Do you seriously no know by now? I could reverse everything Rym just said!
Yep, I'm seriously not sure if you're joking because generally the term "chicken shit" means that something isn't worth even considering. So I'm not sure how that term makes sense here.
Not that I doubt you have absolutely terrible opinions about this.
Really? I thought the best reason to vote for Obama was to see him go absolutely apeshit on the GOP, now that he doesn't have another term election to fret over.
Really? I thought the best reason to vote for Obama was to see him go absolutely apeshit on the GOP, now that he doesn't have another term election to fret over.
Really? I thought the best reason to vote for Obama was to see him go absolutely apeshit on the GOP, now that he doesn't have another term election to fret over.
Do you seriously no know by now? I could reverse everything Rym just said!
Yep, I'm seriously not sure if you're joking because generally the term "chicken shit" means that something isn't worth even considering. So I'm not sure how that term makes sense here.
Not that I doubt you have absolutely terrible opinions about this.
I do but I'll keep them to myself. Suffice it to say I'm voting Romney for the reasons Rym listed.
Once his second term is up, it'd be nice to see the Obamablog that point-by-point explains exactly how the GOP held our economy hostage for their own party political points. Sure, we've already got relatively unbiased articles that go through the whole clusterfuck, but it'd be nice to hear it straight from the man himself. Dreaming of a badass world, and all.
Do you seriously no know by now? I could reverse everything Rym just said!
Yep, I'm seriously not sure if you're joking because generally the term "chicken shit" means that something isn't worth even considering. So I'm not sure how that term makes sense here.
Not that I doubt you have absolutely terrible opinions about this.
I do but I'll keep them to myself. Suffice it to say I'm voting Romney for the reasons Rym listed.
In the absence of any argument or justification, I'll just assume you're woefully ignorant and perfectly comfortable with voting in psychopaths and obstructionists to run your country. Fair enough.
In the absence of any argument or justification, I'll just assume you're woefully ignorant and perfectly comfortable with voting in psychopaths and obstructionists to run your country. Fair enough.
Nah, we've heard his reasons. I really doubt they've changed. Obama is too left leaning and favors too many social programs for him.
Do you seriously no know by now? I could reverse everything Rym just said!
Yep, I'm seriously not sure if you're joking because generally the term "chicken shit" means that something isn't worth even considering. So I'm not sure how that term makes sense here.
Not that I doubt you have absolutely terrible opinions about this.
I do but I'll keep them to myself. Suffice it to say I'm voting Romney for the reasons Rym listed.
Because he panders to a socially and economically regressive political party more than the other guy? I'm voting for Obama because I agree with the majority of his views and policies, and personally believe that many of his greatest failures during his first four years in office were caused directly by shady and immoral political tactics held by the majority of congress.
You, meanwhile, are claiming you're voting for the man just because he's associated with one end of the spectrum, even though he has made it clear outright that his policies while in office will directly and pointedly fuck you. 'K bro.
It's hard to understand why social regressives want to live in a society at all. Surely there are plenty of third world poopholes they could easily move to and satisfy their anarchist itch?
Or maybe it's the fact that Obama's regulations (like the Dodd-Frank above) are going to stifle innovation in the marketplace and curtail expansion of companies. Or the horrifyingly high tax rates placed on corporations are encouraging them to move to other countries.
But then again, these companies have entire departments dedicated to not paying that rate and are fairly successful at it. Even wealthy people don't pay the 35% tax bracket that they are supposed to be in.
Of course, this means that if we lower the tax rate for those companies it might make it more attractive for them to move back into the US and bring back those good, well-paying jobs.
The counter-argument to that, though, is that we are losing our edge in skilled manufacturing labor. Take the Kindle for example, we couldn't build it here if Amazon wanted to. We simply don't have the trained work force to be able to do the work, South Korea already cornered that market. And our schools, while still having good Engineering and whatnot programs, aren't churning out the numbers of skilled engineers we need to be competitive... considering that we other countries push harder than we do for that.
...wow, I can have this argument with myself. I've heard it too many times.
So everybody knows that tax rates are the lowest ever since the Depression, that a very large portion of corporations pay no federal taxes at all, and that higher tax rates on the highest income levels actually correllate strongly (or exactly) with higher economic growth, social mobility, and an overall healthier nation using economic, educational, and satisfaction metrics.... right?
So everybody knows that tax rates are the lowest ever since the Depression, that a very large portion of corporations pay no federal taxes at all, and that higher tax rates on the highest income levels actually correllate strongly (or exactly) with higher economic growth, social mobility, and an overall healthier nation using economic, educational, and satisfaction metrics.... right?
Nope, and they're the same people who don't bother looking at what our economy was like in the past.
Also I'm pretty sure those people are in the same boat as the RONPAULRONPAULRONPAUL gold standard nutballs.
Although, realistically, Cremlian's arguments have swayed me a bit more to the right. The fact that we did pass some legislation makes sense. I've still yet to be convinced that removing any regulation is necessary.
I'm with the wishful thinking. We should only deficit spend during a recession and balance the budget when we're booming. Yes we're in a recession now, don't I know it.
I'm with the wishful thinking. We should only deficit spend during a recession and balance the budget when we're booming. Yes we're in a recession now, don't I know it.
Balancing the budget during a recession is the single most sure-fire way to extend and deepen the recession. This is well documented and well accepted by everyone but FOX ditto heads.
I'm with the wishful thinking. We should only deficit spend during a recession and balance the budget when we're booming. Yes we're in a recession now, don't I know it.
Balancing the budget during a recession is the single most sure-fire way to extend and deepen the recession. This is well documented and well accepted by everyone but FOX ditto heads.
Are you dyslexic? I said to balance when we're NOT in a recession!
I'm with the wishful thinking. We should only deficit spend during a recession and balance the budget when we're booming. Yes we're in a recession now, don't I know it.
That makes sense. What got us out of the depression? Massive government spending in context of a war. Also: gumption. Afterwards we did have to spend several decades battling down the deficit though.
I'll be interested to talk about what we need to cut once we're out of the recession though. I'm actually pretty anxious to see what we need to cut. Spoiler alert: Right now I see a ton of waste in government contracts and how they're handled.
I wouldn't take medicare reform off the table, either. Nor military spending. Also all of the Senators should get their haircuts at Great Clips. I think I can get them a coupon.
I'm with the wishful thinking. We should only deficit spend during a recession and balance the budget when we're booming. Yes we're in a recession now, don't I know it.
Balancing the budget during a recession is the single most sure-fire way to extend and deepen the recession. This is well documented and well accepted by everyone but FOX ditto heads.
Are you dyslexic? I said to balance when we're NOT in a recession!
Something about your contributions to the thread so far made me assume you were being sarcastic.
I'm with the wishful thinking. We should only deficit spend during a recession and balance the budget when we're booming. Yes we're in a recession now, don't I know it.
Balancing the budget during a recession is the single most sure-fire way to extend and deepen the recession. This is well documented and well accepted by everyone but FOX ditto heads.
Are you dyslexic? I said to balance when we're NOT in a recession!
I think he took your comment for sarcasm. I read it that way as well.
Comments
Not that I doubt you have absolutely terrible opinions about this.
You, meanwhile, are claiming you're voting for the man just because he's associated with one end of the spectrum, even though he has made it clear outright that his policies while in office will directly and pointedly fuck you. 'K bro.
But then again, these companies have entire departments dedicated to not paying that rate and are fairly successful at it. Even wealthy people don't pay the 35% tax bracket that they are supposed to be in.
Of course, this means that if we lower the tax rate for those companies it might make it more attractive for them to move back into the US and bring back those good, well-paying jobs.
The counter-argument to that, though, is that we are losing our edge in skilled manufacturing labor. Take the Kindle for example, we couldn't build it here if Amazon wanted to. We simply don't have the trained work force to be able to do the work, South Korea already cornered that market. And our schools, while still having good Engineering and whatnot programs, aren't churning out the numbers of skilled engineers we need to be competitive... considering that we other countries push harder than we do for that.
...wow, I can have this argument with myself. I've heard it too many times. First Man - Bill Clinton.
Also I'm pretty sure those people are in the same boat as the RONPAULRONPAULRONPAUL gold standard nutballs.
I'll be interested to talk about what we need to cut once we're out of the recession though. I'm actually pretty anxious to see what we need to cut. Spoiler alert: Right now I see a ton of waste in government contracts and how they're handled.
I wouldn't take medicare reform off the table, either. Nor military spending. Also all of the Senators should get their haircuts at Great Clips. I think I can get them a coupon.