Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Obama vs Romney 2012 - CDC Election


  • Please log in to reply
2022 replies to this topic

Poll: Obama vs Romney (329 member(s) have cast votes)

Who would you vote for?

  1. Obama (279 votes [85.32%])

    Percentage of vote: 85.32%

  2. Romney (48 votes [14.68%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.68%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#481 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 18 September 2012 - 12:48 PM

You do know that fifty percent of people in the States do not pay any income taxes, and that those on government benefits get more money back in fully refundable credits, like the earned income credit and child tax credits. There are also many people down here who get free medicaid, free prescriptions through PPARX, who get their rent paid for under Section 8, who get free food stamps, utility assistance, and who get welfare cash benefits, and may even get a disability check on top of it, and not to mention full Pell grants to attend college for free, and all of this is tax free. The fact is most Canadians have no clue about how generous the American welfare system is. The real problem is the people who work, and are not eligible for any of the benefits are really suffering. That those who are on public assistance may have more dispensible income at the end of the month.


Fact Check: Mitt Romney's '47 Percent' Claims Wildly Inaccurate

Mitt Romney's now infamous comments about half of America made at a May fundraiser are not only offensive, but also inaccurate.

In a video taken at the fundraiser and leaked on Monday, Romney claimed that 47 percent of Americans are Obama voters that "pay no income tax," "are dependent upon government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it."

Romney's 47 percent figure lumped together separate groups that have little relation to one another. Most Americans do pay taxes: The poorest fifth of Americans paid an effective tax rate of 17 percent last year, and the second-poorest fifth paid an effective tax rate of 21 percent, when factoring in payroll taxes, sales taxes and property taxes, among others, according to Citizens for Tax Justice.

It is true that 46 percent of American households did not pay federal income taxes last year, according to the Tax Policy Center. But that number is unusually high, in part because of the recession -- and a majority of that 46 percent still paid payroll taxes. Only 18 percent of American households paid no income taxes and no payroll taxes last year. It is largely low-income seniors and very poor people that legally don't pay federal income taxes or payroll taxes, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Tax Policy Center.

It was also inaccurate for Romney to claim that those who don't pay federal income taxes would vote for President Obama "no matter what." Nearly all states with a high percentage of Americans that don't pay federal income taxes vote Republican in presidential elections, according to the Washington Post.

Moreover, Republican policy -- on the part of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush -- has pushed to move poorer people off of the federal income tax rolls, as noted by the Washington Post's Ezra Klein and Newsweek's Matt Zeitlin.

As for entitlements, contrary to Romney's portrayal, more than 90 percent of entitlement benefits go to the elderly, seriously disabled or members of working households, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Romney stood by his comments on Monday, telling reporters that though his comments were "not elegantly stated," Obama's approach is "attractive to people who are not paying taxes."


Mitt Romney's '47 Percent' Includes Real-Life Millionaires


In that crowd of wealthy donors at Marc Leder's Boca Raton sex palace that listened to Mitt Romney blast Americans who don't pay income taxes, there were probably a few people who didn't pay income taxes.

Wonder if they're thinking of asking for a refund today.

The vast majority of what Romney calls the "47 percent," the percentage of Americans who don't pay federal income taxes --which is really 46 percent, but who's counting -- are working poor, retirees and the disabled, including disabled veterans, along with students and some people suffering long-term unemployment after the Great Recession. As Bonnie Kavoussi and others have pointed out, many in this group still pay federal payroll taxes, likely at a higher rate than Romney's own tax rate.

But a tiny sliver of this 47 percent includes the 1 percent -- the country's top earners.

According to the non-partisan Tax Policy Center, some 3,000 of the 76 million taxpayers that were expected to pay no federal income taxes in 2011 were members of Romney's cohort, making nearly $2.2 million per year, which puts them in the top 0.1 percent income bracket.

Another 24,000 taxpayers expected to pay no income taxes last year were in the top 1 percent income bracket, according to the TPC, making between $532,613 and $2.2 million per year.

How the heck does this happen? For one thing, as Kevin Roose at New York magazine points out, these wealthy earners benefit to an unusual degree -- as Mitt Romney himself does -- from tax breaks on investment.

Capital gains on investments are taxed at 15 percent, much lower than the top income-tax rate. "Carried interest" income, which Romney and other private-equity executives enjoy, is taxed at the capital-gains rate. And many wealthy taxpayers take advantage of a feature that lets them recognize past investment losses to lower or eliminate their tax bills.

But the main (legal) reasons the One Percenters pay no income taxes are far less exotic, according to an Internal Revenue Service study of 2009 tax data. For the most part, these people get off with paying nothing because of run-of-the-mill stuff like getting their income from tax-free municipal bonds and plain-vanilla itemized deductions (monocle prescriptions, top-hat cleaning, manservant housing).

A lot of big and small companies, meanwhile, also do not pay taxes. Some even get so many tax breaks that the government pays them.

In his comments, Romney suggested that the 47 Percenters would never vote for him because a promise of a tax cut would be meaningless to them. But some of that group is probably contributing to his campaign, and they might well be hoping to keep some of the tax breaks they already have.


Edited by Sharpshooter, 18 September 2012 - 12:51 PM.

  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#482 jmfaminoff

jmfaminoff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 05

Posted 18 September 2012 - 12:57 PM

What matter does it make to you Canadians back home, it is not like you pay US income taxes.
  • 0

#483 jmfaminoff

jmfaminoff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 05

Posted 18 September 2012 - 12:58 PM

Mittens, is that you??

I do have a nice pair of Canada Olympic mittens that my Mom sent me for Christmas a couple of years ago. But we have no need for them down here.
  • 1

#484 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 18 September 2012 - 01:21 PM

What matter does it make to you Canadians back home, it is not like you pay US income taxes.


Actually I do pay taxes on my foreign U.S income...30% in fact.
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#485 jmfaminoff

jmfaminoff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 05

Posted 18 September 2012 - 01:24 PM

  • Posted Image
  • September 18, 2012, 10:59 AM ET
The Data Behind Romney’s 47% Comments




Posted Image AP Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney campaigns at Van Dyck Park in Fairfax, Va., Thursday, Sept. 13, 2012. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak) Published Credit: Associated Press

By Damian Paletta and John D. McKinnon
In his comments to fundraisers captured on video, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said 47% of Americans would almost automatically vote for President Barack Obama because they were “dependent” on the government, in part because they received government benefits and paid no federal income taxes.
In a press conference late Monday, Mr. Romney said his comments were “not elegantly stated” while at the same time reiterating the main point. Our translation: If you don’t pay federal income taxes, you may not be swayed by a candidate that wants to cut them.
Here’s a rundown of the data behind Mr. Romney’s argument, some of which he correctly stated and other parts of which don’t hold up so well.
Entitlements:
According to the Census Bureau, 49% of Americans in the second quarter of 2011 lived in a household where at least one member received a government benefit. (The total population at the time was 305 million).
That’s up from 30% in the 1980s and 44.4% in the third quarter of 2008, a recent growth in part attributable to the bad economy of President Obama’s first term.
The Census Bureau broke the data down like this:
  • 26.4% of U.S. households had someone enrolled in Medicaid (the health-care program for low-income Americans)
  • 16.2% of households had at least one member receiving Social Security.
  • 15.8% lived in a household receiving food stamps
  • 14.9% had a member with Medicare benefits
  • 4.5% of households received assistance with their rent
  • 1.7% had a member receiving unemployment benefits.
The large majority of Medicare and Social Security recipients have paid payroll taxes in many cases for decades to qualify for those benefits.


More In 2012
There can be a lot of overlap in which programs benefit certain households. For example, millions of people receiving Social Security benefits also receive Medicare health benefits. Many Americans covered by Medicaid are also receiving food stamp benefits.
Mr. Romney implied that anyone receiving government benefits wouldn’t likely be one of his voters. But there’s no clear partisan split among beneficiaries, especially for broad-based federal retirement and health-care programs.
Taxes:
Mr. Romney correctly noted that nearly half of Americans pay no federal income tax. Who are all these people? And how did we get here?
Here’s a quick answer. Roughly half of U.S. households that pay no federal income tax are exempted because of basic provisions such as limitations on tax for low-income earners, according to a 2011 study by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. The other half benefit from targeted breaks (known to tax geeks as “tax expenditures”), such as assistance for the working poor and for children in moderate-income families. Seniors also benefit from some of these targeted breaks.
To analyze which breaks are most important in moving people off the income-tax rolls, the TPC study arranged these tax expenditures into eight categories:
  • Elderly tax benefits (the extra standard deduction for the elderly, the exclusion of a portion of Social Security benefits, and the credit for the elderly);
  • Credits for children and the working poor (the child tax credit, the child and dependent care tax credit, and the Earned Income Tax Credit);
  • Exclusion of other cash transfers (such as welfare and disability payments);
  • Tax-exempt interest and some other deductions, such as for retirement savings;
  • Itemized deductions;
  • Education credits;
  • Other credits; and
  • Reduced rates on capital gains and dividends (zero rate on gains and dividends that would otherwise be taxed at 10% or 15%, 15% rate combined with credits).
The TPC found that of the 38 million households that are made nontaxable by tax expenditures, “44% are moved off the tax rolls by elderly tax benefits and another 30% by credits for children and the working poor.”
So how did we get to the point where almost half of American households pay no income tax? Since the 1970s, Congress and successive presidents have begun creating more and more tax breaks to benefit broad swaths of the population (and some very narrow gauges too). Democrats generally have been more supportive of the particular breaks that push people off the income-tax rolls, but Republicans have supported a few too, and they also have pushed breaks that benefit higher-income people.


More In Taxes
The basic exemptions for very low-income people have been around for a while and are pretty non-controversial. Many of the breaks that benefit the elderly also have been supported by members of both parties, who realize older Americans are among the most consistent voters. Breaks for military personnel – such as the exemption for combat pay – also are widely popular.
The real partisan division has come over the growing number of other breaks, particularly those for children and for the working poor. Democrats in the 1970s pushed through the first and still arguably the most important of these, the Earned Income Tax Credit. Essentially, it’s an income supplement for the working poor, and can provide several thousand dollars in extra cash each year for a typical eligible family.
Over the years it’s been significantly expanded, most recently in the 2009 stimulus bill. While Republicans generally have been supportive of the EITC in practice, they have opposed several of the expansions and also are concerned about relatively high levels of erroneous payments under the highly complex EITC rules.
Conservatives tend to focus on the number of people not paying federal income taxes to make a case about the state of American democracy. For example: If half the country has no financial stake in decisions made in Washington, they’ll inevitably end up supporting expensive federal policies. And the burden will fall on everyone else. (That tends to overlook the fact that nearly two-thirds of households that paid no income tax still paid payroll tax, according to the Tax Policy Center.)
Republicans, however, did help push through another big break—the child credit. It’s been aimed at helping moderate-income families, including one-earner couples, afford to have kids. Like the EITC, it’s a “refundable” credit – meaning that it is paid to eligible taxpayers even when their tax liability has been erased. Democrats have pushed to make it more broadly available to lower-income people, often over GOP objections.
Below, Sara Murray discusses the video on WSJ Live.




Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit
www.djreprints.com
  • 0

#486 jmfaminoff

jmfaminoff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 05

Posted 18 September 2012 - 01:24 PM

Actually I do pay taxes on my foreign U.S income...30% in fact.

As a non resident correct?
  • 0

#487 Columbo

Columbo

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,901 posts
  • Joined: 04-May 04

Posted 18 September 2012 - 01:35 PM

The fact checking behind how Romney came to the 47% number is far less important than what his message was saying... basically if you're not rich, it's not his job to worry about you. As far as people being "entitled" to housing and food, why would we even have a government unless they did all they could to ensure their own citizens had those basic necessities? Romney seems to think the role of government is only to cut taxes if you're rich and to stop you from having an abortion if you're a woman. Good luck to you Americans if you vote this guy in as your President.
  • 0

#488 jmfaminoff

jmfaminoff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 05

Posted 18 September 2012 - 01:55 PM

The fact checking behind how Romney came to the 47% number is far less important than what his message was saying... basically if you're not rich, it's not his job to worry about you. As far as people being "entitled" to housing and food, why would we even have a government unless they did all they could to ensure their own citizens had those basic necessities? Romney seems to think the role of government is only to cut taxes if you're rich and to stop you from having an abortion if you're a woman. Good luck to you Americans if you vote this guy in as your President.

The idea that some Americans have of paternalism needs to be challenged. The Democrats of President Kennedy's day are gone. In a true American spirit the people need to listen to President Kennedy's inaguaration speech, "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country." Where does a welfare state fit with this ideology?
  • 0

#489 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:11 PM

As a non resident correct?


Yep
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#490 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,859 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:13 PM

The idea that some Americans have of paternalism needs to be challenged. The Democrats of President Kennedy's day are gone. In a true American spirit the people need to listen to President Kennedy's inaguaration speech, "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country." Where does a welfare state fit with this ideology?


