Joe the Plumber

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2802620
Were we a socialist country in the 90's? How about in the 40-50s?
No. Then, again, in those times did we:
*Have a President calling for "redistribution of wealth"
*President pushing to Nationalize Health Care
*President pushing to Nationalize energy
*President pushing to Nationalize m ortgage and banking
*President pushing to Nationalize private insurance
*President advocating "a ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns..."
See the difference?
Thus Socialism...

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2802821
No. Then, again, in those times did we:
*Have a President calling for "redistribution of wealth"
*President pushing to Nationalize Health Care
*President pushing to Nationalize energy
*President pushing to Nationalize m ortgage and banking
*President pushing to Nationalize private insurance
*President advocating "a ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns..."
See the difference?
Thus Socialism...

You need to read Obama's policies a little closer before making those claims.
He's not nationalizing healthcare. He's offering individuals who don't have insurance with an employer the opportunity to BUY into the same insurance system as Federal employees.
He's not nationalizing energy. He's want to provide tax incentives for people to build energy effective equipment (wind turbines, solar panels). This produces job growth. McCain wants 45 government run nuclear plants. Whose the one nationalizing energy?
The idiots in Congress just 'nationalize' the

[hr]
and banking industry. BOTH candidates approved it.
McCain is the one pushing the $5000 per person insurance benefit. Whose the one nationalizing insurance?
There ya go. Get the NRA and gun fanatics fired up. The NRA is so deep into Congressional pockets that there's no president that will ever get any legislative change regarding the 2nd Amendment or gun laws.
Read up before you spew more lies...

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2802839
You need to read Obama's policies a little closer before making those claims.
He's not nationalizing healthcare. He's offering individuals who don't have insurance with an employer the opportunity to BUY into the same insurance system as Federal employees.
He's not nationalizing energy. He's want to provide tax incentives for people to build energy effective equipment (wind turbines, solar panels). This produces job growth. McCain wants 45 government run nuclear plants. Whose the one nationalizing energy?
The idiots in Congress just 'nationalize' the

[hr]
and banking industry. BOTH candidates approved it.
McCain is the one pushing the $5000 per person insurance benefit. Whose the one nationalizing insurance?
There ya go. Get the NRA and gun fanatics fired up. The NRA is so deep into Congressional pockets that there's no president that will ever get any legislative change regarding the 2nd Amendment or gun laws.
Read up before you spew more lies...
Ok, how about we quote Obama on each of these points, shall we?
Healthcare:
"The Obama-Biden plan provides affordable, accessible health care for all Americans..." http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/ and:
"Provide Universal Health Care and Lower Health Costs: Barack Obama and Joe Biden are committed to signing universal health legislation by the end of their first term in office that ensures all Americans have high-quality, affordable health care coverage..."
Please read up on your candidate's position, from their own webpage, before telling me I'm wrong or"spewing lies".
Energy:
"I'll make oil companies like Exxon pay a tax on their windfall profits, and we'll use the money to help families pay for their skyrocketing energy costs and other bills"...http://www.reuters.com/article/topNe...00963020080609 Classic Socialism. Redistribution of wealth...
banking and m ortgages: Read here for the full list of new government interference Obama proposes: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/family/ And, btw, I was opposed to the bailout McCain signed as well.
I quoted Obama on gun control. Sorry if you are afraid that will fire someone up.
As I said, please read your candidates webpage. I think you will learn a lot.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2802616
Well, lets do some math.
$30,000 profit @ 35% corporate tax rate= $10,500 in taxes. Not quite the $360,000 stated above. If it is not incorporated, and your friend pays himself 220,000, then :
$250,000 @ 35% = $87,500, then under obama 250K @ 38%= $95,000.
Leads me to believe one of the numbers he gave you is incorrect, granted SS etc. is not included in this, but the pure numbers show that something is fishy.
So:
Assume 35% corporate rate:
$360,000/.35= $1,028,571 profit before taxes. If his company makes this much and he is incorporated, his taxes don't change under Obama.
Everyone keeps saying that Obama will kill business, but he hasn't talked about raising business tax now has he. He has talked about personal income tax for 5-6% of the population, and anyone who makes a significant business profit are incorporated, therefore business is the same. There can be an argument made about start-ups, but I find it to be null as those in the highest tax bracket have easy access to credit in our normal economy.
I don't think he was just talking about the income tax. I wouldn't be suprised paying the government 40 cents a gallon, to see him rack up a huge tax bill.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2802620
Were we a socialist country in the 90's? How about in the 40-50s?
I'm not getting what you're getting at.

