THE POLITICAL ARENA!!! Political Gladiators Inside!!

[Hawk]

lonewolf:
"As I told Johnny, when I see the feds do some "Christ-like" miracles, I'll go for a "Christ-like" federal government. There is nothing "Christ-like" about anything the feds do and that means ESPECIALLY programs for the poor."

I'd call it a miracle that Obama kept the US form a full fledged depression given that GW left us on the brink of economic disaster.

[songsmith]

Stocks close at highest point since May '08:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/markets/s ... 52945322/1

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Lates ... -year-high

Why? Because the unemployment rate went down.:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/ ... AB20120202

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 64696.html

PLEASE NOTE: These links are not blog-links. They are from journalists who have to at least sort of be truthful, whereas blogs are seldom fact-checked, and all you have to do to put one on the interwebs is sign up.

[Banned]

Funny that stumpy used a USA Today link as proof. Last time I used that same source, he disputed that data. I guess he only likes a source when he agrees with them or when it makes his illegal Kenyan look slightly less worthless.

The link he disputed was the USA Today article that there is over $100 TRILLION of debt due to unfunded liabilities for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That is on top of the $15.3 TRILLION federal debt.

I do realize that facts confuse liberals.

[lonewolf]

lonewolf:
"As I told Johnny, when I see the feds do some "Christ-like" miracles, I'll go for a "Christ-like" federal government. There is nothing "Christ-like" about anything the feds do and that means ESPECIALLY programs for the poor."

I'd call it a miracle that Obama kept the US form a full fledged depression given that GW left us on the brink of economic disaster.

Nah, it was apparent to me (and most other professional investors) that we had avoided catastrophe by December of '08 and thats when I started watching for the bottom for a "buy" opportunity. That bottom came in early March of '09--way too soon for Obama to have anything to do with anything. It was averted on Dubya's watch and hit bottom before Obama played his 3rd round of golf.

Since then we have been in a stock market trading range between DOW 10,000 and 13,000. We are at the high end of that range and it should peak and consolidate again.

[f.sciarrillo]

[songsmith]

Funny that stumpy used a USA Today link as proof. Last time I used that same source, he disputed that data. I guess he only likes a source when he agrees with them or when it makes his illegal Kenyan look slightly less worthless.

The link he disputed was the USA Today article that there is over $100 TRILLION of debt due to unfunded liabilities for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That is on top of the $15.3 TRILLION federal debt.

I do realize that facts confuse liberals.

I dispute your debt numbers, because you quote different number frequently. Once, you said as much as $160 Trillion (roughly half of the entire world's GDP).

Here are some hopefully joe-approved links, I hope you're able to back your crap up as well.

Wall St. Journal, owned by NewsCorp, Rupert Murdoch.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 56766.html

Sky News, partially owned by Murdoch
http://news.sky.com/home/business/article/16162994

Business Week
http://news.businessweek.com/article.as ... AP9DU214OL

CNBC, which UAjoe claims to watch most
http://www.cnbc.com/id/46251590

Bloomberg, owned by noted conservative and the wealthiest elected politician in the world
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-0 ... -data.html

UK Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012 ... sfeed=true

These are simple Google-searches. If you want more, do your own research on something other than a blog.
Thanks for the chance to once again show what a dipstick you are. Now go away.

[Banned]

Business Week---strongly liberal slanted

CNBC---same, they sometimes allow a non liberal on air

Bloomberg---a big government authoritarian, leans liberal, votes democrat

UK Guardian---strongly liberal

The first two (WSJ and Sky News are owned by Murdoch, who is BBF with Hillary Clinton), nuff said.

You don't like my sources, I feel the same towards yours.

[lonewolf]

You don't need a source to show that the DOW is up 150 points or so.

You DO need a decent analysis to reveal that the reason for the drop in the unemployment rate is because 1.2 million people gave up looking for a job and lost their status as "unemployed". Despite Friday's irrational exuberance, I do believe that its about that time when pro-investors will start extracting their profits at the expense of working class IRAs.

Foreign sources are rarely politically motivated:

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article32988.html

"However, a closer look at the unemployment data reveals plenty to be concerned about. The labor force participation rate, which is the percentage of working-age persons in an economy who are employed or unemployed, dropped to 63.7 percent, its lowest level in 30 years. A record breaking 1.2 million people dropped out of the available labor pool used in the unemployment calculation. According to Zero Hedge, using the average long-term labor force participation rate of 65.8 percent, the real unemployment rate actually increased in January to 11.5 percent. In fact, the spread between the reported and implied unemployment rate just hit a fresh 30 year high of 3.2 percent.

Another concerning data point in the unemployment report is that the number of part-time workers is quickly rising, as many people are having to settle for employment opportunities. In January, the number of part-time workers surged by almost 700,000, representing the biggest jump on record. Meanwhile, full-time workers only increased by 80,000. the reported and implied unemployment rate just hit a fresh 30 year high of 3.2 percent."

[lonewolf]

Taxes: Is 102% high enough?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/102-tax-r ... 2.html?l=1

[songsmith]

Taxes: Is 102% high enough?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/102-tax-r ... 2.html?l=1

Bills: If someone's utility payments exceed their income, they shouldn't have to pay it, right? I mean, if if it's wrong for government inefficiencies to cost people more than they make, the same must be true for business... unless you believe business should have powers government does not. Is that what you believe? That's an interesting conversation, right there, on entitlement-philosophy.
I'm gonna go with the standard conservative answer: That guy is lazy, and needs to work harder... when he does, he'll be in a better tax position. You can't tamper with the free market, he'll get those tax breaks when he works hard enough to deserve them.

[songsmith]

Business Week---strongly liberal slanted

CNBC---same, they sometimes allow a non liberal on air

Bloomberg---a big government authoritarian, leans liberal, votes democrat

UK Guardian---strongly liberal

The first two (WSJ and Sky News are owned by Murdoch, who is BBF with Hillary Clinton), nuff said.

You don't like my sources, I feel the same towards yours.

I see. All those sources are tainted left-wing propaganda. Rupert Murdoch is in Hillary Clinton's pocket, Bloomberg's not con enough, and there is no rightwing media.
Okay then, what is acceptable journalism, for you? (This oughta be good. )

[lonewolf]

Taxes: Is 102% high enough?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/102-tax-r ... 2.html?l=1

Bills: If someone's utility payments exceed their income, they shouldn't have to pay it, right? I mean, if if it's wrong for government inefficiencies to cost people more than they make, the same must be true for business... unless you believe business should have powers government does not. Is that what you believe? That's an interesting conversation, right there, on entitlement-philosophy.
I'm gonna go with the standard conservative answer: That guy is lazy, and needs to work harder... when he does, he'll be in a better tax position. You can't tamper with the free market, he'll get those tax breaks when he works hard enough to deserve them.

If his collective governments charged him 102% of his income in taxes, he should seriously consider moving...like a lot of businesses are starting to do. When it comes to freedom, 21st century America is highly overrated.

Anyone who thinks that 102% taxation is justified is simply a fucktard with a double digit IQ.

[Banned]

Taxes: Is 102% high enough?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/102-tax-r ... 2.html?l=1

Bills: If someone's utility payments exceed their income, they shouldn't have to pay it, right? I mean, if if it's wrong for government inefficiencies to cost people more than they make, the same must be true for business... unless you believe business should have powers government does not. Is that what you believe? That's an interesting conversation, right there, on entitlement-philosophy.
I'm gonna go with the standard conservative answer: That guy is lazy, and needs to work harder... when he does, he'll be in a better tax position. You can't tamper with the free market, he'll get those tax breaks when he works hard enough to deserve them.

One can boycott any company, if the utility bills are too high, move south. How does one boycott government and the IRS?

[lonewolf]

Taxes: Is 102% high enough?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/102-tax-r ... 2.html?l=1

Bills: If someone's utility payments exceed their income, they shouldn't have to pay it, right? I mean, if if it's wrong for government inefficiencies to cost people more than they make, the same must be true for business... unless you believe business should have powers government does not.

Yes, states and business and people all have many powers that the federal government does not have (or at least not supposed to have). Read the 10th amendment.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."


Only statists and uninformed sheeple would believe otherwise.

Its your choice (where have i heard that concept before) whether you rack up bills that exceed your income. It is not your choice when the government holds a gun to your head and demands taxes.

[songsmith]

If his collective governments charged him 102% of his income in taxes, he should seriously consider moving...like a lot of businesses are starting to do. When it comes to freedom, 21st century America is highly overrated.

Anyone who thinks that 102% taxation is justified is simply a fucktard with a double digit IQ.

