See who agrees with Obama's "Spread the wealth around" agenda, part 2

[Little-Acorn]

Looks like mfm has succeeded in filling another thread he doesn't like, with enough crap to get it closed, as he so often does. May I make a request that he be banned from this replacement thread at least? IMHO he has "contributed" quite enough.

Back to the subject:



Any differences that aren't trivial?

Obama's stated desire is to tax the people earning more money, and send their wealth to people who earned less or none. This points to the most fundamental difference there is, between modern liberals and conservatives.

Liberals believe that your earnings are not yours, but government's (that is, theirs), to do with what THEY want. They have no problem enacting legislation to do just that.

Conservatives believe that your earnings are YOURS. And that government, while necessary, should be kept to a minimum, and do only the things private people or groups CANNOT do. They enact legislation to take your money as taxes, too, but they keep it to a minimum, and believe that they are spending it on things YOU want to spend it on. And they point out that the reason government is taking it to spend on those things, is because you as private people CANNOT do those particular things: Defend the nation, dispassionately pursue and prosecute criminals, handle foreign affairs, etc. Anything you CAN do as private people, the Federal government has no business in.

If Joe the Plumber wanted some welfare queen to have some of his money, he could have written her a check. He doesn't need government to do that for him.

Needless to say, conservatives are getting harder and harder to find in government nowadays. And the fundamental battle we face, is getting the liberals out (from both parties) and conservatives in.

[MtnBiker]

We don't need Obama or any politician deciding on how wealth should be spread around!

[LOki]

Looks like mfm has succeeded in filling another thread he doesn't like, with enough crap to get it closed, as he so often does. May I make a request that he be banned from this replacement thread at least? IMHO he has "contributed" quite enough.

Back to the subject:



Any differences that aren't trivial?

Obama's stated desire is to tax the people earning more money, and send their wealth to people who earned less or none. This points to the most fundamental difference there is, between modern liberals and conservatives.

Liberals believe that your earnings are not yours, but government's (that is, theirs), to do with what THEY want. They have no problem enacting legislation to do just that.

Conservatives believe that your earnings are YOURS.

In so far as you are not speaking of liberals all-inclusively, but rather in general, I'm agreeing, more or less, up to here.

Conservatives (generally, not all-inclusively) believe that your earnings are ultimately Jesus'; and since THEIR personal Jesus is the Jesus THEY're talking about; that the will of THEIR personal Jesus, expressed through THEIR personal relationship with THEIR Jesus, is the ultimate measure, and justification for their coercive dispostion of your existence; in other words, Conservatives believe that your earnings are THEIRS. Praise Jesus.

And that government, while necessary, should be kept to a minimum, and do only the things private people or groups CANNOT do. They enact legislation to take your money as taxes, too, but they keep it to a minimum, and believe that they are spending it on things YOU want to spend it on. And they point out that the reason government is taking it to spend on those things, is because you as private people CANNOT do those particular things: Defend the nation, dispassionately pursue and prosecute criminals, handle foreign affairs, etc. Anything you CAN do as private people, the Federal government has no business in.

Oh yes. The conservative's notion of limited government is government limited to the jurisdiction of their personal Jesus--which, they're glad to tell you, has no limitations.

If Joe the Plumber wanted some welfare queen to have some of his money, he could have written her a check. He doesn't need government to do that for him.

You're absolutely right. And if the farcical threats of some omniscient and omnipotent, invisible father who lives in the sky is what it takes to keep Joe the Plumber (or others like him) in line, then he should stick to plumbing, and leave government to better people than him.

Needless to say, conservatives are getting harder and harder to find in government nowadays.

You mean "Happy to say, . . ."

And the fundamental battle we face, is getting the liberals out (from both parties) and conservatives in.

No. the actual battle is to get both the emotional and superstitious retards out, and rational people in.

[red states rule]

Join the Communist Party and Vote Obama

You don’t want to miss this entry by PTG.

It’s a doozy, but not so much for me as it is for the people that are about to vote NOBama into office.

A Gal that left a comment here on my blog not too long ago mentioned Marxism and other commentators felt she she needed to spoon feed them with her reasoning.

Then I happened to stumble on PTG’s post and though, why reinvent the wheel of spoon feeding Marxism when they can read it for themselves over there, right?

Has John McCain really gone soft on Communism? No, I don’t think he has. I do believe that he will save the best of her factual punches for the last Presidential debate.

I find it ironic that a few years ago I was upset that John McCain had a temper. Now I find myself wishing that he would dig down deep and find that fire and fight the good fight because if Obama gets in we are in so much trouble economically, globally, militarily, etc.

I wonder how many people will cheat the system and not pay their taxes as a result of the financial turmoil they are about to endure. Can you take a guess?

The businesses that are struggling and barely making it are about to take a hit and if you think Barack NOBama is not going to raise your taxes because he will think you can’t afford it, you can think again. Taxes are already high and it’s not just the straight shooting taxes, it’s the taxes on everything, like capital gains taxes, etc. Do your homework before you step into vote or you just might be throwing that dagger into your own back.

Those voting the lesser of two evils need to really stop and THINK about what it is they are doing. Your Children’s lives are at stake. Our freedoms as directed by the Constitution are at stake. NOBama’s team of mentors is disturbing to me.

Bird’s of a feather flock together. For some reason that was really resonating with me this weekend. I kept asking myself, “Angela… who are you spending your time with?” Thank God He woke me up to the truth. It’s like my SIL was telling me, everything happens for a reason. All the seasons are beautiful but at some point they can end. Nothing is forever and I think it’s time to take stock in my Bible and get to reading it so I myself can wise up against the spiritual forces of evil
http://angela-stevens.com/archives/j...nd-vote-obama/

[CatalystOfChaos]

Nowhere in the "Joe Plumber" sequence did Obama say he wanted to "spread the wealth" or "redistribute."

He said he wanted individuals and companies who make more than 250k to pay a little more in taxes, those who make less to pay a little less.

He did not in any way say that the tax money coming from Joe the Plumber would go into the waitress' he referred to's pocket.

He simply said that she'd pay less in taxes, he'd pay a little more.

Some might say that making one person pay more taxes than another in reality is, taking his money and giving it to her. I disagree.

Let's say...

I have $10.
Joe has $100.

Let's say the current plan means we both pay 30%.

I now have $7 left, Joe has $66 left. Government now has $36. Now, let's for argument's sake say that this $36 is going into transportation funding (road maintenance.)

Now, let's say Obama's plan goes into effect. Now I pay 20%, so I'm paying $2. Joe now pays 34%, so pays $34. So he paid an extra dollar, I paid a dollar less. This money still goes into transportation, it is not given to me.

Now, with that extra dollar... Americans spend spend spend. Joe provides a service. That extra dollar gets spent on services or product. Joe or someone like him sees it again. Now maybe I'm just really, really struggling and so that extra $ goes into my rent. My landlord hires plumbers.

It's not a redistribution or spreading of the wealth. It's trying to help the people hurt most by the economic crises we are facing by paying the government's programs, tax funded maintenance and such that are staples of government and American existence. The dollar is not coming out of Joe's pocket and going into mine, its coming out of Joe's pocket and helping to pay for road maintenance and law enforcement and such. The "works hard" argument only goes so far. I'll give you an example.

I worked for 5 years for CompUSA, working hard. From the age of 16 to 21, I worked hard for that company. They never paid a whole lot, but I've always felt that if you're going to work for someone, you agreed to do your job for what you were paid. CompUSA shut down. All my hard work? Waste of time.

Then I got a job with CE Workforce, making quite a bit more money and a better position (Sales Rep up to Field Area Manager.) Then CE Workforce shut down a month later. Again, my hard work and all the interviews I had gone to, positions I had turned down... meant nothing.

My next job, Hewlett Packard as an in store rep/trainer, lasted for a little over a year. HP cut the contract short and early, budget cuts due to lower sales due to the economy being messed up. Now I have no work, and spend day after day trying to set up interviews. For all the positions I've interviewed for, I'm competing against up to a dozen other candidates, many of which are older than me with more experience, so I do not get hired. My "hard work" goes nowhere. I will not go work at McDonalds or StarBucks or WalMart where I probably could get a job, because I can't pay my bills on those wages AND it looks bad on a resume. But with our current screwed up economy, its an employer's market. They can afford to fire people then rehire people at a lower wage than that job paid a year previously. A job that paid $15 an hour last year now pays $9 an hour. A job that was 40 hours a week last year, cut to 20 hours a week this year. The job market is terrible, and the areas where people seeing rough times were able to find jobs before (retail, restaurants, etc) now can't find jobs.

