RE: Politics and the South

RE: Politics and the South (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Mercnbeth -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 4:07:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol But if they don't want to contribute to society... out of it they should go. What a wonderful and inclusive concept kittin. I'm happy to see you disclose that you have this personal philosophy. I'll be sure to keep that in mind regarding future posts of yours. The question is where to put them? Camps or something else of that nature? Or just kill them right off?

HunterS -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 4:19:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: nightphoenix quote: ORIGINAL: HunterS quote: ORIGINAL: variation30 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJyS1WJNisM&feature=related our problems are because of the 'simplistic notion that people who have wealth are entitled to keep it and they have an antipathy towards the means of redistributing wealth.' jesus christ... The people who have wealth have no problem redistributing wealth up just against redistributing it down...whycome? False generalization. I know quite a few above the $250k annual income mark that is equally against "upward" wealth redistribution...they simply feel they should be able to keep what they kill. A half million a year is just barely upper middle class...What we are speaking of her are those who make over five million a year. H.

rexrgisformidoni -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 4:21:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: variation30 quote: ORIGINAL: rexrgisformidoni and what pray tell would you have lost? your lunch? your keys? wallet maybe? what a tool. let me guess, you'll have to pay more taxes. waaaaaaa. don't like it, tough shit. or don't pay them and end up in prison, then you'll lose alot more. well, for starters I'll be losing the value on my property through horrendous economic policies. I stand to lose even more constitutional liberties. I stand to lose security through terrible foreign policies. by the way, I am speaking of both mccain and obama here. neither one of them would/will make good presidents. and I like the ever so trenchant rebuttal that is 'waaaaaaa. don't like it, tough shit.' you've missed your calling as a lobbyist. I forgot you are an economic genius. do you actually own your property, or does the bank via mortgage? Just generalizing, but I am guessing the later. So you might lose some value, but on land you don't own yet. Liberty can be taken or given, so count your blessings you have any, life could have dealt you a crap hand and you'd been born in china or something. Can you fix foreign policy along with the economy? Its pretty darn complex. And who would you have picked for president? And I loathe lobbyists. I was just being a smart ass, humor is obviously something you lack.

HunterS -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 4:25:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: It has been pointed out to you several times in this thread that the popular vote has no bearing on who becomes president...so why do your posts persist in this line of circular logic? The Electoral College has echoed the popular vote since direct election of electors became the norm in the early 19th century. To say the popular vote has no bearing is to ignore the history of Presidential elections. While you were sleeping the supreme court ruled that the people have no right to vote for electors...it is a privilege that is extended by some states and may be revoked at the pleasure of the legislature. H.

celticlord2112 -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 4:27:55 PM)
quote: While you were sleeping the supreme court ruled that the people have no right to vote for electors...it is a privilege that is extended by some states and may be revoked at the pleasure of the legislature. If the state legislatures ever choose to indulge that pleasure, then (and only then) will your line of reasoning have merit. Until then, the popular vote does influence the Electoral College, to such a degree that only a handful of faithless electors have ever dared buck their state's popular vote.

Blaakmaan -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 4:29:04 PM)
quote: Shocking as it may seem to Democrats, a good many folk even in the lowly South honestly disapprove of the man's politics as well as his political associations. ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 Well, let's see... The South was as reliably Democratic (notwithstanding the occasional "Dixiecrat" rebellion of Strom Thurmond and the like...) as it has been Republican in elections since 1968, UNTIL... the Democrats, under Lyndon Johnson, passed the civil rights laws that have been collectively referred to as "The Second Reconstruction" (e.g., the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Housing Act, etc.)... which inspired the presidential campaign of George ("segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever") Wallace... So, not, what do YOU think turned the South (aka the former Confederate states) into a Republican stronghold, if not issues of race? I think the thing speaks for itself...

nightphoenix -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 4:29:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterS quote: ORIGINAL: nightphoenix quote: ORIGINAL: HunterS quote: ORIGINAL: variation30 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJyS1WJNisM&feature=related our problems are because of the 'simplistic notion that people who have wealth are entitled to keep it and they have an antipathy towards the means of redistributing wealth.' jesus christ... The people who have wealth have no problem redistributing wealth up just against redistributing it down...whycome? False generalization. I know quite a few above the $250k annual income mark that is equally against "upward" wealth redistribution...they simply feel they should be able to keep what they kill. A half million a year is just barely upper middle class...What we are speaking of her are those who make over five million a year. H. Tell that to Obama who is increasing taxes quite harshly for many making over $250k.

slvemike4u -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 4:34:55 PM)
Harshly...3.5 fucking % qualifies as harshly?