Now you're cooking with gas! If he doesn't like it, MOVE! That's the wing-nut way, baby.
Incidentally, I never said 102% was justified, I simply applied conservative values to the situation... Poor people deserve to be poor, rich people deserve to be rich. Other rich people pay far less in taxes, and you can't deny that. This guy needs to work harder and make even more money, then he will get a better tax rate. I didn't make that up, it's how your neocon principles work. If he's stupid and lazy enough to fall into a stricter tax bracket, it's his fault, other people deal with it all the time. You just want the ability to pick and choose who gets what advantage, same as any other neo. Your use of the word "freedom" is especially funny, as it assumes you decide what freedom is.
Anyone who thinks they define freedom for anyone else is a fucktard with a single-digit IQ.

[songsmith]

One can boycott any company, if the utility bills are too high, move south. How does one boycott government and the IRS?

One moves to a country with a true libertarian government, like Haiti or Somalia.
Buh-Bye!

[f.sciarrillo]

Today is Ronald Reagan's birthday. He would be 101. Happy birthday, Mr. President.

[songsmith]

Yes, states and business and people all have many powers that the federal government does not have (or at least not supposed to have). Read the 10th amendment.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."


Only statists and uninformed sheeple would believe otherwise.

Its your choice (where have i heard that concept before) whether you rack up bills that exceed your income. It is not your choice when the government holds a gun to your head and demands taxes.

Niiiice. I'm assuming by "people," you mean YOU, personally. Nice one. As for powers of states, your 102% guy is free to move to another state at will, perhaps one with lower taxes. See how that works?
Neo's always say if you don't like corporate rule, don't use their product... if you don't like a state's politics , move. They NEVER suggest picking their own fat asses up and moving, that's for other people, not them. How's that feel?
It is your CHOICE to operate your business in a state or country that taxes you. Nobody forced you to open a business. If you don't like paying taxes, or don't like the rules, move there. Don't move everyone else's JOB there, numbnuts, YOU MOVE THERE. If you then want to take advantage of the biggest, most robust market in human history, you can pay a tariff to do so, as a foreigner. You do know that most of the world's industrialized nation have a much-higher tax rate than we do here, right? Taxes aren't business's main cost, and never were. Labor is, but of course your economic genius is is already aware of that. Companies go overseas for cheap labor, not tax breaks.
If the former patriots on this thread hate the American system of government SO much, get out. Get out of MY country. You're not going to like waht's going to happen in November anyway, so start packing. Be a true conservative, and live by your own creed.
102% guy is a lazy, whiny liberal-thinker, expecting government to give him a tax-break handout when he obviously doesn't deserve it. Work harder. Mitt Romney makes $56K per day doing nothing, and he only pays 13.9%.
102%-guy needs to find a CEO job. They're doing great. I love America!

[lonewolf]

If his collective governments charged him 102% of his income in taxes, he should seriously consider moving...like a lot of businesses are starting to do. When it comes to freedom, 21st century America is highly overrated.

Anyone who thinks that 102% taxation is justified is simply a fucktard with a double digit IQ.

Now you're cooking with gas! If he doesn't like it, MOVE! That's the wing-nut way, baby.
Incidentally, I never said 102% was justified, I simply applied conservative values to the situation... Poor people deserve to be poor, rich people deserve to be rich. Other rich people pay far less in taxes, and you can't deny that. This guy needs to work harder and make even more money, then he will get a better tax rate. I didn't make that up, it's how your neocon principles work. If he's stupid and lazy enough to fall into a stricter tax bracket, it's his fault, other people deal with it all the time. You just want the ability to pick and choose who gets what advantage, same as any other neo. Your use of the word "freedom" is especially funny, as it assumes you decide what freedom is.
Anyone who thinks they define freedom for anyone else is a fucktard with a single-digit IQ.

I don't know about neocons, but the whole idea of tax shelters was almost eliminated in 1986, returned in the '90s and has been growing ever since. The multi-bracket tax format is named after the people who defined it: progressive. These are bi-partisan creations that only serve to illustrate political hypocrisy in Washington.

Of course, you can't seem to remember this, so I will have to drill it:

I prefer a flat income tax that exempts poverty level income.
I prefer a flat income tax that exempts poverty level income.
I prefer a flat income tax that exempts poverty level income.
I prefer a flat income tax that exempts poverty level income.
I prefer a flat income tax that exempts poverty level income.

Any other comments about my position on taxes are just plain lies.

I guess Merriam-Webster must be a fucktard with a single-digit IQ. Since there are varying degrees of freedom, I can only comment on what's left, not attempt to define it.

[lonewolf]

Yes, states and business and people all have many powers that the federal government does not have (or at least not supposed to have). Read the 10th amendment.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."


Only statists and uninformed sheeple would believe otherwise.

Its your choice (where have i heard that concept before) whether you rack up bills that exceed your income. It is not your choice when the government holds a gun to your head and demands taxes.

Niiiice. I'm assuming by "people," you mean YOU, personally. Nice one. As for powers of states, your 102% guy is free to move to another state at will, perhaps one with lower taxes. See how that works?
Neo's always say if you don't like corporate rule, don't use their product... if you don't like a state's politics , move. They NEVER suggest picking their own fat asses up and moving, that's for other people, not them. How's that feel?
It is your CHOICE to operate your business in a state or country that taxes you. Nobody forced you to open a business. If you don't like paying taxes, or don't like the rules, move there. Don't move everyone else's JOB there, numbnuts, YOU MOVE THERE. If you then want to take advantage of the biggest, most robust market in human history, you can pay a tariff to do so, as a foreigner. You do know that most of the world's industrialized nation have a much-higher tax rate than we do here, right? Taxes aren't business's main cost, and never were. Labor is, but of course your economic genius is is already aware of that. Companies go overseas for cheap labor, not tax breaks.
If the former patriots on this thread hate the American system of government SO much, get out. Get out of MY country. You're not going to like waht's going to happen in November anyway, so start packing. Be a true conservative, and live by your own creed.
102% guy is a lazy, whiny liberal-thinker, expecting government to give him a tax-break handout when he obviously doesn't deserve it. Work harder. Mitt Romney makes $56K per day doing nothing, and he only pays 13.9%.
102%-guy needs to find a CEO job. They're doing great. I love America!

No Johnny, you assumed wrongly. By "people" I mean everyone...EVEN YOU! Of course, since they are "inside the box", statists and sheeple don't understand that they are entrusted with any power, so the government takes it, a little bit at a time.

Yes Johnny, that's what I said, the 102% guy is free to move anywhere he wants to, even out of the country...as long as they'll take him. The higher tax states like NY and CA are already starting to see this migration. Since PA has the 2nd highest combined corporate tax rate in the world, I doubt that many will be moving here and the standard of living will continue to erode. With instant e-trading, I don't know why the big Wall Street firms are still on Wall Street. One of these days, they'll come to the conclusion that their address is no longer worth it and move. New York will be left with their huge welfare state and nobody to pay for it and California won't be far behind.

The main cost component in a business is dependent on the business. On what do you make this wild generalized claim that labor is business's largest cost component? I'd really like to see that data.

You really envy Mitt Romney, don't you? Sad.

[f.sciarrillo]

Two politicians; Two barbers

George W Bush and Barack Obama somehow ended up at the same barber shop.

As they sat there, each being worked on by a different barber, not a word was spoken. The barbers were even afraid to start a conversation, for fear it would turn to politics.

As the barbers finished their shaves, the one who had Obama in his chair reached for the aftershave. Obama was quick to stop him saying, “No thanks, my wife Michelle will smell that and think I've been in a whorehouse.”

The second barber turned to Bush and said, “How about you sir?” Bush replied, “Go ahead; my wife doesn't know what the inside of a whorehouse smells like.”

[Merge]

What do all of you think of this:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20 ... -super-pac

[Banned]

NObama now supporting Super Pacs. I wonder what the super pac opponents will say now.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... ?hpt=hp_t1

[f.sciarrillo]

NObama now supporting Super Pacs. I wonder what the super pac opponents will say now.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... ?hpt=hp_t1

I knew he was full of shit. He is all for super pacs, as long as they are helping him. He is such a hypocrite.

[f.sciarrillo]

What Do Your Morals Say About Your Politics?

http://billmoyers.com/content/what-do-y ... -politics/

I am tied with conservative on the Traditional subscale, but just under conservative, I would classify that as an independent, on the progressive subscale. I guess, since I believe in the death penalty, I would fall into that category.

The only thing I don't like it about the survey was that it is too vague.