Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 249
  1.    #121  
    Quote Originally Posted by Workerb33
    and @dbd, your thread has been totally hijacked.
    Lol, i see that.
    That's why i wrote this earlier:
    Quote Originally Posted by dbdoinit
    dbdoinit 08:00 PM 08/30/2010 -- [Ed] [Reply] [!!]
    I don't think there's any reason for this NOT to be civil.

    This discussion isn't supposed to be about whether left-wingers or right-wingers are right or wrong.

    This is supposed to be a discussion as to whether it should be acceptable (as it seems to be) for what are called "news orginizations" to slant toward their inclinations.

    Why are news organizations even allowed to contribute to campaigns?
    How can the public ever expect to get a fair news report about the party that didn't receive donations from that outlet?

    There's nothing wrong about having political shows. But it shouldn't be disguised as reporting news.

    News should be news. No spices added.
  2. #122  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    ...Show some love for our fellow Pre owners.
    Mr. Eastwood -- nice to see that you have compassion for oppressed minorities ...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  3. #123  
    Quote Originally Posted by Workerb33 View Post
    ...
    In terms of income, I'm no where near a tax bracket that you think would benefit. I think we'd all benefit more if the gov spent less instead of more. Personally I support something called the "fair tax" which is essentially a consumption tax rather than an income tax. Easy to exempt taxes on certain products or low-income people. No need for the IRS, no need to spend 50+ hours per year doing income tax filing (that's the average per person in the US), no need for zillions to be spent on tax attorney's, lobbyists trying to win loopholes, etc. Definitely not a republican vs democrat approach, because they would both lose a lot of power.

    and @dbd, your thread has been totally hijacked.
    though I would personally benefit from the system you propose, its bad for the country socially, and bad economically.

    The principle on which graduated taxation is based is that those who have the most are expected to pay the most.

    The system you suggest would most burden the middle and lower classes who spend practically everything they earn.

    Billionaires by their nature, literally cannot spend all they earn.

    A system such as that would also further reinforce the existing trend that GOPers have pushed (under the "Death Tax" scam slogan), which protects the wealthiest, and creates a permanent super upper class in america.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  4.    #124  
    Now let's see if we can actually discuss what the original question was about.

    Full:
    http://forums.precentral.net/off-top...-part-2-a.html

    Mobile:
    http://m.forums.precentral.net/off-t...-part-2-a.html
  5. #125  
    Quote Originally Posted by dbdoinit View Post
    Now let's see if we can actually discuss what the original question was about.

    Full:
    http://forums.precentral.net/off-top...-part-2-a.html

    Mobile:
    http://m.forums.precentral.net/off-t...-part-2-a.html
    if you love something, set it free ...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  6. #126  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    though I would personally benefit from the system you propose, its bad for the country socially, and bad economically.

    The principle on which graduated taxation is based is that those who have the most are expected to pay the most.

    The system you suggest would most burden the middle and lower classes who spend practically everything they earn.

    Billionaires by their nature, literally cannot spend all they earn.

    A system such as that would also further reinforce the existing trend that GOPers have pushed (under the "Death Tax" scam slogan), which protects the wealthiest, and creates a permanent super upper class in america.
    quite the opposite. Read the book before jumping to conclusions. It would abslutely be good for the country. Open your mind and read the book.
  7. #127  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    though I would personally benefit from the system you propose, its bad for the country socially, and bad economically.

    The principle on which graduated taxation is based is that those who have the most are expected to pay the most.

    The system you suggest would most burden the middle and lower classes who spend practically everything they earn.

    Billionaires by their nature, literally cannot spend all they earn.

    A system such as that would also further reinforce the existing trend that GOPers have pushed (under the "Death Tax" scam slogan), which protects the wealthiest, and creates a permanent super upper class in america.
    You apparently have not read the book on the Fair Tax....heavy sigh....you just assume you know the Fair Tax is bad because it comes from the right? The goal under the Fair Tax is not to get the wealthy to pay less tax, they will end up spending approximately the same on taxes....the benefit to the wealthy is they won't be spending money on all the things they do NOW to avoid paying taxes (trusts, estate planning, investments, etc). The other thing you likely fail to realize, when you say the lower and middle class will not benefit, is that if they earn $2000, they will get a check for $2000 (minus state taxes). Neither Federal tax nor FICA and FUTA is taken from their pay check.....they end up with more money in their wallet. Yes, they pay a higher tax when they purchase a good, however, they would receive a check each money to offset the taxes paid on essentials. I forget the exact figures, but a family making $40000 would receive approximately $600 per month from the government to offset the taxes paid for purchases. Again, just read the facts on what the Fair Tax is not the liberal talking points on how it is "unfair".

    Here....read this: Americans For Fair Taxation:
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  8. #128  
    Quote Originally Posted by Workerb33 View Post

    From every paycheck we give 10%, and save 10% right off the top. Why should the federal government have the expectation that they are entitled to more than God is?

    I wish a politician would run on that platform: 10% maximum tax with no deductions. If 10% is good enough for God, it's good enough for Americans!

    Has a nice ring to it, eh?
    “When facism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.” Sinclair Lewis
  9. #129  
    back to the topic. Groovy said it best, its all about revenues. a Publisher has to pay the bills, including the wages of the reporter, if he ****es off a couple of dozen advertisers, he looses revenue. A lot of papers are going the route of as neutral as possible. However, you now have people ( advertisers) who want a given newspaper to take a stand. its damned if you do damned if you dont. What i find is funny as hell, is the complaints about letters to the editor, many scream, that printing a letter that they dont agree with is the publishers fault. They pull advertising for it as well. lol Now I am not saying there are not biased media outlets out there. I read everything from CBC, CTV, BBC, Reuters, Washington Post, etc etc.. to get an over all look at a particular item. I wish more would do that, instead of going to the outlet that just suits how they feel.
    Life is short, Play hard, and enjoy every moment as if it was your last.
  10. #130  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    “When facism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.” Sinclair Lewis
    what? Because I give 10% and save 10% I am a facist? What the heck?
  11. #131  
    Quote Originally Posted by dbdoinit View Post
    Lol, i see that.
    That's why i wrote this earlier:
    I tried to keep this on track by raising awareness of the very real threat from crab people but everyone stayed focused on this taxation thing.
  12.    #132  
    Quote Originally Posted by ducatti20 View Post
    I tried to keep this on track by raising awareness of the very real threat from crab people but everyone stayed focused on this taxation thing.
    Lol, thanks, i noticed that too.
  13. #133  
    News organizations are private companies (in the USA) and can do whatever they want. As a company their first and foremost priority is to make money for the shareholders or owners. Thus they shape their product accordingly. I don't see any issues with this.
    Sprint|Samsung Epic
  14. #134  
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    News organizations are private companies (in the USA) and can do whatever they want. As a company their first and foremost priority is to make money for the shareholders or owners. Thus they shape their product accordingly. I don't see any issues with this.
    it used to be that they had to serve the public good as the top requirement for an FCC license (because the airwaves are considered to be owned by the public). News was never expected to be profitable, but it was an unavoidable cost associated with meeting public service requirements to continue license renewal.

    The advent of cable changed all that, because they have no "public service" requirement and are expected to be as profitable as any other content. The fact is that most cable "news" is extremely profitable. Although I find those channels annoying, it also should be an indicator to the traditional media and politicians where the majority of Americans stand on issues. Especially on issues of patriotism. Even the liberal journalist were once very patriotic. Vietnam and Watergate seemed to stamp that out.

    It's not an accident that MSNBC is at the bottom of the ratings pile and Fox (Faux?) News is at the top. People vote with their time as well as their money.

    BTW I don't watch either one of them, which is how I vote with my time. I don't have cable anyway, which is how I vote with my money.

    I get all my news from threads by "dbd" and "Take Care, Jay".
  15. #135  
    In my experience the USA has some of the most politically slanted news one can find in the western world (based on my first hand experience living in Canada and Europe). Other nations don't stand for it but then many of these nations have publicly owned national media entities.
    Sprint|Samsung Epic
  16. #136  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    Oh no....my wife remembers the good Rev Wright, LOL. Her point, as was many people's point, was how could a Christian go to a church that preached hate. I have to admit, it was hard to argue that point. Rev Wright clearly is a hateful person towards many white people.....all you had to do was listen to him to discover that. Of course, apparently he only preached his racist sermons when obame wasn't there.
    So does this at least clear up the 'Obama is a Muslim' issue for her?
    My shiny new TouchPad apps: Scientific RPN Calculator HD - Screamager HD
  17. #137  
    Quote Originally Posted by Workerb33 View Post
    what? Because I give 10% and save 10% I am a facist? What the heck?
    Really? It's not your selection of 10%, it's your rationale for selecting 10%. But feel free to use God for political aims and the basis for fair taxation if you want. I'd rather base what's fair on what society determines its needs are.

    Oh...and by the way, I am just distraught that liberals no longer meet your definition of patriotic. GMAFB.
  18.    #138  
    Quote Originally Posted by Workerb33
    I get all my news from threads by "dbd" and "Take Care, Jay".
  19. #139  
    I thought, according to Fox, that Obama was a muslin.
    Last edited by ryleyinstl; 08/31/2010 at 01:28 PM. Reason: Oh shoot! I got the Prez's name wrong!
    Sprint|Samsung Epic
  20. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #140  
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    I thought, according to Fox, that Oboma was a muslin.
    I don't know about Fox, and your diction needs a bit of work (spell check is your friend!), but I've been told that technically, Obama was born a muslim, as his father was a muslim. To me, it doesn't mean a hill a beans; but isn't it technically a correct statement to say he was born a muslim?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions