Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

---

At 4/19/09 10:15 AM, KemCab wrote:
How about the New Deal? That seemed to have generally worked. It was basically a giant pump-primer into the American economy, which is the premise behind the stimulus bill.

Well, the New Deal didn't plunge us into a deficit on this scal did it? Taxes were also much lighter back then, then add the fact that it wasn't the New Deal, but industrial production spurred by WW2 that got us out of the Depression. So it wasn't a disaster, but there were differences, and it didn't by any means restore the economy.

Of the day? The bill passed in February. The DJIA's low point was in early March. It's up 20% now. If anything, the stimulus seems to be working, or at least restoring confidence.

The earnings reports from the time at which the bailouts were given have been coming in, around which time, the was more money circulating due to $1 a gallon gas prices as well.

A Good Samaritan law is not a duty to rescue someone or report a crime, it's a law that legally protects people who go out of their way to rescue people from legal repercussions. The laws that you're thinking about are state laws, and those are rarely enforced because they're hard to.

Are you sure? I was to understand it was that if you see a crime, you have to do something about it and not sit idly by.

That's Bush, not Obama. I don't doubt the implications of the new measures taken to fight terrorism, as far as rights and freedoms are concerned, but they have been effective.

Yes, but at what cost?

Don't you do that already?

Not if I lose it to taxation.

The military budget is half a trillion dollars. Cutting half of that would save you $250 billion dollars alone. And did I say neglect government waste and corruption? No, but in light of all these things we need to take care of, we really do not need to fight the war, and shouldn't continue it while trying to cut back on useless spending.

Unfortunately, yes, we're contracted into it and it would cause us major problems to pull out. However, allowing the contract to expire in 2011 would have no negative effects and we can claim we won the war. Also 250 billion is nothing on the unnecessary spending we do. We're literally spending trillions.

That's like saying I have no right to take all your money and put you in a cardboard box. He never mentioned how much he would be taxed, if he paid taxes in the first place, even though Obama asserted taxes would return to the level it was during the Clinton administration. And he obviously didn't speak for 95% of the population, who don't even make enough money to "buy a business that makes over $250,000 a year" like he really knows that Obama has plans for tax hikes for the middle class.

Clinton taxed the upper class too much as it is. 39.6%, almost 40%, that's pretty excessive.

Which is why people should give the bill time.

But the problem is, if it doesn't, it's a crippling blow. And then what? Congress bitched and moaned endlessly about cutting taxed by 1.6 trillion in the Bush era, so how can we expect them to ever cut these taxes? That's why everyone is so upset. It's not like they have no problem cutting spending and taxes when they find they don't need 'em.

Medicaid is definitely overburdened, as I know it. Many people can't pay for health insurance and over 40 million people rely on it. Then again, the healthcare industry as a whole is completely swamped, thanks to a load of issues like malpractice insurance and expensive meds.

It wasn't when I applied for it a few years ago, but with healthcare declining since then it's not unbelievable. Still, I didn't get it back when I applied for it and their excuse was that while I qualified, they wanted people who were stupid enough to produce multiple kids they couldn't take care of( and honestly, I'd much rather those kids starve so they and their stupid genes can be a thing of the past anyway)

Too bad Obama's not going to do that because UAW was a strong supporter.

Right, but that's a problem now isn't it.

It is, but he can't really do anything about UAW. They're not receiving money, they supported him, and it would look bad if he did anything about it. They assert it's because of pensions and healthcare benefits, and that alone would seem like a breach of promises after all that talk about fixing the system.

This is true, and no one's saying that being a politician is easy, but doesn't it look just as bad if he allows himself to be in the pockets of UAW? I mean, it looks bad ether way, so he may as well do the right thing. Besides, he's a good speaker, I'm sure he can easily get the public to understand him not wanting to blindly serve the interests of people who fund his campaigns, being how it is like bribery and all.

Okay, you were right, but that's more of their fault than his.

Granted, but it's still an issue that UAW needs to be told to stop their nonsense, be their estate 33 million or 50 billion.

January 20 to April 19?

Yeah I noted in a successive post that I messed up the timeline.

His approval rating seems to remain fairly high. Higher than pre-9/11 Bush anyway. Regardless of political affiliation no candidate will get 100% support from every single member of his party.

Well polls aren't all that trustworthy, but even so, for his disapproval rating to be so close to the percentage who don't approve is pretty bad. People who don't support him, plainly hate him(as the tea parties show), and we don't know how much those who said they approve of him support him.

That's an eventual possibility but things aren't that bad right now.

No, not right now, and I would like to think they won't come to it. But it's still possible. I'd say a 5-10% chance, but that's high compared to the 1 in 10000 to 1 in 1000000 chance for most presidents.

Governors are ambitious to get in the national spotlight, for example, Palin.

True, but they are unlikely to do it by taking a stance they don't hold. If they do, they get caught double talking which never ends well for them.

Why do you think there's been so much coverage of the whole thing? Personally, I support Obama but the presidential race has been racially charged ever since he got the nomination. Whether or not the people who oppose him are racist are a different story.

Because the media believes it to be good for their ratings(whether it actually is or not). Talking about his race makes it a hot issue that draws attention, and, as they hope, gets people watching. Almost nobody actually care about his race.

I think we are comfortably far from one to say, thankfully, that it's crazy talk for now.

Well not crazy talk, but not exactly imminent for the time being. Enough of a possibility to be a concern though.

I think we need massive inflation for that.

Which is what the tea parties are about, at least partly. Taxation can indeed cause inflation and that is one of the top concerns.

---

At 4/19/09 12:17 PM, Armake21truth wrote: Taxes were also much lighter back then,

Really now?

Picture already used in the other Tea Party thread, my thanks to Bolo for sharing it

---

At 4/19/09 10:39 AM, KemCab wrote: even if it's supposedly grassroots.

And of course, anyone willing to do a little research into the matter will realize that it's not. It's astroturfing organized and sponsored by conservative non-profits with ties to the Republican party. This whole thing is one giant embarrassment in my opinion.

---

At 4/19/09 12:46 PM, Mast3rMind wrote:
Really now?

I was to understand it didn't get to the 70%-90% range until about Nixon, but regardless, there were indeed other factors of the time, and hiking taxes doesn't really help the economy.

---

When you see these people calling Obama a socialist, terrorist, Muslim, Communist, Hitler, clown, whatever... Do you ever think "Wow, Americans really are that fucking retarded."? I think the americans who are, for lack of a better word, tea-bagging us. Okay, I did have a better word, so let's just say for shits and giggles. I think they lack knowledge and perspective of what they're taliking about.

Their basis for calling him a Muslim is his middle name, and the fact that his father was Muslim. Even though he only knew his dad for one week of his life, and only 25% of Americans are of the same religion as their parents. This ties into the claim that he's a terrorist, because he's Muslim according to them, that he would rather negotiate with them as opposed to sending our young men and women to fight and die. and that he treats them as, you know, human beings.

Apparently he's a socialist because some businesses have been nationalized, and as yet another example of american ignorance, they think he's a communist because he's a socialist according to them. And know he's Hitler because they've used every other stand-by fear mongering technique.

And you know? I defy anyone who thinks he's anything I listed above to read these:
The Communist Manifest
Mein Kampf
Engaging the Muslim world
The qaran
And honestly read them, not skim, finding one line Obama might agree with.

---

"We have passed a broad and sweeping tax cut for 95 percent of American workers," Obama told reporters in the Old Executive Office building.
How to evade taxes offshore.
So the people protesting the taxes will most likely get a tax cut while corporations evade taxes using offshore tax shelters shown above.
The teabaggers complain that future generations will shoulder this debt. Well how about cracking down on the tax evading corporation?

---

At 4/19/09 06:24 PM, aninjaman wrote: stuff

And more anger at protesters.
Where were they during the Bush administration when there was rampant military spending?
Why do they only complain when a politician of a seperate party starts spending?
And is Fox News even trying to be unbiased? I watched Glenn Beck coverage of the protests.
And finally can Fox stop calling this a revolution. This isn't even a fraction of the size of the anti-war protests.

---

At 4/19/09 12:46 PM, Mast3rMind wrote:

At 4/19/09 12:17 PM, Armake21truth wrote: Taxes were also much lighter back then,

Really now?

funny thing about that is:

all those really high taxes are from during the cold war.

however, you made a good point to armake.

---

I took a brake for a few days to re-evaluate something. Apparently the rich were much more taxed in the past, BUT, there were facotrs back then that don't apply today, many of which apply to the cost of living being way lower(due to a number of reasons), meaning people had more money to spend to buy more products back then.

At 4/19/09 01:49 PM, KemCab wrote:
World War II did. It took decades to pay back for it. The government did more borrowing during the war than through the entire New Deal, and the post-war economy boomed as a result. But we paid it back and no one had to foot the bill right up front.

Fair enough, I guess we'll see on the deficit.

The stock market drops and rises on a whim. And again, the stimulus bill has only been taking effect now and the price of crude oil is going up.

Which makes taxing worse, people need money to drive to work, if the government is taking it away that's bad.

There's a similar law that's on the books of a lot of states that force you to report a crime, but very few people are prosecuted for it. Not that it's bad- for example, in India, a practice called sari, or immolating a widow on her husband's funeral pyre, is banned, and since no one wants to intervene they made it a law not to sit idly by.

Yeah, maybe so.

I guess there are possible implications, but the United States is far from a dictatorship. Rights are one thing, but a balance of power is another, and no party could ever get unilateral control for an extended period of time without a fight.

Not totalitarian, but the government could chill a bit.

True, but I doubt it will be severe. Excessive taxation would stifle the economy.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't a gas tax included? Cus gas prices are what made people unable to pay their loans ya know.

It is a problem. We should get them out as fast as possible, but... we did win the war. In 2003. Also, the military is overextended. We have hundreds of military bases in other countries, a lot of which do not serve any practical purpose at this time. And sure, we have other problems too.

Right, but pulling out sooner might make us look like deserters and pussies. Can't have countries thinking they can militarily push you around, or else they will try and do so.

By whose standards? Ours? We've always had a lower tax rate than a lot of developed countries. And what about the rich? The very rich have enough money as is, they don't need a new mansion or jet.

Maybe, but they've earned the rights to it. It's not just that though, the very rich pay your check and set prices at the store. That is why the top bracket is the most dangerous to tax, because it hurts everybody.

There's a high probability that it will at least do something, and if it doesn't, you have to wonder where all that money went. Either way, government is probably not going to raise taxes until we're out of the recession, because taxes will only plunge us back into it if we do it immediately.

Well we can only hope, and when we're out, let's hope it doesn't plunge us back down.

Because of all the poor people that rely on it. We're far from a complete welfare state but you can't expect people to rely on welfare AND be against abortion while having a dozen kids. Healthcare has become an issue in the last few years, too.

And I garentee you that very few of them are actually reaping its benefits. Being someone, who, actually qualified and knew others who qualified and also never got them. It's helping maybe 1% of the poor people who even qualify, because they are so picky that almost none of the allocated money is given out.

Well, what can you do? Bush coddled the Republican right for a while during his first term.

And that's bad also.

Yet Obama's working for the common man and the union supposedly represents the worker. It would be nice for him to speak out against UAW- they do deserve it, and it would be good if he took similar measures to them as to GM's CEO, but it seems like a risk to his approval rating considering the right-wing's complete antipathy to his administration rather than a booster.

But people know UAW is a problem, it's not like the public hasn't noticed it. It's not as risky as it may seem at first glance.

The country is pretty divided on that. A majority have hailed him as a bringer of hope, but that only makes the minority already against him angrier and more paranoid. Hell, people have called him the Antichrist and the agent of the New World Order. He's had the highest approval rating so far, so it seems like people still have a good impression.

I could swear dropping 9% in 3 months was a high rate to fall, but I was wrong about the top tax, so maybe not. We'll see.

But the problems have compounded before Obama even stepped into office, he's not creating the problems... so far. Detractors have made outrageous claims about him, and have gotten more explosive over his election than any other president.

But the detractors are the ones seeing him say stuff like "When you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody", so a lot of it is certainly his fault. I haven't seen all of it so maybe some isn't, but I know a lot of it is.

Three interesting cases: Sarah Palin, Bobby Jindal, and Rick Perry. All of them governors who are trying to make an appearance in the limelight yet seem like weak contenders. Palin's a populist idiot, Jindal's a wannabe good ol' boy, and Perry made a mention of actual secession from the Union. What year does he think this is, 1861?

Okay, and your point is? Cus I'm not quite sure what you're saying exactly.

But they don't talk about his race all the time. It's a tacit issue. It affects it whether or not people mention it, and his race has been a factor in people's support for him during the election. Otherwise McCain wouldn't have tried to up him with a woman VP candidate, he would have gotten a more qualified one.

I can see your point, people did want to see the first black president and have wanted to for years. I think more than not voted neutrally of the matter though. I'm not saying everyone was racially unbiased, just most people.

It might not be crazy talk if the stimulus fails, rapid inflation ensues, and nothing is fixed. I don't sense it would be a concern in the major population centers of the country on the coasts, but there is the off-chance that militia groups would try to cause problems for the federal government in light of a major crisis.

Yeah, I guess only time will tell.

Yet inflation is more likely to arise from our debt or from the loss of competitiveness in foreign markets. Also, some inflation is good or at least unavoidable- hyperinflation is bad, but deflation or zero inflation can destabilize the economy. It allows more money to flow in the economy while not making the currency totally worthless in purchasing goods.

Here we agree. And in fact, the debt is part of the reason for the Tea Parties as well.

---

:I took a brake for a few days to re-evaluate something. Apparently the rich were much more taxed in the past, BUT, there were facotrs back then that don't apply today, many of which apply to the cost of living being way lower(due to a number of reasons), meaning people had more money to spend to buy more products back then.

I forgot to clarify that it was lower, even adjusted for inflation, my bad.

---

At 4/19/09 06:24 PM, aninjaman wrote: So the people protesting the taxes will most likely get a tax cut while corporations evade taxes using offshore tax shelters shown above.

Of course you ignore that small, starting businesses can't use those "shelters"

---

I've got so much sweet/iced tea around everywhere, I could just dump it around the ocean just to get rid of the darned stuff. Of course, my mother's a huge fan of it, so I may as well dump all that stupid yogurt as well.

---

I fully supported it with every morsel of my body, but I didnt attend, since my town didnt have 1 :(

---

When the media stuck the word teabagging to the events, I knew it was gonna stick... especially when one of the rallies was by your state capital building which happens to look like this