It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Obama : "It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody that

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 04:16 PM

Originally posted by Constitutional Scholar
reply to post by chickenshoes

By your own admission, you were already struggling, yet you CHOSE to have a 2nd child.

You may not have felt abortion/adoption was the right option, but it would have been the smart and responsible one.

Yes, trugod is just supposed to walk away from the down if they couldnt meet the terms. There is more to the story (as is always the case) that trugod isnt telling us.

Again, trugod is the one responsible for his current predicament. He signed on the dotted line.

What more is there to my story? Not much really;

Yes I live in a Mobile Home Park....I suppose that makes me less than worthwile now?

Lets see my house cost $115K and I put 12k down I knew what I was getting into... AGAIN THEY CHANGED THE TERMS WHEN I CAME INTO SIGN THE PAPERS.

Hey Stoopid I'm still making my payments I'm not a freaking dead beat so jump the hell down off your horse and step into my reality.

Im not walking away from 12k because the bank decided they could make a few hundred more off me every month.

[edit on 15-10-2008 by ATruGod]

[edit on 15-10-2008 by ATruGod]

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 04:27 PM
reply to post by ATruGod

Was your 12 k in escrow?

If you think you are less of a person for living in a trailer, thats your problem.

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 04:39 PM

Originally posted by Constitutional Scholar
reply to post by ATruGod

Was your 12 k in escrow?

If you think you are less of a person for living in a trailer, thats your problem.

Dude I am so done with this debate, you make it sound like the banks are freaking angels. For you to defend the fact "they can change the terms anytime they want" is crap. I jumped through thier hoops for 6 months they screwed me in the last minute because they could.

But as I've mentioned already im not a deadbeat and am making my doesnt change the fact they screwed me and anyone who defends that...well anyways.

Come on man just admit it once "Banks don't care about the people...just thier money".

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 04:59 PM

Originally posted by wonkamaniac
reply to post by jerico65

Oh, noes!!!! Tax credits for a college education!
Oh, noes!!!! Tax credits for clean, efficient automobiles!
Oh, noes!!!! Tax credits for actually (gasp) saving money!
Oh, noes!!!! Tax credits for daycare (we all know how cheap that is).
Whatever will we do with well-educated people with money in the bank that can actually afford to go to work without worrying about their children while we all breathe cleaner air??? Shocking!

Seriously, Obama's plan is by no means perfect. I am not an Obama Borg by any stretch of the imagination. If you want to blame anyone for the way I feel about things right now, feel free to blame the Bush/Reagan/Clinton dynasty. Trust me when I say it is they who have pushed me to this point. We've tried it the Reagan way for 25 years now. And look where it got us. I'm just saying, let's give something else a chance for a while. Obama is going to spend most of his first term in office just doing damage control for the current failed policies.

Did you actually read the article, or just the cool stuff Obama is going to give out?

From the link:

"Here's the political catch. All but the clean car credit would be "refundable," which is Washington-speak for the fact that you can receive these checks even if you have no income-tax liability. In other words, they are an income transfer -- a federal check -- from taxpayers to nontaxpayers. Once upon a time we called this "welfare," or in George McGovern's 1972 campaign a "Demogrant." Mr. Obama's genius is to call it a tax cut.

The Tax Foundation estimates that under the Obama plan 63 million Americans, or 44% of all tax filers, would have no income tax liability and most of those would get a check from the IRS each year. The Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis estimates that by 2011, under the Obama plan, an additional 10 million filers would pay zero taxes while cashing checks from the IRS."

So, my hard earned tax dollars will be going to people that sit on their ever-expanding asses doing nothing.

But hey, as you say, "Let's give someone else a chance!!" Hope and Change are good!

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 05:12 PM
reply to post by ATruGod

I already said banks arent in business to make your life better, they are in business to make money.

Dont like it? Fine, dont use banks.

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 05:13 PM
reply to post by jerico65

It sucks. However, it's going to happen one way or another. I worked for a Rent-to-Own company in two different locations. One was a city, the other was the country.

In both locations, the preferred method of income was SSI.

Either way, those people are going to get money to survive. We can either continue bandaging up the wound, or we can find the problems and fix them.

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 05:36 PM
reply to post by Sublime620

As I understand it, under an Obama healthcare and taxation program, those business owners who work the hardest and the longest will suffer the most. Being taxed for income and profit and then either channeling profits into mandatory heath care for employees or paying further in penalties will do them in.

I always had a theory. There really isn't have's and have-nots, its did's and did-not's. Those who did study hard, did stay in school, did take two jobs, or a hard primary job, did work their asses off, did save, did invest, did defer buying expensive stuff, etc.. Then there are those who didn't do any of those things. Those are the people screaming loudest for "fairness". They look at another person who has money and decent stuff and think it happened just because the system is stacked against them.

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 06:37 PM

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 06:51 PM
You sound as if a third of Americans were not paying taxes who should be. Ridiculous. Everyone is taxed who makes over something like $8,000 unless they have children. And if the have children, they are spending a lot more on their children than they are saving in taxes! If you are single and make something like $15,000 a year you are just plain screwed and have to pay a lot of taxes. -- $15,000 --. To tax someone who makes so little is ridiculous. I don't at all believe your statistics. I'd much rather believe the IRS's tax statements which are quite clear the single exemption is a tiny $8,000 (roughly). And that roughly $500+ tax on a $15,000 salary does not include state taxes, sales taxes, local taxes, government fees, government fines, and mandatory government services like tolls on the toll-ways. Talk about criminal negligence to allow that.

Taxes should be on income over what is absolutely necessary to live. Any less and you are doing a moral wrong by taking away someones needs.

Taking without asking is stealing. Taxes involve taking without asking, so taxes are stealing. If we are going to steal from people in the name of the law, the least we could do is only steal from people who are not going to suffer extreme consequences from the loss of wealth. Personally I do not have health insurance because I cannot afford it. Yet I have to pay quite a lot of taxes. That is absolutely sick and pathetic in my opinion.

Now a lot of people say... oh its poor people's own fault they are poor. What a pack of lies. No. Some people are literally stupid and some people are plainly unlucky. And some people made bad decisions such as not graduating high school or college, but in fact educations are dramatically over-rated and half of jobs requiring a college degree (or more than half) don't actually use anything of the knowledge the degree requires, at least in the US.

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 07:00 PM

Originally posted by jerico65
reply to post by Sublime620

I always had a theory. There really isn't have's and have-nots, its did's and did-not's.

Using your very popular theory, I would expect those born in Ukraine to be equally as well off as those born in the US. Do you think the people of Ukraine are poor because they just don't work as hard as Americans?

People with your theory fail to realize that success is mostly about connections. Who you know, and who your friends and family know are more than half of financial success. Then there is luck.

Your theory suggests that those born in Ukraine only need to do more and they'll be just as well off as you are. Nonsense.

Wealth is much about connections and access to resources, especially access to money! Hard work and smarts do play a role, but it is secondary role.

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 07:09 PM
reply to post by Constitutional Scholar

Note that McCain's vaunted economic "advisors" are Wall Street weenies who revel in the derivatives gambling scenario. Another group of his advisors advised him to select winking Sarah as his running mate. His advisors don't seem to be worth much and can't reconnect John with reality. Joe Six Pack knows how many houses he is making payments on [one] and doesn't believe that it takes $5 million/year income to move beyond the middle class.

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 07:12 PM
I don't blame Obama or McCain, I blame the system. The reason why they are in the position they're in is because both believe they're making the right decision for America with the options that are currently in place. Remember, if there was no Fed Reserve, there would be no deficit. If there was no deficit, there would be no need to tax. If there's no tax, there's no inflation. So based on this logic, I would say that since the Fed system has been set in place, anyone who tries to come up with a tax system that will work for everyone will be kidding themselves. If you people have a better way, please let the masses know. Let your Congressmen know, Hell, let somebody know, because up til this point I don't believe there's been a single President who has successfully been able to properly disseminate the system. The last one who tried (Kennedy) got assassinated. I'm all about exposing problems, but my thing is, don't point out the problem without pointing out the solution because if you only point out the problem, you're not helping, you're only contributing to the problem. So people, let's try to take this approach toward problems:

Step 1. Point out the Problem
Step 2. Propose a workable solution to the problem.

Doing stuff like this is what's going to help fix America. If we keep doing the same things, we will keep getting the same results. That's not my idea of America's future. I don't know about anyone else, but I like to see progress and positive change. Let's do ourselves a favor and start adjusting our paradigms to reflect more of what we want instead of focusing on what we don't like or don't want.

