What???

[rdubnpk]

Originally Posted by twinimini

You may be right because he did tank after the tax return issue. My mother was from rural SC and my sister lives there now and I know folks there can be a little bit provincial when it comes to religion. It's a place where if you say God often enough you can pull in some votes. Hey, they had Strom Thurmond for a Senator for something like two centuries or so. I think he may still be there!

rdubnpk
Wasn't he more famous for using the "N" word???

[twinimini]

Originally Posted by rdubnpk

rdubnpk
Wasn't he more famous for using the "N" word???

Yes, Strom was something else. After he died it came out that he had a child whose mother was not Caucasian. Surprise, Surprise!

[rdubnpk]

Originally Posted by twinimini

Yes, Strom was something else. After he died it came out that he had a child whose mother was not Caucasian. Surprise, Surprise!

rdubnpk
His ilk thought it was their right to screw the help.

[V]

Should Romney be critiicized for using the tax law to his advantage?

I'm not sure anybody has criticised him, on this thread. I think if you look over my posts, you'll see that I haven't. Instead, I've been talking about his tax status, and the impact this is having on him as a potential candidate for president.

It's not just about impressions: few people have made as much as he has, but I suspect most of those taxpayers who've held down good jobs have paid a much higher percent of their earnings in combined income taxes, and social security taxes than he admits doing. This candidacy has put the privileges of the few under the spotlight.

[gabesz]

That guy from NJ is smarter then many of the others. He does not want too put up with the Media and the mess they would causes for his family. Newt has it right about the media. Too bad that he will probably not get nominated.

[rdubnpk]

Originally Posted by V

I'm not sure anybody has criticised him, on this thread. I think if you look over my posts, you'll see that I haven't. Instead, I've been talking about his tax status, and the impact this is having on him as a potential candidate for president.

It's not just about impressions: few people have made as much as he has, but I suspect most of those taxpayers who've held down good jobs have paid a much higher percent of their earnings in combined income taxes, and social security taxes than he admits doing. This candidacy has put the privileges of the few under the spotlight.

rdubnpk
Why should someone be criticized for adhering to the tax laws? He is, as he has stated, paying exactly what the tax laws require and not a penny more. The problem is, as you point out, that the average Joe republican who has been told repeatedly that those poor rich folk deserve all those tax breaks are seeing exactly how it works in black and white. Plus, the revelation is not coming from the media but from the other Republican candidates. That is what has me so baffled. Are they not shooting themselves and their entire platform regarding the richest 1% in the foot??

[V]

Are they not shooting themselves and their entire platform regarding the richest 1% in the foot??

I thought you had it about right. Romney's candidacy is shaking the Republican Party to its roots. Cracks were bound to appear, sooner or later, when you look at who the supporters of the Republican Party have been.

The rich and business interests have been the main clients of the Republican Party for my lifetime and, starting in the 60s, they shrewdly cobbled together support from a motley group of immigrant haters, gun lovers, anti-abortionists and christian fundamentalists, persuading these to vote against their self-interest on economic issues.

Successfully promoting an anti-government message, they managed to impose policies which have resulted in no increase in real wages for three decades, in addition to creating the greatest income disparity in our country's history. Romney's candidacy is reopening examination of these and other fundamental social issues.

[twinimini]

Originally Posted by V

I thought you had it about right. Romney's candidacy is shaking the Republican Party to its roots. Cracks were bound to appear, sooner or later, when you look at who the supporters of the Republican Party have been.

The rich and business interests have been the main clients of the Republican Party for my lifetime and, starting in the 60s, they shrewdly cobbled together support from a motley group of immigrant haters, gun lovers, anti-abortionists and christian fundamentalists, persuading these to vote against their self-interest on economic issues.

Successfully promoting an anti-government message, they managed to impose policies which have resulted in no increase in real wages for three decades, in addition to creating the greatest income disparity in our country's history. Romney's candidacy is reopening examination of these and other fundamental social issues.

V, I think your characterization of the Republican Party is way off base. If you want to go that route then let's refer to all those in the Democratic Party as lazy, benefit sucking, drug taking, incompetent sleaze bags. If you will look at the historic side of things, the majority of our jobs started leaving the US when Clinton and his Wal Mart cronies were in power. Also our good friend Mr. Obama still is getting a huge amount of money from the same Wall Street people that he loves to bash in public.

The point of many of us that are more to the right than the left is that the past policies of government give aways has not worked. It has created an environment that allows politicians to buy votes with government hand outs. Every president that I can remember going back to Johnson has said they were going to end poverty. All they have done is create a generation after generation stream of poverty because of the system of hand outs.

In case you never noticed, a very large segment of the US is lazy and won't work when there are government dollars available. Right now you can draw unemployment benefits for almost two years. The result of that hand out is that every single one of my clients who is looking to hire people make the same complaint......they can't find people to work. So do you really think these hand outs are a good thing?

The liberal idea of let's give people everything is a lot like feeding the bears in the park. Eventually the bears will not hunt but will depend on human hand outs. When the hand outs stop, the bears turn on the humans. I never really understood how liberals could see the same programs destroy generations of people and then clamor for more of the same.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by twinimini

In case you never noticed, a very large segment of the US is lazy and won't work when there are government dollars available. Right now you can draw unemployment benefits for almost two years. The result of that hand out is that every single one of my clients who is looking to hire people make the same complaint......they can't find people to work. So do you really think these hand outs are a good thing?

The liberal idea of let's give people everything is a lot like feeding the bears in the park. Eventually the bears will not hunt but will depend on human hand outs. When the hand outs stop, the bears turn on the humans. I never really understood how liberals could see the same programs destroy generations of people and then clamor for more of the same.

I'll give you a real life example from here in Denver.

Recently a company was looking to expand it's operations. They were offering wire assembly jobs with training for $16 an hour. They got hundreds of applications but only 2 people showed up for interviews. Why? Cause people didn't want to take the pay cut from unemployement. They were getting $17 there.

So why send in the application? Because to continue to get unemployement, you have to keep applying for jobs like you are looking for work, but they don't ask if you showed up for an actual interview.

Used to be that a job with benefits was more desirable than collecting unemployement. But I guess living off the government tit, sitting at home watching TV is more fun.

Now, not everyone on unemployement is sitting home doing nothing but recently I watched a friend who was out of work post daily on FB what he was doing each day. I was jealous that I had to work and he was going from place to place. Granted he was doing a lot of volunteering and helping people out, but he was also describing great resturants and bars he was going to. Yes he is single with no mortgage or major bills to worry about and he was looking for a job, but damn.. I wanted to go hang with him rather than sit at this desk...

And Twinimini, I think the reason they keep adding social program after social program (many overlaping existing coverage) is because they are afraid of the Bear coming back to eat them.

Jamie

[rdubnpk]

rdubnpk
Our national debt is astronomical. Government spending is like a snowball rolling down hill, constantly gaining momentum and size, with no apparent end. Our children's future and the future of generations after are looking so bleak it makes you want to cry. The incumbent is a large reason for this unbrideled growth and the clown before him started us down the hill. Republican-Democrat, what difference does the label make when they all seem intent on destroying the greatness of America? We who are Democrats wish, as I have indicated on another thread, another choice to represent us. The way the political game works, though, it ain't gonna happen. And you give us Newt Gingrich?

[twinimini]

Originally Posted by rdubnpk

rdubnpk
Our national debt is astronomical. Government spending is like a snowball rolling down hill, constantly gaining momentum and size, with no apparent end. Our children's future and the future of generations after are looking so bleak it makes you want to cry. The incumbent is a large reason for this unbrideled growth and the clown before him started us down the hill. Republican-Democrat, what difference does the label make when they all seem intent on destroying the greatness of America? We who are Democrats wish, as I have indicated on another thread, another choice to represent us. The way the political game works, though, it ain't gonna happen. And you give us Newt Gingrich?

Where, oh where, is Ross Perot when we really need him?

[Franco27]

You'll have to forgive my ignorance here, I know very little about US politics other than what we see over here in the news ..

But it seems to me, that only the super rich have any chance of standing for presidency, and therefore almost by definition cannot possibly represent the vast majority (or the 99% if you will) that they claim too! The whole system seems to be contradictory and the 'greed is good' mantra is alive and kicking! (just my take from across the pond!)

[Ben & Lisa]

Originally Posted by Franco27

You'll have to forgive my ignorance here, I know very little about US politics other than what we see over here in the news ..

But it seems to me, that only the super rich have any chance of standing for presidency, and therefore almost by definition cannot possibly represent the vast majority (or the 99% if you will) that they claim too! The whole system seems to be contradictory and the 'greed is good' mantra is alive and kicking! (just my take from across the pond!)

Not unlike any other country. Politics has always been and will always be a rich mans game.

