Giving the PC Liberals something else to research (open to all)

It looks like you are rich if you make over $500k.

Just in case you didn't know if you were or not, that's the line you shalt not cross before the current congress gives you the shaft.

Under 500k and you're just a poor schmuck much like the poor members of congress and their measily 125k salaries. Over 500k and you are wealthy beyond your own needs and the fed needs your overhead to spend on their own frills.

I'm not sure what formula they use to decide where the 'rich line' is supposed to be. Why not 400k, or 110k so their own paychecks take a big hit?

I'm not there, but I'm sure there are people making 500k who don't feel like they've gained their success with the idea being to give it to Nancy to spend.

Flat tax... everyone pays 17%, don't matter if you're 500k or 12k

 

:lol: "Go a head and pick this email apart" Don't flatter yourself :lol:

 

Actually this whole argument is nothing but worn out right wing boilerplate spin. The words make it sound like we've never had it so good, where, if we all look around us we see things very differently. It seems like only the very rich have never had it so good, and that at the significant expense of the rest of us.

What really needs to be understood by our conservative brethern is the fact that it wasn't, "PC Liberals" that cost them the election, it was the great majority of folks who stand to the left of the extreme right. Left of the extreme right does not equal, "PC Liberals", it equals the great majority of American voters. And the great majority of American voters simply want to see a bipartisan approach to solving America's problems. The great far right conservative mistake was to take the very arrogant stance that says, only we know what is right for America, we are going to make all the decisions, and fight like hell to keep out any input from anyone who thinks differently than us.

The new direction for america that I look forward to is one where decisions are made as a result of joint agreement, or at least compromise, by members of both sides of the aisle working as a team fighting for what is best for the American people, ALL of the American people.

 

I won't bother picking it apart, because you'd just drag me down to your level and beat me with experience.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Jan 8 2007, 09:35 PM) [snapback]372865[/snapback]</div>

It was a trick question if you read his signature line:
"I reject your reality and substitute my own".

You can't really win an argument with a person who has their own reality.

 

Here's some research for you.

"As unlikely as it seems, big business could emerge as the force that finally brings about universal health insurance. In the first week after the November elections, the CEOs of General Motors, Ford and Chrysler met with President Bush to discuss issues they faced, including health care costs. That same week, America's Health Insurance Plans, a trade group of large insurers, released a 10-year, $300 billion proposal to provide health insurance for all children and 95 percent of adults—through a combination of tax breaks for individual taxpayers and the expansion of government programs such as Medicaid."

Those dirty, traitorous liberals!.......wait a minute.

And this from a source I'm sure you'll embrace:

Schwarzenegger proposes sweeping health care plan

Schwarzenegger proposes free health care to illegals

Schwarzenegger to make health insurance mandatory.

Why that dirty, pinko, commie, liberal, Democr......wait a minute.

Do you think maybe this country does have a problem with health care? Do you think maybe we *do* need some sort of Universal Healthcare. Hmm...now who was working on Universal Healthcare before it became....fashionable?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Cam @ Jan 8 2007, 11:40 PM) [snapback]372868[/snapback]</div>

And we don't need to pick it apart, since the text predates the election and others have long ago done the job. It got picked apart back on Nov 6 2006 below and elsewhere I'm sure.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politic...9cace842314b6c4 (scroll down to see dissection if you've really nothing better to do).

 

If all those statements you've posted are true, and they're not, then why did a majority of Americans just vote for that new direction in one of the biggest election sweeps in history?


Wages of average workers trailing far behind surge in corporate profits

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/busi...sprofits19.html

excerpt:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Cam @ Jan 8 2007, 10:40 PM) [snapback]372868[/snapback]</div>

And to quote one Stephen Colbert, 'reality has a well-known liberal bias.'

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Jan 9 2007, 08:01 AM) [snapback]372957[/snapback]</div>

I think it's also amusing at just how "angry" their tones are... One step short of name calling....

Par for course I'd say... :lol:

 

Another sign of the booming economy, record home foreclosures.

http://sanantonio.bizjournals.com/eastbay/.../08/daily8.html

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Beryl Octet @ Jan 9 2007, 09:10 AM) [snapback]372982[/snapback]</div>

You will find most of these foreclosures are not the "typical" homeowner (your average "Joe" with a typical fixed 15/30 year mortgage). The foreclosures are a result of people speculating that their new "investment" house would appreciate at a high rate enabling them to sell in two years for the tax deduction and make a huge easy profit to boot. So they financed these houses (which were out of income range) with very risky short term ARM mortgages which are now ballooning with "fast-rising home payments" as you stated, hence the foreclosures. Some even bought second houses as additional investments. But get too greedy chasing easy money and you could get bit.

But of course such a double digit appreciation market will not last forever and will eventually undergo a correction. Peoples income has not lagged (in fact it has risen faster than inflation for many years because of lower income taxes) but they simply bought more than they could afford and now they are paying the price.

With real estate, just as any other free market, if you can guess when the market will peak, you will make money, else you lose or plan to wait for the next peak. No one can accurately guess when market peak, or we all would buy Google at $80/share and sell when it reaches ??? and become instant millionaires. But for every dollar made a dollar is lost.

You, who obviously does not understand basic capitalist economics, can let the government set the price for your house. I would rather take a calculated risk let the market do it for me... Invest wisely and conservatively and you will not face a foreclosure.

Rick
#4 2006

 

Placing obstacles to stem cell research and other science programs.

No energy policy.

No deal...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Jan 8 2007, 07:47 PM) [snapback]372819[/snapback]</div>

Priusguy04, I think your post makes many great points. I am very active in state-wide politics as both a donor and a guy not afraid to give my input. I think the state and national Republican party has been corrupted by being in unchallenged power for too long. Many segments of the economy are incredibly strong however the middle class is being destroyed by the trade deficit and the tax situation. Many of the Republicans I am in contact with were either too ignorant of this fact before the November elections, did not care, or were being bought off. The election served its purpose in waking them up at least for the short-term.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Jan 9 2007, 06:01 AM) [snapback]372957[/snapback]</div>

Disprove it? How about you provide some proof? My taxes certainly aren't lower, nor are oil prices plummeting. Unless you count $54.02/barrel as plummeting.

State and local taxes are roughly doubled since G.W. took over. Along with gas prices. My heating bill is now about triple what it was in 2000.

I will give you the part about home evaluations being up, which is good for my friends who have been laid off and are underemployed, the home equity loans helped through the rough patches.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Beryl Octet @ Jan 9 2007, 08:50 AM) [snapback]372996[/snapback]</div>

The Democratic Party has the best opportunity they have had in years. They could implement a strong common-sense energy policy, tackle the trade deficit, put a moratorium on ANY tax increases, and push for some real campaign-finance reform and they would cement their power for years to come. My fear is they will get bogged down in the agendas of special interest groups, increase spending and attempt more social engineering. For the sake of the country I hope I am wrong.

 

Only when priced in current dollars. In inflation-adjusted dollars it's down almost 10% from its high during the Clinton Administration, and priced in euros it's down about 30%. Should we continue, or would you rather show your grandmother how to suck eggs?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alric @ Jan 9 2007, 09:48 AM) [snapback]372993[/snapback]</div>

What obstacles? Since when is it illegal to do any form of stem cell research? Are you upset because the government did not finance these programs? And why should they? I am sure everyone could think of a million other programs the government "should" finance.

No energy policy? You lost me again. Thanks to GWB I will be receiving a $3,250 tax credit, not some wimpy deduction, because I bought an energy efficient vehicle. I personally think the government should not be meddling or subsidizing private companies but because of the tax credit the Prius has become a very much sought after automobile.

Rick
#4 2006