The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 44

Thread: Afraid to Vote??

  1. #31
    Senior Member M&K's Retrievers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Royse City, TX
    Posts
    5,159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by road kill View Post
    How did you respond if you were not logged in??


    RK
    Beat me to it.
    M&K's HR UH Tucker of Texoma JH
    M&K's SHR Prime Black Angus
    M&K's Miss Jessie Girl JH
    Sir Jacob of Lakeview-Jake
    Freeway JYD

    Mike Whitworth

  2. #32
    Senior Member dnf777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Western Pa
    Posts
    6,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by M&K's Retrievers View Post
    Beat me to it.
    1) Reading posts on a different computer while not logged in, so I can see the posts.

    2) Read a post by RK that asked a legitimate question, and contained no insults or diversions.

    3)Picked myself up off the floor, admitted to St. Peter that miracles do happen.

    4) Logged in and posted a reply

    5) Read the next few posts, and told St. Peter I was right afterall. This was just a fluke. He agreed.
    God Bless PFC Jamie Harkness. The US Army's newest PFC, but still our neighbor's little girl!

  3. #33
    Senior Member road kill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Berlin, WI
    Posts
    10,704

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dnf777 View Post
    1) Reading posts on a different computer while not logged in, so I can see the posts.

    2) Read a post by RK that asked a legitimate question, and contained no insults or diversions.

    3)Picked myself up off the floor, admitted to St. Peter that miracles do happen.

    4) Logged in and posted a reply

    5) Read the next few posts, and told St. Peter I was right afterall. This was just a fluke. He agreed.
    Was it really St. Peter??

    Or was it just some voices in your head, you know, the ones that tell you what to post???

    RK
    Stan b & Elvis

  4. #34
    Senior Member BrianW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Athol, North Idaho
    Posts
    885

    Default

    Re; the poll results "showing" that the majority of Americans favor the cuts staying for those under $250k. Since the vast majority of individuals earn under $100k, the fact is and what the poll results show, is that that the People want to keep more of their own money and they believe they know how to spend it better than than gov.org. But is it any wonder that "the majority" favor keeping "theirs" at the expense of someone else making more?

    Especially when PBO gets up and makes statements like "On average millionaires would get a check of a hundred thousand dollars," & "$700b of unfunded tax cuts that we can't afford. This is an irresponsible thing for us to do."

    That's BS and everybody knows it, but it sounds good as a "bite". Remember, that these are not tax "cuts", this is an extension of the current tax rates. What it is, (besides promoting the whole "class warfare" ideal) is $100k less in a check that "the millionaires" are sending to the government now, and an a blatant acknowledgment of $700b of unfunded spending (at least) that we can't afford. That's irresponsibility at it's epitome.
    (And now btw, just how did everyone making over $250k suddenly become millionaires & billionaires? More of that fuzzy math like 57 states?)


    Despite all PBO's rhetoric, this is the whole Progressive mentality of "We are going to penalize you for your success." That's why the Dems don't want it on display during these last few weeks.
    "It's not that government is inherently stupid, although that's a debatable question."
    Rand Paul CPAC speech 2011

    I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1791
    ________________________________________
    Proud partner of (HR) WR SR Brian's 44Magnum Monster
    co-owned by HR Rianne's 2nd Chance Hurricane Rebel

  5. #35
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianW View Post
    Re; the poll results "showing" that the majority of Americans favor the cuts staying for those under $250k. Since the vast majority of individuals earn under $100k, the fact is and what the poll results show, is that that the People want to keep more of their own money and they believe they know how to spend it better than than gov.org. But is it any wonder that "the majority" favor keeping "theirs" at the expense of someone else making more?

    Especially when PBO gets up and makes statements like "On average millionaires would get a check of a hundred thousand dollars," & "$700b of unfunded tax cuts that we can't afford. This is an irresponsible thing for us to do."

    That's BS and everybody knows it, but it sounds good as a "bite". Remember, that these are not tax "cuts", this is an extension of the current tax rates. What it is, (besides promoting the whole "class warfare" ideal) is $100k less in a check that "the millionaires" are sending to the government now, and an a blatant acknowledgment of $700b of unfunded spending (at least) that we can't afford. That's irresponsibility at it's epitome.
    (And now btw, just how did everyone making over $250k suddenly become millionaires & billionaires? More of that fuzzy math like 57 states?)


    Despite all PBO's rhetoric, this is the whole Progressive mentality of "We are going to penalize you for your success." That's why the Dems don't want it on display during these last few weeks.
    1. The majority of families actually earn less than $50,000 per year -- not even close to $100k.

    2. The reason the tax cuts are expiring is that when they were originally adopted, the law required either that the revenue loss be offset with spending cuts (i.e. "funded") or that the tax cuts be supported by a super majority. The administration was not prepared to implement spending cuts and did not have the votes to pass the tax cuts with a super majority. They got around the law by having the tax cuts expire. Current forecasts of deficits do not assume that cuts will be extended for those with incomes over $250k. As a consequence, deficits that are already so high that they will destroy what is left of our economy would be driven even higher.

    We need to be looking at ways to reduce the deficit by $500-700 billion per year beginning within the next 1-2 years. There is no way to do that without looking both at massive spending cuts and tax increases. Neither party has proposed ways to make the situation better.
    Last edited by YardleyLabs; 09-29-2010 at 09:14 AM.

  6. #36
    Senior Member WaterDogRem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    SLC, UT
    Posts
    305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stumpholehunter View Post
    I guess your right. I liked Dave's answer and would support it 100%.
    Agree.
    Guess it's hard to respond to logical reasoning and facts.

  7. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Eastern NC
    Posts
    2,755

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YardleyLabs View Post
    1. The majority of families actually earn less than $50,000 per year -- not even close to $100k.
    $50,000 is less than $100,000, right?

    Then what he said is correct.

    Common sense would tell you that most people, by human nature, are going to vote to keep more of their money and let the big bad rich guys pay for it. After all, we do always hear that it's okay as long as someone else's ox is being gored, right? That's all it's about and that's all the O wants to make it about. Class envy. Disgusting, if you ask me.

  8. #38
    Senior Member BrianW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Athol, North Idaho
    Posts
    885

    Default

    So you feel that letting the current rates expire doesn't penalize one for doing better?
    If I invent a widget and my income is $249k , at a 33% tax rate or $82,170, the final number would be $166,830.
    Let's say the current tax rates expire for those making over $250k and for next year, their rate increases to a top rate of 35%. (If it stayed that low I'd be very surprised)
    Next year, I get lucky (?) and sell more widgets and end at $251k. My tax bill is then $87,850, a difference of $5020. So for doing $2k better in sales, I lose $3020 more in taxes, for a net of $163,150. That's a strange definition of "success".
    Where is my (or anyone else's) incentive to do better?

    We also all know, with 99% certainty, that that's just the tip of the iceberg, because while everybody knows we're in a hole, Obama/Congress can't stop digging! Care to bet that, in the name of fighting this deficit crisis, the rate goes much higher than that 35% AND the ceiling gets lowered? Remember that FDR tried to impose a 100% tax rate on incomes over $25k to help with the war effort and the highest rates have been in the 90's in the past.
    After all, "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste' ... it's an opportunity to do things you didn't think you could do before"

    "Should five per cent appear too small, Be thankful I don't take it all..."
    Beatles - Taxman
    "It's not that government is inherently stupid, although that's a debatable question."
    Rand Paul CPAC speech 2011

    I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1791
    ________________________________________
    Proud partner of (HR) WR SR Brian's 44Magnum Monster
    co-owned by HR Rianne's 2nd Chance Hurricane Rebel

  9. #39
    Senior Member Julie R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Orlean VA
    Posts
    2,869

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dnf777 View Post
    Sounds like a solution in the making. Why abandon either. Combine them. Make all welfare recipients perform some support mission for the military, even if its picking up trash and planting flowers on post. If they're able bodied, sign 'em up! Waive education and criminal record restrictions. Who better with guns on the front line than illiterate criminals with a bad attitude?
    So it was OK for you and your family to avail yourself of government largesse but anyone else that does is an illiterate criminal? Doesn't sound very "progressive" or "middle of the road" to me.

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    3,928

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dnf777 View Post
    Sounds like a solution in the making. Why abandon either. Combine them. Make all welfare recipients perform some support mission for the military, even if its picking up trash and planting flowers on post. If they're able bodied, sign 'em up! Waive education and criminal record restrictions. Who better with guns on the front line than illiterate criminals with a bad attitude?
    so you are saying all welfare recipients are illiterate criminals? spin your way out of that one houdini.

    oh yeah. and that would end any atrocities like we see by the few bad seeds already. yep, criminals with a bad attitude would make great soldiers. great idea dave.

    and there is no way in heck you are ever going to get liberals to agree to forced military service in exchange for welfare. it would cost them votes. heck, they even think a chain gang is cruel and unusual punishment.
    Last edited by david gibson; 09-30-2010 at 09:46 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •