Boost_Junky

Disclaimer: This is not directed towards anyone here personally. This is more or less an angry rant toward failed idealism. Not only others but my own. Most people know that Obama is a better candidate. (look at the votes) -His party does not lead by fear. -He did not sling mud and lie during his campaign. -He is young, well spoken and acts on knowlege not emotion -He speaks for me, not rich people alone -He won’t spread the wealth to the rich like the republicans have for 12 years -He represents people, not companies. (It’s for the people not for the company) -He wants to get out of Iraq. -He wants to help people live a better life, the majority, not the minority of people. Let me list some of the lies of a horribly failed campaign ran by the republicans. They lead by fear. -He will redistribute wealth -He is Muslim -He will give reparations -He will increase the size of Government -He will give handouts -He is the Anti-Christ -He will increase taxes -People will riot if he is not elected -He sides with William Ayres -People only vote for him because he’s black All this “he is so left” and “the country is going to go to crap” is just that, CRAP. Republican’s and their failed policy have lead this country into the worst position it’s been in since the great depression. Say “it isn’t so” and say “don’t blame us” but one of the choices we have in place to change things is our vote. So we did, we voted out what we could change. The republican’s did a horrid job, now they want to whine about not getting re-elected. How about regroup and get a better candidate than the Keating 5 John, can’t think without getting mad, old going to die soon, outdated thoughts, picked a woman in an attempt to gain hip voters, gabbing at straws, and dirty business McCain. Republicans lost. If what they thought was right for the country, than it would have happened. Last time I checked, more people agree with me and I believe in the American way. The problem is not capitalism. It’s greed. Policy has become unregulated to the point that we let personal and cooperate wealth trump all else. We left the money man alone to the point that he became greedy and didn’t think about the future or people. Then when everything failed, we bailed him out because we were stuck between a rock and hard place. GREAT, thanks. Never again. We will not let it happen. All this real estate wealth is fake. All this credit wealth is fake. If you bought a house for 70k and it was appraised at 300k 5 years later, what makes you think it’s a good idea to max your equity to buy more houses and other crap? That is not smart and most of the people trying to protect their fake wealth are the ones crying right now or their kids or followers. They should have left it alone. The market will fluctuate. I told my Dad this and I’m saying it now. It is a bad business decision to max out your credit or your equity. Save for a rainy day. Easy come, easy go. News flash, markets fluctuate. You think these financial companies care about you? NO. They would rather claim bankruptcy than pay you that fake money. The only reason they let it go on was to create their own wealth and then bail. All the while people are crying about how they earned all this money, they didn’t earn it. It was FAKE. Did they get paid a wage for it? NO. Did they sell a product that they produced, NO. They bought a house or two and then watched their equity rise. That is investing, and it has risks, hello. Invest a portion, not all of your income. Did the 80’s teach us nothing? I said it before and I will say it again. Nobody on this forum is rich enough to be represented by the republican party this year. NOBODY. They represented companies that want less and less regulation so they can keep raping you, the people. Weed through all the lies and that is the brass tax. This new guy is for us. Let’s see if he can live up to his word. That is our only worry. Our problems are so deep, it’s hard to believe that anyone can help. /rant No, no, not end rant. That guy who wouldn’t answer my questions in the Tax thread. Lame is not answering my questions. How long do you expect to be able to spit that mess? Consumers dictate the economy. Supply in demand. No demand, no supply. What your saying is the supply dictates the demand. Try and sell that somewhere else because it isn’t working. The economy is a balance and if you can’t do it right then stop. The customer is ALWAYS right and we are tired of a$$ rape. Hey rich companies owners and fake wealthy, you’re doing it wrong. Actual /rant

:blink: Should I chime in?

He's talking about America, not you.

Obama wins.

