|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
206.255.213.61
In Reply to: RE: Data free perception posted by Mr_Steady on May 09, 2016 at 17:00:12
You have to consider that all forms of government in this country are now the largest employer in this country.
Given that 45% of our populace pay ZERO income tax, that's not necessarily a great message for their future.
Those days are gone.
Indeed. Those with high school educations can no longer make $45/hr turning bolts at GM.
Now we are just printing it. Do you think that's sustainable?
Absolutely not. Obama has profoundly overspent the most money in our history. "Free stuff to everyone!"
Within two years all the black people but one was replaced by Hispanic women who had their papers.
Demonstrable work ethic and productivity always trump entitlement.
Follow Ups:
reallySo, using raw dollars, Obama did oversee the lowest annual increases in spending of any president in 60 years.
Here are the results using inflation-adjusted figures:
Average percentage increase per year
Johnson 6.3
George W. Bush 5.9
Kennedy 4.7
Carter 4.2
Nixon 3.0
Reagan 2.7
G H.W. Bush 1.8
Clinton 1.5
Obama -0.1
Eisenhower -0.5
Edits: 05/10/16
What about the rest
Yeah what about it
Obama's statements by ruling (75% truth)True (21%)
Mostly True (27%)
Half True (27%)
Mostly False (12%)
False (12%)
Pants on Fire (2%)
Trump's statements by ruling (76% of statements false or worse)True (2%)
Mostly True (6%)
Half True (15%)
Mostly False (15%)
False (43%)
Pants on Fire (18%)
Sanders's statements by ruling (69% true but no outright lies)True (14%)
Mostly True (37%)
Half True (18%)
Mostly False (18%)
False (12%)
Pants on Fire 0%Clinton's statements by ruling (72% truth).
True (23%)
Mostly True (27%)
Half True (22%)
Mostly False (16%)
False (11%)
Pants on Fire (2%)Interesting factoids
Edits: 05/11/16 05/11/16 05/12/16
Surely everyone is aware of at least a dozen of those, but perhaps not that many!
Let's look at total debt:
It went from $10T in 2008 to $22T today. Adjusting for inflation, the beginning number would be $12.2T. Obama added another Ten Trillion to the national debt under his watch.
Here's another view as percent of GDP:
The last time the debt was 100% of GDP was during WWII!
Source: Source using GPO budget figures.
No, that is not sustainable!
If anyone has any queries on money or loan or debt, then they can clear their queries by contacting the national debt line.
Or then again.I can't say too much other than perhaps money isn't the only thing to consider when choosing between choice A and choice B.
I suppose whether people like/dislike Obama policy - doesn;t much matter at this point since he's there and that's the fact of life you gotta live with.
The more interesting thing is which choice is next - HC or DT? I have to say I do find US politics hugely entertaining. It's kind of like a game show.
Edits: 05/12/16
I suppose whether people like/dislike Obama policy - doesn;t much matter at this point since he's there and that's the fact of life you gotta live with.
The more interesting thing is which choice is next - HC or DT? I have to say I do find US politics hugely entertaining. It's kind of like a game show. - RGA
You tell me ........
Edits: 05/12/16
My last post was deleted - not sure why because it was not political - merely stated facts - but I suppose facts can be political - but if you and E-Stat looked at that political fact site you can key in each politician's name and you can see their rankings of true statements, mostly true, somewhat true, somewhat false, all the way down to pants on fire.When you talk Obama - regardless of which side you happen to be on - it doesn't matter - he's in and he's in until someone new comes in.
I do find it interesting the board allows all discussion on Obama but no discussion on Trump or Hillary.
It would seem that your choice as Americans will be between these two.
At the top of the page you merely key in any politician's name and you can see how many true/false or worse statements each make. I made no political statement just posted the results.
Edits: 05/12/16
Pegion hole much ..?
Your pretty Naive with this kind of stuff huh RGA ..:) you do realize Military spending pay a lot of Bills by creating high paying private sector jobs , jobs which create the technology necessary for a modern military ( and world ) of course (sigh) every now and again one of our despots do tend to get greedy and carried away ...
:)
Edits: 05/12/16
much matter at this point since he's there and that's the fact of life you gotta live with.
It will be generations to come who will have to "live with" the consequences.
BTW, the final swing vote for Obamacare was from an Arkansas Democrat named Blanche Lincoln. She was voted out of office by a landslide in 2010 by ignoring the will of the people she presumably "served".
Yes but as I noted there is no point in arguing about it because he is the president. Looking on boards who like the guy I get tons of graphs and articles that say he's great and on the other side tons of graphs and articles that say he isn't.
Reading more of what you have written on this page I tend to see more where you're coming from on the jobs area - people make their choices and should not whine about the choice. And they should work - Both things I agree with you on. As a teacher I see the thugs and the lazy butts do nothings who whine and complain when all they can get is a min wage job but want plenty of hand outs from John Q hardworking tax payer. Why work if you will be taxed to death when the taxes go to those kids who never bother to do homework but instead were getting high and throwing a football. And don't whine if you go into a profession that pays poorly.
What it all comes down to is choices for people and governments - how much money do you put where. Do you choose to allocate funds to help war vets or do you give Congress a 10% pay increase, do you choose to put money to feed children (because bad parenting isn't the kid's fault) or do you choose to spend it on missile defense which doesn't work). Do people choose to spend money on education or a new baseball stadium and $300 million for A-Roid?
And if you don't like something you vote. And if nothing changes your lot - you change your situation. I whined about teacher salaries - but I stopped whining because hey it's my responsibility to look into what the salaries are and the way the government treats teachers. In other words you (I) have to know what we're getting into when we sign up. I could have just as easily went into law - a more lucrative field. Or medicine but the smells and the blood - not my grades - kinda pushed that one off the table.
I chose to be a do-gooder and romanticize the teaching education field to my chagrin. But I complained for a bit - then saw nothing would get changed - and moved to a country where now as a teacher I make more than double what the top Canadian teachers earn. Canada is the 6th most taxed nation apparently at around 53% or so on a salary over about $120k. So after taxes. It's not like I live like a king - granted I do have a maid.
I would say I'm 80% with you on these things - but I think I have a kinder heart to the special needs needs - being a teacher I see more individuals where in it's not about effort level or being lazy it's about being physically and mentally incapable of doing higher wage work. I'm willing to pay more in tax to allow them to have a decent life and some food and vets to get free medical - I mean they did kind of fight so you and I can have a nice paying job the least we can do is you know make sure they have a decent life not begging on the side of the road - perhaps you're not willing to do these things. So there it is.
but I think I have a kinder heart to the special needs needs - being a teacher I see more individuals where in it's not about effort level or being lazy it's about being physically and mentally incapable of doing higher wage work.My wife's parents adopted two special needs children after raising their own four. One is a Rubella syndrome boy with autism and the other, a girl abandoned by her alcoholic mother who has fetal alcohol syndrome. Maybe the only way we might disagree is: who determines where charitable money should be spent. Years ago, Bill Clinton overtly claimed he could "spend other's money better than they". Naturally, I don't agree with liberal elites like he and his wife who suffer from a superiority complex.
I can have a nice paying job the least we can do is you know make sure they have a decent life not begging on the side of the road - perhaps you're not willing to do these things. So there it is.
I could get some really cool audio gear for the $20k we donate annually to a range of charitable organizations. :)
edit: I think I've mentioned this before, but I'm very supportive of education. My wife is a PharmD who chose to teach and make considerably less money than she could have in the private sector. I'm proud to say that she has also built a college of pharmacy from scratch as founding dean - we moved from Atlanta ten years ago for that dream to be realized. That was not an easy task. Now that the school is fully accredited and vibrant, she is now a vice provost over the entire university. I'm convinced that education is essential to personal enrichment and success.
On a related note, I count myself very lucky. My mother taught me to read before before I ever attended school. It is heartbreaking that teachers today in elementary school have to begin where parents should have already taken their children.
Edits: 05/12/16 05/12/16 05/12/16
Your wife's parents should be commended. If more people did those sorts of things we'd probably be better off.
I understand the irritation with the liberal like Bill when they say they could spend money better than you. Although what I would say is he's not talking about you or your wife's family - he's probably referring to the 9/10 who do nothing.
