I just don't get how this guy might be the next leader of the Free World

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by GrouperGenius
http:///forum/post/2820280
So your good with paying 22% x 2 of your income for insurance and schooling? Lets work this out, shall we? So now 44% is going to insurance and school. And depending on income is tax bracket. Let's use $50,000 a year. And you have a family. Congratulations, the kids are cute.
So, $50,000 - 44% insurance/schooling is now $28,000. $2333 a month.
Food and clothing is all you need? No rent, electric, water, heat oil, gas for your car, car insurance, ya'll might want to consider having the cable TV shut off so ya can have a phone.
Come on, don't blame the guy for not using a calculator. My familiy's insurance is about 2.2% of our income for health and life insurance. Which level of schooling are we talking about? If you talking elementary, middle, and high school, that's covered by our home's property taxes, about 3% of anyone's income. If I send my older daughter to a very good state university here in Texas, I'm looking at approximately $15,000 a year for tuition and books. For your $50,000 family, that's about 30% of their annual income. For me, someone in the upper income bracket, it's less than 10%. So that's the breaking point in your theory. If you omit the cost of higher education, a family making $50,000 a year would do pretty good on free healthcare and schooling:
$50,000 - 10.4% = $44,800. 3733/month.
Like I said, the back breaker is paying for college. But then, not many families making $50,000/year can afford to send their kids to college today without loans, grants, or scholarships.
Anyway, taking your numbers your theories are flawed. A family making only $50,000/year couldn't live on $2,300/month? If you live within your means, and don't go out and get one of these $300,000 homes like the people who want to be bailed out, you could easily live on $2,300/month (depending WHERE you live). In San Antonio:
3 bedroom house, 1700 square feet - $700/month rent
Utilities: electric, water, cable, phone - $300/month
Autos: gas and car insurance (2 drivers) - $350/month
Food: family of four - $500/month
Total: $1850/month
Sure, money would be tight, but you could live on it. Again, this is San Antonio. It isn't LA, New York, or any of these other ridiculously high rent areas. I personally don't know how someone who makes only $50,000/year could even live in these areas, even if they had to only pay 22% of their income to insurance and school.
 

jaymz

Member
Originally Posted by GrouperGenius
http:///forum/post/2820280
So your good with paying 22% x 2 of your income for insurance and schooling? Lets work this out, shall we? So now 44% is going to insurance and school. And depending on income is tax bracket. Let's use $50,000 a year. And you have a family. Congratulations, the kids are cute.
So, $50,000 - 44% insurance/schooling is now $28,000. $2333 a month.
Food and clothing is all you need? No rent, electric, water, heat oil, gas for your car, car insurance, ya'll might want to consider having the cable TV shut off so ya can have a phone.
why is everyone missing what im trying to say.. put the booze down and let your brain cells see clearly for a second. NO i mean 22% goes to fed, state, local, soc security like it is now.. and the other 22% goes to medical insurance and schooling. And I mean FULLY covered medical and schooling. No books or supplies to buy, insurance covers dental and eyes and jock itch.
Yes everything else you mentioned is a luxury. Since you like to parse what people say to rediculous ends. Food and water is the only thing a human can not truly live with out. Now just because we have created this illusion we call life that requires electric and a roof sure i guess its a necessity. How is heat oil not a luxury, how is a car not a luxury. There are wood buring stoves and public transportation, and yes they cost money to use but MUCH MUCH less. Now car insurance is the law so its a forced luxury.
Remember the good old days when law students used to rack up a nice $100K+ student loan bills and then as soon as they passed the bar they filed for bankruptcy. Where did those days go. I wonder who they are voting for.
 

jaymz

Member
And YES I MEAN COLLEGE IS PAID FOR. atleast a state school and if you want a fancy education you can go to IVY leauge and pay for it.
 

groupergenius

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2820330
Come on, don't blame the guy for not using a calculator. My familiy's insurance is about 2.2% of our income for health and life insurance. Which level of schooling are we talking about? If you talking elementary, middle, and high school, that's covered by our home's property taxes, about 3% of anyone's income. If I send my older daughter to a very good state university here in Texas, I'm looking at approximately $15,000 a year for tuition and books. For your $50,000 family, that's about 30% of their annual income. For me, someone in the upper income bracket, it's less than 10%. So that's the breaking point in your theory. If you omit the cost of higher education, a family making $50,000 a year would do pretty good on free healthcare and schooling:
$50,000 - 10.4% = $44,800. 3733/month.
Like I said, the back breaker is paying for college. But then, not many families making $50,000/year can afford to send their kids to college today without loans, grants, or scholarships.
Anyway, taking your numbers your theories are flawed. A family making only $50,000/year couldn't live on $2,300/month? If you live within your means, and don't go out and get one of these $300,000 homes like the people who want to be bailed out, you could easily live on $2,300/month (depending WHERE you live). In San Antonio:
3 bedroom house, 1700 square feet - $700/month rent
Utilities: electric, water, cable, phone - $300/month
Autos: gas and car insurance (2 drivers) - $350/month
Food: family of four - $500/month
Total: $1850/month
Sure, money would be tight, but you could live on it. Again, this is San Antonio. It isn't LA, New York, or any of these other ridiculously high rent areas. I personally don't know how someone who makes only $50,000/year could even live in these areas, even if they had to only pay 22% of their income to insurance and school.
Sure would be nice if budgeting was that easy. What if the car breaks down? The rent....that's like 1980 pricing round here and this ain't New York. Food for 4 $500?? no way. I include laundry, TP and all the other necessities in with the food bill.
And the biggest kicker.......income tax. Or does the $50,000 family not pay taxes?
 

groupergenius

Active Member
Originally Posted by Jaymz
http:///forum/post/2820342
why is everyone missing what im trying to say.. put the booze down and let your brain cells see clearly for a second. NO i mean 22% goes to fed, state, local, soc security like it is now.. and the other 22% goes to medical insurance and schooling. And I mean FULLY covered medical and schooling. No books or supplies to buy, insurance covers dental and eyes and jock itch.
Yes everything else you mentioned is a luxury. Since you like to parse what people say to rediculous ends. Food and water is the only thing a human can not truly live with out. Now just because we have created this illusion we call life that requires electric and a roof sure i guess its a necessity. How is heat oil not a luxury, how is a car not a luxury. There are wood buring stoves and public transportation, and yes they cost money to use but MUCH MUCH less. Now car insurance is the law so its a forced luxury.
Remember the good old days when law students used to rack up a nice $100K+ student loan bills and then as soon as they passed the bar they filed for bankruptcy. Where did those days go. I wonder who they are voting for.

Can't argue with that logic.
 

jaymz

Member
I have college loans, paying them back along with health insurance eats up about 28% of my monthly income. I am paying for this health insurance and cant even afford to use it.
 

zman1

Active Member

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2819871
There is one political party that fits that description...
Life- So where does life begin?
Please explain to me with facts how "one political party that fits that description" demonstrated
this over the last eight years. This party has lost its way and rhetoric doesn't make it so... They haven't proved to be frugal
in the last eight years - this is science fiction at its best...

Life- So where does life begin? What is a misscarrige? 1 in 4 and the other choice 2 in 100. That works out to 25% and 2%. I am not sure who is to blame for the 25% number though, Mother Nature or something else...
Also, if you have a federal-back student loan - Sallie-Mae, bankruptcy doesn't allow you to write that off, to keep the record straight.
 

1journeyman

Active Member

Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2820527
Please explain to me with facts how "one political party that fits that description" demonstrated
this over the last eight years. This party has lost its way and rhetoric doesn't make it so... They haven't proved to be frugal
in the last eight years - this is science fiction at its best...

Life- So where does life begin? What is a misscarrige? 1 in 4 and the other choice 2 in 100. That works out to 25% and 2%. I am not sure who is to blame for the 25% number though, Mother Nature or something else...
Also, if you have a federal-back student loan - Sallie-Mae, bankruptcy doesn't allow you to write that off, to keep the record straight.
Few if any of the Conservatives around here will not agree that the past 8 years saw a drift away from Conservatism. If you read my post I said we needed to get back to Conservatism.
That said, you cannot possibly argue, even against the past 8 years, that Obama woud be closer to the ideas I espoused than McCain.
 

zman1

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2820547
If you read my post I said we needed to get back to Conservatism...you cannot possibly argue, even against the past 8 years, that Obama woud be closer to the ideas I espoused than McCain.
Yes, I can argue. The party may say what you believe or want to hear, but they haven't practiced your beliefs in the last 8 years. I question why would you blindly follow and have obedience to the rhetoric and say they will.
They are better than the other party because they say what I want to hear, forget they haven't delivered. Teach them a lesson, if they want your vote, they will have to actually earn it...
 

reefraff

Active Member
Why would anyone who is mad at the Republican party for moving left vote for a Democrat who is more socialist than liberal?
We can't afford Obama and Pelosi running the show.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2820578
Yes, I can argue. The party may say what you believe or want to hear, but they haven't practiced your beliefs in the last 8 years. I question why would you blindly follow and have obedience to the rhetoric and say they will.
They are better than the other party because they say what I want to hear, forget they haven't delivered. Teach them a lesson, if they want your vote, they will have to actually earn it...
I'll say it again;
Even as "moderate" as the administration has been the past 8 years, it has been in no way the Liberal circus that would be put into place under Obama.
 

zman1

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2820612
Why would anyone who is mad at the Republican party for moving left vote for a Democrat who is more socialist than liberal?
We can't afford Obama and Pelosi running the show.

Originally Posted by 1journeyman

http:///forum/post/2820614
I'll say it again;
Even as "moderate" as the administration has been the past 8 years, it has been in no way the Liberal circus that would be put into place under Obama.
You have Bob Barr, if you vote your convictions... I didn't say vote for a democrat.
"They are better than the other party because they say what I want to hear, forget they haven't delivered. Teach them a lesson, if they want your vote, they will have to actually earn it... "
 

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2821140
You have Bob Barr, if you vote your convictions... I didn't say vote for a democrat.
"They are better than the other party because they say what I want to hear, forget they haven't delivered. Teach them a lesson, if they want your vote, they will have to actually earn it... "

Why would I throw away my vote and allow a socialist to come to power?
 

zman1

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2821162
Why would I throw away my vote and allow a socialist to come to power?
Capitalist markets don't want government to get in their way. Until they backrupt themselves by greed and then the capitalist want and need a socialist plan to bail them out. Go Figure....
You have three now.. Bush, McCain, and Obama, two voted and one signed the socialist bailout plan. I see you have your morals intact because you're okay with varying levels of socialism on the free market. So its really not a conviction or true belief. Otherwise, neither McCain or Obama would get your vote. Now I know you are a quasi socialist as others are too.
 

zman1

Active Member
A few of the Socialist bailout supporters in the Senate. I put in a few of the battle ground states and others. For the strict anti-socialist crowd
Alaska
Aye AK Murkowski, Lisa [R]
Aye AK Stevens, Ted [R]
Arizona
Aye AZ Kyl, Jon [R]
Aye AZ McCain, John [R]
Delaware
Aye DE Biden, Joseph [D]
Aye DE Carper, Thomas [D]
Florida
Aye FL Martinez, Mel [R]
Nay FL Nelson, Bill [D]
Illinois
Aye IL Durbin, Richard [D]
Aye IL Obama, Barack [D]
Indiana
Aye IN Bayh, B. [D]
Aye IN Lugar, Richard [R]
Iowa
Aye IA Grassley, Charles [R]
Aye IA Harkin, Thomas [D]
Missouri
Aye MO Bond, Christopher [R]
Aye MO McCaskill, Claire [D]
New York
Aye NY Clinton, Hillary [D]
Aye NY Schumer, Charles [D]
Ohio
Aye OH Brown, Sherrod [D]
Aye OH Voinovich, George [R]
South Carolina
Aye SC Graham, Lindsey [R]
Nay SC DeMint, Jim [R]
Texas
Aye TX Cornyn, John [R]
Aye TX Hutchison, Kay [R]
 
V

vinnyraptor

Guest
in 8 short years college tuition has tripled. food gas and energy has doubled. jobs, especially manufacturing have disapeared. i too have friends in jail or on drugs. i too am scraping by and i too have friends that are "rich". the opportunities we ALL had 10 20 or 30 years ago aren't as abundant as they were back then. if your from a poor family and aren't exceptional how are you to live the American dream? by working at Walmart or McDonalds? you cant go put in an application at the local steel mill or auto plant there in China and Mexico. you cant get a scholarship or grants for college or trade schools. what is the C average poor kid to do nowadays? back in the day he could work an honest blue collar job and provide for his family. he would pay taxes, provide a service, and contribute to society. now he's at a fastfood joint or two and still cant afford a trade school or college. he/she has no healthcare and is a paycheck or two away from being homeless! this is not fair and is not the american dream, especially while the richest 1% have made record profits! if EVERYONE was struggling equally i could except it. but thats not the case. our young and poor quite simply do not have a fair shot. i dont want my tax dollars going to lazy welfare bums but I DO WANT it to go to hardworking poor kids who want the American dream. they DONT have the same opportunities that we had and thats the problem...
Originally Posted by GrouperGenius
http:///forum/post/2819771
Equal and fair shot....why is it that some of my old classmates are in jail, some are scraping by (like myself) and some are rolling in the big bucks?
The beauty of this Country is that it gives you the opportunity. It's up to each individual to make their own destiny. Obama himself, raised by a single mom and his Grandmother, got this darn far in life. Did it happen with the policies he's trying to put in place? Or was it there all along....life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
 

socal57che

Active Member
Originally Posted by VinnyRaptor
http:///forum/post/2821213
you cant go put in an application at the local steel mill or auto plant there in China and Mexico. ...
Google bill clinton NAFTA.
Your big employers went to a more tax friendly environment, free from the US labor unions.
 

groupergenius

Active Member
Originally Posted by socal57che
http:///forum/post/2821260
Google bill clinton NAFTA.
Your big employers went to a more tax friendly environment, free from the US labor unions.
Hmmm. help me out with this one....labor unions. Organizations to help make sure every individual is treated the same no matter how good they are. How hard they work, and how lazy they are. All equals. All get the same over the top benefits all the same no matter what the employee's actual input is.
Labor unions....sounds a bit like Socialism to me.
So these Union organizations, who do they back and support in the political arena??
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2821176
Capitalist markets don't want government to get in their way. Until they backrupt themselves by greed and then the capitalist want and need a socialist plan to bail them out. Go Figure....
You have three now.. Bush, McCain, and Obama, two voted and one signed the socialist bailout plan. I see you have your morals intact because you're okay with varying levels of socialism on the free market. So its really not a conviction or true belief. Otherwise, neither McCain or Obama would get your vote. Now I know you are a quasi socialist as others are too.
No... but given the choice we go with the much lesser of two evils...
Capitalist societies go bankrupt and need Socialist plans to bail them out huh? So you think people can't live without Government holding their hands and making their decisions for them?
 
Top