Obama/Biden or McCain/Palin/Who ever (826)
Skybow: There are lots of them reaching out and lots of them have tried everything in their power before reaching that point. This isn't just a few people or a certain demographic. It seems to be a broad cross section of desperate people, once fairly successful people.
Yes it would be fairly successful people as those are the ones who fall the hardest and have the most to lose...this is the impact I was wondering about the other day...the real human impact that has affected actual lives rather than just the discussion of numbers and that is the real shame of the shape of the economy...politics aside....it is destroying people...their families and taking innocent lives...and that is the saddest part of the whole thing.....
Oh, I think the economy thing is all over rated. A couple of banks
went under and more people are losing there jobs, but in the
grand sceme of things is a very small percentage. Even our
local governement wants to raise car registration fees. If the
economy was so bad I do not think the government would be
so stupid to raise fees.
went under and more people are losing there jobs, but in the
grand sceme of things is a very small percentage. Even our
local governement wants to raise car registration fees. If the
economy was so bad I do not think the government would be
so stupid to raise fees.
StressFree: So? What's your point? Obama said this from that article:
"we'll ensure that economic justice is served," he asserted. "That's what this election is about."
Obama announced today to "spread the wealth around" with his tax plan. I think this spread the wealth around tax plan will only gain more votes among undecided middle class/working class voters.
Obama is out to bring down the rich CEO's and business executives. He wants a society for the average American, not a Republican agenda that protects the top 2 percent of wealthy citizens and business executives.
"we'll ensure that economic justice is served," he asserted. "That's what this election is about."
Obama announced today to "spread the wealth around" with his tax plan. I think this spread the wealth around tax plan will only gain more votes among undecided middle class/working class voters.
Obama is out to bring down the rich CEO's and business executives. He wants a society for the average American, not a Republican agenda that protects the top 2 percent of wealthy citizens and business executives.
There are obviously those who think that Justice=Communism!
61 procent for Obama/Palin and 39 procent for McCain/Palin and this is not the one and only poll I have made in CS regrding the election..... they all have almost the same results.........
Is that all what you can do Bushney Endorsers???????????
These results Really Truelly Sweets the way your Bushney,s Soon have to flee the White House and allowing a whole world breathing one more time
It was Damn Damn too much man!!!!!!!! Wow!!!!!!! Soon it is all over and we can feel our selves one more time!!!!!!!
Where are all the Bushney,s gone ...... oh my gosh! Here in CS you can not Cheat your self to Victory!!!!!!!!
Maybe....... CS should sell the system to the current government of the United States so no body can cheat?????
Is that all what you can do Bushney Endorsers???????????
These results Really Truelly Sweets the way your Bushney,s Soon have to flee the White House and allowing a whole world breathing one more time
It was Damn Damn too much man!!!!!!!! Wow!!!!!!! Soon it is all over and we can feel our selves one more time!!!!!!!
Where are all the Bushney,s gone ...... oh my gosh! Here in CS you can not Cheat your self to Victory!!!!!!!!
Maybe....... CS should sell the system to the current government of the United States so no body can cheat?????
Hot_Single_Dude: 61 procent for Obama/Palin and 39 procent for McCain/Palin and this is not the one and only poll I have made in CS regrding the election..... they all have almost the same results.........
Is that all what you can do Bushney Endorsers???????????
These results Really Truelly Sweets the way your Bushney,s Soon have to flee the White House and allowing a whole world breathing one more time
It was Damn Damn too much man!!!!!!!! Wow!!!!!!! Soon it is all over and we can feel our selves one more time!!!!!!!
Where are all the Bushney,s gone ...... oh my gosh! Here in CS you can not Cheat your self to Victory!!!!!!!!
Maybe....... CS should sell the system to the current government of the United States so no body can cheat?????
Is that all what you can do Bushney Endorsers???????????
These results Really Truelly Sweets the way your Bushney,s Soon have to flee the White House and allowing a whole world breathing one more time
It was Damn Damn too much man!!!!!!!! Wow!!!!!!! Soon it is all over and we can feel our selves one more time!!!!!!!
Where are all the Bushney,s gone ...... oh my gosh! Here in CS you can not Cheat your self to Victory!!!!!!!!
Maybe....... CS should sell the system to the current government of the United States so no body can cheat?????
You're DELUSIONARY!
ATLAS IS SHRUGGING;Dude!
Hot_Single_Dude: 61 procent for Obama/Palin and 39 procent for McCain/Palin and this is not the one and only poll I have made in CS regrding the election..... they all have almost the same results.........
Is that all what you can do Bushney Endorsers???????????
These results Really Truelly Sweets the way your Bushney,s Soon have to flee the White House and allowing a whole world breathing one more time
It was Damn Damn too much man!!!!!!!! Wow!!!!!!! Soon it is all over and we can feel our selves one more time!!!!!!!
Where are all the Bushney,s gone ...... oh my gosh! Here in CS you can not Cheat your self to Victory!!!!!!!!
Maybe....... CS should sell the system to the current government of the United States so no body can cheat?????
Is that all what you can do Bushney Endorsers???????????
These results Really Truelly Sweets the way your Bushney,s Soon have to flee the White House and allowing a whole world breathing one more time
It was Damn Damn too much man!!!!!!!! Wow!!!!!!! Soon it is all over and we can feel our selves one more time!!!!!!!
Where are all the Bushney,s gone ...... oh my gosh! Here in CS you can not Cheat your self to Victory!!!!!!!!
Maybe....... CS should sell the system to the current government of the United States so no body can cheat?????
That poll and 75 cents might get you a stale danish.
Hundreds of economists (including Nobel Prize winners Gary Becker, James Buchanan, Robert Mundell, Edward Prescott, and Vernon Smith) have signed letters opposing Barack Obama's economic and tax plans (here, here, and here):
We are equally concerned with his proposals to increase tax rates on labor income and investment. His dividend and capital gains tax increases would reduce investment and cut into the savings of millions of Americans. His proposals to increase income and payroll tax rates would discourage the formation and expansion of small businesses and reduce employment and take-home pay, as would his mandates on firms to provide expensive health insurance.
After hearing such economic criticism of his proposals, Barack Obama has apparently suggested to some people that he might postpone his tax increases, perhaps to 2010. But it is a mistake to think that postponing such tax increases would prevent their harmful effect on the economy today. The prospect of such tax rate increases in 2010 is already a drag on the economy. Businesses considering whether to hire workers today and expand their operations have time horizons longer than a year or two, so the prospect of higher taxes starting in 2009 or 2010 reduces hiring and investment in 2008.
(Hat Tip: Greg Mankiw.)
October 13, 2008 in Political News | Permalink
This is for that one special dude...
We are equally concerned with his proposals to increase tax rates on labor income and investment. His dividend and capital gains tax increases would reduce investment and cut into the savings of millions of Americans. His proposals to increase income and payroll tax rates would discourage the formation and expansion of small businesses and reduce employment and take-home pay, as would his mandates on firms to provide expensive health insurance.
After hearing such economic criticism of his proposals, Barack Obama has apparently suggested to some people that he might postpone his tax increases, perhaps to 2010. But it is a mistake to think that postponing such tax increases would prevent their harmful effect on the economy today. The prospect of such tax rate increases in 2010 is already a drag on the economy. Businesses considering whether to hire workers today and expand their operations have time horizons longer than a year or two, so the prospect of higher taxes starting in 2009 or 2010 reduces hiring and investment in 2008.
(Hat Tip: Greg Mankiw.)
October 13, 2008 in Political News | Permalink
This is for that one special dude...
Indyfella: Hundreds of economists (including Nobel Prize winners Gary Becker, James Buchanan, Robert Mundell, Edward Prescott, and Vernon Smith) have signed letters opposing Barack Obama's economic and tax plans (here, here, and here):
We are equally concerned with his proposals to increase tax rates on labor income and investment. His dividend and capital gains tax increases would reduce investment and cut into the savings of millions of Americans. His proposals to increase income and payroll tax rates would discourage the formation and expansion of small businesses and reduce employment and take-home pay, as would his mandates on firms to provide expensive health insurance.
After hearing such economic criticism of his proposals, Barack Obama has apparently suggested to some people that he might postpone his tax increases, perhaps to 2010. But it is a mistake to think that postponing such tax increases would prevent their harmful effect on the economy today. The prospect of such tax rate increases in 2010 is already a drag on the economy. Businesses considering whether to hire workers today and expand their operations have time horizons longer than a year or two, so the prospect of higher taxes starting in 2009 or 2010 reduces hiring and investment in 2008.
(Hat Tip: Greg Mankiw.)
October 13, 2008 in Political News | Permalink This is for that one special dude...
We are equally concerned with his proposals to increase tax rates on labor income and investment. His dividend and capital gains tax increases would reduce investment and cut into the savings of millions of Americans. His proposals to increase income and payroll tax rates would discourage the formation and expansion of small businesses and reduce employment and take-home pay, as would his mandates on firms to provide expensive health insurance.
After hearing such economic criticism of his proposals, Barack Obama has apparently suggested to some people that he might postpone his tax increases, perhaps to 2010. But it is a mistake to think that postponing such tax increases would prevent their harmful effect on the economy today. The prospect of such tax rate increases in 2010 is already a drag on the economy. Businesses considering whether to hire workers today and expand their operations have time horizons longer than a year or two, so the prospect of higher taxes starting in 2009 or 2010 reduces hiring and investment in 2008.
(Hat Tip: Greg Mankiw.)
October 13, 2008 in Political News | Permalink This is for that one special dude...
Actually you are not really Right about tis post either Indyfella........
As a matter of very fact.........
McCain/Palin grop did what ever they could to get endorsement from economics all over the country to endores their Stupied plans about american economy...... and guess what ? they have got 92 economs on their side so far..... 92 and this is a result of a longer time effort began by McCain before Palin were announced......
How many economs are there in the United states........ around 20,000 at least!
But ok it is like very creative to like.... Turning the Truth in the direction you want it, and just throughing it on air and see if it can land some where
You Concider THIS:
"Nicholas Gregory "Greg" Mankiw (pronounced /mæ?'kju?/) (born February 3, 1958) is an American macroeconomist. From 2003 to 2005, Mankiw was the chairman of President Bush's Council of Economic Advisors. He is among the most influential economists in the world according to IDEAS/RePEc"
......As some body the majority of americans want to Ever listen to one more time? Got to be kiddng dude
Skybow: There are lots of them reaching out and lots of them have tried everything in their power before reaching that point. This isn't just a few people or a certain demographic. It seems to be a broad cross section of desperate people, once fairly successful people.
So who's heading up, "The Failures for Obama Campaign"
Indyfella: Hundreds of economists (including Nobel Prize winners Gary Becker, James Buchanan, Robert Mundell, Edward Prescott, and Vernon Smith) have signed letters opposing Barack Obama's economic and tax plans (here, here, and here):
We are equally concerned with his proposals to increase tax rates on labor income and investment. His dividend and capital gains tax increases would reduce investment and cut into the savings of millions of Americans. His proposals to increase income and payroll tax rates would discourage the formation and expansion of small businesses and reduce employment and take-home pay, as would his mandates on firms to provide expensive health insurance.
After hearing such economic criticism of his proposals, Barack Obama has apparently suggested to some people that he might postpone his tax increases, perhaps to 2010. But it is a mistake to think that postponing such tax increases would prevent their harmful effect on the economy today. The prospect of such tax rate increases in 2010 is already a drag on the economy. Businesses considering whether to hire workers today and expand their operations have time horizons longer than a year or two, so the prospect of higher taxes starting in 2009 or 2010 reduces hiring and investment in 2008.