An individual can make a charitable donation instead of paying a tax but perhaps a tax can build a pool of money that can do a better job. An analogy might be a guy comes into the hospital with a bullet in his chest and 50 mosquito bites. A pool of money with one decision maker puts the money to hiring the best surgeons to deal with the chest and save the guy's life. The individual charities operating individually have smaller amounts of money - each can afford to deal with the 50 mosquito bites and there's only money for a band-aid for the guy's chest.
Sure the mosquito bite swelling is down and he can't feel the itch because he's dead.
If you think about - each person looks at the tax system from their own belief systems. A very conservative Christian might hate the idea of their tax money going to things that support gay marriage or helping women get abortions or various other programs. On the other side is the Atheist Liberal who get irritated that their tax money funds teaching some sort of creationism in the classroom, or that all churches ride completely tax free or money for military etc.
The point is that the money gets spent and each side will complain about what the money gets spent on. You can't please everyone - so I suppose that's why you have a vote - you choose the person who will spend your money on the things you want it spent on. You choose which person is more palatable on other social domestic issues. Depending on your situation you will vote accordingly. It's like the people who were hippies in the 60s and now very conservative - it's easy to vote liberal when you have nothing and then when you have something - you want to protect it.
For instance your wife's parents are certainly doing their part (more than their part in fact). So you could say - hey why pay tax why not rely on charity - but it makes the assumption that people are generous kind hearted people. I hate to be a cynic but I don't think most people are. Most people don't put their money or time to support their views.
Hypothetical: Take 100 relatively wealthy people and say okay these 100 people make $1 million each.
We can tax them at 20% and for a tax take of $20,000,000 and we can use that money to deal with special needs education in the given city (where the bill is $19,897,000. Covered and covered well with spare money leftover to test even better newer programs.
Or we can not tax them and rely on charity. Ten people are generous they give $300,000 each let's say - even more than they would be taxed. 20 more would give the tax rate - 20 more would give $100k and 20 would give $50k but 30 will give nothing - they're saving for the new Mercedes.
The problem now is that you only got $10m to deal with the issue but you needed $19.87m to actually do the thing properly.
Your wife's parents I respect because they actually put their money and time and love behind their beliefs. Perhaps they are pro-life and they back it up. What bothers me is people who claim to be pro-life but in fact are only pro-birth and then proceed to wash their hands of paying extra taxes to look after all the children with no parents where there isn't someone who volunteers to take them in. The state then needs money to look after them. From a purely business mindset- if you are going to force someone to have their kid - you better be willing to pay for that kid for their entire upbringing. If you convince them to have an abortion it saves a huge amount of money and resources.
Funny Huh , bet he was'nt prepared for such a response .... :)
Edits: 05/12/16
I can't say too much other than perhaps money isn't the only thing to consider when choosing between choice A and choice B. - RGA
Dont tell us , tell your Boss, he may want you to skip a few paychecks to pay for it ..
:)
True but you could also cut military spending in half and that would pay for pretty much every other program tabled and you still have a military better than the next 5 nations combined. It's always a choice of where the money goes. And taxes people would probably not mind paying if it went to something valid.
Funny how the biggest jump was in 2009 while under still the fiscal year 2008 budget set by the GWB admin. At least that's how it looks based on your quoted source.
"The final spending bills for the budget were not signed into law until March 11, 2009 by President Barack Obama, nearly five and a half months after the fiscal year began."
So, a president takes office in late January and in a matter of 7 weeks manages to produce a completely new budget? Impressive!
The Democratic Congress installed in 2007.
Don't be so disingenuous. Obama had a head start.
Since President Barack Obama took office, the national debt has nearly doubled, growing from $10.6 trillion to exceed $19 trillion. In dollar terms, this is the largest increase in the national debt in U.S. history.
Since the traitors Cameron & Osborne came to power in the UK, according to the Independant National Debt has increased by £555 billions.
Since the Traitors Cameron & Osborne came to power in the UK according to the Independant National Debt has increased by £55 Billions
Edits: 05/10/16 05/10/16 05/10/16 05/10/16 05/10/16 05/10/16
Now who's basing his statements on anecdotes?
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: