Author Topic: Who's Crazier?...you make the call  (Read 1790 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« on: March 10, 2011, 12:01:34 PM »
Charlie Sheen, at least, has an excuse. He's on a drug he calls "Charlie Sheen."

But what powerful hallucinogen inhaled by the left induces the mental fantasy that makes them believe:

Spending nearly a trillion dollars in "stimulus" money "created or saved" 3.5 million jobs?

A "tax cut" means giving checks to the nearly 40 percent of the workforce that pays no federal income taxes?

Racism drives the tea party/conservative/right-wing criticism of a left-wing black president ? who received more of the white vote than John Kerry, in every age demographic, and who at one time enjoyed an approval rating of almost 70 percent?

Government can "invest" in "green jobs of the future" better than can the private sector, can pick winners and losers better than the marketplace, and can do this while not rewarding those with political influence or punishing those without it?

The rich pay no taxes ? even though the top 1 percent of income-earners pay nearly 40 percent of all federal income taxes? 

Tax cuts only benefit the rich ? even though they disproportionately pay the income taxes (see above)?

Federal and state budget problems can be solved by simply raising taxes on "the rich" and making them pay "their fair share"?

Governors' attempts to rein in public-sector compensation ? because it vastly exceeds the private-sector counterparts ? constitute an "assault" on "all unions"?

Expensive, anti-competitive, job-killing "global warming" regulations imposed on U.S. businesses can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions ? even though the No. 1 and No. 4 "polluters," China and India, respectively, say, "Go to hell, we're growing our economies"?

Obamacare adds 30 million uninsured to the insured; allows people to keep their doctor or health insurance; forces health insurance companies to "insure" applicants with pre-existing illnesses ? all while saving money, lowering costs and retaining the same quality?

President Barack Obama presented a "fiscally responsible" 2012 budget ? even though it adds to the debt, continues high annual deficits and changes nothing about the three autopilot entitlement programs, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid?

"Greed" and lack of Wall Street regulation caused the housing meltdown ? even though the Community Reinvestment Act, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and the Federal Housing Administration distorted behavior; pressured lenders to give loans to the "underrepresented"; incentivized people who should have been renting to buy homes; and put taxpayers on the hook for the losses?

"Obamacare" is a racist and offensive word ? but not "Romneycare" or Hillarycare"?

The Muslim Brotherhood is "primarily secular"?

Health care is a "right" ? but keeping a handgun in your own home should be a crime?

Public education can be fixed by spending more money ? without allowing greater parental choice and more competition against government schools?

If millions of illegal aliens would likely vote Republican, liberals would still support putting them on a pathway to citizenship?

If convicted felons would likely vote Republican, liberals would still push to restore their full "voting rights"?

Right-wing "vitriolic rhetoric" caused the mass shooting in Tucson ? but left-wing rhetoric like MSNBC's Chris Matthews' description of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich as "a car bomber" does no damage?

The Bush tax cuts for the rich "caused the deficit" ? even though Obama says maintaining the current rates for the top 2 percent of income-earners "costs" $700 billion over 10 years, or for each year, less than 5 percent of the current annual deficit?

The war in Iraq caused the deficit ? even though the combined annual costs of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars represent about 10 percent of the current annual deficit?

President George W. Bush and his policies made America hated in the Middle East ? even though polls show the Egyptians have a lower opinion of America under Obama than they did under Bush?

Obama can convince Iran from continuing its nuclear weapons programs ? by criticizing Israel for building "settlements," and by breaking missile-defense promises made to the Czech Republic and Poland to get Russia's help in pressuring Iran?

Bush "admitted committing torture" by approving waterboarding and is, therefore, a confessed "war criminal"?

Questioning Obama's place of birth or religion is insanity ? but not believing that "Bush lied, people died"; Bush had prior knowledge of 9/11; Bush allowed America to be attacked on 9/11 to provide a pretext for war in Iraq; 9/11 was a government-involved inside job; and that WTC Building 7 imploded from planted explosives?

Bush governed as an evil, civil liberty-crushing warmonger ? even though Obama continues the same war on terror programs and policies, including the use of the "state secrets" courtroom defense to prevent national-security-sensitive documents from being turned over to the defense; rendition; the terrorist surveillance program; the Patriot Act, including the despised library provision; drone attacks in Pakistan; and the continued use of Guantanamo Bay prison?

Obama fulfilled his campaign promise to reduce the influence of lobbyists ? while members of his administration hold meetings off White House premises to avoid the requirement of having to keep a record of the meetings?

So here's the question. As between Charlie Sheen and the nonsense-believing left-wingers, who should be drug tested?




"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« Reply #1 on: March 10, 2011, 12:38:50 PM »
Wait ,,... isn't Charlie a member of the group he is being compared with?

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2011, 04:38:05 AM »
Congressman Paul Ryan, one of the least insane men in Washington, has a 10-year plan.
President Barack Obama, one of the most insane spenders in Washington, has a 12-year plan.

After hearing the president's plan, Standard & Poor's downgraded the U.S. Sovereign debt outlook to "negative." Ah, the fine art of understatement. In 1940, after the fall of France and the evacuation from Dunkirk, presumably they downgraded Britain's outlook to "spot of bother."

At the world's first "Presidential Facebook town hall meeting" on Wednesday, even Obama had a hard time taking his "plan" seriously. Sometimes he referred to it as a 12-year plan, sometimes 10 years, sometimes saving four trillion, sometimes saving two trillion. So will the Obama plan save four trillion over 12 years or two trillion over 10?

For the answer let's go to next week's first Presidential Twitter town hall meeting:
OMG!!! LOL!!!!!!! ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!
Overly Massive Government!!! Legislating Official Largesse!!!!!!! Requiring Offering Foreign Lenders More American Ownership!!!!!!!!!

The president's plan is to balance the budget by climbing into his Little Orphan Obammie costume and singing: "The sun'll come out tomorrow/Bet your bottom dollar that tomorrow there'll be sun." We've already bet our bottom dollar and it's looking like total eclipse. But Obammie figures if we can only bet Daddy Warbucks' bottom dollar the sun will shine. The "rich" don't have enough money to plug the gap: As a general principle, whatever the tax rates, the Treasury can never take in more than about 19 percent of GDP. Since Obama took office, the government's spent on average 24.4 percent of GDP.

That five-point gap cannot be closed, and it's the difference between the possibility of a future and the certainty of utter ruin. Hence, outlook "negative."

By the way, if you were borrowing (as the United States government does) $188 million every hour, would your bank be reassured by a 12-year plan?

That's 2023. Go back 12 years. That's 1999. Which, if any, politicians correctly identified the prevailing conditions in the America of 2011? Most of our problems arise from the blithe assumptions of the political class about the future. European welfare systems assumed a mid-20th century fertility rate to sustain them. They failed to foresee that welfare would become a substitute for family and that Continentals would simply cease breeding. Bismarckian-Rooseveltian pension plans assumed you'd be living off them for the last couple of years of your life. Instead, citizens of developed nations expect to spend the final third of their adult lives enjoying a prolonged taxpayer-funded holiday weekend.

What plans have you made for 2023? The average individual attempts to insure against future uncertainty in a relatively small number of ways: You buy a house because that's the surest way to preserve and increase wealth. "Safe as houses," right? But Fannie/Freddie subprime mumbo-jumbo and other government interventions clobbered the housing market.
You get an education because that way you'll always have "something to fall back on." But massive government-encouraged expansion of "college" led Americans to run up a trillion dollars' worth of student debt to acquire ever more devalued ersatz sheepskin in worthless pseudo-disciplines.
We're not talking about the wilder shores of the stock market ? Internet start-ups, South Sea bubbles and tulip mania ? but two of the safest, dullest investments a modestly prudent person might make to protect himself against the vicissitudes of an unknown future. And we profoundly damaged both of them in pursuit of fictions.

I don't claim absolute certainty about what the world will be like in 2023, but I know what our governing class is telling us. At Tufts University, Nancy Pelosi urged her "Republican friends" to "take back your party, so that it doesn't matter so much who wins the election ? because we have shared values about the education of our children, the growth of our economy, how we defend our country, our security and civil liberties, how we respect our seniors. Elections shouldn't matter as much as they do."

The last line attracted a bit of attention, but the "shared values" - i.e., the fetid bromides of conventional wisdom ? are worth decoding, too:
"Education of our children" means more spending on an abusive and wasteful unionized educrat monopoly;
"growth of our economy" means more spending on stimulus funding for community-organizer grant applications;
"how we defend our country" means more spending on defense welfare for wealthy allies;
"our security and civil liberties" means more spending on legions of crack TSA crotch fondlers;
"how we respect our seniors" means more spending on entitlements for an ever more dependent citizenry whose sense of entitlement endures long after the entitlement has ceased to make any sense.

Nancy Pelosi fleshed out the Obama plan: More spending. More more. Now and forever. That's what S&P understands. The road to hell is paved with stimulus funding.

The world has started to listen to what Obama is telling us. In that respect, let me make a single prediction for 2023 ? that by then the dollar will no longer be the global reserve currency. Forty years ago, Treasury Secretary John Connally told Europe that the dollar is "our currency but your problem."

The rest of the world is now inverting the proposition: The dollar is our problem but, in the end, it's your currency, not ours. In Beijing, in Delhi, in Riyadh, in Rio, the rest of the planet is moving relentlessly toward a post-dollar regime.

What will America look like without the dollar as global currency? My old boss Conrad Black recently characterized what's happened over the past half-century as a synchronized group devaluation by Western currencies. That's a useful way of looking at it. What obscured it was the dollar's global role. When the dollar's role is ended, the reality of a comatose "superpower" living off a fifth of a billion in borrowed dollars every single hour of the day is harder to obscure.

In the absence of responsible American leadership, the most important decisions about your future will be made by foreigners for whom fatuous jingles about "shared values" have less resonance.


If you don't want the certainty of a poorer, more decrepit, more diseased, more violent America, you need to demand your politicians act now ? or there won't be a 2023.
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Christians4LessGvt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11149
    • View Profile
    • "The Religion Of Peace"
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« Reply #3 on: April 25, 2011, 08:07:45 AM »
"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" - Ronald Reagan - June 12, 1987

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« Reply #4 on: April 25, 2011, 11:53:46 AM »
Ryan's plan sucks and sucks deeply. He wants to give the superrich an even BIGGER tax break.

He is getting boo'ed by fellow Republicans, and he deserves each and every boo.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« Reply #5 on: April 25, 2011, 12:25:58 PM »
Ryan's plans sucks because it barely scrapes the debt that your boy, Obama put this country in.  Meaning, it sucks because it doesn't do enough
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« Reply #6 on: April 25, 2011, 02:00:33 PM »
The national debt is not going to be reduced by reducing taxes on the superrich even further.

The solution must be bipartisan, and it must include both spending cuts and increases in one or more tax.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« Reply #7 on: April 25, 2011, 02:15:24 PM »
We have a FAR greater chance of reducing the debt by reducing taxes on the "uber rich" (read NOT ELIMINATING, knowing Xo's favorite deflection is to claim that reducing taxes is akin to abolishing taxes)

The solution does NOT REQUIRE a raising of ANY taxes.  Eliminate that, and now you can work in a bipartisan approach
---------------
Writer Martin Wisckol has a flawed understanding of the cause and effect of lower tax revenue in his opinion piece "Taxes reach historic lows" while he bashes the Tea Party as not "nuanced." When a liberal says there view is nuanced, it usually means it is incomprehensible and indefensible. Wisckol naively believes tax revenues increase with tax rates without understanding that taxes diminish economic activity. The government, unlike any business, assumes that they can increase their cost to the consumer (the taxpayer) without having any impact on consumer behavior (how much people work).

The higher the taxes, the less taxable income is produced.

When this administration attacks those providing the majority of the jobs and the tax revenue, they produce less and pay less taxes. A prime example of this is the high corporate tax rate keeps overseas profits from being repatriated (sent back) to the United States. Lower taxes rates would result in more tax revenue (and more jobs).

But there are other ?taxes? that burden the economy, impact job creation, and reduce tax revenues that Wisckol completely missed. Not knowing what new government regulations and costs are going to be imposed makes it risky to invest in new jobs. Increased regulations impede economic growth by making it more difficult for business to produce. The FDA, EPA, and many other government agencies creates many needless regulations with minimal benefits which increase business costs, which in turn increases consumer costs and kill jobs. Shutting down new drilling in the gulf contributed to the rise in the cost of gasoline, costs tens of thousands of jobs, and decreased tax revenue.

At the same time government agencies (and pseudo government agencies like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) have accounting policies that are completely corrupt and exempt from government rules. The Financial Reform Act of 2010 didn?t address Fannie and Freddie at all because of their Washington patronage. The accounting for Social Security would put anyone is the private sector in jail.

Economics & Taxes 101
« Last Edit: April 25, 2011, 03:08:45 PM by sirs »
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« Reply #8 on: April 26, 2011, 12:52:10 AM »
The national debt is not going to be reduced by reducing taxes on the superrich even further.



How not?

Isn't a reduction in taxation a job producing measure?
Wouldn't a reduction on bussiness tax load help keep more jobs in the USA and not overseas?

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« Reply #9 on: April 26, 2011, 09:14:26 AM »
Ryan's plan sucks and sucks deeply. He wants to give the superrich an even BIGGER tax break.

If you had actually looked at Ryan's plan, you would have noted that even though he is reducing the *rate*, he is eliminating enough credits and deductions that the "rich" would pay even more under his plan than before.
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« Reply #10 on: April 26, 2011, 11:15:29 AM »
But.....but....Ami.....he has an (R) after his name.  It has to be helping the rich while starving the elderly and killing children.  Or is it killing the elderly and starving the children?
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« Reply #11 on: April 26, 2011, 12:51:05 PM »
Isn't a reduction in taxation a job producing measure?

Not necessarily. This is a common Republican fiction.
And not all jobs created by the reduction in taxes would be created HERE.
===================

Wouldn't a reduction on bussiness tax load help keep more jobs in the USA and not overseas?
Again, not necessarily.

How is a reduction in business tax the same as a reduction in the personal income tax?
 
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« Reply #12 on: April 26, 2011, 02:49:07 PM »
Economics 101

Decreasing business taxes, allows companies and small businesses to expand, add more employees, generating more taxable income and decreased unemployment

Decreasing income taxes generates increasing personal income, which then provides increased taxable income
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« Reply #13 on: April 26, 2011, 06:43:33 PM »
There is an ideal tax rate, below which the government goes broke, and above which the economy is constrained. At present taxes are at all all-time LOW.

Revenues must go up and expenses must go down. Cutting taxes more at this point is not going to cause a recovery, it will merely cause the government to go broke.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Who's Crazier?...you make the call
« Reply #14 on: April 26, 2011, 08:53:23 PM »
Then the solution is obvious. The poor must be taxed more heavily.


because there are more of them than the uber rich