[twinimini]

Originally Posted by Franco27

You'll have to forgive my ignorance here, I know very little about US politics other than what we see over here in the news ..

But it seems to me, that only the super rich have any chance of standing for presidency, and therefore almost by definition cannot possibly represent the vast majority (or the 99% if you will) that they claim too! The whole system seems to be contradictory and the 'greed is good' mantra is alive and kicking! (just my take from across the pond!)

Franco, the options are that either you are born or have become wealthy or you sell your soul to the highest bidder to fund your campaign. Obama, who supposedly represents the poor and downtrodden has already raised close to $100 million. Somehow I think most of that money did not come from the poor. Government for sale to the highest bidder is how it works now.

[V]

Recently a company was looking to expand it's operations. They were offering wire assembly jobs with training for $16 an hour. They got hundreds of applications but only 2 people showed up for interviews. Why? Cause people didn't want to take the pay cut from unemployement. They were getting $17 there.

I wouldn't get too carried away with this example, myself, as it suggests everyone in Colorado gets $17 on unemployment; but, Colorado bases the rate of compensation on prior earnings, and a person who gets $17/hour equivalent on unemployment must have had very high wages, indeed, while employed. Such a person would be loathe to take a job doing wire assembly work, and perhaps permanently lock himself into lower paying work than he is qualified for.

Once you accept work that involves less responsibility, and is less well compensated, you may never be able to climb back to where you were before: many who've had good jobs understand this well, and would want to avoid it, if at all possible.

[twinimini]

Originally Posted by V

I wouldn't get too carried away with this example, myself, as it suggests everyone in Colorado gets $17 on unemployment; but, Colorado bases the rate of compensation on prior earnings, and a person who gets $17/hour equivalent on unemployment must have had very high wages, indeed, while employed. Such a person would be loathe to take a job doing wire assembly work, and perhaps permanently lock himself into lower paying work than he is qualified for.

Once you accept work that involves less responsibility, and is less well compensated, you may never be able to climb back to where you were before: many who've had good jobs understand this well, and would want to avoid it, if at all possible.

Well V, then let's look at NY. Here the unemployment is a little over $400 a week. So what happens here when my clients look for employees. They all complain about the same thing....they can't find people. We have over 8% unemployment, but every single one of my clients who has been looking for employees says the same thing, "I can't find people!" Guess what? Obama's two years of unemployment are the big cause of that problem. Why work when they can sit at home, do some cash jobs on the side and draw down their nice checks? America, what a country!

[B & B]

Originally Posted by twinimini

Well V, then let's look at NY. Here the unemployment is a little over $400 a week. So what happens here when my clients look for employees. They all complain about the same thing....they can't find people. We have over 8% unemployment, but every single one of my clients who has been looking for employees says the same thing, "I can't find people!" Guess what? Obama's two years of unemployment are the big cause of that problem. Why work when they can sit at home, do some cash jobs on the side and draw down their nice checks? America, what a country!

2 years???

If I quit or get fired, I cannot draw, if I get laid off, i can draw, but only for 6 months. If I get a buy out of say 3 months, I cannot draw until the 3 month period has gone by.

I can only recieve, I believe 70% of my prior income up to a max of 37K per year.

For all of these reasons, I would only leave my current job to go to a better one, sitting at home is not an option.

[twinimini]

Bob, the way it works here is that you cannot draw if you quit or if you are self employed in some regard. Other than that, unemployment has become just another government handout. We even had a situation where we found one of our clients former employees working for cash while drawing unemployment. We informed unemployment and their response was that they don't have time to investigate the fraud within the system. Is it any wonder that those of us who have our own businesses get so frustrated with the system?

There are laws to prevent abuses. If you are an employer those laws are enforced with a vengance. If you are an employee, the laws are meaningless.

[Brewster]

Originally Posted by twinimini

Where, oh where, is Ross Perot when we really need him?

I saw him interviewed the other day on TV. Hasn't aged a bit.

[BillS]

Originally Posted by rdubnpk

rdubnpk
So, they sign pledges to not raise taxes on them, risk alienating an entire group of Americans (see 99%ers) to defend their inalienable low tax rights, all the time denying they are in their hip pockets with a straight face and then the Poster Child for the 1%ers, the leading candidate for the Republican presidential nod gets booed during the debate??? Just because he pays less in taxes as percentage of income than a lunch lady??? He is doing everything you guys are contantly saying is noble and good and the American way and he gets booed??? Balderdash!!!

Damn, the rants continue! You make my day with these!! Go Skippy!!!!!