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

groupergenius

Active Member
Originally Posted by prime311
http:///forum/post/2818983
Oh give me a break. The US is not socialist nor will it be under Obama. You vastly overestimate the impact one president can have on our system. If you think we're going to be socialist under Obama then you must believe that we already are.
Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Reid, and a Democrat majority in Congress can make more of an impact though.
 

prime311

Active Member
Originally Posted by GrouperGenius
http:///forum/post/2819110
Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Reid, and a Democrat majority in Congress can make more of an impact though.

Well I'm voting for our republican house representatives in Wisconsin. Ideally I'd prefer to have a president offset by congress rather then enabled. I'd vote R for senators too if we didn't have 2 Dems that I really like(Feingold and Kohl<owner of the Bucks>). Still these things are what I expect economically from Obama: Overall Higher taxes, reduced Military Spending, and a budget more in balance then what it is now. I also think Universal Health Care will never happen in the US. Maybe I'm wrong, but that is what I believe. If it makes you feel better I'll probably vote R in '12 because it seems to me that all of our recent presidents suck in their 2nd term, assuming Obama wins anyway.
Also, I'd like to say a US President is a lot like a baseball manager. Sometimes he has little to do with how his team is playing, even though the ultimate credit/blame will probably fall to him anyway.
 

socal57che

Active Member
Originally Posted by prime311
http:///forum/post/2819199
Well I'm voting for our republican house representatives in Wisconsin. Ideally I'd prefer to have a president offset by congress rather then enabled. I'd vote R for senators too if we didn't have 2 Dems that I really like(Feingold and Kohl<owner of the Bucks>). Still these things are what I expect economically from Obama: Overall Higher taxes, reduced Military Spending, and a budget more in balance then what it is now. I also think Universal Health Care will never happen in the US. Maybe I'm wrong, but that is what I believe. If it makes you feel better I'll probably vote R in '12 because it seems to me that all of our recent presidents suck in their 2nd term, assuming Obama wins anyway.

I vote across party lines every election. I HATE it when I'm asked whether I'm republican or democrat. I'll vote for the candidate that will serve me best. In this case it is neither O or Mc, but my guy has no real chance.
 

1journeyman

Active Member

Originally Posted by Jaymz
http:///forum/post/2818831
Did you seriously just say that? Are you serious? I mean really for one millisecond you are serious about this statment.
WHY DOES EVERY ONE WANT IT?????
One more time, you are serious?
Isn't it we HAVE to have it if we dont want be nailed to the wall with debt if we happen to break a bone or have a child.
And no 1manJury the government doesnt HAVE to provide us with anything. But it sure would be nice if they did. If they took 50 percent of my pay check in taxes and I and my family was medically FULLY
covered and schooling was free, I would be fine with that.
Im sorry if you think that government becoming part of our lives is too much I suggest you not have anything to hide. I do not see any other reason to be worried about it.
My question was, IF insurance is inflated why does everyone want it... I was clearly pointing out it is not. Your argument agrees with what I was saying.
What kind of job do you have that pays so little you pay more than 50% of your income to insurance? Unless a person is uninsurable that is crazy.
I have nothing to hide, trust me
Its the Democrats that don't want the Government to wiretap Al Qaeda members when a cell phone rings in a cave in Somewhereistan. Not wanting Government to trample my Constitutional rights has nothing to do with trying to hide something in my past.
 

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2819353
My question was, IF insurance is inflated why does everyone want it... I was clearly pointing out it is not. Your argument agrees with what I was saying.
What kind of job do you have that pays so little you pay more than 50% of your income to insurance? Unless a person is uninsurable that is crazy.
I have nothing to hide, trust me
Its the Democrats that don't want the Government to wiretap Al Qaeda members when a cell phone rings in a cave in Somewhereistan. Not wanting Government to trample my Constitutional rights has nothing to do with trying to hide something in my past.
Insurance is not inflated? Where are you buying yours (or is this fancy company you work for giving it to you for free)? Over the last three years, my wife went to having to pay only $40/month for her company insurance plan, to $260/month to get the same coverage for me, her, and my family. Even with that, our deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums also tripled over those same three years. You don't call that inflation?
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2818847
See....this is what I think of Bush supporters...all 25% of you...
1- probably people like Buffet and Gates who are Obama supporters and already give tons....
2- I guess only conservatives serve overseas.....
Need one? I personally know several unethical republican accountants that service your area....(well, Texas, not Iraq)
*Show me where we Republicans on this forum have said things like "McCain doesn't believe that" when McCain or his website were quoted.... If you can do that then my Monty Python analogy fits Republicans. If you cannot, then your comment reinforces my analogy regarding obama supporters...
*Statistically Conservatives give more to charity. Pointing out a couple of rich guys that support Obama certainly doesn't change that. http://philanthropy.com/free/article...4/04001101.htm
*I never said only Conservatives serve overseas. Feel free to take a look at how the military votes, however, to get an idea on the numbers however.
*Nope. I would never use one, nor would I associate with one. I've got a great accountant that knows the laws well... I'll be ethical and legal and better off.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2818850
Because medical expenses are even more inflated (sorry dad!)
And neither is a tax break
100% Aussie 'American'
*Huh? If Insurance pays for something that is more inflated than it is, can Insurance still be inflated? Pleassse explain that...
*I never said a tax break was Socialistic. I said saying the civil rights movement failed to use the courts to redistribute wealth was Socialistic.
*No, 100% American. I will never add an adjective in front of American when describing myself.
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2819368
Insurance is not inflated? Where are you buying yours (or is this fancy company you work for giving it to you for free)? Over the last three years, my wife went to having to pay only $40/month for her company insurance plan, to $260/month to get the same coverage for me, her, and my family. Even with that, our deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums also tripled over those same three years. You don't call that inflation?
40-260 in 3 years? are you kidding me? Mine has climbed, but the only time it jumped like that is when it went from single to family insurance...how many people is 260 a month insuring?
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by VinnyRaptor
http:///forum/post/2818874
ITS THE GOVERNMENT'S JOB AND CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY TO PROVIDE LIFE LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS TO ALL OF ITS CITIZENS!!!!
Yes it is...
Life- You Libs quickly forget this when the topic of Abortion comes up. Suddenly "life" is replaced with "choice". Under the Constitution you are guaranteed certain rights that allow you life. The word "life" doesn't in any way imply "being sustained by the Government's coffers"
Liberty- Like religion in public, gun ownership, freedom from oppressive taxation, freedom of speech? All of these things your candidate is against.
Pursuit of Happiness- The Government allows you to pursue it. It does not guarantee it.
I literally am down on my knees begging you to debate this with me. I am begging you to show me how my comments are in any way unConstitutional. Please... Let's take them point by point.
 

kjr_trig

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2818951
So you have to be Republican to know how to manage your assets? Now that's a moronic statement. What school did that economic professor teach at, ITT Technical Institute?
The profits from my part ownership of my company does pay me well. But if you know how to manage those assets, you can actually decrease your taxes. Something I imagine this economics professor didn't teach you.
LOL, you totally missed the point of the statement, not surprising. The point is not how you manage your personal funds as a business owner or highly paid professional. The point is you would have to be a moron to want to give more of your hard earned money to the government to pay for programs and things you don't need, to help out people that don't work as hard as you do. That as an educated, highly paid person you don't need "more government". If Obama gets elected and passes his economic plan, my household would have to pay roughly $15,000 more a year in taxes. I would have to be a moron to vote for that. That's his point.
BTW it was Western Washington University, it's not Harvard, but it's rather good but horribly liberal school.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by prime311
http:///forum/post/2818983
Oh give me a break. The US is not socialist nor will it be under Obama. You vastly overestimate the impact one president can have on our system. If you think we're going to be socialist under Obama then you must believe that we already are.
So, to clarify;
You liberals say President Bush is the devil who has run the country into the ground. Yet, somehow, I am the one who is overestimating the power of one President?
Look at what happened to our Nation under Jimmy Carter, then tell me one man can't do that much. Look at Venezuela right now, or Cuba in the 60's or Germany in the 30's, or Russia in the 20's.
If one man can't do much, why is Obama running on "Change"?
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2819368
Insurance is not inflated? Where are you buying yours (or is this fancy company you work for giving it to you for free)? Over the last three years, my wife went to having to pay only $40/month for her company insurance plan, to $260/month to get the same coverage for me, her, and my family. Even with that, our deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums also tripled over those same three years. You don't call that inflation?
If it is inflated why do you keep paying it?
 

jmick

Active Member
Wanted to chime in on something and agree with Journey. I think abortion is one of the most disgusting and selfish acts a person can commit. After becoming a parent my thoughts about it have really changed but I still think taking away the right presents a slippery slope and what would we do as a nation if that were to happen?
Who would foot the bill for all children being born into poverty? Who would pay for the added burden on social services? Would we as Americans step up and start adopting all these unwanted children or would many of them spend their lives living with people who didn't love them?
 

socal57che

Active Member
Originally Posted by Jmick
http:///forum/post/2819428
Who would foot the bill for all children being born into poverty? Who would pay for the added burden on social services? Would we as Americans step up and start adopting all these unwanted children or would many of them spend their lives living with people who didn't love them?
Maybe, just maybe, it would decline if we raised more responsible kids in the first place. People don't teach their kids accountability any more.
And I, too, changed my views on abortion after becoming a parent.
 

groupergenius

Active Member
Originally Posted by Jmick
http:///forum/post/2819428
Wanted to chime in on something and agree with Journey. I think abortion is one of the most disgusting and selfish acts a person can commit. After becoming a parent my thoughts about it have really changed but I still think taking away the right presents a slippery slope and what would we do as a nation if that were to happen?
Who would foot the bill for all children being born into poverty? Who would pay for the added burden on social services? Would we as Americans step up and start adopting all these unwanted children or would many of them spend their lives living with people who didn't love them?

