumb-a@@ choice and blames nobody but himself. He does not expect the government to bail him out on what he could not pay for. He does not blame the bank. They gave him the contract to look over and he made the CHOICE to sign for the loan(s).

My biggest problem with america as it currently stands is the absolute LACK of personal responsibility.

Sorry if I wondered off topic, but everyone loves to blame the banks, when they are NOT entirely at fault. It is a combo of Gov. interference, stupid personal choices, and bad lending habits.

[Marlon_JBT]

OK, sorry to say this but that really is stupid. After the mortgage, taxes, insurance and other upkeep costs I can easily see that house costing them at least $2500/mo.

[little_red_cherokee]

My biggest problem with america as it currently stands is the absolute LACK of personal responsibility.




x2x2x2

[Metz]

Oh I know its stupid. My father admits its stupid. But 10 years ago there is NO WAY they could've gotten that loan.

I think sometimes the dems have their hearts in the right place, but 99.9% of the time they don't bother to research the full consequences of their actions and laws.

[admar2]

I think sometimes the dems have their hearts in the right place, but 99.9% of the time they don't bother to research the full consequences of their actions and laws.



yeah, but don't you know, results don't matter,only intentions. :rolleyes:

[axehead]

To address the bold part directly...

The Clinton administration pressured the mortgage industry (though a combo of regulations and political pressure) to seek out low income and minority groups and get them into homes as part of the whole "home ownership is a right" nonsense.

Please read: http://www.progressivehistorians.com/2007/11/bill-clintons-role-in-mortgage-crisis.html

Under the new lending rules came the "sub-prime" market and adjustable rates.

Now these new lending standards could not be limited to one race, so of course all those who could not qualify for a typical loan, or could not come up with a down payment generally fell into the sub-prime bracket.

My parents are a perfect example of both unintelligent borrowing and pseudo-predatory lending.

My parents combined income was less than 70k/year. They had JUST come out of bankruptcy not 3 years prior to trying to buy this $210,000 home. There was NO WAY they could afford the home if the interest rate when up even .5%

They were initially turned down for the loan as they had no cash to put down, a 500ish credit score, and couldn't qualify for the second loan to pay the "down payment"

So there loan officer told my father to go get a credit card and max it out. Pay on it for three months and come talk to him again.

He did it, and WALA- loan approved.

of course, not 12 months later their rate started climbing and I started getting phone calls to bail them out (i was in the army at that point in time and had the money to help). 3 years from the day of closing, they were kicked out by the town sheriff.

Hind sight being 20/20 my father knows he made a dumb-a@@ choice and blames nobody but himself. He does not expect the government to bail him out on what he could not pay for. He does not blame the bank. They gave him the contract to look over and he made the CHOICE to sign for the loan(s).

My biggest problem with america as it currently stands is the absolute LACK of personal responsibility.

Sorry if I wondered off topic, but everyone loves to blame the banks, when they are NOT entirely at fault. It is a combo of Gov. interference, stupid personal choices, and bad lending habits.

i agree that it was a huge combination of things, i reasearched this from various sources & it appears to have started with carter & escaladed from there with reagan, bush sr., clinton, & bush jr. i also agree on the person's responsibility, but these banks shouldn't target people either.

[BillM]

If I try to offer you a load of bologna and you buy it under my terms, then it is MY fault? It is up to you to make sure that you don't get burned, taken, snookered in this world. Hence, PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

[admar2]

because the banks run around twisting people's arms, making them take loans.

LOL

[Whitnel]

When Julie and I bought our house two years ago we had to get pre approved for a loan. When we got out papers back I could not believe the amount of money we qualified for. If I had bought a house at the max amount they would be in so much trouble now.

[admar2]

same when we qualified for a loan 4.5years ago. credit score of right at 800. they said we qualified for a RIDICULOUS amount. we DID OUR HOMEWORK though, and knew the range we wanted to be in ahead of time. something we could easily make, even if 1 of us lost our jobs. (that pesky personal responsibility thing)

that being said, the amount of paperwork I had to provide up front was incredible. IN FACT, we lived in an extended stay in brentwood for a month because the bank absolutely had to have a pay stub from each of us from our current jobs, and the wife only gets paid once a month.

[BrianM]

x2x2x2
x2 Amen brother. People in this generation (some but not all) seem to want to "live it large" when things are going well economically around the globe and for themselves. The minute things start to go sour people point the finger for their misteps...the President, bankers, wall street, oil companies, etc. . However, People just need to point the finger at themselves. How many of us have heard "don't spend more than you make?" Financing a house is normal, but people need to stay within their means. I think it all goes back to that time 'ol game of "keeping up with the Jone's"

[axehead]

If I try to offer you a load of bologna and you buy it under my terms, then it is MY fault? It is up to you to make sure that you don't get burned, taken, snookered in this world. Hence, PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

if i sell you a car that i know has a cracked engine block & don't tell you about it, i'm not a responsible person. responsibility is of the buyer & seller in this situation.
i know that lending is different because you should read what you sign, but not everyone has the smarts to understand everything that they read. some folks are smarter than others, they may think that they understand but sadly they do not.

[admar2]

so what, that means we should have a nanny state to protect people too dumb to know what they are signing? people 2 dumb to know if they are working at walmart, driving a new escalade and living in a $350k house, that they are living beyond their means?

I guess we should get somebody to follow them around and make sure they don't run with scissors too.

[axehead]

so what, that means we should have a nanny state to protect people too dumb to know what they are signing? people 2 dumb to know if they are working at walmart, driving a new escalade and living in a $350k house, that they are living beyond their means?

I guess we should get somebody to follow them around and make sure they don't run with scissors too.

LOL! those are extreme examples, the debate (at least what i was debating) is about who is at fault. i still say that if i sell a blind man (another extreme example) a dead bird i'm not responsible.
another thought, its not moral to offer a bad product.

[fjmf]

if i sell you a car that i know has a cracked engine block & don't tell you about it, i'm not a responsible person. responsibility is of the buyer & seller in this situation.
i know that lending is different because you should read what you sign, but not everyone has the smarts to understand everything that they read. some folks are smarter than others, they may think that they understand but sadly they do not.

Thats not a apples to apples comparison... Its more like if you find a new car at one lot and find the same car a different lot with a low price.

Mortgages are not faulty, these people got exactly what they agreed to....

Maybe times have changed but I believe a good man sticks with his word wither he likes it or not...


Your just not making any sense with your comparisons if you told the man it was a live bird then yes you would be wrong...

[admar2]

what the **** is immoral about offering a loan? its not a bad loan if the person MAKES THE PAYMENT.

to somehow excuse the borrower, because "its a bad deal" is borderline ridiculous.

why can't you understand that YOU are responsible for the choices you make in life!!!! not some "evil banker" or "the man" or GWB.

[little_red_cherokee]

i think anybody should be able to understand that they cant afford a 350,000 house making on 50,000 a year. i guess common sense isn't so common anymore.

i understand that if i don't have money, i don't get jeep parts.

i also understand that if i have lots of money, but no job to keep the cash flow coming in, i don't get jeep parts. i save my $$ for emergencies.

as far as who is at fault, I'd say both parties are equally at fault. the people getting the loan shouldn't have borrowed over their head, but equally so the bank shouldn't have loaned ridiculous amount of money to people that obviously cant afford it is stupid. i do NOT think that we should have to pay for others mistakes (in the form of billions of dollars)

the people signing the loan had it laid out exactly what they were getting. but the loner also saw exactly what that person could realistically pay and still gave them more.

if a homeless man askes me for a $100 and says he'll pay it back, Im going to say no (id try to help some other way) because its quite obvious to me he cant pay it back. but if i say o sure here is $200, its my fault if he runs off with it and i shouldnt go ask the govt to bail me out so i can take a million dollar camping trip

[Metz]

A better comparison to home loans than some that i have seen here are the check cashing places.

You *should* know its a terrible deal and you are going to get screwed, but people do it anyways.

Its like the people that do the "buy here pay here" car deals. "but its only $100 per week!"
Then you look at the terms and the $5000 car they bought for $100/week is going to cost them $15,600 over the next 3 years, they're just too lazy/stupid/don't care to do the math *cough* JD Byrider *cough cough*.

But hey- that is why they need the government to take care of them so these evil companies stop forcing them to take bad loans!

If the government is going to pay off the "upsidedowness" or whatever the proper term is on the subprime homes so they can be refinanced then I want the same thing done for my car loan or 50k knocked off the balance of my home loan to make up for the hit it is going to take when these asshats start selling!

[little_red_cherokee]

A better comparison to home loans than some that i have seen here are the check cashing places.

You *should* know its a terrible deal and you are going to get screwed, but people do it anyways.

Its like the people that do the "buy here pay here" car deals. "but its only $100 per week!"
Then you look at the terms and the $5000 car they bought for $100/week is going to cost them $15,600 over the next 3 years, they're just too lazy/stupid/don't care to do the math *cough* JD Byrider *cough cough*.

But hey- that is why they need the government to take care of them so these evil companies stop forcing them to take bad loans!

If the government is going to pay off the "upsidedowness" or whatever the proper term is on the subprime homes so they can be refinanced then I want the same thing done for my car loan or 50k knocked off the balance of my home loan to make up for the hit it is going to take when these asshats start selling!

yeah i saw a commercial on TV the other day for a loan. it was like an emergency type loan for only a few thousand dollars but right at the bottom in fine print it says "99.9%" intrest...

***? who would do that?

[axehead]

what the **** is immoral about offering a loan? its not a bad loan if the person MAKES THE PAYMENT.

to somehow excuse the borrower, because "its a bad deal" is borderline ridiculous.

why can't you understand that YOU are responsible for the choices you make in life!!!! not some "evil banker" or "the man" or GWB.

i do understand that we are responsible for the choices we make in life, the lenders should be responsible also. no one should get a pass on not being responsible.

[jeepercreeper]

yeah i saw a commercial on TV the other day for a loan. it was like an emergency type loan for only a few thousand dollars but right at the bottom in fine print it says "99.9%" intrest...

***? who would do that?

most states have a limit on interest rates...most states

[Metz]

i do understand that we are responsible for the choices we make in life, the lenders should be responsible also. no one should get a pass on not being responsible.

The bottom line is, they present the terms in writing. Read them and be enlightened.... OR... don't :)

[baracuda]

The bottom line is, they present the terms in writing. Read them and be enlightened.... OR... don't :)


a home loan is a contract, therefore if you need to. you can take it to a lawyer and have them look it over and give you a laymans summary.

so there again, personal responsability

[BillM]

most states have a limit on interest rates...most states

There is a FEDERAL law putting a cap on interest rates. Anything over that, and it is loan sharking which is a federal crime. ;) Just so ya'll know.

[Marlon_JBT]

There is a FEDERAL law putting a cap on interest rates. Anything over that, and it is loan sharking which is a federal crime. ;) Just so ya'll know.
So Bill, what would that cap be? :)

[Metz]

prolly something retarded high depending on what type of loan it is.

I know there are different limits for credit cards, vs car loans, vs home loans.

[BrianM]

http://www.daveramsey.com/etc/newsletters/company/102408.cfm?ectid=cnl0810.2_05
I thought this article was pretty interesting.

[BillM]

Marlon I used to know this. I have no idea what it is now. I can say that it is a certain percent added to the prime lending rate. Ex. prime + 18%. I am pretty sure it is higher than that though. My wife has a credit card that is 29.98%. :O Tell me that ain't crazy.

[zj4life]

http://i213.photobucket.com/albums/cc79/zj4life07/cid_8E9A3D7F2AE14E2880336309F1515A4.jpg

[Andy's03]

Phillip...before you start trying to spread propoganda...you should do just a little research.


http://www.fareedzakaria.com/books/index.html

Sounds like a book we should all read.

[John]

Andy, America has to stop rising for the other countries to surpass us. BO is just learning how to make that happen.

[Andy's03]

John...we are not on top now! Quit blaming this countrys issues on a man that has had nothing to do with them. All the Obama hate is really getting old! I was not for him but the fear that a dang republican that thinks like half of you scares the heII out of me.