Republican vice president candidates
I'm willing to go back to Clinton era tax taxes. We had a balanced budget back then.Quote: AZDuffmanSo, how much more in taxes do YOU want to pay?
Quote: AZDuffmanSo, how much more in taxes do YOU want to pay?
I'll pay the same percent as Romney paid last year. What was that 15%? You know what, I'll even pay 1% higher taxes than him.
The IRS already has a progressive tax. All Obama wants to do is tweak it.
Quote: s2dbakerI'm willing to go back to Clinton era tax tated. We had a balanced budget back then.
WOW, you want to raise taxes on the lowest earners by 50%! (10% Current to 15% Clinton rate.)
Would you be willing to cut spending back to about 19% of GDP as in Clinton as well, since that is what really balanced the budget. This would mean killing Obamacare and other cuts from the 23% or so we are spending now. Would you accpet this as part of the package?
I'm willing to murder writhing bloody babies. Actually, that's my dream.Quote: AZDuffmanWOW, you want to raise taxes on the lowest earners by 50%! (10% Current to 15% Clinton rate.)
Would you be willing to cut spending back to about 19% of GDP as in Clinton as well, since that is what really balanced the budget. This would mean killing Obamacare and other cuts from the 23% or so we are spending now. Would you accpet this as part of the package?
Quote: s2dbakerI'm willing to murder writhing bloody babies. Actually, that's my dream.
I'll take that as a "no."
Quote: AZDuffmanWOW, you want to raise taxes on the lowest earners by 50%! (10% Current to 15% Clinton rate.)
Would you be willing to cut spending back to about 19% of GDP as in Clinton as well, since that is what really balanced the budget. This would mean killing Obamacare and other cuts from the 23% or so we are spending now. Would you accpet this as part of the package?
You are presenting a false dichotomy. I'd like to cut other spending and keep health care reform.
I'm fine with getting rid of the 10% tax bracket. No full-time employee can make that little of income, it's mainly for part-time low wage workers anyway.
Quote: FinsRuleYou are presenting a false dichotomy. I'd like to cut other spending and keep health care reform.
I'm fine with getting rid of the 10% tax bracket. No full-time employee can make that little of income, it's mainly for part-time low wage workers anyway.
A full-time worker in a laborer-type positon paid $12 an hour makes $24,960 per year. With the standard deduction of $11,900 for her and a non-working husband, the taxable income would be $13,060. That is in the 10% tax bracket. Are you really willing to raise that family's taxes 50%?
Quote: RonCA full-time worker in a laborer-type positon paid $12 an hour makes $24,960 per year. With the standard deduction of $11,900 for her and a non-working husband, the taxable income would be $13,060. That is in the 10% tax bracket. Are you really willing to raise that family's taxes 50%?
Flat taxer's would.
Unless they increased the standard deduction rate.
Quote: FarFromVegasOkay--start cutting. Try it at home. Someone suggested cutting 10% of everything.
Already done...had to do it when my wife went back to get her Master's and also when I lost my job.
Quote: FarFromVegasSo pay 90% of your mortgage and see how long the bank lets you stay in your house.
The mortgage is non-negotiable but I didn't over-buy or over-pay. I've always had equity in my house since day one and it might be down a little, but it is still there because I bought less than I could afford and paid more down. We could've pulled the trigger and sold if things would have gotten that bad for us.
Quote: FarFromVegasCut your utility use. Environmentalists have been begging you to do that for years.
Did that.
Quote: FarFromVegasStop eating in restaurants. Michelle Obama will be thrilled with you eating less fat and salt.
Did that, too.
Quote: FarFromVegasDon't buy so much stuff. Stimulating the economy that way only helps the credit card lenders and Chinese factories.
Bought less when we had less...and cut up all credit cards as part of the debt reduction. As they were paid off, they didn't come back.
Quote: FarFromVegasFire your lawn service, even if it puts a small business out of business.
I would have, had we had one. Sorry...but some decisions are tough. The housekeeper would have been the last cut, we ended up being able to keep her. Many did not but the $50 a week we pay her for a couple of hours of her time is priceless to my wife.
We made cuts when we needed to, kept things tight as we both worked in our newer, better jobs, and now have MORE money to spend than ever. It took work to get there.
Hmmm...see a theme in that????
Quote: FarFromVegasYou'd make a great liberal! :P
No, I wouldn't.
Quote: thecesspitFlat taxer's would.
Unless they increased the standard deduction rate.
Most flat-taxers start with a minimum income before taxation. In the example I found, this amount would not be taxed.
http://www.freedomworks.org/flattax/index.php
The tax code is how politicians reward their friends and punish their enemies.
No way that is gonna change in my lifetime or even my grand childrens.
Quote: RonCA full-time worker in a laborer-type positon paid $12 an hour makes $24,960 per year. With the standard deduction of $11,900 for her and a non-working husband, the taxable income would be $13,060. That is in the 10% tax bracket. Are you really willing to raise that family's taxes 50%?
Her non-working husband needs to get a job. That will put them in the 15% bracket.
Quote: RonC
We made cuts when we needed to, kept things tight as we both worked in our newer, better jobs, and now have MORE money to spend than ever. It took work to get there.
Hmmm...see a theme in that????
Yes--that you live your life like I do! Only we have different philosophies. The Others aren't always the enemies in my world.
Quote: buzzpaffFlat Tax ??? ROFLMAO
The tax code is how politicians reward their friends and punish their enemies.
No way that is gonna change in my lifetime or even my grand childrens.
Economists tend to agree (left or right) that the US tax code is one of the biggest fiscal problems in the US today. No-one will change it though, for reasons as you state.
Quote: thecesspitEconomists tend to agree (left or right) that the US tax code is one of the biggest fiscal problems in the US today. No-one will change it though, for reasons as you state.
But do they agree what the problem with the tax code is, and how to fix it? I think the left/right economists would start to show their stripes there!
Quote: FarFromVegasYes--that you live your life like I do! Only we have different philosophies. The Others aren't always the enemies in my world.
You won't find me "hating" Democrats or Liberals. I don't find them (as a group) to be repugnant, smelly, nasty, ugly, or anything bad, they just have different opinions than I do.
I DO find some things that I don't like in the current leaders of the Democrats. I think Pelosi and Reid are horrid; I am not a huge Beohner fan, either. I don't think any of them measure up to some of the better Speakers and Majority Leaders we have had from both parties. Hell, Peolisi and reid couldn't even get President Obama's agenda through Congress when they controlled the whole deal.
I do find it disgusting that Al Sharpton is a voice for the party and a race (not the voice; a voice) because his path to fame came via the whole Twana Brawley incident (spelling may be off...). I know people mess up, but a guy who lies about a girl being covered in poop just shouldn't be the speaker for anyone!!
Obama as president, besides the old and worn out
Liberal talking points of, the rich are evil, all unwanted
babies should be hideously murdered in the womb,
the Supreme Court has to be 100% Lefties so anybody
can marry anybody else at any time and all drugs that
make you 'feel good' will be available over the counter,
and socialize healthcare so everybody will be equally
miserable. Oh, and slowly dismantle the military so
Canada and Mexico are superpowers compared to us.
Yawn, same agenda they had 1n 1972, nothing ever
changes.
Quote: AcesAndEightsBut do they agree what the problem with the tax code is, and how to fix it? I think the left/right economists would start to show their stripes there!
Oh they agree... it's far too complex and Byzantine.
Quote: s2dbakerThanks for reminding me. I have to go gargle with fresh fetus parts.
Ever see a video of a partial birth abortion, that
your hero Obama fully supports? I don't recommend
it because you'll never get it out of your mind. You'll
also never make crude thoughtless jokes like you
just did ever again.
leading Obama by 16 points among Independents.
Why is this poll imortant? Its a an inside Democtat
poll. It has to be as accurate as possible because its
what Obama uses. Its James Carville. It can't be
skewed because it would be worthless if it was. 16
points, when Obama won with Indies in 2008? This
has Obama sweating, believe it.
Quote:Gov. Mitt Romney’s campaign toasted its top donors Wednesday aboard a 150-foot yacht flying the flag of the Cayman Islands…. The event, attended by no more than 50 people, along with Romney relatives, including older brother Scott, appeared on no public calendars…. The Cracker Bay is owned by Gary Morse, developer of the Villages retirement community. Companies controlled by Morse gave nearly $1 million to the pro-Romney Restore Our Future superPAC. Registered in the Caymans, the Cracker Bay has an impressive art collection and can seat 30 for dinner.
