Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Political discussions of any type are welcome here. All we ask is that you try to respect everyone's views, and that you use facts to back up any claims that you make.

Moderators: BarbaraSher, Tituba

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby Tituba » Thu Nov 08, 2012 6:00 pm

There was a group of people calling seniors telling them they could call in their vote, or vote the next day. This kind of vote fixing was in previous elections as well. There will always be people who try to force their own agenda.
Tituba
Mega Poster
Mega Poster
 
Posts: 9627
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:01 pm
Location: North Shore - Boston

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby Tituba » Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:33 pm

From this article, clearly Romney still doesn't get it

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la ... 2330.story
Tituba
Mega Poster
Mega Poster
 
Posts: 9627
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:01 pm
Location: North Shore - Boston

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby Scenario Thinker » Wed Nov 14, 2012 8:10 pm

Well, I guess the number of people receiving Obama's "gifts" outnumbered the wealthy people who are receiving the tax breaks. :)
S.Thinker
....o
^/v
/>
User avatar
Scenario Thinker
Mega Poster
Mega Poster
 
Posts: 7331
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 11:01 pm
Location: near Chicago

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby jcjm » Thu Nov 29, 2012 6:53 am

Kinda sad. Just a little over 3 weeks since the election, we still have all the problems both sides were telling us were going to be the downfall of the country, and the big stories since then have been about twinkies and a former general having an affair.

I guess that's what happens when people start to watch reality TV.
jcjm
Mega Poster
Mega Poster
 
Posts: 1600
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2002 10:01 pm

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby Scenario Thinker » Thu Nov 29, 2012 8:21 am

People are probably watching reality TV (I watch talent shows myself) to escape all the idiots trying to run the country. They voted, nothing they can do now but watch them fight and be in stalemate like usual.
S.Thinker
....o
^/v
/>
User avatar
Scenario Thinker
Mega Poster
Mega Poster
 
Posts: 7331
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 11:01 pm
Location: near Chicago

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby Tituba » Thu Nov 29, 2012 8:43 am

I guess that's what happens when people start to watch reality TV


Our government IS a big dysfunctional reality TV show. What I especially liked is how they all were warning about the dire fiscal cliff, made all these proclamations and then promptly went on vacation for the holiday. If it is so dire, why not stay and work it out and eat turkey later..... I don't know. Maybe it is me, having worked in IT. When the computer systems go down in a company, no IT person dares leave until everything is back.
Tituba
Mega Poster
Mega Poster
 
Posts: 9627
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:01 pm
Location: North Shore - Boston

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby Scenario Thinker » Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:07 am

It's government work, good work if you can get it. :)
S.Thinker
....o
^/v
/>
User avatar
Scenario Thinker
Mega Poster
Mega Poster
 
Posts: 7331
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 11:01 pm
Location: near Chicago

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby jcjm » Fri Nov 30, 2012 4:53 pm

What really bothers me is the people talking about entitlements.

They took our money since the 1930s for retirement, now they want to run off with the money we put in, to pay for other spending they borrowed for.

There are 4 trillion dollars in govt bonds owned by social security. Its our money not an entitlement like welfare.

Anybody who wants to steal our money, doesn't deserve to be in office.


As far as taxing high earners, I am now for it. Not to rob from the rich to give to the poor, but to keep the rich from monopolizing opportunity. To keep those high earners from buying lobbyists and making laws to make them richer.

Also, when we had a 90% top tax brakcet (as late as the 60s), those high earners were forced to either cut back and give others a chance or donate large sums to charity to lower their tax rate. Either way the average person wins.

I think its all spin. I don't see it as robbing from the rich to give to the poor and I don't see socisl secuity and welfare as remotely the same thing.
jcjm
Mega Poster
Mega Poster
 
Posts: 1600
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2002 10:01 pm

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby merk » Fri Nov 30, 2012 6:19 pm

Even if it were robbing the rich and giving the poor, in the end it has to be done. Not as an issue of fairness or right vs wrong. I just don't think you will have a health and stable society when there is such a HUGE discrepancy between what people earn.

Right now i think people still have the wool over their eyes as to how things are going. but people are starting to wake up. If things continue in the direction they are going, eventually something is going to snap and the next riot you see on the news wont be in 'some other country', it'll be here.

But i do think it's in the interest of fairness to re balance things a bit. If you compare how much people earn to how much they contribute to society, there's a huge imbalance. There's no way some CEO who works at a company for less then a year and leaves the company no better off (or worse off) then when they started deserves a few million dollars, while the people doing the 9 to 5 grind have to fight not for a raise, but have to fight to limit how much of a pay cut they are going to take.

Eventually people are going to start realizing the system is rigged and that most people in this country are getting screwed over.

I'm not saying everyone should all get paid the same amount, but i don't think the guy working at the top is worth 10,000 times more then the guy working at the bottom, especially not when you're cutting the guy's wages at the bottom and giving the guy at the top a bonus for doing nothing.
My Blog http://blog.imerk.com
User avatar
merk
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2710
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 1999 10:01 pm
Location: Pasadena, CA

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby Scenario Thinker » Fri Nov 30, 2012 8:10 pm

Problem is, there's been complaining about executive pay compared to the average worker since I started working in the 1980's, and especially the 1990's and beyond, but it doesn't seem to be stopping any time soon.

I don't think taxing the rich more is going to help much anyhow. Sure, it's a lot of money to you and me, but to the national debt we've created, it wouldn't be much. We didn't get into this massive amount of debt because we weren't taxing the rich at a higher rate.

The other thing people don't think about a lot, the rich and the average person don't both just "make a salary" and the rich have a lot higher of one than the average worker. Well, the average worker makes a salary (because they're usually working for the rich), but the rich own massive amounts of assets (that may or may not make money). So, it isn't just about "income" taxes. Also, the CEO Avg:Avg Worker Avg ratio is more like 200-300+ : 1.
S.Thinker
....o
^/v
/>
User avatar
Scenario Thinker
Mega Poster
Mega Poster
 
Posts: 7331
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 11:01 pm
Location: near Chicago

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby jcjm » Mon Dec 03, 2012 7:16 am

Even if it were robbing the rich and giving the poor, in the end it has to be done.

But i do think it's in the interest of fairness to re balance things a bit.

Eventually people are going to start realizing the system is rigged and that most people in this country are getting screwed over.


I agree with the last 2 but not the first. Here is why.

I'm not for just taxing rich people to even things out. I am for taxing them to reduce the deficit and balance the budget.

I am also for taxing the super rich to keep it a level palying field. If someone is super rich they can buy lobbyist and votes and create a monopoly. To me it is keeping people from monopolizing things.

So, Its not the ball players or movie stars, its the business people who make a killing off a monopoly or by buying failing companies and breaking them up. Its the people who get stock options, then sell millions of dollars on a jump up, leaving everyone else to take the loss when the price drops because of their "legal" insider trade. Except for Oprah and a few others, celebrities make a pittance conpared to CEO's, etc. (check them out on one of the celebrity net worth sites.)

I am for taxing high earners so they can pay the deficit and we can level out the playing field. If that were accomplished the rest of us would be able to take care or ourselves. Right now we are getting a double hit. Paying taxes and having all the advantages go to high earners, while high earners are getting neither. They don't pay their share of taxes and they get advantages which make it easier for them to make more money at our expense.

A good start would be to tax all income the same. No reason a person who is selling their time should be taxed higher than someone who is selling stock.
jcjm
Mega Poster
Mega Poster
 
Posts: 1600
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2002 10:01 pm

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby merk » Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:45 pm

It sounds like you do agree with my first statement, so i'm a little confused.

When i say in the end it has to done, i mean only that i think our country is getting dangerously unbalanced. There's way too much money concentrated in the hands of a very small group of people. I think that will eventually lead to some trouble. So in the long run for the stability of the country, i think it's good if it's evened out a bit. I'm not saying it's right or wrong for some people to be extremely wealthy, i just think when it gets this unbalanced (and it's only getting even more unbalanced) it's better overall if it gets evened out a bit.

If we're talking right vs wrong - i do think the way many people make their money is wrong. I don't think you should be able to work at a company for less then a year and walk away with more money then someone who works their their whole lives would make even if they worked there 200 years. Even more so when you leave the company worse off then when you started. I really don't think anyone in any company is worth 100,000x more then the lowest paid worker. Regardless of how brilliant the person at the top might be, it still takes all the people at the bottom to build the company.

Hopefully some things will change soon, otherwise i think this country is going to go down the toilet.
My Blog http://blog.imerk.com
User avatar
merk
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2710
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 1999 10:01 pm
Location: Pasadena, CA

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby jcjm » Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:10 am

Its the robbing from the rich to give to the poor part I don't agree with.

I'm not against people making a lot of money and keeping it. In the case of celebrities and sports figures, its what the market will bear. They do have a unique set of skills and if they can make a lot of money it is fine with me. In most instances there is enough pie to go around. Even though there are starving actors and want to be ball players, it is usually because they are good but not the best. It is skills more than politics and careers are short lived, so they have to make as much as they can when they are young.

In business its not the same. People get appointed to positions because of family ties, politics, etc. and not skills. Plus they can usually get payment in the form of stocks and claim capital gains tax rates while athletes, actors etc. pay wage tax rates.

To me a monopoly can be made in business, but not so much in sports, acting etc. Actors and athletes come and go, but CEO's are around for 50 years (even if not at the same company) So it is keeping monopolies from being formed and keeping extremely wealthy people from using their wealth to buy legislation that will make them wealthier, that I am for. Not a redistribution of wealth.

I don't want to take money away from wealthy people, just keep them from using that wealth to create a monopoly. Also have them pay the same rate on investments as people do on wages.

This mean in additionto higher tax rates on earmers over $250,000, even higher rates on people who make over $5 or 10 million.

In 1969 we had a 90% tax rate on earnings over 1 million. Indexed for inflation that would be $6,302,000 today.

Surely people making that amount from investments should be paying more than the 15% capital gains rate like so many of them do. Especially when an athlete or actor who makes the same amount is paying around 35%.

I don't call that distribution of wealth, just fair play.
jcjm
Mega Poster
Mega Poster
 
Posts: 1600
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2002 10:01 pm

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby merk » Tue Dec 04, 2012 1:15 pm

just for clarity, i don't care about sports figures and celebrities. They are basically a blip on the radar. It's really just business people that are really accumulating the wealth.

as far as robbing from the rich to give to the poor - like i said, I don't think there's anything inherently wrong in being rich. I just think it's bad for the country as a whole when you have such an extreme concentration of wealth in such a small percentage of the population. I think it's bad for the stability of the country. And I also think it's wrong to a certain degree since i don't think 1 percent of the population actually generates 99 percent of the goods and services in this country. If you remove all those 1 percent people, i'm pretty sure the country would continue along more or less the same.

So I do agree with you about adjusting our tax system. In the ends that's still basically amounts to taking from the rich to give to the poor. So i think maybe we're sorta of agreeing to the same thing, just using slightly different terms.

I would so love to see a reality show akin to the movie trading places. I'd love to see if you could take someone with a moderate amount of brains who is working on an assembly line or some other job that tends to be considered expendable by the higher ups and see how well they would do if they took over from the CEO (with some training to get them started). I would REALLY love to see that.
My Blog http://blog.imerk.com
User avatar
merk
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2710
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 1999 10:01 pm
Location: Pasadena, CA

Re: Election 2012 - Gonna be ugly

Postby jcjm » Wed Dec 05, 2012 7:31 am

just for clarity, i don't care about sports figures and celebrities. They are basically a blip on the radar. It's really just business people that are really accumulating the wealth.


I don't care about them either. To me they have a unique set of skills. My only reason mentioning them is there are quite a few making over $10 million a year and they would probably be caught up in any tax increase on high earners. They would probably be hurt by an increase, that is why I say we need to tax wages and investment income at the same rate. It might take some of the bite out of it for high earners who aren't exploiting the system in business.


as far as robbing from the rich to give to the poor - like i said, I don't think there's anything inherently wrong in being rich. I just think it's bad for the country as a whole when you have such an extreme concentration of wealth in such a small percentage of the population. I think it's bad for the stability of the country. And I also think it's wrong to a certain degree since i don't think 1 percent of the population actually generates 99 percent of the goods and services in this country. If you remove all those 1 percent people, i'm pretty sure the country would continue along more or less the same. So I do agree with you about adjusting our tax system. In the ends that's still basically amounts to taking from the rich to give to the poor. So i think maybe we're sorta of agreeing to the same thing, just using slightly different terms.


I agree that the imbalance is not good for the majority of the county. But thats not my reason for wanting to increase taxes on the ultra rich. I am not for the government leveling things out. Just preventing the ultra-rich from using their money to create a monopoly envirnment, where money is buying opportunity at others expense. So, we probably agree but for different reasons.



Overall, I don't care how much money a person makes. I just don't want them to be making it by lobbying for loopholes. Especially when they are loopholes that only a few can get and hurt everyone else.

At this point I think it is insane to expect middle class people to pay more taxes while high earners pay less. That is Reagan's trickle down economics, and it doesn't work. If anything it should be trickle up economics. Increase the standard deduction and the upper tax rates. That gives everybody more more to spend and imrove the economy, and makes up for it by taking more from those who have more.

And how is the budget growing when we pulled troops out of Iraq? Where did that money go? To Afganistan? A minor thing until the defense department had more money left in their budget. Like any govt agency, they had to find a reason to spend it elsewhere.

As you can see I am disgusted with it all. Radicals on both side fighting over extremes while the 80% in the middle get screwed.

Worse of all, 2 years of election promises by both sides and we are still where we were before any campaigning started.



I
jcjm
Mega Poster
Mega Poster
 
Posts: 1600
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2002 10:01 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron