Great start for Obama and America!

[greg334]

I read your post twice Greg, I really don't know what to say...

Don't say anything. Read it again with an open mind next time.

You know, the average brain washed right winger's rhetoric is pretty much harmless, but what you express scares the crap out of most reasonable people because it's a well packaged deeply flawed delusion, it's dangerous as history has showed us many times.

So instead of calling me a brainwashed idiot, what is flawed?

The fact that we have a complacent leader?

We do have a complacent leader, not one who is strong but one who wants to apologize and make friends with the bad nasty people and understand their pain.

It is the fact that our spending hasn't caught up with us yet?

You know that the worst is going to be here sooner than you think and it is the flawed and ignorant thinking that we can spend our way out of a recession that is the problem.

Was it the name I named, with the idea that we can streamline government?

Or was it the tax comments, which seems to be the same comments as others who actually make a living watching our financial system.

Rightwing, think again.....

I see the only thing that makes our country work is smaller government with low taxes. NO invovlement of government in finances, in the stock market or anywhere else for that matter that can choke our economy. Taxes are used as a tool to control people, and has benen a very effective tool because we pattern our entire lives around our tax system.

I also see that the government does not help people out of their situation but traps them. For example we have staged a war on poverty for most of my life, we have won the war on with one issue but actually lost that war because of government's involvement. We have in this country no poor by the world's stadards, but we have rich poor - who are actually equal to the rest of the world's middle class. Isn't that what we are striving for, being brought down to the worlds standards or elevate people up?

 

[MrGautama]

OK Greg, if you find it absolutely necessary...

To put this in perspective, meeting with Chavez and Castro's demands is not regaining respect was the complete quote, nevertheless watch and listen what happened, we now have a complacent leader. The demands are his participation in an apologetic posture as the leader of our country. Apologizing to another leader that something happened before he was borne is a very weak thing to do and shows he is nothing more than a child trying to play house.

You can like it or not but Obama is the president now and the approach to foreign policy that he favors is long overdue. Only apologetic?, well He's not perfect but I hope one day we'll have a leader that would stand in front of the world and honestly ask for forgiveness for all the atrocities our government has carried out for the benefit of the elite and with the silent compliance of the citizens of this country; maybe one day we'll be able to wash off the blood that stains your hands and mine.

NO I mean that the spending that our democratic controlled congress has been doing (and has caused the mess) hasn’t caught up to the economy yet. By the way it is not the president that inherited anything – that is BS – We Have. He is trying to garner more control out of the hands of congress and the people by using the treasury department to leverage the loans and grants that were made to fix the problems. He is creating more positions that are not needed within the government and appointing people to be “TSARS” who are bypassing the congressional approval process.

I have to give it to you, you are the “spin-master” of the week. I think you could make some money with your own program in hate-radio; you might even give Rush a run for his money.
How easy is to manipulate reality with half truths, they are a lot more powerful than straight out lies. Add to that a bit of oversimplification and you are ready for prime time.

So let me get this straight, the democratic controlled congress is the responsible for the crisis, not maybe the home buyers that took advantage of the cheap credit after the federal reserve cut interests after the dot-com bubble debacle. Or maybe the real estate agents and their higher commissions on more expensive houses combined with mortgage tax deductions that tempted people to buy more expensive homes. Or the famous sub-prime adjustable loans that the mortgage brokers pushed into unsuspecting buyers, some of this buyers encouraged by the now infamous Alan Greenspan to take adjustable rate mortgages. Another possibility The Clinton and Bush administrations; the former for pushing for easing the requirements for mortgages and down payments for working class Americans, and the later for failing to detect and enact a measure of control over the MBSs, and the Wall Street complete disregard for the integrity of such instruments.

Maybe some or all of the above are the most likely responsible for the mess we are in, it is such a complicated economic universe that not even the major players in it would dare in all honesty to claim a complete understanding of it. So just blaming “our democratic controlled congress has been doing (and has caused the mess)” is a childish oversimplification of reality that may be suited for others but one I see right through.

Now, why is he trying to “garner more control out of the hands of congress” and “bypassing the congressional approval process”?. Let me guess... He wants to lead us in to Marxism?.

The real problem is that not many remember when government wasn’t involved and how well everything worked. The fiasco is the ignorant and stupid thinking that we must have the government regulate our financial system for our sake, these people think that the rich and greedy’s involvement is the cause of most of our problems in the first place.

I would like to know when was that, maybe the robber barons days?, is that your ideal of society?.

I said; And picking consultants and people who expected payback is not smart, honest or competent.

Yea, that’s easy…. Here’s one…. Jeffrey Zients – political payback

He is going to be helping streamlining of our government which takes another step of removing our rights and powers. The streamlining of our government comes from reducing it to a manageable size which is congresses job, not the executive’s branch. Regardless what comeback you make, this attempt was done by ALGORE during the Clinton administration and kind of failed.

There are others, just look around… maybe if you knew about the up and coming healthcare fiasco you could pick them out.

And Zients is a political payback because...?.

Health care fiasco?. I know about the current health care fiasco which puts us at the level of a third world country; but please enlighten me and help me “pick them out”.

I said; If we move to an all inclusive tax system that puts the burden on the consumer, then investments and business activity will increase. The problem right now is business pays about 15% of in federal income taxes, we pay something like 58% but that 15% is passed on to us as part of the cost of the product or service which is an all inclusive hidden tax.

Well how does it work? do they pull the money out of their a**es? Come on the money has to come from somewhere, and it is not the stock market. The cost of doing business to the company is always passed on to the consumer; the profit (stockholder’s returns) is what is left. I have a lot of examples but I am fairly certain you will dispute them.

No Greg, they don't “pull money out their a**es”. They just pay poverty wages to the workers; ever heard of the working poor?.
I know that at first glance the earth seems flat but I assure you it is not, the same applies to the idea that everything in the economy follows a linear model, it's a bit more complicated than that Greg.

Well the 30% is the fallacy number, simply because the balance between all the tax revenue collected from both corporate and personal income taxes and other taxes evens out to about 24.5%. Now this also means that some people pay a lot more than 24.5%, some companies pay a lot less and some people don’t pay at all but get money from the government for doing nothing. I think that the 30% is the number the opponents always give to scare people.

Let's analyze this “fallacy number” (funny, I thought fallacies were logically unsound arguments not numbers):

There only difference between the two is the way they represent this tax. A 23% inclusive equals a 30% exclusive. Using the lower number is just a clever way to disguise the true about the real tax percentage. Actually, the President's Advisory Panel on Tax Reform concluded that the real tax rate would have to be 34% to make it revenue neutral. When the panel first approached the proposal they used the 23% inclusive (30% exclusive) but soon realized that those number were based on an unrealistic expectation of 100% tax compliance meaning no one would cheat on taxes. Current tax evasion data from the Treasury department puts it at about 15% so thats the number they used to get to 34% exclusive.
Even more troubling is the fact that the supporters of the Fair Tax made a basic mistake when taking into account the purchases by the federal government taxed at full rate by not taking in consideration at the moment of calculating federal expenses the additional cost of this 30% tax, meaning that the revenue from taxing those federal purchases would be canceled exactly by the increase in the federal budget. There is even a formula from W. Gale from the Brooking Institute that corrects that mistake and puts the figure eve higher at 39.3% !.

Quite honestly if it has to be 30% ok, I would rather pay 30% tax on a new item for non-business use than to pay what I am paying in income tax now.

Very well, correct me if I'm wrong but I think it's safe to assume you make less than $200K a year, if that is correct you would be paying more taxes not less as you think; I wonder if after realizing that you have been led against your own interests for the benefit of the few you would have the capacity to recognize your mistake?, I guess we'll never know because it looks very unlikely that the fair tax bunch will be able to fool the necessary amount of people to get it enacted.

I feel that the country will benefit from this tax CHANGE, not reform, in a lot of ways that I don’t have time to explain. One by the way is the change from putting money into off shore accounts and returning that money here – that is something like 6 trillion being held offshore and by the way our American companies also shift almost 25% of their profits off shore to protect them from taxes.

The poorest will of course see a better life, believe it or not, more opportunities and the people making $200k or more will see their income tax liability go to zero. The thing that you miss is the herd effect in all of this, give the people the money and they will spend it. Spending it on new stuff, not old stuff is the key, get it? Isn’t that what the government is trying to force us to do to help the economy?

The real issue that many miss is this change will empower who ever does it; what if Obama says “I will push for the Fair Tax to be enacted”? I can tell you that people will not care about anything else but seeing they get more money in their pocket, he can even run for a fourth term because the people will be his followers without any doubt.

By the way, who cares what the wealthy get, they spend more money than you or I do, and that provides work for us the poor people of the country. If you care about the rich, then you are part of the typical brainwashed crowd who believes in class warfare. Worry about yourself and how things shape up for you or did I miss something with the Buddha there?

All of the above is resumed as the “ trickle-down theory”, also known as the economic policies of “Reaganomics”, “Supply-side Economics” or “Horse and Sparrow Theory”. It is a now discredited theory that seems condemned to live inside the realm of peoples fantasies and no economist wants to be connected to; it's an economic hot potato!

The data recollected from the past 50 years convincingly refutes any arguments that cutting taxes for the rich will stimulate the economy or improve the conditions of the middle and lower classes. Tax cuts to the top have no correlation with economic growth rate, income growth rate, hourly wage growth rate, or change in unemployment.

What we are witnessing now with this new government is the death of Reaganomics, I would suggest you find a newer model... you are becoming obsolete.

 

[greg334]

You can like it or not but Obama is the president now and the approach to foreign policy that he favors is long overdue. Only apologetic?, well He's not perfect but I hope one day we'll have a leader that would stand in front of the world and honestly ask for forgiveness for all the atrocities our government has carried out for the benefit of the elite and with the silent compliance of the citizens of this country; maybe one day we'll be able to wash off the blood that stains your hands and mine.

The problem is we don’t need weak leadership at this place and time in our history and this is weak leadership. It is not a rightwing point of view, it is an informed point of view from someone who at leasts looks around when I traveled in the world. Learn how other cultures, not their press but the cultures view weakness and diplomacy, the Arab nations love this because they think we are very weak right now. The SA dictators love it because it brings more control to them to manipulate the US through an immature person we have.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t like Obama but he is my president and I will support him when and where I can as long as I feel he is doing the right thing. The wrong thing is talking like he is a school kid at a band competition.

Atrocities?

Asking for forgiveness from a world that has done what to deserve the moral high ground?

Hey Buddha, the problem is that the world is not owed an apology until they themselves make amends to the people they wronged who were victims of atrocities committed by the powers of Europe, Asia and Africa and they have yet to come forth and do any of that for one atrocity.

Take one really important issue – modern day slavery on the African continent, I have yet heard a peep out of the African congress or the world court on who is going to go after these people let alone apologize for the ongoing issue of modern slavery, have you? Of course the world has turned their head because it is a cultural thing, taking children and selling them is a cultural thing that dates back to the dawn of man so we can’t ask for them to change. It amazes me that you can even suggest that we need to apologize.

Oh by the way, when you travel to Africa to help out in nasty places like I did, remember that we exported our capitalism to a lot of these countries by accident and that they, the people who live in these countries seem to be living better using us, the United States as inspiration to make better lives for themselves than they ever did under European colonial rule. This my Buddha friend comes from the very liberal source – the BBC.

Let’s take another instance of European history, has Poland, France, England and the Netherlands ever apologize for their persecution of the Jews in the later part of the 19th century up to the end of the Second World War? I am not talking about the holocaust by Germans but these countries. Ever hear what happened in Poland, the sweet country who was invaded by the mean old nasty Germans? Wasn’t there mass killings and starvation going on with the Jews who fled Russia? How about the status of “non-citizens” (thanks to Poland stripping the Jews of their citizenships) forced upon thousands of Jews who eventually died there because there was no international recognition or aid.

I have to give it to you, you are the “spin-master” of the week. I think you could make some money with your own program in hate-radio; you might even give Rush a run for his money.

How easy is to manipulate reality with half truths, they are a lot more powerful than straight out lies. Add to that a bit of oversimplification and you are ready for prime time.

Well half truths, ok I guess if you see it that way.

So let me get this straight, the democratic controlled congress is the responsible for the crisis, not maybe the home buyers that took advantage of the cheap credit after the Federal Reserve cut interests after the dot-com bubble debacle. Or maybe the real estate agents and their higher commissions on more expensive houses combined with mortgage tax deductions that tempted people to buy more expensive homes. Or the famous sub-prime adjustable loans that the mortgage brokers pushed into unsuspecting buyers, some of this buyers encouraged by the now infamous Alan Greenspan to take adjustable rate mortgages. Another possibility The Clinton and Bush administrations; the former for pushing for easing the requirements for mortgages and down payments for working class Americans, and the later for failing to detect and enact a measure of control over the MBSs, and the Wall Street complete disregard for the integrity of such instruments.

Maybe some or all of the above are the most likely responsible for the mess we are in, it is such a complicated economic universe that not even the major players in it would dare in all honesty to claim a complete understanding of it. So just blaming “our democratic controlled congress has been doing (and has caused the mess)” is a childish oversimplification of reality that may be suited for others but one I see right through.

Mr. Buddha, I agree with what you are saying, but here is the oversimplified underlying problem with all of that; the republican congress did not do their job in the first place, they actually practiced bi-partisanship which was the mantra of the democrats and allowed a lot of legislation to be passed and a lot of oversight committees to drop real important issues. They got soft and when they lost congress, the congress really ran amuck. A lot of this could have been stopped in 2006, meaning if the congress did their jobs after 2006, we would not have had such a mess. But see the problem was not greed on the part of the bankers/lenders, or the greed of the people or for that matter the Federal Reserve but it was all political and staying in power by any means – not right wing or left wing but all of them involved.

When you examine the fanny mae mess closely you can see where the problems started, who covered what up and what has happened since.

Now, why is he trying to “garner more control out of the hands of congress” and “bypassing the congressional approval process”?. Let me guess... He wants to lead us in to Marxism?.

Well first thing is, he is trying to get his hands on more power, GM is a perfect example he has pushed for more power for the treasury department and now dictating to a non-government company who will lead them, what they have to do and so on – all based on a loan.

He doesn’t want to lead us to Marxism, it actually looks like Fascism.

I would like to know when was that, maybe the robber barons days?, is that your ideal of society?.

No, don’t be foolish. We need to return to the early 30’s in regards of property freedom, we need to allow people to make decisions for their businesses and livelihood. The labor laws, protection laws and other regulations that were meant to keep things in check should stay but let people achieve what they want to without the hatred or jealousy and surely without using the government as a tool to make everyone equal.

And Zients is a political payback because...?.

Health care fiasco?. I know about the current health care fiasco which puts us at the level of a third world country; but please enlighten me and help me “pick them out”.

Yes political payback, just like many of the Clinton people who are working for Obama, I thought we would see fresh faces and real change, who lied?

Third world? Have you ever been sick in the third world?

Today’s healthcare problems have to do with several things, one is insurance companies pool money together and pay out for procedures that that have nothing to do with actual sickness, like tattoo removal. The other thing is the removal of the patient in the involvement of the payment of the treatment; it is like virtual healthcare and has to do with the same issues surrounding taxes.

The real fiasco is government’s involvement with healthcare – Medicare and Medicaid are the worst run systems in the world, even the socialized medicine in Europe keeps fraud and abuse in check where we don’t.

If we want to improve our healthcare, then we need to allow cross border insurance - aka competition. We need to allow people to pool their resources together for group rates and we must stop having the government dictates to the insurance companies about what procedures they pay for (barring of course the procedures related to actual diseases).

No Greg, they don't “pull money out their a**es”. They just pay poverty wages to the workers; ever heard of the working poor?.

I know that at first glance the earth seems flat but I assure you it is not, the same applies to the idea that everything in the economy follows a linear model, it's a bit more complicated than that Greg.

The last time I look GM doesn’t pay poverty wages. Neither does a lot of companies, stop taxing people at all levels and you will see good positive changes.

Let's analyze this “fallacy number” (funny, I thought fallacies were logically unsound arguments not numbers):

There only difference between the two is the way they represent this tax. A 23% inclusive equals a 30% exclusive. Using the lower number is just a clever way to disguise the true about the real tax percentage. Actually, the President's Advisory Panel on Tax Reform concluded that the real tax rate would have to be 34% to make it revenue neutral. When the panel first approached the proposal they used the 23% inclusive (30% exclusive) but soon realized that those number were based on an unrealistic expectation of 100% tax compliance meaning no one would cheat on taxes. Current tax evasion data from the Treasury department puts it at about 15% so thats the number they used to get to 34% exclusive.
Even more troubling is the fact that the supporters of the Fair Tax made a basic mistake when taking into account the purchases by the federal government taxed at full rate by not taking in consideration at the moment of calculating federal expenses the additional cost of this 30% tax, meaning that the revenue from taxing those federal purchases would be canceled exactly by the increase in the federal budget. There is even a formula from W. Gale from the Brooking Institute that corrects that mistake and puts the figure eve higher at 39.3% !.

Ok I got the fallacy part, I’ve been working too much.

If I remember right the President's Advisory Panel on Tax Reform didn’t consider the Fair Tax as a serious proposal, it was touched on, and the numbers you are quoting if I remember right were based on the flat tax – different animal.

At this point it doesn’t matter, taxes will go up, you can throw out the finer points of the problems they say what may happen but all I know is if we don’t change the way we do things soon, we will have to incur a lot higher taxes than the return of the 39%.

Very well, correct me if I'm wrong but I think it's safe to assume you make less than $200K a year, if that is correct you would be paying more taxes not less as you think; I wonder if after realizing that you have been led against your own interests for the benefit of the few you would have the capacity to recognize your mistake?, I guess we'll never know because it looks very unlikely that the fair tax bunch will be able to fool the necessary amount of people to get it enacted.

Well Mr. Buddha, without knowing my lifestyle, you are dead wrong. Before I got on the Fair Tax bandwagon fully, I took all the records of my purchases, tax returns and so on for the past 6 years and did a comparison of our tax system, Forbes flat tax and the fair tax. The results were not all that surprising because I was told what to expect. When I was working, I would pay overall a little more in taxes under the flat and fair tax, something like $8k more. Under my present situation, I would be paying $2k less with the flat tax but I would be paying taxes on nothing outside purchase of fuel, medical, and other incidentals under the fair tax.

The really nice thing is I will not be paying a dime for any expenses incurred in this business, not a dime.

But that’s not all….

I went to the people over at this school, U of M, and asked a few of the students in the economics program to take a look at my stuff and come up with their own conclusions. As liberal as some of them are, they said the Fair Tax would be the best for me and many like me.

All of the above is resumed as the “ trickle-down theory”, also known as the economic policies of “Reaganomics”, “Supply-side Economics” or “Horse and Sparrow Theory”. It is a now discredited theory that seems condemned to live inside the realm of peoples fantasies and no economist wants to be connected to; it's an economic hot potato!

Actually Mr. Buddha, you’re wrong. This is not trickle down *** it was applied in the 80’s.

For the trickle down theory to work, you have to have taxes in the present form, a punitive regressive tax system. The idea steps away from the trickle down by directly handing the control to the people and taxing consumption which is what we do in this country more than we actually produce. When trickle down was used, we still had a manufacturing based economy, nothing like the service/virtual economy we have today. There is no discrediting of the theory by the way, it worked when it was used but now we have a different economy and different set of rules and it is actually taught in the schools today.

The data recollected from the past 50 years convincingly refutes any arguments that cutting taxes for the rich will stimulate the economy or improve the conditions of the middle and lower classes. Tax cuts to the top have no correlation with economic growth rate, income growth rate, hourly wage growth rate, or change in unemployment.

Where is the data pre-1932?

Where is the data pre-federal income tax?

See the thing is that you accuse me of regurgitating things from some rightwing center of propaganda but you are doing the same thing but using the same old arguments that have been around since the 60’s.

So to recap –

The fair tax has nothing to do with cutting taxes for the rich, it has to with empowering the people at the bottom to be able to do more with the money they have. It eliminates Income taxes at the source for all.

The fair tax provides the rich with incentives to keep the money here and spend it here, believe it or not the addition cost to them may never matter – it is the taxes that drive them to go off shore. If you don’t believe me, what is an offshore tax shelter all about?

The idea that the trickle down theory applies to simulation is right but this is not using the trickle down theory, it is an elimination of taxes to free up all money. Remember that the poor do not provide jobs, the people who own the businesses and run them to make money do.

Sorry for the quote boxes, it keeps adding them into the post for some reason.

 

[davekc]

Wow....you guys can put up some loooong posts
I am more of a simple thoughts for a simple mind.

The reality is you have to keep taxes to a minumum on business. Why? Because they have the alternative to go over seas. We have one of the highest rates now.
Keep raising them......and watch where they go.
Taxes should be lower rather than higher. If additional revenue is needed, you have to tax the ones that pay nothing now.
I know there is the "Big Bad Business" class envy, but one has to look at who creates the opportunities.
Lastly, whether poo-pooing Reaganomics or anything else, You can't tax and spend yourself into prosperity.
If it is possible, I would love to hear of the country that is successful with that program.
How simple is that? Tell me one, and I might be willing support what I see as total foolishiness right now.
I don't believe that is a political party idea, just common sense.

 

[MrGautama]

The problem is we don’t need weak leadership at this place and time in our history and this is weak leadership. It is not a rightwing point of view, it is an informed point of view from someone who at leasts looks around when I traveled in the world. Learn how other cultures, not their press but the cultures view weakness and diplomacy, the Arab nations love this because they think we are very weak right now. The SA dictators love it because it brings more control to them to manipulate the US through an immature person we have.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t like Obama but he is my president and I will support him when and where I can as long as I feel he is doing the right thing. The wrong thing is talking like he is a school kid at a band competition.

I think where this really takes us is to the age old question of Why do they hate us? And Do we really need another strong leader?

I'm sure you don't buy the envy explanation or the idea that a couple of idiots in a cave somewhere in Afghanistan are plotting against us just because they can't stand the fact that... I don't know... here men don't grow beards and women wear pants.


So, why do they hate us?

Well Greg, here comes a bit of my personal experience which unfortunately can't reveal in too much detail considering that it may give away my identity away to some readers (the company I'm contracted to specially), even in our country where we enjoy the wonderful gift of free speech being an anarchist and an atheist doesn't make you the most popular kid on the block with the big wigs and can have nasty consequences as I've painfully learned in the past.

After more than 20 years living abroad and experiencing how things really were on the receiving end of one of the darkest chapters in American foreign policy it's easy for me to answer that question.

I am an eye witness to the toppling of a democratic government and the implementation of a right wing repressive military dictatorship, the suspension of all civil rights, the state death squads traveling the country summarily executing dissidents (politically active citizens that believed in the democratic process). Soccer stadiums used to concentrate the soon to be members of the disappeared lists, the free press braking under repression and becoming just a tool for official indoctrination, the heartbreaking sight of all those mothers, wifes and daughters of the vanished marching in the streets with pictures of their loved ones; can you imagine the desolation in their hearts?; can you walk just for a minute in their shoes?.
Ever even wondered how might it feel to drive down the street past a building complex where the only thing you hear is very loud music knowing that it's being used to mask the screams of the ones being tortured inside.

I saw the implementation of a brutal capitalist model that moved the poor back to the slums and made a few collaborators very rich, and witnessed trough the years, at the cost of thousand of lives, the complete and systematic transformation of a society until it was rendered politically sterile, just a shadow of what once was a vibrating political environment.


So why did all this atrocities happened?

Very simple, to protect the economic interests of 2 American corporations and the destruction of an alternative model that might be a bad example for the other countries in the region as stated in the pertinent White House and Pentagon documents declassified years later under the Freedom of Information Act and other initiatives.

This is not an isolated incident, after going through such an experience, which deeply touched me, you begin to analyze other incidents around the world and a pattern begins to appear. One in which many of the circumstances are similar but just the actors are different; that is the day when you come face to face with the full understanding of the American foreign policy.

The priorities of our foreign policy have been be presented as follows:

1.- Ensure that the world safe for American corporations.

2.- Enhancing the financial statements of defense contractors at home who have contributed
generously to members of congress.

3.- Preventing the rise of any society that might serve as a successful example of an alternative to
the capitalist model.

4.- Extending political and economic hegemony over as wide an area as possible.


So back to answering the question of why do they hate us?... it's the empire Greg and all it's nasty consequences. It has nothing to do with our freedoms or beliefs; it's just that people around the world want our hands out of their natural resources and away from their governments!. Do you know what is the name for American in Spanish?; it's gringo (green-go!) kind of tells us something don't you think?

So, is Obama weak?. I don't think so, I believe this new approach could be the beginning of a very long healing process between us and the people that has been affected by our criminal pursuit of power and dominance.

To better protect our country against the foreign threat we don't need another strong president, we need one that will lay the foundation for a radical change in our policies both domestic and international; someone that will start the long road to bring us back from the disproportionate use of the worlds resources, we use 25% of the worlds oil and other resources at only 5% of the population; this simply means that many people are going without so we can have double, this people are not giving us their resources voluntarily... we are taking them by force and as long as that stays that way we will remain in danger.

Atrocities?

Here is a partial list, let me know if you need information about any of this instances of US atrocities and I'll be happy to post it.

China, 1945 to 1949. Italy, 1947 to 1948. Greece, 1947 to 1949. Philippines, 1945 to 1953. South Korea, 1945 to 1953. Albania, 1949 to 53. Germany, 1950s. Iran, 1953. Guatemala, 1953 to 1990s. Middle East, 1956 to 1958. Indonesia, 1957 to 1958. British Guiana/Guyana, 1953 to 1964. Vietnam, 1950 to 1973. Cambodia, 1955 to 1973. The Congo/Zaire, 1960 to 1965. Brazil, 1961 to1964. Dominican Republic, 1963 to 1966. Cuba, 1959 to present. Indonesia, 1965. Chile, 1964 to 1973. Greece, 1964 to 1974. East Timor, 1975 to 1990s. Nicaragua, 1978 to 1989. Grenada, 1979 to 1984. Libya, 1981 to 1989. Panama, 1989. Iraq, 1990s. Afghanistan, 1979 to 1992. El Salvador, 1980 to 1992. Haiti, 1987 to 1994.

Asking for forgiveness from a world that has done what to deserve the moral high ground?

Hey Buddha, the problem is that the world is not owed an apology until they themselves make amends to the people they wronged who were victims of atrocities committed by the powers of Europe, Asia and Africa and they have yet to come forth and do any of that for one atrocity.

Take one really important issue – modern day slavery on the African continent, I have yet heard a peep out of the African congress or the world court on who is going to go after these people let alone apologize for the ongoing issue of modern slavery, have you? Of course the world has turned their head because it is a cultural thing, taking children and selling them is a cultural thing that dates back to the dawn of man so we can’t ask for them to change. It amazes me that you can even suggest that we need to apologize.

Oh by the way, when you travel to Africa to help out in nasty places like I did, remember that we exported our capitalism to a lot of these countries by accident and that they, the people who live in these countries seem to be living better using us, the United States as inspiration to make better lives for themselves than they ever did under European colonial rule. This my Buddha friend comes from the very liberal source – the BBC.

Let’s take another instance of European history, has Poland, France, England and the Netherlands ever apologize for their persecution of the Jews in the later part of the 19th century up to the end of the Second World War? I am not talking about the holocaust by Germans but these countries. Ever hear what happened in Poland, the sweet country who was invaded by the mean old nasty Germans? Wasn’t there mass killings and starvation going on with the Jews who fled Russia? How about the status of “non-citizens” (thanks to Poland stripping the Jews of their citizenships) forced upon thousands of Jews who eventually died there because there was no international recognition or aid.

Greg, we are only responsible for the monstrosities that our government does, for the others is the job of the citizens of those countries to force their governments to issue apologies and reparations as they see fit.
If you for a moment think that I believe that the US is the only or the worst of the abusers you are wrong; this crazy world has chapters so dark in its history that would make us look like amateurs, but nonetheless the government of the US is our responsibility and to do nothing because no one el has makes no sense to me. If you want to lead then lead!.

He doesn’t want to lead us to Marxism, it actually looks like Fascism.

I honestly find it hard to attribute that to Obama, after all it's been a while since we have been just one political party away from a single party system.

Third world? Have you ever been sick in the third world?

Well... as you can imagine the answer is yes.

The last time I look GM doesn’t pay poverty wages.

Thank you very much UAW.


The rest (taxes and health care) is something we'll never see eye to eye so I think we should put them to rest for a while.

 

[pelicn]

Wow....you guys can put up some loooong posts
I am more of a simple thoughts for a simple mind.

The reality is you have to keep taxes to a minumum on business. Why? Because they have the alternative to go over seas. We have one of the highest rates now.
Keep raising them......and watch where they go.
Taxes should be lower rather than higher. If additional revenue is needed, you have to tax the ones that pay nothing now.
I know there is the "Big Bad Business" class envy, but one has to look at who creates the opportunities.
Lastly, whether poo-pooing Reaganomics or anything else, You can't tax and spend yourself into prosperity.
If it is possible, I would love to hear of the country that is successful with that program.
How simple is that? Tell me one, and I might be willing support what I see as total foolishiness right now.
I don't believe that is a political party idea, just common sense.

Thank you! See guys? It can be done, a simple straight forward answer without all the jabber
Sheeeesh....and they say women talk too much!

 

[Desperado]

amen i stoped reading them maybe they should email one another