Bill K
Whooshite Candidate
Posts: 33
|
Post by Bill K on Oct 22, 2004 12:55:32 GMT -6
LG: I rarely watch Fox News, usually ABC (Peter Jennings), and whenever I want a good laugh, Dan Rather Yes I can tell you tax cuts for the rich are a good thing, cause the rich don't stuff that $$ into a matterss, they put it back into the economy, buying stuff, which creates jobs, invest it, which drives up the stock market, or sometimes use it to start new businesses, in fact that is how the company I work for got started, cause a rich guy was looking to do something profitable with his money that the gov't had so graciously let him keep, and backed a friend of mine who was looking to start up his own construction business, but lacked the funds. That was about 30 years ago, and myself and a couple of dozen other folks have made a comfortable living ever since, as well as 50 - 100 other guys and gals who work for us seasonally. We have a fleet of trucks and equipment, regularily purchase all kinds of supplies, which helps create more jobs for more people. All this, because a "rich guy" was able to keep his $$ and make his own choice as to what to do with it, instead of sending it down some government black hole. Bill K
|
|
Bill K
Whooshite Candidate
Posts: 33
|
Post by Bill K on Oct 22, 2004 13:49:59 GMT -6
Spartacis: Your post are so long, it's hard for an old guy like me to remember enough of em to respond.......... For all I know tho' you could be older that I am, I was just saying that I've been around long enough that I think I can recognize a phony when I see one, and I think I see one in JK. And I'm not lecturing anybody, just pointing out that I did not just get off the boat, for what it's worth. I get the feeling you are lecturing me though. My posts are usually half serious, but I try to make em a little humorous, tonge in cheek, too, this is supposed to be fun isn't it? I keep forgetting that "liberals" don't have a sense of humor, just outrage. Bill Clinton is worthwhile bringing up, since he is a good example of what I am getting at about putting a guy in the White House that shouldn't be there.......Eight years in office and nothing to show for it other than being the punch line in a thousand sex jokes. By the way, speaking of Big Bill, I heard Kerry is going to fix the health care system.....didn't Hillary fix that when BC was Pres.? And you don't know James Carville....really? He is the Democratic mouthpiece who talks really fast, hoping that before folks realize that 99% of what he is saying is hogwash they will have already swallowed a substantiol amount of it. Well, keep your head down, because I understand John (strict gun control) Kerry is doing some big game hunting in Ohio. Well, hunting photo ops, anyway. In a hundred thousand words or less, what is JK's intent re Iraq? I've heard him say we're not doing enough to hunt down the terrorists....does this mean more troups, more invasions, more of everything you guys don't seem to like about GWB's policies, more, that is, if France and Germany etc say it's OK as I see he intends delegating the last word on US foreign policy to every other country except the US. Now, after reading yet another looong post of yours, need to clear my head. (Or maybe I just inhaled too many exhaust fumes from Theresa's SUV) Bill K
|
|
|
Post by Lesa on Oct 23, 2004 0:20:51 GMT -6
Wow, 50-100 jobs in 30 years' time, now that really took a big chunk out of the unemployment rate. Wouldn't it make more sense to let your friend keep more of his money instead of giving all the tax breaks to the rich, so your friend wouldn't have to go out looking for someone to loan him the money? What about those of us who are less fortunate in trying to start our own business, and aren't lucky enough to find a rich person who is willing to part with their money? I certainly wouldn't be padding my mattress with a tax cut, either. I'd be paying more of my bills off, and maybe, just maybe, I could actually put an ad in the yellow pages to advertise my own startup business. I never did get the "logic" behind incorrectly stating that rich people buy more stuff when they get more tax breaks. They'll still be buying the same amount of food, so hard-working farmers aren't going to get any more money out of the deal. Since they're already rich and already buy all the clothes they need and want, I can't see them getting that $117,000 tax refund in the mail and saying, "Ooh! Now I can buy that Armani suit I've had my eye on all year!"Rich people spend about the same amount of money whether they get a tax break or not, because they've