While this has traversed to the abortion segment of this thread, didn't McCain in the last debate say he would like the matter to be State choice instead of Federally mandated.
 

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by kjr_trig
http:///forum/post/2819386
LOL, you totally missed the point of the statement, not surprising. The point is not how you manage your personal funds as a business owner or highly paid professional. The point is you would have to be a moron to want to give more of your hard earned money to the government to pay for programs and things you don't need, to help out people that don't work as hard as you do. That as an educated, highly paid person you don't need "more government". If Obama gets elected and passes his economic plan, my household would have to pay roughly $15,000 more a year in taxes. I would have to be a moron to vote for that. That's his point.
BTW it was Western Washington University, it's not Harvard, but it's rather good but horribly liberal school.
Didn't miss the point of the statement at all. You need a better accountant. If you manage your assests properly and LEGALLY to the extent of the current tax laws, you could pay no more than the average citizen. I do it every year. Don't know if my family makes more than yours, but based on your statement of having to pay $15,000 more a year in taxes, I would say we're not far off.
 

jmick

Active Member
Originally Posted by socal57che
http:///forum/post/2819439
Maybe, just maybe, it would decline if we raised more responsible kids in the first place. People dont teach their kids accountability any more.
And I, too, changed my views on abortion after becoming a parent.
It'd be great to think that every parent invested the time in their children to ensure they grew up with morals and knew what responsibility was. This isn't the case, there are a lot of parents out there who just don't care and think about themselves first and place the welfare of their kids second.
Growing up we had a neighbor who's parents divorced when they were young. The dad didn't come over very often and the mom would go out every night and seemed to bring home a different man at the end of every evening. By the time the three of them were in Jr Hs each one was doing drugs and this was in an upper middle class neighborhood. They moved when I was in 7th grade, can only imagine what happened to them.
 

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2819395
If it is inflated why do you keep paying it?
Uh, because I need medical insurance to cover me and my family in case of a major medical procedure? My wife had a benign tumor last year, and had to get a complete hysterectomy and a partial colon resection. The total cost out the door was over $250,000. With our insurance, we had to pay $8,000. Which one would you choose?
I don't make the rules when it comes to insurance coverage through a company provider. That's the problem with major companies. They want to contribute less and less towards coverage, and expect the employees to pay more of the burden. On top of that, you get fewer services. That's the flaw in McCain's health plan. He thinks $5,000 will provide some great medical coverage. Being an independent contractor, I've seen the rates in my area if I just want to go out and buy insurance on my own. To get the same coverage we get with my wife's company, I'd have to pay another $1,000 on top of McCain's 'tax credit'. And you don't think the insurance companies won't take advantage of knowing people will have to come to them for coverage, since major companies will start dumping medical coverage because it will no longer be pre-tax? Watch rates skyrocket. And remember, McCain wants to give a 'tax credit'. That doesn't necessarily mean you'll get the complete $5,000. If you owe taxes for any reason, that $5,000 can disappear real quick.
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2819507
Uh, because I need medical insurance to cover me and my family in case of a major medical procedure? My wife had a benign tumor last year, and had to get a complete hysterectomy and a partial colon dissection. The total cost out the door was over $250,000. With our insurance, we had to pay $8,000. Which one would you choose?
I don't make the rules when it comes to insurance coverage through a company provider. That's the problem with major companies. They want to contribute less and less towards coverage, and expect the employees to pay more of the burden. On top of that, you get fewer services. That's the flaw in McCain's health plan. He thinks $5,000 will provide some great medical coverage. Being an independent contractor, I've seen the rates in my area if I just want to go out and buy insurance on my own. To get the same coverage we get with my wife's company, I'd have to pay another $1,000 on top of McCain's 'tax credit'. And you don't think the insurance companies won't take advantage of knowing people will have to come to them for coverage, since major companies will start dumping medical coverage because it will no longer be pre-tax? Watch rates skyrocket. And remember, McCain wants to give a 'tax credit'. That doesn't necessarily mean you'll get the complete $5,000. If you owe taxes for any reason, that $5,000 can disappear real quick.
I thijnk Journey is of the same mind set I am on this topic. The government should not be paying health insurance in any form. Instead, those that can't afford it based off income can enrol in medicaid/medicare like everyone else that want's medical and can't afford it has been for years. Instead of creating ANOTHER health program, how about fix the first one created.
 

prime311

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2819387
So, to clarify;
You liberals say President Bush is the devil who has run the country into the ground. Yet, somehow, I am the one who is overestimating the power of one President?
Look at what happened to our Nation under Jimmy Carter, then tell me one man can't do that much. Look at Venezuela right now, or Cuba in the 60's or Germany in the 30's, or Russia in the 20's.
If one man can't do much, why is Obama running on "Change"?

I'm more of a Libertarian then a Liberal and I never said Bush ran the country into the ground(altho I hardly find his rule inspiring). So don't draw conclusions out of your false assumptions about me or my beliefs.
 
Top