-How can a tax base grow and then we end up with a finite labor resource? -Won’t sales growth from the increased market and tax base allow for a larger profit margin? Taking into account that the cost of operations will generally increase, but always has and should be accounted for in the business model. The incentive for efficient operations is cheaper product and market domination, while maintaining a healthy profit margin. -If you’re not getting enough for your product and your being taxed higher, than your in a bad business. It’s doesn’t take an economic genius to realize that. The market will adjust. Since when has any business “took it in the profit?” Those tax cost are a line on your receipt. -To achieve a result of continual profit to insure their own personal success, regardless of future progress. Point in case, Fanny, Freddie, Enron, Wachovia, Washington Mutual, Lealman Brothers ect…. -The issue of progressive tax can be argued to death. A consumption tax would be a better standard. Only paying tax on goods and services you receive. I fully agree. However, the beneficiaries of these taxes are not only government sectors but contractors for them and so on and so on. It should be known that the companies that are “America”, will not allow a consumption based tax. -Making point to my comment regarding benefit for taxation. The government securing the economy has larger financial benefits for some than others. While you feel these are all pedestrian ideals, I fail to see where you have brought to light an abundance of ideals that haven’t been discussed, respectively. While I site Chomski quite a bit, I don’t feel his ideals alone are the answer. I will say that he has a very insightful view on current issues and a dreamers vision for the future. Regardless the ideals of supply in demand, resources vs. production and taxation are all a balance. Like I have mentioned before, we need all the pieces to make the puzzle, not just one. Incentive based societies breed the best innovation, we can all agree on that. Point in case being America. However, to insure the progress you mention, we must not create a huge gap between socioeconomic groups. Nor shall we provide a canvas of unregulated capitalism and hope it turns out for the best.

I like that site. Most of it seems to be right on. +1 That is soooo true! I know I scream some humanitarian stuff, but I am not for free rides. I think we can do a better job of taking care of our people by making some of the basic needs more accessable. Regardless, I agree, this is going to get real bad...

I would call him a carrier lobbyist and puppet for corporate finance. Like most politicians.

Well, this is a complex question. There are two parts. 1- Theologically 2- The laws of men through government Theologically speaking anyone who is in need, and lacking something they should have to sustain their life would be a candidate for help. You would treat them they way you treat yourself. By helping, you would not look to your own advantage or reward. You would not look to them for thanks, your reward would come after life. Leviticus 25:35 " 'If one of your countrymen becomes poor and is unable to support himself among you, help him as you would an alien or a temporary resident, so he can continue to live among you. 36 Do not take interest of any kind from him, but fear your God, so that your countryman may continue to live among you. 37 You must not lend him money at interest or sell him food at a profit. In our times and with our government, the trick to answering that correctly would be getting many points of view and experience. The law would have to be written in a way that has checks and balances. No one would should be burden of the state. We should not become indebted to helping our needy, nor should we profit. I stress that by keeping these people in some form, stable, and on a basic level functional within our society, we are able to continue with our business. Remember, it is our civility that allows us to be successful. As we grow our nation in wealth and technology, we cannot let our civil service become unimportant. Allow me to explain this in another way. A tree can be named by the fruit it gives. The quality of fruit is determined by the richness of soil, abundance of light, availability of water and strength of its branches. If the soil was barren, the fruit would be bad. You existence and ability to sustain yourself depends on a large number of factors. Without them all, our life as we know it, would not be possible. A large portion of the people (companies) who lobby, influence and support our politicians were able to convince them that it was in our (the people of the United States) best interest to bail them out. Regardless if that was the true answer or not, their influence is stronger than our democracy. It is no different than asking a favor from the mafia, then having them knocking at your door later to return it. Our two party system is majorly flawed and true constitutionalist will agree. Candidates are brought into power by wealthy investors, foreign and domestic. These investors expect that their agendas be carried out through the office of the presidency and houses of congress. They paid for it, and if they NEED something, by their definition , they will get it. I personally do not wish to be Governed. It is our lack of faith that makes us in need of it. I agree. An excerpt from Anarchism 101 with Noam Chomsky, Power, unless justified, is inherently illegitimate. The burden of proof is on those in authority to demonstrate why their elevated position is justified. If this burden can't be met, the authority in question should be dismantled. Authority for its own sake is inherently unjustified. An example of a legitimate authority is that exerted by an adult to prevent a young child from wandering into traffic.

Bravo Eric. Very insightful. Some of things one may find when researching the Muslim faith will further understanding. Add that with a historical account of the region and you’re on your way to understanding why America is seen by many in that region in such a negative light. America has time and time again disrespected their faith, traditions and taken sides in their wars. By doing so we have created a long standing hatred for America and it’s beliefs. I.E. Funding wars, selling weapons, taking Israel’s side with everything, buying oil from the lowest bidder in turn funding rebels, unprovoked occupations, hiring lawless renegade contractors to fight our wars and building military bases on holy land. Just to name a few. I don’t expect the US to act perfect. I also understand by fighting a war, there will be an enemy. However, we can do much better. Much, much, much better.

ZING!!! Actually usawakeup.org is a neo-con run organization. They are writers funded by Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and other personalities. They use avenues like this to support their radical views that are too edgy for their radio programs. They will mention these sites and these sites will support them. It's part of their propaganda rumor mill. Do your own homework though, I may be for basic rights, but I am not for free rides.

Better question, who is behind usawakeup.org?

No, I said it was a bad idea. Read it again. I say, that it is NEVER a good idea. Your grasp on simple economics must be hurting as well. The only reason America survives is because it has an economy based on consumption. The middle class are the number one consumers. Without their disposable income the whole thing falls apart. Look what happens when they don’t spend on gas, or at Christmas. Wake up. Albeit, there also has to be good incentives, i.e. profits, for the companies to do business here and create jobs. It’s a balance, but don’t think the fat cats staying rich is the only answer. It’s called supply in demand not demand in supply. New flash, most of the jobs in America are not created by people who will be effected by most tax laws. They’re either stock holders or foreign investors. Income tax laws will not affect them in the same ways that you understand. They also have ways of shielding their income from high taxes. The republicans are trying to scare any Joe that "thinks" he's rich into protecting his income. The fact is no person on this forum is rich enough to be affected in any substantial way by tax laws. Only a small percentage will change. The people, companies and foreign investors lobbing congress are the ones that will be effected. New flash, they have already picked sides and are funding this whole shebang. You’re right by saying the government shouldn’t be into all these institutions, they should be private. Society is not ready to do what it has to do though. There are a ton of things we should do for ourselves instead of the government doing them. We should pick our brothers up and feed them and make them well. Not judge their life and see if we deem them appropriate for help. The only criteria is to make sure you treat others well. If we did that there would be no need for any institutions. That won’t happen for a long, long time.

I don't feel his thoughts and ideals should be dismissed as anti-America, so I put the crinkle face. In fact he is one of the greatest American thinkers of our time. The things he proposes are not going to happen for a LONG while though. We will work towards a great society that protects human rights, little by little. While I don’t agree with everything he says, Chomsky has very intelligent insights when describing media, military, foreign policy, big business and government. It’s a great opposition point of view. I don't know if that will help him or not. They are both grabbing at whatever they can. McCain looks angry and desperate though. King regurgitation. Have you ever had an original thought? I listen to Sean Hannity, Mark Levine, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News… I listen to Keith Olbermann, Local Left Radio DJ’s, NPR and so on. I get emails from my Conservative Republican Grandmother who happens to be the leader of her state party. I also get those same emails from my wife’s uncle and people at work. I receive mailers from Democrat.com and other left emails. I receive somewhere between 50-150 emails a day with political crap from people I know. On top of that I listen to all of the sited people. I consider myself well informed. The political machines of these two candidates turn out a bunch of spun lies. Truth is not a factor. They are trying to get you to think one way or another by turning up stories that you, the people, will relate to. They will scare you making you think you will lose your dollar, freedom, healthcare whatever you have given them as ammunition by showing you care. I will say that the republicans have been ten times worse this campaign and they look ridiculous. I am registered Republican but I refuse to vote for them. McCain is mentally weak, driven by emotion and controlled by special interest and large cooperation’s. Obama is sneaky, his full agendas are not always told and he also works for special interest groups. But between them, Obama is the less of two evils. Republicans are forgetting about humanity and they need to reevaluate their protection of human life. I’m not talking about be anti-abortion and then pro gun in the same breath. I mean move this country in a direction where it’s people can concentrate on life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Not just trying to survive. That is not what our forefathers built this county for.

He should not succeed within the law of men, but there are humanitarian responsibilities we should keep in mind. No man, should be sick or die because of a lack of treatment or go hungry in a country as great as this. We do more than that for less motivated people in countries thousands of miles away. Yet you will let a fellow American die at your feet because he didn’t satisfy your ideals of success. You will see first hand the fruits of your labor vs. his. Read about the rich man and Lazarus. We all have equal access to public resources. The rich guy, "Fred" uses the road to drive to work. He uses the military to protect him. He uses the currency of the state and so on. By using that, he made 5 million in one year. Middle class "Joe" used the same things, he made 45 thousand a year. Fred will pay a larger amount than Joe. At the end of the day Fred kept 4.5 million and Joe kept 30 thousand. They both are citizens of the USA and use the same resources. What if Fred hired a clever accountant. This accountant put Fred's money in retirement accounts and low yield IRAs. Fred hid a ton of income because he could pay the accountant to figure it out. So in the end Fred paid a lower percent of his income in taxes. It happens all the time. Point in case by Chuck’s comment. You also have to consider that Fred with his good business practice and hard work made more than Joe. Fred also is able to lobby congress and most likely had a direct relationship with his state representative. His voice is heard louder than Joe's because of his campaign contributions. Therefore Fred’s wealth and higher tax bill has suited him better than Joe’s meager contribution. How are you so sure I am poor? My faith makes me rich. Truth be told, I am not financially wealthy enough to be represented by the conservative republicans. Neither is anyone on this forum… Further more I support a lot of conservative ideals. I also support a ton of the liberal humanitarian views. I agree with libertarian socialist views in some respects, but the world is not ready for most of those utopian ideals. Above all though is my faith and love for Jesus Christ. Those of you who have read Christian writings know where some of my statements are from. Luke 6:24 "But woe to you who are rich, for you have already received your comfort.”

Then same tax. That's how it works. That is why you have to make a story that doesn't happen. What your saying isn't how it works. They rich get a bigger financial benefit from our infrastructure, therefore they pay more. Because at the end of the day the company owner got to keep 1 million dollars and idle employee got to keep 10 thousand. See how it works? It called incentive. You are so right. That is never a good idea.

American. edit: So as not to seem deceiving, his information can be looked up on Wikipedia. Sited; “Avram Noam Chomsky (pronounced /noʊm ˈtʃɑmski/; born December 7, 1928) is an American linguist, philosopher,[2][3][4] cognitive scientist, political activist, author, and lecturer. He is an Institute Professor emeritus and professor emeritus of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.[5] Chomsky is well known in the academic and scientific community as the father of modern linguistics.[6][7] Since the 1960s, he has become known more widely as a political dissident, an anarchist,[8] and a libertarian socialist intellectual.”

