Politics & Current Events
catsareniice1
member
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Obama fans?
Are most of the people here who are voting for Obama voting for him based on social issues?
Re: Obama fans?
Obama wants to raise taxes on the wealthy, therefore those "rich people" and business owners will be giving more money in correlation to what they make. It's suggested they will lay off people as a lot of those rich people are owners of huge companies that branch into small companies, etc. and employ many people overall. Also, the mindset that the more you make, the more you give to the government is not healthy for capitalism, especially if you want people motivated to be successful. Success should not be punished. This will help pay off the government's debt.
Romney does not want to cut taxes on the rich; he wants to create more "loopholes and deductions" while at the same time keeping tax rates generally the same (from what I understand). So businesses can profit like my husband's, (we can feel the burden right now and it'd be nice to have some lifted so my husband can employ more people and make more money!) Basically he's not raising taxes on the rich like Obama. Therefore these large companies will continue growing, building wealth, creating jobs and employing people. So how will the government get their money then? Well, these new jobs will create more tax revenue from the new working/tax paying people. With this solution, more jobs are created, more people are employed, more people are spending money, and more people are paying taxes. So the economy is stimulated and the government gets their money without having to raise the burden on individuals, because more people are working.
Except that it doesn't, and has never worked this way in reality.
Then vote for Obama. We can have a repeat of the last four years.
Sounds good to me. Slow improvement is better than getting worse (which is what would happen under Romney). And creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau? Increased credit card regulations and the end of universal default? Laws prohibiting proprietary trading by banks? Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act? Repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell? Reversing the global gag rule? Increased funding for veteran services? Ending restrictions on embryonic stem cell research? Yes please!
Ok, will do.
At least you are educated on the issues. I respect that.
Pretty much yes. Romney and social conservatives are on the wrong side of history. FFS, Romney doesn't even believe that global warming is real/man made!
I will never vote for someone who wants to legislate what I can do with my uterus. Biden's answer in the debate was perfect. Maybe abortion is not a choice he would make, but he won't force that on others.
And don't even get me started on Romney and his hypocrisy. He thinks that the government shouldn't be involved in medical decisions (i.e. "Obamacare")...but it's fine and dandy to tell abortion providers that they have to perform UNNECESSARY vaginal ultrasounds, make the woman listen to the heartbeat, describe what the ultrasound shows, etc. That's fine, because that's what that slutty slut deserves.
I can't stand how often he touts his ability to reach across the aisle as governor of Massachusetts. Yeah, he had no problem working with Dems because he basically was one. Romneycare, prochoice, cap and trade...where did that Romney go? I could vote for that Romney!
My Lunch Blog
There are rich people that work hard.....that's what I don't get. If I was rich and I got it thru hard work and the money I made I invested wisely I wouldn't want to get taxed more.
But you're okay with those of us who are not wealthy getting taxed more while the wealthy continue to get tax breaks?
Seriously. It's a zero-sum game. Money's got to come from somewhere, so why are we shifting the burden to the middle class when the status quo is already set up to benefit the wealthy? It's like a double tax on the people that already have less. Trying to squeeze blood from a turnip only gets you so far.
The middle class isn't shrinking because they are movin' on up to the deluxe apartment in the sky.
Here's the biggest problem with your kind of thinking...it isn't factual.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/08/22/159798269/pew-middle-class-poorer-earning-less-and-shrinking
The researchers at Pew Social & Demographic Trends aren't holding back in their new report on the middle class. It calls the last 11 years, "the lost decade" for the country's middle class.
The highlight from the report issued today is that the middle class is poorer, earning less and shrinking.
You need to increase taxes AND cut spending. This isn't an either/or situation.
This. I personally never thought a buisnessman should run our
country. They are for profit over creating jobs.
Oh dear God. Please, I beg you to educate yourselves on the whole Trickle Down Economics and Tax Cuts for the Rich nonsense.
It has worked, under the Harding, Kennedy and Reagan administration.
Please read up on Supply Side economics which argues that economic growth can be most effectively created by lowering barriers for people to produce (supply) goods and services, such as lowering income tax and capital gains tax rates, and by allowing greater flexibility by reducing regulation.
http://www.tsowell.com/images/Hoover%20Proof.pdf
What is Obama's plan? More stimulus? We see how well that worked, doing very little to boost the economy long term and adding more money to the national debt.
Was this a typo? Because Romney keeps talking about closing loopholes and tax deductions, not creating them. Although he will not specify which loopholes he'll close and how much money that will generate to pay for his proposed tax cuts.
This is not quite true. The US deficit is roughly 1.3T for 2012 (we can all agree the actual number gets a bit fuzzy, but we can get a decent estimate.) Total revenue was 2.5T. Expenditures were 3.8T. If we doubled what everyone pays in taxes to 5T, not only would there be no deficit, we'd pay off 1.2T from the debt annually and eliminate it in a bit under a decade. The debt (not deficit) is 11.3T.
Of course, even flaming liberals like me can agree that doubling what everyone pays in taxes would probably have a significant negative impact on the economy, so it is probably more complicated.
We do need to make cuts, mostly to the military and somewhat to social security. Everything else is just pennies.
Don't you work hard? Don't you invest your money wisely? If so, why aren't you rich?
Oh, and to answer cats' question, in my opinion, there's so much overlap between social and economic issues that it doesn't make much sense to think of them as being in two separate realms. So while I don't agree with Obama on everything and I don't think he's the Greatest President in the History of the World, overall I find his entire platform much more compelling than the platform of this version of Romney.
agreed. you need to do more research