Now, I'm in a really tough position. I couldn't finish school because of financial aid issues, they cut me off. I was making $40,000 a year. This barely pays the bills in California, it does not allow me to pay my own way through school. I don't have financial aid from the government, I don't have a job, and unemployment is a piddling amount of money that they try to hassle you every bit of the way rather than give you.

I spend 4-6 hours a day looking for jobs, sending in resumes, calling around, etc. The other 4-6 I spend doing side projects, trying to sell stuff on Ebay, whatever I can do so I don't lose my car and so the electricity isn't shut off.

I'm not the only one facing this kind of problem. Now, Joe paying a little more in taxes and me paying a little less... the government continues running. Transportation gets to keep the roads maintained. And now I have an extra dollar that i can go pay a bill with, pay the rent with... which frees up an extra dollar to spend elsewhere. With less money flowing around, the government has less money from taxes... the money has to come from somewhere. Raise taxes for everyone, including the people who can't pay their electricity bill in spite of the fact they "work hard?"

In a normal economic situation, where "working hard" means success, maybe this complaint would be true. I graduated high school. I worked all through and during high school. I've stayed in work, I went to college. My hard work has gotten me nowhere with how screwed up our economy is. So Joe, who is making quite a bit of money, and gets his money from other people needing his services, is in decent shape. He's worked hard, he's been rewarded for it. Some extra cash here and there would enable me to keep paying for bills and services, such as what Joe provides.

[Yurt]

he expressly said he wanted to spread the wealth around

[retiredman]

this thread reminds me of a similar sort of phenomenon with golfers. If you ASK the average golfer how far he hits his driver, he'll give you a yardage... it may be 240 or 280 or some even bigger number. But when you put that same golfer on a driving range and ask him to hit his driver, he invariably hits it twenty or thirty yards shorter than he claimed he could.

All these folks whining about Obama's bumping the marginal rate for over $250K to where it was when the rich were having a hell of a good time under Clinton are kinda like those golfers.

[Little-Acorn]

Nowhere in the "Joe Plumber" sequence did Obama say he wanted to "spread the wealth" or "redistribute."

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10...spread-wealth/

Obama to Plumber: My Plan Will 'Spread the Wealth Around'

Barack Obama tells a plumber in Ohio he wants to "spread the wealth around," eliciting criticism that his economic recovery plan is socialist in nature.

Monday, October 13, 2008

Barack Obama told a tax-burdened plumber over the weekend that his economic philosophy is to "spread the wealth around" -- a comment that may only draw fire from riled-up John McCain supporters who have taken to calling Obama a "socialist" at the Republican's rallies.

Obama made the remark, caught on camera, after fielding some tough questions from the plumber Sunday in Ohio, where the Democratic candidate canvassed neighborhoods and encouraged residents to vote early.

"Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?" the plumber asked, complaining that he was being taxed "more and more for fulfilling the American dream."

"It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success too," Obama responded. "My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody ... I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

He did not in any way say that the tax money coming from Joe the Plumber would go into the waitress' he referred to's pocket.
He simply said that she'd pay less in taxes, he'd pay a little more.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/spread-the-weal.html

"The only thing that changes, is I’m gonna cut taxes a little bit more for the folks who are most in need and for the 5% of the folks who are doing very well - even though they’ve been working hard and I appreciate that – I just want to make sure they’re paying a little bit more in order to pay for those other tax cuts."

Let's say...
Joe has $100.
Let's say the current plan means we both pay 30%.
Joe has $66 left.

Why am I not surprised, that someone who:

(a) is grossly ignorant of the details of Obama's plans,
(b) can't (or won't) do the most basic research, and
(c) can't even manage simple arithmetic correctly,

....is the one who's in favor of Obama's socialistic agenda?

[hjmick]

Nowhere in the "Joe Plumber" sequence did Obama say he wanted to "spread the wealth" or "redistribute."

You may want to listen a little more closely, Obama does indeed say that he believes in spreading the wealth around. In fact, his exact words are, "I think that when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

The quote comes at the 4:43 mark in the video:

[YOUTUBE]BRPbCSSXyp0[/YOUTUBE]

[CatalystOfChaos]

Have you even watched the whole video instead of the 10 second clip?

And for my math, I'm sorry, I'm tired, I was thinking 33% for some reason, not 30%.

Jeezus, way to nitpick :P

And I spend hours every single night researching everything I can, because I have an absentee ballot on my desk staring me in the face that I haven't finished filling out yet.

I'm sorry that my research isn't all on FoxNews.com

[Binky]

Nowhere in the "Joe Plumber" sequence did Obama say he wanted to "spread the wealth" or "redistribute."

He said he wanted individuals and companies who make more than 250k to pay a little more in taxes, those who make less to pay a little less.

He did not in any way say that the tax money coming from Joe the Plumber would go into the waitress' he referred to's pocket.

He simply said that she'd pay less in taxes, he'd pay a little more.

Some might say that making one person pay more taxes than another in reality is, taking his money and giving it to her. I disagree.

Let's say...

I have $10.
Joe has $100.

Let's say the current plan means we both pay 30%.

I now have $7 left, Joe has $66 left. Government now has $36. Now, let's for argument's sake say that this $36 is going into transportation funding (road maintenance.)

Now, let's say Obama's plan goes into effect. Now I pay 20%, so I'm paying $2. Joe now pays 34%, so pays $34. So he paid an extra dollar, I paid a dollar less. This money still goes into transportation, it is not given to me.

Now, with that extra dollar... Americans spend spend spend. Joe provides a service. That extra dollar gets spent on services or product. Joe or someone like him sees it again. Now maybe I'm just really, really struggling and so that extra $ goes into my rent. My landlord hires plumbers.

It's not a redistribution or spreading of the wealth. It's trying to help the people hurt most by the economic crises we are facing by paying the government's programs, tax funded maintenance and such that are staples of government and American existence. The dollar is not coming out of Joe's pocket and going into mine, its coming out of Joe's pocket and helping to pay for road maintenance and law enforcement and such. The "works hard" argument only goes so far. I'll give you an example.

I worked for 5 years for CompUSA, working hard. From the age of 16 to 21, I worked hard for that company. They never paid a whole lot, but I've always felt that if you're going to work for someone, you agreed to do your job for what you were paid. CompUSA shut down. All my hard work? Waste of time.

Then I got a job with CE Workforce, making quite a bit more money and a better position (Sales Rep up to Field Area Manager.) Then CE Workforce shut down a month later. Again, my hard work and all the interviews I had gone to, positions I had turned down... meant nothing.

My next job, Hewlett Packard as an in store rep/trainer, lasted for a little over a year. HP cut the contract short and early, budget cuts due to lower sales due to the economy being messed up. Now I have no work, and spend day after day trying to set up interviews. For all the positions I've interviewed for, I'm competing against up to a dozen other candidates, many of which are older than me with more experience, so I do not get hired. My "hard work" goes nowhere. I will not go work at McDonalds or StarBucks or WalMart where I probably could get a job, because I can't pay my bills on those wages AND it looks bad on a resume. But with our current screwed up economy, its an employer's market. They can afford to fire people then rehire people at a lower wage than that job paid a year previously. A job that paid $15 an hour last year now pays $9 an hour. A job that was 40 hours a week last year, cut to 20 hours a week this year. The job market is terrible, and the areas where people seeing rough times were able to find jobs before (retail, restaurants, etc) now can't find jobs.

Now, I'm in a really tough position. I couldn't finish school because of financial aid issues, they cut me off. I was making $40,000 a year. This barely pays the bills in California, it does not allow me to pay my own way through school. I don't have financial aid from the government, I don't have a job, and unemployment is a piddling amount of money that they try to hassle you every bit of the way rather than give you.

I spend 4-6 hours a day looking for jobs, sending in resumes, calling around, etc. The other 4-6 I spend doing side projects, trying to sell stuff on Ebay, whatever I can do so I don't lose my car and so the electricity isn't shut off.

I'm not the only one facing this kind of problem. Now, Joe paying a little more in taxes and me paying a little less... the government continues running. Transportation gets to keep the roads maintained. And now I have an extra dollar that i can go pay a bill with, pay the rent with... which frees up an extra dollar to spend elsewhere. With less money flowing around, the government has less money from taxes... the money has to come from somewhere. Raise taxes for everyone, including the people who can't pay their electricity bill in spite of the fact they "work hard?"

In a normal economic situation, where "working hard" means success, maybe this complaint would be true. I graduated high school. I worked all through and during high school. I've stayed in work, I went to college. My hard work has gotten me nowhere with how screwed up our economy is. So Joe, who is making quite a bit of money, and gets his money from other people needing his services, is in decent shape. He's worked hard, he's been rewarded for it. Some extra cash here and there would enable me to keep paying for bills and services, such as what Joe provides.

You say you can't pay your bills on wages from McD's, Starbucks etc, but are you able to pay them now, since you are drawing unemployment? Soon the money will run out. Then where will you be? I've always been under the assumption that any job was better than no job. And that one has to do, what one has to do. We don't always like what we have to do, but that doesn't matter when it comes to eating and paying the bills. In times like we see today, where any sort of job is hard to come by, especially in rural areas, it isn't important how pretty your resume looks with this and that splashed throughout it. What matters is that you are doing whatever it takes to attempt at filling your daily needs.

Go out there and get whatever job you can. The future is now. You need to eat to survive. Appearances be hanged. At least you'll have something in your stomach other than hunger pains.

[red states rule]

this thread reminds me of a similar sort of phenomenon with golfers. If you ASK the average golfer how far he hits his driver, he'll give you a yardage... it may be 240 or 280 or some even bigger number. But when you put that same golfer on a driving range and ask him to hit his driver, he invariably hits it twenty or thirty yards shorter than he claimed he could.

All these folks whining about Obama's bumping the marginal rate for over $250K to where it was when the rich were having a hell of a good time under Clinton are kinda like those golfers.

What is it with you libs. You tell everyone you want people to attain the America dream - but then you admit you will screw them over if they make more then $250,000/yr

Is $250,000/yr now considered rich by the left?

Why should Joe then want to take a risk by buying a plumbing business, hire more workers, (who will then be paying taxes) expand the business, help the local economy - when he will be punished by handing over more of the profit to the Federal government?

[CatalystOfChaos]

You say you can't pay your bills on wages from McD's, Starbucks etc, but are you able to pay them now, since you are drawing unemployment? Soon the money will run out. Then where will you be? I've always been under the assumption that any job was better than no job. And that one has to do, what one has to do. We don't always like what we have to do, but that doesn't matter when it comes to eating and paying the bills. In times like we see today, where any sort of job is hard to come by, especially in rural areas, it isn't important how pretty your resume looks with this and that splashed throughout it. What matters is that you are doing whatever it takes to attempt at filling your daily needs.

Go out there and get whatever job you can. The future is now. You need to eat to survive. Appearances be hanged. At least you'll have something in your stomach other than hunger pains.

There is $11,000 in my unemployment. I'm not going to take a job that pays $8 an hour when my unemployment pays me $10-12 an hour and the tax is not withheld. My girlfriend is still working, so between what she makes and my unemployment we survive, but its a struggle.

Basically, I'm able to pay my very very basic needs, but not my credit card bills. Which I hate, because my credit score goes down, and its money that I agreed to pay back and now have no money to pay those debts with.

Taking a job at McDonalds would only hurt me, not help me.

[hjmick]

Have you even watched the whole video instead of the 10 second clip?

Yeah, I watched the whole video, for the umpteenth time. The clip I posted is only about 5 minutes and a few seconds long and as you can see, I had the courtesy of giving folks the exact point it can be found in the video. After watching to that point, I figured I'd go ahead and finish.

[Yurt]

There is $11,000 in my unemployment. I'm not going to take a job that pays $8 an hour when my unemployment pays me $10-12 an hour and the tax is not withheld. My girlfriend is still working, so between what she makes and my unemployment we survive, but its a struggle.

Basically, I'm able to pay my very very basic needs, but not my credit card bills. Which I hate, because my credit score goes down, and its money that I agreed to pay back and now have no money to pay those debts with.

Taking a job at McDonalds would only hurt me, not help me.

take two jobs...when i was younger and bustin ass to get ahead (still doing it) i worked at mcds...the guy next to me had 2 kids and 3 jobs...he had to the pay bills and he could only get lower wage work so he took multiple jobs