Trying thinking of it as the "you" is the wealthy and fortunate and where "your country" includes the least fortunate among you. The sick, the elderly, the war veterans who fought for smug little pricks who can only think of their greedy selves....
  • 0

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#491 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:17 PM

  • Posted Image
  • September 18, 2012, 10:59 AM ET
The Data Behind Romney’s 47% Comments





Posted Image AP Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney campaigns at Van Dyck Park in Fairfax, Va., Thursday, Sept. 13, 2012. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak) Published Credit: Associated Press
By Damian Paletta and John D. McKinnon
In his comments to fundraisers captured on video, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said 47% of Americans would almost automatically vote for President Barack Obama because they were “dependent” on the government, in part because they received government benefits and paid no federal income taxes.
In a press conference late Monday, Mr. Romney said his comments were “not elegantly stated” while at the same time reiterating the main point. Our translation: If you don’t pay federal income taxes, you may not be swayed by a candidate that wants to cut them.
Here’s a rundown of the data behind Mr. Romney’s argument, some of which he correctly stated and other parts of which don’t hold up so well.
Entitlements:
According to the Census Bureau, 49% of Americans in the second quarter of 2011 lived in a household where at least one member received a government benefit. (The total population at the time was 305 million).
That’s up from 30% in the 1980s and 44.4% in the third quarter of 2008, a recent growth in part attributable to the bad economy of President Obama’s first term.
The Census Bureau broke the data down like this:
  • 26.4% of U.S. households had someone enrolled in Medicaid (the health-care program for low-income Americans)
  • 16.2% of households had at least one member receiving Social Security.
  • 15.8% lived in a household receiving food stamps
  • 14.9% had a member with Medicare benefits
  • 4.5% of households received assistance with their rent
  • 1.7% had a member receiving unemployment benefits.
The large majority of Medicare and Social Security recipients have paid payroll taxes in many cases for decades to qualify for those benefits.


More In 2012There can be a lot of overlap in which programs benefit certain households. For example, millions of people receiving Social Security benefits also receive Medicare health benefits. Many Americans covered by Medicaid are also receiving food stamp benefits.
Mr. Romney implied that anyone receiving government benefits wouldn’t likely be one of his voters. But there’s no clear partisan split among beneficiaries, especially for broad-based federal retirement and health-care programs.
Taxes:
Mr. Romney correctly noted that nearly half of Americans pay no federal income tax. Who are all these people? And how did we get here?
Here’s a quick answer. Roughly half of U.S. households that pay no federal income tax are exempted because of basic provisions such as limitations on tax for low-income earners, according to a 2011 study by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. The other half benefit from targeted breaks (known to tax geeks as “tax expenditures”), such as assistance for the working poor and for children in moderate-income families. Seniors also benefit from some of these targeted breaks.
To analyze which breaks are most important in moving people off the income-tax rolls, the TPC study arranged these tax expenditures into eight categories:
  • Elderly tax benefits (the extra standard deduction for the elderly, the exclusion of a portion of Social Security benefits, and the credit for the elderly);
  • Credits for children and the working poor (the child tax credit, the child and dependent care tax credit, and the Earned Income Tax Credit);
  • Exclusion of other cash transfers (such as welfare and disability payments);
  • Tax-exempt interest and some other deductions, such as for retirement savings;
  • Itemized deductions;
  • Education credits;
  • Other credits; and
  • Reduced rates on capital gains and dividends (zero rate on gains and dividends that would otherwise be taxed at 10% or 15%, 15% rate combined with credits).
The TPC found that of the 38 million households that are made nontaxable by tax expenditures, “44% are moved off the tax rolls by elderly tax benefits and another 30% by credits for children and the working poor.”
So how did we get to the point where almost half of American households pay no income tax? Since the 1970s, Congress and successive presidents have begun creating more and more tax breaks to benefit broad swaths of the population (and some very narrow gauges too). Democrats generally have been more supportive of the particular breaks that push people off the income-tax rolls, but Republicans have supported a few too, and they also have pushed breaks that benefit higher-income people.


More In TaxesThe basic exemptions for very low-income people have been around for a while and are pretty non-controversial. Many of the breaks that benefit the elderly also have been supported by members of both parties, who realize older Americans are among the most consistent voters. Breaks for military personnel – such as the exemption for combat pay – also are widely popular.
The real partisan division has come over the growing number of other breaks, particularly those for children and for the working poor. Democrats in the 1970s pushed through the first and still arguably the most important of these, the Earned Income Tax Credit. Essentially, it’s an income supplement for the working poor, and can provide several thousand dollars in extra cash each year for a typical eligible family.
Over the years it’s been significantly expanded, most recently in the 2009 stimulus bill. While Republicans generally have been supportive of the EITC in practice, they have opposed several of the expansions and also are concerned about relatively high levels of erroneous payments under the highly complex EITC rules.
Conservatives tend to focus on the number of people not paying federal income taxes to make a case about the state of American democracy. For example: If half the country has no financial stake in decisions made in Washington, they’ll inevitably end up supporting expensive federal policies. And the burden will fall on everyone else. (That tends to overlook the fact that nearly two-thirds of households that paid no income tax still paid payroll tax, according to the Tax Policy Center.)
Republicans, however, did help push through another big break—the child credit. It’s been aimed at helping moderate-income families, including one-earner couples, afford to have kids. Like the EITC, it’s a “refundable” credit – meaning that it is paid to eligible taxpayers even when their tax liability has been erased. Democrats have pushed to make it more broadly available to lower-income people, often over GOP objections.
Below, Sara Murray discusses the video on WSJ Live.




Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit
www.djreprints.com



It's bad news for Romney, when even the WSJ acknowledges that he talked out of his ass.

Here’s a rundown of the data behind Mr. Romney’s argument, some of which he correctly stated and other parts of which don’t hold up so well.


Don't hold up so well = This is the best we can to do sugar coat his nonsensical claims.
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#492 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,859 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:24 PM

The idea that some Americans have of paternalism needs to be challenged. The Democrats of President Kennedy's day are gone. In a true American spirit the people need to listen to President Kennedy's inaguaration speech, "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country." Where does a welfare state fit with this ideology?


Also when speaking like that, asking people to "pull up their bootstraps" etc it helps to have some actual tangible goals and leadership people can follow and route for/feel a part of. Space exploration, infrastructure etc.

Telling people to suck it up and work harder so a select few can get richer off of them and special interest groups can continue to bend them over is hardly inspiring.
  • 0

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#493 Aleksandr Pistoletov

Aleksandr Pistoletov

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,035 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 18 September 2012 - 03:36 PM

Wait. Isn't the government run by big business lobbyists though...? ;) The two are, by and large, really one intertwined entity now.

That is indeed a problem, but a problem where onus is on government to prevent the type of collusion occurring, instead they are aiding and abetting it.
  • 0

"When Jonah's agent called him and said Quentin Tarantino wanted to put him in a spaghetti western [Django Unchained], Jonah was like, 'You had me at spaghetti.'"

 

"Aziz has been charming audiences and snakes for years. And I guess you’re here tonight because now that Kanye had a real baby he doesn’t need you anymore."

 

 -- Jeff Ross

 

 


#494 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,859 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 18 September 2012 - 03:44 PM

That is indeed a problem, but a problem where onus is on government to prevent the type of collusion occurring, instead they are aiding and abetting it.


Politics has always and likely will always, be self-serving to a degree. In a broad sense it is in fact the public's responsibility to "clean house" there.
  • 0

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#495 Buddhas Hand

Buddhas Hand

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,828 posts
  • Joined: 19-December 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 03:57 PM

The idea that some Americans have of paternalism needs to be challenged. The Democrats of President Kennedy's day are gone. In a true American spirit the people need to listen to President Kennedy's inaguaration speech, "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country." Where does a welfare state fit with this ideology?


