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 economic plan 'backasswards,' Palin says

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by DeReK DaRkLy
 


Schwartzenegger isn't even natural born, so he cannot run as President. Beyond that he is an ass clown.

My guess is that they will run Newt Gingrich. Even I can think up a great marketing plan for getting Newt elected.




posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by ZuluChaka
 


First off I am NOT A CONSERVATIVE. I am a Libertarian, or should I say Classical liberal(that is more accurate). I want a lot of reform brought to America, not just economic.

And the only reason I say 3 months is because under Austrian School that is the very most that would ever be needed. And most people would not have to use it because there would be jobs for pretty much everyone you just have to be willing to take a pay cut.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by ldyserenity
 


Lady I am saying this out of concern for you, because I usually like your posts. I feel you might want to tone it down a notch so as not to get banned, because some could take your comments and construe them as racist. Sorry for nagging you like I am your mom or something. I just dont want to see you get in trouble.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by dfens
reply to post by 23refugee
 


I agree, maybe its different in Alaska, but she can't even get smart alec remarks right.

I'll go out on a limb and say that it wasn't her brainpower that got her elected. She is no saviour. It'll only be more of the same only worse next go round.

I don't think her handlers at the national level would be unaware of the PC behavior required from large segment of potential supporters.
The word "bassackwards" is a rique but permissable allusion to a "blackguard" word. "Backasswards" is not. The word is unchanged. Those people who might be offended know she's talking about a posterior, not what Jesus rode to town.
Subtle, but a gaffe.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Well I am not sure I understand what you are saying. If you dont mind could you detail out a plan? My questions are why would any libertarian be for any sort of government handouts and why should/would we take a paycut? Wouldnt a libertarian think the government should stay out of the relationship between a worker and their employer?



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Love her or hate her, at least we can all agree she would know how to handle this BP catastrophe a lot better than the one in charge now.
Maybe because she has more experience dealing with oil companies.

...btw, back on topic, she is right.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kernel Korn
The Kernel isn't "on the left" but the only thing that the Kernel fears is if she's as good a shot as Cheney. And the effect of gravity in the future. It would be frightful if she got the nominations for 2012. However the Kernel is sure that this will not come to pass.


ole miss here too

hotty toddy

don't worry everybody

THE SOUTH WILL RISE AGAIN



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZuluChaka
reply to post by ldyserenity
 


Lady I am saying this out of concern for you, because I usually like your posts. I feel you might want to tone it down a notch so as not to get banned, because some could take your comments and construe them as racist. Sorry for nagging you like I am your mom or something. I just dont want to see you get in trouble.



Okay, yes maybe I am being a bit boisterous, I should say most aren't and he's one that isn't intelligent. You're right though, I should tone it down. Anyway Palin isn't any more intelligent herself. The thing I have noticed the past several decades, is that most of our presidents haven't been very intelligent, the reason for this is that less intelligence= easily led, they are puppets and puppets have to be stupid.

I think that to enter the presidency it should not go by the college they attended or the job they held because we both know that there are some people in high positions who have graduated ivy league who are not very intelligent at all, their grades and degrees and positions were bought. (George W.) I think instead they should take an IQ test and it be based on their score. Also an emotional IQ test would be a good idea. That way we would know if we were dealing with a retard or someone who really has intelligence, because without intelligence and emotional intelligence, they would only listen to advisors who are paid for by special interest and not think on their own, I would rather a president think for themselves, not advisors who are paid to tell them what to do that is not for our country, but only for a small set of people who are greedy, hateful, and self righteous! Like corporations and banks, the biggest problem to this country!



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZuluChaka
reply to post by Misoir
 


Well I am not sure I understand what you are saying. If you dont mind could you detail out a plan? My questions are why would any libertarian be for any sort of government handouts and why should/would we take a paycut? Wouldnt a libertarian think the government should stay out of the relationship between a worker and their employer?


Because I am not a pure Libertarian, I support a minimal welfare state and some streamlining regulation. And when I say take a pay cut what I meant was either you could collect unemployment OR you could get a job that might pay less than what you were previously earning, hence Pay cut.

And I never said there should be any intervention by government into the worker-employer relationship.

And the way I would pay for the welfare state would not be through taxation but instead through the small tariffs. And government should not distribute the assistance it should be privately managed by non-profits. Military spending would be done through a national sales tax of 10%.

There would be a constitutional amendment saying that income, payroll and corporate taxes are illegal at the federal level. Another constitutional amendment that says it is illegal to deficit spend. And another which would say any law that does not protect citizens from harm or uphold a legal agreement is not justifiable.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Wow thanks for detailing that. I have a whole different understanding of your views now, which is way different from what I believed your views would be based on any other post of yours I have read on here.

I agree with most of what you said, but how could we pay off the debt if we outlawed federal taxes? Would you propose we do that after the debt is cleared?

Certainly for this to work SS and Medicare and Medicaid would have to really get slimmed down.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZuluChaka
reply to post by Misoir
 


Well I am not sure I understand what you are saying. If you dont mind could you detail out a plan? My questions are why would any libertarian be for any sort of government handouts and why should/would we take a paycut? Wouldnt a libertarian think the government should stay out of the relationship between a worker and their employer?



I have to say I agree, WTH would I want to take a pay cut, after busting my A At ITT online to get an associates in IT networking, want to after taking thousands in student loans want to go work for 7.50 an hour when the whole entire point to me going to school was so I did not have to be paid such a crappy wage anymore??? Heck, how do you expect I pay my loans back? I have three kids, a monthly rent, and bills besides, but I should take a pay cut???? I went to school so I could do better for myself!!!! NOT to work for free!!!!! What's wrong with you guys, OK well, I'll take the pay cut, if they drop the housing prices to REALISTIC prices and FOOD to REALISTIC prices, but HA we'll never see that in our lifetimes!!!!!!!



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by ldyserenity
 


You know what I think is that even GW was a pretty smart guy and even Obama is intelligent. Of course, Clinton is a flipping genius with a very high IQ.

Truthfully, I think Obama isn't doing this because he is stupid. He is doing this because he wants to, for whatever reason, bankrupt the country.

Nobody in their right mind would propose Cap and Trade during a recession/depression unless they wanted to collapse the economy.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:36 AM
link   
STOP THE PRESSES! PALIN STATES THE OBVIOUS!!!!!!!!!!

Why are we still talking about this foolish broad? I guess if you want to think she's onto something or is some great politician(that's a oxymoron, right?) you can.

I see nothing special in this. She said something(couldn't even get bassackwards right) that even a fifth grader could figure out and people are claiming she's the new messiah.

This chick is a fool.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by astrogolf
reply to post by anon72
 


For whapt it's worth. I work in the financial services/investment industry, and if I wanted to bring down this economy, here are some steps I'd take.
...snip...
-increase government controls on the financial sector.


I've worked in the financial sector for a while, and given that experience combined with the meltdown we saw in the past few years, I see it as you are just plain wrong. You are probably aware of the fact that for policy makers in banking, the risk/reward ratio has gone completely out of control -- trading derivatives has become a sort of gambling. People involved can have two or three good years, and if the outfit goes kaput, they are still in a good financial shape personally. If there was no MBS, the housing bubble would have never happened and neither would credit crunch.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by ldyserenity
 


Yeah no kidding. Taking a pay cut would be intolerable for most people, because most people are stretched thin as it is.

In Misoir's defense, I guess he meant that you would take a lesser job if you lost your job and couldnt find an equal or better paying job. Seems almost like a no brainer though. I mean what other choice would you have?



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZuluChaka
reply to post by ldyserenity
 


You know what I think is that even GW was a pretty smart guy and even Obama is intelligent. Of course, Clinton is a flipping genius with a very high IQ.

Truthfully, I think Obama isn't doing this because he is stupid. He is doing this because he wants to, for whatever reason, bankrupt the country.

Nobody in their right mind would propose Cap and Trade during a recession/depression unless they wanted to collapse the economy.


I don't know I think it's the people in the backroom the smoky room that are telling him this stuff, but hey, maybe you're right....but I don't think any of the presidents were very intelligent. But, of course I respect your opinion. The truth is someone is trying to bankrupt this country and whoever it is, we need to kick them the heck out!!!!


Actually I think the corporations and banks are behind it, but they want to bankrupt the citizens, and If I got to take a pay cut, they should first!!! They are the only ones who beniefit from our labor. It's gotten to the point that none of us benefit from our hard work anymore, and they are trying to make it so we're almost slaves, I think this is an outrage. Then on top of this they want us to shell out our tax dollars to bail out those who make far too much than they're worth to begin with and the lazy POS that would sitt on their A all day and pop out a kid every ten months every year. It's disgusting.

[edit on 12-7-2010 by ldyserenity]



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by TheLoony
 




This chick is a fool.


How can you call her a fool. She has taken her VP Candidacy, where before that the only people who knew who she was were Caribou, and turned that into a small fortune in book and speaking income. She created a PAC so she could influence elections all over the country and she has driven Liberals insane with rage against her. That, my friend, is pure genius and making the most out of an opportunity.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by ldyserenity
 


You very well could be right that someone behind the scenes is trying to wreck this country, but the more I think about it the more it seems to me that we are just falling under our own ego and trying to delude ourselves that we are something that we are not anymore.

Are country has become like a morbidly obese alcholoic who once was a trim, handsome, and wealthy man. Even now as we are drunk, fat, ugly, and broke we still think all the women find us attractive.

What we need to do is accept that we have a problem and come up with a plan to sober up, diet, and exercise.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZuluChaka
reply to post by Misoir
 


Wow thanks for detailing that. I have a whole different understanding of your views now, which is way different from what I believed your views would be based on any other post of yours I have read on here.

I agree with most of what you said, but how could we pay off the debt if we outlawed federal taxes? Would you propose we do that after the debt is cleared?

Certainly for this to work SS and Medicare and Medicaid would have to really get slimmed down.


It would take far too long for our debt to be cleared for us to wait on clearing off our debts. The best suggestion I could honestly give is bankruptcy. We would be switching to the gold standard anyways so our currency would be abandoned, but through bankruptcy prices would reset themselves to honest levels. I'm sure there are other ways but that is the only quick way I can think of at the moment.

Well Medicare and Medicaid would become savings accounts, and health care(not insurance) would become near universal through private accounts. Health insurance should be purchased and only used for medical emergencies such as heart attack, cancer, etc... While the private savings accounts would for your actual health care. The poor would have public accounts paid for by the tariffs.

And these positions are new for me. Back in late June when my grandma passed it really led me to thinking, and before that I was a Socialist. Then just after I returned to ATS I was more of a populist and now I am a Liberal Libertarian. And the reason for that is because I am planning on moving to Pennsylvania and they had a lot of assistance, not just government but private as well. I am from Florida and the Red Cross has said do not call them unless something like your house burnt down, because they have no funds. And private places that help with rent and electric bills have closed, no more charity assistance for the past 2 years.

So now I know that charities actually do work at helping people.

[edit on 7/12/2010 by Misoir]



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by astrogolf
reply to post by anon72
 


For whapt it's worth. I work in the financial services/investment industry, and if I wanted to bring down this economy, here are some steps I'd take.
-let the tax cuts expire
-nationalize healthcare ...
-increase government controls on the financial sector.
....


You work in the Financial Services/Investment Industry?...

Wow!...well I guess I should listen carefully since you already almost brought down the economy once...

I imagined you would have suggested tried and true methods like...unbridled greed, corruption, dishonesty and ripping off the general public at every opportunity.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join