 

[veni vidi vici]

Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2802616
Well, lets do some math.
$30,000 profit @ 35% corporate tax rate= $10,500 in taxes. Not quite the $360,000 stated above. If it is not incorporated, and your friend pays himself 220,000, then :
$250,000 @ 35% = $87,500, then under obama 250K @ 38%= $95,000.
Leads me to believe one of the numbers he gave you is incorrect, granted SS etc. is not included in this, but the pure numbers show that something is fishy.
So:
Assume 35% corporate rate:
$360,000/.35= $1,028,571 profit before taxes. If his company makes this much and he is incorporated, his taxes don't change under Obama.
Everyone keeps saying that Obama will kill business, but he hasn't talked about raising business tax now has he. He has talked about personal income tax for 5-6% of the population, and anyone who makes a significant business profit are incorporated, therefore business is the same. There can be an argument made about start-ups, but I find it to be null as those in the highest tax bracket have easy access to credit in our normal economy.
In either one of those tax formulas ,taxes are to high for the 200k and up and also the 200k and down.Our current tax system sucks and we are paying to much to a congress who is financially irresponsible.
Its been over 200 years of this and it may be time for a second" Boston Tea Party" in a peaceful manner of course.
Unless we can get a full and complete change of personnel in out current federal government. Get rid of the all the politicians and replace them with people who want to do whats best for "We The People" and not "We the Congress" with the biggest check book in the world ,nothing will change.It makes me laugh to hear them scold the likes of AIG and yet they do the same. We need change all right ,not to socialism or any other form of government ,we need a change of personnel all the way down the board.We need people like "Joe the Plumber" or Ed the Carpenter ........And not Lawyers and professional Politicians.We need to find away to get rid of this failing 2 party system that is constantly at odds with themselves while "We the People" suffer, while the democrats and republicans fight a unending war for power and control of our check book to squander our money away.Maybe we need to do away with the Electoral College and go with the popular vote so then when you or i go to vote it really counts.

 

[ironeagle2006]

This persons Average truck solo for him brings in 170K a year team truck is 270 grand. His revenues are 1,730,000 for the YEAR. Now out of that he pays FUEL TAXES ROAD TAXES DRIVER WAGES SOCIAL SECURITY TAXES PLUS MAINTAINCE AND FUEL PLUS PAYS FOR HIS EQUIPMENT. Now the Messiah wants to increase his taxes on HIS GROSS INCOME before he pays any of that can you say BYE TO THE ENTIORE TRUCKING INDUSTRY. BTW you would not eat drink have power or anything in your houses without trucks on the road.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by ironeagle2006
http:///forum/post/2802930
This persons Average truck solo for him brings in 170K a year team truck is 270 grand. His revenues are 1,730,000 for the YEAR. Now out of that he pays FUEL TAXES ROAD TAXES DRIVER WAGES SOCIAL SECURITY TAXES PLUS MAINTAINCE AND FUEL PLUS PAYS FOR HIS EQUIPMENT. Now the Messiah wants to increase his taxes on HIS GROSS INCOME before he pays any of that can you say BYE TO THE ENTIORE TRUCKING INDUSTRY. BTW you would not eat drink have power or anything in your houses without trucks on the road.
You're forgetting the price increase in gasoline when Obama implements the "windfall" tax on the oil industry.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2802855
Ok, how about we quote Obama on each of these points, shall we?
Healthcare:
"The Obama-Biden plan provides affordable, accessible health care for all Americans..." http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/ and:
"Provide Universal Health Care and Lower Health Costs: Barack Obama and Joe Biden are committed to signing universal health legislation by the end of their first term in office that ensures all Americans have high-quality, affordable health care coverage..."
Please read up on your candidate's position, from their own webpage, before telling me I'm wrong or"spewing lies".
Energy:
"I'll make oil companies like Exxon pay a tax on their windfall profits, and we'll use the money to help families pay for their skyrocketing energy costs and other bills"...http://www.reuters.com/article/topNe...00963020080609 Classic Socialism. Redistribution of wealth...
banking and m ortgages: Read here for the full list of new government interference Obama proposes: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/family/ And, btw, I was opposed to the bailout McCain signed as well.
I quoted Obama on gun control. Sorry if you are afraid that will fire someone up.
As I said, please read your candidates webpage. I think you will learn a lot.
OK. As for healthcare, how about reading the first line on the web site:
On health care reform, the American people are too often offered two extremes - government-run health care with higher taxes or letting the insurance companies operate without rules. Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe both of these extremes are wrong, and that’s why they’ve proposed a plan that strengthens employer coverage, makes insurance companies accountable and ensures patient choice of doctor and care without government interference
What part of "without government interference" don't you understand?
Energy:
What's wrong with companies who make billions of dollars in profits paying their fair share of taxes? You know how many write offs these big companies get? You complain they pay a higher percentage, but what is that percentage based on? Exxon is still getting tax credits from all those years the price of oil was next to nothing. You don't think they didn't write off their losses?
How is McCain going to pay for the 45 nuclear plants he wants? Who wants a nuclear facility in their back yard?
As far as the page regarding families, exactly which part are you against? The key word here is 'family'. I don't have a clue as to your background, but what I've read on this site, you're a single, middle-aged individual who has no wife or children. Based on the proposals on that page, not many, if any, would benefit someone like yourself. From what I read, the majority of them would benefit me and my children greatly. Sorry if Obama didn't look out for the single person.
What statement did he make against gun control? Does he want to ban all guns, or just certain types? The gun control issue has been beat to death for decades. We've heard the chants from the gun activists, how you'll have to "pry my gun from my cold dead hand" (or whatever Charlton Heston said). There's not a politician alive that will ever get the 2nd Amendment changed. I've owned a gun since I was 8. I still go dove and deer hunting every season. I also have a weapon to protect my home. People like me aren't who their trying to restrict owning a gun. Unfortunately, you can't determine who will do what with a gun when they get it. It's practically impossible to legislate that without an "all" or "none" approach. As long as there's the NRA, the "all" option will NEVER happen. So why even bring it up? Politicians make statements to appease the crowd they're talking to. Problem is, they can't act on 1/3 of their promises. This is just one of Obama's 'statements' that will never come to fruition.

 

[sickboy]

Originally Posted by ironeagle2006
http:///forum/post/2802930
This persons Average truck solo for him brings in 170K a year team truck is 270 grand. His revenues are 1,730,000 for the YEAR. Now out of that he pays FUEL TAXES ROAD TAXES DRIVER WAGES SOCIAL SECURITY TAXES PLUS MAINTAINCE AND FUEL PLUS PAYS FOR HIS EQUIPMENT. Now the Messiah wants to increase his taxes on HIS GROSS INCOME before he pays any of that can you say BYE TO THE ENTIORE TRUCKING INDUSTRY. BTW you would not eat drink have power or anything in your houses without trucks on the road.
Gross Income is not taxed. "The Messiah" has said nothing about changing corporate taxes. That is what I was trying to point out. Net income; income after wages, SS, maintenaince, fuel, etc; is.
Yes I agree it would be devastating for the trucking industry to go under. I'm not trying to disrespect truckers....my mother-in-law is part of a two person trucking team. I'm just saying that nothing has ever been said about raising the corporate tax rate. Plus, what has hurt your friend more: A) An oil man president that allows price manipulation by major oil while they claim they are "only making $.04/gallon, while at the same time we are helping destabilize the oil region with war or B)Taxes that he is already paying?

 

[sickboy]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2803080
You're forgetting the price increase in gasoline when Obama implements the "windfall" tax on the oil industry.
Have you watched oil and gas prices?????? Can't get any worse than it has over the last 4 years......

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2803213
Yes I agree it would be devastating for the trucking industry to go under. I'm not trying to disrespect truckers....my mother-in-law is part of a two person trucking team. I'm just saying that nothing has ever been said about raising the corporate tax rate. Plus, what has hurt your friend more: A) An oil man president that allows price manipulation by major oil while they claim they are "only making $.04/gallon, while at the same time we are helping destabilize the oil region with war or B)Taxes that he is already paying?
Using that same flawed logic, one could argue, that in the last two years when prices ballooned (more than doubled) that the supply constricting congress was to blame.

 

[sickboy]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2803236
Using that same flawed logic, one could argue, that in the last two years when prices ballooned (more than doubled) that the supply constricting congress was to blame.
Yeah except they were trying to get Bush to release some of the strategic oil reserve...... talk about failed logic

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2803258
Yeah except they were trying to get Bush to release some of the strategic oil reserve...... talk about failed logic
This is what I don't get. Releasing some oil from our strategic reserve will solve the problem, but drilling won't? Come on. Remember the debate they were having. It is this same logic that says we should be dropping billions from the treasury into the economy instead of addressing the root cause of the problem. You know and I know, that releasing oil wouldn't have been a drop in the bucket on oil prices. But assuming that it would have had a significant effect on prices, it would only be temporary relief because we'd run out, and still have to refill them. The main problem with government intervention in the market, and that problem is that it isn't sustainable.

 

[sickboy]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2803273
This is what I don't get. Releasing some oil from our strategic reserve will solve the problem, but drilling won't? Come on. Remember the debate they were having. It is this same logic that says we should be dropping billions from the treasury into the economy instead of addressing the root cause of the problem. You know and I know, that releasing oil wouldn't have been a drop in the bucket on oil prices. But assuming that it would have had a significant effect on prices, it would only be temporary relief because we'd run out, and still have to refill them. The main problem with government intervention in the market, and that problem is that it isn't sustainable.
Drilling will help in what...15 years after everything is built and it finally starts to flow? Releasing oil won't 'solve' the problem, but it could help temporarily. To solve the problem we have to quit giving tax breaks to oil companies that continue to support a middle-eastern cartel. Did you hear on Friday they are going to cut output b/c several of the gov'ts budgeted for $70-90/gallons and now they will have a deficit? Who's getting played? We're getting played! Give tax breaks for renewable energy, with PROOF that you are doing more than just putting out commercials saying you are.
As far as the bailout, it is a horrible waste of our money. Bush should have stuck to his economic policy and let companies die. Instead, he has become a huge socialist. And now Bernanke is supporting a second economic stimulus plan. Are we that stupid????!!!!???? Here's a good idea: Lets tax ourselves to give ourselves money!!!

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2803216
Have you watched oil and gas prices?????? Can't get any worse than it has over the last 4 years......
Of course it can... It can and will go higher if the government raises taxes.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2803324
Drilling will help in what...15 years after everything is built and it finally starts to flow? Releasing oil won't 'solve' the problem, but it could help temporarily. To solve the problem we have to quit giving tax breaks to oil companies that continue to support a middle-eastern cartel. Did you hear on Friday they are going to cut output b/c several of the gov'ts budgeted for $70-90/gallons and now they will have a deficit? Who's getting played? We're getting played! Give tax breaks for renewable energy, with PROOF that you are doing more than just putting out commercials saying you are.
As far as the bailout, it is a horrible waste of our money. Bush should have stuck to his economic policy and let companies die. Instead, he has become a huge socialist. And now Bernanke is supporting a second economic stimulus plan. Are we that stupid????!!!!???? Here's a good idea: Lets tax ourselves to give ourselves money!!!

I'm in the oil business, it isn't going to take 15 years to get Alaska up and running, it wouldn't take 15 years to get a full field running off the florida coast. However at $70 a barrel I don't think florida is as viable, although alaska is.
Personally, now this is my conjecture, all it takes is the perception of an increase of supply. For oil to tumble. (like it did) Personally I think if Obama gets ellected, and re-enacts the offshore drilling ban, or he passes the dem's plan that never got put to a vote, we'll see prices shoot back up.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2803258
Yeah except they were trying to get Bush to release some of the strategic oil reserve...... talk about failed logic
Please post the numbers of the total amount of oil in the strategic reserve, as well as the amount of oil our nation uses per day...

