America, July 5, 2015, Under President Romney

page: 2
16
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by babybunnies

Originally posted by Jefferton
It's fun to pretend.

I'll stick with reality though. Most here may have to look that word up.


lol. Yeah, I love the ones here who look for consipiracies just for conspiracy's sake.

This was just a fun extrapolation from what's been said on the campaign trail over the last six months or so, templated onto current events.


You should have started with this.

After the national debt soared another $5 trillion higher Romney ... oh wait, never mind that isn't the future, that's the present under Obama. Silly me.




posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by babybunnies
 


Emotionally based and illogical. No sense of basic economic law whatsoever.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 08:37 AM
link   
reply to post by syrinx high priest
 





you forgot the depression of '14 triggered by the deregulation of the banks leading to a repeat of the derivatives crises


Is it possible to deregulate them any further?



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 08:43 AM
link   
I find it hilarious that pro-Romney folks are saying this is ridiculous and pure fantasy...but all you did was take what he is saying in his stump speeches.


Tax cuts for the rich don't make much sense when put into context...do they Conservatives????



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Also in this update:

With Roe v Wade being successfully overturned in November, 2013, the death rate from illegal abortion continues to grow to near 20,000 since the ruling. Secretary Akin stated: "These are unfortunate statistics, especially since the babies had to die along with the mothers. It just proves that these women weren't fit to be mothers, anyway. The babies will go to heaven and have another chance at life. It's a scientific fact." President Romney and VP Ryan agreed, stating that the number of babies saved by the ruling makes up for the deaths of these women.

Consequently, however, foster homes continue to bulge at the seams and just last week, another child died from abuse in the overcrowded "Sanctuary House", the largest new foster home in Indiana.

Child abuse statistics have risen again this month, and a correlation has been made between unwanted pregnancies, forced to go full term, and the incidents of child abuse and neglect by young and uneducated parents.

The good news? The number of high-school girls who drop out because of pregnancy took a slight dip to 36% last month. School boards across the nation are still in talks to expand their abstinence-only education mandate by the federal government - the teachers and board members want to include SOME information about how to avoid pregnancy, but with the new law against it, they face an uphill battle.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
I find it hilarious that pro-Romney folks are saying this is ridiculous and pure fantasy...but all you did was take what he is saying in his stump speeches.


Tax cuts for the rich don't make much sense when put into context...do they Conservatives????


let say the "rich", whoever that is, dont get tax cuts and they are taxed more. how does that help the economy? how does that create permanent jobs?



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
I find it hilarious that pro-Romney folks are saying this is ridiculous and pure fantasy...but all you did was take what he is saying in his stump speeches.


Tax cuts for the rich don't make much sense when put into context...do they Conservatives????


let say the "rich", whoever that is, dont get tax cuts and they are taxed more. how does that help the economy? how does that create permanent jobs?


By giving the money to the government. Which will spend it. Which creates jobs, as most of the money will stay inside the USA. I really, really hope that is not a too difficult concept to see.
It works here quite well. A rich government is a spending government. What would be the worst? Paying debts?..

The trickling down doesn't work. TAKE from the rich and build with it.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by camaro68ss
 



let say the "rich", whoever that is, dont get tax cuts and they are taxed more. how does that help the economy? how does that create permanent jobs?


No no no...don't try to turn it around.

You tell us...how does giving the rich tax cuts create jobs.

And remember...the rich have enjoyed a very nice tax cut for over a decade now...and I'm not seeing many jobs resulting from that.

But explain to me why someone would create a job soley because they have more money...explain the economics of that to me. Explain to me how you think a job is created.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by camaro68ss
 



let say the "rich", whoever that is, dont get tax cuts and they are taxed more. how does that help the economy? how does that create permanent jobs?


No no no...don't try to turn it around.

You tell us...how does giving the rich tax cuts create jobs.

And remember...the rich have enjoyed a very nice tax cut for over a decade now...and I'm not seeing many jobs resulting from that.

But explain to me why someone would create a job soley because they have more money...explain the economics of that to me. Explain to me how you think a job is created.


"Obviously" via Trickling Down.
Don't ask me, I have never seen a rich man going down the street losing his money out of his pockets. Really, how should this have worked out?
Well, it didn't. The middle class is evaporating, the gap to the rich is expanding.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by camaro68ss
 



let say the "rich", whoever that is, dont get tax cuts and they are taxed more. how does that help the economy? how does that create permanent jobs?


No no no...don't try to turn it around.

You tell us...how does giving the rich tax cuts create jobs.

And remember...the rich have enjoyed a very nice tax cut for over a decade now...and I'm not seeing many jobs resulting from that.

But explain to me why someone would create a job soley because they have more money...explain the economics of that to me. Explain to me how you think a job is created.


no,no,no,no,no,

you awnser the question first. your always dodging questions.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by ManFromEurope

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
I find it hilarious that pro-Romney folks are saying this is ridiculous and pure fantasy...but all you did was take what he is saying in his stump speeches.


Tax cuts for the rich don't make much sense when put into context...do they Conservatives????


let say the "rich", whoever that is, dont get tax cuts and they are taxed more. how does that help the economy? how does that create permanent jobs?


By giving the money to the government. Which will spend it. Which creates jobs, as most of the money will stay inside the USA. I really, really hope that is not a too difficult concept to see.
It works here quite well. A rich government is a spending government. What would be the worst? Paying debts?..

The trickling down doesn't work. TAKE from the rich and build with it.


by your logic then we should tax them 100%. tax them 100% and it will create a maga boom in the economy right? That should fix everything. In fact, lets tax everyone 100%. that will make a Maga MAGA boom.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by ManFromEurope

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by camaro68ss
 



let say the "rich", whoever that is, dont get tax cuts and they are taxed more. how does that help the economy? how does that create permanent jobs?


No no no...don't try to turn it around.

You tell us...how does giving the rich tax cuts create jobs.

And remember...the rich have enjoyed a very nice tax cut for over a decade now...and I'm not seeing many jobs resulting from that.

But explain to me why someone would create a job soley because they have more money...explain the economics of that to me. Explain to me how you think a job is created.


"Obviously" via Trickling Down.
Don't ask me, I have never seen a rich man going down the street losing his money out of his pockets. Really, how should this have worked out?
Well, it didn't. The middle class is evaporating, the gap to the rich is expanding.


I've never seen a poor man hire or create a job.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by camaro68ss
 



let say the "rich", whoever that is, dont get tax cuts and they are taxed more. how does that help the economy? how does that create permanent jobs?


No no no...don't try to turn it around.

You tell us...how does giving the rich tax cuts create jobs.

And remember...the rich have enjoyed a very nice tax cut for over a decade now...and I'm not seeing many jobs resulting from that.

But explain to me why someone would create a job soley because they have more money...explain the economics of that to me. Explain to me how you think a job is created.


heres your awnser.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

your turn



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by ManFromEurope

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
I find it hilarious that pro-Romney folks are saying this is ridiculous and pure fantasy...but all you did was take what he is saying in his stump speeches.


Tax cuts for the rich don't make much sense when put into context...do they Conservatives????


let say the "rich", whoever that is, dont get tax cuts and they are taxed more. how does that help the economy? how does that create permanent jobs?


By giving the money to the government. Which will spend it. Which creates jobs, as most of the money will stay inside the USA. I really, really hope that is not a too difficult concept to see.
It works here quite well. A rich government is a spending government. What would be the worst? Paying debts?..

The trickling down doesn't work. TAKE from the rich and build with it.


by your logic then we should tax them 100%. tax them 100% and it will create a maga boom in the economy right? That should fix everything. In fact, lets tax everyone 100%. that will make a Maga MAGA boom.


No, find some more serious number. 100% is not the tax I would use. If you want to use 100%, the economy would be dead. Twisting my words doesn't win you anything.

A rich man doesn't make many others get a job. What larger company is owned and run by a single rich man? Most are corporations owned by shareholders, right? SO its not the effort of a single man who produces jobs, right? So, why should a rich man doesn't give a higher share of his income than a poorer man? Because it hurts more if he gets only 19.000.000$ instead of 25.000.000$? Do you even care about a poorer man earning 60.. no, make that 40.000$ annualy - if taxes for this person would be higher, his standard of living would DROP ENORMOUSLY, as he would be struggling before and even harder after the tax-raise.

Percentage is one side - absolute numbers are more important.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by ManFromEurope

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by camaro68ss
 



let say the "rich", whoever that is, dont get tax cuts and they are taxed more. how does that help the economy? how does that create permanent jobs?


No no no...don't try to turn it around.

You tell us...how does giving the rich tax cuts create jobs.

And remember...the rich have enjoyed a very nice tax cut for over a decade now...and I'm not seeing many jobs resulting from that.

But explain to me why someone would create a job soley because they have more money...explain the economics of that to me. Explain to me how you think a job is created.


"Obviously" via Trickling Down.
Don't ask me, I have never seen a rich man going down the street losing his money out of his pockets. Really, how should this have worked out?
Well, it didn't. The middle class is evaporating, the gap to the rich is expanding.


I've never seen a poor man hire or create a job.

Huh? Do you have to be rich to start a company? If your company is running, you might get enought money to hire people and get bigger and bigger.
Do I really have to explain capitalism to you?



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by camaro68ss
 



let say the "rich", whoever that is, dont get tax cuts and they are taxed more. how does that help the economy? how does that create permanent jobs?


No no no...don't try to turn it around.

You tell us...how does giving the rich tax cuts create jobs.

And remember...the rich have enjoyed a very nice tax cut for over a decade now...and I'm not seeing many jobs resulting from that.

But explain to me why someone would create a job soley because they have more money...explain the economics of that to me. Explain to me how you think a job is created.


heres your awnser.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

your turn


And here is yours:

www.pewsocialtrends.org...
Abstract: "Since 2000, the middle class has shrunk in size, fallen backward in income and wealth, and shed some—but by no means all—of its characteristic faith in the future."

Trickle down is the fairy tale with which the rich have lulled the middle and the lower classes into slumber. It didn't work.

You have no more turns left.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by ManFromEurope

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by ManFromEurope

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
I find it hilarious that pro-Romney folks are saying this is ridiculous and pure fantasy...but all you did was take what he is saying in his stump speeches.


Tax cuts for the rich don't make much sense when put into context...do they Conservatives????


let say the "rich", whoever that is, dont get tax cuts and they are taxed more. how does that help the economy? how does that create permanent jobs?


By giving the money to the government. Which will spend it. Which creates jobs, as most of the money will stay inside the USA. I really, really hope that is not a too difficult concept to see.
It works here quite well. A rich government is a spending government. What would be the worst? Paying debts?..

The trickling down doesn't work. TAKE from the rich and build with it.


by your logic then we should tax them 100%. tax them 100% and it will create a maga boom in the economy right? That should fix everything. In fact, lets tax everyone 100%. that will make a Maga MAGA boom.


No, find some more serious number. 100% is not the tax I would use. If you want to use 100%, the economy would be dead. Twisting my words doesn't win you anything.

A rich man doesn't make many others get a job. What larger company is owned and run by a single rich man? Most are corporations owned by shareholders, right? SO its not the effort of a single man who produces jobs, right? So, why should a rich man doesn't give a higher share of his income than a poorer man? Because it hurts more if he gets only 19.000.000$ instead of 25.000.000$? Do you even care about a poorer man earning 60.. no, make that 40.000$ annualy - if taxes for this person would be higher, his standard of living would DROP ENORMOUSLY, as he would be struggling before and even harder after the tax-raise.

Percentage is one side - absolute numbers are more important.


hum, and Europe is doing well right now taxing the rich?

how is that working for greece. Greece taxes all there rich higher percentages. Greece must be booming right now.

By your logic, why would the US goverment making a big deal about this "fiscal cliff" that will be coming Jan 2013? it increses taxes yet every economist says it will devastate the economy.

how come we are spending 1.3 trillion dollars a year deficits yet the economy is still in the tolet? do we need to spend more? will that create good and servieces that will hire people?



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by camaro68ss
 


Your "answer" talked about corporate tax rate...not individual tax rate...that is an entirely seperate conversation.

We are talking about income tax breaks for wealthy individuals.


Answer me this...what creates a job...a demand for that job...or a rich person having extra money laying around???



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by ManFromEurope

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by ManFromEurope

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
I find it hilarious that pro-Romney folks are saying this is ridiculous and pure fantasy...but all you did was take what he is saying in his stump speeches.


Tax cuts for the rich don't make much sense when put into context...do they Conservatives????


let say the "rich", whoever that is, dont get tax cuts and they are taxed more. how does that help the economy? how does that create permanent jobs?


By giving the money to the government. Which will spend it. Which creates jobs, as most of the money will stay inside the USA. I really, really hope that is not a too difficult concept to see.
It works here quite well. A rich government is a spending government. What would be the worst? Paying debts?..

The trickling down doesn't work. TAKE from the rich and build with it.


by your logic then we should tax them 100%. tax them 100% and it will create a maga boom in the economy right? That should fix everything. In fact, lets tax everyone 100%. that will make a Maga MAGA boom.


No, find some more serious number. 100% is not the tax I would use. If you want to use 100%, the economy would be dead. Twisting my words doesn't win you anything.

A rich man doesn't make many others get a job. What larger company is owned and run by a single rich man? Most are corporations owned by shareholders, right? SO its not the effort of a single man who produces jobs, right? So, why should a rich man doesn't give a higher share of his income than a poorer man? Because it hurts more if he gets only 19.000.000$ instead of 25.000.000$? Do you even care about a poorer man earning 60.. no, make that 40.000$ annualy - if taxes for this person would be higher, his standard of living would DROP ENORMOUSLY, as he would be struggling before and even harder after the tax-raise.

Percentage is one side - absolute numbers are more important.


hum, and Europe is doing well right now taxing the rich?

how is that working for greece. Greece taxes all there rich higher percentages. Greece must be booming right now.

Different topic, I will try to answer (as no-one has a simple answer, obviously) nevertheless. Greece's government has a huge problem still with prodigality. They paid the civil servants a thirteenth and fourteenth month's salary, for example. On the other hand, the rich are always trying to bring their money into countries with a smaller tax or even as illegal money on bank accounts anonymously. I doubt that they could do so with even more money, as the rich are right in this moment trying their best to hide their money.
No difference if you tax them 13 or 25 or 35%: They will always try to save their money overseas (or, in Germanys case, over the Alps... Well, I didn't say anything about a chocolate-loving country with lots of mountains and alphorns.. They are pi**ed at Germany right now anyways..)



By your logic, why would the US goverment making a big deal about this "fiscal cliff" that will be coming Jan 2013? it increses taxes yet every economist says it will devastate the economy.

how come we are spending 1.3 trillion dollars a year deficits yet the economy is still in the tolet? do we need to spend more? will that create good and servieces that will hire people?


Quote some of those economists, please. I would like to read their comments about it.

Maybe 1.3 trillion is not enough? Or it is going into a too small number of companies? Haliburton sure gained wealthy..

I am in a position that the German government gives me money to build for public services. I choose companies to build what I ordered and so the money is spent on a large number of companies, which is ensured by a free and equal competition. Everyone, even the very small companies, get a good part of the share. Sometimes there are larger orders, often smaller ones. The cash is flowing and not leaving the country. The government doesn't sit on its money - even if they should repay some debts, in my opinion.
Germany had an excess of 10 bil EUR this year as I learned of today, I am curious about the spending of that money.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by ManFromEurope

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
I find it hilarious that pro-Romney folks are saying this is ridiculous and pure fantasy...but all you did was take what he is saying in his stump speeches.


Tax cuts for the rich don't make much sense when put into context...do they Conservatives????


let say the "rich", whoever that is, dont get tax cuts and they are taxed more. how does that help the economy? how does that create permanent jobs?


By giving the money to the government. Which will spend it. Which creates jobs, as most of the money will stay inside the USA. I really, really hope that is not a too difficult concept to see.
It works here quite well. A rich government is a spending government. What would be the worst? Paying debts?..

The trickling down doesn't work. TAKE from the rich and build with it.


Wow... talk about delusional. I for one do not want to give my money to the govt. and hope they create jobs with it. Just sheer stupidity!





new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join