As a matter of fact, it would probably be better to just skip step one and go straight to step two ideally.

[edit on 10/15/2008 by Mr Knowledge]

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 07:25 PM

Take from the people who have worked hard to be successful and give it to others who have refused to help themselves to a better life

Money should never dictate the quality of someone's life.

I'll never be rich because I'll never be greedy. Only the greedy and self serving get rich. Society is about helping out each other as a whole, not a competition to see who can get to the top.

Rich people don't work hard, and never had. Until you live life day in and day out suffering until you die, watching your people and homeland be torn apart by corporations... you've never worked hard.

Greed is a crime that this "Christian" nation decided not to include within the laws.

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 07:26 PM

Originally posted by nyk537
The entire tax proposal is a disaster of massive proportions.

So is capitalism. The Janitor cleaning the CEO's floors should be paid better than he is currently rather than some elitist guy making 5, 10, 100 million a year.

It is high time the middle class takes back what has been looted by the elite in this Country and world. I believe President Obama will do just that. I must admit however I used to like John Mcain until he remade himself into Bush 3 in an attempt to get elected. I think we have two people who both would make decent Presidents especially in the shadow of the disastrous Bush administration.

Only people who genuinely create something like Bill gates did deserve to be that disgustingly wealthy.

Stop being filthy pigs and we all can live a happier and healthier life.

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 07:30 PM

Originally posted by truthquest
Using your very popular theory, I would expect those born in Ukraine to be equally as well off as those born in the US.

I'm sorry. Did I miss something? Obama is running for President of the Ukraine?

The Ukraine and the US are two different political systems, etc. Apples and Oranges. Try again.

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 07:50 PM
reply to post by daddyroo45

Achievers achieve things not because they are better but because they have access to better social-economic conditions for achieving their goals. Let 1% of the US population monopolize 40% of the wealth WITHOUT paying taxes on their profits, and you've got a big class of overachievers who achieve so much that they set up a government to serve their "achievements" and protect their interest, while hundreds of millions of people work hard to get the tiny pieces left of liberty. Laissez-faire capitalism, this is how it is called. A system designed by philosophers such as Adam Smith who were too idealistic and disconnected to recognize the greed of men in a patriarchic society, that is proven as being unable to keep monopolies from being created and defended, and political tyranny to eventually take shape.

[edit on 15/10/08 by Echtelion]

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 07:51 PM

But I'm a realist. Huge mistakes have been made by the leadership of this country and we're all going to have pay the tab for that drunken kegger. I believe this country -
reply to post by jtma508

You've done a lot of thinking which is nice but you came to the wrong conclusion. Don't you think it was more the leadership like Obama that put us into this mess? Obama is very young and can only be blamed for his neferious involvement with Acorn which he mostly denys. The real blame lies with the liberal legislation involving CRA in the Carter years, Clinton 1999, the bank merger act and the lack of action more recently by Barney Frank (House Finance) and Chris Dodd (Senate Finance)!

So since liberal legislators in the past got us into this mess you think we should all suffer and pay more taxes especially the rich corporations and we should ellect a liberal for a president? Why ellect a liberal when they are responsible? Where is the reason there?

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 08:04 PM
reply to post by plumranch

I agree. Tho if you check out this thread, it's really all Bush's fault:

The problem is that Carter thought that owning a home in America was a right everyone had, and it's not. It's a privledge.

[edit on 15-10-2008 by jerico65]

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 09:11 PM
reply to post by jerico65

Bush did his best to stop this financial debocle starting back in 2002. McCain sponsored legislation also but all those efforts were squarely blocked and opposed by Frank and Dodds. We should and could have stopped this 6 years ago but Democrats blocked it.

This banking debocle has nothing to do with offshoring jobs or failed tax policies it has to do with investment securities that were supposed to be AAA but were actually junk. They were junk because the banks and Fannie were required by CRA and other liberal legislation to lend to unqualified low income buyers that had no business taking out housing loans. Failed liberal social engineering!

Social engineer, Obama, will provide more of the same!

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 09:30 PM
reply to post by plumranch

What? You realize the Democrats could do nothing right? They were the minority. The Republicans controlled everything and... everything went to hell. Yet its somehow the democrats fault even though the GOP outvoted them on anything they wanted like destroying America.

new topics

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in