HunterS -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 4:43:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Thank you for your continued examples of the Democratic stance to how "two wrongs make a right". I have never advocated that two wrongs make a right. What I am stating is that the rich have no problem leaching off the not rich. What I am saying is what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the goosie. I never said I was happy with how everything goes in this country, but what I did say was I wasn't expecting anyone to give me anything because life is "unfair". Everything you have was given to you. Your eduation...your knowledge of mathematics,history or any other field of endeavor....please don't try to tell me that when you were born there were no hospitals,roads,infastructure...we are a society. Everyone is indebted to those who came before you and owe a debt to those who will follow. Apparently, the corruption of others provides the rationalization for all your beliefs. Perhaps you should read what I actually post instead of what you want to see. Mine doesn't. It's solely based off principal. If the best you can provide is arguments that are justified because "other people have done bad things so I should get a piece of the pie as well", then let's hope you are not the representation of the Democratics. What I am saying is that everyone is entitled to a piece of the pie and that the pie should not be hogged by the rich and powerful. And your right. I am not speaking as a historian. I am speaking of my own experiences of living in the South and the spirit of people's values. I too have lived in the south...Houston,Savanah,Pensacola and Charlston...I have seen KKK meeting advertised in the front window of the local "pigly wigly" I was one of those guys in the green suits at Ol' Miss when Ross Barnett said "ain't no niggers goin' to Ol' Miss". I am not unaware of the "values" of the South.

nightphoenix -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 4:44:54 PM)
It adds up to a lot more than 3.5% to a lot of people. To quote the previously quoted college professor again - "Nevertheless, you fail to understand why I am leaving. Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan already eliminated the majority of mythical tax loopholes for private citizens. The Alternative Minimum Tax does a grand job of ensuring I pay my due to Uncle Sam. Rough and dirty math that it may be, for every investment dollar I bring in (long term investments), my net taxable income increases by $0.25. The effect of this is to raise paid capital gains taxes from 15% (current level) to 22.5%. If you raise capital gains taxes to 20% base, then the AMT pushes them to 30%. It's a flat 50% increase in the effect of the Capital Gains Tax on long term investments. George W. Bush already punished the day-traders and short-wave investors: all sort term investments are taxed at 35% -- the highest individual income marginal (that's investments capitalized within 2 years of purchase). All said, the AMT results in an effective Individual Income Tax burden of 28.5% on all of my income, regardless of source. I also pay out 22.5% of my income to payroll taxes on the first $115,000 a year. I get no refunds or credits. I pay 28.5% on all income and an additional $25,875 dollars a year for payroll tax contributions. Under Obama's plan, I will lose the scaling exemption for AMT requirements between $150,000 and $750,000, meaning I will pay the highest marginal on ALL income, making my effective tax rate 39.6% on every penny I earn plus the additional $25,875 dollars, assuming zero payroll increases. That's a 28% increase in my tax burden. The AMT mostly affects income between $150,000 and $415,000 now, and the how of it's calculations are tricky. Theoretically, it is 26% of all income under $150,000 + 28% of all income over $150,000. Unfortunately, because I have no AMT preferences other than my personal exemption and my state income taxes, I pay the mathematical maximum."

kittinSol -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 4:45:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth The question is where to put them? Camps or something else of that nature? Or just kill them right off? The Cayman Islands? Switzerland? Lichtenstein? Monaco? Andorra, even? The world is their oyster, mon petit.

jombuto -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 4:48:45 PM)
3.5 % of $250K = $8750. You wanna fork out an extra $9 grand? P.S. a two income home each making $125K are a $250K household. Don't get me wrong, they're doing well, but not well enough to shrug off 8 grand.

MadRabbit -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 4:59:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterS I have never advocated that two wrongs make a right. What I am stating is that the rich have no problem leaching off the not rich. What I am saying is what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the goosie. That's what you are doing. Your saying that your principles are only as good as what other people do. Mine aren't. I vote based on those principles and hope we get someone who does the best job in this country. quote: Everything you have was given to you. Your eduation...your knowledge of mathematics,history or any other field of endeavor....please don't try to tell me that when you were born there were no hospitals,roads,infastructure...we are a society. Everyone is indebted to those who came before you and owe a debt to those who will follow. Of course, socialism is to some degree needed in any form of government solely for the sake of pragmatism. I am more than happy paying my taxes to help pay for things that make up the infrastructure of our society and more than willing to pay on my own for the things that are my individual benefit. Health costs, advanced education, food, water, etc. But you know...just because we have to have certain things in place for a stable society doesn't mean we have to go to far to the left and except the government to give it all to us and do nothing to earn it. However, you seem to think you should pay less because the rich are doing bad things. I see no principle or integrity in that. It's a rationalization. quote: Perhaps you should read what I actually post instead of what you want to see. Maybe you are just too blind in your "ME! ME! GIVE ME! GIVE ME WHAT THE RICH HAVE!" to understand your own hypocricy. quote: What I am saying is that everyone is entitled to a piece of the pie and that the pie should not be hogged by the rich and powerful. And I am saying that nobody is entitled to a peice of that pie and they have to earn it. The rich have it, I want it, I have to get it. Smart people don't sit around and piss and moan about how unfair things are and how they should be entitled to something. They figure out how the world is and seek to work within it to accomplish their own goals and maybe use the power they acquire to make some changes. But then again, I am a Nietszchian and those are my values. Your entitled to your own. quote: I too have lived in the south...Houston,Savanah,Pensacola and Charlston...I have seen KKK meeting advertised in the front window of the local "pigly wigly" I was one of those guys in the green suits at Ol' Miss when Ross Barnett said "ain't no niggers goin' to Ol' Miss". I am not unaware of the "values" of the South. And those things are only a fraction of the South as a whole. Hey, buddy. You have whatever values you want and vote for whoever you want. But maybe you can take a minute to try and understand my orginal post was just meant to communicate my personal experiences as to why people vote Republican. Nothing more, nothing less. You have seemed to overlook that in order to throw a bunch of arguments at me that are completely irrelevant to the premise of my post, particularly since it wasn't a post illustrating how all of Democrats suck, but rather a personal viewpoint.

Musicmystery -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 5:00:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jombuto 3.5 % of $250K = $8750. You wanna fork out an extra $9 grand? P.S. a two income home each making $125K are a $250K household. Don't get me wrong, they're doing well, but not well enough to shrug off 8 grand. Sigh. That's not how tax schedules work. Higher income people are NOT taxed a higher rate on their ENTIRE income---rather, the higher rate applies ONLY to the amount over the break point. In other words, your $250,000 couple would see no difference.

slvemike4u -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 5:13:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jombuto 3.5 % of $250K = $8750. You wanna fork out an extra $9 grand? P.S. a two income home each making $125K are a $250K household. Don't get me wrong, they're doing well, but not well enough to shrug off 8 grand. Give me a fucking break...this fictional 2 income family you are citing has no deductions to claim...it is a tax base...everyone starts there and finds a way to move downward.

slvemike4u -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 5:15:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: jombuto 3.5 % of $250K = $8750. You wanna fork out an extra $9 grand? P.S. a two income home each making $125K are a $250K household. Don't get me wrong, they're doing well, but not well enough to shrug off 8 grand. Sigh. That's not how tax schedules work. Higher income people are NOT taxed a higher rate on their ENTIRE income---rather, the higher rate applies ONLY to the amount over the break point. In other words, your $250,000 couple would see no difference. Now don't I feel stupid MM,I ran with my visceral reaction to the silly post....sent it and than read your much more reasoned and intelligent response to such nonsense...thanks

Cagey18 -> RE: Politics and the South (11/12/2008 5:58:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: jombuto 3.5 % of $250K = $8750. You wanna fork out an extra $9 grand? P.S. a two income home each making $125K are a $250K household. Don't get me wrong, they're doing well, but not well enough to shrug off 8 grand. Sigh. That's not how tax schedules work. Higher income people are NOT taxed a higher rate on their ENTIRE income---rather, the higher rate applies ONLY to the amount over the break point. In other words, your $250,000 couple would see no difference. Agreed. Paying 3.5% on $250K would mean their income is $500K, and would pay an extra $8750. To put that in perspective, equivalent to a $50K household paying an extra $875 in their tax bill. Hell, less than that--since a $500K household hardly pays 10 times as much of disposable income towards food, gas, utilities, etc. as the $50K household Probably not a 10X mortgage either. So maybe equivalent to an extra $600.

HunterS -> RE: Politics and the South (11/13/2008 5:59:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit quote: ORIGINAL: HunterS I have never advocated that two wrongs make a right. What I am stating is that the rich have no problem leaching off the not rich. What I am saying is what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the goosie. quote: That's what you are doing. Your saying that your principles are only as good as what other people do. No...what it says,if you would care to read it,is that the rich are not carrying their fair share of the load. If you go into a grocery store and buy five bags of groceries then you should pay five times what the person who buys only one bag. Why is it that the rich get welfare. When the founders stated in the preamble to the constitution the reasons why they were committing treason one of those reasons was to provide for the "general welfare" not the welfare of the rich. quote: Of course, socialism is to some degree needed in any form of government solely for the sake of pragmatism. I am more than happy paying my taxes to help pay for things that make up the infrastructure of our society and more than willing to pay on my own for the things that are my individual benefit. Health costs, advanced education, food, water, etc. Could you please explain why advanced education is for your individual benefit and basic education is not? You being healthy is not just a benefit to you it is also a benefit to society at large...if you are sick you are a contagious danger to society,if you are healthy you are a benefit to society. Why do you think that most water supplies are government monopolies? quote: But you know...just because we have to have certain things in place for a stable society doesn't mean we have to go to far to the left and except the government to give it all to us and do nothing to earn it. There is the fallacy of your thinking. The government has no money. The government manages the money of the taxpayers. Taxpayers pay for public schools and the government administers it...it is not something for nothing. You mention health care. If you take the profit motive out of health care then patients receive care based on medical reasons and not on some bean counter with his eye on the "bottom line" quote: However, you seem to think you should pay less because the rich are doing bad things. I am not saying I should pay less because the rich are doing bad things I am saying that the rich should pay their fair share just as I do. If you would like a primer on just how the rich avoid taxes read a book called "Perfectly Legal" It will tell you how,once you start making several million dollars a year, you can stop paying taxes. In the mean time you can continue paying your fair share plus theirs. quote: Maybe you are just too blind in your "ME! ME! GIVE ME! GIVE ME WHAT THE RICH HAVE!" to understand your own hypocricy. You have not heard me say anything of the sort. All I have said is that the rich should pay their fair share just like the not rich. quote: What I am saying is that everyone is entitled to a piece of the pie and that the pie should not be hogged by the rich and powerful. quote: And I am saying that nobody is entitled to a peice of that pie and they have to earn it. The rich have it, I want it, I have to get it. Smart people don't sit around and piss and moan about how unfair things are and how they should be entitled to something. They figure out how the world is and seek to work within it to accomplish their own goals and maybe use the power they acquire to make some changes. You appear to be saying that it is right for the smart to fuck over the not smart. The only changes I see the rich enacting are changes that benefit them and not the society that they leach off of. quote: But then again, I am a Nietszchian and those are my values. Your entitled to your own. The Nazi "Real Politic" was based on Nietzsche "the strong take and the weak were meant to be subjugated" quote: I too have lived in the south...Houston,Savanah,Pensacola and Charlston...I have seen KKK meeting advertised in the front window of the local "pigly wigly" I was one of those guys in the green suits at Ol' Miss when Ross Barnett said "ain't no niggers goin' to Ol' Miss". I am not unaware of the "values" of the South. quote: And those things are only a fraction of the South as a whole. You are absolutely right it is only a fraction. I lived in the south for over twenty years and I found that fraction to be about 3/4

SilverMark -> RE: Politics and the South (11/13/2008 7:23:33 AM)
~cough~ lol....the point being a NON incumbant winning the popular vote at that % of the electorate is LARGE....the electoral college was also impressive... recent history for contested Presidential elections and % of popular votes without an incumbant. There haven't been many but Kennedy vs. Nixon, Nixon vs. Humphrey http://uspoliticsguide.com/US-Politics-Directory/Historical-Presidential-Election-Results/1968-Presidential-Election-Results.php Kennedy vs. Nixon was won by .1%.....One of the few larger under similar circumstances was Eisenhowe vs. Stevenson.....so before you hack up a lung or something....take a look ...even as a sitting VP Bush the first only garnered 53.4% against a guy who looked really bad in a tank and a helmet.

scarlethiney -> RE: Politics and the South (11/13/2008 7:43:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: but I am tired of people thinking that just because we are southerners, we are somehow backwards, lack intelligence, or are racist. Why do you care what any one else thinks about you? Certainly you don't think another persons view of you defines you in any way? That would be giving them way too much power. All you have to do is stand and pledge allegiance to Dear Leader and you will be magically transformed into someone who is enlightened, intelligent, and color blind. No actually I'm already intelligent and color blind. I'm still working on the enlightened part.

Page: << < prev 4 5 6 [7] 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875