mccain obama debate #3

[maladroit]

WTF was mccain talking about when he said that canada's response to obama's nafta policy was "we'll sell our oil to china"? i live in canada and i never heard anything remotely like that from any canadian in politics or coffee shops

i think obama took that debate but he was weak in his counter-offence to mccain...i think he was trying to take the high road...obama would have done a better job of that by apologizing to mccain for taking the low road on negative campaigning

[bobthenuker]

That debate left a bad taste in my mouth. The word...dirty, comes to mind.

I gotta give it up to McCain though, in my opinion he came out looking much more like a leader. Maybe it was an off night for Obama? Though I think Obama nailed him in the past 2 debates.

W.e, I still don't think it's going to change much, I'm pretty damn sure the debate changed no one's minds, maybe only a few undecided voters here and there. I think Obama has this election in the bag.

[Psycho4Bud]

This person exposed Obama's tax plan for what it really is and probably cost him this election. Way to go Joe!:thumbsup:

Have a good one!:s4:

[justanotherbozo]

This person exposed Obama's tax plan for what it really is and probably cost him this election. Way to go Joe!:thumbsup:

Have a good one!:s4:


yeah, that's much better than 'let them eat cake'

[daihashi]

1st Debate: Obama bulldozed McCain.. Obama Victory

2nd Debate: WTF was this.. both sides sucked and the moderator was lame. It's like he didn't care to be there.

3rd Debate: McCain seriously laid down a can of whoop ass.. In addition to this he explained why Obama's plans wouldn't work.. compared them to his own; brought up Obama's record or lack there of.. compared it to his own. Got in some jabs in the process. I have to admit McCain was really on fire last night and Obama seemed to be off his game.

Quite a few times Obama looked like he was at a loss for words.

I don't know though if it was enough to turn the tide of the election. Currently it's a 3-5 point race. Which is VERY close.. I think over the course of the next few days it will really start to sink into people the things that were brought up.

In addition if McCain can keep this going for the next 3 weeks then he definitely stands a chance. This is the platform and aggressiveness he should've used after Obama won the Democratic Nomination.

Although I would've liked to see Bill Ayers brought up more.. through the use of a repetitive question to really drive the point home. I would've liked to seen infanticide brought up a little bit more aggressively, there were a few things I would've liked to seen on McCains side, but all in all I thought it was a good debate for him.

I liked the fact that he pointed out that Obama doesn't actually say or commit to anything in his words.. that they are just elegant and well spoken.

Also I felt that the Moderator this round asked some serious questions and wasn't as much of a pansey/pushover like the previous 2.


ps: Did anyone else think that McCain looked like he took some happy pills? LOL. He just looked so cheery and sassy. like a little school boy.

[IAmKowalski]

I think, overall, Obama came off better than McCain in the debate. It was still a bit of a disappointment though. McCain needed a decisive win to regain some ground, whereas Obama needed to be cautious and well reasoned in order to maintain the lead that he has without taking any real risks. Obama did just that, but no more - he was being cautious, too cautious for his supporters who watched in annoyance as he made no move for the jugular. It did seem obvious that Obama was debating McCain, whereas McCain time and again was debating a straw man - not actually responding to his opponent but arguing against his campaign's mischaracterizations of Obama's platform and positions. That came across in the debate pretty clearly, a CBS poll of undecided voters had Obama as the winner at 53% compared to McCain at 22%. CNN's poll was also for Obama at 58% to 31%. There was, however, no clear knockout moment. This leaves the McCain campaign with a couple weeks to try to swiftboat Obama - throw out charges and accusations hoping that there won't be enough time to debunk or answer the charges and hoping that they will be sensational enough to get significant coverage in the media - this is why we are seeing things like the silly Acorn tactic being used now. Their hope is that there won't be time for people to figure out who Acorn is, what Obama's involvement with them was, and what exactly they are accused of. Anyone remember Dukakis being slammed for being a "Card Carrying Member of the ACLU"?

[daihashi]

I guess most people don't know how to read body language. As an avid poker player who makes a decent amount of money yearly on the game.. Obama appeared very frustrated throughout most of the debate.

[bobthenuker]

yeah, that's much better than 'let them eat cake'

A very frequently used quote...it's a myth though, she never said that. Or did not mean it in that sense.

Anyway, though the debate did not tide well for Obama, I don't think it cost him the election as suggested...I think it was a big loss on his part, the most important debate as well. It may be more close now, but I still think Obama will pull ahead...we shall see though.

[daihashi]

A very frequently used quote...it's a myth though, she never said that. Or did not mean it in that sense.

Anyway, though the debate did not tide well for Obama, I don't think it cost him the election as suggested...I think it was a big loss on his part, the most important debate as well. It may be more close now, but I still think Obama will pull ahead...we shall see though.

Agreed.. I don't think it lost him the election; but it put him into a position to where he *could* lose the election. Something that previously was a guaranteed win.

It will be tight/close from here on out. The truth is no one will know until election day.

[maladroit]

the people have spoken: obama won the debate

CBS Poll: Obama Has Edge In Final Debate, By Large Margin, Uncommitted Voters Say Democrat Won The Last Debate Before The Election - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/16/politics/2008debates/main4525289.shtml?source=mostpop_story)

McCain lost final debate with Obama, polls say | The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24506160-5013948,00.html)

Poll: Debate watchers say Obama wins - CNN.com (http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/15/debate.poll/?imw=Y&iref=mpstoryemail)

[daihashi]

the people have spoken: obama won the debate

CBS Poll: Obama Has Edge In Final Debate, By Large Margin, Uncommitted Voters Say Democrat Won The Last Debate Before The Election - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/16/politics/2008debates/main4525289.shtml?source=mostpop_story)

McCain lost final debate with Obama, polls say | The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24506160-5013948,00.html)

Poll: Debate watchers say Obama wins - CNN.com (http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/15/debate.poll/?imw=Y&iref=mpstoryemail)

Phoned in polls really don't mean much as the demographic sampling is uncontrolled.

:thumbsup:

Wait for the Rasmussen and Zogby polls that will reflect this debate in a few days.

[allrollsin21]

Unfortunately i only caught the last 35 minutes of the debate. I saw no clear winner in that time. I definitely saw how my bias shaped the way i perceived things. Here's a few examples.

McCain was smirking the whole time. Big difference between a beady eyed smirk, and a smile of disbelief. He looked unhinged on a few occasions. especially during the abortion question, at one point he was visibly about to blow his top...that is scary to ME.

As far as Obama he seemed overly careful and unsure of himself. As if he was not certain what tactic to take. He also seemed to get stuck on his thoughts at times. Though he showed a calmness much more desirable for in a president, at least for this fan of ANTI WAR policy.

[maladroit]

the CBS poll was solid and i think the CNN poll was too:

This CBS News poll was conducted online by Knowledge Networks among a nationwide random sample of 638 uncommitted voters - voters who donâ??t yet know who they will vote for, or who have chosen a candidate but may still change their minds - who have agreed to watch the debate. Knowledge Networks, a market and public policy research firm based in Menlo Park, CA, conducted the web poll among a sample of adult members of its panel, who are provided web access if they don't already have it. More technical information is available at Additional Information about KN for Reviewers (http://www.knowledgenetworks.com/ganp/reviewer-info.html).

This is a scientifically representative poll of uncommitted votersâ?? reaction to the presidential debate. The margin of sampling error could be plus or minus 4 percentage points for results based on the entire sample.

[maladroit]

mccain has anger management issues (not the right temperment for control of nuclear weapons)

McClatchy Washington Bureau | 09/07/2008 | McCain's history of hot temper raises concerns (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/51660.html)

[DaBudhaStank]

I agree, it seemed McCain was a bit more on point, more aggresive this time around. But then, I barely remember it because I was taking bong rips the whole time with my buddy, and then we said "Fuck the debate" at 10 because new South Park was on. Woo!

[Psycho4Bud]

Clean-up in aisle 3.....all the garbage is gone.:thumbsup:

Have a good one!:jointsmile:

[Chong Version 2.0]

McCain looked out of his depth.

confused (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EASpPlcVbdI) :confused:

angry (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGzfYOp34d8) :mad:

[happiestmferoutthere]

Hmmm... Looks like "Joe the Plumber" is getting more attention than he wished.
Joseph Wurzelbacher - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Wurzelbacher)
The guys story is falling apart.
Not that I really feel sorry for a plumber that makes a $ 250,000.00 a year when teachers make less than 1/4 that, but hey.... I'm just sayin'

[happiestmferoutthere]

The guys story is falling apart
Say it isn't so Joe!! **WINK** **WINK**

Sorry...... I couldn't resist!;)

[dragonrider]

I guess most people don't know how to read body language. As an avid poker player who makes a decent amount of money yearly on the game.. Obama appeared very frustrated throughout most of the debate.

I don't read body language well. What does it mean when Pokerface McCain's eyebrows shoot up, down, up, down, up, down in rapid succession, then he blink, blink, blink, blink, blinks, then his eyes dart left and right, he takes a huge breath and puffs out his cheeks, grimaces and laughs. What the hell does it mean? He has the wierdest facial contortions of anyone I have ever seen!

And what does this mean? Is this a poker tell of some kind?:

[dragonrider]

Didn't McCain say something about how he was gonna "Lick Obama in the dabate?"

[dragonrider]

Remember when Bush snuck up on German Chancellor Merkel and freaked her out by massaging her back? What if McCain did this to her? We'd probably go to War with Germany! Is that what we want? Can we risk it?

[Reefer Rogue]

Joe the plumber only represents 5% of Americans who would be taxed and they make 250,000 a year anyway, no sympathy from me, they're trying to make it appear Obama is 'crushing the american dream' absolute garbage. Obama will cut taxes for 95% of Americans, who are middle and lower class, the people who make more can afford to pay more. Oil companies it's time to use your land or lose your land. I think Obama won that debate and every debate because i think his policies are superior. Why hasn't Mccain talked more about helping people in to college? Because he called these people 'interest groups' they are the future! His health plan is flawed, the average health insurance bill is 12,000 Obama said, well how is that 5000 gonna help, it's a deficit of 7,000. About Obamas record and voting present, he explained that well in the roe v wade section which i won't repeat. Mcangry got pissed about being like Bush, but it's his record, 4 out of 5 of the last economic policies voted for and foreign policies he supported bush. I'm very optimistic for the future of America if Obama wins. Vote Obama 08 :D

[Psycho4Bud]

Joe the plumber only represents 5% of Americans who would be taxed and they make 250,000 a year anyway, no sympathy from me

Why should small business get a break? Who do you think is going to absorb the final cost of tax increases to the oil companies and the rest of businesses that would take this tax hit? THE CONSUMER that's who!

Hey small business making lets say $300,000; your taxes will increase and after that you'll be required to get into this socialist health care system for all employees. NOW create some jobs after the hit. Makes perfect sense to me.

Under Obama's "college plan" he'll give a kick for education but these people have to do a certain amount of time in a national service program after graduation. VERY NICE, we get to pay for ANOTHER government agency to moderate and enforce this.

You want big government? Don't bitch when Uncle Sam wants to play daddy and dictate what you can or cannot do with your life.

Have a good one!:s4:

[DaBudhaStank]

You want big government? Don't bitch when Uncle Sam wants to play daddy and dictate what you can or cannot do with your life.

Have a good one!:s4:

Where have YOU been the last 8 years? Big government is preeeeeeetty standard after 9/11, and we practically BEGGED for it in the name of national security.

[texas grass]

Why should small business get a break? Who do you think is going to absorb the final cost of tax increases to the oil companies and the rest of businesses that would take this tax hit? THE CONSUMER that's who!

Hey small business making lets say $300,000; your taxes will increase and after that you'll be required to get into this socialist health care system for all employees. NOW create some jobs after the hit. Makes perfect sense to me.

Under Obama's "college plan" he'll give a kick for education but these people have to do a certain amount of time in a national service program after graduation. VERY NICE, we get to pay for ANOTHER government agency to moderate and enforce this.

You want big government? Don't bitch when Uncle Sam wants to play daddy and dictate what you can or cannot do with your life.

Have a good one!:s4:




first off oil companies have made more money in 1 quarter than over many many years. so they deserve to pay higher taxes, hell oil is trading around low 70's a barrel and were still paying $3 a gallon, but when oil is 150 a barrel its $4 a barrel, those profits are fraudulent gains


as for healthcare, bush and the republicans have made it harder to get healthcare, and prices have rised. and on top of that mccain wants to put an extra 5000 TAX ON YOU, and that tax on healthcare has never been there,


as far as your big government comment, look at your beloved party that has illegally stepped around the constitution and put illegal laws in place



i think its funny how there are so many attacks against politics from both sides, but 1 side in paticular attacks and complains and just runs back to the republicans and theres abunch attacking both sides and being labeled as democrats. its complete nonsense on how blind people are




and by the way

IM NOT VOTING FOR A DEM OR REP BECAUSE THEY ARE THE PROBLEM WITH POLITICS IN AMERICA

[chongman420]

By Andrea Hopkins

CINCINNATI (Reuters) - After Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama made him into the most famous plumber in America, it turns out Joe Wurzelbacher isn't a licensed plumber after all. Oh, and his real name is Sam.

The morning after he emerged as the unexpected star of Wednesday evening's U.S. presidential debate, Samuel "Joe" Wurzelbacher of Holland, Ohio, found himself at the center of a media frenzy, with reporters camped out on his front lawn and his phone ringing off the hook.

But it wasn't long before the Association of Plumbers, Steamfitters and Service Mechanics revealed that Wurzelbacher was not a licensed member of their trade.

"That means that he has not completed the training program necessary for him to sit for a license test," said Tony Herrera, market recovery specialist for Plumbers and Steamfitters Local 50 in Toledo, Ohio.

"It's a shame that this guy has ended up in this situation because it seems like he's misrepresented himself -- and for that matter the plumbing and pipefitting industry."

Without a license, Wurzelbacher cannot practice in the city of Toledo but can work for someone with a master's license or in outlying areas that do not require a license, Herrera said.

Wurzelbacher, 34, listed in the phone directory as Samuel, did not answer his phone and his voicemail box appeared to be full. Reporters at his home said he had driven away.

Wurzelbacher has become a darling of conservatives for attacking Obama's tax policies but he has declined to say who he will vote for in the November 4 election.

[daihashi]

Wurzelbacher has become a darling of conservatives for attacking Obama's tax policies but he has declined to say who he will vote for in the November 4 election.

Honestly the articles attacking Joe the Plumber are pretty dumb. Regardless of his licensing status.. it does not change the validity of the question that was posed. Which was the TRUE importance that Joe the Plumber played.

With that said.. Go get a valid license Joe and his boss! :thumbsup:

[IAmKowalski]

He also owes $1182.98 in back taxes to the state of Ohio.

And as far as buying the business that he works for?

Nope, "Joe" is broke - he isnt' buying any business, but if he did - he still wouldn't see a tax increase because the business doesn't see a NET PROFIT of anywhere near 250k a year. So good news, Joe, your taxes will go down just like the rest of us non-Bently driving slobs.

But let's entertain Joe's fantasy for a moment - maybe Joe will win the lottery and use it to buy the business, and maybe now that he's a celeberity business will pick up and actually see $250k profit per year.... want to guess how much President Obama's tax plan is going to cost Joe? Between $0 and $900.00....

That's right, the huge burdon of extra taxes that is going to hold Joe back and keep him from buying the business will be at worst $900.... which aparently will just cripple poor Joe who is trying to scrape by on a meer $250,000.00 per year....

Aparently McCamp vetted Joe just about as well as they did Palin :-) Thanks, Joe!

The big winner in all of this (Other than Obama, of course): Joe the Plumber (http://www.joetheplumber.com) - an actual business that may or may not be owned by an actual Joe that has gotten a lot of free advertisement out of the deal.

[daihashi]

He also owes $1182.98 in back taxes to the state of Ohio.

And as far as buying the business that he works for?

Nope, "Joe" is broke - he isnt' buying any business, but if he did - he still wouldn't see a tax increase because the business doesn't see a NET PROFIT of anywhere near 250k a year. So good news, Joe, your taxes will go down just like the rest of us non-Bently driving slobs.

But let's entertain Joe's fantasy for a moment - maybe Joe will win the lottery and use it to buy the business, and maybe now that he's a celeberity business will pick up and actually see $250k profit per year.... want to guess how much President Obama's tax plan is going to cost Joe? Between $0 and $900.00....

That's right, the huge burdon of extra taxes that is going to hold Joe back and keep him from buying the business will be at worst $900.... which aparently will just cripple poor Joe who is trying to scrape by on a meer $250,000.00 per year....

Aparently McCamp vetted Joe just about as well as they did Palin :-) Thanks, Joe!

The big winner in all of this (Other than Obama, of course): Joe the Plumber (http://www.joetheplumber.com) - an actual business that may or may not be owned by an actual Joe that has gotten a lot of free advertisement out of the deal.

Again.. does this change the validity of the question that Joe Posed that is now on the minds of small business owners across America.

Everyone who is jumping on this guy is missing the point of the question he asked. Yes Joe doesn't have a valid license.. yes joe owes back taxes... but it doesn't change the question that Joe asked.

Focus on something other than what the media is spoon feeding us.

and show me where you got the $0 - $900 figure; I'm interested in seeing that because I don't buy that for a second.

[IAmKowalski]

Ummm.. that would be a yes. If Joe claims that he will be unable to buy the business because his taxes will go up too much, (which is exactly the claim that first he, and then McCain made) then yes it obviously blows their argument to hell when you find out that the most he will be cost is $900.00 a year.

Combine that with the fact that there is no way that the business actually brings in anywhere near enough to NET $250,000 which means that if anything the business will see LOWER taxes, then yes it very clearly does sink any validity that his question and McCain's argument had.

[daihashi]

Last I checked Obama plans a 3% tax increase over the current tax rate.. 33%.

33% on 250k = 82k in taxes
36% on 250k = 90k in taxes.

That's a pretty decent tax increase.. doesn't look like 900 to me

[daihashi]

Ummm.. that would be a yes. If Joe claims that he will be unable to buy the business because his taxes will go up too much, (which is exactly the claim that first he, and then McCain made) then yes it obviously blows their argument to hell when you find out that the most he will be cost is $900.00 a year.

Combine that with the fact that there is no way that the business actually brings in anywhere near enough to NET $250,000 which means that if anything the business will see LOWER taxes, then yes it very clearly does sink any validity that his question and McCain's argument had.

Again.. you are missing the point of the question posed.. which was the importance of Joe the Plumber. People are singling him out when his question applies to a number of other small business owners.

Look at the question and not Joe. Even if Joe owes 100k in back taxes it does not change the validity of the question asked.. which is what is important in relation to Joe..

Joe himself is just some guy on the street I could care less about, but the question he asked is applicable to many other people who are small business owners.

Again you miss the point and are fixated on a person who's honestly irrelevant in this election; what was relevant was the question he asked Obama.

ps: Joe never said it made 250k.. he said he would like to grow it to 250k or more and wanted to know how that would effect him. To which Obama said he would "spread the wealth".

[IAmKowalski]

You don't understand: It's a higher rate (3% higher) on income above $250,000.00 not a higher rate on every dollar earned by people earning over $250,000.00/year... get it?

------------------------
While this income would put Mr. Wurzelbacher above the threshold where he could expect to pay higher taxes under Senator Obama's tax plan, the increase in his tax bill would be relatively modest. Under Senator Obama's plan, the tax on income above $250,000 would increase by 3 percentage points from 33 percent to 36 percent. This means that Mr. Wurzelbacher could expect to see his tax bill rise by between $0-$900, assuming that this plumbing business would be his entire taxable income. If he has additional taxable income, then he would see a larger increase in his taxes.

[IAmKowalski]

Joe did say 250k, actually he said it made as much as $280k. The video is online if you want to check.

[daihashi]

You don't understand: It's a higher rate (3% higher) on income above $250,000.00 not a higher rate on every dollar earned by people earning over $250,000.00/year... get it?

------------------------
While this income would put Mr. Wurzelbacher above the threshold where he could expect to pay higher taxes under Senator Obama's tax plan, the increase in his tax bill would be relatively modest. Under Senator Obama's plan, the tax on income above $250,000 would increase by 3 percentage points from 33 percent to 36 percent. This means that Mr. Wurzelbacher could expect to see his tax bill rise by between $0-$900, assuming that this plumbing business would be his entire taxable income. If he has additional taxable income, then he would see a larger increase in his taxes.

Fine.. let's use your equation for someone who makes slightly more than 250k.. we'll use 300k as this is a reasonable number (keep in mind some small businesses make millions and employee a handful of people with high salaries).

so 250k * 33% = 82500
50k * 36% = 18000

for a grand total of 100,500


under current tax rates that's a 1,500 difference.

Now in reality; your local corner store probably makes about 250k if it's in a busy area.. and you see this is not a very large business.

However another example of a small business that actually employs a number of people would be a small construction company.. which may have a revenue of 1 million..

so

250k * 33% = 82,500
750k * 36% = 270,000

Grand total of 352,500

vs

330k under current tax plans.

Keep in mind that it is very expensive to run a business. If you've ever run one then you can attest to how rapidly the costs add up; in addition you need a money buffer in case of emergencies. Enough to be able to last you through at least 1 year of business.

There are certain write offs; but fact is that the amount of tax goes up exponentially. Believe it or not a LARGE portion of small businesses make beyond the 250k mark.

[daihashi]

Joe did say 250k, actually he said it made as much as $280k. The video is online if you want to check.

Touche.. just watched it and you're right.

Still doesn't change the validity of his question.

[IAmKowalski]

Good, now we're getting closer - now remember that it is not gross income which is taxed, it is net profit. So does it still really bothers you that 5% of the public who earn more than $250,000 a year might see a small hike in their taxes? And what about the other 95% who have more money to spend at places like that corner store you mentioned? How do you think that effects the bottom line over the course of a year?

[IAmKowalski]

Touche.. just watched it and you're right.

Still doesn't change the validity of his question.

Well yea... the question has already been found invalid. And you're right, whether Joe claimed $250k or not doesn't make it valid :-)

[daihashi]

Also... examples of small businesses people may not think of when they think of small business

Private Doctor
Independant Lawyer
Dentist
Construction Companies
Apartment Owners
Used Car dealers
Independant Grocery Stores (there are some large ones out there as big as the retail stores).
A/C & Heat repair (big business where I live)
Bars (very big business and the overhead is not as much as you'd like to think)
Resturants
Landscaping services (also a lot of money in this industry)

etc etc

I get the sense when people think of small business they think of the laundry mat; or your local corner store, or dollar store.

Small business generates a LOT of money; and helps employ a great deal of people.

[daihashi]

Good, now we're getting closer - now remember that it is not gross income which is taxed, it is net profit. So does it still really bothers you that 5% of the public who earn more than $250,000 a year might see a small hike in their taxes? And what about the other 95% who have more money to spend at places like that corner store you mentioned? How do you think that effects the bottom line over the course of a year?

Yes it does bother me.. that 5% helps to employ the other 95%.

End of story.

[daihashi]

Well yea... the question has already been found invalid. And you're right, whether Joe claimed $250k or not doesn't make it valid :-)

It's not invalid; and I take it you've never run a business by your previous posts about gross income vs net income.

you are partially right; but it's something you have to experience as a business owner to really understand how that effects you and what the real figures look like.

edit: I should elaborate.. Many small businesses these days are service oriented. In a service oriented business; which many are, where you don't have an inventory.. where you may not have a large office space.. where you might not have the same deductions as say a grocery store or a product based business.... You will take the hardest hit. Because the difference between Gross income vs Net income is not huge..

Even people who are independant contractor based employees and pay their own taxes can attest to this.

[IAmKowalski]

For obvious reasons, I don't plan on discussing my resume on here so I will just advise you to read up Obama's tax plan instead. It's online. Actually, I'm just going to let this thread drop - I spend enough time discussing politics out here in the real world - I come to cannabis.com to discuss... well.... cannabis :-) I just keep getting sucked into these political threads because I have a strong aversion to misinformation, misunderstanding, and manipulative propaganda - that's why I'm an athiest and it's also why I'm a progressive. ;-) Unfortunately, it also makes it difficult for me to just ignore threads like this.

[dragonrider]

I think the point of "Joe the Plumber" in the original Fox News story was that he supposedly pwn3d (I don't realy know what that means) Obama because he claimed he personally represented a person who was going to be hurt by Obama's tax plan. That was his whole value --- he put a face on the issue, just a regular plumber guy who was going to be denied the American Dream. And that is also the reason McCain brought him up at the debate as well --- to personalize the issue.

For McCain, it wasn't about the question Joe asked Obama, it really was about Joe the person as an example.

So when the person Joe the Plumber who is going to be harmed by Obama's tax plan really turns out to the Sam the Unlicensed Plumber who actually benefits from Obama's tax plan, it does sort of invalidate the value he had to McCain.

When you put a real face on the people making more than $250,000 a year or the business owners whose businesses clear a net profit of more than $250,000 a year, it is not ordinary Joes struggling for the American Dream like this guy. Most ordinary Joes struggling for the American Dream like this guy do not clear $250,000 a year and would see a benefit from Obama's tax plan. 95% of American would see a benefit from Obama's tax plan. This guy actually puts a face on the people who would be helped by Obama's plan.

[daihashi]

For obvious reasons, I don't plan on discussing my resume on here so I will just advise you to read up Obama's tax plan instead. It's online. Actually, I'm just going to let this thread drop - I spend enough time discussing politics out here in the real world - I come to cannabis.com to discuss... well.... cannabis :-) I just keep getting sucked into these political threads because I have a strong aversion to misinformation, misunderstanding, and manipulative propaganda - that's why I'm an athiest and it's also why I'm a progressive. ;-) Unfortunately, it also makes it difficult for me to just ignore threads like this.

No one is telling you to leave the thread, and no one asked for your resume. I didn't realize asking if you've ever run a business would give away so much insight that we could track you down. It was a yes or no question; the fact that you elude it is questionable but that is your right and I'll just make no assumptions since no information was given. FYI, I'm agnostic.. I'm logical; however I fail to see the relevance of our beliefs in god or lack there of, but thank you for that tidbit of information I guess.

It would be interesting to see your rebuttal especially factoring in gross income vs net income considering service oriented businesses; which many are these days, and the fact that they indeed do not have as many deductions as you would like to believe. Taxation eats into any type of expansion they may want to give; or perhaps giving their employees a small raise, or maybe they have 4 employees.. make 300k and wanted to give them all a couple of hundred dollars as a bonus, which would be eaten away under Obama's Plan. Furthermore many small business owners pay themselves a salary and put money back into the business as well. Net Income doesn't factor in entire salaries that you pay your employees; another reason why the 3-4% increase over 250k Net Income is so critical.

Fact is that you raise taxes on business.. and business slows down as well as the economy. You put more money into the pockets of business and you give them the ability to expand and grow their business. Which in turn will help generate more income and again will help the government receive the exact same amount of tax money as if it had raised taxes.

And you've only had 17 posts of which 8 are in this thread and about 4 in other threads are cannabis related. Find a balance. I participate in all forums; the politics forum just happens to be the most active. I'm sure you'll find that to be true also.

It's taken a while to find a balance of refraining and jumping in when I feel it's relevant. Something that I still from time to time overstep the line I drew for myself.

This board doesn't have the strongest politics forum; I simply am here to help explain or stop misinformation. I keep my real politics talk onto 2 other forums explicitly for politics; which I can't name or else this post will be deleted.

[daihashi]

So when the person Joe the Plumber who is going to be harmed by Obama's tax plan really turns out to the Sam the Unlicensed Plumber who actually benefits from Obama's tax plan, it does sort of invalidate the value he had to McCain.

When you put a real face on the people making more than $250,000 a year or the business owners whose businesses clear a net profit of more than $250,000 a year, it is not ordinary Joes struggling for the American Dream like this guy. Most ordinary Joes struggling for the American Dream like this guy do not clear $250,000 a year and would see a benefit from Obama's tax plan. 95% of American would see a benefit from Obama's tax plan. This guy actually puts a face on the people who would be helped by Obama's plan.

But for those folks who want to make 250k or more in their business.. they get a slap in the face because they know they'll be punished for doing well. That's a great incentive to want to do better for yourself or your company.

And whether McCain used it as a political tool (which was obvious that he did and you can't really blame him for doing so during an election. This is politics after all) doesn't matter. What matters is what the American people percieve... much as they perceive Bill Ayers as not a big deal because his crime was 30 years ago; but if he were behind bars they would perceive him completely differently.

[maladroit]

"Now in reality; your local corner store probably makes about 250k if it's in a busy area.. and you see this is not a very large business."

- i know you understand this but i want to clarify something:
that $250,000 refers to taxable income, not sales...assuming a 10% net income after inventory, wages to the owners wife and child, rent, supplies, utilities, service contracts, depreciation, etc, that corner store would have to be generating sales of about $2.5 million a year, or about $7000 per day (assuming it's open 360 days a year)

that's pretty good for a corner store...i bet most corner stores don't generate that level of revenue:
BizBuySell - Liquor Stores For Sale (http://www.bizbuysell.com/cgi-bin/adsearch?J=O&i=AD&tab=eb&sort=cashflow&p=0&sorder=1)

[daihashi]

"Now in reality; your local corner store probably makes about 250k if it's in a busy area.. and you see this is not a very large business."

- i know you understand this but i want to clarify something:
that $250,000 refers to taxable income, not sales...assuming a 10% net income after inventory, wages to the owners wife and child, rent, supplies, utilities, service contracts, depreciation, etc, that corner store would have to be generating sales of about $2.5 million a year, or about $7000 per day (assuming it's open 360 days a year)

that's pretty good for a corner store...i bet most corner stores don't generate that level of revenue:
BizBuySell - Liquor Stores For Sale (http://www.bizbuysell.com/cgi-bin/adsearch?J=O&i=AD&tab=eb&sort=cashflow&p=0&sorder=1)

It was an example and probably a poor one at that.. which you took out of context to construe for your own means.

GOOD JOB :thumbsup:

[dragonrider]

Taxation eats into any type of expansion they may want to give; or perhaps giving their employees a small raise, or maybe they have 4 employees.. make 300k and wanted to give them all a couple of hundred dollars as a bonus, which would be eaten away under Obama's Plan. Furthermore many small business owners pay themselves a salary and put money back into the business as well. Net Income doesn't factor in entire salaries that you pay your employees; another reason why the 3-4% increase over 250k Net Income is so critical.

I'm not an expert on taxes, and I'm not going to deny that the cost of taxes cuts into the bottom line, which it obviously does. But I'm not sure I believe everytihg you said here is correct. I think things like the salaries, raises and bonuses you mentioned are deducted from the taxable income of the business. And a lot of the cost of expansion that you mentioned can also be deducted and depreciated over time as well.

[daihashi]

I'm not an expert on taxes, and I'm not going to deny that the cost of taxes cuts into the bottom line, which it obviously does. But I'm not sure I believe everytihg you said here is correct. I think things like the salaries, raises and bonuses you mentioned are deducted from the taxable income of the business. And a lot of the cost of expansion that you mentioned can also be deducted and depreciated over time as well.

It's a deduction; but for instance if you pay someone 35k... that doesn't equate to 35k back into the pocket of the business or even necessarily take 35k off their net income.

Also deductions and depreciation don't help businesses to get funds needed initially to expand. Raising their taxes would further make this difficult.

[dragonrider]

The simple fact is that SOMEBODY is going to have to pay these taxes. We have a $10 trillion debt, and budgets keep growing. At this point, higher taxes is not as great a threat to our well-being as the huge debt. The Repubican ideology has shifted away from the idea of true fiscal responsibility to emphasize only the low taxes side of the equation. If you are going to keep taxes low, you also need to keep spending low, and you also need to have low debt. The governemnt has shown itself incapable of keeping spending low, and the debt is already high, so we will need tax money to pay for those two things.

This is why I actually think that Democrats are really more fiscally conservative than Republicans. The Democrats are honest about the idea that if we really want to have government spend money on the priorities that Democrats represent, then it will require tax money -- Democrats pay for the things they buy. Republicans are not honest about that. Republicans cut taxes while simultaneously increasing spending and just pile on the debt. Now we are getting to the point where that accumulated debt is a real threat to our prosperity --- it is definitiely a far greater threat to our prosperity than raising taxes on people making more than $250,000 a year.

[happiestmferoutthere]

Taxes or no taxes, The guy is a jackass. On Roe vs Wade:
"Health for the mother. You know, that's been stretched by the pro-abortion movement in America to mean almost anything."
Any woman should be very afraid of this statement. I suppose he will get to decide what " health of the mother" means?
Hmmmmph!!!!!!:mad:

[dragonrider]

It's a deduction; but for instance if you pay someone 35k... that doesn't equate to 35k back into the pocket of the business or even necessarily take 35k off their net income.

Well, of course it doesn't put the $35k back into the pocket of the business owner. That is the cost of doing business, and there is no tax plan that could change that, including zero taxes. And I think if they pay a $35k salary, it DOES take $35k off their net income.

[allrollsin21]

How is that you can make a statement along the lines of, "Yes it does bother me.. that 5% helps to employ the other 95%. End of Story"


thats not the end of story. Restaurants which you reference as going to be one of the harder hit, will do just as well if their patrons have more money to spend. We have watched the trickle down theory FAIL MISERABLY, its time for some TRICKLE UP!

The tone in this thread is almost unbearable. Insinuations being flung about "questionable" replies, and total post counts....

Get a grip. I understand it is going to be a hard and long 18 days...its always difficult waiting for change, when it is not quite ready to happen for another little while.

[dragonrider]

Taxes or no taxes, The guy is a jackass. On Roe vs Wade:
"Health for the mother. You know, that's been stretched by the pro-abortion movement in America to mean almost anything."
Any woman should be very afraid of this statement. I suppose he will get to decide what " health of the mother" means?
Hmmmmph!!!!!!:mad:

I thought this was one of the things that will hurt McCain the most. The way he said it was horrible. He used his fingers and did "air quotes" around "Health" of the mother, as if it was a joke. The Supreme Court agrees that the health of the mother must be considered in any abortion law, as do most of people who are not on the extreme fringe of the abortion debate. The kind of sneering and sarcastic way McCain referred to women's health was very off-putting.

[daihashi]

How is that you can make a statement along the lines of, "Yes it does bother me.. that 5% helps to employ the other 95%. End of Story"


thats not the end of story. Restaurants which you reference as going to be one of the harder hit, will do just as well if their patrons have more money to spend. We have watched the trickle down theory FAIL MISERABLY, its time for some TRICKLE UP!

The tone in this thread is almost unbearable. Insinuations being flung about "questionable" replies, and total post counts....

Get a grip. I understand it is going to be a hard and long 18 days...its always difficult waiting for change, when it is not quite ready to happen for another little while.

I notice your thread is particularly aimed at me yet I am the only person currently in the dialogue arguing my point.

FYI; under Obama's tax plan people making between 19k and 67k in Obama's tax plan will get about $567 and $1042 respectively.. Divide this by your number of pay periods. Which I get paid weekly so that's 52..

567/52 = $11/week
1042/52 = $20/week.

Which is $40/$80 a month on the low/high end.

Do you honestly think that extra $40/80 is going to help people go to resturants more and leave bigger tips? Probably not; they will go out probably at the same frequency they currently do.. and leave the same amount of money they currently do.

The truth is that cutting taxes for the working class does not reap as great a benefit as cutting taxes for businesses.. who can lower costs of products.. who can choose how to distribute the extra income they get; which may include hiring an extra hand.

On the opposite end of the spectrum it could result in a job being lost. So do you want more money in your pocket or risk the chance of being one of the people who are likely, when taxes are raised on businesses, to lose their job.

shrug.. making 19k/year is better than making 0k a year even if I pay a little more in taxes.

Fact is that both plans offer tax cuts; which are cuts that Bush implemented and regardless of what either candidate says.. are being expanded upon or altered.

It's also interesting to note that McCain, Obama, and Clinton all opposed the Bush tax cuts and now are trying to expand upon them during the election year.

As Candidates Warm to Bush Tax Cuts, Economists Warn of Long-Term Effect - washingtonpost.com (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/27/AR2008032703145.html)

so instead of everyone jumping down my throat why don't we look at this for what it is.. We are paying less taxes, even in the working class, than under Bill Clinton's administration. Why is everyone so up in arms against McCain who would want to further lower the income tax on businesses. We are already paying lower taxes than we did 16 years ago and they will go down even further regardless of which candidate wins the office.


The Tax Foundation - Comparing Income Taxes under Bill Clinton and George Bush (http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/22958.html)

It's not like the working class has been footing a higher bill; it's the contrary, we're paying less than ever.

[daihashi]

The simple fact is that SOMEBODY is going to have to pay these taxes. We have a $10 trillion debt, and budgets keep growing. At this point, higher taxes is not as great a threat to our well-being as the huge debt. The Repubican ideology has shifted away from the idea of true fiscal responsibility to emphasize only the low taxes side of the equation. If you are going to keep taxes low, you also need to keep spending low, and you also need to have low debt. The governemnt has shown itself incapable of keeping spending low, and the debt is already high, so we will need tax money to pay for those two things.

Less taxes = more business = more net income = same or more amount of tax revenue generated for the government without hurting working class or businesses.

And I strongly agree with low spending and this is something that has been irritating me for YEARS!!! Ever since the last year or so of Bush 41's administration up till today. Spending is definitely out of hand.


This is why I actually think that Democrats are really more fiscally conservative than Republicans. The Democrats are honest about the idea that if we really want to have government spend money on the priorities that Democrats represent, then it will require tax money -- Democrats pay for the things they buy. Republicans are not honest about that. Republicans cut taxes while simultaneously increasing spending and just pile on the debt. Now we are getting to the point where that accumulated debt is a real threat to our prosperity --- it is definitiely a far greater threat to our prosperity than raising taxes on people making more than $250,000 a year.

Fiscally conservative would require for them to stop making so many social programs. Not that they aren't needed but honestly they go overboard wit them.

Fact is that both parties increase spending... hell look at Nancy Pelosi adding an extra 150billion to try to do another stimulus package.. WE JUST HAD ONE.. which I also thought was a stupid idea. The first stimulus package made sense because we had a fairly healthy economy that was just on a decline.. now we have an economy that is pretty hurt (not horrible.. but beyond the help that little $300/600 checks can provide). People are not going to spend this money or put it back into the economy. They are going to hold onto it instead preparing for hard times; which isn't a bad thing but the idea here is to try to prevent the economy from GETTING to that point. I'd rather the government do something with the 150 billion that would aid the economy and prevent it from ever reaching "hard times".

Both parties are out of control and it is undeniable. Some things I stand up for in the republican base because I have conservative views.. this doesn't mean I have modern day republican views.. but when they are wrong I do call them out on it as I see fit.

Democrats and Republicans a like are out of control and honestly have us held hostage by this 2 party majority system.

[dragonrider]

FYI; under Obama's tax plan people making between 19k and 67k in Obama's tax plan will get about $567 and $1042 respectively.. Divide this by your number of pay periods. Which I get paid weekly so that's 52..

567/52 = $11/week
1042/52 = $20/week.

Which is $40/$80 a month on the low/high end.



This is why I think the tax arguaments are generally political red herrings. I've been paying taxes for several decades now under many different adminsitrations and congresses and tax codes. Every election there is a huge argument over who is going to raise taxes and who is going to lower taxes as if it is the most important thing in the world. My experience has been it matters very little to me and how I live my life. We've had these hard fought increases and decreases during my working career, and honestly it made so little difference in my paycheck, that I didn't even notice it.

The example above shows how tiny the difference would be under the Obama plan from the current plan. The differrence betwenn Obama's plan and McCain's plan is even smaller. For most people, it won't mean a thing.

[allrollsin21]

what about the people making 68K - 249K. Why only use the low end? That does not seem rationale. Using your numbers...fill in the blanks.

100K a year =

249k a year =



Now as for people spending the money, and going out to eat. I am not talking about the tips. I am talking about the business owner making money. In the restaurant business in particular, peoples perception of the economy has as much to do with actual wealth in deciding whether they go out to eat or not.

"I notice your thread is particularly aimed at me yet I am the only person currently in the dialogue arguing my point."
uh yeah. your the one arguing your point and that is why i am referring to your argument. Whats the problem?

[daihashi]

This is why I think the tax arguaments are generally political red herrings. I've been paying taxes for several decades now under many different adminsitrations and congresses and tax codes. Every election there is a huge argument over who is going to raise taxes and who is going to lower taxes as if it is the most important thing in the world. My experience has been it matters very little to me and how I live my life. We've had these hard fought increases and decreases during my working career, and honestly it made so little difference in my paycheck, that I didn't even notice it.

The example above shows how tiny the difference would be under the Obama plan from the current plan. The differrence betwenn Obama's plan and McCain's plan is even smaller. For most people, it won't mean a thing.

The only thing I care about in regards to taxes is when concerning business. Business is the only place where numbers are typically big enough where a 2-3% tax decrease could be a significant amount that might result in cheaper products, some new jobs or maybe a few extra benefits.

As long as we stay somewhat close to our current tax brackets (for most working class americans) then I don't see a need to lower taxes among the majority of the working class.

[allrollsin21]

Is a company really going to lower the prices of a good or service because they get a tax break?

hell no

[thcbongman]

Is a company really going to lower the prices of a good or service because they get a tax break?

hell no

If one company doesn't, another will. It's about $$.

[daihashi]

what about the people making 68K - 249K. Why only use the low end? That does not seem rationale. Using your numbers...fill in the blanks.

Because your argument seemed to target the working/middle class. Which the majority of the middle class are in that tax bracket, but since you insist I'll fill in the blanks

100K a year = $1009 under McCain and $1290 under Obama.. Divide by 52 and figure out the amount that'd be weekly on your check.

249k a year = $7800 under McCain and $12 under Obama.. This is where things start to seem off, but we are starting to delve into Business income at this point which really skews it. When people see 249k they think of individual income not realizing small business is lumped in here as well.

Feel free to scrutinize. I anticipate you will.






Now as for people spending the money, and going out to eat. I am not talking about the tips. I am talking about the business owner making money. In the restaurant business in particular, peoples perception of the economy has as much to do with actual wealth in deciding whether they go out to eat or not.

For the majority of the middle class it would be an extra 40 to 80 a month. The economy is not so great right now. So regardless of the tax cuts; by your logic, it won't really make sense if they got a tax cut in if they decide to go out or eat or not. Even if it did.. the extra 40/80 doesn't make a large enough difference to where there would by a pyschological effect when they look at their pay check. I fail to see the point of your argument.



"I notice your thread is particularly aimed at me yet I am the only person currently in the dialogue arguing my point."
uh yeah. your the one arguing your point and that is why i am referring to your argument. Whats the problem?

There's not a problem except that I'm probably the only person who holds some conservative beliefs that's viewing the politics forum at this particular time; but thank you for taking time out to tell me to shut up in a round about way. Unfortunatley it won't work. :thumbsup:

[daihashi]

If one company doesn't, another will. It's about $$.

A perfect example is to look at competing gas stations at opposite sides of the road on a freeway.

They will match each others prices as soon as the other one drops it; however if you drive further down the road and you find a gas station with no surrounding competition you'll find that they do not lower their prices when the two competing gas stations do.

It is all about the money.. and money does not have to do with increasing costs.. you can make more money by increasing the volume of which you do business.. which can happen by lowering prices.

[allrollsin21]

The point of the argument was that in knowing they were paying less taxes they may spend more money. Thats all. As far as the state of the economy, yes this will prevent people from spending more money on non necessities. Things are looking grim. Fact is a lot of business will close their doors. As they should. we have grown too fast and there is too much credit, and most folks have some debts. So the fact that people are going to be spending less money that they don't even have is not always a bad thing. And business' will suffer and Darwinism will prevail.

"but thank you for taking time out to tell me to shut up in a round about way. Unfortunatley it won't work. "

please dont try and explain how i tried to tell you to "shut up". Ridiculous. Overly defensive. I was asking for explanations, and making them. Instead of agreeing to disagree you seem to take the route of confrontation instead. Remember these are ideas we are discussing not each other. Its not personal. I respect the fact that you are one of the few proud folks hanging onto the sinking ship, but lets not get personal.

[daihashi]

"but thank you for taking time out to tell me to shut up in a round about way. Unfortunatley it won't work. "

please dont try and explain how i tried to tell you to "shut up". Ridiculous. Overly defensive. I was asking for explanations, and making them. Instead of agreeing to disagree you seem to take the route of confrontation instead. Remember these are ideas we are discussing not each other. Its not personal. I respect the fact that you are one of the few proud folks hanging onto the sinking ship, but lets not get personal.

is it ridiculous?

uh yeah. your the one arguing your point and that is why i am referring to your argument. Whats the problem?

Your statement insinuated that since I'm the only one arguing from my point of view that it was irrelevant/moot. You're the one that took it personally.

And I am debating with you.. you keep bringing up points and I counter them. There is nothing wrong with that; and saying I should agree to disagree when you insist that you're right would require me to concede. Which would not be a negative thing if there were other people participating in this thread that was from the conservative base; however if I conceded then everyone posting in the thread would be patting each other on the back because you share the point of view of the political left; which again is not a bad thing provided you have another person providing contrast to your view.

What's the point in carrying on a conversation where there is no diversity in opinion. Or perhaps that's what you want?

Who knows.. I certainly don't know what you or anyone here wants. I'm just participating in a thread.

ps: thanks for the positive rep.
:hippy:

[Reefer Rogue]

In the case of distributive justive, inequality is justified when it benefits the least well off, thus the 95%.

[allrollsin21]

Your statement insinuated that since I'm the only one arguing from my point of view that it was irrelevant/moot. You're the one that took it personally.


Honestly i have no idea what you are referring to. I am a plain speaker and was not insinuating anything. How could the number of people arguing a certain point having any bearing on it's validity? I can only assume that i have been misunderstood. Whether this is due to my lack of concise explanations, or a certain prevailing defensiveness in the political forum, i do not know.

I actually already stated that i respect your ability to share your opinions. What i dont respect is when you turn personal and question people's validity based on post count numbers and what forums the posts are in.

Anyway this is a touchy time to be on these forums and as my words are being misrepresented i am going to go and continue to learn how to grow the herb in the hopes that i can produce medicine up to the standards of which i enjoy.

[dragonrider]

I hate to drop out now that we are getting into the "you made it personal," "No YOU made it personal" portion of our debate, but I've got a camping trip to get to. See you all next week!

[daihashi]

Your statement insinuated that since I'm the only one arguing from my point of view that it was irrelevant/moot. You're the one that took it personally.


Honestly i have no idea what you are referring to. I am a plain speaker and was not insinuating anything. How could the number of people arguing a certain point having any bearing on it's validity? I can only assume that i have been misunderstood. Whether this is due to my lack of concise explanations, or a certain prevailing defensiveness in the political forum, i do not know.

I actually already stated that i respect your ability to share your opinions. What i dont respect is when you turn personal and question people's validity based on post count numbers and what forums the posts are in.

Anyway this is a touchy time to be on these forums and as my words are being misrepresented i am going to go and continue to learn how to grow the herb in the hopes that i can produce medicine up to the standards of which i enjoy.

oh boy.. whatever floats your boat. I could personally care less. It seems like no matter how I word it to express why I'm in this thread you will construe it to be a personal attack. Fine by me.

Have a good day.

[maladroit]

where are ya going camping? car camping or back country camping?

[daihashi]

where are ya going camping? car camping or back country camping?

sort've related.. I've only been camping once in my life and never gone again. I got lice that one time I went camping. I think I was about 12 years old. I'm sure I got it from another kid that was there.. but still; it left a bad taste in my mouth.


I do however like to go out to the lake and fish and cook out on an open fire.. RAWR!

[maladroit]

after years of being trapped inside, my kids finally got old enough to sleep in a tent in a campground a few years ago...the first few trips were nightmares, but we kept at it until they got used to it and now camping trips are the highlight of their summers...we bought a 10 man tent at costo for $250...it's a piece of crap, but it's big enough to stand up in, and there's enough room for two queen sized air mattresses and all the backpacks/boots/clothes

cooking outdoors over the open fire, smoking pot, and drinking beer in the rainforest is AWESOME! it's too farking cold and wet now though, so i'm going to kallyfornia to throw some money at the US economy...i hope they still have beer and pot down there

[JaySin]

$40 to $80 would definitely help me out monthly. It would pay a bill or two and free up some money so I can go buy food and maybe have a little fun every once in a while. Right now I'm so up tight with my money that I really don't get the chance to have the fun some people do.

I really do not see how giving businesses tax cuts will help me out. Sure they may be able to lower prices because of less tax, but they will probably just keep the extra profit. People are just too greedy. So as long as we are scraping by enough to buy there products/services, they could give a fuck less as long as they have their two escalades, ferrari, and mansion. Yet they wine because taxes may increase. Damn, they may have to wait an extra few months to get that lambo that they wanted. All because they don't want to help out with the debt of the country that allowed them their riches in the first place. I want my tax break so i can actually have a chance at living at least a little more comfortably. Right now I'm pretty much a slave along with 95% of america.

[daihashi]

I really do not see how giving businesses tax cuts will help me out. Sure they may be able to lower prices because of less tax, but they will probably just keep the extra profit. People are just too greedy.

You said it.. too greedy. I'm not sure what your situation is in regards to what is necessary in your life and what is not but if $40/80 is going to make a difference then there's a chance that you're living beyond your means. Going out when you can't really afford it, buying an item/toy when you shouldn't be. Hitting up the movies when you should stay home, buying services when you should be pinching pennies.

Then again you could be bed ridden for all I know and it could be justifiable; fact is this, we are currently paying lower taxes than we did 16 years ago. Either candidate is proposing tax cuts and we will be paying even less regardless of who is elected.

You talk about greed.. companies give people jobs, benefits and will price their products accordingly so long as their investors are protected and the profit line is good. Without investors or these companies we would not have many of the luxuries we take for granted today. With everything there is Balance... however many people wish to switch the balance and force the small businesses and large corporations which currently pay over 90% of the tax revenue and force more onto them. This will hurt their profits; which in turn will lead investors to sell off stock.. which will hurt them even further forcing them to cut jobs, raise the price of their product or whatever else they can do to protect their profits. Companies don't make goods out of charity. They make products and put time into research for their investors. Their obligation is to the company and to investors, not to the everyday citizen nor the employees that work for them. Their job is to make money.