1-American policy of free trade, oil consumption and foreign dependence. Competing in markets where we drive the common class of people out of work. I.E Flood our country with immigrants because of NAFTA and then despise them. Making capitalism a priority over human rights. Why do you think the “World Trade” Center was attacked? Making financial trade agreements with countries for oil and in turn funding their religious wars. 2-American hypocritical foreign policies in general. Selling weapons and giving funding to help over throw governments. Building military bases on religious ground. Massive human rights violations by supporting non-democratic governments and rebels. Summarized as Oil and Foreign Policy. 1-America should not sign trade agreements with corrupt governments or nations without democratic freedoms. No nation shall be traded with that does not treat their people equally, allow people to vote on policy or have the economic and ethical foundation to pursue fair trade with the US. Heavily peruse energy independence as well. 2-America should not provide assistance to any government, rebellion or coup that does not have democratic fundamentals. All religions and beliefs of the region should be respected and carried out to the best of the US’s ability during an occupation. Strict humanitarian values have to be followed by any US funded group or company. The US will not attack a region unless a direct threat is known, by a state or person publically declaring war or a direct physical attack of US owned interests. Thus abolishing the Bush Doctrine.

Dually noted. I do agree and this is the best in the world. You have a great since of humor. This problem cannot be explained by spending alone. You are not factoring in what the drivers gained by using the toll or road. Taxes are paid by ratio of income. How can you explain this with an example where income is not factored?

Honest anwser. I like that. Why do you feel he should die, go hungry or be sick for not doing well in school? Enlighten me.

If his breeds, worry about his kids. You have expressed that he has had more than a fair chance at success as measured by your standards. However, should he go hungry, be sick or die in the streets?

I see what you mean. Allow me to explain. I used "freedom of speech" and "classlessness" as defined by American policy and social interaction. I don't feel we have a full freedom of speech or classlessness. We are just the closest to it in the world.

Dave, Dave, Dave... Let me site an article from Noam Chomsky that sites the book "Propaganda" by Edward Bernays; "it is possible to "regiment the public mind every bit as much as an army regiments their bodies." These new techniques of regimentation of minds, he said, had to be used by the intelligent minorities in order to make sure that the slobs stay on the right course. We can do it now because we have these new techniques." "When you critique the media and you say, look, here is what Anthony Lewis or somebody else is writing, they get very angry. They say, quite correctly, "nobody ever tells me what to write. I write anything I like. All this business about pressures and constraints is nonsense because I’m never under any pressure." Which is completely true, but the point is that they wouldn’t be there unless they had already demonstrated that nobody has to tell them what to write because they are going say the right thing. If they had started off at the Metro desk, or something, and had pursued the wrong kind of stories, they never would have made it to the positions where they can now say anything they like. The same is mostly true of university faculty in the more ideological disciplines. They have been through the socialization system." The fact is the media has an agenda. Their agenda is getting you to vote for the candidate that supports their business. Be very critical of their stories. Please read the sited article to gain a different view on media. Chomsky view on media

How do I get a free ride with healthcare? My wife works for a hospital. My healthcare is great and we pay for it. I don't agree with socialized healthcare as I assume you mean it. Nobody is proposing that. Accessible and affordable healthcare is necessary. Giving free and equal access is not going to work within our current system. Free does not equal affordable though. Allow me to site Wikipedia’s definition of Noam Chomsky's view on social services; "One can, of course, take the position that we don't care about the problems people face today, and want to think about a possible tomorrow. OK, but then don't pretend to have any interest in human beings and their fate, and stay in the seminar room and intellectual coffee house with other privileged people. Or one can take a much more humane position: I want to work, today, to build a better society for tomorrow -- the classical anarchist position, quite different from the slogans in the question. That's exactly right, and it leads directly to support for the people facing problems today: for enforcement of health and safety regulation, provision of national health insurance, support systems for people who need them, etc. That is not a sufficient condition for organizing for a different and better future, but it is a necessary condition. Anything else will receive the well-merited contempt of people who do not have the luxury to disregard the circumstances in which they live, and try to survive" This country was founded by people escaping persecution of their beliefs. By popular decision we have freedoms like no other country, like our freedom of speech and classlessness. This popular ideology built America. It is a popular problem that healthcare is not affordable. It is necessary for America to take care of American’s. Our society and economy cannot survive without it. This is one of the meanings of “the poor shall inherit the earth.” It is very easy for the rich to let their riches rule their life. Mathew 9:24 “Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." The poor outnumber the rich, and their will is stronger. The answer is not to make a healthcare system that has bad doctors and long lines for care. That is a fear of many when mentioning social healthcare. I assume this is your understanding. The answer is to slowly adapt our current system to accommodate the non-privileged and give them an opportunity to receive care. While still allowing the wealthy and paying citizens choice of premier doctors, care by the best hospitals and fast service. This is the same practice used by our legal system (public defender) and would be adequate for the slow adaptation of our healthcare system (public doctor). Eventually we should grow our healthcare system to provide quick, easy, free access to all. However, that is far, far away and will not work now.

It would be easier to say I'm on crack than understand and agree with my view. You are right, Rome burned not roam, it was a type-o. If you really don't think Rome burned, here is a link. Great Fire of Rome As for my area needing better schools, that is a bit crass. I could say that your area is need of better finishing. Correcting my spelling in this case in straining over a gnat while swallowing a camel. Can you tell me the meaning behind my previously written statements? "Nero watched while Rome burned and bite your nose to spite your face." Allow me to elaborate. While the country falls into an uneducated, non competitive state, you seem to be fighting over a small change in your tax payment, while watching the country fall around you. Why cling to your tax dollar when the institution that gave you the ability or your family to earn that dollar crumbles. Are we creating an opportunity for children to succeed? Or do you have to have a wealthy family to have a chance at success? What about the American dream? A huge misconception is that under developed nations are all poor people. In actuality they have similar ratio of wealth as us (1/10). It is our middle class that separates us, and our technology innovation. If we don't promote education and programs that give us a competitive advantage in a global market while maintaining a healthy middle class our economy will fall. We have an economy based on consumption. The consumer is the key in that equation. Most kids today couldn’t tell me who Nero is. They wouldn’t catch that I capitalized a verb not a proper noun. They are falling behind in math and science and we are in big trouble. Unethical business practices have stifled our economy and the entry level positions these kids would be qualified for are disappearing overseas. Analysts will tell you that America doesn’t want those jobs anyway, but we are also not producing a new generation of white collar worker either. Allow me to indulge your beer story. It is a challenge because in your example you are not talking about income, only spending. You have left out these key issues; The guy spending the most on tax does so because he makes more money. In turn he has a higher tax bill. This is in relation to his income not in relation to the amount of resources he uses, i.e. roads, police or welfare. Although it could be argued that he does need that more. The use of such benefits him greater than the poor. It is evident in his portfolio sir. ZING The guys spending the middle amounts on tax do so because they are in the middle income bracket. The taxes are also geared to give him deposable income which is the corner stone of our economic growth. The poor have little income so they do not get taxed on nothing. Here is some math for you 23% of $0 = $0. By their use of police, welfare and other programs they are not hindering our society from operating as normal. Giving you, the rich, a chance to continue business as usual. How could you be successful if our entire nation was in a humanitarian crisis? You couldn’t. It’s called keeping the peace and it keeps you in business. Some of these poor may be the parents of our next great minds, if those kids are given a fair chance. Of course the wealthy pay more taxes. My grandfather paid more tax in one year than I made in three. But he also has made more money than I make in 15 years. It’s all relative. I am a capitalist. I am an American. I want to make sure that we can stay healthy, strong and lead the world in morals, good business and technology. Your beer example implies that we will scare the rich out of paying taxes, growing companies, creating jobs, and spending. News flash, the wealthy don’t do the most consumer spending. You may spend more than me in taxes, but you also take for granted the institution that gives you the freedom to do so. Your financial benefit is much greater than mine for the infrastructure America provides you with. That is why you pay more taxes than me. Why is it an excellent post?