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.

 

While Sarah Palin Plays Pinky Tuscadero Obama Tours Joplin

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by redrose123
reply to post by gorgi
 


Another example of how low she will go. Ride into a town of devastation and use it for her self centered gold digging campaign. If she was any type of person instead of turning it into a circus. She would have come there with some supporters to do something constructive to help Joplin instead of use Joplin.


Another example of how low Obama will go. Ride into a town of devastation and use it for his self centered gold digging campaign. If he was any type of person instead of turning it into a circus he would have come there with some supporters to do something constructive to help Joplin instead of use Joplin.

/TOA




posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by gorgi
 



The flat tax shifts the burden from the rich to the poor. The low and middle classes cannot afford such high taxes.


A flat tax could easily be designed to avoid those little hiccups. For example: Everybody pays 15% tax on all gross income above $10,000 per legal dependent (including self) per year. I do not have the studies in front of me, but studies show that this would increase the total tax revenue, while lowering the tax burden on the average American family.

We could also fix social security in the same way. No social security/medicare tax on wages below a set level, and no cap on the upper level. More money goes into the social security system AND more money stays in the pockets of those at the lower end of the income spectrum.


That would badly hurt the middle class to have taxes like that. the lower and middle classes already live paycheck to paycheck. this tax would devastate them. Someone here keeps mentioning an opt-out option which contradicts what you said.

Social Security is not in that much trouble. We already have a flat tax on SS and I agree there should be no cap.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by The Old American
 


I didn't vote for him either. To me Palin is totally disgusting. I get an automatic knee jerk about her. She has been literally shoved down everyones throat. You go anywhere, read anything, watchTV etc. unless you have to see her and hear what she has to say. She isn't that smart. That gorgeous and definitely not that good of speaker. She needs to be in show business and stay out of politics.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by redrose123
reply to post by The Old American
 


I didn't vote for him either. To me Palin is totally disgusting. I get an automatic knee jerk about her. She has been literally shoved down everyones throat. You go anywhere, read anything, watchTV etc. unless you have to see her and hear what she has to say. She isn't that smart. That gorgeous and definitely not that good of speaker. She needs to be in show business and stay out of politics.


Actually, I DID vote for him. But in the famous words of Bush "fool me twice...not gonna get fooled again". Palin couldn't run a state. Why would anyone want her trying her hand at a country?

/TOA



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by gorgi
 


The parameters for the minimum income could be tweaked to make sure nobody at the bottom of the scale is paying more taxes than they are now. I do not see how it could hurt the middle class? Currently, a family of 4 with an income of $17k to $69k is already in the 15% tax bracket.

According to This Calculator a family of 4 making $40,000 would currently pay $1340 in tax, while my proposal would result in zero tax. If they made $70,000, they would currently pay $5690, while my plan would have them paying $4500. If they made $140,000 they would pay $20,600, while my plan would have them paying $15,000.

My plan is cheaper on almost all cases, the only caveat is that people in the upper tax brackets can normally find a lot of loopholes and deductions and tax shelters, because they can afford to spend the money to invest and hide and pay accountants and attorneys. My plan would do away with all of those loopholes, and everybody would pay their fair share!!

Another Source



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by gorgi

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by gorgi

Please tell me this this is a joke.



If you're referring to what you've been posting, then yes it has to be a joke.

It's really the only explanation, since NO ONE ANYWHERE seems to be sharing your enthusiasm.


I was referring to your posts. It appears that you didnt read the articles that you had posted. I was just wondering if it was a joke because it agreed with what I was saying and the rest easily disproved.


Like this source showing planned layoffs are up:

source

Plus, you must realize that the job figures the obama administration publishes conveniently leave out the people who are "underemployed and those that have just given up trying to find jobs. Including those people puts the real jobless rate closer to 20%.

source

As Carter found out, it will prove hard to be re-elected with those kinds of numbers.

And again, it shows that your claim that obama's policies are working is patently false.

Wait, I take that back. Obama's policy of deflecting blame by blaming Bush - which you keep parroting - may be the only policy that is even partially working. Well, it worked on you anyway ...






edit on 6/1/2011 by centurion1211 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by redrose123
reply to post by The Old American
 


I didn't vote for him either. To me Palin is totally disgusting. I get an automatic knee jerk about her. She has been literally shoved down everyones throat. You go anywhere, read anything, watchTV etc. unless you have to see her and hear what she has to say. She isn't that smart. That gorgeous and definitely not that good of speaker. She needs to be in show business and stay out of politics.


Which takes us back on the original topic.

Interesting that when someone really doesn't like someone else, they generally have NOTHING to do with them. Don't even spend any time thinking about them.

But here we have more examples of progressives that cannot stop thinking and posting about Palin - almost to the point of it being an obsession.




posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by gorgi

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by gorgi

Please tell me this this is a joke.



If you're referring to what you've been posting, then yes it has to be a joke.

It's really the only explanation, since NO ONE ANYWHERE seems to be sharing your enthusiasm.


I was referring to your posts. It appears that you didnt read the articles that you had posted. I was just wondering if it was a joke because it agreed with what I was saying and the rest easily disproved.


Like this source showing planned layoffs are up:

source

Plus, you must realize that the job figures the obama administration publishes conveniently leave out the people who are "underemployed and those that have just given up trying to find jobs. Including those people puts the real jobless rate closer to 20%.

source

As Carter found out, it will prove hard to be re-elected with those kinds of numbers.

And again, it shows that your claim that obama's policies are working is patently false.

Wait, I take that back. Obama's policy of deflecting blame by blaming Bush - which you keep parroting - may be the only policy that is even partially working. Well, it worked on you anyway ...


edit on 6/1/2011 by centurion1211 because: (no reason given)


If your are going to shift the numbers in your favor, you should just add every body physically able to work. That would boost unemployment to around 50%. You can easily mess with them. The standard way of calculating unemployment is around 9%.

Oh and carters main reason for losing was his handling of the hostage crisis.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by gorgi
 


The parameters for the minimum income could be tweaked to make sure nobody at the bottom of the scale is paying more taxes than they are now. I do not see how it could hurt the middle class? Currently, a family of 4 with an income of $17k to $69k is already in the 15% tax bracket.

According to This Calculator a family of 4 making $40,000 would currently pay $1340 in tax, while my proposal would result in zero tax. If they made $70,000, they would currently pay $5690, while my plan would have them paying $4500. If they made $140,000 they would pay $20,600, while my plan would have them paying $15,000.

My plan is cheaper on almost all cases, the only caveat is that people in the upper tax brackets can normally find a lot of loopholes and deductions and tax shelters, because they can afford to spend the money to invest and hide and pay accountants and attorneys. My plan would do away with all of those loopholes, and everybody would pay their fair share!!

Another Source


What would you consider bottom? Thats very subjective. I know people who make that much and they get refunds so i do not see how your plan would be cheaper. Closing loop holes with the current system is much better than overhauling it.

This article is old but still gets gets the point across. and this one is a bit more recent.



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by gorgi
If your are going to shift the numbers in your favor, you should just add every body physically able to work. That would boost unemployment to around 50%. You can easily mess with them. The standard way of calculating unemployment is around 9%.

Oh and carters main reason for losing was his handling of the hostage crisis.


Sorry, I was an adult during carter's one term and it was the economy AND the iran hostage crisis that got him defeated by Reagan.

And let's see you try and explain these examples from today's news of obama's failing economy in a positive light.

US house price fall 'beats Great Depression slide'


The ailing US housing market passed a grim milestone in the first quarter of this year, posting a further deterioration that means the fall in house prices is now greater than that suffered during the Great Depression.


and

Dow Average Has Its Longest Weekly Slump Since 2004


U.S. stocks fell this week, sending the Dow Jones Industrial Average to its longest streak of losses since 2004, after worse-than-estimated reports on jobs and manufacturing fueled concern earnings growth will slow.


None of this can be fixed by the elections, likely dooming obama to defeat.
edit on 6/4/2011 by centurion1211 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2011 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by centurion1211
 


The economic problems were not caters fault and the hostage crisis is what mainly did him in.
The stock market goes up and down. So what if it did bad for a week or so. It goes back up. The hedge fund managers are making billions by shorting them and buy back later.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join