You're willing to risk increasing unemployment rate increase because you want $40/80 more a month.

To me that seems like greed; but again the situation changes given certain circumstances. You may legitmately need that money but the majority of Americans are not in that boat. The majority of Americans live far beyond their means and are poor with budgeting their money.

I choose trying to keep unemployment rate down/fight it as opposed to putting an extra 40/80 bucks into american's pockets every month.

[daihashi]

I will add this:

I do think the CEO's and boards of these companies are wrong when they give themselves these massive bonuses or give themselves huge raises. The money that's used to give themselves raises and bonuses should be used to lower the cost of one of their product lines or given back to investors in some form.. either a dividend or rebate or something similar.

I don't agree with what the high ups do to further themselves; but at the same time I don't think taxing these corporations and small businesses is the answer. Because ultimately they will still take what they want by hurting the people down beneath them.

[JaySin]

I never used to be living beyond my means. Yet I work more and have less bills and it's still hard for me to afford to live. I had to move out on my own and I've cut back on much of my needless spending. I have one credit card to be paid off then all my debts will be taken care of. With gas going down that will probably help tremendously. I just hope it will stay down.

There is the answer I was looking for. I guess with all that has been going on it's hard for people to see passed Obama's lower tax for %95 of america. Not to mention worry about whether a tax cut for businesses will actually turn into a trickle down effect or not. I guess everyone feels that the government has been turning their back to the country and just wants change and Obama seems to be the biggest change.

Whoever gets elected, I really hope that things get better. Cause right now I may not be poverty stricken, but it would be nice to be able to afford to actually save some money or even be able to finish college.

I'll just write in Ron Paul. That's what we need to do, start a movement instead of play the politics game.

[The Colonel]

I guess most people don't know how to read body language. As an avid poker player who makes a decent amount of money yearly on the game.. Obama appeared very frustrated throughout most of the debate.

I'd say you've got that backwards. McCain seemed to roll his eyes and show a lot more frustration when challenged than Obama did. The funny thing about what you said is I was talking the my mother yesterday, who I watched the debate with, and we were discussing how bad of a poker player McCain would be for just this reason. I personally thought that McCain put out a good effort, but Obama still took the win. What I cant stand about McCain is how tries to explain his ideas, it may be that he is simply a bad speaker, but everytime I listen to McCain I walk away feeling like I was just spoken to as if I were a child. McCain is a war hero, his policital stances dont lessen my respect for him in that regard, and sure he's a "maverick", but I just wish he wouldn't talk so much about how his opponent palls around with terrorist's, or is involved with voter registration fraud, and tell us SPECIFICALLY what he's going to do. His rhetoric sounds good too, because John McCain knows how to fix the economy, and John McCain knows how we can win in Iraq and Afghanistan, and John McCain knows how to creat jobs, and reliable alternative energy, and a newly structured housing market. But since his nomination I haven't heard him be very specific on how. Obama does this sort of thing too on occasion. However when Obama speaks, he speaks to the people in an inteligent and professional way. That shows me that not all American politics has turned into a game of deception and special intrests, also I feel that he will possess a much more respectable reputation along with more successful diplomacy. McCain lost the debate, and I hope the election, for just this reason. His campaign centers simply on how bad a president Obama would be, and they have been doing this by trying to expose the "real" Barack Obama. A person who die hard conservatives have created by using word manipulation on facts, and his ethnicity. Obama has better plans, a better head on his shoulders, and a better group of strategists. McCain is strongly supported by a large part of America that will never vote for Obama because of his "real" side. These ideas are enforced by both GOP candidates, and that's why these people say he is a secrete muslim who hates America and is ready to overthrow the government and destroy our nation from the inside in 3 weeks. This kind of ignorance baffles me, and at the same time shows us how some parts of this country are populated by ignorant people. Religion, race, and money are three things that dominate our government today. I want to raise my children in a country that is dignified and open enough to elect a president even if he was muslim. With that said, Obama won because he displays more professional and presidential qualities. I respect McCain, but my common sense leans towards Obama.

[maladroit]

how is mccain a war hero?

[JaySin]

I will add this:

I do think the CEO's and boards of these companies are wrong when they give themselves these massive bonuses or give themselves huge raises. The money that's used to give themselves raises and bonuses should be used to lower the cost of one of their product lines or given back to investors in some form.. either a dividend or rebate or something similar.

I don't agree with what the high ups do to further themselves; but at the same time I don't think taxing these corporations and small businesses is the answer. Because ultimately they will still take what they want by hurting the people down beneath them.

Yeah, this is why no one wants to give them anymore breaks. So really, if they get higher taxes under Obama it is their own fault for being greedy bastards.

However, McCain wants to lessen regulation while Obama wants to reinstate regulation. Regulation would probably prevent them from giving themselves these huge bonuses instead of lowering the price of goods.

To answer the last question, McCain isn't a war hero. He just plays that card to try and win votes for no good reason. For all we know, being a POW could have fucked him up in the head and now all he wants is revenge. Although, it could also have straightened him out to realize that war should be the last ditch effort. Although, it does seem like he would be a little too eager to use force.

[tmayu2]

haha the only thing that equals big goverment is the republican hack party i mean how can u say that the republicans will better our country after the last 8 years (the patriot act). 911. ron paul (i know hes republican but at least he tells the truth) is the one we need in office but ill settle for barrack obama ps not really retaining to this but if you havent seen it watch this video ITS WELL WORTH WATCHING. IT SHOWS U HOW BAD THE GOVERMENT REALLY LIES AND FUCKS US. Zeitgeist - The Movie (http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com)

[8182KSKUSH]

This depends on one thing.
Did you "watch" the debate, or "listen" to it.
If you just watched it so you could drool over your lord Obama, regardless of what was said then you probably think Obama won, and would think that regardless of what was said.
If you actually "listened" to the words that were said and could comprehend them then obviously McCain owned him, all night.

Perfect example of Obama supporters is out on youtube now. Howard Stern had some schmuck go out and ask people who they support, and then when he found Obama supporters, he would have the schmuck say things like, "yeah, so you support him because of his pro-life position, and how he wants to finish the war in Iraq and win, and because he picked Sarah Palin as vp, and btw, do you think that she was a good choice for him.
And guess what, these "young and educated" democrats just agreed and re-inforced their "new" beliefs about Obama, all the while not knowing that they were agreeing with McCain's policies. LMFAO. I promise you some of those folks post here, and will claim Obama won that debate as well, going back to my point about "watching" as opposed to "listening" to the debate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCcHzUmVP5c
YouTube - Howard Stern Interviews smart Obama supporters In Harlem (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCcHzUmVP5c) (Just in case the embedded thing doesn't work here's the link. Enjoy.:wtf:

I especially like the fucking retarded lady that says that McCain seems "un-educated" and "doesn't have his facts". LMFAO

And yes, there is a stupid McCain supporter here as well in this clip just to be "fair and balanced", do note though, Stern says they only found 1 guy that supported McCain and that was as clueless as the numerous other "kool aide drinkers".

[JaySin]

This depends on one thing.


Perfect example of Obama supporters is out on youtube now. Howard Stern had some schmuck go out and ask people who they support, and then when he found Obama supporters, he would have the schmuck say things like, "yeah, so you support him because of his pro-life position, and how he wants to finish the war in Iraq and win, and because he picked Sarah Palin as vp, and btw, do you think that she was a good choice for him.
And guess what, these "young and educated" democrats just agreed and re-inforced their "new" beliefs about Obama, all the while not knowing that they were agreeing with McCain's policies. LMFAO. I promise you some of those folks post here, and will claim Obama won that debate as well, going back to my point about "watching" as opposed to "listening" to the debate.



You could do the exact same thing with a lot of McCain supporters. I actually have but did not video tape it and only do it to McCain supporters to strengthen my case against the opposition. He probably cut out the people that called him a fuckin retard for even asking trick questions like that. There are several McCain supporters I've had discussions with that DO NOT KNOW A DAMN THING when it comes to what either party stands for. They just go off of word of mouth and what they conjure from it is NObama. That kind of shit angers me no matter what side they support. You should support someone because you believe in their views, not just because the people you know say they are the better choice.

I just noticed that was the video, I'm going to watch it real quick and then add additional thoughts.

[JaySin]

Ok, here are my additional thoughts...

How many people did they talk to? You would have to talk to at least a hundred people to get a fair and balanced survey. Especially considering Obama appears to have more supporters. I would do anything to find some educated McCain supporters around here because so far the people I have talked to just blindly follow him for the most part. I want to find someone that can actually put up a good argument as to why I should vote for him over Obama. Yet, I have found a few people that are very educated on both of the candidates policies and supported Obama. I'm still not set in stone on who I will vote for, but I am definitely leaning towards Obama. Ever since the second debate I have been trying to push myself to agree with McCain; Although, nothing has come across to completely sway me to his side yet.

[daihashi]

I'd say you've got that backwards. McCain seemed to roll his eyes and show a lot more frustration when challenged than Obama did. The funny thing about what you said is I was talking the my mother yesterday, who I watched the debate with, and we were discussing how bad of a poker player McCain would be for just this reason. I personally thought that McCain put out a good effort, but Obama still took the win. What I cant stand about McCain is how tries to explain his ideas, it may be that he is simply a bad speaker, but everytime I listen to McCain I walk away feeling like I was just spoken to as if I were a child. McCain is a war hero, his policital stances dont lessen my respect for him in that regard, and sure he's a "maverick", but I just wish he wouldn't talk so much about how his opponent palls around with terrorist's, or is involved with voter registration fraud, and tell us SPECIFICALLY what he's going to do. His rhetoric sounds good too, because John McCain knows how to fix the economy, and John McCain knows how we can win in Iraq and Afghanistan, and John McCain knows how to creat jobs, and reliable alternative energy, and a newly structured housing market. But since his nomination I haven't heard him be very specific on how. Obama does this sort of thing too on occasion. However when Obama speaks, he speaks to the people in an inteligent and professional way. That shows me that not all American politics has turned into a game of deception and special intrests, also I feel that he will possess a much more respectable reputation along with more successful diplomacy. McCain lost the debate, and I hope the election, for just this reason. His campaign centers simply on how bad a president Obama would be, and they have been doing this by trying to expose the "real" Barack Obama. A person who die hard conservatives have created by using word manipulation on facts, and his ethnicity. Obama has better plans, a better head on his shoulders, and a better group of strategists. McCain is strongly supported by a large part of America that will never vote for Obama because of his "real" side. These ideas are enforced by both GOP candidates, and that's why these people say he is a secrete muslim who hates America and is ready to overthrow the government and destroy our nation from the inside in 3 weeks. This kind of ignorance baffles me, and at the same time shows us how some parts of this country are populated by ignorant people. Religion, race, and money are three things that dominate our government today. I want to raise my children in a country that is dignified and open enough to elect a president even if he was muslim. With that said, Obama won because he displays more professional and presidential qualities. I respect McCain, but my common sense leans towards Obama.

I never talked about McCain and how he looked. He was obviously being overly aggressive; but for him it worked as Obama was on the defense the entire time.

If you couldn't read Obama's body language then I would love to sit down at a table with you :hippy:

[maladroit]

the best thing about mccain's POW experience is that he does not support torture

hey jay, check out mccain's economic policy...that should help you decide

Understanding Supply-Side Economics (http://www.investopedia.com/articles/05/011805.asp)

Supply-side economics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply-side_economics)

[dragonrider]

I hate to drop out now that we are getting into the "you made it personal," "No YOU made it personal" portion of our debate, but I've got a camping trip to get to. See you all next week!


where are ya going camping? car camping or back country camping?


sort've related.. I've only been camping once in my life and never gone again. I got lice that one time I went camping. I think I was about 12 years old. I'm sure I got it from another kid that was there.. but still; it left a bad taste in my mouth.


I do however like to go out to the lake and fish and cook out on an open fire.. RAWR!


after years of being trapped inside, my kids finally got old enough to sleep in a tent in a campground a few years ago...the first few trips were nightmares, but we kept at it until they got used to it and now camping trips are the highlight of their summers...we bought a 10 man tent at costo for $250...it's a piece of crap, but it's big enough to stand up in, and there's enough room for two queen sized air mattresses and all the backpacks/boots/clothes

cooking outdoors over the open fire, smoking pot, and drinking beer in the rainforest is AWESOME! it's too farking cold and wet now though, so i'm going to kallyfornia to throw some money at the US economy...i hope they still have beer and pot down there

It was just a short 2-night trip to a local CA state park, Mount Diablo State Park. It's a car camping site, but the idea was for everyone to take only the gear and food that we would use on a 2-night backpacking trip. One person on the trip wants to go backpacking but does not have a lot of experience, so she needed to do a gear shakedown trip to see if she has what she needs and can actually carry it all. I am not convinced. I think she has too much stuff to carry and not all of it the right thing that she actually needs. Also having the car there with a few things in it that were not in the pack, meant we could cheat a bit --- "I woulldn't carry all these axtra shirts, but since it's cold and it's in the car, I'll just put it on for now."

I just recently got back into backpacking after not having done it for about 10 years, and it took me a few short overnighters to remember how to trim down the load to the essentials. Now I think I have my gear worked out pretty well, and I am going again next week with a different group on a short Sierra overnighter. This other freind of mine needs to do some of these real reality-check overnighters to really test things out. She keeps wanting to plan a week-long backpacking trip without having even doen a real overnighter in which she carries her real gear kit! I'm not getting roped into anything like that!

I actually kickstarted my interest in backpacking again after participating in a few backpacking threads on this site. That got me thinking about it and how much I missed it, and then I met up with a few people who invited me on some of their trips.

Anyway, aside from the bogus nature of the gear shakedown, it was a very fun trip. The people are easygoing and fun. We had plenty of weed and booze. Weather was very nice. The terrain is steep and mostly scrub, small pine trees, and oak. We had a site with some shade, which was great. Mount Diablo is the most prominent mountain for miles around, so you have some GREAT views. The downside is that being on the mountain means any hike you do is steep.

One of the cool things we did was to watch a group of hanggliders take off. it was a group of 4. They would take off one at a time, and then circle in the thermal updrafts on the side of the mountain and pick up more and more altitude. I was listening to them talk before they took off and they were planning to go to a landmark that I think was probably about 40 miles away. But they had closer places where they could land as well. So they were going to go to each one in sequence, like stepping stones, check altitude and if they had enough altitude, they would go to the next one. It was cool to hear them planning the whole thing out.

The one hassle we had is that place is infested with raccoons. They started coming out in the afternoon, and kept coming back all night long. so you really had to be aware af putting things away. They stole a small stuff sack with a few snacks in it, and while we were lookig through the brush for that, we found all of these things that had been stolen from other campers in the past. I found a small sleeping bag in a stuff sack and we found a few garments as well. Daihashi, you mentioned lice, and that cracked me up because we were wondering what to do with the crap we found in the bushes, and someone said there was no way they would keep any of it because it was probably infested with lice.

Al right, enough about my camping trip! How about that debate?

[Dreadscale]

This depends on one thing.
Did you "watch" the debate, or "listen" to it.
If you just watched it so you could drool over your lord Obama, regardless of what was said then you probably think Obama won, and would think that regardless of what was said.
If you actually "listened" to the words that were said and could comprehend them then obviously McCain owned him, all night.

Perfect example of Obama supporters is out on youtube now. Howard Stern had some schmuck go out and ask people who they support, and then when he found Obama supporters, he would have the schmuck say things like, "yeah, so you support him because of his pro-life position, and how he wants to finish the war in Iraq and win, and because he picked Sarah Palin as vp, and btw, do you think that she was a good choice for him.
And guess what, these "young and educated" democrats just agreed and re-inforced their "new" beliefs about Obama, all the while not knowing that they were agreeing with McCain's policies. LMFAO. I promise you some of those folks post here, and will claim Obama won that debate as well, going back to my point about "watching" as opposed to "listening" to the debate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCcHzUmVP5c
YouTube - Howard Stern Interviews smart Obama supporters In Harlem (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCcHzUmVP5c) (Just in case the embedded thing doesn't work here's the link. Enjoy.:wtf:

I especially like the fucking retarded lady that says that McCain seems "un-educated" and "doesn't have his facts". LMFAO

And yes, there is a stupid McCain supporter here as well in this clip just to be "fair and balanced", do note though, Stern says they only found 1 guy that supported McCain and that was as clueless as the numerous other "kool aide drinkers".

Hi All !!! :thumbsup:

I LOVE IT!!!

But seariously, how many people did they have to interview to get this clip?

If it was 4 for 4 the world is in a bad place!!
If it was 500 to get 4 were not so bad then !!

He didn't bother to ask me or if he did I didn't make the clip. :D