The Working Poor In America

By Michael Snyder updated December 27, 2010|





As the middle class in America continues to be slowly wiped out, the number of working poor continues to increase. Today, nearly one out of every three families in the United States is considered to be “low income”. Millions of American families are finding that they can barely make it from month to month even with both parents working as hard as they possibly can. Blue collar American workers from coast to coast are having their wages decreased at a time when it seems like the cost of virtually every monthly bill is going up. Unfortunately, there is every indication that things are only going to get worse and that average American families are going to be financially squeezed even more in the months and years to come.
The Working Poor Families Project has just released their policy brief for the winter of 2010-11. What they have discovered is that the number of working poor in the United States is higher than they have ever seen it before and it continues to increase at a staggering pace. The following are some of the key findings for 2009 that were pulled right out of their report….
* There were more than 10 million low-income working families in the United States, an increase of nearly a quarter million from the previous year.
* Forty-five million people, including 22 million children, lived in low-income working families, an increase of 1.7 million people from 2008.
* Forty-three percent of working families with at least one minority parent were low income, nearly twice the proportion of white working families (22 percent).
* Income inequality continued to grow with the richest 20 percent of working families taking home 47 percent of all income and earning 10 times that of low-income working families.
* More than half of the U.S. labor force (55 percent) has “suffered a spell of unemployment, a cut in pay, a reduction in hours or have become involuntary part-time workers” since the recession began in December 2007.
Unfortunately, things are not going to be getting any better for the working poor. In the new “one world economy” that our politicians keep insisting is so good for us, millions upon millions of American workers now find that they have to compete for work with laborers on the other side of the globe that are willing to work for slave labor wages. This is causing millions of jobs to leave the United States and it is forcing wages down.
Millions of Americans now find that they are making substantially less than they used to. If that has happened to you, perhaps you can take comfort in the fact that you are not alone. Or perhaps it is not that comforting. In any event, American workers are not just competing with each other anymore. Now there is the constant threat that all the jobs could just be sent overseas.
As wages are forced down, a record number of working Americans are finding themselves forced to turn to food stamps and to other government anti-poverty programs. Millions of Americans have been forced to take part-time jobs in order to supplement their incomes. Millions of others have been forced to take part-time jobs because that is all they can find.
This is all part of a long-term trend. The numbers don’t lie. About the only people doing well are those on Wall Street and the very rich. Nearly every other segment of the population is getting poorer.
The following are 10 statistics that I have shared previously, but I think that they do a really good job of highlighting the plight that the working poor in this country are now facing….
#1 In 2009, total wages, median wages, and average wages all declined in the United States.
#2 Since the year 2000, we have lost 10% of our middle class jobs. In the year 2000 there were about 72 million middle class jobs in the United States but today there are only about 65 million middle class jobs. Meanwhile, our population is getting larger.
#3 As 2007 began, only 26 million Americans were on food stamps, but now 42 million Americans are on food stamps and that number keeps rising every single month.
#4 Since 2001, over 42,000 U.S. factories have closed down for good.
#5 One out of every six Americans is now enrolled in at least one anti-poverty program run by the federal government.
#6 Half of all American workers now earn $505 or less per week.
#7 The number of Americans working part-time jobs “for economic reasons” is now the highest it has been in at least five decades.
#8 Ten years ago, the United States was ranked number one in average wealth per adult. In 2010, the United States has fallen to seventh.
#9 In 1976, the top 1 percent of earners in the United States took in 8.9 percent of all income. By 2007, that number had risen to 23.5 percent.
#10 According to one recent study, approximately 21 percent of all children in the United States are living below the poverty line in 2010.
The United States is becoming poorer as a nation even as the boys up on Wall Street are busy grabbing a bigger share for themselves.
We are rapidly becoming a nation that will have a very small privileged class of ultra-wealthy and a very large class of “workers” that is just barely trying to survive.
So is the answer even more government handouts and even more government social programs?
Of course not.
What middle class Americans need are middle class jobs.
But as I have written about previously, the United States is rapidly bleeding middle class jobs with no end in sight.
Globalism has permanently changed the game. The middle class way of life that so many millions of Americans have been enjoying for so many decades is disappearing.
Just because things were a certain way yesterday does not mean that things are going to be the same way tomorrow. The long-term economic trends that this column keeps talking about day after day after day are taking us all to a very dark economic place.
But instead of facing reality, our federal government, our state governments and our local governments just keep borrowing massive amounts of dollars to try to paper over all of our problems.
It is not going to work. Unless something is done to fix our structural economic problems, the economic decay is just going to get worse and all of this debt is eventually going to collapse our entire financial system.
If you are a member of the working poor I wish I had better news for you. Things are not going to be getting better, and unfortunately millions more Americans will probably be joining you soon.
  • 1

The Real war is not between the east and the west. The real war is between intelligent and stupid people.

Marjane Satrapi

tony-abbott-and-stephen-harper-custom-da

That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach.

Aldous Huxley.


#496 Buddhas Hand

Buddhas Hand

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,828 posts
  • Joined: 19-December 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 04:02 PM

Politics has always and likely will always, be self-serving to a degree. In a broad sense it is in fact the public's responsibility to "clean house" there.


Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- AND THAT GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE , BY THE PEOPLE , FOR THE PEOPLE SHALL NOT PERISH FROM THE EARTH
  • 0

The Real war is not between the east and the west. The real war is between intelligent and stupid people.

Marjane Satrapi

tony-abbott-and-stephen-harper-custom-da

That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach.

Aldous Huxley.


#497 SkeeterHansen

SkeeterHansen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,138 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 04:08 PM

American politics confuses the living fluff out of me.


Just like a regular American, I'll just vote for the one I think seems "nicer".
  • 0
CANUCKS TILL I DIE

#498 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 18 September 2012 - 04:49 PM

Even though Bill Kristol is one of the biggest ****-tards out there in Pundit-Land, and I expect his anti-Obama screeds to be ongoing, I couldn't help but laugh my ass off at his targeting of Mittens. Seems like he's given up and is lashing out at everyone.

:lol:

I love it.

A Note on Romney’s Arrogant and Stupid Remarks
9:16 AM, SEP 18, 2012 • BY WILLIAM KRISTOL


So we have in 2012 two presidential candidates who—when they thought they were speaking privately to their fellow 1 percenters—have shown contempt for fellow Americans.

Here's Barack Obama, on April 6, 2008, in San Francisco:

"You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

It's worth recalling that Obama was speaking about Democrats who were voting in the primary for Hillary Clinton. So Obama seems to have contempt not just for the Republicans who oppose him, but for millions of Americans who ended up voting for him in November 2008.

And here's Mitt Romney, on May 17, 2012, in Boca Raton:


"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what….These are people who pay no income tax.... [M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

It's worth recalling that a good chunk of the 47 percent who don't pay income taxes are Romney supporters—especially of course seniors (who might well "believe they are entitled to heath care," a position Romney agrees with), as well as many lower-income Americans (including men and women serving in the military) who think conservative policies are better for the country even if they're not getting a tax cut under the Romney plan. So Romney seems to have contempt not just for the Democrats who oppose him, but for tens of millions who intend to vote for him.

It remains important for the country that Romney wins in November (unless he chooses to step down and we get the Ryan-Rubio ticket we deserve!). But that shouldn't blind us to the fact that Romney's comments, like those of Obama four years ago, are stupid and arrogant.

Indeed: Has there been a presidential race in modern times featuring two candidates who have done so little over their lifetimes for our country, and who have so little substance to say about the future of our country?


  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#499 Fathoms

Fathoms

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,549 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 03

Posted 18 September 2012 - 05:21 PM

Politics has always and likely will always, be self-serving to a degree. In a broad sense it is in fact the public's responsibility to "clean house" there.

The problem with putting the onus on the public for checking the tyranny and corruption of it's government is the basic fact that the government is in charge of educating them about reality/government in the first place. And this of course, results in double-think. People see the government as being there to protect them from sociopaths when in actual fact government power is sociopath catnip, it is free evil, if you are into that sort of thing. And this results in us being lorded over by (literal) addicts and being unable to see or process the immense danger...


Power really does corrupt as scientists claim it's as addictive as cocaine

By DAILY MAIL REPORTER
PUBLISHED: 11:11 GMT, 28 April 2012 | UPDATED: 11:19 GMT, 28 April 2012
Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz26rzrBqGS


More than a hundred years after noted historian Baron John Acton coined the phrase 'power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely' scientists claim the saying is biologically true.
The feeling of power has been found to have a similar effect on the brain to cocaine by increasing the levels of testosterone and its by-product 3-androstanediol in both men and women.
This in turn leads to raised levels of dopamine, the brain’s reward system called the nucleus accumbens, which can be very addictive.

Cocaine works in a similar way, which can have varied effects from increasing alertness, confidence, energy, feelings of well-being and euphoria, but also anxiety, paranoia and restlessness.

Power has almost identical effects to cocaine and too much of it can produce too much dopamine leading to more negative effects such as arrogance and impatience.
The claims by Dr Ian Robertson may go some way to explain the outlandish and impulsive behaviour of city fatcats, tycoons and celebrities.
Writing in the Daily Telegraph today, he said: 'Baboons low down in the dominance hierarchy have lower levels of dopamine in key brain areas, but if they get ‘promoted’ to a higher position, then dopamine rises accordingly.
'This makes them more aggressive and sexually active, and in humans similar changes happen when people are given power.
'Conversely, demotion in a hierarchy decreases dopamine levels, increases stress and reduces cognitive function.'
He added that power has also been found to make people smarter because dopamine improves the functioning of the brain’s frontal lobes.
Submissiveness and dominance also give similar effects through the same reward circuits of the brain as power and cocaine.


http://www.dailymail...ve-cocaine.html
  • 0
wordings...

#500 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,672 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 18 September 2012 - 06:40 PM

What that means then is that as we try to resuscitate this notion that we’re all in this thing together, leave nobody behind, we do have to be innovative and thinking what are the delivery systems that are actually effective and meet people where they live. And my suggestion, I guess would be that the trick, and this is one of the few areas where I think there are technical issues that have to be dealt with as opposed to just political issues. I think the trick is figuring out how do we structure government systems that pool resources and hence facilitate some redistribution because I actually believe in redistribution, at least at a certain level to make sure everybody’s got a shot.

- Obama, 10/19/98 at Loyola U, Chicago


  • 0

#501 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 18 September 2012 - 06:43 PM

What that means then is that as we try to resuscitate this notion that we’re all in this thing together, leave nobody behind, we do have to be innovative and thinking what are the delivery systems that are actually effective and meet people where they live. And my suggestion, I guess would be that the trick, and this is one of the few areas where I think there are technical issues that have to be dealt with as opposed to just political issues. I think the trick is figuring out how do we structure government systems that pool resources and hence facilitate some redistribution because I actually believe in redistribution, at least at a certain level to make sure everybody’s got a shot.

- Obama, 10/19/98 at Loyola U, Chicago



And??
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#502 YaK

YaK

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,910 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 06

Posted 18 September 2012 - 08:22 PM

And??

That sounds an awful lot like class warfare, which Romney would never....


Oh wait.
  • 0
Posted Image
"It felt almost like it was a dream," Burrows said of his game-winner.
"But guys jumped on me and I couldn't breathe, so I knew it was right."

#503 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,859 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 19 September 2012 - 09:25 AM

The problem with putting the onus on the public for checking the tyranny and corruption of it's government is the basic fact that the government is in charge of educating them about reality/government in the first place. And this of course, results in double-think. People see the government as being there to protect them from sociopaths when in actual fact government power is sociopath catnip, it is free evil, if you are into that sort of thing. And this results in us being lorded over by (literal) addicts and being unable to see or process the immense danger...




http://www.dailymail...ve-cocaine.html


and...?

We put these people in positions of power. It's OUR responsibility to keep them in check. Right now, we're not doing that nearly enough and paying the price. Generally this eventually leads to bloody revolution. Here's hoping we've evolved enough to think of something better to solve that problem.
  • 0

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#504 jmfaminoff

jmfaminoff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 05

Posted 19 September 2012 - 09:39 AM

That sounds an awful lot like class warfare, which Romney would never....


Oh wait.

How Obama's jobs council has the president of GE on the board. The company paid no US income taxes last year. It also received handouts for its financial business, as well as its energy production business.
  • 0

#505 Buggernut

Buggernut

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,524 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 03

Posted 19 September 2012 - 12:52 PM



Welcome to politics!
  • 0

#506 Columbo

Columbo

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,901 posts
  • Joined: 04-May 04

Posted 19 September 2012 - 01:13 PM

What that means then is that as we try to resuscitate this notion that we’re all in this thing together, leave nobody behind, we do have to be innovative and thinking what are the delivery systems that are actually effective and meet people where they live. And my suggestion, I guess would be that the trick, and this is one of the few areas where I think there are technical issues that have to be dealt with as opposed to just political issues. I think the trick is figuring out how do we structure government systems that pool resources and hence facilitate some redistribution because I actually believe in redistribution, at least at a certain level to make sure everybody’s got a shot.

- Obama, 10/19/98 at Loyola U, Chicago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge3aGJfDSg4&feature=player_embedded


I don't get it, this clip is clearly from 14 years ago. Is it supposed to be inflammatory or something? The guy's been president for 4 years and hasn't increased taxes on the rich once, I almost wish he believed now what he believed in '98. But anyway it's obviously completely irrelevant.

Edited by Columbo, 19 September 2012 - 01:14 PM.

  • 0

#507 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 19 September 2012 - 01:45 PM

How Obama's jobs council has the president of GE on the board. The company paid no US income taxes last year. It also received handouts for its financial business, as well as its energy production business.


Did Obama write or create the tax structure that this CEO and his company currently exploit and enjoy?? Who did??

And, are you ideologically against giving corporations tax subsidies?
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#508 jmfaminoff

jmfaminoff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,787 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 05

Posted 19 September 2012 - 02:39 PM

He has been in office since January 2009. He was a part of a Democratic controlled Senate for two years before that also included a Democrat controlled House. He also chose the members of his job council.

I am absolutely against corporate wealthfare, farm subsidies, and tax breaks for large companies.
  • 0

#509 Datsyukian Dangle

Datsyukian Dangle

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Joined: 16-September 12

Posted 19 September 2012 - 03:41 PM

Posted Image
  • 0

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Posted Image


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


#510 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 19 September 2012 - 05:00 PM

He has been in office since January 2009. He was a part of a Democratic controlled Senate for two years before that also included a Democrat controlled House. He also chose the members of his job council.

I am absolutely against corporate wealthfare, farm subsidies, and tax breaks for large companies.


Did he create the tax structure that's being enjoyed by GE's CEO and GE?
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.