already got plenty of money to spend. Those of us who are working our fingers to the bone and struggling to make ends meet, however, wouldn't have to buy all their clothes at a second-hand store, and might actually be able to take out a loan for a much-needed car, creating work for clothing and car manufacturers, for instance. Your reasoning just doesn't hold water. In fact, it was proven not to work when Reagan was president, and it was proven again not to work when Dubya re-implemented it. I worked at a bank from April 1999 until July 2003. When I first started, we had 5 tellers on Mondays and Fridays, and we could easily get about 50 customers minimum between 3:15-3:45, coming in to deposit money or cash their paychecks. After Dubya took office, I started seeing more and more unemployment checks, and people coming in to withdraw money from their EBT (welfare) cards. By the time I was downsized at the end of July of last year, business had dwindled down to about 30-40 people on a good day. Now, about 5-10 people per day seems to be typical, from what the tellers tell me. Apparently, not only are people not getting paychecks, but their unemployment has run out as well. As for me, I'm lucky to be making $2 less per hour right now than I did at the bank, and I'll be lucky if my water or electric doesn't get shut off this winter, due to my having to juggle all my bills in an endless attempt to keep from letting one drop. So tell me, this is good exactly how? Click on this link and tell me if you think it's fair: www.ctj.org/html/rebate01.htmI'd like to know what color the sky is where you live. I know this wasn't directed at me, but: I'm sure we'll all need to clear our heads if Dubya gets to start up his "nukular" bomb testing, but at least we'll have a nice, pretty glow to us.
|
|
|
Post by eirene on Oct 23, 2004 11:28:06 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Lesa on Oct 24, 2004 3:06:59 GMT -6
Yep. This thread is a perfect example of how our government has divided us.
|
|
Bill K
Whooshite Candidate
Posts: 33
|
Post by Bill K on Oct 25, 2004 12:30:20 GMT -6
C'mon LG, are you suggesting that the example I gave of our rich backer is the only time such a thing ever happened!? Multiply it by hundreds, or thousands of guys, every year, and you'll get more accurate numbers. Guys with $$$ are always looking for ways to make more, that's what drives the economy. And, as for letting the "little guy" get a bigger tax cut so he can start up a business on his own....just how much of a tax cut do you think that would take? I seem to recall that we had to originally provide a financial statement showing a balance of $100,000.00 cash available, so even if a guy is making $50,000.00 a year, how is he ever gonna get a big enough tax cut to accumulate that kind of money, and still eat and pay his bills. You worked for a bank, then you must know they don't loan big $$$ to anyone unless they can prove they have adequite financial backing.
If you're a Xena fan, then you are probably aware that this is how RenPic, Tapert, Raimi, etc, got their start, getting backers to provide $$$ for that "Evil Dead" film they made way back. I think they were barely out of their teens, how long would they have had to have waited for "lower taxes" to come up with the dough on their own?
A few years ago a huge luxury tax was imposed on the boat/yacht industry. Well, so what? I'm never going to buy one, right? Problem was, the rich folks stopped buying 'em, and the industry tanked, people in the industry got layed off, material suppliers business dropped etc, and guess what? The tax was ultimately repealed and the industry recovered. You try to screw the rich out of too much money, it's only going to come back and hurt the little guy in the end.
I'm not opposed to the little guys like us getting tax breaks, I like to keep as much of the money I earn as I can, I just don't have a problem with others folks, rich or poor, keeping theirs as well. I might agree with you if we lived in a class society where you couldn't "move up", but anyone is free to go out and get theirs, I'm not suggesting it's easy, but there is no law against it, and my friend who needed the help from a rich backer to start his business has been in that high income bracket himself for quite a long time now.
By the way, I worked for a bank a long time ago, good basic training, but not a good place to spend a career, they tend not to pay much, and when you have been there long enough to earn a decent salary, they'll probably "retire" you. (Whether you're ready or not) Ultimately, you'll be glad you left.
Bill K
|
|
|
Post by asso on Oct 25, 2004 23:50:28 GMT -6
Hey there Bill, "Your post are so long, it's hard for an old guy like me to remember enough of em to respond." Heh, well then, today's your lucky day, because this is the last one you're going to have to read.
If you've been around long enough to recognize a phony when you see one, then you should recognize Bush as a phony too. Like I said, it's gamesmanship, they've both done their share of it, you can't decide the election on that, you have to dig a little deeper. Since you didn't just get off the boat, like you say, then you should understand the concept of doing research and learning the truth about things, and you shouldn't need me to explain it to you. This confirms what I said before, that you're not too stupid to understand this simple concept, and you're just choosing to ignore the facts, and since I'm repeating myself, and you continue to repeat the same claims that have already been refuted, it's obvious that this conversation is going nowhere.
I'm not lecturing you, like I said, do what you want, it's just that, you really shouldn't have this unrealistic expectation that people are going to put up with you disrespecting them and/or others like you do. Being as old as you are, hence, as mature as you should be, you really should have learned some manners by now, heh, that's all I'm saying. But then again, if you were to behave yourself, you couldn't take all those cheap shots at the Dem's, and if you couldn't do that, you wouldn't have anything to say.
Yeah, this is supposed to be fun, for me it's an entertaining diversion in my spare time. But you see, I get involved in the political discussions because I like to talk about something substantial, I mean, the reason that most of us post on boards like this, is to actually have a conversation with someone. I usually try to do it in a humorous fashion, while at the same time, I try to get my point across, and sometimes it works, only lord knows I'm no comedian, heh. But I try to do it that way because in the end, there's no reason to waste the energy getting all bent out of shape over things. I've been around long enough to know that when all is said and done, people like us just aren't going to make much of a difference about the way things are. At the same time, I'm not going to be an insensitive ass, and belittle someone for being upset over the way things are going, the fact is that the people who are, have every right to be. People's loved ones are suffering, or they've been killed senslessly. These "liberals", as you put it, don't consider that to be a laughing matter, and I don't either.
As for my question about Clinton, it was sarcasm, I really wasn't looking for an answer, but I guess that's ok, because I didn't get a justifiable one anyway, heh. The fact that you keep saying that there's nothing about Clinton's efforts, when he was in office, that's worth commending, makes the point I'm getting at here. By saying this, you belittle the Albanian people's plight in Serbia, who helped, you belittle the deaths of Americans in Africa, who he tried to get justice for, and you belittle the suffering of people at home, due to the poverty they're facing. As well, when you unreasonably support Bush, you demean the deaths of those who died in New York, because he's not trying to get justice for them, you demean the plight of the Iraqi people, because he's not trying to help them, according to you, it's about oil interests, not about the people, and you demean the deaths of Americans in Iraq, because they're dying for no reason. The point is that you're indifferent to it all, the issues aren't what you're concerned with. I said it before in a joking fashion, but it's true, you're not interested in having a conversation, you're interested in winning an argument. It's not about left vs right, it's about people vs the problems we face. It's about discussing the issues realistically and sharing knowledge in order to be better informed, or sharing insight in order to try to do something to solve the problems, although, like I said, that's not my thing, I'm too lazy, heh.
Speaking of discussing the issues realistically, Kerry's hunting trip doesn't make him a phony. Yeah, it was a photo op, but at least it was honest, I mean, he is a gun owner and he really hunts. Unlike, for instance, Bush's campaign ad of a flag draped stretcher being carried out of Ground Zero, even though he was the one who said that showing pictures of military coffins is inappropriate. Let's get real, you say that you think Kerry's a phony, but you haven't actually pointed out anything he's done or said that makes him a phony. What you've done is make false statements to try and make him out to be a phony. If Kerry was as terrible as you try to make him out to be, then you wouldn't have to resort to lying about him in order to make him look bad. At the same time, you can't even acknowledge any of Bush's faults whatsoever, as if he's never made a single mistake, heh, sorry, but you're in no position to be critisizing anyone else for being a phony, because the fact is, you're a phony. You're not dealing with reality whatsoever, you act as if Bush is some kind of super hero out of a comic book, heh, are you delusional? Nah, your thoughts are coherent, they're just unreasonable. That's because they're purposely unreasonable, to you, this is just a contest to see who can put down the other side with the snappiest comeback, heh.
Speaking of which, heh, Carville's on one of those point, counter point shows right? Yeah, I don't watch those, they're a waste of time, it goes back to what I was saying to A1ecto, it's just a lot of partisan bickering, nobody's checking the facts, and nobody cares to. Of course, James has to have someone to engage in these stupid arguments with, so you know, for every Carville, there's a republican windbag that's just as bad. You know, it's funny that you'd compare me to Carville, when the truth is, you're the one who's actually like him, heh.
So about your question concerning what Kerry intends to do about Iraq and your stupid implication that he would let other countries leaders make our decisions for us, well, there's no point in dicussing it with you now is there? Heh, you don't need me to tell you what he stands for, if you cared to find out what he stands for, you would just open your ears and listen to what the man's got to say. It's not as if he hasn't stated his plans clearly on at least a dozen occasions now. The man speaks english, it's not like you need a translator to understand him. You don't care what he's got to say. You don't care what I've got to say. You're like one of those guys on Carville's show, who's not actually listening to the person who's speaking to them, but instead, thinking about what you're going to say next. Then afterward, you can high five your republican buddies and you can say "Hah, I really got that liberal good, didn't I?" So there's no point in continuing this, I'd rather have a conversation with someone who, well, wants to actually converse, heh.
Of course, you're going to have to get the last word in so you'll have to come back with some supposedly clever response, like accusing me of being angry and running off in a huff, of course, I'm really just bored. Or you could accuse me of being a wimp who can't handle a confrontation, so I ran away, although I've pretty much refuted every argument you've given. Hmm, you could try to turn the tables and play the innocent victim, and make it sound like I'm the one trying to be confrontational, hmm, but after all those unfounded accusations and so forth, not sure that would go over real well. Oh, I know, you could try to accuse me of being a hypocrite and making false accusations about you, but then again, you haven't really said much of anything that shows you're interested in a real conversation, so I don't know. Well, you could just take the easy way out and say that I really went an awful long way just to make a simple point, oh, that's right, you already made a crack about my wordiness. I'm not sure what you could do, but whatever it's going to be, it can't be anything I've listed, I mean, you've got to try and be original, but I wouldn't drain my brain on it or anything if I were you, I mean, you shouldn't waste any of your best material on my account, because I'm not going to be back to read it, heh.
One more thing before I get out of here, Le, "pretty glow", heh, yep, that's about right, I was going to mention the fact that W, who also claims to care about the environment, drives a one ton pickup truck, but you know, the SUV thing is a petty argument anyway. Even if he did own it, so what, so now he's supposed to be a terrible guy because he drives a car like everyone else? Heh, but now that you've pointed out W's plans to resume nuking the ozone layer, the thing about the trucks just seems pretty irrelevent. Anyway, have a good one guys, see you on another thread.
~Asso
|
|
|
Post by Lesa on Oct 26, 2004 4:20:11 GMT -6
Bill-- Have you been in a coma the last 30 years, or are you just making this stuff up? Maybe it's a little of both. This post may be disjointed, but who cares? This whole thread is disjointed anyway. Whether you refer to it as trickle-down economics, supply-side economics, or Reaganomics, it's all the same. You can theorize all you want about it, but it would be a big waste of time, since it was proven to not work when Reagan screwed up the economy with his huge tax breaks to the rich. Your comparison with how RenPics got started and the kind of money I need for my own small business is moot, since I don't need the kind of money it takes to make a film. Tax breaks or not, there will always be rich producers out there looking for a good script. As for me, I could easily save up enough money for a yellow page ad if I wasn't paying such a huge chunk of my measly paycheck in taxes. But as it stands, I don't even get to keep enough money to pay rent on my apartment plus a phone bill, an internet bill (which I need for my business), my water bill, car insurance so I can drive to work, not to mention the outrageous gas prices in order to get to work. I have applied for other jobs, but as it stands, there is just no good full-time work available, and I can't find a second part-time job that I can work in with my current "flexible" schedule, except to try and find new customers to build websites for. But since the big corporations pretty much hire someone in-house to do that, my demographic is small businesses, and with the ones that either don't have a website or have a crappy one, it's because they can't afford to hire even a halfway decent webmaster. Yes, George Senior sure did screw up by imposing a whopping 10% tax on luxury purchases, didn't he? Incidentally, it was Clinton who signed the Small Business Job Protection Act in 1996, which was to phase the luxury tax out over a period of seven years, finally doing away with the tax completely in 2003. After all, with the tax originally being imposed on any vehicle that costs $30,000 or more, for instance, it wasn't just rich folks getting hit with that whopping 10% tax, but hard-working middle-class people who have to scrounge up money to buy those cars as well. Instead of penalizing Americans for buying expensive items that many have trouble affording as it is, Clinton raised a tax that the rich whiners couldn't boycott, which is income taxes. And as we all know, our economy was great under Clinton. Thanks for making yet another point for me, Bill. Kerry doesn't want to raise income taxes any higher than they were under Clinton, and he hasn't expressed any desire to impose idiotic luxury taxes on anything like Bush Senior did. Kerry just wants to reverse the cuts that Bush has given to the wealthiest Americans making over $200,000 a year, which means they'll be just as well off as they were under Clinton. Another problem with giving tax cuts to the rich is that the government has to raise money in other ways to make up for it. Enter the sin tax, which just gets higher and higher every year, and the manufacturers sure as heck aren't seeing any more of that money. Do you realize that poor people buy more alcohol and cigarettes than rich people? Yes, it's a vicious cycle, smoking and drinking to relieve stress, much of which is caused by poverty; and now smoking is actually contributing more to their poverty than it was 15 years ago. Gee, it would be nice if these vices weren't so addictive. The tobacco tax is supposedly designed to dissuade the poor from smoking, so why don't they just raise the tax to $50/pack and be done with it? Obviously, it's because they want people to keep buying cigarettes, so the government can continue to make more and more money from it. But do they put that money into Medicare? Uh huh, sure. Well, the government makes it even harder by proactively widening the gap between the existing classes, especially when they help the rich get richer by giving them huge tax cuts, so we might as well be in a "class society." Your friend was fortunate enough to get money from a rich guy who wanted to invest in his business. Great. But would he have invested in your friend's education? I'm sure your friend already had the skills he needed to run his business, otherwise the guy wouldn't have invested in him in the first. So, where did he get his skills, and how did he pay for it? In one of the debates, Bush was asked what his answer would be to someone who had just lost their job due to outsourcing. His answer was that he would help them go to college to learn the skills needed to get another job. I was extremely disappointed in Kerry when he was given his 90 seconds to respond to Bush's answer, because he didn't ask or state the obvious.... What about all those highly-qualified IT's who have lost their jobs and can't find another one? What about 55-year-olds who don't have enough money to retire, and whom most companies won't hire because of their age? Also, what are they supposed to do for income while they're back in school? Age discrimination is another reason why not everyone is free to go out and 'get theirs.' It is on record that Bush has stated that people are poor because they're lazy. Do you share that belief, Bill? Because Dubya sure as heck didn't come into his wealth from hard work, and when he finally did start working, he failed miserably in every single one of his business endeavours, including his governorship and presidency. Daddy helped him dodge the Vietnam draft, daddy got him into both Yale and Harvard, and daddy helped him buy the oil company that failed miserably, even with Osama's brother's huge investments. Right before Dubya's oil company went bankrupt (gee, how lucky was that? ) and while he was Governor of Texas, he sold his oil shares and used that money to buy into the Texas Rangers, then decided to trade Sammy Sosa to the Chicago White Sox. A lot has changed since then, but there's one thing that hasn't, and that's that working at a bank sucks. Like I said, I was downsized over a year ago. In other words, I did not leave voluntarily, because as much as the job sucked, it was one of the best paying jobs I could get at the time in my area. Even so, I definitely don't miss the place. Asso-- Yep, one's choice of car definitely doesn't compare with our president's choice of blowing up the ozone layer with nuclear weapons tests, and I'm not sure whether I should add a lmao guy here or a worried guy. So how about both? You've made a good point that I'm not sure if anyone else has made in this discussion, and that's the fact that reps can't dig up any real dirt on Kerry, so they have to resort to distorting truths and all-out lying. Maybe I should make a post of "Absolute Lies" of the Bush camp like I did with the "Absolute Facts." That would probably be a waste of time, though, since several websites like FactCheck.org have already done that. And before any uninformed republicans say anything, FactCheck also refutes incorrectly stated figures that Kerry has given during the campaign — so they're obviously a neutral group of fact-finders — but Bush's lies and deceit far outweigh that. Thanks, Dick Cheney, for incorrectly siting FactCheck.com, prompting the media to jump on it and helping me find FactCheck.ORG. I also find it hilarious that factcheck. com decided to send everyone to georgesoros.com for a few days because of Cheney's dishonest maneuver. Here's what FactCheck.org had to say about that:
|
|
|
Post by Lesa on Oct 26, 2004 4:21:03 GMT -6
Hehe! Wouldn't you know? Asso isn't the only one who can't make his post in 100,000 words or less. So anyway, enough rambling. Anyone who truly wants to know the facts can find a wealth of information from plenty of sources on the internet. And to save people the trouble of Googling it: And now for some fun: Bush's ResumeMore fun: Dubya Audio - Oct 16, 2004 And even more fun: Fresh Dubya Quotes
|
|
Bill K
Whooshite Candidate
Posts: 33
|
Post by Bill K on Oct 27, 2004 11:32:51 GMT -6
Haven't been in a coma or anything the past 30 years LG, been working, and I explained to you why. The more of their own money everybody gets to keep, the better off we all are, and if you buy into the Democrat's "screw the rich, give to the poor" policy, well, don't come here to Upstate New York looking for work 'cause after all those years of Mario Cuomo doing just that, most business's packed up and left. I've lost a job or two in my time, happens to everybody. The economy goes up and down, there are a lot of forces acting on it besides the guy in the White House. (I lost one job 'cause the Federal Govt (HUD) refused to pay for work my company did (their developer overspent his grant, didn't tell anybody till the work had been done) bankrupted the guys I worked for to the tune of a million $$$. Could've blamed Gerry Ford, or the Democrats running Congress, but instead I just went and found another job.) Keep looking, you'll find the right situation. Warning, most small businessmen are Republicans, so if you're looking, leave the anti-Bush 'tude at the front door Asso said I'd have to get the last word on him, so am deliberately not going to respond to his post, just to pi** him off. Only a few more days to go, be glad when the election is over. Bill K
|
|
|
Post by Lesa on Oct 28, 2004 19:58:28 GMT -6
If you re-implement the taxes at the federal level, then they would have to move out of the country to avoid those taxes, and any company that's going to do that, would've done it already 8 years ago. That all depends on where you live. Some areas are mostly Republican, and some are mostly Democrat. That looks like a response to me! Me too.
|
|
|
Post by Lesa on Oct 29, 2004 1:20:20 GMT -6
|
|