I'm voting for McCain....

fuck all that technical bullshit.

Obama is the president for the next four years. either deal with it or move to another country. Whether or not his policies are the right thing for the country is irrelevant now...he's the PRESIDENT.

GET OFF HIS DICK
 

323cheezy

Well-Known Member
it is basically supplyside vs demand side..... people that study economics know what im saying....
keynesianism.... vs reganism or smithism (laissez fiare).......
i keep on hearing that obama's gonna tax everyone and give money to all the poor .... which may consequently lead us to be a lazyier nation.... by giving the poor a free ride.....

Well the idea of laissez fiare (republican) is that by cutting taxes for the big corporations ...the corporation will manufacture more, create more jobs, pay higher wages , and eventually the wealth will trickle back down to the proliterait.... and the invisible hand will distribute the wealth fairly.....
the problem is we reached a point where the middle class started holding on to their money or ran out of money..... now they have less to spend..... thus spending less caused a decrease in sales ....losses for the corporations..... besides were to busy spending money on fuel...... stimulating other nations economies...
Now lets look at obamas plan.....which is basically a democratic economics..... keynesianism...... in which we place higher taxes on the corporations..... and cut taxes for the middle classes and lower class ( the workers, proliteriat)....this will give the common more capital....thus we will have more money too spend ...which will lead to more spending .... and increase production and stimulate the economy.....

The true question is that who should we trust with the money ...... the working people who make the surplus... or the big wigs , ceo, top 5 percent who create markets jobs...

you feel me????
 

shitsngiggles

Active Member
This thread started with the words "fuck Obama". Which makes me want to now say, no, fuck you my friend. As I did earlier in the thread I will again point out that Obama is on record stating he will never spend federal dollars (DEA) trying to intercede in states where medical marijuana laws are in place for users and growers alike, and he has mentioned that prosecutions and incarceration for Marijuana "crimes" are not and will not be a priority of his administration.. That means by definition that he is a friend of all of us on this site. McCain has stated on many occasions that he supports and all out war on medical marijuana and also believes that it is a "gateway" drug that leads to cocaine, heroin use etc.. That kind of thinking is outdated, stupid and dangerous. See for yourself- there are endless videos on youtube showing this vast difference in ideaology between Obama and McCain and you can also see the factual evidence at granitestaters.com. Here is a link to see McCain views about Marijuana- YouTube - Senator John McCain on Medical Marijuana 8-11-07--Part 2.
Plainly stated, how in the fuck could you support McCain if in fact you support the idea of users and growers of marijuana to exist without the fear of incarceration, property seizures etc.. To do so is the most blatant example of hypocrisy I have ever seen, not to mention self- defeating and just plain stupid.
God bless the United States, Ganja, and Barack Obama.
Finally- I can't help pointing out that all you McCain supporters really took it in the ass this time. :peace:
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
it is basically supplyside vs demand side..... people that study economics know what im saying....
keynesianism.... vs reganism or smithism (laissez fiare).......
i keep on hearing that obama's gonna tax everyone and give money to all the poor .... which may consequently lead us to be a lazyier nation.... by giving the poor a free ride.....

Well the idea of laissez fiare (republican) is that by cutting taxes for the big corporations ...the corporation will manufacture more, create more jobs, pay higher wages , and eventually the wealth will trickle back down to the proliterait.... and the invisible hand will distribute the wealth fairly.....
the problem is we reached a point where the middle class started holding on to their money or ran out of money..... now they have less to spend..... thus spending less caused a decrease in sales ....losses for the corporations..... besides were to busy spending money on fuel...... stimulating other nations economies...
Now lets look at obamas plan.....which is basically a democratic economics..... keynesianism...... in which we place higher taxes on the corporations..... and cut taxes for the middle classes and lower class ( the workers, proliteriat)....this will give the common more capital....thus we will have more money too spend ...which will lead to more spending .... and increase production and stimulate the economy.....

The true question is that who should we trust with the money ...... the working people who make the surplus... or the big wigs , ceo, top 5 percent who create markets jobs...

you feel me????
That's not true Laissez Faire economics. True laissez faire economics dictates that the government does not interfere in the markets.

It is socialism and fascism that favor giving tax benefits to big corporations, and bloated bureaucracies that enjoy making the law so obfuscated that it is impossible for a lay person to understand it forcing the hiring of lawyers and lobbyists. Lawyers, to understand the spaghetti code of legal jargon, and Lobbyists to carve loopholes into the bloated cancerous mass of extraneous restrictions, and to create more extraneous restrictions in favor of who they are employed by.
 

Leilani Garden

Well-Known Member
narcissism prevents one from internalizing any personal attacks,suggestions, or critiques.

leilani if you believe in the dsm than realize it's not his (brutal's) fault. nor anyone elses that your trying to help see the light. it's a mental illness, empathy can't be learned if it can't be internalized.

