It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Obama's New Attack on Those Who Don't Want Higher Taxes: ‘Selfishness’

page: 10
13
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by MAINTAL
 


The $120,000.00 was made....by a Democrat....not Obama....not Biden....but by Bill Richardson....who was campaigning for Obama and Biden at the time.

Source




Sen. Obama has been pledging that no one making under $250,000 a year would have their taxes increased under his plan. But the campaign released an advertisement early in the week that said the level for tax cuts was $200,000. Then vice-presidential nominee Sen. Joe Biden told a Scranton, PA television station that the income threshold for tax cuts was $150,000. Now comes Gov. Richardson lowering the magic income level even further.

"What Obama wants to do is he is basically looking at $120,000 and under among those that are in the middle class, and there is a tax cut for those."


[edit on 11/1/2008 by skeptic1]




posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic1
The $120,000.00 was made....by a Democrat....not Obama....not Biden....but by Bill Richardson....who was campaigning for Obama and Biden at the time.

Source

Riiiight and what does elite gamers post say?




"Did Obama or Biden say it was $120k? No. Did named member of the campaign? No. " Elitegamer



and as i have said five times now he is wrong "NAMED MEMBER IS RICHARDSON. "







[edit on 1-11-2008 by MAINTAL]



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by MAINTAL
 


I was just posting the link to the source of the statement....people said it wasn't said, and I posted the link that proves it was said. By someone who does a lot of campaigning for Obama.



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic1
reply to post by MAINTAL
 


I was just posting the link to the source of the statement....people said it wasn't said, and I posted the link that proves it was said. By someone who does a lot of campaigning for Obama.



Oh My Apologies there, and yes you have also proven elite gamer to be incorrect. Appreciate the link my friend



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   
So what difference does it make if the 120,000 was made by anyone?

The fact is even without this last comment, the trend is going down in a hurry straight from the campaign.

Why is the media not questioning this one?



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   
So what difference does it make if the 120,000 was made by anyone?

The fact is even without this last comment, the trend is going down in a hurry straight from the campaign.

Why is the media not questioning this one?



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by PowerSlave
So what difference does it make if the 120,000 was made by anyone?

The fact is even without this last comment, the trend is going down in a hurry straight from the campaign.

Why is the media not questioning this one?


Because Barack Obama is the one he and all of us have all been waiting for, the Messiah, "The One" Powell says "will electrify the world stage as the first of a new generation of his kind and that we should all be proud including us white folk" The media is Obama's bitch so they wouldnt have the mind to do the right thing



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by MAINTAL
 


Why do you continue to spout the figure when I've already shown it to be false?

I have no choice but to consider you inept.



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by elitegamer23

im still waiting for that 120k figure mantail. say nothing more if u cant show your proof.

[edit on 1-11-2008 by elitegamer23]


Hey guy I'm still waiting for YOU to show me the quote where I ever said 120k pal. Put up or shut up. -----maintal


Originally posted by MAINTAL


Did Obama or Biden say it was $120k? No. Did named member of the campaign? No.


Yes and Yes



when u said put up or shut up i hope u were offering to shut up yourself.
did u simply make an account on ats to troll and flame?




[edit on 1-11-2008 by elitegamer23]

[edit on 1-11-2008 by elitegamer23]



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sublime620
reply to post by MAINTAL
 


Why do you continue to spout the figure when I've already shown it to be false?

I have no choice but to consider you inept.


Awe I'm all broken up about that sublime,, I don't take compliments that come from fools much less criticism from those who can't follow the thread and elitegamers incessant requests to have me prove him wrong AGAIN. that makes 4 times. As for your assertion you have shown the figure to be false? You have done no such thing.

You're welcome to try again but the answer is still the same because unlike Obama and his change you can all believe in,,

Facts like this don't change, they only incite more excuses from the Obamanoids



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by elitegamer23


Originally posted by elitegamer23

im still waiting for that 120k figure mantail. say nothing more if u cant show your proof.

[edit on 1-11-2008 by elitegamer23]


Hey guy I'm still waiting for YOU to show me the quote where I ever said 120k pal. Put up or shut up. -----maintal


Originally posted by MAINTAL


Did Obama or Biden say it was $120k? No. Did named member of the campaign? No.


Yes and Yes



when u said put up or shut up i hope u were offering to shut up yourself.
did u simply make an account on ats to troll and flame?




[edit on 1-11-2008 by elitegamer23]

[edit on 1-11-2008 by elitegamer23]



No elite YOU said 120 not me. You said that it wasn't a quote from the three choices you give in the same post and I only said yes because named member of the campaign DID say it and that has been proven ad- infinitum ad Nauseum. I can't help it you can't seem to wrap your mind around things so academic. I never brought up the number, YOU did. The only number I mentioned was $200,000 from his original $250,000

[edit on 1-11-2008 by MAINTAL]



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sublime620

No, it's your failure to understand POLICY. He has never said that people over $200,000 will get a tax cut.

Let me try to explain this a little better for you:

Your income = x

x < $200,000 = Tax break

$200,000 < x < $250,000 = No Tax Break

x > $250,000 = Tax Hike

Got it? Nothing changed, you just failed to comprehend because you read smear sites.

*Edit:

And the house really isn't controlled by either. Here are the figures.

1

Democratic Party 233 +31 53.6%
Republican Party 202 −30 46.4%


Not even close to "controlled".

And we've already discussed the Senate.



[edit on 1-11-2008 by Sublime620]


Sublime,, care to show me the quote I am misunderstanding as a tax cut?