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2803198
OK. As for healthcare, how about reading the first line on the web site:
On health care reform, the American people are too often offered two extremes - government-run health care with higher taxes or letting the insurance companies operate without rules. Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe both of these extremes are wrong, and that’s why they’ve proposed a plan that strengthens employer coverage, makes insurance companies accountable and ensures patient choice of doctor and care without government interference
What part of "without government interference" don't you understand?
Energy:
What's wrong with companies who make billions of dollars in profits paying their fair share of taxes? You know how many write offs these big companies get? You complain they pay a higher percentage, but what is that percentage based on? Exxon is still getting tax credits from all those years the price of oil was next to nothing. You don't think they didn't write off their losses?
How is McCain going to pay for the 45 nuclear plants he wants? Who wants a nuclear facility in their back yard?
As far as the page regarding families, exactly which part are you against? The key word here is 'family'. I don't have a clue as to your background, but what I've read on this site, you're a single, middle-aged individual who has no wife or children. Based on the proposals on that page, not many, if any, would benefit someone like yourself. From what I read, the majority of them would benefit me and my children greatly. Sorry if Obama didn't look out for the single person.
What statement did he make against gun control? Does he want to ban all guns, or just certain types? The gun control issue has been beat to death for decades. We've heard the chants from the gun activists, how you'll have to "pry my gun from my cold dead hand" (or whatever Charlton Heston said). There's not a politician alive that will ever get the 2nd Amendment changed. I've owned a gun since I was 8. I still go dove and deer hunting every season. I also have a weapon to protect my home. People like me aren't who their trying to restrict owning a gun. Unfortunately, you can't determine who will do what with a gun when they get it. It's practically impossible to legislate that without an "all" or "none" approach. As long as there's the NRA, the "all" option will NEVER happen. So why even bring it up? Politicians make statements to appease the crowd they're talking to. Problem is, they can't act on 1/3 of their promises. This is just one of Obama's 'statements' that will never come to fruition.
LOL, read the healthcare statement again... The part you put in bold print ONLY refers to choice of Doctors.... NOT the industry as you apparently thought it did.

Do you know how much Oil Companies pay in taxes? As for nuclear plants, I have one not too far away from my backyard. Didn't bother me a bit.
The whole page is full of Socialist propaganda. That was my point.
I quoted Obama on gun control. As for gun restrictions never happening, tell that to the residents of Washington DC that for years could not own a gun. Again, arguing "it will never happen" isn't a viable defense of a un-Constitutional positon.

 

[sickboy]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2803336
I'm in the oil business, it isn't going to take 15 years to get Alaska up and running, it wouldn't take 15 years to get a full field running off the florida coast. However at $70 a barrel I don't think florida is as viable, although alaska is.
Personally, now this is my conjecture, all it takes is the perception of an increase of supply. For oil to tumble. (like it did) Personally I think if Obama gets ellected, and re-enacts the offshore drilling ban, or he passes the dem's plan that never got put to a vote, we'll see prices shoot back up.
Ok, so we get it from Alaska. I'm not convinced that he's right on whether or not to drill in Alaska, and I don't really care. What is the problem? We are addicted to oil and needs to find a more viable option. We will always use oil for something, but do we need to burn it all the time to get from point A to B? I'm not really concerned about global warming either. Just, we have had the technology to change our fuel for over 50 years, yet we are still dependent on Oil Companies who are dependent on the oil cartel. (Who coincidentally have terrorists also dependent on them. Connection to Terrorism?

) For example: why couldn't we have perfected the electric car by now so that we could get our energy from clean coal from right here in the USA. Creating American jobs instead of Mid-eastern jobs?
I'm in the oil business
This helps me immensely in understanding some of your view points. (Not joking or mocking, just really, it makes more sense now).