Ding, ding, ding . . . been reading the DSM lately? :!:

Cybergirl posted this:

Just to throw some more fuel on the fire.. I am poor. Unemployable for the simple fact that I have a mentally ill child that I can't afford to get help for. I have lost jobs because of having to come pick her up from school and it's taken 2 years of fighting to be able to get any help for her at all. I am well educated, well spoken, and broke as hell. I pay taxes, I contribute to society, but now I am hoping that Obama's policies will lead to better funding for special ed so that I have more options.
What does that mean? Taxes. Bottom line, taxes will always be necessary. Taxes and social programs that can help someone like me overcome obstacles in order to raise successful children. I do agree that more taxes should go to the state, not the federal government, the fed should stay the hell away from states like mine and stop WASTING money enforcing laws we decided we don't agree with.

BTW Congrats to Michigan with their Medical marijuana law!!


THis is a perfect example. Does Cybergirl sound stupid, greedy or lazy? What about her child? Stupid, intent on living off the backs of those more fortunate. Wouldn't it be too cool if CyberGirl's child could get the help she needs, enabling the mother to function at a higher level? Or are they both just stupid and lazy?

Thanks for that info. Perfect example.
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
narcissism prevents one from internalizing any personal attacks,suggestions, or critiques.

leilani if you believe in the dsm than realize it's not his (brutal's) fault. nor anyone elses that your trying to help see the light. it's a mental illness, empathy can't be learned if it can't be internalized.
Phishhead, I don't know what weird retarded world view you have, but first off, I should point out that your comment can only make people wonder if you are pretending to be psychic.

As far as who's fault it is. Unlike you crazy demented socialist's who have to blame everyone else but yourselves, I'll freely own up to my choices, and saw that I have responsibility for adopting the world view that I have adopted, and any one else that wishes to argue otherwise needs to have their head examined.
 

DKskater75

Well-Known Member
I think Samuel L. Jackson said it very well last night lol "you know it's like for the past 8 years everyone has hated us because of our president and what he's done, now that we got Obama it's like welcome back to the rest of the world America"
 

cybergrl23

Well-Known Member
I know, it's nice isn't it? It's like finally leaving an abusive spouse. It takes a few tries, and it's hard, but you come out way better in the end for it. Stronger, more confident, able to take care of business and get your life back.
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
Whatever. You jumped all over someone for using bad language about Palin, asking does not everyone deserve respect, which is just plain hypocritical, considering the crap you shoveled in my direction. Live by the sword, dle by the sword.


Are children responsible for their miserable conditions? And others, the parents? At any time, they can get off their asses and what? Just change everything about themselves, their backgrounds, their teeth, appearance? You think it's just so easy. I bet that you are white, come from a nice middle class background, and so on. I bet your teeth look just fine, are not corroded from years of neglect. You're reasonably well spoken and educated.

Am I responsible for their condition? Any one with half a brain will honestly state that I am not. Though, I supposed I ought to laugh at your petty attempts to stereotype.

Actually, my teeth are fucked up from years of neglect, but I'm not going to say that some one else needs to pay to have them corrected, or that the government should fix them. I don't want government to help me, I want government to get off my back, so I can take care of myself.

You are also completely lacking in any way of empathy: the ability to try to imagine what things feel like for others. That's a very dangerous way to go through life. In fact, if you go check out the DSM-IV and look at some of the AXIS TWO disorders . . .. I'll let you figure that one out. Empathy is what allows human beings to be more than just beasts, scraping up every single little bit of meat for themselves and watching others die. It's also how some animal groups die out, as well as human beings. Recall the Ik people I told you about. Empathy is dead with them, and they will probably not survive.

Still stereotyping? You don't have the foggiest clue about who, or what kind of person I really am, and yet, because I disagree with your idiotic world view, you feel the need to stereotype me, and try hammering me into some round hole. Maybe I was correct to compare you to Hitler, because the NAZIs did the same exact thing to the Jews.

Your use of the word stupidity here reveals you for what you are. You think all poverty is caused by stupidity. Is the color of one's skin and one's parents caused by stupidity?

Are their parents my fault? I don't recall holding a gun at any one and telling them that they had to procreate. One of the few things that I can agree with religion on, is that people shouldn't have kids outside of marriage. I've also always been of the opinion that people should make sure that they are financially stable before having kids. Of course, that is a little hard with the economy going in the direction it is going, but nonetheless it is true. Though, speaking of people being separate from animals, don't you think that it is just as bad for people to act like animals by having children with out any thought to the kind of conditions those children will be in?

Who said I want you, personally, to pay for others, anyway? I think a few of us on this thread have been pretty vocal that the spending on utterly nonsensical things could go a long way toward getting those who can be saved out of poverty, so they too are CONTRIBUTING to society.

Obviously the tax dollars that are coming out of my pocket, are going to pay for these things, thus I am paying for them.

What is stupid, imo, is that there are so many who refuse to even acknowledge that helping people out of poverty will only enhance the culture as a whole. You like living near poverty? YOu probalby don't, and I know it's hard for someone who lacks empathy, but try to imagine what it might feel like to live near a poverty-stricken area. Imagine the crime. Think you'd enjoy that? Where there is poverty, there are lacking resources, and where you have that, you will have crime. So, the plot thickens: reduce poverty, reduce crime.

If that's the case about poverty reducing crime how do you explain the accounting frauds and other white color criminals? Excuse me for shooting a gaping hole in your theory about poverty being the root cause of crime.

There might be possible that it contributes, especially in cases where through stupidity, such as NAFTA, GATT, WTO and other trade agreements that screw over the industrial sector of this country, and thus the country at large there are no jobs so the only choice people have is to do whatever they need to do to survive.

You can't ameliorate poverty by educating some one, because unless there is a job for them, then they are still going to be poor. Perhaps, more ideal would be to ensure that there are jobs first. Of course, such a thing is highly unlikely, because minimum wage has been shown to destroy entry level positions which hurts both the poor, and the middle class, especially people that are trying to save for college, and for people that are finding it necessary to work to pay for college.

You cannot change human nature. Where there is poverty, there will be crime.

That's debatable, it is more a matter of crime paying better than honest work. Which will be the case regardless of minimum wage increases, because people will always seek to differentiate themselves through having better "things", and thus there will always be a group of people that can be perceived as being impoverished.

You can, however, be part of the solution and that is doing all we can rid ourselves of such a huge underclass, the poverty stricken. It will only HELP all of us.

Once again, I must state that there will always be poverty. Now, perhaps a better way to go about removing it would be to cut farm subsidies that pay farmers for not growing food, and thus push food prices up artificially. Cut ethanol subsides which also distort food prices.

Government regulation is both good, and bad, but when it is bad it is disasterous, just look at what stupid legislation such as CRA has done to this country when combined with inept bureaucrats who refused to strengthen the oversight of the GSEs and loosened other regulations.


One, I'm not an idiot, nor are my thoughts idiotic. You might disagree, but do it RESPECTFULLY, just like you insisted upon regarding Ms. Palin.

Why should I extend you any respect at all, when you are unwilling to show me any courtesy, and resort to stereotyping and trying to accuse me of not having empathy. Et Tu Brute?

Why would this mean that everyone is equally poor? Just how did you arrive at this conclusion. You answer that, and I'll answer you. But for me to answer this question as you've worded it, would only make it appear that I am tacitly condoning your insinuating that I am idiotic and that everyone will be poor if we make more of an effort to rid ourselves of poverty.

If minimum wages are increased, then the cost of living increases (maybe not as fast, but it will increase) thus once again people like you will cry for the need to raise minimum wages again. The circle is repetitive.

One more note--not for Brutal, though.

I do believe that we've got a huge number of people, who due to the gleeful hatred of the last eight years--that fascism--actually like knowing that there are poverty stricken people out there. THey like knowing that someone else has it harder than they do. My gut feeling is that as long as someone else has it rougher and "we" can pile on the recriminations (they're stupid and make the same mistakes over and over again, etc, etc, ad nauseum), "we" can feel so much better about ourselves. IOW, these folks derive happiness and esteem out of knowing how hard life is for others. A very sad state of affairs, indeed.
I personally don't feel better about myself because other people are worse off than I am, nor am I jealous of those that are better off than I am. I have been near starving, and it sucks, and I'm assuming that for people that are near starving it sucks for them just as much as it sucked for me, if not more so.

Perhaps, a good solution, would be to give a dollar per dollar credit on tax liability for every dollar that is donated to a charity. Let people benefit directly from being charitable. Taxation is a highly inefficient method of ameliorating poverty, because it introduces too many middlemen, and each middleman takes a cut.
 

Stoney McFried

Well-Known Member
Uh..sorry haven't been on.What I mean is, you shouldn't get more tax breaks if you make more money, while the rest of the folks are still paying the same amount.I thought I made it pretty simple.I don't hate the rich, I just think they as Americans should pay their fair share too.Wanna bitch about folks on welfare?Why not reroute some of the money we spend on missiles into job training programs?How about we cut pork programs?Self centered? Cold hearted?You don't even know me.I bet I do a hell of a lot more HONEST giving than the rich.I give even when I don't have it.Why is their example, which is dodging taxes and accumulating THINGS, an example to aspire to?I never said they couldn't pursue wealth.I said they need to pay their fair share, same as anyone else.Just because you poop in a gold toilet doesn't mean your shit stinks any less than mine.
And just what is their fair share, STONEY?

When they are reduced to poverty paying for every damn welfare whore out there?

Every thieving politician?

Every GM, FoMoCo, and Chrysler?

Every Lehman, Fannie and Freddie?

Do you not realize that Socialism = Big Business subsidized at tax payer expense?

Look at Europe, they subsidize EADS

China, it should be called PLA-China, Inc.

At least under capitalism every company can compete with out worrying about the government subsidizing them...

well, at least that's what the idea was.

Of course, another thing I don't understand is why socialists are so self-centered, and so cold-hearted. Don't even bother denying it. If you weren't self-centered and cold hearted, you'd be saying that their examples are something for everyone to aspire to. You wouldn't be accusing them of being greedy just because they made a lot of money.

$250,000 or $400,000 isn't a lot of money.

A lot of money starts at, $1,000,000/year or more.

Nothing but peasant hatred of the merchant class, which was really common in Europe during the middle ages, too.
So say I.When you've run out of salient arguments, then you start calling folks like med and I socialists and nazis.Here's a word.Fascist.:o
Dear Brutal, get a life. What you are describing, "Socialism for business", has a neme, it is plutochracy. It does nothing to help the average man, helping "Joe average" may well be socialism. If so, God bless it.
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
Uh..sorry haven't been on.What I mean is, you shouldn't get more tax breaks if you make more money, while the rest of the folks are still paying the same amount.I thought I made it pretty simple.I don't hate the rich, I just think they as Americans should pay their fair share too.Wanna bitch about folks on welfare?Why not reroute some of the money we spend on missiles into job training programs?How about we cut pork programs?Self centered? Cold hearted?You don't even know me.I bet I do a hell of a lot more HONEST giving than the rich.I give even when I don't have it.Why is their example, which is dodging taxes and accumulating THINGS, an example to aspire to?I never said they couldn't pursue wealth.I said they need to pay their fair share, same as anyone else.Just because you poop in a gold toilet doesn't mean your shit stinks any less than mine.

So say I.When you've run out of salient arguments, then you start calling folks like med and I socialists and nazis.Here's a word.Fascist.:o
And what is their fair share?

How much must they pay before you are finally satisfied that they have paid enough?
 

Stoney McFried

Well-Known Member
THE SAME AS EVERYONE ELSE! Hullo!Did I not make that clear?Here's an example, mkay?
Bob the Mcdonald's cashier pays 22 percent of his income in taxes.Bob makes 12,500 a year.
Harold B. Hornsby esq. III is the ceo of a multibillion dollar corporation.He pays 22 percent of his income in taxes.He makes 3 million a year.
Now I've more than answered your question.Can you quit trying to argue with me now?Thanks!
And what is their fair share?

How much must they pay before you are finally satisfied that they have paid enough?
 

phishhead

Well-Known Member
Phishhead, I don't know what weird retarded world view you have, but first off, I should point out that your comment can only make people wonder if you are pretending to be psychic.

As far as who's fault it is. Unlike you crazy demented socialist's who have to blame everyone else but yourselves, I'll freely own up to my choices, and saw that I have responsibility for adopting the world view that I have adopted, and any one else that wishes to argue otherwise needs to have their head examined.

brutal your so stupid for someone with obvious intelligence.


I paid you a compliment and all you can do is throw insults. :clap:
 

323cheezy

Well-Known Member
I think Samuel L. Jackson said it very well last night lol "you know it's like for the past 8 years everyone has hated us because of our president and what he's done, now that we got Obama it's like welcome back to the rest of the world America"
i agree with that ..... but whos this samuel l jackson guy....neva heard of him........:-P
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
THE SAME AS EVERYONE ELSE! Hullo!Did I not make that clear?Here's an example, mkay?
Bob the Mcdonald's cashier pays 22 percent of his income in taxes.Bob makes 12,500 a year.
Harold B. Hornsby esq. III is the ceo of a multibillion dollar corporation.He pays 22 percent of his income in taxes.He makes 3 million a year.
Now I've more than answered your question.Can you quit trying to argue with me now?Thanks!
That's a percentage, not an actual dollar figure. I don't give a damn about a percentage, because a percentage is still inherently unfair. Give me a dollar figure.
 

Stoney McFried

Well-Known Member
Hey, TBT, I can't paint the picture any clearer.Their fair share is the same percentage of their income that the middle and lower class has to pay.So I'd say...if your income is 400k...and 22 percent is the tax rate...and I'm not a tax lawyer so I don't know the exact amount...then uh...your taxes would be a little over 88k.But I don't set the tax rate...I just think it's only fair we pay our share.Incidentally, 22 percent of 12.5k is 2750.I did the math for ya.Now I'm sure you'll find something else to bitch about.Keep in mind, most people, with child deductions,etc,won't end up paying the full amount of said taxes.
That's a percentage, not an actual dollar figure. I don't give a damn about a percentage, because a percentage is still inherently unfair. Give me a dollar figure.
 
Top