(Hat Tip: Greg Mankiw.)
October 13, 2008 in Political News | Permalink This is for that one special dude...
We are equally concerned with his proposals to increase tax rates on labor income and investment. His dividend and capital gains tax increases would reduce investment and cut into the savings of millions of Americans. His proposals to increase income and payroll tax rates would discourage the formation and expansion of small businesses and reduce employment and take-home pay, as would his mandates on firms to provide expensive health insurance.
After hearing such economic criticism of his proposals, Barack Obama has apparently suggested to some people that he might postpone his tax increases, perhaps to 2010. But it is a mistake to think that postponing such tax increases would prevent their harmful effect on the economy today. The prospect of such tax rate increases in 2010 is already a drag on the economy. Businesses considering whether to hire workers today and expand their operations have time horizons longer than a year or two, so the prospect of higher taxes starting in 2009 or 2010 reduces hiring and investment in 2008.
(Hat Tip: Greg Mankiw.)
October 13, 2008 in Political News | Permalink This is for that one special dude...
you mean this Indyfella no??????
__________________________________
McCain's Not Very Big Guns
In a post entitled "The Booming of the Big Guns," Peter Robinson boasts that the McCain campaign has gotten "100 economists" to sign a statement warning of the grave effects of Barack Obama's economic program.
This statement strikes me as far less devastating than Robinson makes it out to be. First, 100 economists is not actually all that many, given the number of economists in our country. Second, the list of signatories actually has only 90 economists on it. (Count for yourself.) This trouble with basic arithmetic might explain the McCain campaign's stated beliefs in such fallacies as tax hikes always cause revenues to fall.
Was the campaign unable to find 100 economists? The list certainly does not suggest excessive discrimination about credentials. It's heavily larded with GOP apparatchiks now residing in the right-wing think tank world (my favorite is "economist" George Schultz of the Hoover Institution), as well as two signatories who list their affiliation as "McCain-Palin 2008." The takeaway here is that, even with the most generous standards, the campaign couldn't find 100 economists in the country to badmouth Obama's proposals, let alone endorse their own.
__________________________________
Pathetic McCain and his what ever......
Hot_Single_Dude: you mean this Indyfella no??????
__________________________________
McCain's Not Very Big Guns
In a post entitled "The Booming of the Big Guns," Peter Robinson boasts that the McCain campaign has gotten "100 economists" to sign a statement warning of the grave effects of Barack Obama's economic program.
This statement strikes me as far less devastating than Robinson makes it out to be. First, 100 economists is not actually all that many, given the number of economists in our country. Second, the list of signatories actually has only 90 economists on it. (Count for yourself.) This trouble with basic arithmetic might explain the McCain campaign's stated beliefs in such fallacies as tax hikes always cause revenues to fall.
Was the campaign unable to find 100 economists? The list certainly does not suggest excessive discrimination about credentials. It's heavily larded with GOP apparatchiks now residing in the right-wing think tank world (my favorite is "economist" George Schultz of the Hoover Institution), as well as two signatories who list their affiliation as "McCain-Palin 2008." The takeaway here is that, even with the most generous standards, the campaign couldn't find 100 economists in the country to badmouth Obama's proposals, let alone endorse their own.
__________________________________
Pathetic McCain and his what ever......
The #1 Expert from Denmark.__________________________________
McCain's Not Very Big Guns
In a post entitled "The Booming of the Big Guns," Peter Robinson boasts that the McCain campaign has gotten "100 economists" to sign a statement warning of the grave effects of Barack Obama's economic program.
This statement strikes me as far less devastating than Robinson makes it out to be. First, 100 economists is not actually all that many, given the number of economists in our country. Second, the list of signatories actually has only 90 economists on it. (Count for yourself.) This trouble with basic arithmetic might explain the McCain campaign's stated beliefs in such fallacies as tax hikes always cause revenues to fall.
Was the campaign unable to find 100 economists? The list certainly does not suggest excessive discrimination about credentials. It's heavily larded with GOP apparatchiks now residing in the right-wing think tank world (my favorite is "economist" George Schultz of the Hoover Institution), as well as two signatories who list their affiliation as "McCain-Palin 2008." The takeaway here is that, even with the most generous standards, the campaign couldn't find 100 economists in the country to badmouth Obama's proposals, let alone endorse their own.
__________________________________
Pathetic McCain and his what ever......
Actually I think Indy meant this one:
_____________________________________
300 Economists Support My Economic Plan...NOT!!
By SilentPatriot Saturday Jul 12, 2008 9:30am Sam Graham-Felsen of myBarackObama.com writes in:
For the third time in two days, Senator McCain repeated the false claim that his economic plan has been endorsed by 300 economists.
FACT: Many of the 300 economists don't support McCain's whole economic agenda. On Monday, John McCain's campaign released a statement signed by 300 economists who "enthusiastically support" his "Jobs for America" economic plan, providing a heavyweight testimonial to the presumptive Republican nominee's "broad and powerful economic agenda." There's just one problem. Upon closer inspection, it seems a good many of those economists don't actually support the whole of McCain's economic agenda. And at least one doesn't even support McCain for president. In interviews with more than a dozen of the signatories, Politico found that, far from embracing McCain's economic plan, many were unfamiliar with - or downright opposed to - key details. [Politico, 7/9/08, ]
FALSE McCAIN CLAIM: "And by the way my economic plan has been signed on to by 5 Nobel laureates and by over 300 economists, so I have my own supporters as well and again the Congressional Budget Office and others of do their calculations on static economic conditions, i don't except that." [McCain tele-town hall, 7/10/08]
FALSE McCAIN CLAIM: "Our economic plan has been supported by 300 economists and five Nobel laureates." [McCain avail, 7/9/08]
FALSE McCAIN CLAIM: "I'm saying that there is five Nobel laureates and 300 economists who think my economic plan is a good one." [CBS Evening News, 7/9/08]
When John McCain and reality square off, reality wins. Every time.
___________________________________________
McCain the only true Patriot and a Real Symbol of Honesty and Purity and Real american Values and the one and only Straight Talk Express who Never Ever Lies............. NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
_____________________________________
300 Economists Support My Economic Plan...NOT!!
By SilentPatriot Saturday Jul 12, 2008 9:30am Sam Graham-Felsen of myBarackObama.com writes in:
For the third time in two days, Senator McCain repeated the false claim that his economic plan has been endorsed by 300 economists.
FACT: Many of the 300 economists don't support McCain's whole economic agenda. On Monday, John McCain's campaign released a statement signed by 300 economists who "enthusiastically support" his "Jobs for America" economic plan, providing a heavyweight testimonial to the presumptive Republican nominee's "broad and powerful economic agenda." There's just one problem. Upon closer inspection, it seems a good many of those economists don't actually support the whole of McCain's economic agenda. And at least one doesn't even support McCain for president. In interviews with more than a dozen of the signatories, Politico found that, far from embracing McCain's economic plan, many were unfamiliar with - or downright opposed to - key details. [Politico, 7/9/08, ]
FALSE McCAIN CLAIM: "And by the way my economic plan has been signed on to by 5 Nobel laureates and by over 300 economists, so I have my own supporters as well and again the Congressional Budget Office and others of do their calculations on static economic conditions, i don't except that." [McCain tele-town hall, 7/10/08]
FALSE McCAIN CLAIM: "Our economic plan has been supported by 300 economists and five Nobel laureates." [McCain avail, 7/9/08]
FALSE McCAIN CLAIM: "I'm saying that there is five Nobel laureates and 300 economists who think my economic plan is a good one." [CBS Evening News, 7/9/08]
When John McCain and reality square off, reality wins. Every time.
___________________________________________
McCain the only true Patriot and a Real Symbol of Honesty and Purity and Real american Values and the one and only Straight Talk Express who Never Ever Lies............. NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh my!!!! You meant this one Indyfella right?
____________________________________
Three times in the past two days, Sen. John McCain has proclaimed that 300 economists have enthusiastically endorsed his "Jobs for America" economic plan. The number, line, and message are highly misleading.
On Wednesday, Politico reported that a handful of those 300 had expressed reservations with McCain's "policy prescriptions." One wasn't even supporting the Arizona Republican for president.
Nevertheless, McCain again touted the support of the economists during a townhall event last night. So the Huffington Post decided to dig in a bit further, sending emails to roughly 150 members of the list. The response, from roughly a fifth of that group, was telling. Many of the economists whom McCain cited were generally supportive of his economic goals. But their support was tempered by strong objections towards specific proposals as well as deeper skepticism to the non-economic components of McCain's candidacy. Many felt compelled to clarify that their show of support for the Arizona Republican's economic proposals shouldn't be misinterpreted as an endorsement of his presidential campaign.
"Yes, I support the Jobs for America policy proposal, especially a simplified tax code, lower restrictions on trade, and energy development," said Michael Connolly, Professor of Economics, University of Miami. " I am worried that continuing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will tear apart our social fabric and defeat any economic proposal to reduce the deficit and stimulate growth. Guns are crowding out butter."
This past week, the McCain campaign presented the list of the economists as backing a general statement outlining the Senator's economic objectives. But when asked to weigh in on specific proposals -- as opposed to the 403-word executive summary -- many in the group shuddered. Among individual policies, McCain's idea of a gas tax holiday was the one most scoffed at with nary an economist offering a defense.
"It would do nothing but increase the quantity demanded - and it wouldn't increase supply," wrote Dave Garthoff of the University of Akron. "So price would just go back up again until demand and supply approached equilibrium, and everyone would blame the oil companies."
Others, meanwhile, said they were not supportive of McCain's pledge to balance the budget by 2013. "No, I think some flexibility to run deficits and surpluses, although I agree that the deficit is too large," said Glenn MacDonald, Distinguished Professor of Economics and Strategy at Washington University in St. Louis.
One economist said his endorsement was for the "general economic principles only" before expressing disagreement with some of plan's specifics.
countinues..........
____________________________________
Three times in the past two days, Sen. John McCain has proclaimed that 300 economists have enthusiastically endorsed his "Jobs for America" economic plan. The number, line, and message are highly misleading.
On Wednesday, Politico reported that a handful of those 300 had expressed reservations with McCain's "policy prescriptions." One wasn't even supporting the Arizona Republican for president.
Nevertheless, McCain again touted the support of the economists during a townhall event last night. So the Huffington Post decided to dig in a bit further, sending emails to roughly 150 members of the list. The response, from roughly a fifth of that group, was telling. Many of the economists whom McCain cited were generally supportive of his economic goals. But their support was tempered by strong objections towards specific proposals as well as deeper skepticism to the non-economic components of McCain's candidacy. Many felt compelled to clarify that their show of support for the Arizona Republican's economic proposals shouldn't be misinterpreted as an endorsement of his presidential campaign.
"Yes, I support the Jobs for America policy proposal, especially a simplified tax code, lower restrictions on trade, and energy development," said Michael Connolly, Professor of Economics, University of Miami. " I am worried that continuing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will tear apart our social fabric and defeat any economic proposal to reduce the deficit and stimulate growth. Guns are crowding out butter."
This past week, the McCain campaign presented the list of the economists as backing a general statement outlining the Senator's economic objectives. But when asked to weigh in on specific proposals -- as opposed to the 403-word executive summary -- many in the group shuddered. Among individual policies, McCain's idea of a gas tax holiday was the one most scoffed at with nary an economist offering a defense.
"It would do nothing but increase the quantity demanded - and it wouldn't increase supply," wrote Dave Garthoff of the University of Akron. "So price would just go back up again until demand and supply approached equilibrium, and everyone would blame the oil companies."
Others, meanwhile, said they were not supportive of McCain's pledge to balance the budget by 2013. "No, I think some flexibility to run deficits and surpluses, although I agree that the deficit is too large," said Glenn MacDonald, Distinguished Professor of Economics and Strategy at Washington University in St. Louis.
One economist said his endorsement was for the "general economic principles only" before expressing disagreement with some of plan's specifics.
countinues..........
Hugz_n_Kissez: So, it makes sense that vice presidential hopeful Sarah Palin is now trying to convince voters that Obama pals around with terrorists -- another tall tale.
Coincidentally, it is Palin who has been caught fibbing since a report released by a bipartisan commission last weekend makes it clear that she wasn't being truthful about her actions regarding her former brother-in-law.
The commission found the governor abused her power when she tried to have her former brother-in-law fired as a state trooper for personal reasons.
Palin, who has billed herself as a born-again, tongue-talking Christian, a reformer and a maverick, violated a statute of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act when she put pressure on a former public safety commissioner to fire her ex-brother-in-law, who was going through a nasty divorce with Palin's sister.
Heck, maybe someone ought to be asking whether this woman is really a Christian.
Unfortunately, despite the evidence, some would rather believe the lie from Palin than the truth about Obama.
Coincidentally, it is Palin who has been caught fibbing since a report released by a bipartisan commission last weekend makes it clear that she wasn't being truthful about her actions regarding her former brother-in-law.
The commission found the governor abused her power when she tried to have her former brother-in-law fired as a state trooper for personal reasons.
Palin, who has billed herself as a born-again, tongue-talking Christian, a reformer and a maverick, violated a statute of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act when she put pressure on a former public safety commissioner to fire her ex-brother-in-law, who was going through a nasty divorce with Palin's sister.
Heck, maybe someone ought to be asking whether this woman is really a Christian.
Unfortunately, despite the evidence, some would rather believe the lie from Palin than the truth about Obama.
It would be nice for the truth for obama to come out...since he doesn't care to share it.
Hugz_n_Kissez: Yes I know....and it's shameful....BUT I also see them not admitting that it is really happening until it is too late...foreclosure is imminent and acting out of despair...rather than trying to turn things around...
If ya buy a 200,000 house on a 30,000 salary, there's not much to be suprised when it goes into foreclosure.
jlw45: you were right i found it....."the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy".~~~joe biden
Wasn't that a great quote "gaffe"......or quote, I'm not sure what Obiden would call it now.
Indyfella: If ya buy a 200,000 house on a 30,000 salary, there's not much to be suprised when it goes into foreclosure.
Actually it's doable if you are on an extreem diet, don't need electricty, water, etc... and can commute to work by walking. Unfortunately, when push comes to shove ya gotta eat. One solution may be to devour all those little ACORNS. That should solve two problems at once.
The Obama economic philosphy is another possible solution. He can make it where a majority don't pay any taxes and get a check every year from the minority that do.
Indyfella: If ya buy a 200,000 house on a 30,000 salary, there's not much to be suprised when it goes into foreclosure.
No but when you buy a house for 200,000.00 and were making 100,000.00 at one time but now have no job...those mortgage payments add up pretty quick and pretty soon...you reach the point of no return...where catching up is just not gonna happen...even if you find another job....Like skye said this is happening to those who once used to have paying jobs....not just the poor...although with things fluctuating as they have and no more fixed rate mortgages...I can see also how people who just make ends meet can get in over their heads...without having done a thing different...just from rising costs....
Hugz_n_Kissez: No but when you buy a house for 200,000.00 and were making 100,000.00 at one time but now have no job...those mortgage payments add up pretty quick and pretty soon...you reach the point of no return...where catching up is just not gonna happen...even if you find another job....Like skye said this is happening to those who once used to have paying jobs....not just the poor...although with things fluctuating as they have and no more fixed rate mortgages...I can see also how people who just make ends meet can get in over their heads...without having done a thing different...just from rising costs....
*high paying jobs....
Hugz_n_Kissez: No but when you buy a house for 200,000.00 and were making 100,000.00 at one time but now have no job...those mortgage payments add up pretty quick and pretty soon...you reach the point of no return...where catching up is just not gonna happen...even if you find another job....Like skye said this is happening to those who once used to have paying jobs....not just the poor...although with things fluctuating as they have and no more fixed rate mortgages...I can see also how people who just make ends meet can get in over their heads...without having done a thing different...just from rising costs....
Most Americans over bought in the past 10 years thinking they'd get rich on their residence. Stupidity doesn't know specific socio-economic boundries. It's an equal opportunity deal.... plus, there are other variables not figured into the equation.
Sparky55: Actually it's doable if you are on an extreem diet, don't need electricty, water, etc... and can commute to work by walking. Unfortunately, when push comes to shove ya gotta eat. One solution may be to devour all those little ACORNS. That should solve two problems at once.
The Obama economic philosphy is another possible solution. He can make it where a majority don't pay any taxes and get a check every year from the minority that do.
The Obama economic philosphy is another possible solution. He can make it where a majority don't pay any taxes and get a check every year from the minority that do.
Sparky, you seem intelligent. I've not gotten a Dem to answer this and I can't figure it out.
How do you reduce income taxes for 95% of the population when the bottom 40% don't pay any income taxes?
Let me know how that works
Indyfella: Sparky, you seem intelligent. I've not gotten a Dem to answer this and I can't figure it out.
How do you reduce income taxes for 95% of the population when the bottom 40% don't pay any income taxes?
Let me know how that works
How do you reduce income taxes for 95% of the population when the bottom 40% don't pay any income taxes?
Let me know how that works
On a related note. I read today that Obama's tax/economic plan is already at the $300 Billion mark.
Indyfella: Most Americans over bought in the past 10 years thinking they'd get rich on their residence. Stupidity doesn't know specific socio-economic boundries. It's an equal opportunity deal.... plus, there are other variables not figured into the equation.
A lot of people over extended themselves with credit and bad interest rates
StressFree: A lot of people over extended themselves with credit and bad interest rates
You must watch CNN
Indyfella: Sparky, you seem intelligent. I've not gotten a Dem to answer this and I can't figure it out.
How do you reduce income taxes for 95% of the population when the bottom 40% don't pay any income taxes?
Let me know how that works
How do you reduce income taxes for 95% of the population when the bottom 40% don't pay any income taxes?
Let me know how that works
I can imagine why no dem ever gave an answer. there isn't one unless there's a new form of math. Kinda like Jethro Bodine's Gozinta math. You know.... 2 gozinta 4, 2 times. 2 gozinta 6, 3 times, etc...
WhatUwish4: On a related note. I read today that Obama's tax/economic plan is already at the $300 Billion mark.
Is that all, I thought it would be much higher than that.
Sparky55: I can imagine why no dem ever gave an answer. there isn't one unless there's a new form of math. Kinda like Jethro Bodine's Gozinta math. You know.... 2 gozinta 4, 2 times. 2 gozinta 6, 3 times, etc...
I guess I'll just have to wait on DUDE to answer that highly technical question.
Indyfella: I guess I'll just have to wait on DUDE to answer that highly technical question.
Maybe Agman can answer it???
WhatUwish4: Maybe Agman can answer it???
Or....... our "Obama Girl"
More Threads
Icebergs Still Around
How far is too far?
Don Shits-In-Pants!!!
What's going on
rarotonga
Salami, Salami, Baloney
What I Lack In Vocabulary
1830's Music
Heavy Bass In The PM
Reality Check
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
There are lots of them reaching out and lots of them have tried everything in their power before reaching that point. This isn't just a few people or a certain demographic. It seems to be a broad cross section of desperate people, once fairly successful people.