Hey, I know when Obama is taking money from Streisand or Michael Moore, but Romney doesn't like revealing his donors. They ran this on the news, and couldn't get anyones name getting on or off the boat.
here
What joke? You know that liberals dream of writhing bloody babies. You said so yourself a few pages back. I was just agreeing with you.Quote: EvenBobYou'll also never make crude thoughtless jokes like you just did ever again.
Sorry it took so long to respond but I was in a coma from watching that link. I wouldn't call it scary though.Quote: rxwineYou think that's scary
Quote: s2dbakerSorry it took so long to respond but I was in a coma from watching that link. I wouldn't call it scary though.Quote: rxwineYou think that's scary
Yeah, but you only had to watch it one time.
Quote: AZDuffmanYou mean like the one who stated race is more important than qualification as to who should be promoted in the fire department?
Anyone can do this, just as long as they are both of legal age and of the oppisite sex. Other things are not a marrige.
Did you use the whites only or colored only water fountains?
Remember when I said this and then it turned out to be true? Ah, good times :)Quote: s2dbakerRomney just traded Florida for Wisconsin and Wisconsin isn't even a sure bet. There's still three months to go before the election and that's an eternity in politics but it's looking more and more like 330 electoral votes for Obama.
Quote: s2dbakerIt's already been decided. Mitch Daniels is the Veep choice. I'd bet on it with the right odds.
Now stu... if you quote your good ones.... quote your bad ones... ?"it's already been decided?"
Quote: s2dbakerRemember when I said this and then it turned out to be true? Ah, good times :)
Not quite sure how he "traded FL." Obama carried FL in 2008 and again in 2012. Romney did well among seniors. Obama won by less than he did in 2008, first POTUS since Wilson to do so I beleive.
All we proved is that it is next to impossible to win when you are running as a competent adult and your opponent is running as Sana Claus promising handouts with a media that is on his side.
I said it to my fellow conservatives at my office the night after the election. It is going to take a lot of pain to get thus USA serious about what needs to be done on spending. The pain of another depression or the like. Too many on the left think "the rich" are supposed to pay the way for everyone else; that education and health care should be "free." That the laws of economics do not apply. That "profit" = "greed."
I can't wait for the reaction of the Obama Voters who in 2013 find they are actually "rich" when their taxes go up. Might be time to close our eyes and just jump off the so-called fiscal-cliff. Tell America, "This is what you voted for, enjoy!"
Quote: AZDuffmanObama won by less than he did in 2008, first POTUS since Wilson to do so I beleive.
I understand why the right wing commentators won't let this go. And it is a fact. But Obama also won his first term by a very large margin. I'm pretty sure that the two events are correlated, but nobody mentions the first one as being one of the causes of the second one.
Edit: And FDR's margins declined from a peak in '36. He had a lower share in '40, and a lower share yet in '44. '40 and '44 were both under his share in '32.
You are correct. I bungled that one! But it's more fun to dig up the times that I'm right.Quote: SOOPOONow stu... if you quote your good ones.... quote your bad ones... ?"it's already been decided?"
"Traded Wisconsin for Florida" means that by picking Ryan, Romney weakened his chances in Florida to strengthen his chances in Wisconsin. Turns out that he lost both instead of taking Florida as Az predicted.
2011- top 1 % of taxpayers paid 40% of all federal income tax.... Yeah... lets increase that so they pay their 'fair share'......
They also make 23% of all the income. I think we should tax them more!Quote: SOOPOO2011- top 1 % of taxpayers paid 40% of all federal income tax.... Yeah... lets increase that so they pay their 'fair share'......
Quote: thecesspitThe election left the US more divided, not less. Kinda sad, really.
When one side says the other is declaring a "war on women" just because they do not believe in forcing employers to provide free birth cotnrol and free abortion on demand; and when one side says teh other is "anti-hispanic" just because the other side believes we should not have unlimited illegal immigration; and when one side says the other 'will put you back in chains; and when one side insults anyone who built a business by saying, "YOU DIDN'T BUILD THAT, SOMEONE ELSE DID!"--when one side does all of this then you are indeed going to have a more divided nation.
I will restate it. The USA has a history of increasing social divide that peake midway between every third generation, or about once every 70-80 years. We are nearing such a peak now. 1776-1883, 1861-1871, and 1932-46 were the last ones. I feel we are seeing the begining of a new one. Baby-boom starting to die off and population growth now coming nearly soley from immigration. I don't think the later has ever happened--native population always grew once we got beyond the early settlements. Mexico does not have the same political values of Northern and Eastern Europe. All of this will force social change.
