Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Post by StreetBum87 on Nov 12, 2008 12:31:21 GMT -5
boss is a die hard R
and i got this in my email
Yesterday on my way to lunch at Doe's, I passed one of the homeless guys in that area, with a sign that read "Vote Obama, I need the money." Once inside I noticed my waiter had on an "Obama '08" tee shirt.
When the bill came, I decided not to tip the waiter and explained to him while he had given me exceptional service, that his tee shirt made me feel he obviously believes in Senator Obama's plan to redistribute the wealth. I told him I was going to re distribute his tip to someone that I deemed more in need--the homeless guy outside. He stood there in disbelief and angrily stormed away.
I went outside, gave the homeless guy $3 and told him to thank the waiter inside, as I had decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy looked at me in disbelief but seemed grateful.
As I got in my truck, I realized this ra ther unscientific redistribution experiment had left the homeless guy quite happy for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn.
Yesterday on my way to lunch at Doe's, I passed one of the homeless guys in that area, with a sign that read "Vote Obama, I need the money." Once inside I noticed my waiter had on an "Obama '08" tee shirt.
When the bill came, I decided not to tip the waiter and explained to him while he had given me exceptional service, that his tee shirt made me feel he obviously believes in Senator Obama's plan to redistribute the wealth. I told him I was going to re distribute his tip to someone that I deemed more in need--the homeless guy outside. He stood there in disbelief and angrily stormed away.
I went outside, gave the homeless guy $3 and told him to thank the waiter inside, as I had decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy looked at me in disbelief but seemed grateful.
As I got in my truck, I realized this ra ther unscientific redistribution experiment had left the homeless guy quite happy for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn.
Oh, now I get it. Is it too late to change my vote? ??? ;D
Here's an idea. We split the taxes straight down the middle and we call one pile Red Taxes and we call the other pile Blue Taxes. Red people can use their taxes for stuff like bombs and pre-emptive strikes. Blue people can use their taxes for social programs. Blue people wont ask for defense if someone attacks, and Red people can't have Unemployment checks, medicaid, etc. because they don't believe in those things and should go get a job.
^^^ seems pretty clear red would kick blue's ass in this case. blue would surrender all their guns and red would just drive in with giant hummer h2's packed with the red militia.
^^^ seems pretty clear red would kick blue's ass in this case. blue would surrender all their guns and red would just drive in with giant hummer h2's packed with the red militia.
They wouldn't come near us, man. We're all going to hell in a handbasket. G.od's O.wn P.arty fears the blue taint.
Post by StreetBum87 on Nov 12, 2008 14:44:37 GMT -5
dudes im not tryin to scare or start anything...that just went with what was being said.... i didnt want mcain to win...and im glad its a democrat in office now....i just wish it would have been someone with a little more experience.....my .02......i never posted within political threads..simply cuz im not too savy on it..im tryin to learn tho and i realy do hope obama does good and changes my perspective on him
im sure that i many will disagree with me, but these are my views which i am entitled to, and i feel strongly about them
as far as parties are concerned, i am split right down the middle...i am very liberal on social issues, but extremely conservative on fiscal issues...i do not believe that it is patriotic to pay more taxes because you make more than most other people (i believe that everyone should pay the same percentage, so it is fair), after all, you are only what you make of yourself
my father was born in a foreign country to extremely poor parents...he moved to this country (legally) when he was young...four children in one bedroom, and another for the parents was all they had...he made something of himself, because he worked for it...he took out loans for college (as well as worked full-time) and medical school, because nobody was there to help him...it took many years to pay everything back, as im sure that a lot of your parents may have had similar experiences regarding school...he worked and always provided for us, but we were not living in luxury...about three years ago, he opened his own clinic, paid for everything by himself...yes, he is doing well now, but HE STRUGGLED FOR MANY YEARS for everything that he has because he was determined to make it...as it is right now, a huge amount of his pay goes towards taxes...now, with obama coming into power, that huge amount of taxes will become even that much more
now, working in his clinic, i see all the fraud that comes with trying help people out...about 95% of the patients that come in are on medicaid, food stamps, subsidized housing, welfare, etc...i understand there are people that really do need help, but a good chunk of these patients wear or have jordan shoes, coach purses, iphones and various other smart phones, rims that probably cost about several months rent, nba season tickets (lowest priced seats, but still a luxury, not a necessity), season passes to six flags AND seaworld, and the list goes on...one of my co-workers has two children, one of which was taken off medicaid because between the mother's and father's income they dont qualify for both kids to be on medicaid...she went to the medicaid office to see what she could do, and they told her "if you want to have your other child receive medicaid, have another child or quit your job"...on top of that, many of these mothers have like a whole flock of kids (i see their medicaid forms with all the kids (many with kids of multiple fathers) names listed on them)...one such mother has EIGHT kids, from at least three fathers...now, im not for setting a limit to family sizes, but if they cant even afford one or two kids, i do not believe they should be having kids to fill a van...no body is putting guns to their heads and making them have babies, but yet the country pays for them to keep it up...im all for helping people, but come on this is rediculous, there has to be better regulation of these programs or else it will turn into another fanny mae-type situation...its not right for these people to have their little luxuries at the expense of everyone else...and if the people of one clinic spend their money so carefree, imagine what it is like at all the other clinics across the country...many people collecting government money to pay bills, while most of what they make at their jobs is wasted on frivolous items
the reason these people need these programs is because they lack initiative...why strive to make yourself better, when you know the government will bail you out...my father, obama, colin powell and condy rice all worked to get where they are (i used three African-Americans to illustrate that there is no barrier, including color, if you really want to make something of yourself)...i truly believe that if you want something, you can get it...however, there is this message of government paying for everything, and so these people will never try to acheive more
all in all, i do not believe we should PUNISH those who make something of themselves, only to help those who, not all but many, will abuse the help only for their meager gains...just my two cents
and for the sake of the country, i do wish obama the best
THIS^^^^^^^I agree with all of this. Living in Mississippi has opened my eyes to the amount of fraud that goes on in the welfare system. I'll be damned is I am going to "sahre the wealth" that i worked my ass off to earn so that someone else can sit on welfare and milk the system and have the luxuries that I go without in order to pay the bills.
im glad that someone on here agrees with me on this...i also liked the story of giving the waiter's tip to the bum (exactly what i am talking about)...i dont know if the comment made about scaring people was meant for me, but if it was let me make it clear, i was not trying to scare anyone with my remark...i was just explaining why a lot people are worried, in regards to finances, when obama takes office
mikearoo said that obama will not be taking our money, with a mention of JOE THE PLUMBER...why is it that after joe the plumber asked his question (basically calling obama out on the taxes issue) the obama campaign did everything they could to smear joe's image?
People's "wealth" has been redistributed for years. That what taxes do. That's like saying "My house has never caught fire so I shouldn't have to pay for the fire dept." You can't pick and choose where your tax dollars go. It bothers me when people complain about the gov't taking their money. For 95% of Americans, this guy is going to take less of your money! So what are you complaining about? "Share the wealth" is getting the same treatment as Howard Dean's "beYeaaaaaah."
I know that there are people that abuse the system. My sister worked for DSS in Texas and I've heard plenty of stories. But (and here's where my bleeding heart comes out) what about the lady who has 4 kids and is a stay at home mom and her husband gets killed by a drunk driver? How is she supposed to support a family? Are we supposed to deny her our support too?
why is it that after joe the plumber asked his question (basically calling obama out on the taxes issue) the obama campaign did everything they could to smear joe's image?
Joe had no image previous to this exchange. So its not a smear: THAT IS JOE'S IMAGE. Joe didn't call him out on sh!t either. Joe isn't making $250k+ a year. So Joe's taxes aren't going anywhere but down. Why didn't people call out Bush when he decided to cut taxes for the wealthiest people in America? So its OK to cut taxes for the wealthiest 5% of American's but its being a "socialist" to reverse those cuts and instead apply them to the other 95% of Americans?
Last Edit: Nov 12, 2008 16:02:12 GMT -5 by MrKC - Back to Top
^^^i dont know where you get your info, but im positive that 95% of Americans dont pay taxes (with the exception of the taxes everyone pays for goods--food, clothing, cars, etc)...on the contrary, a high percentage actually receive reimbursement checks when it comes tax season time
also, i do have a heart and do care for that "stay at home mom, with four kids, whose husband was killed by a drunk driver"...she does deserve help...im talking about those that willingly screw the government, by taking hand-outs, when they know that the money is not going for what it was intended to do...you've heard the stories from your sister, and yet you still think that these people deserve more, while working less
I was speaking about those that do pay income taxes. So let me re-write that:
So its OK to cut taxes for the wealthiest 5% of American's (who pay taxes) but its being a "socialist" to reverse those cuts and instead apply them to the other 95% of Americans (who pay taxes)?
The thing is, those that don't screw the system and those that do are all in the same system. So what are ya gonna do? How do you propose we give money to the people that deserve it and take it away from those that don't?
I know that there are people that abuse the system. My sister worked for DSS in Texas and I've heard plenty of stories. But (and here's where my bleeding heart comes out) what about the lady who has 4 kids and is a stay at home mom and her husband gets killed by a drunk driver? How is she supposed to support a family? Are we supposed to deny her our support too?
here is my issue with this - I work and pay for life insurance on myself and on Boz in case the horric scenario that you just described happened. So that my kids are taken care of in the even that some dire accident would happen - why can't that same stay at home mom do the same thing I am doing??? Why should the government have to bail her out with money that I have paid into taxes - I know it seems cold and callous to say that but why should people be rewarded for not being prepared for life's challenges.
I could see - this this situation - where the husband was not killed but ended up on some form of life support for the rest of his life or needing 24 hour nursing case - I can see bailing them out in that situation - AFTER the insurance that should have had has been used. But to reward the woman for not bothering to think about her kids and life and what she would do if her husband was not there to support her??? NOPE - not me.
Post by bamadancer on Nov 12, 2008 16:53:48 GMT -5
Joe The Plumber does not know anything about what socialism is... good lord.
All the people who are screaming about redistribution of wealth being socialism don't even know what socialism IS. TAXES are a redistribution of wealth!
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
hmmm - I don't want any of these - I don't want more government - what we have is already screwed up - fix what we have - don't advocate more social programs
I want to keep what i work for - I am not sure why that is such a difficult concept to grasp. I know there are people out there that truly need help - but what is about to happen with the raise in taxes is that the people that are facing higher taxes (coincidentily - these are the same people - a majority of them that donate to charities or support needy families on their own) will no longer do this because they will no longer that that discretionary income to use.
Do I think the Paris Hilton's of the world should just skip down the road? Nope - she sure as hell did not work for the money she has. But I also still cannot fathom that we pay people who play professional sports the amount of money that we pay them - come on - they are enjoying what they are doing - who the hell needs a multi million dollar contract to play a sport that you like playing anyway - I am not saying they should not be compendated - but multi millions???? and the coaches also - get real. - tax those people - tax the celebraties - why raise taxes on people like my parents who have worked their asses off all their lives to "make it good" finally and be comfortable without having to stress about paying the bills.
^^^THIS...the celebrities and millionaires of America can afford to share a little money (not saying its fair to tax them more), but the ones that are borderline $250k will suffer
I know that there are people that abuse the system. My sister worked for DSS in Texas and I've heard plenty of stories. But (and here's where my bleeding heart comes out) what about the lady who has 4 kids and is a stay at home mom and her husband gets killed by a drunk driver? How is she supposed to support a family? Are we supposed to deny her our support too?
here is my issue with this - I work and pay for life insurance on myself and on Boz in case the horric scenario that you just described happened. So that my kids are taken care of in the even that some dire accident would happen - why can't that same stay at home mom do the same thing I am doing??? Why should the government have to bail her out with money that I have paid into taxes - I know it seems cold and callous to say that but why should people be rewarded for not being prepared for life's challenges.
I could see - this this situation - where the husband was not killed but ended up on some form of life support for the rest of his life or needing 24 hour nursing case - I can see bailing them out in that situation - AFTER the insurance that should have had has been used. But to reward the woman for not bothering to think about her kids and life and what she would do if her husband was not there to support her??? NOPE - not me.
The reason you want to help out those who can't/won't help themselves is because it helps you.
The reason medical costs keep going up? Because there are 47 uninsured who go to the emergency room when their allergies turn into pneumonia. Or go bankrupt after their hospital bills become overwhelming and so the cost goes unpaid.
Schools in wealthy neighborhoods produce better educated children. You make more money and can afford to move your children into these districts. But you should also pay to improve the schools in the poorer districts because educated children are less likely to become gang members, thieves, drug dealers. Less violence and crime means fewer people in jails.
I don't know. It all just makes sense to me. Not everyone is blessed with the wherewithal to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
Plus, Obama is not saying let's throw more money into crap systems or create ones that only look good on the surface. He's saying let's put more money behind the systems that work and fix the ones that don't. Such as No Child Left Behind. And, while I'm not 100% on this one, probably also the welfare system. Especially considering he spent years working in poor communities in Chicago, you know he has to know what's going on there.
Uhhh - No Child Left behind does NOT work - it is a primary reason for the failing schools in the poorer neighborhoods - no one wants to fail Johnny and keep him a grade or two behind because that might damage his ego - I say people need to be held accountable for their actions and what we have taught our children is that you don't have to be accountable - there will be someone there to give you a hand out.
I have been there with being bankrupt after medical bills - I have been on food stamps - I have lived in low income housing - I pulled myself up by my bootstraps and made a better life for myself. It is not impossible. Unfortunately we have a second and third generation that has lived on welfare all their lives and have been taught how to milk the system and make it work for them. Like Jigawig said - the people that live in welfare housing and get foodstamps (the majority of them at least) are the ones walking about in the $120 shoes, with Coach and Gucci bags and driving cars that ic annot even afford the insurance on - I don't want to give them any more money - I want them to get off their asses and work for it.
Fine - they want to live on welfare - give them one of the jobs that no one else wants - have them provide community service - have them serve meals in the same soup kitchens that are proviing them meals - have them clean up the graffitti - have them help with beautifications projects across the country - busy hands keep people from doing criminal things.
Sorry if I wasn't clear - I was putting No Child Left Behind in the "doesn't work" category. That is a HORRIBLE program and has been from the beginning.
Welfare also needs to be reformed. But not by cutting off money to it.
I totally agree that people should be accountable. But sometimes you do have to give them a helping hand if they are unable to help themselves.
Ok. Here's what I'm not at all understanding about this whole "redistribution of wealth" argument. Obama has said repeatedly that if you make over 200,000-250,000 a year that you will see your taxes go up. Those that make less, will see your taxes go down. The reason for this is the constant "squeezing" of the middle class. Prices are going up and people's pay is staying the same, or in some cases, declining. So Obama believes that if you work and you aren't making a sh!tton of money you deserve to keep more of it. If you make alot, you should pay more. So how is Obama's tax plan socialism? How is this "redistributing the wealth."
I don't think, to my knowledge, that Obama has said anything about giving more money to welfare recipients or to people on food stamps. He's talking about hard working Americans. It's a common for people to think that Dems are gonna pour more money into welfare and give them poor folk a free ride. I'm poor. I've tried to get gov't health care, because my job doesn't offer it and I've been having back problems that require medical attention. But I make "too much" to receive gov't health care, even though I'm at poverty level. If I had a child I could receive it. I know Obama has talked about expanding health care. But what other plans gov't plans has he talked about expanding? I think people just assume cause he's a Dem that he will. This is not socialism. The gov't bailout plan to Wall St. is socialism.
And for the record, Joe the Plumber has an agent and has been juicing his new found stardom for all it's worth. Please don't try to make is sound like the Obama campaign attacked him. The media vetted him after McCain started bringing him up at every campaign rally. That's the media's job. They should have done it as much with Palin
But I don't get where it is right to raise the taxes of those that make $200-250k. why not set it at people that make $1 mill or more - most of the people that I know that make in the range of $200 - 300k have worked hard to get where they are - they are not living off of trust funds - they worked to get a college education and competed for the jobs that they have that allow them to make that much money. These poeple made wise choices in investments and they are going to be punished for it by having to pay more in taxes.
This is just my opinion, but if you make that much money, I think you can afford to contribute more in taxes. Honestly, how much money do people need to "live comfortably?" I know, I know, this is America and if you work hard you should get to keep your money, and how is it the government's right to tell you that you should contribute a higher percentage than those that make less? Well, I think you should. Kobe Bryant, Warren Buffet, Brad Pitt and Oprah will be just fine paying slightly more every year. And so will the people making 200,000-250,000K. They ARE considered rich. I mean, I'm considered at poverty level, but to the majority of the rest of the world, I'm rich.
We are blessed here in the good ol' US of A. And our country has fallen on tough times mainly because of the greed of the elite few. So we're all going to be asked to make sacrifices for the good of the nation as a whole, in one way or another. This is something that shouldn't cause us to question why, but rather ask what I can do to help.
2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
That is ridiculous!!! No one said ANYTHING about there being no private property. That is something Sarah Palin said at a rally and I hope you're not taking your talking points from her.
I want to keep what i work for - I am not sure why that is such a difficult concept to grasp.
You've never kept 100% of what you work for. Ever. You're tax money has always gone to schools, fire department, police, roads, welfare, etc. I am not sure why that is such a difficult concept to grasp. In fact, under Obama chances are you're gonna be able to keep more of what you work for.
^^^lol...to an extent, this is true, its coming in the middle that is the difficult task...as for there always being a "redistribution of wealth", that is true...however, why do people who make more have to support the people who decide that "flipping burgers" is the highest in life that they want (not downing people flipping burgers)...why is it that people who cannot take care of their own issues, expect the people who "made it" to take care of them
i find it funny how originally, obama made the statement of people making 250K+, then biden comes out and says 200k+, and then again, richardson (of new mexico) comes out and says 150k+...so which is it
point is, people need to take responsiblity for themselves, get out of the rut of the 2nd/3rd/4th/etc generation of expectance, and start having higher goals so they, in turn, can start being part of the solution (this is CHANGE that needs to happen)
as for the comment regarding how do we decide who gets help and who doesnt...there is not an easy answer to that...i do know that more regulation (which will cost more, but in the end if done properly will save) of who makes how much is called for
as for how is paying more "socialism"...well lets see, taking money from people who actually earned it, and then giving it to people who didnt...that to me seems a no brainer...just like the story of the waiter who earned the tip, and the bum that did nothing to deserve that money...the taxes that everyone pays (for goods and services) will benefit everyone with better roads, schools, etc...the taxes that the higher class pay go to fund the welfare programs
i guess this is one of the issues i feel strongest towards, just because it will affect people who are near and dear to me (my family)
Post by strumntheguitar on Nov 13, 2008 2:14:47 GMT -5
The problem I see with the waiter example, and I'm only picking at this example and not taking any side whatsoever, is that the waiter is not in that higher income bracket most likely. If the example was "So Bill Gates was my waiter at a pizza place yesterday and rather than giving him a $5 tip I gave it to the bum outside" then I would consider that a far more accurate depiction of Obama's intended plan as far as he's stated thus far.
So who would you rather give $5 to... Bill Gates cause he served you a few slices of pizza and refilled your drink or the bum outside cause he's out of luck and in need of money, despite potentially being a complete slackface. Personally, I'd rather give the bum money, knowing full well that he will take that and buy some liquor. Atleast he'll have his bourbon blanket for warmth that night.
(Yes, I'm fully aware that I countered an extreme situational example with a polar opposite extreme example. It just seemed fair tho ;D )
i find it funny how originally, obama made the statement of people making 250K+, then biden comes out and says 200k+, and then again, richardson (of new mexico) comes out and says 150k+...so which is it
Its $250k. Its always been $250k. Per the Tax Policy Center, here is how Obama's tax plan breaks down for individuals: $0-$18,891 = $567 tax cut $18,982-$37,595 = $892 tax cut $37,596-$66,354 = $1,118 tax cut $66,355-$111,645 = $1,264 tax cut $111,646-$160,972 = $2,135 tax cut $160,973-$226,918 = $2,796 tax cut $226,919-$603,402 = $121 tax increase $603,403-$2.87 million = $93,709 tax increase $2.87 million-plus = $542,882 tax increase
as for how is paying more "socialism"...well lets see, taking money from people who actually earned it, and then giving it to people who didnt...that to me seems a no brainer
That is actually NOT the definition of socialism. Socialism means putting the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. That is not what's happening here.
What you described is taxes. They take your money, my money, our money, lump it all together and then cut out a piece for the military, infrastructure, welfare, etc. Now if you want to argue about government overspending as a whole, that's fine. But don't make an erroneous claim that paying taxes is socialism.
2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
That is ridiculous!!! No one said ANYTHING about there being no private property. That is something Sarah Palin said at a rally and I hope you're not taking your talking points from her.
Nope - I may be a Republican but I don't like Sarah Palin. As a mom - I think she should be at home dealing with her family - her special needs child and her 17 year old who will need her now more then ever.
As for the definition - it was just one of several definitions that Merriam Webster gave me. I posted all of them and just highlighted what I saw as the important parts of each definition.
The problem I see with the waiter example, and I'm only picking at this example and not taking any side whatsoever, is that the waiter is not in that higher income bracket most likely. If the example was "So Bill Gates was my waiter at a pizza place yesterday and rather than giving him a $5 tip I gave it to the bum outside" then I would consider that a far more accurate depiction of Obama's intended plan as far as he's stated thus far.
So who would you rather give $5 to... Bill Gates cause he served you a few slices of pizza and refilled your drink or the bum outside cause he's out of luck and in need of money, despite potentially being a complete slackface. Personally, I'd rather give the bum money, knowing full well that he will take that and buy some liquor. Atleast he'll have his bourbon blanket for warmth that night.
(Yes, I'm fully aware that I countered an extreme situational example with a polar opposite extreme example. It just seemed fair tho ;D )
but see bill gates still worked for his money where as the bum has had x amount of years to atleast work in that same pizza place, but instead decides to just ask for money vs work for it.....he doesnt have any money but yet he hasnt done anything to deserve the money......bill gates has a butload of money....but he worked for it and still works for it....and donates to charity as it is...why should he HAVE to donate more... Personaly, if i had an ass load of money, and an orginization came to me and asked to donate to help clothe and shelter, or they asked me to buy school books and desks...i would....but if 3 slackass guys come up and just ask for money...fuck no..instead of goin and gettin booze and drugs, go the the shelter i just donated at and sleep and get some food, and send you kids to this school so they dont grow up like you....the more we just "HANDOUT" to people the more they realize its ok to slack ass....
but who knows.....one way could be right the other could be right...its proven over and over again..what looks good on paper, may not actualy work we will see
Would you hire the bum to work in the pizza place if you owned it? I would assume not, seeing as you want an employee that will be serving customers to actually bathe. So its not like they guy hasn't tried to get a job. And to say that all homeless folk don't try to get work is another generality. Just like all people on welfare don't abuse the system.
It appears that this is just misplaced anger. You are for helping people when they deserve help and against helping them when they abuse the help. That I can understand. But to say "Don't take my money and give it to people that don't work" seems silly because a) Since you've been paying taxes, your money has always gone toward gov't programs. b)Under the Obama plan, chances are, you get to keep more of your money.
Would you rather have a tax cut for yourself or a tax cut for corporations?