I don't seem to recall ever mentioning anything about a tax cut so how can you possibly know what it is i don't understand?



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by MAINTAL
 


You don't even understand the concept of tax breaks v tax hikes.

There is a difference and that difference is responsible for the difference in numbers.

Why can't you respond to that?

200,000 or less gets a tax break.

250,000 or more gets a tax hike.

Got it?



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cowgirlstraitup7
I don't get this line of thinking at all.


Given your response, I can tell. Your line of thinking isnt very well thought out. You are blame CEO's for making loads of money, which is there job. There job is to create profit. Why do they go overseas? So they can compete in the global market. They go overseas because of our corporate taxes, which is the second highest in the world. A lower corporate tax rate is essential to keeping good jobs in the United States (Obama wants to increase the corporate tax rate, which will result in massive job loss).


For the last eight years the middle class have been shouldering the burdon of the corporate tax breaks


You are aware that the top 5-10% of this country's wage earners pay 70-80% of all the taxes, correct? The lower middle class do not even pay any, and the mid middle class pays 2.5% of all taxes... The middle class has hardly been shouldering anything...Thats not to say they are not in need of some help, but it does relay a message that paints a far different picture then the one you are trying to create.


in the hopes that these corporations would use the money to create jobs. Instead they pocketed the money and shipped jobs overseas.


This bottom part of your post is ironic, and quite contradictory. Under Obama, you are looking at MORE jobs going overseas as a direct result of the increase in capital gains tax, and taxes in general.


Now it's their turn to shoulder the burdon.


Like paying more then what they pay now (which is 80% of all our taxes)? How is that fair?


That's the bottom freaking line. If you don't like it don't vote for him, which I assume you weren't going to anyway.


Give me one reason why I should vote for him.



[edit on 1-11-2008 by West Coast]



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


This is so petty and divisive...United we stand, Divided we fall, gentle people.

You aren't going to be dramatically better or worse off fiscally

by either candidate unless you are making more than a few hundred $K.

Did you know the average cop in Vallejo CA makes about $130-$190k?

I believe that is underpaid for what they do/risk. Teachers too.

Do the CEO's of AIG deserve $3.6 billion total compensation and

their succesors deserve a $400k spa weekend after WE bail them out? Duh.

I for one am in for higher taxes, my wife and I are over $700k and

we work like dogs (er, doctors) for it, truthfully earning 1/2 what

other docs are being paid for what we do (we are academics)

My wife is voting differently from me. I am willing to pay some more.

I suspect the giants of industry

(with their $$GIANT payscales), will scream bloody murder a lot louder than any Joe the plumber,

and they get heard folks, we don't.

enough about us....

Its about US!

the U.S. of A.

PLEASE do not create a huge rift in thought that will lead to

civil war over an election. There is a lot of talk on ATS reflecting

hate of one party for the other, in fact one thread blatantly talks about

shooting and killing liberals. Amazing.

We have come so far, and

really haven't. Children throwing a tantrum, with automatic weapons.

I for one have followed john titor's predictions for years, analyzing

their inaccuracies and patterns, and know 1 thing:

IF you vote for the pattern of war, lies, and corporate robbery

we have already witnessed - and you have to admit this from either

side of the aisle - then you will get/derserve more of the same.

More war, more corporate treasury raiding, more strife between families.

Titor's world - Nuke war/ environmental

collapse/ mad cow/ civil war - all stemmed from a fascist govt. that

stole multiple elections. In fact he states the president in 2009 ("he/she")

will be most interested in holding onto power in the face of a widening

civil war (armed conflict). What an interesting statement that is....!

People! do we need war on our streets now, after all the bloodshed in

Iraq, and all the economic bloodletting (that still isn't over)?

Please, vote your consciences - and especially get off your duffs and VOTE!

We have a chance here to AVERT THE WORLD TIMELINE OF JOHN TITOR

and literally save ourselves from ourselves.

the answer should be clear.

And no, I am not in favor of either candidate. Just opposed to anyone promoting a civil, and then 3rd world, wars.

[edit on 11/1/2008 by drphilxr]



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Cowgirlstraitup7
 


i wanna add to that. since republicans have been in office the richer have been getting richer and the poorer are getting poorer. whenever the world realises that we are all, in an essence, a whole, not individuals, we will stay on the same tracks. we need to give of ourselves and give to the people in need.



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by cbardales12
 


Then why can't we give to charities whose job it is to help out those in need?

Why does the government have to TAKE from us to give to those in need....when in reality, it gives to those who refuse to help themselves??

The government has shown that it isn't really good at managing the money it already takes from us? Why are some of you all so good and fine with it wanting to take more?



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 09:35 PM
link   
This has got to be one of the most asinine and idiotic not to mention ungrateful and unappreciative things Obama has said to date.

The absolute arrogance of this greedy socialist. Just who in the hell does he think he is saying that crap. We just busted out 750 Billion dollars of our money to bail out the same banks Obama and his buddy Franklin Raines drove into collapse with one taking millions in Bonus and the other the second highest contributions owing the biggest favors, one of which was shutting down McCain's 2005 proposal to tighten up the GES's where Obama voted no on it. The audacity of this conartist and charlatan to call ANY American "Selfish" goes beyond any possible excuse or reason.

Obama,, jeeez how stupid can he be

-



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by MAINTAL
 


Not sure, coming from a guy like you who can't understand basic tax policy.



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 11:18 PM
link   
Most, if not all, of the new government agencies ushered in by Bush and his neocon country club cronies can be completely shut down, thus saving the USA enough billions to help the poor and needy.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join